Jonas 4

João Calvino · Comentários Bíblicos

Jonas 4:1

Jerônimo elogia essa tristeza de Jonas e a compara ao santo zelo de Paulo quando ele desejou ser um anátema para seus irmãos ( Romanos 9:3 :) pois ele nega que sofreu porque Deus mostrou misericórdia para com uma cidade tão ilustre; mas porque a conversão dos gentios foi um certo presságio da destruição do povo eleito. Como então Jonas percebeu como num espelho a quase ruína de Israel, ele se entristeceu por esse motivo, se acreditarmos em Jerônimo: mas essa noção é extremamente frívola; pois, imediatamente depois, Deus reprovou Jonas. De que então o pedido de desculpas tolo e pueril de Jerônimo servirá ao Profeta, já que Deus declarou que ele agiu perversamente no luto? Não, a estupidez de Jerônimo torna-se assim evidente; (assim, de fato, falo de um homem que, embora instruído e laborioso, ainda se privou daquele elogio, que de outra forma ele poderia ter merecido com justiça.) Sua disposição rebelde em todos os lugares se traiu; e ele é evidentemente refutado neste mesmo contexto, onde Jonas mostra claramente que a causa de sua dor era outra, mesmo esta - que ele não estava disposto a ser considerado um profeta falso ou mentiroso: daí estava sua grande dor e sua amargura. E isso, vemos, se Deus não tivesse expressado sua mente, seria injusto e inconsistente com todas as razões. Podemos então concluir que Jonas foi influenciado por um falso zelo quando não pôde suportar com resignação que a cidade de Nínive deveria ter sido libertada da destruição: e ele próprio também amplifica a grandeza de seu pecado. Ele poderia ter dito, em uma palavra, que isso desagradou a Jonas; mas não satisfeito com esta forma simples, acrescenta ele, sentiu grande descontentamento ou tristeza; e depois ele acrescenta que estava muito zangado. Embora o começo possa não ter sido errado, o excesso era pecaminoso. Mas ele confessa que houve excesso e falta de moderação em sua dor: desde então ele se acusa em palavras claras, de que adianta, com pretextos falsos e inventados, encobrir o que vemos claramente que não pode ser desculpado? Mas para que fique mais evidente por que a libertação da cidade de Nínive desagradou a Jonas, continuemos com o contexto –

