A project of the Bible in Its Traditions Research Program AISBL
Directed by the École Biblique et Archéologique in Jerusalem
To support us, click here
1 Now, the word of YHWH was to Yona son of Amittai, saying, —
1 And the word of the Lord was
Vhappened to Ionas Vson of Amathi, saying, —
1 Now, the word of the Lord was upon Yaunon son of Matthai, saying, —
2 Get up Gand go to Nineveh, the great city, and call out against
G Vpreach in
Spreach against it for their evil
Gthe outcry of its wickedness has come up before my face.
Gto me.
V Sbefore me.
3 And Jonah got up to flee to Tarshish from the face
Spresence of YHWH.
G V Sthe Lord.
G VAnd he descended to Yapho
G V SJoppa and found a ship going to Tarshish.
G VAnd he paid its fare and descended into
Gboarded it
to go
Gsail with them to Tarshish from the face
Spresence of YHWH.
G V Sthe Lord.
4 But YHWH hurled
Gthe Lord raised
Vthe Lord sent
Sthe Lord cast down a M V Sgreat wind onto the sea.
There was a great storm on the sea
and the ship thought it would break
G Vwas in danger of breaking
Swas bending to the point of breaking up.
5 The sailors became afraid
and each man
Vthe men cried out to his
G Vtheir god.
They hurled
Gjettisoned
Sthrew away the vessels which were in
Sfrom the ship into the sea to make it lighter for them.
But
VAnd Jonah descended into the recesses of the boat
G V Sship
and lay down and fell fast asleep.
Gwas sleeping and snoring.
Vwas sleeping in a deep sleep.
She slept.
6 VAnd the captain approached him and he said to him,
What is it with you that you are sleeping?
Get up! Call out to
VInvoke your god! Perhaps the god might think of
Vrecollect on us that we might not perish.
6 The bowman
captain approached him and he said to him,
Why are you snoring?
Ssleeping?
Get up! Call on
Sout to your god! So that your
SPerhaps the god might think of
Sdeliver us that we might not perish.
7 And each man
Gone said to his companion, —
Gneighbor, —
Come, let us cast lots
that we might know on whose account
Vwhy this evil is upon us.
G VAnd they cast lots
and the lot
G Vlots fell upon Jonah.
7 And each man said to his companion, —
Come, let us cast lots
that we might know because of whom this evil has come upon us.
And they cast lots
and Jonah's lot fell out.
8 They said to him, — Tell us, [you] on whose account this evil is upon us:
What is your occupation and where do you come from?
What is your land and from what people are you?
8 They said to him, — Tell us, on whose account is
Von what account is
Swhy has come this evil upon us?
What is your occupation and where do you come from?
V, what is your land?
And from which country and
Vwhere from or
Swhat is your land and from what people are you?
9 And he
SJonah said to them, —
I am a Hebrew. And Yhwh
V Sthe Lord, God of the heavens,
Vheaven, [him] do I fear, he who made the sea and the dry land.
9 And he said to them, —
I am a servant of the Lord, God of heaven, I worship the one who made the sea and the dry land.
10 G VAnd the men were greatly afraid.
Gfeared a great fear.
Vfeared with a great fear.
G VAnd they said to him, — What is this you have done?
VWhy have you done this?
For the men knew that from the face of YHWH
G Vthe Lord he was fleeing, for he had told them.
10 Those men were greatly afraid.
They said to him, — What did you do?
For each of them knew that from the presence of the Lord he had fled.
11 They said to him, — What shall we do to you, that the sea might calm down from [raging] against
Gabate from
Vhold back from us?
For the sea continued to become more stormy.
Gkept coming and stirring up exceedingly rough water.
Vwas flowing and swelling.
11 When he told them, they said to him, — What shall we do to you, that the sea might abate from us?
For behold the sea keeps growing rougher against us.
12 He said to them, —
Pick me up and hurl me into the sea that
Vand the sea might calm down from [raging] against
Vwill hold back from you.
For I myself know that because of me this great storm is upon you.
12 Jonah said to them, —
Pick me up and throw me into the sea and the sea will abate from you.
For I myself know that because of me this great rough water is
Sstorm has come upon you.
13 Now the men rowed
GAnd the men struggled
VAnd the men rowed
SAnd each of them strove to return to dry land, but they could not
because the sea
continued to become more stormy against
Gwas coming and stirring up more upon
Vwas flowing and swelling upon
Skept growing rougher against them.
14 And they called
Vcried out to YHWH
V Sthe Lord and said, —
Please, O YHWH
V SLord, may we not perish on account of
Sfor this man's life. And do not place
Scount innocent blood upon
Sagainst us
for you
, O YHWH, have done
V, O Lord, have done
S are the Lord and you do as you M Vhave willed.
14 And they cried out to the Lord and said, —
By no means, O Lord, should we be destroyed on account of this man's life. And do not place righteous blood upon us
for you, O Lord, have done as you willed.
15 So they lifted
Gtook Jonah and hurled
G Scast him into the sea
and the sea ceased
Swas at rest from its raging.
Gsurging.
Sstorms.
16 G VAnd the men greatly feared YHWH.
G Vfeared with a great fear the Lord.
They offered a sacrifice
Gsacrificed a sacrifice
Vimmolated sacrifices to YHWH
G Vthe Lord
and made
Vvowed vows.
16 Then each of them greatly feared before the Lord.
They offered sacrifices to the Lord
and made vows.
17 And YHWH appointed
V Sthe Lord prepared a great fish to swallow
Sand it swallowed Jonah
and Jonah was in the innards
V Sbelly of the fish three days and three nights.
17 And the Lord commanded a great sea-monster to swallow Jonah
and Jonah was in the belly of the sea-monster three days and three nights.
2:1 S"The Prayer of Jonah"
And Jonah prayed to YHWH
G Vto the Lord
Sbefore the Lord his God from the innards
Gbelly
V Swomb of the fish.
Gsea-monster.
2:2 And he said, —
I called out from
G Sin my distress to YHWH
Gthe Lord my God
V Sthe Lord and he answered
Gheard me.
From the belly of Sheol
GHades
VHell I cried out. You
V S and you heard my voiceG, my cry.
2:3 And you cast me into the depths, into
Gdepths of
Sdepth, into the heart of the seas,
Gsea
V Ssea, and a river would have surrounded
Grivers surrounded
Va river surrounded
Sa river went around me.
All your breakers
Gswells
Vwhirlpools
Sstorms and waves passed over me.
2:4 And I myself said, — I have been driven
Skept myself away from before
Vthe sight of your eyes.
Nevertheless, I will
GWill I
SNow I will again look upon
Ssee your holy Temple.
G?
2:5 Waters
G SWater enveloped me as far as the throat, [the] deep
G Vsoul, abyss
Ssoul, [the] deep surrounded me,
seaweed was wrapped about
Ginto the fissures of mountains
Vthe sea covered
Sat the bottom of the sea my head ∅.
Gwent down.
Swas held captive.
2:6 I descended to the roots
Vlimits
Slowest parts of the mountains;
the bars of the earth were behind me
V bars of the earth confined me
S earth closed her bars on my face for ever.
And you raised
Vwill raise my life from the pit, O YHWH
V Scorruption, O Lord my God.
6 I descended to the earth;
the bars of which are eternal barriers.
And let the corruption of my life be raised, O Lord my God.
2:7 When my breath
G V Ssoul was growing weak within me,
Vdistressed within me,
Gdeparting from me,
Soverwhelmed, I remembered YHWH
G Sthe Lord
Vthe Lord,
and
Vso that my prayer came to
Gmay come to
Vmight come to
Scame before you, to your holy Temple.
2:8 SAll those who revere vain illusions
Vguard vanities in vain
Srevere vain idols forsake their fidelity.
Vhis mercy.
Syour mercy.
8 Guarding vanities and lies, they have forsaken their mercy.
2:9 Yet I myself, with a voice of thanksgiving, let me sacrifice to you;
what I have vowed let me pay. Salvation belongs to YHWH.
9 Yet I myself, with a voice of praise and thanksgiving,
Vpraise,
Sthanksgiving, will sacrifice to you;
what I have vowed, I will pay for my salvation
S[as] recompense to the Lord.
2:10 And YHWH spoke
Vthe Lord spoke
Sthe Lord ordered to the fish, and it vomited Jonah out on the dry land.
10 And it was commanded to the sea-monster, and it cast out Jonah on the dry land.
3:1 Now,
G VAnd the word of YHWH was to
Gthe Lord was to
Vthe Lord happened to
Sthe Lord was upon Jonah a second time, saying, —
3:2 Get up Gand go to Nineveh, the great city,
and call to
G Vproclaim in
Sproclaim against it the
Gaccording to the previous proclamation that I am telling
Gspoke to you.
3:3 And Jonah got up and went to Nineveh according to the word of YHWH.
V Sthe Lord.
And Nineveh was a great city belonging to
Vgreat city of
Scity great to God, Vwith a journey of three days.
3 And Jonah got up and went to Nineveh just as the Lord said.
And Nineveh was a great city to God, a road journey of about three days.
3:4 And Jonah started to enter the city Gabout one day's journey and he called out
G Sproclaimed and said, —
Forty
GThree days more, and
Sfrom now Nineveh will be overturned.
3:5 G V SAnd the men of Nineveh believed in God
and they called for
G Vproclaimed
Sdecreed a fast and put on sackcloth, from their great ones to their small ones.
V greater to smaller.
3:6 And the word reached
Gapproached the king of Nineveh
and he got up from his throne
and he removed his robe from himself
Scrown
and covered [himself] with
G Sput on
Vwas clothed with sackcloth and sat in ashes.
3:7 And he cried out
Git was proclaimed
She proclaimed and Git was said in Nineveh by the decree of the king and his great ones,
G Vnobles, saying, —
Neither human nor animal, herd nor flock,
G V Shumans nor beasts of burden, oxen nor sheep, shall taste anything,
nor shall they feed, nor shall they drink water.
3:8 And let sackcloths cover human and animal
Vmen and beasts be covered with sackcloths
and let them call out to God mightily
and let each man turn
Vbe turned from his evil way
and from the violence
Viniquity that is in their hands.
8 And people and animals put on sackcloths
and they cried out to God earnestly
and each man shall turn away from his way of evil
and from the unrighteousness that is in their hands. Saying, —
8 But rather people and beast shall be covered with sackcloths
and they shall call out to God with groaning
and each person shall turn from his evil way
and from the plunder that is in his hands.
3:9 Who knows?! God may turn and relent
and turn away from his fierce anger, that we might not perish.
9 Who knows if the god will change his mind
VGod will turn back and forgive
SGod will turn back and have mercy on us
and turn away from his fierce anger,
Shis fierce anger away from us, that we might not perish?
3:10 And God saw their deeds, how they turned
Gturned away
Vwere turned from their evil way,
Gways,
and God relented
Gchanged his mind
Vshowed mercy concerning the evil that he said he would do
Gspoke of doing
Vhad said that he would do to them. And he did not do it.
10 And God saw their deeds, how they turned from their evil ways,
and he turned his fierce anger away from them. And he did not destroy them.
4:1 And [this] great evil displeased Jonah and he was enraged.
1 And Jonah grieved
Vwas afflicted by a great grief
Vaffliction and he was confused.
Vangry.
1 And a great sorrow grieved Jonah and distressed him greatly.
4:2 And he prayed to YHWH
Sbefore the Lord and said, —
Please, O YHWH!
SO Lord! Was this not my thought while I was still in my land?
This is why
SBecause of this I first
Sarose early [and] fled to Tarshish
for I know that you are a gracious
Smerciful and compassionate God,
slow to anger and abounding in love, and relenting from evil.
2 And he prayed to the Lord and said, —
O Lord! Were these not my words while I was still in my land?
Because of this I first fled to Tarshish
for I know that you are merciful and compassionate,
patient and having great mercy, and repenting from evil.
2 And he prayed to the Lord and said, —
I beseech [you], O Lord! Is this not my word while I was still in my land?
Because of this I first fled to Tarshish
for I know that you are a lenient and merciful God,
patient and abounding in pity, and forgiving concerning evil.
4:3 And now, O YHWH, please take
VLord, take, I ask, my life
Vsoul from me, for my
Vto me death is better than Mmy life.
3 And now, O sovereign
STherefore, my Lord, take my soul from me, for it is better for me to die than for me to live.
4:4 And YHWH
Vthe Lord said, — Is it
VDo you think it is good for you to be
Vgo on being angry?
4 And the Lord said to Jonah, — Have you been greatly grieved?
4 And the Lord said to him, — Did it grieve you greatly?
4:5 So Jonah went out of the city
and sat down to the east of
Gopposite
Vagainst the east of the city
and he made for himself there a booth
G Stent
Vshady place
and sat beneath it in the shade
Gits shadow
until [such time] that he might see what might become of
Vmight befall
Swould happen to the city.
4:6 And YHWH God appointed a qîqāyôn
and it went up over Jonah
to be a shade over his head to protect him from his evil.
And Jonah was greatly delighted on account of the qîqāyôn.
6 And the Lord God commanded Sthe tendril of a gourd
and it rose up above Jonah's head
Ssprouted and rose above Jonah
to be
Sand it was a shade over his head to shade him from his calamities.
Sand relieved him of his evil.
And Jonah rejoiced a great joy
Swas greatly delighted at Sthe tendril of the gourd.
6 And the Lord God prepared an ivy
and it went up over Jonah's head
that it might be a shade over his head and protect him for he had labored.
And Jonah rejoiced with great joy on account of the ivy.
4:7 And God appointed
Vprepared a worm when dawn arose
Gearly the next day
and it struck the qîqāyôn
Ggourd
Vivy and it withered.
7 But the next day, the Lord God commanded a worm at the rising of dawn
and it struck the tendril of the gourd and cut it off.
4:8 And it happened, as the sun rose, that God appointed a scorching east wind
and the sun struck upon Jonah's head. And he became faint
and he wished for his life to end and he said, —
My death is better than my life.
8 And it happened, as the sun rose, that Sthe Lord God commanded a hot Gand burning wind, Sand it dried up the gourd
and the sun beat upon Jonah's head. And he was discouraged
Soverwhelmed
and he renounced
Srequested death for his soul and he said, —
It is better for me to die than to live.
Shas come into your hands, Lord, to take my life from me, for I am not better than my fathers.
8 And when the sun had been raised, God prepared a hot and burning wind
and the sun struck upon Jonah's head. And he was agitated
and he desired in his soul that he might die and he said, —
It is better for me to die than to live.
4:9 And God said to Jonah, —
Is it good for you to be angry over the qîqāyôn?
And he said, — It is good for me to be angered to death.
9 And Sthe Lord God said to Jonah, —
Have you been
SAre you greatly grieved about Sthe tendril of the gourd?
And he
SJonah said, — I have been
Sam greatly grieved to death.
9 And the Lord said to Jonah, —
Do you think you are rightly angry about the ivy?
And he said, — I am rightly angry to death.
4:10 And Yhwh said, —
You have shown pity on the qîqāyôn for which you did not labor and you did not grow,
which came to be overnight and perished overnight.
10 And the Lord said Sto him, —
You treated the gourd leniently though you did not suffer over it
Stook pity on the tendril of the gourd for which you did not labor and you did not raise,
which came to be overnight and perished overnight.
Sthat sprouted in a night and dried up in a night.
10 And the Lord said, —
You grow sorrowful over the ivy for which you did not labor, nor did you do [anything] that it might grow,
that was born in one night and perished in one night.
4:11 But I, should I not show pity on
G Vspare Nineveh, the great city,
in which there are
Gdwell more than a hundred and twenty thousand humans who do not know their right hand from
Vwhat is between their right hand and their left hand, and many animals?
V beasts of burden?
1:1ff God Surprises the Prophet; Jonah Surprises the Reader →Introduction to the Book of Jonah
An a/typical prophetic commission comes to a typical prophet characterizing Nineveh as a new Sodom. Will the prophet respond in the manner of Abraham and engage God? Will his response fit the readers' expectations for a prophet? In a book of surprises, the first is that a prophet is sent to Nineveh. The second is that he flees.
It is never announced that Jonah is a prophet, but the structure of the opening leaves no doubt. The story opens the way many stories about prophets open (Biblical Intertextuality Jon 1:1 Now), with the commissioning of a task (Literary Genre Jon 1:1). The surprise, though, is the response of the prophet who, told to get up and go, gets up and flees.
Nineveh, steeped in biblical intertexuality, is presented in overtly negative ways (esp. Nahum) Biblical Intertextuality Jon 1:2; 3:2–7; 4:5,11. The subtle allusion to Sodom in M is emphasized in versions Comparison of Versions Jon 1:2Biblical Intertextuality Jon 1:2 and noted in the reception history. Christian Tradition Jon 1:2
The opening indicates that we are dealing with prophetic material, but unlike other prophetic texts, readers are given little information about the prophet himself (other than his patronym), his time, and his location. (Literary Devices Jon 1:1) This allows for: rêverie on his very name (Vocabulary Jon 1:1), biblical intertextuality (Biblical Intertextuality Jon 1:1 Yona son of Amittai), historicization (Historical and Geographical Notes Jon 1:1; Jewish Tradition Jon 1:1,3a,5,7,15,17; 2:1,10; 3:1,3; 4:1,5,8).
The motivation for Jonah to flee is not given at this point, and the reader must wait several chapters for more information on this. The curiosity of the reader is piqued, and many interpreters have reflected on the prophet's surprising behavior. Christian Tradition Jon 1:3Jewish Tradition Jon 1:3
4:1 great Leitwort, Meaning See Literary Devices Jon 1:2.
3:2–7 Nineveh A City of Biblical Imagination See Biblical Intertextuality Jon 1:2 Nineveh.
3:2–7 Nineveh Assyria's Last Capital See Historical and Geographical Notes Jon 1:2.
3:2a great Leitwort, Meaning See Literary Devices Jon 1:2.
3:7a great Leitwort, Meaning See Literary Devices Jon 1:2.
4:11a great Leitwort, Meaning See Literary Devices Jon 1:2.
1:1 Yona Another Witness to a Prophet Jonah? 2Kgs 14:25 mentions a prophet Jonah in the time of Jeroboam. According to Josephus’ retelling, despite Jeroboam’s wickedness—which had brought his people to misfortune—Jonah advised him to march against the Syrians in order to enlarge his territory.
1:4a great Leitwort, Meaning See Literary Devices Jon 1:2.
1:6c Perhaps Conjectural Religious Language The captain's "perhaps" expresses uncertainty. He recognizes the need for divine intervention while avoiding a mandate or prediction of divine behavior. Evidently he recognizes from experience that prayers may go unanswered.
1:8a this evil An Unnatural Storm
1:17a a great fish Devouring Whole Ships
2:5a as far as the throat Targumic Abstraction
The Targum chooses to translate nepeš as the abstract concept “death” rather than the concrete body part “throat.” This translation changes the passage from a representational description of an imminent near-death experience to an abstract description of ultimate fate.
1:8b occupation Specification of the Term for Shipwork?
Ps 107:23 uses the same word to refer to shipping.
1:1ff Narrative Trigger The introduction consists of two roughly equal parts:
The common denominator of both parts is the divine presence, God's "face." His message to Jonah is the result of the wickedness of the Ninevites entering before God’s face, and Jonah then tries to flee from that same face (cf. Jon 1:10).
1:5a The sailors NARRATION Characterization of Jonah's Companions through Word Choice While the sailors are simply referred to later as "men," the use of a technical term here (Vocabulary Jon 1:5a) might serve to emphasize that even sailors (not simply unskilled men) were scared.
4:5a So Jonah went out Transposed Verse? See Textual Criticism Jon 3:4.
1:17 TYPOLOGY Elijah and Elisha as Types of Jonah See Biblical Intertextuality Jon 1:1f.
1:1 Yona son of Amittai A Multivalent Name
Jonah's name means "dove," which is used throughout Scripture and conveys multiple nuances (Biblical Intertextuality Jon 1:1).
Derived from the verb he’ĕmîn, “to believe,” although its form is closer to the noun ’ĕmet, “truth,” the name includes a theophoric ending and could be translated as “Yhwh is true.”
1:3b ship And Not: Fleet
1:2 Get up NARRATION Characterization of God as the First Speaker The author’s choice to present God as the first speaker sets the tone for the exchanges that follow. God’s speaking first gives Jonah an opportunity to respond, yet Jonah does not accept the invitation. In this way, Jonah might be seen as a foil to Samuel who hears the divine call and willingly responds. Jonah calls to God from the belly of the fish, but God does not respond. These two only begin to speak to one another in chapter four.
1:2 MOTIF An Israelite Sent to the Gentiles: Typological Motif in the Life of Paul? The motif of a member of Israel being redirected to Gentile ministry is also found in Acts’ account of Paul’s life.
1:1 the word of Yhwh was to Yona Targumic Amplification
The Aramaic preposition qŏdām “before” used with the reference to God expresses respect. It keeps the courtly tone in which various acts are performed “from before” the kings or nobles.
1:3a from the face of Yhwh Targumic Expansion
1:5–17 Moby Dick: Sermon on Jonah Although the film adaptation of Moby Dick (1956) must necessarily be trimmed to a reasonable length, a significant amount of time is given to Father Mapple’s sermon given to the whalers (cf. Literature Jon 1:3a). Father Mapple (played by Orson Welles) exhorts the sailors to bravery: “Delight is to him, who, against the proud gods and commodores of this earth, stands forth his own inexorable self.”
1:2 Get up, go Or: Set Out for! (Asyndetic Verbal Hendiadys: Auxiliary Use of the Verb?) The two opening verbs are imperatives: qûm and lēk.
However, the imperative qûm is often used as an auxiliary verb (having an adverbial function) when preceding another verb with no conjunction.
Nevertheless, in this particular case, it is better to render the verb, for, while it does not make a significant change in meaning, it does preserve the (somewhat ironic) structure of the book’s opening (Literary Devices Jon 1:2f).
1:3d to Tarshish Use of the Locative -he Taršîšâ (cf. Textual Criticism Jon 1:3d).
1:2 Get up, go G C: Syntactic Construction G and →C (the Sixto-Clementine Vulgate) smooth out the construction of the first two verses (Grammar Jon 1:2) by inserting a conjunction: hence they read, “Get up and go.”
1:1–2:1; 2:10 Use in Lectionary →RML: Monday, Week 27 in Year I.
1:4ab the sea NARRATION Dialectic Characterization of the Sea (cf. Jon 1:5,9,11,12,13,15; 2:3)
The representation of the sea in Jonah reflects a mytheme common among ancient cultures (Ancient Cultures Jon 1:4a).
The Lord acts upon the sea (Jon 1:4); it responds as a creature should. Jonah later declares that the Lord made the sea (Jon 1:9).
As the story progresses, the sailors appear to regard the sea as a deity (Jon 1:11) and its actions grow increasingly nefarious (Jon 1:11,13) until it is placated with the sailors' offering of Jonah (Jon 1:15). This personification of the sea as a deity may continue into the psalm (Jon 2:3).
1:11b For the sea Emphatic kî-Clause? Here the kî-clause can be interpreted as emphatic rather than explanatory: its sense is “indeed the sea.”
1:7c,8a evil Leitwort in the Service of Irony See Literary Devices Jon 1:2 evil.
1:10a greatly Leitwort, Meaning See Literary Devices Jon 1:2.
1:11ab,12bc,13b calm down + storm(y) — Quiet Storms and Stormy Humans Usage of wᵉyištōq (“and it calmed”) and wᵉsōʿēr (“and it stormed”) in parallel clauses invites readers to consider the blurring of literary personification and naturalization in Jonah. The word s‘r is used to describe storms (Jon 1:11–13; Jer 23:19; 25:32; Zec 7:14) and human anger (2Kgs 6:11). In Prv 26:20 we see štq used to describe the ceasing of a quarrel, while in Ps 107:30 the people rejoice in the new quiet (štq) of a stilled sea that was once stormy.
1:12c,16a great Leitwort, Meaning See Literary Devices Jon 1:2.
1:14a to Yhwh Change in Prayer Instead of calling out to their own gods, as the sailors did earlier (Jon 1:6), they now call out to the Lord. This does not need to reflect some sort of conversion; it simply expresses the sailors’ recognition that Jonah’s god has brought this storm upon them.
1:17a a great fish And a Talkative One
2:3a heart of the seas Polysemous Phrase
1:17a great Leitwort, Meaning See Literary Devices Jon 1:2.
2:2c belly of Sheol Intentional Intestinal Metaphor The phrase “belly of Sheol” only appears in Jonah (Vocabulary Jon 2:2c).
2:6a I descended Underworld in Ugaritic Literature A myth about the feast and drunkenness of El (Ilu) assimilates downward motion with the dead and the underworld:
Likewise, consider Baal’s words to his messengers to Mot, the god of earth and underworld:
2:3b breakers G: swells G: meteôrismoi (“lifting up”) is related to the verb meteôrizô (“to raise to a height”) in the context of being on the high sea.
2:10 vomited Aquila's Use of Homeric Greek The verb exemeô “vomit forth, disgorge,” used by Aquila’s translation, is used of Charybdis in The Odyssey ( → ad loc.).
3:4 Transposed Verse?
Around 11 to 20 mss. of M move Jon 4:5 to the end of Jon 3:4.
