Cross-Reference Analysis
Cross-Reference Analysis — Jonah (Full Book) | English → French
Methodological Note: Citation Normalization
All citations in this document use the pattern Book Chapter:Verse (e.g., Genesis 15:6, Jonah 3:4) for the English source witness. Because this Language Package is bilingual by design and will be consumed alongside French-language teaching material, the table below fixes the required French book-name equivalents for every book cited in this analysis, extending the baseline’s existing list (Romans = Romains, Genesis = Genèse, Psalms = Psaumes, Isaiah = Ésaïe, Habakkuk = Habacuc, Joel = Joël).
| English book name | French citation form | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Jonah | Jonas | Core curriculum book |
| Genesis | Genèse | (baseline-established) |
| Exodus | Exode | New for this curriculum |
| Numbers | Nombres | New |
| Psalms | Psaumes | (baseline-established) |
| Jeremiah | Jérémie | New |
| Joel | Joël | (baseline-established) |
| Nahum | Nahum | New — same spelling in French |
| Nehemiah | Néhémie | New |
| 2 Kings | 2 Rois | New |
| Matthew | Matthieu | New |
| Luke | Luc | New |
| Acts | Actes | New |
| Romans | Romains | (baseline-established) |
| 1 Corinthians | 1 Corinthiens | New |
Verse numbers remain Arabic numerals in both languages, per baseline convention. All cross-references below are given in the English normalized form; Phase 2 output must substitute the French book name at point of use while preserving the Book Chapter:Verse structure.
Part A — Cross-Reference Matrix by Chapter
Chapter 1 — Jonah’s Flight and the Storm
| Passage | Theme | Related Character(s) | OT/NT Connection | Translation Sensitivity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jonah 1:1-2 | Divine calling; mission to a hostile Gentile power | Jonah, God (YHWH) | 2 Kings 14:25 (historical notice of the prophet Jonah, son of Amittai, under Jeroboam II) | Low. Establishes Jonah as a known, historical prophetic figure, not a fictional device; French rendering “Jonas, fils d’Amittaï” should match the 2 Kings French rendering used elsewhere in this Language Package for name consistency. |
| Jonah 1:2 | Universal scope of divine concern; “their evil/wickedness” | Nineveh (city) | Anticipates Genesis 18:20-21 (God “sees” Sodom’s outcry) and Nahum 1-3 (later prophetic judgment oracle wholly against Nineveh) | High. Nahum’s entire book pronounces Nineveh’s eventual, unmitigated destruction roughly a century after Jonah — the two books must be taught in canonical tension, not harmonized away: Jonah shows God’s mercy toward genuine repentance; Nahum shows judgment falling once repentance is abandoned. Do not let French teaching material imply Jonah’s episode was Nineveh’s final destiny. |
| Jonah 1:3 | Human reluctance vs. God’s universal love; fleeing God’s commissioned presence | Jonah | Psalm 139:7-10 (“Where shall I flee from your presence?”) | Medium. Psalm 139 affirms inescapable divine presence (omnipresence) as comfort; Jonah 1:3 dramatizes the same truth as futile rebellion. French rendering of “presence” in both passages should use compatible vocabulary (présence) so the ironic echo is recoverable by a French reader moving between the two books. |
| Jonah 1:4-16 | Sovereignty of God over creation; contrast between pagan fear and prophetic disobedience | Jonah, the sailors, YHWH | Psalm 107:23-30 (sailors in a storm cry to the LORD and are delivered); Psalm 104:1-9 (God’s sovereign rule over the sea) | Medium. The sailors’ progression from natural terror to reverential “fear of the LORD” (1:16) should use the same French contrastive vocabulary (avoir peur / craindre le Seigneur) recommended in 08_core_glossary.md term #13, to keep this pattern visible across both the Jonah and (later) Psalms curricula. |
| Jonah 1:9 | Confession of YHWH as Creator | Jonah | Genesis 1:1, Exodus 20:11 (creation confession formula: “who made the sea and the land”) | Low. Standard creedal creation-confession language; no specific French risk beyond consistent capitalization of le SEIGNEUR per glossary term #1. |
