1^^ 
 
 h 
 
 '%\M 
 
 Chambers 
 
 ^i 
 
 Magazine of 
 Christian Literature 
 
 3S\60S, 
 
 Jj^^ 
 
tihvaxy of t:he Cheolojical ^t^mmaxy 
 
 PRINCETON • NEW JERSEY 
 
 From the Library of 
 Prof. Benjamin Breckinridge Warfield 
 
 Bequeathed by him to 
 the library of 
 Princeton Theological Seminary 
 
 .fS. C44 
 
THE 
 
 
 ■S^liiKi hi^^'- 
 
 MWariFleld LiWar-^ r 
 
 AGAZINE OF CHRISTIAN LITERATURE. 
 
 Vol. 2. 
 
 AUGUST, 1890. 
 
 No. 5. 
 
 For The Magazine of Christian Literature. 
 
 THE BOOK OF JONAH : IS IT FACT OR FICTION ? 
 
 BY KEY. TALBOT W. 
 
 CHAMBERS, D.D., LL.D., OF THE COLLEGIATE EEFORMED DUTCH 
 CHURCH, ]S"EW YORK CITY. 
 
 The old metlioci of explaining the story 
 of Jonah by a comparison with heathen 
 fables is now out of date. The myth that 
 Perseus rescued Andromeda by slaying the 
 Bea monster to whom she was exposed, and 
 the similar tale that Hercules delivered 
 Hesione, who was confronted with the same 
 danger, by leaping into the jaws of the 
 monster and tearing out its entrails, are ad- 
 mitted now to have no connection with a 
 Hebrew narrative composed long before the 
 earliest date assigned to these classical 
 stories. Indeed, they are so different in 
 tone and texture and ethical purport that 
 only a wild imagination can dream that all 
 three belong to the same category. 
 
 But at the present time the question has 
 taken a new shape. It is no longer between 
 believers and unbelievers, or supernatural- 
 ists and rationalists, or the learned and the 
 ignorant. But devout scholars of high re- 
 pute for attainments and character, who 
 equally recognize the divine authority of the 
 written Word, differ very widely as to the 
 way in which the Book of Jonah is to be 
 regarded. Some accept the common opin- 
 ion of the Church at large that it is strictly 
 historical, and is a faithful narrative of act- 
 ual occurrences. Others affirm that it is 
 an imaginative composition, not intended 
 to be understood literally, but written with 
 a didactic purpose, like the parables of our 
 Lord, or the vision related to King Ahab 
 by Micaiah, the son of Imlah (1 Kings xxii. 
 19-23). Professor Briggs (" Biblical Study," 
 pp. 238-39) does not positively pronounce 
 Jonah to be a fiction, but strenuously in- 
 sists that if it were there would be no loss, 
 tipeaking of this book and Esther he says, 
 *' The model of patriotic devotion, the les- 
 son of the universality of divine providence 
 and grace, would be still as forcible, and 
 the gain would be at least equal to the loss. 
 
 if they were to be regarded as inspired 
 ideals rather than inspired statements of 
 the real. The sign of the Prophet Jonah 
 as a symbol of the resurrection of Jesus 
 Christ is as forcible, if the symbol has an 
 ideal basis, as if it had an historical basis." 
 To the same effect Professor Bruce says 
 ("The Chief End of Revelation,'' p. 221), 
 *' On similar grounds we can regard with 
 equanimity critical discussions respecting 
 the literary character of such a book as 
 that of the Prophet Jonah. Whether it be 
 history, or whether it be parable, that book 
 bears witness to the catholicity of divine 
 grace, and in performing that important ca- 
 nonical function, it fully vindicates its title 
 to a place in the literature of revelation." 
 Still more plain is the language of Professor 
 G. P. Fisher, of Yale University, in his ad- 
 mirable article in the Century for January 
 last, on the nature and method of Revela- 
 tion. After mentioning the hatred of pious 
 Israelites toward the abominations of pagan- 
 ism, which awakened a desire for the divine 
 vengeance to fall upon heathen worshippers, 
 he proceeds (pp. 4G3-G4), " An impressive 
 rebvike of this unmerciful sentiment, and 
 what is really a distinct advance in the in- 
 culcation of an opposite feeling is found in 
 the Book of Jonah. There are reasons 
 which have availed to satisfy critics as 
 learned and impartial as Bleek, who are in- 
 fluenced by no prejudice against miracles as 
 such, that this remarkable book was origi- 
 nally meant to be an apologue — an imaginary 
 story, linked to the name of an historical 
 person, a prophet of an earlier date, and was 
 composed in order to inculcate the lesson 
 with which the narrative concludes. This 
 was the opinion also of the late Dr. T. D. 
 Woolsey. One thing brought out by the 
 experience of Jonah is that, so great is 
 God's mercy that even an explicit threat of 
 
258 
 
 MAGAZIXE OF CHRISTIAN LITERATURE. 
 
 [August, 
 
 dire calamities may be kft unfulfilled in 
 case there intervene repentance on the part 
 of those against whom it ■\vas directed. 
 The prophet who was exasperated at the 
 sparing of the Ninevitcs was taught how 
 narrow and cruel liis ideas were, by the sym- 
 bol of the gourd ' which came up in a night 
 and perished in a night.' He was incensed 
 on account of the Avithering of the gourd 
 which had shielded his head from the sun. 
 The Lord referred to Jonah's having had 
 jiity on the gourd, and said : ' And should 
 not I spare Nineveh, that great city, Avherein 
 are more than sixscore thousand persons 
 that cannot discern between their right 
 hand and their left hand ; and also much 
 cattle ": ' This humane utterance, in which 
 compassion is expressed even for the dumb 
 brutes, is memorable for being one of the 
 most important landmarks in Scripture, 
 since it marks a widened view of God's love 
 to the heathen. To illustrate trhis truth 
 the narrative was written, and toward it as 
 onward to a goal it steadily moves.'' * 
 
 The same ground is taken by Br. Charles 
 H. IL "Wriglit, author of several valuable 
 cxegetical works, in a volume of " Biblical 
 Essays," issued in 18SG. His view is that 
 the book is an allegory, which he supports 
 by a reference to the fourth chapter of Gala- 
 tians in which the Apostle Paul cites the 
 account given in Genesis of Abraham's two 
 sons, one by the handmaid and one by the 
 free- woman, and then adds "which things 
 contain an allegory." But the allegory 
 here instead of excluding presupposes the 
 historical sense. Dr. Wright holds that 
 the book is an allegorical description of 
 Israel's past and a prophecy of Israel's fu- 
 ture, lie explains the meaning of the 
 great fish by such phrases as Isaiah's 
 (xxvii. 1) " He shall slay the sea-monster 
 which is in the sea," i.e., the world-power 
 opposed to God and His people, and Jere- 
 miah's (li. 34) ''The King of Babylon 
 liath devoured me ... he hath swallowed 
 me up like the sea-monster, he luith filled 
 his maw with my delicates," and still further 
 the Avords of Jehovah (li. 44) " I will do 
 judgment upon Bel in Babylon, and I will 
 bring forth out of his mouth that which he 
 
 * One's confidence in Professor Fisher'e critical acumen is 
 shaken by hia remark (p. 402) on the supposed fact that the 
 less instructed Hebrews imagined that there waa Bome sort of a 
 territorial limit to the jurisdiction of the Ciod whom they wor- 
 shipped. " An indii<tinct idea of this kind is at least a natural 
 explanation of the attempted flit^hl of the Prophet Jonah to 
 Tarshish which lay on the western border of tlie Mediterra- 
 nean." We believe that all modern critics arc agreed that the 
 phrase (i. 3) " lo flc* from the presence of tlie Lord" does not 
 mean at all that the prophet hoped to escape Jehovah's omnis- 
 cient eye, but that he fled from beint; in the presence of the 
 Lord as His servant and minister. It was a formal renuncia- 
 tion of his office Weak as Jonah was, he could not possibly 
 have ret;iirde<l " the God of heaven, which hath made the sea 
 and the dry land " (i. 9) as a local deity. 
 
