Bible Study

Leave a comment Posted on Apologetics, Bible Study, Evidence, Theology

Reflecting on the Recent Discussion on Apologetics Live with Dan Kreft

As part of last night’s discussion on the cumulative case argument for apologetics, we examined whether Acts, as a descriptive text, should be used prescriptively in evangelism. I want to first express my gratitude to Dan Kraft for engaging with me on the topic. His thoughtful approach is genuinely appreciated, and his commitment to a godly dialogue was evident. If I misunderstand any of his perspectives here, I invite him to correct me, as my intent is to represent his views as accurately as possible.

During our discussion, we discussed whether Acts offers a prescriptive model for evangelism, Romans 1’s relevance in conversations about God’s existence, and the role of 1 Peter 3:15 in apologetic contexts. My goal here is to delve more deeply into these passages, grounded in sound exegesis and a spirit of humility, both to clarify my own position and to encourage further reflection.

Acts as Descriptive or Prescriptive?

  • Dan’s Position (as I understand it): Dan holds that Paul’s evangelistic approach in Acts should be viewed as a prescriptive model for how Christians today should share the gospel. He argues that Paul’s consistent approach throughout Acts—including his direct proclamation of the gospel rather than arguing for God’s existence—demonstrates a “biblical” method of evangelism, rooted in the conviction from Romans 1 that God’s existence is evident to all. By this logic, Paul’s lack of engagement in philosophical arguments for God’s existence serves as an implicit directive for believers to similarly affirm, rather than argue for, God’s reality when witnessing.
  • My Position: I see Acts primarily as a descriptive narrative, chronicling the specific contexts and methods the apostles, including Paul, used to spread the gospel, rather than a prescriptive manual for all believers. In my view, the accounts in Acts serve to illustrate the early church’s growth, its challenges, and the flexibility of the apostles’ methods based on their audiences, without necessarily mandating that we imitate each aspect of their approach in every setting. To consider Acts as prescriptive in this way could inadvertently limit the scope of effective evangelism and ignore Paul’s own adaptability.

Exegetical Analysis:

Acts, written by Luke, presents a historical account of the early church’s growth and includes a variety of evangelistic methods adapted to diverse contexts. For instance, Paul’s approach to Jewish audiences differs from his engagement with Greek philosophers in Athens (Acts 17). The fact that Paul changes his method based on the audience suggests flexibility rather than rigidity. If we understand Acts as prescriptive, we might risk limiting the range of methods allowed in evangelism, contradicting the nuanced, contextual approach that Paul himself models.

If Dan believes all Christians must follow Paul’s methods exactly as described in Acts, I respect his consistency in seeking a biblical foundation. However, I see Acts as primarily historical, intending to inform and inspire rather than dictate a single method. If I’m wrong on this point, I encourage Dan to offer further clarification. Consequently, I think Dan is committing a hermeneutical error.

Romans 15:4 and 1 Corinthians 10:11

One moment in the discussion where I admittedly was taken by surprise was Dan’s use of Romans 15:4 and 1 Corinthians 10:11 as the “biblical answer” to why there are “historical books” included in the Old Testament, linking them to the way the book of Acts is seen in the New Testament. I wasn’t prepared for this, and since have noticed a missed opportunity I had at this point in the discussion. Here are the perspectives and breakdowns:

  • Dan’s Perspective: Dan referenced these verses to argue that all Scripture, including Acts, was written for our instruction, thus supporting a prescriptive reading of Paul’s approach.
  • My Perspective: I believe these verses speak more to moral and spiritual instruction rather than prescribing an evangelistic or apologetic methodology.

A deeper Analysis of these verses:

Romans 15:4

  • Context and Purpose: Romans 15:4 states, “For whatever was written in former days was written for our instruction, that through endurance and the encouragement of the Scriptures we might have hope.” In the broader context of Romans 15, Paul addresses the unity of believers, urging the “strong” and “weak” to bear with each other, follow Christ’s example, and live in harmony. Paul’s appeal to the Scriptures here supports his encouragement for mutual endurance and the communal hope shared by believers.
  • Focus on Endurance and Hope: Paul’s phrasing suggests that the purpose of the Old Testament writings is to instill perseverance and encourage believers in times of difficulty. The “endurance” Paul mentions is tied to a capacity for resilience, often in the face of persecution, hardship, or challenges within the Christian community. This is not a directive for evangelistic or apologetic method but rather an affirmation of Scripture as a source of strength and resolve.
  • Scripture as a Guide for Personal and Communal Growth: Paul’s reference here highlights the Old Testament’s value for guiding moral and spiritual formation within the church. By seeing how God sustained His people, believers are encouraged to hold fast to faith. The instruction of “whatever was written” points to a broad applicability, suggesting that all Old Testament Scripture contributes to the believer’s spiritual foundation, developing character and hope through examples of faithfulness.

