Welcome back to my study/review of The Book of Jonah. If you missed the previous parts of this study, you can find them HERE.
Jonah 2:1-10
2 Then Jonah prayed to the Lord his God from the belly of the fish, 2 saying,
“I called out to the Lord, out of my distress,
and he answered me;
out of the belly of Sheol I cried,
and you heard my voice.
3 For you cast me into the deep,
into the heart of the seas,
and the flood surrounded me;
all your waves and your billows
passed over me.
4 Then I said, ‘I am driven away
from your sight;
yet I shall again look
upon your holy temple.’
5 The waters closed in over me to take my life;
the deep surrounded me;
weeds were wrapped about my head
6 at the roots of the mountains.
I went down to the land
whose bars closed upon me forever;
yet you brought up my life from the pit,
O Lord my God.
7 When my life was fainting away,
I remembered the Lord,
and my prayer came to you,
into your holy temple.
8 Those who pay regard to vain idols
forsake their hope of steadfast love.
9 But I with the voice of thanksgiving
will sacrifice to you;
what I have vowed I will pay.
Salvation belongs to the Lord!”
10 And the Lord spoke to the fish, and it vomited Jonah out upon the dry land.
______________________________
The prayer above comprises the entirety of Chapter 2 of the Book of Jonah. Verse 1 of Chapter 2 is heavily quoted in the Jewish and Christian communities. (From The Pulpit Commentaries🙂
Then Jonah prayed. These were his feelings when he sank in the waters and while he lay in his mysterious prison; he may have put them into their metrical form after his deliverance. The grammatical arrangement, and especially the language of verse 7, seem to speak of a deliverance already experienced rather than of one expected. As this “prayer” does not suit an allegory, and as no cue but Jonah could have known its substance, we have here an argument for his authorship. It is rather a thanksgiving than a prayer—like that of Hennas (1 Samuel 2:1). When he realizes that he was saved from drowning, he uttered his gratitude, and saw that he might hope for further rescue. How he passed the three days we cannot tell; some have thought he was unconscious; but this is, perhaps, hardly consistent with the notice of his praying, and with the action of his great Antitype, who, during his sojourn in the unseen world, “preached to the spirits in prison” (1 Peter 3:19). His God. He acknowledges Jehovah as his God. He had proved himself his by inspiration, by chastisement, and now by mercy (Pusey). The following prayer contains ample reminiscences of the Psalms, which would be familiar to a devout Israelite. Those quoted are mostly what have been considered to belong to David’s time. if their date is really ascertained. But it is a matter of controversy, incapable of settlement, whether Jonah or the psalmist is the original.
The note abve describe Jonah as an antitype of Christ. In other places, you might see Jonah described as a Type of Christ. What do those terms means? via encyclopedia.com:
TYPE AND ANTITYPE
The word “type” is a transcription of the Greek word τύπος (from τύπτω, to strike), which means, first of all, a blow, and then the mark left by a blow or the application of pressure, e.g., the mark of the nails in Christ’s hands (Jn 20.25). It can refer also to an image or model (a statue is the τύπος of the one represented) and is so used in the Septuagint (Am 5.26, where it refers to statues of false gods; see also Acts 7.43). But in its strictly Biblical sense it refers either to a moral lesson (the events of the Exodus are lessons, τύπτοι, for the Christian community; 1 Cor 10.6); or to some person, event, or institution of the Old Law related in some way to the new and definitive self-revelation of God in Christ. In this sense Adam is “a type of the one to come” (Rom 5.14).
In the Gospels. It is a basic supposition in all the sources of the Gospel tradition that Jesus fulfills the Old Law, and He Himself affirms this (Mt 5.17). Not only was Jesus seen as the climax of sacred history, but an ever deepening meditation gradually revealed hidden correspondences between the time of promise and that of fulfillment. Thus, while Mark has no mention of the sign of Jona (in Mk 8.12 Jesus refuses to give a sign), the Logia source (see synoptic gospels) contained a well-developed form of it, though this has been variously transmitted (Mt 12.38–41; Lk 11.29–32) (see jonah, sign of).
In John this process is taken much further and no doubt owes a debt to the liturgical life of one or more early Christian communities. Structurally basic to this Gospel is the idea that Jesus fulfills what is implicit in the great Jewish feasts (see john, gospel according to st.). The realities of the Old Testament are on a lower and representational level: the bronze serpent (Nm 21.4–9) prefigures Christ on the Cross (Jn 3.14); the water of Jacob’s well and that of the rite of pouring water at the Feast of booths serve only as figures of the true life-giving water (Jn 4.10; 7.37–39). The manna in the desert points forward to the reality possessed by the antitype, the true Bread (Jn 6.32). A hidden correspondence is also traced between the Passion of Jesus and the Old Testament Passover (Jn 19.33–36; cf. Ex 12.46) (see passover, feast of).