 hath swallowed up." To these passages is 
 to be added the saying of Hosea (vi. 2), 
 " After two days will He revive us : on the 
 third day He will raise us up, and we shall 
 live before Him." On the basis of these 
 hints Dr. AVright thinks that the story was 
 constructed in order to meet the case of 
 Israel Avhen restored to their own land. 
 They expected that the judgments upon the 
 heathen Avorld foretold in the prophets 
 Avould bo at once executed, and since they 
 were not, they were greatly disappointed. 
 It was not enough that the covenant people 
 were brought back, their enemies and God's 
 needed to be signally overthrown, and since, 
 on the contrary, they were great and flourish- 
 ing, Avhile Israel was weak and in subjec- 
 tion, they became gloomy and depressed. 
 Now the Avriter of the Book of Jonah made 
 his narrative to suit the case. First the 
 huge fish swallows the jirophet Avho repre- 
 sented his people ; his entombment con- 
 tinues three days. Then he is suddenly ex- 
 tricated, alive and Avhole. He proceeds on 
 an errand of mercy to the great heathen 
 capital of which the fish was a symbol, and 
 that errand is successful. Here, then, is 
 exhibited anew and in a very striking form 
 the extent of the divine compassion and the 
 truth that God's denunciations of wrath 
 against any nation are conditioned on the 
 continuance in evil of the nation especially 
 threatened. The ruin of kingdoms an- 
 nounced by any prophet might be averted 
 by their repentance. Jeremiah expressly 
 states this (xviii. 7, 8) " At what instant I 
 shall speak concerning a nation, to pluck up 
 and to destroy it ; if that nation, concern- 
 ing Avhich I have spoken, turn from their 
 evil, I Avill repent of the evil that I thought 
 to do unto them." This great principle is 
 emphasized in Jonah because his unwilling- 
 ness to execute the commission with which 
 he was entrusted was due to the conviction 
 he cherished in his innermost soul that God 
 Avas " gracious and full of compassion, slow 
 to anger, and plenteous in mercy" (Jonah 
 iv. 2). He considered it quite possible that 
 God might repent of the evil He designed 
 to do, and that his message delivered in 
 Nineveh might be the very means of awaken- 
 ing the repentance Avhich would avert the 
 threatened doom. It is not strange, there- 
 fore, that this result when it did occur great- 
 ly surprised him. His prophecy Avas appar- 
 ently a failure, and the heathen enjoyed a 
 Avonderful exhibition of the divine favor. 
 This Avas admirably adapted to correct th*) 
 vicAvs of the exiles who returned from Baby- 
 lon. For though restored they Avere still 
 under the Gentile yoke. Their bodies 
 
1890.] THE BOOK OF JOJ^TAII: IS IT FACT OR FICTION? 
 
 259 
 
 their cattle, and their goods were in the 
 power of their enemies, and they were con- 
 sequently in great distress (Neli. ix. 3G-37). 
 It was quite natural for them to scan eagerly 
 the horizon in order to discover any one who 
 would bring them news of the great overthrow 
 which they had been taught to expect and 
 which they eagerly wished. The allegory 
 also represents one of their expectations and 
 its disappointment. This w^as the hope 
 excited by Haggai's promise to Zerubbabel 
 that followed immediately upon the predic- 
 tion of a great shaking of the heavens and 
 the earth. ' ' In that day, saitli Jehovah of 
 hosts, will I take thee, Zerubbabel, my 
 servant, the son of Shealtiel, saith Jehovah, 
 and will make thee as a signet ; for I 
 have chosen thee" (ii. 23). The Jews ex- 
 pected that their governor would soon be 
 manifested not as a mere Persian viceroy, 
 but as the Anointed of Jehovah ; that the 
 government would be upon His shoulder ; 
 and that they would indeed sit down under 
 His shadow with great delight, and His fruit 
 be sweet to their taste (Cant. ii. 3). But 
 this expectation was not realized. Zerub- 
 babel, although he was a lineal descendant 
 of David and a man of many excellences, 
 soon passed away. Whether he died in ex- 
 ile or in the city of his fathers, we know 
 not, but his viceroyalty was short. The 
 gourd or palmchrist, on which the Jews had 
 fixed their hopes, and which for a time 
 shadowed and sheltered them, was destroyed. 
 It perished, as it were, in a night. The 
 worm did the work of destruction. And 
 after that the house of David sank for cen- 
 turies into utter insignificance. 
 
 Dr. Wright thinks that the reference of 
 our Lord to Jonah can be fully justified 
 even if the ground be taken that the book 
 was an allegory or symbolical prophecy. 
 For Messiah and the people of Israel are so 
 closely connected together that the prophe- 
 cies which relate to the one refer more or 
 less directly to the other. Messiah and 
 Israel are both termed " the servant of 
 Jehovah," the one in the higher, the other 
 in a lower, sense of the phrase (cf. Isa. 
 xlii. 1 and 19). The events which happened 
 to the people of Israel in the infancy of the 
 nation find a counterpart in the history of 
 Israel's king. The world-power sought to 
 destroy both in infancy (Ex. i. 15-22 ; 
 Matt. ii. IG) ; they were both driven into 
 Egypt for temporary deliverance from 
 danger (Gen. xlv. 7-11 ; Matt. ii. 13-15) ; 
 and after a season were called forth out of 
 that land (cf. Hos. xi. 1 with Matt. ii. 
 15). It is hence inferred that a prophetical 
 allegory, depicting the temporary death of 
 
 the nation and its resurrection anew to a 
 national existence, might therefore very 
 properly be referred to as containing a 
 prophecy of the death and resurrection of 
 Israel's Lord and king. 
 
 We have thus endeavored to give a faith- 
 ful outline of Dr. Wright's view, using 
 largely his own words, and it is fair to pre- 
 sume that the w^ork of so learned and de- 
 vout a scholar presents that side of the 
 question as fully and strongly as any of its 
 advocates could desire.* But before con- 
 sidering his theory it may be well to look 
 at the objections he makes to the accept- 
 ance of the book as actual history. One is 
 that if the f ramers of the Canon of the Old 
 Testament had so regarded it, they would 
 scarcely have inserted it in its present posi- 
 tion among the prophetical, instead of with 
 the historical books. It is hard to see the 
 force of this reason. The book does not 
 have the usual character of histories Avhicli 
 are anonymous (Judges, Ruth, Samuel, 
 etc.), but after the regular manner of proph- 
 ecies begins with the customary identifica- 
 tion of the author, " the AVord of the Lord 
 came unto Jonah." And to this is prefixed 
 the word ''And" [in A. V., Now\, thus 
 joining it on to the other prophetic writings, 
 in the midst of which it is found. It re- 
 cords the experience of a prophet in the 
 discharge of his official duty, and as such 
 Avas surely entitled to the place it occupies, 
 whether interpreted literally or symboli- 
 cally. So far as we can judge from the 
 usual methods of those who compiled the 
 Canon they had no option but to 2)ut it 
 where we find it. 
 
 Again, it is said that "if the incidents 
 mentioned in the book were historical, it is 
 more than strange that no allusion is made 
 to any one of them in the Books of the 
 Kings and the Chronicles." The argument 
 e silentio is always a precarious one, because 
 we know not all the circumstances of the 
 case. Dr. Wright says that no prophet 
 was ever despatched on a grander or more 
 important mission than Jonah, and the out- 
 come, if the narrative be regarded as his- 
 tory, was a wonderful success. When com- 
 pared with the result of Jonah's preaching, 
 Elijah's controversy with Israel on Mount 
 Carmel sinks i" / utter insifirnificance. 
 
 ♦ I have not quoted Dr. Wright's reference to the parable of 
 the Prodigal Son, because that parable does not treat of Jews 
 compared with Gentiles but (as Luke xv. 1, 2 shows) of 
 Pharisees compared with publicans and sinners, and because 
 the whole narrative of the eldest son is mere costume, designed 
 to set off and enhance the ground of the father's compassion, 
 but having no independent signification of its own, and hav- 
 ing no counterpart in actual life either when the exquisite 
 parable was delivered or at any period since, any more than 
 there are now or ever have been " ninety and ume just persons 
 who need no repentance." 
 
