Idioms (figure of speech)
Cut off
Means to kill, die or come to an end.
For example: Genesis 9:11, 1 Samuel 24:21, 1 Kings 18:4, Isaiah 53:8
From heaven
Nobody believed John pre-existed and came "from heaven", yet it was written:
But Jesus answered and said to them, “I also will ask you one thing, which if you tell Me, I likewise will tell you by what authority I do these things: The baptism of John — where was it from? From heaven or from men?”
And they reasoned among themselves, saying, “If we say, ‘From heaven,’ He will say to us, ‘Why then did you not believe him?’ But if we say, ‘From men,’ we fear the multitude, for all count John as a prophet.” -- Matthew 21:25
The issue was that "from heaven" means "it is good" and therefore they were supposed to accept John's baptism and "from men" means "it is bad" which would have offended the people.
Likewise, nobody believed John was God's avatar or reincarnation "sent from God", yet it was written:
There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. -- John 1:6
Nobody expected the Christ to "come from heaven". This is clear from the crowd's reaction to Jesus announcement:
Has not the Scripture said that the Christ comes from the offspring of David, and comes from Bethlehem, the village where David was?” -- John 7:42 (ESV)
Another example:
Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and comes down from the Father of lights, with whom there is no variation or shadow of turning. -- James 1:17 (NKJV)
and
"And try Me now in this," says the LORD of hosts, "If I will not open for you the windows of heaven and pour out for you such blessing that there will not be room enough to receive it." -- Malachi 3:10 (NKJV)
Nobody expected "good gifts" or "blessings" to literally fall out of the sky.
With this in context, John 3:31 also makes more sense if it is interpreted as an idiom:
He who comes from above is above all; he who is of the earth is earthly and speaks of the earth. He who comes from heaven is above all. -- John 3:31 (NKJV)
It should not be taken literally, then John would have meant that Jesus' disciples were also previously in heaven or some other place other than our world
As You sent Me into the world, I also have sent them into the world. -- John 17:18 (NKJV)
Jesus' disciples were already on Earth. As a literal interpretation Jesus' statement does not make sense, but in the context of this idiom it means they will continue the "good work" that God originally sent Jesus to do.
Idiom of permission
An idiom is “a phrase or expression whose meaning cannot be understood from the ordinary meanings of the words in it.” Idioms often do not make sense when translated literally into other languages or heard by people who have not been taught what they mean. For example, the American English idiom, “stop on a dime” has nothing to do with a dime, it means “stop quickly.”
It is vital that we understand biblical idioms if we are going to understand the Bible. What many scholars refer to as “the idiom of permission” is an idiom that occurs in the Hebrew language (in fact, in Semitic languages and occasionally in other languages as well). The “idiom of permission” generally occurs when someone is said to do something or make something happen that they contributed to happening in some way, but did not actually do.
For example:
And the LORD said to Moses, “When you go back to Egypt, see that you do before Pharaoh all the miracles that I have put in your power. But I will harden his heart, so that he will not let the people go. -- Exodus 4:21 (ESV)
Explanation:
If anything God has done has contributed to Pharaoh’s hard heart, then God can be said to have hardened Pharaoh’s heart even though it was Pharaoh who hardened his own heart.
In the case of Pharaoh in Exodus, God asked Pharaoh to let the Israelites go. At that point, Pharaoh could have said, “Okay,” and let them go, and he and Egypt would have been unhurt, and even blessed for obeying God. But God’s demand forced Pharaoh to make a choice: he could either let God’s people go, or he could harden his heart and say, “No,” which is what he did. As Pharaoh continued to say “No,” time after time, God put more and more pressure on him in the form of plagues that affected the land and people of Egypt. As the intensity of the plagues increased and there was more and more damage to Egypt and the Egyptians, Pharaoh’s heart had to become harder and harder in order for him to keep saying “No” to God’s request to release the Israelites. But God was not the problem; Pharaoh was the problem. However, because God was the one making the request and putting the pressure on Pharaoh, the Semitic idiom of permission is expressed by the phrase “God hardened Pharaoh’s heart.” It simply means that God acted in such a way that Pharaoh had to harden his heart to resist God. God did not harden Pharaoh’s heart, Pharaoh hardened his own heart because he did not want to obey God’s request.
