It's a fishy week here at the Desert Seminary. I'll be posting my sermon on Jonah once it's available. For now, here is a paper on the historicity and importance of Jonah.
Jonah’s Tale of a Whale
Fishing tales are always viewed as suspect. Every time the story is retold, the details seem to be more and more exaggerated. Within the Old Testament, Jonah is sometimes viewed as such a ‘whale of a tale’.[1] Despite these claims, Jonah can and does stand the test of historicity. While one must accept supernatural miracles, as in the fish or whale, the surrounding facts are not only substantiated as true, but also give greater insight into the book. Reading Jonah as a parable not only ignores facts, but also lessens the appreciation for the message of the book. This paper will show that Jonah contains the most impactful message when understood in a literal and historical context.
Often Jonah is cast as a “whale of a tale” instead of a “tale of a whale.” Going back to the translation of the Septuagint,[2] questions have existed about the historicity of the story of Jonah. Not only the historicity, but even the very genre of the book of Jonah baffles at times. Although this book is placed in the Minor Prophets, the book is not prophetic, but instead a story about a prophet. Not quite a history, but not quite an allegory, Jonah’s genre is hard to define. These issues lead some, like Dr. Elkins, to say Jonah best fits a parable.
Jonah as Parable
Taking the position of Jonah as a parable will not leave one on the outside looking in. Many biblical scholars quickly abandon a historical view of Jonah. As Dr. William Elkins says of Jonah, “Any interpretation, however, should not attempt to rescue the historical accuracy of this narrative. In a literary perspective, the book of Jonah is parable.”[3] Jonah, to this group of scholars, makes much more sense as a parable. Several major reasons are listed for this decision.
The first reason lodged for a parabolic reading is that Jonah lacks the details of a historical account. Furthermore, compared to the accounts of Chronicles and Kings, the book of Jonah skips details or is at best inaccurate in his descriptions. For example in Jonah 3:6, there is a reference to the ‘king of Nineveh’. However, at the time of Jonah, Nineveh was part of the Assyrian empire and was not its capital. Not until the reign of Sennacherib- around 50 years after Jonah- that Nineveh became the new capital of Assyria.[4] This lack of detail is also seen in no sins being leveled at Nineveh, the type of fish that swallowed Jonah not being named, and location of ejection from the fish being absent from the story.
A second point is raised by William Elkins concerning the abrupt ending of Jonah. The story does not resolve Jonah’s life or his trip home, but ends with God teaching Jonah a lesson outside the city of Nineveh. The ending shows, to scholars like Drs. Shepherd and Elkins, that the book has a didactic rather than historical purpose. Kings and Chronicles do not have such an overt teaching point to their books. The pro-parabolic group would make the case that a true history should resolve Jonah’s decisions after the book, as well as the fate of the city. Since it does not, then the genre clearly is defined by the didactic truth in Jonah chapter four.
A last objection to the historical accuracy of Jonah can be found in the response of the city of Nineveh. The response is seen in Jonah 3:5-7:
Then the people of Nineveh believed in God; and they called a fast and put on sackcloth from the greatest to the least of them. When the word reached the king of Nineveh, he arose from his throne, laid aside his robe from him, covered himself with sackcloth and sat on the ashes. He issued a proclamation and it said, "In Nineveh by the decree of the king and his nobles: Do not let man, beast, herd, or flock taste a thing. Do not let them eat or drink water. (NASB)
The problem is summed up best by Victor Shepherd when he says, “Speaking of bearing fruit, when Jonah preaches in Nineveh, the entire city, without any exceptions (according to the tale) repents and comes to faith. No evangelist before or since has had 100% success like this, not even Jesus”.[5] This universal repentance is not in keeping with the experience of any evangelist. This statement instead must be hyperbole, according to these scholars, which would be acceptable in a parable, but not so in a historical book. Taken all together, these three points conclusively prove to some scholars that Jonah is a parable.
Proper Inquiry
Some have claimed against these objections that Jonah is a miraculous book and must be simply accepted as such. M.R. DeHaan takes this opinion when he says, “This attempt, therefore, to explain Jonah by natural reasoning or scientific investigation is a trick of the enemy to destroy the supernatural character of the Gospel which the story of Jonah illustrates”.[6] Although the zeal to maintain the supernatural power of God is admirable, this explanation of canonical inquiry is incorrect.
