DOES THE SAME WORD ALWAYS MEAN THE SAME THING?
Bible and Logic — Study 4
How changing the meaning of a word can produce a false conclusion.
1. One Word. Two Meanings. One Wrong Conclusion.
Consider these statements:
Premise 1: Every bat is an animal.
Premise 2: A baseball player uses a bat.
Conclusion: Therefore, a baseball player uses an animal.
Something is obviously wrong!
The word bat appears in both premises.
But it does not mean the same thing.
In the first statement, a bat is a flying mammal.
In the second statement, a bat is a piece of sports equipment.
The argument appears to connect the statements because the same word is used.
But the connection disappears when we recognize that the word has two different meanings.
In logic, this mistake is called equivocation.
Equivocation occurs when an argument depends on using the same word or expression in different senses without recognizing the change.
And this mistake can be much harder to recognize when studying the Bible.
2. Why Does This Matter in Bible Study?
The Bible was written over many centuries, by different writers, in different circumstances.
Its books include history, poetry, prophecy, letters, parables, and other kinds of writing.
Words must be understood in their context.
A word may have several meanings, and its intended meaning depends on how it is being used.
This is true in English.
It is also true in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek, the languages in which the biblical books were originally written.
The fact that two passages use the same word does not prove that they are talking about the same thing.
Nor does it prove that the word has exactly the same meaning in both passages.
We must examine the context.
3. Does the Bible Use the Word "World" in Different Ways?
Yes.
Consider John 3:16.
"For God so loved the world..."
Now consider 1 John 2:15.
"Do not love the world or the things in the world."
Is John contradicting himself?
Of course not.
In John 3:16, the world refers to humanity as the object of God's saving love.
In 1 John 2:15, the world refers to the sinful desires and values opposed to God.
The same English word appears in both passages.
The Greek word kosmos is also used in both.
But the context shows that the word is being used in different senses.
Suppose someone reasons:
Premise 1: God loves the world.
Premise 2: Christians must imitate God.
Conclusion: Therefore, Christians should love the world in the sense forbidden by 1 John 2:15.
That conclusion does not follow.
The argument changes the meaning of world.
God's love for humanity does not mean that God approves of the sinful values condemned in 1 John.
A shared word does not guarantee a shared meaning.
4. What About the Word "Saved"?
Consider Matthew 8:25.
During a storm, the disciples cried out to Jesus:
"Lord, save us! We are perishing!"
They were asking Jesus to rescue them from drowning.
Now consider Acts 16:30.
The Philippian jailer asked:
"Sirs, what must I do to be saved?"
The context concerns a much larger question about salvation.
The English word saved appears in both passages.
But the situations are different.
In Matthew 8, the disciples feared physical death in a storm.
In Acts 16, Paul and Silas responded to the jailer by speaking about believing in the Lord Jesus, and they taught him and his household the word of the Lord.
We must not assume that every occurrence of saved refers to exactly the same kind of rescue.
Sometimes the Bible speaks of rescue from physical danger.
Sometimes it speaks of deliverance from enemies.
Sometimes it speaks of salvation from sin and judgment.
The context determines what kind of salvation is being discussed.
5. What About the Word "Law"?
This example is especially important when studying Paul's letters.
Consider Romans 3:27.
Paul asks:
"By what kind of law? Of works? No, but by a law of faith."
Now consider Romans 7:7.
Paul asks whether the law is sin and then refers to the commandment against coveting.
Does law have exactly the same meaning in both passages?
Not necessarily.
In Romans 3:27, Paul uses the expression often translated "law of faith" in a discussion of boasting, faith, and justification.
In Romans 7:7, he refers to a specific commandment from the Law of Moses.
The Greek word nomos can refer to law in different senses, including a body of commandments or a governing principle.
We must determine its meaning from the argument Paul is making.
This becomes especially important when studying Romans and Galatians.
A teacher who assumes that law always means exactly the same thing may misunderstand Paul's reasoning.
The meaning of a word must be determined by its use in the passage, not merely by finding another verse containing the same word.
6. Does the Same Hebrew Word Always Identify the Same Person or Being?
No.
Consider the Hebrew word elohim.
It is frequently used to refer to the God of Israel.
For example, Genesis 1:1 declares that God created the heavens and the earth.
But the same Hebrew word can be used in other contexts.
Psalm 82:1 uses elohim in a passage where God stands in judgment among those called elohim. Interpreters disagree about whether these are heavenly beings or human judges.
Exodus 7:1 uses the same word when God tells Moses that He has made him "God" to Pharaoh.
Moses did not become the Creator of the universe.
The word's meaning and reference depend on the context.
Therefore, this argument would be invalid:
Premise 1: The Creator is called elohim.
Premise 2: Another being or person is called elohim.
Conclusion: Therefore, that being or person must be identical to the Creator.
The conclusion does not follow.
The shared word does not establish identical identity, nature, or authority.
This is especially important when someone builds a doctrine on the claim that two passages use the same Hebrew or Greek word.
That fact may be relevant.
But by itself, it does not settle the question.
7. Can a Word Have More Than One Meaning in the Same Book?
Yes.
Consider the word flesh in Paul's writings.
In Romans 1:3, Paul says that Jesus was descended from David according to the flesh.
Here, the expression concerns Jesus' human descent.
In Romans 8:5–8, Paul speaks about those who live according to the flesh and set their minds on the things of the flesh.
There, the context concerns a way of life opposed to God's Spirit.
It would be a serious mistake to assume that flesh always means sinful human behavior.
If we did, we might misunderstand passages describing Jesus' genuine humanity.
The same word can serve different purposes even within the same biblical book.
Context must control meaning.
8. What Is the Difference Between a Word and a Concept?
This is another important distinction.
Sometimes the same word expresses different concepts.