We use the same kind of idiom in English. If a person does something that upsets us, we might say to them, “You made me mad.” But the person did not actually “make” us mad; anger was our personal response to what the person did to us. Someone else may have the same thing happen to them as happened to us but not get angry at all. So, when we say, “You made me mad,” we are using an idiom that expresses that anger was our response to what someone else did. A trained psychologist would not say, “You made me mad,” they would say, “I responded with anger when you did what you did.”
It was due to his understanding of the Semitic idiom of permission that Joseph Rotherham, in his Emphasized Bible, translated Exodus 4:21 as, “I will let his heart wax bold,” rather than “I will harden his heart.” The literal truth of what was going on with Pharaoh is stated in Exodus 9:34, that he hardened his own heart. God is love. He does not do evil. But because He created people with free will, and because He set laws and norms in place that require people to live righteous lives, when people do evil it is often, via the Semitic idiom of permission, spoken of as if God was the one who did the evil.
...
There is another reason that we should be able to comprehend that God was not making Pharaoh’s heart hard so that he would disobey God. We are all like Pharaoh to a degree, because we all have some pride, some stubbornness, and some resistance to doing the whole will of God, and thus all of us disobey God from time to time. Sometimes our disobedience is out of stubbornness or just being insensitive and unresponsive to God’s desires, and in those times it is not God “making” us disobey, it is our weak and sinful human nature, likely intermixed with a lack of focus on God and too much focus on what we ourselves want, that causes us to disobey.
God is love, and He loved the Egyptians just as much as He loved Israel. He did not want to hurt Egypt, but neither was He going to stand by while the Egyptians hurt His people and defied His will. But God did not take away Pharaoh’s free will and harden his heart; He gave Pharaoh choices. Pharaoh decided to harden his heart and defy God, but that was Pharaoh’s own doing.
It is very important to understand the Semitic idiom of permission in order to understand the Bible because the idiom occurs many times. However, there are times when God does intervene in human affairs and punishes the guilty or acts powerfully to protect His people from His enemies. A good example of this is when He helped the Israelites conquer the Canaanites and threw hailstones down from heaven upon them (Josh. 10:11). Another example is when He caused Noah’s Flood to protect humans from the overpowering wickedness of the time. Sometimes, however, there are events in the Bible when it is not clear whether or not God is directly acting or if the event is the idiom of permission. Those times require study and prayer, and we must not be in a rush to determine the correct answer, but sometimes must be content to sit in uncertainty. Generally, however, if God is said to be afflicting and killing His people, the Jews, it is the idiom of permission, but there are exceptions to that.
It is also important to note that calling the idiom, “the idiom of permission” is misleading, since God does not actively give His permission for evil to happen. It is not as if Pharaoh asked God if he could harden his heart and God said, “Yes.” The name of the idiom, “the idiom of permission” was primarily given by theologians who thought in a Calvinistic way that everything that happens is God’s will, so if evil happens then God must “permit” it. But Scripture does not teach that everything that happens is God’s will. Quite the opposite! There is an active war between Good and Evil, between God and the Devil, that is going on in the spiritual world and the physical world. Many times the will of God is not done. God wants all people to be saved, but most will not be (cp. Matt. 7:13-14), and there are thousands of other things that God wants to happen that do not happen.
There are many examples of the “idiom of permission” in the Bible (e.g., Exodus 4:24, 32:35; Numbers 21:6; Deuteronomy 29:4; Joshua 11:20; Judges 3:12, 9:23; 2 Samuel 24:1; 2 Kings 24:2; 1 Chronicles 10:14; Isaiah 6:10, 45:7; Jeremiah 36:3, 42:10; Ezekiel 14:9).
