Beyond the Whale - II
By Warren Calhoun Robertson
August 5, 2001
Jonah 4:
en we think of Jonah, we first think of the whale. In looking at Jonah these past two weeks, I've wanted us to look beyond the whale. The whale, of course, is important, but it is not a simple thing in itself. It can be viewed two ways: as a force to overcome, something that overwhelms Jonah; or as a vehicle of deliverance, that which brings Jonah up from the depths. So it's an important part of the story, but there is so much more that gets little attention. The whale gets so much attention either as something that people defend as historical[1] or trip over in disbelief. Those defending it as strictly historical make claims too high for the text; those who trip in disbelief tend to disregard the book all together.[2]
I'm inviting us to reconsider the book of Jonah. Even as Jonah had a second opportunity to
hear and respond to God's call, I'm hoping this will be a second, or at least a
new opportunity for us to hear and respond to the book's message.[3] Even though I spent some time last week on
the question of historicity, let's try to set that aside; rather, let's try to
capture the real to life themes of the book. Rather than judging the relative quilt or innocence of the book's
historical accuracy, let's just see if the book deserves a full hearing.[4]
One theme stands out in the fourth chapter that we read this
morning. A theme so far as I can tell,
has been given very little attention. While much attention is given to Jonah's eventual response to God's
call,[5]
that he did finally go to Nineveh, I don't believe that I have ever heard a
sermon on another response of Jonah to God, his anger.[6]
Anger, of course, is a common human experience, and many of our
exemplary biblical folk get angry. None
other than Jesus himself overturns the tables of the moneychangers in the
temple.[7] Among OT characters, I think of King
Saul. You know, he was rather
temperamental, and this was one reason he had David, later King David, join his
court. David played the harp, and this
soothed King Saul when he was irritable. Nonetheless, he tried to pin David to the wall with his spear on a
couple of occasions (1 Samuel 18). One
day around the dinner table, Saul gets so angered with his son Jonathan that he
calls him a “son of a perverse, rebellious woman” (1 Samuel 20:30), which the
Living Bible renders, “SOB.” One
morning when I was in about the 6th grade, my Dad, as was our
custom, read from the Bible and a devotional thought just as we finished
breakfast. He was reading this story of
Saul and Jonathan, from the Living Bible. “Saul became very angry with Jonathan saying, ‘You son of a
bi....ba..bi'” He wasn't quite sure what to do with that! He'll be here with us next week. . . . But don't you tell him what I said!
What do you see when you think of anger?
I see a young man behind the wheel of a car in a traffic on a Friday
evening. He's late for a date with
someone he's not really sure he likes. The day at the office was very stressful. He got three new assignments, which is particularly frustrating
because he hasn't even finished the two he is working on already. Not to mention the fact that he has to work
with Mike. Mike always sloughs off work
assigned to groups. “I'll end up doing
all myself!” About that time, someone
cuts in front of him. He has to slam of
brakes. “Jerk!” he screams while flipping the bird. He starts back up, tires
squalling. I'll show him he says to
himself. And off he goes for
payback.
I see a mother in a hurry to leave the house on time in morning. But first, she must dress three children
under 6. She's ready (almost), but one
child is still in pajamas, one is in the basement playing, and the third need's
a clean diaper, and all of them need to brush there teeth. What a zoo! And by the time she gets one to brush his teeth, the other two are in
the basement playing Power Rangers.
I see flaring, flaming nostrils, like the Chicago Bulls' logo. This is, in fact, very close to the Hebrew
image of anger, human and divine. What
we render into English as “he was angry” is literally “his nostrils burned.”[8] I see Jonah huddled under his little shade
booth, arms crossed, turban pulled low, teeth set, eyebrows low, nostrils
burning.
We probably ask first, why is he angry?[9] Well, let's face it. He finally goes to Nineveh to proclaim its
overturn right? Here's the Israelite
prophet, he gets one 8 word line of prophecy, only 5 words in Hebrew. And even it doesn't come to pass. I mean, every self respecting prophet wants
to proclaim events that come about. But
God turns from destruction and spares Nineveh, a move Jonah figured God would
do anyway. “So why did you send me in
the first place?” he must have thought. He must have felt pretty stupid. The story tells us that he gets angry.
Now I can't go in depth this morning about the psychological dynamics
of anger. Besides, many of you know
that part much better than I. There
does come a rub though, when we who think of ourselves as ones trying to hold
forth what is noble and constructive get high strung with anger. As a result, we often say things we wish we
had not and do things we wish we had not. We cannot help but become angry at times; learning appropriate
boundaries of expression is a part of maturing; channeling its energy for good
is a goal we reach all too infrequently.
What reflections I can offer you on anger this morning come from God's
question to Jonah in chapter 4. Now, I
have rendered that question a particular way, revealing in part my thoughts on
anger. When we compare other
translations, we find what seem to be other thoughts on anger.[10] The question comes when Jonah is east of the
city, nostrils burning. God questions
his anger. Again, after the plant grows
up, shades Jonah, but then withers, Jonah gets angry and God questions
him. Let's look at several translations
of this question.