This is apparently because in Jon 4:5 Jonah awaits Nineveh’s demise. But why would he await its demise after its visible conversion? Thus, in the mind of an ancient redactor, the events of Jon 4:5 must have taken place after Jonah’s preaching, but before the Ninevites’ conversion.
According to the principle of lectio difficilior, the internal evidence of M, and the external evidence of G, V, and S, the verse in Jon 4:5 should not be moved.
3:8d violence that is in their hands Metaphorical Containers of Violence While hands (kāp) can enact violence, here they metaphorically serve as its containers (cf. 1Chr 12:17; Jb 16:17; Ps 7:3; Is 59:6).
4:7a the next day Hebrew Variant: Addition
1:4b,11b,12c,13b storm Cognate Noun and Verb The participle sō‘ēr (“storming”) used at Jon 1:11b,13b is a cognate of the noun sa‘ar (“storm”) found at Jon 1:4b,12c.
As a noun it appears three times in Jeremiah (Jer 23:19; 25:32; 30:23), and once in Amos (Am 1:14). As a verb it appears in 2Kgs 6:11; Is 54:11; Jer 30:23; Hos 13:3; Hb 3:14; Zec 7:14. Most often, it is used to denote storms at sea (Literary Devices Jon 1:11ab,12bc,13b).
1:10c he had told them Art of Telling: Ellipsis of Details The narrator implies that Jonah had told the sailors more information than was conveyed in his earlier answer. → suggests that this necessary information was omitted in Jonah's reply to sharpen the focus of his answer on the essential details.
2:5b seaweed Contextual Meaning
3:7a the decree of the king Aramaic Influence?
3:7a saying Enunciative Ambiguity Determining the phrasing of the royal decree has long vexed translators. The difficulty arises from the many verbs of speech that appear in the first half of the verse.
Translators from the rabbis onward have often maintained that the first two verbs, the hip‘il of z‘q (“cried out”) and the qal of ’mr (“said”), along with the locative phrase bᵉnînᵉwé (“in Nineveh”) belonged to the introduction of the decree because the Masoretes’ cantillation marks indicate a strong stop (zaqeph qaton) after the locative phrase (→, 125–126; and 1978→, 80; →, 31). Thus, the proclamation would begin with “By the decree.”
Another suggestion is that, because speech acts in Hebrew narrative typically follow immediately upon verbs of speech, the locative phrase “In Nineveh” should begin the proclamation (→, 252–253).
Finally, the present translation maintains that the discourse of the proclamation begins after the final verb of speech (lē’mōr “saying”), which marks direct speech throughout the Hebrew Bible (for discussion, see →, 196; →, 75–76; for examples, see Gn 39:14–15; Ex 15:1; Nm 30:1; Jo 9:22–23; Jgs 16:18; 21:10–11). The Masoretic tradition supports this reading by providing the strongest possible stop (atnaḥ) with the last verb of speech (lē’mōr). This is likewise supported by the translation decisions of G and V, wherein the proclamation unambiguously begins after lē’mōr (i.e., legôn and dicens). Additionally, the medieval cola et commata of V begin a new line after dicens, implying a shift from narration to direct speech.
4:1 [this] great evil displeased Jonah Internal Adjunct
This verse presents an unusual internal adjunct wherein the noun phrase rā‘â gᵉdôlâ (“a great evil”) serves as the subject, not the object: “a great evil (or displeasure) displeased Jonah.”
Its construction is similar to the cognate accusative, which the author favors for conveying expressions of great emotion, such as fear (Jon 1:10,16), anger (Jon 4:1), and happiness (Jon 4:6; cf. Literary Devices Jon 1:10a,16a; Literary Devices Jon 1:16).
4:8b became faint Physical or Emotional/Spiritual Affliction? The versions translate M’s yit‘allāp with verbs that denote physical, emotional, and spiritual affliction. In the minds of these ancient interpreters, therefore, it is clear that Jonah’s physical suffering complements his anguish already described in Jon 4:1–2.
1:3b going to Tarshish Or: Coming to Tarshish? The author could have conveyed that Jonah found a ship that was “going to” Tarshish with either the locative -he (Grammar Jon 1:3d) or the verb hālak.
1:1 Now Narrative Marker The first word of the book, wayhî can carry at least six nuances, including a temporal one:
As a narrative marker, it may be simply rendered as “Now” (cf. Literary Genre Jon 1:1).
1:2 call out against Or: to (Meaning of the Preposition)
Our translation emphasizes that the sense of qr’ + the preposition ‘ālêhā is oppositional: calling out against, rather than calling upon. The oppositional nature is fortified by the content of Jonah’s message when he does, in fact, call out against Nineveh (Jon 3:4).
1:2f Irony of Jonah's Flight: Inversion of the "We Will Do and We Will Listen" Motif? After the revelation of the Torah on Mount Sinai, the Israelites famously pledged na‘ăśê wᵉnišmā‘ (“We will do and we will listen [to all that God has declared],” Ex 24:7), making two promises: to do/obey and to listen/learn.
1:2,3a,10c face Leitwort
God calls Jonah because the wickedness of the Ninevites has ascended before God’s face; Jonah then tries to flee from before the face of God.
1:2 against it for their evil Number Variation
The author could have written that Jonah was to call out against the city because "her wickendness" has come up. By switching to plural, the author is drawing attention more concretely to the citizens of the city for the first time.
1:2 evil Leitwort in the Service of Irony (cf. also Jon 1:7–8; 3:10; 4:1-2,6).
The noun rā‘â has a very generic meaning and expresses
Within the story, evil functions as an unwanted and dangerous object that is passed around.
The enactment of “evil” is not only the domain of human beings.
1:3 RHETORIC Chiseled Dispositio This verse offers a concentric structure:
This structure is enriched with a pair of triads, with the verse focusing on the intent, activity, and goal.
Moreover, there is a reflection effect between Jon 1:3 and Jon 1:2 (Literary Devices Jon 1:2f; Literary Devices Jon 1:3f).
1:1 Yona son of Amittai The Same as the One from Gath-Hepher? 2Kgs 14:25 contains the OT's only other mention of a prophet named Jonah the son of Amittai. There one learns that Jonah was from Gath-Hepher, which was the eastern boundary of the tribe of Zebulun as noted in Jo 19:13 (cf. Jewish Tradition Jon 1:1; Christian Tradition Jon 1:1).
1:2 Nineveh Assyria's Last Capital (cf. Jon 3:2–7; 4:5,11).
Jonah contains nine of the OT’s fourteen references to the city.
An extremely ancient city (6000 B.C.), Nineveh (Nînᵉwé) is on the banks of the Tigris, near modern Mosul.
Archaeological excavations of Tell Kuyunjik (not of Tell Nebi Yunus due to its sanctity among Muslims) by the French and British have been conducted since the mid-19th c., generating volumes of scholarly publications (see →; and 1929→). The British Museum houses many of the great finds. and
These include carved wall panels of the palaces of Sennacherib and Ashurbanipal, complete with depictions of lion hunts, gardens, and the construction of great monuments.
Based on the cuneiform for Nineveh (Ninua), which is a fish within a house, the city may have derived its name from a fish goddess.
Beginning in the Old Assyrian period, the city was dedicated to “Ishtar of Nineveh.”
Sennacherib (704–681 B.C.) fortified the city, enclosing an area of 750 ha. He saw to the construction of the Jerwan aqueduct as a means of irrigating the surrounding region and bringing fresh water to the city from the local mountains (see photos in →, 17). Evidence of grand public works, especially for irrigation, has led to a scholarly discussion about the possibility of identifying Nineveh (rather than Babylon) as the site of the famous hanging gardens of ancient Mesopotamia ( 1935→). Ultimately, Sennacherib made Nineveh the capital of the Neo-Assyrian Empire. 2015
Nineveh looms large in the archaeological record. Its size is mentioned in Jon 3:3 and again in Jon 4:11. Still, evidence from Kuyunjik by no means confirms that its size would have necessitated a three-day walk. The reference to Nineveh’s size in Jonah (Jon 3:3; 4:11) may serve more to accentuate the enormity of the task before Jonah and the enormity of the Ninevites’ response.
1:3b found a ship Archaeological Evidence for the Wordplay? An 8th–7th c. seal shows the earliest representation of a ship with a Hebrew inscription.
The Judahite name Oniyahu means "Yhwh is my strength," but could easily be heard as "Yhwh is my ship."
1:3b Yapho Elsewhere in Scripture
1:1 Yona son of Amittai Rabbis on Jonah (cf. Jon 1:3a,5,7,15,17; 2:1,10; 3:1,3; 4:1,5,8).
Noting the Zarephath tradition,
Similarly, the rabbinic tradition identifies a young Jonah as the prophet sent by Elisha to anoint Jehu and to announce God’s desire that he dispatch the remnant of the house of Ahab (→Pirqe R. El. 10; →S. ‘Olam Rab. 19).
As a result, the rabbinic tradition shows that Jonah serves as a prophet (like Moses) to the entire House of Jehu (→, xxiv–xxvi, 78–79). and 1978
1:1 The word of Yhwh Jonah Already an Active Prophet
1:1 son of Amittai Identity and Symbolism of Jonah
1:2f A Mystic Sympathizes with Jonah's Flight In 1897, the Carmelite nun, St. Thérèse of Lisieux, wrote a letter to her Prioress wherein she describes the difficulty of training novices. In particular, she notes how she has become aware of the extent to which conversion is a divine act, something achieved by God’s grace, not by human action. Given this difficulty—as well as the need to remain humble while administering reproofs and instruction—she sympathizes with Jonah, who would rather flee than reproach Nineveh.
→ “In the abstract, it seems easy to do good to souls, to make them love God more, and to mould them to one’s own ideas. But, when we put our hands to the work, we quickly learn that without God’s help it is as impossible to do good to them, as to bring back the sun when once it has set. Our own tastes, our own ideas must be put aside, and in absolute forgetfulness of self we must guide souls, not by our way, but along that particular path which Our Lord Himself indicates. The chief difficulty, however, does not lie even here—what costs more than all else is to be compelled to note their faults, their slightest imperfections, and to wage a deadly war against them...ever since I placed myself in the arms of Jesus I have been like a watchman on the look-out for the enemy from the highest turret of a fortified castle. Nothing escapes me; indeed my clear-sightedness often gives me matter for surprise, and makes me think it quite excusable in the prophet Jonas to have fled before the face of the Lord rather than announce the ruin of Ninive. I would prefer to receive a thousand reproofs rather than inflict one, yet I feel it necessary that the task should cause me pain, for if I spoke through natural impulse only, the soul in fault would not understand she was in the wrong and would simply think: ‘The Sister in charge of me is annoyed about something and vents her displeasure upon me, although I am full of the best intentions.’ But in this, as in all else, I must practise sacrifice and self-denial” (176–177). Autob.
1:3a Jonah got up to flee Reordering the Story
This narrative differs from the biblical account because Islamic commentators were concerned by the notion of a prophet who refuses Allah’s mission—and who even gets angry with Allah. Thus the tale has been modified in order to absolve Jonah from reproach and to preserve the impeccability of prophets.
1:2 Nineveh, the great city Geography for Children Although the moral aspects of the story of Jonah are clear, especially in children’s adaptations, several books include historical content as well.
1:5d But Jonah Paragraph Demarcation
The blank interval in 4QXIIg likely indicates that a new sense unit begins after v. 5a. This division of sense units highlights the contrast between Jonah's behavior and that of the sailors: whereas the sailors, fearful for their lives, cry to their gods and jettison cargo, Jonah inexplicably descends to the hold of the ship to go to sleep (Grammar Jon 1:5d; Literary Devices Jon 1:5d).
1:5c the vessels which were in the ship Referent: Cargo in Jars? The banal Hebrew word kēlîm means "containers" or "jars," probably amphorae for transporting goods (Historical and Geographical Notes Jon 1:5c).
1:5d boat Hapax legomenon: Aramaism?
It must refer to a type of a ship with a deck and a hold for cargo. See →Introduction §1.2.
1:6a captain Technical Term: "Chief of the Ropes"?
→, 103) bases his translation, "helmsman," on his interpretation of iconographic depictions of Levantine ships in which a rudder is steered with ropes.
1:6c think of Hapax legomenon: Aramaism The Hebrew root 'št rarely occurs in the OT.
Here the stem is hitpa‘el (yit‘aššēt); it has the sense, “to think well of,” indicating an Aramaism (cf. Dn 6:3 [4]; →, 107; 1986→, 51).
Understandably, the versions diverge from this, employing a free translation.
1:4a,5b,12b,15a hurled + hurl — Leitwort
Nowhere else in the Bible does God “hurl a wind.” This lends strength to the view that the word is consciously used to unify the various actions.
1:4b,11b,12c,13b storm + stormy — NARRATIVE Punctuation and Intensification At key points of the story, readers are given information about the severity of the storm.
At the climax of the sailors’ interrogation of Jonah (“What shall we do to you...?”), the narrator adds to the urgency of this question by noting that the sea grew stormier (Jon 1:11).
The sailors try to row hard toward land once more, but the intensification of the storm makes this impossible (Jon 1:13).
1:6c your god NARRATION Characterization of God: One among Others? When the captain specifies to Jonah that the object of his cries/prayers should be "your" (i.e., Jonah's) deity, he tacitly recognizes multiple deities.
1:5e and lay down and fell fast asleep Jonah's Sleep The Hebrew verb rdm, “to sleep heavily,” is sometimes connected to visions in M (Biblical Intertextuality Jon 1:5e). G, V, and S, however, do not note this association.
G renders M’s wayyiškab wayyērādam with ekatheuden kai erregchen, which is not an exact translation. The first verb of the translation, katheudô (“to lie down to sleep,” “to sleep”), corresponds semantically to M’s škb and, as such, is frequently chosen to render škb in G (→, 2:700). However, the second verb of G, regchô (“to snore”), corresponds neither to rdm (“to sleep deeply”) nor to anything else in M. It is unlikely that this is a matter of a different Vorlage; rather, it appears to be a free decision of the translator. One possible reason for this translation choice may have been to make the narrative more vivid ( 1906Comparison of Versions Jon 1:6c).
The phrase wayyiškab wayyērādam is translated by a single verb, wedmak (“and he slept”), in S. This appears to be the result of a translation decision, not a different Vorlage.
The Vetus Latina, which reads et dormiebat, et stertebat (“was sleeping and snoring”), follows G. V, on the other hand, translates M with dormiebat sopore gravi (“was sleeping in a deep sleep”). Jerome thus appears to have taken wayyiškab wayyērādam as referring to one single action rather than two; perhaps he understood the second verb, wayyērādam, to be an adverbial modification or clarification of the first.
1:6c think The Connection between Thinking and Saving Perhaps due to the rarity of the Hebrew verb yit‘aššēt (“think of”), the versions offer diverging translations.
At first G’s diasôsêᵢ does not appear to be a close translation of yit‘aššēt, which is perhaps due to the rarity of the word in Hebrew. It is possible that the translator sought to make the sense of the Hebrew more explicit in this context—namely that God’s remembrance of them would bring about their salvation. On the other hand, the term diasôᵢzô might have some semantic overlap with the Hebrew ‘št. In Greek literature of the 5th–4th c. B.C., diasôᵢzô sometimes has the sense of keeping something in mind, i.e., “saving” what one has learned (cf. → 10.63; Hel. enc.→ 395b; Resp.→ 7.2.17; Hell.→ 3.5.22). Though this is not the primary meaning of diasôᵢzô, it may explain why it was used to translate yit‘aššēt. Mem.
The Syriac translator uses a standard pa‘el verb (nepṣᵉyan) meaning “save” or “deliver” to translate M’s yit‘aššēt. This could be an interpretive translation that sought to replace a metaphorical expression with its signifié—a tendency reflected throughout S. According to the translator, “to think on them” means “to save them.” It is also possible that S was influenced by G’s use of diasôᵢzô; indeed, S exhibits a degree of literary dependence on G, particularly in its translation of the Twelve Prophets (→, 264–295; →, 326–331).
The Vetus Latina, which reads si quomodo salvos faciat nos Deus, appears to be a slightly awkward periphrastic translation of G. V’s rendering, si forte recogitet Deus, is a close translation of M. The correspondence between cogito and the Aramaic verb ‘št, which has more or less the same meaning as ‘št in Hebrew, is found in the Vulgate at Dn 6:4 as well.
1:4a hurled a great wind Similar Imagery in the OT By depicting Yhwh as hurling a storm, the Book of Jonah merges the imagery of a divine warrior and storm deity.
Likewise, the image of God as a storm deity who casts lightning bolts as weapons appears elsewhere in the OT, typically in its most ancient poetry (e.g., 2Sm 22:15; Ps 18:15).
1:5e fast asleep Motif of Divinely Induced Sleep? The verb rdm, “to sleep heavily,” is found 11 times in the Hebrew Bible. The following are examples of its usage.
Sisera sleeps deeply when exhausted from battle (Jgs 4:18-21).
The lazy sleep during harvest (Prv 10:5).
When Daniel hears the voice of a heavenly figure, he sleeps deeply, and upon waking, he has additional visions (Dn 8:18; 10:9).
In other cases, the verb npl is used in conjunction with the derivative form tardēmâ, usually to express divinely induced sleep:
God puts Adam into a deep sleep in the garden before taking his rib (Gn 2:21).
A deep sleep falls upon Abraham, presumably at God’s behest, during which he has a vision that concludes with God making a covenant with him (Gn 15:12).
God puts Saul and his companions into a deep sleep, thus allowing David to take Saul’s spear and water jug (1Sm 26:12).
God pours out a spirit of deep sleep upon the prophets and others as part of his judgment against them (Is 29:10).
Jb 4:13; 33:15 likewise joins dreams and visions—perhaps of a more mundane sort—to a deep sleep.
The use of this expression here could indicate that Jonah went down into the ship in order to enter a trance and receive a revelation. There is nothing else in the story, however, to suggest this was Jonah’s intent; so it is more likely that Jonah yet again seeks to flee God (Literary Devices Jon 1:5e).
1:4a Yhwh hurled Why Does God Punish Jonah?
1:5c They hurled the vessels Halakhah Regarding Cargo
The storm-tossed sailors do likewise in Acts 27:18.
1:7e and the lot fell Hebrew Orthographic Variant
1:8a Tell Hebrew Grammatical Variant
Though this grammatical difference would be difficult to bring out in translation, it seems likely that the imperative form attested in M is more emphatic than that found in 4QXIIa.
1:8a on whose account A Secondary Insertion?
Significant disruption in the text has led to the argument that the text originated as a marginal note meant to explain the relative in Jon 1:7 (i.e., š- = ’ăšer) and was later incorporated into the text at the wrong point (→, 107). 1986
The mss. of G tend toward two different translations of ba’ăšer lᵉmî:
Given the above considerations of ancient sources as well as the principle of lectio difficilior potior, the text of M should not be emended. The sense of the unemended text of M is explored below (see Grammar Jon 1:8a Implied Nominal Phrase).
1:13a rowed Shift of Register from Earth to Sea The standard meaning of the Hebrew verb ḥtr is “to dig,” which can be ascertained from the following contexts:
The use of the verb in Jon 1:13 (wayyaḥtᵉrû) to describe the sailors’ activity seems to indicate the lack of a Hebrew word for rowing, and may also suggest a lack of familiarity with nautical terminology. The use of this term for rowing still obtains in modern Hebrew.
1:9b do I fear Participle: Durative Force Jonah begins his response with a verbless clause “I am a Hebrew.” The matching expression “do I fear” echoes the construction of Jonah’s initial claim with the same syntax but utilizes a participial construction which, as an echo of the first clause (Literary Devices Jon 1:9b), must be taken as a verbal predicate.
A participial predicate, which normally connotes present tense, evidently has a durative sense in the present context. That is, Jonah has feared and continues to fear Yhwh.
1:11b,13b continued to become more stormy Gradual Progression The lack of a finite verb within the kî-clause in which this construction appears effectively places its data in the background of the narrative. The pair of participles, hôlēk wᵉsō‘ēr, here functions as a verbal hendiadys to describe the storm’s growing intensity.
Since both verbs are participles, they convey a durative force: thus the sea “continued to become more stormy.”
For other examples of this construction, see Ex 19:19; 1Sm 17:41; 2Sm 3:1; 15:12; Est 9:4; Prv 4:18.
1:10–13 RHETORIC Concentration of kî-Clauses Clauses introduced by the Hebrew particle kî can have various meanings and functions. Such clauses appear nine times throughout Jon 1 and three occur at the conclusion of Jon 1:10, having the effect of an anaphora:
This three-fold repetition of kî-clauses is often explained as a later interpolation from an early marginal note (Textual Criticism Jon 1:10c). Considering the broader context of Jon 1:10–13, the series of kî-clauses expands significantly—from three to seven occurrences. Within this broader context a clear rhetorical structure and purpose can be discerned (cf. →, 142).
The series of kî-clauses in Jon 1:10 and its accompanying shift to narratival explanation may therefore be explained in two ways.
1:10a,16a the men were greatly afraid + the men greatly feared Yhwh — THEME Fear Properly Directed
Fear has a significant role in driving the sailors’ behavior: they abandon precious cargo and cry out to their gods. Jon 1:10, with its cognate accusative, captures the intensification of the sailors’ fear, when they learn that Jonah has angered Yhwh through his flight. Jon 1:16 emphasizes their redoubled fear of Yhwh when the sailors toss Jonah overboard.
Jonah, on the other hand, is not afraid of the storm—evidenced by his nonchalant sleeping—but he is afraid of the God who brought it.
When the sailors do as Jonah tells them, and hurl him overboard, the storm ceases. With no more storm, the sailors might have nothing to fear. Instead, they become like Jonah, and fear a great fear of Yhwh and offer him worship. Whereas before, in the chaos of the storm, the sailors each cried out to his own god, now they are unified and safe, offering sacrifices and vows to Yhwh.
1:9b,11ff,15 the sea See Literary Devices Jon 1:4ab the sea.
1:11a What shall we do End of Questions Having gathered all the necessary information about Jonah’s situation, the sailors ask the final question about what they must do to calm the storm. Moreover, they recognize not simply that they must do something but that they must do something to Jonah.
1:13a rowed Irony? The use of the word ḥtr (“to dig”; cf. Vocabulary Jon 1:13a) conveys vigor and intensity: “rowed hard.” →) adds a sense of futility in his translation, “desperately rowed.” (2006
1:14b Please Pleading for Life
Here one find’s language of entreaty in the particles ’ānnâ and -nâ. This language is reserved for extreme circumstances (Biblical Intertextuality Jon 1:14b).
For the first time, the Lord is directly addressed. Even though the captain instructs Jonah to call out to his god, he did not do so.
1:16 RHETORIC Triple Repetition of Verb Plus Cognate Accusatives This verse presents an unusual use of three verbs used along with their cognate accusatives.
This device allows the narrator to illustrate the emotional states of his characters.
1:16a the men greatly feared Yhwh NARRATION Characterization of the Sailors: Converts? This verse recalls the beginning of the drama when the sailors feared the storm and called on their own gods (Jon 1:5). Having been rescued from death, they now fear Yhwh and make sacrifices and vows to Yhwh. This may be an instance of conversion, as later Jewish tradition will emphasize (Jewish Tradition Jon 1:16c). Alternatively, it may be another example in which they recognize the power of Yhwh inasmuch as Jonah had been called upon to pray to Yhwh (Jon 1:6) and they had prayed to Yhwh prior to hurling Jonah overboard (Jon 1:14). In any case, no word for conversion is explicitly stated.
1:9b I am a Hebrew Etic Demonym Jonah’s emic self-identification would be “I am an Israelite.” He uses here the etic identification of his people: “I am a Hebrew.” Jonah’s self-descriptive “I am a Hebrew” would be odd for him to use when talking to another Jew, although perfectly normal for him to use when speaking to sailors from other, various people groups.
1:13a rowed New Use of an Old Term Because M’s ḥātar (“to dig”) is a repurposed word—i.e., a familiar word given a new meaning—the ancient translators could not render it literally if they would maintain the intelligibility of the story.
1:9b,13a; 2:10 dry land TYPOLOGY Motif of God's Mighty Deeds The use of yabbāšâ is particularly interesting here. It is associated:
with the Chaoskampf mythology that undergirds the creation account (Gn 1:1–2:3; cf. Jon 1:9; yabbāšâ is also used in Ps 95:5 wherein God “formed the dry land”);
with Israel crossing the Yam Sûp (Sea of Reeds) in Ex 14:16,22,29; 15:19; Ps 66:6; Neh 9:11;
with Israel crossing the Jordan River (Jo 4:22; Biblical Intertextuality Jon 2:5b).
In Jon 1:13 it probably has a meaning similar to Jon 2:10 (i.e., the shore). In Ex 4:9 and Is 44:3 it underlines a contrast between (some) liquid and dry land.
If one takes into account a possible link to the crossing of the Sea of Reeds (Jon 2:5c [M-2:6c]), it may suggest that—after all—God granted Jonah a safe passage, just as he did to Israel in Ex 14. → suggests that the mention of “dry land” implies an inversion of the Exodus account: whereas the Egyptians are thrown into the sea and die, Jonah is thrown into the sea and lives.
1:9b Hebrew Rare Word in the Bible “Hebrew” appears almost exclusively in the Pentateuch (and references thereto; e.g., Gn 14:13; Dt 15:12 // Jer 34:9,14) and in the narratives of the battles with Philistines (e.g., 1Sm 4:6; 13:3).
