/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.19943372]

What was the moral of the story?

[Anonymous No.19944054]

>>19943372
Stop looking for morals in the Bible, Christianity is amoral.

[Anonymous No.19944111]

>>19943372
Don't get eaten by big fish.

[Anonymous No.19944123]

>>19944054
>Stop looking for morals in the Bible,
Why?
>Christianity is amoral.
How?

[Anonymous No.19944131]

>>19943372
Obey God.

[Anonymous No.19944185]

>>19944123
The Torah is not a book that teaches morals, it's God's word. Neither is there a moral system in Jesus's teachings. Jesus goes against moral systems constantly in the Gospels. If you want to read more I suggest reading Ellul's Subversion of Christianity (and the rest of his religious works if you are interested in his readings of Scripture), specifically chapter 4 on moralism.

[Anonymous No.19944190]

>>19944185
Oh, you're just shilling books

[Anonymous No.19944231]

>>19944190
I'm not shilling books, I'm giving you recommendations since you do not have a solid grasp of what the Bible, and Christianity in general, is saying. Your cliched intro by simply requesting what the "moral" of a story is (as if a story is to simply teach a moral and add it to your shelf of virtues) is telling that you didn't really think through Jonah, but just want someone to give you a simple answer.

[Anonymous No.19944237]

>>19944231
I asked you a question and you're just rambling and making assumptions about me to shill some books.

[Anonymous No.19944263]

>>19944231
And I answered your question, it doesn't contain a moral teaching. I don't know if you were taught to always find the moral of a story as if it's the ultimate goal of reading or something like that, but that's a very American-centric way of textual criticism.

[Anonymous No.19944293]

>>19944263
meant for
>>19944237

[Anonymous No.19944303]

>>19944263
Christianity does contain a moral teaching. OP was asking about a specific book and you went off rambling to shill a book.
>crying about America
Completely off topic, you have nothing of value to say book shill.

[Anonymous No.19944343]

>>19944303
And what exactly is the moral teaching?
>Completely off topic
If you are going to ask about morals in the Bible with even engaging with Judaism or Christianity, and do it in such a repetitive cliched modern way that shows you put no thought in the manner, you deserved to be ridiculed.

[Anonymous No.19945441]

>>19943372
Funny you bring it up because I was thinking about it a few weeks ago. I don't know. But I was thinking Jonah symbolizes Jesus, and the sailors symbolize the Romans. What does that tell you? The story says Jonah was running away from God, i.e. sinning, and the sailors who threw him into the sea were acting righteously when they were doing so. In other words Jesus was sinning, and the Romans who were torturing him and killing him were acting righteously when they were doing so, even though Jesus said "father forgive them for they don't know what they're doing". I think this is the same reason it's said being a good person can't save you. Like Bashar said, the reason you can't forgive someone is because you think that they might be right about you in their opinion of you as a bad person. But your ego and pride don't want it to be true. What I criticize about Bashar is he says your enemy can "go around insulting everybody". He himself says you can't forgive when you think the other might be right about you. That is most strongly so when all evidence actually points to it being a fact that you are indeed the sinner and your enemies who punish you are "punishing righteously". People say Bashar's idea of "you don't take it to heart if you know it has nothing to do with you" is a narcissistic one. "I never do anything wrong" etc. But I think they're misunderstanding. It's the same idea as the Gospel. And this is why I think repentance and loving your enemies are the same thing. Repentance is where you let go of the pride which says you can't be as they think, and say yes you are right about me, then it loses its power. It's a leap of faith. Might be the leap of faith they talked about in the Matrix.
https://youtu.be/tLVA07_ISUk

[Anonymous No.19945547]

>>19944185
>>19944343
I'm not sure "moral" in "moral of the story" necessarily is that meaning of the word "moral", but maybe it can mean just "message" or "lesson"?

