Introduction to Jonah
The story of Jonah is part of the Minor Prophets (minor indicates the short length of these books, not their importance). Although other prophetic books contain descriptions of events around a prophetic figure (e.g. Amos 7:10-17, Jer 26:7-24) alongside their prophecies, but Jonah is primarily a story about a prophet and only contains one sentence of actual prophecy (Jonah 3:4). What we learn from the book is through the events it describes rather than the prophetic words spoken.
Historic background
Jonah’s name means ‘dove’, which had associations for Israel of being foolish or silly (Hos 7:11). The only other mention of Jonah is in Kings, where the prophet predicted the restoration of Israel’s borders to what they had been in David’s time (2 Kings 14:25). It is sometimes assumed from this brief statement that Jonah was narrowly nationalistic (hence his dislike of Nineveh receiving grace in the Book of Jonah), but surely this reads too much into a brief sentence. Would we want to be judged on one thing we mentioned out of everything we said in life? In any case, if Jonah was a true prophet, which Kings assumes, then he spoke what God intended for His people, not what he desired, so we cannot gauge his attitude from the prophecy. Jonah was a northerner (Gath-hepher is identified as a settlement just north-east of Nazareth in Galilee), but we have no idea how long his ministry lasted.
Jeroboam II, during whose reign Jonah is mentioned in Kings, ruled over the northern kingdom of Israel in the eighth century (786-746 BC). Although Israel had run-ins with Assyria a century earlier (Ahab joined an anti-Assyrian coalition and was defeated and Jehu paid tribute to Assyria),[1] most of Israel’s wars seem to have been with her near neighbour, Syria (Aram). Assyrian expansion took off only after Jeroboam’s time (745 BC onwards), under Tiglath Pileser III (see his first mention in 2 Kings 15:29). The northern kingdom was taken into Assyrian captivity first (722 BC; 2 Kings 17:6), followed by the conquest of Judah and the threat to Jerusalem (around 701 BC). However, King Hezekiah of Judah sought God’s help and Jerusalem escaped a siege in the end (2 Kings 18:13-37; 19:1-37). Thus, it is unclear to what extent Assyrian cruelty and domination, such as Nahum points to (see posts here), was remembered, known, or experienced in Jonah’s time. The Book of Jonah does not mention specific historic circumstances such as the reign of kings in Israel or Judah to orientate us (compare Hos 1:1; Amos 1:1; Mic 1:1) so that the information we can glean from elsewhere is meagre.[2] Clearly, the writer did not think it necessary to reveal more of the historic context and we do well to take our cue from this.
Date and author
Some seek to find a historic setting for the book through a reflection on author and date, but these again are uncertain. Arguments that point away from Jonah as the author is that the whole story is written in the third person and that he is such a negative figure, almost a caricature of what a prophet should be. Neither is there a resolution to Jonah’s attitude, which again makes his authorship unlikely. If someone else wrote up the story, it could have been any time. It is sometimes argued that the book is late because of certain Aramaisms that came into Hebrew after the Babylonian exile (late 6th – early 5th century onwards), but others explain these as part of a north-western Semitic dialect that existed centuries before Jonah’s lifetime. Since the linguistic evidence is debated, the meaning of Jonah is often used as a pointer towards dating. Thinking about the message of the book, scholars speculate on the context that could have given rise to it, but this method threatens to become circular (Jonah must be about ‘A’, hence its context must be ‘B’ and since the context is ‘B’, therefore the message must be ‘A’).
Themes
Jonah is at first glance a simple story, much loved and easily told in Sunday school. A closer look, however, reveals that it is a more sophisticated narrative than it is sometimes assumed. Jews read Jonah on Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement because of the sincere repentance demonstrated in the story, which is to be emulated. This, however, can only be described as a sub-theme in the story. Other sub-themes include God’s sovereignty (He makes things happen; Jonah 1:4, 17; 2:10; 4:6, 7) and His ‘repentance’ or changing His mind (Jonah 3:10). The key question, however, revolves around the reason for Jonah’s reluctance to go to Nineveh.
