The story of Jonah

[COPLAND_3]

So am I bad person for believing the story is just a myth ment to convey a moral teaching? I just can’t swallow the idea that a person could live in a whale for 3 days. ( i know that God is all powerful but I just think that the story is not meant to be taken literally)

Bad person? Absolutely not! It is acceptable for Catholics to hold the position that its not historical. I personally believe that its not humanly possible for the story to be true, but I have no problems believeing that it was a miracle that happened. Water being turned into wine, people being raised from the dead, people being cured from all sorts of things, etc etc, Jonah surviving being in a whale is another act of God.

 

[PeterK]

The original faith community from whom this story emerged and was memorialized probably accepted the narrative as literally true. but there must have been no small supply of amazing fish stories in circulation around the ancient Mediterranean. So whats so special about this one? And it the extremely hopeful message that Gods word, which saves, will not be silenced - even if his own prophets don’t approve of the message. So Jesus, fully aware of his eminent death, is telling the corrupt temple authorities, who are already contriving his murder, that even killing him will not silence the message he brings.

So if you wish to believe the narrative as literally historic you would be in good company, but do know that Gods power over marine animals is not the main point of the story. The main point is that a sinful nation receives the healing word of god. Jonah is the obstacle to Gods will and Jonah is overcome.

This is a welcome narrative for todays scandal riddled times. Nothing will silence God. The good news will be proclaimed regardless the of the priorities of the ministers.

Peterk

 

[Huiou_Theou]

Its not a matter if a person can live within a whale for that amount of time, but whether God can preserve them. People have endured many things with God’s hand involved, but on their own power could never have done it.

I couldn’t agree more. (although, he may have allowed a punishment of being chewed – and then a repair job to a mangled body, as well…)

Regarding Whale vs. Fish; The word in Greek is copied in the NT quotation; so it is pertinent to study the Greek;

The Douay interprets it as whale in one place that is instructive:
Genes 1:21, τα κητη τα μεγαλα;
But Knox and most others call it something along the lines of “the great sea-beast”; and I would concur that this is the more correct rendering in light of the word’s ambiguity, and the audience which scripture (and Jonas) would have been written to – they could be, with good reason, supposed to have a popular understanding of what whales were like, even if the word did – somehow – mean “whale”.

Clearly, it isn’t the word alone that referrs to whale – but a particular kind of monstrosity would also be requred, for the word is qualified; a “Large” one.

The NT texts don’t quote the size, but Jonas was swallowed by a large one according to the LXX.

Notice also Job 3:8; Which shows evidence of familiarity with Job, the womb of earth/death, and resurrection, and coils of a fish also being a “womb”.

Notice, this next passage is a curse – and there are some subtle differences between the Greek and the Douay translation; but it is sufficient to enter the discussion…

Job 3:8 αλλα καταρασαιτο αυτην ο καταρωμενος την ημεραν εκεινην ο μελλων το μεγα κητος χειρωσασθαι
Job 3:8 Let them curse it who curse the day, who are ready to raise up a leviathan:
Job 3:9 Let the stars be darkened with the mist thereof: let it expect light, and not see it, nor the rising of the dawning of the day:
Job 3:10 Because it shut not up the doors of** the womb** [literally guts, coils, intestines] that bore me, nor took away evils from my eyes.
Job 3:11 δια τι γαρ εν** κοιλια** ουκ ετελευτησα εκ γαστρος δε εξηλθον και ουκ ευθυς απωλομην
Job 3:11 Why did I not die in the womb? why did I not perish when I came out of the belly?

There are other examples: Job 9:13; or 26:12, in the LXX which is even more curious…
Also, the interpretaion of Job 9:13 in the Hebrew is the idea of Chaos being triumphed by God – yet literally, the metaphor of Chaos in the LXX – is a kEtos.

In Job 26:12 it is called the “Dragon” (Knox version), “Proud One” (Douay version), etc.
See especially Job 26:13 (Douay) “His obstetric hand has brought forth …” Sirac 43:25(Lxx) or 43:27 in most other versions… (Womb, again associated with whale/monster/fish guts…)

It isn’t, except in an apocryphal work, where Jonas is said to be in the Belly. In canonical texts, he is in the guts – intestine – or womb. The same is held by the new testament texts.