[Anonymous No.19945806]

>>19944343
>And what exactly is the moral teaching?
Do unto others what you would have done unto you.
Love the Lord your God with all your heart and all your soul and all your mind and all your strength. Love your neighbor as yourself.
Love your enemies. Bless those who curse you; pray for those who persecute you.
Greater love has no man than this: that he lays down his life for his friends.

>inb4 "well then the OT is amoral"
He hath shewed thee, O man, what is good and what the Lord requireth of thee: but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God.

[Anonymous No.19947024]

>>19943372
wait at least an hour after eating before you go swimming.

[Anonymous No.19947038]

>>19943372
Here's veggietales take on it:
https://youtube.com/watch?v=YeOnADmkD74

[Anonymous No.19947093]

>>19943372
wtf? Tolkien has translated books from the bible?
how's the translation? how does it compare to common translations?

[Anonymous No.19947118]

>>19944190
>someone in /lit/ is recommending books
>he's a shill
At last I see

[Anonymous No.19947200]

>>19943372
There's a few. One it juxtaposes the godless Ninevites (Assyrians) and Jonah who was supposed to be faithful. Ninevites who turned to God after acknowledging there was a problem with them and received a reprieve, yet Jonah ran from his duty to warn Nineveh and eventually preached after God showed him mercy. At the end Jonah is still upset because he didnt think Nineveh should have been spared. God reinforces his right to show mercy with the lesson he shows by the gourd plant at the end.
In the book of Nahum a century latery Nineveh is destroyed because the evil flourished once again without turning back.
Also, Christ points the sign of Jonah as the only prophetic sign of his ministry, that he will enter the belly of the earth and rise on the third day.
Also read Moby-Dick which has a nice chapter where a character preaches about this book.

[Anonymous No.19947212]

>>19945806
None of those are morals.
>First, in the Hebrew Bible the Torah is not a book of morality, whether as constructed by a moralist or as lived out by a group. The Torah, as God's Word, is God's revelation about himself. It lays down what separates life from death and symbolizes the total sovereignty of God. Similarly, what Jesus says in the Gospels is not morality. It has an existential character and rests on a radical change of being. Again, what Paul says in the exhortations in his letters is not morality but consists of practical directions by way of example. Second, there is no moral systems in the revelation of God in Jesus Christ. There are no moral precepts that can exist independently in some way, that can have universal validity, and that can serve the elaboration of a moral system. Third, the revelation of God in Jesus Christ is against morality. Not only is it honestly impossible to devise a moral system in the Gospels and Epistles, bu further, the main keys in the Gospel - the proclamation of grace, the deceleration of pardon, and the opening up of life to freedom - are the direct opposite of morality, for they imply that all conduct, including that of the devout, or the most moral, is wholly engulfed in sin.

[Anonymous No.19947825]

>>19947212
>moral (n.)
>a lesson, especially one concerning what is right or prudent, that can be derived from a story, a piece of information, or an experience.
Those examples absolutely fit the Oxford definition.

[Anonymous No.19948504]

>>19947825
>>a lesson, especially one concerning what is right or prudent
Nothing like this is found in the Bible. I don't understand why Anglos feel the need to quote definitions from dictionaries while not understanding the source material they are working with and instead try to take it out of context.

[Anonymous No.19948586]

In a world full of prophets, be a whale

[Anonymous No.19948600]

>>19944111
But it was being eaten by the fish that saved him from drowning at sea

[Anonymous No.19948615]

>>19948504
Try reading the Bible then, dumbass

[Anonymous No.19948847]

>>19948504
>Nothing like this is found in the Bible
Book of Proverbs, Sermon on the Mount, Sermon on the Plain. Almost all major and minor prophets (but especially Jeremiah) decry the moral bankruptcy of the nations of Israel and Judah prior to their exile.

>not understanding the source material they are working with
With all due respect anon, I don't think you understand the source material. You continue to assert that the Bible, and by extension Judaism and Christianity, are amoral. But even a cursory reading of both Old and New Testaments present a thoroughly moral understanding of the world and explicitly teach moral lessons.
You could make the case that not every biblical narrative is morally prescriptive -- instead merely describing characters' actions and their subsequent consequences -- but to claim that there are *no* explicitly moral lessons or tales at all is blatantly absurd. There are many, as I and other anons in this thread have demonstrated.
Your accusation of my ignorance is also false, since I have a biblical studies degree from a four-year college.