1 Corinthians 10:11

  • Context and Purpose: In 1 Corinthians 10:11, Paul writes, “Now these things happened to them as an example, but they were written down for our instruction, on whom the end of the ages has come.” Leading up to this verse, Paul recounts the moral failures of the Israelites in the wilderness—idolatry, immorality, testing God, and grumbling. Paul’s aim is to caution the Corinthian believers against repeating these mistakes, stressing that their lives as New Covenant believers require vigilance and integrity.
  • A “Warning” for Godly Living: The term “example” (Greek: typos) implies a pattern or model meant to teach a lesson. Here, the emphasis is on learning from Israel’s errors to avoid similar pitfalls. The phrase “for our instruction” conveys a moral and ethical intent, underscoring the importance of holy living and cautioning against complacency. Paul uses Israel’s story as a solemn reminder, not as a model for how to conduct apologetics or evangelism, but as a call for self-examination and personal sanctification.
  • Relevance to New Testament Believers: Paul’s use of “on whom the end of the ages has come” signals an eschatological urgency. Believers, standing in the fulfillment of God’s redemptive plan, are urged to live with heightened awareness and commitment. This passage serves as a moral and spiritual instruction for Christian conduct, aimed at fostering maturity and discernment within the church body, rather than offering a formula for external evangelistic methods.

The Formative Role of Scripture in Christian Life

  • Spiritual and Ethical Formation:

Both Romans 15:4 and 1 Corinthians 10:11 point to Scripture’s role in shaping the inner life of the believer. These verses underscore that Scripture acts as a tutor, leading believers to develop virtues like patience, faithfulness, and resilience. By looking at Israel’s history and the fulfillment of promises, Christians are equipped to build lives marked by integrity and perseverance.

  • Scripture as Instruction for Growth, Not Methodology:

The emphasis in both verses is on personal and communal transformation rather than prescriptive methods for evangelism or apologetics. They highlight the Old Testament’s instructive power, providing believers with examples to emulate or avoid, reinforcing the view that these passages serve as guides for character formation. If these verses were intended as directives for methodology, we might expect clearer connections to specific evangelistic or apologetic practices.

If Dan sees these passages as supporting a particular apologetic approach, I can understand his reasoning in linking them to the narrative examples in Acts. However, I interpret these verses as broadly encouraging Christian living, focusing on the ethical and spiritual formation that equips believers for faithful witness. In this sense, they function as a foundation for enduring faith rather than prescribing specific methods for engaging others. Therefore, I would, in retrospect, kindly point out that Dan is misapplying these texts.

Romans 1: Does It Preclude Arguing for God’s Existence?

• Dan’s Perspective (as I understand it): Dan suggests that Romans 1 renders arguments for God’s existence unnecessary. He interprets this passage to mean that because God’s existence is evident in creation, there is no need to argue for it, particularly in evangelism. According to this view, Romans 1 provides a sufficient basis for presupposing God’s existence without engaging in additional philosophical or evidential arguments.

• My Perspective: I interpret Romans 1 as affirming the principle of general revelation—that God has made His existence known to all through creation. However, I believe that this does not exclude the use of reasoned arguments for God’s existence, especially when addressing those unfamiliar with or skeptical of Christian teachings. I see value in engaging people intellectually to help bridge gaps in understanding, as Paul demonstrates in his discourse with the Athenians in Acts 17.

Exegetical Analysis of Romans 1

Romans 1:20 reads, “For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.” The Greek phrase aorata (“invisible qualities”) and dynamis (“power”) affirm that creation provides clear evidence of God’s existence and attributes. Paul’s wording—phanera (“clearly seen”)—implies that God’s qualities are perceptible and understood universally, which aligns with the concept of general revelation.

However, Paul’s intention here seems more focused on establishing humanity’s accountability than eliminating the need for discourse on God’s existence. He emphasizes that people are “without excuse” because creation itself attests to God’s reality. While this natural knowledge of God provides an inherent awareness, it doesn’t necessarily eliminate the usefulness of engaging people through argument, particularly when addressing different intellectual or cultural contexts.

Classical and Evidential Apologetics’ Use of Romans 1

Evidentialists and classical apologists often appeal to Romans 1 to support the value of general revelation in apologetics. They argue that this passage affirms the natural world as a foundation for demonstrating God’s existence, which allows for reasoned discourse and evidence-based arguments. For evidentialists, Romans 1 validates using creation as a “first step” to present the case for God’s existence, allowing observations from science, history, and nature to reinforce faith.

  • Classical Apologetics and Romans 1: Classical apologists, who often utilize a two-step approach (first arguing for theism, then for Christian claims), see Romans 1 as a biblical basis for general revelation. They argue that while creation reveals God’s reality, reasoned discourse helps articulate and clarify this revelation. For example, Thomas Aquinas viewed natural theology—arguments based on observation of the natural world—as a means to lead people toward an understanding of God. Classical apologists believe Romans 1 supports the use of cosmological and teleological arguments, which point to God’s existence as a rational conclusion drawn from the natural order.
  • Evidential Apologetics and Romans 1: Evidentialists also turn to Romans 1 as a foundation for presenting evidence that supports theism. They argue that if God’s attributes are “clearly seen” in creation, then scientific, historical, and philosophical evidence can serve as a legitimate basis for helping others recognize God’s existence. Evidentialists often use the passage to show that arguments based on observable phenomena—like the complexity of the universe or the fine-tuning argument—can bring people closer to belief. In this sense, they see Romans 1 as an invitation to use creation as an apologetic tool, grounding their approach in the natural revelation that Paul describes.

Acts 17 as a Model of Engaging Through Reasoned Discourse

Paul’s encounter in Athens (Acts 17:16-34) serves as a compelling example of his willingness to engage in discussions about God’s nature with people unfamiliar with the Jewish faith. In Acts 17:22-23, Paul opens his address by acknowledging the Athenians’ religiosity and referring to their altar “To an Unknown God.” This beginning is a contextual, respectful acknowledgment of their worldview, designed to open the door for dialogue. Paul then moves into a theistic argument, proclaiming God as the “Lord of heaven and earth” who does not live in temples built by hands (Acts 17:24).

