This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
of speaking . . .” or “. . . a form of speech artfully varied from common usage” (Instit. Orat. IX, i, 11). These forms were called by the Greeks Schema, and by the Romans Figura. Both words mean “shape” or “figure.” P. J. Corbett, however, divides figures of speech into two main groups--the schemes and the tropes (Classical Rhetoric for the Modern Student [New York: Oxford Press, 1971]). He writes: “A scheme ... involves a deviation from the ordinary pattern or arrangement of words. A trope involves a deviation from the ordinary and principal signification of a word” (p. 461). In this discussion we shall survey the most important types of tropes and schemes. More attention will be given to the tropes than the schemes because they are more difficult to learn. The types listed below are those encountered most frequently in the study of the Psalter. The student may find it helpful to use E. W. Bullinger (Figures of Speech Used in the Bible) for the less common types and problematic passages. But this book should not be used simply for finding obscure figures or technical jargon. The table of contents and the Scripture index will provide the student with a beginning for the use of this reference tool. Before surveying the common types of figures one must briefly, at least, consider a basic issue--the tension between the literal and the figurative. Many students of the Bible think that if something is figurative it means that no one can be sure what is being said (for this, see Bullinger’s preface). Others, however, insist on a “literal interpretation” of the Bible to the exclusion of figures of speech. If “literal interpretation” is taken literally, then there are all kinds of problems--God would be a block of granite, Jesus a piece of wood on hinges, and believers grazing sheep or growing wheat. The problem is confronted enough to warrant a survey of how the issue has been handled in the interpretation of the Bible.\ Students of the Bible are perhaps aware of Augustine’s concept of multiple senses of Scripture, whereby both words and the things they signify point to spiritual or allegorical meanings. Yet Augustine gave careful attention to the words of Scripture, the literal sense, as the ground for the spiritual significances. Attention to the words involves knowledge of the original languages, of logic (rules of valid inference), or history, and especially the rhetorical figures. He says, Lettered men should know, moreover, that all those modes of expression which the grammarians designate with the Greek word tropes were used by our [Scriptural] authors, and more abundantly and copiously than those who do not know them . . . are able to suppose or believe. Those who know these tropes, however, will recognize them in the sacred letters, and this knowledge will be of considerable assistance in understanding them . . . . And not only examples of all these tropes are found in reading the sacred books, but also the names of some of them, like allegoria, aenigma, parabola (De Doctrina, III, xxix). Thomas Aquinas’ discussion of the senses of Scripture in Summa Theologica rationalized Augustine’s account of figurative meaning into the Catholic formula: a literal sense, and a spiritual sense having three levels--allegorical or typological, tropological or moral, and anagogical (I. Q. 1, Art. 10, Basic Writings, I, 16-17). With regard to the literal sense, Aquinas says,
By words things are signified properly and figuratively. Nor is the figure itself, but that which is figured, the literal sense. When Scripture speaks of God’s arm, the literal sense is not that God has such a member, but only what is signified by this member, namely, operative power (ibid). While Aquinas classifies the meaning of the trope as the literal sense, he suggests that the poetic language often obscures the truth, making the reader look beyond the figures for the true meaning. There is no real emphasis on the meaning conveyed by the metaphor itself. Neither Augustine or Aquinas place great value upon the poetic language of Scripture as such. The Reformation surfaced a new emphasis on literalism in the Scripture, along with the emphasis on the one sense of Scripture. But a study of the writings of the Reformers shows that this was no prosaic literalism. Tropes now became God’s chosen formulations of the revelation which must be understood correctly, in themselves, and not as a means to a higher, allegorical vision. Calvin’s discussion of the doctrine of the sacraments, especially the expression “This is my body” is instructive: [Those who state that] the bread is the body . . . truly prove themselves literalists . . . . I say that this expression is a metonymy, a figure of speech commonly used in Scripture when mysteries are under discussion . . . . For though the symbol differs in essence from the thing signified (in that the latter is spiritual and heavenly, while the former is physical and visible), still, because it not only symbolizes the thing that it has been consecrated to represent as a bare and empty token, but also truly exhibits it, why may its name not rightly belong to the thing? . . . Let our adversaries, therefore, cease to heap unsavory witticisms upon us by calling us “tropists” because we have explained the sacramental phraseology according to the common usage of Scripture (Institutes IV, xvii, 20-21). The irony here is that the Roman Catholic position on the sacrament (transubstantiation) is achieved by taking the text literally. The figurative sense (metonymy) communicated by the physical signs was taken by the Reformers. Based on such ideas the Protestants’ writings in the subsequent centuries systematized the study of the rhetorical devices used in Scripture. The importance of understanding the tropes and schemes became paramount. It was not that they were now taking the text literally whereas the Church had taken it allegorically or mystically; rather they were now studying the figures used in the Bible as means of communicating the divine revelation. Because the Scripture made widespread use of figurative language, scholars realized that skillful use of the various types of figures was necessary for exegesis. Handbooks on the figures of speech and interpretation appeared throughout Protestantism. It was prompted by the recognition that figures of speech served as vehicles of truth; they were chosen by God for His revelation of himself to people. The concept of God as a magnificent poet who uses figurative language to communicate His literal Word is graphically expressed by Donne:
My God, my God, Thou art a direct God, may I not say a literall God, a God that wouldst bee understood literally, and according to the plain sense of all that thou saiest? But thou art also . . . a figurative, a metaphoricall God too; A God in whose words there is such a height of figures, such voyages, such peregrinations to fetch remote and precious metaphors, such extensions . . . . O, what words but thine, can expresse the inexpressible texture, and composition of thy word (Sermons, VII, 65). So the concept that figurative language is the character of the literal Word of God in many places, and not some mystical sense, came to be the important distinctive of biblical exegesis after the Reformation. Unfortunately, modern “expositions” have not taken the time to understand much of this, but rather stand closer to some Puritan interpretations which considered rhetorical devices to be minimal or deceptive. Each student of the Bible must recapture this important relationship between the figurative and the literal. One must learn that not only is the figurative the means of communicating the literal, but that the figurative is the literal in its chosen means of expressing the truth, a means that includes intellectual and emotional connotations, allusions and sounds. The figure is both unified in its communication, and diverse in its aspects.The Classification of the Figures Because writers turn their words in various ways, literary critics have attempted to analyze and categorize these deviations in the use of words in order to gain better control over the intended thought and feeling of the author
I. Figures Involving Comparison
In these figures of speech the author transfers a word into a foreign semantic field to illustrate or picture his thought and to evoke the appropriate feeling in his reader. In this way the writer draws a comparison between two things of unlike nature that yet have something in common. The subject matter is real, but that to which it is compared is present in the imagination. That which the subject and things compared have in common is not stated and must be guessed at and validated by the interpreter from other indications in the composition. The interpreter must also try to articulate the mood evoked by the figure.
