The Fork in the Road: The Man or the Plan, Part 5 (Metonymy and the Meaning of “Faith”)

Metonymy

It’s been argued in the comments that Phil’s statement that we are saved by “faith in the plan” is mere metonymy (referring to something or someone by something intimately associated with it) for “faith in Jesus.” And, indeed, Phil may well have been engaging in metonymy. But if so, what doctrinal underpinnings cause him to think that “plan” is a fair and helpful way to speak of Jesus?

Obviously, metaphors matter. If I were to refer to my wife as “the old ball and chain,” that would tell you a lot about our relationship. And it wouldn’t speak well of it at all. Just so, if we refer to Jesus the person as “the plan,” then we’ve somewhat depersonalized him and reduced him to a concept. I can’t imagine that he’d be pleased.

Imagine calling your wife “my marriage contract.” What would that say about your relationship — metonymy and all? When persons become things, we have a problem.

But the bigger issue is not just the wisdom of our choice of metonymy. Rather, it’s more about what underlying theology leads to our choice of “plan” as a term meaning “Jesus.” Why do we see “plan” as a fair metaphor for Jesus? That’s a big question.

What is “faith”?

Let’s start with the most basic question: What is “faith”? Long-time readers will recall that I’ve addressed this several times, so I’ll try to be brief. (I’ll fail, but I’ll try. So I’ll throw some new material in to keep it interesting.)

  • The Greek word is pistis. The verb form in English is  “believe.” In the NT, “faith” and “belief” are the very same thing. So are  “have faith” and “believe.” They also translate the same Greek word.
  • The Greek word has these three shades of meaning –
    • It can mean to accept a truth claim as true. I “believe” or “have faith” that what you say is  true.
    • It can mean to trust.  I can believe or have faith that you will keep the promise that you make.
    • It be mean to be  faithful. Indeed, pistis is  often translated “faithful” in the NT.

Thus, to “have faith in” Jesus can mean to believe that what he says is true, that he will keep his promises, and to be faithful to him. All three meanings are there in the Greek word.

N. T. Wright explains in Christian Origins and the Question of God: Jesus and the Victory of God, p. 263, how “repent” and “faith” were used by First Century Jews. He refers to a story told by Josephus about a Jewish rebel named Jesus –

I was not ignorant of the plot which he had contrived against me … ; I would, nevertheless, condone his actions if he would show repentance and prove his loyalty to me.

[quoted by Wright at p. 250.]

The Greek used by Josephus, metanoesein kai pistos (repent and believe = show repentance and prove loyalty) is identical to the Greek in Mark 1:15

“The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent and believe in the gospel.”

Wright notes that “believe in me” is translated “be loyal to me” in most translations. “Believe in” or “have faith in” means “be loyal to” or even “submit to as lord.”

Wright explains,

Josephus asked Jesus the Galilean brigand leader [not Jesus of Nazareth], ‘to repent and believe in me,’ in other words, to give up his agenda and follow Josephus instead. Jesus of Nazareth, I suggest, issued more or less exactly the same summons to his contemporaries.

To “repent” in this context is not to “no longer commit that sin” but to “change loyalties.”

(Acts 20:21) I have declared to both Jews and Greeks that they must turn to God in repentance and have faith in our Lord Jesus.

Now, when we consider the life of Abraham, we see that he showed his faith (counted as righteousness) through obedience — by relocating to Palestine, by attempting to sacrifice Isaac — but that he was also capable of great sin (giving his wife to a king for his harem twice!) Therefore, his obedience was far from perfect, but he was, on the whole, deeply loyal to God, and his life was characterized by obedience even though he sinned.

Abraham, therefore, had a faith that not only accepted certain factual claims by God to be true, but also trusted in his promises and led him to be faithful — even though quite imperfectly so. Indeed, the scriptural emphasis regarding Abraham’s faith is on the last two elements — trust and faithfulness — not the mere intellectual acceptance of certain fact claims.

Now, a mistake made by many, going back to certain elements of Reformation thought, is to treat “faith” as purely “accept certain facts as true.” Thus, to have faith in Jesus is merely to accept that he really is the Messiah, the Son of the Living God, as Peter confessed. And, indeed, this truth claim is at the very core of the gospel. But it hardly exhausts the meaning of “faith.”

“Faith” in James, Romans, and Hebrews

As James cogently says,

(Jam 2:18 ESV) 18 But someone will say, “You have faith and I have works.” Show me your faith apart from your works, and I will show you my faith by my works.

James’ point, of course, is that “faith” as used in Christianity necessarily includes works — indeed, works demonstrate faith. This would only make sense if “faith” includes the third sense, that is, faithfulness. I can believe a fact to be true and do no works. I can even believe that a promise will be kept and do no works. But I can’t be faithful and do no works.

Paul, in Rom 10:9 tells us to confess –

(Rom 10:9) That if you confess with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.

We should surely take Paul to be intending “faith” to include accepting the truth of the resurrection but also submission to Jesus as Lord. It’s a bit shallow to take “confess” here as merely a step in a plan. The “step” is, if anything, a demand that we submit to Jesus as Lord – it requires our faithfulness/loyalty to Jesus, not merely assent to a truth claim.

We see this concept of faith laid out clearly in Heb 13 –

(Heb 11:1-2) Now faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see. 2 This is what the ancients were commended for.

Now, what does the Hebrews writer mean by this?

(Heb 11:11-13) By faith Abraham, even though he was past age — and Sarah herself was barren — was enabled to become a father because he considered him faithful who had made the promise. 12 And so from this one man, and he as good as dead, came descendants as numerous as the stars in the sky and as countless as the sand on the seashore. 13 All these people were still living by faith when they died. They did not receive the things promised; they only saw them and welcomed them from a distance. And they admitted that they were aliens and strangers on earth.

(Heb 11:17-18 ESV) 17 By faith Abraham, when he was tested, offered up Isaac, and he who had received the promises was in the act of offering up his only son, 18 of whom it was said, “Through Isaac shall your offspring be named.”

The Hebrews writer teaches that the point of faith is that it includes faithfulness. Just as did Abraham, we act because we believe the promises. We accept the truth of what is said, we believe the promises, and we act faithfully in reliance on them. This is faith.

Faith in Jesus

Faith in Jesus is therefore faith that he is whom he claimed to be, that his promises will be kept, and that we act faithfully/loyally by living in reliance on those truth claims and promises.

Now, what are those truth claims and promises? I’ll not try to be exhaustive, but rather give the general sense –

  • Jesus is the Messiah –  the king long-promised by the Prophets, the king who sits on the throne of  David and rules over the Kingdom of God on earth and in heaven.
  • Jesus is Lord – the  true king of the universe and, therefore, the king of each of our lives.
  • Jesus saves those with  faith in him.
  • Jesus was resurrected,  and so those who are in him through faith will also be resurrected. This  is sometimes called “hope” and sometimes our “inheritance.”
  • To know Jesus is to  know God. Jesus’ is a part of God somehow, and he reveals God to us. To  say that “Jesus is Lord” is to accept his claim to be divine, because the  Jews only called God himself “Lord.”

(Heb 11:6 ESV) 6 And without faith it is impossible to please him, for whoever would draw near to God must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who seek him.

About Jay F Guin

My name is Jay Guin, and I’m a retired elder. I wrote The Holy Spirit and Revolutionary Grace about 18 years ago. I’ve spoken at the Pepperdine, Lipscomb, ACU, Harding, and Tulsa lectureships and at ElderLink. My wife’s name is Denise, and I have four sons, Chris, Jonathan, Tyler, and Philip. I have two grandchildren. And I practice law.
This entry was posted in Fork in the Road, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

9 Responses to The Fork in the Road: The Man or the Plan, Part 5 (Metonymy and the Meaning of “Faith”)

  1. laymond says:

    "if we refer to Jesus the person as “the plan,” then we’ve somewhat depersonalized him and reduced him to a concept. I can’t imagine that he’d be pleased."

    Isa 11:1 And there shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a Branch shall grow out of his roots:
    Isa 11:2 And the spirit of the LORD shall rest upon him, the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and might, the spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the LORD;
    (sounds like a plan to me)

    Isa 42:1 Behold my servant, whom I uphold; mine elect, [in whom] my soul delighteth; I have put my spirit upon him: he shall bring forth judgment to the Gentiles.
    (Jesus didn't seem to be offended, when he was called a servant, he seemed to confirm it )

    Mat 12:18 Behold my servant, whom I have chosen; my beloved, in whom my soul is well pleased: I will put my spirit upon him, and he shall shew judgment to the Gentiles.

    When Peter called him the son of God, he didn't say Hey I have a name , use it. ( I doubt Jesus was offended by what Phil said.)

    (my opinion)

  2. "If I were to refer to my wife as “the old ball and chain,” that would tell you a lot about our relationship. And it wouldn’t speak well of it at all"

    If you and your wife hold the phrase “the old ball and chain,” fondly and with humor, it would speak well of your relationship.

