Non Sequitur by Wiley Miller for January 20, 2011

A bit? Whoa!

That might be hard to swallow.

It’s beginning to make sense…………….

Is he the guy who ate the whale?

Never did buy that fish tale.

I bet Ira wants a drink of water about now.

Lewreader, actually, it was the large fish that swallowed him.

Say, Are you talking about Suze Orman’s money management books?

sayhowURfeelingB4URgone said: Everyone enjoys a nice little fictional story, of myths and fables, to fill some sort of empty void….

Aesop thought so, too. There’s more raw truth in one of his fables, about the world and who we are as creatures in it, than in any talking-head opinion show you’ll see on TV. Then there’s Shakespeare….

Even if Genesis 1:1 means nothing to you – and if it doesn’t, neither will the rest of the Bible – you could still learn from it.

Before you make a fish joke, remember that the fairy tale states that Jonah was swallowed by a whale, and whales are mammals.

the fish was either an Alien Sub or Space-ship, if it really happened.

Well, actually — and not that it matters to the point of the story, but I enjoy being fussy :) — “great fish” is a better translation than “whale”.

Whales are not found in the Mediterranean Sea, but basking sharks and (rarely) whale sharks are. These two are the largest of the sharks, whale-sized with enormous mouths easily capable of swallowing a man whole — although they’re non-aggressive filter feeders, and live on plankton. If one did swallow a man, it would have a massive bellyache…which would explain why Jonah’s host vomited him up onto the beach three days later. :)

Anyway, marine biology is not the point of the Book of Jonah — that would be God’s mercy and loving provision, even when we least deserve it. (And centuries later Jesus referred back to it as foreshadowing his three days in the tomb.) But the writer of the Book of Jonah knew his stuff.

Nothing original there – every fisherman exaggerates the size of his catch! (When the fish told the story, he probably made Jonah out to be Goliath’s brother…)

Ignorant people criticize things they have never read.

The Old Testament story says “great fish”. The New Testament reference to Jonah says “whale” Just more proof of the “inerrancy” of the bible.

And sometimes depends on the prejudice of the translator, Runar. Why there are so many different translations. And still so many get saved by the most published book ever written.

By the way, several human beings HAVE been swallowed by whales and survived, though much the worse for wear. Some suggest it was a giant grouper.

And ignorant people can read it and still not get it, Scooter.

Thing about Jonah was that Nineveh was a city that worshiped the Fish and Jonah being spewed right on their shores from a great fish would easily help explain the massive revival of the city, said to have some possible non-Biblical confirmation.

Even if you see it as allegory, it is a great tale of someone used by God Despite his own bias.

runar, please. “Inerrancy” refers to the meaning and the concepts being expressed, not (to any serious scholar) a particular word that might be translated differently or paraphrased without changing its meaning in context.

Any Bible you find in a hotel room drawer is the end product of an awesome history of heroic scholarship. The Old Testament is a translation from ancient Hebrew; the New Testament is a translation from ancient colloquial Greek, the language it was written in — and that was a translation from Aramaic, the spoken language of the time and place. Where the New Testament quotes the Old, it usually quotes the Septuagint translation from ancient Hebrew into colloquial Greek, which was made several centuries before Christ, and was probably more familiar to his hearers than the original.

And finally, any English translation, and there have been many, is the result of centuries of effort by the best scholars of their time to render the ancient content into terms a contemporary reader could understand, while staying as true as possible to the original meaning. All things considered, the remarkable thing about the Bible isn’t the occasional changes in wording, but the astonishing consistency of it within itself, and over the thousands of years it was compiled and copied and translated. (Yes, I know, this could start a lively discussion with those who sincerely believe that their favorite English translation is the one and only true one. With the deepest respect to the sincerity of their faith, I’ll say only that I think they’re ignoring the history and missing the point, and I think it best to leave it at that.)

Bottom line, runar, whether it’s “great fish” or “whale” simply doesn’t matter — it’s what the narrative says, about its content and about us. If you actually read it with an open mind and heart, I think you’ll find that it’s inerrant enough in that way.

I am beyond caring. I will just watch you learned,righteous folks fight it out. Comics are serious sh, oops I mean stuff. Peace

SCAATY_423, please, tell me something I don’t already know. I happen to own a number of biblical texts, including several different versions and several different languages (including New Testament Greek). What you and freeholder said is the scholarly view. What I’m talking about is the view of the rank and file flock member who sits in front of a pulpit (or TV screen) and regurgitates what he thinks he’s heard and calls it “faith”. Sorry to have spurred you to go to all that trouble

I’m with you 1OldDude

Wiley made a good funny today

Come on, people - it’s a joke about publishing, not religion.

Have you forgotten when James Frey’s “autobiography” “A Million Little Pieces,” was exposed as a piece of fiction (with a million little lies) after Oprah had hyped it on her show in ‘06?

Among his claims was that he’d spent time in prison, when he’d really been in jail overnight on a traffic violation.

And of course there are the countless books by politicians (including, I believe, the recently convicted Tom DeLay) claiming they were framed by the ‘liberal media.’

I’d spent years working in bookstores, and I’ve shoveled a ton of B.$. marketed as non-fiction.

