Jonah — Preacher of Repentance (6) The Sign of Jonah
In the story of Jonah’s preaching to the Ninevites, and in Jesus’ warning to Israel, we hear God’s call to repent of our sins and place our trust in Jesus, the greater Jonah, whom God sent to save us from our sins. The question now before us is this: “will we be witnesses against our own evil generation? Or will we be among those on trial, who demand more signs, and who wish to remain indifferent to our sin and the evil around us?” Who are we–Ninevites who believed, or Israelites who didn’t?
You Can Run But You Can’t Hide – Jonah Re-Commissioned
Chapter 3 of Jonah’s prophecy opens with Jonah back on dry land in a virtual rewind of verses 1-2 of chapter 1. Jonah is to “arise,” “go” and “call out,” but with one major difference–this time Jonah does not attempt to flee.[1] “Then the word of the Lord came to Jonah the second time, saying, `Arise, go to Nineveh, that great city, and call out against it the message that I tell you.’ So Jonah arose and went to Nineveh, according to the word of the Lord’” In light of all that has happened to Jonah, it is remarkable that he is neither rebuked, nor is he allowed to go on his way. The word of the Lord came to him a second time, which, in effect, indicated that YHWH re-commissions Jonah to go and preach to Nineveh to fulfill his original mission. Notice too that Jonah is given the message which he is to proclaim to the Ninevites–one of the distinguishing marks of YHWH’s prophets is that they speak his words, not their own.
Aside from the significance of YHWH ensuring that his greater purposes will be fulfilled when Jonah is re-commissioned–the gospel will go out to the ends of the earth, in this case to Nineveh–we also see in Jonah’s re-commissioning that God often gives us second chances to accomplish that of which we have already made a significant mess. Jonah is an example to us in that he is sustained in his time of trial by his knowledge of God’s word (specifically the Psalms), and he is also an encouragement to those of us who often take more than one time to do things the right way. YHWH commissions Jonah but does not abandon him when Jonah rejects YHWH’s call. YHWH loves his people enough to discipline them. And his purpose for Nineveh still stands.
Jonah Goes to Nineveh and Calls for Repentance
In the last half of verse 3 of chapter 3, we learn that “Nineveh was an exceedingly great city, three days’ journey in breadth.” Four times in Jonah’s prophecy the city is described as large (1:2; 3:2, 3; 4:1). But the Hebrew text of 3:3 is much more specific as to why the city’s size is so important to what follows. The verse can be variously translated as Nineveh is “large to the gods,” or “a large city to/for God.” The latter makes more sense in context.[2] Nineveh is a large city in the heart of pagan Assyria with its multiple deities. Yet, Jonah is told that Ninevah is YHWH’s city. Jonah would naturally assume that YHWH is Lord over the cities of Israel. But YHWH is also Lord over the pagan Assyrian city to which Jonah is being sent. Jonah might see Assyria as enemy territory, but he now knows the city is under YHWH’s authority. To paraphrase the Psalm 24:1, “the earth is the Lord’s, every square inch of it.” No doubt, the same thing holds true today. YHWH’s rule extends to every corner of the earth.
Jonah “arose” and “went” (v. 3) which tells us there has been a complete change in Jonah’s previous attitude. It would have taken Jonah a month or so to travel the 500 miles north to Nineveh. As we read in verse 4, as soon as he got there, “Jonah began to go into the city, going a day’s journey.” The Nineveh of Jonah’s day was not quite the great city it had been a millennium or so earlier, or that it would become under the reign of king Sennacherib a hundred or so years later. But it still was large enough to take Jonah a full day to pass through the city. Jonah did not wait to get to the city’s center–the summer palace of Assyian kings–but he began preaching the words YHWH gave just as soon as he entered the city. “And [Jonah] called out, `Yet forty days, and Nineveh shall be overthrown!’”
Jonah’s message is briefly summarized, but it is not a stretch to assume that the heart of Jonah’s preaching was that which we’ve already read in Jonah’s prophecy–the city had become a place of exceedingly great evil and had come to YHWH’s attention. The words of Jeremiah 18:7–8 are also likely a factor when we consider the content of Jonah’s preaching. “If at any time I declare concerning a nation or a kingdom, that I will pluck up and break down and destroy it, and if that nation, concerning which I have spoken, turns from its evil, I will relent of the disaster that I intended to do to it.”
