The Sign of Jonah in Matthew 16: Missio-centric Reading applied to the Arab World by Duane Alexander Miller The Pharisees and Sadducees came up, and testing Jesus, they asked Him to show them a sign from heaven. But He answered and said to them, “When it is evening, you say, ‘It will be fair weather for the sky is red.’ And in the morning, ‘There will be a storm today, for the sky is red and threatening.’ Do you know how to discern the appearance of the sky, but cannot discern the signs of the times? An evil and adulterous generation seeks after a sign; and a sign will not be given it, except the sign of Jonah.” And He left them and went away. Matt. 16:1-4 (NAS)
Jesus’ reference to the sign of Jonah at once captivates our attention because Jonah seems to be a relatively minor type for the Christ, given the more pronounced and frequent allusions to parallels between Jesus and David (a savior-king) and Jesus and Moses (a lawgiver). In this paper we will take a look at the usage of this phrase and try to determine its significance at the story level, how likely it is that these words originated in the mouth of Jesus, and make some other observations.
1. The Text as it Stands: Narrative, Redaction, Rhetorical, and Reader Response Before examining specifically these four verses we must take a look at the preceding material in Matthew as we have it today. We will then comment on the significance of this specific text within the overall framework of Matthew. Our purpose is not to summarize Matthew as a whole, but we should note that the final redaction is probably taking place within the context of a massive influx of Gentile families to the church. For this reason Matthew has what Kingsbury calls a distinct gentile bias
1
St Francis Magazine Nr. 1 Vol. IV (June 2008)
(Kingsbury 151). He also says that the implied reader is a Christian who is being informed of the universal mission of the church (Kingsbury 39). Matthew is also geared specifically towards a Jewish audience that is concerned with the fulfillment of the Hebrews’ prophets (Gundry 162). In sum, there is the intent to explicate Jesus’ messianic ministry as that which was foretold in the Hebrew Scriptures while focusing on the missionary role of the church as it reaches out to gentiles everywhere. So then, let us observe the place of the Sign of Jonah within the larger text as we have it today. Matthew has proved rather difficult to clearly outline: Ryrie (1511) places this section in a series of four attacks on Jesus’ messianic program, following attacks from his own town people (13:53-58), by Herod (followed by miracles; 14:1-36), by the scribes and Pharisees (followed by two miracles; 15:1-39), and finally an attack by the Pharisees and Sadducees (16:1-12). Gundry makes no attempt to concisely group the events and sayings in Matthew. In any case, we must note with Malina (Malina 111) that this section forms an inclusio with 12:38ff which contains the other use of the Sign of Jonah. The earlier section explains specifically that, “just as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the sea monster, so will the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.” This is followed by a condemnation of “this generation” in light of the fact that the gentiles of Nineveh repented at Jonah’s preaching, while “this generation” is not repenting at Jesus’ preaching even though “something greater” (the Kingdom, as implied by the gender of the Greek word) is present with them. This section clearly supports our explanation above of Matthew’s focus on the mission of the church and his desire to include gentiles in it. However, we desire to focus on the other use of the Sign of Jonah. In 15 we find that some Pharisees and scribes challenge Jesus because his disciples break the traditions of the elders by not washing their hands when they eat bread. Jesus blasts them for their hypocrisy in that their traditions permit a person to dishonor his parents in violation of the commandment. This is concluded with a “saying” of Jesus: “It is not what enters into the mouth that defiles a man, but
2
www.stfrancismagazine.info
St Francis Magazine Nr. 1 Vol. IV (June 2008)