A real whale, un-angered by attack, is not generally a destructive creature;
Many of us approach Jonas with this kind of mindset when we see “whale”; and possibly remember pinochio (say’s J. Lenno)?? so much so, that many of us wish to read that gentle idea into scripture;
However, the typical ancient’s view – OR EVEN–a majority view of much more modern naturalists would be to the contrary:

schatzie-speaks.hubpages.com/hub/Melvilles-Research-for-Moby-Dick

This can be directly traced to the intro of Natural History, where Thomas Beale sites the naturalists Olassen and Povelsen as inaccurately depicting sperm whales as savage animals who roam the seas in quest for the blood of fish and the flesh of man, and that “seized, and upset with their jaws, a boat which contained some seamen, whom they speedily devoured.” Beale refutes these claims of a murderous nature and appetite of whales, stating that “the sperm whale has been quietly searching the ocean depths for his food, and avoiding with the greatest care and timidity the slightest danger or rencontre of any kind,”

A creature as large and as intimidating as a whale was generally UNDERSTOOD to be destructive and bloodthirsty in the popular mindset, and surely – Once attacked, a whale can be ferocious;
And some whales, such as killer whales – would be decidedly meat eating if they ever DID swallow a human being like they do seals, drawing blood…
(Even If Orcas are not a true whale, that isn’t the point…)

I would challenge anyone to find examples, in Greek, of kEtos which are at all gentle… If this can’t be done – then one needs to consider that the author of Jonas was somewhat ir-responsible for not clarifying that God pacified the fish, or didn’t allow it to chew, etc. Placing a monster, and Sheol (death), in putting Jonas in the intestines (guts) – is rather – well, graphically violent.

 

[Huiou_Theou]

Huiou Theou ,

Thank you for reminding us of 1 Kings 17:21, the poetic contrasts in the story of Jonah, of the 'Fish gate" of the temple, Tobit 13:2 and 2 Kings 14:25 (which I was not aware).

Then it was especially worth-while to share.

Yes, the significance of the story of Jonah and the fish as it relates to the sign that our Lord Jesus Christ gave to the Jewish people is one which is rich in historical precedence.

Finally, how significant is Jonah and his (dying?) within the fish, and being resurrected from the dead, to the universal symbol of our Lord Jesus Christ represented by the fish?

I’m not sure what scale to use to measure significance. Let me try Abraham, at first:

I know that Abram’s wife, Sarai, had a dead womb. I know that the transformed Abraham and those of his time, expected that anything planted in that womb starved or was killed by it’s environment. The words “dead womb” are in fact understood much like the tomb Jesus was laid in. Consider St. Paul:

Roman 4:19 – And he was not weak in faith. Neither did he consider [eg: did not fear] his own body, now dead (whereas he was almost an hundred years old), nor the dead womb of Sara.

Literally, this is a necrotic womb, not just empty: (την νεκρωσιν της μητρας).
Abraham experienced FIRST a miracle of a powerless womb bringing forth a hope.
And then he was faced with a baptism (a plunging into death of his son.)

Hebre 11:17 By faith Abraham, when he was tried, offered up Isaac: and he that had received the promises offered up his only begotten son,
Hebre 11:18 Of whom it was said, [the remaing part of the promise] That in Isaac shall thy seed [aka. children of the flesh] be called:
Hebre 11:19 [Abraham] Accounting that God was able to raise him up, even from the dead; from whence also he received him in a figure.

Now perhaps you can recognize:
Abraham first received Isaac from the dead, when he received him from an exterminating womb.

This first birth was a THE miracle, sign, a figure, which allowed Abraham to figure out that even should his son die again – that there was an indirect guarantee of literal resurrection; eg: his son would come back to life.

This is a logical deduction of a man with experience of a miracle based on the same promise – This is not a leap of faith with no information as a foundation.

Consider also, the original story, where Abraham uses the plural, which shows he really did reason in this way – exactly as St. Paul says. (And I am ashamed of translators, who read popular ideas into a translation in preference to what the original text CLEARLY says. Some translators, are ignorant traitors.)

Genes 22:5 And Abraham said unto his young men, Abide ye here with the ***; and I and the lad will go yonder and worship, and come again to you.

The translation does not quite capture the Greek’s forceful emphasis; The Greek is a conditional statement – Stay here with the donkey, and We who succeed in worshiping over there will come back to you.