This approach aligns with Paul’s assertion in Romans 1 that God is evident through creation, yet it shows his willingness to expound on this truth in ways that resonate with the cultural and intellectual background of his listeners. By quoting Greek poets (Acts 17:28), Paul leverages general revelation to build a bridge to his audience, showing that reasoned discourse can serve as a valuable means of helping others understand God’s nature. The Greek word used in Romans 1:20, kathoratai (translated as “clearly seen”), emphasizes that God’s qualities are observable and accessible, yet it does not imply that additional reasoning or evidence is redundant.

General Revelation and Reasoned Apologetics

While Romans 1 presents God’s existence as evident in nature, this revelation is non-specific and may leave certain individuals seeking a fuller understanding. Classical and evidential apologists argue that reasoned discussions help clarify and expand upon this general revelation, making it more intelligible to those from secular or skeptical backgrounds. For them, Romans 1 supports the approach of starting with common ground—such as the natural world—and moving toward a fuller understanding of God, especially when addressing modern audiences who may lack a foundational belief in God.

In this view, reasoned apologetics complements Romans 1 rather than detracts from it. While creation reveals God’s attributes, dialogue helps address specific doubts and intellectual barriers, allowing individuals to engage deeply with these truths. If Dan sees this reasoning as detracting from the sufficiency of Romans 1, I respect his view; however, I believe that Paul’s use of reason in Acts 17 exemplifies the validity of engaging audiences intellectually. This approach can offer clarity for those genuinely seeking to understand, without negating the foundational truth that God has made Himself known through His creation.

1 Peter 3:15 and Its Role in Apologetics

  • Dan’s Perspective (as I understand it): Dan maintains that 1 Peter 3:15 should not be exclusively viewed as an apologetic text, given its broader context focused on godly conduct and endurance in the face of suffering. He emphasizes that Peter’s primary concern lies in how believers respond to opposition, not necessarily in prescribing formal apologetic methodology.
  • My Perspective: While I agree with Dan that 1 Peter 3:15 is set within a broader context of encouraging steadfastness and integrity during persecution, I see this verse as underscoring the need for believers to be prepared to articulate their faith. This readiness extends beyond hostile situations to encompass daily interactions where questions about faith may arise.

Exegetical Analysis of 1 Peter 3:15

Contextual Background of 1 Peter 3:15

  • The broader section (1 Peter 3:13-17) addresses believers enduring hardship and persecution. Peter encourages them not to fear intimidation but to conduct themselves with honor and gentleness. His aim is to strengthen their witness, advising them to sanctify Christ as Lord and remain ready to answer anyone who asks about their hope.
  • Peter’s immediate context is one of suffering, but his instruction in verse 15 goes beyond simply enduring hardship. He emphasizes a proactive stance: believers are to sanctify Christ in their hearts and be prepared to give a reasoned explanation for their faith, implying a responsibility to both steadfastness and clarity in testimony.

Detailed Exegesis of Key Phrases in 1 Peter 3:15

1. “Sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts” (Greek: kyrion de ton Christon hagiasate en tais kardiais humon):

  • The verb hagiasate (translated as “sanctify”) means to “set apart” or “consecrate.” This command is in the aorist imperative, signaling an urgent, decisive action to honor Christ above all in the believer’s heart.
  • En tais kardiais humon (“in your hearts”) suggests an internal commitment. Peter links the act of sanctifying Christ as Lord directly with the believer’s core being—the “heart” (kardia), which in Greek thought often represented the seat of emotion, intellect, and will. By anchoring this in the heart, Peter establishes that a believer’s outward testimony flows from a deep-seated devotion.
  • This phrase, then, underscores that apologetics is not merely intellectual but deeply rooted in one’s commitment to Christ. The heart-orientation toward Christ as Lord provides the foundation for a life that is visibly set apart, attracting questions from others.

2. “Always be prepared to make a defense” (Greek: hetoimoi aei pros apologian):

  • Hetoimoi (“prepared” or “ready”) suggests a continual, vigilant readiness. The adverb aei (“always”) reinforces that this preparedness is not situational but rather a permanent state of readiness, whether in persecution or in everyday interactions.
  • The term apologia (translated as “defense”) means “reasoned response” or “explanation.” In classical Greek, apologia was often used in a legal context to denote a formal defense, yet Peter’s usage here suggests something broader: the ability to articulate one’s beliefs clearly and thoughtfully.
  • The phrase pros apologian can be rendered as “toward a defense,” indicating an orientation or intention toward explanation rather than simply passive endurance. Peter thus calls believers not merely to withstand questioning but to actively engage in thoughtful, reasoned responses about their faith.

3. “Always be prepared to make a defense” (Greek: hetoimoi aei pros apologian):

  • The phrase panti to aitounti (“to everyone who asks”) implies that this readiness to respond is not limited to hostile interrogators but to anyone who inquires, including those genuinely curious or seeking understanding.
  • Logon peri tes en hymin elpidos can be translated as “a reason concerning the hope that is in you.” Logon (from logos) means “reason,” “word,” or “explanation,” suggesting a clear, logical articulation of one’s beliefs. The word elpidos (“hope”) speaks to the future-oriented confidence Christians have, grounded in the resurrection and promises of Christ.
  • Importantly, peri tes en hymin elpidos (literally “concerning the hope in you”) highlights that the hope is internalized—it is something believers personally hold, experience, and can testify to. This hope isn’t an abstract concept but a living reality that should naturally provoke questions, especially when expressed with peace and steadfastness in challenging circumstances.

