What Really Swallowed Jonah? | The Institute for Creation Research

What Really Swallowed Jonah?

Did a fish, whale, or something else swallow the prophet Jonah? Historian Bill Cooper recently helped answer this question in his 2012 book The Authenticity of the Book of Jonah.1 The main clue Dr. Cooper followed was simply the then-common Greek word the Lord Jesus used in Matthew 12:40 for Jonah’s monster, transliterated kêtos. What was the ketos? Dr. Henry Morris wrote, “It could have been…a large whale-shark, or possibly some now-extinct marine reptile.”2

Although knowing the animal’s exact identity is not necessary to understand the Jonah passages, its proper identification would add an element of historicity to the prophet’s traumatic experiences. Jonah 1:17, referenced as 2:1 in the Hebrew Bible, uses the Hebrew word dag to refer to a broad range of sea creatures. It had “great” (gadôl) size—large enough to swallow a whole man.

The second century B.C. saw the Hebrew Old Testament translated into the Greek Old Testament, commonly called the Septuagint. There, dag gadôl (“great fish”) translates into kêtei megalô, meaning a “mega-sized ketos.”3

Jesus said, “For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the [ketos], so will the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.”4 Was Jonah swallowed by a now-extinct marine reptile? Ancient writers—including New Testament authors—used specific words for specific creatures.5 Why did Matthew’s gospel not use the common words for fish, shark, or whale?

Cooper identified an array of sources from outside the Bible that pinpoint the ketos as a sea dragon. A ponderous weight of historical evidence shows those who best knew the Mediterranean Sea consistently used ketos to mean “a sea serpent.” Cooper wrote, “The ketos—the dog-headed sea-dragon—appears in accounts from ca. 700 B.C. and all the way up to ca. A.D. 500.”1

These and other ancient authors and historians mentioned the ketos:1

  • Homer (9th–8th century B.C.)
  • Euripides (ca. 480-406 B.C.)
  • Aristophanes (448-380 B.C.)
  • Lychophron (285-247 B.C.)
  • Marcus Terentius Varro (116-27 B.C.)
  • Diodorus Siculus (ca. 60 B.C.–A.D. 30)
  • Manilius (1st century A.D.)
  • Pausanias (2nd century A.D.)
  • Claudius Aelianus in his De Natura Animalium (ca. A.D. 175-235)
  • Oppian of Apamea (ca. A.D. 200)
  • Eustathius (ca. A.D. 300-377)
  • Hesychius (5th century A.D.)
  • Johannes Moschus (6th century A.D.)

As if it were needed, additional visual art evidence identifies the ketos as a sea serpent. Artists in Rome, Africa, Turkey, Asia, and England painted, carved, and modeled the ketos with consistent anatomy. Again and again, they depicted its dog-like head with prominent teeth and plume-like flaps or frills above the head and neck. They also consistently rendered its huge body as slender and often coiled.

The Authenticity of the Book of Jonah describes a first-century painting from a Roman catacomb showing Jonah being thrown to a sea monster. This ketos had a dog-like head and a flexible neck. Numerous artifacts show a similar animal, including tile mosaics, wood, stone, ivory carvings, and even coins. The ketos looked like nothing common today, but that does not mean marine reptiles were not common in the past. After all, both the books of Job and Psalms refer to the large sea reptile leviathan.

History and archaeology indicate that the Lord Jesus’ audience might have understood exactly the kind of creature to which He referred—the ketos, the sea serpent that swallowed Jonah.

References

  1. Cooper, B. 2012. The Authenticity of the Book of Jonah. Amazon Digital Services, Inc.
  2. Morris, H. 2012. The Henry Morris Study Bible. Green Forest, AR: Master Books, 1319.
  3. Jonah 1 (King James Version). The Blue Letter Bible. Posted on blueletterbible.org, accessed April 11, 2013.
  4. Matthew 12:40.
  5. Some Greek names for sea creatures are galeos (small shark), zygaina (hammerhead), karcharias (sand shark), and ichthus (fish).

* Mr. Thomas is Science Writer at the Institute for Creation Research.

Cite this article: Thomas, B. 2013. What Really Swallowed Jonah? Acts & Facts. 42 (6): 16.

The Latest
NEWS
Hot Water, Cracked Rock, but No Life
Could an asteroid impact really spark life? A recent AGU Advances paper says early asteroid impacts might have cracked Earth’s crust and made...

NEWS
Creation Advocate Mike Riddle Goes Home to Be with the Lord
by Randy J. Guliuzza, P.E., M.D., and Jake Hebert, Ph.D.* Following a lengthy illness, Mike Riddle, founder and president of Creation Training Initiative...

NEWS
When DNA Stop Signs Change Their Message
Imagine an intersection where the red stop sign suddenly means, “Right turn only.” Most drivers wouldn’t reach their destinations...

NEWS
August Wallpaper
"The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament shows His handiwork"  (Psalm 19:1, NKJV) ICR's August 2026...

NEWS
Helium in Exoplanet's Atmosphere: Apparent Evidence of Youth
The prestigious journal Science has published evidence that a planet orbiting a red dwarf star has an atmosphere.1,2 This extrasolar planet,...

CREATION PODCAST
Christian Geologist: I Studied Rocks for 13 Years - What I Found...
Geologist Dr. Tim Clarey spent 13 years digging into rock layers from every continent on Earth, and what he found doesn't match what most people were taught...

NEWS
Giant Fossil Shark Consistent with Extreme Pre-Flood Longevity
Paleontologists recently rediscovered the largest known set of vertebrae from the giant fossil shark Otodus megalodon, popularized by The Meg movies...

NEWS
Faster Chemistry Is Not the Same as Life
A pile of metal, wires, and computer chips will not assemble itself into a working airplane. The parts may have useful properties, but they still need...

NEWS
Fearsome Cleveland Fossil Is Still a Fish
According to evolutionary theory, fish went through a variety of forms until they evolved into the fish we see swimming today. Recently, what conventional...

NEWS
Let the Fossils Speak for Themselves
When conventional scientists call a fossil an early step in animal evolution, the claim may rest more on a reading of the fossil than on the fossil...