what proceeds out of the mouth, this defiles a man” (v. 11). The naiveté of his disciples strikes us when they ask him if he is aware that the Pharisees were offended by his saying; the reader probably knows that Jesus doesn’t care about his reputation among the Pharisees and wonders what the disciples are thinking. Jesus then issues two fairly simple sayings and we are again struck by the obtuseness of Peter when he requests an explanation for “us”, the disciples, implying that the others did not understand his sayings either. Also, Peter incorrectly calls the simple sayings (similar to proverbs, also called apothegms) a parable. This lack of understanding earns the frustration of Jesus, but he explains to them that God is concerned with the heart, and not merely with the external actions of the person (one of the key themes to the Sermon on the Mount). The next development is important: Jesus “withdrew into the district of Tyre and Sidon” (v. 21) where he encounters a gentile woman who correctly identifies him as “Lord, Son of David.” Jesus then responds with a saying regarding his own ministry, that he was sent to Israel. The dialogue which we will not comment on exhaustively is significant though from the narrative and reader-response points of view. Unlike Peter she not only understands Jesus’ sayings, but plays the same game with him. This earns her the granting of the exorcism she requested and the bright praise of Jesus, “your faith is great” (v. 28). This stands in stark contrast with v. 7, “You hypocrites”, and v. 16, “Are you still so lacking in understanding?” For the unbiased reader it is hard not to marvel at this woman who is a gentile who actually achieves genuine communication with Jesus. The Pharisees and Scribes cannot because they value their tradition more than the interior conversion that this Kingdom calls for. His disciples are simply too inane and dumb to understand even his most simple sayings, but this woman has earned high praise from Jesus. The next scene presents us with another feeding, this time of four thousand men with their families. Jesus commands his disciples to feed them but again they lack faith and fail to remember the previous miraculous feeding in 14. This time though we are not privy to Jesus’ words after he asks how many loaves the disciples have. This crowd however is gentile since Matthew specifies that they worship the God of Israel (v. 31). So not only is Jesus not concerned about
3
www.stfrancismagazine.info
St Francis Magazine Nr. 1 Vol. IV (June 2008)
his disciples not washing before eating (v. 2), he will miraculously multiply bread and fish so that his disciples can give that bread to the huge gentile throng. With this in mind, given this specific ordering of sections, the reader wonders if Jesus purposefully left Jewish territory for the sake of insulting the Pharisees who criticized his disciples. The repetition of key words ties the accounts together: “For they do not wash their hands when they eat bread” (v. 2) and, “And they all ate [bread] and were satisfied” (v. 37). We are now prepared to examine the sign of Jonah in Matthew 16. Here we have the Pharisees and the Sadducees come to Jesus, desiring to test him. The last challenge to Jesus’ authority was issued by the Pharisees and scribes, so this change is significant. The informed reader would be aware that the two groups had little in common and rarely cooperated, but here we have them working together against Jesus, signifying that their opposition to Jesus allows them to surmount their considerable doctrinal differences. Right away we are ready for a fight. Indeed, throughout the whole Gospel we find that “religious leaders are malicious, legalistic, slanderous, fearful, deceptive, cunning, unjust, blasphemous, corrupt” (Kingsbury 22). By using the word “test” Matthew is already showing us that whatever the outcome of the encounter they are not sincere in their questioning. We must here pay attention to the precise request of the antagonists: a sign from heaven. The reader is right away disgusted by this because we have just seen Jesus exorcise a demon and feed thousands of people! It is significant to note here that Matthew does not attribute to Jesus’ ministry the working of signs. “God, the source of ‘power,’ has empowered his Son Jesus with the Spirit; in consequence of this the miracles Jesus performs are ‘deeds of power’ and not false ‘signs and wonders’” (Kingsbury 69). Henry points out that they did not think that Jesus could provide such a spectacular sign. It must be a sign from heaven. They would have such miracles to prove his commission, as were wrought at the giving of the law upon mount Sinai: thunder, and lightening, and the voice of words, were the sign from heaven they required. Whereas the
4
www.stfrancismagazine.info
St Francis Magazine Nr. 1 Vol. IV (June 2008)
sensible signs and terrible ones were not agreeable to the spiritual and comfortable dispensation of the gospel.