When God speaks, a decision is demanded. Unless the people of Nineveh repent of their sin and trust in YHWH’s great mercy to save them, the city would be destroyed in forty days. The number forty is not a random number. “Forty” years or days appears several times in Scripture as a time of waiting and testing. Israel was in the wilderness of the Sinai forty years. Jesus was tempted by Satan in the wilderness for forty days. According to Deuteronomy 9:18, 25, Moses spent forty days of supplication before the Lord.[3]. YHWH’s clock is running. Nineveh has forty days to repent.
Unlike Israel, Nineveh Believes and Repents
Jonah does not make his reader wait long to discover the outcome–again, loaded with irony, in this case, bitter irony. We read in verse 5 that upon hearing Jonah preach, “the people of Nineveh believed God.”
-
America’s Not-So-Great Awakening
American Awakening is packed with biblical wisdom for Christians of every color, both sexes, and almost all political persuasions. But if you’re a Christian who’s attracted to identity politics, Mitchell wants to convince you that what’s attracting you isn’t a legitimate political extension of Christianity but rather an idolatrous substitute. His chief claim is that “Christianity has not disappeared from America; rather, the Christian categories of transgression and innocence have moved into politics” (34). And unless they’re moved back where they belong, our society is doomed.
False Atonement: Scapegoating Straight White Men
Christianity teaches the doctrine of original sin—all mankind is fallen in Adam and inherits his guilt and stain at birth. The only way to have our stain removed is by having it transferred onto the divine Scapegoat, Jesus Christ, who bore our sins in his body on the tree (1 Pet. 2:24; cf. Isa. 53:6; John 1:29). This is the heart of the Christian gospel: salvation by substitution. What can wash away our sin? Nothing but the blood of Jesus.
But when this message is rejected, the need for cleansing doesn’t just disappear. Instead, we seek to cover our guilt by other means, either engaging in penance ourselves or else finding scapegoats to blame. This has been a driving force for false religions throughout history: the effort to achieve innocence by scapegoating something (or someone), thus appeasing the gods.
When scapegoating moves from religion into politics, we get identity politics. And according to Mitchell, “The scapegoat identity politics offers up for sacrifice is the white, heterosexual man. If he is purged, its adherents imagine, the world itself, along with the remaining groups in it, will be cleansed of stain” (xxi).
Straight white males make a natural scapegoat (I speak as one). In intersectional scorekeeping, we rank dead last. As males, we’re guilty of oppressing women. As whites, we’re guilty of oppressing racial minorities. As heterosexuals, we’re guilty of oppressing those who identify as LGBT+. And worse, according to identity politics, we’ve also “broken the world…economically by [our] invention of capitalism…and environmentally by the greed of [our] industrial capitalism unleashed” (72).
Some of these concerns are legitimate. All of them also require clarification. But, as a whole, this condemnation feels like an updated version of the old “white man’s burden,” only this time with white men cast as the villain instead of the hero.
Mitchell presses the religious nature of this scapegoating further. In embracing his role as scapegoat, the straight white male doesn’t literally have to die (though hopefully demographic destiny will diminish him in due time). But he’s required to forever engage in acts of “innocence signaling.” In a Passover-like ritual, he must display the acceptable “signs of innocence on his front door—or more likely, his office door—for all to see.” Examples include stickers declaring “This office is green,” announcements about upcoming “diversity training,” and New York Times articles excoriating Donald Trump (xxiv–xxv). When they see the blood, they’ll pass over you. Just remember, this is a daily ritual, not a yearly one—so gird up your loins.
Some might wonder if Mitchell is blind to the genuine racial injustices of the past (or present) or whether he may be unwittingly carrying water for true racists. I don’t think he is. He spends an entire section of the book condemning the alt-right as yet another perverse alternative to Christianity (104–20).
But given how broadly the definition of racism has been expanded (10), in addition to being lumped in with other dubious social justice issues (like LGBT+ rights), Christians of all colors will have to risk being falsely accused of this sin by certain hostile sectors of the American public. Our goal is to not actually be a glutton or a drunkard or a racist—rather than to avoid being called one at any cost (Matt. 11:19). God knows our hearts, and he’ll vindicate all who truly love him and his people on the Last Day, if not sooner. -
Reverence and Emotion in Reformed Worship Part 2
Reverent, grave, seemly, solemn – these adjectives convey a seriousness about worship that seems to preclude external expressions of emotion. But this language is not to suppose that the Puritans did not value emotion. In fact, the Puritans were “intensely self-conscious of – and, indeed, fascinated by – their own emotions.”[1] Many Puritans looked to their own spiritual experience for evidences of God working in their lives.[2] For the Puritans, reverence in worship did not stifle the emotions, but channeled them so that they ran deeper.