4. “With gentleness and respect” (Greek: meta prautetos kai phobou):

  • Prautetos (gentleness or meekness) and phobou (respect or reverence) together characterize the demeanor believers should embody when giving their defense. Prautetos denotes a humble, patient attitude, while phobou conveys a reverent, respectful approach, possibly toward both God and one’s audience.
  • This phrase indicates that the manner of apologetics is as important as the content. A defense given with gentleness and respect avoids arrogance or aggression, aiming instead to invite understanding and reflect Christlike humility.

Broader Implications of 1 Peter 3:15 for Apologetics

  • While 1 Peter 3:15 is situated within a context of persecution, the call to be “always prepared” (hetoimoi aei) suggests an all-encompassing readiness applicable to daily life. The open-ended phrasing “to everyone who asks” (panti to aitounti) implies that this preparedness is not exclusive to hostile situations but includes any opportunity where questions may arise.
  • Furthermore, the internal aspect of “sanctifying Christ as Lord” grounds the apologetic response in personal devotion, making it relevant beyond specific moments of persecution. Believers are encouraged to give a reason for their hope with humility and clarity, not as a defense mechanism but as an invitation for others to understand the faith that sustains them.

If Dan views the apologetic application of 1 Peter 3:15 as overly narrow, I understand his caution, especially given the verse’s primary setting in the context of suffering. However, I interpret the verse as urging both preparedness in trials and in general interactions. This readiness to give a reasoned account is essential for engaging a world that often asks questions about faith in a variety of contexts. By emphasizing gentleness and respect, Peter sets a tone that is universally applicable, ensuring that the believer’s response is not only reasoned but also Christlike.

Final Reflections:

Reflecting on this dialogue, I am sincerely grateful to Dan for his thoughtful engagement and the chance to refine my perspective. His commitment to the authority and clarity of Scripture is inspiring, and his points have challenged me to revisit each passage with a deeper sense of responsibility to accurately represent God’s Word. If I have misunderstood or misrepresented any aspect of his views, I welcome his correction, as my goal is to engage with both accuracy and humility. These conversations offer invaluable opportunities not only to sharpen our own theological understanding but also to build unity in our shared pursuit of truth.

In considering these passages together—Acts, Romans 1, Romans 15:4, 1 Corinthians 10:11, and 1 Peter 3:15—I find that each, while distinct in purpose and context, collectively upholds a principle of flexibility and wisdom in evangelism and apologetics, without diminishing the importance and supremacy of scripture in evangelism. Acts illustrates the adaptability of the apostles’ methods, revealing how they responded to diverse audiences with contextually relevant approaches. Rather than prescribing a single evangelistic method, Acts demonstrates the apostles’ responsiveness to the Holy Spirit and to the unique backgrounds of their listeners, which I see as an encouragement to similarly engage others thoughtfully.

Romans 1 affirms the truth of general revelation, that God’s existence and attributes are evident in creation. However, rather than precluding further dialogue, this passage establishes a foundation for engaging those who may need a bridge from their natural awareness of God to a fuller understanding of the gospel. Classical and evidential apologists have long understood Romans 1 as validating reasoned discourse and the use of evidence, reflecting Paul’s own practice of engaging others thoughtfully, as he did in Athens.

Romans 15:4 and 1 Corinthians 10:11, while not focused on methodology, reinforce the formative role of Scripture in shaping believers’ lives and character. These passages remind us that the Old Testament writings are for our instruction, teaching us perseverance and humility. This personal formation naturally informs our witness, equipping us to respond to others from a place of integrity and maturity rather than rigid adherence to a single model.

Finally, 1 Peter 3:15, set within the context of enduring hardship with faithfulness, emphasizes the importance of readiness to give an answer for the hope within us. While it encourages steadfastness under persecution, its message extends beyond this to a general call for preparedness in all encounters. Peter’s focus on gentleness and respect highlights the spirit in which our witness should be given, making this verse foundational for an apologetic approach that is both reasoned and compassionate.

In sum, these passages collectively encourage a witness that is thoughtful, adaptable, and grounded in Scripture. Rather than binding us to one prescriptive method, they emphasize the importance of context, character, and readiness. While Dan’s perspective offers valuable reminders of the foundational truths we share, I hold that these texts invite us to approach apologetics and evangelism with flexibility and attentiveness to the needs of those we encounter. Thank you again to Dan for his insights and his godly approach to this discussion; his perspectives have both challenged and encouraged me in my commitment to faithful witness.

Leave a comment Posted on Apologetics, Bible Study, Book of Jonah

Commentary on Jonah Chapter 1:1-6

Jonah Flees God’s Presence

John Bevere is famous for always saying God is a gentleman and would never force you to do anything. I wonder what Jonah, in Jonah chapter 1, would think of that!

Jonah Flees God’s Presence

            “Now the word of the Lord came to Jonah the son of Amittai, saying, “Arise, go to Nineveh, that great city, and call out against it, for their evil has come up before me.” But Jonah rose to flee to Tarshish from the presence of the Lord. He went down to Joppa and found a ship going to Tarshish. So he paid the fare and went down into it, to go with them to Tarshish, away from the presence of the Lord.