2 GO 
 
 MAGAZmE OF CnRISTIAN LITERATURE, 
 
 [August, 
 
 " Why, then, shouhl the latter incident 
 have been recorded iu tlie Second Book cf 
 Kings (chap, xviii.), while the most extraor- 
 dinary fact connected with a prophet is 
 passecl over in silence ?" This question is 
 by no means unanswerable. Elijah's deal- 
 ing at ;Mount Carmcl was a constituent 
 part of the miraculous procedures intended 
 through the agency of him aiul his succes- 
 sor Elisha to "arrest the dreadful apostasy 
 introduced by Ahab. That apostasy was 
 not simply, like previous backslidings, the 
 worship of God by idols, but an absolute 
 dethronement of Jehovah and the putting 
 of Biwl in his place. To overcome this 
 great evil and recover the nation back to its 
 ancient faith there was an unusual display 
 of supernatural power, and it was success- 
 ful. The people swung back to their former 
 moorings, and Baal worship was suppressed. 
 These proceedings were part and parcel of 
 the national history, and they needed to be 
 recorded if that his'tory was to be complete. 
 The experience of Jonah, on the contrary, 
 was an episode, bearing no relation to the 
 ordinary stream of events, an object-lesson 
 on some principles of the divine nature and 
 government, and therefore not requiring to 
 be noticed by the historian or annalist. 
 The author of the Book of Kings (2 Kings 
 xiv. 25) recorded Jonah's prediction of the 
 recovery of the lost provinces of Israel be- 
 cause it indicated the divine hand in the 
 l^rosperous reign of the great Jeroboam II., 
 and he omitted to mention the prophet's 
 expedition to Nineveh because it had no 
 bearing upon the course of things inside 
 the commonwealth of Israel. 
 
 Precisely the same objection may be made 
 to the Book of Ruth. Iler name and his- 
 tory are not mentioned or even alluded to 
 in the Old Testament. Shall we then say 
 that this touching story Avhich Goethe pro- 
 nounced to be " the loveliest thing in the 
 shape of an epic or an idyl which has come 
 down to us" is not a narrative of facts, but 
 simply a pastoral story composed for moral 
 and didactic purposes ? 
 
 Another objection is drawn from the 
 prayer of Jonah recorded in the second 
 chapter of his prophecy. This is said to be 
 a cento of passages taken chiefly from the 
 Psalms, many of which were composed dur- 
 ing the exile (iii. 8 ; xviii. 4, 5, 6 ; xvi. 10 ; 
 XXX. 3 ; xxxi. 6, 22 ; xlii. 7 ; Ixxxviii. 6, 7 ; 
 Ixix. 1, 2, 5 ; cxvi. 17 ; cxix. 55 ; cxx. 1 ; 
 cxlii. 3). 
 
 It must be admitted that the resemblance 
 between Jonah's language and that of the 
 Scriptures referred to is real and not imag- 
 inary, yet he is not a mere copyist. If he 
 
 were, it would make against the allegorical 
 theory, for why could not the genius who 
 conceived and executed such a marvellous 
 composition, showing such a creative imag- 
 ination and such a power of condensation, 
 have expressed the sentiments proper to the 
 occasion in words of his own ? Whereas on 
 the literal interpretation it is reasonable to 
 6U])pose that Jonah's mind being stored with 
 the Ivrics used in public worship, he natu- 
 rally"^ used these consecrated words and 
 phrases in uttering his feelings. When it is 
 said th.at the Psalms used were "sva-itten in 
 view of or at the time of the captivity, one 
 doubtful hyi^othesis is sustained by another 
 equally doubtful. The only compositions 
 of certainly late date that are said to be bor- 
 rowed from are cxvi. 17 and cxx. 1. The 
 former has, 
 
 I will olTer to Thee the sacrifice of thanksgiving. 
 And will call upon the name of the Lokd. 
 
 I will pay my vows unto the Lord, 
 Yea, in the presence of all His people. 
 
 The words of Jonah are (verse 9) 
 
 But I will sacrifice unto Thee with the voice of 
 thanksgiving ; 
 I will pay that which I have vowed. 
 
 But is it necessary to suppose that the terms 
 of such a commonplace statement Avere bor- 
 rowed by the prophet ? The same question 
 may be asked with still more point in re- 
 gard to the opening words of the prayer, 
 
 I called by reason cf mine affliction unto the Lord, 
 And He answered me, 
 
 which are said to have been taken from the 
 second of the Psalms cited above, viz. : 
 
 In my distress I cried unto the Lord, 
 And He answered me. 
 
 Could not such an utterance be made inde- 
 pendently by two writers, v\^ithout either 
 leaning upon the other ? 
 
 It is further said of the prayer that not 
 a single note of repentance is struck from 
 first to last. It contains no lamentation 
 for sin. It is not such a hymn as could 
 have been naturally composed under the 
 circumstances, if those circumstances be re- 
 garded as literal facts. Nor is it such a 
 hymn as one would think that a man res- 
 cued from the stomach of an actual sea- 
 monster would compose as a memorial of 
 his deliverance. In reply it may be said 
 that the objection fails to consider the exact 
 circumstances of the case, and the purport 
 of the composition. Certainly the terms 
 and phrases employed are well adapted to 
 set forth after the Hebrew fashion the con- 
 ceptions of a man drowned ioi the open sea. 
 
1890.] THE BOOK OF JONAH: IS IT FACT OR FICTION? 
 
 261 
 
 It is his rescue from this hopeless condition 
 that he celebrates, and not from the im- 
 prisonment in the fish's belly, for the latter 
 was a token of favor and the means of his 
 preservation. What he dwells on is that he 
 had sunk down to the roots of the moun- 
 tains, his liead wrapped in the seaweed and 
 the solid bars of the earth around him for- 
 ever, and yet Jehovah, his God, had de- 
 livered him from the desperate entangle- 
 ment. This absorbs his mind. There is no 
 confession of sin, but there is no assertion of 
 righteousness (as in Ps. xviii. 20-24 and else- 
 where) ; there are no words of repentance, 
 but is not this implied in his calling upon 
 Jehovah, and his turning again, though cut 
 oif and cast out, toward God's holy temple ? 
 And is it anything marvellous if the con- 
 sciousness of forgiveness assured by his rescue 
 so filled his mind with the sense of gratitude 
 that this alone was the burden of his utter- 
 ance unto the Lord ? Besides, the argument 
 may be turned against its proposers, and wo 
 may ask, if this narrative were an apologue 
 composed by some sacred scholar in his re- 
 tirement, would he not have been careful to 
 insert a proper expression of the prophet's 
 sin .'* The omission of such an utterance, 
 therefore, makes for the historical character 
 of the book. At the same time it is note- 
 worthy that while Jonah's sin is clearly set 
 forth no remarks are made upon the sub- 
 ject. Even at the close of the proceeding, 
 when the prophet displayed his miserable pet- 
 ulance so strikingly, all the reproof uttered 
 is simply a question, '' Doest thou well to be 
 angry ?" The design was to use iiim and 
 his narrow-minded bigotry as a foil in order 
 to set forth the wondrous compassion of the 
 Most High more effectively. Hence the 
 absence of penitential confessions in Jonah's 
 prayer is no argument against the real oc- 
 currence of the strange rescue tliat called 
 forth his gratitude and praise. 
 
