The abundant use of figurative language within the Old Testament’s prophetic corpus requires a thoughtful interpretive approach. The following essay first expounds on the metaphorical language in prophetic rhetoric in the Old Testament and then distinguishes between figurative language’s form and function. Second, a foray into hermeneutical methodology provides a foundation for interpreting figurative language in the prophetic corpus. Third, a brief discussion regarding the distinction between figures of speech and apocalyptic symbols commences to mitigate the risk of confusion. Finally, an analysis of three prophetic texts, Micah 3:12, Isaiah 4:15-16, and Isaiah 42:14-16, completes the essay by utilizing the hermeneutical approach established to identify the form, function, and interpretation of the imagery provided in a given prophetic text.
Metaphorical Language
Figurative language looms large in all Old Testament poetry, but it is particularly relevant within the prophetic literature of the major and minor prophets. In its most basic form, figurative language and figures of speech are comparison devices. More specifically, metaphor uses word imagery to point to or identify a subject, concept, or idea. Other literary devices or forms, such as metonymy, also land under the metaphor heading when similar or associated ideas replace the subject. A famous passage in Isaiah also highlights metaphorical language in the form of a simile: “But they who wait for the Lord shall renew their strength; they shall mount up with wings like eagles; they shall run and not be weary; they shall walk and not faint” (Isa 40:31, English Standard Version). The imagery of an eagle taking flight provides richness and interest. It may evoke an emotional or visceral response from the reader, which points to the power of the Old Testament’s prophetic messaging.
Although language, in general, is informative, it also has the power to move beyond the dissemination of information. A text has propositional or locutionary meaning, but it also has an illocutionary and perlocutionary aspect. The illocutionary dimension calls for a response to the text, while the perlocutionary dimension points to the impact of the words on the reader. The Old Testament prophets deeply understand all three dimensions of language, not only in its figurative forms but also in its functional capabilities. Metaphorical language can paint a picture with words and spark interest. However, it also can function in a way that provides a deeper dimension of the text, which enhances understanding. Figurative language such as metaphor, metonymy, and hyperbole also can function in various other capacities. For example, figures of speech may enhance memorability, provide a euphemism, or enlarge or diminish an idea. The Old Testament prophets may be considered metaphorical language savants who prolifically use imagery to convey the message of Yahweh.
Hermeneutical Approach
Interpreters have suggested various hermeneutical approaches over the centuries. During the patristic and medieval times, ancient interpreters deployed various forms of literal, allegorical, tropological, and anagogical hermeneutics. Hermeneutical methodology has more recently revolved around the readers, the text, or the author. Historical-critical approaches have focused on the text or, more often, what exists behind the text. In contrast, post-modern perspectives have focused on the reader through various reader response initiatives to determine meaning. Alternatively, conservative scholars and evangelicals have located meaning in the original author’s intent. Andreas Köstenberger promotes using the hermeneutical triad, which utilizes a passage’s historical setting, literary context, and theological message grounded in authorial intent to determine meaning.[1] Broadly, utilizing the hermeneutical triad is the most reasonable approach for all Old Testament texts, including the figurative language within prophetic literature. In sum, original intent determines the meaning of the prophetic figurative language based on its historical, literary, and theological contexts.
Once the interpreter establishes a hermeneutical methodology, a more detailed approach to analyzing and interpreting the Old Testament prophets’ figurative language may begin. First, two other hermeneutical questions often arise: whether a literal or metaphorical approach is appropriate and whether a text can have multiple meanings. Authorial intent answers both questions.
Introduction to Biblical Interpretation
If the author intended the meaning to be metaphorical, then metaphor is appropriate, and if the author intended for multiple meanings of a given text, then multiple meanings are available. Second, William Klein, Craig Blomberg, and Robert Hubbard provide a concise hermeneutical approach to interpreting the Old Testament prophet’s figurative language: identify the type or form of the figurative language, determine the figurative meaning from the literal meaning, and, finally, determine the function of the figurative language.[2] The examples below will utilize both the broader hermeneutical triad and the more specific approach provided by Klein, Blomberg, and Hubbard to engage the imagery-rich language of the prophetic corpus.
Figures of Speech and Apocalyptic Symbolism
A final interpretive element to consider before engaging specific examples of figurative language pertains to distinguishing between figures of speech and visionary or apocalyptic symbols. A clear-cut delineation between prophetic figures of speech and apocalyptic symbols only sometimes exists. At times, a blurring of language occurs. For example, Old Testament prophetic imagery sometimes uses symbolic language. Likewise, Old Testament apocalyptic symbolism often engages rich imagery similar to the figurative language used by the prophets. However, a few distinguishing features do exist. Andreas Köstenberger and Richard Patterson explain that apocalyptic symbolism generally includes a “visionary or revelatory means of communication” and a “dualism between earthly and heavenly realities” while simultaneously utilizing symbolic and figurative language.[3] In short, figures of speech include a wide range of rich imagery utilized by the Old Testament prophets, while apocalyptic symbolism emphasizes an eschatological initiative within a supernatural worldview.