>instead try to take it out of context
Look man, you're the only one here who reads the dictionary definition of "moral" and pouts "Nuh-UH! It's whatever the book I'm shilling says it is!"

[Anonymous No.19948947]

>>19945806
I think what he means is the core of the Gospel is not morals, because morals are politics, rules for how to behave, while the core of the Gospel is about perception. The exoteric interpretation is political, the esoteric interpretation is psychological. I don't think that's necessarily relevant for the expression "the moral of the story" as I said, because there "moral" means message or meaning.

[Anonymous No.19948981]

>>19947212
This discussion is kind of off on a tangent and nitpicking but to engage in it I'm not sure morals are necessarily limited to this political sense which you are implying. Even if a religion is all about the psychology of the reader himself, perception etc why couldn't there be morals to that? You have a faulty perception which causes suffering to yourself vs you see the truth and are no longer suffering, that's good vs bad too, which is what morals is about, who's to say morals is only "someone steals you ought to chop his hand off"?

[Anonymous No.19949082]

>>19948947
>I think what he means is the core of the Gospel is not morals
If that were indeed what he meant, I would agree. The whole point of the Gospel is that merely following a set of prescribed rules does not justify one before God. Grace is necessary and is freely provided through Christ alone.
However, I truly do not think that is what anon is arguing. He's claiming that "the revelation of God in Jesus Christ is against morality" and "it [is] honestly impossible to devise a moral system in the Gospels and Epistles," which is blatantly false. Both the Gospels and Epistles prescribe explicitly moralistic behavior as the valid response to receiving God's grace (cf. the Sermon on the Mount and Ephesians, in particular). While I concede that it is indeed impossible to devise a moral "system" in the sense of a systematic, codified set of rules, it does not follow that the Gospel is "the opposite of morality." The NT does not anchor morality on prescriptions, but a person; not a code, but a Christ. Hence the emphasis on Christian freedom from the law for the sake of love.

But I agree with you that this topic is a digression from OP's question. Nevertheless, it needed addressing.

[Anonymous No.19949087]

>>19948586

[Anonymous No.19949218]

>>19949082
Christ is not an anchor of morality, he acts completely amorally throughout the Gospels. He is someone who does not care about the moral systems of his society but instead obeys God's Word. That's why he tells people to follow him instead of laying down moral regulations, it's about being apart from an individual's present situation relative to society at large. This is why Jesus attacks the Pharisees, who are supposedly the most moral people, because they have substituted morality in place of the living will of God. This is the same for Paul, who constantly attacks Jewish morality in his writings. The replacement of law for love is not the replacement for one set of morals with another. I suggest reading the ideas that Ellul puts forward over the common understanding which has subverted Christianity.

[Anonymous No.19949252]

>>19949218
>>19948847

[Anonymous No.19949253]

>>19947038
I have trouble understanding what they're saying. Anyway I don't think the Book of Jonah is about second chances. It's not A happens, then later on B happens. Rather it's about perception, in the present moment. But I guess you could call that "a second chance" if you wanted, it's kind of a semantic discussion.

[Anonymous No.19949286]

>>19947038
Based Veggietales

[Anonymous No.19949302]

>>19949253
You're feelin' pretty blue
You didn't do what God requested
Yeah, I'd be mopin' too, if I was gonna be digested
This ain't a pretty picture, no
I said, it ain't a pretty sight, no
You ran from God this morning and you're
Whale chow tonight!
But hold up, hang on
Not so fast, your life ain't over yet
See, we're here to tell you all about
The forgiveness that you can get
You see God's a God of mercy
God's a God of love
And right now, He's gonna lend
A helping hand from up above
Praise the Lord, He's the God of second chances
You'll be floored how His love your life enhances
You can be restored from your darkest circumstances
Our God is a God of second chances!
Ain't it good to know a God who gives a second chance?
Why, that's enough to get a smile from Mr. Grumpy-Pants
So, if you say you're sorry for all the stuff you do
We know that He'll be ready with a second chance for you
Praise the Lord, He's the God of second chances
You'll be floored how His love your life enhances
You can be restored from your darkest circumstances
Our God is a God of second chances
Our God is a God
If you believe, God's love is true
Then you should know what you should do
If you believe, God's love is true
Then you should know what you should do
If you believe, God's love is true
Then you should know what you should do
If you believe, God's love is true
Then you should know what you should do
God gives a second chance
Second chances, second chances
Praise the Lord, He's the God of second chances
You'll be floored when you're restored from your darkest circumstances
Our God is a God of second chances
Second chances, second chances
Praise the Lord, He is the God of second chances
You'll be floored when you're restored from your darkest circumstances
Our God is a God of second chances
If you believe, God's love is true
Then you should know what you should do
If you believe, God's love is true
Then you should know what you should do
Second chances, second chances
Praise the Lord, He's the God of second chances
You'll be floored when you're restored from your darkest circumstances
Our God is a God of second chances
Our God is a God
Our God is a God
Second chances, second chances
Second chances, second chances
Second chances, second chances
Second chances, second chances

[Anonymous No.19949457]

>>19949252
>You continue to assert that the Bible, and by extension Judaism and Christianity, are amoral
No, I assert that Christianity is amoral. Jews obviously have a moral law they value. As this whole subthread is about Christians, it's obvious that they do not follow the moral lessons of the Bible which has been integrated into religious laws because Jesus rejects them wholesale.
>Book of Proverbs, Sermon on the Mount, Sermon on the Plain
Proverbs is a book concerning Hebrew behaviour under the Old Testament, it is not entirely relevant to Christians. I already discussed how the Sermon on the Mount was not a laying of moral foundation but a grand teaching by Jesus to follow in his footsteps. This also applies to Luke's sermon.

[Anonymous No.19949516]

>>19949457
>not a laying of moral foundation
>but a grand teaching by Jesus to follow in his footsteps
At this point, it just looks like you're intentionally redefining the concept of morality just so you can exclude Jesus from it.

[Anonymous No.19949519]

>>19948847
>you're the only one here who reads the dictionary definition of "moral" and pouts "Nuh-UH! It's whatever the book I'm shilling says it is!"

This is why philosophy threads are so insufferable. Some jackass posts a provocative statement, gets refuted, then smugly informs you that you're wrong because he's using some special snowflake definition of a common term completely at odds with common usage. Then the whole thread breaks down into insults and shitflinging.

[Anonymous No.19949637]

>>19949516
>>19949519
Morality is simply differentiating between proper and improper behaviour, between what is right and wrong. Jesus does not do this in his teachings. I don't know what vague idea of morality you have but this is the simplest understanding of it.

[Anonymous No.19949670]

>>19949637
Right and wrong isn't limited to behavior, there is such a thing as right and wrong perception, truth and falsehood, why isn't that morality in your opinion? I already addressed this but you ignored it. And are any of you fools going to discuss the Book of Jonah at all?

[Anonymous No.19949704]

>>19949457
>As this whole subthread is about Christians
Says who? The second post ITT was the one to bring up Christianity. Do you by subthread mean this off-topic discussion which spawned from that? The OP is about the Book of Jonah, and says nothing about Christianity, furthermore the Book of Jonah is part of the Old Testament. Make your own thread about this different topic of yours.

[Anonymous No.19949739]

Furthermore nobody responded to what I said about the meaning of "the moral of the story".

>A moral (from Latin morālis) is a message that is conveyed or a lesson to be learned from a story or event.
>a message that is conveyed
>a message that is conveyed
>a message that is conveyed
OK? Get it? Now that's settled. Now address the OP or fuck off with your off-topic shit.