If Isaac succeeds in worshiping, he too will return. The only part which required faith, alone, was whether or not Isaac who had never been tried – would succeed in the trial of worship. For if he failed, he would surely die – and yet, God had already said by virtue of his promise that Isaac would succeed.

Taken in context, move the same moral on to Jonas; this is another reason I would suspect (strongly) that Jonas did suffer death; he refused to worship for a time, but ran away.

The child, too, which Elijah raised – the said child was a worshiper by proxy – since his mother had responded to Elijah earlier on pain of an early death; She sanctified her child – and it is for this, her faith, that she says – “Have you come to recall my sins to me?” – she does not ask about the guilt of the child.

Then, with all these things as precedents – Jesus – who intended to fulfill all these types of his death and resurrection; recalls only Jonas’ punishing death as the example of his own punishing death. He bore punishment, that of Jonas, and of us – so that he might rise again.

 

[Loveolivia]

http://www.castoffdebt.comlol

 

[teeboy]

I have tended to think of the swallowing by the fish as symbolic of being overcome by an evil spirit (a possession). Jonah was then “raised” away from the evil spirit (the dead) by the Grace of God (Actual Grace). In exchange for this rightful act of God, Jonah went off to Assyria to do the work of God. The work or act that he performed was preaching to the Ninevites, which is a form of repayment to God. This leads us into the New Testament “love thy neighbor”; the Assyrian Empire was a neighbor to the Nation of Israel.

 

[mercytruth]

Huiou Theou,

Thank you for the further insights from the Greek language. It seems that you refer to the Septuagint for your text quotations, yet you have an interest in the Maronite rite, which uses Aramaic?

Back to the subject at hand. The faith that Abraham already had when he received his promised son from the ‘dead’ womb of Sarah is enlightening in view of his willingness to offer up his promised son, knowing by faith that God would be able to raise him up from the dead.

Is the Greek word for ‘womb’ equivalent in any manner to the Greek word for ‘belly’ as in out of the belly of hades cried I" ? Is it the same Greek word that is found in the gospels where Jesus says, 'As Jonah was three days and three nights in the fish’s belly"

Further, the apostle Peter says in Acts 2:24, “Whom God raised up, having loosed him from the sorrows of hades, for it was not possible for him to be held by it”. Is the Greek word for sorrows equivalent to birth pangs?

Thank you, if you are able to answer these questions from a Greek understanding of the language. As a second inquiry, the idea of worship as it relates to faith seems to be an underlying theme which you were trying to illustrate. Would you be able to answer this in relationship to Jesus Christ in his suffering death?

God’s peace.

 

[teeboy]

Huiou Theou,

Thank you for the further insights from the Greek language. It seems that you refer to the Septuagint for your text quotations, yet you have an interest in the Maronite rite, which uses Aramaic?

Back to the subject at hand. The faith that Abraham already had when he received his promised son from the ‘dead’ womb of Sarah is enlightening in view of his willingness to offer up his promised son, knowing by faith that God would be able to raise him up from the dead.

Is the Greek word for ‘womb’ equivalent in any manner to the Greek word for ‘belly’ as in out of the belly of hades cried I" ? Is it the same Greek word that is found in the gospels where Jesus says, 'As Jonah was three days and three nights in the fish’s belly"

Further, the apostle Peter says in Acts 2:24, “Whom God raised up, having loosed him from the sorrows of hades, for it was not possible for him to be held by it”. Is the Greek word for sorrows equivalent to birth pangs?

Thank you, if you are able to answer these questions from a Greek understanding of the language. As a second inquiry, the idea of worship as it relates to faith seems to be an underlying theme which you were trying to illustrate. Would you be able to answer this in relationship to Jesus Christ in his suffering death?

God’s peace.

Do you agree with post no 24?

 

[mercytruth]

Do you agree with post no 24?

This may be a secondary meaning to the story of Jonah. As it relates to the gospel, I tend to think that Jonah physically died either in the fish, or prior to being swallowed by the fish. From the story, it seems as if the soul of Jonah descended to sheol, as his body was being corrupted in the fish’s belly.

So, it seems to be an account of Jonah’s resurrection of body and soul from death, which is what our Lord Jesus Christ accomplished on our behalf.

God’s peace.

