Ecology and the Christian Life

Our natural world consists of various ecological systems, in which plants and animals interact in complicated ways. A scriptural example of this is found in Psalm 104:10-21, which describes an ecosystem consisting of plants, animals, and humans. A food chain is described that includes herbivores, carnivores, and omnivores, and the passage repeatedly emphasizes God's care for his creatures. God has created the natural world in such a way that living things rely on one another in symbiotic relationships. Many ecosystems contain a keystone species, and if this species is removed, the entire ecosystem will suffer drastically. 

The ecology of the natural world is a great analogy for the spiritual ecologies that exist among Christians. God does not intend for Christians to operate on their own. At the very beginning of creation, God said that it was a not good for the man to be alone (Genesis 2:18), and God provided him with companionship in the form of his wife. The man, his wife, and their children form an interconnected system of relationships. Each member of the family has a role to play. According to 1 Corinthians 11:12, neither man nor woman can exist without the other. 

In addition to family, another important connection that Christians share is in the church. In 1 Corinthians 12, the church is likened unto a human body where each member has its function and role to play in the greater system. Every part of the body is important and necessary for its proper function. The interconnected nature of the body is emphasized in 1 Corinthians 12:26, where we are told that if one member suffers, the rest of the body suffers with it. Likewise, when one member is honored, the entire body rejoices with it. It is important that we as Christians participate in these church relationships and fulfill the unique calling that each of us has received from God. 

We also need to realize that all of these ecologies, including the church, are interactive. Many Christians attend church passively, listening to the music and preaching, but not participating in a meaningful way. According to Ephesians 4:16, every part of the body needs to contribute in order for the body to edify itself in love. Although some roles in the church are more prominent than others, each member should seek to participate and use their unique spiritual gifts for the benefit of the entire congregation. Just as the lack of a certain species can harm an ecosystem in nature, the church is also harmed when a member is missing or not fulfilling their calling.

The Canon of Scripture

The English word "canon" comes from the Greek word κανών, which means "list," "rule," or "standard" (Klein 2017, 165). This Greek word is used in Philippians 3:16, where Paul tells the Philippians that we should all walk by the same rule, the underlying Greek word for "rule" being κανών. In the context of studying the Bible, the word "canon" refers to the authoritative list of books that make up the Holy Bible. For evangelical Christians, that list consists of 66 books from Genesis to Revelation. 

All the books which now make up the New Testament were written in the first century A.D. In the following centuries, these books were read, preached, and used by Christians in various parts of the world. However, other texts like the Epistle of Barnabas and the shepherd of Hermas also enjoyed relatively short-lived popularity in certain Christian circles (Klein 2017, 174). These texts would ultimately be discarded as non-canonical. Early Christians ultimately felt the need for an authoritative canon of scripture due to heretics like Marcion, who removed anything from the New Testament that did not fit his heretical theology (Ibid.). An authoritative list would prevent true scripture from being removed, and it would also prevent spurious scriptures from being added. 

There were a few basic criteria for a book to be considered for the New Testament canon. First, it needed to be tied to an apostle. All the books of the New Testament are either written by apostles, or by men who were closely connected to an apostle or with Jesus (Ibid., 179). Second, it needed to be in harmony with the rest of the New Testament with respect to its doctrine. Another way of saying this is that it should not contradict any other book of the New Testament (Ibid.). Third, it needed to have the widespread acceptance of Christians in general, as opposed to only having been accepted by a certain group or certain geography. Books that made it into the canon had stood the test of time and had been effectively used by Christians throughout the world. 

In my opinion, the most important criterion for canonicity is that a book be in harmony with the rest of the New Testament. If a book were to teach heretical doctrine, it could not possibly come from God, and it therefore should not be included. I think the least important criterion is that a book be tied to an apostle. The human author is not the most important consideration when determining canonicity. If we think about the Old Testament, there are very many books whose author is completely unknown. We know they are God's word because of their power and their consistency with the rest of scripture.

It is important to note that "[t]he process of canonization did not grant biblical books their authority" (Klein 2017, 180). The production of an authoritative list of books for the New Testament simply formalized something that was already de facto agreed upon by the majority of Christians. The books of the New Testament are authoritative because they stand out as being divinely inspired. Another way of saying this is that the scriptures are self-authenticating. Without self-attestation, something other than the scriptures would have to be our final authority. The scriptures show themselves to be the word of God by having a power that man-made books simply do not have. 

If someone claimed to me that the canon of scripture should still be open, I would point out that any new discoveries at this late date could not possibly be God's word. God promised repeatedly to preserve his word (e.g., Matt. 5:18, 24:35) so something that has been buried for centuries does not fit that bill. God clearly preserved the rest of his word over the past 2,000 years, so it would make no sense that he had allowed part of the Bible to perish for thousands of years, only to be rediscovered later. 

Bibliography 

Klein, William W., Craig L. Blomberg, and Robert L. Hubbard, Jr. Introduction to Biblical Interpretation. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2017. 

The Whole Armor of God

We as Christians are continually involved in spiritual warfare. On the one hand, Satan himself is seeking to devour us (1 Pet. 5:8), and on the other hand, the human enemies of the Gospel are persecuting us for seeking to live a godly Christian life (2 Tim. 3:12). In order to stand up to this onslaught, we will need to be strong in the Lord and not rely on our human strength alone. The battle is spiritual in nature, and it will take spiritual fortitude to win the victory. For example, if a preacher gets up and preaches a hard truth from the word of God, he may face a backlash from people who don't know or don't care what the Bible says. Humanly speaking, he may be tempted to walk back his biblical statements since so many people are saying that he is wrong. However, if he is strong in the Lord, he will have enough faith to stand by his guns about what the Bible says and not water down the message.

If we are going to effectively stand, we need to first make sure that we are grounded in truth, which is why the first step to putting on the whole armor of God is having our "loins girt about with truth" (Eph. 6:14). Taking a stand is of no value if we are standing for something that is not even true. God's word is truth (John 17:17), and we need to make sure that everything we believe is derived from scripture. Possessing the truth and being confident that it is in fact the truth will give us boldness to stand in the evil day. 

The next piece of armor, the breastplate of righteousness, is also of critical importance since it involves putting the truths we know into practice. The truths of God's word give us "instruction in righteousness" (2 Tim. 3:16), and being a doer of the word means living out those truths in our day-to-day lives. For example, the Bible teaches that we should use corporal punishment on our children (Prov. 23:13-14). The world may criticize or condemn this type of parenting, but we know from the Bible that this is a timeless truth. There may be times that we doubt the wisdom of this teaching, but if we do what the Bible says in spite of what others may say or do, we are protected by the breastplate of righteousness. Knowing the truth and putting it into practice is a powerful combination. 

The next step in putting on the whole armor of God is having our feet shod with the preparation of the Gospel of peace. Many Christians are not actively involved with evangelizing the lost. In many cases, even if an opportunity to share the Gospel were to fall right into their laps, they would be unprepared. By continually sharing the Gospel, and thus being prepared to do so whenever the opportunity arises, we are also protecting ourselves from the Devil's attacks. This may seem counterintuitive, but upon further reflection, it makes a lot of sense. Preaching the Gospel to the lost keeps the Gospel on our minds continually which strengthens us spiritually. The Gospel will be more real and fresh to the person who is regularly witnessing to the lost, than to the person who rarely, if ever, gives the plan of salvation to anyone. 

The shield of faith has to do with believing what the Bible says in spite of the doubts that may arise. This world has an agenda to get us to doubt the word of God, and when we hit a spiritual low point, the Devil will seek to sow doubt in our minds about the way we have chosen to live our lives in accordance with scripture. He will also try to get us to doubt our salvation, which is why the helmet of the hope of salvation is so important. The more we read our Bibles and the more we listen to the Bible being preached, the stronger our faith will be. Putting the Bible into practice will also strengthen our faith as we learn from experience that God's way is the right way. Preaching the Gospel will also assure us of our own salvation as we constantly revisit the fact that we are saved by grace through faith (Eph. 2:8). Ultimately, every piece of armor is about having total faith in the truth of God's word. 

Conclusion

The whole armor of God is essential to living the Christian life, and putting on the whole armor is an exercise in trusting God and his word. Although we as Christians do not wrestle against flesh and blood, we are involved in spiritual warfare every day. The Devil and his minions want to create doubt in the word of God, which will ultimately lead to Christians becoming backslidden and failing to stand. The catalog of armor found in Ephesians 6 provides us with a checklist to ensure that our faith remains unshaken, and that we are able to stand in the evil day. 

Why the Book of Jonah Should be Taken Literally as History

 First I will give a few of the best arguments for Jonah not being literal, and then I will explain why Jonah should be read as a literal history.

Arguments for Jonah not being literal

For me, the most compelling argument as to why someone would view Jonah as a work of fiction is that the literary devices in the book, such as irony and poetic justice, are almost too perfect. Everything that happens in the story is so extreme, that one could be tempted to believe that it did not actually happen in real life. For example, Jonah is fast asleep while the ship is going through an intense storm that is on the verge of tearing the ship apart. The heathen sailors are rebuking the man of God for not praying. The heathen sailors are all converted to worshiping the LORD. Later, the men of Nineveh convert to worshiping the LORD en masse. All of these plot points are so extreme that I can see why someone might think that this is a parable using radical situations to drive home a spiritual truth, as opposed to documenting events that actually happened. 

Another somewhat compelling argument is that there seems to be a lack of historical context in the sense that we are not given the names of any kings who are reigning. There is nothing in the book itself to tell us when these events happened, other than the identity of Jonah himself, whom we can place in a historical context based on 2 Kings 14:25. The book immediately jumps into the action in Jonah 1:1 and ends abruptly in Jonah 4:11. Other narrative books tend to give more historical context either at the beginning or end of the book, or in both places. 

Arguments for Jonah being literal

The Bible contains many genres, but some genres are more common than others. There are large sections of the Old Testament that are clearly historical narratives, whereas there are relatively few allegories and parables. Therefore, it stands to reason that we would start with the assumption that Jonah is yet another historical narrative, and that we would not regard it as fictional without a very compelling reason.[1] 

Some would point to a late composition date as a reason to regard the book of Jonah as fictional, but this argument is flawed for a couple reasons. First, we cannot be sure that Jonah was composed at a late date. The book's use of the word טעם is considered an Aramaism,[2] but this is not necessarily indicative of late composition. The action is taking place in a foreign country, so the use of a somewhat exotic word is not too surprising. Second, even if the book were composed many centuries after the events it records, this does not mean it is not recording real events. Many historical narratives in the Old Testament were written centuries after the fact. Scripture is inspired by God, and therefore it does not rely on human memory or eyewitnesses alone to get the story right. 

Another objection to the historicity of Jonah is that it seems far-fetched that the capital of the Assyrian empire would have such dramatic repentance, and that there would be no historical record of it. First, the vast majority of historical records from antiquity have not survived, so absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Second, the book of Jonah never refers to Nineveh as the capital of the Assyrian empire, and it never refers to Nineveh's king as the king of Assyria.[3] In fact, if we use 2 Kings 14:25 to place the book of Jonah in its proper historical context, we find that Nineveh was decidedly not the capital of the Assyrian empire at this time.[4] Therefore, we can conclude that the king of Nineveh was the king of the city of Nineveh alone, which is the only claim being made by the Bible. It is thus one city that repented at the preaching of Nineveh, and the historical record of this event is the book of Jonah itself. Nothing else regarding this incident has survived. 

A good reason not to regard Jonah as a parable is the length of the book. Parables tend to be much shorter than the book of Jonah. Parables in both the Old and New Testaments tend to be a few verses long.[5] Even a long parable, like the story of the prodigal son, is only 22 verses long. The book of Jonah on the other hand is 48 verses long, which is substantially longer than the longest of biblical parables. Also, the book of Jonah consists of four distinct chapters, which makes it too long and complex to fit the genre of being parable. Furthermore, parables do not use names. A parable would speak of "a certain prophet" not "Jonah the son of Amittai." 

Parables tend to tell stories about things that happen, or at least could happen, in everyday life.[6] I have often heard a parable defined as "an earthly story with a heavenly meaning." The book of Jonah, on the other hand, is far from describing ordinary life. It is packed with miracles and supernatural occurrences. Thus, it is ironic that scholars would point to the extraordinary occurrences in the book of Jonah as evidence that it is parable, when in reality, those are some of the very reasons why it could never be considered a parable.[7]   

Conclusion

I am fully convinced that Jonah should be read as history and not as a work of fiction or a parable. In addition to the compelling reasons listed above, the most powerful evidence is the way that Christ himself referred to Jonah. Jesus compared his own death, burial, and resurrection to the ordeal of Jonah in the whale, and he referred to it as a "sign." Just as Jonah was a sign to the Ninevites, Jesus was a sign to his own generation (Luke 11:30). The miraculous sign of Jonah being swallowed by a whale and regurgitated was likely instrumental in Nineveh's mass repentance.[8] If it did not actually happen, then why would Jesus compare the miracle of his actual resurrection to a sign that was not real? 

[1] Douglas Judisch, "The Historicity of Jonah," Concordia Theological Quarterly 63, no. 2 (April 1999): 146. 

[2] Paul J. N. Lawrence, "Assyrian Nobles and the Book of Jonah," Tyndale Bulletin 37 (1986): 121.

[3] Jay Lemanski, "Jonah's Nineveh," Concordia Journal (January 1992): 42.

[4] Ibid. 

[5] Judisch, "The Historicity of Jonah," 149.

[6] Ibid., 152. 

[7] Ibid. 

[8] Eugene H. Merrill, "The Sign of Jonah," Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 23, no. 1 (March 1980): 29.

Bibliography 

Judisch, Douglas. "The Historicity of Jonah." Concordia Theological Quarterly 63, no. 2 (April 1999): 144-157. 

Lawrence, Paul J. N. "Assyrian Nobles and the Book of Jonah." Tyndale Bulletin 37 (1986): 121-132. 

Lemanski, Jay. "Jonah's Nineveh." Concordia Journal (January 1992): 40-49.

Merrill, Eugene H. "The Sign of Jonah." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 23, no. 1 (March 1980): 23-30.