Jonah and the Whale OR Dagon the Fish God?

All of the ancient texts specifically speak of a "great fish" when referring to Jonah's story, but somewhere along the line, a transcriber decided to give that fish a name and changed the wording to read "whale" instead. Could it be that this was deliberate in order to obfuscate the real connection and what may have actually transpired in history?

The Hebrew text of Jonah 2:1 (1:17 in English translation), reads dag gadol (Hebrew: דג גדול), which literally means "great fish." The Septuagint translates this into Greek as ketos megas, (Greek: κητος μεγας), "huge fish"; in Greek mythology the term was closely associated with sea monsters.[7] Saint Jerome later translated the Greek phrase as piscis granda in his Latin Vulgate, and as cetus in Matthew 12:40
...
In his 1534 translation, William Tyndale translated the phrase in Jonah 2:1 as "greate fyshe," and he translated the word ketos (Greek) or cetus (Latin) in Matthew 12:40 as "whale". Tyndale's translation was later incorporated into the Authorized Version of 1611. Since then, the "great fish" in Jonah 2 has most often been translated as "whale".

en.wikipedia.org...

Why is this one word of translation so important in connecting the dots? One word can change the truth of history into something that sounds like a ridiculous far-fetched fable. Is this image below the picture of a man swallowed by a fish? Is the man not "in the belly" of the fish?





The above is an image from a stone laver from Assyria. Dagon, being a fish god, would of course be of the mind that water is holy; therefore he sprinkles the Holy Water. Dagon was a Philistine deity who was half-man and half-fish.


Is it possible that the Dagon Priest was actually Jonah from the Jonah and the Whale story?

Jonah's destination was Nineveh; this was the capital city of Assyria. The ancient images of Dagon are from Assyria.

Jonah came from an area called Gath-hepher. "Gath" means 'wine press' as in the sense of "treading out grapes". Gath was one of five chief cities of the Philistines and a native city of Goliath. In some translations, it is said that Jonah came from Gitta-hepher; Gittite (from Gitta) means "belonging to Gath.' Was Jonah a Philistine?





Mod Edit: External Source Tags Instructions – Please Review This Link.

reply to post by Alethea


A lot of tales from our past have been mythologized.
To suit whatever religion that narrates them.
Sometimes the hand of allegorical genius is at play.
And what about the Babylonian fish god Oannes?
One letter away from Ioannes which represents the,
Hebrew name Jonah in the Greek translation.
Let’s not forget the Babylonians conquered Nineveh.
I think this old tale has a germ of truth in it.

reply to post by Alethea


Your question implies you question the veracity of the Bible. The Bible itself is very accurate. It itself tells us who Jonah was:


(2 Kings 14:25) . . .He it was that restored the boundary of Israel from the entering in of Ha′math clear to the sea of the Ar′a‧bah, according to the word of Jehovah the God of Israel who spoke by means of his servant Jo′nah the son of A‧mit′tai, the prophet that was from Gath-he′pher.

Gathhepher was a border city of Zebulon and is usually identified with Khirbet ez-Zurra. So Jonah was an Israelite that was sent from Israel to a pagan nation by the true God Jehovah to foretell their coming destruction because of their extreme badness.

That the account of Jonah was not just a myth but real was confirmed by Jesus when he came to the earth. He spoke of it himself:


(Matthew 12:39-41) . . .“A wicked and adulterous generation keeps on seeking for a sign, but no sign will be given it except the sign of Jo′nah the prophet. 40 For just as Jo′nah was in the belly of the huge fish three days and three nights, so the Son of man will be in the heart of the earth three days and three nights. 41 Men of Nin′e‧veh will rise up in the judgment with this generation and will condemn it; because they repented at what Jo′nah preached, but, look! something more than Jo′nah is here. . .


I looked up the word used in Jonah 1:17 where it says a big fish swallowed him (Now Jehovah appointed a great fish to swallow Jo′nah) and got this word used for the word fish:

“Fish.” Heb., dagh; Gr., ke′tei, “sea monster; huge fish”; Lat., pi′scem.

The Bible does not specify what type of sea creature swallowed Jonah, only using th term "big fish." But there are whales that are known to have the capacity to swallow a man whole. For example, National Geographic (December 1992) stated that the whale shark has the capacity, it is over 70 feet tall and weighs over 70 tons.