 

[TimothyH]

This may be a secondary meaning to the story of Jonah. As it relates to the gospel, I tend to think that Jonah physically died either in the fish, or prior to being swallowed by the fish. From the story, it seems as if the soul of Jonah descended to sheol, as his body was being corrupted in the fish’s belly.

So, it seems to be an account of Jonah’s resurrection of body and soul from death, which is what our Lord Jesus Christ accomplished on our behalf.

God’s peace.

And what did both Jonah and Jesus do? Both brought the gentiles to repentance and saved them from death.

People get caught up in the dramatic story of being swallowed by the fish, but the real story is that the Gentiles are saved in both the story of Jonah and the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

-Tim-

 

[teeboy]

And what did both Jonah and Jesus do? Both brought the gentiles to repentance and saved them from death.

People get caught up in the dramatic story of being swallowed by the fish, but the real story is that the Gentiles are saved in both the story of Jonah and the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

-Tim-

No, I don’t agree. The Savior is Jesus Christ. Jonah’s Death and Ressurection would have put his soul in Abraham’s Bosom after his mortal death, assuming he stayed Just for the remainder of his mortal life.

 

[teeboy]

This may be a secondary meaning to the story of Jonah. As it relates to the gospel, I tend to think that Jonah physically died either in the fish, or prior to being swallowed by the fish. From the story, it seems as if the soul of Jonah descended to sheol, as his body was being corrupted in the fish’s belly.

So, it seems to be an account of Jonah’s resurrection of body and soul from death, which is what our Lord Jesus Christ accomplished on our behalf.

God’s peace.

I can agree with this if I were to take the account literalistically in that the body was actually swallowed by a fish. Literally, I interpret the meaning of the swallowing and the fish to be symbolic of a possession. Literally, I interpret the “spitting out” by the fish after the 3 day period to be symbolic of Jonah’s triumph over death with the help of God’s Grace.

 

[mercytruth]

And what did both Jonah and Jesus do? Both brought the gentiles to repentance and saved them from death.

People get caught up in the dramatic story of being swallowed by the fish, but the real story is that the Gentiles are saved in both the story of Jonah and the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

-Tim-

Yes, so as to be a sign to the Jewish people as Jesus said, the story of Jonah is not only a dramatic deliverance of Jonah from death, but it is a story of God bringing repentance to the Gentiles, which was unthinkable to the Jewish people of Jonah’s day.

This story is then reduplicated as you say, in that we have the dramatic story of the resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ, which brings about the repentance of Gentiles…something which is a stumbling block to the Jewish people, even today. May God have mercy on the Jewish people.

God’s peace.

 

[CHRISTINE77]

It’s just a big fish story. Just kidding.

But whether Jonah was swallowed by a giant fish is literally true or not, is not really what I wonder, which is: Did Jonah ever really learn his lesson? Because at the end of the story, Jonah still seemed to be mad that God showed the Ninevites mercy.

 

[Huiou_Theou]

Huiou Theou,

Thank you for the further insights from the Greek language. It seems that you refer to the Septuagint for your text quotations, yet you have an interest in the Maronite rite, which uses Aramaic?

Yes; I have the Hebrew Text from Jerusalem (Mechron Mamre), which is the oldest fully preserved TANAK that I know of. I have the LXX (Septuagint); But, now that you mention it – I don’t have the Peshitta. eg: I haven’t located a download copy.
My familiarity with Greek is very good, that with Hebrew is neophyte; and although I pray the aramaic, and know some words, when I attend a Maronite church – I would be starting over with that particular language. It’s something that I ought to do, and will when I have some time.

Back to the subject at hand. The faith that Abraham already had when he received his promised son from the ‘dead’ womb of Sarah is enlightening in view of his willingness to offer up his promised son, knowing by faith that God would be able to raise him up from the dead.

Is the Greek word for ‘womb’ equivalent in any manner to the Greek word for ‘belly’ as in out of the belly of hades cried I" ? Is it the same Greek word that is found in the gospels where Jesus says, 'As Jonah was three days and three nights in the fish’s belly"

There is a difference between the actual word for womb; and euphamisms such as “belly” which replace “womb”. Even in our culture, mothers often say their child is in the “belly” when describing the event to a little child.