While God can and does work miracles, we must also understand that He typically acts through agents to accomplish His will. From using Moses to free Israel, to having prophets as the messengers, God uses men to further His redemptive plan. He has also created us with an intellect and the power to reason. These faculties should not be ignored when trying to discover the works of God in creation. The command to give an account for faith is not satisfied by simply ignoring the questions. Instead, inquiry should be done so that a more meaningful answer can be given.
Counter-Points to the Parable
The act of accepting Jonah as history is not a blind leap of faith, as some would argue, but rather it is the most reasonable conclusion. Although there are interesting objections to the historical accuracy of the book, all three previous cases against a historical Jonah can be answered. Nineveh was indeed not the capital of Assyria,[7] but it was a major city of the empire.[8] Much like New York City and Albany, sometimes a non-capital city can be more important than a capital city. There is also precedence when referring to a king, the city where they were located supplants the name of the country. For instance, Ahab is called the ‘king of Samaria’ in 1 Kings 21:1, where a more technical description would be ‘king of Israel’. The reference in Jonah to the ‘king of Nineveh’ is easily explainable in a historical setting.
The second objection, that a didactic book cannot be historical, is simply not founded.[9] Jonah is clearly a book with a specific message to teach, that is undeniable. However, simply because a book has a moral doesn’t mean that it de facto cannot be true. The book of Chronicles is a history, but it differs from Kings in that it has a specific message to teach. Chronicles focuses on God’s promise to the Davidic line and can be used to teach God’s commitment to the people of Israel. Just because it is historically accurate does not eliminate a teaching purpose for the book. These two characteristics of the book, the didactic nature and its historicity, are not mutually exclusive.
The final objection of universal repentance can be resolved in one of two ways. First would be to take DeHaan’s approach and view this event as a miracle. The second would be to allow this response as a hyperbolic statement emphasizing the response of the people of Nineveh compared to the unresponsiveness of Israel. A single statement of hyperbole does not necessarily disqualify the historicity of the text. Perhaps though, a blended approach is best. The event was miraculous and happened as the text said. The total repentance of Nineveh occurred to highlight the difference between Nineveh and Israel. Striking a balance between the two options, this blend makes the most sense. Regardless of the solution devised, this objection does not hold much weight alone against the historicity of the book
Jonah as History
Not only are there answers to these objections, but there are also objective facts that show Jonah is historical. Parables tend not to contain many details as is evidenced in the parable of the talents in Matthew 25. The location of the story, occupation of the master, his destination and length of departure are all missing from the story. They are superfluous details that are unnecessary to the story. Jonah contains details that are similarly superfluous if it is only a parable. The locations of Joppa and Tarshish are accurate in their geography. Additional details such as Jonah walking to the east of the city add nothing to the content of the story, but they do ground its historical truth by placing it in the appropriate geographical setting.
Another reason to take Jonah as history is the fact that the prophet himself is viewed so dimly in the book. The book of Jonah has always been viewed as canonical by both Jews and Christians.[10] However, the book ridicules the prophet Jonah as being a bigot. It is known from 2 Kings 14:25 that there was a prophet named Jonah, and that he lived during the reign of Jeroboam II.[11] If a moral was the object of the story, it makes little sense why a historical prophet would be used rather than a made up prophet. Once this work is viewed as inspired despite its poor treatment of the prophet, the reader will grasp the true nature of the story from the prophet to illustrate his mistake and correction.
Finally, an argument for the historicity of Jonah can be made from authority.[12] Both Josephus[13] and Herodotus[14] make reference to Jonah as a historical event. These historians both lend external evidence to the historicity of Jonah, but the bible itself also attests to the veracity of the events. Jesus references the events of Jonah in both Matthew 12 and Luke 11. While it may be argued that Christ is talking only of a parable that the Jews would understand, this does not fit the context. After mentioning Jonah, Jesus talks about the Queen of Sheba visiting Solomon,[15] events that actually occurred. It is reasonable to posit the idea that Jesus viewed Jonah as historical.
Taken all together, there is overwhelming support for Jonah as being historical. While there are elements of the book that would fit into a parabolic story, none require that the story be exclusively a parable. For most evangelicals, the seal on this conclusion is found in Christ and His references to a literal Jonah event. Having reached such a conclusion, there is additional benefit to be found by examining the historical context of the book.
Additional Depth
By taking a historical view of Jonah, the dating, culture, and events that surround the actual prophet can be taken into account leading to a wealth of information otherwise lost to a parable. This background information is, in itself, not a reason to take a historical view of the book; the reasons to do that have been listed previously. Instead, after concluding the book is historical, this information allows a deeper understanding of the message of Jonah. The king of Israel, the contemporary prophets, and the geography of Jonah all add to the depth of the book.
