Talk:Jonah 1:1-17

Verse 1:2

In coming back to what I wrote yesterday and trying to work some more, I realized in what complete disarray my comments of yesterday are in. I'd like to work through them, but let's be honest, I'm not an editor (and certainly not of my own stuff). I here issue a request, then, that someone enter the discussion on my verse 2 commentary directly so that I can rework my thoughts on these questions without having to do the tedious (and all-too-solitary) work of simply editing what I wrote. I'd much rather work it out in conversation. --Joe Spencer 13:55, 13 Sep 2006 (UTC)

Give me a little more time to try to make sense of "arise" as it occurs in Jonah. It's interesting to me that it occurs three times in the two different call narratives for a total of six times. I find the last occurrence in Jonah 3:6 most interesting where the king arises and then covered himself in ashes and sat in ashes. This exalt-then-abase vs. abase-then-exalt motif seems particularly interesting in Isaiah (hence my Isa 49:7 question and talk-page comment). Actually I think this should all be tied somehow back to our discussion of Job 42:6. That is, in the same sense that the king of Nineveh arises to repent, perhaps Job's "repenting of dust and ashes" should be viewed as both an arising and a descending. Can the king of Nineveh's arising be interpreted as a repenting of dust and ashes also? That is, he I think we could talk in terms of him repenting of the dust of kingship without God (kingship without God as one phrase here). But the fact that the king of Nineveh sits in ashes seems contrary to Job's repenting of ashes. Perhaps this is an significant point: the king of Nineveh is taking the first step of repentance which is effectively a descending step into ashes. In contrast, perhaps Job, who was "perfect" was simply at a different stage of repentance, the last step subsequent to being tried by God. Thus Job, in contrast to the king of Nineveh who was repenting of dust but in sackcloth and ashes, was repenting of both dust and ashes.... I need to consider all this a bit more before I feel ready to may any edits to the commentary. --RobertC 22:29, 13 Sep 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, Robert. Keep me posted, and I'll follow out some of these threads as well. --Joe Spencer 14:06, 14 Sep 2006 (UTC)

I'm thinking about the possibility of scrapping all the comments so far posted for verse 2 and starting fresh, so that I can think through the nature of "arise" again more clearly. Any complaints? It is not that I don't appreciate what has been written (by others and myself), but that I can't think through the word by editing (I'm too Nietzschean for that). Of course, the scrapped material would be in the history, and it can be resurrected later if what I work out doesn't work. Any thoughts? --Joe Spencer 13:57, 19 Sep 2006 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. I'll keep an eye on what you post and add anything you leave out if I think it's important. I'm entering into a pretty busy spell with teaching and research and will unfortunately probably be a bit more sparse.... --RobertC 18:54, 19 Sep 2006 (UTC)

Great stuff Joe, this helps a lot understand what you had in mind with the Matt 6:6 discussion. Similar ideas in Ex 3 come to mind immediately: the coming down of God in Ex 3:8 and the taking off of the shoes of Moses and Moses' autonomy to flee, and even the talking face to face (wherever that verse is)—all this seems to establish the calling as something somehow lying in the space between heaven and earth (which seems to suggest interesting parallels with the temple itself). --RobertC 19:00, 25 Sep 2006 (UTC)

On the one hand, I think what you're getting at here seems similar to a Christian type of rebirth. We are called to take up our crosses to follow Christ, to become new creatures in Christ. This very calling, like the Lord's prayer, presupposes a relationship with God. This invitation to a relationship creates a moment of truth, a moment of radical subjectivity if I'm understanding Joe's use of the term at all. Is this then the agency of man in the D&C sense? Also, what I think is interesting, is that BOM passages such as Alma 24:30 seem to address this issue in a related though quite different way in discussing the Lamanites vs. the Nephites who had fallen away (in Lehi's dream, these seem similar to those who taste the fruit and then wander off). From my recent Isaiah-centric perspective, I see this all elaborating on the interaction between God and Israel—he calls them but they do not respond (or, more similar to the fallen Nephites, God has called Israel, Israel responded by entering into a covenant with God, then Israel forgot God...) so he then "calls" them by the voice of many waters (i.e. the Assyrian army). This seems to be a way to differentiate between those that respond quick and voluntarily (contra those that are compelled to be humble in Alma 32). --RobertC 12:41, 26 Sep 2006 (UTC)