Grace Theological
Journal 11.1 (1991) 3-16
[Copyright © 1991
Grace Theological Seminary; cited with permission;
digitally prepared for use at
Gordon and
DEATH IN LIFE:
THE BOOK OF JONAH
AND BIBLICAL TRAGEDY
BRANSON L. WOODARD
Literary
analysis of the book of Jonah indicates a number of
features found in the OT tragedies about Samson and Saul, as well as
the tragic narrative of Adam and Eve. Relating Jonah to ancient
Hebrew tragedy suggests
a broader, more sophisticated expression
of the Hebrew tragic vision than current research has shown
and
strengthens a reading of the book as history. This account of the
prophet's experiences, moreover, displays impressive use of dramatic
irony, which reveals the calamitous dimension of the downfall of
a
Hebrew protagonist. The recipient of a divine call to missionary ser-
vice--and of chastisement for his obstinate disregard of
Yahweh's
grace--Jonah is a tragic figure whose spiritual estrangement
through-
out the narrative intensifies his death-in-life.
* * *
WHILE
biblical and literary scholars continue to debate the author-
ship, purpose, and structure of various OT narratives,
commen-
tary on the book of Jonah
retains a certain uniformity, keeping intact
one assessment from the mid-sixties:
Controversies over The Book of Jonah have
apparently all but ceased.
One's viewpoint on the
historicity of the "great fish" (ch.
ch. 2:1]) no longer
determines his orthodoxy or heterodoxy, and refer-
ence to Matt. 12:40 does not
provide conclusive proof of the matter.
That theological battle has been finished. There
is even a remarkable
unanimity on the interpretation
of the book among Old Testament schol-
ars. . . . It is agreed
that the story is fictional and that the psalm in
ch. 2:2-9 (Heb., ch. 2:3-10) is a later insertion.1
1 Edwin Good, Irony in the Old Testament (
4
GRACE THEOLOGICAL
JOURNAL
Scholarly
consensus has its own persuasiveness, of course, partly be-
cause dissent must respond well to a number of
crucial--and still
unresolved--issues: the identity of the author and
time of writing, his
knowledge of other literature, and particularly
the diversity of genres
associated with the book of Jonah itself. Early in
this century, for
example, J. Bewer
called it a "prose poem not history," reasoning that
the literary aspects of the book disqualify it from
consideration as a
factual account.2 More recently, J.
Miles has called the book parody,3
while A. Hauser classifies it as caricature, the work
of a skillful nar-
rator who uses the element of
surprise to unify his plot. As the
narrative unfolds, says Hauser, "the writer
has progressively and delib-
erately destroyed Jonah's
credibility, making him one who strikes out
too readily at the world when it does not suit him.”4
To be sure, his
disgruntled attitude throughout makes for powerful
drama; but H. W.
Wolff's
hypothesis that the book is a five-act drama is inadequate.5
Equally
troublesome are J. Kohlenberger's phrase
"parable-like com-
position" and J. Ackerman's term "short
story," especially in light of
Ackerman's
subsequent statement in the same article that "the ele-
ments in the narrative. . . bring
it close to classical satire.”6 Elsewhere
Ackerman
and others, including J. Holbert and E. Good, have
dealt at
length with the pervasive irony in the book, extending
our understand-
ing of the narrator's
literary sophistication and rhetorical skill.7
2
tary on Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi and Jonah (Edinburgh: T. & T.
Clark, 1912). Bewer
speaks sharply against a reading that unites poetry
and history: the book, he says, is "not
the record of actual historical events nor was it
ever intended as such. It is a sin against
the author to treat as literal prose what he
intended as poetry" (p. 4), "the work of poetic,
imagination, pure and simple" (p. 9).
Bewer's view is shared by C. S.
Lewis, who considered the book "a tale with as few
even pretended historical attachments as Job,
grotesque in incident and surely not
without a distinct, though of course edifying,
vein of typically Jewish humour" ("Modern
Theology
and Biblical Criticism"; Christian
Reflections, ed. Walter Hooper [Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans,
1967] 155).
3 John A. Miles, Jr., "Laughing at
the Bible: Jonah as Parody," JQR
65 (1975)
168-81.
4 Alan J. Hauser, "Jonah: In Pursuit
of the Dove," JBL 104 (1985)
36-37.
5 H. W. Wolff, Jonah: Church in Revolt (St. Louis: Clayton, 1978). Like Bewer,
Wolff
rejects the Book as history, calling it "poetic fiction.
. . comparable to Jesus'
parable of the prodigal son." Thus, readers
should not fight about historicity; the passage
about the great fish, "like the whole
book," is "without question, work of the imagina-
tion" (p. 40).
6 John R. Kohlenberger
III, Jonah and Nahum (Chicago: Moody
Press, 1984) 19;
James
S. Ackerman, "Jonah" in The Literary Guide to
the Bible, ed. Robert Alter and
Frank
Kermode (Cambridge, MA: Harvard UP, 1987),234.