[Anonymous No.19949748]

>>19949670
>As Genesis shows us, the origin of sin the world is not knowledge, as is often said (as though God were interdicting our intellectual development, which would be absurd); it is knowledge of good and devil. In this context knowledge means decision. What is not acceptable to God is that we should decide on our own what is good and what is evil. Biblically, the good is in fact the will of God. That is all. What God decides, whatever it may be, is the good. If then we decide what the good is, we substitute our will for God's. We construct morality when we say and do what is good, and it is then that we are sinners. To elaborate a moral system is to show oneself to be a sinner before God, not because the conduct is bad, but because, even if it is good, another good is substituted for the will of God.
>>19949704
I already responded to OP in the first post about Jonah. If he or anyone else cannot take the time to read an 100 page book on the work I find it difficult to believe he truly wants to understand its meaning (nonetheless what vague notion he has in finding a moral in it).

[Anonymous No.19949802]

The Book of Jonah was written as a satire, unironically
The stupidity of being eaten and living in a big fish, over the top fantasy Nineveh, the impotence of the attempt at prophetic work, the unclimactic success, the cartoon shit with the gourd

Because it was a fairly insular jewish satire that didn't translate well across cultures, we're now left with people trying to find deep meaning in what was essentially Blazing Saddles or Space Balls

[Anonymous No.19949807]

I'm a theist although I don't believe in any particular revelation and I think Jonah represents the Jewish Nation and his mission to Nineveh represents the Jewish mission to the gentiles
God is too kind and forgiving of the Jews

[Anonymous No.19949873]

>>19949802
>The Book of Jonah was written as a satire, unironically
The plot centers on God's (disobedient) chosen prophet who only very reluctantly delivers a call to repentance to a wicked people who then immediately repent and are spared, to the prophet's chagrin. That's pretty satirical.

God lectures Jonah about how he cares even for the Ninevites, and Jonah openly expresses his resentment of God's forgiveness toward Gentiles. It's like an inverse of the end of Nehemiah, in which the pious Jews send away their foreign wives and become ethnically isolationist.

[Anonymous No.19949914]

>>19949253
Well God wants to give Ninevah a second chance. That is the whole point of the story.

[Anonymous No.19950009]

>>19949748
>>As Genesis shows us...
What's your point?
>I already responded to OP...
>read the book
not an argument

[Anonymous No.19950024]

>>19943372
Utilitarianism
Why spare 7 innocents in a city of thousands to be destroyed

[Anonymous No.19950025]

>>19949807
>God is too
no, God is not too anything, except maybe too great to comprehend. Are you Indian or something? Judging by your English.

[Anonymous No.19950048]

>>19950025
No I'm not Indian
My English is perfectly adequate you fucking cunt

[Anonymous No.19950059]

>>19950048
Then wtf do you mean by "God is too kind"? Too kind for whom? Too kind for your liking maybe?

[Anonymous No.19950152]

>>19949914
The story is just a story. I don't think the actual message is about second chances. But there's probably more than one layer of meaning to it. There was a good verse in the Gospel of Thomas I was thinking of which I think is about the same thing as the Book of Jonah. Not sure but I think it was this:
>His disciples said to him, "When will the kingdom come?"
>"It will not come by watching for it. It will not be said, 'Look, here!' or 'Look, there!' Rather, the Father's kingdom is spread out upon the earth, and people don't see it."
Same reason why Christianity says being good can't save you, and that you should love your enemies, and the same as repentance. I explained it here: >>19945441
It's not about a second chance. Second chance implies you had a chance and lost it, and now you think you're doomed, due to being punished for your sins. But my point is that punishment comes in the form of things outside you, often perceived enemies. My point when I say it's not about a second chance is that it's not "be better and this punishment will disappear", but rather it's you are looking for "the kingdom" in this direction and that direction, when in fact it's not there. In this case you think your place in heaven is blocked by your enemies or general adversities. But it's not. That's a delusion. I mean it's kind of a theory but I've gotten bits here and there to build it and it's what I think.