In the Epistles. St. Paul‘s typological actualization of the Old Testament was already prepared for in that of contemporary Judaism. This was true of Adam as type (see adam), though Paul’s application in Rom 5.14 is certainly original [see W. D. Davies, Paul and Rabbinical Judaism (London 1958) 44] and can be compared with that of Philo’s heavenly Adam who is stamped (τετύπωσθαι) with the divine image. Paul uses Exodus typology also (1 Cor 10.6–11) and speaks of the “allegory” of the two sons of Abraham (Gal 4.21–31), with a term that appears to have been first used by philo judaeus and Flavius josephus.
The typological correspondence is carried through more thoroughly in Hebrews than elsewhere in the New Testament and can be compared with the discourse of Stephen (Acts 7), in which the Old Testament is given a largely typological value. The contribution of Hebrews lies in a Platonic-Philonian distinction between the representational and real levels: Old Testament liturgy is but a copy and shadow (σκία: Heb 8.5) of the new, the “heavenly things” (9.23–24); the “earthly” sanctuary (9.1) points forward to the “true tent” (8.2). And, in particular, the entry of the High Priest into the inner sanctuary on the Day of atonement (Yom Kippur) is a figure (παραβολή: 9.9) that refers to the salvific entry of Jesus into heaven after His Resurrection.
It will be clear from the preceding that antitype is the correspondent in the New Testament to the Old Testament type as in 1 Pt 3.21 where Baptism is the άντίτυπος of the Flood. In Heb 9.24 the word is synonymous with type, but this is due to the different thought-context.
Conclusions. These correspondences between persons, events, and institutions of the Old Law and the new reality in Christ show that the typological relation follows from the unity of salvation history and, at the same time, the uniqueness of the Christ-event, which, as the final and all-inclusive reality, is foreshadowed in the Old Testament. The discovery of such types may not, therefore, be an arbitrary process but must be based on the literal sense of the Scriptures and be guided by the primitive tradition. It is especially important to distinguish typology from allegory, which generally aims at a point-by-point correspondence and is not so controlled. Philo’s allegorical methods left their mark on the Christian Alexandrian school (see F. Büchsel in G. Kittel, Theologisches Wörterbuch zum Neuen Testament 1:260–261), which, through the great prestige of origen, deeply influenced the West, as can be seen in the homilies of St. Augustine and St. Gregory the Great. This approach is still strong in the works of St. Thomas Aquinas and later writers; it led to a depreciation of the literal sense and of a genuine typology (see exegesis, biblical, 5, 6, 7). Though a reaction had already set in with the Antiochean School, chiefly in the works of theodore of mopsuestia, it is only in the modern period that the balance has been restored.
The typological or spiritual sense of Scripture includes the identification of these types. It too must be based firmly on the literal sense (see divino afflante spiritu; H. Denzinger, Enchiridion symolorum, ed. A. Schönmetzer, 2293) but can have wider connotations: dogmatic (allegorical) referring to Christ and redemption; moral (tropological), to moral conduct; or eschatological (anagogical), to the realities of the future life.
Bibliography: É. amann, Dictionnaire de théologie catholique, ed. a. vacant, 15 v. (Paris 1903–50; Tables générales 1951–) 15.2:1935–45. p. grelot, Sens chrétien de l’Ancien Testament (Tournai 1962). j. daniÉlou, From Shadows to Reality: Studies in the Typology of the Fathers, tr. w. hibberd (Westminster, MD 1960). h. de lubac, “‘Typologie’ et ‘allegorisme’,” Recherches de science religieuse 34 (Paris 1947) 180–226. j. levie, The Bible: Word of God in Words of Men, tr. s. h. treman (New York 1962) 252–264. j. coppens, Les Harmonies des deux Testaments (new ed. Tournai 1949). On Origen, see j. daniÉlou, Dictionnaire de la Bible, suppl. ed. l. pirot, et al. (Paris 1928–) 6:884–908 and h. de lubac, Histoire et Esprit: L’Intelligence de l’Écriture selon Origéne (Paris 1950). For Protestant views, see h.h. rowley, The Unity of the Bible (Philadelphia 1955); g. von rad, “Typological Interpretation of the Old Testament,” Interpretation 15 (1961) 174–192; g. w. h. lampe and k. j. woollcombe, Essays in Typology (Naperville, IL 1957).
