“Before we discuss it, Peter’le, there is a preliminary point to consider. Do other Minor Prophets deliver a message?”

“They do. Amos, for instance, criticises the opulence – the ostentatiousness – of upper-class society during the reign of Jeroboam II; Hoshea castigates the people’s failure to obey God’s commands and their wayward ways; Nahum tells us that sinful Nineveh will be punished.”

“So, in this regard they do not differ from Jonah, whose message we are going to consider. Or do they?

“I believe they do, Maestro. The message of prophets other than Jonah emerges from their sermons or prophecies. Jonah differs: the message is derived from the narrative; not from the prophet’s mouth. And it deals with the very nature of God. Unlike all other prophetic tomes, Jonah is a parable.”

“Why then is Jonah not placed in the last section of the Old Testament: The Scriptures (Ketuvim)?”

“An historical accident or, perhaps, an attempt to ensure that it would not be assailed. Contextually, it should have been placed beside other wisdom tomes, such as Job and Ecclesiastes.”

“Alright, let us then turn to the message. How is it spelt out?”

“The author is articulate. He presents two points of view or conceptual approaches. One is Jonah’s. It typifies the restrictive theology of Esra and Nehemiah, who treat Jehovah as the God of the Jews. They preach segregation. In a sense, their outlook is echoed in Jonah’s decision to escape God. On the one hand, he knows that Jehovah has created the entire world. On the other hand, he believes that Judah is special to him, so that by running away he distances himself from God’s call.”

“Surely, Peter’le, Jonah must have known that God’s word can be heard anywhere. God addressed Moses, Ezekiel and Jeremiah in places other than Judah.”

“He should have known. All the same, he thinks that by sailing to Tarshish, he will manage to escape his vocation. He means to thwart God’s call. The sea tempest proves him wrong.”

“And what is the other point of view? And whose is it?”

“The other point of view emphasises God’s universality. Being the creator of everything, repentance and God’s mercy are available to everybody, including the fierce and destructive Assyrian. When they pray to God and mend their evil ways, God forgives them, has mercy on them and does not destroy them.”

“Does Jonah come down in favour of one of these incompatible approaches?”

“The tome does. It prefers the latter approach, which sounds loud and clear in the rhetorical question, cited earlier on. Jehovah tells Jonah that repentance and God’s mercy are not confined to the Jewish community. God is universal.”

“Point taken,” said Theophil. “To comprehend the implication of Jonah’s message and outlook let us have a closer look at the manner it describes gentiles.”

“The sailors are described in a very positive and humane manner. When Jonah tells them that his escapade is the cause of the storm, they voice their displeasure by asking Jonah: ‘What have you done’. They would appear to have realised the inconsistence between Jonah belief that Jehovah created the entire world and his attempt to flee.”

“Are they outraged when the realise that Jonah has jeopardised the safety of themselves and the entire ship? Do they wish to take revenge?”

“Far from it. They try to raw back to land, where Jonah would have disembarked. They try to save both themselves as well as him. And they ask God to save them from spilling blood. It is only when their salvage efforts fail, that they throw Jonah overboard.”

“And Peter’le, how about Nineveh? Is its description negative?”

“It is not. When Jonah predicts imminent doom, the King and population repent and declare a fast. And they ‘believe in God’.”

“Would you say that Jonah outlook is compatible with Ezra’s and Nehemiah’s?”

“It is not. Ezra and Nehemiah preach segregation. And Nehemiah’s description of gentile leaders and politicians is hostile. He tells us that when the Jews sought to restore the city’s fortifications, they had to arm themselves so as to repel disruptive attacks of gentiles.”

“Which approach was common?”

“The official approach in Jehud was that of Ezra and Nehemiah: segregation. It is most clearly stated, at a much earlier period, when Balaam describes the Hebrews as ‘a nation that dwells apart’ [Num. 23:9]. In the Diaspora Jews had to coexist with Gentiles and mix with them. Intermarriage was acceptable, especially in Elephantine. This tolerant attitude is embraced by Jonah’s author.”

“I thought, Peter’le, that mixed marriages were common even in Judah and later on in Jehud? For instance, Samson married a Philistine girl and in Ruth Boaz marries a Moabite woman. Also, Nehemiah refers to such marriages and Esther married a Persian king.”

“True, Maestro; but such marriages were accepted grudgingly. Obviously, Nehemiah disapproves; Samson’s parents wonder why he does not marry a local girl; and in Esther we are told that she ‘was taken’ to the king’s harem. Still, there is no hint that the Jews in Susa disapproved of the match. So here we witness the rather tolerant approach prevailing in the Diaspora.”

“What you really say, Peter’le, is that the Diaspora’s easy-going ‘live and let live’ philosophy is embraced in both books.”

“Quite so. You will recall that this is one ground for my belief that Jonah was composed in the Diaspora.”

“I do, Peter’le. Does this difference in approach affect conversion policies?”

“It does. In his prayer from the belly of the fish, Jonah says that those ‘that guard lying vanities forsake their loyalties.’ This implies that conversion to belief in Jehovah entails abandonment of other deities.”