Jonas 4:2

Não parece de forma alguma apropriado que Jonas tenha dito aqui que orou; pois a oração deve ser calma; mas ele confessa que sua mente estava em estado de excitação. Como então a raiva ardia dentro do Profeta, como ele poderia se apresentar diante de Deus e proferir uma oração adequada? E, além disso, qual é o fim da oração, senão confessar que todo bem que deve ser obtido reside em Deus e deve ser buscado humildemente dele? Mas Jonas aqui, ao contrário, expõe e clama contra Deus; pois ele parece estar afirmando que tinha um motivo justo para sua fuga, e também que Deus não deveria ter perdoado os ninivitas. Ele então acusa a Deus, para se libertar de toda culpa. Mas tudo isso é estranho e distante do que é exigido na oração. Como então devemos entender esta passagem, na qual ele diz que orou? A minha resposta é que os fiéis, muitas vezes num estado mental perturbado, aproximam-se de Deus com o desejo de orar, e que as suas orações não são totalmente rejeitadas, embora não sejam totalmente aprovadas e aceites. E, portanto, também parece mais evidente como as obras dos piedosos são consideradas por Deus, embora sejam polvilhadas com muitas manchas. Sempre que os papistas leem que qualquer obra agradou a Deus, eles imaginam que tudo era perfeição e limpeza: mas não há obra que não esteja infectada com alguma poluição, a menos que seja purificada por um perdão gratuito. Isto que digo é evidente para nós nesta oração, que não foi tão rejeitada por Deus, como se não retivesse o caráter da oração: e ainda assim é certo que Jonas não foi de forma alguma influenciado corretamente quando orou tão clamorosamente, encontrando falhas, por assim dizer, em Deus, e retendo ainda alguma parte de sua própria obstinação; pois ele se vangloriou de sua fuga. Mas esta fuga, como afirmamos, foi uma prova de rebelião manifesta, pois, ao livrar-se do jugo, desprezou o chamado de Deus. Devemos, portanto, reconhecer que houve alguma piedade nesta oração de Jonas, bem como muitas falhas. Foi um ato de piedade que ele dirigiu suas queixas a Deus. Pois embora os hipócritas possam orar a Deus, eles ainda são totalmente avessos a ele e livremente dão vazão à sua amargura contra Deus: mas Jonas, enquanto ele aqui reclama e não observa moderação, mas é levado por um impulso cego e perverso, ainda está preparado para se submeter a Deus, como veremos a seguir. Esta é a razão pela qual ele diz que orou: pois não teria vergonha de confessar nenhum pecado grave do qual pudesse ter consciência. Ele então não atenuou sua culpa usando a palavra oração como costumam fazer os hipócritas, que sempre armam alguns disfarces ou véus quando procuram cobrir sua própria baixeza: esse não era o objetivo de Jonas. Quando, portanto, ele diz que orou, ele declara geralmente que não falou assim contra Deus, mas que ainda mantinha alguma semente de piedade e obediência em seu coração. Jonas então orou. Daí resulta, como afirmei anteriormente, que muitas das orações dos santos são pecaminosas (vitiosas – defeituosas) que, quando testadas pela regra correta, merecem ser rejeitadas. Mas o Senhor, segundo a sua própria misericórdia, perdoa os seus defeitos para que estas orações confusas e turbulentas ainda mantenham o seu título e honra. Agora ele diz: Peço-te, Jeová, não foi isso que eu disse? Aqui Jonas declara abertamente por que suportou tão mal a libertação de Nínive da destruição, porque foi descoberto que ele era falso e mentiroso. Mas pode parecer estranho que o Profeta tivesse mais consideração pela sua própria reputação do que pela glória de Deus; pois nisso brilha especialmente a glória de Deus, que ele é reconciliável assim que os homens retornam ao caminho certo, e que ele se oferece a eles como um pai. Deveria então Jonas ter preferido sua própria honra à glória de Deus? Eu respondo: – que o Profeta não era tão dedicado a si mesmo, mas que a preocupação com a glória de Deus ocupava o primeiro lugar em sua alma; isso é certo. Pois ele conectou, e com justiça, seu próprio ministério com a glória de Deus; como procedeu de sua autoridade. Quando Jonas entrou em Nínive, ele não chorou como um homem particular, mas confessou que foi enviado por Deus. Agora, se a pregação de Jonas for considerada falsa, a reprovação recairá sobre o autor de seu chamado, até mesmo sobre Deus. Jonas, então, sem dúvida, não poderia suportar que o nome de Deus fosse exposto às reprovações dos gentios, como se ele tivesse falado dissimuladamente, agora abrindo o inferno, depois o céu: e não há nada tão contrário à glória de Deus como tal dissimulação. Vemos, portanto, por que Jonas foi tomado por tanta dor; ele não se considerava; mas ao ver que seria dada uma ocasião aos ímpios blasfemadores, se Deus mudasse seu propósito, ou se ele não parecesse consistente com sua palavra, ele se sentiu muito triste. Mas, por mais ilusória que seja essa razão, ainda aprendemos quão úteis são as boas intenções para com Deus. Qualquer que seja a boa intenção que se possa imaginar, foi certamente uma boa intenção de Jonas, digna de algum elogio, que ele preferisse morrer cem vezes a ouvir essas blasfêmias reprovadoras - que a palavra de Deus era um mero esporte, que suas ameaças não eram melhores do que fábulas, que Deus fez isso e aquilo e se transformou em vários personagens. Esta foi certamente a melhor intenção, se for avaliada pelo nosso julgamento. Mas veremos em breve que foi condenado pela boca do próprio Deus. Aprendamos, portanto, a não nos arrogarmos o julgamento em assuntos que excedem nossas capacidades, mas a submeter nossas mentes a Deus e a buscar dele o espírito de sabedoria. Pois de onde foi que Jonas se irritou tanto com Deus, exceto porque ele ardia de desejo por sua glória? Mas seu zelo foi imprudente, pois ele próprio seria o juiz e árbitro, ao passo que, pelo contrário, deveria ter-se submetido totalmente a Deus. E a mesma regra deve ser observada também por nós. Quando vemos muitas coisas acontecendo através de uma interposição divina, isto é, através da providência secreta de Deus, e coisas que expõem seu nome às blasfêmias dos ímpios, devemos de fato sentir tristeza; mas enquanto isso, peçamos ao Senhor que transforme finalmente essas vergonhosas censuras para sua própria glória; e não vamos de forma alguma levantar alvoroço, como fazem muitos, que imediatamente começam a contender com Deus, quando as coisas são ordenadas de outra forma que não o que desejam ou pensam ser útil. Aprendamos com o exemplo de Jonas a não medir os julgamentos de Deus pela nossa própria sabedoria, mas a esperar até que ele transforme as trevas em luz. E, ao mesmo tempo, aprendamos a obedecer aos seus mandamentos, a seguir o seu chamado sem qualquer disputa: embora o céu e a terra se oponham a nós, embora ocorram muitas coisas que possam tender a desviar-nos do caminho certo, continuemos ainda nesta resolução, - que nada é melhor para nós do que obedecer a Deus e seguir no caminho que ele nos indica. Mas, ao dizer que se apressou em ir para Társis, ele não desculpa totalmente sua fuga; mas agora ele explica mais claramente que não evitou problemas ou trabalho, que não fugiu de uma competição ou perigo, mas que apenas evitou seu chamado, porque sentiu uma preocupação pela glória de Deus. A importância, então, das palavras de Jonas é: – que ele faz de Deus aqui, por assim dizer, sua testemunha e juiz, que ele não se retirou da obediência a Deus por medo do perigo, ou por ociosidade, ou por um espírito rebelde, ou por qualquer outro motivo maligno, mas apenas porque ele não estava disposto a que seu santo nome fosse profanado, e não seria por sua própria vontade o ministro daquela pregação, que seria a ocasião de abrir a boca de homens ímpios e profanos, e de fazê-los rir do próprio Deus. Desde então, não posso esperar, diz ele, qualquer outro resultado para minha pregação do que fazer com que os gentios ridicularizem Deus, sim, e insultarem seu santo nome, como se ele fosse falso e enganoso, preferi fugir para Társis. Então Jonas não se purifica completamente aqui; pois, caso contrário, aquele castigo, pelo qual ele deveria ter sido completamente subjugado, teria falhado em seu efeito. Ele havia sido recentemente restaurado das profundezas, e diremos que agora ele se exalta tanto contra Deus, que deseja parecer totalmente livre de toda culpa? Isto certamente seria muito estranho: mas, como eu disse, ele declara a Deus que fugiu no início por nenhuma outra razão, mas porque não esperava nenhum bom fruto de sua pregação, mas, pelo contrário, temia o que agora parecia acontecer, – que o nome de Deus fosse ridicularizado. Pois ele imediatamente acrescenta: Pois eu sei que tu és um Deus cheio de graça e misericordioso, lento para a ira, etc. É uma maravilha que Jonas tenha se retirado de seu chamado legal; pois ele sabia que Deus era misericordioso, e não há estimulante mais forte do que este para nos estimular, quando Deus se agrada em usar nosso trabalho: e sabemos que ninguém pode prestar serviço a Deus com entusiasmo, a menos que seja seduzido