Poor in the spirit
For example:
Blessed are the poor in spirit, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to them. -- Matthew 5:3
Explanation:
This is a Semitic idiom and is an idiomatic way of saying “humble in their attitude.” To fully understand the idiom, we must examine both “poor” and “spirit.” The Greek word “poor” is ptōchos (#4434 πτωχός), and it means poor in wealth, but can refer to being “poor” in other ways. For example, the people Christ addresses in Revelation 3:17 are technically wealthy in material goods, yet Jesus says: “you say, ‘I am rich, and have acquired riches, and have need of nothing,’ and yet do not know that you are the wretched one, and pitiful, and poor, and blind, and naked.” In this verse, “poor” refers to being poor in godliness and in the treasure that will be bestowed at the Judgment. Similarly, the word “poor” can refer to being poor or humble in one’s attitude. This is reflected in Isaiah 66:2, which mentions the person to whom God will pay attention: “but to this man will I look, even to him that is poor and of a contrite spirit, and trembleth at my word.” This verse mentions a “poor and contrite spirit” but many versions correctly understand that the word “poor” refers to “humble,” and translate it that way (ESV, HCSB, NASB, NIV, NRSV). Kenneth Bailey does a good job in showing from the Old Testament, the Qumran texts, and even early Christian sources, that “poor” was used idiomatically for “humble.”d
The word “spirit” is translated from the Greek word pneuma (#4151 πνεῦμα), and pneuma has many meanings, such as “wind” and “breath.” Furthermore, when pneuma is translated as “spirit,” it can refer to many different things, including God who is spirit (John 4:24); Jesus who is called “the spirit” (2 Cor. 3:17); angels who are spirits (Heb. 1:14); and demons who are spirits (Matt. 10:1). It can also refer to “attitude,” which it does here in Matthew 5:3. Other places it refers to attitude are Matthew 26:41 and Mark 14:38, when Peter and the other disciples were sleepy and Jesus told them, “The spirit [attitude] is willing, but the body is weak.” It is also “attitude” in Acts 18:25 when Apollos was called, “fervent in the spirit” (KJV), meaning that he had a fervent attitude, which is why the NRSV translates the phrase, “he spoke with burning enthusiasm.” Interestingly, English also uses “spirit” as “attitude.” For example, we speak of a person being “in good spirits,” or a school having good “school spirit.”
When Jesus says that the "the Kingdom of Heaven belongs to the poor in the spirit", he possibly referred to this Psalm:
In just a little while, the wicked will be no more;
though you look carefully at his place, he will not be there.
But the meek (humble/lowly/poor) shall inherit the land and delight themselves in abundant peace.-- Psalm 37:10 (ESV)
For more information see the topic: Who is part of the Kingdom of God?
Serpents or scorpions
This is the figure of speech hypocatastasis. It seems best to understand “serpents and scorpions” in its widest sense, referring to the Devil, evil spirits, and also evil people. The Devil is called a serpent in Genesis 3:1; 2 Corinthians 11:3, and Revelation 20:2, John the Baptist referred to the evil people he confronted as a brood of vipers (Matt. 3:7), and Jesus referred to the religious leaders he confronted as serpents and vipers (Matthew 23:33). Also, Psalm 91:13 says the one who makes Yahweh his refuge will trample on snakes and serpents. Furthermore, Ezekiel 2:6 refers to evil, rebellious people as “scorpions.”
Jesus gave his disciples authority to trample on “all the power of the enemy,” and that includes both evil spirits and evil people.
For example:
And he (the Lord Jesus) said to them, “I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven. Behold, I have given you authority to tread on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy, and nothing shall hurt you. Nevertheless, do not rejoice in this, that the spirits are subject to you, but rejoice that your names are written in heaven.” -- Luke 10:18-20 (ESV)
Son of ...
It was a common Semitic idiom to refer to an aspect of one’s character by referring to him as the “son of” some quality. Thus we have “son of eighty years” which means someone 80 years old (Exodus 7:7 YLT); “son of stripes” is someone deserving to be beaten (Deuteronomy 25:2); “sons of rebellion” (Numbers 17:10); “sons of the army” are soldiers (2 Chronicles 25:13 YLT); “sons of the pledges” are hostages (2 Kings 14:14 YLT); “sons of death” are those who are worthy of death or are going to die (Psalm 79:11 YLT); “son of Gehenna” (Matthew 23:15); “son of destruction” (2 Thessalonians 2:3); “son of encouragement” (Acts 4:36); “son of the Devil” (Acts 13:10); this custom even applies to animals: “son of the herd” (Genesis 18:7 YLT), and objects: “sons of the flame” for sparks (Job 5:7). The exact meaning of the idiom “son of X” has to be determined from the context, as the examples above show. -- Revised English Version Commentary
The prophetic perfect
In the Hebrew and Aramaic languages in which much of the Bible was written, when something was absolutely going to happen in the future, it was sometimes spoken of as if it had already occurred in the past. This is apparently due to the fact that it is sometimes hard to express that a future event is certain to happen. Many times when we simply say that something “will” happen it does not happen. One way the Semitic languages avoided that was by idiomatically saying something already had happened even though the event was actually still future. That is the case in Ephesians 2:6 and some other verses in the New Testament—a future event is put in the past tense for emphasis.
In Ephesians 2:6 the verb “seated” is in the aorist tense, as if the seating had already occurred, even though actually we have not yet been seated in heaven. This is a figure of speech, in this case, an idiom that comes under the general category that some scholars refer to as the “prophetic perfect,” and in this specific case is a “futuristic aorist” (also sometimes called a “proleptic aorist”). We have not yet been seated in heaven, but the fact that we are born again guarantees that we will be when the Rapture occurs, so that fact is expressed by the idiom and we are said to be “seated” in heaven.
Hebrew scholars are familiar with this idiom and refer to it as “the prophetic perfect,” “the historic sense of prophecy,” the “perfective of confidence,” and in the NET text note on Obadiah 1:2 it is referred to as “the perfect of certitude.” It is also referred to by some scholars as the “here now, but not yet” or “already—not yet.” We should not be surprised that different scholars refer to the idiom by different names because idioms in languages do not have specific names; they are just the way people in that culture speak.
E. W. Bullinger recognized that a future event was sometimes referred to in the past tense as if it had already occurred, and instead of referring to it as an idiom of the language, referred to it as a figure of speech called heterosis (“The past for the future”).
The average Christian has no knowledge of the idiom because most of the time when it occurs in the Bible, the translators have not translated it literally, but instead have changed the tense of the verb so the English is easy to read and understand. Thus, the “prophetic perfect” is rarely apparent in English Bibles. In fairness to the translators, because the English language seldom uses anything like the prophetic perfect, most Christians would only be confused if the idiom was translated literally into English. For example, the Greek text of Jude 14 says that the Lord “came” with thousands of his saints (cp. NASB). Scholars of the biblical languages recognize that Jude was simply using the prophetic perfect to indicate the certainty of the Lord’s coming in the future with thousands of saints. But if they translated the verse literally, the average Christian would probably become confused and wonder, “When did the Lord come with thousands of his saints? The first and only time he came he had only a small group of apostles and disciples.”
Although the idiom of the prophetic perfect is originally a Semitic concept, it occurs in the New Testament Greek. Often the idioms of the Hebrew language and culture come over into the New Testament text. E. W. Bullinger explains that the idioms of the Hebrew language and culture are reflected in the Greek text:
The fact must ever be remembered that, while the language of the New Testament is Greek, the agents and instruments employed by the Holy Spirit were Hebrews. God spake “by the mouth of His holy prophets.” Hence, while the “mouth” and the throat and vocal chords and breath were human, the words were Divine. No one is able to understand the phenomenon; or explain how it comes to pass: for Inspiration is a fact to be believed and received, and not a matter to be reasoned about. While therefore, the words are Greek, the thoughts and idioms are Hebrew. Some, on this account, have condemned the Greek of the New Testament, because it is not classical; while others, in their anxiety to defend it, have endeavored to find parallel usages in classical Greek authors. Both might have spared their pains by recognizing that the New Testament Greek abounds with Hebraisms: i.e., expressions conveying Hebrew usages and thoughts in Greek words.”
When the Hebrew idiom of the prophetic perfect is brought into Greek, it is expressed in several different ways, because the Greek tenses are structured differently than the Hebrew tenses. Thus, technically in Greek, under the category of the prophetic perfect idiom, there is the prophetic perfect (the perfect tense used to express a future event), and proleptic aorist (the aorist tense used to express a future event).