| Jonah 1:17 | Sovereign appointment of the great fish; typological seed for the sign of Jonah | God (YHWH), Jonah | Matthew 12:40 (direct NT citation: “For just as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the great fish…”); LXX κῆτος μέγα | Critical. This is the narrative event Jesus cites as His own resurrection type. The French noun chosen for “great fish” here (un grand poisson) must be identical to the noun used in the French rendering of Matthew 12:40 used elsewhere in this Language Package’s NT curricula, so the typology is visible to a French reader without cross-referencing footnotes. |
Chapter 2 — Jonah’s Prayer from the Deep
| Passage | Theme | Related Character(s) | OT/NT Connection | Translation Sensitivity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jonah 2:2 | Prayer from the realm of the dead; God’s sovereignty reaching into Sheol | Jonah | Psalm 18:6 (“out of his temple he heard my voice”); Psalm 120:1 | Medium. Confirms Jonah 2 is deliberately composed in the idiom of the individual lament psalms; French rendering should be stylistically consonant with the Psaumes tradition already fixed in this Language Package (once produced) so readers recognize the genre. |
| Jonah 2:3 | Sovereignty over cosmic waters | Jonah | Psalm 42:7 (“deep calls to deep… all your waves and your billows have gone over me”); Genesis 1:2 (תְּהוֹם, tehom, the primordial deep) | Medium. “The deep” (les profondeurs/l'abîme) links Jonah’s near-death experience to the primeval chaos-waters God alone masters — reinforces Sovereignty over Creation doctrine; keep vocabulary consistent with any future Genesis 1 curriculum. |
| Jonah 2:4 | Exile from God’s presence, echoing but distinct from 1:3 | Jonah | Psalm 31:22 (“I am cut off from your sight”) | Low. |
| Jonah 2:5-6 | Descent to the very roots of creation; near-total death imagery | Jonah | Psalm 69:1-2; Psalm 30:3 (“O LORD my God, I cried to you for help, and you have healed me… you have brought up my soul from Sheol”) | High. Psalm 30:3 is the closest verbal/thematic parallel to Jonah 2:6’s “you brought up my life from the pit” — both use resurrection-shaped rescue language later applied typologically to Christ. French rendering of “brought up my life” (tu as fait remonter ma vie) should track the Psalm 30 French rendering for recognizability. |
| Jonah 2:6 | Sheol / the pit as the realm of the dead, not a place of eternal torment | Jonah | See glossary term #15; cf. Psalm 16:10 (“you will not abandon my soul to Sheol”), a verse Acts 2:27 (Peter’s Pentecost sermon) applies directly to Christ’s resurrection | Critical. Psalm 16:10 → Acts 2:27,31 is the New Testament’s own primary resurrection-from-Sheol proof-text, running in exact theological parallel to the Jonah 2 / Matthew 12:40 typology. Both threads (Psalm 16/Acts 2 and Jonah 2/Matthew 12) must use the same French term for “Sheol/the pit/the realm of the dead” (le séjour des morts) wherever this Language Package’s curricula touch either passage, so a French learner can perceive that Scripture consistently frames resurrection as reversal of Sheol. |
| Jonah 2:8 | Idolatry forsakes covenant loyalty (chesed) | Jonah (addressing generic idolaters) | Psalm 31:6 (“I hate those who pay regard to worthless idols”) | High — see glossary term #19 on chesed vs. grâce. |
| Jonah 2:9 | Salvation belongs to the LORD alone | Jonah | Psalm 3:8 (“Salvation belongs to the LORD”), verbatim Hebrew parallel | Medium. Direct quotation-level parallel; the French rendering “le salut vient du Seigneur” should match however Psalm 3:8 is eventually rendered in this Language Package, and reuses baseline salut exactly. |
| Jonah 2:10 | Sovereign command over the fish; deliverance completed | God (YHWH), Jonah | Anticipates the manah-appointment pattern completed at Jonah 4:6-8 | Medium — see glossary term #12. |
Chapter 3 — Nineveh’s Repentance (Core Passage)
Full verse-by-verse term analysis is provided in 07_semantic_analysis.md Part A. This section adds the specifically cross-referential and canonical-parallel dimension.