por sua bondade paternal. Portanto, ninguém será um profeta ou professor voluntário, a menos que esteja convencido de que Deus é misericordioso. Jonas então parece raciocinar de forma muito absurda quando diz que se retirou de seu cargo, porque sabia que Deus era misericordioso. Mas como ele sabia disso? Pela lei de Deus; pois a passagem foi tirada de Êxodo 33:1, onde é descrita aquela visão notável e memorável, na qual Deus ofereceu a Moisés uma visão de si mesmo: e foi então exibida ao santo Profeta, por assim dizer, uma representação viva de Deus, e não há passagem na lei que expresse mais a natureza de Deus para a vida; pois Deus teve então o prazer de se dar a conhecer de maneira familiar ao seu servo. Como então Jonas havia sido instruído na doutrina da lei, como ele poderia exercer o cargo de Profeta entre seu próprio povo? E por que esse conhecimento não desanimou sua mente quando foi chamado para o cargo de Professor? É então certo que isso deve ser limitado ao tipo de pregação, tal como explicamos anteriormente. Jonas não teria se esquivado da ordem de Deus se tivesse sido enviado aos ninivitas para ensinar o que lhe foi ordenado fazer entre o povo escolhido. Se então uma mensagem tivesse sido confiada a Jonas, para apresentar um Deus gracioso e misericordioso aos ninivitas, ele não teria hesitado um momento sequer em oferecer seu serviço. Mas como esta ameaça expressa, Nínive será destruída, foi-lhe dada a responsabilidade, ele ficou confuso e procurou por muito tempo fugir em vez de executar tal ordem. Por que isso? Porque ele raciocinou consigo mesmo: "Devo denunciar uma quase ruína sobre os ninivitas; por que Deus me ordena fazer isso, exceto para convidar esses homens miseráveis ao arrependimento? Agora, se eles se arrependerem, Deus não estará instantaneamente pronto para perdoá-los? Caso contrário, ele negaria sua própria natureza: Deus não pode ser diferente de si mesmo, ele não pode adiar aquela disposição da qual uma vez testificou a Moisés. Visto que Deus, então, é reconciliável, se os ninivitas retornarem ao caminho certo e fugirem para ele, ele os abraçará instantaneamente: assim serei considerado falso em minha pregação.” Percebemos agora como deve ser entendida esta passagem de Jonas, quando ele diz que fugiu para além do mar, pelo menos que tentou fazê-lo, porque sabia que Deus era gracioso; pois ele não teria privado a Deus de seu serviço, se essa contrariedade não tivesse perturbado e desencorajado sua mente: "O quê! Eu irei para lá como embaixador de Deus, em pouco tempo serei descoberto como um mentiroso: essa reprovação não será lançada sobre o nome do próprio Deus? Portanto, é melhor para mim ficar em silêncio, do que Deus, o fundador do meu chamado, ser ridicularizado." Vemos que Jonas tinha uma consideração distinta por esse tipo de pregação ao qual já nos referimos. E, portanto, parece que Jonas deu aos ninivitas mais do que pensava; pois ele supôs que foi enviado por Deus, apenas para que os ninivitas soubessem que seriam destruídos: mas ele trouxe libertação para eles; e isso, de fato, ele suspeitava parcialmente ou sabia antes; pois ele reteve esta verdade – que Deus não pode se despojar de sua misericórdia, pois ele permanece sempre o mesmo. Mas quando ele saiu para executar o dever que lhe foi ordenado, ele certamente não tinha nada a esperar, a não ser a ruína total da cidade de Nínive. Enquanto isso, Deus empregou seu ministério para um fim e propósito melhores. Na verdade, não há dúvida de que ele exortou os ninivitas ao arrependimento; mas seu próprio coração estava fechado, de modo que ele não podia permitir-lhes a misericórdia de Deus. Vemos, portanto, que Jonas foi tomado de perplexidades, de modo que não pôde oferecer libertação aos ninivitas, e ainda assim foi oferecido a eles por Deus por meio de sua instrumentalidade. Agora entendemos como Deus freqüentemente trabalha por meio de seus servos; pois ele os conduz como cegos por suas próprias mãos, onde eles não pensam. Assim, quando ele incita qualquer um de nós, às vezes ficamos ὀλιγόπίστοι — muito fracos na fé; pensamos que nosso trabalho será inútil e sem frutos, ou pelo menos terá pouco sucesso. Mas o Senhor nos permitirá ver o que não poderíamos esperar. Esse foi o caso de Jonas; pois quando chegou a Nínive, ele não tinha outro objetivo senão testemunhar a respeito da destruição da cidade; mas o Senhor teve o prazer de torná-lo ministro da salvação. Deus então honrou com notável sucesso o ensino de Jonas, embora ele fosse indigno de tão grande honra; pois, como já dissemos, ele fechou de certa forma todo acesso à bênção de Deus. Apreendemos agora o significado desta passagem, na qual Jonas diz que fugiu do chamado de Deus, porque sabia que Deus estava pronto para ser gracioso e misericordioso. Chego agora às grandes coisas que são ditas de Deus. חנון, chenun, significa propriamente uma disposição para mostrar favor, como se fosse dito que Deus é gratuitamente benevolente; expressamos o mesmo em nossa língua pelos termos benin, gratieux, debonnaire. Deus então assume para si esse caráter; e então ele diz, misericordioso; e ele acrescenta isso para que possamos saber que ele está sempre pronto para nos receber, se de fato formos a ele como à fonte de bondade e misericórdia. Mas as palavras que se seguem expressam mais claramente a sua misericórdia e mostram como Deus é misericordioso - até porque ele é abundante em compaixão e lento em irar-se. Deus então está inclinado à bondade; e embora os homens para quem ele olha sejam indignos, ele ainda é misericordioso; e isso ele expressa pela palavra רחום, rechum É ao mesmo tempo necessário acrescentar estas duas frases que ele é abundante em compaixão e lento em irar-se: - por que isso? Pois sempre buscamos em nós mesmos alguma causa para o favor de Deus; quando desejamos que Deus seja gentil conosco, perguntamos em nós mesmos por que ele deveria nos favorecer: e quando não encontramos nada, toda a fé que tínhamos antes a respeito da graça de Deus desaparece imediatamente. O Senhor, portanto, aqui nos chama a si mesmo e testemunha que ele é gentil e misericordioso, na medida em que é abundante em compaixão; como se ele dissesse: “Tenho em mim mesmo uma razão suficiente para ser acessível a você e para recebê-lo e mostrar-lhe favor”. Conseqüentemente, somente a bondade de Deus deve ser considerada por nós, quando desejamos sua misericórdia e quando precisamos de perdão. É como se ele tivesse dito que ele não é influenciado por qualquer consideração por nosso mérito, e que não é por méritos que ele está disposto à misericórdia quando pecamos, e que ele nos recebe em favor; mas que ele faz tudo isso porque sua bondade é infinita e inesgotável. E também é acrescentado que ele é lento em irar-se. Essa lentidão em irar-se prova que Deus provê a salvação da humanidade, mesmo quando ele é provocado por seus pecados. Embora os homens miseráveis provoquem Deus diariamente contra si mesmos, ele ainda continua a ter consideração pela sua salvação. Ele é, portanto, lento para a ira, o que significa que o Senhor não executa imediatamente o castigo que merecem aqueles que assim o provocam. Vemos agora então qual é a importância dessas palavras. Voltemos agora a isso – que Jonas se afastou de seu cargo, porque sabia que Deus era lento para a ira, e misericordioso, e cheio de graça: ele até recorreu a este raciocínio: “Ou Deus mudará sua natureza, ou poupará os ninivitas se eles se arrependerem: e pode ser que eles se arrependam; e então minha pregação será considerada falsa; pois Deus não negará a si mesmo, mas fornecerá um exemplo de sua bondade e misericórdia em perdoar este povo”. Podemos observar novamente que agimos perversamente quando seguimos sem discriminação o nosso próprio zelo: é de fato um fervor cego que então nos apressa. Embora então encontremos milhares de inconsistências quando Deus ordena qualquer coisa, nossos olhos devem estar fechados para elas, e devemos sempre seguir o curso de nosso chamado; pois ele regulará todos os eventos de tal maneira que todas as coisas redundarão em sua glória. Nesse caso, não cabe a nós ser excessivamente sábios; mas a melhor maneira é deixar nas mãos de Deus o resultado das coisas. Na verdade, cabe-nos temer e sentir-nos preocupados; mas a nossa ansiedade deve, ao mesmo tempo, estar em submissão a Deus, para que nos seja suficiente orar. Esta é a importância do todo. Agora, quanto ao que ele diz que Deus se arrepende do mal, já explicamos isto: significa que embora Deus já tenha levantado a mão, ele ainda a retirará, assim que vir qualquer arrependimento nos homens; pois o mal aqui deve ser considerado punição. O Senhor então, embora possa infligir com justiça punição extrema aos homens, ainda assim suspende seu julgamento, e quando eles vêm a ele em verdadeira penitência, ele é instantaneamente pacificado. Este é o arrependimento de Deus; diz-se que ele se arrepende quando perdoa livremente qualquer punição ou homens maus que tenham merecido, sempre que se odiam. Segue-se agora -