 Again, it is said that, considering the 
 size and importance of Nineveh and the 
 minute and well developed system of idol- 
 atry that prevailed there, it is incredible 
 that such a change should so suddenly have 
 been produced by the outcry of a single 
 man, and no record of it made in the 
 monuments that remain. The 'answer is 
 that extensive and thorough as is our ac- 
 quaintance with the history and literature 
 of ancient Egypt, there has yet to be found 
 any trace of the ten plagues inflicted through 
 Moses or of the catastrophe at the Red Sea. 
 The lacuna in the Nile Valley explains the 
 lacuna on the Tigris. Besides, it is not 
 said that the Ninevites were spiritually con- 
 verted, or that they dethroned their idols. 
 
 or that they worshipped the Jehovah of the 
 Hebrews. All these things may have taken 
 place, but they are not necessarily involved 
 in the view that the narrative is historical. 
 All that the book says is that the people 
 one and all repented, turned from their evil 
 ways, especially " the violence that was in 
 their hands," and instituted a universal fast 
 accompanied with a fervent cry unto God, 
 i.e., the God whose announcement had 
 struck them with terror. It was more an 
 ethical than a religious movement. Now 
 there is on record the case of an individual 
 which for ought we know may present ex- 
 actly what occurred at Nineveh. Elijah 
 was sent to Ahab with a prediction of 
 dreadful evil upon him because he sold him- 
 self to work evil in the sight of the Lord, 
 whereupon the king rent his clothes and 
 put sackcloth upon his flesh, and fasted, 
 and went softly (1 Kings xxi. 27). There 
 is not much reason to consider this exercise 
 of Ahab a deep-seated and spiritual one 
 such as is described in Ps. xxxii. and li., espe- 
 cially when one remembers his conduct and 
 his death, as described in the next chapter, 
 yet Jehovah was pleased to accept it, and 
 accordingly he said to Elijah, " Seest thou 
 how Ahab humbleth himself before me ? be- 
 cause he humbleth himself before me, I will 
 not bring the evil in his days, but in his 
 son's days will I bring the evil upon his 
 house." What is to hinder us from think- 
 ing that the humiliation and fasting and 
 reformation of the Ninevites procured for 
 them just what Ahab's humiliation pro- 
 cured for him, i.e., not a reversal of the 
 sentence, but a suspension of it, so that it 
 was not inflicted upon him, but upon an- 
 other generation ? This agrees with all the 
 facts in the case. Nineveh was overthrown, 
 and the predictions of Israel's prophets 
 were literally accomplished, but it was more 
 than a century after Jonah's time. The 
 mission of the disobedient prophet was ef- 
 fectual. It accomplished its pur]30se. It 
 spared more than sixscore thousand people 
 for several generations, and exhibited in 
 the most striking manner the mercy and 
 forbearance of the Most High. 
 
 As to the language of the book, it has 
 been claimed that there are words used 
 which distinctly show that it was composed 
 at a late period when the language received 
 a Chaldaizing element. But Dr. Pusey in 
 his commentary has shown that all or nearly 
 all the words specified are Hebrew or from 
 a Hebrew root, and that they are not used 
 elsewhere because there was no occasion to 
 use them, just as Luke, for the same rea- 
 son, in recounting Paul's voyage to Rome, 
 
262 
 
 MAGAZIN^E OF CHRISTIAK LITERATURE. 
 
 [August, 
 
 employs a number of words not to be found 
 in any other part of the New Testament. 
 One peculiar word (faani) rendered " de- 
 cree," which is not Hebrew but Aramaic, 
 was doubtless the very term used in Nin- 
 eveh to designate the ordinance of the king 
 and nobles. 
 
 The notion that the book is a fiction 
 seems to us not consonant with the ideas 
 we are accustomed to cherish concerning 
 divine revelation. As the late Dr. J. A. 
 Alexander stated it, " The necessity of fic- 
 tion to illustrate moral truth arises not 
 from the deficiency of real facts adapted to 
 the purpose, but from the writer's limited 
 acquaintance with them, and his conse- 
 quent incapacity to frame the necessary 
 combinations without calling in the aid of 
 his imagination. But no such necessity can 
 exist in the case of an inspired, much less 
 of an omniscient teacher. To resort to fic- 
 tion, therefore, when real life affords in 
 such abundance the required analogies, 
 would be a gratuitous preference, if not of 
 the false to the true, at least of the imag- 
 inary to the real which seems unworthy of 
 our Lord, or which, to say the least, we 
 have no room to assume without necessity" 
 (Com. on Mark, p. 8G). He thinks there- 
 fore that all our Saviour's parables are 
 founded on fact, if not entirely composed 
 of real incidents. But whether this be so 
 or not, they are set forth as simply illustra- 
 tions of moral or religious truth derived 
 from the analogy of human experience. 
 They do not pretend to be anything more 
 than figurative statements or prolonged 
 metaphors, and can in no case deceive.* 
 All hearers or readers at once penetrate be- 
 neath the surface, and see what is really 
 meant. Take, for example, the parable of 
 Dives and Lazarus. The rich man is repre- 
 sented as asking for water to cool his tongue, 
 yet at that very time his body, as the para- 
 ble says, was lying in the grave, and hence 
 every one sees that these words are only a 
 representation of mental anguish. The 
 same is true of all the so-called apologues in 
 the Old Testament. They bear their meta- 
 phorical meaning on their face. And this 
 seems to have been the rule, and one in 
 marked contrast with the customs of the 
 Orientals, whose teachings abounded in 
 fables, apologues, and allegories. Thus 
 the extremely fine story of the way in which 
 Abraham came to escape the idolatries of 
 
 * Are any words strong enough to express the difference be- 
 tween a transparent fiction like that of the parable of the 
 Sower which every hearer detects at once as having a concealed 
 meaning, and a narrative which has so much the appearance 
 of actual history that forages and generations it neve- enters 
 the. mind of a reader that it is anything else ? 
 
 the primeval world, which is' referred to by 
 Josephus and Philo, and given at length in 
 the Talmud and the Koran, was doubtless 
 extant when our Canon was formed if not 
 long before, yet it was not inserted in the 
 sacred text, simply because it was not 
 true. Abraham might have said this, but 
 there is no evidence that he did say it. 
 Yet if it had been reproduced, it would 
 have impressed the reader as the narrative 
 of a fact. * 
 
 And just here is the great objection to 
 the view which regards Jonah as an ideal 
 composition. Not a hint of anything of 
 the kind is anywhere given in the prophecy. 
 From first to last the book runs on like the 
 narrative of a series of actual occurrences. 
 Indeed, so plain and palpable is this that 
 one is tempted to think that if it had not 
 been for the abnormal entombment of the 
 j)rophet in the belly of the fish, no one 
 would ever have dreamed of taking it as an 
 allegory. This seems to have staggered the 
 faith of men, yet without reason. For to 
 one who believes in God nothing in the 
 shape of a miracle is incredible. One sign 
 difliers from another in its form and accom- 
 paniments, but substantially all stand upon 
 the same footing, and are alike manifesta- 
 tions of Him to whom all things are possi- 
 ble. " There can be no scale of the miracu- 
 lous. To Infinite Power it is no easier to 
 pick up a pin than to stop all the planets in 
 their courses for a time and then send them 
 on again" (Eeade). Nor is it for us to de- 
 termine when, where, and how the miracu- 
 lous shall be put forth. And, further, if the 
 fish's swallowing Jonah is objectionable as 
 a fact, why is it not equally so as an ideal 
 narrative? If it shocks common sense in 
 one case, why not in the other ? 
 
 Again, the Book of Jonah, while of course 
 it has, and must have, a moral aim, bears 
 throughout the appearance of an historical 
 narrative and has been so regarded for ages. 
 It is thus referred to in Tobit xiv. 4, 8, 15, 
 and by Josephus, Ant. 9, 10 : 2. In the 
 Koran a chapter (the tenth) bears the 
 prophet's name as a title, and in the thirty- 
 seventh chapter there is a distinct recital of 
 his experiences— that he fled, that he was 
 cast overboard and swallowed by a fish, 
 that he was vomited out, and that a gourd 
 was made to grow up over him. There is 
 
 .yl7^^ %^Z^-^ '!.*^"^ Siven in the Koran : When night over- 
 shadowed him he saw a star and said, "This is m? Lord " 
 But when it Bet he said, " I like not those that set." And when 
 he saw the moon rising he said, " This my Lord " But when 
 
 n theThfi'''^ ?"T*;r^' " ^^•'"'y " my Lord direft me not 
 ,VJif K^^* ^7J ^ ^^''J". ^"^ 8« one of those that err." And 
 when he saw tbe sun rising he said. " This is my Lord This^ 
 greater than the star or the moon." But when the sun went 
 down he said, "O my people, I am clear of these thinirrf 
 turu my face to Him who hath made the heaven aSl the Sh " 
 
1890.] 
 