7 Edwin M. Good, Irony in the Old Testament (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1965)
39-55;
John C. Holbert, "'Deliverance Belongs to
Yahweh': Satire in the Book of
Jonah,"
JSOT 21 (1981) 59-81; and James
Ackerman, "Satire and Symbolism in the
WOODWARD: DEATH IN LIFE 5
All in all, commentary seems to move in one of
at least two
directions: toward a pluralistic response to the
issue of historicity,
primarily because several supposedly preposterous--therefore
purely
imaginary--events in the plot make the book a
satire; or toward a
one-dimensional view of the text as
history, due in part to other
biblical references to Jonah as an actual person,
not as a fictional
character (see 2 Kgs
former reading, critics assume that certain events could
not happen
and seek a way to explain the text accordingly.
With the latter, the
veracity of the narrative in Kings and
Chronicles, the words of Jesus,
as well as the OT prophets' fundamental concern
with the historical
nature of narrative, exclude any possibility that
Jonah is a fiction.
This article does not attempt to resolve all
issues regarding the
genre and background of the book; it does, however,
suggest an
altogether different context for criticism of the
book, based upon
literary matters that have not been raised before--details
that not only
accommodate the flashes of irony, the compact
structure, and various
other poetic elements in the narrative but also point
to sources that
may have aided the author. In short, the book of
Jonah has various
features that appear in biblical tragedy. In the
following discussion, I
wish to show how these features follow the text,
providing a firm
literary base for the ironic statements in the
plot; associate the author
of Jonah with the Hebrew tragic vision; and show
that a reading of the
book as history is quite defensible.
Explication of a text is always more than mere
plot summary.
Nevertheless,
to uncover the tragic qualities in the book of Jonah,
especially in light of the various genres attached
to it, an explication
close to plot summary is necessary. In fact, such an
approach, drawing
upon the primary features of biblical tragedy--dilemma,
choice, catas-
trophe, suffering, perception,
and death9--will reveal a highly unified
narrative about the dramatic descent of a proud
prophet.
CHARACTERISTICS OF TRAGEDY IN THE TEXT
Jonah's dilemma is easy enough to identify. He
must preach to the
Ninevites as God has commanded or disobey the very
One who has
called Jonah and his countrymen the Chosen People. The
former
Song
of Jonah," in Traditions in
Transformation: Turning Points in Biblical Faith (ed.
B.
Halpern and J. Levenson;
Winona
8 The most recent discussion is by J. H. Stek, "The Message of the Book of Jonah,"
Calvin Theological
Journal
4 (1969) 23-50, defending the importance of historical
perspective in prophetic narrative; but the article
says far too little about the literary
features of Jonah to refute the current view that
the book is satiric fiction.
9 Leland Ryken, Words of
Delight (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1987) 145.
6
GRACE THEOLOGICAL
JOURNAL
the safety of the prophets' own territory, Jonah is
being sent to the
Gentile
people.10 His other alternative, however, is the infinitely more
dangerous, unholy, and unloving option of refusing
Yahweh's call
altogether. That call, moreover, is based upon an
awesome fact that
intensifies Jonah's dilemma: the Ninevites'
wickedness has "come up"
to Yahweh, affronting His holiness. Thus, for
Jonah to ignore his
mission is to ignore his God--a crisis indeed,
though the prophet
has no excuse for disobeying Yahweh's command,
regardless of the
consequences.
No wonder, then, he flees to Tarshish
(1:3). Twice in the verse,
perhaps to achieve emphasis, the narrator states
that Jonah fled from
the Lord. Whether this emphasis is ironic is
debatable. To be sure, no
one can absent himself from the omnipresent One;
therefore, Jonah's
self-deluded attempt to run may be
read as dramatic irony, the implicit
contradiction between what a character
says or does and what the
reader knows to be true. Moreover, such discrepancy
may embellish
(rather than contradict) a presumed historical fact that one
of Yahweh's
prophets rebels against Him, seeking to avoid His
will and presence,
and thus reacts rashly (and irrationally) in a vain
attempt to escape.
Jonah's
choice is particularly noteworthy because it links his
character with other OT tragic figures. Whereas
Samson's tragic flaw
was his lack of self-control (Judges 14-16) and
Saul's, a rashness or
proneness to extremes that eroded his ability to
lead (1 Samuel),
Jonah's
was contempt fed by pride. He wanted the Ninevites to
perish
because, as Gentiles, they stood outside the
camp of God's covenant
blessing. Such insensitivity must have been
intense to motivate a
believer to turn away from Yahweh's call.
The prophet's choice soon leads to catastrophe,
the divinely-sent
storm (1:4-16), circumstances made all the more
desperate by the tense
dialogue between Jonah and the ship's crew. The
narrator introduces
this dialogue with a brief statement about the
effects of the storm. Its
ferocity could have split apart the ship, as
could Yahweh's hand; but
whatever damage would be sustained, the sailors
were fearful enough
to pray to their false gods and to part with
various cargo so as to keep
the ship afloat. All the while Jonah lay in a
deathlike sleep, a detail that
may suggest in a different way the extent of his
insensitivity. Whatever
the case, he is confronted by a series of questions
(1:6, 8, 10), each of
which reveals the speaker's desperation.