Jonas 4:3

We here see how angry Jonah was in his zeal: for this prayer cannot certainly be ascribed to his faith, as some think, who say that Jonah took a flight as it were in his soul to heaven, when he made this prayer, as though he dreaded not death, but having been divested of all fear, being free and disengaged, he presented himself to God. I do not think that the mind of Jonah was so heroic. There is indeed no doubt, as I have already said, but that he still retained some seed of piety; and this, I said, is sufficiently proved by the word prayer; for if Jonah had burst out in the strain of one in despair, it would not have been a prayer. Since then he prayed by thus speaking, it follows that it was not the cry of despair, but of too much displeasure, which Jonah did not restrain. In short, this prayer proceeded from a pious and holy zeal; but Jonah sinned as to its measure or excess; for he had in a manner forgotten himself, when he preferred death to life Thou Jehovah, he says, take me away. He was first not free from blame in hastily wishing to die; for it is not in our power to quit this world; but we ought with submissive minds to continue in it as long as God keeps us in the station in which we are placed. whosoever, then, hastens to death with so great an ardor no doubt offends God. Paul knew that death was desirable in his case, (Philippians 1:22;) but when he understood that his labor would be useful to the Church, he was contented with his lot, and preferred the will of God to his own will; and thus he was prepared both to live and to die, as it seemed good to God. It was otherwise with Jonah, “Now,” he says, “take away my life.” This was one fault; but the other was, — that he wished to die, because God spared the Ninevites. Though he was touched with some grief, he ought not yet to have gone so far as this, or rather to rush on, so as to desire death on account of the weariness of his life. But we hence learn to what extremes men are carried, when once they give loose reins to inconsiderate zeal. The holy Prophet Jonah, who had been lately tamed and subdued by so heavy a chastisements is now seized and carried away by a desire to die, — and why? because he thought that it was hard that he denounced destruction on the Ninevites, and that still their city remained safe. This example ought to check us, that we express not too boldly our opinion respecting the doings of God, but, on the contrary, hold our thoughts captive, lest any presumption of this kind be manifested by us; for there is none of us who does not condemn Jonah, as also he condemned himself; for he does not here narrate his own praise, but means to show how foolishly he had judged of God’s work. Jonah then confesses his own folly; and therefore his experience is to us an evidence that there is nothing more preposterous than for us to settle this or that according to our own wisdom, since this is alone true wisdom, to submit ourselves wholly to the will of God. Now if any one raises a question here, — whether it is lawful to desire death; the answer may be briefly this, — that death is not to be desired on account of the weariness of life; this is one thing: and by the weariness of life I understand that state of mind, when either poverty, or want, or disgrace, or any such thing, renders life hateful to us: but if any, through weariness on account of his sins and hatred to them, regrets his delay on earth, and can adopt the language of Paul, “Miserable am I, who will free me from the body of this death!” (Romans 7:24,) — he entertains a holy and pious wish, provided the submission, to which I have referred, be added so that this feeling may not break forth in opposition to the will of God; but that he who has such a desire may still suffer himself to be detained by his hand as long as he pleases. And further, when any one wishes to die, because he fears for himself as to the future, or dreads to undergo any evil, he also struggles against God; and such was the fault of Jonah; for he says that death was better to him than life, — and why? because the Lord had spared the Ninevites. We hence see how he was blinded, yea, carried away by a mad impulse to desire death. Let us then learn so to love this life as to be prepared to lay it down whenever the Lord pleases: let us also learn to desire death, but so as to live to the Lord, and to proceed in the race set before use until he himself lead us to its end. Now follows the reproof of God —