 THE BOOK OF JONAH: IS IT FACT OR FICTION'? 
 
 263 
 
 also in the twenty-first chapter distinct 
 mention of him as the dweller in the fish 
 and of his ]3rayer in the darkness and of 
 God's answer. Now the oracles of Mo- 
 hammed are not quoted as authority, but 
 they may justly be appealed to as witnesses 
 to the prevailing manners and modes of 
 thought among the Orientals, and as evi- 
 dence that an occurrence which to Western 
 tastes would be most unsuitable would ex- 
 actly meet their needs and be in their view 
 every way appropriate. The religious les- 
 son of the narrative is wholly neglected by 
 the Koran, but the miracle as an evidence 
 of God's power and justice is duly empha- 
 sized. And what is there in the story that 
 is justly objectionable to the people of any 
 age or land ? As far back as the Song of 
 Moses (Deut. xxxii. 21) we read 
 
 They have moved me to jealousy with that which 
 
 is not God ; 
 They have provoked me to anger with their vani- 
 
 ties : 
 And I will move them to jealousy with those who 
 
 arc not a people ; 
 I will provoke them to anger with a foolish nation. 
 
 These words are quoted by the Apostle Paul 
 (Rom. X. 19) to prove that Israel would 
 be rejected for their sins and the Gentiles 
 received to favor instead of them ; and they 
 had the same meaning at an older date. 
 When Jonah was commissioned to go to 
 Nineveh, he doubtless remembered these 
 words of the Most High, and inferred that 
 the substitution spoken of was about to 
 take place, in consequence of which repent- 
 ant Nineveh would become the people of 
 God while the children of Abraham would 
 be cast out. And this was insupportable. 
 In any event the covenant people were no 
 longer to be the exclusive recipients of di- 
 vine revelation. Eather than be a party to 
 any such proceeding Jonah would renounce 
 his office and give up his home in Israel. 
 God allows him to carry out liis purpose so 
 far as to embark for a heathen port, and 
 then interposes with a fearful storm so per- 
 sistent and increasing as to suggest super- 
 natural agency. In the end he is cast over- 
 board, but is miraculously preserved in a 
 most wonderful way, whereupon his com- 
 mission is renewed and he executes it with 
 the result which he anticipated from the 
 beginning. Nineveh repents and is spared. 
 The prophet repines and mourns, and is re- 
 buked by symbol and word, in the gourd 
 which sheltered him and in the words of 
 Jehovah, " Should not I have pity on that 
 great city Nineveh ?" Now we may well 
 ask. If Jewish narrowness and bigotry were 
 to be rebuked and God's boundless grace to 
 
 be set forth, how could these things be 
 more effectually accomplished than by such 
 a series of events as are here recorded ? 
 The objections made to the narrative as 
 halting and incomplete are of no account, 
 for all that is necessary for the instruction 
 of the reader is given. What the special 
 sins of Nineveh were, the name of the king 
 then on the throne, the details of the 
 prophet's journey, the subsequent fate of 
 Jonah, are points not at all required to the 
 author's aim. That aim is not simply to 
 add a chapter to Israel's history or record 
 what otherwise might be lost, but to set 
 forth a divine disclosure made in a series of 
 historical acts and words, and bearing upon 
 a feature of God's character most likely at 
 that period to be misconceived or denied. 
 
 But the decisive evidence in regard to 
 Jonah is given by our Lord in words re- 
 corded by two of the evangelists (Matt. xii. 
 38-41 ; xvi. 4 ; Luke xi. 29-32). The 
 people, or rather certain of the scribes and 
 the Pharisees, came to him, seeking a sign 
 from heaven. They wanted some miracu- 
 lous token of his divine mission, such as 
 when Moses gave manna from the skies, or 
 when Joshvia made the sun and moon stand 
 still, or when Elijah brought down fire upon 
 the sacrifice at Carmel. To this request 
 blended of idle curiosity and unbelief Christ 
 refused compliance, and said that the only 
 sign of this sort that would be given to the 
 evil generation was that of the Prophet 
 Jonah. " For as Jonah was a sign to the 
 Ninevites, so shall also the Son of man be 
 to this generation" (Luke). The words re- 
 corded by Matthew show how Jonah was a 
 sign to the Ninevites, viz., his marvellous 
 experience when swallowed by the fish, 
 '*' For as Jonah was three days and three 
 nights in the whale's belly, so shall the Son 
 of man be three days and three nights in 
 the heart of the earth." {Three days and 
 three nights are to be computed in the 
 Jewish manner, which applies that formula 
 to one whole day with any part however 
 small of two others.) The sign to be given 
 is that of his own burial and resurrection, 
 which Christ's connects in an enigmatical 
 manner with a well-known incident of Old 
 Testament history. The historical verity 
 of that incident is thus guaranteed by the 
 Saviour's words — words which are not to be 
 explained away by saying as Dr. Hort does 
 (App. p. 282), " It is difficult to believe 
 that all the words as they stand have apos- 
 tolic authority," or as does Professor Toy 
 (" Quotations," p. 28) that they are due 
 to " the oral tradition ;" for the textual 
 authority for them is complete. Our Lord 
 
264 
 
 MAGAZINE OF CHRISTIAX LITERATURE. 
 
 [August, 
 
 then says that Jonah's miraculous deliver- 
 ance from the belly of the fish "vvas a sign to 
 the men of Nineveh, i.e., a miglity deed 
 •which confirmed to them the authority of 
 the ])rophet and influenced tlieir reception 
 of liis message, and similar Avas the inten- 
 tion and in many cases the result of his own 
 deliverance from tlie tomb. But if the Old 
 Testament story is a myth or an allegory, 
 "what are "wo to think of the New Testament 
 narrative thus put on a par v/ith the former ? 
 Surely the same rule must be applied to 
 both. But our Lord "went further. He 
 drcAv a parallel not only between Jonah and 
 Himself, but also between Jonah's hearers 
 and His own, saying. " The men of Nineveh 
 shall stand up in the judgment witli this 
 generation, and shall condemn it ; for they 
 repented at the preaching of Jonah, and 
 behold a greater than Jonali is hero." The 
 force of this solemn assertion lies in its lit- 
 eral verity. If there was no preaching of 
 Jonah and no repenting of the Nincvites, 
 then it is impossible to see any weight in 
 our Lord's comparison. 
 
 It has been said that " the marks of a 
 story are as patent in the Book of Jonah as 
 in any one of the Thousand and One 
 Nights." It is very true that the literary 
 skill shown in the narrative is surjirising. 
 Charles Rcade, himself certainly no mean 
 judge, has said (" Bible Characters," p. 76), 
 that "It is the most beautiful story ever 
 written in so small a compass. In writing 
 it is condensation that declares the master, 
 verbosity and garrulity have their day, but 
 only hot-pressed narratives live forever. 
 The book is in forty-eight verses or one 
 thousand three hundred and twenty-eight 
 English Avords. That number does not 
 carry the reader far even in such close mod- 
 els as ' Robinson Crusoe,' the ' Vicar of 
 AVakefield,' ' Candidc' ' Rassclas,' yet in 
 Jonah it gives a wealth of incident, and all 
 the dialogue needed to carry on the grand 
 and varied action. You have also charac- 
 ter, not stationary, but growing just as 
 Jonah's grew, and a plot that woiild bear 
 volumes yet Avorkcd out without haste or 
 crudity and with the jicrfect proportion of 
 dialogue and narrative." If this be so, it 
 can be explained in no other way than that 
 in which wo account for the simple and un- 
 studied yet lucid and complete and masterly 
 narrative contained in the synoptical Gos- 
 pels. The writers told nothing but tlie 
 truth, but a divine hand directed them 
 what to say and how to say it. And so 
 with Jonah, or whoever made the record 
 that bears his name. The so-called resem- 
 blance to an Arabian tale is onlv on the sur- 
 
 face. All those tales are of the earth, and 
 earthy, devoid of any ethical aiui and simply 
 intended to amuse. But this narrative has 
 a lofty moral purpose throughout. Even if 
 one accepts tlie conclusion of Yolck in the 
 Schatf-llerzog Encvclopsedia {suh voce) that 
 the central purport of the book is given m 
 the three positions that the prophet of God 
 must do whatever the Lord commands ; 
 that not even death can frustrate his call- 
 ing ; and that lie must leave the fulfilment 
 of his message to God, there is still that 
 Avhich Avidely separates this narrative from 
 every other'of those to which it has been 
 compared. The interval is as wide as that 
 between the one living and supreme God 
 and the imaginary ge?iii Avhose aid is secured 
 by magical formula. But the contrast be- 
 comes far greater when one considers the 
 real controlling purpose of tlie book and 
 what it contains, viz., the rebuke of national 
 bigotry and hard-heartedness, and the vindi- 
 cation of Jehovah's tender compassion tow- 
 ard His creatures even outside the bounds 
 of the Abrahamic covenant. 
 