The prophetic perfect and proleptic aorist are vital idioms for students of the Bible to understand, because of the important meaning it brings to the text. By writing about a future event in the past tense, God is emphasizing that the event will absolutely come to pass. If God simply used the future tense to write about future events, the aspect of absolute certainty that the idiom communicates would be lost. Here in Ephesians 2:6, for example, God could tell us, “we will be seated in heaven with Christ.” However, there might then be mitigating factors that would keep us from going to heaven, which is exactly what those people who say that Christians can lose their salvation teach. But saying that Christians are already in heaven is one of the ways God says that our salvation is not in doubt; we Christians will absolutely be with God.
There are many examples of the prophetic perfect in the Bible. For instance, God told Noah to build the ark. After telling him how to build it, the Hebrew text, translated literally, reads that God said, “And you have come into the ark” (Genesis 6:18). The ark was not even built at that time, but Noah would absolutely be inside it in the future. Another is when God said to Abraham, “To your descendants I have given this land” (Genesis 15:18; cp. NASB). This promise was made to Abraham before he even had any descendants to give the land to, but God states His promise in the past tense to emphasize the certainty of the event. Later, when Abraham was bargaining with God to save Sodom, God told Abraham that if 50 righteous people could be found in the city, He would spare it. To make His point clear, God used the prophetic perfect and said, “If I find at Sodom 50 righteous people, I have spared the whole place” (Genesis 18:26). Another example occurs when Joseph interpreted Pharaoh’s dream and foretold that there would be seven years of plenty and seven years of famine. When mentioning the years of famine, Joseph used the prophetic perfect for emphasis and said, “And there have arisen seven years of famine” (Genesis 41:30). The prophecy of the coming Messiah given by the prophet Balaam is placed in the prophetic perfect for emphasis. Although it would be more than 1,400 years before the Messiah would come, the Hebrew text has, “A star has come forth out of Jacob and a scepter has arisen out of Israel” (Numbers 24:17). Although Isaiah wrote more than 700 years before the birth of Christ, the Hebrew text reads, “To us a child has been born, to us a son has been given, and the government has been on his shoulders, and he has been called Wonderful, Counselor…” (Isaiah 9:6). There are many, many examples of the prophetic perfect in the Bible (cp. Proverbs 11:21).
Wallace explains the proleptic aorist as follows: “An author sometimes uses the aorist for the future to stress the certainty of the event. It involves a ‘rhetorical transfer’ of a future event as though it were past.”
Other examples of the proleptic aorist besides Jude 1:14 that was mentioned above are John 3:31 and Hebrews 2:5.
The way to tell that the Bible is not describing an actual past event but is using the prophetic perfect idiom is that the event in question is written about as both a past and future event, and the scope of Scripture makes it clear that the event is future. A good example is Jude 1:14, about the return of Christ. There are many scriptures that say Christ’s return is future, so when the Greek text of Jude 1:14 says it is in the past, we can tell that is the prophetic perfect idiom and emphasizing the fact that he absolutely will come back.
The Bible uses both the prophetic perfect idiom and the literal truth when speaking of a number of spiritual matters. For example, there are verses stating that Christians have already been saved (Ephesians 2:8), and there are verses stating that our salvation is still future (Romans 13:11). The verses that say our salvation is still future are literal because we are not “saved” (“rescued”) yet, which is why we all still suffer and die now. That our salvation and redemption are still future is why the Bible says we have a “guarantee” of our salvation and everlasting future (Ephesians 1:14; 2 Corinthians 1:22; 5:5). In the future we will be “saved” and at that time suffering and death will be no more. The verses in the New Testament that say we are already saved are the Semitic idiom of the prophetic perfect, and they are making the point that we will absolutely—without any doubt—be saved in the future.
Similarly, the Bible says Christians are already redeemed (Romans 3:24; Ephesians 1:7; Colossians 1:14), but it also says we are still awaiting our redemption (Romans 8:23; Ephesians 1:14; 4:30); it says believers have been adopted into God’s family (Romans 8:15), but it also says we are still awaiting our adoption (Romans 8:23); it says that we are glorified (Romans 8:30), but it also says our glorification is still future (Romans 8:17; Colossians 1:27). The verses that speak of our salvation, redemption, adoption, and glorification as past events are the prophetic perfect idiom, assuring us that one day we will all have those things. The verses that say our salvation, redemption, adoption, and glorification are future are literal, which is why now we have the “hope” of salvation (1 Thessalonians 5:8).