“The whale shark’s unusual digestive anatomy lends itself to Jonah stories. It is easy to imagine yourself being inadvertently sucked into a whale shark’s mouth, which is huge . . . The cavernous mouth of even a small adult whale shark could easily accommodate a pair of Jonahs.”

reply to post by Calender


Are you implying that this is a true account?
And that Jonah was swallowed.
That it is not allegorical but literal.

reply to post by midicon


I have no reason to doubt Jesus' word on it. That it could happen is not out of the question (scientific proof that is, there are whales out there with the capability to swallow a human no problem). That there is a God, I have no doubt. If he can create a fish that has the capacity to swallow a human, and then that he decides to use it to save a human after he throws himself overboard into the sea to save the crew of people he was with because that same God was causing a storm in the sea, none of it seems far-fetched at all.

Now, obviously you take a different stance. And that is no doubt because you don't believe the Bible. But have you ever actually took the time to read it?

reply to post by Calender


It is out of the question.
Three days in a whales belly says it all.
Nothing far fetched about that!
And you make too many assumptions.
Like I don’t believe the bible,
I just don’t accept it’s all literal truth.
Perhaps there is depth,
For the eyes that that can see,
Have I read the bible?
I don’t think you have.
Or at least not with any understanding.

Regards Midicon.

reply to post by Calender


your very ignorant for assuming the bible you read tells you the truth. the only way for you to really know what the bible says is to read it in the orignal language it was written.

Originally posted by Calender
reply to post by midicon

 

I have no reason to doubt Jesus' word on it.

last time i checked jonah was from the old testament....that would be before jesus' time. sorry i have to tell you the order your holy book goes in when im not even christian, let alone believe in yahweh or yeshua.

Originally posted by midicon
reply to post by Calender

 

It is out of the question.
Three days in a whales belly says it all.
Nothing far fetched about that!
And you make too many assumptions.
Like I don’t believe the bible,
I just don’t accept it’s all literal truth.
Perhaps there is depth,
For the eyes that that can see,
Have I read the bible?
I don’t think you have.
Or at least not with any understanding.

Regards Midicon.

I made no assumptions about you. I asked if you have ever read the Bible? For surely if you have, then you would see it is really God's word, and truth, just as it claims to be:

(2 Timothy 3:16-17) All Scripture is inspired of God and beneficial for teaching, for reproving, for setting things straight, for disciplining in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be fully competent, completely equipped for every good work.


As for the three days in the belly of the great fish. If you choose to believe that both Jesus was wrong and misleading about it as well as the inspired book of Jonah, that is your choice. But to think that a man can live for three days in a very cramped living space such as the belly of a whale is not far-fetched, nor out of the realm of belief at all.

Again I will stand by Jesus' own words on the matter. There could be no greater witness to the veracity of the account than those of Jesus himself, who was alive in the spirit realm before he came to earth, and was there to see the event take place.

Originally posted by bismos

Originally posted by Calender
reply to post by midicon

 

I have no reason to doubt Jesus' word on it.

last time i checked jonah was from the old testament....that would be before jesus' time. sorry i have to tell you the order your holy book goes in when im not even christian, let alone believe in yahweh or yeshua.

I touched on this in my last post. But remember what Jesus himself said:


(John 8:58) . . .Jesus said to them: “Most truly I say to YOU, Before Abraham came into existence, I have been.”

(John 17:5) . . .So now you, Father, glorify me alongside yourself with the glory that I had alongside you before the world was.


The fact that Jesus was alive when the events in the book of Jonah transpired and, he being "the truth" in whom there was found no lie, came to earth and verified the account as accurate and reliable, is enough for me:


(Luke 11:29-30) . . .[Jesus speaking] But no sign will be given it except the sign of Jo′nah. 30 For just as Jo′nah became a sign to the Nin′e‧vites, in the same way will the Son of man be also to this generation.


Jesus speaking as an eye-witness observer of Jonah's encounter with the huge fish:


(Matthew 12:40) . . .For just as Jo′nah was in the belly of the huge fish three days and three nights, so the Son of man will be in the heart of the earth three days and three nights.


Did Jesus claim this just to be allegory, or mythical, or unreality? No, he verified the account of the Bible record as truth, as are all of the words found in the holy scriptures, just as was pointed out in the scripture at 2 Timothy 3:16, 17.

Originally posted by bismos

Originally posted by Calender
reply to post by midicon

 

I have no reason to doubt Jesus' word on it.

last time i checked jonah was from the old testament....that would be before jesus' time. sorry i have to tell you the order your holy book goes in when im not even christian, let alone believe in yahweh or yeshua.

Actually, bismos, the story of Jonah was also mentioned and referred to in the new testament. When the disciples (NT) asked Jesus to give a sign of when he would return, he answered them saying that it would be a wicked generation and that for that reason no sign would be given it except for "the sign of Jonah".

IMO, I think he was referring to the contagion of this Fish-god-man continuing to mislead people. That it could become a world-wide practice if it was not stopped. And that only too late would people come to realize this. Too-late, meaning it would have roots everywhere and would be practically indestructible. That would certainly describe exactly what has happened today. Every "bible" originated from what the Vatican has allowed to be published.