Simile: Resemblance, an explicit comparison (using “like” or “as”) between two things of unlike nature that yet have something in common (see Bullinger, pp. 726-733).
“Silence settled on the audience like a block of granite.”
“Silence” settling down is here compared to a “block of granite.” The image is one of suddenness and absoluteness. There is a contrast implied between the roar of an audience before a performance, and the sudden silence when the safety curtain goes up.
“All flesh is like grass.” (1 Pet. 1:24)
In this verse “flesh,” which is also a figure of speech representing all living creatures, is compared to “grass.” The point is that grass is transitory--it withers and dies easily. This figure must be seen in the context of grass in Israel--in the heat it completely disappears from the hills until the rainy season. The feeling that this simile evokes is one of pathos and futility.
“He shall be like a tree planted by rivers of waters.” (Ps. 1:3)
The psalm is describing an individual who meditates in the Law of the LORD. The comparison is now made to a tree. Here, as is often the case, the simile is qualified: the tree produces fruit in season and does not wither because it is planted by water. The qualifications lead us to conclude that the water represents the Law, and the fruit righteousness. The common thought between the tree and the person is life or vitality. It creates a positive feeling of desirability.
Metaphor: Representation, an implicit comparison between two things of unlike nature that yet have something in common; a declaration that one thing is or represents another (see Bullinger, pp. 735-743). This description will serve the purpose of this introduction, but it must be acknowledged to be a simplification. Pure metaphors are essentially figures of transference (for a detailed study, see Gustav Stern, Meaning and Change of Meaning, chapter xi). That is why many prefer to use “metaphorical language” as the equivalent of “figurative language” without further qualification of types. The study must be aware of this; some commentaries will use the word “metaphor” to mean any figure of speech, when the actual figure under consideration is not a metaphor.
teaching them the truth. However. The figure of “shepherd” was used frequently enough to achieve lexical status. The point is that it is tangled. cleansing them from sin. “The LORD is my shepherd. 23:1) In this line a comparison is expressed between the LORD (a spirit) and a shepherd (a human being who tends flocks).” Each metaphor supplies different information about the LORD. “The LORD God is a sun and a shield.” The metaphor conveys the feeling of frustration. The essential qualities of the shepherd are transferred to the LORD so that a greater understanding of his nature may be achieved. “thorny. The “sun” conveys light. warmth.” (Ps. complexity.e.” When this happens the figure is classified as a dead metaphor. leading them.“The question of federal aid to education is a bramble patch. because it is a figurative use of a term. so that the shepherding activates of feeding the flock. So we can see that the context must be considered in explaining a figure. i.” (Ps. provision for growth among other things. and so dictionaries often list the figurative use as one of the categories of meaning. . So the line brings a feeling of security in God’s provision of and protection for life. in your exegesis you must interpret it as you would any metaphor.. and refreshing them. are all brought to bear on the communication of the LORD's spiritual ministries to His people. Even in English dictionaries under “shepherd” you will find “ecclesiastical use for minister.” The idea of “federal aid to education” is now stated to be a “bramble patch” (not “like” a bramble patch). pain. The subsequent lines of the psalm (verses 1-4) extend and qualify the metaphor. not easily solved. or an idiom. and leading them in righteousness. the “shield” primarily represents protection. 84:12 ) The LORD God is being compared to both a “sun” and a “shield.
127:5) In the context the psalmist has used a simile to compare children to arrows in the hand of a warrior. Unlike the above. in hypocatastasis the subject must be inferred (see Bullinger. Bullinger. but the true topic or subject will be suppressed. For example. It may be simpler to refer to this as an implied metaphor if the title sounds too technical or difficult. then the house is like a quiver--but house is not mentioned. he would have stated explicitly “my enemies are like dogs. a declaration that implies a comparison between two things of unlike nature that yet have something in common. the context will state it is a company of evil-doers. you have to return to the figure and ask why he compares them to dogs. . “Smite the shepherd and the flock will be scattered” is a statement that remains on the figurative level. Much like the vultures in the desert they would pick at carcases.” “Dogs have surrounded me. If the children are “like” arrows. however. The exegete must discern from either the context or usage of the terms what is meant by “shepherd” and “flock. There are no dogs surrounding him. Once this has been done.” But he simply says “dogs have surrounded me. If he had used a simile. “Blessed is the man whose quiver is full of them” (Ps. 22:17 ) The psalmist is comparing his enemies to dogs. Hypocatastasis: Implication. Building on that point the psalmist uses “quiver” to refer to his household. Dogs in the ancient Near East were scavengers--they ran in packs and scoured for food. So the psalmist is saying a lot about his enemies.” and you are left to determine if they are real dogs. does not give enough attention to this very common figure).3. the figure will be expressed fully. The main feature is that in the text. what are they. and a lot about his condition--he is almost dead. “My frame was not hidden from You. 744-747. however. When I was made in secret.” (Ps.” A straightforward metaphor would have said “my enemies are dogs. and if not. pp. So the comparison is implied.
stressing remoteness and hiddenness (this is before sonograms).” (Ps. 751-753).” (Matt. 13:24ff. and ballein = to cast) of two things of unlike nature that yet have something in common. an extended simile. 139:15) In this passage the psalmist is describing how God formed him in his mother's womb--but he calls it the “depths of the earth. The comparison with a lion stresses the fierce and brutish nature of this pagan power. But he does not state the comparison.” (Jer.and skillfully wrought in the depths of the earth. Daniel's visions of such grotesque beasts prepares for his vision of “one like the Son of Man” who will replace them (Dan. 139:7-12). an anecdotal narrative designed to teach a lesson.” He is thus comparing the womb to the deepest recesses of the earth. and of no other word. The extent of the comparison must be guessed at and validated by other indications in the literature (see Bullinger. pp. but the most famous examples are those found in the New Testament. In fact. 4:7) The context will make it clear that the idea is the king of Babylon who has left his domain. “The kingdom of heaven is likened unto a man that sowed good seed in his field. Parable: a placing beside (from para = beside. he merely uses the figure to imply the comparison. One reason for this strange comparison is rhetorical: he wants to form a link to the preceding strophe in which he described God’s presence in such remote areas (see Ps. and conveys a feeling of fear of attack and death. 13).) . masal. 4. “A lion has gone up from his thicket. Writers frequently use animals or beasts in their hypocatastases for rulers to stress such brutish power. 7:12. “Parable” is used about 30 times to translate lvm.