| Passage | Theme | Related Character(s) | OT/NT Connection | Translation Sensitivity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jonah 3:1-2 | Renewed divine calling after initial refusal | Jonah, God | Jonah 1:1-2 (verbal echo of the identical commissioning formula, “Arise, go”) | Low — see glossary term #6; French must preserve the identical wording across both occurrences so the obedience-reversal is visible. |
| Jonah 3:3 | The scale of God’s concern reaching a great Gentile city | Nineveh | Anticipates Jonah 4:11’s closing “great city” statement; parallel scope to Romans 1:16 (“to the Jew first and also to the Greek”) | High. This is the book’s central textual anchor for “God’s Compassion for the Nations,” and stands in direct canonical continuity with Paul’s gospel-to-all-nations argument in Romans. See Part C below for the full Romans parallel table. |
| Jonah 3:4 | ”Overthrown” — judgment vocabulary echoing Sodom | Jonah, Nineveh | Genesis 19:25 (הָפַךְ, haphak, “he overthrew those cities” — identical root) | High. Direct intertextual echo; French “renversée” (not the more generic “détruite”) should be used in both Jonah 3:4 and wherever Genesis 19:25 appears in this Language Package, to preserve the deliberate literary link that Nineveh stands under Sodom-level judgment before its repentance changes the outcome. |
| Jonah 3:5 | Gentile faith-repentance; belief that produces immediate action | The people of Nineveh | Luke 11:32 (“The men of Nineveh will rise up at the judgment and condemn this generation, for they repented at the preaching of Jonah, and behold, something greater than Jonah is here”); Matthew 12:41 (parallel saying) | Critical. Jesus Himself makes Nineveh’s repentance a direct point of comparison and rebuke against His own unbelieving generation. This is not incidental background but the NT’s own authoritative commentary on Jonah 3. French rendering of Nineveh’s belief (crurent en Dieu, glossary term #25) must be theologically consistent with however Luke 11:32’s “repented” (μετενόησαν, metenoēsan) is rendered in this Language Package’s Luke curriculum, since both describe the same historical event from two Testament vantage points. |
| Jonah 3:5-9 | Corporate repentance expressed through fasting, sackcloth, royal decree | The king and people of Nineveh | Joel 2:12-14 (a near-verbal parallel: fasting, weeping, “who knows” idiom, and the hope that God “may turn and relent”) | Critical. Joel 2:13-14 and Jonah 3:9/4:2 share both the “Who knows?” idiom and the nacham (“relent”) vocabulary almost verbatim, and both quote or echo the Exodus 34:6-7 divine-character formula. French rendering of “relent” applied to God must be identical across Jonah and any future Joel curriculum in this Language Package — see Part D rendering-consistency rules below. |
| Jonah 3:9-10 | Repentance produces observable behavioral change (“turned from their evil way”) | Nineveh, God | Jeremiah 18:7-8 (the general prophetic principle: “if that nation… turns from its evil, I will relent of the disaster that I intended”) | Critical. Jeremiah 18:7-8 states as a general theological principle exactly what Jonah 3 narrates as a specific historical case; the two passages function as principle-and-example. French rendering of “turn from evil” (se détourner de sa mauvaise voie) and “relent of disaster” (see Part D) should be doctrinally and, where feasible, lexically aligned between the two books. |
| Jonah 3:10 | God’s mercy triggered by genuine repentance, without compromising justice | God | Numbers 14:20 (God relents from immediate destruction of Israel at Moses’ intercession, though consequences remain); Exodus 32:14 | High. A recurring OT pattern of relenting-in-response-to-intercession/repentance; keep the Jonah occurrence doctrinally distinct from any suggestion that God’s justice is thereby abolished rather than satisfied through genuine change. |
Chapter 4 — Jonah’s Anger and God’s Rebuke
| Passage | Theme | Related Character(s) | OT/NT Connection | Translation Sensitivity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jonah 4:2 | The classic divine self-revelation formula, quoted in complaint | Jonah, God | Exodus 34:6-7 (the formula’s fountainhead, given at Sinai after the golden calf); echoed at Numbers 14:18, Psalm 86:15, Psalm 103:8, Psalm 145:8, Nehemiah 9:17, Joel 2:13 | Critical. This is the single most quoted divine-character formula in the OT. Every occurrence within this Language Package’s growing curriculum must render the four terms (channun/gracious, rachum/compassionate, erekh appayim/slow to anger, rav-chesed/abounding in steadfast love) identically in French — see Part D. Jonah’s citation is unique among all these occurrences for being spoken in bitter complaint rather than praise, a rhetorical inversion that must not be flattened in translation. |
