Problem: Nahum declares that God “avenges and is furious.” Indeed, God is often represented as being angry in the Bible (cf. Isa. 26:20; Jer. 4:8). At the same time, the Bible urges believers not to be angry, since it is a sin (cf. Gal. 5:20). But if it is a sin, then how can God do it?
Problem: Matthew seems to misquote Micah 5:2. Compare the two below:
Problem: This text and other passages of Scripture (cf. Isa. 1:15; James 4:3) speak of God withholding His blessing from those who cry unto Him. But, the Bible contends, on the other hand, that God “gives to all liberally” who ask (James 1:5), “for everyone who asks, receives” (Luke 11:10).
Problem: When Jonah arrived at the city of Nineveh, he observed that the city was so large, that it took a three-day journey to pass through it. However, such a statement must be an exaggeration, since it is argued that the average man could walk only from 50 to 70 miles in three days. A city of 50 to 70 miles in diameter is not recorded in all of history until modern times. Is this an error?
Problem: Jonah states, “When God saw their deeds, that they turned from their wicked way, then God relented concerning the calamity which He had declared He would bring upon them. And He did not do it” (Jonah 3:10). Does this mean that people could be forgiven apart from the Temple sacrifices commanded in Leviticus? Of course, the Ninevites didn’t offer a blood sacrifice, but they were spared from judgment. Orthodox Jewish interpreters extrapolate this to the present day, saying that blood sacrifice in the Temple is not necessary for the Jewish people (because the Temple was destroyed in A.D. 70).
Problem: Many passages teach that God is immutable and doesn’t change his mind (1 Sam. 15:29; Mal. 3:6; Heb. 6:17; Jas. 1:17). However, this passage teaches that “the Lord changed his mind” (Ex. 32:14). Open theists argue that God doesn’t know the future, using this passage to support this theological conclusion. Does God change his mind or not?[1] Continue reading →
Problem: Conservative scholars maintain that the Book of Jonah was written by the prophet Jonah who actually experienced the events recorded in the book. However, if the Book of Jonah was written by a Hebrew prophet who lived in the time of the Assyrian empire, why would he refer to the king of the Assyrian empire simply as the king of Nineveh?
Problem: Critics of the historicity of Jonah argue that Jonah was written during the time of Ezra and Nehemiah in the fifth century—not the time of the eighth century BC, when it claims. They argue that Jonah (in the eighth century) would never have written of the “king of Nineveh.” He would have written the “king of Assyria.” Critics charge that Jonah was writing in the fifth century, and he was ignorant of the fact that the king of Nineveh was also the king of Assyria. Is this the case?
Problem: Jonah records a “three days’ walk” through the city of Nineveh, but this would make the city larger than even modern cities—let alone ancient ones.
The Hebrews lacked an appropriate word for “whale,” because they only had a 3,000 word vocabulary. Archer writes,
Problem: Jesus certainly seemed to think so, because he compared it with his resurrection, which was a historical fact. Christ said, “For just as JONAH WAS THREE DAYS AND THREE NIGHTS IN THE BELLY OF THE SEA MONSTER, so will the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth” (Mt. 12:40). Archer adds,
Problem: Critical theologians take this entire story to be allegory—not history. Jonah represents the Jews, the great sea represents the Gentile nations, the great whale represents Babylon, and the Great Fish represents the Exile. After Jonah (Israel) spends several days in the Great Fish (the Exile), he has a different attitude toward God’s will in reaching the Ninevites (the Gentiles). However, there are a number of problems with this allegorical interpretation:
Solution: First, nothing in the text gives us an indication that it is allegorical. Instead, it presents itself as historical in its genre.
Second, other biblical authors interpret this work as historical—not allegorical. Jonah’s work is mentioned in 2 Kings 14:25 as historical work. Kings says, “He restored the border of Israel from the entrance of Hamath as far as the Sea of the Arabah, according to the word of the LORD, the God of Israel, which He spoke through His servant Jonah the son of Amittai, the prophet, who was of Gath-hepher” (2 Kings 14:25; Compare with Jonah 1:1 “son of Amittai”). Moreover, and most importantly, Jesus compared Jonah’s historicity with the historicity of his resurrection from the dead (Mt. 12:39-41), which is essential Christian doctrine (1 Cor. 15:12-19).
Third, the allegory breaks down. For one, why would the allegory give three days in the whale to symbolize seventy years in Exile?
Problem: Traditional Bible scholarship has held that the Book of Jonah records events that actually took place in history. However, because of the literary style of the book and the amazing adventures that are said to have befallen the prophet Jonah, many modern scholars propose that it is not a book of actual historical events, but a fictional story designed to communicate a message. Did the events of Jonah actually happen or not?
Problem: The prophecy of Obadiah is essentially a message of divine moral judgment upon the nations. Of the 21 verses that comprise this book, 16 are directed as pronouncements of coming judgment against Edom, and 5 verses are dedicated to the prophecies of the future triumph of Israel over Edom. But, isn’t this simply an example of Jewish nationalism rather than a revelation of God?