[Anonymous No.19950204]

>>19950009
Being moral and creating a moral system is an affront to God. Your distinction between perception and falsehood is not relevant, it is God who decides what is good, not humans.

[Anonymous No.19950211]

>>19950204
I didn't say perception vs falsehood. Your points are all retarded. Get on the actual topic of the thread or fuck off. This is getting lame as fuck.

[Anonymous No.19950259]

>>19950211
>there is such a thing as right and wrong perception, truth and falsehood, why isn't that morality in your opinion?
Distinguishing between perception or truth or falsehood or whatever dichotomy between right and wrong you make is irrelevant to God.
>Get on the actual topic of the thread
You don't even understand your own question, how do you expect anyone to answer it to your satisfaction?

[Anonymous No.19950363]

>>19950259
>Distinguishing between perception or truth or falsehood or whatever dichotomy between right and wrong you make is irrelevant to God.
Meaningless drivel. The Bible has a message, a meaning, about how to perceive the world, about truth. I'm tired of your pseudo-intellectual contrarian autistic drivel. You have done nothing in this thread but gone off rambling about your nitpicking bullshit, where you don't even present an actual case, do you feel smart or something. Pat yourself on the back. Is derailing threads rewarding to you? Maybe get a pet instead.

[Anonymous No.19950407]

>>19950363
>muh amorality
>muh irrationality
What you are dealing with is a a fine example of the trve Calvinist™, probably also thinks beauty is idolatry (but saying that doesn't breaking amorality because you can just redefine terms on the fly).

[Anonymous No.19950592]

>>19950407
>trve Calvinist
A literal heretical sect that makes God out to be the author of evil.

[Anonymous No.19950687]

>>19947200
This is the correct answer.
There's also a nice undercurrent relating to the relationship between cosmic order and chaos. The great fish that swallows Jonah is likely supposed to allude to the Leviathan which was a symbol of chaos across the ancient Levant. The sea also had a similar symbology attached to it and Jonah himself in his prayer interchanges the sea and the sea-beast with Sheol, the realm of the dead.
Jonah rebelled against God and was taken into chaos and eventually death but God (and notice God and not Jonah by his own designs) brought Jonah back out of the grave and the realm of chaos (the sea) and set him back onto the path to bring divine order to the Ninevites.
God is master of Chaos and bringer of moral and spiritual rectitude. God even sends the storm and the fish to Jonah.
Similar themes and symbols can be discerned through-out the books of the Bible (Exodus particularly).
This is all to say that Jonah, despite how short and superficially simple it is is packed with allot of meaning and people who get tangled up on the "lol, big fish story is dumb because big fish aren't real" are the most illiterate people you can come across.

[Anonymous No.19950946]

>>19944054
Post your nose.

[Anonymous No.19951359]

>>19947200
>>19950687
He asked for the moral of the story, not a synopsis, retards

[Anonymous No.19951518]

>>19951359
> It is wrong to deprive others of spiritual truths because they are your national enemies
> It is wrong to value your own comfort over the needs of others
> If you are called to a higher spiritual purpose you have a duty to pursue it
> There are greater spiritual forces at work in the world and following the one leads to death and the other to life so chose well.
> None of these things are moral lessons
> It is somehow possible to divorce a stories moral lessons from the story itself

I hope you realize who the retard here is because it isn't us. If you read the biblical books as morality tales then you're reading them wrong. there are actually very few straight morality tales in the Bible because as works of literature and ancient historiography (and do keep in mind the adjective "ancient" how ancient peoples viewed the recording of history as a discipline was very different from our own and it's anachronistic and ahistorical to foist our definitions and sensibilities on to them as they were communicating very different kinds of things then what we would find important) they are engrained with much, much more cultural and theological meaning then just stories to tell you how to be a good person. You can derive those kinds fo meanings from them and you should as that is a tertiary purpose and a way they were used anciently by the people who served as the original audience for them but it is not their primary purpose.
you need to read the bible like you would read any other book of ancient literature. You don't ask "What is the moral of the Odyssey" even though it does have a wealth of examples of valor, courage, filial loyalty and romantic fidelity that no doubt were meant to set virtuous examples for it's audience but the Odyssey wasn't written to be a lesson in those virtues primarily.