| Jonah 4:2 | Reluctant prophet resents the very mercy he was sent to proclaim | Jonah | Structural parallel to Romans 11:11-24 (Paul’s warning against Gentile-Christian arrogance toward unbelieving Israel — the mirror-image danger to Jonah’s Jewish-prophet resentment of Gentile inclusion) | High. See Part C below; this is one of the strongest whole-book parallels between Jonah and Romans. |
| Jonah 4:5-8 | Sovereignty over creation completing the manah-pattern (plant, worm, wind) | God, Jonah | Continues the pattern begun at Jonah 1:17 (the great fish) | Medium — see glossary term #12; French verb consistency required across all four occurrences. |
| Jonah 4:9-11 | God’s unresolved rhetorical appeal; compassion extended even to animals | God, Jonah, Nineveh | Psalm 145:9 (“The LORD is good to all, and his mercy is over all that he has made”); Matthew 5:45 (God’s common grace to “the just and the unjust”) | High. The book’s deliberately open ending (a question, not a resolution) must be preserved as a rhetorical question addressed to the reader, not converted into a closing moral statement; see glossary term #36. |
Part B — Messianic References and Typology
| NT Passage | Jonah Reference | Type / Antitype | Translation Sensitivity |
|---|---|---|---|
Matthew 12:39-40 | Jonah 1:17; 2:1-10 | Jonah’s three days and three nights in the fish ↔ Christ’s three days in the tomb before resurrection | Critical. The French phrase “trois jours et trois nuits” must be verbatim-identical wherever Matthew 12:40 or Jonah 2 (LXX numbering 2:1) appear across this Language Package, per the baseline’s mandated cross-document consistency rule (cf. Romans 1:16-17, 8:28, 10:9-10). Mandatory theologian review. |
Matthew 12:41 / Luke 11:32 | Jonah 3:5-10 | Nineveh’s repentance at Jonah’s preaching ↔ the response owed to Christ, “something greater than Jonah” | Critical. Jesus’ argument depends on Nineveh’s repentance being read as real repentance (not mere ritual), matching the “turn from evil way” (shuv) analysis at Jonah 3:8,10. French rendering must keep this behavioral-reorientation sense intact so the a fortiori logic (“if pagan Nineveh repented at a reluctant prophet’s one sermon, how much more should hearers of Christ respond”) is not weakened. |
Matthew 16:4 | Jonah (whole book, summary reference) | “An evil and adulterous generation seeks for a sign, but no sign will be given except the sign of Jonah” | High. Same French phrase “le signe de Jonas” required; see glossary term #38. |
1 Corinthians 15:4 | (general resurrection “on the third day” pattern) | Confirms “three days” as a fixed, Scripture-attested resurrection pattern rather than an isolated detail | Medium. Not a direct verbal quotation of Jonah, but reinforces the same numerical pattern; no specific French rendering conflict, but useful cross-reference for teaching the typology’s canonical breadth. |
Psalm 16:10 / Acts 2:27,31 | Jonah 2:6 (Sheol/pit imagery) | Parallel (not identical-source) resurrection-from-Sheol typology, applied by Peter directly to Christ | High — see Chapter 2 matrix entry above; French le séjour des morts consistency required across both threads. |
Romans 1:4 | (general resurrection doctrine, baseline resurrection_of_christ) | Confirms the doctrinal category (“declared to be the Son of God by the resurrection”) into which the Jonah-sign typology feeds | Medium. Reuse baseline résurrection exactly; the Jonah sign is one OT-rooted line of evidence feeding this larger NT doctrine, not a separate concept requiring new vocabulary. |
Part C — Cross-Curriculum Parallels: Jonah and Romans
This section addresses the hard-rule requirement to cross-reference “parallels to other curricula in this language (especially Romans).” Romans is the only other curriculum with a completed Language Package baseline at time of writing; all parallels below are checked against baseline translation_memory.json and doctrine_risk_registry.json for rendering compatibility.