Now, some religions teach that Jesus meant the "sign of Jonah" refers to the resurrection, as in Jesus was in the earth three days just as Jonah was in the belly of the whale three days. THIS IS A MADE UP TEACHING OF MAN. Nowhere does the scriptures confirm that train of thought. This is "religion" making up s*** by the seat of their pants.

And the idea that "Jesus went into the bowels of the earth" or "Jesus went to hell for three days and took the keys"....that is also MADE UP TEACHING OF MAN. It is bunk. For one thing, Jesus was not put into the ground; and another thing, he was not "dead" for three days, either, according to the scriptural account.

Religious leaders have blurred the lines between what was printed and what their speculations are. They promote their own ideas as the absolute truth. They do not allow their captives to question what they dictate from the pedastals. It is not a learning environment. You are being talked down to and expected to believe whatever opinion they dish out as truth.

Originally posted by Calender



The fact that Jesus was alive when the events in the book of Jonah transpired and, he being "the truth" in whom there was found no lie, came to earth and verified the account as accurate and reliable, is enough for me:


Did Jesus claim this just to be allegory, or mythical, or unreality? No, he verified the account of the Bible record as truth, as are all of the words found in the holy scriptures, just as was pointed out in the scripture at 2 Timothy 3:16, 17.

Jesus referenced the incident. I would not call that a verification for what the twisted beliefs are today.

Did you look at the image in the first post? Is it not a man "in the belly" of a large fish?

Do you see any similarities in these two costumes?





Calender, if I described to you a tribe of people who take sticks and affix pig hair on them and then they use these sticks in some kind of ritual where they go off into a room by themselves and pretend to eat the sticks, but they do not eat them......can you figure out that it may be someone from another culture attempting to describe people who brush their teeth?

I think we have to take into consideration the time frame, the old manuscripts, and trying to better understand the descriptions being portrayed. It may have been literal when it was originally written, but with so much information left out, very little articulation of what we do have, we have to pull from other sources of history to get a more accurate idea of what might possibly be taking place here.

In hindu they have a story of a fish man telling a king of a coming great flood/deluge and more, kind of like noah.
believed to be an avatar of vishnu/god

en.wikipedia.org...

reply to post by platipus


I noticed in the artwork portraying Manu that the figure is holding a six pointed star---Solomon's seal? I really wonder at what point in history that story developed.

Originally posted by Alethea
reply to post by platipus

 

I noticed in the artwork portraying Manu that the figure is holding a six pointed star---Solomon's seal? I really wonder at what point in history that story developed.

Found this explanation while looking for the meaning of what he was holding:

In the Puranas, Vishnu is described as having the divine colour of water filled clouds, four-armed, holding a lotus, mace, conch (shankha) and chakra (wheel).

I am aware of the relationship between the pagan fishgod dagon, and that of the Catholic Church. It is quite blatant, thank you for the reference.

For more similarities between different pagan forms of worship and that in Christendom check out a video I made recently and put on youtube:

reply to post by Calender


I believe christianity took ideas from "pagan" religions and claim it as their own to establish a religion that would be suited for the westerners and crush the other western religions.

The whale was not dagon. It was a large fish/whale/sea dweller that God used as a tool to teach Jonah. Jonah would have been familiar with the relation of the dagonian meaning by using the whale. God used the temptation to do bad, as a motivator to do good. He reversed what it represented. This is a case where God is omnipotent, He can do what he feels and wants to do. If that means defying our dimension as we know it, so be it. Anytime God makes an appearance firsthand or by another means, He defies every known law of science or measurements. Science cannot pinpoint Him because God chooses not to be found by those means. In this circumstance God reversed the meaning of the Underwater world for Jonah.

reply to post by RisingPhoenix33


well said phoenix!

even though ive never heard of jonah and the whale story it seems to compare to sumerian tales of half fish man who teaches writing and other things to people and help with civilization.

the dogon people of africa talks of fish-like beings from sirius coming to earth...but thats probably a whole other story.

reply to post by Calender


That was a nice video presentation; it held my interest because it moved smoothly, kept focus on one subject and had good visuals. It was a little bit of Zeitgeist.

However, if all religions belong to the false religions of Babylon, I would think it erroneous to claim that even one of them would be a "true" religion. Religion is the problem as it acts like a catalyst to promote divisions among people.

The Creator, not the god "Jehovah", gave man dominion over the earth. The only "service" such creator hoped for was for man to enjoy the gift and take care of it. The Creator gave man dominion over the beasts of the earth, not dominion over one another. Religious leaders force their dominion over other human beings. No one was given any such authority by the Creator.