and the common feeling is contempt or disgust. The Allegory of the Fig. Israel should have produced “fruit” under the careful work of her “gardener. 5. Thus. the bramble.The parable is essentially a story based on a simile. only one of the two things in the comparison is clearly stated. 748-750). the images are not historical or actual. But in the classical sense an allegory is an extended metaphor. where people assemble]). Vine. The common thought between Israel and the vineyard is that of an unjust return. Expositors often say that an allegory refers to something non-historical in the comparison. There are not many examples of allegories in the Old Testament. each allegory requiring specific attention. but along the way other comparisons are obvious (e. i. Olive. The Allegory of the Unproductive Vineyard (Isa.. Paul's use of the term in Galatians 4:24 is perfectly legitimate--it does not deny the historicity of the Old Testament event..e. 9:7-15): This is not a parable because there is no similitude expressed explicitly. and Bramble (Ju. Allegory: (from allos = another and agourein = to speak in the agora [i. pp. 5:1-7): The LORD is compared to the faithful gardener. the thing used in the comparison could be historical or fictional. 7). designed to defend against the almost unlimited allegorical use of Scripture by some Church Fathers. the Beloved One. wants to rule over the nation. and Israel to an unproductive vineyard (v. Rather.. but this may be more apologetic than factual. the elder brother representing the Pharisees). an extended simile. it is a continued hypocatastasis. It is safe to say the main point of the parable is what was intended. an extended metaphor (see Bullinger.g. In the context the point is that only the worthless one.” . and of those that come to mind.e. It is not always easy to determine how much of the story should be interpreted as part of the simile.
23:4) Here the human ability to provide comfort in time of trouble is ascribed to the LORD’s rod and staff. thus making a comparison. the investiment of nonhuman subjects (e. carrying through the comparison of the LORD’s activities with those of the shepherd (so they are hypocatastases). 7. With all the figures discussed thus far. they comfort me.” (Ps. and it conveys a feeling of condemnation and indignation.g. Here. The point is that the blood is a witness that a murder has been committed. the things compared are of unlike nature. person + facio = to make.. But the thought is the extreme agricultural disaster. Anthropomorphism: An implicit or explicit comparison of God to some corporeal aspect of mankind. “rod” and “staff” are also figures. It is a demand for vengeance. The line essentially affirms that the means of protection that the LORD uses brings comfort to the worried psalmist. inanimate objects. By this comparison the author does not intend to . and the feeling is sadness and grief. this figure also belongs to the sub-group of figures involving resemblance. “The voice of your brother’s blood cries to me from the ground. This is a good example of how some figures build on other figures. Of course. but the thing to which the comparison is made is always a person. The figure is used to stir emotions and to create an empathy with the subject (see Bullinger. too. or animals) with human qualities or abilities.” (Joel 1:10) The human traits of mourning and languishing are attributed to the land.” (Gen.6. abstractions. “The land mourns--the oil languishes. 861-869). pp. the making or feigning of a person). Personification: Personification: (From Latin persona: actor's mask. 4:6) Abel’s shed blood is personified as a voice crying out. “Your rod and your staff.
Such anthropomorphisms are for our benefit--it is an urgent cry for God to hear the prayer.. the nostrils signify His anger. the expression is human--one leaning over to listen more intently to what someone says. the face denotes His presence. uses the expressions “eyes” and “eyelids. This is probably why Jesus is described as the complete revelation of God.. “Incline your ear to me.g. 883-894). the Logos--in the incarnation the Word (or should we say “the words”?) became flesh. viz. God does not need to do this (nor does he have an ear that he lowers to the one praying).e. 871-881.” (Ps. wishing to reveal God’s close examination of all human affairs. He prays that God would forgive him and not hold his sin against him. i.” God is a Spirit and not corporeal. to communicate the nature of God in language people understand. not looking at something.be evocative but to be didactic. moreover.” (Ps. to communicate a truth about the person of God. The author will choose that part of human life which best corresponds to some characteristic of God’s person: e.. But what these mean for human life enables people to understand the divine activity of investigation and judgment. The human activity of “hiding one’s face. 31:3 ) Again. pp. and the heart speaks of His moral purpose (see Bullinger.” i. . Throughout the OT God is described as if he has all such human parts and functions. divine omniscience does not need to squint the eyelids to look more intently.. 51:11 ). the sons of men.” (Ps. This is in David’s confession of sin. the alpha and the omega.e. graphically conveys his wish and brings him comfort. the eyes denote His awareness. Revelation of the Godhead demands the use of anthropomorphic language. “Hide your face from my sins. “His eyes behold. his eyelids try. the ears signify His attentiveness. 11:4) The psalmist.
but maintain that God’s passions are literal (see Bullinger includes it on pp. Bullinger cites Genesis 4:7 (“Sin crouches at the door”) as an example of personification. 63:8) Of course. then God is commanding Cain to rule over sin which threatens him like a lion. Moreover. If so.” “putting tears in a bottle. 895.B. 894. Bullinger lists this under anthropomorphism).. But note this: Many authors distinguish this figure from the description of God’s passion(s) which they designate as anthropopatheia: an implicit or explicit comparison between the nature of God and human passions. God is not a bird with wings. If this interpretation is right. “to couch. They are all meant to reveal the person and work of the LORD in terms that we can understand and appreciate. ready to pounce. 883).g. Although the verb rabats. the figure should also be interpreted in light of the command to mankind to have dominion over the animals. pp.The Scriptures are filled with anthropomorphic expressions about God that will have to be interpreted clearly (and carefully since many people simply take these literally). Doing this may give the impression that God may not in fact possess passions or emotions. Zoomorphism: An explicit or implicit comparison of God (or other entities) to the lower animals or parts of the lower animals (see Bullinger. 882. it more frequently is used of animals. N. Divine protection is frequently expressed in zoomorphic terms. e.” (Ps. “In the shadow of your wings I used to rejoice. This notion greatly limits God's personality.” “saving hand.” and a host of other figurative expressions from the human realm. Often animals take on a symbolic significance.” “feet”. It speaks of safety and security. 8. God is described as having “everlasting arms.” “blotting out of a book. the figure employed is a zoomorphism.” “consuming breath of his nostrils. trusting under the shadow of his wings. especially of lions. And so I do not use this category at all.” “hurling a storm. . sensibility and will.” may signify human activity. he is portrayed as “sitting enthroned. traditionally defined as intellect.