 But the Lord hurled a great wind upon the sea, and there was a mighty tempest on the sea, so that the ship threatened to break up. Then the mariners were afraid, and each cried out to his god. And they hurled the cargo that was in the ship into the sea to lighten it for them. But Jonah had gone down into the inner part of the ship and had lain down and was fast asleep. So the captain came and said to him, “What do you mean, you sleeper? Arise, call out to your god! Perhaps the god will give a thought to us, that we may not perish” (Jonah 1:1-6).

            This text starts off in a peculiar manner, almost as if it is a continuation of a larger story. But isn’t that what every book contained in the canon of scripture is? The Bible is comprised of 66 books, from around 40 different authors, over the course of thousands of years. It is God’s story to humanity about Himself and the work of Christ on the Cross for the redemption of us, His covenant people set aside for Himself in an age of mass rebellion. Yet, in the midst of all that, it is also a story that often reminds us of the rebellion that is frequently inside our own ranks as God’s covenant people. I think this is one of the themes of this Book of Jonah. I think the Holy Spirit caused the writer to start this work with the word “now” to make it clear that this story is a continuation of major themes found in the books of scripture before it. Throughout them, God wrestles with a rebellious people! In this case, one of these rebellious people would be our dear friend, the prophet Jonah. We see in the text that the “word of the Lord came to Jonah the son of Amittai.” This is no small thing. When “the word of the Lord” comes to a prophet, it’s because God has something He wants to say! He tells his oracle, Jonah, “Arise, go to Nineveh, the great city, and call out against it, for their evil has come up before me.” God is essentially telling Jonah to call Nineveh to repentance! Calling out against Nineveh’s great sins. But what does Jonah do? He flees from the presence of God in rebellion against Him.

            This is such a serious moment. Jonah does several things that are unbecoming of a prophet of God. A prophet is one who should make his home in the presence of God. Here, Jonah exiles himself from God’s presence. In fact, He leaves Israel, the covenant promised land of God to live in utter disobedience. Why would a prophet of God willfully leave the presence of God and all the good things that come from it? Well, the simple answer would be because Jonah had a rebellious attitude. Warren Weirsbe points out, “Jonah’s wrong attitude toward God’s will stemmed from a feeling that the Lord was asking him to do an impossible thing” (Weirsbe, Be Amazed, pg. 92). How often do we, in our Christian walks, see that God has called us to do something seemingly impossible, and we turn from Him in disobedience? I’m not talking about supernatural things. I’m talking about things that, to us, seem like an outrageous request. This was the case for Jonah, whom Timothy Keller refers to as the “prodigal prophet.” But what exactly is the problem here? Well, as St. Jerome points out, “The prophet knows, the Holy Spirit teaching him, that the repentance of the Gentiles is the ruin of the Jews. A lover, then, of his country, he does not so much envy the deliverance of Nineveh as will that his own country should not perish” (Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture, XIV, pg. 130). What is our forefather saying about Jonah? That he is politically motivated! Jonah has heard all of the prophecies about the doom and exile coming to Israel. He is also the prophet who prophesied the restoration of the boundaries of the Northern Kingdom (2 Kings 14:25). When this happened, it cemented his name in scripture forever and likely the hearts of the Israelite people.  

            Imagine what thoughts may have entered into his heart as he mulled this over. Think about his hatred for the Assyrians, who were violent, evil people. Think about his patriotism and desire to see Israel continue in her time of prosperity in light of the Assyrians, who had committed great atrocities against Israel. Think of the envious thoughts he may have had toward other prophets. Our father in the faith, St. Jerome, puts it this way, “Seeing that his fellow prophets are sent to the lost sheep of the house of Israel to excite the people to repentance, and that Balaam the soothsayer too prophesied the salvation of Israel, he grieves that he is chosen to be sent to Assyria, the enemies of Israel, and that the greatest city of the enemies where there was idolatry and ignorance of God” (Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture, XIV, pg. 130). Think about it. All the other prophets before him get to preach repentance to Israel, the apple of God’s eye. He has to preach to the wicked Ninevites. Even Balaam the wicked false prophet was used to preach salvation to Israel; but Jonah? Jonah was stuck with the Ninevites. Oh the things that can muddy up the hearts of God’s people, causing their actions to be impure!

And what did Jonah do? He fled from the presence of God. He fled so intentionally that he “went down to Joppa and found a ship going to Tarshish. So he paid the fare and went down into it, to go with them to Tarshish, away from the presence of the Lord” (Jonah 1:3, ESV) Jonah has committed a serious, willful sin here. Not only did he disobey God, but he did it deliberately. He packed up his bags intentionally, and intentionally followed the map to get down to Joppa to arrive at the port. That was very intentional! But what’s worse? While he was in Joppa he could have repented. He could have repented and turned 550 miles northeast to Nineveh, but instead he paid what was likely a large sum of money to sail 2,500 miles toward Tarshish. The writer of the Book of Jonah adds something very interesting to the end of this verse. He adds at the end, “…away from the presence of the Lord.” Not only was Jonah intent on being disobedient, but he was willing to leave God’s presence to get away. One may be asking, what is s important about Tarshish? Why would he flee towards there? Tarshish, which is part of modern Spain, was the very edge of the known world that Jonah lived in. For all intents and purposes, it was as far from Nineveh as possible. In other words, Jonah was willing to go to the end of the world to get away from his calling.

