Biblical Theology Bulletin Volume 42 Number 4 Pages 172–86

© The Author(s), 2012. Reprints and Permissions: http://www.sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav

DOI: 10.1177/0146107912461870
http://btb.sagepub.com

Jonah in Mark and Matthew:

Creation, Covenant, Christ, and the Kingdom of God

Joel Edmund Anderson

Abstract

This article analyzes how Jonah is incorporated within the Synoptic Gospels, particularly Mark and Matthew.
In addition to looking at the well-noted “sign of Jonah” passages Matthew and Luke, as well as at the clear allusion
to Jonah found in the Stilling of the Storm episode in all three Synoptic Gospels, we suggest that there is a more
over-arching use of Jonah in Mark and Matthew that runs from the Beelzebub controversy in Mark 3:20–35/Mat-
thew 12:22–32 to the Transfiguration in Mark 9:2–32/Matthew 17:1–23. This larger Jonah-theme within Mark
and Matthew points not only to the explicit connection between Jonah’s three days in the great fish and Jesus’ three
days in the tomb, but also to the larger issues of Jesus’ identity, the nature of the Kingdom, and the mission to the
Gentile world.

Key words: Creation, Covenant, Kingdom of God, Intertextuality

I n two earlier articles in BTB, I looked at how the themes

of covenant and creation were woven together throughout the
he calls it, “inner-biblical exegesis,” and has convincingly
demonstrated how the later writers of the Old Testament
book of Jonah to challenge the post-exilic Jewish community: scrupulously drew from and reinterpreted their inherited au-
as yhwh re-creates his people after the exile and extends thoritative scriptures (i.e. traditum) to speak to their present
his covenant hesed to even Gentiles who repent. Will the day historical circumstances (i.e. traditio) (Fishbane: 1–43;
Jewish people accept this new covenant and live in yhwh’s
new creation, or will they, like Jonah, reject what yhwh was
doing, and cling to the old covenant in a corrupted creation? Joel Edmund Anderson, Ph.D. (University of Pretoria), author
With that established, I wish to consider now the ways in of “Isaiah 36-39: Rethinking the Issues of Priority and Histori-
which Jonah is incorporated within the Synoptic Gospels, cal Reliability,” in HTS Teologiese Studies/Theological Studies
most notably Mark and Matthew. (n. 123), “Jonah’s Peculiar Re-Creation,” in BTB 41:4 (Nov.
Whenever we address the New Testament’s use of the 2011): 179–88; and “YHWH’s Surprising Covenant Hesed in
Old Testament, we must realize that we are essentially try- Jonah,” in BTB 42:1 (Feb. 2012): 3–11, is the Biblical World-
ing to understand the intertextual dialogue that is going on view coordinator at Shoals Christian School, 301 Heathrow
between the New Testament writer and the inherited au- Drive, Florence, Alabama 35633-1559, and an assistant profes-
thoritative texts of the Old Testament. Michael Fishbane sor at the Anglican School of Ministry, 8300 Kanis Road, Little
has done extensive work in the area of intertextuality, or as Rock, Arkansas 72215. E-mail: [email protected].

172

Downloaded from btb.sagepub.com at University of Sydney on May 4, 2015

 B I B L I C A L T H E O LO GY B U L L E T I N • VO LU M E 4 2

408–40). In doing so, they were able to show how God’s ish worldview that believed “Israel’s vocation is not compro-
past authoritative word remained fresh, relevant, and equal- mised but in a sense fulfilled when Gentiles come to join the
ly authoritative for successive generations. I hold that this people of God (like Ruth the ancestress of David), listen to
practice is precisely what we witness in the New Testament’s his wisdom (like the Queen of Sheba), or otherwise share
use of the Old Testament. Given the events surrounding Je- the life of his people” (1992: 267).
sus Christ, his early followers rooted the proclamation of On the other hand, Wright continues, there was the view
the gospel in their inherited authoritative scriptures. Since that the Jews’ “becoming the true Adam had more to do
the New Testament writers were convinced that Jesus was with the destroying of the evil hordes that ranged against
the Messiah, they sought to show how their authoritative the true god and his people than their welcome and bless-
scriptures were fulfilled by him. In doing so, these New Tes- ing” (1992: 267). Consequently, the messianic hope that
tament writers essentially provided us with a record of the permeated Second Temple Judaism was primarily one that
earliest Christian dialogue with the Jewish scriptures. involved a coming Davidic king who would oust the half-Jew
Herod from his throne, purify the Temple from corrupting
Clarifying the Issues foreign pollution, defeat Rome, set up the Kingdom of God,
and rule the nations from his throne in Jerusalem.
Before we delve into the specific examples relating to Jo- Therefore, Jesus’ message about the Kingdom of God,
nah, though, we must first quickly touch upon the central calling for the Jewish people to be the true people of God
issues that divided the early Christian community and the who forgave their enemies and who would be a light to the
surrounding Jewish community of the first century ce. Ever Gentiles, certainly posed a stiff challenge. As Wright says,
since the return from exile, the central issue confronting the “We have seen that Jesus was challenging Israel to be Israel;
Jewish community was that of group identity and how they that is, to be the light of the world, the salt of the earth. He
were to help restore their relationship with yhwh. In addi- was, that is, criticizing his contemporaries for being more
tion to this, there was the related matter of how they were to concerned for victory over the gentile world than for being
relate to the rest of the Gentile world. On one hand, in Ezra yhwh’s healing and salvation to it” (1996: 308–09). Inter-
and Nehemiah we find the postexilic Jewish community at- estingly enough, we find in both the Book of Acts and the
tempting to purge itself of all traces of foreign influence, to epistles of Paul that the major schism that eventually divided
the point of even divorcing their foreign wives and banishing the Church and the Synagogue was not over the issue of
the children that had come from such unions (Ezra 9–10; Christ’s resurrection or the early believers’ claim that he was
Nehemiah 13). On the other hand, though, in the works of the Jewish messiah. Controversial as the early Church in
Isaiah, Zechariah, and Jonah, we find curious passages that Jerusalem may have been, it still was nevertheless considered
either imply or outright proclaim that Gentiles, as Gentiles, part of the Jewish community. The issue that eventually di-
would come to worship yhwh and be accepted within the vided Church and Synagogue was the issue of the full inclu-
people of God (Isaiah 66; Zechariah 14; Jonah 1–4). sion of Gentiles within the people of God (2 Cor 5:17; Gal
That being said, the events of the Intertestamental pe- 6:15). Paul’s words in Galatians 6:15–16 express the hope
riod did not exactly leave the Jews with a good taste in their and mission of the gospel of Christ: “For neither circumci-
mouths in regards to Gentiles. N. T. Wright points out that sion nor uncircumcision is anything; but a new creation is
Second Temple literature is replete with imagery from Gen- everything! As for those who will follow this rule—peace be
esis, where Israel is portrayed as the true humanity, the true upon them, and mercy, and upon the Israel of God.”
Adam, and the restoration was viewed in terms of a new In short, the New Testament is a witness to the fact that
creation. He states, “Divine order will be restored to the cre- the new community of believers in Christ consisted of both
ator’s garden, through a genuine Adam—i.e., Israel—who Jews and Gentiles. They considered themselves to be the true
will renounce idolatry and so, in obedience to the creator, people of God, the true Israel of God, reconstituted within
rule wisely over the creation” (1992: 266). The disputed the new covenant on the basis of faith in Christ. Therefore,
issue, of course, was what exactly that new creation would the external distinctions between Jew and Gentile no longer
look like. On one hand, Wright states, there was the Jew- were the factors that determined whether or not someone