First the captain, rousing Jonah, asks,
"How can you sleep? Get
up and call on your god! Maybe he will take notice
of us, and we will
not perish" (1:6).11 This
exclamatory question, heavily ironic because
Jonah's
God sent the storm, addresses not the obvious issue, how to
10 Kohlenberger,
Jonah and Nahum, 29.
11 This and all subsequent references
follow the NIV (
1985).
WOODWARD: DEATH IN LIFE 7
survive the wind and waves, but how anyone could
be so oblivious to
the imminent disaster. It is a question of shock
and fear. Particularly
striking is the narrator's silence; no mention of
Jonah's reply follows,
perhaps an indication that Jonah is disturbingly
passive, especially in
chapter 1.12 What does follow is a
brief description of the crew's casting
lots in order to identify the culprit (v 7). After
the lot falls on Jonah,
the other men pose a series of questions to him,
not rhetorical but
genuinely expository ones: "Who is
responsible for making all this
trouble for us? What do you do? Where do you
come from? What is
your country? From what people are you?" (v 8).13 Again, as with the
captain, the crew focus their attention not upon
the gale but upon the
prophet, linking him with the storm. Some
commentators argue that
the narrator is using this situation, a crisis in
which pagans are more
discerning than a prophet, to satirize Jonah.14
But more likely, the men
12 Hauser, "Jonah: In Pursuit of the
Dove," 23: "Passivity. . . plays an
important
role in ch 1. Although
Jonah's decision to flee (1:3) is certainly active, virtually every-
thing else said about Jonah in ch
1 is passive." Thus, all are unwitting tools in Yahweh's
hand.
This emphasis, however useful in analyzing the
plot design, fails to consider Jonah
as defensive, not just passive--perhaps not
passive at all. First, Hauser downplays the
significance of Jonah's decision to
flee, the response that leads to the subsequent trials for
himself and for the sailors. His blatant
rebellion puts him on the defensive; he must
protect himself. And he does so without fear of
God or man. Such is not necessarily a
passive stance. Second, certain remarks from
Jonah are as much facts that he must
acknowledge as they are tacit expressions of
passivity. When he identifies himself as a
Hebrew
and a worshiper of Yahweh (1:9), he is simply explaining an earlier admission
(
preceding interrogation (1:6-10). He simply cannot
now deny that his presence caused
the storm and accompanying danger. Besides, as
Hauser later admits twice (p. 26),
Jonah's
suggestion that the sailors throw him overboard is an "offer" of his
own life for
theirs, a display of Jonah's irrational thinking; in
fact, these words anticipate his
response after the sailors repent.
The question is whether a passive character
makes such offers. Probably not, if
indeed Jonah is motivated in part by his defensiveness--a
sign not of weakness but of
resolution, albeit ill-conceived.
13 Good seems to be overreaching here,
thereby obscuring the point of the sailors'
questions. He calls the situation "wildly
incongruous" that "in the midst of the howling
storm, [the crewmen] request of Jonah a thumbnail
autobiography" (p. 44). The ques-
tions, I would argue, are
motivated by the drama of the moment; as Holbert
notes, "The
lots have already revealed the truth; Jonah is the
guilty party. The questions of the
sailors in v. 8 become highly significant in the
light of their certain knowledge of Jonah's
guilt" (p. 67). Moreover, the gravity of the
circumstances would prompt the men to blurt
out questions, not to await a systematic reply but
to react to the perceived mysteries of
Jonah's presence among them.
14 See Holbert
66-67: "in a satiric piece it is the unexpected one who offers the
expected solution [to crises involving divine
judgment]. It is the pagan captain who
suggests, 'perhaps that God will stir himself on
our behalf in order that we do not perish.'
Crying
for help to the source of help may lead to help; that is good religion. The
'faithful'
prophet of God never thought of it; or if he
did, he surely did not act upon it . . . another
famous pagan in the book, the Ninevite
king, has nearly an identical suggestion in
8
GRACE THEOLOGICAL
JOURNAL
are expressing the ancient tendency to assume that
crises were divine
judgments upon sinful deeds; therefore, their
wisdom is syncretistic,
not orthodox.15 At any rate, he
identifies himself as a Hebrew and a
worshiper of Yahweh, Creator of the sea as well as
the land (v 9). How
do these statements affect the crew? They are
horrified and to show
their terror raise the second of two rhetorical
questions: "What have
you done?" They knew already, from Jonah's own
lips, that he was
attempting to avoid Yahweh's presence (v 10), so
the question is uttered
in sheer panic.
The catastrophe worsens as the sailors turn
their attention from
Jonah's background to his threatening presence
on the ship.
Accord-
ingly, they ask him what to
do with him to still the waves (v 11), to
which he replies, "Pick me up and throw me into
the sea. . . and it will
become calm." Then, perhaps to show his strength
of mind, if not
forcefulness of will, he accepts
blame for the storm: "I know that it is
my fault that this great storm has come upon
you" (v 12).