Jonas 4:4

There is no doubt but that God by thus reproving Jonah condemns his intemperate warmth. But since God alone is a fit judge of man’s conduct, there is no reason for us to boast that we are influenced by good intentions; for there is nothing more fallacious than our own balances. When therefore we weigh facts, deeds, and thoughts by our own judgment, we deceive ourselves. Were any disposed rhetorically to defend the conduct of Jonah, he might certainly muster up many specious pretenses; and were any one inclined to adduce excuses for Jonah, he might be made to appear to us altogether innocent: but though the whole world absolved him, what would it avail, since he was condemned by the mouth of God himself, who alone, as I have already stated, is the judge? We ought then to feel assured, that Jonah had done foolishly, even if no reason was apparent to us; for the authority of the Supreme Judge ought to be more than sufficient. Now God expressly condemns his wrath. Had Jonah modestly expostulated, and unburdened his griefs into the bosom of God, it would have been excusable; though his ardor would not have been free from blame, it might yet have been borne with. But now, when he is angry, it is past endurance; for wrath, as one says, is but short madness; and then it blinds the perceptions of men, it disturbs all the faculties of the soul. God then does not here in a slight manner condemn Jonah, but he shows how grievously he had fallen by allowing himself to become thus angry. We must at the same time remember, that Jonah had sinned not only by giving way to anger; he might have sinned, as we have said, without being angry. But God by this circumstance — that he thus became turbulent, enhances his sin. And it is certainly a most unseemly thing, when a mean creature rises up against God, and in a boisterous spirit contends with him: this is monstrous; and Jonah was in this state of mind. We hence see why an express mention is made of his anger, — God thus intended to bring conviction home to Jonah, that he might no more seek evasions. Had he simply said, “Why! how is it that thou dost not leave to me the supreme right of judging? If such is my will, why dost not thou submissively acknowledge that what I do is rightly done? Is it thy privilege to be so wise, as to dictate laws to me, or to correct my decisions?” — had the Lord thus spoken, there might have remained still some excuse; Jonah might have said, “Lord, I cannot restrain my grief, when I see thy name so profaned by unseemly reproaches; can I witness this with a calm mind?” He might thus have still sought some coverings for his grief; but when the Lord brought forward his anger, he must have been necessarily silenced; for what could be found to excuse Jonah, when he thus perversely rebelled, as I have said, against God, his Judge and Maker? We now then understand why God expressly declares that Jonah did not do well in being thus angry. But I wonder how it came into Jerome’s mind to say that Jonah is not here reproved by the Lord, but that something of an indifferent kind is mentioned. He was indeed a person who was by nature a sophister, (cavillator — a caviler;) and thus he wantonly trifled with the work of falsifying Scripture; he made no conscience of perverting passages of holy writ. As, for instance, when he writes about marriage, he says that they do not ill who marry, and yet that they do not well. What a sophistry is this, and how vapid! So also on this place, “God,” he says, “does not condemn Jonah, neither did he intend to reprove his sin; but, on the contrary, Jonah brings before us here the person of Christ, who sought death that the whole world might be saved; for when alive he could not do good to his own nation, he could not save his own kindred; he therefore preferred to devote himself and his life for the redemption of the world.” These are mere puerilities; and thus the whole meaning of this passage, as we clearly see, is distorted. But the question is more emphatical than if God had simply said, “Thou hast sinned by being thus angry;” for an affirmative sentence has not so much force as that which is in the form of a question. God then not only declares as a Judge that Jonah had not done well, but he also draws from him his own confession, as though he said, “Though thou art a judge in thine own cause, thou can’t not yet make a cover for thy passion, for thou art beyond measure angry.” For when he says לך, lak, with, or, in thyself, he reminds Jonah to examine his own heart, as though he said, “Look on thyself as in a mirror: thou wilt see what a boisterous sea is thy soul, being seized as thou art by so mad a rage.” We now then perceive not only the plain sense of the passage, but also the emphasis, which is contained in the questions which Jerome has turned to a meaning wholly contrary. I will not proceed farther; for what remains will be sufficient for to-morrow’s lecture.

