Introduction

About the Book of the Prophet Jonah

Information about the prophet Jonah, like that of most Old Testament divinely-inspired writers, is marked by great scarcity. The book bearing his name, while providing detailed accounts of his mission—his embassy and preaching in Nineveh—says little about Jonah himself, noting only that he was “a Hebrew, a worshipper of the God of heaven, the son of Amitai” (Church Slavonic: Amaphii). A valuable supplement to this information is provided by the fourth book of Kings. In describing the expansion of the boundaries of the Kingdom of Israel under Jeroboam II, it remarks that this was accomplished “by the word of the Lord God of Israel, which He spoke through His servant Jonah, son of Amittai, the prophet, who was from Gath-hepher” (2 Sam 14:25). This remark resolves for us an important question about the time of life and place of the prophet Jonah’s ministry. Coming from Gath-hepher, he was therefore descended from the tribe of Zebulun, in which this city was located (Josh 19:13), and belonged to the prophets of the Kingdom of Israel. His name is connected with the reign of Jeroboam II, who ascended the throne in 835 BC and occupied the Israelite throne for 41 years (2 Sam 14:23). The war with Syria, as a result of which the boundaries of the Israelite kingdom were expanded according to Jonah’s prediction, should be dated to the beginning of Jeroboam II’s reign, since it was begun by his predecessors (Jehoahaz and Jehoash) and merely brought to a successful conclusion by him. Thus Jonah’s life must be pushed back to an earlier period. If Jonah’s prophecy was fulfilled at the beginning of Jeroboam II’s reign, then it was uttered earlier, during the reign of Jehoash that preceded it. To this king the prophet Elisha, before his death, predicted that he would defeat the Syrians, but only “not to the end” (2 Sam 13:14-20). Jonah’s prophecy concerning the final victory over Syria and the restoration of the ancient boundaries of the Israelite kingdom thus appears as a continuation and complement to Elisha’s prophecy, and was most likely spoken to this same Jehoash as consolation. From the foregoing it follows that the prophet Jonah lived in the middle of the ninth century BC; consequently in the time of his ministry he was the most ancient of the prophets who left us their writings. He was the younger contemporary of Elisha and possibly even of the prophet Elijah and their successor in prophecy. Jewish tradition not without reason considers him a disciple of the prophet Elisha, having received training in those prophetic schools that were founded by Elijah (2 Sam 2:2-6; 2 Sam 6:1-8); it identifies him with that impetuous young man whom Elisha sent to anoint Jehu as king (2 Sam 9:1-10). Another tradition, transmitted by blessed Jerome, considers the prophet Jonah to be the son of the widow of Zarephath, raised to life by Elijah (1 Sam 17:17-23). These traditions, establishing a connection between Jonah and the great Israelite prophets—Elijah and Elisha—have been received by the Orthodox Church and are included in the liturgical service for this prophet on September 22. We have no further information about the activity of the prophet Jonah beyond the account in his book about his preaching in Nineveh. The other places in Scripture where Jonah is mentioned (Tob 14:8; 3 Macc 6:6; Matt 12:41; Luke 11:30-32) only confirm this fact. Regarding the end of the prophet’s life and his death, we learn from tradition. According to one account, the prophet Jonah remained to live in Nineveh after his preaching there until the end of his life, and died there. His tomb is still pointed out on a high hill near the village of Mosul, where the ruins of Nineveh were uncovered. According to another tradition, Jonah returned from Nineveh and died in his homeland in Gath-hepher. Here, as near Nineveh, a venerated tomb of the prophet is found. This latter version concerning the prophet Jonah’s death is confirmed by the words of the third book of Maccabees, that God “showed Jonah after his stay in the belly of the whale to all his relatives unharmed” (3 Macc 6:6). This means he returned to his homeland.

Concerning the nature and origin of the book of the prophet Jonah. The question of the nature of the book of the prophet Jonah is answered differently in exegetical literature. The most ancient opinion, relying on direct testimony of the biblical text, considers the book of the prophet Jonah to be a historical narrative, conveying an account of actual events and persons. Another opinion, developed and widely argued in critical literature, does not recognize Jonah’s book as genuine history, because much in it appears extraordinary, incomprehensible in its miraculous character, and historically incredible. Defenders of the second opinion regard the book of the prophet Jonah as a more or less fictional work. Some see in it an account of a vision that came to the prophet, others consider it a fable, allegory, or parable told for moral instruction, still others accept it as a legend that embellished a simple and natural fact with miraculous and incredible details. We will not pause to discuss how successfully the book of the prophet Jonah can be equated with the literary forms mentioned above and found in Scripture (see the Introduction for that); the very diversity of attempts to present Jonah’s book not in the form of a historical account shows that none of them was entirely satisfactory. All these attempts flow from the idea that it is impossible to regard the events recounted in Jonah’s book as having actually happened. In explaining the text of the book, we will try to remove obstacles to its historical understanding, and for now we offer external testimony in favor of its historical character.