The most sensible response to these words is to
throw Jonah
overboard. But the narrator suspends that
possibility and thereby
heightens the catastrophe. The sailors know that
Jonah's suggestion
involves certain death for him and whatever his
wrongdoing may be,
death hardly seems appropriate; therefore, the crew
try to row against
the currents, unaware that God is increasing the
winds. Facing an
impossible task, the men finally abandon their
efforts and throw Jonah
into the sea, after which the storm subsides. But
the catastrophe does
not even end here. The crewmen think that they may
have caused the
death of an innocent man (v 14)--casting lots is
hardly a foolproof
3:9.
. . . Must the pagans teach the prophets proper religion? Apparently, this
prophet
needs teaching."
To begin with, one simply cannot assert that
Jonah did not call upon God and that
he may have. Trying to have it both ways is as
unpersuasive as ever. Also, Jonah's need
of teaching, or lack of it, is quite a different
matter from the captain's wise counsel, an
expression of his pagan religiosity. Certainly that
counsel should be uttered by a Hebrew
prophet such as Jonah, but Gentile religious
invocations during a crisis hardly lead to
only one conclusion, that the narrator is satirizing
Jonah. On the contrary, why could
not the narrator be reporting actual statements,
the sum of which obviously underscores
Jonah's spiritual faults? Indeed, this effect can
be drawn from the mere unfolding of
tragic narrative, without the literary apparatus of
satire.
15 Based upon a study of fourteen Hittite
prayers, Walter Beyerlin found a note-
worthy characteristic that occurs also in the OT (Near Eastern Religious Texts Relating
to the Old Testament, trans. John Bowden [
prayers, which are primarily argumentative,
"are made from the basic conviction that a
transgression against the deity will
be punished by a visitation; conversely, a blow which
falls on a community or an individual indicates a
wicked action which has been
committed recently or even longer before." Beyerlin then illustrates these concepts by
citing Jonah 1, as well as 2 Sam 21:1ff., Ps 38:lff.,
and individual speeches by Job's
interlocutors. Whether the sailors
were Hittite or not, recalling their mind set points
clearly to the possibility that the narrator may
not be ridiculing Jonah at all.
WOODWARD: DEATH IN LIFE 9
technique of determining a man's guilt or
innocence--and fearfully
offer sacrifices and make vows to God (v 16).
Surviving the storm
should be cause for revelry, but these sailors see
nothing to celebrate.
So
ends chapter 1 in the Hebrew Bible, though English translations
include the next verse: "But the Lord
provided a great fish to swallow
Jonah,
and Jonah was inside the fish three days and three nights"
(
The prayer that follows, which George Landes has argued most
compellingly as integral with the
original text,16 dramatizes Jonah's
suffering (2:1-8) and, later, his perception--the
realization of a key in-
sight, though that insight may not resolve all of his
troubles (2:9-3:10).
Who
can read Jonah's prayer without being moved by his suffer-
ing? His first words
("In my distress I called to the Lord ") set the mood
while subsequent phrases point to his physical
torment and spiritual
anguish. Images of death and burial pervade the
pleas: Jonah calls to
God
"From the depths of the grave" (v 2), from "the deep" (v
3); this
"deep" engulfs him, he says (v 5); even so, as he sinks
down, he
acknowledges that the Lord delivered
him from the "pit" (v 6). Here
the mood swings from suffering to hope, an
important structural detail
because chapter 3 focuses upon life, not death;
and that life is an
outworking of Jonah's perception during the three
days in the belly of
the fish.
The perception itself is the most pleasant part
of the narrative.
Jonah
sings with thanksgiving to praise God from whom comes salva-
tion (2:9).17
This strong claim attests to his courage and faith and
16 “The Kerygma of
the Book of Jonah," Interpretation
28 (1967) 3-30. Landes
argues persuasively that 2:2-9 fits contextually into
the prose narrative and therefore is a
viable part of the original composition, not
inevitably an interpolation from a later
editor. First, he notes, we have no textual evidence
that the book "ever circulated
without the psalm"(p. 10), though he
concedes that the earliest known text (from the late
third century B.C.) still
allows ample time for interpolation to occur. Then he cites the
unifying function of the psalm: that it includes
two prayers, rather than one, allows it not
only to "describe Jonah's anguish after having
been cast into the sea" and his "plea for
deliverance" but also his "grateful praise
for a past deliverance" (p. 15). Finally, Jonah's
personality in the narrative has "nothing
significantly disharmonious" with his person-
ality in 2:2-9.
T. Warshaw,
interpreting the book as satire, supports Landes on
the integrity of the
psalm as a part of the book, at least if viewed from
a literary perspective: "Jonah's prayer
presents difficulties, but from the point of view
of the literary critic it contains many
echoes of motifs in the story that surrounds it,
making it an artistic part of the whole"
("The Book of Jonah," Literary Interpretations of Biblical
Narrative; ed. Kenneth R. R.