Jonas 4:5

It may be here doubted whether Jonah had waited till the forty days had passed, and whether that time had arrived; for if we say that he went out of the city before the fortieth day, another question arises, how could he have known what would be? for we have not yet found that he had been informed by any oracular communication. But the words which we have noticed intimate that it was then known by the event itself, that God had spared the city from destruction; for in the last lecture it was said, that God had repented of the evil he had declared and had not done it. It hence appears that Jonah had not gone out of the city until the forty days had passed. But there comes again another question, what need had he to sit near the city, for it was evident enough that the purpose of God had changed, or at least that the sentence Jonah had pronounced was changed? he ought not then to have seated himself near the city as though he was doubtful. But I am inclined to adopt the conjecture, that Jonah went out after the fortieth day, for the words seem to countenance it. With regard to the question, why he yet doubted the event, when time seemed to have proved it, the answer may be readily given: though indeed the forty days had passed, yet Jonah stood as it were perplexed, because he could not as yet feel assured that what he had before proclaimed according to God’s command would be without its effect. I therefore doubt not but that Jonah was held perplexed by this thought, “Thou hast declared nothing rashly; how can it then be, that what God wished to be proclaimed by his own command and in his own name, should be now in vain, with no corresponding effect?” Since then Jonah had respect to God’s command, he could not immediately extricate himself from his doubts. This then was the cause why he sat waiting: it was, because he thought that though God’s vengeance was suspended, his preaching would not yet be in vain, but that the ruin of the city was at hand. This therefore was the reason why he still waited after the prefixed time, as though the event was still doubtful. Now that this may be more evident, let us bear in mind that the purpose of God was hidden, so that Jonah understood not all the parts of his vocation. God, then, when he threatened ruin to the Ninevites, designed to speak conditionally: for what could have been the benefit of the word, unless this condition was added, — that the Ninevites, if they repented, should be saved? There would otherwise have been no need of a Prophet; the Lord might have executed the judgment which the Ninevites deserved, had he not intended to regard their salvation. If any one objects by saying that a preacher was sent to render them inexcusable, — this would have been unusual; for God had executed all his other judgments without any previous denunciation, I mean, with regard to heathen nations: it was the peculiar privilege of the Church that the Prophets ever denounced the punishments which were at hand; but to other nations God made it known that he was their Judge, though he did not send Prophets to warn them. There was then included a condition, with regard to God’s purpose, when he commanded the Ninevites to be terrified by so express a declaration. But Jonah was, so to speak, too literal a teacher; for he did not include what he ought to have done, — that there was room for repentance, and that the city would be saved, if the Ninevites repented of their wickedness. Since then Jonah had learned only one half of his office, it is no wonder that his mind was still in doubt, and could not feel assured as to the issue; for he had nothing but the event, God had not yet made known to him what he would do. Let us now proceed —

Jonas 4:6

Before I proceed to treat on the contents of these verses, I will say a few things on the word קיקיון, kikiun; for there were formerly some disputes respecting this word. Some render it, a gourd; (eucurbitam) others think it to have been a cucumber. Free conjectures are commonly made respecting obscure and unknown things. However, the first rendering has been the received one: and Augustine says, that a tumult arose in some church, when the Bishop rend the new interpretation of Jerome, who said that it was the ivy. Those men were certainly thoughtless and foolish who were so offended for a matter so trifling; for they ought to have more carefully inquired which version was the best and most correct. And Augustine did not act so very wisely in this affair; for superstition so possessed him, that he was unwilling that the received version of the Old Testament should be changed. He indeed willingly allowed Jerome to translate the New Testament from the Greek original; but he would not have the Old Testament to be touched; for he entertained a suspicion of the Jews, — that as they were the most inveterate enemies of the faith, they would have tried to falsify the Law and the Prophets. As then Augustine had this suspicion, he preferred retaining the common version. And Jerome relates that he was traduced at Rome, because he had rendered it ivy instead of gourd; but he answered Augustine in a very severe and almost an angry manner; and he inveighed in high displeasure against some Cornelius and another by the name of Asinius Polio, who had accused him at Rome as one guilty of sacrilege, because he had changed this word. I cannot allege in excuse, that they peevishly rejected what was probable. But as to the thing itself, I would rather retain in this place the word gourd, or cucumber, than to cause any disturbance by a thing of no moment. Jerome himself confesses, that it was not ivy; for he says, that it was a kind of a shrub, and that it grows everywhere in Syria; he says that it was a shrub supported by its own stem, which is not the case with ivy; for the ivy, except it cleaves to a wall or to a tree, creeps on the ground. It could not then have been the ivy; and he ought not to have so translated it. He excuses himself and says, that if he had put down the Hebrew word, many would have dreamt it to have been a beast or a serpent. He therefore wished to put down something that was known. But he might also have caused many doubts: “Why! ivy is said to have ascended over the head of Jonah, and to have afforded him a shade; how could this have been?” Now I wonder why Jerome says in one place that the shrub was called in his time Cicion in the Syrian language; and he says in another place in his Commentaries, that it was called in the same language Elkeroa; which we see to be wholly different from the word קיקיון, kikiun. Now when he answered Augustine I doubt not but that he dissembled; for he knew that Augustine did not understand Hebrew: he therefore trifled with him as with a child, because he was ignorant. It seems to have been a new gloss, I know not what, invented at the time for his own convenience: I doubt not but that he at the moment formed the word, as there is some affinity between קיקיון, kikiun, and cicion. However it may have been, whether it was a gourd or a shrub, it is not necessary to dispute much how it could have grown so soon into so great a size. Jerome says, that it was a shrub with many leaves, and that it grew to the size of a vine. Be it so; but this shrub grows not in one day, nor in two, nor in three days. It must have therefore been something extraordinary. Neither the ivy, nor the gourd, nor any shrub, nor any tree, could have grown so quickly as to afford a cover to the head of Jonah: nor did this shrub alone give shelter to Jonah’s head; for it is more probable, that it was derived also from the booth which he had made for himself. Jonah then not only sheltered himself under the shrub, but had the booth as an additional cover, when he was not sufficiently defended from the heat of the sun. Hence God added this shrub to the shade afforded by the booth: for in those regions, as we know, the sun is very hot; and further, it was, as we shall see, an extraordinary heat. I wished to say thus much of the word ivy; and I have spoken more than I intended; but as there have been contentions formerly on the subject, I wished to notice what may be satisfactory even to curious readers. I come now to what is contained in this passage. Jonah tells us that a gourds or a cucumber, or an ivy, was prepared by the Lord. There is no doubt but that this shrub grew in a manner unusual, that it might be a cover to the booth of Jonah. So I view the passage. But God, we know, approaches nature, whenever he does anything beyond what nature is: this is not indeed always the case; but we generally find that God so works, as that he exceeds the course of nature, and yet from nature he does not wholly depart. For when in the desert he intended to collect together a great quantity of quails, that he might give meat to the people, he raised wind from the east, (Numbers 11:31.) How often the winds blew without bringing such an abundance of birds? It was therefore a miracle: but yet God did not wholly cast aside the assistance of nature; hence he made use of the wind; and yet the wind could not of itself bring these birds. So also in this place, God had chosen, I have no doubt, a herb, which soon ascended to a great height, and yet far surpassed the usual course of nature. In this sense, then, it is that God is said to have prepared the קיקיון, kikiun, and to have made it to ascend over Jonah’s head, that it might be for a shade to his head and free him from his distress.