The comparison idea comes through clearly in an analysis of the usage of masal. The student of the Bible must research them further. Proverbs are very complex in Hebrew literature.We can see by this that zoomorphism is not limited to descriptions of God. 10. but more often subtle. a wisdom psalm. “If I take the wings of the dawn. but the children’s teeth are set on edge. pp. Proverbs will not figure predominantly in the study of the Book of Psalms.” comparing the rays of the sun to wings of a bird that fly from the east and land in the distant west. Bullinger offers many examples of idiomatic expressions of the Bible . Psalm 49. The idea of comparison is often explicit (“like father--like son”). Proverb: (from pro + verbum = more at word). uses the verb in the repeated expression that the worldly man “is like” the beast that perishes. “The fathers eat the sour grapes. and settle in the remotest part of the sea. “Is Saul also among the prophets?” (1 Samuel 10:11) The action of Saul is like that of the prophets--but he is the king. 755-767). the general truth expressed by the saying is that children unjustly receive the penalty earned by parents.” (Ezek. Idiom: the regular occurrence of figures of speech. Any figure (including those to follow) can become idiomatic when by frequent use it achieves lexical status. 18:2) The comparison is clear in the figure. with the speed of light) God is always there. however. The axiom is that they are amazed over his reversal of roles. a specific illustration to signify a general truth about life.. especially when studying a book like Proverbs. “The wit of one is the wisdom of many” (see Bullinger. His point in the context is that no matter how fast or far he might “fly” (i. 9. Psalm 139:9 says.e. a brief popular witticism.
or a common use of a figure.” In contrast to many of the above figures which are based on resemblance.such as “breaking bread. a mitre. Do not assume biblical idioms are generally understood. From meta indicating “change” and onoma meaning “a name. but it will be seen that the analysis cannot always fit neatly into one of them alone (see Bullinger. Metonymy: Change of Noun (or any idea). There is no Uncle Sam.” “turn to ashes. These are helpful. of the adjunct. “way” is idiomatic.” “pen” for “writer. Once this has been done. “White House” being substituted for the President in the White House. But there is a White House. For example. “crown” for “royalty. It may also be metaphorical (“way” or “road” compared to pattern of life). viz.S. the interpretation will apply to subsequent usages. low figure. of the subject. of the effect. that to which a comparison is made is imaginative. Even though idioms may be readily classified as idioms. the expositor will still have to evaluate what figure originally was involved. the change of a word naming an object for another word closely associated with it. If we say. For example.” we have a hypocatastasis.” “three days and three nights” and many more (see Bullinger. but a metonymy can word with a verb as well. Whereas in figures based on resemblance.” that is a metonymy. 819-860). II. If we say “Uncle Sam wants you. in metonymy the word that triggers an association is historical reality--there really is a crown. noun”. It may be easily activated if used in a fresh way. pen. a basic point that often needs to be made.” “the Son of Man. pp.” “bad hand” for “poorly-formed characters. An idiom is also called a dead metaphor. have been taken and compared to a person (actually a personification as well). metonymy is founded on relationship.. This is important.” “brass” for “military officer. or a whole line. But much more is meant. The letters U. The substitution of some attributive or suggestive word for what is meant. .” “open the mouth. of the cause.” “mitre” for “bishop. pp. brass. because you will have the most difficulty in distinguishing metonymy from hypocatastasis. Figures Involving Substitution 11. and the like. 538-608). “the White House said today. Bullinger analyzes metonymy into four kinds.
Examples where the thing or the action is put for the effect: “Pour out your anger upon the nations. So the cause is stated. The way to test this is that if you call something a metonymy of cause you must state what the intended effect would be. 11:1) The verse means that everyone spoke the same language. Metonymy of the Cause: When the writer states the cause but intends the effect (Bullinger.a.” (Gen. 540-560).” “At the mouth of two or three witnesses” (Deut. The psalmist wants God to pour out (also a figure. the instrument of giving testimony. 36:10) .” (Ps. “Lip” is the cause. the instrument--so the expositor must state the effect. Examples where the instrument is put for the effect: “And the whole earth was of one lip. the effect--judgment--is meant. 79:6) “Anger” is the emotion behind the judgment. “Continue your loyal love to those who know you. “language. 17:6) The intended meaning is the testimony of the witnesses. “mouth” is the cause.” (Ps. an implied comparison) acts of judgment.
.” (Luke 16:29) What is meant is that they have the Scriptures that Moses and the Prophets wrote.” (Ps. Metonymy of the Effect: When the writer states the effect but intends the cause producing it (Bullinger. is put for the effect: “They have Moses and the Prophets. they would utterly destroy the land and its inhabitants. but it clearly indicates that Scripture is meant (they do not have Moses). 2:5). that he may take away from me this death only. but the spiritual and material blessings that God’s loyal love brings are intended.” (Exod. 10:17) Locusts! That is what the Pharaoh wanted removed. it stresses the authority by giving the identification of the authors. Sometimes one line of poetic parallelism will give both the metonymy of cause and the metonymy of effect to express the complete idea: “Then he will speak (cause) to them in his anger. The cause is stated. Examples where the effect is put for the thing or action producing it: “Entreat the LORD your God.The attribute is stated. and terrify (effect) them in his fury. It is a way of saying two things at once. the effect is meant. pp. because the communication of those attributes is meant (hence: communicable attributes). Example where the person acting. But if they were allowed to remain. To make the request more vivid he substitutes the effect for the cause. In most cases the attributes of God will be metonymies of cause. the agent or actor. b. 560-567).
He wants both to be forgiven and to enter the praise. The psalmist desires to hear the oracle of forgiveness from the prophet. 51:10) The entire line is a metonymy of effect. but the effect. 74:15) He split the rock in two. my glory” (Ps. and water came out.” (Ps. the real you). is intended. 57:9) The stated effect is “glory”. Example where the effect is put for the instrument or organic cause: “Awake. “Fountain” and “flood” are also figurative expressions of water. “show me your glory. So the line is “saying” far more than what is literally expressed. is stated. Example where the effect is put for the material object from which it is produced: “You split the fountain and the flood.” (Ps. Example where the effect is put for the person or agent producing it: . The effect of being forgiven is that the psalmist can once again join the congregation with shouts of praise to God and hear all the congregational rejoicing. It is also possible that “glory” represents the real person (compare Exodus 33:18. he states the effect and implies the cause. The use of metonymies here is very economical. for it is obvious that God did not split the water.” which may mean “show me yourself” [ = LXX]. The reader would know that the cause. water from the rock.“Cause me to hear joy and gladness. the rock. the intended cause is the tongue that sings praises to glorify God.