In case that’s not entirely clear, you might think of Type and Antitype as one part of the story foreshadowing another part. Jonah descends – in his words – to Sheol and he returns from there, shares God’s message, and wicked Gentiles subsequently repent. Continuing on in verse 2, also from The Pulpit Commentaries:
He introduces the prayer with the tact that he cried to God in distress and was heard. By reason of mine affliction; better, out of my affliction. This may be a reminiscence of Psalms 120:1 or Psalms 18:6; but from such coincidences nothing can be established concerning the date of the book. Like circumstances call forth like expressions; and the writers may have composed them quite independently of one another. Hell (Sheol). The unseen world (Ezekiel 32:21). He was as though dead when thus engulfed (comp. Psalms 18:5). Cried I (Psalms 28:1, Psalms 28:2). Thou heardest my voice (Psalms 130:1, Psalms 130:2).
Sheol = שְׁאוֹל shᵉʼôwl, sheh-ole’; or שְׁאֹל shᵉʼôl; from H7592; hades or the world of the dead (as if a subterranean retreat), including its accessories and inmates:—grave, hell, pit.
As we mentioned in the previous post, Christ compared his death and resurrection to Jonah “the sign of Jonah.” It is notable that Jonah compares his time inside the fish with death, also. We’ll continue on on the text, looking next at Ellicott’s Bible Commentary:
(3) Hadst cast.—Rather, didst cast. (See Psalms 88:6.)
Floods.—Literally, river, used here of the ocean currents. (Comp. Psalms 24:2.)
All thy billows and thy waves.—More exactly, all thy breakers and billows. (See Psalms 42:7, where the same expression is used figuratively for great danger and distress.)
(4) I am cast out of thy sight.—“Jonah had wilfully withdrawn from standing in God’s presence. Now God had taken him at his word, and, as it seemed, cast him out of it. David had said in his haste, “I am cut off” (Psalms 31:22), Jonah substitutes the stronger word, “I am cast forth,” driven forth, expelled like the mire and dirt which the waves drive along, or like the waves themselves in their restless motion, or the heathen (the word is the same) whom God had driven out before Israel, or as Adam from Paradise” (Pusey).
Yet I will look again.—The Hebrew is very impressive, and reads like one of those exile hopes so common in the Psalms: “Yet I have one thing left, to turn towards Thy holy Temple and pray.” (For the attitude see Note on Psalms 28:2.)
The language here, even in the translated form, is very poetic. Jonah has nothing left except to turn toward God and pray. The language and the imagery here evokes the idea of death and hell. Jonah’s hope is turn his eyes back upon God. He had set his gaze on Tarshish, hoping to get as far from God as possible. Now he returns his gaze to God and his hope is in God’s mercy. Continuing on on The Pulpit Commentaries:
Compassed me about. Not the same word as in Jonah 2:3. Septuagint, περιεχίθη μοι “was poured around me.” Even to the soul; so as to reach his life (comp. Psalms 18:5; Psalms 69:1, Psalms 69:2; Lamentations 3:54). The depth closed me round about. The verb is the lame as in Jonah 2:3, translated there, “compassed me about” Vulgate, abyssus vallavit me. The weeds (suph); seaweed. Jonah sank to the bottom before he was swallowed by the fish. The LXX. omits the word. The Vulgate gives pelagus, which is probably derived from the fact of the Red Sea being called “the Sea of Suph,” the term being thence applied to any sea.
The bottoms of the mountains; literally, the cuttings off, where the mountains seem to be cut off by the ocean floor; the roots of the mountains. Εἰς σχισμὰς ὀρέων, “the clefts of the mountains”; Psalms 18:15. The earth with her bars; as for the earth, her bars were about me; return to it was shut out for me; the gate by which I might return was locked behind me. He adds, forever, as it was to all appearance, because he had no power in himself of returning to earth and life. Yet; in spite of all, I am preserved. From corruption (shachath); as Job 17:14; de corruptione (Vulgate); so the Chaldee and Syriac; Septuagint, Ἀναβήτω ἐκ φθορᾶς ἡ ζωή μου (Alex), Ἀναβήτω φθορὰ ζωῆς μου (Vatican), “Let my life arise from destruction;“ or, “Let the destruction of my life [i.e. my destroyed life] arise.” Jerome refers the word to the digestive process in the fish’s stomach; it is probably merely a synonym for “death.” The marginal rendering, “the pit,” i.e. Sheol, is also etymologically correct (comp. Psalms 30:3). My God. He thankfully acknowledges that Jehovah has proved himself a beneficent God to him.
The imagery of these two verses is of Jonah sinking to the bottom of the sea before he was rescued by the fish. The intended metaphor is that of death. This portrays the God of Israel as the God who is supreme, even over death. He can pluck someone out of Sheol if He wishes. Returning next to Ellicott for verses 7 and 8:
(7) Fainted.—Literally, covered itself. Comp. Jonah 4:8. (See Psalms 61:2; Psalms 142:3; Psalms 143:4, where the same Hebrew word is rendered overwhelmed. Comp. Psalms 107:5.) Here, apparently, we are to think of the blinding mist of death slowly stealing over sight and sense.