Based on this request Jesus tells them that they are able to use their reason and senses to discern the coming weather, and then employs a rhetorical question, asking if they are not then able to discern the signs of the times. The signs of the times are clear to the reader, that Jesus is the Messiah, fulfilling the prophecies of the OT, ushering in the Kingdom of God for Jews and gentiles everywhere. Then, similar to the section from chapter 12, he calls them “an evil and adulterous generation.” In calling them so, he “labels his opponents as the wicked offspring of adulterous marriages, that is, wicked bastards with no claim to the inherited honor of the offspring of Israel!” (Malina 99) The social connotations of this statement are much direr in that culture than in our own. Normally we would not expect a religious figure to issue such an emotional and vitriolic condemnation, but Jesus does so, followed by the statement that they will only receive the Sign of Jonah. As mentioned above this sign is not to be looked at simply as another miracle because Matthew does not have a high regard for prophetic figures performing signs and wonders. Here we must take a look at the dynamics that Matthew uses in this conversation whereby he guides us, his readers, to a more enlarged scope of meaning for this sign than the one presented in ch. 12. Most noticeable is the fact that this does not contain the explanation of what the Sign of Jonah is. This use of the rhetoric of indeterminacy causes the reader to wonder if perhaps the meaning of the Sign of Jonah has not gained an additional sense in light of the previous material. Also, we must ask, what would Jesus’ opponents have thought of regarding the Sign of Jonah? The real significance of Jonah lies not so much in his being swallowed by a sea monster, but in his reluctance to rejoice and accept the repentance of the gentiles. In view of the events in ch. 15 which focus heavily on gentiles and interior conversion, it seems clear that the significance of the Sign has expanded to encompass in its meaning not only the burial and raising
5
www.stfrancismagazine.info
St Francis Magazine Nr. 1 Vol. IV (June 2008)
of the Son but also the repentance and incorporation of the gentiles in massive numbers into the community that would be left behind by Jesus. These two meanings seem clear, but there are additional possibilities. In reference to Jesus’ opponents, the sign of Jonah could very well be their interior hardening. This would be in keeping with Matthew’s aversion to the contemporary usage of “sign”. Finally, and most speculatively, his later peculiar usage of Peter’s full name, “Simon son of Jonah” (v. 17), might hint to Matthew’s community that the ekklesia founded on Peter’s confession (“on this rock…”) is the final and most complete embodiment of the fulfillment of the Sign of Jonah. The growth and history of that ekklesia encompass all the other senses of the Sign. It is the community whose birth is based on the death and the resurrection of Jesus, it is the community that is welcoming throngs of repentant gentiles, and it is the community that the Pharisees and Sadducees rejected in their hardness of heart and ethnocentricity. Matthew makes it clear that the response or reaction of the opponents is so insignificant that he does not even include it. Rhetorically speaking, he discredits their point of view by not even giving them space. In any case, the reader is left waiting for more information regarding the now open-ended fulfillment of this Sign. The next section in Matthew that is connected to the Sign of Jonah section is regarding the leaven of the Pharisees. The disciples are again naïve and obtuse, having forgotten Jesus’ provision, and showing that they are unable to understand the meaning of his words. By placing these episodes in juxtaposition, Matthew is showing us that we must reject the “leaven” of the Pharisees and Sadducees. And what might this be? In light of what we have seen it must be their insistence that Jesus the Messiah operate in accordance with their religious system, doing what they require of him, and not doing what they do not approve. That is, be must operate within their parameters, within their boundaries.