One thing that we will see as we go through this book is the type and shadow that Jonah really is. One of the types he resembles is God’s intention for humanity. A way to look at it, which we will visit in a later chapter as well, is found in the gospels of Matthew and Mark. In them, Jesus tells the combatant pharisees that they will not receive a sign except the sign of Jonah: “For just as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the great fish, so will the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth” (Matthew 12:40). Jonah was a foreshadowing type of Jesus and His resurrection. Now, you may be wondering why I am bringing the resurrection up in light of Tarshish. Allow me to bring you to Paul’s epistle to the Romans where he says to the saints in Rome, “I hope to see you in passing as I go to Spain, and to be helped on my journey there by you, once I have enjoyed your company for a while” (Romans 15:23, ESV). Remember when I said that Tarshish is modern Spain? The borders of Spain have not changed much since then. Paul’s mission was to go to Tarshish!

Again, I know I need to bring this home for you to really know where I am going with it. Paul was headed to Spain to preach the message of the risen savior to the gentiles there. In fact, Paul is intending to fulfill the prophecy given by Isaiah, which says, “…I will set a sign among them, I will send survivors to the nations, to Tarshish, Pul, Lud, who draw the bow, to Tubal and Javan, to the coastlands far away, that have not heard my fame or seen my glory. And they shall declare my glory among the nations” (Isaiah 66:19, ESV). Paul sees himself as a survivor sent to the nations, to proclaim the gospel to the gentiles so that God’s glory will be declared to all the nations. Now, these are not modern nations. These are the nations listed in Genesis 10, called the “table of nations.” Paul is trying to make it to all nations, and Tarshish is the last stop. Now, the type and shadow comes here: Just as Jonah was the rebellious prophet to the gentiles, Paul, filled with the Spirit of Christ, is the obedient apostle to the gentiles. Just as Jonah was rebellious and fled, Paul was obedient and was sent. Just as Jonah fled to Tarshish so the gentiles would not be saved, Paul advances obediently to Tarshish so that all that gentiles may be saved. Just as Jonah only preached to one gentile city, calling it to repent, Paul preached to many gentile cities and called them to repentance. Paul’s actions are a reversal of Jonah’s actions. Why? So that the one who is greater than Jonah, (Jesus), could redeem the lost that lived there. This is why I bring up Jesus’ words so soon. The salvation to be brought through Him is the completion of Jonah’s time in salvation history.

Now that this is brought full circle, it’s important to note that Jonah did not have bad theology about God’s heart and intention toward the lost. As Warren Weirsbe aptly put it, “The Assyrians were a cruel people who had often abused Israel, and Jonah’s narrow patriotism took precedence over his theology. Jonah forgot that the will of God is the expression of the love of God (Ps. 33:11) and that God called him to Nineveh because He loved both Jonah and the Ninevites” (Weirsbe, Be Amazed, pg. 92). The problem wasn’t Jonah’s theology, it was his heart. He had an awful attitude towards God for telling him to go to this horrible enemy to preach repentance. Jonah even admits that he knows God loves the Ninevites at the beginning of chapter 4, “O Lord, is not this what I said when I was yet in my country? That is why I made haste to flee to Tarshish; for I knew that you are a gracious God and merciful, slow to anger and abounding in steadfast love, and relenting from disaster” (Jonah 4:2). Jonah hated the Assyrians. In fact, Weirsbe insinuates that there is a special reason for this. Jonah’s home land, Gath-Hepher, was on the border of Zebulun, one of the northernmost tribes; which was extremely vulnerable to invaders like Assyria. Perhaps Jonah had seen some of the evils Assyria was capable of (Weirsbe, Be Amazed, pg. 214). Needless to say, Jonah was not willing to obey God because of his prejudice towards the Assyrians for the evil they resembled. He was so hardened toward the Assyrians that he was unwilling to submit to the heart of God for the gentiles, which we see fulfilled in the culmination of the work of the apostles in the New Testament. But how often do we ignore the call to preach today? Jonah in some sense has justifiable reasons to abstain from preaching repentance to the Assyrians. For most Christians today the problem is merely that we are uncomfortable, and so we ignore the great commission. Lack of comfort won’t excuse us on judgement day, though! Because of the work of Christ through His apostles, there will be no excuse today for disobedience to the call to preach the gospel to the lost. No matter how evil the lost are or how uncomfortable we are!

The Lord God’s response to this is incredible; and it really reveals an important aspect of His nature. Yes, you read that correctly. The text reads, “But the Lord hurled a great wind upon the sea, and there was a mighty tempest on the sea, so that the ship threatened to break up” (Jonah 1:4). At first glance this seems to be the act of an angry God, bent on forcing His way, and in some ways that assessment may prove correct. As we read the book of Jonah, it appears obvious that God does indeed “make” Jonah do His will. But with that said, pay attention to the patience of God. God could have easily decided to destroy Jonah and use somebody else. But God elects to show Jonah the same kind of longsuffering that He is extending toward the Assyrians. This further proves Jonah’s assessment of the love of God, that God is, “steadfast in love, and relenting from disaster.” Jonah is slowly beginning to realize that when the heart of God is set upon you, His steadfast love remains a lighthouse of hope for the soul that is far from Him. Jonah, who left the presence of the Lord, could not escape the love of the Lord. Perhaps this puts into perspective why the apostle Peter exhorts the Church by saying, “The Lord is not slow to fulfill his promise as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance” (2 Peter 3:9, ESV). It is because of the love of God that God is patient towards sinners. God speaks this same sentiment to Israel through the mouth of His prophet Ezekiel saying, “Say to them, As I live, declares the Lord God, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from his way and live; turn back, turn back from your evil ways, for why will you die, O house of Israel” Ezekiel 33:11, ESV)?

