From: Robert Schneider (rjschn39@bellsouth.net)
Date: Wed Sep 18 2002 - 13:58:26 EDT
Walter writes, regarding my note which he copied below:
> I have seen it posted many times that Jonah was an allegory or
Parable, rather
> than a historical event. Now I can understand why that may be said for
events
> that seem to be invalidated by scientific research (such as global flood).
> However, I see no reason for rejecting Jonah as a historical event, other
than a
> bias against "miraculous" type events events in the Old Testament. Is
there any
> scientific data to reject this as an actual happening?
Bob's comment:
I do not think that scientific data is required to judge whether the story
told in the Book of Jonah is a historical event. Now there is that
interesting "fundamentalist fish tale" that Ted Davis did a really fine
piece of historical research upon: someone claimed he was swallowed by a
whale and lived in its belly for three days until rescued by whalers who
captured the beast. The story got passed around in popular press and was
taken up by creationist Harry Rimmer. The story was cited as proof of the
historicity of the Jonah story, but in fact it was a species of what today
we call an "urban legend." You'll find Ted's article at
www.asa3.org/ASA/PSCF/1991/PSCF12-9Davis.html. I guess one could argue that
a human being swallowed by "a great fish" is an unlikely event. But I do
not think it is up to science to prove the negative; it would rather be the
task of those who claim the story is an actual historical account to make a
convincing case for it and not simply assert this on the ideological ground
that every story in the Bible not labeled "parable" or with some other
roadsign is to be taken as historical.
Nor do I think that the great majority of Bible scholars question the
historicity of Jonah on the grounds that they are biased against the
miraculous. No, the consensus that Jonah is a parable has emerged as a
result of a careful study of the narrative form and stylistic features of
the text. Narratives contain in themselves clues to their own form and
function. One obvious issue is the fact that Jonah, unlike the other texts
of the minor and major prophets, contains no prophetic oracles; rather, it
is a story. Like stories do, it has a beginning, a middle, and an end; and
by the time you get to the end of it you have a pretty good idea of its
meaning if you haven't gotten hung up, as so many people do, over whether
Jonah was really swallowed by that "whale."
So, there is a consensus (based on the commentaries I have consulted)
that Jonah is a prophetic narrative, with the features of a type of Hebrew
parabolic story called a "mashal." Some critics also see allegorical
elements in the narrative. Most scholars divide this narrative into two
parts with four scenes that deal alternately with a group of pagans and then
with Jonah and God. The author, whoever he is, was a fine literary artist,
as the narrative is characterized by balance and symmetry in its structure,
and the scenes are tied together by a skill use of wordplay, and rhetorical
features such as irony and exaggeration. (I thank God for choosing such
fine literary artists to create stories for the canon of Scripture.)
To read this story as simply a historical account of Jonah's travails as
a prophet is to miss its very important theological messages, which is where
its truths lie: in the message of God's free and unmerited mercy, that may
be bestowed by God upon whomever God wills. Jonah is charicatured as a
Hebrew prophet unwilling to deliver God's message of repentance and
forgiveness to those outside of the covenant, tries to run away from his
charge, is forced to give it anyway, and then is peeved beyond measure and
goes into a giant sulk when those wicked gentiles repent and are forgiven.
The Book of Jonah proclaims powerful truths, but they are timeless truths
about God and about mercy that are here captured in parable, not in some
"straightforward" historical account. (I also thank God for inspiring
writers to create sacred fiction to convey divine truths; after all, we
human beings use fiction to convey truth all the time, so why shouldn't
God?)
I have no trouble seeing the account of Jonah in the belly of the fish
being transported from the Mediterranean (around Cape of Good Hope) to the
Persian Gulf and up the Euphrates and spit out on the sands of Ninevah as
"miraculous," but the miracle is part of the story not of history. One does
not deny faith in the miraculous by confining this miracle to the story.
Grace and peace,
Bob Schneider
----- Original Message -----
From: "Walter Hicks" <wallyshoes@mindspring.com>
To: "Robert Schneider" <rjschn39@bellsouth.net>
Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 5:03 PM
Subject: Re: The Flood Hoax
>
>
> Robert Schneider wrote:
>
> > Ian in his note below interprets Jesus in Matt. 5:17, 18 as referring to
the
> > "inerrancy" of the scriptures or the law. I think rather that Jesus was
> > referring to "fulfillment" rather than "inerrancy." He also writes that
> > "Christ re-affirmed OT stories (Jonah in Mt. 12:38-40)" and adds "Were
> > Christ's references to Jonah and the flood simply his misunderstanding
of
> > the scriptures? Did He really believe that Jonah was swallowed by a big
> > fish?" Reading this passage from Matthew I see no reason to conclude
> > necessarily that Christ thought that the story of Jonah was a historical
> > fact. One could make a good case that Christ, being a teller of
parables
> > himself, recognized that the story of Jonah is an extended parable, for
the
> > lesson which Christ draws from the story of Jonah is the lesson of that
> > parable: repentance. That is one "sign of Jonah" Christ clearly refers
to.
> > Another is his using the allusion of Jonah in the fish three days and
nights
> > as an allegory for his forthcoming death and resurrection; the former
sign
> > is wrapped around the latter..
>
> I have seen it posted many times that Jonah was an allegory or Parable,
rather
> than a historical event. Now I can understand why that may be said for
events
> that seem to be invalidated by scientific research (such as global flood).
> However, I see no reason for rejecting Jonah as a historical event, other
than a
> bias against "miraculous" type events events in the Old Testament. Is
there any
> scientific data to reject this as an actual happening?
>
> Walt
> ===================================
> Walt Hicks <wallyshoes@mindspring.com>
>
> In any consistent theory, there must
> exist true but not provable statements.
> (Godel's Theorem)
>
> You can only find the truth with logic
> If you have already found the truth
> without it. (G.K. Chesterton)
> ===================================
>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed Sep 18 2002 - 14:12:32 EDT