Jonas 4:7

But it is said afterwards that a worm was prepared. We see here also, that what seemed to happen by chance was yet directed by the hidden providence of God. Should any one say, that what is here narrated does not commonly happen, but what once happened; to this I answer, — that though God then designed to exhibit a wonderful example, worthy of being remembered, it is yet ever true that the gnawing even of worms are directed by the counsel of God, so that neither a herb nor a tree withers independently of his purpose. The same truth is declared by Christ when he says, that without the Father’s appointment the sparrows fall not on the ground, (Matthew 10:29.) Thus much as to the worm.

Jonas 4:8

It is now added, that when the sun arose the day following, a wind was prepared. We here learn the same thing, — that winds do not of themselves rise, or by chance, but are stirred up by a Divine power. There may indeed be found causes in nature why now the air is tranquil, and then it is disturbed by winds; but God’s purpose regulates all these intermediate causes; so that this is ever true — that nature is not some blind impulse, but a law settled by the will of God. God then ever regulates by his own counsel and hand whatever happens. The only difference is, that his works which flow in the usual course have the name of nature; and they are miracles and retain not the name of nature, when God changes their wonted course; but yet they all proceed from God as their author. Therefore with regard to this wind, we must understand that it was not usual or common; and yet that winds are daily no less stirred up by God’s providence than this wind of which Jonah speaks. But God wrought then, so to speak, beyond the usual course of nature, though he daily preserves the regular order of nature itself. Let us now see why this whole narrative has been set down. Jonah confesses that he rejoiced with great joy, when he was sheltered from the extreme heat of the sun: but when the shrub withered, he was touched with so much grief that he wished to die. There is nothing superfluous here; for Jonah shows, with regard to his joy and his grief, how tender he was and how susceptible of both. Jonah here confesses his own sensibility, first by saying that he greatly rejoiced, and then by saying that he was so much grieved for the withered shrub, that through weariness of life he instantly desired death. There is then here an ingenuous confession of weakness; for Jonah in a very simple manner has mentioned both his joy and his grief. But he has distinctly expressed the vehemence of both feelings, that we might know that he was led away by his strong emotions, so that in the least things he was either inflamed with anger, or elated with joy beyond any bounds. This then was the case with him in his grief as well as in his joy. But he does not say that he prayed as before; but he adopts the word שאל, shal, which signifies to desire or wish. He desired, it is said, for his soul that he might die. It is hence probable that Jonah was so overwhelmed with grief that he did not lift up his heart to God; and yet we see that he was not neglected by God: for it immediately follows —

Jonas 4:9

We see here that God had concealed himself for a time, but did not yet forsake his servant. He often looks on us from behind; that is, though we think that he has forgotten us, he yet observes how we go on, that he may in due time afford help: and hence it is that he recovers and raises up the falling, before we perceive that he is near. This was his manner with Jonah, when he began to address him: for, as we have said, grief had so oppressed the mind of the holy Prophets that it could no longer be raised up to God. Hence he desired to die; and still God did not forsake him. This was no common example of the invaluable mercy of God, with which he favors his own people, even when they precipitate themselves into ruin: such was the case with Jonah, who rushed headlong into a state of despair, and cared not for any remedy. God then did not wait until he was sought, but anticipated miserable Jonah, who was now seeking destruction to himself. He says, Doest thou well that thou art thus angry for the gourd? As though he had said, that he was too violently disturbed for a matter so trifling. And we must ever bear that in mind, of which we spoke more fully yesterday, — that God did not merely reprove his servant, because he did not patiently bear the withering of the gourd — what then? but because he became angry; for in anger there is ever an excess. Since then Jonah was thus grieved beyond measure, and without any restraint, it was justly condemned by God as a fault. I will now not repeat what I said yesterday respecting the enhancing of the crime, inasmuch as Jonah not only murmured on account of the withering of the shrub, but also disregarded himself, and boiled over with displeasure beyond all due limits. And the answer of Jonah confirms this, I do well, he says, in being angry even to death. We here see how obstinately the holy Prophet repelled the admonition of God, by which he ought to have been restored to a right mind. He was not ignorant that God spoke. Why then was he not smitten with shame? Why was he not moved by the authority of the speaker, so as immediately to repress the fierceness of his mind? But thus it commonly happens, when the minds of men are once blinded by some wrong feeling; though the Lord may thunder and fulminate from heaven, they will not hear, at least they will not cease violently to resist, as Jonah does here. Since then we find such an example of perverseness in this holy man, how much more ought every one of us to fear? Let us hence learn to repress in time our feelings, and instantly at the beginning to bridle them, lest if they should burst forth to a greater extent, we become at last altogether obstinate. I do well, he says, in being angry even to death. God charged his servant Jonah with the vice of anger; Jonah now indulges himself in his own madness, so that he says that desperation is not a vice: I do not sin, he says, though I am despairing; though I abandon myself to death as with mad fury, I do not yet sin. Who could have thought that the holy Prophet could have been brought into this state of mind? But let us be reminded, as I have already said, by this remarkable example, how furious and unreasonable are the passions of our flesh. There is, therefore, nothing better than to restrain them, before they gather more strength than they ought; for when any one feeds his vices, this obstinacy and hardness always follow. But to be angry, or to be in a fume even to death, is to feel such a weariness of life, as to give ourselves up of our own accord to death. It was not indeed the design of Jonah to lay violent hands on himself; but though he abstained from violence, he yet, as to the purpose of his mind, procured death to himself; for he submitted not to God, but was carried away by a blind impulse, so that he wished to throw away his life. It now follows —