Jonah, for all intents and purposes is evil for his rebellion against almighty God. Yet God continues to show divine patience, putting up with his obstinate rebellion. Despite God’s patience, however, Jonah is not doing well. He is unable to sin peaceably. St. Jerome said of the subject, “Nothing is secure when God is against us” (Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture, XIV, pg. 132). Jonah may have experienced the grace of God, but God was still against him. God gave him the command to go to Nineveh, and instead, Jonah fled. And Jonah would not be allowed to flee so easily! John Chrysostom adds, “Sin is like heavy cargo” (Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture, XIV, pg. 132). This is why when we move to the next verse, we see that, “…the mariners were afraid, and each cried out to his god. And they hurled the cargo that was in the ship into the sea to lighten it for them. But Jonah had gone down into the inner part of the ship and had lain down and was fast asleep” (Jonah 1:5, ESV). Jonah’s sin caused a life and death situation to unfold. The mariners were likely headed to Tarshish to sell their cargo. This was how they were going to make their income. Not only this, but as Timothy Keller notes, these mariners were “…experienced sailors who took bad weather in stride, so this must have been a uniquely terrifying tempest” (The Prodigal Prophet, pg. 33). So, these sea hardened sailors were so terrified by the tempest, (which was the result of Jonah’s sinful rebellion), that they threw their only source of income overboard. How heavy is the burden of sin!

Yet in the midst of it all, Jonah was asleep. And how often are we asleep as God is speaking? When our hearts are so hardened to our own sin that we have fallen asleep as God is shouting loudly to us, “Repent! Repent!” Yet Jonah was clueless. He was fast asleep, and therefore unable to recognize the great warning of God. The unsaved pagans on the ship certainly recognized the situation before Jonah. So much so that they prayed to their own gods in hope that they might save them. The pagan mariners were unable to tell that salvation was only through Jonah’s God, yet they still more awake to the truth in areas of life that Jonah was fast asleep in. We see a similar instance of such hardening in the New Testament. Jesus has just arrived home to Nazareth and He reads the Isaiah scroll, saying, “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to proclaim good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim liberty to the captives and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are oppressed,to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor” (Luke 4:18-19 ESV). This would have been no issue for the people had Jesus not uttered the following words after rolling up the scroll and giving it back to the attendant, saying, “Today this Scripture has been fulfilled in your hearing” (Luke 4:21, ESV). The people, who were spiritually asleep doubted Jesus, saying, “Is not this Joseph’s son” (Luke 4:22, ESV)? They had either grown up with Jesus or watched as the incarnate Jesus became a grown man. So used to Jesus, they allowed their hearts to be so “used to him” that they became hardened toward Him when He was revealing Himself as their only hope for salvation. At the end of this passage in Luke, it says, “…passing through their midst, he went away” (Luke 4:30, ESV). Because of the hardness of their hearts, the people of Nazareth missed the coming of the Messiah, the proclaimer of their liberty. May we never be hardened so much so that the presence of the Lord goes away!

In so many ways, this is also Jonah. Yes, Jonah is foreshadowing Nazareth. A prophet of God, so acquainted with the presence of God, flees the presence of God; and when the presence of God returns to him in the form of a great tempest, Jonah remains asleep. Hardened toward God! Yet the pagan captain of the ship would have none of it. In the next verse it says, “So the captain came and said to him, “What do you mean, you sleeper? Arise, call out to your god! Perhaps the god will give a thought to us, that we may not perish” (Jonah 1:6, ESV). There have been times where I would read this verse with great conviction because there have been moments in my life where I was as faithless as Jonah. Since being in ministry, I have been inspired by the willingness of lost young teenagers as they come to church, seeking what they do not yet know, primed for an encounter with God. It reminds me to never allow myself to be hardened towards the things of God; because there are lost people who have less than I, spiritually speaking, who are seeking a salvation that only my Jesus can give them, and I must be ready to preach the Gospel to them. Yes, in my ministry, Young people whose supplications are like the statue at the Areopagus in Athens, “to the unknown God” (Acts 17:23, ESV). Let this be a reminder to all of us that we must be like the Apostle Paul, eager to give an answer to the lost people of this world for the hope that is within us, as Peter commends in 1 Peter 3:15. Let us not be like Jonah, who needed to be begged by the pagan mariners to intercede on their behalf. No, let us already be praying for the lost and ready to spread the hope of Jesus to the lost people of this world.