 This fact dispels at once and forever the 
 notion that the book is a poetic myth based 
 upon tradition, or a mere expansion of some 
 ancient incident which may or may not 
 have been historical. There Avas nothing 
 in the character or the habits or the tastes 
 of the HebrcAvs at any time during the eight 
 centuries before Christ to suggest or to in- 
 vite any such composition. Everything 
 pointed the other way. The habitual 
 thought of the people Avas that they were 
 the favored and accepted people of God, 
 having the true Avorship and the certain 
 hope of continuance, Avhile all other nations 
 Avere idolatrous, depraved, and sure in the 
 end to bo the victims of the divine Avrath. 
 The intensity and inveteracy of this feeling 
 may bo gathered from the evidences of its 
 survival to the time of Christ and its pass- 
 ing over for a time at least into the Chris- 
 tian Church. Dr. Wright has brought this 
 forth Avith his accustomed lucidity: "The 
 efforts made by our Lord in His lifetime to 
 raise the degraded classes of the Jcavs were 
 not looked upon Avith faA'or by the Pharisees 
 and scribes (Luke xa-. 1, 2). The A'ery dis- 
 ciples of Jesus, Avho were directed by the 
 Master to go into all the world and 'make 
 disciples of all nations, showed a deep-seated 
 and decided reluctance to belicA-e that God 
 Avas no respecter of persons ; but in every 
 nation he that feareth Ilim and Avorketh 
 righteousness, is acceptable to Him (Acts 
 X. 34). The early Christians were amazed 
 Avhen the Holy Spirit was bestoAved upon 
 the Gentiles." Dr. Wright justly remarks 
 
1890.] 
 
 THE BOOK OF JONAH: IS IT FACT OF. FICTIONS 
 
 2G5 
 
 that " There is little reason to be surprised 
 at the jDicture of Jonah sitting over against 
 Nineveh, angry and sullen because God had 
 granted rejoentance and life from the dead 
 to that city after it had been doomed to de- 
 struction, when the disciples of Jesus, in the 
 full enjoyment of a Pentecostal effusion of 
 grace, found it so hard to believe in the 
 loving-kindness of God/' And, in fact, it 
 took a long course of years and many efforts 
 of the great Apostle to emancipate the Jew- 
 ish believers from their prejudices. Their 
 great desire was to bring Gentile Christians 
 under the yoke of the old law. They in- 
 sisted that these disciples should become 
 Jews, and like the servants of Abraham 
 should receive on their persons the sign of 
 circumcision. This led to the first great 
 controversy of the new dispensation, and to 
 settle it the council was called which met at 
 Jerusalem, and after a long discussion came 
 to a conclusion in favor of liberty (Acts 
 XV.). But even this did not settle the ques- 
 tion in practice as it did in theory, for the 
 struggle was renewed again and again. 
 Once even Peter and Barnabas were con- 
 strained by the adverse feeling to dissemble 
 the broad and liberal views they had before 
 held and expressed on this question (Gal. ii. 
 11-14). 'Not indeed was it finally settled 
 and laid to rest until the period when the 
 temple was destroyed, the city overthrown, 
 and the Gentile clement in the Church 
 shown to be a decided majority. And it is 
 fairly argued by Dr. Wright that the atti- 
 tude of the Church on this question under 
 apostolic leading was one great reason why 
 the Jews so largely refused to recognize the 
 claims of Christianity. They could not 
 bear to admit that the Gentiles ought to be 
 admitted to an equal position with them- 
 selves. The two stumbling-blocks in their 
 way were the doctrine of Christ crucified 
 and the equality of the Gentiles, and the 
 latter was as great as the former. When 
 Paul at Jerusalem related in Hebrew the 
 story of his conversion and the vision he 
 had seen of the glory of the Lord Jesus, he 
 was listened to patiently, far more so than 
 was the proto-martyr Stephen when he ad- 
 dressed the council, but when the Apostle 
 proceeded to state that Christ had sent him 
 to the Gentiles, the Jews could abide his 
 speech no longer, but lifting up their voices 
 with one accord, they cried out, " Away 
 with such a fellow from the earth, for it is 
 not fit that he should live" (Acts xxii. 22). 
 Thus did the Jews, the prophets of human- 
 ity, intended by Divine Providence to be 
 the teachers of religion to the world, act 
 when the very mission they had been se- 
 
 lected and appointed to discharge met with 
 its grandest success. Such now being the 
 prevailing habit of mind toward the heathen 
 world, how could there have arisen among 
 them of their own accord any conceptions 
 of a message to the metropolis of the na- 
 tions, designed to lead this great capital to 
 repentance and thus avert the deserved 
 judgment that impended ? What welcome 
 could such a story receive ? What induce- 
 ment Avas there for any one to devise or cir- 
 culate it ? 
 
 This is still further confirmed by a refer- 
 once to the prevailing tenor of prophecy in 
 regard to Assyria and its capital Nineveh. 
 In this point of view the material miracle in 
 Jonah's preservation in the belly of the fish 
 is far outstripped by the moral miracle 
 shown in tlie mere fact of the prophet's mis- 
 sion to Nineveh. That stands alone in the 
 whole history of the covenant people. 
 Nothing like it occurred from the days of 
 Samuel to those of Malachi. The great 
 empire whose seat was on the Tigris is often 
 mentioned in Scripture, but always in its 
 relation to the covenant people, either as 
 an oppressing foe which is one day to be de- 
 stroyed, as in the vivid j)ictures of Nahum 
 setting forth the assault, the siege, the cap- 
 ture, the overthrow, the final and remedi- 
 less ruin, or in Zephaniah's mention of the 
 day of Jehovah's anger, the dies irm, when 
 He will make Nineveh a barren waste where 
 wild animals roam and the pelican and the 
 porcupine lodge amid the fallen columns, or 
 as an alien who is one day to be converted 
 into a friend, as in Isaiah's memorable ut- 
 terance (xix. 24, 25), " In that day shall 
 Israel be the third with Egypt and with 
 Assyria, a blessing in the midst of the earth 
 for that the Lord of hosts hath blessed 
 them, saying. Blessed be Egypt My people, 
 and Assyria the work of My hands, and 
 Israel Mine inheritance." In marked con- 
 trast to these and all similar utterances is 
 the Book of Jonah, which makes no refei'- 
 ence whatever to any antagonism between 
 Israel and Assyria, and does not point at all 
 to the distant fviture, but deals only with 
 the present. The prophet is summoned to 
 bear a divine message to Nineveh, not be- 
 cause of past injuries to Israel or because 
 such are apprehended in the future, but 
 simply because of its wickedness which is 
 such as to attract the attention of the Most 
 High ; and Jonah is bidden to announce its 
 overthrow within a limited period. The 
 only reason for such a warning beforehand 
 was that an opportunity of repentance 
 might be afforded. This Jonah under- 
 stood at once and hence his refusal to act. 
 
/ 
 
 2C6 
 
 MAGAZIXE OF CHRISTIAN LITERATURE. 
 