1:9b fear Fear of YHWH in the Storm While the sailors are greatly afraid of the storm, Jonah tells them that he fears the God “who made the sea and the dry land.” These two uses of fear, the human response to the dangers of nature on the one hand and reverence for God on the other, illustrate its primary functions in the Bible.
About 80% of the references to fear concern God.
Abraham fears God because he was willing to sacrifice Isaac (Gn 22:12).
The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom (Prv 1:7).
An emphasis on the fear of the Lord provides the context for the Shema (Dt 6:2,13).
While some might want to see God, Amos reminds them that the day of the Lord will be terrifying (Am 5:18–20).
The reader is encouraged to hide in the dust from the “terror of Yhwh” (Is 2:10).
In response to the natural fear of a theophany, God must often assure, “Do not fear” (Gn 15:1).
1:11a,12b calm down Allusion to a Precise Psalm? The sailors ask Jonah how to calm the sea. In one of the only two other occurrences of “be calm” (štq), readers find sailors wishing for calm.
1:13a the men rowed Calming of the Sea In the NT, both the Synoptic and Johannine Gospel traditions convey accounts in which the disciples of Jesus find themselves in a boat that struggles to make headway against a stormy sea (Mk 6:48; Jn 6:16–19).
1:14b innocent blood Motif of Killing the Undeserving The phrase dām nāqî’ (“innocent blood”) connotes the murder of the innocent.
1:10–2:7 Use in Lectionary
1:8b What is your occupation Unloading the Sailors' Questions
1:9b I am a Hebrew Targumic Variation: A Jew
This may simply reflect a preference for one term over another.
1:7e,15a Jonah Rabbis on Jonah See Jewish Tradition Jon 1:1.
1:7–12 Calvin's Summarizing Prayer: Jonah as Negative Moral Example
1:9b I am a Hebrew Why Does Jonah Identify Himself Thus?
1:16a feared Christ's/Jonah's Passion Reveals the True God
1:16b offered a sacrifice Did God Approve of Such Sacrifice?
1:7b cast lots Elaboration of the Scene
1:17a; 4:6a,7a,8a appointed Insistence on the Verbal Nature of God's Command to Creation The verb “to appoint” is repeated four times (Literary Devices Jon 1:17a; 4:6a,7a,8a).
V does not reflect the uniformity of M. Did Jerome prefer the elegance of variatio over philological consistency?
Like G, S implies that God’s direction of created works involves speech.
1:17a swallow ALLUSION A Fish Tries to Swallow Tobias While journeying, Tobias is attacked by a fish which leaps from the Tigris and tries to devour him (Tb 6:2). With Uriel’s help, Tobias kills and guts the fish. The fish’s entrails are later integral to the book’s happy resolution, restoring Tobit’s sight and protecting Sarah and Tobias from death on their wedding night (cf. Tb 6:7–9).
1:17b three days and three nights TYPOLOGY Allusion to Joseph?
1:17a a great fish Adapting Jewish Traditions for Children A children's adaptation, Jonah and the Two Great Fish, makes use of the rich speculation and ritual use of Jonah in the Jewish tradition.
1:17b three days and three nights Prefiguration of the Christian Experience: Persecuted but Victorious
1:17a to swallow Jonah Captain Jonah and the Whale The American comedy duo of Bud Abbot and Lou Costello, whose careers peaked in the 1940s, had a popular routine wherein Costello would try to tell a new joke about “Captain Jonah” but is frustrated by Abbot’s persistent, extraneous questions, such as “What type of whale was it?”
This routine is from the first episode of the Abbott & Costello television show, originally broadcast in 1952. In addition to their television show, the routine appeared in the film Here Come the Co-Eds (1945).
2:3a depths Possible Insertion?
→, 126) argues that mᵉṣûlâ ("depths") is an insertion—probably of a marginal note—for three reasons: (1986
→, 146–163) has shown that meter inadequately describes the Hebrew poetic system and, at most, appears to be a tertiary feature; whereas matching (or parallelism) plays a much more important role in the system of syntactic constraints that underlie Hebrew verse. As a result, Wolff’s final point need not be accepted. In like manner, his account of the parallel “depths of seas” // “heart of seas” can be dispensed with. Finally, one need only acknowledge that small particles (like prepositions) often fall away in poetry and consistently remain difficult to account for ( (1980→; 1999a→). 1999b
2:4b Nevertheless Or: "How?" (Hebrew Variant)
2:5a enveloped Orthographic Variant
2:6c you raised : S | S Manuscript: you raised towards you
This variant makes explicit that God not only has saved Jonah (delivered from the corruption) but has drawn the prophet to himself as well.
2:3a,5a surrounded Poetic Non-Sequential Use of the Yiqtol Form In Hebrew poetry the qatal and yiqtol forms sometimes alternate to achieve grammatical parallelism. →, 36) observes that this kind of qatal-yiqtol shift occurs for stylistic rather than semantic reasons (i.e., it does not indicate a temporal sequence). Thus, the yiqtol of sbb in this verse refers to an action in the past (Grammar Jon 2:3b).
2:3b passed over Interpretation of Qatal One could justifiably translate ‘br using the pluperfect tense, instead of the simple past: hence, the breakers “had passed over.” Though the qatal is typically rendered with the simple past, it can be more broadly understood to denote action that takes place prior to a given narrative’s time-frame. This translation choice would make even more sense if one wishes to emphasize that the storm has already passed when Jonah finds himself in the calm innards of the fish. See also Grammar Jon 2:3a,5a.
2:8 those who revere Unique Pi‘el Form Mᵉšammᵉrîm is the pi‘el plural participle of the verb šmr (in qal “to keep,” “to observe,” “to celebrate”). Although the pi‘el usually has as an emphatic or intensive sense, here the verb should be understood as having a factitive or causative nuance. Hence it could be woodenly rendered, “those who bring it about that they are observed,” or, more elegantly, “adore,” “worship,” or “revere.” An echo of this passage in qal can be found at Ps 31:6 (M-31:7); perhaps the author intended to link Jonah’s prayer with the psalm (Biblical Intertextuality Jon 2:8).
2:9b Salvation Ancient Accusative? M divides the phrase as if the last two words of the verse were to create a nominal sentence. Nevertheless, the morphology suggests that the unusual form of the noun, yᵉšû‘ātâ instead of yᵉšû‘â, can be interpreted as a trace of the ancient Hebrew accusative (thus →). In that case, the renderings of G and V are accurate. 1847
2:3a,5a surrounded "Growing Phrase" →, 40) indicates that two instances of sbb (“to surround”) should be interpreted as cumulative or progressive, given the change of subject. First the “river” (or “current”) surrounds Jonah ( (1983Jon 2:3) and then, the “abyss” (Jon 2:5). This progressive action—or “growing phrase,” in Magonet’s words—emphasizes downward movement from the water’s surface to the depths (cf. Literary Devices Jon 1:3b,5d; 2:6a).
2:8 revere vain illusions Antithetic Parallel Within the context of Jon 2, as well as in Ps 31 (Biblical Intertextuality Jon 2:8), the text mentions those who “revere vain illusions,” not so much to condemn idol worship, but rather to affirm the importance of worshipping God alone. That is, the text wishes to emphasize what one should not do.
Jonah thereby creates an antithetical parallel between himself and idol worshippers which emphasizes his own rectitude as one who worships the God of Israel.
Finally, the abstract nature of the phrase hablé šāw’ leaves the door open for “relecture”—what are the vain illusions that later readers, including ourselves, might revere?
2:9a sacrifice Sacrifices and Vows Jonah promises to offer a sacrifice and make vows if God saves him. This calls to mind the actions of the Gentile sailors who offered sacrifices and vowed vows after the storm’s miraculous cessation (Jon 1:16).
2:2c the belly of Sheol Underworld ("Mot") as a Voracious Monster, in Ugaritic Literature Thus speaks Baal to his messengers:
2:3a the seas and a river A Synonymous Parallel: Sea and River In Ugaritic myth, Yam (Sea) and Nahar (River) are used in parallel, as if they are synonyms:
2:9a thanksgiving Harmonization in G? M’s tôdâ is rendered by a doublet in G: ainesis kai exomologêsis. This doublet often appears in liturgical texts (G-Is 51:3; Jdt 15:14; Sir 39:20). In turn, M employs a similar doublet, hōdôt wᵉhallēl, in 1Chr 25:3 (cf. 2Chr 20:22).
2:5b seaweed Explicit Link to the Sea of Reeds
This amplified translation, yām sûp (rather than M: sûp), makes explicit M’s implicit allusion to the Exodus (Vocabulary Jon 2:5b; Biblical Intertextuality Jon 2:5b).
2:3a you cast me God, Not the Sailors, Cast Jonah into Sea
2:9b what I have vowed Confessional Polemic: Calvin Compares Jonah's Vow to Those of the Church Fathers and the Papists
2:10 Yhwh spoke Literary Structures in G: A Double Inclusio In G, there is a double inclusio between Jon 1:17 and Jon 2:10:
2:10 Jonah Rabbis on Jonah See Jewish Tradition Jon 1:1.
2:10 vomited Jonah Preserved by Miraculous Means
2:10 YHWH spoke to the fish The Fish Hears God's Voice
3:1–3a God Commissions His Prophet Again Just as the book began with God commissioning Jonah for a task (Biblical Intertextuality Jon 3:1), the story resets, with a nearly identical commission (Literary Devices Jon 3:1f).
One may dispense with reducing it to a doublet through redaction criticism: the repetition reads well as an intentional parallel, emphasizing this time the brevity of time between divine mandates to prophesy.
Retellings of “Jonah and the Whale” for children often end here, assuming that the point of the story is that Jonah has learned his lesson, namely, to obey God (Literature Jon 3:3a). Even readers who do not stop here might subscribe to that interpretation. Over-familiarity with the story and with typical interpretations can lead to interpretive ruts and limit one’s ability to read imaginatively.
A slow reading of the text with a kind of intentional forgetting can lead us to ask fresh questions about what we find: Has Jonah been changed by his experience? Has he been convinced to do “what is right”? Or is he simply resigned and complying because he knows he cannot get out of it?
Jonah’s internal disposition is hidden from readers who have not yet learned why he fled. Judging by his behavior, we can conclude that he has learned something new: he cannot hope to flee from his task. Moreover, we can tell that he does not immediately return to it since God must again tell him to go to Nineveh.
3:2a Go Morphological Variant
The imperative lēkâ is a form which occurs several times in M (e.g., Gn 31:44; Ex 3:10), though it is usually followed by a cohortative verb.
3:2b the proclamation that : M | QXIIa: the proclamation according to which (Clarifying Variant?)
Both texts seek to clarify that the message referred to in this verse is the same as that of Jon 1:2.
3:1 the word of Yhwh was to Semantics See Grammar Jon 1:1; Literary Genre Jon 1:1.
3:2b call to + proclamation — The Internal Adjunct Returns The verb qr’ and the cognate noun qᵉrî’â form an internal adjunct, which is a stylistic device the author employs several times in the book.
In this context, the use of the device seems to highlight Jonah’s compliant behavior.
Further, it should be noted that it is possible that the author created this noun form for the sake of this construction, thus demonstrating his creativity (cf. →Introduction §1.2; Vocabulary Jon 3:2b).
3:1ff TYPOLOGY Elijah and Elisha as Types of Jonah See Biblical Intertextuality Jon 1:1f.
3:1 second time MOTIF Repeated Commission The term šēnît is common, but only here does it imply that God has given a prophet the same commission a second time.
Haggai receives as second (new) word on the same day (Hg 2:20).
Elsewhere, the term is common for the repetition of actions (e.g., dreaming in Gn 41:5; 1Kgs 9:2).
In 1Kgs 13 a man of God is tricked into disobedience by another who says he has received a word from God. The man of God is killed for his disobedience.
Here in Jonah, however, the disobedient prophet gets a second chance, which is in keeping with the portrayal of God as “a gracious and compassionate God, slow to anger, and abounding in love” (Jon 4:2).
3:2b call to Common Imperative Directed to the Prophets See Biblical Intertextuality Jon 1:2; 3:2b.
3:1 second Two or Three Calls?
3:2b call to A Gentler Mandate In comparing the prepositions of Jon 1:2 (‘ālêhā) to Jon 3:2 (’ēlêhā), some rabbis identify a gentler mandate in the latter passage.
3:1 Now, the word Jonah, a Type of Christ’s Agony
3:4b Forty days more, and Nineveh will be overturned A Minimal Sentence with Maximal Impact The compact structure of Jonah’s oracle against Nineveh renders each word significant.
3:4b Forty days more, and Nineveh will be overturned (Prophetic) Oracle? Several devices make this phrase sound like an oracle (Literary Devices Jon 3:4b), though it differs from other oracles seen in the Bible (Biblical Intertextuality Jon 3:4b). The possibility of giving this prophecy a positive interpretation—namely, that Nineveh will be overturned (i.e., turned around) in forty days—may also indicate that it is not to be read solely as a portent of doom (cf. Jewish Tradition Jon 3:4b; Christian Tradition Jon 3:4b,10b; 4:1) .
3:4 Jesus Proclaims Judgment on a City
Jesus proclaims judgment upon the city of Jerusalem and laments its impending end from beyond the city walls (Mt 23:37–39; Lk 19:41–44). Again, Jesus’ obedient delivery of the message of God’s judgment and mercy stand in opposition to Jonah’s recalcitrant hopes for Nineveh’s destruction as he too watches from beyond its walls (Jon 4:1–3).
Consider likewise the proclamations of judgment upon Babylon in the Book of Revelation (which comes to replace Nineveh in the biblical imagination: Biblical Intertextuality Jon 1:2 Nineveh).
3:4b Forty days more and Nineveh will be overturned Terse Oracular Formula Jonah’s prophecy to the Ninevites is very brief compared to those of other prophets.
There is one very close parallel to Jonah’s terse oracle, namely Zephaniah’s proclamation against the Ethiopians: “You also, O Ethiopians, shall be slain by my sword” (Zep 2:12).
3:4b Nineveh will be overturned Tobit on Jonah and Nineveh Despite Nineveh’s repentance in the latter half of Jon 3, Tobit is confident that the city will be destroyed—indeed he welcomes it, for it is a sign of the diaspora’s end and the coming of the messianic age. As seen below, it is possible that Tobit has Nahum’s prophecy in mind; moreover, perhaps Tobit’s interpretation of Jonah’s prophecy represents one way of maintaining its veracity. If Nineveh did not see immediate destruction because they heeded Jonah, then, at some point in the future, its prophesied destruction would inevitably come. For other strategies of handling this difficulty, cf. Jewish Tradition Jon 3:4b; Christian Tradition Jon 3:4b,10b; 4:1 .
Flee Nineveh: In Tobit’s final speech from his deathbed (Tb 14:4–8), he counsels his son to take his family and leave Nineveh, for the promised destruction of the Assyrians is about to befall it. At Tb 14:4, G explicitly mentions Jonah: hoti pepeismai hosa elalêsen Iônas ho prophêtês peri Nineuê hoti katastraphêsetai “For I trust what Ionas the prophet said about Nineue, that it will be overthrown.” This passage is not in V, which follows an Aramaic original.
God’s mercy belongs to Israel: A second, and perhaps ironic, parallel between the books surfaces when Tobit’s counsel also includes a prediction of the destruction of the Temple at Jerusalem and the deportation of Judeans, who will eventually be returned to the land because “God will have mercy on them” (Tb 14:5), the same fate that awaits the Ninevites in Jonah.
Nahum replaces Jonah: In many translations of this passage, Tobit refers not to Jonah’s prophecy but to Nahum’s.
The Book of Tobit concludes with an account of Tobit’s death. Yet, before Tobit dies, he receives the news of Nineveh’s destruction and the leading out of her people at the hands of the Medes. At this news he rejoices and is able to die in peace (Tb 14:14–15).
3:3b great city Nineveh's status Why is Nineveh “God’s” or “to God” or “for God” (lē’lōhîm)?
→: lē’lōhîm is an idiom that denotes utter immensity. E.g., Comm.Ps 36:6 harᵉré ’ēl (“enormously high mountains”); Ps 80:10 ’ārzé ’ēl (“enormously tall trees”); Sg 8:6 ’ēš šalhebetyâ (“an exceedingly intense flame”).
→: likewise Nimrod is described in Comm. Pent.Gn 10:9 as a hunter lipné YHWH, meaning, “an exceedingly mighty hunter.”
→: the phrase means that Nineveh’s greatness is due to God’s power, not Assyria’s. Kad
→: Nineveh was previously God-fearing, but had degenerated by Jonah’s time. Comm.
See also Grammar Jon 3:3b; Literary Devices Jon 3:3b.
3:4a started Wait or begin? Rabbis differ on the translation of wayyāḥel. Without vowel pointing, the wayyiqtol of yḥl ("to wait") and ḥll ("to begin") are identical.
3:3b belonging to God A Great City to God
3:4f Jonah’s Preaching: Deception for the Purpose of Salvation?
3:4a Jonah Tobit: Jonah or Nahum? Tobit predicts the destruction of Nineveh based on the prophecy of Jonah (Tb 14:4–8; Biblical Intertextuality Jon 3:4b). Some English translations of Tb 14:4 replace “Jonah” with “the prophets of Israel” or “Nahum”—due to his prophecy of Nineveh’s destruction (Na 1:1–3; 2:7). While the destruction predicted by Jonah did not happen because the Ninevites repented, their repentance did not necessarily cancel Nahum’s aforementioned prophecy.
3:7b–8a; 4:11b animal Specific or General The term bᵉhēmâ can generally refer to all animals, as opposed to human beings; or it can more specifically denote domesticated animals. Since it is paired here with hā’ādām, we have opted for the more general meaning (Comparison of Versions Jon 3:7b,8a; Biblical Intertextuality Jon 3:5,7; 4:11).
3:7f Series of Jussive Clauses: A Solemn Command Lacking a genuine 3rd person imperative, Hebrew employs jussive commands in both positive and negative (’al) forms (→ 109). Given similar limitations in the Latin language, V employs an analogous construction—the hortatory subjunctive; Greek, however, has a 3rd person imperative, which G uses.
We have translated the jussive clauses of v. 7 using a modal verb instead of the typical English jussive: “neither human…shall taste anything,” rather than “let neither human…taste anything” (cf. RSV; JPS). Our translation seems to give more force to the king’s command.
3:6a word Ironic Ambiguity The dābār reaches the king, but it is ambiguous whether this is:
3:7b human nor animal Merism?
3:9a,10b; 4:2e relent NARRATION Characterization of God The theme and vocabulary connected with relenting/repenting (nḥm) are repeated several times within a few short verses. While the people turn (šwb), God relents (Jon 3:9–10). On the other hand, Jon 4:2 makes it clear that this quality of Yhwh pertains to His very nature.
3:10b evil Leitwort in the Service of Irony See Literary Devices Jon 1:2.
3:7b,8a humans nor beasts of burden + oxen nor sheep + people and beast — (S) Alternation of Number in S: Heightened Register of the Decree?
For the sake of readability, this unique stylistic feature is not brought out in the present translation. It is possible that this translation descision was made in order to accentuate the orality of the message since it introduces grammatical parallelism that is often found in poetry.
3:8b mightily Septuagint Free Translation
This translation decision reflects the translator’s freedom in rendering individual terms.
3:8d violence : M | G: unrighteousness | V: iniquity (Semantic Range)
G: adikia (“unrighteousness”);
V: iniquitas (“iniquity”).
The semantic overlap obtains throughout G and V where ḥāmās is glossed with either of these terms.
3:6a the word reached the king MOTIF The King's Response Kings can respond to prophets in many ways, including:
Jeremiah 36 recounts events of prophetic proclamation and rejection similar to Jonah: Baruch writes down a message at the command of Jeremiah, while Jehoiakim, who receives a message from Jeremiah via Baruch, burns the scroll bearing its contents, which constitutes an overt rejection. A year later a copy is read in the Temple, where Gemariah’s son hears it and reports to the nobles. Eventually, the nobles pass it to Jehoiakim, who calls for the prophet, listens to the whole message, and again rejects it outright (Jer 36:20–26).
The king of Nineveh’s immediate acceptance of the message is similar to Hezekiah’s actions of mourning: when besieged by the Assyrians—who, in turn, demand that the Hebrews surrender—he rends his clothes, covers himself with sackcloth, and goes into the House of God (2Kgs 19:1).
3:10–4:11 Use in Lectionary
4:2d gracious and compassionate God Specifically Divine Attributes
The adjective ḥannûn (“gracious”) is used only of God, occurring 13 times (Ex 22:27; 34:6; 2Chr 30:9; Neh 9:17,31; Ps 86:15; 103:8; 111:4; 112:4; 116:5; 145:8; Jl 2:13; Jon 4:2). Otherwise it occurs as a proper name, Hanun, “favored” (e.g., 2Sm 10:1).
The adjective raḥûm (“compassionate”) occurs 13 times and is only ever used to describe God (e.g., Ex 34:6; Dt 4:31; 2Chr 30:9; Neh 9:17,31; Ps 78:38; 86:15; 103:8; 111:4; 112:4; 145:8; Jl 2:13; Jon 4:2; cf. Biblical Intertextuality Jon 4:2).
4:1ff NARRATION Characterization of Jonah's Relation to God through Incongruous Emotions and Words This section displays an incongruous presentation of anger and theological confession. Jonah is obviously upset, and so upset, in fact, that he wants God to kill him! This is the deepest insight the reader gets into Jonah’s character because it is here that his motivation for fleeing, which precipitated all the action in Jon 1–2, is disclosed.
Jonah's actions have taught the reader how often the hero has refused to reply to God.
In his story, Jonah makes two statements about God:
At this point, however, one can see both the rightness of Jonah's beliefs and the tension that exists between those beliefs and his feelings about them.
4:1 he was enraged NARRATION Plain Insight into Jonah's Character As the book comes near its conclusion, the narrator provides, for the first time, insight into Jonah's emotion and thoughts. Any earlier estimation of his internal state must be deduced from his actions or words to others. For example, readers are not told in Jon 1:3 that Jonah became afraid, or angry, and fled; nor are they told that he was scared or calm while on the ship.
4:1,2e evil Leitwort in the Service of Irony See Literary Devices Jon 1:2.
4:3,8f NARRATION Characterization of Jonah by Death Wish
See also Biblical Intertextuality Jon 4:3,8f.
4:2b my thought : M | G: my words
It is likely that the translator read dbry in the unpointed Vorlage as plural, dᵉbāray (“my words”).
4:1 enraged Why Did Jonah Grieve? Jonah was not aware that Nineveh would be spared (cf. →b. Sanh. 89a). Jonah was worried that, since the prophesied destruction of the city did not come about, both the Gentiles and Israel would discredit him as a false prophet (→, 132–133). and 1978
→ has Jonah conclude, “Now the nations will claim that I am a false prophet.” Comm.
→ holds that Jonah learned prophetically during the 40 days that Nineveh would be spared. His grief began while still in the city. Then he departed from the city expecting the fervor of repentance to wane before the 40-day grace period had expired. When the Ninevites would return to their wicked deeds, in Jonah’s mind, then the prophecy would finally be fulfilled. Comm.
Some rabbis teach that Jonah understood that whereas Nineveh would repent, Israel would not.
→: Jonah grieved “because of Israel who did not repent.” Comm.
→; Comm.→: Jonah’s anguish stemmed from his foreknowledge: since Nineveh would repent and would not be destroyed, God would later be able to use Assyria as the “rod of God’s anger” to punish Israel. Gé’ ḥizzāyôn
See also Christian Tradition Jon 3:4b,10b; 4:1 .
4:2f Confessional Polemic: The Moral Contents of Jonah's Prayer
4:1–11 Puzzling Plant and Anger In the Qur’an, Allah creates the plant in order to strengthen Jonah, weakened by his stay in the whale. The fish deposits Jonah in a wasteland; God sends the plant to give him food and shade. It is traditionally thought that “Yaqtin” refers to a gourd—called in a hadith “Jonah’s plant.”
In the Qur’an, the episode happens at a different time than in the biblical narrative since it precedes Nineveh’s conversion. The Qur’an therefore does not link the plant’s story with Jonah’s anger after Allah spares Nineveh in spite of his prophecy. However, the Qur’an does mention that Jonah was angry (see →Qur’an 21.87). This anomaly disturbed several commentators who had difficulty with understanding how a prophet could be angry with God’s will.
4:6c to protect Divergent Hebrew Textual Tradition?
4:7a when dawn arose Hebrew Variant: "as the morning rose"
The variant in 4QXIIg is most likely the result of a (mis)reading of kaph for beth (→DJD XV, 312).
4:5b east Spatio-Temporal Designation The Hebrew qedem—which probably meant “before the face” originally (→, 354–356)—can signify: 1996
Its cognate qiddamtî (“beginning”) is found at Jon 4:2. Likewise its cognate qādîm (“east wind”) is found at Jon 4:8 (Biblical Intertextuality Jon 4:5b; Ancient Cultures Jon 4:5b).
4:6d was greatly delighted Cognate Accusative The cognate accusative construction that appears here is similar to the internal adjunct of Jon 4:1. The use of this construction achieves two things:
4:8c wished for his life to end Syntax of the Death Wish
The Hebrew idiom is comprised of a waw-consecutive + direct object + infinitive construct: wayyiš’al ’et-napšô lāmût.