Gros Louis with James Ackerman and Thayer Warshaw [
1974] 192). Critics familiar with the Hebrew note
additional literary artistry through
vocabulary and various instances of word play.
17 Landes,
referring to the entire psalm, includes two other details as part of Jonah's
perception (pp. 24-25), though not in the context
of biblical tragedy, as I am arguing.
First,
Jonah realizes that this life-threatening incident at sea results not solely
from his
10
GRACE THEOLOGICAL
JOURNAL
presents him as anything but a passive man. At
this point, Yahweh
commands the fish to vomit the prophet on dry
land; and it is so.
"Salvation comes from the Lord"
indeed, and the recipients of
that salvation include some of the most wicked
people on earth, the
Ninevites, as Jonah well knows (see 4:2). He
admits such knowledge
even before he fled to Tarshish.
Thus when Yahweh extends a second
call to preach to
do; and his sensitivity has been raised
considerably after three days in
solitude, smelling gastric juices, seeing
nothing. With short, direct
statements, the narrator reports Jonah's obedient
response, along with
a description of his trip and the results (vv
3-10). Jonah's message too
is short and direct ("Forty more days and
[v 4]) and is the negative aspect of
his positive statement inside the fish,
"Salvation
comes from the Lord." As Jonah issues God's warning, he
witnesses the mighty deliverance of a brutal
people whose king fasts,
dons sackcloth, places himself at the mercy of God,
and exhorts his
subjects--including the animals--to do likewise,
as a testimony of
their contrition (vv 5-9). Sincere doubts about the
inclusion of the
animals have prompted some commentators to
interpret this scene as
grotesque and, literally, fantastic.18
But the narrator may have a differ-
ent (nonsatiric)
intention, to dramatize the depth of God's concern for
the Ninevites and even
for their animals, a compassion expressed also
in the conclusion of the book:
the whimsical picture of
the beasts of
crying mightily to God, if it
stood alone, might be dismissed as only a
humorous embellishment of the
narrative; but the closing words of the
book, "and also much
cattle," can be understood only as emphasizing
the compassion of God for
animals as well as men.19
rebellion or from the sailors' decision to throw
him overboard but also from his
chastisement by Yahweh. Second, he
learns "a fundamental truth in the Israelite concep-
tion of death: death means
radical separation from God, a sense of being bereft of the
divine presence. . . ." Both details, I would suggest,
contribute to the reading of Jonah as
a tragic figure, shown divine truths but later
(chaps. 3-4) rejecting them for the sake of
his own interests.
18 Good, 49-50 and Warshaw, 197.
19 Millar Burrows, "The Literary
Category of the Book of Jonah," in Translat-
ing & Understanding the Old Testament (ed. H. T. Frank and W.
L. Reed;
TN: Abingdon, 1970) 102.
That animals are described as sharing human
experiences is not limited to Jonah
3:7-8
anyway. The prophecy of Joel refers to beasts engaged in moaning and suffering
(
crops (
a post-exhilic period)
makes any further connection between the two books mere
conjecture, the similarity of the two descriptions
of animals warrants further study.
WOODWARD: DEATH IN LIFE 11
Chapter
3, then, is not only a continuing part of the narrative but, for
Jonah
anyway, a striking commentary on the insight he has gained.
Of course, the literary artistry enhances this
commentary, as it has
strengthened the preceding accounts.
One particularly powerful device
is contrast: earlier, Jonah rebelled against
Yahweh and went to an
obscure western city; now he obeys and visits an
"important" eastern
one (3:3). Before, he was the cause of a ship's
being destroyed; now he
preaches to prevent a city from a similar end.
Whereas on the ship he
remained defensive, now he proclaims Yahweh's
message. Then comes
the climax of Jonah's realization (or perception);
as he observes the
Ninevites plead for mercy, then
beholds Yahweh respond with com-
passion and grace, he becomes part of a full and
rich expression of
divine love and divine life.
What could gratify a believer any more than
that? Not Jonah,
though; he grows angry at Yahweh's grace. Moreover, he
asks to die
(4:3),
as Elijah had requested for himself (1 Kgs 19:4).
These two
details, in addition to other images of death in
chapter 4 (and through-
out the book), present Jonah less as a satirized
prophet and more a
tragic figure. Some humor may arise from the
narrative, but the
laughter turns to mourning as the intended Hebrew
audience considers
the Abrahamic Covenant
(Gen 12:3). How utterly disgraceful for the
melancholic evangelist to seek death for himself and
destruction for the
Ninevites, rather than further Yahweh's plan to
make of Abraham a
great nation and through his progeny to evangelize
the Gentiles. That
blessing, in Jonah anyway, has turned into a
curse, though never apart
from divine superintendence.
God's sovereignty is further elevated, and
dramatically so, in the
narrative following Jonah's death wish. Once again
he leaves his as-
signed place of ministry, goes somewhere east of
(Again
one recalls the dramatic irony in Elijah's self-willed flight from
Jezebel,
as if she controlled all, and God's providential care of Elijah
during his "retreat.") But even now, the
metaphor of death remains; as
the fuming prophet shelters himself from the sun,
the narrator says, he
"waited to see what would happen to the city" (v 5).
