What was Jonah Thinking?

Jonah was the famously reluctant prophet of Israel who was sent to a pagan city, warning of Divine wrath and the danger of Judgment. Besides running away from the task of bearing that message, (with the dramatic episodes of the storm, being thrown overboard, and spending 3 days studying marine life from the inside) he pitched a tantrum when he saw that they heard the warning. At the very moment that God's wrath was turned away, Jonah's was kindled. (Text for the Biblical account of Jonah here.)

What provoked such an extreme reaction? Why was Jonah hell-bent on their destruction?

To examine this question, we need a little background.

The timeline of Jonah is not certain, but he appears to be the same Jonah spoken of in 2 Kings 14:25 this puts him between the division of Israel into two kingdoms, and the Assyrian conquest of Northern Israel. This would place him in the reign of Jeroboam II, whose reign was in the high 700's and low 800's BC.. With 721 BC the year that Assyria conquered Israel, and sent them to exile, that could place Jonah's work perhaps only 30-50 years before Shalmaneser's conquest.

Looking backward, these events would happen about 100 years after Elijah's work. The spiritual climate of Israel itself in Jonah's day can be seen by the wickedness of their king, Jeroboam II. Israel as a whole has turned to the Idols of their neighbors, and have adopted their manner of pagan worship.

Where did he Jonah go off the rails? For one thing, Jonah had obvious misgivings about God's right to exercise His authority over people.

In disobeying God, he tried to place his own will above God's. Asking to be thrown overboard was a desperate act. His conduct later does not support the notion that he said this to save the lives of others. It is more probable that even there, Jonah was trying, if he could control nothing else, to control time and place of his death. But God exercised his authority to forgive, which was just as much his authority as his authority to judge. And Jonah struggled with that. God's authority over his creation is a major -- possibly THE major-- theme of this short book.

What was the Hebrew understanding of their relationship with God? Why was it special?

For one thing, God had declared that Israel was special. God made specific promises to Abraham, Issac and Jacob. It did not even extend to all the natural offspring of Abraham and Issac, but only to the children of promise. So point one, God Himself made that distinction.

Next, the relationship to God rested on Covenant. God made a promise, there was a covenant sign (circumcision) and Israel (ideally) approached God in specifically the ways that God said one should approach him. In fact, several moments of judgment in Israel's history were directly related to people worshiping God in a way that he had not mandated. Wrong person, wrong method, wrong place, etc. The lesson they learned and re-learned through their turbulent history: God was to be treated as Holy.

David himself, in the famous standoff with Goliath directly referenced Goliath's uncircumcised status, as a deciding factor in who God would support in that battle.

Even in the New Testament, there are similar reminders that gentiles were "without God and without hope, strangers to the covenant of promise." We were outsiders, and could not hope to be reconciled to God without entering into covenant with him, and -- sadly God did not appear to be establishing new children to Abraham. (At least, not by the natural means. More on that later.)

Added to fact that they were strangers they were also idolaters. They approached gods, but not the True God. Observant Jews had witnessed God frequently chasten his own covenant people, sometimes very harshly, for turning to false gods. If God dealt that way with his children, how much more would a Hebrew have assumed that He would deal harshly with a uncircumcised nation for the same crimes?

Moses himself records God's mercy and forgiveness in the same sentence as "by no means clearing the guilty."

And let us be clear: to a Jew, who understood that the very reason the people of Canaan were given over to Israel was because of their sin, not Israel's righteousness, Nineveh was exceptionally wicked, and ripe for judgment.

But what was Nineveh? It was a bustling city on the principle East-West trade route. They would have been very cosmopolitan, bringing people (and gods) from abroad. They even officially adopted some foreign gods and added them to their pantheon. Think New York, Toronto, London, or some similar large center of commerce.

But more notably, they were very warlike. Even before Jonah, Israel was at war with what one writer called 'the bloodiest ancient civilization'. They were a very real threat to Jewish national security. Even their art was brutal:

Another work, The Battle of Til-Tuba, dates to the reign of Ashurbanipal and its depiction of bloody warfare reinforces the Assyrians’ reputation for ruthlessness. Considered the finest large-scale composition in Assyrian art, the monumental relief shows the Assyrians defeating the Elamites of southern Iran. Scenes highlight the Elamite king’s chariot crashing down, the king’s flight from the wreckage, and his capture and beheading, with the severed head being carried back as a trophy to Assyria. The story unfolds amid a backdrop of horrible carnage and the confusion of battle. (quote in full context here)

Some harrowing images of Assyrian art from that era here. It wasn't made to be beautiful, but to inspire fear of their enemies.

Jonah did not have difficulty with God exercising his right to judge the wicked. In fact, he expected that he himself would be thus judged when he was flung into the sea.

Jonah simply did not have a category in his thinking, for a Holy God forgiving sin "just because". God was not basing it on an existing covenant. Not on faithful devotion. Not on the slightest hint of godliness on the part of the Ninevites. Not on anything but God's unmerited favour.

If you want to get closer to the full force of his thought processes, imagine for a minute that you are in post WWII Germany. The Nazi War Crimes Tribunals are being held. The courtroom is filled with people whose arms bear the tattooed evidence of their time in Treblinka or another of the Death Camps. Families devastated by the War. People seeking justice. (These events were cultural equivalents of actual Assyrian practices.)

Imagine the defendant of a very high profile case. Maybe someone in Hitler's inner circle. One of the diseased minds from which the Nazi doctrine originally sprang. Evidence is presented against him. He is incontrovertibly guilty. He admits it. He says he is sorry, and it will never happen again. The judge pauses a moment, smiles, and with one swing of the gavel, declares that all charges against him have been dropped. The apology has been accepted.

How do you think the courtroom would react? The country? You?

Would you be pleased with the decision, or outraged? Disgusted maybe? Why?

The judge would be thought of as no better than the guilty man who he set free. Why? Because a judge cannot "wish" away wrong-doing. Someone 'must pay' for justice to be satisfied. Justice is not a sinful or carnal demand. It's origins are found in God's own character.

It could be that the commentaries all have it right: Jonah simply didn't think that Nineveh was worthy of God's kindness. Jonah's problem was that he objected to "who" God saved.

I wonder, though, whether it may have been not just "who" but "how" God saved that gave him trouble. Could he have wondered "how" God could do so without discrediting his own Holiness?

If so, that is a higher view of God's holiness than most people today have. And more consistent with New Testament scripture, as well.

Jonah, naturally, could not see the Cross, since it wouldn't happen for another 800 years or so. He had no context for how a foreigner could be reconciled to God. How could they "possibly" be made righteous? Well, today we have an answer that he did not have.

But that objection fits completely with the big idea in Romans 3:26:

²⁶It was to show his righteousness at the present time, so that he might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.

In the context of the Cross, this passage demonstrates that God was not only establishing our innocence (by propitiation) but also establishing HIS innocence as well. He is not a God who winks at sin. He cannot be wicked as the judge in the illustration would have been. God is not only merciful, but also fully Just. Mercy does not destroy Justice. It finds a way "despite" justice. Christ Jesus crucified and risen is that way.

The God who is proclaimed Holy Holy Holy by the angels cannot dismiss sin, he must punish it. That was the Cross.

Glorious Saviour who loves us so much.
Glorious God whose righteousness is forever established.

Only God could have arranged so Great a Salvation.