It can be translated woodenly as "he asked his life/breath (’et-napšô) to die," but the present translation has opted for a more idiomatic rendering in English.
4:5 Storytelling: Fast-Paced Action While there are several scenes of sequential actions (e.g., the sailors, the people, the king), here we have the story’s most terse sequence of verbs: Jonah went out, sat down, made, sat, might see. Hebrew storytelling tends to be lean in general, but this one verse covers a great deal of ground in order to move Jonah from the city to where he needs to be for the next scene to take place.
4:5a So Jonah went out CHARACTERIZATION of Jonah's Silence Throughout the book, Jonah chooses to respond or remain silent when spoken to. Not even God is always answered. Jonah
4:6c evil Leitwort in the Service of Irony See Literary Devices Jon 1:2.
4:6d greatly Leitwort, Meaning See Literary Devices Jon 1:2.
4:5b east Divergent Translations As noted above, qedem is polysemous (Vocabulary Jon 4:5b), leading to divergent translations (cf. a similar case with Gn 2:8; 3:24). Does Jonah go “in front of” Nineveh? Or does he go “east of” the city?
4:8c he wished for his life to end Translation of a Hebrew Idiom The Hebrew idiom wayyiš’al ’et-napšô lāmût (“he wished/desired his life to die”) is handled in a few different ways by the versions. Both V and S illustrate the difficulties involved in a verbatim translation. G, on the other hand, is less literal but captures the meaning of the Hebrew, while also conveying the idiom’s rarity.
G renders it with the phrase apelegeto tên psuchên autou (“he renounced his life”). Not only is apolegô a hapax legomenon in G, but it is also relatively rare in Greek literature.
Plutarch uses the verb in a similar manner (though in the active voice) in reference to high ranks or prizes (ta prôteia), victory (tên nikên), and life (ton bion; see → 42.5; Luc.→Nic. 6.2; →Sol. 12.1).
Perhaps owing to the rarity of the verb apolegô, the Vetus Latina does not capture its exact sense, opting instead to render it with taedere (“to be tired/weary”).
V closely follows the Hebrew with its petivit animae suae ut moreretur (“he desired in his soul that he might die”). This seems to go beyond the bounds of idiomatic Latin.
In S the sense of the phrase is conveyed with similar lexemes, though in a different syntactic arrangement: wš’l mwt’ lnpšh (“he requested death for his soul”).
4:5–8 SCENARIO Prophetic Symbolic Action? In Scripture, wordless prophecies are meant to communicate certain truths viscerally.
Here, God uses the plant’s death to impress upon Jonah that God laments the destruction of his creation.
4:5b east Geography, Demography, and Nature of Biblical “East” After giving his prophecy, Jonah sits to the east of Nineveh. In the context of ancient Near Eastern geographic symbolism, this move is quite significant (Ancient Cultures Jon 4:5b).
The Hebrew word qedem is the most-common term employed for “east,” with the dual meaning of something that is directly in front of someone and temporally first. Mizrāḥ, though less frequent, can also denote the east.
In general the Bible considers the east to be holy, associating it with the past and, therefore, Eden. Eden is located in the east, marking both its spatial and temporal separation from the lived experience of readers (Gn 2:8). When Adam and Eve are expelled from the Garden, the eastern entrance is barred and guarded by cherubim, signaling their movement east of the site.
Moving eastward, however, could also symbolize movement away from the intentions of God, but not from God’s protection, as indicated by Cain’s story. Cain is banished following his murder of Abel and is made to wander even further “east of Eden” (Gn 4:16).
Abraham sends his concubine’s sons to the ’ereṣ qedem, the “east country” (Gn 25:6).
The eastern wind, known commonly as the hamsin or sirocco, was a real threat to ancient societies. Coming from the arid stretches of eastern Syria and Arabia, it carried large amounts of debris and was destructive to agriculture and architecture.
Pharaoh’s dreams of impending famine describe heads of grain that are withered by the east wind (Gn 41:6,23,27).
The plague of locusts is brought to Egypt by means of an east wind from God (Ex 10:13).
The Sea of Reeds is dried up by another east wind sent by God (Ex 14:21).
In Ezekiel’s prophetic rhetoric, the east wind withers a vine representing Jerusalem’s recalcitrant ruler (Ez 17:10; 19:12) and churns the metaphorical waters of Tyre’s existence when they seek to capitalize on Jerusalem’s destruction (Ez 27:26).
The term bᵉné-qedem cannot be pinned down to a specific people or characterization.
Jacob searches for a wife among “the people of the east” (Gn 29:1).
The bᵉné-qedem are mentioned elsewhere in tandem with Midianites and Amalekites (Jgs 6:3,33; 7:12; 8:10).
In other texts, they are described as wise (1Kgs 4:30). Job is said to have been the greatest among them (Jb 1:3).
The bᵉné-qedem are the enemies of God who are to be defeated (Jer 49:28), or they are agents of God’s judgment (Ez 25:4,10).
Like Cain, Jonah also wanders east of the city, away from the intentions of God and in hopes of seeing his own desires for the city fulfilled. Even though Jonah wanders, he cannot go beyond the reach of God’s protection, which comes in the form of the qîqāyôn-plant.
4:6ff SCENARIO Parallel Lives of Jonah and Job? God’s behavior drives the narrative in both Jon 4:6–8 and Jb 1–3, which invites comparison.
4:7a worm Referent in Scripture: Worm, Maggot, Weakling Although tôlā‘ literally means “maggot” or “grub,” most of its biblical occurrences actually refer to the crimson dye derived from kermes, usually dubbed “crimson-grubs” (e.g., Ex 25:4, and more than 30 passages). When used in other contexts, it can refer to:
4:8c he wished for his life to end Jonah's Agony The heat is so powerful that Jonah experiences excruciating pain.
Jonah asks for death as a result of such agony.
4:5a out of the city Jonah Awaits Nineveh's Punishment
4:7a appointed a worm The Worm Absent from Most Children's Books While children’s adaptations frequently simplify the Book of Jonah into a moralistic tale about whale-induced obedience, those that make an effort to include other aspects of the Book of Jonah might push pre-conceived boundaries and engender wonder and delight for child readers.
Although the worm may problematize Jonah’s utility as a moralizing tale, its inclusion in adaptations for children may lead to deeper and more meaningful insights.
4:5–8 Resting in the Shade in Early Christian Art
Jonah’s pose on this piece is reminiscent of Endymion in pagan sarcophagi; one can also compare Jonah to typical Greco-Roman depictions of Ariadne or of Dionysius, both of whom are usually depicted lounging among foliage. At the same time, the slumberer’s nakedness symbolizes a recovered innocence, like Adam before the Fall.
The right panel of the sarcophagus features the nude prophet resting on a rock amongst animals, in the shade of the divinely provided gourd-plant. Material signifiers (such as big, pendulous, phallic gourds, and huge leaves—broad even for a gourd-plant) express the spiritual abundance eventually achieved by the prophet.
The struggles of pre-Constantinian Christians made the appropriation of this pagan image of rest and well-being particularly appealing and useful. The resting Jonah-Endymion type largely disappears after Constantine.
One could also give this piece an eschatological interpretation. Jonah peacefully rests in the shade of the Church, enjoying her spiritual fecundity, while awaiting the eschaton and the total destruction of sin and death.
4:9b Is it good for you to be angry? Repetition and Development God repeats and modifies the question which Jonah ignored in Jon 4:4. Here, God is not referring to the anger that Jonah has toward the repentance of the Ninevites and God’s relenting from punishment, but rather to the anger Jonah has toward the death of the plant. Jonah’s response appears uninformed by biblical traditions associated with “shade/protection” (Jon 4:5–6 ṣēl), which repeatedly point to God as the sole means of shade/protection (Ps 17:8; 36:7; 91:4).
4:11 Concluding Unanswered Question The narrative ends with a long rhetorical question addressed to Jonah. It serves also as a conclusion of the whole book. The question reaches beyond the beginning of the book, for the apparent first question of the impending destruction of Nineveh is solved. Since the ending does not give Jonah’s answer, the text arguably closes with narratorial metalepsis: God directs his question not to Jonah, but to the reader.
4:11a Nineveh Assyria's Last Capital See Historical and Geographical Notes Jon 1:2.
4:11a Nineveh A City of Biblical Imagination See Biblical Intertextuality Jon 1:2.
4:10f God's Lesson
But if Jonah grieves over the destruction of something gratuitous, like the God-ordained qîqāyôn, should not God grieve even more over the destruction of his own creation, namely the Ninevites—and, by extension, all of mankind? Cf. →, 140–141. and 1978
1:17a; 4:6a,7a,8a Yhwh appointed + God Appointed — NARRATION Characterization of God through Continuity of Action In the Book of Jonah, the same verb mnh ("appoint") is used four times to describe God’s dealings with Jonah, although it is sometimes translated differently depending on the context (Comparison of Versions Jon 1:17a; 4:6a,7a,8a). He “appoints” different elements of his creation to shape the fate of his reluctant prophet and to communicate to him. Nature’s role in the book manifests God’s control over the cosmos as a whole—even including stubborn human beings like Jonah. Indeed, as we have seen with the storm and the sea-monster, nature is more obedient than Jonah himself.
Nature reprises its role in Jon 4 wherein comfort (Jon 4:6) gives way to discomfort piled on top of discomfort (Jon 4:7–8). God commands a plant to grow; then he commands a worm to kill it. Meanwhile he marshals the sun and a scorching wind against Jonah, before revealing to Jonah his solicitude for the multitudes of Nineveh and their cattle.
2:3a the seas See Literary Devices Jon 1:4ab the sea.
4:1–4 Competing Views of Mercy Until this point, the reader has been in the dark with regard to why Jonah fled from his first commission. Now we know: God’s decision to relent from destroying Nineveh was both predictable and infuriating. In a flood of self-destructive emotion, Jonah verbally abuses God with language that, in another context, would be an encomium of God’s greatest qualities: mercy, steadfast loyalty, forgiveness, and willingness to relent from the destruction of a people (Biblical Intertextuality Jon 4:2).
God asks Jonah if this is a good way to respond, but Jonah is done talking. He leaves the city and sits down to see what will happen next. Again Jonah has spoken of what he knows. He knows God’s character, which is precisely why he tried to avoid his commission and why he is furious at being forced to complete it.
As one who has just experienced an unparalleled act of mercy—for no one survives the depths of the sea, let alone surviving the belly of a sea-monster—Jonah is now angered by the very qualities that spared his life. In this thought experiment, the reader is now drawn to reflect on God’s mercy, both towards Nineveh, a second Sodom (Biblical Intertextuality Jon 1:2), and towards Jonah, impudent and stubborn. Finally, the reader is provoked to wonder whether his own view of God’s mercy is overly limited.
Jonah’s response to God may surprise the reader. In Jonah’s reception history, many have tried to understand it, suggesting that Jonah was afraid of being a false prophet, or that the Ninevites’ quick repentance would make Israel look bad by comparison (Jewish Tradition Jon 1:3a; Jewish Tradition Jon 4:1). Others interpret Jonah’s anger in light of Ezra, for whom God seems to belong to Israel alone. Regardless of one’s approach, it is important to note the role this passage has played in polemical Christian readings against Judaism, which present the main character as “Jonah the Jew,” a selfish nationalist who opposes God’s mercy to non-Jews (Christian Tradition Jon 4:1ff). The source of Jonah’s anger is essential for reading the book, since it relates to his behavior in Jon 1, but it is also important to not view Jonah’s motivation in a way that emerges from biases implicitly or explicitly embedded in stereotypes (→, 23; Christian Tradition Jon 4:11). Even if Jonah is presented in a very negative way, this is not a discussion among Jews and Christians, but about a Jewish author engaging with his own theological tradition; it makes little sense to view the theology of Jonah as more authentically Jewish than that of the author.
Instead of a joyous statement of praise (Biblical Intertextuality Jon 4:2), the traditional divine qualities (Vocabulary Jon 4:2d) listed by Jonah (Literary Devices Jon 4:1ff) engender here great resentment and anger (Literary Devices Jon 4:3,8f). His wish for death is extreme, but in itself, not without scriptural antecedents (Biblical Intertextuality Jon 4:3,8f). This is the second time that Jonah has spoken about God (Jon 1:9). In the storm, Jonah spoke about God’s role as creator. Here, in the context of sin and repentance, he speaks about God’s mercy. Jonah knows who God is, but does he think that God should not act this way toward the Ninevites? This anger seems to expose Jonah’s underlying assumption that God’s mercy should only apply to those he considers to be part of the covenant community.
Stressed by an ancient demarcation mark (Textual Criticism Jon 2:9f; 4:3f) and featuring a Leitwort, anger (Comparison of Versions Jon 4:1,4,9bc), God's direct question to Jonah triggers the readers’ attention to the important theological problem at the heart of the book.
2:10 on the dry land The Euxine or Black Sea
3:5b from their great ones to their small ones Merism The merism here refers to power and status, not size. This foreshadows the city’s repentance, of which the king, the nobles, townsfolk, and even the animals partake.
1:3b,5d; 2:6a descended Repetition, Meaning: Inverted Symbolism of Directions
Elsewhere in the Bible, departure from Jerusalem is always descent while movement toward the Holy City is always ascent. Movement to and from Egypt is similarly rendered.
In Jonah the verb yārad appears four times. Whereas Jon 1:2 suggests that to get to the Lord’s face, one needs to “ascend,” Jonah decisively takes the opposite direction. He descends first to Joppa, then to the ship (Jon 1:3) (2x), then to the bottom of it (Jon 1:5), to finish with a descent to the “roots of the mountains” in his prayer (Jon 2:6 [= V-2:7]).
1:1 the word of YHWH was to Prophetic Word Formula (Wortereignisformel)
The phrase occurs more than 40 times in the Book of Ezekiel alone. It can be found regularly embedded within large narrative sections, such as with Elijah (1Kgs 17:2,8; 18:1).
The phrase does not necessarily bring about a prophetic commission; God may simply be communicating with a human being, as with Abram (Gn 15:1) or Solomon (1Kgs 6:11).
The phrase is lacking only in Obadiah, Nahum, and Habakkuk. If one were to approach this phrase from a form-critical perspective, Jonah can easily be related to other prophetic literature. However, as →, 124–125) points out, the formula as an opener with no content can lead readers to the conclusion that this story is about Jonah himself, rather than the words he is commissioned to speak.
1:3f RHETORIC Dispositio: Anadiplosis (Repetition)
Thus is emphasized Jonah's failure to escape from the presence of the Lord.
1:3c paid its fare How Much? There is both ancient and contemporary disagreement about how much Jonah paid and for what he paid.
→, 83–84) conveys these opposing views and outlines contemporary differences of opinion. He himself sides with the position that Jonah hired the whole ship.
1:4a But YHWH hurled RHETORIC Dispositio: Emphasis through Inversion This verse emphasizes the subject—the Lord—by placing it before the verb rather than employing the standard verb-subject order found elsewhere in Biblical Hebrew.
4:6ad,7b,9b,10b What Is the Qîqāyôn-Plant? The term qîqāyôn is a hapax legomenon. The identity of this plant has been a mystery since Antiquity, as the diversity of interpretations among ancient translations shows (Historical and Geographical Notes Jon 4:6ad,7b,9b,10b).
→Tg. Jon., Aquila, and Theodotion simply transliterate the word (→ ad loc.). In our translation we have opted to follow their lead by simply denoting it “the qîqāyôn”: this clearly notifies the reader of its genus without proffering a particular species (Literary Devices Jon 4:6ad,7b,9b,10b).
4:6ad,7b,9b,10b qîqāyôn Neologism? It is possible that the author did not intend to designate a specific plant by qîqāyôn (Vocabulary Jon 4:6ad,7b,9b,10b; Historical and Geographical Notes Jon 4:6ad,7b,9b,10b). This opens up several interpretive possibilities.
It is a nonce-word—a word invented just for a single occasion. It is possible that it plays on the verb qy’ (“to vomit”), especially since it is used earlier when the fish vomits Jonah onto the shore (Jon 2:10).
4:10b pity on the qîqāyôn God's Lesson for Jonah
4:6ad,7b,9b,10b qîqāyôn The Plant in Film
1:7c on whose account Persian Aramaic Calque? This expression might be an Aramaic calque (bldy) from the Persian period.
The lemma (in Hebrew bᵉšellᵉmî) is a composite of four elements (lit. “on” + “whom” + “to” + “who?”):
The force of the lemma, based on the first element, is that of a prepositional phrase.
Although the relative particle shin (š) is derived from proto-Semitic, it was not used in Classical Biblical Hebrew (’ăšer was preferred), until Aramaic influenced the language. Hence Jonah’s use of bᵉšellᵉmî is evidence that its Hebrew is relatively late.
1:7a And each man said to his companion Syntax A more literal rendering of wayyō’mᵉrû ’îš ’el rē‘ēhû would be, “And they said, each to his companion,” which works well in English.
The construction of the plural verb and singular noun ’îš expresses that the same action is performed by the singular subjects: “each one said”; see also Grammar Jon 1:5b.
Likewise this construction expresses reciprocity: “to each other” (as in Gn 11:1,3; Jgs 6:29; 1Sm 10:11; 20:41). Therefore one can translate it simply as, “they said to one another.”
1:9b,13a; 2:10 the dry land Leitwort With all its theological significance (Biblical Intertextuality Jon 1:9b,13a; 2:10), “dry land” also appears as a Leitwort in Jonah.
1:17b Jonah Rabbis on Jonah See Jewish Tradition Jon 1:1.
2:1 Jonah Rabbis on Jonah See Jewish Tradition Jon 1:1.
2:4b your holy Temple Stained-Glass of Jonah The scroll presented by Jonah reads:
1:17–2:1; 2:10 fish Three Consecutively Swallowed Fish?
2:1 "The Prayer of Jonah" Syriac Heading S includes a heading to this section.
2:8 Those who revere vain illusions Theological Polemic: Jonah's Reliance on Faith over Works
2:1–9 From the Prayer of Jonah to the Psalter
Jonah becomes a model for praying in distress.
2:10 TYPOLOGY Elijah and Elisha as Types of Jonah See Biblical Intertextuality Jon 1:1f.
3:5–8 The Fast: Animals Participating in Religious Activity?
The king’s decree for all humans and animals to fast is analogous to the Judeans’ corporate fast in the face of the Babylonian/Assyrian invasion (Jdt 4:9–11). There, the high priest Joakim declares that all the people—including the aliens in their midst, their hired laborers, their slaves, and their cattle—should don sackcloth and ashes and fast.
The animals’ fasting and repentance might be a playful echo of the psalmist’s descriptions of praise that all of creation offer to God (cf. Ps 19; 29; 96:11–13; 98:7–9; 148; 150; G-Dn 3:57–90). In any case, as the closing rhetorical question of the book makes clear, the well-being of the animals, not just the human inhabitants of Nineveh, is important to God.
3:8c,9a turn Theological Play on Words
This play on words captures an important aspect of the divine-human relationship as described throughout Scripture: God and man mirror one another (cf. Zec 1:3; Mal 3:7; Jas 4:8; Biblical Intertextuality Jon 3:8c,9a). In Christian theology, this relationship is later encompassed by the concept of co-operative (or synergistic) grace.
4:3,8f Motif of the Wish for Death Throughout Scripture, a number of key figures wish for death.
The idiom wayyiš’al ’et-napšô lāmût (lit. “he desired his life to die,” Jon 4:8) likewise appears in 1Kgs 19:4, on the lips of Elijah.
Elijah, sitting under a tree, wishing for death, ends up talking with God. The reversal is apparent: Elijah is dejected because he cannot bring Israel to repentance (cf. Biblical Intertextuality Jon 1:1f), though Jonah’s dejection may likewise be for Israel’s sake (Jewish Tradition Jon 4:3).
More than merely wish death, Jeremiah wishes he had been stillborn, with his mother as his grave (Jer 20:17).
Job wishes for death (Jb 3:20–22) and, like Jeremiah, that he had been stillborn (Jb 3:11; cf. Biblical Intertextuality Jon 4:6ff).
4:5–8 God Begins to Show Jonah Having ignored God’s question, Jonah heads eastward (Biblical Intertextuality Jon 4:5b), away from home, exiting the city and making a booth to await what happens next. In terse succession, the narrative has quickly moved past what appeared to be the story’s central concern, the redemption of the Ninevites, and now focuses on God’s creative and destructive abilities, as well as Jonah’s self-concern. Jonah’s booth-building is reminiscent of Sukkot, the harvest festival celebrating the ingathering of the season’s crops. Agricultural echoes resound in the imagery of the plant, the worm, and the wind. As Jonah waits in his booth, wherein a farmer typically sleeps during harvest-time, readers come to see that God and Jonah have differing understandings of the extent of God’s harvest. Again, readers are forced to interrogate Jonah’s understanding of God’s mercy and its supposed limits.
While Jonah waits to see what will become of the city, God’s attention has shifted to his recalcitrant prophet. The repetition of mnh in this pericope displays the ambiguities that attend God’s creative and destructive abilities. God’s concern for Jonah reflects the author’s own interrogation of a theological position that accords with Jonah’s perspective. To whom should God’s mercy be extended? Could it even include Israel’s worst enemy? The answer, if it is given here, is not clear. Rather, God’s sovereignty is emphasized. God appoints things for his own purposes, as he wills. This is true of the plant, the worm, the wind, and even the city of Nineveh itself. Nineveh does not know what role it plays in God’s design, nor does it now know its right hand from its left.
Jonah’s second death wish follows quickly on the heels of his first (Jon 4:3). His wish calls Job to mind. Job is distraught by scandalous suffering—Jonah, by scandalous mercy. What does Jonah’s death wish say about his character as a prophet? Is Jonah merely hyperbolic? Some do point to Jonah’s extreme emotions as evidence of satire or comedy; but why should we not take Jonah as seriously as we take Job, for Jonah has just played an important role in bringing God’s salvation to his enemies?
1:3a Tarshish The Meanings of Tarshish
The Glossa also records a number of mystical interpretations of Tarshish and the flight in general.
2:4b,7b your holy Temple Same Phrase In vv. 4b and 7b the same phrase appears (’el hékal qodšekā), linking the two verses. What is impossible for vision, is possible through prophetic insight. See the Sitz im Leben in Literary Genre Jon 2:1–9.
2:1–9 Myth and Mythemes in Jonah's Psalm Numerous mythic fragments (mythemes) from ancient Canaan and Mesopotamia appear throughout Scripture. Jonah’s thanksgiving prayer offers a prime example (Biblical Intertextuality Jon 2:1–9).
Repeated references to the sea (Biblical Intertextuality Jon 2:3a,5a) and the waters recall related personified nature deities from ancient cultures.
References to mountain crevasses and the bars of the earth (i.e., the nether world; cf. Vocabulary Jon 2:6ab), as well as Jonah’s drowning and strangulation, indirectly invoke the deity Death (Ancient Texts Jon 2:6a).
2:10 vomited Possible Connotation in S: Giving Birth The Syriac verb plṭ can generally be glossed as "eject" or "escape" in the pe‘al stem. Depending on the context, it can have more specific meanings such as "vomit," "spit out," or even "to be removed from an enclosed space." Perhaps related to this last possible meaning of the verb, there are instances where plṭ is used figuratively for the act of giving birth. See, for example,
Although the translator of S may not have intended to evoke this figurative connotation of plṭ, it is this very term—along with m‘ayyā in Jon 1:17–2:1—that inspired a particular exegetical thread among the Syriac Fathers (Comparison of Versions Jon 2:1; Christian Tradition Jon 1:17b–2:1).
3:8abc let sackcloths cover + call out + turn — The Septuagint Translator’s Construal of Verbs
The three jussives in M (wᵉyitkassû, wᵉyiqrᵉ’û, wᵉyāšūbû) are all rendered with aorists (perieballonto, aneboêsan, apestrepsan) in G. The translator may have interpreted the Hebrew verbs as waw-consecutives.
legontes (“saying”) is a plus in G. This appears to smooth out the translation by introducing the question following in v. 9 and attributing it explicitly to the Ninevites.
In M the edict of the king and his nobles continues through vv. 8–9.
In G the king’s proclamation of the edict ends in v. 7; v. 8 returns to narrate the report of the narrator.
Thus, in M the repentance of the people of Nineveh is only explicitly mentioned once (Jon 3:5). The compliant response of the Ninevites is implied by the text of Jon 3:10, but the reader must fill in this gap in the narrative.
In G, however, the repentance of the Ninevites is emphasized since it is depicted twice, once in Jon 3:5 and again in Jon 3:8. Whereas the people’s initial repentance in v. 5 is somewhat spontaneous, in v. 8 it is a direct response to the edict of the king and his nobles.
3:5,7; 4:11 LANGUAGE Ancient Pairing: Humans and Animals Two terms are used to designate the Ninevites:
This language is reminiscent of that used to describe humans and animals in Gn 1–3. The echo may recall the reader to the themes of creation, restoration, and God’s providential care for his creatures (cf. Jewish Tradition Jon 1:1).
3:3a got up Jonah, a Type of Christ's Resurrection
3:2b according to the previous proclamation that I spoke to you (G) God’s Message Is Exactly the Same as in Jon 1:2
Two features of G emphasize that God’s message is the same as that which Jonah had received earlier (cf. Jon 1:2).