This remark
implies that Jonah still hoped for the
destruction of
another dimension to his death-in-life. He is
alive, but his thoughts are
ruled by death, either his own or the Ninevites'--or both.
This metaphor of death guides the remainder of
the narrative as
well. First comes the death of the vine that brought
a welcomed shade
to Jonah (v 7). Then the narrator, perhaps
intensifying Jonah's earlier
death wish, refers to it again; and the reference
occurs on two rhetori-
cal levels, through the narrator's commentary and
through Jonah's
direct statement: "He wanted to die, and said,
'It would be better for
me to die than to live'" (v 8). This claim,
incidentally, is a literary
12
GRACE THEOLOGICAL
JOURNAL
convention that enhances Jonah's call as a prophet.
Finally, after
Yahweh
again asks Jonah if he has "a right to be angry about the vine,"
the prophet once more shows his preoccupation with
death: "'I do,' he
said. 'I am angry enough to
die'" (v 9). Thankfully, Yahweh has the
final word, explaining to Jonah the symbolism of the
vine and the
value of the Ninevites in
carrying out His plan (v 10); and He concludes
with a rhetorical question, which is a
characteristic way of showing
divine sovereignty: "Should I not be concerned
about that great city?"
The
very focus of this question is upon death, the would-be destruction
of an ancient metropolis, had the people not
repented. The question,
posed to an impenitent prophet, heightens the death
imagery in the
story and points to more dramatic irony: the contrite
people of
are more alive than the Hebrew prophet, whose
existence is truly a
death-in-life. That the book does not refer to his physical death hardly
seems significant in the context of his recurrent
spiritual insensitivity,
especially after the miraculous display of Yahweh's
love.
Throughout the book, then, Jonah demonstrates
the downward
movement typical of tragedy, in which a
privileged protagonist falls
from a position of honor and respect, here the ministry
of a prophet, to
one of rebuke and death. The narrator, in fact,
makes this movement
clear through repetition: His special standing is
established by the
phrase "son of Amittai,"
i.e., truth, and by the call to ministry itself
(1:1).
Without further delay, however, the narrator explains
Jonah's
fall, particularly through repetition. He "went
down" to Joppa (1:3);
aboard the ship in a storm, he had "gone
below" (v 5). Later he
descended "into the deep" (2:3) and
"sank down" (2:6). This entire
scene is filled with images of death. And the
narrative concludes with
Jonah's two death wishes (4:3, 8) and the death
of the plant (4:7). His
shame is complete, and the irony most strong, as the
book ends; the
"son of truth" who well knows Yahweh's grace must hear a
plea from
Yahweh to believe it. This low point is
probably the most degrading
one in the book.
THE TRAGIC VISION OF THE
HEBREWS
This brief narrative is quite similar to OT
tragedy, which is found
in several texts. Genesis 1-3, probably written
1400 B.C., is tragedy,
following the model of dilemma-choice-catastrophe-suffering-perception-
death that fits Jonah. Adam and Eve face the dilemma
of obeying
God's command or eating the fruit (3:1-4). They make a deliberate
choice (vv 5-6), then face a twofold catastrophe:
their shameful self-
consciousness of being naked (v 7),
an awareness that must have been
horrible because their nakedness once involved no
self-consciousness
at all and their alienation from Yahweh, implicit
in His rhetorical
question "Where are you?" (v 10). Next, the couple endures suffering,
WOODWARD: DEATH IN LIFE 13
not just the punitive pronouncements from God but
expulsion from
the garden and, ultimately, physical death. Of
course, neither Adam
nor Eve (nor Jonah) physically dies immediately
following the suffer-
ing. Adam and Eve come to
realize that disobedience brings disaster;
thus, as fallen beings, they now must depend upon
Yahweh for help-
precisely Eve's statement in 4:1-2.
Within the Jonah text are indications that the
author has drawn
upon the phraseology of the tragedy in Genesis. As
J. Holbert argues
(in another context), the use of "sleep" refers
back to Gen
rhetorical question in 1:8 is an "exact
analogy of God's question to
Adam
in the garden" (see Gen
is this you have done?" is the
"identical phrase" in Gen 3:13.20 Surely,
then, the author of Jonah knew this account and used
its literary
features in his own narrative.
Even if he did not use Genesis, he had two other
biblical tragedies
to consult. The account of Samson (Judges 13-16)
was written prob-
ably in the eleventh century. Here a Nazirite strongman must either
adhere to his vow or forsake his spiritual privilege
for temporal plea-
sures. He chooses the latter
(see esp. 14:8-9 and 16:1, 4-17, esp. 17)
and soon thereafter experiences, unknowingly, the
greatest catastrophe
conceivable, the departure of God's Spirit (v 20).