173

Downloaded from btb.sagepub.com at University of Sydney on May 4, 2015

 Anderson, “Jonah in Mark and Matthew” “

was part of the re-created Israel of God. This was not some- •  Matthew 12:40 has Jesus saying, “For just as Jonah
thing that Paul simply made up on his own. He, as well as was in the belly of the sea monster for three days and
the gospel writers (and I would argue, Jesus himself), got three nights, the Son of Man will also be in the heart of
this idea from the authoritative Jewish scriptures themselves: the earth for three days and three nights too,” whereas
namely, Isaiah, Zechariah, and Jonah. If Jonah presented to in Luke 11:30, Jesus focuses on an entirely different
the postexilic community the possibility that Gentiles could scene from Jonah, and says, “For just as Jonah became
become a part of yhwh’s re-created people of God, then a sign for the Ninevites, in the same way, the Son of
the gospel writers presented the reality that Gentiles were Man will be a sign to this generation.”
indeed becoming part of the people of God. The Jewish •  Whereas Matthew 12:41–42 offers up the examples
contemporaries of Jesus and the apostles, much like Jonah of the men of Nineveh and the Queen of the South,
himself, had a decision to make. Luke 11:31–32 reverses the order of these examples.
By the time the Synoptic Gospels were written, the events In both cases, though, Jesus says that both will rise up
of 70 ce were fresh in the minds of the ancient world, and at the Judgment and judge “this generation,” because
three facts were fixed in the minds of the early Christians: he is greater than both Jonah and Solomon, and yet
•  Jesus had been crucified and was resurrected, “this generation” did not repent and did not listen to
•  the Gospel had gone out to the Gentiles, and the wisdom of Jesus.
•  Jerusalem had come under judgment for rejecting Jesus There is a substantial amount of scholarly opinion as to
as the Messiah. the meaning of this passage. George Landes points out that
What we find, therefore, in the Synoptic Gospels’ linking since Luke mentions nothing about the “great fish,” and sim-
the story of Jesus to the story of Jonah is more than what ply says that Jonah himself was a sign to the Ninevites, Luke
scholars like James Limburg have stated, namely, is not holding up the sign of Jonah to be a miraculous event,
namely “the sign of the resurrection,” as Matthew clearly
The linking of the Jonah story with hope for resurrection does. In Luke, Landes argues, it is Jonah’s preaching and
comes from the New Testament. Jonah’s experience of being the Ninevites’ repentance that is the sign (140–42). Thus,
swallowed and then delivered is understood as a preview of the the sign of Jonah in Luke is a clear challenge to the Jews
death and resurrection of Jesus [22]. to repent. By and large, we agree with his assessment, al-
though, as will be argued later, a proper emphasis on the
In addition to the obvious death/resurrection connection, the ac- fact that Jesus’ comments have to do with Gentiles is missing.
ceptance of the Gospel by Gentiles and the rejection, and sub- Eugene Merrill, though, tries to argue for a historical
sequent judgment, of the Gospel by Jews also play a vital part. impetus as to the reason why the Ninevites repented. He
says that it must be because they had gotten the news about
The Sign of Jonah I: Matthew 12:38–42 Jonah’s “survival in and regurgitation from the belly of the
and Luke 11:29–32 great fish. This series of supernatural events made such a
profound impact on the people of Nineveh that they repent-
Perhaps the best-known allusion to the Jonah story in the ed in sackcloth and ashes” (24). Merrill further speculates
Synoptic Gospels is found in the parallel passages of Mat- that the
thew 12:38–42 and Luke 11:29–32. Despite the fact that
these two passages are largely identical, there are a number experience in the fish must have been communicated to the
of minor differences. Assyrian capital and have become to the Ninevites a sign that
•  Whereas Matthew 12:38–39 has the Scribes and Jonah was a divine messenger. Such a sign would be particu-
Pharisees asking for a sign, Luke 11:29 says only that larly convincing to a people whose aetiology taught them that
there were increasing crowds coming to Jesus. Never- their city had been founded by a fish-god. The spectacular and
theless, in both accounts Jesus responds by saying that timely arrival of Jonah among them created a curiosity and
an evil generation asks for a sign, and that the only receptivity to his message that would have been possible in no
sign that will be given is “the sign of Jonah.” other way [29–30].

174

Downloaded from btb.sagepub.com at University of Sydney on May 4, 2015

 B I B L I C A L T H E O LO GY B U L L E T I N • VO LU M E 4 2

Needless to say, Merrill’s suggestion that the reason why Matthew and Luke would view this as speaking, not only to
the Ninevites listened to Jonah, a prophet of yhwh, was that the Gentiles’ acceptance of the Gospel, but also to the even-
they had interpreted his survival in the fish as a sign from the tual rejection of the Gospel by the Jews as a nation, which
fish-god founder of their city that Jonah was a divine mes- eventually resulted in the destruction of the temple in 70 ce
senger, is highly questionable to say the least. as the sign of God’s judgment upon the Jewish nation for its
James Swetnam’s attempt to add two additional points rejection of the Gospel.
to Landes’ argument also falls flat. First, he points to Mark
8:12, claims this is a parallel passage to Matthew 12:39 and The Sign of Jonah II: Mark 8:11–13
Luke 11:29, and argues that the reason why Mark does not and Matthew 16:1–4
mention “the sign of Jonah” is that for him, Jesus’ resurrec-
tion was not a “sign” (126–30). The only problem, as will As mentioned before, James Swetnam wrongly sug-
be discussed shortly, is that Mark 8:11–13 is a parallel pas- gested that Mark 8:11–13 is a parallel passage to Matthew
sage, not to Matthew 12:38–42 and Luke 11:29–32, but 12:38–42 and Luke 11:28–32. Although certainly similar
rather to Matthew 16:1–4. Second, he argues, to these two passages, Mark 8:11–13 actually parallels Mat-
thew 16:1–4. Both passages, found immediately after Jesus’
In Matthew the example involving the preaching of Jonah feeding of the 4,000 in Gentile territory, have only minor
comes first because the destruction of the temple is involved differences.
in the nature of the sign of Jonah in Matthew; in Luke the •  Whereas Mark 8:11 has only the Pharisees ask Jesus
example involving the wisdom of Solomon comes first because for a sign, Matthew 16:1 also includes the Sadducees.
the raising up of the new temple is involved in the nature of the •  Also, Matthew 16:2–3 includes Jesus’ comments re-
sign of Jonah in Luke [78]. garding interpreting the “signs of the times.” These
comments, though, are not found in Mark 8.
To make such an argument tying the temple to the “sign •  In Mark 8:12, Jesus simply says, “no sign will be given
of Jonah,” when nothing in the context of the passage hints to this generation,” whereas in Matthew 16:4, the
that the temple is even in view, and to base it on simply on phrase, “except the sign of Jonah” is included.
the order of examples, is also highly questionable, and ulti- It is ironic that in both passages this request by the Phari-
mately not convincing. sees (and Sadducees) comes immediately after the miracu-
Perhaps we should just see that in both Matthew and lous feeding of the 4,000 in Gentile territory. The implica-
Luke, the sign of Jonah is that of a prophet who tion in both Mark and Matthew is that the Pharisees (and
•  spent three days and nights in the belly of Sheol/the Sadducees) simply would not acknowledge a sign directed
sea monster, who then toward the Gentiles. What concerns us though is, why does
•  preached to the Gentiles, who in turn Matthew add this “sign of Jonah” at this point in Mark’s
•  repented. Gospel as he re-works it into his own? When one looks at
The whole thing is the sign. By the time Matthew and the wider context of Matthew 16, one can find the answer
Luke were written, these three things were already under- a few verses later in Matthew 16:17. At Caesarea Philippi,
stood in relation to Jesus. Jesus, like Jonah, had spent “three when Jesus asks the disciples who they think he is, Peter
days and nights in the heart of the earth.” Jesus, like Jonah, says, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God!” Je-
had had his message go out to the Gentiles. And by 70 ce, sus responds, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah!” This
Gentiles had responded to Jesus’ message, just as the Ninev- comment on the part of Jesus is rather odd, in light of the
ites had responded to Jonah’s message. Anyone who reads fact that in the Gospel of John Jesus refers to Peter as “son
both Matthew 12:38–42 and Luke 11:28–32 in their en- of John” no fewer than four times (John 1:42; 21:15–17).
tirety will clearly see all three things at work. Furthermore, Many scholars have noticed this difficulty and have attempt-
when Jesus states that the Ninevites and the Queen of the ed to account for it.
South would rise up in judgment against Jesus’ generation, In his commentary, Donald Hagner discusses various
there is very little doubt that the original audience of both scholars’ attempts to explain the phrase, “son of Jonah” in