First, the New International version: God asks Jonah, “Have you any
right to be angry?” Then, the New
Revised Standard Version: God asks Jonah, “Is it right for you to be
angry?” Then mine, which you might
guess that I most with agree . . . and I am unanimous in that . . . “What good
is your anger?” which is close to the rather awkward Revised Standard Version,
“Do you do well to be angry?”
Again, the NIV, “Have you any right to be angry?” The problem with that translation is what
seems to be the view that anger, an emotion hard wired to our own unique
selves, must be justified by some external standard. For sure, how we express anger must observe external boundaries,
but does feeling angry require a right? Now I would say, that if one thinks his or her anger is excessive one
could monitor his or her anger. After
all, anger can be an indicator of depression or some other emotional disturbance. Try this, ask yourself the next time you
blow your top, does the degree of my anger match the circumstances? If one threatens to blow up Manhattan
because of a stubbed toe, the degree of anger is disproportional to the
circumstances. So, asking “have you any
right to be angry” could mean this.
Again, the NRSV, God asks Jonah, “Is it right for you to be
angry?” We might ask of this
translation, is anger itself a matter of being right or wrong? Are emotions right or wrong? Are we wrong to feel a certain way? Was is wrong for Jonah to feel angry? That's not being very sympathetic. And he wasn't hurting anyone else with his
anger. Instead, he withdrew. He sits alone. Is it wrong for him to pull his robe over his head? I don't think this translation, or this view
of anger is quite on target.
Well how about, “What good is your anger?” At least I get to explain what I mean! “What good is you anger
under these circumstances, Jonah? Will
your anger change what you are angered about? Or is it something about your attitude that needs to change?”
What makes you angry? How about
a call just before supper from a total stranger who is trying to get you to
switch long distance servers, or to get another charge card? They have the nerve now to say, “This is a
courtesy call.” Just the other week, we
got four calls in three days from a credit card company. Unbelievable. One time, I got them though. When they ask for me, they always ask for Mr. Warren Robertson, using my
first name. I know they want me, and I
know it is someone who doesn't know me, or they would ask for Cal. Well, you know that our oldest son is
Warren. He's five. So one time when we got such a call, I said,
“You want Warren? Yes, just a minute .
. . Warren . . . it's for you!”
How about when things aren't fair. Does that make you angry? When
promotions are granted at work and someone who has not been there as long as
you gets promoted over you? I suppose
many of us would get angry over that.
I remember in college two of my friends were as different as could be
in preparing for exams. Suzanne was
very methodical. She took copious notes
during the semester. She reviewed her
notes weekly, even re-wrote some. She
started her papers early and turned them all in on time. Then there was David. He was far more spastic. He reminded me of Tigger. He'd bounce into class and bounce out with
hardly a note in between. He bummed
notes from the rest of us come exam time and cram the night before. He'd start papers late and turn them in
late. At the end of the semester, when
the final was over and grades came out, Suzanne and David both got an A. This really irritated Suzanne. “I'm so mad,” she once said, “I could
die.” It just didn't seem fair that
they would get the same grade. It just
wasn't fair that she put in so much work and David sailed through and the both
got the same grade in the end.
Sound familiar? This is like
the parable of the workers in the vineyard from our NT reading. Those called into the vineyard late in the
day got paid the same as those who started working early in the morning. This made the later group very angry and we
can see why. But the vineyard owner
says, “Take what belongs to you, and go . . . am I not allowed to do what I
choose with what belongs to me? Or do
you begrudge my generosity?” (Matthew 20:14-15).
I think Suzanne's anger, the vineyard worker's anger and Jonah's anger
are all very similar. Someone was
getting something that the angered party thought was undeserving. And it put the presumed undeserving on the
same level as the angered party. Oh,
now that really get's our goat doesn't it. We no longer have special place, and when it's a special place in the
eyes of God that is at stake. The
whale, it seems is not the only thing in Jonah that is too much to
swallow. Nineveh was a traditional
enemy of Israel. Elsewhere in the Old
Testament, particularly in the book of Nahum, Nineveh is proclaimed destroyed
and there is no turning from it.
Jonah was likely written post-exile, a time when circumstances called
Hebrew nationalism into question. Earlier, Israelites had drawn a tight circle around themselves.[11] They were God's chosen and none other. Now they were having to see election in a
different light. Rather than election
by God instead of other's but election by God on behalf of others. They were asked to see that God has concern
for other people too, even those Ninevites! A hard pill to swallow for Jonah and many of the story's audience, a
hard pill for New Testament era people when the gospel spread to the Gentiles,
and sometimes a hard pill for us to swallow when God's love is proclaimed for
people different than ourselves.
But herein lies an important message of Jonah: God is bigger than one's
limited understanding, God is concerned for people outside one's tightly
defined group, there is a wideness in God's mercy like the wideness of the
sea.