The Puritans (1600s)
The Puritans in the 1600s continued the legacy of the Reformers by seeking to purify the worship of the Church of England. The crowning documents of the Puritans were the Westminster Standards, completed in 1646. In The Directory for the Public Worship of God, the Westminster Divines describe how the congregation ought to assemble for worship:
Let all enter the assembly, not irreverently, but in a grave and seemly manner, taking their seats or places without adoration, or bowing themselves towards one place or other.
The congregation being assembled, the minister, after solemn calling on them to the worshipping of the great name of God is to begin with prayer.
In all reverence and humility acknowledging the incomprehensible greatness and majesty of the Lord, (in whose presence they do then in a special manner appear,) and their own vileness and unworthiness to approach so near him, with their utter inability of themselves to so great a work; and humbly beseeching him for pardon, assistance, and acceptance, in the whole service then to be performed; and for a blessing on that particular portion of his word then to be read: And all in the name and mediation of the Lord Jesus Christ.
Reverent, grave, seemly, solemn – these adjectives convey a seriousness about worship that seems to preclude external expressions of emotion. But this language is not to suppose that the Puritans did not value emotion. In fact, the Puritans were “intensely self-conscious of – and, indeed, fascinated by – their own emotions.”[1] Many Puritans looked to their own spiritual experience for evidences of God working in their lives.[2] For the Puritans, reverence in worship did not stifle the emotions, but channeled them so that they ran deeper. Speaking of early modern Protestants, historian Alec Ryrie writes:
Certainly they observed and disciplined their emotions with unusual rigour … But channeling a current only makes it run swifter and deeper. Nor did the early modern Protestants discipline their emotions because they wished to suppress them. Rather, they believed that the emotions – or “affections”, “feelings” or “passions”, to use their preferred terms – could be guides on the road to godliness, supports when the road became hard, and invaluable testimonies that the destination was within reach. Protestants disciplined their emotions because they mattered.[3]
For the Puritans, the emotional and rational faculties of man are both necessary for true spiritual worship.
Read More
Related Posts: -
What is the Doctrine of Adoption?
We’re born as sinners, which means that we’ve been separated from God and have become spiritual orphans without God as our Father. But the Father sent His own Son to save us by His life, death, and resurrection, so that we could be brought into His family forever. When we believe in Jesus the Son, we become adopted by God the Father, receive the Holy Spirit, and get lots of new brothers and sisters.
There are hundreds of thousands of orphans in the United States alone and millions around the world. A distinctive feature of Christianity has been caring for these orphans (Ja. 1:27), but this was always expected of God’s people (Isa. 1:17). In the Old Testament, the ethical imperative to care for orphans was grounded in God’s character. He is a Father to the fatherless (Ps. 68:5). However, in the New Testament, we receive a fuller revelation, teaching us that Father is a proper name. God is eternally Father, Son, and Holy Spirit apart from the created order.
The apostle Paul prays to “the Father from whom every family in heaven and on earth is named” (Eph. 3:14). In other words, creaturely fatherhood derives from the eternal Father, who eternally begets His beloved Son. Similarly, all sonship is derivative of the Son. We might be tempted to think that when the Bible speaks of believers being adopted, it is merely a metaphor based on the context of adoption in the ancient Greco-Roman world. But to the contrary, earthly adoption is a metaphor, a shadow, a sign to the reality of salvific adoption, whereby a spiritual orphan becomes a son of God. Fatherhood and Sonship precede all creation, and adoption is nothing less than participation in the life of the Trinity through union with the natural Son of God. In love, the Father predestined us for adoption to Himself as sons through Jesus Christ (Eph. 1:4-5). In Him we have obtained an inheritance—a fitting thing for a son to receive—and the Holy Spirit is our downpayment (Eph. 1:11-14). The distinct missions of the Son and the Spirit are achieved in order for us to become sons and heirs (Gal. 4:4-7). As Fred Sanders has written, “Salvation by adoption is the salvation than which nothing more fitting can be imagined by a triune God.”[1]
Adoption is a much “bigger” doctrine than most recognize. Our predestination, effectual calling, justification, and glorification are centered around adoption (Rom. 8:12-30), containing legal, transformational, and eschatological elements.
Read More
Related Posts:
