Review of Previous Posts
The posts in this Jonah Series of the Prophets Section explore meanings for the story of Jonah. The previous post, Number 6 of 14, was the third of four posts presenting several implications for the story of Jonah.
Preview of this Post
This is post 7 of 14 and is the fourth of four posts presenting implications for the story of Jonah.
- God does not change His mind
With further regard to God not punishing those who are not expected to know better, it should be noted that since the people of Nineveh were not punished for their actions, but were spared because of their response to the warning, it seems that God was changing His mind. Jonah seemed to be equating God’s actions with mercy and was misapplying the concept of mercy to mean changing consequences for actions knowingly taken. As was discussed in the essays on prayer and God’s Ground Rules, God cannot change consequences associated with actions as chaos will result because nobody could be sure that the consequences that they envision for any action will, indeed, occur. For the same reason, God cannot change His mind.
However, it appears that the situation in Jonah is different due to the fact that the Ninevites were non-believers and did not know right from wrong (they “did not know their left hand from their right”) and were considered along with the beasts of Nineveh. Thus, these people were not able to imagine consequences since they did not know right from wrong and no lessons would be learned by suffering consequences. Thus, the Ninevites were not spared because God changed His mind or was merciful toward them, they were not punished for actions taken due to their ignorance, they were instructed in what was right and wrong, and then they were given a clean slate since they now knew right from wrong. Furthermore, the Ninevites punished themselves by fasting and wearing sackcloth. Thus, there was no need for God to punish, and God did not change His mind, he merely withheld His punishment because He believed that the punishment inflicted by the Ninevites on themselves was adequate.
Furthermore, regarding the issue of God apparently changing His mind, it might be argued that God was not changing His mind with regard to the destruction of the Ninevites for their “wickedness,” instead He was actually keeping His word. He warned Nineveh that they would be destroyed if they did not change their ways which clearly implies that if they did change their ways they would not be destroyed. God sent Jonah to instruct the people of Nineveh in the ways of right. They changed their ways, and God kept His word – He did not punish further. This episode shows that God cares about everyone and understands when someone should know better and when they are not expected to know better. It also means that God will keep His word, even if doing so might endanger His people since the Ninevites were enemies of Israel and may be considered as being a threat.
The series “Imagination and Moral Responsibility” discusses the concept that encouraging desirable (“right”) consequences and discouraging undesirable (“wrong”) consequences is the aim of a moral code. If one does not or cannot know which is right and which is wrong, he cannot be held responsible for actions taken. Thus, the people of Nineveh, like the beasts of Nineveh, could not be held responsible for their actions taken prior to knowing the God of Israel since they did not know what was right and what was wrong.
Thus, we are left nearly where we began. God cannot change His mind or change consequences associated with actions knowingly taken. But the story of Jonah provides a little bit of refinement to this rule in that if one would not be expected to be able to visualize consequences, it is wrong to apply those consequences to him, but it is better to teach him the consequences and then apply them later if he chooses to act in a manner that is associated with those consequences.
Preview of the next post
The next post, Number 8 of 14, discusses what the story of Jonah teaches those who should know better, i.e., those who “know their right hand from their left.”