38:18) This is a common motif in the Hebrew Scriptures. for the psalmist is enumerating the LORD's spiritual and physical provisions for life. In the sentence “voice of Yahweh” is also figurative. “The voice of the LORD shakes the wilderness. the place or the container is put for that which is contained (Bullinger.. 567-587)..” (Ps. Metonymy of the Subject: when the subject or thing is put for the attribute or adjunct of it. Examples where the container is put for the contents: “The grave cannot praise you. be not far off. 22:19[181) The stated effect is help. The prophet means that a dead person in the grave cannot praise God. O LORD.” (Ps.“But you. i. i.e.” (Isa. 23:5) The stated subject-idea is “table.e. would be most inappropriate here. 29:8) As a metonymy of subject “wilderness” signifies the flora and fauna in the wilderness. carpentry.” but the intended ideas are food and drink on the table. hasten to my assistance. “You prepare a table before me” (Ps. The intended cause is the LORD. . pp. To use the word “grave” heightens the tension and motivates God to keep the individual alive to praise Him. O my help. The literal meaning of preparing a table. what the psalmist will receive. c.
will. Wolff.” The Hebrews associated the visceral organs with the will and the emotions. “kidneys” for conscience. pp. understanding. thoughts. “heart” for thoughts. desire.n. nephesh..” i. Examples where the thing or action is put for that which is connected with it (the adjunct): “Soul” [if that is the translation.. appetites. Anthropology of the Old Testament). etc. or hypocatastasis for the similarity of thunder to a voice. All these we classify as metonymy of subject. why are you persecuting me?” (Acts 9:4) The stated subject-idea is “me. words [met. Jesus. “You are near in their mouth (i. passions.. that means the whole person. body and soul] for desires. Example where the possessor is put for the thing possessed: “Saul. 567-570. of cause]) but far from their kidneys.e. “liver” for emotions. center of immaterial part (see Bullinger. see also Hans W. affections.e. Examples where the sign is put for the thing signified: . The point is a common one in Scripture--to persecute the Church is to persecute Christ. which is a misleading translation of the Hebrew word vp.either a metonymy of cause for the storm (God commanded it). Saul. courage. and then interpret the corresponding adjunct--will. but the intended idea is His Church. much like the modern western world would use “heart” for strong will (“believe with your heart”) or strong affection (“love with all my heart”).
“The scepter shall not depart from Judah. 2:12) In this example we have a verbal idea used as a metonymy. Example where the time is put for the thing done in it: . Example where the attribute is put for the thing or object: “Then shall you bring down my gray hairs with sorrow to the grave. what is connected to the act-submission. an implied metaphor here. showing homage. The sign of the rulership is a scepter. d.” (Gen. “Kiss the son” (Ps. Metonymy of Adjunct: The writer puts the adjunct or attribute or some circumstance pertaining to the subject for the subject (Bullinger. pp. 42:38) Now we have the opposite of the metonymy of subject. that is. so we classify that as metonymy of subject because it signifies far more than (literally) retaining a scepter. Obviously more than the gray hairs will be brought down to the grave (“grave” is a metonymy of subject for death). “Son” also is figurative in the psalm. of cause]) will retain the tribal supremacy or rulership. but stated metaphor earlier in the passage (“you are my son”). The stated idea of kissing the son is intended to convey the adjunct. 587-608).” (Gen. 49:10) The point of the oracle is that Judah (here the tribe and not the patriarch [met. but does happen. This is not too common. Here the adjunct--gray hairs--is put for the subject--old Jacob.
” the time of the harvest. “Summer. 6:7) . 2:11) They opened the chests that were holding the treasures. but the stated description is an adjunct of that defeat. Here the adjunct is stated (contents of the containers) but the subject is meant (containers). 16:9) The intended idea is the harvest that takes place in the summer. Example where the thing signified is put for the sign: “because the separation is on his head” (Num.“For the shouting for your summer” (Isa.” (Ps. is an adjunct idea (something descriptive connected to the idea). The intended subject-idea is that the enemies be defeated. 72:9) This is a vivid description of the defeat of enemies. By substituting summer the prophet has economized his description and conveyed more than “harvest” alone would convey. Example where the contents are put for the container: “And when they had opened their treasures” (Matt. be in a state of humble prostration. Example where the appearance of a thing is put for the thing itself: “His enemies shall lick the dust.
creature for man. For example.. pp.” 12. in synecdoche the exchange is made between two words related generically. The intended sign of the vow would be uncut hair (the subject).” (Ps. Synecdoche: the exchange of one idea for another connected idea. but as a synecdoche it would mean distant geographical locations as part of a larger mass of land--soil. a.This expression comes from the chapter on Nazirite vows in which the person would not cut his hair. one may use synecdoche for figures that are actually a part of the whole. vehicle for bicycle (Bullinger. “Separation” is not a metonymy of effect. 20:2) The stated title is “name”. In this figure one word receives something from another which is unexpressed but associated with it because it belongs to the same genus. . but is serviceable for those things actually related generically. “ends of the earth” as a metonymy of subject would mean the people living in the ends of the earth. but the intended meaning is the LORD Himself. but the thing that is signified is stated-separation. Synecdoche of the Genus: The genus is substituted for the species: e. all the attributes of the LORD. This would be the same for “ask anything in my name. But whereas in metonymy the exchange may be made between related words belonging to different genera (and so only loosely connected by contact or ascription). 613-656). or the whole for a part--more strictly connected to the thing intended than a metonymy would be. As a general guideline. weapon for sword. not people. arms for rifles.g. Example where the Name of a person is put for the person: “May the name of the God of Jacob protect you. The use of Genus and Species may not be as frequent as Whole and Part. Like metonymy the figure is based on a relationship rather than a resemblance. because that would say that long hair causes the vow. or better.
” (Isa. if you think it might be a metonymy. The stated genus here is “all the people. Francis took this literally.” but the intended sense is “the greater number of the people.Words of wider meaning for a narrower sense: “The glory of the LORD shall be revealed. you would need to state the intended idea to substantiate it. “Preach the gospel to every creature.” Recall how St. and all flesh shall see it together.” (Jer. Metonymy will not work (cause? effect? subject? adjunct?). “All” for the great part: “All the people were gathered to Jeremiah. the intended species is “people.” (Acts 10:12) . 40:5) The general word “flesh” is used in place of the specific idea “mankind” (they stand in a genus-species relationship).” (Mark 16:15) The stated genus is “creature”.” “All” for all kinds: “It contained all fourfooted animals. 26:9) This use of “all” might just as easily be handled as a lexical matter.
the place is too crowded.” (Ps. cutthroat for assassin (Bullinger. a part for the whole. “Nobody goes there anymore. 20:26) The synecdoche is “nothing. Species for genus proper: “A land flowing with milk and honey” (Ex.. What is meant no doubt is that all kinds of four-footed animals (i. Words of a narrower sense for a wider meaning: “I will not trust in my bow.. Universal for a particular: “Saul said nothing that day.One would doubt that the vision contained all fourfooted animals.” (1 Sam. neither shall my sword save me. 44:7 ) This type of synecdoche is more helpful exegetically. 17) . Synecdoche of the Species: The species is substituted for the genus. pp. e.” The meaning then is broader than the stated figures--but includes them. 623-635).g.” but the intended meaning is “nothing about David.e. 3:8. In this psalm “bow” and “sword” are stated. I am reminded of the line attributed to Yogi Berra. every kind) were represented.” b. bread for food. but the intended meaning is “weapons.” We find even in English that universals most often are intended to signify something more specific.
. c. The Whole is put for the Parts: (Bullinger. Many of these figures also involve metonymy of subject--the container for the contents.” (John 12:19) The synecdoche of the whole is “world”. the intended meaning (the part) is people of all sorts. this may be a lexical matter. “And he shall serve him forever. pp.Often a tour bus in Israel will take its people to a location where there are cows and beehives in a field and then quote this verse. or the way it has been translated that has to be discussed. the world has gone after him. 636-640).” (Matt. It is worth noting that synecdoche is also frequently hyperbolic. “Give us this day our daily bread. Many of the samples listed in Bullinger might better be treated as lexical matters. “Behold. But much more is meant: the intended genus is all luxurious foods. especially when “all” is used for parts. the intended part is “as long as the slave lives.” (Ex. 21:6) The whole is “forever”. 6:11) The intended meaning is “basic food. Usually it is enough to classify it is a metonymy and then explain the meaning. or even understatement.” But again. That explanation will show that the whole is put for the part.” “Daily bread” is a species of the genus food.
many of these are close to metonymy. An integral part of men for others associated: .” the meaning is the whole person in dignity. But “to lift up the head” may better be explained as either metonymy of effect or adjunct. “head. Part of man for the whole man: “Their feet run to evil.” But the intended whole is the city. The point is that heart and soul they are into evil deeds.g.” (Gen. 640-656). The Part for the Whole: e. 1:16) The part stated is the “feet”. pp.” (Prov. canvas for sail (Bullinger. sail for ship.. “The one who lifts up my head.d.e. the intended whole is “their entire bodies” = evil people. then that is metonymy of subject. A part of the thing for the whole thing: “Your seed shall possess the gate of his enemies.” (Ps. because people and gate are not generically connected.. This is the most common use of synecdoche. If you think gate means people in the gate.” moreover. These could also be classified under “species for genus. 3:4 ) For the stated part. restoration to dignity and honor. 22:17) The stated part is “gate. As a synecdoche “gate” represents brick and mortar--the actual city. i.
“If I ascend to heaven. stir up your might. Merism: the use of two opposite statements to signify the whole.g. It means. You are there. p.” (Ps. “You know every move I make”-including these of course. 435). . 139:8) “Heaven” and “Sheol” are opposites. southern tribes. day and night.” (Ps. 80:2) By these parts the psalmist means the northern tribes. “From the rising of the sin to the place where it sets. Benjamin. of cause] or the people living in Judah [met. of subject]--but not Judah himself. and Manasseh. Here the expressed ideas are indeed literal. 139:2) The ideas of “sitting down” and “rising up” are opposites. the intended whole is universal space and all the situations in it. You are there.. hell and high water (Bullinger.g. If I make my bed in Sheol. In other contexts the patriarchal names could be metonymies of cause (e. Words like “seed” and “sons of” will receive similar considerations.. and tribes of Transjordan. 13. Note that Bullinger lists these passages under synecdoche. expresses a vertical merism--everywhere from heaven above to Sheol below. for merism is a kind of synecdoche. 113:3). This line. “You know when I sit down and when I get up. then. “Judah gathered against him” means either the descendants of Judah [met. the name of the LORD is to be praised.” (Ps. the intended whole is all the activities with reference to time--including sitting down and getting up. but more is meant.” (Ps.“Before Ephraim. e. But we shall use a separate category. springtime and harvest.
“I will greatly multiply your pain and your conception. or a verb and an adverb. but the next line clarifies it is a hendiadys: “in pain you shall bring forth children. he also brought from the firstborn of his flock and from the fat of them.” So the single idea is painful labor in bearing and rearing children (“conception” would have to be a synecdoche. 14.” “Who is like Yahweh our God? He makes high to sit." (Ps. or. the Hebrew simply having “its going in”). pp. One component specifies the other (Bullinger.This verse could be interpreted in one of two ways: it could mean everywhere--from east to west.” instead of a noun and an adjective.” This is how one tests the category. “But Abel. 113:4). Hendiadys: Two for One.” (Gen.” (Ps. since there is no pain in conception). the expression of one idea through two formally coordinate terms joined by “and.” (Gen. I have rendered this very literally so you can see the starting point of the interpretation. . 63:6) The single idea is expressed better by making one of the nouns a modifier: “abundant fatness. 657-672). Our interpretation would signify: “he also brought the fattest firstborn of his flock. 3:16) Two nouns are joined with a conjunction. 4:4). a part for the whole process. it could mean all the time--from sunrise to sunset (“the place” is added by the NIV. “My soul shall be satisfied with fat and fatness.
signifying in the idea of sitting enthroned his dominion over the earth. . You mountains of Gilboa . the hendiadys should be given a smooth reading--“He sits on high. David turns from his prayer in trouble to address those who had brought the trouble upon him: “Depart from me. 16. 1: 19-21) “When Israel went forth out of Egypt . pp. “Your glory. 6:9). O sea. . you workers of iniquity. Euphemism: the substitution of an inoffensive or mild expression for an offensive one (Bullinger. . they must be understood. 901-905). is slain upon your high places . What ails you. that you flee?” (Ps.” (Ps. Apostrophe: a turning aside from the direct subject-matter to address another who may be present in fact or in imagination (Bullinger.” (2 Sam. Do you still hold your integrity? Bless (= curse) God and die. . 114:1-5) . O Israel. Probably most of the euphemisms have entered the text through scribal activity and were not part of the original writing. pp. “Then his wife said to him. 15. . 684-688). but “curse” is clearly required in the context.The text has a participle followed by an infinitive. .” (Job 2:9) The text has substituted the word “bless” because it is more appropriate with “God”.” The idea of “sitting” is anthropomorphic as well. But since they exist. .