Jonas 4:10

Here God explains the design he had in suddenly raising up the gourd, and then in causing it to perish or wither through the gnawing of a worm; it was to teach Jonah that misconduct towards the Ninevites was very inhuman. Though we find that the holy Prophet had become a prey to dreadful feelings, yet God, by this exhibition, does in a manner remind him of his folly; for, under the representation of a gourd, he shows how unkindly he desired the destruction of so populous a city as Nineveh. Yet this comparison may appear ill suited for the purpose. Jonah felt sorry for the gourd, but he only regarded himself: hence he was displeased, because the relief with which he was pleased was taken away from him. As then this inconvenience had driven Jonah to anger, the similitude may not seem appropriate when God thus reasons, Thou wouldest spare the gourd, should I not spare this great city? Nay, but he was not concerned for the gourd itself: if all the gourds of the world withered, he would not have been touched with any grief; but as he felt the greatest danger being scorched by the extreme heat of the sun, it was on this account that he was angry. To this I answer, — that though Jonah consulted his own advantage, yet this similitude is most suitable: for God preserves men for the purpose for which he has designed them. Jonah grieved for the withering of the gourd, because he was deprived of its shade: and God does not create men in vain; it is then no wonder that he wishes them to be saved. We hence see that Jonah was not unsuitably taught by this representation, how inhumanely he conducted himself towards the Ninevites. He was certainly but one individual; since then he made such an account of himself and the gourd only, how was it that he cast aside all care for so great and so populous a city? Ought not this to have come to his mind, that it was no wonder that God, the Creator and Father, had a care for so many thousands of men? Though indeed the Ninevites were alienated from God, yet as they were men, God, as he is the Father of the whole human race, acknowledged them as his own, at least to such an extent as to give them the common light of day, and other blessings of earthly life. We now then understand the import of this comparison: “Thou wouldest spare,” he says, “the gourd, and should I not spare this great city?” It hence appears how frivolous is the gloss of Jerome, — that Jonah was not angry on account of the deliverance of the city, but because he saw that his own nation would, through its means, be destroyed: for God repeats again that Jonah’s feeling was quite different, — that he bore with indignity the deliverance of the city from ruin. And less to be endured it is still, that Jerome excuses Jonah by saying that he nobly and courageously answered God, that he had not sinned in being angry even to death. That man dared, without any shame or discernment, to invent a pretense that he might excuse so disgraceful an obstinacy. But it is enough for us to understand the real meaning of the Prophet. Here then he shows, according to God’s representation, that his cruelty was justly condemned for having anxiously desired the destruction of a populous city. But we ought to notice all the parts of the similitudes when he says, Thou wouldest have spared, etc. There is an emphasis in the pronoun אתה, ate, for God compares himself with Jonah; “Who art thou? Doubtless a mortal man is not so inclined to mercy as I am. But thou takest to thyself this right — to desire to spare the gourd, even thou who art made of clay. Now this gourd is not thy work, thou hast not labored for it, it has not proceeded from thy culture or toil; and further, thou hast not raised it up, and further still, it was the daughter of a night, and in one night it perished; it was an evanescent shrub or herb. If then thou regardest the nature of the gourd, if thou regardest thyself, and joinest together all the other circumstances, thou wilt find no reason for thy hot displeasure. But should not I, who am God, in whose hand are all things, whose prerogative and whose constant practice it is mercifully to bear with men — should not I spare them, though they were worthy of destruction? and should not I spare a great city? The matter here is not concerning a little plant, but a large number of people. And, in the last place, it is a city, in which there are a hundred and twenty thousand men who know not how to distinguish between their right hand and the left.” We now then see how emphatical are all the parts of this comparison. And though God’s design was to reprove the foolish and sinful grief of Jonah, we may yet further collect a general instruction by reasoning in this manner, “We feel for one another, and so nature inclines us, and yet we are wicked and cruel. If then men are inclined to mercy through some hidden impulse of nature, what may not be hoped from the inconceivable goodness of God, who is the Creator of the whole world, and the Father of us all? and will not he, who is the fountain of all goodness and mercy spare us?”

Jonas 4:11

Now as to the number, Jonah mentions here twelve times ten thousand men, and that is as we have said, one hundred and twenty thousand. God shows here how paternally he cares for mankind. Every one of us is cherished by him with singular care: but yet he records here a large number, that it might be more manifest that he so much regards mankind that he will not inconsiderately fulminate against any one nation. And what he adds, that they could not distinguish between the right hand and the left, is to be referred, I have no doubt, to their age; and this opinion has been almost universally received. Some one, however has expressed a fear lest the city should be made too large by allowing such a number of men: he has, therefore, promiscuously included the old, as well as those of middle age and infants. He says that these could not distinguish between the right hand and the left, because they had not been taught in the school of God, nor understood the difference between right and wrong; for the unbelieving, as we know, went astray in their errors. But this view is too strained; and besides, there is no reason for this comment; for that city, we know, was not only like some great cities, many of which are at this day in Europe, but it surpassed most of the principal cities at this day. We know that in Paris there are more than four hundred thousand souls: the same is the case with other cities. I therefore reject this comment, as though Jonah was here speaking of all the Ninevites. But God, on the contrary, intended to show, that though there was the justest reason for destroying entirely the whole city, there were yet other reasons which justified the suspension of so dreadful a vengeance; for many infants were there who had not, by their own transgressions, deserved such a destruction. God then shows here to Jonah that he had been carried away by his own merciless zeal. Though his zeal, as it has been said, arose from a good principle, yet Jonah was influenced by a feeling far too vehement. This God proved, by sparing so many infants hitherto innocent. And to infants he adds the brute animals. Oxen were certainly superior to shrubs. If Jonah justly grieved for one withering shrub, it was far more deplorable and cruel for so many innocent animals to perish. We hence see how apposite are all the parts of this similitude, to make Jonah to loathe his folly, and to be ashamed of it; for he had attempted to frustrate the secret purpose of God, and in a manner to overrule it by his own will, so that the Ninevites might not be spared, who yet labored by true repentance to anticipate the divine judgment.