Micah 3:12
The first example of imagery-rich language from the prophetic corpus is found in a judgment speech in Micah 3. The prophet calls the rulers of Israel to attention in verse 9a and then levels several accusations against them in verses 9b-11. Micah then threatens the rulers by stating, “Therefore because of you, Zion shall be plowed as a field; Jerusalem shall become a heap of ruins and the mountain of the house a wooded height” (Mic 3:12). The literary context surrounding verse 12 provides clarity that the prophesied destruction was because of corruption associated with the Jewish leaders. The historical context sits in the late eighth to early seventh century BC during the reigns of Kings Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah. In hindsight, Micah points the modern reader to the destruction of Jerusalem by Babylon in 586 BC. Finally, Micah 3:12 also supports the thematic initiative of God’s judgment upon the sinful nations of Judah and Israel (cf. Mic 1:3-7), which provides the theological context for the verse.
By laying a broad hermeneutical foundation, the more specific interpretive work of analyzing the three figures of speech in verse 12 may commence. The first step is to identify the form or type of figurative language. Micah uses a simile in the first phrase when he contends that Zion will be plowed like a field, and the prophet uses metaphorical language in the final two phrases when he claims that Jerusalem becomes a heap of ruins, and the temple mountain becomes a wooded height. The second step is to distill the figurative meaning from the literal meaning. The literal meaning of the first phrase points to farm machinery, but Micah intends to highlight the figurative meaning that the city will be pulverized like the soil after a farmer plows a field. In a sense, the literal interpretation of Jerusalem becoming a heap of ruins and a mound of overgrown weeds is what happened in 586 BC. However, in another sense, Micah’s point was to describe something other than Jerusalem’s future topography. Instead, Micah’s figurative meaning is that Jerusalem would eventually face destruction because of its leaders’ corruption, regardless of how the weeds would eventually grow on the mountain. The third step is identifying the function of the figure of speech in its context. In light of the literary, historical, and theological contexts, the figurative language used by Micah functions to warn his readers of the devastating effects of corruption, which ultimately transpired in 586 BC at the hands of the Babylonian Empire.
Isaiah 41:15-16
The second example of imagery-rich language from the prophetic corpus is found in a salvation oracle in Isaiah 41. The prophet announces the oracle in verse 8, reminds his audience of God’s past encounters in verse 9, promises salvation in verses 10 and 14, and prophesizes the destruction of enemies in verses 11-13 and 15-16. In the final two verses, Isaiah utilizes powerful, figurative language: “Behold, I make of you a threshing sledge, new, sharp, and having teeth; you shall thresh the mountains and crush them, and you shall make the hills like chaff; you shall winnow them, and the wind shall carry them away” (Isa 41:15-16a). The immediate literary context highlights that verses 15-16 are part of a larger salvation oracle rather than the desire of a capricious God to randomly destroy enemies. According to Gary Smith, the historical context pertains to an unidentified conqueror from the east noted in Isaiah 41:2-3 warring against the people of God (Isa 41:12).[4] The idea that Yahweh controls the world, rather than the pagan gods of Israel’s enemies, provides the thematic thread that undergirds the theological context of the verses.
Furthermore, verses 15-16a encompass various forms of figurative language. First, the prophet uses metaphor by comparing God’s people to a sledge and then personifies the sledge with sharp teeth reminiscent of a lion, tiger, or wild beast. The prophet then uses metonymy by replacing the word “enemies” with “mountains and hills,” which are beaten, crushed, and ground into dust. The prophet uses a simile when asserting that the hills will be like chaff. The prophet also uses metaphor when he explains that Israel will winnow or release the grain from the chaff. Finally, the prophet also possibly uses metonymy by replacing the word “Yahweh,” who will ultimately blow the pulverized nations into obscurity, with the word “wind.”
The literal meaning of all the phrases points to harvesting wheat or other grain types using the agrarian language of threshing, crushing, chaffing, and winnowing. However, Isaiah’s figurative meaning is clear: Israel will destroy her enemy with Yahweh’s power. At this point, the function of the figurative language crystallizes. The literary, historical, and theological contexts all support the thematic initiative that God is more potent than all the other gods. Accordingly, figurative language encourages the Israelites not to fear (Isa 41:14) but to put their trust in the Holy One of Israel (Isa 41:16b).