 [August 
 
 It was unprecedented tlmt tlie heathen 
 should be dealt witli in tliis way, and he 
 was not disposed to be an agent in the 
 work. Tliis luxs usually been regarded as a 
 personal defect, due to some unusual nar- 
 rowness of disjwsition. But this niav well 
 be doubted. Probably any other prophet 
 would luive done the same. To admit indi- 
 vidual Ninevitcs or even the whole city to 
 the privileges of Judaism upon condition of 
 their adopting circumcision and the cere- 
 monial law would have been notliing strange, 
 but to show mercy to the heathen as heathen, 
 and simply upon the condition of repent-* 
 ance was a new departure. The case of the 
 widow of Zarephath (1 Kings xvii. 10) is 
 not analogous, for Elijah went to her be- 
 cause his life was not safe anywhere in 
 Israel, and since the Sidonian widow re- 
 ceived him and sheltered him he gained for 
 her a great blessing. Still less is there any 
 similarity in the case of Xaaman. iS'ot only 
 did he apply himself in person for what he 
 needed, but came with money enough for a 
 king's ransom to pay for liis cure if pay 
 were wanted. The circumstances at Nin- 
 eveh are wholly different. No application is 
 made, nothing in the condition of Jonah or 
 the people to whom lie belonged invited 
 any such mission as he effected. The whole 
 movement is original, spontaneous, and free 
 from any ulterior thought. 
 
 A weighty argument against the allegori- 
 cal interpretation of the book has been ad- 
 duced by Dr. 0. M. Mead in his recent vol- 
 ume on '' Supernatural Eevolation,'' which 
 contains in an Appendix a short essay on 
 the subject. The substance of his forcible 
 reasoning is here reproduced. One point is 
 that if the book be an allegory the author 
 must have intended it to be so understood, 
 but as it was not so regarded by those for 
 whose benefit it was written, he must bo 
 considered as having made a bad failure. 
 This point becomes still more serious wheii 
 it is claimed to be an inspired ideal, for then 
 the failure goes back of the human author 
 to the Divine Spirit under whose influence 
 he wrote. 
 
 Another point is that the very considera- 
 tions which are urged to prove the book to 
 be unhistoncal equally bear against the as- 
 sumption of its didactic character. We are 
 assured tliat its chief events, the strange 
 conduct of Jonah in his flight from the 
 presence of God, the story of his miraculous 
 preservation through the fish, the improb- 
 ability of so long and toilsome a journey as 
 he IS represented as making, the lack of de- 
 tails in the account of Nineveh and its 
 king, the thorough and universal repent- 
 
 ance, are intrinsically improbable, and tha 
 therefore the story is not historical and wa! 
 not intended to be understood as such. 
 Thus Kueneu says, "■ The whole of this 
 writing — which interpreted historically sc 
 justly gives offence — breathes a spirit oi 
 benevolence and universal humanity which 
 is very attractive" ("Religion of Israel/' 
 II., 244). What else can this mean than 
 that if God had really brought about by His 
 providence such occurrences as are narrated 
 in this book, it would have been justly offen- 
 sive ; but if the occurrences are only imag- 
 ined to have taken place, they convey a 
 most attractive lesson 'i Can anything be 
 more absurd ? The theory of Dr. Wright, 
 the best sustained of all that have been de- 
 vised to escape the natural and rational in- 
 terpretation of the narrative, maintains, as 
 we have seen, that it was composed in order 
 to justify God for not having fulfilled the 
 prophecies against the heathen which are so 
 conspicuous in the writings of the Old 
 Testament seers. Now admitting this to 
 be the case, although no evidence can be 
 adduced for it, the question arises how this 
 end was to be gained ? The answer is that 
 the narrow conceptions concerning God's 
 dealings with the heathen and His purposes 
 to^yard them, which were cherished by the 
 writer's contemporaries, would be corrected 
 by the story of the Prophet Jonah's preach- 
 ing to the Ninevites. This is quite satis- 
 factory, if the narrative was true and related 
 actual occurrences, but not at all if it was 
 fictitious. For in that case the narrow- 
 minded contemporaries might justly reply. 
 How can fiction give evidence in favor of 
 triith.? And especially how can a story 
 which contains extravagant and incredible 
 statements furnish a proper basis for rightly 
 conceiving the character of God ? If the 
 story IS true and what is related did really 
 occur, we do have a most winning and con- 
 vincing Statement of the gracious nature of 
 our covenant God ; but since it is merely a 
 work of the imagination, it leaves the case 
 just where it was before. The terrible pre- 
 dictions as to the utter ruin of the great 
 world-powers still stand, and we await their 
 accomplishment with some disappointment 
 that It is so long delayed ; and to meet the 
 case you put us off with an allegory, you re- 
 late a narrative of inherently improbable, 
 nay impossible events. We decline to ac- 
 cept your ingenious fiction as an offset to 
 certain and acknowledged facts. Thus it is 
 seen that the theory Sf a didactic purpose 
 m the book and the theory that it i a pure 
 and acknowleclged fiction, are mutua l/Se! 
 sti-uctive. Fiction cannot do the work of 
 
1890.] 
 
 THE DIFFICULTIES IN SCRIPTURE. 
 
 267 
 
 truth. Fictitious narratives may and do 
 often powerfully excite the feelings, but 
 they cannot turn doubt into conviction or 
 unbelief into belief. That is quite beyond 
 their province. The illustrious men whose 
 names have come down to us as models of 
 heroism, self-sacrifice, charity, or devotion 
 make a deep impression so long as the rec- 
 ord made of them is deemed trustworthy, 
 but let it bo resolved into a myth or an 
 allegory, and the charm is at an end. 
 It is time to sum up. 
 
 1. The book has every appearance of 
 being a record of facts, not a hint to the 
 contrary being anywhere dropped. 
 
 2. It was evidently so regarded by the 
 compilers of the Old Testament Canon. 
 
 3. The same view prevailed, so far as we 
 have any evidence on the subject, among the 
 Jews in the time of Christ. 
 
 4. The modern opponents of this view 
 differ widely as to the date of the book's 
 composition, some putting it in the eighth 
 century B.C., others in the second, the times 
 of the Maccabees, and the rest at various 
 intermediate periods.* 
 
 5. They differ also as to its character. 
 Some make it an allegory, others a legend 
 or tale, others a myth, intermingled with 
 Grecian or with Babylonian elements, others 
 a moral fable or parable, and others a pro- 
 phetic didactic fiction. 
 
 6. The objections they make to its reality, 
 whether founded upon its place in the Minor 
 Prophets, its style and language, its lack of 
 details, the improbability of the events it 
 records, or the failure of the historical books 
 to mention them, are all without founda- 
 tion. 
 
 7. If the book was intended as an alle- 
 gory, it failed of its purpose, as it was not 
 so regarded by the Jews. 
 
 8. If it was a didactic fiction it could not 
 answer the end proposed, because as a fic- 
 tion it could show only what God might do, 
 not what He would do or was actually doing 
 at the time. 
 
 9. If it was not amiss to feign that God 
 acted as the book represents Him, where is 
 the harm in considering that He really did 
 so act? 
 
 10. If the narrative viewed as fiction is 
 honoring to God and helpful to man, surely 
 it is immeasurably more so if it be consid- 
 ered strictly historical. 
 
 11. The testimony of our Saviour is con- 
 clusive. He referred to Jonah and Nineveh 
 just as He did to Tyre and Sidon, to Sodom 
 and Gomorrah, or to Noah and the deluge, 
 
 * For details on this point and the next, see Lange's " Com- 
 mentary, Minor Prophets, Jonah," pp, 3, 11. 
 
 or even more emphatically ; and by conse- 
 quence all are alike historical. 
 
 12. If the book is a fiction (whether in- 
 spired or uninspired makes no difference), 
 the solemn warning of the Lord Jesus to 
 His contemporaries is utterly pointless. 
 
 I conclude with two sentences from Dr. 
 Donald Fraser's " Synoptical Lectures on 
 the Books of Scripture" (L, 340). "The 
 stones of Nineveh have risen already within 
 our own lifetime to cry out against the men 
 of this generation who were incredulous of 
 Bible history. But there is to be a greater 
 resurrection on those famous Eastern plains. 
 The men of Nineveh shall stand up in the 
 judgment with this generation, and shall 
 condemn it ; because they repented at the 
 preaching of Jonah ; and behold, a greater 
 than Jonah is here." 
 