The most ancient testimony in favor of the historical character of Jonah’s book we find in the books of Tobit and Third Maccabees. In them is attested a historical understanding of the two principal facts of Jonah’s book, most often met with objection: the prophet’s stay in the belly of the whale (3 Macc 6:6) and his preaching in Nineveh (Tob 14:8). Then Josephus Flavius, in recounting the contents of Jonah’s book in his “Jewish Antiquities” (Иона 9:2), considers it to be genuine history. Only if Jonah’s book were historical in character would it have been possible for it to be included in the canon of sacred divinely-inspired books by the Old Testament church; a work that was fictional or distorting reality could not have enjoyed such great respect. Following the Old Testament church, the early Christian church also understood and interpreted Jonah’s book in the historical sense. In this matter it followed the unquestionable authority of Jesus Christ Himself. In response to the Pharisees’ demand that He show them miraculous signs, He said that the fact of Jonah’s staying in the belly of the whale should serve as the greatest sign for them: “for as Jonah was in the belly of the whale three days and three nights, so will the Son of Man be in the heart of the earth three days and three nights” (Matt 12:40). These words of the Savior could have had their convincing force only if He was speaking of an actual fact. Another miracle analogous to it and necessarily historical (not fictional) could serve as a sign of the miracle of Christ’s resurrection. In the same way the Savior attested the historical character of another event in Jonah’s book—the repentance of the Ninevites. He said: “The Ninevites will rise at the judgment with this generation and condemn it; for they repented at the preaching of Jonah, and behold, something greater than Jonah is here” (Luke 11:32). The Savior could set the Ninevites as an example of responsiveness to God’s word to His contemporaries only when both He Himself and His listeners regarded the account in Jonah’s book as genuine history.

But the book of the prophet Jonah is not only a historical narrative, but also at the same time a prophetic writing. Its prophetic and typological meaning is indicated in the words of the Savior cited above (Matt 12:40). Jonah by his three-day stay in the belly of the whale prefigured the Savior’s three-day stay in the heart of the earth. This is the main point of the book, but nonetheless one cannot limit all of the prophetic meaning of the book to this, for in that case all the remaining content of the book, except chapter II, would be a completely unnecessary addition, inexplicably told. Moreover, the typological meaning of the book pointed out by the Savior would have been understood only by Christians, not by Jews—whereas it was the Jewish church that included it among the prophetic books. In light of all this, the prophetic meaning and significance must be found not only in individual parts of the book, but in the whole of it, in the fundamental idea developed throughout the entire book. This idea is that salvation through repentance can be granted by God not to Jews alone, but also to pagans. Jehovah is not the national God of the Hebrews alone, but God of all peoples. Theocracy (the manifestation of God) extends to all humanity; pagans will enter God’s Kingdom, because the path to it is one for all—moral perfection. Unfolding this idea in a historical narrative, Jonah’s book prepared the Jews for assimilating the chief Messianic idea about the spiritual and universal character of the Messiah’s Kingdom. In Jonah’s age this idea first so clearly illumined the religious consciousness of the Jews and, as the example of Jonah himself shows, was adopted by them with great pain, after a heavy struggle with their narrowly nationalist prejudices. Subsequent prophets down to John the Baptist continued to teach about the salvation of all people in the Messiah’s Kingdom, that is, to develop the fundamental idea of Jonah’s book, and this constituted the chief task of their prophetic ministry. Thus the book of the prophet Jonah must be recognized as the first by time and content of the prophetic books.

Regarding the origin of Jonah’s book, as well as its nature, representatives of critical exegesis express very diverse opinions. With great effort they seek in the book signs of its later origin, and on this basis date the time of its writing—some to the Assyrian captivity, others to the time of the Judahite king Josiah or to the period of the Babylonian captivity, still others believe it was written in the post-exilic period, possibly even in the time of the Maccabees. In our exposition of the book we shall note that those places in it which are seen as evidence of its later origin do not actually contain such indications; for now let us concentrate on the positive side of the question. The book of Jonah was known to Ben Sira, who speaks of the Twelve Minor Prophets (Sir 49:12); Tobit is familiar with its contents (Tob 14:8). It could not have been written later than 430 BC, the time the Old Testament canon was closed, since it was included in it. From the character of the book’s content, it is most probable that it was written by the prophet Jonah himself. No one besides him could have known and so vividly portrayed the most secret movements of his inner life, and particularly such movements as did not serve to his credit. The author of the book was undoubtedly in Nineveh, became familiar with its life and customs. The language reveals in him an Israelite, not a Judahite. It is true that Jonah is spoken of in the book in the third person, but this is the custom of many sacred writers to put themselves in the shadows and to bring to the foreground God’s word acting through them.