I remember a follow-up story about an old time sailor who was swallowed by a sperm whale during a whale hunt … they cut him out of the stomach after catching the whale, expecting him to be dead, but he was still alive, though the worse for wear. His skin was damaged and bleached almost white from the stomach acids of the whale. I’m sure his mental state was not much better. But it proved a person could be swallowed by a large fish/whale and survive. While I do believe the story of Jonah (I think it was a large fish more than a specific whale), can you imagine the impact of a guy suddenly showing up on your street, telling you your town is being destroyed in 30 days AND he looks like a ghost and smells like the devil? For a society without TV and special effects movies, that would be very convincing!

Jonah would have preferred to tell about the one that got away?

runar, no trouble at all. I rather enjoyed it. :) I apologize for going on at length about what you already know; I intended no disrespect in doing so.

“What I’m talking about is the view of the rank and file flock member who sits in front of a pulpit (or TV screen) and regurgitates what he thinks he’s heard and calls it ‘faith’.” That’s too true — and the same applies to those who listen to self-inflated political pundits on the same TV screens. It’s easier to take something as spoon-fed Gospel (whether religion or politics) without thinking about it.

NightShade09 said: “Come on, people - it’s a joke about publishing, not religion.”

Looking back at it, you’re absolutely right…and you’re the only one of us who picked up on that. :) The rest of us went off on our pet tangents. No wonder we leave Wiley shaking his head about us!

“Jonah, we cannot continue this discussion while you have a mouthful of fisherman!”

the story had to start somewhere, LOL! Wiley, THANKS!

WHAT?

Wiley, This strip could work as the back story to Moby Dick, too, but the comments would not have been as lively.

Thanks for the laugh.

Scatty

This would be the same merciful god that sent two she bears to kill 42 children for taunting a bald man?

@plus4: No one denies that the bible is old. Like, seriously old. You’d also have to be a real ninker to ignore that many of the locations, people and events have been historically or archeologically proved as real.

But those two points do not a religion prove.

I could point you towards a certain comic/illustrated novel series by Neil Gaiman that has several events that link in to historical, recorded fact - yet it is a work of fiction… or as some people have coined the style - faction (factual fiction, clever!). What I’m getting at is along the lines of Wiley’s strip - editorial license. Plus4, you can’t think of any reason why someone would write a distorted or fictional account in a historical form? If you look at modern cult leaders they regularly base their teachings on historical fact and then stretch that out into fiction to justify why everyone should listen to them and follow their orders. We also see this in the political arena i.e: with wars being fought over Weapons of Mass Destruction that don’t exist. The Administration provided us with lots of “proof” but when it came down to it, there was no substance.

I’d much prefer to be one of those cynical people who is constantly questioning and demanding more effort from those that want me to follow and believe in them… than the people who swallow almost anything that’s fed to them.

Couple points. Jonah never claimed to write the book. Indeed, his own cynical prejudices against the Assyrians and his stubborn refusal to get God’s point at the end of the book point to him NOT writing it.

At least one commentary by J. Vernon McGee suggests that Jonah actually died and was resurrected by God as part of the experience, certainly something Christ implied in his remark about the Sign of Jonah being His own being in the grave three days as Jonah was in the belly of the fish. So the idea of him not surviving certainly has no relation to the discussion. Miraculous either way. If you accept it.

Runar, yours is the sad old argument that the people who claim to love God aren’t good enough so God isn’t good enough. Many Christians would agree and have started the movement to follow Christ as Lord and not just savior.

Let me point out that, when the perfect guy was here, all of us crucified him anyway, so the idea of our imperfection being the sticking point is just a sham.

Christ told the pharisees they didn’t believe him since he drank with the sinners and they didn’t believe John the Baptist because he went into the wilderness and didn’t associate with sinners. the point being, you simply don’t want to believe and you’re using other people’s actions as your excuse. At least have the courage to admit it’s your own choice based on personal bias. that’s a start.

Hey Wiley! Some day you’re going to have to draw a strip that finally gets people talking! I’m tired of all these comment-less strips. : - )

Be careful not to embellish too much, Jonah, or your manuscript might explode into a “million little pieces”

well, lets say maybe 2% of the bible is accurate Lets give them something

My favorite comparison, “Jonah was the Homer Simpson of Biblical Prophets.”

he had a gourd tree too

You know how God always says “repent or be destroyed” in the OT? And how everyone always ends up being destroyed? Jonah is the only exception I can think of - when he finally goes to Nineveh, I think the peeps there actually repent and are not destroyed. So Jonah is important for that reason - very important.

Good bunch of comments today (Thank’s Wiley) especially from Scaaty and Runar. I’m not much of a Biblical scholar, but it was interesting.

Exoticdoc -

Bible Verses: King James Version, Second Kings 2:23-24 23: And he [Elisha] went up from thence unto Bethel: and as he was going up that way, there came forth little children of the city, and mocked him, and said unto him, Go up, thou bald head; Go up, thou bald head.

24: And he turned back, and looked on them, and cursed them in the name of the LORD. And there came forth two she bears out of the wood and tare forty and two children of them.

You may have a better translation than these people but this is what Im working from. Now you can justify it by saying it is young adults and not little children. My point is 42 people are “Tare” by she bears because of some taunting - not a loving person in my books.