175

Downloaded from btb.sagepub.com at University of Sydney on May 4, 2015

 Anderson, “Jonah in Mark and Matthew” “

Matthew 16:17 (469). He notes the following explanations: the sign of Jonah,” the reader would naturally be reminded
•  R.W. Wall sees in both Peter and Jonah a common of the earlier passage, where Matthew emphasized, not only
reluctance to preach the Gospel to the Gentiles; the ties Jonah had with both Jesus’ future death and resur-
•  Robert Gundry sees “bar Jonah” as a warning of the rection, but also the gospel eventually going out to the Gen-
eventual martyrdom and of the promise of resurrection; tiles. In the following passage at Caesarea Philippi, though,
•  C. Brown suggests that since Jesus equates himself it seems that Peter understands who Jesus really is—the
with Jonah in Matthew 12:38–42, that he is now call- Messiah. With Jesus’ response of “Blessed are you Peter,
ing Peter his own spiritual son; son of Jonah!” Jesus is saying, “Yes Peter! You understand
•  Davies and Allison offer the suggestion that “John” the ‘sign of Jonah!’” The Pharisees did not understand it,
was changed to “Jonah” by Matthew in order to el- but Peter seemingly does. This is cut short, though, when
evate Peter to the status of a prophet. we find Peter rebuking Jesus for speaking about his eventual
Hagner himself proposes that perhaps “Jonah” was inad- suffering and death, and specifically about his being raised
vertently changed in the fourth Gospel to “John.” All these on the third day—a further subtle connection to Jonah. To
suggestions fail to convince because none of them consider this, Jesus responds with, “Get behind me Satan!” When
how “son of Jonah” may fit within the overall context of Mat- all is said and done, we find that Peter does not fully under-
thew. Without considering the context of which it is a part, stand quite yet what “the sign of Jonah” means.
any suggestion is as to the meaning of “son of Jonah” is Mark, though, addresses this same idea of Peter’s lack of
suspect. When one does consider the overall context though, understanding in his passage concerning the twice-healed
one realizes that “son of Jonah” probably contains literary blind man in Mark 8:22–26, immediately preceding Peter’s
connections with, not only 16:1–4, but also 12:38–42. confession in 8:27–9:1. Peter, like the blind man, sees who
Matthew is unique among the gospel writers in both Jesus is, but not yet clearly. Later on in Mark 10:46–52,
instances. Matthew 15:1–16:12 clearly is patterned on another blind man is instantly healed, and begins follow-
Mark 7:1–8:26, yet there are two significant differences. ing Jesus into Jerusalem, where Jesus will suffer, die, and
•  Mark does not mention a “sign of Jonah,” whereas be resurrected. It is then that Peter and the disciples clearly
Matthew does. Instead, Mark includes the account of see what kind of Messiah Jesus is. The point to be made,
the twice-healed blind man in 8:22–26, whereas Mat- though, is that both Matthew and Mark shape their ac-
thew does not. counts differently to emphasize Peter’s lack of understanding
•  although all three Synoptic Gospels include Peter’s concerning Jesus at this point. Mark incorporates the imag-
confession of faith (Matthew 16:13–28; Mark 8:27– ery of blindness, whereas Matthew, building on 12:38–42,
35; Luke 9:18–27) we find that Matthew follows incorporates the “sign of Jonah” once again in order to em-
Mark very closely, yet includes Jesus’ statement about phasize, not only his suffering and resurrection, but also in
“Peter son of Jonah.” this particular instance, Peter’s ignorance of it.
Luke, though, not only takes this scene out of the con-
text of Caesarea Philippi, he also takes out Jesus’ eventual Jesus Stilling the Storm
rebuke of Peter, when Peter protests about the Messiah’s
future suffering. Given this analysis, it appears that Mat- Aside from these two passages in the Synoptic Gospels,
thew must have had an intentional reason to include these another passage to consider is the account of Jesus stilling
two references to Jonah in these two passages. So why did the storm in Mark 4:35–41, Matthew 8:23–27, and Luke
he do this? 8:22–28. Although Joel Marcus discusses these connec-
One must look back to the aforementioned Matthew tions in considerably more detail (333–40), we will simply
12:38–42 and Matthew’s first reference to Jonah, where he note that this passage contains no fewer than six specific
explicitly made the connection between Jonah being in the connections to Jonah 1:
belly of the sea monster for three days and nights with Jesus •  The setting is that of a boat at sea when a windstorm
being in the grave. So here in 16:1–4, when Jesus once again comes upon it (Mark 4:37, Matthew 8:24, Luke 8:23,
tells the Pharisees that they will be given no sign “except for Jonah 1:4). Mark holds an additional connection to