“Is this the current stand of Judaism?”

“It is, Maestro. Orthodox Judaism discourages conversion. To be accepted into the fold, a would be convert has to follow given rituals, including circumcision in the case of males. But Jonah’s approach is far less rigid. The sailors make sacrifices and take vows to Jehovah without first discarding their own deities. And Nineveh’s repentance triggers His mercy although it is not suggested that they converted. Further, King II 17:24-34 advises that gentiles exiled to Palestine worshipped both their own gods and Jehova.”

“Was conversion freely available?”

“I think it was. Ruth’s declaration that she accepts Naomi’s God, viz. Jehova, constitutes conversion. Similarly, Esther [8;17] tells us that many people throughout the Persian Empire ‘became Jews.’ Something akin to ‘an act of faith’ was the only requisite. And people did not have to discard their traditional deities.”

“Any other aspects of the message you consider relevant, Peter’le?”

“Just one. In his prayer Jonah tells us that in his adversity he remembered Jehova. There is here an indictment of those, who recall God’s capacity to help them, when they face a calamity.”

“Am glad you spotted this point. Religion thrives when mankind encounters a crisis. A slang expression tells the story. It is: Fox Hole religion. In periods of peace places of worship become empty. Well, why don’t you sum up the message conveyed by Jonah.”

“The book emphasises the universality of God and his mercy. Redemption is available to people other than Jews.”

“Is this message echoed in other Biblical books?”

“It is. Job discussed the theodicy issue but all principal character (except Elihu) are gentiles. Quohelet (Ecclesiastes) tells us that ‘all’ is vanity, and Ruth and Esther indicate that God’s faith can be embraced universally and that conversion is straightforward.”

“What then is special about Jonah?”

“It is a polemic. Quite apart from preaching God’s universality it ridicules the doctrinal approach of Ezra and Nehemiah. Jonah – the prophet – typifies this stand. The book exposes the futility of his rebellion and challenges his philosophy.”

“Why then did the book survive? Why was it not supressed or excluded from the canon?”

“I suspect that this was due to its attribution to a prophet referred to in Kings II. And Maestro, our analysis supports my argument that the book was composed in the Diaspora.”

“Please explain.”

“The great historian, Josephus Flavius, relates that 2nd Temple Judaism comprised three

parties, or schools of thought: Pharisees, Zadokites and Essenes. The existence of other, smaller sects, in Jehud and later in Judah cannot be ruled out. Neither his The Jewish War (known as The War of the Jews and the Romans) nor Antiquities of the Jews refers to the Qumran sect, which existed during his period (the 1st century CE). And he may also have left out other small and exclusive sects. But, of course, his discussion is confined to the political landscape in Palestine. He did not deal with Diaspora Judaism.”

“Is there any source about such sects?”

“We do not have accounts made in the 5th century BCE. Later, during the first half of the 1st century CE, Philo of Alexandria describes an ascetic Jewish group, the Therapeutae, living just outside Alexandria. Philo presents them as a Diaspora counterpart to the Essenes – models of spiritual discipline and philosophical devotion.”

“But Peter’le, why is this group relevant? They are discussed in a tome written long after the composition of Jonah.”

“True. Still, Philo describes them as being of antiquity. But this not the main point. It is quite possible that other sects, or schools of thought, existed in the Diaspora, even if not mentioned in existing records.”

“Can you think of any location?”

“Once again, I have to come back to my hunch respecting Elephantine. We know that this community had its own temple. It was destroyed during unrests in 410 BCE. After obtaining approval, inter alia, from the establishment in Jerusalem, it was rebuilt on a smaller scale and without an altar in 407 or 404. Basically, this means that it became a synagogue. There is evidence of its existence during the next century.”

“I hear you. But why, then, is it relevant?”

“The community in Elephantine had a liberal outlook and mixed with the local population. A sect opposed to the Jehud rigidity might have thrived there. But, of course, we cannot be certain. There was correspondence between Elephantine and Jerusalem. But the trip was lengthy: it took up to four to six or even weeks.”

“By land or sea? Give me some details, please.”

“Sea was the gentler master. One drifted down the Nile to Heraklion or Naucratis, then along the Mediterranean coast to Jaffa, and onwards overland to Jerusalem. The period I mentioned, takes into account waiting time. A land route by caravans was also available.”

“So Elephantine was not cut off Jerusalem. Still, the trip was lengthy. You, Peter’le, weave a tempting thread. But let us keep the loom visible.”

“Maestro, I am aware that this militates against my hunch. this can be argued against my hunch. Still, I do take the view that Jonah, which I believe was composed in the Diaspora, challenges the doctrine of segregation voiced by Ezra and Nehemiah and adopted by the community in Babylon. Members of the Elephantine community might have taken such a stance.”

“They might, Peter’le. But would their voice be heard in Jerusalem?”

“We cannot be certain. Still, distance does not mean isolation. Despite the lengthy trip, Elephantine was threaded into the fabric of Persian-era Jewish life. Their voice, I believe, was not silenced by their remoteness from Jehud.”