| Jonah Passage | Romans Passage | Shared Theme | Rendering-Consistency Requirement |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jonah 1:1-2, 3:1-3 | Romans 1:1, 1:5 (appelé, appel) | Divine calling of a specific person to a specific mission | Use baseline appelé/appel exactly for Jonah’s commissioning language; do not introduce vocation, per baseline’s explicit forbidden-substitution rule. |
| Jonah 3:5, “believed God” | Romans 4:3 (quoting Genesis 15:6, “Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness”); Romans 10:9-10 | Faith as personal trust producing a life-response, not mere intellectual assent | Jonah 3:5’s crurent en Dieu and Romans 4:3’s rendering of the same underlying concept (belief credited/producing righteousness) must both draw on baseline foi doctrine notes: “the object of faith must always be recoverable from context.” Flag for native speaker review to confirm consistent phrasing of “believed [in/-] God” across both curricula. |
| Jonah 3:3-10 (Gentile Nineveh’s inclusion in God’s mercy) | Romans 1:16 (“to the Jew first and also to the Greek”); Romans 3:29-30 (“no distinction”); Romans 10:12-13 (“no distinction between Jew and Greek… everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved”) | Universal scope of the gospel; God’s compassion crosses ethnic/covenant boundaries | High. Jonah is the OT narrative enactment of the principle Paul states doctrinally in Romans. Baseline doctrine universal_scope_of_gospel (High risk, human theologian review) and unity_of_jews_and_gentiles (High risk, human theologian review) both apply directly to Jonah 3 and should be flagged in Jonah teaching material with explicit reference to their Romans doctrinal-registry entries, not treated as a new doctrine invented for this curriculum. |
| Jonah 4:1-3 (Jonah’s resentment of Gentile mercy) | Romans 11:11-24 (warning against Gentile-Christian arrogance toward Israel — the structurally mirrored danger) | Human reluctance to embrace God’s chosen scope of mercy, whichever direction the resentment runs | High. Jonah resents mercy extended outward (to Gentiles); Romans 11 warns Gentile believers against resenting/despising Israel’s place in God’s plan. These are mirror-image applications of the same underlying doctrine (Human Reluctance versus God's Universal Love); teaching material should make the structural parallel explicit rather than treating Jonah’s attitude as unrelated to Paul’s argument. |
| Jonah 4:2 (Exodus 34:6-7 formula, cited in complaint) | Romans 9:15-16 (quoting Exodus 33:19, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy”); Romans 9:22-23 (vessels of wrath and mercy); Romans 11:32 (“God has consigned all to disobedience, that he may have mercy on all”) | God’s sovereign, self-determined mercy — never a mercy creatures can demand or predict | Critical. Both Jonah 4:2 and Romans 9 root divine mercy in God’s own free self-disclosure (Exodus), not in creaturely merit or ethnic status. The baseline’s High-risk élection caution (French élection risks a competitive/democratic misreading) is directly relevant background for teaching Jonah 4, since Jonah’s complaint is effectively “God’s mercy is not distributed the way I would distribute it” — the same sovereignty issue Romans 9 addresses head-on. Theologian review required wherever these two passages are taught together. |
| Jonah 1:1-16 (pagan sailors’ growing “fear of the LORD” exceeding Jonah’s own) | Romans 1:18-23 (general revelation: what can be known of God even apart from special revelation) and Romans 2:14-15 (Gentiles who, without the Law, do what the Law requires) | God’s self-revelation reaching and moving even those outside the covenant community, sometimes more readily than covenant insiders | Medium. Do not overstate the parallel — the sailors’ fear is response to a specific miraculous sign (the storm and Jonah’s testimony), not Romans 1’s general revelation through creation — but both passages share the theme of Gentile responsiveness contrasted with covenant-insider resistance. Flag for native speaker review to keep the distinction clear in teaching notes. |
| Jonah 2 (typology of death/resurrection) | Romans 6:3-5 (union with Christ’s death and resurrection through baptism); Romans 4:25 | Death-and-resurrection as the pattern of salvation, historically enacted first in a type (Jonah) and then in the reality (Christ) | High. Reuse baseline résurrection (Medium risk) exactly; Jonah 2 material should explicitly point forward to this Romans doctrine rather than functioning as a self-contained deliverance story disconnected from the cross/resurrection center of the gospel. |
| Jonah 3:9, 4:2 (“relent,” nacham) | Romans 11:29 (“For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable”) | Tension and resolution between God’s expressed intentions and His unchanging character/purposes | Critical. Care must be taken that French rendering of divine “relenting” (see glossary term #29, renoncer au mal / changer de dessein, never se repentir for God) does not contradict the Romans 11:29 doctrine of God’s irrevocable purposes. Teaching material must clarify that God’s relenting in Jonah is the outworking of an unchanging character (mercy toward genuine repentance), not a change in His ultimate purposes — directly paralleling how Romans 11 holds together God’s unchanging election-purpose with real, responsive historical dealings with Israel and the nations. Mandatory theologian review. |
Jonah 1:9-16, 2:9 (sacrifice, vœu) | Romans 12:1 (“present your bodies as a living sacrifice”) | Worship as response to deliverance | Low. No specific French rendering conflict; both use standard sacrificial vocabulary without doctrinal tension. |
Part D — Rendering-Consistency Rules for Shared Quotations
The following rules govern any Phase 2 segment in Jonah (or any future curriculum in this Language Package) that renders a passage quoted, echoed, or typologically paired across books. These extend the baseline’s “Theological Consistency Rules Across Documents.”