The prepositions kata and emprosthen are pluses compared to the text of M, which is supported by S (dᵉ’āmer ’nā lāk).
There is shift in verbal aspect (the participle is rendered with an aorist).
This is further amplified in mss. 87, 91, and 490, which attest the perfect lelalêka (“I had told”; cf. → ad loc.).
dōbēr: M | G: elalêsa—it is entirely possible that the consonants dbr were construed as a qal perfect, thus explaining the aorist verb in G.
G: kata—it is possible that the Vorlage of M contained something like kzwt (“according to”; cf. Textual Criticism Jon 3:2b), though this is uncertain. It is equally possible that the translator decided to add it for clarification.
G: emprosthen—it seems most likely that the translator added the preposition emprosthen for emphasis or clarification.
3:5b,7a their great ones + his great ones — Do the Two Groups Correspond?
In M and S there is a strong implication that at least some of “the great” (people) of Nineveh who initially spontaneously repented in v. 5 are also those who are involved in the official proclamation of the fast in v. 7. This connection, at least on a textual level, is somewhat weakened in G and is completely removed in V.
1:3d to Tarshish Hebrew Variant: With Them of Tarshish
1:1ff God Surprises the Prophet; Jonah Surprises the Reader An (a)typical prophetic commission comes to a typical prophet, characterizing Nineveh as a new Sodom. Will the prophet respond in the manner of Abraham and heed God? Will his response fit the reader’s expectations of a prophet? In a book of surprises, the first is that a prophet is sent to Nineveh. The second is that he flees.
It is never announced that Jonah is a prophet, but the structure of the opening leaves no doubt. The story opens the way many stories about prophets open (Biblical Intertextuality Jon 1:1 the word), with the commissioning of a task (Literary Genre Jon 1:1). The surprise, though, is the response of the prophet who, when commanded to get up and go, gets up and flees.
Nineveh, steeped in biblical intertextuality, is presented in overtly negative ways (esp. Nahum) (Biblical Intertextuality Jon 1:2 Nineveh). The subtle allusion to Sodom in M is emphasized in later textual traditions (Comparison of Versions Jon 1:2; Biblical Intertextuality Jon 1:2 their evil) and noted in the reception history (Christian Tradition Jon 1:1–11; Christian Tradition Jon 1:2).
The opening indicates that we are dealing with prophetic material, but unlike other prophetic texts, readers are given little information about the prophet himself (other than his patronym), his time, and his location (Literary Devices Jon 1:1). This allows for reflection on
The motivation for Jonah’s flight is not given at this point, and the reader must wait several chapters for more information on this. The curiosity of the reader is piqued, and many interpreters have reflected on the prophet’s surprising behavior (Jewish Tradition Jon 1:3a; Christian Tradition Jon 1:3a to flee).
1:1; 3:1 the word of Yhwh was to Semantics The phrase wayhî + dᵉbar-YHWH + ’el is usually rendered by the verb of movement "the word of YHWH came to…" For instance,
Nevertheless, all ancient versions keep in their translations some form of the verb “to be,” or “to become.” This grammatical construction led to our interpreting "the word of YHWH" as an active subject (hypostatization). Others argue that this formula simply means that communication has occurred. Therefore, this expression is as minimally descriptive as possible (see Literary Genre Jon 1:1).
1:2 for Causal Clause The kî ("for") clause is most probably causal, given the general theme of the book; moreover, the message's content is not specified. Less likely the clause is objective.
1:1 Yona son of Amittai Relative De-contextualization Although we are given the prophet’s name and patronym, we do not have any other indication of historical context, unlike other prophetic books. See, for example,
The author seems to be unconcerned, maybe intentionally so, with informing us of the story’s historical circumstances. Similarly, the Books of Joel, Obadiah, Nahum, Habakkuk, and Malachi provide little context.
1:2–3:8 Leitwort "Call Out": Jonah as a Story about "Calling" The verb qr’, “to call, to cry out,” occurs eight times within the story.
"Calling," with all its polysemous qualities (speaking in the name of God—proclamation—and speaking to God—prayer), is a significant theme of the story.
Its occurrences reveal the basic structure of the narrative.
1:2 great Leitwort (cf. also Jon 1:4,10,12,16; 2:1; 3:2–3,5,7; 4:1,6,11).
Through its repetitive usage, the term “great” contributes to the story’s larger than life character.
The instances of the adjective gādôl in Jonah comprise 25% of its appearances in the Book of the Twelve, a sign of the story’s tendency toward exaggeration.
A focus on the superlative trades on the multivalence of the term which can at once intimate the magnitude and power of Nineveh and the natural elements of wind, sea, and fish that are put to work by Yhwh. In doing so, the narrative conveys indirect qualitative assessments of the essential goodness and importance of these entities, which God recognizes despite Jonah’s inability to do so.
Though God is not described as gādôl in the text, readers are drawn to the conclusion that greatness of cities and the natural world cannot compare to Yhwh’s own greatness as “God of the heavens…who made the sea and the dry land” (Jon 1:9).
1:1 Now, the word of Yhwh was to Yona son of Amittai Prophetic Word Formula
The wayyiqtol form of hyh is a common grammatical feature opening narratives (Grammar Jon 1:1; Literary Devices Jon 1:1ff), but it is uncommon at the opening of a prophetic book. Jonah alone among the Minor Prophets begins this way.
A prophetic commission is regularly conveyed with this phrase (Grammar Jon 1:1; 3:1). As the most formulaic expression for establishing a prophetic commission, the examples are too numerous to list (Biblical Intertextuality Jon 1:1 the word of YHWH was to).
1:3–16 Ships and Seafaring in the ANE Water travel was practiced in the ANE at least as early as 10,000 B.C. Given the likely deterioration and decomposition of ships over millennia, little survives that could be excavated, and the best information comes from artistic renderings.
Here, Prof. E. Nantet explains maritime archaeology to the contributors to this edition of Jonah (July 7th, 2019). Part of the retrieved blue stones of the cargo is displayed on the ground.
1:2; 3:2b call out + call to — Common Imperative Directed to the Prophets The verb qr’ is one of the most often repeated keywords (see also Jon 1:6,14; 2:2; 3:2,4–5,8; cf. Literary Devices Jon 1:2).
This verb is often used as a technical term that instructs the prophet as to what he is to say or do; e.g., 1Kgs 13:32; Is 40:2,6; 58:1; Jer 3:12; 7:2; 11:6; 19:2; Zec 1:14,17; Jl 3:9 (M-4:9).
1:2 their evil (G) Typological Allusion to the Episode of Sodom and Gomorrha It is possible that the translator of G chose to render M’s rā‘ātām (“their evil”) with hê kraugê tês kakias autês (“the outcry of its wickedness”) in order to establish a connection between the story of Jonah and the story of Sodom and Gomorrah in Gn 18–19 (cf. Comparison of Versions Jon 1:2).
For an early comparison of Nineveh to Sodom, see Tertullian’s poem on Jonah (Christian Tradition Jon 1:1–11).
1:2 Nineveh Why Was God So Concerned with Saving Nineveh?
1:1 Yona son of Amittai Muslim Jonah
While the book of Jonah does not call Jonah a prophet, the Qur'an lists him among the greatest of the tradition:
1:3a And Jonah got up to flee to Tarshish The Sermon in Moby Dick Father Mapple’s sermon focuses almost solely on Jon 1–2, elaborating often on aspects that the text neglects, such as the negotiation of the fare or the size of Jonah’s cabin below deck. The sermon is delivered to men about to embark on long whaling voyages, from a pulpit that has many characteristics of a ship, such as a rope ladder (Cinema Jon 1:5–17).
1:2 Get up Jonah as an Invitation to Take the Next Step In the words of the singer-songwriter Bruce Cockburn:
1:4a great Hebrew Vorlage of G G lacks the adjective at this point.
1:5a The sailors Technical Word (Etymology) The Hebrew and Aramaic word for "sailor," mallaḥ, comes from Sumarian via the Akkadian malāhu (Literary Devices Jon 1:5a).
1:5b each man cried out to his god Distributive Subject The verb form in the Hebrew is plural ("they cried") but the subject is singular, ’îš ("man").
The behavior indicated by the verb is performed independently by each of the men. It is a further indication that the sailors worship multiple deities rather than the God of Israel.
1:5d descended SYNTAX Ambiguous Verbal Contrast Jonah is narrated using the simple past preterite (wayyiqtol), but qal verbal forms punctuate the narration. These variations invite the reader to note the disruptions in the narrative’s flow. Sometimes these disruptions demarcate turning points in the story. So here, in contrast to the repeated form depicting the actions of the sailors (wayyiqtol), Jonah’s descent (yārad) into the recesses of the ship is represented with a qal verbal form. The sense is adversative.
Deeper analysis of the syntatical forms employed in this narrative disruption distinguishes them according to tense, aspect, and mood.
When the verbal system is considered in terms of tense, Jonah’s descent may be regarded as:
relative to the simple past preterite (wayyiqtol) actions of the sailors. They (sequentially) become afraid, cry out, and jettison the cargo. The Hebrew verbal system does not clarify tense any further.
Grammatically,the verb used to describe Jonah’s descent has a perfect aspect. The narrative maintains an external vantage point while recounting in parallel two event sequences, the sailors’ (wayyiqtol) and Jonah’s (qal; Literary Devices Jon 1:5d).
Modality concerns the relative knowability or possibility of a given action. Some verb forms (wayyiqtol, qal) connote clearly known actions, conditions, states, or processes and therefore concern realia. By contrast, some verb forms (wᵉqātal, yiqtol) reflect increased levels of contingency and concern irrealia, i.e., unreal, possible, statements (this includes the future). Verb forms in this category merit a more generous application of modal verbs (e.g., can, could, may, might, must, ought, shall, should, will, would) or adverbs in translation. Considering modality, then, Jonah’s descent is a realis.
The narrator not only maintains a similar vantage point on Jonah and the sailors (aspect), but also presents the same level of knowledge concerning his actions. Just as the sailors clearly scramble to keep the ship afloat, Jonah clearly descends to the lower deck of the ship. For the narrator, it is clear that Jonah does not join the crew in doing all in their power to save the vessel.
1:5 RHETORIC Parallel Ternary Verbal Groups The actions of the sailors and that of Jonah are grouped into two sets of three verbs.
1:6b What is it with you that Accusing Question While the form is that of a question, the meaning need not be interrogative but accusatory (e.g., →, §161.b] translate Jon 4:4 "you are really angry"; cf. 1986, 169). The Hebrew mâ lᵉkā conveys an accusation in the form of a question, which, throughout the Bible, appears in exchanges from superiors to inferiors (see Gn 20:9; Is 3:15; 22:1; Ez 18:2). Likewise Jesus' exclamation ti emoi kai soi (Jn 2:4) may be a translation of this Hebrew idiom.
1:5c the vessels which were in the ship Amphorae? The excavation of shipwrecks can help us understand what the ancients were shipping. Jars, for example, are often marked with names, showing that a single ship served many merchants. →, 3:96–97) provide a sample list of shipwrecks with their cargo. (2010
1:4–2:10 TYPOLOGY Jonah and Noah The two best known nautically themed stories of the OT exhibit structural and thematic similarities.
God sees the wickedness (rā‘â) of human beings: the evil’s scope is more universal in Genesis (Gn 6:5; Jon 1:2).
Forty days: the duration of the storm (Gn 7:17) and the grace period until God’s judgment (Jon 3:4).
Sacrifice: Noah, the sailors (Jon 1:16), and Jonah (Jon 2:9) offer sacrifices in response to God’s salvation from the waters (Gn 8:20–21).
Animals: God’s concern for animals is ambiguous in Genesis, for, on the one hand, he saves the animals from the flood, but, on the other hand, he then gives them to Noah and his descendants to eat (Gn 7:2–3). His solicitude for animals in Jonah seems clearer (Jon 4:11). Incidentally, the presence of animals in these two stories may account for why they are the two most popular stories for biblical children’s literature (cf. →Introduction §3.13).
Large populations: Noah’s story emphasizes the multitude of people on the earth (Gn 6:1), while Jonah’s notes the immensity of Nineveh’s population (Jon 1:2; 4:11).
Dove: Noah releases a dove to check whether the floodwaters have receded (Gn 8:8), and Jonah’s name means “dove” (Jon 1:1).
Power over creation: divinely ordained storms prevail over the face of the earth (mountains, etc.; cf. Gn 7:19) and threaten Jonah’s ship (Jon 1:4).
Salvation from water: God rescues our two protagonists from the waters of chaos by commanding Noah to build an ark (Gn 6:14) and the sea-monster to swallow Jonah (Jon 1:17).
Sin and Forgiveness: depending on how one interprets Gn 6:3, God either gives humanity 120 years to repent—during which time, it is said, Noah exhorts repentance—or he simply chooses Noah and his family alone to be saved. At any rate, no one else has repented and joined Noah by the time the storms begin. Apart from the ark, all of humanity and animal life is destroyed in the flood (Gn 7:21–23). In the Book of Jonah, on the other hand, God’s call to conversion is wildly successful (Jon 3:10). Why God acts differently is unambiguous if one accepts the traditional interpretation that Noah spent 120 years calling for repentance. The Ninevites repented and found mercy, whereas the men of Noah’s time failed to repent. If, however, God does not call for repentance through Noah, we can wonder why the same offer of mercy is not made in the story of Noah.
1:5b cried out to his god Targumic Polemical Amplification
1:5e fast asleep
Several patristic authors offer their thoughts on how it is that Jonah could have gone to sleep in the middle of such a perilous storm. While some attribute it to Jonah’s emotional state, others opt to explain it away by reinterpreting the timeline of events.
→ initially attributes Jonah’s ability to sleep to a natural disposition: “With respect to the history, the secure mental state of the prophet is being described; he is not disturbed by the storm, nor by the dangers, but he bears the same spirit in calm and when shipwreck threatens.” Yet, he immediately qualifies this, explaining that Jonah recognized the storm was a result of his actions and became depressed: “…the one who is sad hides himself, lest he should see that the waves, like God’s avengers, are swelling up against him. But his sleep is not out of a sense of security but out of grief...the ‘falling asleep’ of the prophet and the deepest sleep signify that man is groggy with the deep sleep of error, to whom it was not enough to have fled from the face of God, unless his mind, overwhelmed by a sort of madness, was ignorant of the anger of God.” Comm. Jon.
→ surprisingly follows Jerome’s line of interpretation instead of that of his teacher, Theodore, when he suggests that “because Jonah was stung (kentoumenos) by his conscience, fell into despondency (athumiaᵢ), and could not bear the barbs of [his] thoughts, he obtained consolation (parapsuchên) from sleep” (PG 81:1725D). Interpr. Jon.
→ 122 in a somewhat negative tone, attributes Jonah’s sleep to his depression and anxiety after having disobeyed God. Nonetheless, Jacob also presents Jonah’s sleep in the ship as an element that contributes to his status as a type of Christ since Jesus also slept in a boat while a storm raged and frightened his disciples ( Hom.Lk 8:22–25; see 1910, 4:385.7–387.10).
→ 1:5–6 “Indifference about praying and a preference for sleeping are hardly appropriate to a prophet’s alertness in the face of danger, when the occasion and the situation call one to action, and the proper response would rather be to appease the God of all. Hence we might presume that the sleeping was done before the storm, and that his going down to the actual hold of the ship was a mark of one accustomed to being on his own...The prophet therefore was dozing, not ignoring his duty, but, as I said, doing so before the onset of the storm.” Comm. Jon.
→ “It was not that after this happened he went below and was sleeping: it would have been ridiculous if with such an alarm raised and everyone’s life at risk he had surrendered himself to sleep; rather, he did so as soon as he went on board.” Comm. Jon.
1:7–16 The Sailors Learn to Fear God The contrast between Jonah and the sailors is developed in these verses around the themes of fear and knowledge. In response to their perilous situation, the sailors seek knowledge through the casting of lots (Ancient Cultures Jon 1:7b).
Because Jonah has said so little, his motivations remain unclear. Is his demand to be hurled into the sea suicide? Is he giving his life for the sailors? Is he certain that he will be saved from the sea?
In a state of fear, the sailors seek knowledge—first from lots and then from Jonah. The information they receive further terrifies them. Instead of following his instructions, the sailors try to return to shore since they are afraid of incurring guilt for murder (Jon 1:14). Their fear of nature eventually gives way to fear of God, which they demonstrate through actions typical of sailors in the ancient world: making sacrifices and taking vows (Historical and Geographical Notes Jon 1:3–16).
Jonah knows a great deal more than the sailors: who he is, who God is, the cause of the storm, and how to end it. The author continues to draw on biblical language: Jonah identifies himself as a Hebrew and a fearer of God, associating himself with such exemplars of obedience as Abraham (Gn 22:12), the Hebrew midwives (Ex 1:17 ), and the wisdom authors (Prv 1:7; 9:10; Sir 1:14; Vocabulary Jon 1:9b; Ancient Cultures Jon 1:9b). In response to the sailors’ questions, Jonah expresses what he knows, and what any reader of Scripture knows: that God (Yhwh) is the creator of the earth and sea. His surprising directive to the sailors—to hurl him into the sea—indicates his prophetic knowledge (like other prophets, Jonah just knows what to do: Biblical Intertextuality Jon 1:1f; Biblical Intertextuality Jon 1:9b,13a; 2:10). Though he possesses knowledge about God, Jonah does not appear to understand what it means; his actions contradict his claim that he is a fearer of God.
The inanimate sea, formerly operating in the background as a creature acted upon by God, now takes center stage in the narrative. In response to the sailors’ attempts to return to the shore, it rages more and more fiercely. Finally, the sea calms when the sailors hurl Jonah into the sea. Thus, the sea participates in teaching the sailors to fear God (Ancient Cultures Jon 2:1–9; Biblical Intertextuality Jon 2:3a,5a).
1:10c For the men Hypothesis in Redaction History: Interpolations?
A three-fold series of subordinate clauses introduced by kî concludes the verse: “For the men…that from…for he.” These are often thought to be later interpolations that at one time served as a marginal note and later came to be inserted into the text (cf. discussion in →; 1986→). Support for such a claim is as follows: 1999
stylistic awkwardness in the shift from the direct speech of the sailors to the narrative explanation of the kî-clauses (“For the men…that from…for he had told them”): the sailors’ questions would seem to demand a response from Jonah in direct speech rather than the narrator’s intrusion.
Contrary to Jon 1:8, if Jon 1:10 is an interpolation it must have occurred at the earliest stage of the text’s transmission, for the text does not appear to have been deemed sufficiently awkward to merit emendation throughout its history of transmission, as is evident from the absence of variants in ancient manuscripts. Depending on how late one dates Jonah, the series may be considered original. Interpolation is therefore unlikely.
1:9b Hebrew Rare Word Ancient Cultures Jon 1:9b; Biblical Intertextuality Jon 1:9b.
1:9b,13a; 2:10 dry land vs. "earth, country": Scriptural Connotations
It also stresses Yhwh’s ability to separate the waters to reveal dry land in times of great need (Biblical Intertextuality Jon 1:9b,13a; 2:10).
1:11a,12b calm down from [raging] against Two Expressions Condensed into One
mē‘ālénû and mē‘ălékem are composed of three elements:
min “from”;
‘al “upon” or “against”;
-nû and -kem, the 1st and 2nd person plural pronomial suffixes.
It has several meanings:
Since min primarily expresses separation and distance, the composed proposition mē‘āl denotes relief from harassment, as in, “may the sea quiet down from [raging] against us” (cf. →, §133.f).
As a directional prepositional phrase, mē‘āl demands some sense of motion; however, šātaq (“to be quiet”) does not belong to this category. This apparent syntactic anomaly should most probably be understood as a kind of brachylogy in which šātaq marks the goal of motion. That is, the sense of the phrase is, “that the sea might become quiet [by moving] away from us/you.”
1:9 NARRATION Characterization of God The great storm which God hurls at the ship enacts Jonah’s declaration: “I fear the one who made the sea and the dry land.”
“The sea and the dry land” is a merism that signifies the whole of creation, as in Ps 95:5: “The sea is his, and he made it; and his hands formed the dry land.” This merism is likewise comparable to God’s common title as the creator or lord of “the heavens and the earth” (Gn 1:1). He is neither a sea-god nor a storm-god but an everything god! Moreover, Jonah’s full declaration involves all three zones of the cosmos: the heavens, the sea, and the earth (cf. Ps 135:6).
Many formulations like this one abound. Although it is not the main point of the story, it is abundantly clear that God controls the natural world.
1:12b Pick me up and hurl me Characterization through a Contest of Wills The first clear inversion of the symbolism of descent, Jonah’s command for the sailors to pick him up (śā’ûnî), is followed immediately by his arresting command to hurl him into the sea (wᵉhăṭîlūnî). His goal appears to be that of calming the storm. The contradictory nature of his two commands, however, may manifest a contest of wills within Jonah. God has commanded him to rise (qûm, Jon 1:2), but, at the same time, Jonah himself wishes to flee through descent.
The pressing question is whether or not Jonah wants to die as a means of final escape. If he assumes that being tossed in the sea will result in his death, this will not be his only death wish (Jon 4:3,8). On one hand, his hope may be to avoid the guilt of having the sailors’ blood on his hands. Why should they die for his insolence? → suggests that Jonah does not want to add the murder of the crew to his crime of desertion. If this is the case, it is curious that Jonah does not throw himself into the sea but rather commands that the sailors pick him up and hurl him into the sea. It may be the case that a prohibitive stance toward suicide underlies the presentation of Jonah’s request. Further confounding matters, the sailors fear lest they incur the blood-guilt of an innocent man ( Comm. Jon.Jon 1:14).
It is difficult to discern the primary focus of this portion of the narrative. Should Jonah’s actions be interpreted as compassionate or even penitential? Limited narratorial comment on Jonah’s interior disposition exacerbates matters and raises more questions than answers. Is Jonah certain that God is going to forgive or save him from the sea and its monsters? To what extent does Jonah know that God is slow to anger and abounding in love and mercy? If Jonah is well informed about the Lord’s loving nature, might he simply not want God to extend the same abounding love and mercy to non-Hebrews? It would seem that Jonah knows God and God’s will to forgive but does not want God to be God, at least not for the Ninevites. And he may be willing to pay the ultimate price for it—if perhaps others are willing to incur the guilt for it.
1:15b the sea ceased Personification The verb used here to describe the sea’s raging (z‘p) is only used elsewhere for human beings (2Chr 16:10; 26:19; 28:9; Prv 19:12) or God (Is 30:30).
1:9b do I fear : M | G: I worship (Insistence on the Religious Dimension)
G translates the Hebrew verb yr’ with sebomai, a verb which can connote the experience of reverential fear, especially toward deities, as well as the act of worshipping gods (Literary Devices Jon 1:9b,14b). Thus, on the lexical level, G makes more explicit the sense of the Hebrew yr’, which can refer to any kind of fear.
Moreover, the contrast between fear of God and fear in general is brought out in the next verse (Jon 1:10), where the more common verb for “fear,” i.e., phobeô, is used in conjunction with the noun phobos in relation to the visceral fear of the sailors (Literary Devices Jon 1:9b,14b; Literary Devices Jon 1:10a,16a).
1:12b Pick me up Overboard Here, Jonah demonstrates his knowledge of Halakha.
Drowning, then, would be the most appropriate punishment for Jonah (→, 100). and 1978
1:8f,14 Typological Reading: The Sailors Prefigure Pilate A few patristic writers expand their typological reading of Jonah to include the sailors, with the result that their interrogation of Jonah (Jon 1:8–9) and their petition to be absolved of innocent blood (Jon 1:14) are seen as prefigurations of Pilate's actions.
1:8a On whose account Moral Interpretation: The Sailors and Papacy Neglect Their Own Depravity
1:12b Pick me up and hurl me Jonah's Strange Demand
1:12c great storm Allegory of the Storm
1:16bc offered a sacrifice + made vows — The Sailors' Sacrifice: A Sign of Monolatry or Monotheism? Some early patristic commentators focus on the sailors’ reaction to the sea’s calming down, examining whether or not it should be taken as a genuine conversion to monotheism. Their opinions range from non-conversion (Cyril) to full conversion to Yhwh (Theodoret).
1:7–15 Jonah Cast into the Sea in Early Christian Art
See further →Jonah: Visual Arts
1:17 A Fish Swallows a Prophet In a way, the fish that swallows Jonah has also swallowed the story. After all, no one refers to the book as the story of “Jonah and the Ninevites,” or “Jonah and the worm-eaten plant.” Even those who may know nothing else about the book, know that Jonah is swallowed by a whale. Such familiarity can, however, obscure the surprise of a divinely-appointed fish coming out of nowhere to gulp up the prophet. In fact, neither the purpose nor the outcome of this unexpected development are clear to the reader at this point in the narrative. Is God saving Jonah from drowning to give him a second chance? Or, is God punishing Jonah for disobedience by having him suffer for three days inside a monstrous fish?
When God appoints the fish to swallow Jonah, God reemerges as the primary mover of the story. Whereas God first sent Jonah, and then prevented his escape by hurling a wind and causing a storm, he now prevents, at least momentarily, Jonah’s death. God’s oversight of the unfolding of events within the story is expressed with the theologically-charged word “appoint,” which connotes God’s control over the world and every part of it. This emphasis on God’s command of the natural world will be revisited several more times in the narrative with the qîqāyôn-plant, the worm, and the scorching wind (Literary Devices Jon 1:17a; 4:6a,7a,8a; Comparison of Versions Jon 1:17a; 4:6a,7a,8a).