6
www.stfrancismagazine.info
St Francis Magazine Nr. 1 Vol. IV (June 2008)
2. The World that Produced the Text: Source, Form and Historical Criticism. Harrington says that the source for this passage was Mark 8:11-21 (244, 5), while acknowledging that Matthew’s redaction alters the emphasis of the saying about the leaven. Hare doubts that the Pharisees and Sadducees would ever team together and therefore doubts the historicity of the setting, if not the saying itself (182). Bultmann makes no precise judgment regarding this passage but he does point out two things that are relevant: (1) The antagonists are probably more often than not the people, and not the religious leaders: “it is rather the great mass of the people who must be thought of as the opponent of the Church, as for example in the demand for a sign. […] It is also quite possible that many controversy dialogues originated in debates within the Church.” (Bultmann 53) (2) Matthew “many times fashioned an explanation: at 16:11 for the saying of the yeast; 12:40 for the saying of Jonah.” (Bultmann 326) Based on this skepticism it seems clear that if Bultmann would accept anything at all here it might be that Jesus actually did use some variation of “sign of Jonah.” I suppose that Bultmann would have argued that this could well be a form of apologia on the part of the Church for a lack of miracles in certain places. “The men you are in these times deride // what has been done of good, you find explanations // to satisfy the rational and enlightened mind” (Eliot 149). Bultmann (126) calls the sign of Jonah passage a prophetic/apocalyptic saying (or apothegm). Taylor does not speak directly to this passage as far as form goes, but he does call the parallel in Mark 8 a pronouncement story (Bultmann 78-79). We think there is little debate that this is indeed an apocalyptic saying of Jesus. In characteristically Matthean fashion it calls upon the past as a pattern for a fulfillment related to the eschatology of the Kingdom which is now breaking into the world. Our view is that, whatever may be said of the specific setting, the saying probably does date back to Jesus. It has multiple attestations, two in Matthew, and one in Luke. It is at once Jewish and Christian in character. It matches well the role of Jesus as an eschatological prophet that we mentioned above. Inasmuch as the apothegm was supposedly used for 7
www.stfrancismagazine.info
St Francis Magazine Nr. 1 Vol. IV (June 2008)
sermon illustrations this matches well with our argument that the second Sign of Jonah opens up (at least) a two-fold meaning, one regarding the death and resurrection, and one regarding the Mission of the Church. Finally, regarding the comment on discerning the weather, it is excluded in many manuscripts (Harrington 243). On the other hand, it does accurately describe weather in Palestine. This leads Malina to propose that it could be an original statement (Harrington 111). The appeal to nature for the sake of illustration certainly is common in Jesus’ teachings in Matthew, and the saying is fairly simple and contains the unique phrase “signs of the times,” which is nowhere else found in Scripture. Our opinion is that unless a compelling reason exists to doubt the originality of such a short and characteristic illustration, we need not assume it was a later accretion. Since many mss. do not contain it, it may have been added from another story or series of sayings.
3. The Text in the World Today: Actualization and application in the Arab world We have suggested (at least) a three-fold meaning for the “sign of Jonah” expression in Matthew 16, and now we must ask questions about the application of these insights to ministry in the Arab world today. The Sign of Jonah qua influx of gentiles. Matthew uses this story about the sign of Jonah to teach and encourage his readers, who are experiencing a large influx of Gentiles into their communities, that in spite of the hectic and difficult aspects of the situation it is actually a messianic sign and a fulfillment of prophecy. In other words, Matthew, in his own way, is accomplishing what Paul does through more explicit writing about the mystery of the church that, to everyone’s surprise, is growing rapidly amongst the gentiles. We can draw a rough parallel here with the established churches in MENA: Matthew’s audience has a sense of unique chosenness, they have suffered through empire and slavery, and they have gone from being a great power to being a tribute-state ruled by people who often times neither understand them nor respect them. The religion of their 8
www.stfrancismagazine.info
St Francis Magazine Nr. 1 Vol. IV (June 2008)