Isaiah 42:14-16
The third example of imagery-rich language from the prophetic corpus comes from a more challenging passage: Isaiah 42:14-16. Although the interpretive issues are numerous, the figurative language is profound. The interpreter may classify the pericope as a salvation oracle in light of the powerful concluding promise that Yahweh will not forsake His people (Isa 42:16). The immediate literary context places the passage between singing to the Lord (Isa 42:10-14) and Israel’s inability to see and hear God’s message (Isa 42:18-25). It is difficult to identify the historical context in any specific sense; however, ancient Israel generally struggled to hear God. Theologically, God desires Israel to be His people and act like His people; accordingly, the prophecy ultimately provides hope to Israel.
Regarding specific figurative language, in verse 14a, the prophet uses hyperbole when explaining that God has kept still or silent, for Yahweh is never completely silent. Further, metonymy likely exists where the term “silence” replaces the idea that Israel’s prayers were not answered to their liking. Isaiah uses a simile when he asserts that Yahweh cries like a woman in labor (Isa 42:14b). The prophet uses the language of laying waste and drying up metaphorically to describe a type of destruction (Isa 42:15). In verse 16a, replacing the idea of wayward people with the word “blind,” the writer uses metonymy. Furthermore ,the prophet uses metaphorical language to represent God’s loving kindness when stating that He will make “rough places into level ground” (Isa 42:16b). The literal meaning of pregnancy in verse 14 points to a figurative meaning that God is experiencing pain. However, the exact reason for the pain is not evident. The meaning of drying out in verse 15 may point to a literal drought but figuratively to destruction through warfare. The literal meaning of blindness in verse 16a figuratively evokes the sense that His people have lost their way and need a lighted path. In verse 16b, the literal meaning of path as a method of transportation points figuratively to a God who will guide His people by providing insight (light) and a productive environment for accomplishing His tasks (level ground).
Finally, the function of the passage is clear even though, at times, the literary, historical, and theological contexts may be ambiguous. The function of the figurative language in verses 14-16 is to provide hope to those who feel emotionally lost or even wholly forsaken (Isa 16b). Regardless of the interpreter’s challenges, the message that God will never forsake His people shines through the prophetic text.
Conclusion
The plethora of forms used by the Old Testament prophets is quite impressive and includes hyperbole, personification, metonymy, metaphor, and simile, to name a few. However, without an analysis of function, the forms may be more ornamental than substantive. Accordingly, a hermeneutical approach to figurative language must not only engage the broader literary, historical, and theological contexts but also provide a specific interpretive methodology for literary devices utilized by the prophets. By first identifying the forms and then distilling the figurative meaning from the literal meaning of the text based on its broader context, the interpreter can then move toward identifying the function of the figurative language. Ultimately, the function of the literary devices provides insight into the author’s intent regarding why the figure was used and what the figure contributed to the meaning of the text. As applied to three Old Testament passages, the hermeneutical process provided a solid methodology for reasonably interpreting each prophetic text.
______________________________________________
[1] Andreas J Köstenberger, “Invitation to Biblical Interpretation & the Hermeneutical Triad: New Hermeneutical Lenses for a New Generation of Bible Interpreters,” Criswell Theological Review 10, no. 1 (2012): 3.
[2] William W. Klein, Craig L. Blomberg, and Robert L. Hubbard Jr., Introduction to Biblical Interpretation (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2004), 315.
[3] Andreas J. Köstenberger and Richard D. Patterson, Invitation to Biblical Interpretation: Exploring the Hermeneutical Triad of History, Literature, and Theology (Grand Rapids: Kregel Academic, 2011), 520–21.
[4] Gary Smith, Isaiah 1-39, vol. 15A, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Holman Reference, 2007), 125.
Bibliography
- Klein, William W., Craig L. Blomberg, and Robert L. Hubbard Jr. Introduction to Biblical Interpretation. Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2004.
- Köstenberger, Andreas J. “Invitation to Biblical Interpretation & the Hermeneutical Triad: New Hermeneutical Lenses for a New Generation of Bible Interpreters.” Criswell Theological Review 10, no. 1 (2012): 3–12.
- Köstenberger, Andreas J., and Richard D. Patterson. Invitation to Biblical Interpretation: Exploring the Hermeneutical Triad of History, Literature, and Theology. Grand Rapids: Kregel Academic, 2011.
- Smith, Gary. Isaiah 1-39. Vol. 15A. The New American Commentary. Nashville: Holman Reference, 2007.