 For The Magazine op Christian Literature. 
 
 THE DIFFICULTIES IN SCRIPTURE. 
 
 BY BEV. HOVTARD CROSBY, D.D., LL.D., PAS- 
 TOR OF THE FOURTH AVENUE PRESBY- 
 TERIAN CHURCH, NEW YORK CITY. 
 
 The Bible is a composite of apparently 
 sixty-six books (which may be reduced to 
 fifty-seven) written by at least forty differ- 
 ent authors during a period of fifteen hun- 
 dred years. That a work thus constituted 
 should have a substantial unity is a wonder 
 unparalleled in the history of literature. 
 This fact, if carefully considered, would 
 alone prove that a divine influence has 
 marked its production. From the tree of 
 life in the beginning of Genesis to the tree 
 of life in the end of Revelation the viewof 
 God and man is the same, and the holy 
 philosophy taught is one. Man is through- 
 out a sinner. God is the holy and right- 
 eous Judge and the merciful Saviour. 
 Bloody sacrifice is the medium through 
 which man comes to God, by which He 
 maintains His justice and yet justifies the 
 sinner. The Infinite Judge is thus the 
 pitying Father to every one who will have 
 it so. There is no conflict of doctrine any- 
 where in the Bible. 
 
 1. The oppositions that men have alleged 
 between the Old Testament and the New 
 have been the results of superficial thought. 
 Changes have been rung on the antagonism 
 of Law and Gospel, as if the Old Testament 
 prescribed good works as the efficient means 
 of salvation, while the New Testament pre- 
 scribed faith, when the truth is that the 
 Old Testament is full of faith and the Gos- 
 pel, and exhibits God's holy law as a rule of 
 
268 
 
 MAGAZINE OF CHEISTIAX LITERATURE. 
 
 [Augtist, 
 
 life for tlioso who accept Balvatiou by faith 
 in the sacrilice appoiutecl of God. From 
 Abel to Noali ami from Xoali to Abraham 
 tlie bloody sacrilice is the symbol of a sub- 
 stitute bearing man's sin, and faith, not 
 ■work, is the etticient factor in the worship. 
 " By faith Abel offered up." '*' Abraham 
 hdiercd God, and it was accounted to him for 
 righteousness." It is God's mercy, and not 
 man's obedience to law, that saves man, and 
 this is tlio doctrine of the Old Testament as 
 much as of the New. The typical cere- 
 monies of the Old Church were no means of 
 salvation, but types of tlie coming One in 
 whom faith centred. The fact that the 
 Jews perverted these types and made them 
 saving ordinances no more alters the truth 
 of their oliaracter than the same perversion 
 of ordinances in tJie present Church of 
 Christ. The godly soul finds the self-same 
 teaching in Exodus as in Matthew^ in the 
 Tsalms 3 in John. 
 
 2. X. .ct to this difficulty about the two 
 Testaments we may place the doctrinal diffi- 
 culties that men find in the teaching con- 
 cerning the fall of man, the incarnation of 
 the Word, tlie substituted sacrifice, the sal- 
 vation by faith, and the gift of the Holy 
 Spirit. These doctrines are said to be con- 
 trary to the reasonable propositions that 
 God would not let man sin ; that God, who 
 is Spirit, could not be man ; that one suffer- 
 ing for another is unjust and does not meet 
 the end of punishment ; that works have far 
 more merit than faith, and that to confound 
 the Divine Spirit with man's spirit is ab- 
 surd. These difficulties regarding the car- 
 dinal doctrines of Scripture are to be an- 
 swered by the truths that man is sinful, 
 howrever it came about, and that as a sinner 
 it is for him to look not to himself, but to 
 God for salvation and restoration to holi- 
 ness, and that tlie Scripture professes to be 
 God's way of saving sinful man. It will be 
 seen that a free will in man implied the 
 power to sin ; that, if man was made in the 
 image of God, there is nothing incredible in 
 the Son of God becoming man ; that in 
 Him thus becoming man and suffering, 
 man's sin was punished in man, and that 
 the saved are tliose who, by the indwelling 
 of the Divine Spirit, are made one Avith the 
 Son of God who became man. The salva- 
 tion is thus reasonable and in full accord- 
 ance with the holiness and justice of God. 
 But these difticulties of doctrine, though so 
 readily explained, will never be received by 
 the evil heart of man until he bow humbly 
 before God as speaking in His Holy "Word. 
 
 3, After these difficulties come those of a 
 lower nature. First, there is the difficulty 
 
 about miracles. Old and New Testaments 
 both narrate many miracles, and if these 
 are falsehoods the revelation is a cheat. 
 Those who would eliminate the miracles de- 
 stroy the whole authority of the Bible, for 
 they are interwoven with the whole texture 
 of Scripture. You cannot take out these 
 threads without ruining the whole cloth. 
 But miracles, instead of being a difficulty, 
 ought to be a witness to the truth of Scrip- 
 ture. A revelation of God without a mir- 
 acle could have no Aveight in the human 
 mind, for the mere learning about God 
 from'tho Avorks of nature is no revelation in 
 the sense Ave use the word. A revelation 
 demands a miracle. We can conceive of 
 none Avithout. A revelation is extraor- 
 dinary, something outside of the ordinary 
 course of nature. It must have a specific 
 and direct action on the mind, that it may 
 not be mistaken for anything else. And 
 hence it must have the credentials of ex- 
 traordinary events impossible to man, and 
 yet wrought by man as evidence that God 
 chooses him as Ilis mouthpiece. So Moses, 
 the prophets, Christ and the apostles, all 
 Avho furnish us with the Book of God, 
 Avrought miracles in confirmation of their 
 divine calling and message. Hence the 
 words of Peter, " Jesus Christ ajDproved of 
 God among 3^ou by miracles and wonders 
 and > signs." This is the function of mir- 
 acles), and we Avould not bo justified in ac- 
 cepting anything as God's Word unless it 
 Avere ]3roved by miracle. Miracle confirmed 
 the Old Testament dispensation, and only 
 miracle could set it aside and confirm the 
 NcAv in its place. Otherwise we should yet 
 have tlie old ritual as our form of Avorship. 
 _ That miracles are impossible is the asser- 
 tion only of the atheistic mind. If God 
 cannot do Avorks impossible to man, then 
 there is no_ God. The proof of miracles is 
 that of ordinary human testimony. 
 
 4. After the difficulty regarding miracles 
 and the supernatural, which Ave assert to 
 have no basis in reason, we may put the 
 matter of discrepancies in the Scriptures. 
 Of course it would be impossible in a brief 
 paper to catalogue the alleged discrepancies 
 and meet them all. There are useful books 
 in which this has been done more or less 
 completely, as, for example, Haley's "Ex- 
 amination of the Alleged Discrepancies of 
 the Bible," published at Andover in 1881. 
 Many of our best commentaries explain sat- 
 isfactorily the points at issue. All we can 
 do in this article is to call attention to a 
 few general facts regarding these alleged dis- 
 crepancies. In the first place, thousands 
 of mtelligent and learned Christians have 
 

(jaulord : 
 PAWPHin BIMOre 
 
 ;^^; Syrocuse, N. Y. 
 ■ Stockton, Calif. 
 
 
 DATE DUE 
 
 • 
 
 ws^tsSa*^?^^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 iwr 
 
 
 
 v-.jiti.:r 
 
 
 
 
 mmum^ 
 
 
 
 
 -*^^**^" 
 
 
 
 
 !','?]ff^f^ia 
 
 1^ 
 
 
 
 ....'.,. 1 f -: 
 
 ' 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ! 
 
 
 
 
 CAVLORD 
 
 
 
 PBINTEDINO.S.A 
 
Pnnceton Theological Sem.nary-Speer Library^ 
 
 1 1012 00054 9107 
 
 I. **' 
 
 "*. 
 
 <}, 
 
 >. 
 
 iiJwmitiL.. ' ■ ■tA^m