Sefer Yonah and the Sin of the Calf

Introduction

The story of Yonah and Nineveh recalls several aspects of the story of the Sin of the Golden Calf. Both narratives revolve around potential destruction of sinners and Hashem's ultimate decision to have mercy on the people and overturn the decree. A handful of almost verbatim linguistic parallels accompany the shared content. However, it is the contrasts between the stories which are most illuminating, as they shed light on the differing character of both the sinners (Israel and Nineveh) and the spiritual leaders (Moshe and Yonah) of each story.

Content Parallels

The overall story-line of the two narratives is similar:

• Sin and declaration of punishment – In both stories, a nation/city finds itself close to destruction due to the severity of it sins.
• Prayer to overturn decree – In each case, a leader (Moshe / King of Nineveh) expresses a request that God nullify the decree and return from his wrath.
• 40 days of intervention / fasting – Nineveh is given forty days to change during which the people fast, don sackcloth and cry out to God. Moshe, similarly, spends forty days on Mt. Sinai, fasting and interceding on behalf of the people.
• Punishment averted – Both groups receive Divine mercy and Hashem "regrets" the evil He had planned.
• God's attributes – In both stories Hashem's attributes of mercy are highlighted. Hashem introduces them to Moshe on Mt. Sinai, and in Sefer Yonah, the prophet tells Hashem that he has always known that Hashem is a "אֵ-ל רַחוּם וְחַנּוּן אֶרֶךְ אַפַּיִם וְרַב חֶסֶד".

Literary Allusions

There are several almost verbatim parallels between the stories:

Analysis

• Degree of similarity – There is a strong degree of similarity between the parallels.  In two of the cases entire phrases are repeated in the same exact form, with only the order of two words being reversed.
• Distinctive phrases – The parallels are somewhat distinctive:
• Various forms of the phrase "וְשָׁב מֵחֲרוֹן אַפּוֹ" appear 13 times in Tanakh, but in only Shemot and Yonah is the phrase accompanied by the root "נחם".
• Variations of the phrase "נחם על הרעה" appear 11 times in Tanakh, but the full formulation "וַיִּנָּחֶם.. עַל הָרָעָה אֲשֶׁר דִּבֶּר לַעֲשׂוֹת" is unique to these stories.
• Hashem's attributes of mercy are mentioned seven times in Tanakh. Tehillim 86:15 matches the version in Shemot (ending with "וֶאֱמֶת"), while the version in Yonah echoes that in Yoel 2:13 (ending with "וְנִחָם עַל הָרָעָה"). In the other three cases the attributes extend only until the trait of "חסד".‎¹

Points of Contrast

Despite the general similarity in plot discussed above, there are several important differences between the stories:

• Sins of Israel and Nineveh – While Israel sins in the realm of belief, turning away from Hashem to worship the calf, the sins of Nineveh are concentrated in the interpersonal realm, "הֶחָמָס אֲשֶׁר בְּכַפֵּיהֶם".
• Punishment of Israel and Nineveh – Despite Hashem's forgiving of Israel  and nullifying the decree of complete destruction, many of the offenders are still punished and killed. In Sefer Yonah in contrast, the Ninevites do not get punished at all.
• Names of Hashem – In the story of the Sin of the Golden Calf, the verse states that Hashem regretted His decision to destroy, using Hashem's proper name. In the Book of Yonah, the name Elokim is used instead.
• Who cries: "וְשָׁב מֵחֲרוֹן אַפּוֹ"?  In Shemot, this plea emerges from the mouth of Moshe, the prophet who intercedes on behalf of the people. No similar cry is heard from the Israelites themselves.   In Yonah, in contrast, it is the king, one of the sinners,² not the prophet, who cries out.
• Moshe and Yonah – Perhaps the most striking differences between the stories relates to the attitudes of Moshe and Yonah:
• Moshe ascends a mountain to speak with Hashem. Yonah descends to the seas to flee from Hashem.
• While Moshe desires the people's repentance and the overturning of the decree, Yonah actively opposes it.
• Moshe asks to be "erased" from Hashem's book if He does not forgive Israel (Shemot 32:32).  Yonah, in contrast, requests death because Hashem has forgiven Nineveh (Yonah 4:3).
• In Shemot, Hashem's attributes include the quality of "אמת", yet when Yonah quotes the various attributes, he omits this trait, replacing it with  the phrase "וְנִחָם עַל הָרָעָה".‎³

Conclusions

• Fate of Nineveh and Israel – Of the two sets of sinners, Israel fares much worse than Nineveh. Despite Hashem's saving them from total destruction, they are still punished.⁴  Why is this? Some of the other differences noted might shed light on the question:
• It is possible that the sin of idolatry is considered more egregious than the "violence" committed by the Ninevites. 
• Regardless, since Israel has a personal relationship with Hashem (exemplified by the use of His proper name throughout the story), more is expected of them.
• Finally, and perhaps most importantly, while the Ninevites embark on a comprehensive campaign of repentance, the Israelites do not. It is Moshe, not they, who destroys the calf and prays to God.
• Leadership of Moshe and Yonah – The stories illuminate the vastly different attitudes of the two leaders.  Moshe is the ultimate defender, praying for forgiveness, actively destroying the object of sin, and willing to be "erased" to save his people. Yonah is the opposite, doing as little as possible to defend Nineveh or get them to repent.  It is the King of Nineveh, not he, who cries out to God and pushes the people to change. The contrast makes the reader question: Why does Yonah not act like Moshe?  Why does he oppose the salvation of Nineveh, see in it a lack of "אמת"?‎⁵  For several approaches to this question, see Why Did Yonah Disobey Hashem.
• Defender – Mekhkilta assumes that Yonah's reluctance to save Nineveh stemmed from his desire to defend Israel.  Yonah assumed that Nineveh's repentance would cast a negative light on Israel's lack thereof, and thus preferred to die rather than harm Israel. As such, he followed in the footsteps of Moshe who was similarly willing to die (מְחֵנִי נָא מִסִּפְרְךָ אֲשֶׁר כָּתָבְתָּ) for his people.
• Accuser – Others⁶ assume that Yonah was a man of "truth" who theologically  opposed the concept that repentance should erase the need for retribution. Unlike Moshe, he saw no value in being merciful to sinners.