I’ve heard it said several times by Muslims: how God treated the Ninevites proves that a blood sacrifice isn’t necessary for the forgiveness of sins. In other words, the events in Jonah prove that substitutionary atonement isn’t required for the forgiveness of sins.
Does God’s treatment of the Ninevites prove that a blood sacrifice isn’t necessary for forgiveness.
While seemingly small in its claim, if true, it would overturn the distinct shape of the Old Testament; and, of course, its fulfilment in Jesus. And that’s exactly why it is stated. To chip away at that revealed reality and hope, the depth of sin and our need for Jesus must be minimised, if another way is being proposed.
Frankly it’s a claim without merit when weighed at a very basic level. It’s an example of how, too often, misunderstandings related to the Bible can be cleared up by reading the passage in question; and, importantly, at a more developed level, reading passages in the context of the rest of the Bible. With that in mind, here are three reasons why the claim can be ignored.
1. Jonah 3 Doesn’t Say They Were Forgiven
The claim is that the Ninevites were forgiven. But that’s not what the passage says! Here’s Jonah 3:10, in the CSB: “God saw their actions—that they had turned from their evil ways—so God relented from the disaster he had threatened them with. And he did not do it.” Let me spell that out. Jonah 3:10 doesn’t say that God forgave the Ninevites! It says that God relented from sending on them the disaster he said he would bring on them. Those are different things; and, on that alone, the claim fails.
However, perhaps for some people that’s exactly what forgiveness means: the axe doesn’t fall. But that’s a very pale version of biblical forgiveness. In other words, forgiveness is not just about a negative—disaster or judgement averted. It has as its goal a positive—a restored and rich relationship with the God who is the very end of salvation.
Forgiveness has a positive goal—a restored and rich relationship with the God.
The first view of only the negative (disaster averted) is common in religions around the world, where the sum of salvation seems to be us not getting what we (might) deserve. And, unfortunately, Christian versions of the same exist. Don’t hear me wrong: judgment is certainly a significant part of understanding forgiveness! But to stress only the negative without the positive is a mistake, missing the overall relational goal of sins forgiven.
2. Jonah’s Ministry Fits a Promise From God Made Elsewhere
Again, here’s another reading issue. What God does in Jonah 3:10 isn’t isolated or odd. It certainly isn’t an example of God’s responses swinging wildly from one extreme to another; or even of him being inconsistent with his promises or declarations. ‘After all,’ people claim, ‘didn’t the Lord say through Jonah: “in forty days Nineveh will be destroyed”? And then what? They weren’t!’
God judges. He will and he must judge evil, because of who he is.
No. None of that. Have a read of Jeremiah 18:7-10. “At one moment I might announce concerning a nation or a kingdom that I will uproot, tear down, and destroy it. However, if that nation about which I have made the announcement turns from its evil, I will relent concerning the disaster I had planned to do to it. At another time I might announce concerning a nation or a kingdom that I will build and plant it. However, if it does what is evil in my sight by not listening to me, I will relent concerning the good I had said I would do to it.”
In Jonah 3:10 God stands by his promise in Jeremiah 18:7-8—not forgiving sins in this instance, but relenting of planned disaster.
Furthermore, for God to announce disaster and then not to follow through on it is not a marker of his inconsistency, let alone his changing emotions. Instead, the announcement gives people the opportunity to respond rightly—namely, to turn away from evil, something God desires. Again, hear me clearly here: God judges. He will and he must judge evil, because of who he is. But as I read recently concerning God’s judgment of rebellious Judah, it’s his “unexpected work,” his “unfamiliar task” (Isaiah 28:21). Despite God’s just need and promises to judge Israel, Judah and the nations, the passages in Isaiah keep painting a portrait of a God and his heart that naturally overflow in offering hope—that’s his more expected work and familiar task.
God is a gracious and compassionate God, who relents from sending disaster.
And so even when God warns of upcoming disaster on stubborn people, the warning carries the opportunity to turn away from what’s deserved. This is consistently the case with the prophets going to God’s people, or even here to a pagan people, the Ninevites. And in that way, it’s a bit like the warning passages in Hebrews; they are means of grace, gracious openings to not have what is said fall on you. But they all occur in line with God’s consistent character and promises. After all, as Jonah knew in theory but not necessarily in heart: God is a gracious and compassionate God, slow to anger, abounding in faithful love, and one who relents from sending disaster (Jonah 4:2). That’s who he is.
3. This Passage Doesn’t Contradict the Bible’s Teaching Regarding Blood Sacrifice
Thirdly, he’s also a God who, not constrained by something outside of him, has decreed that forgiveness requires blood sacrifice. And this revelation abounds in the Bible. From the opening chapters of Genesis where an animal must die so that his fallen first people could be covered, through to the Passover and Mosaic law and the Day of Atonement, blood sacrifices dominate the entire Old Testament, from the Pentateuch to the Prophets and everything in-between. And then, of course, the same is shouted in the New Testament, from start to end. Indeed, worthy is the Lamb who was slaughtered (Revelation 5:12).
The consistent message concerning salvation ties forgiveness to a blood sacrifice.
Jonah 3:10 hardly contradicts this reality. Obviously it doesn’t, for the simple fact that it doesn’t say that the Ninevites were forgiven (see above). And when some say that Jonah 3:10 is but one example of the Old Testament not requiring blood sacrifice, I can’t help but wonder what those other examples are, if the often quoted example of Jonah doesn’t even prove their point.
Instead, the consistent message concerning salvation ties forgiveness to a blood sacrifice. Why? Because for there to be true and lasting forgiveness, there must be substitution. The life is in the blood.
Only Jesus’ substitution brings great assurance of true salvation from judgment.
In the Old Testament it was animals: their given life to cover the sins of the people. But that was in some ways a stopgap. Or perhaps better, it pointed to a lasting substitution that was to come with the arrival of the better Adam and true Israel. He would stand in for us. In John’s words, when Jesus comes into view: “Behold the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world” (John 1:29). How?
Well, not as some mere averting of disaster, but by exhausting of the judgement we deserve. The Son willingly takes it all on himself. He drinks every last drop of the cup of wrath. And only his substitution brings great assurance of true salvation from judgment—everything else puts you in a swamp of uncertainty.
What’s more: not only is judgment removed; righteousness is given. We can know God, not just as God, but as our Father, with the deepest assurance because we are seen and counted as the Son is before his Father. We are “in Christ.” His blood both covers our sins, and draws us near—into the very family of God.
Does Jonah 3:10 Teach Forgiveness Without Blood Sacrifice?
- No, the passage doesn’t say the Ninevites were forgiven
- And what is said (of relenting) fits with promises God makes elsewhere
- Overall, the passage doesn’t contradict what the rest of the Scriptures say about forgiveness and blood sacrifice.
So then, a question that might have seemed a bit unnecessary to deal with, is in fact intimately tied to the very goodness of the good news of Jesus. That’s why it’s worth dealing with. If you’d like to do some reading about substitutionary atonement (or sacrifice)—while they are older and not light reading—I’d recommend the following two books:
- The Glory of the Atonement: Biblical, Theological and Practical Perspectives, edited by Charles H. Hill and Frank A. James III
- Pierced for Our Transgressions: Rediscovering the Glory of Penal Substitution, by Steve Jeffery, Mike Ovey, and Andrew Sach.