Hermeneutics

Part 3

Grammatical Interpretation

Internal Helps for The Explanation of Words

Though not always, quite often the text under consideration will yield clues for its interpretation. These are referred to as internal helps.

Internal helps are explained as follows:

1. Definitions or explanations which the authors themselves give of their words constitutes one of the most efficient helps

• No one knows better than the author what particular senses he attaches to a word. Perhaps the following examples will help illustrate what I mean: Genesis 24:2 : “And Abraham said to the eldest servant of his house,” to which is added by way of definition, “that ruled over all that he had.” 2 Timothy 3:17: “That the man of God may be perfect,” which is said to mean, "thoroughly furnished unto all good works." Hebrews 5:14: “But strong meat belongeth to them that are of full age” (or perfect), which is explained by the following words: “even those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil.”

2. The subject and predicate of the proposition mutually explain each other

• In Matthew 5:13, where we read : “If the salt have lost its savor,” the meaning of the verb moranthei, which may also signify, to become foolish (cf. Romans 1:22), is determined by the subject, salt. In Romans 8:19-23, the meaning of the subject, creature, is limited by the various predicates {a predicate is the verb and the words associated with it}. The good angels are excluded by verse 20; the bad, by verses 19-21. The same verses make it impossible to include the wicked among men, while the 23rd verse also excludes the children of God. The idea is limited, therefore, to the irrational and inanimate creation.

3. Parallelism may aid in determining the meaning of a word

• In Psalm 7:13, we read: “He hath also prepared for him the instruments of death,” which is explained by the following member: “He ordaineth his arrows against the persecutors.” In Isaiah 46:11, the Lord says of himself that he is “calling a ravenous bird from the East,” and this finds its explanation in the parallelism: “the man that executeth my counsel from a far country.”

4. Parallel passages also constitute an important help

• Parallel passages are divided into two groups : verbal and real. “When the same word occurs in similar connections, or in reference to the same general subject, the parallel is called verbal...Real parallels are those similar passages in which the likeness or identity consists, not in words or phrases, but in facts, subjects, sentiments, or doctrines” (Terry, Biblical Hermeneutics, p. 121).

In enlisting the aid of parallel passages, the interpreter must be certain that they really are parallel. In the words of Davidson, “It is not enough that the same term or phrase be found in both ; there must be similarity of sentiment.” For instance, Jonah 4:10 and 1 Thessalonians 5:5 are not parallel, though the expression “son(s) of a (the) night” is found in both. Neither are Proverbs 22:2 and 29:13, though they are often thought to be. See Terry, Biblical Hermeneutics, p. 121.

It is necessary that the phrase or expression calling for explanation be clearer in one passage than it is in the other, since it is impossible to explain an obscure passage of scripture with one that is equally obscure. It hardly need be mentioned, in this connection, that the interpreter should dutifully guard against the mistake of trying to illustrate a perfectly clear passage by one that is less perspicuous.

• In Colossians 1:16 we read: “For by him (Christ) were all things created.” In view of the fact that the creative work is here ascribed to Christ, some put forth the opinion that the expression “all things” (panta) refers to all the new creation, though the context rather favors the idea that the universe is meant. Now, the question arise, whether there is any passage in which the work of creation is ascribed to Christ, and the possibility of a reference to the new creation is excluded. Such a passage is found in 1 Corinthians 8:6, where the phrase ta panta is used of all created things, and the creative work is ascribed equally to the Father and the Son.
• In Isaiah 9:6 the prophet says: “For unto us a child is born...and his name shall be called...Mighty God (El gibbor).” Gesenius finds no reference to God here, and renders these words “mighty hero.’ But in Isaiah 10:21, the same phrase is used in a context in which it can only refer to Deity.
• John 9:39 contains the statement: “For judgment I am come into the world, that they which see might be made blind.” Now , the word krima (judgment) usually denotes a judgment of condemnation, but the final clause in this case would seem to require signification of judgment in general. Therefore, the question is asked whether the word is ever used in that sense. Romans 11:33 gives the answer to that question , because there the same word undoubtedly has a general signification.

The Figurative Use of Words

The figurative use of words is discovered through tropes, internal helps, and principles used for interpreting figurative language.

Principal Tropes Used in Scripture

We are not concerned with figures of syntax or figures of thought (at least not in the present connection), but rather with those figures of speech that are commonly called tropes, in which a word or expression is used in a different sense from that which properly belongs to it. Tropes are founded on resemblance or on certain definite relations. The principle tropes are the metaphor, the metonymy, and the synecdoche.