The fish appears suddenly and serves as God’s instrument for correcting the prophet. With the entrance of the great fish, the verisimilitude of the story seems to evaporate and the reader is confronted with a question about the story’s purpose and genre. What had begun as a typical prophetic narrative seems to have transformed into a fantastic tall tale. In fact, this single verse has been a source of incredulity for many authors from late Antiquity through the Enlightenment (Historical and Geographical Notes Jon 1:17a; Ancient Texts Jon 1:17–2:1; Comparison of Versions Jon 1:17–2:1; Christian Tradition Jon 1:17–2:10; Philosophy Jon 1:17b).
Yet, if this great fish is meant to be a literary feature of the story, we may well ask: what is its purpose? what is the author attempting to express? As will become clear in the course of ch. 2, the fish serves as a liminal space in which the prophet hangs between life and death, offering an anguished prayer of thanksgiving.
Jonah has moved from being the primary actor within the story to a passive object. After the sailors hurl Jonah, the vessel of God’s message, into the sea with the other vessels, he is immediately swallowed by the great fish. Curiously we, as readers, are told that Jonah remained within the fish for three days and three nights, a detail which builds up suspense; though we know that Jonah is not yet dead, we remain in the dark about his precise fate. Of course, in the history of reception, this detail has sparked more theological and typological reflection than any other within the book (Christian Tradition Jon 1:17–2:10).
1:17b–2:1 innards Multivalence: Digestion and Reproduction
The term mē‘îm occurs only in the plural. Since knowledge of physiology was limited in Antiquity, it served as a nonspecific anatomical reference, comparable to viscera in Latin or “guts” in English (cf. 2Sm 20:10; 2Chr 21:18–19). More specifically, the mē‘îm designate the organs involved in digestion, reproduction, and gestation.
Mē‘îm can denote:
The primary sense of the term as it appears in Jon 1:17b–2:1 appears to be “stomach,” but the multivalence of the term is something reflected in both ancient translations and the exegesis of some Church Fathers (Comparison of Versions Jon 1:17–2:1; Biblical Intertextuality Jon 1:17b–2:1; Christian Tradition Jon 1:17–2:10).
1:17; 2:1,10 fish He-Fish or She-Fish? Shift in Gender Whereas in Jon 1:17a the Lord appoints a dāg, “fish” in masculine form, one reads in Jon 2:1 that Jonah prays from the innards of a dāgâ, “fish” in feminine form. In Jon 2:10, however, the creature is again called a dāg.
The text’s ambiguity inspired a number of Jewish explanations (Jewish Tradition Jon 1:17; 2:1,10) and may have influenced certain translation choices in Jerome’s Vulgate (Comparison of Versions Jon 1:17–2:1).
1:17b three days and three nights A Motif in a Mesopotamian Myth
1:17–2:1; 2:10 fish : M | G: a sea-monster The Greek kêtos does not closely correspond to M's dāg; in Greek the term ichthus ("fish") is the semantic counterpart of dāg. This translation decision is both an homage to Greek culture and a product of ancient exegesis that creates a link between Jon 1:17 (M-2:1) and other biblical texts.
The term kêtos “sea-monster” has cosmological associations in G.
It occurs in the description of the fifth day of creation in Gn 1:21. The first sea-creatures are the “great tannînim" (= kêtê).
In Jb 3:8, the same term translates Hebrew liwyātān, and in Jb 9:13; 26:12 , it translates rāhab (see also Jewish Tradition Jon 1:17a).
In Sir 43:25 the great sea-monsters are the proof of the Creator’s might.
In the Song of the Three Youths the kêtê praise and bless the Lord (G-Dn 3:79).
1:17b–2:1 innards Transforming mē‘îm The Hebrew term “innards” can denote both the stomach (and digestion) and the womb (and reproduction; Vocabulary Jon 1:17b–2:1); hence, its contents can either be destroyed or confected. Figuratively, they are a site of transformation.
By metonymy mē‘îm refers to the seat of such emotions as love (Sg 5:4), compassion, and anguish (Jb 30:27; Jer 4:19; Lam 1:20). In the context of Jonah, this last connotation is significant: in parallel with the root rḥm, mē‘îm is associated with compassion and mercy (cf. Is 16:11; 63:15; Jer 31:20).
Jonah finds himself in the mē‘îm: when he departs, he will be, in a way, “the son of a fish.” Those mē‘îm, which could have destroyed him, let him live.
1:17a appointed Does God Speak to His Creatures? Some patristic writers examine what it means for God to command the great fish (Comparison of Versions Jon 1:17a; 4:6a,7a,8a).
→ 2:1–2 notes that when the text says that God commanded, this means that the whale swallowed Jonah “by divine assent” (theôᵢ neumati) in a general sense (PG 81:1729B). Interpr. Jon.
→ 2:1 has an interpretation reminiscent of some of the rabbinical commentaries mentioned above (cf. Comm. Jon.Jewish Tradition Jon 1:17a): “…when it says he prepared, it means either from the beginning, when he created it, of which it is written in a Psalm, ‘This is the dragon which you formed to play therein’ (Ps 104:26), or certainly he made it come next to the ship to receive Jonah into its belly, who had been thrown headlong, and to offer him a little living space instead of death.”
1:17a great fish What Is That Fish?
A century after Carl Linnaeus described the mammalian qualities of whales, Moby Dick’s Ishmael had a wealth of information at his disposal; he composed an entire treatise on cetological categories, appealing to the most important 18th and 19th c. naturalists. At the end of many arguments that the whale is not a fish, however, Ishmael has to disagree.
Ishmael shares the reasoning used in a near contemporary court case, in which it was decided that whales are legally fish (Law Jon 1:17a).
2:1–9 The Fish as Womb, Tomb, Temple, or Prison? Yes, All of These As the progress of the narrative comes to a stop, readers are privileged to hear Jonah’s psalmic prayer from within the great fish. In the course of his prayer, we see that he has continued his descent; whereas he initially descended to Joppa and then descended into the recesses of the ship to flee from God, he now describes how he descended into the depths as far as the primordial features of the world that no mortal has seen. This prayer in the fish is the culmination of his experience, as he recollects sinking to the depths and then his rescue by God. Jonah says that he went to the roots of the mountains, with the bars closed upon him forever; it is at this point that God brings him up from the pit and rescues him (Jon 2:6). Does this prayer reflect the knowledge and fear of God that Jonah professed in the first chapter—that the God who controls the sea and the dry land can save him? The fish is an instrument of Jonah’s salvation, a supreme demonstration of mercy at the most critical moment. In many ways, the commentary tradition has argued that the fish gave Jonah a veritable tour of the deep (Literary Devices Jon 1:3b,5d; 2:6a).
With a subtle change in grammatical gender, the great fish transforms from a he-fish into a she-fish (Vocabulary Jon 2:2c), a fact that reinforces its fantastical qualities. Though this mythopoeic fish has played a large role in two short verses (Jon 1:17–2:1), it immediately recedes into the background, becoming a liminal stage on which Jonah prays (Jon 2:2–9). Within the history of Jewish reception, the androgynous fish (Grammar Jon 1:17; 2:1,10; Jewish Tradition Jon 1:17; 2:1,10) is eventually listed among the entities that were with God when he created the world (→Protoctist Entities: What Was with God at the Creation?; Jewish Tradition Jon 1:17a). In the Christian tradition, on the other hand, some patristic authors think that Jonah’s time in the fish is, in fact, a period of prophetic gestation; his time in the fish prepares him to obey God’s commission (Comparison of Versions Jon 1:17–2:1; Comparison of Versions Jon 2:1; Comparison of Versions Jon 2:2b).
At least in terms of his external behavior, Jonah demonstrates a change. Though he complies with neither directive to call out (qr’: Jon 1:2,6), here, in the belly of the great fish, in the depths of the sea, he finally does call out (qr’; Literary Devices Jon 1:2–3:8). While this difference in behavior may also signal a change within Jonah, it is important to observe that his prayer is self-interested. Further, the words of the prayer, especially Jon 2:5–7, reveal something the reader has not yet encountered in the story: Jonah describes how he feels.
Like many of the psalms, we are given the context for Jonah’s prayer: he prays from the belly of the she-fish. As noted above, the prayer gives the reader a glimpse of Jonah’s inner-emotional state, and for many within the history of interpretation, its repentant tone redeems him as a prophet. Further, this prayer serves as a model within the Christian tradition; like Jonah, we are to pray in the midst of distress for help and salvation from God. The prayer itself is comprised of a patchwork of psalmodic language (Textual Criticism Jon 2:9a; Biblical Intertextuality Jon 2:1–9), including references to cult, particularly the Temple and thanksgiving sacrifices. Thus it has found a home in liturgy (Liturgies Jon 2:1–9). With references to mythical elements, such as the roots of the mountains and Sheol, some have viewed the prayer as the description of a cosmological journey through the depths and to the beginnings of creation.
Although it is likely that the prayer is secondary to the story, we read Jonah as a unified text regardless of its historical development (Literary Genre Jon 2:1–9).
2:6c my life : M | Potential Plus in 4QXIIg: the life of my soul
It is possible to reconstruct ḥyy (“my life”) in the lacunae between frs. 82, 84, and 85, all of which contain ink traces that are commensurate with such a reconstruction. The phrase npšy ḥyy can be translated as “the life of my soul” (→DJD XV, 310–311).
2:9a let me sacrifice : M | 4QXIIg: I will sacrifice The cohortative ’ăšallēmâ is found in M, while the pi‘el yiqtol ’ăšallēm occurs in 4QXIIg (4Q82 fr. 78ii+82-87:9; →DJD XV, 310).
This occurrence in 4QXIIg accords well with its usage in the Book of Psalms in M.
2:2c the belly of Sheol Semantic Field of "Belly" Beṭen means “belly.” Like English, beṭen has several literal and figurative senses:
Sheol is often personified as having a hearty appetite.
While the “beṭen of Sheol” is only found here, it is in keeping with this imagery, and so “belly” seems preferable to “womb” (see also Jewish Tradition Jon 2:2c).
2:3a river Possible Contextual Meanings Since nāhār most often means “river,” one wonders why it is mentioned in parallel with the “seas.”
2:5a [the] deep Cosmological Term Jonah descends into tᵉhôm (G: abussos), the primordial depths from which Creation is brought forth (Gn 1:2; Biblical Intertextuality Jon 2:3a,5a). The use of this term, which is associated with transcendent space-time realities, fosters later interpretations of Jonah’s cosmological tour under the earth, during which he passes through the foundations of the cosmos (Ancient Cultures Jon 2:1–9).
2:8 vain illusions A Metaphorical Expression
On its own, the term hebel means “vapor” or “breath,” though this basic meaning is not always, or even often, the one that is found in the Hebrew Bible. Thus, lexicons often gloss hebel as “vanity.”
It can denote the transitory nature of human life: Jb 7:16; Ps 62:10; 144:4.
It is also found in a few places in prophetic literature in contexts where idolatry is condemned: Is 57:13; Jer 10:3,15; 51:18, where it may underscore the idols' non-existence (hbl) and deceitfulness (šw’ ).
It is perhaps best known as the Leitwort of Ecclesiastes—occurring some 30 times—where it is normally translated as “vanity.”
2:8 their fidelity Ḥesed: A Notoriously Difficult Term The word ḥesed—often translated as eleos in Greek and “loving-kindness” in English—is polysemous; it denotes, for example, God’s mercy and fidelity, as well as human kindness and loyalty. In some contexts, it accords with the theological term “grace.” Though much has been written on the word, it remains difficult to map the semantic range in a systematic and consistent manner. See →; 1993-2011→TLOT; →HALOT, s.v. ḥesed.
2:4b Nevertheless Contextual Meaning of the Adverb Generally, ’ak expresses affirmation. Hence it can be rendered:
Depending on the context, however, it can express restriction, in which case it should be translated:
2:8 vain illusions Superlative or Not The Hebrew phrase hablé šāw’ is a construct chain of two synonyms:
2:8 forsake Epistemic Modality of Yiqtol Though its form is yiqtol, ya‘ăzōbû here should not be understood as describing future, speculative, or unreal action; rather, it describes a general truth, one that is always the case. The act is certain and obvious; compare similar usage in sayings, precepts, and proverbs (e.g., Prv 10:1). Perhaps the most famous example of this kind of yiqtol is the translation of the divine name at G-Ex 3:14: egô eimi ho ôn “I am he who is.”
2:1–9 Cosmological Background of Jonah's Prayer It is important to keep →General Israelite Cosmology in mind when reading the Book of Jonah, especially Jon 2, since its language is undoubtedly infused with these cosmological concepts.
See likewise Vocabulary Jon 2:6ab; Vocabulary Jon 2:6c; Biblical Intertextuality Jon 2:3a,5a; Jewish Tradition Jon 2:2c.
2:5b seaweed : M | G: fissures of mountains | S: bottom of the sea | V: sea The Hebrew sûp (usually “seaweed” or “reeds”) is here used to denote aquatic flora (Vocabulary Jon 2:5b). It is interesting that none of the versions translate sûp accurately, suggesting that the use of sûp to refer to seaweed was not well known.
The translator then merged the end of v. 5b with the beginning of the next verse (Jon 2:6a: lᵉqiṣbé hārîm), resulting in “into the fissures of mountains my head went down.”
2:6b behind me : M | G: eternal barriers (Greek Allusion to Ancient Magic?)
In addition to denoting anything that “binds” or “inhibits,” the substantivized adjective katochos (from the verb katechô) may mean “tombstone” and even a binding or inhibiting spell (cf. the similarly used katadesmoi and Latin defixiones).
2:7a was growing weak G vs. V and S: Physical vs. Emotional Affliction
S: ’tṭrpt (“he was overwhelmed” or “he was exhausted”), the itpa‘al of ṭrp can have both a physical and emotional nuance. This is useful to note, particularly in the interpretation of S-Jon 4:8 (Comparison of Versions Jon 4:8b).
Whereas G develops the sense that the speaker was near physical death, both V and S denote an emotional, or spiritual, anguish. This may be because G interpreted M’s npš as “life,” while V and S understood it as “inner-spirit” or “soul.”
2:8 their fidelity : M | G: their mercy | V: his mercy | S: your mercy
M’s ḥasdām (“their fidelity/loyalty”) is a multivalent term that proved to be somewhat difficult for the translators in this context (Vocabulary Jon 2:8).
2:9b Salvation : M | S: recompense S: pwr‘n’ (“recompense”) has both positive and negative connotations. Much closer to the Hebrew yᵉšû‘ātâ would be pwrqn’ (“salvation”).
Because a scribal error (the letter ‘ayin mistakenly written in place of the qop) does not seem to be very probable, it is likely a conscious translation decision.
2:1–9
Thanksgiving psalms seem to have been inserted in other narratives of the Old Testament, usually after overcoming a providential trial or ordeal.
Jonah’s prayer employs many themes, words, and phrases from the psalms.
Jon 2:2 // Ps 120:1 “In my distress I cry to Yhwh, that he may answer me.”
Jon 2:3 // Ps 42:7 “Deep calls to deep at the thunder of thy cataracts; all thy waves and thy billows have gone over me”; Ps 18:4–5 “The cords of death encompassed me, the torrents of perdition assailed me; the cords of Sheol entangled me, the snares of death confronted me.”
Jon 2:4 // Ps 31:22 “I had said in my alarm, ‘I am driven far from thy sight.’ But thou didst hear my supplications, when I cried to thee for help.”
Jon 2:5 // Ps 69:1–2 “Save me, O God! For the waters have come up to my neck. I sink in deep mire, where there is no foothold; I have come into deep waters, and the flood sweeps over me.”
Jon 2:6 // Ps 30:3 “O Lord, thou hast brought up my soul from Sheol, restored me to life from among those gone down to the Pit.”
Jon 2:7 // Ps 18:6-7 “In my distress I called upon the Lord; to my God I cried for help. From his Temple he heard my voice, and my cry to him reached his ears.”
Jon 2:8 // Ps 31:6 “Thou hatest those who pay regard to vain idols; but I trust in the Lord.”
Jon 2:9 // Ps 3:8 “Deliverance belongs to Yhwh; thy blessing be upon thy people!”; Ps 116:17–18 “I will offer to thee the sacrifice of thanksgiving and call on the name of Yhwh. I will pay my vows to Yhwh in the presence of all his people.”
2:3a,5a depths + [the] deep — Waters of Chaos and of Creation Jonah’s immersion into the depths (mᵉṣûlâ) in v. 3 and the deep (tᵉhôm; G: abussos) in v. 5 recalls several instances throughout the Bible where water (mayim) is a cosmological force of chaos and creation (→, 737). For biblical authors, God maintains the balance between water’s chaotic and creative aspects. , , and 1995
Water is associated with the sea-god Yam, the river-god Nahar, and the primordial dragon of chaos—identified variously as Tiamat, Leviathan, and Rehab—who lives in the sea (Jb 3:8; 41:1; Ps 104:26; Is 51:9–10). This divine struggle to maintain power over the forces of water is known broadly as the Chaoskampf (chaos-struggle) motif. This motif runs throughout ancient Near Eastern texts, including the Bible (cf. →).
The creation account in Gn 1 indirectly concerns this motif, while passages like Hb 3:8 and Ps 104:1–14 directly refer to Yhwh’s battle with the sea (Yam) and river (Nahar). Biblical authors frequently cite the Exodus as such a battle (Ps 77:17–21; 106:9; 107:23–24; Is 44:27; 63:11–12; Hb 3:10).
In the NT, the Chaoskampf motif is recapitulated in the story of Jesus walking on the water: as God, he victoriously tramples the head of the primordial sea-dragon (Mt 14:22–33). The revelation of the New Heaven and New Earth, when John reports that “the sea is no more” (Rv 21:1), is the culmination of this motif. This only spells the end of the chaotic aspect of water, for the river of life continues to flow forth from the throne of God (Rv 22:1–2).
The deep waters are sometimes associated with Sheol (Jb 7:9; Ps 24:7–10; 88:6), as well as near-death experiences. In Jonah—as in Dt 32:39; 1Sm 2:6; 2Kgs 5:7—Yhwh is the only one who has the power to take and give life. Likewise, only he has power over the waters. Thus both droughts (1Kgs 17:1; Jer 14:1–6; Hg 1:10–11) and floods (Gn 5–9) are means of divine punishment.
2:8 vain illusions Prophetic Language
2:2ff,7 Use in Lectionary →RML: Monday, Week 27 in Year I – Responsorial Canticle.
2:2b answered me God Is Present in the Sea-Monster's Belly
2:1–9 Christian Application of Jonah's Prayer In an album whose title obviously turns Jonah into a type of the human condition, American blues singer and guitarist Kelly Joe Phelps mixes country, blues, and gospel, offering an emotional song that re-interprets the themes of Jonah’s prayer within the context of a sinful yet repentant Christian (cf. allegories of Jonah’s flight in Christian Tradition Jon 1:3a).
2:10 vomited Jonah RITUAL Jonah in Liturgical Furnishings While Jonah's imagery has frequently been used to adorn the walls, ceilings, and floors of churches and synagogues, at various times it was fashionable to use its imagery on ambos and pulpits. See, for example, excellent examples in 11–12th c. Italy and in the Lands of the Bohemian Crown in the 18th c.
This ambo employs both Cosmatesque ornament—typical of medieval Italy—and mosaics depicting peacocks, Jonah, and the sea-monster (a typological reference to Christ’s death and resurrection). One mosaic depicts Jonah being swallowed by the sea-monster, and the other shows him emerging from its belly three days later. The representation of the character is steep, almost in silhouette, because the Cosmatesque style is essentially abstract. Indeed this geometric art requires advanced mathematical knowledge and fascinates as much as some contemporary artwork.
Such a direct connection of the story of Jonah with preaching might both admonish reluctant preachers and remind the congregation—who play the role of the Ninevites—that they are in need of repentance and forgiveness.
2:10 vomited Jonah Expelled from the Fish
Contrary to the biblical text, Jonah is not vomited onto the shore but rather disgorged into a sea swarming with creatures (three fish, a crab, a snail, and a salamander). The scene of Jonah begging to a fisherman and his boy may be reminiscent of those standing “over the waters” in Ezekiel’s vision of the future Temple, Ez 47:10 “Fishermen will stand beside the sea; from Engedi to Eneglaim it will be a place for the spreading of nets; its fish will be of very many kinds, like the fish of the Great Sea. See also →Jonah: Visual Arts.
2:10 on the dry land Heading Back to Israeli Shore with Jonah The Romanian-Israeli artist Jean David was active in Israel from the 1940s onward. Some of his most well-known work consists of travel posters and advertisements done for El Al airlines. In this piece, David does not draw upon traditional and expected imagery when depicting Jonah in the whale. Jonah is not in distress; instead, his time in the whale is an image of comfortable travel back to Israel!
Eugene Abeshaus moved to Israel from Russia in the 1970s and joined the artist community in Ein Hod, which David had helped to found more than three decades prior. In keeping with the sensibility of David’s piece above, Abeshaus likens an immigrant’s arrival at the port of Haifa to Jonah’s expulsion from the whale.
3:3a according to the word of YHWH : M | G: as the Lord said (Further Emphasis)
It is possible that the repetition of the aorist verb form further emphasizes the connection to Jon 1:2. The very same message that the Lord communicated to Jonah initially in Jon 1:2, and about which the Lord reminded Jonah in Jon 3:2, is now finally proclaimed by Jonah in Jon 3:3 (Comparison of Versions Jon 3:2b).
3:3a went to Nineveh according to the word of YHWH The End of the Story for Many Children While some adaptations wrestle with the open ending of the book (Jon 4:11), others conclude the story here, choosing to focus on Jonah’s decision to go to Tarshish and his change of heart due to the time spent in the belly of the fish.
3:3b–5 Minimal Effort Generates an Immediate Response With the recommissioning complete, the story moves at lightning speed: Jonah goes and calls out, the people believe and act. The narrator is not the only one who seems interested in moving the story along. Jonah walks one day, less than needed to reach the city center, and utters one sentence. It is only now that readers learn the content of the word of the Lord. The oracle is terse and Jonah does not repeat himself—but the results are effective: the people of Nineveh believe God. The prophet does not need to plead or make an elaborate display.
It is clear that Nineveh is a “great city” in a tale that focuses on the extraordinary. This great size is matched only by the speed at which the whole city engages in ritual acts of repentance. Nineveh might even be a great city belonging to God or to the gods (Jon 3:3; see History of Translations Jon 3:3b). Likewise it is ambiguous whether the Ninevites repent because they believe God, believe in God, or, simply, believe the gods in general (Jon 3:5). However one translates this passage, it cannot be translated to say that they believed Jonah. Nineveh’s size is foregrounded in the text’s description as an indication not so much of the enormity of Jonah’s task, but of the proportion of God’s concern for the city’s repentance.
Jonah seems to do the absolute minimum to fulfill his duty. He delivers his oracle, but does not elaborate. He seeks no one out and does not go to the king (Literary Devices Jon 3:6a). Instead, readers are told that, although the city is three days across, Jonah does not even make it into the center before he delivers his line. Compare Jonah’s terse message with the extravagant pleading one hears from Jeremiah, who calls upon the people to put on sackcloth and engage in ritual acts of penitence and mourning (Jer 4:8). He begs them to “wash your heart from wickedness, that you may be saved” (Jer 4:14). Jeremiah’s desire for the people to repent and save themselves causes him distress: “My anguish, my anguish! I writhe in pain! Oh, the walls of my heart! My heart is beating wildly; I cannot keep silent for I hear the sound of the trumpet, the alarm of war” (Jer 4:19, RSV).
Because the message is so brief (Biblical Intertextuality Jon 3:4b), some have concluded that this must be an abridged report, maybe the title of his sermon rather than the content of it (Christian Tradition Jon 3:4b). Regardless, God does not accuse Jonah of neglecting his task.
3:3b a great city belonging to God NARRATION Characterization of Nineveh
Nineveh is referred to as a “great city” three times (Jon 1:2; 3:3; 4:11). It’s breadth is a three days’ journey (Jon 3:3). The frequent reminders of Nineveh’s size may serve to :
Most translators interpret lē’lōhîm as signifying the city’s size (an exceedingly great city). We have chosen to render it such that it expresses a relationship of some sort between the city and God.
While Jon 1 seems to exhibit much interest in geography, the second half of Jonah seems less concerned with it. How should we interpret the details given about the city of Nineveh? Though Nineveh did exist in ancient history (and was actually destroyed in the 7th c. B.C.), the narrative’s choice to avoid geographic details, especially with regard to Nineveh, presses readers to go beyond the bare meaning of the text. Indeed, the narrative seems to employ geography as a plot device—to press for historical accuracy might miss the point of the narrative (cf. the mystical interpretations of Jonah’s flight to Tarshish at Christian Tradition Jon 1:3a).
The narrative’s vagueness, therefore, should indicate that this is not intended to be a travelogue.