Universalism vs narrow nationalism
Some argue that Jonah is narrowly nationalist, whereas God wants to save all and that is why the prophet resists going to Nineveh. This contrast between universalism (salvation for all) and narrow nationalism is seen as the key theme of Jonah. This view places the book in the postexilic period, where its message of ‘universalism’ is supposed to challenge the narrow and exclusionary policies of Ezra and Nehemiah. There are, however, several problems with this as a theme. First, as I argued above, Jonah’s supposed ‘nationalism’ is based on the thin evidence of prophesying the expansion of Israel’s borders. Second, Jonah is not antagonistic to the sailors (who are also Gentiles) but tries to save them from being destroyed by offering his own life for punishment (Jonah 1:12). Third, the story does not deal with the long-term effects of either the sailors’ acknowledgement of Yahweh, Israel’s God, nor portrays the Ninevites as becoming Yahweh worshippers. These Gentiles are not incorporated into the people of God nor learn to walk in God’s ways as set out in Israel’s Law. Yes, God universally cares for all of His creation (animals included), but this does not make the story one of ‘mission’ or ‘conversion’, much as these themes resonate with us, Christians. Finally, it is hard to see how anyone in Ezra and Nehemiah’s time would recognise the book as an argument against their exclusionary policies. Their focus was on not compromising faithfulness to God through the influence (idolatry) of foreigners. Thus, the exiles kept themselves separate from these outsiders in their temple building, worship, and marriages (Ezra 4:1-5; Ezra 6:21; Neh 13:1-3; Ezra 9:1-2, 10-15; 10:3).[3] By contrast, idolatry is not mentioned in Jonah; in fact, the Ninevites’ sin is never identified, and since there is no interaction in the story between God’s people and the Assyrians, the question of Israelite compromise does not arise.
Unfulfilled prophecy
A second suggestion is that Jonah is bothered about being shown up as a false prophet whose prophecies do not come true (see criteria in Deut 18:21-22). To be sure, the side-effect of God’s compassion is that the judgment on Nineveh does not come true. However, Jonah’s complaint mentions nothing about unfulfilled prophecy or his status as a prophet explicitly, so this is less likely to be the theme of the book. In any case, it is in the nature of prophecy to warn of disaster or offer hope, but it is God’s prerogative to change the outcome dependent on people’s responsiveness. This point is not made explicit until Jeremiah’s time (Jer 18:7-10), over a hundred years after the historic prophet Jonah, which leads some scholars to argue that Jonah was dependent on Jeremiah for this insight and therefore the book must be exilic or post-exilic. However, this understanding of prophecy was known centuries earlier in David’s time who prayed for his child of adultery to survive despite the prophet saying he would die (2 Sam 12:14, 22). Other examples of this phenomenon include Amos (roughly Jonah’s contemporary), who sees disaster coming on Israel and pleads with God to pardon (Amos 7:1-6), Micah (a bit after Jonah), who prophesied Jerusalem’s fall, which did not happen because Hezekiah repented (Mic 3:12; Jer 26:18-19). Likewise, Isaiah (Micah’s contemporary) prophesied Hezekiah’s death, but when the king pleaded with God, his life was extended (2 Kings 20:1-6). The fact that, long before Jeremiah, all these people appeal to God for something prophesied not to happen suggests an understanding of prophecy as not set in stone.[4] Even the pagan Ninevites were aware of this point (Jonah 3:9), which suggests that it was a widely recognised fact about the nature of prophecy.
God’s mercy and justice
The most obvious theme that runs through the Book of Jonah is that of God’s character, specifically His justice and mercy. God intends to judge wickedness and sends Jonah to Nineveh (Jonah 1:1-2). When Jonah flees and gets into a storm, he recognises the connection between his disobedience and his life-threatening circumstances (Jonah 1:12). While he expects God to judge him, he is shown mercy when God sends a fish to save him from the sea (Jonah 1:17; 2:10) and he is given a second chance. However, God is gracious not only to his servant but to a wicked pagan nation, too – when they repent (Jonah 3:10). This is harder to swallow particularly with the hindsight of all that will happen to Israel and Judah because of Assyria’s cruelty and arrogance. Instead of pointing a finger at Israel or the prophet for being narrow-minded, however, we should recognise our own struggle with God’s ways. It is the audacity of God’s grace even to our enemies and tormentors, I believe, that is the greatest challenge of this book.
[1] These events are mentioned in Assyrian texts but not in the Bible. “Babylonian and Assyrian Historical Texts”, trans. A. Leo Oppenheim, in James B. Pritchard (ed.), Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament (third ed.; Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1969), 278-79, 281.
[2] To the question of the historicity of the Book of Jonah, I shall return in another post.
[3] For the issues, see my posts on Ezra and Nehemiah, especially on Ezra 4:1-3, and on racial purity and Ezra 9. I am convinced that Ezra and Nehemiah do not advocate racism but are motivated by the fear that if they compromise their faithfulness to God, He will lose patience with them and they in turn will jeopardise their future as God’s people. In other words, their exclusionary policies are not based on ethnicity but on religious convictions (note Ezra 10:8, where Jews are excluded) and it is not argued from the position of being superior to these other people groups, but from fear of offending God (e.g. Ezra 9:13-15).
[4] The criterion in Deut 18:21-22 should not be read in isolation from this broader understanding of prophecy. In other words, assessment of what is and isn’t false prophecy should take into account this dynamic of human appeal and God’s response. If there is no such dynamic and the prophecy still does not come true, then it is false.
If you enjoyed this post, please share it with others.