At other times, different words express the same or closely related concepts.
For example, Scripture can speak about forgiveness, redemption, reconciliation, and justification.
These words are not identical.
Each has its own meaning and emphasis.
But they can describe related aspects of God's saving work through Christ.
We should not assume that two passages are unrelated merely because they use different words.
Nor should we assume that two passages teach the same thing merely because they use the same word.
The real question is:
What is the writer communicating in this passage?
That requires examining sentences, paragraphs, arguments, and the larger context.
A dictionary can help us understand a word's possible meanings.
But a dictionary cannot decide which meaning the writer intended without considering the context.
9. Can We Make the Opposite Mistake?
Yes.
We have been discussing the danger of assuming that one word always has the same meaning.
But we can also make the opposite mistake.
We may assume that because two writers use different words, they must be talking about different things.
That conclusion does not necessarily follow either.
Consider Matthew's frequent expression "kingdom of heaven" and the expression "kingdom of God" used elsewhere in the Gospels.
Matthew 19:23–24 places both expressions in the same conversation.
Jesus first speaks of entering the kingdom of heaven and then speaks of entering the kingdom of God.
The expressions are used in closely related ways.
We should not automatically invent two different kingdoms simply because the wording differs.
Once again, the context must determine whether the expressions refer to the same reality or different things.
Different words do not automatically prove different meanings, just as identical words do not automatically prove identical meanings.
10. How Can We Recognize Equivocation?
When someone builds an argument around a particular word, ask these questions:
First: What does the word mean in the first passage?
Second: What does it mean in the second passage?
Third: Does the argument require the word to have exactly the same meaning in both places?
Fourth: Does the context support that shared meaning?
Fifth: Would the argument still work if we replaced the word with its intended meaning in each passage?
That final question is especially useful.
Return to our opening example.
"Every flying mammal called a bat is an animal."
"A baseball player uses a piece of equipment called a bat."
"Therefore, a baseball player uses an animal."
Once we replace the shared word with its actual meaning in each sentence, the error becomes obvious.
The same test can expose more complicated arguments about Scripture.
11. Some Objections Worth Considering
Objection: "If the same Greek word appears in two passages, shouldn't it have the same meaning?"
Not necessarily.
Words often have several related or distinct meanings.
The same is true in English.
The fact that a Greek word appears in two passages is useful information, but it does not prove that the word carries exactly the same meaning in both.
Context must determine its intended sense.
Objection: "Doesn't this allow people to change the meaning of words whenever they want?"
No.
We are not free to assign any meaning we prefer.
The meaning must fit the grammar, historical setting, literary context, and way the word was used.
Context limits our choices.
A meaning that contradicts the surrounding passage cannot be defended merely by saying that the word has several possible definitions.
Objection: "What if two passages really do use the same word in the same sense?"
Then we should recognize that.
Equivocation occurs when an argument improperly changes meaning.
Using a word consistently is not equivocation.
The purpose of this study is not to create doubt about every repeated word.
It is to make sure we have established that the meaning is the same before building an argument on it.
Objection: "Can someone who does not know Hebrew or Greek recognize this mistake?"
Often, yes.
The surrounding passage may make the difference clear even in a good English translation.
Comparing several reliable translations can also help.
Knowledge of the original languages is valuable, but no one should be intimidated into accepting a conclusion merely because a teacher quotes a Hebrew or Greek word.
The teacher still has to demonstrate that the argument follows.
12. Try It Yourself
Consider these statements:
Premise 1: Jesus is called the Lamb of God (John 1:29).
Premise 2: Lambs are young sheep.
Conclusion: Therefore, Jesus was literally a young sheep.
Does the conclusion follow?
No.
John the Baptist was using figurative language.
The expression "Lamb of God" identifies Jesus through imagery connected with sacrifice and the removal of sin.
Treating the figure of speech as a literal statement produces a false conclusion.
Now consider:
Premise 1: God is called our Father (Matthew 6:9).
Premise 2: Human fathers are male human beings.
Conclusion: Therefore, God must be a male human being.
Again, the conclusion does not follow.
The argument wrongly transfers every characteristic of human fatherhood to God.
These examples involve a related error: failing to recognize figurative or analogical language.
They remind us that understanding the kind of language being used is part of understanding its meaning.
13. What Have We Learned?
We have learned that:
A word can have more than one meaning.
The same Hebrew or Greek word does not always refer to the same person, thing, or idea.
Equivocation occurs when an argument improperly changes the meaning of a word.
Context determines which meaning is intended.
A shared word does not automatically establish a shared identity.
Different words do not automatically establish different concepts.
Figurative language must not be treated as literal description without justification.
A teacher must demonstrate that a word is being used consistently when an argument depends on that consistency.
Here is the principle to remember:
THE SAME WORD DOES NOT ALWAYS MEAN THE SAME THING.
And the reverse is also true:
DIFFERENT WORDS DO NOT ALWAYS MEAN DIFFERENT THINGS.
A Final Thought
One of the easiest ways to make an argument sound biblical is to connect several verses containing the same word.
Sometimes those connections are legitimate.
Sometimes they are not.
Our responsibility is to examine what each writer meant before deciding what the passages establish together.
A repeated word may invite further study.
It does not automatically prove a conclusion.
And if the conclusion really follows from Scripture, we should be able to demonstrate why.
Read First. Reason Carefully. Conclude Later.
TEXT B4 TRADITION
Continue Exploring Scripture
Bible and Logic — Main Study Page
Does That Conclusion Really Follow?
Previous Study — When Does a Conclusion Go Too Far?
Learn to distinguish what Scripture proves from what it merely suggests.
Next Study — Does One Event Prove What Caused Another?
Learn why something happening before another event does not automatically prove that it caused the event.
Return to HOME page
Return to STUDY page