3:3b,5a,8ff God Theological Ambiguity: Which God (or Gods)? Whereas in Jon 1:14 the sailors clearly called out to Yhwh, the object of the Ninevites’ entreaty is less clear (Jon 3:8–9), for the word ’ĕlōhîm, used of God in Jon 3, is ambiguous. Grammatically, it is simply the plural of the Hebrew word for “god” or “divinity.” Especially since the Ninevites are polytheistic, the word ’ĕlōhîm may refer to :
Likewise, it is possible that the Ninevites here profess a henotheistic belief in Yhwh, acknowledging him as the supreme God among many lesser gods.
Context, however, makes a polytheistic or pagan interpretation of ’ĕlōhîm unlikely: the narrative is focused upon illustrating Yhwh’s mercy towards Nineveh, the book as a whole is committed to monotheism, and Jonah himself is a self-professed monotheist (Jon 1:9). Thus, it is likely that ĕlōhîm, as elsewhere in Biblical Hebrew, denotes the God (Yhwh) of the Hebrews (cf. Grammar Jon 3:3b; Jewish Tradition Jon 3:3b).
3:3b great city belonging to God : M | G: a great city to God (Isomorphic Translation)
While it is possible that the Greek translator did not understand the idiom (Grammar Jon 3:3b), it is more likely that this is an instance of word-for-word “translation Greek” that is characteristic of G’s Jonah.
3:4b Forty days : M | G: Three days
M and G differ on the number of days that Nineveh has to repent. One could reasonably argue that either reading is the original one.
The phrase “forty days” (’arbā‘îm yôm) is found 17 times in M, mostly in the narratives about Noah and Moses (Gn 7:4,12,17; 8:6; Ex 24:18; 34:28; Nm 13:25; 14:34; Dt 9:9,11,18; 10:10), as well as the prophetic accounts about Elijah (1Kgs 19:8) and Ezekiel (Ez 4:6).
It is possible, therefore, that a scribe harmonized Jonah with the above patterns in order to link Jonah more clearly with other great figures of the Bible.
The phrase “three days” (šᵉlōšâ/šᵉlōšet yāmîm) occurs over 35 times in M, and twice in Jonah (Jon 1:17; 3:3).
In an unpointed text, the absolute and construct of “three” would have looked quite similar—the difference would be between a final he or taw.
Thus, it is possible that “forty days” was original and it became “three days” as the result of attraction to the three days found in v. 3b.
This difference inspired much interpretation in the book’s reception history. Many Church Fathers (following G) reflected upon the brevity of time given for repentance: that is, they understood the passage to mean that after three days of repentance, God would relent—hence it is remarkable that God would show mercy even after such a short period of repentance. Since V follows M, the Glossa ordinaria is aware of both traditions and finds both fruitful for exegesis (Christian Tradition Jon 3:4b).
3:4b Forty days MOTIF The Number Forty: A Comprehensive Period of Time
The flood of Noah is brought by rains that last forty days and nights (Gn 7:12,17).
Ezekiel lays on his right side for a period of forty days in a symbolic enactment of Judah’s sins (Ez 4:6).
Ezekiel prophesies against the Egyptians and claims that their land will be desolate for forty years (Ez 29:11–16).
Isaac is forty years old when he marries Rebekah (Gn 25:20).
The judges Othniel (Jgs 3:9–11), Ehud (Jgs 3:15–30), Deborah/Barak (Jgs 4:4–5:31), and Gideon (Jgs 6:11–8:32), and the priest Eli (1Sm1:1–4:18) all lead Israel for forty or eighty years.
Moses dies when 120 years old (Dt 34:7), which can be interpreted as three lives: forty years each in Egypt, Midian, and the wilderness (cf. Ex 7:7).
Moses climbs Mt. Sinai to receive the Torah and is there for forty days and nights (Ex 24:18; 34:1–28).
The Israelite scouts reconnoiter the Promised Land for forty days (Nm 13:25; 14:34).
The Israelites spend forty years wandering in the wilderness (Ex 16:35; Nm 32:13; Dt 29:5).
Elijah recapitulates Moses’ experience with forty days on Mt. Horeb (1Kgs 19:8).
3:5a the men of Nineveh believed Why Did the Ninevites Repent So Quickly?
→: The Ninevites' belief refers only to their accepting that God had the power to destroy the city if he so wished and that he loves righteousness. Comm.
See →, 123. and 1978
3:3b a great city belonging to God Modern English Translations: A Crux Interpretum The Hebrew expression ‘îr-gᵉdôlâ lē’lōhîm (lit. a city-of great/large to-g/God[s]) describing Nineveh is polysemous; determining its meaning entails adjudicating numerous semantic and grammatical variables: Grammar Jon 3:3b; Jewish Tradition Jon 3:3b. Though some word-for-word translations into English have been attempted, most have adjudicated the previously mentioned issues by offering an idiomatic translation that focuses on the city’s size (“large”) or its status (“great”), while sometimes also providing notes about the “literal” meaning of the phrase.
3:8b to God Or: "Upon God" (Hebrew Variant)
3:6a the word reached the king Violent Connotation and Authority of a Decree The semantic field of the Hebrew root ng‘ encompasses violent interactions (i.e., striking, plaguing, smiting, afflicting). Thus, “reached” should have a negative and forceful connotation, as if the word “struck” or “assailed” the king. Analogous expressions can be found in Est 8:17; 9:1 where “the king’s word and his decree reach” his subjects. If this phraseology is at work in Jonah,
3:7ab by the decree of the king + shall taste — Wordplay
The use of this term in v. 7a sets up a play on words since it is repeated in v. 7b in the content of the announcement that humans and animals are forbidden to taste anything: ’al yiṭ‘ămû (→, 256).
3:10
Jon 3:10 is dense with repetition, and the structure can be viewed differently depending on whether one organizes it according to vocabulary or grammar.
In Jonah, God is quick to forgive (Jon 4:3). Uncharacteristic of the omniscient deity of systematic theology, he seems to watch the actions of human beings with hope and interest. One could even draw the implication that he does not know how the Ninevites will react (Comparison of Versions Jon 3:9).
3:6a the king of Nineveh Kings of Assyria in the Bible As with the pharaoh of the Exodus, it is probably not possible to identify this king with any particular historical figure. In other contexts, the Bible is concerned with specificity and identifies five consecutive Assyrian kings by name:
If, based on the reference in 2Kgs 14:25, the Book of Jonah is intended to take place during the reign of Jeroboam II (c. 790–750 B.C.), the story should take place during the reigns of Shalmaneser IV (783–773 B.C.) or Ashur-dan III (773–755 B.C.).
One king who is not mentioned in the Bible is Shalmaneser III (859–824 B.C.). The British Museum, however, holds an important artifact that depicts King Jehu bowing before Shalmaneser III, the
.
Records of victories of Shalmaneser III feature on the top and the bottom of the reliefs, in cuneiform inscriptions. They enumerate the campaigns which the king and his commander-in-chief headed every year, until the 31st year of the reign.
Further down is purportedly the scene of King Jehu making obeisance and bearing tribute. The Assyrian cuneiform inscription above the scene reads:
3:8c,9a turn + God may turn — LANGUAGE Theological Play on Words?
This episode of the king’s command and the Ninevites’ repentance is yet one more instance wherewith the author aims to exhibit the piety of Gentiles, seeing as they pray and act in accord with a Deuteronomic worldview.
In this particular instance, the king’s decree that the people “turn from their evil ways” calls to mind a basic prophetic formula expressed throughout the Bible (Jer 15:7; Ez 3:19; 13:22).
The specific formula employed here bears closest resemblance to the words of Jeremiah (Jer 18:11; 23:22; 25:5; 26:3; 36:3,7).
The repetition of šwb emphasizes the mirroring between God and man throughout Scriptures: inasmuch as man turns towards God, God turns towards him. God, however, is the first mover, calling Abraham and his progeny to faith. In the Hebrew Bible, this synergistic relationship is well expressed in figures that use the same word to describe human and divine actions.
The paradigmatic encounter at the burning bush (Ex 3) presents several locutions that echo one another. For instance, Ex 3:14 “God said unto Moses, who ,” mirrors Ex 3:11 “Moses said unto God, Who am I?” Or, in Ex 3:4 both protagonists, the human and the divine, look at each other: “Yhwh saw that he turned aside to see.”
Sometimes, this relationship is expressed by using different forms of the same root when describing human and divine action.
Isaiah provides a famous example in the warning inserted right before the Emmanuel oracle (Is 7:9): ’im lô ta’ămînû kî lô tē’āmēnû “If you will not believe, surely you shall not be established” (RSV); “If your faith does not remain firm, then you will not remain secure” (NET).
Phonetically, there is something tautological about it, because the same root ’mn is used in both propositions, in two forms that entail only slight vocalic changes: ta’ămînû and tē’āmēnû.
Semantically, it sounds a bit like the French proverb, Aide-toi, le Ciel t’aidera (“God helps those who help themselves”).
Poetically, the derivation of ’mn encapsulates a correct conception of the divine and human action: one single action (signified by a single root) is entirely divine (nip‘al tense), and entirely human (hip‘il tense).
Man’s activity is both an answer to God’s Word and a gift of God. G interprets this tautology in terms of noetic gain (G-Is 7:9 kai ean mê pisteusête oude mê suniête; cf. Anselm’s epigram, likely based on the Vetus Latina: nisi credidero, non intelligam), as if the text were recording its own performativity.
3:10a God saw their deeds The Character of Repentance
3:6ff Sola Scriptura: The King Does Not Prescribe Any Penance beyond That Described in the Bible
3:6a the king The Lofty Are the Last to Believe
3:10a God saw their deeds Justification by Faith
4:1,4,9bc enraged + angry: M | G: confused + grieved | S: distressed + grieved — Translation of Jonah’s Anger Jonah’s emotional reaction to the events of Jon 3 undergoes a shift in G and S.
The two most common Greek verbs for “anger” are orgizô and thumoô.
Each is used to render approximately one-third of the total occurrences of the Hebrew term.
They are typically used when the emotion denoted by it can potentially destroy human life as a kind of punishment.
Most of the time, God is the subject (e.g., Ex 32:22), although both verbs can be used for human beings (e.g., Nm 22:27; 24:10).
Outside of Jonah, paroxunô is used twice (Hos 8:5; Zec 10:3). In Hb 3:8 orgizô is used, which is more expected given the frequency of its correspondence to ḥrh in G.
In the Book of Jonah, G treats ḥrh quite differently compared to the rest of the Minor Prophets, as can be seen in the following cases.
In Jon 4:1 it appears as though the G-translator has rendered the Hebrew wayyiḥar (“he was enraged”) rather freely with sunechuthê (“he was confused"). This translation is unexpected; in fact, of its 17 occurrences in G, Jon 4:1 is the only place where sugcheô renders ḥrh. This translation seems to have been corrected to êthumêsen (“he was angry”) in a couple of manuscripts, including Wc and the Syro-Hexaplar, the latter of which →, 251) attributes to Symmachus.
In Jon 4:4,9 the three occurrences of ḥrh are all translated with lupeô in the middle voice (meaning “he was grieved,” or “saddened”), which seems to be a closer translation than sugcheô from v. 1. Still, there is some semantic distance between the terms. In fact, there are only two other places in G where lupeô translates ḥrh: Gn 4:5 and Neh 5:6. The former verse occurs in a context similar to that of Jon 4, namely that of Cain’s response to God’s rejection of his offering; both Cain and Jonah are pained by God’s actions because they don’t understand how God works. In the case of the latter, Nehemiah is grieved about the treatment of the poor inhabitants of Judea by their fellow Jews. In all of these cases, one can detect a level of emotional hurt or distress.
In Jon 4:1 the Hebrew cognate accusative wayyēra‘…rā‘â (lit. “it was evil…[as] a great evil”) is translated wᵉkeryat…karyutā rabtā (“it grieved [Jonah], a great grief”), and the verb in the second half of the verse, ḥrh (“to be angry”), is rendered by ‘wq (“to be in distress”).
In Jon 4:1 and Jon 4:9, the three occurrences of ḥrh are again translated by the verb kr‘.
As with G, therefore, the emotional response of Jonah undergoes a change in translation; i.e., it is not one of anger, but of sorrow and despondency.
The overall effect of these translation decisions in both G and S is to soften Jonah’s emotional response, thereby making him more sympathetic. This might explain the reason why the treatment of Jonah in Greek and early Latin Church Fathers does not typically focus on his lackluster reaction to the sparing of the Ninevites.
The early Latin Fathers follow G via the Vetus Latina (Et contristatus est Jonas tristitia grandi, et confusus est; cf. → 4:1). Comm. Jon.
The Greek Fathers, reading G, may have seen Jonah as grieved and confused by God’s forbearance, not angry (Christian Tradition Jon 3:4b,10b; 4:1).
Whereas S attests a similar translational shift, a number of Syriac Fathers consider Jonah’s anger to be negative, for he feels sorrow rather than happiness at the repentance and salvation of others, indicating his smallness of spirit (cf. Christian Tradition Jon 4:1–5).
4:1–11 Use in Lectionary
4:8a scorching Unclear hapax legomenon The Hebrew word ḥărîšît (translated here “scorching”) is a biblical hapax legomenon. It is advisable to follow the versions and translate it as “scorching,” even though its meaning appears to be contextual.
“Scorching” wind: G, V, and S all translate it in the sense of “scorching” (G: sugkaionti; V: calido; S: dᵉšawbā).
4:5f NARRATION Modest Realism Why does Jonah need a plant when he already has a booth?
4:5c booth Sūkkâ Jonah goes outside of the city and erects a makeshift shelter. These shelters (sūkkôt) were used for temporary lodging, such as when needing to guard fields overnight during harvest (Is 1:8). They were and are likewise integral to the feast of Sukkot, which commemorates the period of the Israelites’ wandering in the wilderness (Lv 23:42–43).
4:5b east Orientation in the Ancient Near East The four cardinal directions possess a myriad of meanings in the ancient world. In the ancient Near East, the significance of orientation is rarely haphazard. Assigning value to particular categories of space and time is rooted in larger cosmological assumptions.
The most common element of these shared directional understandings can be seen in the word “orientation,” the meaning of which is to turn to the east (oriens = “east” in Latin). Up into the Middle Ages, maps can be found that are oriented to the east, not to the north.
Most cultic sites in the ancient Near East are oriented toward the east.
Though no topographical site of Kedem (“east”) is known from the material record, the Egyptian tale of Sinuhe gives an account of a traveler’s visit to a land of Kedem that is in proximity to the city of Byblos.
The west signifies the future, since it is the direction in which the sun travels. As one faces east, then, one’s gaze is to the past and one’s back to the future.
South, then, is by necessity on one’s right-hand side. It is correlated with morality, well-being, and security.
North is associated with that which is immoral, uncontrollable, and dangerous.
Linguistic parallels also exist for these spatial representations in the textual records of Semitic peoples (cf. →, 42–51).
’aḥar (Hebrew), aḫr (Ugaritic), and aḫāru (Akkadian) mean “west,” “behind,” “backwards,” “after,” and “afterwards”; hence, “future.” Each of these three linguistic groups share similar lexical and definitional patterns for the other cardinal directions.
yāmîn/témān (Hebrew “right/south”) are synonymous with yamîn/yaman in Arabic. Later Greek and Latin words for cardinal points are also indicative of the valuations of directionality, with dexia/dexter indicating both the right hand and “right-morality” while aristeros/sinister signify evil.
4:6ad,7b,9b,10b qîqāyôn The Identity of the Plant in the Versions While the precise identity of the plant in M remains unknown (Historical and Geographical Notes Jon 4:6ad,7b,9b,10b), the versions all identify it as some type of vine plant.
→ 112.22 cites his Jewish teachers when he asserts that the plant is a type of ivy and not a fruit-bearing gourd-plant ( Ep.History of Translations Jon 4:6ad,7b,9b,10b). S offers a periphrastic translation that identifies more specifically the part of the plant affected. It is possible that the translator was thinking of a kind of melon-plant that was particularly vunerable to sun damage (cf. →CAD 17.2, s.v. šarūru).
4:6b over Jonah : M | G V: above/over Jonah’s head (Plus in G and V) The phrase mē‘al lᵉyônâ, “over Jonah,” is translated:
Both mean “over Jonah’s head” and contain a plus compared to M, which might have been from a desire to clarify the text. In both G and V, these pluses introduce some repetition since a nearly identical phrase follows in v. 6c: huperanô tês kephalês autou; super caput eius.
4:8d Expansion in S Jonah’s direct speech is quite different in S; it is nearly identical to Elijah’s prayer in S-1Kgs 19:4 (cf. Biblical Intertextuality Jon 1:1f). It appears the translator consciously sought to harmonize Jonah’s prayer with Elijah’s. The petitions of Elijah and Jonah in S are as follows:
1Kgs 19:4 saggi li hāšāh māryā sab napᵉš men meṭul dᵉlā hᵉwit ṭāb nā men abāhay “It is enough for me now Lord. Take my life from me, for I am not better than my fathers.”
Jon 4:8 māṭe bidayk māryā lᵉmesab napᵉš men meṭul dᵉlā hᵉwit ṭāb nā men abāhay “It has come into your hands, Lord, to take my life from me, for I am not better than my fathers.”
It would appear that presence of the distinctive Hebrew idiom wayyiš’al ’et-napšô lāmût “he wished for his life to end” (in S: waš’el mawtā lᵉnapšeh), which is only found in these two verses, may have led to their harmonization in S.
4:6–11 The Lesson of the Qîqāyôn-Plant In this final episode of the book, Jonah sits outside the city in a sūkkâ, waiting to see what happens. Will God finally smite the Ninevites? God uses this opportunity to teach a lesson about his mercy.
The rabbis first draw a contrast between Jonah’s own man-made hut and the qîqāyôn that grows at God’s command (→, 139). and 1978
→ note that the qîqāyôn is sturdier than the hut, being nourished by the sun and the earth—whereas the hut withers in the heat of the sun. and Metzudah
→ remarks that the qîqāyôn provides much greater shade than Jonah’s hut, which only provided a modicum of shade. Malbim notes further that while Jonah may have first rejoiced in the plant—thinking it a sign that God approved of his interpretation of the prophecy and would destroy Nineveh—the next day God sends a worm to kill the qîqāyôn. Gé’ ḥizzāyôn
4:8a wind The Silencing Wind The term used to describe the wind, ḥărîšît, derives from the causative form of the root ḥrš “to stifle.”
4:6ad,7b,9b,10b ivy (V) The Ivy as Israel
4:7a And God appointed a worm TYPOLOGY The Worm Prefigures Christ While on the cross, Jesus invokes Ps 22 by reciting its incipit, “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” (Ps 22:1, RSV; cf. Mt 27:46; Mk 15:34). Presuming either that Jesus intended to invoke the entire psalm by referencing its incipit, or that the evangelists thereby intended to show that Jesus prayed the entire psalm on the cross, the whole text could be considered Jesus’ own typological interpretation of his mission, passion, and glorification.
Notably the psalm uses the same word for “worm” as Jon 4:7. Ps 22:6 reads, “But I am a worm (tôla‘at), and no man; scorned by men, and despised by the people” (RSV). Based on this—and, of course, the blood symbolism of the crimson-grub’s color (Biblical Intertextuality Jon 4:7a)—a number of the Church Fathers interpret Jonah’s worm as a type of Christ.
4:6ad,7b,9b,10b qîqāyôn The Plant in Children's Stories The plant of Jon 4:6–7 is frequently omitted in retellings for children, for the focus is almost exclusively on the whale (→Introduction §3.14). It does occasionally appear:
4:9ff Divine Lesson in Mercy God repeats the question posed in v. 4, thereby forming a narrative frame that encapsulates the object lesson of the plant and worm. Whereas Jonah previously remained silent, here he answers, repeating his desire for death. As the book concludes with a final poignant question regarding the welfare of 120,000 ignorant persons as well as many animals, the narrative is left unresolved; there is no tying up of loose ends, no response from Jonah, and no indication of how the prophet’s story ended. Why would the author leave the audience with such an unsatisfying ending? Perhaps it is because the purpose of the book is not so much to tell the story of an 8th c. prophet as it is to examine a theological topic: God’s mercy. On the one hand, the interrelationship of knowledge and culpability underlies God’s final question. God’s mercy toward the Ninevites has to do with their lack of knowledge; compared to Jonah (and, by extension, Israel), who has the privilege of divine revelation, they might as well be ignorant of right and left. Moreover, the narrative implies that Jonah has never considered their position. It is therefore possible that Jonah receives new knowledge about God’s mercy, namely that God has special care for those who are ignorant of him.
This message, however, seems to contradict that of many other biblical prophets, such as Amos and Jeremiah. For them, ignorance is a sign of idolatrous pride, not a reason for mercy. As usual with the Bible, paradoxical contradictions are to be held together. God is compassionate towards the ignorant yet will bring judgment to the idolatrous. Is it possible, then, that the author of Jonah seeks to direct the book’s final question to his contemporary audience—Jewish(?) readers who might have a one-sided understanding of the extent and meaning of God’s mercy? In order to be thoughtfully provocative in this manner, the author places the reader in a position of knowledge that is greater than that of Jonah, since this enables the reader to make judgments about Jonah’s attitudes and behaviors.
The placement and structure of God’s repeated question (Jon 4:4,9) aids the reader in deciphering the elements of God’s rhetorical argument.
Within the argument, it is important to note the subtle insinuation that Nineveh is like the plant, not only because it is created by God but also because it is ignorant or not guilty, a quality that is explicitly mentioned in God’s final question to Jonah.
Other short narrative portions of the Bible (e.g., Tobit, Judith, Esther, Job’s frame narrative, and Daniel) typically end with accounts of the protagonists living to old age, having families, and being blessed by God.
One of the most remarkable aspects of the Book of Jonah is that it does not conclude with any information about the rest of the prophet’s life, the later fate of Nineveh, or any kind of concluding note such as “Jonah agreed with God.” Though purposeful, such an ending can seem unsatisfying to a reader, and this is likely why in the course of reception history, one encounters various attempts to complete the story.
4:10f Qal Waḥomer (a fortiori Argument) God’s response to Jonah employs an a fortiori or qal waḥomer (“light and heavy”) argument. This is the technique of making a small point and using it to illustrate a larger one. That is, the city is greater than the plant, and so anything that applies to the plant will apply a fortiori to the city. Moses argues with God in this way (Ex 6) when he protests that if his own people will not listen to him, then surely Pharaoh would not either.
4:11b do not know their right hand from their left hand A Unique and Unclear Idiom
See also Jewish Tradition Jon 4:11b; Christian Tradition Jon 4:11b.
4:11b do not know their right hand from their left hand
4:11a But I, should I not show pity on Nineveh An Open-Ended Question for Children Though the open-ended nature of the end of Jonah may be unsatisfying to many readers, “the ultimate gap at the end of the book offers another excellent opportunity for religious education” (→, 306). Although children’s adaptations of biblical stories usually have discussion questions at the end, Jonah is unique in that it already has such a question in the source text. God’s question to Jonah, however, is far more profound than the discussion questions usually subjoined to these texts, which seek answers a child could easily give, such as the correct moral course of action or a simple regurgitation of elements of the narrative. Thus, almost every children’s adaptation of Jonah adds something to the end of the story that elucidates both the ending and God’s question to Jonah.
Mackall’s adaptation of Jonah tells the story twice—once from the perspective of Jonah and once from the fish. The latter ends with a quotation of the NLT’s paraphrase of Jon 4:11, “Shouldn’t I feel sorry for such a great city?” ( →, 20). 2016
4:11b do not know their right hand from their left hand, and many animals The Innocence of the Ninevites This final remark by God refers to the innocence (or innocents) of the Ninevites (cf. →, 141–142). and 1978
The remark about animals likewise is interpreted to refer to innocence.
1:3a And Jonah got up to flee Syntax The phrase wāyyāqām…librōaḥ echoes the divine order from Jon 1:2 (Grammar Jon 1:2). See also Biblical Intertextuality Jon 1:2; 3:2b.
The wayyiqtol verb that opens the sentence is a regular narrative form suggesting a smooth continuation of the story. Jonah does “get up” but—to the reader’s surprise—to do the reverse of the second command: “And Jonah got up to flee”! This syntax and Jonah’s half-way obedience, i.e., disobedience, reinforce the staggering effect of Jonah’s unexpected flight.
Like the two asyndetic imperatives in Jon 1:2, the phrase can be interpreted as verbal hendiadys, in which the first verb is interpreted as an auxiliary that conveys an ingressive force: “Jonah set out to flee” (see →, 31–37).
As mentioned above, the wayyiqtol conveys subsequent action. Most of the time, it is simply translated as "and then he…" or "it came to pass that…" Since, however, Jonah gets up to flee from God's mission, a number of translators choose to begin Jon 1:3 with an adversative conjunction such as “but” or “instead,” thereby moving the prophet’s surprising disobedience to the beginning of the clause. E.g.,
Some translators choose to insert an adversative halfway through the clause instead:
1:3b a ship going to Tarshish Going or Coming? (Ambiguous Construction) The usual sense of the verb bô’ is movement toward (coming to) rather than going away. Translated literally, this would mean that Jonah looked in Joppa for a ship “coming to Tarshish.” The author could have conveyed that Jonah found a ship that was "going to Tarshish" with either the locative -he or a proposition using the verb hālak.
