prophets. It is a word of judgment that burns and smites the sinful offender unto utter ruin, and the intensity of its power is enhanced by the double simile.

er.

of

The tendency of the Hebrew writers to crowd several similes together is noticeable, and this may be in part accounted Crowding for by the nature of Hebrew parallelism. Thus in Isa. similes togethi, 8: "The daughter of Zion is left as a booth in a vineyard; as a night-lodge in a field of cucumbers; as a city besieged." And again in verse 30: "Ye shall be as an oak withering in foliage, and as a garden to which there is no water." And in xxix, 8: “It shall be as when the hungry dreams, and lo, he is eating, and he awakes, and his soul is empty; and as when the thirsty dreams, and lo, he is drinking, and he awakes, and lo, he is faint, and his soul is eagerly longing: so shall be the multitude of all the nations that are warring against Mount Zion." But though the figures are thus multiplied, they have a natural affinity, and are not open to the charge of being mixed or confused.

Similes are of frequent occurrence in the Scriptures, and being designed to illustrate an author's meaning, they involve similes self-inno difficulties of interpretation. When the Psalmist terpreting. says: "I am like a pelican of the wilderness; I have become as an owl of desert places; I watch and am become as a solitary sparrow on a roof" (Psa. cii, 6), he conveys a vivid picture of his utter loneliness. An image of gracefulness and beauty is presented by the language of Cant. ii, 9: "My beloved is like a roe, or a young fawn." Compare verse 16, and chapter iv, 1–5. Ezekiel (xxxii, 2) compares Pharaoh to a young lion of the nations, and a dragon (crocodile) in the seas. It is said in Matt. xvii, 2, that when Jesus became transfigured “his face did shine as the sun, and his garments became white as the light." In Matt. xxviii, 3, it is said of the angel who rolled the stone from the sepulchre, that "his appearance was as lightning, and his raiment white as snow." In Rom. xii, 4, the apostle illustrates the unity of the Church and the diversity of its individual ministers by the following comparison: "Even as in one body we have many members, and all the members have not the same work: so we, who are many, are one body in Christ, and severally members one of another." Compare also 1 Cor. xii, 12. In all these and other instances the comparison is self-interpreting, and the main thought is intensified by the imagery. A fine example of simile is that at the close of the sermon on the mount (Matt. vii, 24-27): "Every one therefore who hears these words of mine, and does them, shall be likened unto a wise man, who built his house upon the rock." Whether we here take the

opowdnoεтai, shall be likened, as a prediction of what will take place in the final judgment-I will then make him like; show as a matter of fact that he is like (Tholuck, Meyer), or as simply the predicate of formal comparison (the future tense merely contemplating future cases as they shall arise), the similitude is in either case the same. We have on the one hand the figure of a house based upon the immovable rock, which neither storm nor flood can shake; on the other of a house based upon the shifting sand, and unable to resist the violence of winds and floods. The similitude, thus formal ly developed, becomes, in fact, a parable, and the mention of rains, floods, and winds implies that the house is to be tested at roof, foundation, and sides-top, bottom, and middle. But we should not, like the mystics, seek to find some special and distinct form of temptation in these three words. The grand similitude sets forth impressively the certain future of those who hear and obey the words of Jesus, and also of those who hear and refuse to obey. Compare with this similitude the allegory in Ezek. xiii, 11–15. Blair traces the pleasure we take in comparisons of this kind to three different sources. "First, from the pleasure forded by sim- which nature has annexed to that act of the mind by which we compare two objects together, trace resemblances among those that are different, and differences among those that resemble each other; a pleasure, the final cause of which is to prompt us to remark and observe, and thereby to make us advance in useful knowledge. This operation of the mind is naturally and universally agreeable, as appears from the delight which even children have in comparing things together, as soon as they are capable of attending to the objects that surround them. Secondly, the pleasure of comparison arises from the illustration which the simile employed gives to the principal object; from the clearer view of it which it presents, or the stronger impression of it which it stamps upon the mind. And, thirdly, it arises from the introduction of a new, and commonly a splendid object, associated to the principal one of which we treat; and from the agreeable picture which that object presents to the fancy; new scenes being thereby brought into view, which, without the assistance of this figure, we could not have enjoyed."1

Pleasures

ile.

af

Assumed com

There is, common to all languages, a class of illustrations, which might be appropriately called assumed comparisons. parisons or il- They are not, strictly speaking, either similes, or metalustrations. phors, or parables, or allegories, and yet they include some elements of them all. A fact or figure is introduced for

1 Lectures on Rhetoric, lecture xvii.

the sake of illustration, and yet no formal words of comparison are used. But the reader or hearer perceives at once that a comparison is assumed. Sometimes such assumed comparisons follow a regular simile. In 2 Tim. ii, 3, we read: "Partake thou in hardship as a good soldier of Christ Jesus." But immediately after these words, and keeping the figure thus introduced in his mind, the apostle adds: "No one on service as a soldier entangles himself with the affairs of life; in order that he may please him who enlisted him as a soldier." Here is no figure of speech, but the plain statement of a fact fully recognized in military service. But following the simile of verse 3, it is evidently intended as a further illustration, and Timothy is left to make his own application of it. And then follow two other illustrations, which it is also assumed the reader will apply for himself. "And if also any one contend as an athlete, he is not crowned if he did not lawfully contend. The labouring husbandman must first partake of the fruits." These are plain, literal statements, but a comparison is tacitly assumed, and Timothy could not fail to make the proper application. The true minister's close devotion to his proper work, his cordial submission, and conformity to lawful authority and order, and his laborious activity, are the points especially emphasized by these respective illustrations. So, again, in verses 20 and 21 of the same chapter: "In a great house there are not only vessels golden and silver, but also wooden and earthen ones, and some Literal stateunto honour and some unto dishonour." simple statement of facts intended for an illustration, son. but not presented as a simile. It is suggested by the metaphor in the preceding verse, in which the Lord's own chosen, the pure who confess his name, are represented as the firm foundation laid by God, a beautifully inscribed substructure, which, however, is to be gradually builded upon until the edifice becomes complete.' Its real character and purport are as if the apostle had said: “And now, for illustration, consider how, in a great house," etc. What he says of this house is, in itself, no figure, but a literal statement of what was commonly found in any extensive building; but in verse 21 he makes his own application thus: "If, therefore, any one purify himself from these (persons like the troublesome errorists, as the babblers, Hymenæus, etc., verses 16, 17, considered as vessels unto dishonour), he shall be as a vessel unto honour, sanctified, useful to the Master, unto every good work prepared."

