TITLE: SOME NEW TESTAMENT METONYMS FOR GOD

AUTHOR: S. VERNON MCCASLAND

                - University of Virginia

TABLE OF CONTENTS:

1.       The Blessed

2.       Power

3.       The Most High

4.       Majesty

5.       Creator

6.       Heaven

7.       Father

8.       Master

9.       Lord

10.   Lord of Lords

11.   King of Kings

12.   Potentate (Sovereign)

13.   The Name

14.   The Glory

15.   The Throne

JOURNAL SUMMARY:

                Looking back over the terms given above as names for God, it is a simple matter to pint out why they are metonyms. The author discussed each name accordingly: The Blessed is derived from the quality of blessedness associated with God in his own true being or from the fact that he is universally praised or blessed by his worshippers. Power is one of the most obvious of the attributes ascribed to God. Potentate, King of Kings, Lord, and Lord of Lords reflect man’s belief in the sovereignty of God over everything he has made. The Most High refers to the exalted position of God with respect to his creation. The Name as a metonym is associated with the very old belief that the essence of a being inheres in his name. The Hebrew emphasis on the family with the father as its head naturally led them to think of God as the diving Father. In a similar way, the important institution of slavery suggested the idea of the heavenly Master. The Creator as a metonym is simply God’s attribute or function as the maker and author of all that is. When Heaven is used as a metonym, it is an example of substituting the place for its inhabitant. Throne is substituted for the person who sits on it. Glory and Majesty are attributes of the divine King. A simple test which can be applied in such cases, to determine whether a word is a metonym or not, is to read the passage substituting God for the word or phrase in question. If the word is a metonym, the meaning of the passage will usually be clarified when God is substituted.

                As indicated, most of the metonyms noted here have good parallels in Hebrew and Jewish writings, but especially in apocryphal and rabbinic sources. The only conclusion which the author draw along this line is that the NT writers used a theological vocabulary which they had learned in Judaism. The kinship is mainly, as we should expect, with writers of approximately their own period.