Conclusion:

            If I were to give Jonah any advice, it would be straight from the writer of Hebrews who said, “By faith Abraham obeyed when he was called to go out to a place that he was to receive as an inheritance. And he went out, not knowing where he was going.  By faith he went to live in the land of promise, as in a foreign land, living in tents with Isaac and Jacob, heirs with him of the same promise.  For he was looking forward to the city that has foundations, whose designer and builder is God” (Hebrews 11:8-10, ESV). In a very real way, Jonah was sent to Nineveh to receive the people there as an inheritance. Winning those lost souls to the Lord was a very real victory, one that would add many jewels to his crown in heaven. Unfortunately, at least at this part in the story of Jonah, he has rejected those jewels. If only Jonah were able to read the book of Daniel where it says, “And those who are wise shall shine like the brightness of the sky above; and those who turn many to righteousness, like the stars forever and ever” (Daniel 12:3, ESV). But unfortunately Jonah was not thinking of “forever and ever.” He was thinking of the nation of Israel, of which Assyria was a rival of. This worldly thinking caused Jonah to rebel! Needless to say, Jonah’s excessive love for country proved that he lacked faith in God. Sure, he believed in God and had faith in God in many ways, but he was holding out. For some reason, he didn’t seem to trust that God would uphold His people. Perhaps he knew Israel was in sin and therefore soon to be judged. Either way, Jonah failed to live as his father Abraham did; who was “looking forward to the city that has foundations, whose designer and builder is God.” Instead, he let his love for the city of Jerusalem blind him. He was so blind that he hardened his heart and fled from God’s presence! What a conundrum for a prophet of God to have to answer for! So, if I could, I would have encouraged Jonah to take his eyes off of himself; and off of the cities of this world, and think of the lost who dwell among him, and to place his sole faith in the God who is the architect and builder of the eternal city that will last forever and ever!

Leave a comment Posted on Bible Study, Uncategorized

Overview of the Book of Jonah: Responding to Liberal Theologians

Some liberal theologians chalk the book of Jonah up to merely being a children’s fable that isn’t founded in reality. In the coming three paragraphs I will respond to this.

This book is named after the main protagonist of the book: Jonah, son of Amittai. Aside from the book of Jonah, another place in the Old Testament mentions him. In the book of 2 Kings, Jonah was briefly cited as the one who prophesied that Jeroboam II would restore “the boundaries of Israel from Lebo Hamath to the Dead Sea” (2 Kings 14:25). In this same verse quoted, it mentions that Jonah lived in a place called Gath-Hepher, which was located in the territory of the tribe of Zebulun (Joshua 19:10-13). So, Jonah was a prophet of God in the time of Jeroboam II who lived in Gath-Hepher, and he was the son of Amittai. I say this because it is important to note that Jonah was a real person. He had a real family lineage, he had a real place of residence, and he had a real vocation: that of prophet. Some have tried to say that the Book of Jonah reads like and is likely a children’s fable, citing the supernatural event of being swallowed up by a great fish as a reason for saying this. However, as Timothy Keller points out that, “A fiction writer ordinarily adds supernatural elements in order to create excitement or spectacle and to capture the reader’s attention, but this writer doesn’t capitalize on the event at all in that way” (The Prodigal Prophet, pg. 4). Dr. Keller follows this up by noticing that “The fish is mentioned only in two brief sentences and there are no descriptive details. It is reported more as a simple fact of what happened.” In other words, the writer of the book of Jonah mentions the great fish and then moves along as if he is merely pointing out real details of the historical narrative. So again I will restate my conclusion: Jonah was a real person, with a real lineage, with a real place of residence, with a real vocation, and a real story: and this book is a historical account of part of his life. In other words, this book is a real part of his story.

Perhaps another problem liberal theologians run into when chalking Jonah up to that of a children’s fable is that he is not only a real person, but Jesus talks about him in a very serious manner. In the New Testament, after the religious leaders of the day commanded that Jesus give them a sign, Jesus is recorded as saying, “An evil and adulterous generation seeks for a sign, but no sign will be given to it except the sign of the prophet Jonah. For just as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the great fish, so will the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth. The men of Nineveh will rise up 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” (Matthew 12:39-41, ESV).  This is very injurious to the notion that the book of Jonah is a mere children’s fable. Not only is Jesus revealing himself as the better version of Jonah, alluding to his death, burial, and resurrection; but He says that the same generation of Ninevites that Jonah preached to will judge those of that current generation who demanded that He give them a sign. This is amazing! If anything, Jesus’ affirmation of the event of Jonah preaching to the Ninevites is a solid endorsement from the Risen Lord that the book of Jonah is an accurate account of real events. Those who say otherwise are in direct opposition to the Son of God.

There is so much more to add to the historicity of this story that we could dive into, but that would mean much more writing that I have the time for. Regardless, the truth remains the same: the Book of Jonah is a historical account of real events. 2 Kings affirms that Jonah is a real person, with a real lineage, with a real place of residence, and with a real vocation as prophet. Despite the arguments of some liberal theologians that the book of Jonah is merely a children’s fable, that argument just doesn’t add up because of the way the story is presented. To add to this, Jesus Himself refers back to Jonah as a real person. He even says the very Ninevites that Jonah preached to will rise up and judge the evil and adulterous generation that beheld His coming. Therefore I rest my case that this story is very much an accurate account of events that took place in Jonah’s life. Liberal theologians who argue otherwise find themselves at serious odds with Jesus. This leads me to remind you that, as stated in the foreword, the Word of God is “…living and active…” (Hebrews 4:12). The Book of Jonah is part of the Word of our God to His people. Therefore there are important lessons He wants us to learn from it. There is life giving power that is waiting to be exposited out of this text, and this is why we will enter into it and find out what life awaits us within passages of this text!