-
Matthew 12:40 / Jonah 1:17, 2:1 — the French phrase “trois jours et trois nuits” and the French noun “un grand poisson” (never “une baleine”) must be identical, verbatim, in both locations across every document in this Language Package. Mandatory theologian review on every occurrence.
-
Exodus 34:6-7 formula and its echoes (
Numbers 14:18,Psalm 86:15,Psalm 103:8,Psalm 145:8,Nehemiah 9:17,Joel 2:13,Jonah 4:2) — the four-part French rendering “miséricordieux et compatissant, lent à la colère et riche en bonté” (aligned with established Segond/TOB rendering tradition) must be used identically at every occurrence throughout this Language Package’s OT curricula. Mandatory theologian review whenever a new occurrence is first translated, to confirm no drift has occurred. -
Divine “relenting” (nacham) applied to God (
Jonah 3:9-10,4:2;Jeremiah 18:8;Joel 2:13;Exodus 32:14) — always render with “renoncer (au mal) / changer de dessein”; never “se repentir,” which is reserved exclusively for human repentance throughout this Language Package. Mandatory theologian review on every occurrence. -
“Who knows?” idiom (
Jonah 3:9;Joel 2:14) — render identically as “Qui sait ?” in both locations; this is a fixed idiom of epistemic humility before divine mercy, not a genuine expression of doubt, and must not be rendered with a French phrase implying skepticism (e.g., avoid “Qui peut savoir vraiment ?” which over-intensifies doubt). -
“Believed God” (Jonah 3:5) and “Abraham believed God” (Romans 4:3, quoting Genesis 15:6) — both must draw on the same underlying French
foidoctrine framework (personal trust in a person, not intellectual assent to a proposition); the specific verb phrase may legitimately vary slightly by immediate grammatical context, but the theological content (trust that issues in life-change) must be identical. Native speaker review required to confirm no drift toward a “were convinced” (mere persuasion) reading in either location. -
“Turn from evil way” (shuv) (
Jonah 3:8, 10;Jeremiah 18:8; and any future curriculum touching OT repentance vocabulary) — render consistently with “se détourner de sa mauvaise voie” / “revenir de sa mauvaise conduite”; never the weaker “regretter.” Native speaker review required. -
“The sign of Jonah” (
Matthew 12:39,16:4;Luke 11:29) — render identically as “le signe de Jonas” at every occurrence, matching established Segond/TOB/Bible de Jérusalem tradition. -
Universality formulas (“no distinction,” “everyone who,” “from the greatest to the least”) appearing in both Jonah (3:5’s merism, 3:9’s “who knows,” 4:11’s cattle) and Romans (1:16, 3:22-23, 10:12-13) — per the baseline’s existing rule, these must never be qualified, hedged, or narrowed in French translation in either curriculum.
Part E — Full-Book Coverage Confirmation
| Chapter | Cross-reference coverage status |
|---|---|
| Jonah 1 | Reviewed and analyzed above — divine calling, flight, storm, sailors’ fear, great fish/typology seed. |
| Jonah 2 | Reviewed and analyzed above — Sheol, the deep, psalmic parallels, “salvation belongs to the LORD,” typological anchor for resurrection doctrine. |
| Jonah 3 | Reviewed and analyzed above (core passage) — repentance, Sodom-echo, Exodus 34:6-7 background, direct NT dominical commentary (Matthew 12:41, Luke 11:32). |
| Jonah 4 | Reviewed and analyzed above — Exodus 34:6-7 formula quoted in complaint, sovereignty-over-creation pattern completed, unresolved rhetorical close, Romans 9/11 parallels. |
No chapter of Jonah is silently omitted; every chapter contributes cross-referential material load-bearing for at least one of the curriculum’s five core doctrines.
This analysis extends, and must be read alongside, 07_semantic_analysis.md and 08_core_glossary.md. All French renderings above reuse baseline Romans translation_memory.json terms exactly where indicated and follow the risk-tier review routing established in doctrine_risk_registry.json.