The prophetic present
A different idiom, but one that is very closely related to the prophetic perfect, is the prophetic present. It is very similar to the prophetic perfect, which as we have seen, was used when an event was certain to happen. However, the prophetic present also usually indicates that the event being referred to was close at hand.
Touching women
Some bible translations read:
Now I will answer the questions you asked in your letter. You asked, "Is it best for people not to marry?" -- 1 Corinthians 7:1 (CEV)
or
Now in response to the matters you wrote about: “It is good for a man not to have relations with a woman.” -- 1 Corinthians 7:1 (HCSB)
This supports the Roman Catholic view that priests should remain celibate. But was that really what Paul intended to communicate? A more literal translation reads:
Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me: It is good for a man not to touch a woman. -- 1 Corinthians 7:1 (KJV)
But men and women touches each other every day as they interact. This would be an unfair request from Paul.
In verse 1, the Greek text does not have the word “marry.” Instead, it has the phrase, “touch a woman,” which explains why the King James Version and many other versions read that way. Although translating literally is usually the best practice, this is a good example of when a word or phrase is misleading if translated that way.
In the above verse it is quite obvious that the word “touch” is being used idiomatically (to touch in a sexual way), because men and women “touch” all the time. The verse is not talking about touch in the normal course of daily activity. The whole context of the chapter is sexual behavior, so it is not unusual that we find a sexual idiom here. The subject of sex is inherently relational, often taboo, and always exciting. Every language abounds in figurative language for sex and sexuality. It is widely known that the word “touch” in this verse refers to sexual touch and sexual intercourse. In his commentary on 1 Corinthians, R. C. H. Lenski writes: “‘To touch a woman’ is euphemistic for the sexual contact and intercourse in marriage.” Many other sources could be given to support the fact that “touch” can mean “touch sexually,” but this fact is so well known that anyone wishing to substantiate it will find an abundance of references.
For people not used to the Greek idiom, the verse could be translated,
“It is good for a man not to touch a woman in a sexual way.”
This would be a closer rendition of the Greek text than the NIV and would be clearer than just “touch.” The problem then is that most people do not realize that a large part of the meaning of the verse is guidance to stay unmarried if possible. It is “good” to touch your spouse in a sexual way when you are married. When this verse is properly understood, it means that it is good to stay unmarried if you are able to do so, and it is always good to avoid sexual touch outside of marriage. By wording the Greek the way it is, God “killed two birds with one stone,” so to speak. He makes the point about not getting married, which the NIV picks up very well, and He refers to the obvious fact that a man should not be touching a woman in a sexual way if he is not married to her. Of course, the same is true for women touching men.
Touch is a very strong stimulant, and once a person gets aroused and stimulated by touch, it can be difficult for him to control his thoughts and actions. Satan has always had plenty of sexual distractions for those men and women trying to live godly lives, and if someone is so distracted by the sexual influences around him that his service to the Lord seems difficult, then that person should marry.
The next verse makes this point clear:
Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband. -- 1 Corinthians 7:2 (KJV)
Yoke
In the biblical culture, the literal yoke that was used to harness animals together for work was essential for survival: it was used so animals could plow, thresh grain, and pull loads such as carts. The yoke was not something animals liked to wear, because the loads they pulled were often heavy and difficult. Furthermore, many yokes rubbed sores on the animal’s necks because they were quickly and crudely made.
People also used the word “yoke” figuratively and applied it to things that were heavy and unpleasant. The hard work that Solomon made his subjects do was called a “yoke” by his subjects (1 Kings 12:4). Enemies put a “yoke” on the people of Israel, placing various kinds of burdens on them (Deuteronomy 28:48; Isaiah 10:27, 47:6; Jeremiah 27:11). The word “yoke” was also used of being a slave because it was usually burdensome (1 Timothy 6:1).