Then Samson en-
dures the degradation of
Philistine imprisonment and slavery (v 21),
living in physical blindness (as Jonah does inside the
belly of the fish).
Shortly
before his death, Samson utters a death wish (
Jonah,
and realizes that his strength comes only from God. Yet another
tragedy, that of Saul (1 Samuel), was written
ca. 900 B.C., at least a full
century before Jonah. This narrative, explicated
most impressively by
W.
L. Humphreys and L. Ryken,21 joins two
other similar narratives,
all of which presented the writer of Jonah with a
literary form highly
useful to the story of an angry, recalcitrant prophet
who would rather
20 See "Deliverance," 65, 67, 68.
The Hebrew for "deep sleep" (Jonah 1:5-6) is
discussed also by J. Magonet,
who argues that in both Genesis and Jonah, the words
refer to a dormancy "beyond rousing which is
close to death" (Form and Meaning:
Studies in Literary
Techniques in the Book of Jonah, 2nd ed. [
67).
The phrase "deep sleep" in 1:5-6, based upon
a root word that, says Magonet,
occurs only eleven times in the Bible, is the "first
hint of Jonah's 'death wish,' a theme
which is more and more explicitly demonstrated as the
story progresses, the request to be
thrown overboard, the requests for death in Chapter
4" (68). If Magonet's connection
between the root in 1:5-6 and Jonah's declaration
to die is forced, certainly the prophet's
preoccupation with death intensifies
as the narrative develops. The more important
point, however, is that neither Holbert
nor Magonet suggests any relation between this
language and the Hebrew tragic vision that I
believe appears in Genesis 2-3 and in
Jonah.
21 W. Lee Humphreys, "The Tragedy of
King Saul: A Study of the Structure of
I Samuel 9-31," JSOT 6 (1978) 18-27; and Words
of Delight 151-55.
14
GRACE THEOLOGICAL
JOURNAL
die than obey God. No further connection between
Jonah and the
earlier tragedies can be claimed, of course,
because we have not dated
the composition of the book of Jonah precisely,
identified its author
conclusively, or documented his
knowledge of contemporary literature.
Nevertheless,
the earlier OT tragedies were written and the author of
Jonah
used phraseology in at least one of them to shape his story.
This context for analyzing Jonah derives further
support from the
tragic spirit in OT literature as distinguished from
Greek plays that are
called tragedies. The Hebrew tragic vision, defined by
W. L. Hum-
phreys as the struggle in a
hero between forces beyond his control and
flaws within his own character, is "larger than
the pure forms of Greek
tragedy, and it informs a wide range of
literature," appearing perhaps
for the first time in The Gilgamesh Epic.22
Humphreys' discussion
draws in part upon the work of L. Michel, who claims
that a tragic
view of literature has two prerequisites, the
"inscrutability of God" and
"actual or moral evil." Both are found, he says, in the OT:
In the Old Testament the materials are often. . . those of competition
between men: Cain slew Abel,
Jacob defrauded Esau, David coveted
Uriah's wife: but the important
aspect of these actions is that they are
not only evil or dangerous,
but sinful. What counts is how a man acts in
the eyes of the Lord. . . .
No sin is a little thing, because of God's
greatness. And it is here that
the Hebrews, unlike their contemporaries,
took the step that allows
their history to be seen tragically: Having
abandoned God they caused their
own penalty and woe.23
This
observation is further detailed by R. Sewall, who
notes that the
Israelites
looked upon the elements of tragedy with "striking clarity,"
an insight not apparent in other nearby cultures:
Of all ancient peoples, the Hebrews
were most surely possessed of
the tragic sense of life.
It pervades their ancient writings to an extent not
true of the Greeks. . . . The
Hebraic answer to the question of existence
was never unambiguous or
utopian; the double vision of tragedy--the
22 W. L. Humphreys, The
Tragic Vision and the Hebrew Tradition
(
Fortress, 1985) 1-9, 18. Humphreys is here
distinguishing tragedy, which he says
describes the story of Saul, from the tragic
vision--a literary dynamic that appears in
such passages as Genesis 2-3 and Judges 13-16 (see
pp. 69-70 and 77). Whether these
passages conform to a genre that may be termed
Hebrew tragedy, as I am suggesting, or
display the Hebrew tragic vision, the important
point is that they present a hero
regressing through various phases toward
degradation and shame--not as a victim of
circumstances, as in formal Greek
tragedy, but as a free moral agent who rebels against
Yahweh.
23 "The Possibility of a Christian
Tragedy," in Tragedy: Modern Essays
in Criticism,
ed. Laurence Michel and Richard B. Sewall (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1963)
220-21.
Later in the same article, Michel denies that tragedy
and Christianity are
compatible, due to the fact of redemption (pp.
223-33).
