A pattern notable in the Old Testament is the distress/deliverance motif, sometimes depicted directionally with descent/ascent language. The story of Jonah features such a motif, and it even includes a three-day reference for the prophet’s deliverance. Just as Jonah was in the fish for a period of days associated with the number three, so too was Jesus in the grave until the third day.

Matthew 12 is packed with powerful claims. In Matthew 12:6, Jesus said, “I tell you, something greater than the temple is here.” And he was referring to himself. In 12:8, “For the Son of Man is lord of the Sabbath.” Again, he was referring to himself. In 12:29, “Or how can someone enter a strong man’s house and plunder his goods, unless he first binds the strong man?” Yes, Jesus is the stronger man plundering the evil one’s domain. In 12:42, “Behold, something greater than Solomon is here.” Who is greater than Solomon? You only need one guess.
Among the incredible statements from Jesus in Matthew 12, we read of the prophet Jonah in Matthew 12:38–41. The reason Jesus brings up Jonah is because God literally brought up Jonah from the belly of a fish in Jonah 2:10. Soon Jesus would descend into death and then ascend through a victorious resurrection, and the story of Jonah provided the descent/ascent pattern that foreshadowed the Messiah’s work.
The story of Jonah had a typological function. In other words, Jonah’s experience was a type (or prophetic pattern) of Christ. I’ve written about typology on this site before (see here and here and here), and I’ve written about Jonah as well (see here and here). For a book-length treatment of typology, check out 40 Questions About Typology and Allegory.
My claim about Matthew 12:38-41 is that Jesus is reading the story of Jonah typologically. Some scribes and Pharisees wanted a sign (12:38), Jesus responded by calling them an evil and adulterous generation, and he told them that no sign would be given except the sign of the prophet Jonah (12:39).
What about Jonah’s life did Jesus have in mind? “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” (Matt. 12:40).
The correspondence between Jonah and Jesus involves the descent-and-ascent pattern. Differences in the stories are obvious.
Read More
Related Posts:

Written by Carl R. Trueman |
Thursday, February 3, 2022
Preaching will only gain in practical importance as the aggressive myths of this present age are preached at us from every soap opera, commercial, and TikTok video. If the church is (humanly speaking) to survive, she needs to confront these falsehoods with the truth proclaimed in the preached Word. Chrysostom’s legacy is not just sacramental. It is also prophetic. And if we are to carry out the church’s prophetic calling, we too must make sure that our preaching is powerful and central. That is one important way to honor Chrysostom’s legacy.

Years ago, when teaching at a seminary, I was responsible for the course on the ancient church. In every class I have ever taught, I have regarded it as my chief task to introduce students to the great primary texts on the subject at hand; in this course, I made sure that they became acquainted with John Chrysostom’s On the Priesthood. Of course, any book with the word “priesthood” in the title was not an obvious choice for the Presbyterians who generally populated my classes, but it was nonetheless a text that proved popular and, if emails from graduates are any basis for judgment, useful to those who went on to ordained ministry.
Orthodox and Catholics may be surprised by that. Chrysostom’s conception of the ministry is, after all, highly sacramental, with baptism and the eucharist at its heart. But it is not just the sacraments that are at the heart of Chrysostom’s understanding of ministry. As his nickname indicates, he was an outstanding preacher. On the Priesthood demonstrates that the proclamation of the Word was a vital part of his conception of the ministry.
His chapter on the ministry of the Word is, perhaps unintentionally, one of the most amusing. In a section on how to handle responses to sermons, he advises preachers to pay no attention to criticism from laypeople as, untrained as they are, they are incompetent to offer such. The sting in the tale, of course, is that the same principle applies to praise. The admirer is no more competent than the critic; and just as criticism should not cause the preacher to be despondent, so praise should not tempt him to pride.
Amusing pearls of wisdom aside, Chrysostom’s greatest lesson for the church today is arguably the importance he ascribes to the preached Word in his account of the priesthood and in his own ministry. In our day, secular indifference to religion is rapidly changing to positive hostility throughout much of the West.
Read More

The one who trusts in the Lord will, like the Psalmist, know the joys of fruitful labor and the delight of sweet rest. They will, Lord willing, know the rich blessing and heritage of an abundance of children, far greater than all other material blessings this earth has to offer. Such are the blessings when the Lord builds the house.

The culture in which we live is diametrically opposed to the idea of the family as set forth in Psalm 127. Here, the Psalmist refers to a household, composed of a father and mother who married early and are blessed by an abundance of children, as a direct and wonderful blessing from God.
It is, in fact, good for Christians to get married and have many children while young. It is an evil sign of modernity that family life is put off so long. Contra the opinions of secularism, children are not a burden but a blessing. Christians ought to desire a household full of offspring. After all, a household full of children is far greater and grander than a life without, no matter how Instagramable it may appear to onlookers. While it is true that, occasionally, God does not permit Christians to have children of their own, it is no less a good thing for young Christians to get married, have children, and strive toward filling a Christian household with godly, covenant children.
Of course, all such things are impossible apart from God. Building a house, like building a church, cannot be blessed if God is not laboring in the work himself. Solomon, whose inscription this Psalm bears, was a man who understood this well. His father, King David, had long desired to build a Temple for God to inhabit in a special way upon the earth. But God did not permit David to build such a House. The right to build went instead to his son, Solomon, and Solomon knew that the Lord’s blessing was essential to building both his own home and palace, and the Temple of the Lord.
Thus, verse 1 begins with the warning that, “Unless the Lord builds the house, those who build it labor in vain. Unless the Lord watches over the city, the watchman stays awake in vain.” While there are two ideas here, they are closely related. Just as it is essential for the Lord to build a house or the laboring is done in vain, so too must the Lord defend and protect a city, or the watchmen watches in vain. In other words, if the Lord does not build the house, it will crumble regardless of the materials used and craftsmanship employed.
Read More
Related Posts: