Jonah's Journey In The Belly Of A Mammal

[Buff Scott Jr.]

Jonah’s Journey In The Belly
Of a Mammal​

He boarded a ship to flee from a mission he had been challenged to accept. When the ship was some distance out a great wind was hurled upon the sea, accompanied with a mighty tempest, so that the ship was about to break up. Conceiving he was the cause of the turbulent weather, he instructed the men of the ship to throw him into the sea, “for I know,” said he, “it is because of me this great tempest has come upon you.” So they took him and threw him into the sea, and the sea ceased from its raging.

After having been thrown into the rolling billows, he acknowledged his mistake of having fled from the mission he had been challenged to accept and was miraculously rescued from the tomb of the sea by One whose strength was greater than his. Following his rescue, he exclaimed, “I called to the Lord out of my distress, and he answered me.” He went on to accept the challenge and the mission from which he had attempted to flee, and what followed was a complete victory.—Book of Jonah.

The story of Jonah very fittingly depicts my message. The sea of life is encompassed with tempestuous waves. To one degree or another, we all are entangled. Even the great apostle Paul, an ambassador of Jesus, faced with life’s turbulent billows, cried out, “O wretched man that I am! Who on earth can set me free from the clutches of my own sinful nature?” (Rom. 7:24).

Paul happily concluded Jesus was his Deliverer. The apostle was drowning in a sea of problems—trials, uncertainties, persecution, accusations from false brothers, but he knew where relief could be found and how he could be rescued from the hostile forces that surrounded him. The Lord was his lifejacket! Otherwise, he indeed would have drowned.

With many the tempest is raging in the form of frustrations, anxiety, immorality, domestic and social distresses, drugs and alcohol, adultery and homosexuality. These raging billows stifle one’s perception, breed mental perplexities, and create an attitude of apathy and a spirit of dormancy. The conscience becomes a sea of fire and brimstone, and the mind is void of logic and rationale. Those of us who are confronted with these billows ought to call to the Lord out of our distress, as Jonah did. He will answer us!

The problems arose when we turned our faces in the direction of disaster. Like Paul, we roll in the raging billows every day. And like James, we all make many mistakes (James 3:2). But we can discover the “lifejacket” that will gently lift us daily out of the depths of despair and lovingly lower us upon the beaches of tranquility. That “lifejacket” is Jesus! He is our compass, our sense of direction, our purpose and mission in life. Paul’s cup was running over with joy even while he experienced a state of distress! He affirmed on one occasion that when he was the weakest physically, he was the strongest spiritually.

In another place, Paul expressed a desire to go home to be with the Lord. He did not feel, as many of us do, that Earth was his Heaven. He knew he was about to take a journey to a city with everlasting foundations.

We may feast upon the richest of foods, wear the finest of apparel, live in an elegant home, and have a goodly number of friends and celebrities. But these are of no avail when we consider they cannot provide a true peace of mind, real happiness, and genuine security. These heavenly blessings are not available in what we possess. They are available only in the Man Jesus. So reach out for Him. He is not far from any of us! “For it is in Him we live, move, and have our being” (Acts 17:28).​

 

[Josheb]

Wow. I do not think the words or meaning(s) of Jonah was correctly understood.

I do think the book was repeatedly misused and misrepresented, beginning with the assertion Jonah's journey occurred in the belly of a mammal. That's a mistranslation of "ketous" made in the KJV that ignores the meaning of "dag." Neither did God "challenge" Jonah to go to Ninevah. God simply commanded Jonah to go to Ninevah and He commanded Jonah to go with an expectation He would be obeyed and obeyed out of faith and faithful devotion. The book of Jonah is an account of a willfully disobedient prophet. Even if we were to say God always knew Jonah would at first disobey God's command, the significance of the parallels and differences between Jonah (who was also just as wicked as Ninevah) and Ninevah (which repented where Jonah did not).

Jonah 4:9
And [Jonah] said, “I have good reason to be angry, even to the point of death!”

Liar

Jonah 4:9
And he said, “I have good reason to be angry, even to the point of death!”

James 1:19-20
Now everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak, and slow to anger; for a man’s anger does not bring about the righteousness of God.

According to God, Jonah knew better. According to the book of Jonah, Jonah never repented. He remained angry to the point of death and as far as we know from the book, he remained that way. So..... if you mean to compare all other Christians, including the apostle Paul, to that then I will encourage you to 1) go back and re-read the book of Jonah and 2) look around at the Christians you know, maybe instruct them to be honest and forthcoming with you and ask them, "Are you angry with God to the point of death?" Ask them, "To what degree do you think 'angry to the point of death' is a valid description of Christians?"

The sea of life is encompassed with tempestuous waves.​

The sea in the book of Jonah is not representative the sea of life and the "tempestuous waves" in Jonah was a direct result of divine action, not the ordinary circumstances of human life.

We may feast upon the richest of foods, wear the finest of apparel, live in an elegant home, and have a goodly number of friends and celebrities.....​

23 million Christians in the US live in poverty (680 million people worldwide). That "We" is not representative of all Christians, nor most. In point of fact, unless the use of the word "finest" is rhetorical, that commentary doesn't apply to the majority of Christians.



Bad op

The story of Jonah very fittingly depicts my message.​

I have asked you this many times before but because I never get an answer I stopped asking. Given the problems within this op, I think it is time to re-broach the inquiry.



What does scripture call those who unjustly criticize the body of Christ?



.

 

[Arial]

Wow. I do not think the words or meaning(s) of Jonah was correctly understood.

I do think the book was repeatedly misused and misrepresented, beginning with the assertion Jonah's journey occurred in the belly of a mammal. That's a mistranslation of "ketous" made in the KJV that ignores the meaning of "dag." Neither did God "challenge" Jonah to go to Ninevah. God simply commanded Jonah to go to Ninevah and He commanded Jonah to go with an expectation He would be obeyed and obeyed out of faith and faithful devotion. The book of Jonah is an account of a willfully disobedient prophet. Even if we were to say God always knew Jonah would at first disobey God's command, the significance of the parallels and differences between Jonah (who was also just as wicked as Ninevah) and Ninevah (which repented where Jonah did not).

Jonah 4:9
And [Jonah] said, “I have good reason to be angry, even to the point of death!”

Liar

Jonah 4:9
And he said, “I have good reason to be angry, even to the point of death!”

James 1:19-20
Now everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak, and slow to anger; for a man’s anger does not bring about the righteousness of God.

According to God, Jonah knew better. According to the book of Jonah, Jonah never repented. He remained angry to the point of death and as far as we know from the book, he remained that way. So..... if you mean to compare all other Christians, including the apostle Paul, to that then I will encourage you to 1) go back and re-read the book of Jonah and 2) look around at the Christians you know, maybe instruct them to be honest and forthcoming with you and ask them, "Are you angry with God to the point of death?" Ask them, "To what degree do you think 'angry to the point of death' is a valid description of Christians?"

The sea in the book of Jonah is not representative the sea of life and the "tempestuous waves" in Jonah was a direct result of divine action, not the ordinary circumstances of human life.

23 million Christians in the US live in poverty (680 million people worldwide). That "We" is not representative of all Christians, nor most. In point of fact, unless the use of the word "finest" is rhetorical, that commentary doesn't apply to the majority of Christians.



Bad op

I have asked you this many times before but because I never get an answer I stopped asking. Given the problems within this op, I think it is time to re-broach the inquiry.



What does scripture call those who unjustly criticize the body of Christ?



.

That's what happens when one abandons the meaning of something and jumps straight to a moral application. The meaning never gets seen and the "lesson" pulled out of it is twisted. The application is useless because it does not even touch on the meaning. It even has to be distorted in order to create the application.

 

[Josheb]

That's what happens when one abandons the meaning of something and jumps straight to a moral application. The meaning never gets seen and the "lesson" pulled out of it is twisted. The application is useless because it does not even touch on the meaning. It even has to be distorted in order to create the application.

I'm not sure I would qualify this op as a "moral application." Maybe a moralizing application. The irony is it comes eerily close to contemporary virtue signaling and thereby, paradoxically, self-indicting evidence of that which is seeks to repudiate. I might not have caught some of the problems here, but I just got done with a study of Jonah two or three weeks ago, so the book is still being contemplated (skipped Micah, through Nahum and on to Habakkuk currently). Discussions of @Buff Scott Jr.'s ops are usually very substantive (due to lack of participation) so very few points of disagreement (or error) ever get worked out but this is so bad I might go through this line by line if time permits. The title and first line are factually incorrect. The next three are factually correct but bereft of the divine causality and relevant need pertaining directly to Jonah's disobedience. Some of the information that's left out (such as the crew discarding the cargo while Jonah slept) is important (even to the point this op intends to make). Then there's the huge problem of saying Jonah repented. One of the outstanding marks of the book is Jonah's lack of repentance, the machinations he goes through (both internally and externally) to ignore the warrant repentance. That line in Jonah 2:4 is Jonah in denial, not divine truth from God's perspective. It's a scriptural commentary on how delusional sinners can become. There's no neon light with a blinking arrow announcing it but it was NOT God who "expelled" Jonah. Jonah expelled Jonah. The messianic significance of the passage is undermined when the distinctions between sinful, wayward Jonah and sinless obedient Christ are ignored. The irony of "Those who regard vain idols forsake their faithfulness," and emptiness of "But I will sacrifice to You with the voice of thanksgiving," are palpable given the reality Jonah hasn't been faithful or thankful (and he's not actually in the grave).

Following his rescue, he exclaimed, “I called to the Lord out of my distress, and he answered me.”​

Except Jonah hasn't been rescued at that point. He's in the belly of a great fish and as far as he knows - according to the text - he thinks he's going to his grave. He went from the proverbial pan into the fire.

He went on to accept the challenge and the mission from which he had attempted to flee, and what followed was a complete victory.—Book of Jonah.​

Except there are fundament differences between compliance and acceptance, as well as obedience and loving devotion. Jonah complies begrudgingly and he's still very displeased when Ninevah repents. I'm not seeing how that is Jonah accepting the "challenge".

Perhaps the most problematic point I see in the op is that the book of Jonah isn't about Jonah. It's about the compassion of God, a compassion He holds for others even outside the covenant relationship (despite the sometimes selfish and obstructive machinations of His elect!). In the end we know Ninevah is saved from temporal destruction but the text is silent about salvation from eternal destruction. We might even ask the same question about Jonah if all we had was the book of Jonah and not New Testament commentary. Was Jonah a Gideon or a Samson (or something else?).

Hebrews 11:32-34
And what more shall I say? For time will fail me if I tell of Gideon, Barak, Samson, Jephthah, of David and Samuel and the prophets, who by faith conquered kingdoms, performed acts of righteousness, obtained promises, shut the mouths of lions, quenched the power of fire, escaped the edge of the sword, from weakness were made strong, became mighty in war, put foreign armies to flight.

• kingdoms conquered
• acts of righteousness
• promises obtained
• lions silenced
• fire quenched
• escaped the sword
• made strong in weakness
• mighty in war
• foreign armies put to flight

Which ones can we attribute to Jonah?

There was a prophet sent to a Ninevah that did not repent. That prophet spent three days in the belly of the earth, but he could not be held there. He was ever-faithful, obedient and victorious. He overcame every obstacle known to humanity and achieved the greatest victory possible: the defeat of sin and death. at the risk of my own moralizing, how all that Messianic content could be neglected escapes me.

He is much more than a "lifejacket."

 

[Buff Scott Jr.]

Wow. I do not think the words or meaning(s) of Jonah was correctly understood.

I do think the book was repeatedly misused and misrepresented, beginning with the assertion Jonah's journey occurred in the belly of a mammal. That's a mistranslation of "ketous" made in the KJV that ignores the meaning of "dag." Neither did God "challenge" Jonah to go to Ninevah. God simply commanded Jonah to go to Ninevah and He commanded Jonah to go with an expectation He would be obeyed and obeyed out of faith and faithful devotion. The book of Jonah is an account of a willfully disobedient prophet. Even if we were to say God always knew Jonah would at first disobey God's command, the significance of the parallels and differences between Jonah (who was also just as wicked as Ninevah) and Ninevah (which repented where Jonah did not).

Jonah 4:9
And [Jonah] said, “I have good reason to be angry, even to the point of death!”

Liar

Jonah 4:9
And he said, “I have good reason to be angry, even to the point of death!”

James 1:19-20
Now everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak, and slow to anger; for a man’s anger does not bring about the righteousness of God.

According to God, Jonah knew better. According to the book of Jonah, Jonah never repented. He remained angry to the point of death and as far as we know from the book, he remained that way. So..... if you mean to compare all other Christians, including the apostle Paul, to that then I will encourage you to 1) go back and re-read the book of Jonah and 2) look around at the Christians you know, maybe instruct them to be honest and forthcoming with you and ask them, "Are you angry with God to the point of death?" Ask them, "To what degree do you think 'angry to the point of death' is a valid description of Christians?"

The sea in the book of Jonah is not representative the sea of life and the "tempestuous waves" in Jonah was a direct result of divine action, not the ordinary circumstances of human life.

23 million Christians in the US live in poverty (680 million people worldwide). That "We" is not representative of all Christians, nor most. In point of fact, unless the use of the word "finest" is rhetorical, that commentary doesn't apply to the majority of Christians.



Bad op

I have asked you this many times before but because I never get an answer I stopped asking. Given the problems within this op, I think it is time to re-broach the inquiry.



What does scripture call those who unjustly criticize the body of Christ?

Josheb, I did a little research on "mammal" and found, "Yes, a whale is a mammal. Whales breathe air with lungs, are warm-blooded, give birth to live young, and nurse their calves with milk, all of which are defining characteristics of mammals."

If God willed and created a "great fish" or "mammal" to swallow Jonah, and He did, it happened. As to your question, "What does scripture call those who unjustly criticize the body of Christ?" Wrong question. The real question should be, "What does the scripture call those who justly criticize sectarianism or the party spirit?" We might consider the answer to be "reformers," as the "time of reformation" is here (Heb. 9:10, ESV), or "Paulettes" (I Cor. 1:11-13, ESV).​

So long for now. Go ahead and submit another manuscript, as I'm confident you will.

 

[Buff Scott Jr.]

Let’s Do A Syllogism​

A “syllogism” is a form of reasoning in which two statements or premises are made and a logical conclusion is drawn from them.​

Undertaking
Premise # 1— By definition a religious party is a sect or faction (Gal. 5:20)
Premise # 2— All contemporary churches are religious parties.
Conclusion— Therefore, all contemporary churches are sects.​

 

[Josheb]

Josheb, I did a little research on "mammal" and found, "Yes, a whale is a mammal. Whales breathe air with lungs, are warm-blooded, give birth to live young, and nurse their calves with milk, all of which are defining characteristics of mammals."

If God willed and created a "great fish" or "mammal" to swallow Jonah, and He did, it happened. As to your question, "What does scripture call those who unjustly criticize the body of Christ?" Wrong question. The real question should be, "What does the scripture call those who justly criticize sectarianism or the party spirit?" We might consider the answer to be "reformers," as the "time of reformation" is here (Heb. 9:10, ESV), or "Paulettes" (I Cor. 1:11-13, ESV).​

So long for now. Go ahead and submit another manuscript, as I'm confident you will.

Should have done more research. The Hebrew word used in Jonah is "dag," and that word simply means fish, not mammal. In Greek, the word "ketous" means sea monster or huge fish, not mammal. The Koine Greek word for mammal would have been "thilastiko." Only the KJV, its predecessor the Douay-Rheims, and those English translations holding to that tradition (like the ASV, ERV, etc.) translate ketous that way. All others say, "huge fish" or "great fish." Fish are not mammals and any way it is looked at "whale" takes liberties with the text. If it weren't for the mention of "whale" in the traditional translations there'd be no reason to say the fish was mammalian. Furthermore, the only oceanic mammal with a throat large enough to swallow a human male whole is the Sperm Whale and under ordinary circumstances the person swallowed would still die on the way inside. No seafaring mammal swallows its prey whole, btw. The Jonah text states God "prepared," or "appointed" a great fish to swallow Jonah. The ancient Hebrew word for a whale (or other mammalian "fish" would have been "tannin," not dag. The fact of the text is that this was an extraordinary event in which a fish was specially prepared for the purpose of swallowing Jonah and containing him for three days. Liberties are taken to assume this was a mammal.

Furthermore, the likely symbolism was that of an idol that was well-known among the Jews in their history. You may recall the episode when God knocked repeatedly the idol Dagon over in 1 Samuel 5 when the Philistines absconded with the ark of the covenant. God knocked over the idol, on its face laying prostrate before the ark, and the Phils set it back upright. This happened again and on the third occasion God removed the head and arms from the idol. That idol, Dagon, had a fish's head. The Ashdodites were a fishing culture who idolized and worshipped a fish god. That's where the "Dag" in Dagon comes from. God prepared a great dag for the prophet who'd disobeyed him by taking to sea in his effort to run from God. The original Hebrew readers would have instantly understood the reference, and the irony inherent therein. Liberties have to be taken with the text to infer the fish was a mammal.

It's not a particular important point, but it is the first of many problems in this op. More globally, this is one of many ops in which the problem of Christian-ragging is of greater import. With the exception of that one paragraph that starts, "Paul happily concluded Jesus was his Deliverer," the Christian life described in this op is unrecognizable from both scripture and the normal, ordinary lives lived by most Christians. The psychologization of life is particularly curious given the amazing resilience of humans, and Christians in particular. "These raging billows stifle one’s perception, breed mental perplexities, and create an attitude of apathy and a spirit of dormancy. The conscience becomes a sea of fire and brimstone, and the mind is void of logic and rationale" might be something you personally experience, or something you think you observe, but my view as both a Christian of many decades and professional Christian psychologist would be much different. It's a bit overwrought, especially since apathy and irrationality are easily more readily attributed to the flesh, not external circumstances. This is not a uniquely Biblical or Christian perspective, either. At least as far back as the Greek philosopher Epictetus humanity has understood it is not what happens, but what a person thinks about what happens that matters. This is, in fact, much of what the story of Jonah involves because everything he suffered, he suffered because of his own choices and actions, not the circumstances of his life. There'd have been no storm, no ship breaking up, not tossing in the ocean, and no great fish had he just lived by faith and the obedience that comes thereof. It's a cop out to blame the circumstances of life on one's attitude - especially for those privileged with all the power and authority available to us in Christ. Paul wasn't "rescued," he overcame. Jonah? Not so much.

I'm pleased to find the sectarian division common in so many of your ops absent in this one, but its hints are still visible in the misuse of scripture and the mistaken view of the normal Christian life.

 

[Josheb]

Let’s Do A Syllogism​

A “syllogism” is a form of reasoning in which two statements or premises are made and a logical conclusion is drawn from them.​

Undertaking
Premise # 1— By definition a religious party is a sect or faction (Gal. 5:20)
Premise # 2— All contemporary churches are religious parties.
Conclusion— Therefore, all contemporary churches are sects.​

Meh. Unless you are more forthcoming and specific with the relevance, that post is meaningless. That post misuses Galatians 5:20. There is a reason the verse uses "faction," and not "sect." The two are not always synonymous and it is a misuse of the verse to argue they necessarily are. The second premise is also flawed because it conflates congregation with church because of the ambiguity of the latter word. Because both of the premises are flawed, so too is the conclusion.

Bad post.

Bad op.


Let's move past that and discuss what the healthy Christian life should look like relevant to the world in which we live (here in the first world). Let's build on that one paragraph that's worth building on.

Paul happily concluded Jesus was his Deliverer. The apostle was drowning in a sea of problems—trials, uncertainties, persecution, accusations from false brothers, but he knew where relief could be found and how he could be rescued from the hostile forces that surrounded him.​

.....with the caveat Paul overcame and was not merely rescued and, therefore, stands as a stark contrast to Jonah.

You up for that?

 

[Buff Scott Jr.]

Meh. Unless you are more forthcoming and specific with the relevance, that post is meaningless. That post misuses Galatians 5:20. There is a reason the verse uses "faction," and not "sect." The two are not always synonymous and it is a misuse of the verse to argue they necessarily are. The second premise is also flawed because it conflates congregation with church because of the ambiguity of the latter word. Because both of the premises are flawed, so too is the conclusion.

Bad post.

Bad op.


Let's move past that and discuss what the healthy Christian life should look like relevant to the world in which we live (here in the first world). Let's build on that one paragraph that's worth building on.

.....with the caveat Paul overcame and was not merely rescued and, therefore, stands as a stark contrast to Jonah.

You up for that?

Jonah 1:17 - Strong, Hebrew & Greek Scholar:

"dâg dâ'g
dawg, dawg
From H1711; a fish (as prolific); or perhaps rather from H1672 (as timid); but still better from H1672 (in the sense of squirming, that is, moving by the vibratory action of the tail); a fish (often used collectively): - fish."

Also Google: "Yes, a whale is a mammal. Whales breathe air with lungs, are warm-blooded, give birth to live young, and nurse their calves with milk, all of which are defining characteristics of mammals."

 

[Josheb]

Jonah 1:17 - Strong, Hebrew & Greek Scholar:

"dâg dâ'g
dawg, dawg
From H1711; a fish (as prolific); or perhaps rather from H1672 (as timid); but still better from H1672 (in the sense of squirming, that is, moving by the vibratory action of the tail); a fish (often used collectively): - fish."

Also Google: "Yes, a whale is a mammal. Whales breathe air with lungs, are warm-blooded, give birth to live young, and nurse their calves with milk, all of which are defining characteristics of mammals."

Yep. Fish, not mammal.

Josheb, I did a little research on "mammal" and found, "Yes, a whale is a mammal. Whales breathe air with lungs, are warm-blooded, give birth to live young, and nurse their calves with milk, all of which are defining characteristics of mammals."​

Great. The problem is the Jonah text does not say "whale." It says, "dag," a squirmy fish that moves by the vibration of its tale. AND..... dag should never be interpreted in any manner inconsistent with its prior use in scripture.

So do a little more research.

Or.....

move past this mistake because it's not critical to the op and discuss with me the one or two points that are critical (like the criticism of Christians as a whole, the misuse of Jonah as something emblematic, or symptomatic of Christians, the juxtaposition of Jonah and Paul as scripture presents those two men, or the implicit divisiveness inherent in in the deeply flawed sixth post). Take your pick. Personally, I'd prefer we discuss Jonah v Paul because that is the most likely to edify both of us and the lurkers.

If God willed and created a "great fish" or "mammal" to swallow Jonah, and He did, it happened.

That is not a point in dispute or one of contention. I explicitly stated God prepared a great fish (see posts 4 and 7). I'm not sure why you think it necessary or important to repost already posted content unless the purpose is to say, "I completely agree with you and God's word, Josh. God prepared a great fish. That's what scripture states and I acknowledge that fact." But, if I missed something then do please clarify the matter.

As to your question, "What does scripture call those who unjustly criticize the body of Christ?" Wrong question.

No, that is not the wrong question. It is the question you were asked and it is the question to which I would like an answer, and the question I expect you to answer because the answer is very, very relevant to this op.

Do you know the answer, or not? If known then please just post it so we can move forward in agreement. Do you see what you've just done. You criticize others with ops about the denominational divisions within the Church but when the opportunity to meet the standards of Ephesians 4:11-16 arise you bail! Answering the question asked, immediately and succinctly would have established consensus and prospects for edification, unity, speaking truth in love, maturity, and the proper working of individual parts of Christ's body. Instead, the reader is left with the impression what you preach isn't practiced.

The real question should be, "What does the scripture call those who justly criticize sectarianism or the party spirit?"

That would be the "real" question were it the case this op justly criticizes sectarianism but it does not. This opening post misuses the book of Jonah misrepresents Paul's witness, and incorrectly describes the normal Christian life by blaming environmental conditions at the expense of the more accurately scriptural explanation of the believer's flesh.

The question I asked is, therefore, the correct and "real" question to be answered.

We might consider the answer to be "reformers," as the "time of reformation" is here (Heb. 9:10, ESV), or "Paulettes" (I Cor. 1:11-13, ESV).

So long for now. Go ahead and submit another manuscript, as I'm confident you will.

Is this op about the reforms or the Reformers? If so then that should have been stated or made clear in the op because when the purpose isn't clarified a post (not just yours) proves disingenuous. Therefore, THIS is the opportunity to clarify and disclose what this op is specifically about so that you are not furthering any subterfuge. Be the guy who practices Ephesians 4 and doesn't just talk about it while he rags on others.

Ephesians 4:11-16
And He gave some as apostles, and some as prophets, and some as evangelists, and some as pastors and teachers, for the equipping of the saints for the work of service, to the building up of the body of Christ; until we all attain to the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a mature man, to the measure of the stature which belongs to the fullness of Christ. As a result, we are no longer to be children, tossed here and there by waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, by craftiness in deceitful scheming; but speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in all aspects into Him who is the head, even Christ, from whom the whole body, being fitted and held together by what every joint supplies, according to the proper working of each individual part, causes the growth of the body for the building up of itself in love.

• Equip the saints for works of service,
• build up the body,
• attain unity of the faith,
• attain the knowledge of Jesus,
• mature to the fulness of Christ,
• becoming firm in our belief and thereby able to withstand doctrinal winds and the deceits of others,
• become fitted together so the body grows and self-edifies

Right now is your opportunity to do that and Posts 5, 6, and 9 do not do any of that. For some reason you think another manuscript on dag v ketous is needed when I provided all that's necessary to understand neither should be rendered as "mammal," and it's not my job to do your homework for you. (that work should have been done before the op was posted).



What does scripture call those unjustly criticize the Church?


.

 

[Buff Scott Jr.]

Josheb, judging from your responses, I can't help but see you looking primarily for words and statements to criticize and disagree with. In other words, I'm seeing very little positive reactions in your observations of what others post.

Let me ask a question or two. In reading my post on "Jonah's Journey," and other posts as well, have you seen anything that might have prompted you to react positively or agreeably? If yes, why have you not also responded in that manner instead of seeking and responding only to what you considered negative/wrong?

If there is another side of you, please give me a demonstration. Have a good day.​

 

[Josheb]

Josheb, judging from your responses, I can't help but see you looking primarily for words and statements to criticize and disagree with. In other words, I'm seeing very little positive reactions in your observations of what others post.​

Look harder. I explicitly stated the paragraph that began with "Paul happily concluded Jesus was his Deliverer" was good content. Therefore, when you ignore the positive that was presented and accuse me of looking "primarily" for words the criticize that, ironically, proves to be hypocritically self-indicting. This is even more so since I have also explicitly offered to discuss something positive: The contrast between Jonah and Paul).....

...and that request has been ignored. I did, in fact, ask you to move on from the "whale" nonsense AND I offered four or five op-relevant alternatives beside the Jonah v Paul subject.

AND you know that I, among all the members of this forum, don't put up with that nonsense in silence. I am going to make note of it for the express purpose of positive change! So stow that dross and discuss this op.

Let me ask a question or two.

Sure.

In reading my post on "Jonah's Journey," and other posts as well, have you seen anything that might have prompted you to react positively or agreeably? If yes, why have you not also responded in that manner instead of seeking and responding only to what you considered negative/wrong?

I have observed a few things that are true, correct, and positive and I mentioned one of them.

​

The title and first line are factually incorrect. The next three are factually correct but bereft of the divine causality and relevant need pertaining directly to Jonah's disobedience.

....With the exception of that one paragraph that starts, "Paul happily concluded Jesus was his Deliverer," the Christian life described in this op is unrecognizable from both scripture and the normal, ordinary lives lived by most Christians......

The irony, of course, is that Post 11 is not positive. It is unjust to complain about a lack of positivity and not be positive. That would be called hypocrisy. So how about starting over and practicing something positive? The facts in evidence are that I read the op objectively and uncritically, and then I re-read it taking each line, evaluating what is stated for its veracity. It is my normal practice, my standard operating procedure, to affirm that which bears consistency with well-rendered whole scripture, ask questions about that which is either unclear or I do not understand, and refute any content that does not bear consistency with well-rendered whole scripture. I am fairly good at. Anyone in the forum can testify to my methodology. Even you. The problem with this op is 1) There is a lot of error in it and 2) none of it is being discussed even though multiple requests to that effect have been made I have repeated asked one thing be selected and discussed. Many times have I read about the disdain for arguing. Admirable. Let's give it a try . I will extend some credit for asking the question asked if it is asked with a genuine intent to discuss the op that is evidenced by an actual topical conversation.



LOOK! I answered the question asked. I answered it immediately. I answered it directly and succinctly. I was courteous and truthful. I did not delay or obfuscate in any way. I moved the conversation forward in a positive way.


In contrast, am still waiting for an answer to my question.


What does scripture call those who unjustly criticize the Church?


It is a very op-relevant inquiry. One that is valid and worth asking (as well as answering).

 

[Josheb]

If there is another side of you, please give me a demonstration. Have a good day.

Okay.


Aside from the fact there are many mistakes in this op, the effort toward what I presume is encouragement and exhortation of others is noble and potentially valuable. I am not sure what Jonah being in the belly of a whale/great fish has to do with feasting on rich foods or wearing fine clothes, but those are certainly first-world concerns the first world Christian should address AND it is certainly something that can be discussed positively without unjustly criticizing the entire body of Christ. Similarly, the list of what I will call "works of the flesh," frustrations, anxiety, immorality, domestic and social distresses, drugs and alcohol, adultery and homosexuality," is also something with which the modern Christian must come to terms especially since all but one of those things in internal, not external. Both Jonah and Paul had internal problems and both men's internal problems were of greater concern to both God and Jonah or Paul. The list is good. It's not all relevant to Jonah or Paul (who were not homosexual, using drugs, or committing adultery as far as we know) but we could be discussing the list relevant to the premise our turning our face toward disaster is the problem to be solved. In point of fact, we could go through the op and discuss each of its point, collaboratively making positive adjustments as needed to the effect of many positive benefits (you honing your apologetic skills, the collaborative reasoning through scripture to see what is true, the prospect I and others might learn something we hadn't previously considered, the witness we'd bear to the lurkers as two brothers in Christ effectively work through points of disagreement in love, etc.).

I think we should discuss the juxtaposition between Jonah and Paul because those two men are quite a contrast BUT I am open to discussing any subject within the op that is specified. It's your op. It's your op to assert, yours to defend, yours to correct, yours to delete if the conversation brought to bear on should prove that decision necessary. That's how discussion boards work and that is a positive thing, even if it is uncomfortable at times. Presumably, at age 90, you have some knowledge and wisdom to share and, presumably, aren't too old to learn. Is Paul thought to have gotten everything correct? Scripture says no. Is it thought he was unteachable? Scripture says he was teachable. How about Peter? Jonah? Jonah is a mess, yet I do not know any Christian who would not include him among the prophets in Hebrews 11:32. Despite his many flaws (as described in the book bearing his name) Jonah would be counted among those made perfect in us through Christ.

Hebrews 11:39-40
And all these, having gained approval through their faith, did not receive what was promised, because God had provided something better for us, so that apart from us they would not be made perfect.

That is an exceedingly positive thing. Can we include that when we discuss this op?

I'd still like an answer to the question asked, and I still think the juxtaposition between Jonah and Paul is the best subject within this op to discuss if the purpose is to meet the expectations of Ephesians 4., but you choose. Choose, specify, and discuss. Imagine having an enduring, mutually edifying conversation about this op without rancor that lasts a week (or more )!


Please .

 

[Buff Scott Jr.]

After my nap, I may find time to read your manuscript. And I apologize if I have misjudged you.

 

[Josheb]

After my nap, I may find time to read your manuscript. And I apologize if I have misjudged you.

Naps are soooo nice .

I bought a gym membership during the "black Friday" sales and have vigorously worked out every other day. The lactic acid has made me stiff and sore. Today I took a nice long nap and I feel much better, which, apparently, is a good thing because the misses has many boxes of Christmas decorations for me to haul up and down stairs, decorations that need me to climb ladders, just regular old open-eared presence while she speaks her 30,000 daily words . Good to be alive .

 

[Buff Scott Jr.]

Naps are soooo nice .

I bought a gym membership during the "black Friday" sales and have vigorously worked out every other day. The lactic acid has made me stiff and sore. Today I took a nice long nap and I feel much better, which, apparently, is a good thing because the misses has many boxes of Christmas decorations for me to haul up and down stairs, decorations that need me to climb ladders, just regular old open-eared presence while she speaks her 30,000 daily words . Good to be alive .

Exercising is one of the ways to stay healthy. I've been working out for 52 years. Yes, "good to be alive."

 

[Josheb]

Exercising is one of the ways to stay healthy. I've been working out for 52 years. Yes, "good to be alive."

Yep. Now, how about Jonah?


If you could summarize the subject of this op into a single "thesis" statement, what would be that statement?

 

[Buff Scott Jr.]

"Jonah Journeyed Inside an Ocean Creature for Three Days."

[I hope to do one more post on this topic/column, come Sunday]​