1. The metaphor might be called an unexpressed comparison. It is a figure of speech in which one object is likened to another by asserting it to be that other, or by speaking of it as if it were that other. It is different from a simile in that it does not express the word of likeness. Metaphors frequently occur in the Bible. In Psalm 18:2, six metaphors are found in this single verse. Jesus used a metaphor when he said to the Pharisees: “Go ye, and tell that fox,” Luke 13:32. There two kinds of metaphors in the Bible that have reference to the Divine Being, and these deserve special attention.

• Anthropopathisms (An’thro po path’ isms) ascribe human emotions, passions, and desires to God (Genesis 6:6; Deuteronomy 13:17; Ephesians 4:30).
• Anthropomorphisms (An’thro po morf’ isms) ascribe bodily members and physical activities to God (Exodus 15:16; Psalm 34:16; Lamentations 3:56; Zechariah 14:4; James 5:4).

2. The metonymies are also numerous in Scripture. This figure of speech, as well as the synecdoche, is founded on a relation rather than on a resemblance. In the case of the metonymy, the relation is mental rather than physical. It indicates such relations as cause and effect, progenitor and posterity, subject and attribute, sigh and thing signified. Paul says in Thessalonians 5:19, “Quench not the Spirit,” when he refers to the special manifestations of the Holy Spirit. And when, in the parable of Dives and Lazarus, Abraham says, “They have Moses and the Prophets,” Luke 16:29, he naturally meant their writings. In Isaiah 22;22, “the key of the house of David,” conveys the idea of control over the royal house. Circumcision is called a covenant in Acts 7:8, because it was a sigh of the covenant.

3. The synecdoche resembles the metonymy somewhat, but the relation on which it is founded is physical rather than mental. In this figure there is a certain identity of what is expressed and what it meant. Apart is put for a whole, or a whole for a part; a genus for a species, or a species for a genus; an individual for a class, or a class for an individual; a plural for a singular, or a singular for a plural. Jephthah is said to have been buried “in the cities of Gilead” (Judges 12:7) when, naturally, only one city was meant. When the prophet says in Daniel 12:2: “And many of those that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake,” he certainly did not intend to teach partial resurrection. And when Luke informs us in Acts 27:37 that there were in all the ship “two hundred, threescore and sixteen souls, ”he does not mean to imply that there were only disembodied spirits on board.

Internal Helps for Determining Whether The Figurative or Literal Sense is Intended

It is extremely important for the interpreter to know whether a word is used in a literal or in a figurative sense. The Jews, and even the disciples, often made serious mistakes by interpreting literally what Jesus meant figuratively (John 4:11,32; John 6:52; Matthew 16:6-12). Failure to understand that the Lord spoke figuratively when he said, “This (is) my body,” even became fruitful source of division in the Churches of the Reformation. Therefore, it is of paramount importance that the interpreter have certainty on this point.

Principles Useful in Interpreting Figurative Language of The Bible

The interpreter must have a clear conception of the things on which the figures are based, or form which they are borrowed, since the tropical use of words is founded on certain resemblances or relations. The figurative language of the Bible is derived from:

• the physical features of the Holy Land
• the religious institutions of Israel
• the history of God’s people
• the daily life and customs of the various peoples that occupy a predominant place in the Bible

These must be understood, therefore, in order to interpret the figures that are derived from them.

In Psalm 92:12 we read: “The righteous shall flourish like the palm tree; he shall grow like a cedar in Lebanon.” The expositor cannot hope to interpret this passage unless he acquainted with the characteristics of the palm tree and the cedar. If he desires to explain Psalm 51:9, “Purge me with hyssop, and I shall be clean,” he must have some understanding of the method of ceremonial purification among Israel.

The interpreter should make it a point to discover the principle idea without placing to much emphasis on the details. When the Biblical authors employed such figures of speech as metaphors, they generally had some specific point or points of agreement in mind. And even if the interpreter can find still more points of agreement, he must limit himself to those intended by the author. In Romans 8:17, Paul says, "And if children, then heirs; heirs of God and joint heirs with Christ." It is perfectly evident that he refers to the blessings which believers receive with Christ from their common father. The metaphor contained in the word “heir” would be pressed too far, if it were made to imply the death of the Father as the testator. It would be nothing short of spiritual suicide to apply the particulars as they appear in a passage such as Revelation 16:15, where we read: “Behold, I come as a thief.”

Send mail to WebMaster with questions or comments about this web site.
Copyright © 1999-2009 Richard Wayne Fry, Overseer
Published by POLITIC
All rights reserved.
Last modified: Monday February 09, 2009 11:03:33 AM -0800