[Anonymous No.19951542]

>>19951518
>morality
Fuck off, I've addressed that a thousand times already, moral here simply means message fuckface, not reading your shitpost.

[Anonymous No.19951548]

I feel like everyone has a very exoteric interpretation while I have an esoteric interpretation.

[Anonymous No.19951660]

>>19951542
Then why do you think it's at all possible to seperate the "message" from a general understanding of the narrative direction of a story and it's underlaying themes? The narrative and themes are what the author has directly and purposefully chosen to use to communicate that message. Looking at the underlaying structure, symbols and context of the story is how you would go about discerning what the authors message is.
You're just being a contradicting people because you're in an argumentative mood right now. Calm down and drink some water or something because your complaints don't make any sense.

[Anonymous No.19951672]

>>19943372
the details are a bit hazy to me, but isn't the story that god wanted jonah to go to some city but jonah was afraid since that city is a dangerous shit hole so he gets on a boat headed for the other side of the world but is shipwrecked and swallowed by a whale? then he basically says he's sorry, gets spat up, and this does as he's told?

seems like a pretty straight forward "do what god tells you" story, how could you possibly need to ask this

[Anonymous No.19951682]

>>19951660
As I said, the OP didn't ask for a summary, you just posted a QRD, I posted an actual interpretation, people are just retarded.

[Anonymous No.19951688]

>>19951672
no, he wasn't shipwrecked, he was thrown overboard by the sailors, and no that's not the meaning of it

[Anonymous No.19951701]

>>19951688
>and no that's not the meaning of it
well you make a convincing argument

[Anonymous No.19951708]

>>19951701
read the thread tard, I've made multiple posts but got no feedback because people here can't think, the only discussion in this thread was some potatoes having a totally off-topic discussion

[Anonymous No.19951729]

>>19951708
son, it's an anonymous image board, i'm not reading 70 posts to try and make out which bad faith arguments can be attributed to you. it's about second chances and obeying god, any other interpretation is retarded

[Anonymous No.19952521]

>>19951660
Finally, someone who understands what morality actually is and the difference from it and a message.

[Anonymous No.19952643]

>>19950152
I see Jonahs attitude towards God’s extension of forgiveness to the Ninevites as a prefiguring of the extension of the covenant of Abraham to the gentiles in Christ’s resurrection, and the Pharisaic Jew’s reaction towards it.

[Anonymous No.19953326]

>>19952521
moral (noun) =/= morality
retard

[Anonymous No.19953337]

>>19951729
no, second chances is the exoteric interpretation, the interpretation 99% of people will have

[Anonymous No.19953346]

>>19952521
>>Finally, someone who understands what morality actually is and the difference from it and a message.
Also, the poster you replied to didn't even say a thing about that

[Anonymous No.19953360]

>>19953326
The 'moral' of a story is its 'moral significance', which is how it relates to morality.
Hairsplitting faggot.

[Anonymous No.19953376]

>>19953326
Equating the moral of a story with its message is something that I've only noticed recently, particularly with the American saying "The moral of the story". I don't understand why you cannot separate the two.

[Anonymous No.19953789]

A good person does not take it to heart when someone thinks they're a bad person. Even if all evidence point to them being right. That's a paradox. I think that's the meaning of Jesus being a Jew. And it's the meaning of the story of Jonah. Jonah was a prophet. Yet he's portrayed as running away from God, and being thrown into the sea by sailors doing so righteously. That's just like Jesus being crucified. Nobody says Jesus was a sinner and "got a second chance" when he was resurrected. Neither is the story of Jonah about second chances. Rather it's about this paradox. It's about a subtle yet profound change in perception of the world.