    I urge us all to take great care in assuming to know the assumptions, motivations, and privately held beliefs of other people.

  3. Mike Ward says:

    Jay said, "It’s been argued in the comments that Phil’s statement that we are saved by 'faith in the plan' is mere metonymy "

    Jay,

    Did Phil state that we are saved by faith in the plan? I missed it if he did. Your quotation marks don't extend around the word saved so that also make we wonder if Phil actually said this. I don't have the Spiritual Sword aticle so maybe he did, but I find it hard to believe that Phil believes that we are saved by the plan. Do you think Phil believes this? He did say that we need faith in the plan. Personally, I think we need a lot of things, but that doesn't mean I think any of those things save us.

  4. guy says:

    Jay,

    This is a great post, but it seems in other posts you speak as though "faith" is narrowly only one of the three meanings you mention. (i don't have an example off hand.) But in this post, i do believe you're quite on target. And i don't know how to make sense of Acts 19:1-3 or Galatians 3:26-27 if we take "faith" to refer to mere mental states.

    But regarding the last bit of your post (mind you, i am aware you said you didn't mean to be exhaustive): i think Acts 24:24-25 suggests that "faith in Christ" refers to more than mere facts about the person Jesus, but may include other doctrines as well.

    –guy

  5. guy says:

    Jay,

    i quite sympathize with the critique you are making based on Moser's work. But something just occurred to me about A. Campbell's writing–doesn't he have a passage in The Christian System where he speaks of a variety of things "saving" us, but "saving" can be attributed to those different items in different ways? i'm thinking here about a place where he uses some sort of boat illustration, but it's been well over 10 years since i read it.

    (1) Do you think Campbell was right?

    (2) If so, do you think there is *no* sense in which "the plan" saves us?

    (3) If you concede there is some sense, then it's not really an issue of Phil or others being mistaken about *whether* the plan saves us, is it? It could only be either a matter of attributing a manner of saving to the plan which is false, or a matter of emphasis, no?

    –guy

  6. Faith in Jesus is therefore faith that he is whom he claimed to be, that his promises will be kept, and that we act faithfully/loyally by living in reliance on those truth claims and promises.

    This relationship between faith and action is borne out in Titus 3:8 as well.

    This is a trustworthy saying. And I want you to stress these things, so that those who have trusted in God may be careful to devote themselves to doing what is good. These things are excellent and profitable for everyone.

    In this text, "these things" are at least the things Paul introduces in 2:11-3:7.

    The Grace of God that brings salvation and that teaches us to avoid ungodliness to live self-controlled, upright, godly lives now while we wait for the hope of His glorious appearing. The redemption Christ brings to us to deliver us from wickedness and to purify us for himself as people eager to do what is good. The kindness and love of God who saves us, not by our righteous deeds but by His mercy. Salvation through the washing of rebirth and renewal of the Holy Spirit that makes us heirs with hope of eternal life.

    When we start stressing "these things," more people will be more eager to do more good works.

    To do this, of course, we will need to avoid what Paul told Titus (and us) to avoid in 3:9.

    But avoid foolish controversies and genealogies and arguments and quarrels about the law, because these are unprofitable and useless.

    Some of the comments on this series of posts have tended toward the very thing that Paul warned Titus to avoid.

    Jerry

  7. Clyde Symonette says:

    Now, a mistake made by many, going back to certain elements of Reformation thought, is to treat “faith” as purely “accept certain facts as true.” Thus, to have faith in Jesus is merely to accept that he really is the Messiah, the Son of the Living God, as Peter confessed.

    Jay, this is an excellent summation of a post reformation view of faith that was developed to counter the Catholic Church’s unrighteous exaltation of salvation as a reward of works. I hasten to add that the entire article portrays an author with both feet firmly planted in the reality of the word while recognizing that that word is not God Himself.

  8. Jay,

    I would guess that Phil in referring to “faith in the plan” is probably as you say is “engaging in metonymy.”

    Faith at times is used as a reference for the whole Christian system, the gospel plan of salvation delivered by the apostles.

    Surely the best example, and one all can readily see for such a usage, is found in Jude 3, "Beloved, while I was very diligent to write to you concerning our common salvation, I found it necessary to write to you exhorting you to contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints." (NKJV) The phrase "the faith" is reference for the entire gospel system of salvation.

    In the Greek text the definite article preceding “faith” points to the one and only faith: “the faith.” There is no other.

