Thayer Thursday – Whale or big fish??
The first thing that comes to mind when we think of Jonah is the great big fish…you know, the one that swallowed Jonah and vomited him on to dry land.
This is understandable. It’s a miraculous event that shocks us. It’s what we remember, even though it’s not what the story is about.
Now, a great debate has raged in the past as to whether or not this “fish” was a whale. I’m sure some people reasoned that a whale is the largest sea-going creature, so it must be what swallowed Jonah. Others have said that it couldn’t be a whale because it would be impossible for a whale to swallow a human or for a human to survive in a whale’s belly (and many other such objections). So, in a popular response – Christians are quick to point out that the text says that it was a “Great Fish” that swallowed Jonah, not a whale. Thus, they reason, whatever you believe about the anatomy of a whale is unnecessary to believing that whatever type of fish it may have been, it was a large enough sea fairing creature to swallow Jonah whole.
This response is true. The Hebrew text does say that it was a large fish – not a large whale (or Tuna, or Salmon for that matter!). It doesn’t give a species designation.
However, let me suggest that this entire conversation is wrong-headed.
It gets bogged down in the detail of what Jonah was saved by, and misses the essential part that comes right before it – Who saved him?
You see, in the question of what swallowed Jonah there is an underlying assumption we can miss if we’re not careful. This underlying assumption is that supernatural events described in the Bible have to take place within the confines of natural laws. The fish that swallows Jonah has to be a specific kind of fish that can actually do what Jonah said it did, otherwise it didn’t happen.
However, this misses the point of these miraculous events being described.
As we see time and time again throughout the Old and New Testaments, when miracles happened, people recognized that it was God doing them. They recognized that they were not natural (though God could, and has, absolutely used natural events to carry out his supernatural plans[i]). That’s why people called them miracles.
We often have what’s called “chronological snobbery” when looking at miracles in the Bible. It’s easy to assume that people 2,000 years ago (or 2,750 years ago in the case of Jonah) were “intellectually challenged.” It’s often assumed they didn’t understand how things worked and therefore attributed natural events to the working of miracles.
However, we must not forget that they too understood that things like this don’t usually happen.
People don’t get swallowed by a large fish when they’re drowning.
People don’t rise from the dead.
Axe heads don’t float.
They knew that.
That’s why they called them miracles!
So yes, we are technically correct in responding to people that Jonah says the Lord provided a great fish and not a great whale. However, be careful that you don’t accept the underlying assumption: that it wasn’t really done by the Lord, or that it had to be something that happened by natural means. The question we’re trying to answer is the wrong question to ask.
The question isn’t what kind of a fish it was, the question is did the Lord provide it.
This makes all the difference. If the Lord provided it, it could be whatever He wanted it to be.
This also helps us to recognize that the point of the story isn’t the fish. It’s the Lord’s response to Jonah and His remarkable love for His creation in the face of great evil.
If you accept that there is a God and that He did it, the how becomes a side-note.
Chris Thayer
JM’s sermon from last week on Jonah…
MotR – Rundown (04.14.13) from GSUMC on Vimeo.
Audio available HERE.
[i] For instance, in the parting of the sea in Exodus 14:21 the Lord used a “strong east wind” to drive the waters back.
Categories: Biblical Theology, Blog, Hebrew Bible, Ministry