rulers is profoundly flawed for it fails to grasp correctly God’s design for the overarching flow of history or its covenantal dynamic. We therefore understand the change of paradigm required when the inclusion of the gentiles (their rulers and oppressors) challenges their very identity as a people. It is easy to see that the description of the first century Jews given above can equally be applied to any number of the churches in MENA: the Copts who are the descendants of the Pharaohs who ruled much of the region, the Armenians whose nation was the first to become officially Christian and was a major sender of missionaries for centuries, and the Assyrians whose fame and power are wellknown to OT scholars, just to list a few. The bifurcation suggested by Matthew is powerful and relevant for these churches today. Will they fulfill the sign of Jonah as did the Pharisees––by emulating Jonah’s hardness of heart at the repentance of Nineveh? Will these churches find in the inclusion of Arab Muslims a cause for hardening of heart and building up walls? Will they adhere to “the leaven of the Pharisees” and despise those who are called to God’s mercy because it threatens their identity? Here is a challenge, in terms of practical ministry and service in the region: to offer the same encouragement and warning that we find in these verses to these churches, that they fulfill the sign of Jonah (inclusion of the gentiles) while not defying its other meaning (the leaven of the Pharisees). It is important to proclaim that the sign of Jonah will be fulfilled, though, one way or the other, and either fulfillment is a sign to our present wicked generation, as it was in Jesus’ day. There is no party that avoids the Sign of Jonah, and there is no third option. We should strive in our proclamation of the Lordship of Christ over the gentiles, Jews, and the church, to be like Peter, son of Jonah, who is blessed and taught by God, not by flesh and blood (v. 17). On another level, that of method in evangelism, we should notice the dynamic between Jesus and the ones demanding the sign. It is evident that the ones demanding the sign were not sincere, so Jesus’ way of handling the situation should be of interest to Christians engaged in witnessing to their faith. The practical point here is that
9
www.stfrancismagazine.info
St Francis Magazine Nr. 1 Vol. IV (June 2008)
Jesus shuts down the conversation but in such a way as to leave questions with the questioners: what is the sign of Jonah? He didn’t answer our question, but he has left me with another question. Jesus has supplanted their question (what sign will you show us?) with another more difficult question: what is the sign of Jonah? Jesus is following his own advice of not casting pearls before swine by wasting his time speaking to a group that has no genuine interest in his Gospel of the Kingdom, but he leaves them with a question that just might bear fruit in the future. This sort of polemical approach has its place in the history of the Christian encounter with Islam, and one can think of claims that produce a similar sense of dislocation: By claiming that the Qur’an is eternal with Allah you become guilty of shirk, for example. Or, You are not a true Muslim for you do not believe in all the Prophets—otherwise you would read their books and obey them, and so on. Examples could easily be multiplied.
4. CONCLUSION In conclusion, the Sign of Jonah is at once clear and mysterious. Skillfully placed in the midst of conflict and wonderful acts of kindness to Gentiles, it calls us to explore the mystery of the resurrection of Christ in relation to the Mission of the Church. The message is particularly appropriate for the churches in the Arab World who are challenged in their identity by the growing number of Muslim converts and seekers and by a rapidly changing world. The sign of Jonah that proves Jesus’ anointing is present with us today, for the Ninevites still repent, and the servants of God still complain about it.
Works Cited Bultmann, Rudolf. 1963. The History of the Synoptic Tradition. Trans. John Marsh. New York and Evanston: Harper and Row. Eliot, T.S. 1991. Collected Poems: 1909-1962, The Centenary Edition. New York: Harcourt Brace & Co. Gundry, Robert H. 1994. A Survey of the New Testament, Third Edition. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House. Hare, Douglas R.A. 1993. Matthew (Interpretation Series). Louisville: John Knox Press. 10
www.stfrancismagazine.info
St Francis Magazine Nr. 1 Vol. IV (June 2008)
Harrington, Daniel J, SJ. 1991. The Gospel of Matthew (Sacra Pagina Series, Vol. 1). Collegeville, Minnesota: The Liturgical Press. Henry, Matthew. 1706. Commentary on the Whole Bible. Internet: bible.crosswalk.com/Commentaries. Kingsbury, Jack Dean. 1988. Matthew as Story, Second Edition. Philadelphia: Fortress Press. Malina, Bruce J. and Richard L. Rohrbaugh. 1992. Social-Science Commentary on the Synoptic Gospels. Minneapolis: Fortress Press. Ryrie, Charles Caldwell. 1995. Ryrie Study Bible, Expanded Edition. Chicago: Moody Press. Taylor, Vincent. 1964. The Formation of the Gospel Tradition. London: Macmillan & Co. LTD.
11
www.stfrancismagazine.info