The prophet Jonah ministered to Jeroboam II of Israel.[16] Jeroboam is a fascinating king of the divided monarchy, and his reign marked a golden age for his people. Reading through the account of his life in 2 Kings 14:25-29, it is clear that his reign was characterized by the conquest and the reestablishment of Israel’s power and glory. As 2 Kings 14:25a says, “He restored the border of Israel” (NASB). National pride would have been at an all time high under Jeroboam II.
Understanding Jeroboam’s reign sheds new light upon Jonah’s behavior in his book. When God commands Jonah to go to Nineveh at the beginning of the book, Jonah runs away without explanation. Later Jonah reveals his motivation when he says, “O LORD, is this not what I said when I was still at home? That is why I was so quick to flee to Tarshish. I knew that you are a gracious and compassionate God” (Jonah 4:2 NIV). Why, however, would God’s mercy towards the Ninevites so anger the prophet?
Jonah’s account occurred during time of Jeroboam II, when Israel was conquering territory and establishing its might. For a person living in the country, national pride would be at an all time high. It would be great to be a Samaritan,[17] and all other countries would be looked down upon. It is also learned from 2 Kings14:25-29, that Damascus was conquered by Jeroboam II. This would indicate that the Assyrians, rulers of Nineveh and Damascus,[18] and Israel were enemies. Jonah’s response now begins to take form. He did not wish for God to pardon the gentile enemies of Israel, with whom Israel had been fighting.
Another area of background information to consider is at the timeline in which Jonah and the prophets that were operating during his ministry carried out their service. Jonah, whose ministry is thought to be near the beginning of Jeroboam’s reign 790-780 B.C.,[19] had several other prophets living during, or directly after his ministry. They are: Joel,[20] Amos,[21] and Hosea[22] during the life of Jonah, then both Micah[23] and Isaiah[24] right after. It is also important to note that Jonah falls chronologically at or nearly at the beginning of what the modern bible calls the Major and Minor Prophets. After his ministry there are records of at least thirteen[25] other prophets calling the nations of Israel and Judah to repent.
Taking the chronology into consideration, examine the response of Nineveh compared to Israel. The gentile city whose sin has “come up before me” (NASB) in Jonah 1:1, so completely and utterly repents that even the animals are covered in sack cloth in Jonah 3:8. Repentance comes after a single foreigner, probably looking the worse-for-wear after a trip inside a fish, tells them of their doom. Israel, even after 13 of their own prophets preach a message of repentance still refuses to come back to God. The power of the conversion of the city of Nineveh is truly only comprehended after the timeline is taken into account.
The last element of background information can be gleaned from knowledge of the geography. While the location of Jonah at the beginning of the story is undisclosed, 2 Kings 14:25-29 says he is from Gath-hepher. Therefore, it is possible Jonah was in or around his home town. If this is true, then his fleeing to Tarshish by way of Joppa is interesting since it is the exact opposite direction from Nineveh. While Nineveh is north-east of Jonah, Joppa is south-west[26] and Tarshish is somewhere of the Spanish coast,[27] the furthest one could flee in the opposite direction in the known world from Nineveh.
Once this geography is understood, the depth of Jonah’s feelings can be understood. Not only did he not want to execute his office, but he had such distaste for the task that he wanted to run to the ends of the world. In a very real sense he wanted to run anywhere where the Lord would not be. The realization of this futility can then be understood when Jonah says in 1:9b, “I fear the Lord God of heaven who made the sea and the dry land” (NASB). Despite his best attempts to flee, Jonah now sees that nowhere on earth can he run from the Lord.
Jonah can and should be viewed as historical. The authorities that support such a view include famous ancient historians as well as our Lord Jesus Christ himself. Accurate details within the book and the chronological setting of the book truly allows the message of Jonah to come to life. It is easy to see why some wish it to be only a story. Jonah, next to Elijah, has one of the most miraculous lives recorded for us. This abundance of supernatural elements will leave the skeptic uneasy, but the evidence for the historicity of the book cannot be overthrown. By combining the supernatural with history, Jonah is a wondrous story of God’s heart for people in the Old Testament.
SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY
Biblical Studies Press. The NET Bible First Edition Notes. Biblical Studies Press, 2006.
Brand, Chad, Charles Draper, Archie England, Steve Bond, E. Ray Clendenen, Trent C. Butler, and Bill Latta. Holman Illustrated Bible Dictionary. Nashville: Holman Bible Publishers, 2003.
Cabal, Ted, Chad Owen Brand, E. Ray Clendenen, Paul Copan, J.P. Moreland, and Doug Powell. The Apologetics Study Bible: Real Questions, Straight Answers, Stronger Faith. Nashville: Holman Bible Publishers, 2007.
DeHaan, M.R. Jonah Fact or Fiction?. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing, 1957.
Easton, M.G. Easton's Bible Dictionary. Oak Harbor: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 1996.
Elkins, William Wesley. “Jonahic Hermeneutics: How ‘We’ ‘name’ G-d” The Journal of Scriptural Reasoning 3.1, 2003. Cited 1 August, 2001. Online: http://etext.virginia.edu/journals/ssr/issues/volume3/number1/ssr03-01-e07.html
Estelle, Bryan D. Salvation through Judgment and Mercy. Philipsburg, P&R, 2005.
Josephus, Flavius and William Whiston. The Works of Josephus: Complete and Unabridged. .Peabody: Hendrickson, 1996.
Lemanski, Jay. “Jonah’s Nineveh” Concordia Journal (1992): 40.
McGee, J. Vernon. Jonah, Dead or Alive?. Pasadena: Thru the Bible, 1968.
Merrill, Eugene H. “The Sign of Jonah.” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 23, 1980.
Price, Brynmor F. and Eugene A. Nida. A Translators Handbook on The Book of Jonah. Stuttgart: United Bible Societies, 1978.
Shepherd, Victor. “Shorter Books of the Bible: Jonah” Sermons and Writings of Victor Shepherd. Cited 1 August, 2011. Online: http://www.victorshepherd.on.ca/Sermons/jonah.html
Smith, James E. The Minor Prophets. Joplin: College Press, 1992.
Walvoord, John F., Roy B. Zuck, and Dallas Theological Seminary. The Bible Knowledge Commentary: An Exposition of the Scriptures. Wheaton: Victor Books, 1983.
[1] Will be discussed later but these people include Victor Shepherd and William Elkins.
[2] J. Vernon McGee, Jonah, Dead or Alive? (Pasadena: Thru the Bible, 1968), 3.
[3] William Wesley Elkins, “Jonahic Hermeneutics: How ‘We’ ‘name’ G-d” The Journal of Scriptural Reasoning 3.1, 2003. Cited 1 August, 2001. Online: http://etext.virginia.edu/journals/ssr/issues/volume3/number1/ssr03-01-e07.html
[4] Chad Brand et al., Holman Illustrated Bible Dictionary (Nashville, TN: Holman Bible Publishers, 2003), 136.
[5] Victor Shepherd, “Shorter Books of the Bible: Jonah” Sermons and Writings of Victor Shepherd. Cited 1 August, 2011. Online: http://www.victorshepherd.on.ca/Sermons/jonah.htm
[6] M.R. DeHaan, Jonah Fact or Fiction? (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing, 1957), 14.
[7] Jay Lemanski “Jonah’s Nineveh” Concordia Journal (1992): 40.
[8] James E. Smith, The Minor Prophets. (Joplin: College Press, 1992) D.
[9] Ibid., D.
[10] Paul D. Wegner The Journey from Texts to Translations (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2004), 44.
[11] Brynmor F. Price and Eugene A. Nida, A Translators Handbook on The Book of Jonah (Stuttgart: United Bible Societies, 1978), 6.
[12] Smith, Minor, D.
[13] Flavius Josephus and William Whiston, The Works of Josephus : Complete and Unabridged (Peabody: Hendrickson, 1996) 9:10.2.
[14] Herodotus, Histories, 9:24
[15] Smith, Minor, D.
[16] 2 Kings 14:25
[17] Label only used to distinguish the residents of the Northern Kingdom versus the Southern
[18] Brand, Holman, 382.
[19] Brand, Holman, 941.
[20] M.G. Easton, Easton's Bible Dictionary (Oak Harbor: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 1996), Joel, Book of.
[21] John F. Walvoord et al., vol. 1, The Bible Knowledge Commentary: An Exposition of the Scriptures (Wheaton: Victor Books, 1983), 1425.
[22] Ibid., 1376-77.
[23] Ibid., 1474-75.
[24] Ibid., 1029.
[25]From the total of sixteen, four major and twelve minor, subtract Jonah himself and possibly Joel and Amos who may have been slightly before, but certainly not after.
[26] Biblical Studies Press, The NET Bible First Edition Notes (Biblical Studies Press, 2006), Jon 1:3.
[27] Ibid., Jon 1:3.
No comments:
Post a Comment