WOODWARD: DEATH IN LIFE 15
snake in the garden, the
paradox of man born in the image of God and
yet recalcitrant, tending
to go wrong--permeates the Scriptures. . . . The
Old Testament stories are heavy with irony,
often of the most sardonic
kind. And yet their hard,
acrid realism appears against a background of
belief that is the substance
of the most exalted and affirmative religion,
compared to which the religions
of their sister civilizations, Egyptian,
Babylonian, and even Greek, presented a
conception of the universe and
man both terrible and mean.24
Moreover, the terror of tragedy lies in what Sewall describes as the
chaotic nature of reality, its disjointed,
multi-dimensional, irreconcil-
able events and ideas-in which truth is anything but
harmonious. To
be sure, Truth is neither chaotic nor ultimately
irreconcilable, but its
paradoxical dimensions aid our reading of those
times when
Moses, Jonah, and many of the Old Testament
heroes and prophets
argued with Jehovah, questioned
his judgment, criticized his harshness
or (as with Jonah) his
leniency, in actual dialogue. . . . Ideas, or truth,
were not regarded apart, as
abstractions or final causes. They were
ideas-in-action, lived out and tested
by men of flesh and blood.25
In such a weltanshauung, Jonah's flight to Tarshish--not just in fear
but in challenge to Yahweh--and his childish
pouting are not as
exaggerated as they may appear. Likewise, his
reference to Yahweh as
the Creator of the sea (1:9), whether a platitude
or a sincere statement,
emphasizes "the most exalted and affirmative
religion." In fact, Jonah's
acknowledgment of God, revealing his
Hebrew heritage, is not neces-
sarily satiric at all, whether
spoken with heartless orthodoxy or genuine
concern.
JONAH VS. THE PROTAGONISTS IN
CLASSICAL TRAGEDY
Later, the Greek playwrights Aeschylus,
Sophocles, and Euripides
would develop a quite different vision and form of
tragedy. In their
plays noble characters suffer degradation not always
through hamartia
but at the hand of fate, the gods, whose own
follies and obsessions
wreak havoc in the human realm. Ryken
has listed three characteristics
that distinguish OT from Classical tragedy,26 characteristics that
sup-
port a correlation of Jonah with the Hebrew tragic
vision. First, the
spiritual dimension of the narrative is obvious;
in fact, I would suggest,
the ultimate "tragedy" is that the Jonah
narrative closes without clear
indication that the prophet repented of his sin and
found fellowship
with Yahweh. Indeed, as chapter 4 ends, Jonah's
anger is nothing less
24 Richard Sewall,
The Vision of Tragedy (New Haven: Yale,
1959) 9-10.
25 Sewall,
13-14.
26 Literature of the Bible (Grand Rapids: Zondervan,
1974) 105-6.
16
GRACE THEOLOGICAL
JOURNAL
than a "Great Evil" that has left him
"in need of much greater repen-
tance" than he had shown
earlier.27 Surely this is the ultimate disgrace
in any believer's life. It is certainly apparent
in Samson (see Judg
30)
and Saul (see 1 Samuel 31). Second, the blame for the catastrophe
lies squarely with Jonah and throughout the book God
has punished
him for his disobedience. Never does he appear as a
sympathetic victim
of circumstances beyond his control, as happens,
for example, with
Sophocles'
Antigone, whose resolution to her own convictions
leads to
her death; or with Euripides' Medea,
whose uncontrollable anger
prompts her to poison her own children as well
as Creon.28 Quite the
contrary, Jonah's suffering is his own doing.
Thus the Hebrew pro-
tagonists should not be judged
strictly by the Greeks, whose paganistic
determinism creates and sustains a sympathetic
response from the
audience. Third, Jonah has clearly-defined
alternatives, preach to Nine-
veh or reject God's command
and suffer chastisement. Though he
finally opts for the former, he has also endured
the latter, his obstinacy
always frustrating the intimate relationship sought by
a loving God.
That
stubborn pride is what Yahweh hates most--and what makes
Jonah a tragic figure.
CONCLUSION
Abundant irony, highly-crafted structure, artful
narrative, clever
word play, captivating use of dialogue--these make
the book of Jonah
both memorable and literary. The poignant story of a
privileged be-
liever who sacrifices his
ministry and his intimacy with God for self-
gratification is the spirit of OT
tragic narratives in Genesis, Judges, and
Samuel.
That these passages are historical does not make Jonah the
same; but if the narrative about Jonah is a part of
their literary
identity, as I have argued, why should not the
text be read as history,
as a powerful (though temporary) frustration of
the Abrahamic Cove-
nant that only divine grace
could overcome? Whether subsequent
research extends or refutes this argument, at
least the inquiry will have
at its disposal a new basis for commentary and a
new perspective on
the greatest fish story ever told.
27 Duane Christensen, "The Song of
Jonah: A Metrical Analysis," JBL
104 (1985)
231.
28 Both plays, in translation, are
available in the Norton Anthology of
World
Masterpieces, 4th ed. (ed. Maynard
Mack et al.;
from Sophocles (p. 405) is lines 1152ff.; that from
Euripides (p. 442) is lines 1100ff.
This
material is cited with gracious permission from:
Grace
Theological Seminary
www.grace.edu
Please
report any errors to Ted Hildebrandt at:
thildebrandt@gordon.edu