The Bible makes its own claim to be of God (2 Tim 3:16) and not sourced in man (2 Pet 1:20-21). The Word nowhere makes the claim that it is a book on ancient history. Neither is it a book on science. However, whenever it mentions historical data or things of science, it is infallible.
We don’t throw out the baby with the bathwater due to a lack of data because we take a higher position that the Bible is God-breathed (2 Tim 3:16), we can fully place our confidence in it; we better! We are banking our eternal destiny on its veracity! The critics do not. Thinking critically through the Scriptures is being objective and a good thing; critically attacking it is being subjective and non-constructive.
So, let’s hear from Ashur-dan III, the king of Nineveh,
(Jon 3:7) And he caused it to be proclaimed and published throughout Nineveh by the decree of the king and his nobles, saying, Let neither man nor beast, herd nor flock, taste anything; do not let them eat, or drink water.
It’s official! By royal decree, the people started when Jonah showed up on the scene in the outlying villages of the walled city proper, the king put his authoritative stamp of approval to be proclaimed and published throughout Nineveh. This was a good move on Big Dan’s part because everything rises or falls on leadership.
I hypothesized in our series earlier that word probably got back to the king by eyewitness accounts of a messenger of Dagon that came forth from a great sea beast on their shores. The king had to rely on accounts of his whereabouts as Jonah made his way toward Nineveh. Upon reaching the skirt of the city, surrounding the walled city proper, Jonah immediately started preaching. Word quickly spread and news of it reached the king of his arrival and how the people were responding; the king wisely took his cue from that on what to do.
Big Dan was facing double jeopardy. If he quelled the mourning of his people, he may have incited a revolt; he didn’t need another revolt on his hands. If he ignored the warning of this messenger, and something bad happened, he would be blamed for that. All of this is a moot point if the city fails to repent. Again, I know the word repent or repentance is not found in the book of Jonah (cf. Mt 12:41; Lk 11:32). Jesus called it repentance, however; He was there, too, with Jonah in 759 B.C.! He ought to know!
The political alternative available was to join the people in a period of mourning though it temporarily stopped a working economy. He cannot be seen as opposing the gods. However, once he learned that this was not a messenger of any of their gods, but the God who delivered the Hebrews from the Pharoah centuries before, this was no God to contend with, in light of how this messenger came to his country, his odd appearance, and the dire warning that was delivered in light of the past six very challenging years on the throne.
Say what you will; these inhabitants of Nineveh were buying into this fear promulgated by Jonah. Who would have thought that the capital city of the dreadful Assyrians who were infamous for their mistreatment of captured enemy combatants would respond like this to a lowly Hebrew prophet!
Let neither man nor beast, herd nor flock, taste anything; do not let them eat, or drink water
I read that this was a Persian custom of including animals during the fasting and sackcloth times, but I had to set aside my “What!?” reaction and circumvent my incredulity to see if this odd custom of including animals in the mix of mourning made any sense at all. These ancients really did some crazy stuff back in the day but this can be said about modern men as well!
There are two things to point out here. (1) This destruction was targeting every living thing in Nineveh (cf. Jon 4:11), and (2) Both man and animal would be heard crying out (as if Yahweh needed that to get His attention!). Man crying out not to be destroyed; animals crying out over thirst and hunger. Keep in mind that they are steeped in paganism and morally and ethically bankrupt.
What
gets God’s “attention” (Has it ever occurred to you that nothing occurs to
God?) is not the humble look or how loud or long you cry out, but a real change
of heart. We are not going to fool the One who is omniscient and knows our
heart (Jer 17:10) far better than we do (Jer 17:9), I might add. Nonetheless,
the idea of fasting and wearing sackcloth was a visible symbol of a contrite
heart.
I seriously doubt that everyone was buying into this 40-day thing, but spiritually camouflaging will not work! “Hear ye! Hear ye! A resisting and rejecting heart that is costuming contrition is already known by the God who searches the heart and the mind to give to every man and woman according to his or her ways, according to the fruit of his or her doing” (Jer 17:10)!
(Jon 3:8) But let man and beast be covered with sackcloth, and cry mightily to God; yes, let every one turn from his evil way and from the violence that is in his hands.
I will have to admit that including animals during the fasting and sackcloth times (cf. Jonah 4:1, and much livestock) strikes me as rather odd – beast to be covered with sackcloth? Really, a royal decree? The only justification that I can see, thinking like a Persian (if that is even possible?), is understanding how important their animals were to an agrarian economy.
Their very livelihood was temporarily suspended and submitted to the God of this messenger; they wanted to live! A sign of the animals being idle, having no food or water, and a sackcloth laid upon the animals was also a visible symbol by the owner of penitence. He or she was seeking no other agenda than forgiveness. This kind of thing would weed out the pretenders, but the king had no tolerance for the likes of those, hence the royal decree. They were mourning for their very lives! It was an all-hands-on-deck kind of thing.
There is an interesting theological perspective. This reminds me of Paul’s words,
For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it in hope… For we know that the whole creation groans and labors with birth pangs together until now (Rom 8:20, 22).
All of creation (including the animals) were caught up in the ripple effect of the bondage of corruption (sin) and subjected to futility, not willingly. But those beasts in Nineveh feel and experience this bondage of corruption, as all of creation, as a woman travailing in childbirth.
The animals in Nineveh were victims of the sins of the Assyrians; they didn’t commit vile sins and participate in the attendant vices of idolatry or bloodlust of the Assyrians toward their captives. Nonetheless, all (man and beast) living were slated for destruction, forty days out (recall the flood of Noah upon the earth and the devastating blow to the animal kingdom). To cry mightily to God by royal decree would not be a problem for thirsty and hungry beasts. The ultimate green movement is to pray, “O Lord, come quickly,” why?
Because the creation itself also will be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God ... Not only that, but we also who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, eagerly waiting for the adoption, the redemption of our body (Rom 8:21, 23).
It is interesting to read the king's language about turning from two lanes of unacceptable behavior: moral depravity and oppressive force,
Yes, let every one turn from his evil way and from the violence that is in his hands.
turn from his evil way
This speaks of moral depravity.
turn from the violence that is in his hands
This refers to being morally depraved and using oppressive force, which they were infamous for doing to their captives; they possessed a demonic blood-lust.
Wasn’t Big Dan the one in charge of Nineveh? Do you think this is a case of the pot calling the kettle black? When their sinful conscience is no longer telling them that something is wrong, there is already a deep dive into the darkness. Some never see the light because their hearts are hardened and full of unbelief; they are not victims but volunteers (cf. 2 Cor 4:4).
It is peculiar that Jonah is referred to as a “missionary prophet” by some interpreters. That is definitely oxymoronic. Jonah wanted Yahweh to destroy them not spare them. Here was an unwilling preacher who had positive results among the Gentiles to Yahweh’s message! God honors His Word not based upon the spiritual condition or attitude of the one heralding the message! Thank, God!
Sometimes we get credit for the method of our enterprise when in reality it resulted from God being faithful to His Word. Often, I will hear people say, “God is blessing us” to imply they are doing something right as if being the center of spirituality in the area. That might not be the case at all. God will still hold us accountable for personal holiness while blessing His Word (cf. Jdg 21:25). Jonah is a prime example of what I am saying.
Look at Jonah’s messed up attitude (Jon 4:1) and the magnificent results coming forth from his message (Jon 3:10). Boy, was Jonah conflicted. Recall, Jonah wanted Yahweh to nuke Nineveh! You feel the love flowing (Jon 4:1)? Time in the whale addressed keeping Jonah alive and the keeping of his vow to Yahweh.
The acidic attitude of Jonah was another matter altogether. This is concerning for Jonah was not a false prophet by any stretch of the imagination (cf. Jon 4:2). Even good men like Jonah, though forgiven, are flawed by sin: thinking, saying, and doing wrong things. We are all in the same boat with Jonah, no pun intended!
Jonah in some sense is really a metaphor for Israel who forgotten that Yahweh’s concern was not exclusively Israel though they were God’s chosen people out of all the peoples of the earth, imperfect though they be. God was concerned for all of mankind and eventually, Jesus would die for all (Jn 3:16; Rom 5:8).
(1Ch
16:23) Sing to the LORD, all the earth; proclaim the good news of His
salvation from day to day.
(1Ch
16:24) Declare His glory among the nations, His wonders among all
peoples.
(Rom 3:29) Or is He the God of the Jews only? Is He not also the God of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also.
What
Jonah was really doing, which Israel and Judah were guilty of, was allowing his
feelings in a matter to interfere with doing the will of God, as if that were
optional! Disagreeing with Yahweh is sinful (cf. 1 Jn 1:9, confess = agree).
This spiritual malady of disagreeing with Yahweh spread into every area of
their lives for most of them. We don’t do that, do we? For them, it led to the
destruction of the southern and northern kingdoms. For us, we are reminded that
it really doesn’t pay to disobey.
(Jon 3:9) Who can tell if God will turn and relent, and turn away from His fierce anger, so that we may not perish?
The king postulated their situation; it is intense and fraught with uncertainty but also provided the impetus for the people to continue their mourning and penitence because no one in their right mind desired to perish. They didn’t get up that morning, the day Jonah arrived, thinking, “I think I want to perish in the near future!” Common sense will dictate that fasting and wearing sackcloth or not watering and feeding their animals did not continue for a duration of forty days.
Jonah
doesn’t say how long the fasting, the wearing sackcloth, and the crying
continued, but once that short period of contrition was over, from our view,
God would be observing their behavior to see if there was a significant change
of heart. From a theological perspective, He already knew before the mourning
came to an end what they would do. In Part 3 we will take a look at another
controversial expression, God relented. <><
%20MG%20t-bkgrd%2060x44.png){kind=small}
%20sunflower%20makeover%2045x63.png){kind=small}
 |
| To Part 3 |
