Replies

"Well, not particularly different. The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia says that "Iona" may just be a contraction for "Ioannes" -- like Jack and Johnathon or Bill and William (except that Iona and Ioannes seem to me even more linguistically similar in pronunciation than those examples)."

Try going into a room of people called "John" and call out "Jonah" and see how many answer you! ;)

"Do you have any resources on the subject which would suggest otherwise?"

It would take me too long to find at present, but if you are interested I will dig it out. In the meantime lets take Matthew's gospel as the pertinent source for this question - he is inspired after all.

Bearing in mind the importance of your name - particularly in the semitic milieu - it is unlikely that any of the NT writers would be careless about this. Matthew is familiar with both names and uses them both in his gospel. John is used 26 times and Jonah is used just 5 times.

The first 3 uses of Jonah all occur in Ch 12 and clearly relate to the OT prophet. The climactic third occurrence is after Jesus has explained the typological link between Himself and Jonah and uses the a fortiori comparison of type to antitype:

41 "And behold a greater than Jonas here."

Compare this to similar a fortiori properties of the antitype:

6 "But I tell you that there is here a greater than the temple."

42 "and behold a greater than Solomon here."

The fourth occurrence takes place at the beginning of the chapter in contention:

16,4 "A wicked and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign: and a sign shall not be given it, but the sign of Jonas the prophet. And he left them, and went away."

Its as if Matthew is just taking the opportunity to remind his reader that the one who is greater than Jonah is here, before he launches into the climactic revelation of the true identity of Jesus:

"16 Simon Peter answered and said: Thou art Christ, the Son of the living God.
17 And Jesus answering, said to him: Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jona: because flesh and blood hath not revealed it to thee, but my Father who is in heaven."

There is a parallelism in these two affirmations - easier to see if the word order is re-arranged:

"Christ art Thou, Son of the living God"

"Blessed art Thou, Simon son of Jonah"

Jonah is specifically invoked rather than Simon's father's name (John), because:

1) Uniquely in the NT Simon has received a revelation directly from the Father - not mediated by Jesus.

2) He who is greater than Jonah sees in Simon a true son of Jonah - i.e. a prophet - but also in a sense a chip off the old block. (Or chip of rock off the old rock!)

3) Jesus foreknows Simon's destiny to flee his call from God (denying the Christ 3 times) just as Jonah before him fled from God's call.

More importantly, however, is understanding what the “sign of Jonah” is in its fullest sense, and how Peter’s mission is going to parallel that of Jonah. In order to understand this we must understand why Jonah did not want to prophesy to the Ninevites.

Nineveh was the capital of Assyria – mortal enemy of Israel- and God was going to destroy it if its denizens did not repent of their sin. Other prophets had already revealed how God was also going to use Assyria to destroy Israel. Jonah therefore did not want Nineveh to repent and be saved BECAUSE HE KNEW THAT IF IT WAS SPARED IT WOULD ATTACK HIS OWN PEOPLE.

Sure enough, Jonah repented of his denial of God’s mission, Nineveh was spared and within FORTY YEARS, Assyria destroyed Israel and took the 10 Northern tribes off into captivity, never to return.

The “sign of Jonah” which Jesus speaks of, not only encompasses his death and resurrection in 3 days, but also the fate of the city which He has come to redeem within 40 years – dependent upon whether that city will turn and repent of its harlotry.

Simon is “son of Jonah”, because like Jonah he will repent of his denial of God, turn again, and then go and preach to that city which has become his mortal enemy because it crucified his saviour and Lord.

Unlike the Ninevites, however, most of the Jerusalemites fail to repent, they continue to persecute Jesus in Peter and the other Christians, and within 40 years they suffer the same fate as Israel, but at the hands of the Romans. Thus the full sign of Jonah is fulfilled. This is why our Lord can speak with such anger to the Pharisees that the “sign of Jonah” is the only sign that they will receive – it is not “just” His resurrection from the dead.

But this is also why Jesus is one greater than Jonah, and why Simon is “son of Jonah.”

But this is also why Jesus is one greater than Jonah, and why Simon is “son of Jonah.”

That was a great post, very enjoyable to read -- and a lot of interesting exposition on the equivalences between Jesus and Jonah and Peter and Jonah, particularly the latter part concerning Peter's Jonah-like mission to Jerusalem... but...

(And I just know that you're gonna sigh and smack your head against your keyboard)... it still doesn't say anything to contradict the International Bible Encyclopedia's observation that "Iona" may well be a contraction of "Ioannes".

I.E., if Bob's father generally goes by "Bill"; and Sam feels that, in reference to some point he is trying to make on Bob's behalf, he can drive the point home by using the formal "William"; that doesn't change the fact that "Bill" is just a contraction of "William". See what I mean?