Here is a

ment, but implied compari

A similar example of extended illustration appears in Matt. vii, 15-20: "Beware of the false prophets who come to you in sheep's 1 Compare what is said on Peter, the living stone, pp. 124-127.

clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves." Here is a bold, strong metaphor, obliging us to think of the false teacher as a wolf covered over and concealed from outward view by the skin of a sheep. But the next verse introduces another figure entirely: "From their fruits ye will know them;" and then to make the figure plainer, our Lord asks: "Do they gather grapes from thorns, or figs from thistles?" The question demands a negative answer, and is itself an emphatic way of making such answer. Thereupon he proceeds, using the formula of comparison: "So every good tree produces good fruit, and the bad tree produces bad fruit;" and then, dropping formal comparison, he adds: "A good tree cannot bring forth bad fruit, nor can a bad tree produce good fruit. Every tree that does not produce good fruit is cut down and cast into fire. Therefore (in view of these well-known facts, adduced as illustrations, I repeat the statement made a moment ago, verse 16), from their fruits ye will know them." It will be shown in a subsequent chapter how all true parables are essentially similes, but all similes are not parables. The examples of assumed comparison, given above, though distinguished from both simile and parable proper, contain essential elements of both.

Metaphor de

trated.

METAPHOR.

Metaphor is an implied comparison, and is of much more frequent occurrence in all languages than simile. It differs from fined and illus- the latter in being a briefer and more pungent form of expression, and in turning words from their literal meaning to a new and striking use. The passage in Hos. xiii, 8: "I will devour them like a lion," is a simile or formal comparison; but Gen. xlix, 9: "A lion's whelp is Judah," is a metaphor. We may compare something to the savage strength and rapacity of a lion, or the swift flight of an eagle, or the brightness of the sun, or the beauty of a rose, and in each case we use the words in their literal sense. But when we say, Judah is a lion, Jonathan was an eagle, Jehovah is a sun, my beloved one is a rose, we perceive at once that the words lion, eagle, etc., are not used literally, but only some notable quality or characteristic of these creatures is intended. Hence metaphor, as the name denotes (Greek, μerapéρw, to carry over, to transfer), is that figure of speech in which the sense of one word is transferred to another. This process of using words in new constructions is constantly going on, and, as we have seen in forrner chapters, the tropical sense of many words becomes at length the only one in use. Every language is, therefore, to a great extent, a dictionary of faded metaphors.

from natural

The sources from which scriptural metaphors are drawn are to be looked for chiefly in the natural scenery of the lands of the Bible, the customs and antiquities of the Orient, and the ritual worship of the Hebrews.' In Jer. ii, 13, we have two very expressive metaphors: "My people have committed two evils: Examples of they have forsaken me, a fountain of living waters, to metaphor drawn hew for themselves cisterns, broken cisterns, that can scenery. hold no water." A fountain of living waters, especially in such a land as Palestine, is of inestimable worth; far more valuable than any artificial well or cistern, that can at best only catch and hold rain water, and is liable to become broken and lose its contents. What insane folly for a man to forsake a living fountain to hew for himself an uncertain cistern! The ingratitude and apostasy of Israel are strikingly characterized by the first figure, and their selfsufficiency by the second.

In Job ix, 6, a violent earthquake is represented as Jehovah "causing the land to move from her place, and making her columns tremble." The whole land affected by the earthquake shock is conceived as a building, heaved out of place, and all her pillars or columnar supports trembling and tottering to their fall. In chapter xxvi, 8, the holding of the rain in the heavens is pictured as God "binding up the waters in his dark cloud (ay), and the cloud (py, cloud-covering) is not rent under them." The clouds are conceived as a great sheet or bag, strong enough to hold the immense weight of waters. In Deut. xxxii, 40, Jehovah is represented as saying: "For I will lift up to heaven my hand, and say, living am I forHere the allusion is to the ancient custom of Ancient cuslifting up the hand to heaven in the act of making a toms. solemn oath. In verse 42 we have these further images: "I will make my arrows drunk with blood, and my sword shall devour flesh." By these metaphors arrows are personified as living things, intoxicated with drinking the blood of Jehovah's slaughtered foes, and the sword, as a ravenous beast of prey, devouring their flesh. Many similar examples exhibit at one and the same time the Old Testament anthropomorphisms, together with personification and metaphor.

ever."

bits of animals.

The following strong metaphors have their basis in well-known habits of animals: "Issachar is an ass of bone, lying Metaphorical aldown between the double fold” (Gen. xlix, 14). He lusions to the haloves rest, like a beast of burden, especially like the strong, bony ass, that seeks repose between the sheepfolds. "Naphtali is a hind set forth, the giver of sayings of beauty" (Gen. 1Compare above p. 158.