In Greek there are three words to consider: Stomach, Intestines (guts), and womb.
They are, respectively:

• Stomachs: In English have “gastric” juices – so it shouldn’t be a surprise that the Greek word for “stomach” is gastros (γαστρ-ος);
• Intestines: if you have looked at them in animals or humans, they are coiled lengths of tube; We also call them “guts”, and guitar strings and harp strings when made from animals are also often called gut. In the Greek, intestines are called “Koilia” (κοιλ-ια);
• Womb: This word is often interchanged with “mother” and it might be more precisely the entry to the womb, than the womb itself (I’m unsure); And I’m also not sure if “Matron” or “Matrix” in Latin is an example of the same word being borrowed by Latin; The word itself is mEtran “μητραν”. (eg: Luke 2:23 καθως γεγραπται εν νομω κυριου οτι παν αρσεν διανοιγον μητραν αγιον τω κυριω κληθησεται; Every child opening the womb is holy to the Lord.

All three of these words can be used to refer to a womb; though they can not all be used to refer to a stomach or intestines. The most common word for womb is “coils” (guts). When actually looking at the organs, it is easy to see why. The womb looks like a tube just the same as the intestinal tubes; These two tubes are separate, and the ancients didn’t have any way to distinguish how their structure affected what they could do; They simply saw them as two separate instances of the same thing; How they were connected up – one to the stomach, one not – determined what they actually carried. (Homosexuality can also be understood along those lines…)

Very few examples of womb being “belly” (Gastri) exist; Mary is promised that she will conceive a child in the “gastri” (stomach) ONCE, but the growing child is said everywhere to have been in the “coils” (guts). Luke 2:21, Luke 2:23, Luke 11:27, etc. The same is said of John the baptist leaping in the womb (coils).
When the child is brought forth, it is often said “mEtran”; And this is the second most common way to refer to the womb.

Most of the quotes you gave with “belly” are actually vague translations where the word belly has been substituted for “coils”/guts/womb… The location has been substituted for what the thing actually is.

In John, where Nicodemus is being more precise – he only uses the word MEtri as an adjective describing the kind of coils. Nicodemus says John 3:4: “The Coils * womb”; I think he may be speaking with care and precision to insure Jesus knows he isn’t just talking about a shallow entry into a woman as any man might do…

( It’s also interesting that Jesus claims to have told him about natural things with respect to baptism; and is preparing to speak about heavenly things:
John 3:12 If I have spoken to you** earthly things**, and you believe not: how will you believe, if I shall speak to you heavenly things? )

Further, the apostle Peter says in Acts 2:24, "Whom God raised up, having loosed him from the sorrows

of hades, for it was not possible for him to be held by it". Is the Greek word for sorrows equivalent to birth pangs?
You’re on the right track, but I’m going to have to say – No, not technically in that passage. The word used is: ωδινας; Which, I think – (haven’t checked carefully) – is really related to Odius.

I haven’t finished responding, but this is getting long and I need some time to think about your last question as well. I would direct you to John 16:19-21 as a thought teaser where the word sorrow/grief is quite explicitly the same as birth pangs. I’ll explain a little more later.

Your brother in Christ, Jesus, --Andrew.*

 

[mercytruth]

Dear brother,

Thank you for your response up to this point.

In the Septuagint, is Koilia" (κοιλ-ια) translated as belly in Jonah 2:2 "out of the* belly *of hades cried I"?

In Matthew 12:40, Koilia" (κοιλ-ια) is translated as belly: "As Jonah was three days and three nights in the fish’s* belly’**

If so, could it not also be translated as womb? Here are some of the references of Koila translated as ‘womb’ in reference to a mother’s womb. (Matthew 19:12, Lk.1:15,41,42,44; Lk. 2:21,23 Lk.11:27; Jn.3:4.

I am wondering if one could establish a link between the ‘womb of sheol, or hades’ and the sorrows, or birth pangs thereof as mentioned in Acts 2:24?

I do not believe that the apostle Peter speaks of Jesus having been loosed from the sorrows of sheol, or hades unless there is some sort of precedent in the Tanakh.

Here are a few scriptures from the Tanakh which associate Hades, or Sheol with ‘odin’ translated as pains, sorrows, (even birth pangs)?:
Psalm 18:4-5, Psalm 116:3-4, Hoshea 13:13-14.