a visible sign of something invisible. Typology is a form of predictive prophecy. but become historically true in Jesus. yet triumphed over the alazon--the self-deceiving and stupid braggart. pp. 768).17. 22:2 ) The words of the psalm hyperbolically describe the suffering of David. By this casting of the word into an obviously inappropriate context the writer stimulates a mental response (Bullinger. why have you forsaken me?” (Ps. or of a difference between what . Type: a divinely prefigured illustration of a corresponding reality (called the antitype) (Bullinger. 19. The word’s meaning is reversed by juxtaposing it into a semantic field of thought inappropriate to the speaker and/or subject. .” (Isa. Symbol: a material object substituted for a moral or spiritual truth. 807-815). 42:6) “Light” becomes a symbol for spiritual and moral instruction (contrast “darkness” in the next verse). The visible sign stands as a constant resemblance to some spiritual truth. In most of the diverse critical uses of the term “irony” there remains the root sense of dissimulation. a light to the nations. Irony: the expression of thought in a form that conveys its opposite (from eironeia = dissimulation). p. Several of the verses from this psalm are used in the New Testament to describe the sufferings of Jesus. . “I will appoint you . This topic will be discussed at length in the notes on the royal psalms. the major difference being that the passage can only be understood as prophetic once the fulfilling antitype has come into full view. my God. In Greek comedy the character called the eiron was a “dissembler” who characteristically spoke in understatement and deliberately pretended to be less intelligent than he was. Actually. 18. “My God. this symbol originated as a figure of comparison.
and stop crying out to him. Their gods lack stability and are not dependable. p. an expression of feeling by way of a malediction or execration (Bullinger. let him be condemned. Chleuasmos: Mocking. an expression of feeling by mocking and jeering (Bullinger. for he is a god. A Glossary of Literary Terms). The point of the irony is that they should recognize that he is no god. See the discussion of the imprecations in the notes on lament psalms and prayers. 2:4) In addition to forming chleuasmos. The line means that God considers their futile plan utterly ridiculous. for if he was a god they would not have had to cry louder. 942). 940). The whole line is also an example of mockery (see below). “Where are their gods. . “He who sits in the heavens laughs. 32:32) The word “rock” (a hypocatastasis indicating strength and stability) is used here with the opposite intention. this line is boldly anthropomorphic. The LORD holds them in derision. 20. “When he shall be judged.” (Ps. p.” (1 Kings 18:27) Obviously Elijah did not believe that Baal was a god. “Cry louder. Maledictio: Imprecation. 21. their rock in whom they trusted?” (Dt.is asserted and what is actually the case (Abrams. both in the expression of sitting and of laughing/mocking.
pp. 23. 349-362). . 109:7f) The psalmist is filled with zeal for God’s program. . for it is precept upon precept. Let his children be fatherless. and his wife a widow. and so prays for divine judgment on those who oppose it. We would follow the classifications given in Anderson’s commentary of the Psalms.” (Isa. This phenomenon has many variations. and the expositor must state the type and purpose of repetition (see Bullinger. 28:10) . the correspondence of one verse or line with another (for full discussion see the introductions to the Psalms). line upon line. and let another take his office. Figures Involving Addition or Amplification 22. . line upon line. there a little . . here a little.and let his prayer become sin. precept upon precept. Let his days be few. Parallelism: Parallel Lines. “Whom shall he teach knowledge . which a rather extended section). 189-263. but curses are only effectual if they are God's will. Repetition: the repetition of the same word or words in the passage. Be careful in using Bullinger because he discusses these differently (pp. The judgment should take the form of graphic curses. . III.” (Ps.
30:23. my God. Note also the irony--my God should not be forsaking me. “Now the earth was waste and void. turned into a babble) their language” (Gen. phonetic word play.” (Gen. because there the LORD confused (balal. 11:9). why have You forsaken me?” (Ps. a phonetic word play. if the words are not so related. Bab-ili is a Babylonian word that means “gate of God”. and she called his name Joseph (yoseph). You really need to work with Hebrew to notice this figure. The catch-phrase assists the memory and organizes the chapter. pp. i. or.” (Gen. They sound like they might be related.e. “to confuse”--they are different languages. 1:2) The two words are tohu wabohu. If the words are etymologically connected. being both etymologically connected (from yasaph) and morphologically identical--both are hiphil jussives meaning “may he add. the name of it was called Babel. The name Babel is not etymologically related to the Hebrew verb balal. then it is a paronomasia in the classical sense.“My God. then it is a loose paronomasia. 24. saying. ‘May Yahweh add (yoseph) to me another son’. “God has taken away (’asaph) my reproach. “Therefore. but they are from different words. 22:2) The intense pathos of the verse is enhanced by the repetition beyond what one expression would convey.” But the paronomasia with . 307-320). but the verb in Hebrew captures the sounds of the name and makes a comment about it in the context.. 24) The paronomasia yoseph is a true one. Paronomasia: the repetition of words similar in sound and frequently in sense or origin as well (Bullinger.
‘asaph is merely a phonetic wordplay. iterating the theme of the section. 8:2[l] and 10) “My God. why have you forsaken me” and . each chapter has 22 verses for the sequence of the alphabet. Psalm 119 is the passage with which most people are familiar. my God. in spite of attempts by some scholars to trace the root of “Joseph” to ‘asaph. Acrostic: repetition of the same or successive letters at the beginnings of words or clauses (Bullinger. but the third chapter triples each letter’s use. 22:2[l] and 11) 27. .” (Ps. omitting the waw and ending with verse 21. This repetition serves as a framing device. . “O LORD. our Lord. each line of each section begins with the sequential letters of the alphabet. formidable and awesome. “The cities are great. phrase. pp. or clause. is outside the series and probably stressed. In Psalm 34. It usually appears with chiastic constructions. each verse is begun with a letter of the alphabet in sequence. “You are my God. See also the Book of Lamentation. 1:28) The intent of the statement is that the cities are very high. Acrostics served mnemonic purposes as well as rhetorical ones. and walled up to heaven. beginning with a pe’. Hyperbole: the use of exaggerated terms for the purpose of emphasis or heightened effect. how excellent is Your name in all the earth!” (Ps.” (Deut. Verse 22. . pp. 25. Inclusio: the rhetorical figure in which a literary unit begins and ends with the same (or similar) word. 423-428). more is said than is literally meant (Bullinger. 180-188). 26.