176

Downloaded from btb.sagepub.com at University of Sydney on May 4, 2015

 B I B L I C A L T H E O LO GY B U L L E T I N • VO LU M E 4 2

Jonah, in that both accounts use the word “great” to Christ, in order to show that Jesus is indeed greater than
describe the windstorm. Jonah. Whereas Jonah reveals to the sailors the power of
•  The storm is so “great” (severe) that the boat is in dan- yhwh, Jesus reveals that he himself has the power of yhwh.
ger of being swamped (Mark 4:37; Matt 8:24; Luke A final note must be made concerning this episode of
8:23, Jonah 1:4). It is interesting to note that Matthew Jesus stilling the storm. Despite the fact that it is placed in
uses the adjective “great” to describe the waves that a completely different place in each of the three Synoptic
were beating against the boat, and not the wind. Gospels, this episode immediately precedes the episode con-
•  Both Jesus and Jonah are sleeping on the boat during the cerning the demoniac of the Gerasenes in all three Gospels.
storm (Mark 4:38; Matt 8:24; Luke 8:23; Jonah 1:5). In other words, the episodes of Jesus stilling the storm and
•  Both the disciples who wake up Jesus and the Gentile Jesus casting out the demons from the demoniac of the Ger-
sailors who wake up Jonah exclaim that they are about asenes are joined at the hip. In his article, Sea Monsters in
to perish (Mark 4:38; Matt 8:25; Luke 8:24; Jonah Early Christian Art, Graydon Snyder notes this link, and
1:6). The one key difference, of course, is that whereas expresses the connection between the two passages in this
the Gentile sailors ask Jonah to pray to his God to save way:
them, the disciples appeal directly to Jesus himself to
save them. While in the Stilling story Jesus overcomes the chaos, in the
•  Consequently, in the Synoptic Gospels, Jesus wakes demoniac story the water overcomes that which is unclean (the
up and rebukes the wind, and the sea becomes calm pigs) and that which is chaotic (the demons). In other words,
(Mark 4:39; Matt 8:26; Luke 8:24). In Jonah, though, the Stilling story portrays divine victory in the Combat Myth
it is only after Jonah confesses who he is and that he is while the demoniac story portrays the use of conquered water
running from God, and after he is actually thrown into to benefit oppressed people [16–17].
the sea that God calms the sea (Jonah 1:9–15).
•  The response of both the disciples and the Gentile Marcus echoes this observation when he says, “Who [Je-
sailors, specifically in Mark and Jonah, is that of sus] is, then, is the bringer of a new world, who, like the
amazement and fear (Mark 4:41; Matt 8:27; Luke creator God in Ancient Near Eastern myths and poetic Old
8:25; Jonah 1:16). In Mark, the disciples are “filled Testament texts, defeats a demoniac sea monster and thus
with a great fear,” and in Jonah the sailors feared brings a new order, a cosmos, into being” (340). Not only
yhwh “with a great fear.” One point of difference do both scholars see the connection between this episode
is that in Jonah the sailors fully acknowledge yhwh, and the ancient Combat Myth of the Ancient Near East,
whereas the disciples remain clueless, and ask “What but both also notice that the first salvific event immediately
sort of man is this?” after this passage takes place on Gentile soil. This same pat-
Aside from the added drama in Jonah, (where the sailors tern can be seen in Jonah, where after yhwh delivers Jonah
throw their cargo overboard, interrogate Jonah concerning from the sea, Jonah then ends up playing a part (however
his identity, attempt to row to shore, and finally pray to God reluctantly) in bringing salvation to the Ninevites.
for mercy before throwing Jonah overboard), the only sig-
nificant difference from the story in the Synoptic Gospels is The Jonah Theme Embedded within Mark
the obvious one: Jesus does not get thrown overboard, for,
as the gospel writers tell us, Jesus is not just a prophet. He In addition to the clear references to “the sign of Jonah”
has the very power of God himself, in that he can command in Matthew and Luke, and the obvious allusion to the Jo-
the wind and sea. Therefore, this episode, in both Mat- nah story in the story of Jesus stilling the storm in all three
thew and Luke, foreshadows Matthew 12:38–42 and Luke Synoptic Gospels, there is a more fundamental connection
11:29–32, when Jesus proclaims, “someone greater than Jo- to Jonah found within the narratives of both Mark and
nah is here.” What we see here is that the synoptic gospel Matthew. Simply put, Mark takes the themes of covenant
writers have re-interpreted and re-shaped the traditum of the and re-creation in the book of Jonah and weaves them into
Book of Jonah into their respective traditios concerning Jesus a major section in his Gospel. This section extends from

177

Downloaded from btb.sagepub.com at University of Sydney on May 4, 2015

 Anderson, “Jonah in Mark and Matthew” “

the Beelzebub controversy (Mark 3:20–35), in which there Mark 3:20–35: The Beelzebub Controversy—
is the initial question regarding the nature of the kingdom A Question of Kingdoms
Jesus is ushering in, to the transfiguration (Mark 9:2–32),
in which the disciples see a glimpse of the Kingdom of God The episode that starts the reader on the journey toward
coming in power. Throughout this section, Mark implicitly the Transfiguration of 9:1–32 is the Beelzebub controversy
makes reference to not only the story of Jonah, but also to of 3:20–35. After casting out a demon, Jesus is accused by
Moses and Elijah, both of whom are alluded to in Jonah as certain scribes of using the power of Beelzebub. Thus the
well. The narrative flow in this section of Mark can be seen question posed to the reader essentially becomes, “What is
in the chart at the end of this article. Jesus’ true identity, and what is the nature of his kingdom?”
Matthew, from 12:22–32 to 17:1–23, largely follows Jesus immediately refutes their accusation by asking, “How
Mark’s narrative but diverges from it in four respects. can Satan cast out Satan? If a kingdom is divided against
•  Matthew takes Mark’s accounts of Jesus stilling the itself, that kingdom cannot stand.” Instead, Jesus says that
storm (Mark 4:35–41) and his healing of the demoniac he has come to bind Satan (3:27). Since the dual question
of the Gerasenes (Mark 5:1–20) out of their place in of identity and kingdom has been raised, though, we see the
Mark’s narrative and re-inserts them in a different place answer play itself out in the course of Mark’s narrative lead-
within his own narrative (Matt 8:23–27/8:28–9:1). ing up to the Transfiguration.
•  In the place where Mark had the accounts of the still-
ing of the storm and the healing of the demoniac, Mat- Mark 4:1–34: The Kingdom of God in Parables
thew inserts an account where Jesus simply tells the
The next episode is that of 4:1–34, which contains a
Pharisees that no sign will be given except the sign of
number of parables Jesus gives concerning, not surprisingly,
Jonah (Matthew 12:38–42). After this, he inserts two
the Kingdom of God. His teachings come in parables so that
brief accounts: Jesus telling how an unclean spirit, with
people might see, but not perceive. This allusion to Isaiah
the help of seven other spirits, can re-possess a man
6:9–10 brings up a key question: who will understand the
(12:43–45,and the re-inserted accont of Mark 3:31–
essence of Jesus’ messiahship and kingdom? In other words,
35 regarding Jesus’ mother and brothers (12:46–50).
who will be able to both see and understand?
•  As mentioned earlier, Matthew 16:1–4 expands upon
Mark 8:11–13, and has Jesus declare (again) that “no Mark 4:35–41; 5:1–20: The Stilling of the Storm/
sign will be given except the sign of Jonah.” The Demoniac of the Gerasenes
•  In the account of Peter’s confession, Matthew once
again expands on the Mark 8:29, which simply tells us We now come to the dual-episodes of Jesus stilling the
that Peter declares that Jesus is the Christ, and includes storm and his casting the demons out of the man of the tombs.
a response from Jesus, in which he says, “Blessed are Mark 4:35–41 has already been discussed in detail. All that
you Simon, son of Jonah!” (Matthew 16:17). needs to be said here is that any reader who knew anything
Simply put, Matthew takes the one account in Mark that about the Hebrew Scriptures would immediately pick up on
clearly alludes to Jonah, and re-inserts it into a different part the connections between this episode and Jonah 1. Within
of his own narrative, and then, although largely following this connection liesthe following two significant points that
the narrative of Mark, intentionally inserts three explicit ref- have bearing on Mark as a whole.
erences to Jonah within that narrative. Why does he do this? •  Jesus, unlike Jonah, does not go overboard. He does not
I believe Matthew is taking the implicit allusions to the Jo- “go down into Sheol” at this point. His death and resur-
nah story within Mark, and making them explicit references rection come later, but in Mark 4:35–41, this episode
to Jonah within his own narrative. To demonstrate how this acts on one level as a foreshadowing of these later events.
works, though, we must first analyze the unfolding narra- •  Jesus, unlike Jonah, actually commands the wind and
tive in Mark, beginning with the Beelzebub controversy in the sea. The only one who has that kind of power is
3:20–35 and ending with the Transfiguration in 9:2–32. God himself. And so, with this episode, the reader is

178

Downloaded from btb.sagepub.com at University of Sydney on May 4, 2015

 B I B L I C A L T H E O LO GY B U L L E T I N • VO LU M E 4 2

given an initial clue to Jesus’ divine messianic identity, episode” in 6:47–52, which parallels the previous “sea ep-
as well as a foreshadowing of Jesus’ eventual death isode” of 4:35–41. There, the disciples were afraid, and
and resurrection. asked, “Who is this man?” Now, after this larger section
The next episode is that of Jesus’ confrontation with the that focused on Jesus’ activity to the Jewish people, this new
demoniac of the Gerasenes. Here is a clear refutation of the “sea episode” revisits that question to see if the disciples un-
accusation of the Scribes in the Beelzebub controversy: the derstand yet. In this section there is a curious detail that the
demons acknowledge that Jesus is “Son of the Most High author of Mark relates: that Jesus was “intending to pass by”
God.” What also is significant about this event is that not the disciples. Despite what some might think, the author of
only is the demons’ name is Legion (an allusion to the op- Mark is not telling us that Jesus was trying to outrun the dis-
pressing legions of Rome), but that Jesus’ act of casting the ciples. The phrase “he intended to pass them by” should be
demons into the swine is an act of deliverance in Gentile understood against the Old Testament background of Exo-
territory. Jesus has come, not to destroy Roman legions, but dus 33:19, when yhwh says to Moses, “I will make all my
to destroy the Satanic legions who torment both Jew and goodness pass by before your face” and proceeds to reveal
Gentile alike. And so, with these two episodes: his glory, and I Kings 19:11, when yhwh also passed by Eli-
•  Jesus’ divine messianic identity is revealed in the fact jah and revealed his glory In other words, in Mark 6:47–52,
that he not only has power over the wind and sea, but Jesus was intending to show the disciples his glory. What
over demons as well; and we find, therefore, in these two “sea-episodes” in Mark is
•  Jesus’ messianic kingdom extends deliverance to even a subtle allusion to the story and overall message of Jonah.
Gentiles. With 4:35–41 we have already noticed how the episode is
patterned after Jonah 1. With 5:1–20, we again see a pat-
Mark 5:21–6:46: The Kingdom Among the Jews tern where Jesus, like Jonah, follows his “storm ordeal” with
God’s redemptive activity in Gentile territory. Now here,
The next section of 5:21–6:46, consisting of four epi- in 6:47–52, we find Jesus intending to reveal his glory by
sodes, is focused on Jesus’ activity to his fellow Jews. “passing by” the disciples, which alludes back to both Exo-
•  The dual-episode concerning the hemorrhaging wom- dus 33:19 and I Kings 19:11—the very two episodes which
an of twelve years and the dead twelve year-old girl are alluded to in Jonah.
in 5:21–43. Both are directed toward Jewish people, Unfortunately though, the disciples’ fear and lack of un-
and the essential issue at hand is that of defilement. derstanding (specifically, we are told that they “did not un-
•  The rejection of Jesus in his home town of Nazareth in derstand about the loaves” from the feeding of the 5,000)
6:1–5, showing that his own people reject him. cause Jesus to hold off on his revelation of his glory. After
•  The sending out of the twelve in 6:6–13, in which it is this, there is a short episode (6:53–56) where Jesus goes to
told that rejection should be expected. Gentile territory in Gennesaret and performs more healings.
•  The dual-episode concerning the death of John the Thus in both “storm episodes” we have allusions to Jonah
Baptist at the hands of King Herod in 6:14–29, and (the first is a direct allusion to Jonah, whereas the second
Jesus miraculously feeding the 5,000 fellow Jews in extends the allusion to both Moses and Elijah) followed by
Jewish territory in 6:30–46. activity in Gentile territory.
What we see quite clearly in this larger section of 5:21–
6:46, therefore, is the Kingdom of God being extended to Mark 7:1–8:10: The Kingdom of God
the Jewish people. among the Gentiles

Mark 6:47–52/Mark 6:53–56: Jesus Walks on Water/ The next large section of 7:1–8:10, also consisting of four
Healings in Gennesaret episodes, follows the same pattern of 5:21–6:46. The first
episode of 7:1–23 involves a confrontation with the Phari-
Concluding this larger section in which Jesus’ activity sees involving defiled hands, and ultimately there is a ques-
is focused on the Jewish people we have yet another “sea tion of “What truly defiles?” This episode parallels the epi-

179

Downloaded from btb.sagepub.com at University of Sydney on May 4, 2015

 Anderson, “Jonah in Mark and Matthew” “

sode of 5:21–43, where Jesus, by healing an unclean woman the disciples still do not understand. In 4:35–41, they asked
and reviving a dead girl actually restores both of them to “Who is this man?” In 6:47–52, their fear caused Jesus to
fellowship within the community. Here, though, the issue of not “pass by” and reveal his glory to them. Here, their ig-
defiled hands has much more significance to Jew-Gentile re- norance continues, for “they did not understand about the
lations. The food laws were one of the distinguishing marks loaves.” Not only do they still not understand about Jesus’
that set Jews apart from Gentiles. Therefore when Jesus divine messianic identity, but they still do not understand,
declared all foods clean, he was sweeping away any distinc- either, what the kingdom is all about.
tion between Jew and Gentile. If there is no distinction, then The second episode of 8:22–26, unique to Mark, con-
what is to prevent Gentiles from getting into the kingdom? cerns Jesus healing a blind man. Curiously, it take two tries
As if on cue, Jesus sets off to Gentile territory. In the to get the job done: after the first try, the man sees, but not
second and third episodes (7:24–30 and 7:31–37) Jesus clearly. It is only after the second try that the man can clearly
makes his way to the regions of Tyre and Sidon, where he see. When one considers the entire context of Mark, one sees
casts a demon out of a little girl in Tyre, and heals a deaf that Mark is using this “twice-healed” blind man episode in
and mute man in Sidon. Essentially, Jesus performs miracles conjunction with the later healing of blind Bartimaeus in
in Gentile territory, just as he had done in Jewish territory. Mark 10:46–42, to emphasize the disciples’ own “blind-
In the fourth episode of 8:1–10, Jesus miraculously feeds ness” and lack of understanding of Jesus’ divine messianic
4,000, this time in Gentile territory. The point of 7:1–8:10, identity and kingdom. For our purposes though, this initial
therefore, is simple: Jesus is doing the same things in Gentile episode has implications for the following episode: Peter’s
territory that he had done in Jewish territory, only there is confession of faith and subsequent condemnation at Cae-
no hostility toward him, as when he was in Nazareth, or as sarea Philippi in Mark 8:27–33. It is here that Jesus finally
we saw with Herod. Instead, just as in the story of Jonah, we openly poses the question to the disciples: “Who do people
find Gentiles responding in faith. say I am?” They give the same answers that were initially
brought up by King Herod. When Jesus asks, “Who do you
Mark 8:11–13: “No Sign!” say I am?” Peter says, “You are the Messiah!” It seems that
Peter truly sees and understands. But when Jesus begins to
After Jesus’ activity in Gentile territory, the Pharisees ask talk about future suffering, and specifically about his death
for a sign in 8:11–13. With the Jonah-scenes already con- and then rising again after three days (another clear allusion
cluding the first two sections, and with the obvious lack of to Jonah), Peter rebukes him. Jesus in turn rebukes Peter
understanding the Pharisees show in the face of Jesus’ min- right back, and says, “Get behind me, Satan!” Peter, like
istry to Gentiles, Mark shows that Jesus has had enough. He the “twice-healed” blind man, sees that Jesus is the Messiah,
simply says, “No sign will be given to this generation!” The but he does not yet see clearly.
reason for this should be obvious: the dual-episodes of both
Mark 4:35–41/5:1–20 and Mark 6:47–52/6:53–56, both Mark 9:2–32: The Transfiguration
of which contain clear allusions to Jonah, served as signs
already. Jesus, proving himself greater than Jonah and pos- At the end of the episode at Caesarea Philippi, in 9:1,
sessing the very glory of God, was taking the Kingdom of Jesus tells his disciples, “There are some standing here who
God among both Jews and Gentiles. If the Pharisees could will not taste death until they see that the Kingdom of God
not see that, then no other sign would be given. has come with power.” Not only does this verse tie in with
the initial kingdom question in the Beelzebub controversy,
Mark 8:14–9:1: Do You See the Kingdom Clearly? but it also leads into the climactic event of the entire section
of 3:20–9:1: that of the Transfiguration in Mark 9:2–32,
Mark 8:14–9:1 begins to bring the questions initially laid where Jesus is transfigured and reveals his glory to Peter,
out in the Beelzebub controversy to a climax. In the first James, and John. This revealing of Jesus’ true messianic
episode of 8:14–21, Jesus first warns the disciples about the identity and kingdom not only resolves the initial questions
“yeast of the Pharisees and of Herod.” Not surprisingly, of the Beelzebub controversy, but it also relates to Mark

180

Downloaded from btb.sagepub.com at University of Sydney on May 4, 2015

 B I B L I C A L T H E O LO GY B U L L E T I N • VO LU M E 4 2

6:47–52, when we were told that Jesus was “intending to es within Matthew require us to look more closely at how
pass them by.” It should not surprise us that the disciples see Matthew incorporates Mark’s Jonah theme within his own
Moses and Elijah with Jesus in his glory, for they were the narrative. As with Mark, the narrative flow to this section
two men whom yhwh “passed by” and revealed his glory can also be seen in the chart at the end of the article.
in the Old Testament, and as we have already seen, those
two Old Testament scenes are alluded to in Jonah. As they The Re-insertion of the Stilling Storm/Demoniac
come down the mountain, Jesus commands them not to tell Episode in Matthew 8:23–9:1
anyone what they saw until after he had suffered, been killed,
and had risen from the dead after three days—yet another Why did Matthew move the dual-episode of Jesus Still-
allusion to Jonah. ing the Storm/The Demoniac of the Gerasenes from its
original place in Mark’s narrative to a different place within
Conclusion Regarding the Use of Jonah his own narrative? Admittedly, any argument is ultimately
within Mark 3:20–9:32 conjecture. Nevertheless, we can see how this dual episode
fits into the context of Matthew’s narrative section that runs
Although Mark does not explicitly state any “sign of Jo- from 8:1 (the section following the Sermon on the Mount),
nah,” he subtly builds upon the allusion to the Jonah story in and leads up to 12:21 (the Beelzebub Controversy).
4:35–41 throughout the entire narrative section. The ques- One possible reason why Matthew inserted this dual-epi-
tions set out in the Beelzebub controversy concerning Jesus’ sode where he did is that it forms a connection with the pre-
messianic identity and his kingdom are initially answered in ceding episodes concerning the centurion’s servant (8:5–13),
Mark 4:35–41, and continue to unfold throughout the sec- and Peter’s mother-in-law (8:14–17). The astonishing thing
tion. Furthermore, as I have argued in my earlier articles, about the centurion episode, of course, is that it involves a
the story of Jonah is deeply connected to the passages of Roman centurion, and that Jesus praises this man’s faith so
Genesis 6–8, Exodus 32–34, and I Kings 19. Therefore, much that he claims that “many will come from the east and
when Mark alludes to the story of Jonah, it should not be west and will eat with Abraham and Isaac and Jacob in the
surprising to find, right within those very allusions, other al- Kingdom of Heaven, while the heirs of the Kingdom will be
lusions to the figures of Moses and Elijah. They all are wo- thrown into the outer darkness” (8:11–12). The challenge is
ven together within Mark’s narrative to address the question made quite clear: this Gentile displays the sort of faith Jesus
regarding the nature of the kingdom Jesus is proclaiming. It wants to see; so will Jesus’ fellow Jews display this sort of
is the kingdom of the new covenant and new creation, and faith also? During the next episode, after Jesus heals Peter’s
Jesus’ identity as the Christ is something much more glorious mother-in-law, we are told that Jesus cast out many demons
than even his disciples had expected. and evil spirits that evening (8:16). In these two episodes,
therefore, we see Jesus not only dealing with Gentiles, but
Jonah Made Explicit in Matthew also displaying power over demons.
In the next episode (8:18–22) Jesus offers a very stiff
Matthew clearly saw the implicit Jonah theme that ran challenge to two Jewish men, a scribe and one of his own
through Mark, for he took pains to insert three explicit refer- disciples, who wish to follow him. Much has been written
ences to Jonah within the very material he borrowed from about these incidents in and of themselves, but when read
Mark. Yet, at the same time, Matthew also removed the within the wider context of Matthew’s narrative, a more
dual episode of “Jesus stilling the storm/The demoniac of the fundamental question must be asked: if they want to follow
Gerasenes” from its place within Mark’s narrative, and re- Jesus, where is he going? The answer is found in the dual-
inserted it into an earlier section of Matthew 8:1–12:21. Con- episode of Jesus Stilling the Storm/The Demoniac of the
sequently, not only does the Jonah theme still run, even more Gadarenes (a slight variation of Gerasenes) that Matthew
explicitly, throughout the entire parallel passage in Matthew, has taken from its original place in Mark’s narrative and
but Matthew actually extends the Jonah theme to other parts inserted here in Matthew 8:23–9:1.
within his narrative as well. Nevertheless, these subtle chang- The Jonah allusion in both episodes is evident in Mat-

181

Downloaded from btb.sagepub.com at University of Sydney on May 4, 2015

 Anderson, “Jonah in Mark and Matthew” “

thew, as it is in Mark. In Matthew, though, the demoniac its place, he lengthens Jesus’ speech where he condemns
episode ties in to the previous episodes in Matthew 8. The the Pharisees (Matthew 12:33–37), and then inserts the
fact that Jesus casts demons out of these two men in Gentile episode of 12:38–42, where the Pharisees ask Jesus for a
territory not only serves as a contrast to the two Jewish men sign, only to have Jesus say, “No sign will be given . . . ex-
who wished to follow Jesus only after they attended to their cept the sign of the prophet Jonah.” Jesus’ explicit connec-
personal affairs, but it also serves as a parallel to the previ- tion between Jonah being in the belly of the sea-monster and
ous two episodes concerning the centurion and Jesus casting himself being in the grave, thus points forward in Matthew’s
out demons at Peter’s mother-in-law’s house. The episode of narrative to Jesus’ eventual crucifixion and resurrection. At
Jesus stilling the sea, therefore, complete with its connections the same time, though, his claim that the Ninevites and the
with Jonah, gives Jesus’ mission to the Gentiles scriptural Queen of the South would stand in judgment over “this evil
basis. Jesus, although greater than Jonah, is also going to generation,” not only points forward to the future judgment
the Gentiles, just like Jonah. At the same time, it serves as a day, but also points backward in the narrative, to the dual-
challenge: will his disciples be able to follow him? Not only episodes of 8:23–27 and 8:28–9:1.
will they have to face death itself (like Jonah), but they will After the initial confrontation of the Beelzebub contro-
also have to deal with the fact that God honors the faith of versy, Matthew proceeds along the storyline of Mark. Hav-
Gentiles, and that God casts demons out of Gentiles. ing re-inserted the parables of the Kingdom (13:1–54) after
the “sign of Jonah” reference, Matthew tells of Jesus being
Matthew’s Explicit “Sign of Jonah” References rejected in Nazareth (13:55–58), of Herod’s killing John the
Baptist (14:1–12), of Jesus’ feeding of the 5,000 (14:13–21),
In regard to the overall narrative in Mark that runs from and of his walking on the water (14:22–33). All of this takes
the Beelzebub controversy to the Transfiguration, Matthew place in Jewish territory. The next section, though, focuses
largely follows Mark’s lead. Nevertheless, the re-insertion of on Gentiles. It begins with the “Tradition of the Elders” and
the Stilling of the Storm/Demoniac of the Gerasenes epi- the question of unclean food, an obvious Jew/Gentile issue
sodes into a different section in his own narrative means that (15:1–20). We are then told of Jesus’ ministry in, of all places,
Matthew inevitably needs to fill in the hole he has dug out Tyre and Sidon (15:21–31), the very cities that Jesus said (in
of Mark’s narrative. He does this by inserting three explicit 11:20–30) would “repent in sackcloth and ashes” (the very
references to Jonah. Now, as in Mark, the Beelzebub con- thing Nineveh did when hearing Jonah’s message) if they saw
troversy in Matthew spells out the same issues concerning his deeds of power. Not only is Jesus ministering in Gentile ter-
Jesus’ divine messianic identity, the extent of his power, and ritory, and not only does he, as with the centurion of 8:11–12,
the nature of the Kingdom of God. These issues, though, marvel at the faith of the Canaanite woman (15:28), but it is
have already been hinted at, along with the explicit eye to clear that the people of Tyre and Sidon do in fact respond to
a Gentile mission, in the “Stilling the storm/Demoniac of his deeds of power. This episode, therefore, ties in to a num-
Gadarenes” dual-episodes in Matthew 8:23–9:1. We should ber of previous sections in Matthew’s narrative.
further note that immediately before the Beelzebub contro- •  It acts as a contrast to the rejection of Jesus in Naza-
versy in Matthew, there is the episode of 12:9–21, where reth (13:55–58).
Jesus cures a man with a withered hand in the synagogue •  It compliments Jesus’ “no sign but the sign of Jonah”
on the Sabbath. Matthew then quotes Isaiah 42:1–4, which speech (12:38–42).
explicitly talks about how the Servant “will proclaim justice •  It complements and fulfills Jesus’ speech in 11:20–30.
to the Gentiles” (12:18) and how “in his name the Gentiles •  It parallels and compliments the centurion episode
will hope” (12:21). By the time Matthew gets to the Beelze- (8:5–13).
bub controversy, the issue of the Kingdom of God extending After this episode in Tyre and Sidon, Jesus proceeds to
to Gentiles has already been brought front and center. feed 4,000 in Gentile territory (15:32–39). As in Mark,
Therefore, since Matthew has already clearly empha- this serves as a balance to the feeding of the 5,000 in Jew-
sized Jesus going to Gentiles, he alters Mark’s narrative by ish territory, emphasizing a very “Jonah-like” theme of God
taking out the parables of the Kingdom (Mark 4:1–34). In extending his forgiveness and compassion to the Gentiles.

182

Downloaded from btb.sagepub.com at University of Sydney on May 4, 2015

 B I B L I C A L T H E O LO GY B U L L E T I N • VO LU M E 4 2

Jesus even says, “I have compassion for the crowd” (15:32), “Satan.” Rather, by opposing Jesus’ talk of suffering, he has
a phrase strangely similar to the very lesson yhwh taught proven that he has not yet truly understood the nature of Je-
Jonah in Jonah 4:10–11. Gentiles, along with Jews, are por- sus’ messiahship and the full extent of the Kingdom. It is only
trayed as the sheep of the Good Shepherd, Jesus. after speaking about “taking up one’s cross” and about his
At this point in Matthew, the Pharisees and Sadducees ask own future suffering that Jesus allows Peter, James, and John
Jesus for a sign from heaven. In an abbreviated version of to bear witness to him in his glory at the Transfiguration. As
12:38–42, Jesus simply says, “. . . no sign will be given to in Mark, this episode brings to a close this larger section that
[this evil and adulterous generation] except the sign of Jonah” began with the Beelzebub controversy; and, as in Mark, this
(16:4). This serves as the conclusion to 15:1–39, much as episode has subtle connections with Jonah as well.
the first “sign of Jonah” speech (12:38–42) serves as the As one can see, although Matthew closely follows Mark
conclusion to 12:22–37, and as Jesus walking on the water in this larger section, he nevertheless chooses to emphasize a
(14:22–33) concludes 13:1–14:21. Although the events more explicit Jonah-theme in the course of his narrative that
of 8:1–9:1 and 11:20–30 had earlier made the allusion to extends from the Beelzebub controversy to the Transfigura-
the Jonah story, along with examples of God’s forgiveness tion. The points made concerning Jesus’ relation to the Jonah
being extended to Gentiles, the accusation brought up by the story are the same in both Gospels; yet the ways in which
Pharisees in the Beelzebub controversy leads Matthew into they are made are considerably different. Matthew’s choice to
a slightly re-worked version of Mark’s narrative in which he insert the dual-episode of “Jesus stilling the storm/demoniac
makes explicit the “Jonah/Gentile” allusions, both in Mark of the Gadarenes” into a different place, and in its original
and his earlier sections of 8:1–9:1 and 11:20–30. place to introduce the explicit “sign of Jonah” speech on the
The final use of Jonah in Matthew is found in a re- lips of Jesus, allowed Matthew to incorporate two more ex-
worked episode from Mark concerning Peter’s confession plicit references to Jonah that help tie in the “Jonah theme”
at Caesarea Philippi (16:13–28), as well as the episode of to the section, as well as to bring in more examples of Jesus’
the Transfiguration (17:1–23). At Caesarea Philippi, Jesus “Gentile mission” (i.e., the centurion; Tyre and Sidon), and
ask a question regarding the disciples’ understanding: do link them together within this “Jesus/Jonah” theme of God’s
they understand and accept Jesus’ “sign of Jonah” or are forgiveness being extended to the Gentiles.
they, like the Pharisees and Sadducees, still unable to un-
derstand or accept it? Now, where Mark used the imagery Conclusion
of the “twice-healed” blind man to show that Peter and the
disciples “saw” that Jesus was the Messiah, but did not yet Most scholarly work on the use of Jonah in the New Tes-
“see clearly” (Mark 8:22–26), Matthew chooses to make an tament has been limited to the “sign of Jonah” sayings of
explicit Jonah reference: after Peter’s confession, Jesus tells Jesus in Matthew and Luke, and the stilling of the storm
Peter, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah!” story in the three Synoptic Gospels. Yet there has been no
Peter’s father was not named Jonah. We know this from previous study done on how the use of Jonah in the Synoptic
John 1:42, where Jesus says, “You are Simon son of John. Gospels could be extended to a larger narrative structure
You are to be called Cephas.” What Matthew is doing here within those Gospels. With more and more scholarly atten-
ties in with the Jonah-theme we have been discussing. By tion being given to the true art of biblical narrative, though,
calling Peter “son of Jonah,” it seems that Peter has under- hopefully studies like this will become more common.
stood and accepted Jesus’ “Jonah-like” mission to the Gen- For too long, the default starting position of much of
tiles as seen in the previous episodes, and will be prepared to the scholarly work within biblical studies has been the his-
understand and accept Jesus’ “Jonah-like” death and resur- torical-critical presupposition that the final form of a text
rection when they reach Jerusalem. It soon becomes evident, is, at best, a sloppy patchwork job of later redactors, and
though, that Peter does not yet understand Jesus’ mission. therefore holds no relevant meaning or message in and of
So, after attempting to rebuke Jesus, he receives a rebuke in itself. Instead, endless effort is spent in trying to decipher
return, “Get behind me, Satan!” (16:23). Again, just as Pe- alleged sources and redactional seams, rather than attempt-
ter’s father’s name is not really “Jonah,” Peter is not literally ing to understand the message in the text that is before us.

183

Downloaded from btb.sagepub.com at University of Sydney on May 4, 2015

 Anderson, “Jonah in Mark and Matthew” “

The gospel writers, though, were not incompetent redactors. rael. Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press.
They were historians and literary artists who were proclaim- Hagner, Donald A. 1995. Matthew 14–28. World Biblical
ing the gospel in a highly creative way: they wove together Commentary 33b. Dallas, TX: Word Books.
countless themes, storylines, allusions and references from Landes, George, M. 1996. “Jonah in Luke: The Hebrew Bible
their inherited Scriptures, the Old Testament, into a grand Background to the Interpretation of the ‘Sign of Jonah’ Peri-
gospel narrative that proclaimed that Jesus was Messiah and cope in Luke 11:29–32.” Pp. 133–63 in A Gift in Due Sea-
Lord, and that in him the Old Testament expectations of a son: Essays on Scripture and Community in Honor of James
new creation and a new covenant were being fulfilled as he A. Sanders, edited by Richard D. Weis & David M. Carr.
ushered in the Kingdom of God. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Supplement Series
One example of this very thing is what we have discussed 225. Sheffield, UK: Academic Press.
in this article. Mark incorporated within a large section of Limburg, James. 1990. “Jonah and the Whale Through the Eyes
his narrative (3:20–9:32) a number of allusions to Jonah that of Artists.” Bible Review 6: 18–25.
helped highlight Jesus’ identity and mission, and the nature Marcus, Joel. 1999. The Anchor Bible: Mark 1–8. Garden City,
of the Kingdom of God. Matthew maintained Mark’s overall NY: Doubleday.
narrative structure, but chose to both rearrange a number Merrill, Eugene H. 1980. “The Sign of Jonah,” JETS 23/1: 23–30.
of items and incorporate explicit Jonah references to further Snyder, Graydon F. 1999. “Sea Monsters in Early Christian
highlight the Jonah-theme laid out in Mark. And thus, as is Art.” Biblical Research 44: 7–21.
the nature of intertextuality, we find in both Mark and Mat- Swetnam, James. 1985. “No Sign of Jonah.” Biblica 66/1: 126–30.
thew a creative reshaping and reinterpretation of the Jonah Wright, N. T. 1996. Jesus and the Victory of God. Minneapolis,
story, woven within the very fabric of their own narratives. MN: Fortress Press.
Such a study of intertextual processes, though, cannot be 1992. The New Testament and the People of God. Minneapolis,
codified or systematically articulated in a scientific method. MN: Fortress Press.
It ultimately is an artistic and creative process that weaves
together quotations, images, symbols, themes, and motifs Appendix
found in other works. It is not a blueprint of a house; it is an
impressionist painting. It is not the autopsy of a corpse; it is The charts in this Appendix are intended to provide a vi-
the functioning of a living body. And what we see, therefore, sual representation of what I have discussed in the foregoing
is not the cadaver of Jonah being dissected under the knife article. The overarching question that dominates this section
of Mark and Matthew, but rather the Holy Spirit breathing in Mark is, “What is the nature of Jesus’ kingdom? Is it of
new life into Jonah, and Jonah himself stretching his limbs God or of Beelzebub?” The rest of the narrative goes about
and flexing his muscles once again within the body of Mark answering that question, and interspersed throughout the
and Matthew’s Gospel of Jesus: a resurrected text given new narrative are allusions to Jonah. The emphasis, when read
life and meaning within the corpus of Christ. against the narrative backdrop of the Jonah story, becomes
clear: Jesus, as the Messiah, shares in and reveals God’s
Works Cited glory to both Jews and Gentiles—that is what the Kingdom
of God is all about. What the Matthew chart reveals is this
Anderson, Joel Edmund. 2012. “yhwh’s Surprising Covenant very Jonah-theme in more explicit terms. In both charts, vari-
Hesed in Jonah.” Biblical Theology Bulletin 42/1: 3–11. ous episodes are marked off differently in order to highlight
2011. “Jonah’s Peculiar Re-Creation.” Biblical Theology Bul- the structure of both narratives. If nothing else, the charts
letin 41/4: 179–88. help the reader see more clearly how each narrative has been
Fishbane, Michael. 1985. Biblical Interpretation in Ancient Is- woven together.

184

Downloaded from btb.sagepub.com at University of Sydney on May 4, 2015

B I B L I C A L T H E O LO GY B U L L E T I N • VO LU M E 4 2

185

Downloaded from btb.sagepub.com at University of Sydney on May 4, 2015

 Anderson, “Jonah in Mark and Matthew” “

186

Downloaded from btb.sagepub.com at University of Sydney on May 4, 2015