Into thine holy temple.—See Jonah 2:4, and comp. Psalms 18:6.
(8) They that observe lying vanities.—See Note, Psalms 31:6.
Forsake their own mercy—i.e., forfeit their own share of the covenant grace. In Psalms 37:28 it is said that Jehovah does not forsake his chasîdim; they, however, by forsaking Jehovah (Himself called Israel’s mercy, Psalms 144:2, margin) and His law (Psalms 89:30) can forfeit their chesed or covenant privilege.
Jonah describes himself as approaching death, but e also contrasts himself from others due to who his God is. Finally, when we get to verse 9, Jonah relents from his running and vows to do as God has commanded. From The Pulpit Commentaries:
But I—who know better than idolaters, and who have learned a new lesson of trust in God—I will sacrifice. Pusey notes that the Hebrew denotes rather, “I fain would sacrifice,” as it depended, not on him, but on God, whether he was able to worship again in the Holy Land. His sacrifice of thanksgiving (Leviticus 7:12, etc) should be offered with prayer and praise (Psalms 42:5). That which I have vowed (Psa 1:1-6 :14; Psalms 66:13). Salvation is of the Lord. This is the conclusion to which his trial has brought him, the moral of the whole canticle (Psalms 3:8; Psalms 118:14, Psalms 118:21; Revelation 7:10). The LXX. and the Vulgate join this clause to the preceding, thus: “That which I have vowed I will pay to the Lord for my salvation.” This is tame, and not in strict accordance with the Hebrew.
I think it’s worth looking at the text of verse 9 again:
9 But I with the voice of thanksgiving
will sacrifice to you;
what I have vowed I will pay.
Salvation belongs to the Lord!”
Jonah has been fully humbled. He forsook the Lord, and lost His salvation. He turned his eyes back to the Lord and received it again. He says he will do as God commanded “with the voice of thanksgiving.” And at that point, God used a giant fish to save him from death at the bottom of the sea. From The Pulpit Commentaries in verse 10:
Spake unto the fish. The punishment having done its work, the fish is impelled by some secret influence to eject Jonah on the dry land, on the third day after he was swallowed (Jonah 1:17). Some, who regard the Book of Jonah as an historical allegory, see in these three days an adumbration of the period of the Babylonish captivity, during which Israel was buried in darkness, and from which she rose to a new and happier life. They compare, as referring to the same transaction, Jeremiah 51:34, Jeremiah 51:44 and Hosea 6:1, Hosea 6:2. Upon the dry land. Probably on the coast of Palestine, whence he had started.
There are several great interpretations of this story among practicing Jews. One of them I will share here and it is from chabad.org with an excerpt below:
The Story of Jonah and the “Whale”
The Book of Jonah explained by Jewish commentaries
By Mendel Dubov
[…]
The recalcitrance of Jonah is the mystery of the entire book. Why did the prophet not want to go to Nineveh? Where was he running? How could such a great man—a prophet no less—think that it was possible to “run away” from G‑d?
Rashi explains that Jonah’s flight was because he knew that “the gentiles are quick to repent. Should I prophesy to them and they repent, it will mean that I am condemning Israel, who do not heed the words of the prophets.”
To this end, Jonah fled from the Land of Israel, for “the Divine presence does not rest [on a prophet] outside of the Holy Land.” This seemed to Jonah a way to be freed from this guilt-laden mission, as G‑d would then not communicate with him.
As such, this is one of the most breathtaking and historic accounts of ahavat Yisrael, love for the Jewish people.
Here was G‑d Himself coming to Jonah and giving him an instruction. The Talmud says that a prophet who withholds his or her prophecy is deserving of death.2 Indeed, had G‑d not intervened by the fish first swallowing and then ejecting him to safety, Jonah would have lost his life at sea. But to Jonah this did not matter. He preferred to die rather than be the medium through which his people would be seen in a bad light.
It was for this very reason that Jonah was so frustrated over his “success” at Nineveh, and why in the last part of the book he actually asked G‑d to take his life.
As said, this drama is the running theme of the entire book, taking up the majority of its content. It is obvious that Scripture is interested that we read and understand not only the story of Nineveh’s repentance, but also of Jonah’s reluctance.
Among the books of the Old Testament, it is fascinating in particular to see the way that Jewish commentaries and Christian ones interpret this story. There is a lot of overlap, though the differences are dramatic. We shall see how that continues to play out in the remaining chapters.