Jonah's anger could not change this about God, but Jonah's attitude
about God's mercy toward the Ninevites could change. He had experienced deliverance by God's mercy. He could open up to those other folks. Besides, shouldn't God “have mercy upon the
big city of Nineveh where there are a great number of animals and one hundred
twenty thousand people who don't know their right hand from their left?” (Jonah
4:11).
It's really not such a hard question to answer.
Let us pray: Create in us open hearts, O God, to share your abundant of
mercy, through Christ our Lord.
Amen.
[1]Last week, I argued that Jonah is not an
historical account; rather, it is a story (most like a fable). A few caveats, however. Intentionally or not, stories give us some
reliable historical information. As one
example, Jonah goes to Joppa to catch a boat sailing to the West, a likely
scenario. Also, the sailors appeal to a
variety of gods to calm the storm. In a
polytheistic world, this is the approach. Appeal to them all, hoping you invoke the right one for any given situation. Then, they cast lots to see who to blame for
the storm. This is a type of divination
common to the ancient Near East, not to mention present day African tribal
religions and others. It is a realistic
picture that the ancients would blame the storm on a person. The lots single out Jonah. The sailors “were scared big-time” (1:10)
because, as the text tells us, “they knew that he was fleeing from the Lord”
(1:11) This seems to be an act that
would anger God, the most common explanation in the biblical world for
threatening storms. God's anger, the
thinking could be, was roused because Jonah had fled from God's call. Hence, the storm was Jonah's fault. To rectify the situation, the sailors know
that they must do something to make reparation with the divine. They toss him overboard and the sea
calms. The sailors respond with ritual
observances. Compare I Samuel 5-6. Third, Nineveh (Assyria) was an enemy of
biblical Israel. That Jonah would not
want God to spare them is realistic. Compare this book's take on Nineveh with Nahum, another of the minor
prophets. Finally, on historicity, we
have to ask how might the first audience have heard the story? I suspect they at least thought that it could
happen. The story, therefore, contains
reliable historical information, the world view of the writer and
audience. Even so, the story need not
be taken as an historically reliable point-for-point actual event as told. The message carries regardless. Some commentators, however, go to great
lengths to defend point-for-point historicity, thinking “people act more surely
upon what they believe to be true in fact, than merely what they consider
likely in theory.” See Douglas Stuart, “Hosea-Jonah,” Word Biblical
Commentary, vol. 31 (Waco, TX: Word Books, 1987), 440. I couldn't disagree more. Besides, we have mere knowledge in what is
seen (cold, hard facts), but we have faith and conviction in things unseen
(Hebrews 11:1).
[2]See footnote 4 in “Beyond the Whale” (last
weeks sermon).
[3]Not that there is only one message. For such a small book, there are several
important themes.
[4]I'm presently serving as a grand juror in
Union County. The grand jury does not
decide quilt or innocence of the accused; rather, it decides if there is enough
evidence for a case to actually go to trial, to have a full hearing.
[5]A common emphasis on Jonah in sermons I heard
growing up was responding to God's call into missions. God calls (Go!”) , Jonah responds (“and he
went”) if only eventually and reluctantly. Here, the call to Jonah is similar to the call narratives of other
prophets, especially Moses (Exodus 3), Isaiah (Isaiah 6) and Jeremiah (Jeremiah 1). Jonah is the most reluctant of the four.
[6]Some commentators give cursory attention to
Jonah's anger by reflecting on what could cause his anger. One says, “Jonah's anger is most
unreasonable, but he does not see it.” Hinckley Mitchell, G, John M.P. Smith and Julius A. Bewer, A Critical
and Exegetical Commentary on Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi and Jonah. The International Critical Commentary (New
York: Scribner's, 1912), 57. Aren't all
emotions unreasonable? Phyllis Trible
gives much more attention to it in her reflections on the fourth chapter. See P. Trible, “Jonah.” The New
Interpreter's Bible, Vol. VII (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1996),
524-25. One obscure reference came up
through an electronic search of a religious article's data base (ATLA): Glass,
Jonathan. “The God Who Isn't Fair” The
Other Side 21, No.3 (Ap0My 1985): 44-45.
[7]Some might want to call that righteous
indignation instead of anger. Also, it
is interesting that none of the gospel texts actually say that Jesus got
angry. That he turned over tables,
yes. That he drove out the
moneychangers, yes. John even has Jesus
with a whip in his hand. But none say
explicitly that he was angry. (Matthew 21:12-17; Mark 11:15-19; Luke 19:45-48;
John 2:13-16).
[8]In Jonah, the shortened chrh is
used. The longer form is of the
expression in chrh aph. See
Genesis 39:19.
[9]Even though we take the story of Jonah as
fable-like, how can one help but talk about Jonah as if he is a person, with
thoughts and feelings?
[10]Maybe I am assuming too much on the part of
translators on this point. Nonetheless,
it offers a way of commenting on anger from different angles.
[11]See Ezra and Nehemiah.
© 2001 .
All rights reserved