” (Ps. But it certainly does signify a night of intense pain and uncontrollable weeping. Ellipsis: Omission. pp. 3-113). 20:9b). 6:6). 21:13) “Your arrows” is not in the text. it must be supplied from the context. .” The context shows that this is the correct and most important subject. Sometimes words are left out because they are unnecessary to the context.” (Ps. “there is in my heart [ ] like a burning fire” (Jer. such as in the next sample.“I am worn out from groaning. “When you shall make ready [ ] upon your strings. the omission of a word or words in a sentence (Bullinger. Flooding and drenching the bed with tears is probably not literally true. The NIV supplies the omitted subject: “your word is in my heart. all light long I make my bed swim with weeping and drench my couch with tears. IV. other times they are left out for emphasis. Figures Involving Omission or Suppression 28.
pp. 151-154). wonderful. in promise) (Bullinger. indignation. Another good example is Isaiah 1:13 which expresses how “fed up” the LORD is with Israel’s hypocritical worship--although the NIV smooths it out quite a bit. 31:10) The intention is to evoke a feeling of desire for something so rare. Interrogating. but You. By using the figure one seeks to persuade an audience to adopt a point of view. expostulation. pp. prohibitions. Erotesis: also called Rhetorical Question. pity. The psalmist simply breaks off the sentence and leaves it all in the care of the LORD. the asking of questions without expecting an answer (to express affirmation. doubts. “My soul is greatly troubled. 943-956). with sudden silence (in anger. reproaches. O LORD. surpassing”). unless we think in terms of virtuoso. in deprecation. the breaking off of what is being said. disparagements. lamentation. 2:1) . how long--?” (Ps. absurdities--you must decide which of these is the point [see samples in Bullinger]). in grief. exultation. The response desired must be guessed at and validated from the composition (Bullinger. admonitions. 32. denials. “Why do the nations rage?” (Ps. wonder. The question form is used to force Abraham and Sarah to realize the point. it is not a literal question to be answered.29. “Is anything too hard for the LORD?” (Gen. wishes. 6:3) The sentence is not complete because of the intense emotion involved. “Virtuous” in the line is a little misleading for Hebrew khayil. demonstration. 18:14) The point of the question is that nothing is “too hard” (literally “marvelous. “Who can find a virtuous woman?” (Prov. Aposiopesis: Sudden Silence.
the other is that if one does not have a broken heart God will despise. Summary and Illustration . Tapeinosis: a lessening of a thing in order to increase it (Bullinger. “broken” and “heart” are figures as well (hypocatastasis and metonymy respectively). possibly indignation. pp. pp.” But an understatement is used to express two ideas: one idea is that God will receive and take pleasure in a broken heart--that is the intended meaning. “And we were in our own sight as grasshoppers. “A broken and contrite heart. 13:33) Note that this is also a simile.The psalmist is expressing amazement. you will not despise. and so were we in their sight.” (Ps. 159-164). 51:19 ) We would have expected “you will joyfully receive. that the nations would rebel against the LORD. 155-158). 33. Meiosis: a be-littleing of one thing to magnify another (also called litotes) (Bullinger. 34. The be-littleing is meant to enlarge the size and strength of the enemy. O God. comparing people to grasshoppers.” (Num. Of course.
The figure of synecdoche may be diagramed fairly easily because it involves the relationship of a GENUS (or WHOLE) and SPECIES (or PART). or omitting in the sentence. anthropomorphism and zoomorphism.e. we would have to represent the comparison of one genus and another. forming a comparison. The task of the exegete is to determine the point of the comparison. for one may ask if the writer is comparing. limiting the range of the comparison or transference. i. hypocatastasis (or implied metaphor). either stated or implied. GENUS GENUS LORD shield The properties of one semantic field are transferred to another. substituting. One way to do this is to write a new GENUS that would embrace both words. adding. metaphor. The above metaphor would be diagramed as follows: PROTECTION (posited genus) LORD = shield The figures of substitution that demand attention are primarily the synecdoche and the metonymy. but they do it differently. The broader classification of the figures into four groups has proven helpful. Many times the context will restrict or qualify the metaphorical language..There are several of the above figures of speech that can be easily confused at first glance. The figures of comparison that appear most often are simile. If we were to diagram how they work. thus making them each species. . These essentially do the same thing. make a comparison.
g. swords/ploughshares So if the figure is synecdoche. They have the Scriptures that Moses wrote.g. This is also a figure of substitution. but the effect is meant. Thus.GENUS > e. One of the most common figures used in the psalms is the metonymy. With metonymy there is contiguity between the figure and the topic. but not in the sense of a synecdoche. the cause (author) is stated. the metonymy is more loosely connected to the thing meant--but it is connected. In the following diagrams I have tried to illustrate the four basic types (actually two types with reverse directions). and this is where it differs from the figures of comparison. CAUSE EFFECT Moses > the Law Moses wrote “They have Moses” is not to be taken literally. The sample figure is boxed. but whereas the synecdoche is actually a part for the whole or the whole for the part. military weapons/ peaceful implements SPECIES < e. Between an author and his literature there is a real connection.. one must think in terms of substitution in the direction of the genus or larger group to which the figure belongs.. CAUSE EFFECT the rock Moses hit < fountain . or the direction of the species (or part) intended by the mention of the genus.
out of which came the fountain of water when he did it. depending on how the passage is viewed. a Lutheran metonymically. SUBJECT ADJUNCT grave > the dead person in it “The grave cannot praise you” substitutes the container for that which is contained in it (and so my diagram is designed to show the subject encompasses the reality meant). In actual practice it is sometimes difficult to distinguish between these major types. SUBJECT ADJUNCT long hair signifying vow < separation “The separation is on his head” substitutes a descriptive term for what is meant. there will be times when different interpretations are possible. The full statement would say that the long hair which represents his separation to the LORD is on his head. . There is a real connection between the figure (fountain) and what is meant (rock) by it. The Lord’s Supper illustrates this. but the more that one works with them the easier they come. or Sheol. “Grave” as a synecdoche would represent dirt. the long hair of the vow. or the earth. There is a connection between “grave” and “dead”. but not a comparison. and a Baptist metaphorically. Of course.“You split the fountain” substitutes the word “fountain” for the rock that Moses struck. for a Roman Catholic position would take Jesus’ words “This is my blood” literally (yet with qualifications).
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue listening from where you left off, or restart the preview.