    Other passages where “the faith” is used to mean the gospel system is Galatians 1:23 “He who once persecuted us is now preaching the faith”. Gal. 3:14, "That the blessing of Abraham might come upon the Gentiles in Christ Jesus, that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through ('the' is in the Greek text) faith.

    Gal. 3:25, "But after (definite article 'the' is in the Greek text) faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor."

    Gal. 3:26, "For you are all sons of God through ('the' once again is in the Greek text) faith in Christ Jesus."

    1 Tim. 4 :1, "Now the Spirit expressly says that in latter times some will depart from the faith," again, this objective use of the expression “the faith” was common in apostolic times. Greek scholar Henry Alford wrote that the faith is “objective here: the sum of that which Christians believe” (Alford’s Greek Testament).

    Acts 6:7 “So the word of God spread. The number of disciples in Jerusalem increased rapidly, and a large number of priests became obedient to the faith.” (NIV)

    Concerning this verse, Barnes’ in his Notes on the Bible writes:

    “Were obedient to the faith – The word "faith" here is evidently put for the "Christian religion." Faith is one of the main requirements of the gospel Mark 16:16, and by a figure of speech is put for the gospel itself. To become "obedient to the faith," therefore, is to obey the requirements of the gospel, particularly what requires us to "believe." Compare Romans 10:16.”

    Others include: "Examine yourselves as to whether you are in the faith," (2 Cor. 13:5). Gal 1:23 preaching the faith he once tried to destroy. Eph 4:5 only one faith. Eph 4:23 until we all attain to the unity of the faith. 1 Tim 4:6 nourished on the words of the faith and sound doctrine. 1 Tim 6:10 wandered away from the faith. 1 Tim. 6:20-21 gone astray from the faith.

    In fact, this phrase "the faith" is used 39 times in the New Testament. I wouldn’t claim every single instance refers to the gospel or the whole Christian system but many of them do.

    To be quite honest, I find this whole debate over “the Man or the plan” to at times to be silly and leading to the promotion of extremist views on both sides. Yes, there is no doubt at times we in churches of Christ have emphasized “the plan” (i.e., regarding the plan of salvation, worship, church organization) too much to maybe the neglect of the person of Jesus Christ and grace too little.

    But I fear the pendulum is swinging. It seems some progressives in the church are aggressively taking a “the Man instead of the plan” approach.

    Year ago, Reuel Lemmons, editor of Firm Foundation, opined in an editorial in 1962 that those who thus argued (who at the time he styled the “liberal left”) were seeking to foist a dangerous theological shift on churches of Christ. He predicted that, with the easing of the anti-ism controversy in the 1950s, the next battle would be with liberalism, signaled by those who were contending for less emphasis on the “plan” and more on Jesus and grace. (Reuel Lemmons, “The Shifting Current,” Firm Foundation 79, 17 April 1962)

    The New Testament includes “the Man and the plan.” When Philip “preached Christ” to the Samaritans, he preached the “plan of salvation.” This means he preached about sin and how sinners are saved (Acts 2:37-38, 40-41 which of course, included baptism, since “both men and women were baptized” (Acts 8:12). Those who believed the gospel obeyed it and were saved (Acts 8:12-13). In Acts 8:35 Philip was instructed to go down to Gaza and there he would meet a man from Ethiopia. Philip was told to preach Jesus to this man. Preaching Jesus is preaching the Gospel of Christ. Acts 8:35 informs us explicitly that Philip preached Jesus to this man.

    However, in preaching “the Man” Jesus, Philip must have told him the part baptism plays in the plan of salvation. Notice the first question asked by the eunuch, “See, here is water. What hinders me from being baptized?" (Acts 8:26) Preaching Jesus clearly included preaching on baptism, i.e., “the plan.” So this man heard the gospel of Jesus Christ (the Man), and believed, repented of his sins, confessed the name of Jesus as Lord and was baptized into Christ for the remission of sins. Did Philip preach the Man or the plan? Yes!!

    This passage tells us that God has given us eternal life and this life is in His Son, Jesus Christ. (1 John 5:11-12) In other words, the way to possess eternal life is to possess God’s Son. The question is, how can a person have the Son of God?

    The answer is by our trusting in the person of Jesus Christ and His death for our sins which leads us to obedience of the faith of the gospel. (cf. Rom. 1:5; 16:26)

    This is God’s “plan” of salvation. We need to trust and believe what God says.

    Sincerely,
    Robert Prater

  9. Trent Tanaro says:

    Well said Brother,appreciate your time put into preparing these posts for us. A lot of us are learning as we go and are having to de-theologize from yrs of brainwashing and sectarianism….thanks again Brother!

Comments are closed.