Here is a NT scripture which translates ‘odin’ as the ‘travail’ of a woman giving birth:
1 Thess. 5:3. Creation itself is described as ‘travailing together’ (sunodin) in Rom.8:22.

Perhaps with this in mind, the apostle Paul quotes Ps.2:7 in reference to the resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ being raised from the dead(sheol?). That is to say, that his soul was born from out of the travail of sheol.

Acts 13:33-34: "God has fulfilled the same unto us their children, in that he has raised up Jesus again, as it is also written in the second Psalm, “Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee.” And as concerning that he raised him up from the dead, nor more to return to corruption, he said on this wise, “I will give you the sure mercies of David”.

This seems to re-iterate what the apostle Peter said of the two-fold aspect of the resurrection of Jesus Christ when he quotes Psalm 16:10 on the day of Pentecost:
"Thou will not leave my soul in sheol, neither will you allow your holy one to see corruption"

God’s peace*

 

[Huiou_Theou]

Dear brother,

Thank you for your response up to this point.

In the Septuagint, is Koilia" (κοιλ-ια) translated as belly in Jonah 2:2 "out of the* belly ***of hades cried I"?

In Matthew 12:40, Koilia" (κοιλ-ια) is translated as belly: "As Jonah was three days and three nights in the fish’s* belly’***

If so, could it not also be translated as womb? Here are some of the references of Koila translated as ‘womb’ in reference to a mother’s womb. (Matthew 19:12, Lk.1:15,41,42,44; Lk. 2:21,23 Lk.11:27; Jn.3:4.

Yes. It absolutely can be translated “womb”. Koilia (coils) is the most common word for “womb” in Greek. I find it surprising they use “belly” when that implies in English the idea of “stomach”; womb and intestines are different from the stomach…

I am wondering if one could establish a link between the ‘womb of sheol, or hades’ and the sorrows, or birth pangs thereof as mentioned in Acts 2:24?

 

[mercytruth]

My brother Andrew,

I am much appreciative of what you wrote here;

**Quote:
John 16:19 And Jesus knew that they had a mind to ask him. And he said to them: Of this do you inquire among yourselves, because I said: A little while, and you shall not see me; and again a little while, and you shall see me?

Then Jesus says the same thing, in oath format, but using a more detailed description:

Quote:
John 16:20 Amen, amen, I say to you, that you shall lament and weep, but the world shall rejoice: and you shall be made sorrowful, but your sorrow shall be turned into joy.
John 16:21 A woman, when she is in labour, hath sorrow, because her hour is come; but when she hath brought forth the child, she remembereth no more the anguish, for joy that a man is born into the world.

Notice: In this passage, John is using sorrow as “pain”/“grief” exactly as it is used in Genesis to the woman concerning childbirth. (The grief and the groanings…)
He is, therefore, tying child-birth, the tomb, and the womb, together logically as part of the protoevangelum (first gospel).

Quote:
Genes 3:16 και τη γυναικι ειπεν πληθυνων πληθυνω τας λυπας σου και τον στεναγμον σου εν λυπαις τεξη τεκνα και προς τον ανδρα σου η αποστροφη σου και αυτος σου κυριευσει
…
John 16:20 αμην αμην λεγω υμιν οτι κλαυσετε και θρηνησετε υμεις ο δε κοσμος χαρησεται υμεις λυπηθησεσθε αλλ η λυπη υμων εις χαραν γενησεται **

In this instance of John 16:21, the word ‘labor,travail/tikto’ is used also, which we find in Rev.12:4. Many of the early church fathers interpreted this scripture as the man/child Jesus being born into each of those who are baptized into the death and resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ through our mother, the church, or through our mother, heavenly Jerusalem. spoken by apostle Paul in Gal 4:26. The apostle Paul speaks of his **‘travailing in birth/odino’ until Chirst be formed in you **(the Galatian church) three verses later in Gal.4:29.

So what is it that I am implying? The ‘woman’ in John 16:21 may be referring to heavenly Jerusalem, or to the church giving ‘birth’ with sorrow to her spiritual children through their baptism into the death and resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ and to their ‘formation’ as spoken of by the apostle Paul in Gal.4:29.

Regardless of whether we interpret the ‘woman’ of John 16;21 to be a generic woman, or the mother of us all, I do thank you much for bringing these scriptures to my attention.

-Micah.