Several options are possible for translation:
1:1–4:11 Significance of the Names for God? Throughout Jonah readers find several names for God: YHWH (22x); ’Ēl/’Ĕlôhîm (13x); and YHWH ’Ĕlôhîm (4x).
1:2,6c Get up NARRATION Repetition, Meaning The captain’s command to Jonah echoes the prophet’s call from God (Jon 1:2) verbatim. Jonah’s prior refusal of the divine command by “rising and fleeing,” rather than “rising and going,” now results in repetition of the same command to rise expressed in the mouth of a human character.
Such repetition may have startled Jonah, as though God was speaking through the captain, reminding Jonah of his earlier call.
Yet, this time Jonah’s response to the captain’s command is never narrated. He simply appears in the company of the sailors. If Jonah rises at the command of the captain, it is a gap in the text for readers to fill. This increases the contrast between the captain’s (and sailors’) prayerful response to the storm and Jonah’s total rejection of his personalized divine mandates.
1:3b found a ship PROSODY Assonance (Wordplay)
Evidence of this type of wordplay can be found elsewhere (Ancient Cultures Jon 1:3b).
1:3a Tarshish An Enigmatic Location The location of Tarshish (Taršîš) is unknown, although there are a few clues as to its whereabouts. The most obvious of these is that Jonah aims to travel there by ship: hence it must lie somewhere along the Mediterranean coast.
Throughout the ancient sources, including the Bible, inconsistent spelling and usage further complicate an inquiry into Tarshish’s exact location. Indeed, the presumed location of the city depends on which biblical passages one follows.
Regardless of its actual location, it serves as a foil to Nineveh within the narrative.
1:3b Yapho Brief History of an Ancient Port Joppa (Hebrew Yāpô, Greek Ioppê and Iopê), also Iapu, Yafo, or Yafa, is an ancient major port city located 35 miles NW of Jerusalem and just south of the modern city of Tel Aviv.
See also Biblical Intertextuality Jon 1:3b and Ancient Texts Jon 1:3b.
A monumental gateway inscribed with the name of Pharaoh Ramesses II implies that an Egyptian garrison was stationed in Joppa in the 13th c. B.C. This gate was destroyed by an intense conflagration and rebuilt afterwards.
A considerable amount of Philistine ceramics dated to the 12th c.–11th c. B.C. was recovered on the site; two graves where cattle were buried were found, suggesting cultic use.
Domestic remains from the Late Iron Age were discovered, including a winery and pottery. An earthen rampart and mudbrick glacis were also located (→, 73).
Later, it was a source of conflict between the Ptolemies and Seleucids. After the Maccabean revolt, it enjoyed significant autonomy until the end of the Jewish War of 66–70 A.D.
It appears much later in a famous episode of early Christianity (Acts 9:36; cf. Biblical Intertextuality Jon 1:3b).
The École biblique de Jérusalem holds several photos of Jaffa from the late 19th c. taken by the Bonfils family. The port of Jaffa (depicted in image n° 15007-Bonfils 0237), in use ever since the time of the pharoahs, was the principal port of entry for pilgrims to the Holy Land in the 19th c. In shallow water, cluttered with reefs, the harbor could not allow large vessels to dock. Boats remained anchored offshore, and a system of large rowing boats was in service for passengers and luggage transportation.
1:3b Yapho In Ancient Written Sources
The inscription on the 5th c. B.C. sarcophagus of Eshmunazar, “King of the two Sidons,” states that he was granted “Dor and Joppa” by the “king of kings,” that is, the Achaemenid king of Persia (→, 114). 1877
1:2 their evil : M | G: the outcry of its wickedness (Emphasis) G renders M's rā‘ātām ("their evil") with hê kraugê tês kakias autês ("the outcry of its wickedness"). The following are some possible reasons for this translation:
1:1f TYPOLOGY Elijah and Elisha as Types of Jonah (cf. Jon 1:17; 2:10; 3:1-2; 4:3,6-8).
If Jonah is placed in the 8th c. B.C. (as noted in 2Kgs 14:25–28), he follows closely behind the other great Northern prophets Elijah and Elisha. There are many instances in which they are referenced in the account of Jonah.
The opening of Jonah recalls several commissions throughout biblical literature, particularly that of Elijah, who is told, in 1Kgs 17:9–10, to “Get up, go (qûm lēk) to Zarephath…So he got up and went to Zarephath.” By refusing God’s command, Jonah compares rather unfavorably.
1:1 Yona son of Amittai Inspirational Incipit of a Prophetic Book
The opening of the book provides us with the name and patronym of the prophet. While none of the Minor Prophets are left nameless, the introductions vary. With the exception of Obadiah and Habakkuk, the introductions give the name of the prophet’s father, the name of his home, and a chronological marker.
1:1 Yona “Simon, Son of Jonah” Jesus calls Peter by the name Simon bar ("son of") Jonah (Mt 16:17) in response to Simon's recognition of him as "the Messiah, the Son of the living God" (Mt 16:16).
Unlike the names of certain other prophetic characters in the Bible (e.g., Zechariah), Jonah does not appear to have been widely adopted as a personal name. Only two uses beyond Mt 16:17 are attested in the period 330 B.C.–200 A.D.: two ossuary inscriptions (pre-70 A.D.).
The argument has sometimes been made that bariôna in Mt 16:17 is not a patronymic meaning “son of Jonah,” but corresponds rather to an expression found in rabbinic literature signifying an “outlaw” and used to designate a member of the Zealot party. Still, the evidence of Jn 1:42 and Jn 21:15 (“Simon, son of John”) points in a more conventional direction, suggesting some confusion or perhaps simply variation in the tradition regarding the name of Peter’s father.
Generally, Simon Peter’s identity as a fisherman relates to the imagery of sailing and sea-creatures in the Book of Jonah. Beyond this, the meaning of Jesus’ words is ambiguous and several metaphors likely co-occur.
1:2 Nineveh A City of Biblical Imagination Jonah contains nine of the Hebrew Bible’s fourteen direct references to Nineveh. The Book of Tobit also makes reference to Nineveh, while all explicit NT references to Nineveh occur in Matthew and Luke. Still, a keyword search for the city’s name does not suffice. Metonymic uses of the terms Nineveh, Assyria, or the king of Assyria often refer to the Neo-Assyrian Empire and its military and political power. Subsequent use emphasizes the city’s foreignness and ultimately its symbolic value for the journey toward repentance.
All major corpora of the Bible reference Nineveh, indicating the city’s significance in biblical imagination.
There is a deep-seated connection between the cities of Nineveh and Babylon in the biblical imagination. Assyria plays the role of both foe and ally before being replaced by Babylon. Both cities serve as real and metaphorical instantiations of God’s judgment and redemption. The biblical authors’ emphasis on Babylon is proportionally greater, a reality stemming from the Judahite nature of the texts. Nevertheless, these same authors integrate the memory of Nineveh as an agent of God’s justice and punishment, as an analog in the broader biblical trope of the foreign city and as a means of raising general intertextual critiques of empire.
1:1 Yona Jonah Listed among Other Prophets
Jonah is mentioned in the list of prophets in →Mart. Ascen. Isa. (4.22; →OTP 2:163), which is a composite apocryphal text from around the 2nd c. A.D. that has been preserved in its entirety in its Ethiopic version (Ergata Isayeyas).
Jonah is also listed among the prophets in →4 Ezra 1:39 (cf. V; →OTP 1:526), the first two chapters of which are conventionally referred to by scholars as 5 Ezra. Note that some Protestant scholars call 4 Ezra, 2 Ezra.
In a manner similar to 4 Ezra, Jonah is listed among a few patriarchs and prophets in →Sib. Or. (2:248; →OTP 1:351), an originally Jewish document composed in ca. 30 B.C.–30 A.D. that underwent significant Christian redaction in the 1st and early 2nd c. A.D. (→, 151–165).
1:1–17 CALENDAR Feast of Jonah in the Eastern Orthodox Liturgy
Jonah is mentioned in the following places of the liturgy for the day:
1:1 Now The day of Jonah's flight
Identifying Jonah's flight with the fifth day of creation—as well as the connections with Leviathan—situates the story within a broader Chaoskampf myth, the struggle between God and the chaotic forces of water (cf. Biblical Intertextuality Jon 2:3a,5a).
1:3a flee Jonah's Recalcitrance What motivates Jonah to flee God's command? Rabbinic tradition explains that Jonah flees with righteous motivations and highly informed knowledge of the revelatory process between God and his prophets.
Early rabbinic traditions note that Jonah had several motivations for fleeing his divine call.
Some rabbis said that Jonah fled because he believed that the conversion of the Ninevites would have led to Israel's indictment, because they had rejected the prophets. According to →Pirqe R. El., Jonah had been called upon to prophesy twice before the Book of Jonah begins. The Israelites spurned Jonah after God was merciful to them. Moreover, Jonah feared that the success of Nineveh's repentance would actually be taken up by scoffers as proof that God was not going to destroy Nineveh anyway. Therefore, Jonah would be a false prophet:
Jonah was so devoted to God that he could not abide the prospect of hearing converted Ninevites mock him and, by extension, God after having been given an opportunity to repent.
Rabbi Baḥya ascribed Jonah's reluctance to humility.
According to the rabbis, Jonah fled the land of Israel because revelation can only take place there. If Jonah remained in Israel, then God could send a second revelation confirming the first. This is what happens later when the fish spits Jonah onto the beach.
1:3b found a ship God’s Providence Ensures That Jonah Can Flee
1:1–4:11 Veracity of Jonah as a Miraculous Account
→ 3705 “The majesty of the prophet Jonah is surpassing. He has but four chapters, and yet he moved therewith the whole kingdom, so that in his weakness, he was justly a figure and a sign of the Lord Christ. Indeed, it is surprising that Christ should recur to this but in four words. Moses likewise, in few words describes the creation, the history of Abraham, and other great mysteries; but he spends much time in describing the tent, the external sacrifices, the kidneys and so on; the reason is, he saw that the world greatly esteemed outward things, which they beheld with their carnal eyes, but that which was spiritual, they soon forgot. The history of the prophet Jonah is almost incredible, sounding more strange than any poet's fable; if it were not in the Bible, I should take it for a lie; for consider, how for the space of three days he was in the great belly of the whale, whereas in three hours he might have been digested and changed into the nature, flesh and blood of that monster; may not this be said, to live in the midst of death? In comparison of this miracle, the wonderful passage through the Red Sea was nothing. But what appears more strange is, that after he was delivered, he began to be angry, and to expostulate with the gracious God, touching a small matter not worth a straw. It is a great mystery. I am ashamed of my exposition upon this prophet, in that I so weakly touch the main point of this wonderful miracle.” Tischr.
1:1–11 Latin Poetic Retelling An ancient Latin poetic retelling of Jon 1 begins with a reference to the destroyed cities of Sodom and Gomorrah:
1:2 the great city Nineveh, a Symbol of the World
1:3a to flee What Was Jonah Thinking? Many patristic authors focus on the mention of Jonah's flight to Tarshish, addressing two basic questions (cf. Jewish Tradition Jon 1:3a):
Though Jerome appears to change the subject with a Christological meditation, he seeks to answer the question "why did Jonah flee?" from God's perspective. In this framework of thought, the ultimate purpose of Jonah's flight is to prefigure the Incarnation.
Nonetheless, Jerome acknowledges the limits of typological reading:
1:3a flee to Tarshish Luther's Jonah: A Warning to Us All
1:2 go to Nineveh, the great city
A mosque dedicated to Jonah sat atop a tell in Mosul, to the south of Esarhaddon’s palace, and was believed to be his burial place. The structure had been converted from a Nestorian church, and later a Turkish minaret was added. While the tell clearly contained important Ninevite ruins, the sanctity of the location prevented excavation.
1:4ff Jonah and the Sailors React to the Storm Thirteen action-packed verses (Jon 1:4–16) alternating between action and dialogue begin here. This long passage narrates an adventure on the high seas, unique in the OT, in which the ship’s crew reacts to God’s storm. The author grounds this story in the realism of seafaring, while allowing for the fabulous elements of the story to emerge. Like The Wizard of Oz, a realistic setting becomes the opportunity for an encounter with the fantastic.
The author draws readers in through allusions and imagery anchored in seafaring vocabulary (Historical and Geographical Notes Jon 1:3–16) and practices (Historical and Geographical Notes Jon 1:5c; Ancient Texts Jon 1:3b), and drawn from maritime places (Historical and Geographical Notes Jon 1:3b). The adventure is conveyed through the sailors' frantic struggle—and even the personification of the ship (Literary Devices Jon 1:4c). There are similarities to the sea-going accounts of Jesus and the apostles (Biblical Intertextuality Jon 1:4).
God responds to Jonah's flight by "hurling" a great wind like a spear (Literary Devices Jon 1:4a,5b,12b,15a), thereby initiating the next phase of the story. The depiction of God/gods using natural elements to gain a response from human beings is not in itself unique to Jonah (cf. plagues, droughts, miraculous waters; Marginal References Jon 1:4a; Christian Tradition Jon 1:4,11,15). It functions in the narrative to express God's command over the natural world.
With the mention of the pagan sailors "hurling" vessels overboard, and the echo of God's command ("Get up! Call out!") in the voice of the captain (Literary Devices Jon 1:2–3:8), the narrative creates a parallel between their actions and God's. Their calling out to their gods provides an antithetical parallel to Jonah's reluctance to heed God's call. Moreover, the captain’s exclamation to Jonah—to call on his god lest they all perish—serves as the first panel of a diptych, to be completed by the Ninevite king (Jon 3:9), which contrasts Jonah’s assuredness (Jon 4:2) with the uncertainty of others (Jon 4:11).
Instead of working to save the ship and himself, Jonah continues his descent away from God. Jonah, as in the story’s opening, does not heed God but descends—this time to the recesses of the ship to sleep. What does the reader expect? Again, the reader is not privy to Jonah’s motivation; why and when Jonah went to sleep has inspired a great deal of speculation (Christian Tradition Jon 1:5e). The Hebrew term may hint at a divinely induced sleep, which might lead to a revelation (Literary Devices Jon 1:5e; Comparison of Versions Jon 1:5e). However, God does not appear in a dream but in the storm.
1:5e snoring (G) Dis legomenon
The verb was used in Greek literature of the 5th–4th c. B.C. to denote the sound of strenuous breathing.
1:4c the ship thought
The verb ḥšb (pi‘el, "to think upon") is not used elsewhere of inanimate objects. Many translations avoid this difficulty with some periphrastic renderings such as “the ship was in danger of breaking up” (JPS). The text as found in the Hebrew may be considered as a personification or a synecdoche.
This appears to be the only example of personification in the story. The storm, the fish, the plant, and the worm all act because they are directed by God.
Regardless of whether this refers to the ship itself or to its crew, it does provide the storyteller with an assonant turn of phrase: ḥiššᵉbâ lᵉhiššābēr.
1:5d But Jonah descended Art of Telling
As in Jon 1:4 (Literary Devices Jon 1:4a), the word order of this verse emphasizes the subject, Jonah, by placing it before the verb. The context suggests that the conjunction waw contrasts Jonah with the sailors’ behavior.
Although the characteristics of the Hebrew verb render the timing of Jonah’s actions ambiguous (Grammar Jon 1:5d), a consistent external vantage point (identified in the perfective aspect of the qal form yārad) coupled with a clear articulation of the sailors’ fearful motivation (identified in the realis modality of the wayyiqtol form of wayyîr’û, v. 5a), can let us guess Jonah’s motivations, even though they are not overtly articulated.
Based on the narrative, the reader is led to consider the following questions.
If, as the narrator confidently articulates, Jonah is not on deck and not afraid, his motivations seem quite clear. In all probability, Jonah is not acting out of fear and knows what is going on.
1:5e lay down and fell fast asleep Art of Telling
G’s precise diction may be intended to render the narrative more vivid and dramatic. The repetition of the word “snoring” in G-Jon 1:6 implies that the captain found Jonah asleep because he had heard Jonah’s snoring even amidst the great storm.
Since Jonah knows that his flight from God is the storm’s ultimate cause, it is unlikely that his deep sleep is a revelatory trance wrought by God (Biblical Intertextuality Jon 1:5e). Rather, it is translated here as “fast asleep,” emphasizing the disjunct between his and the sailors’ actions.
1:6a He said NARRATION Pause in the Action, Shift to Speech Beginning with the captain’s comments to Jonah, the action, which has been non-stop since Jon 1:2, is here interrupted. Dialogue dominates for seven verses, only returning to action in Jon 1:13 when the sailors resume rowing against the storm. With this pause comes a great deal of information about Jonah, his character, and his view of God.
1:6c,14b; 3:9b; 4:10c perish + perished — Isotopy of Death: Structuring Repetition
Hope for salvation from death is expressed by:
Jonah ultimately comes to believe that he can only escape God’s call through death. In the belly of the fish, however, he realizes that such an escape is not possible (cf. Christian Tradition Jon 2:2–6). The sailors' and Ninevites’ desire for salvation is starkly juxtaposed with Jonah’s repeated wishes for death (māwet), both on the ship amidst the storm and in his booth, beyond the walls of Nineveh, for his desire that the Ninevites would receive their comeuppance brings him great anguish when God spares them destruction (Jon 4:8–9).
The shrub which perishes overnight (Jon 4:10) inspires more pity in Jonah than the potential massacre of Nineveh’s population.
1:4a hurled a great wind Ancient Warrior and Storm Deities Ancient warrior imagery is often associated with verbs of throwing and casting. Divine warrior imagery associated with storm deities is present across ancient cultures, especially in Canaan, Anatolia, Mesopotamia, and Greece. The storm deity Ba‘al (H)adad typically casts lightning bolts as weapons in visual and literary representations.
1:4 MOTIF Stormy Sailing Scenes in the New Testament Several scenes in the Gospels and in the Acts of the Apostles are reminiscent of Jonah’s experience in the storm.
The Synoptic passages wherein Jesus calms a storm (Mt 8:23–27; Mk 4:35–41; Lk 8:22–25) use the imagery and vocabulary of Jonah. When traveling to a Gentile region, a storm causes panic while the main character sleeps. The storm is calmed and the disciples are awed. Unlike the sailors in Jonah who recognize the power of Yhwh and respond to the calming of the sea with worship, Jesus’ disciples remain uncertain of Jesus’ true identity.
1:5c vessels Idols The rabbis note that these "vessels" were actually the sailors' idols.
1:5d Jonah Rabbis on Jonah See Jewish Tradition Jon 1:1.
1:6c Call out to your god! Targumic Expansion The expansion in Targum Jonathan adds a degree of urgency to the captain's words:
In addition, this expansion is likely an assimilation toward the words of the Ninevites found in Jon 3:9, thus creating a parallel between the sailors and the Ninevites:
1:4,11,15 The Role of Nature in Jonah's Attempted Escape
→ 22.105–118 “Again, what of the prophet who was fleeing to Tharsis, who was cast into the sea when the lot dictated by danger fell on him, and who was swallowed by the huge gaping maw of the whale and then vomited forth unscathed from its monstrous belly? He surely teaches us that sea and stars are moved under God’s control. By vainly seeking to flee from God the Controller of all things whom none can escape, he aroused the anger of both sky and sea. Nature, which belongs to the almighty Lord, realised that [Jonah] was revolting and she was afraid to play conspirator by transporting the guilty man safely through her demesne; she chained the runaway with winds and waves. That prophet was chosen by God to frighten sinning nations by his threatening advice. Once he had spoken of the calamitous outcome, had shattered the guilty and diverted God's anger, he washed away his sins by the shedding of tears. Nineve reformed itself and so escaped its final end.” Carm.
→ 122: In his mémrâ on the book of Jonah, the personified figure Justice (kénûtâ) informs the sailors that Jonah is the cause of the storm and assures them that if they throw him overboard, peace will be restored. Here Jacob expresses his conviction that nothing falls outside of God’s providential guidance of the world. Justice’s speech concludes with the explanation that the wind is the means by which God brings back his fleeing servant, Jonah ( Hom. 1910, 4:397.5–10).
Jerome invites readers to pay special attention to the sailors’ care in handling Jonah and to Jonah’s willingness to be thrown overboard. He suggests that the plight of the sailors in the stormy sea prefigures the state of humanity before Christ, while Jonah prefigures Christ by offering himself as a sacrifice.
→ 1:15 “The entire boat of humanity, that is, the creation of the Lord, was in peril. But then, after his passion, we see a world where there is the calm of faith, a world at peace and secure for everyone. We see a turning toward God. In this way we may understand how, after Jonah goes into the sea, the sea is alleviated of its turmoil.” Comm. Jon.
1:5c lighter The Weight of Sin
1:9b God of the heavens + "and earth" — Names of God
1:9b God of the heavens Late Biblical Hebrew ’Ĕlōhé haššāmayim is an expression common to Persian era (or later) biblical literature (e.g., 2 Chronicles, Ezra-Nehemiah, Daniel).
A segment of curses in a Neo-Assyrian treaty between Esarhaddon and Tyre (→ANET 534) refers to a ship-sinking deity.
1:8a [you] on whose account Syntax In Jon 1:7, the sailors want to discover, bᵉšellᵉmî hārā‘â hazzō’t lānû, “On whose account this evil [storm] is upon us.” After the lot falls upon Jonah and the answer is found, the appearance of a nearly identical expression ba’ăšer lᵉmî hārā‘â hazzō’t lānû in Jon 1:8 has led some modern translators to omit either phrase (Textual Criticism Jon 1:8a) or to render them similarly (i.e., as a question).
G, V, and S maintain the interrogative sense in light of the sailors' subsequent questions. Jonah gives them his tribe (the Hebrews) and patronal deity (Yhwh, God of the heavens) in Jon 1:9, but he does not respond to all of the sailors' questions. He tells nothing of his occupation or country of origin.
Moreover, the expression in v. 7 is not identical. The relative pronoun is made subtly distinct by using the Classical Hebrew form ’ăšer to replace š-. As noted above (Vocabulary Jon 1:7c), the latter (in Jon 1:7) is evidence of Aramaic influence. Perhaps the text intends to show us subtly that the sailors speak the lingua franca of the day, Aramaic, whereas Jonah speaks Hebrew. Yet such a reading likely assumes too much based on a single, small linguistic feature. Moreover, it would suggest that the sailors knew that Jonah preferred Hebrew prior to their speaking to him.
More likely, since the sailors now know through their casting of lots that it is on Jonah’s account that the storm is upon them, the subtle change in the relative marker reflects their change in perspective. No longer does the lemma appear in a context colored by doubt, but instead serves to identify a statement of fact regarding Jonah’s culpability. → (also Comm.→, 114-115) proposes that the lemma produces an implied nominal phrase: “you, on whose account.” That is, you (Jonah), on whose account we (sailors) find ourselves in this calamitous situation, must explain yourself.
1:8 RHETORIC Interrogatio: The Sailors Question Jonah Jonah has answered God’s command with rejection and the captain’s inquiry with silence. The sailors, however, barrage him with a series of questions without pausing for an answer. These could be individually rendered (as in the KJV) or paired thematically, so that they comprise just two questions: what are you doing? who are you?
Presented in two pairs of connected questions, one is able to hear the alliterative qualities of the Hebrew:
mâ…ûmē’ayin…mâ…wᵉ’é-mizzê.
Even if one considers the opening to be a nominal phrase (Literary Devices Jon 1:8a), the narrative’s focus conveys the force of the sailors’ questions. Having just learned through lot-casting that Jonah is responsible, the sailors confront him with an accusation and then interrogate him. As they lay out their direct, well-structured, alliterative series of unambiguous questions, the sailors, for the first time, evoke a direct response from Jonah. Having attempted to flee God (Jon 1:3) and man (Jon 1:6), Jonah can no longer evade his lot. These men, whose lives totter on the brink, finally compel Jonah to respond. Although he faces the sailors’ questions, Jonah has still not ended his flight.
1:8a They said to him, — Tell us, [you] on whose account this evil is upon us ENUNCIATION Ambiguity The opening phrase may be translated as another question: “Tell us, on whose account is this evil upon us?”
→, 139-140) suggests that this question connects with the preceding verse’s inquiry.
Moreover, this question may indicate that the sailors ask Jonah, not for his identity, but for the cause of the storm: “Tell us now, on which [god’s] account this evil is upon us?”
Its absence in several manuscripts of G suggests that the opening phrase might be a gloss that eventually became part of the scriptural text.
The translators of this volume opted to render the opening phrase as a nominal (subject) clause: “Tell us now, [you] on whose account this evil is upon us,” based on historical grammar and the narrative context.
1:9b I am a Hebrew. And Yhwh, God of the heavens, [him] do I fear Epistrophe The author pulls the predicate and the direct object forward, in front of the verbs for emphasis, and leaves the subjects ’ānōkî and ’ănî in the last positions.
1:9b,14b Hebrew + fear + innocent — (G) Heightened Irony G’s rendering of Jonah’s response to the sailors’ questions appears to heighten the story’s irony.
Instead of “I am a Hebrew” (‘ibrî ’ānōkî), which is found in M, Jonah’s response found in G is “I am a servant of the Lord” (doulos kuriou egô eimi).
At any rate, Jonah’s answer seems odd. After fleeing God, refusing to accept his prophetic mission, and endangering the ship and its crew, Jonah boldly calls himself a servant of the Lord. This is supremely ironic—even humorous—and may be why the translator chose to put this phrase on his lips (cf. Comparison of Versions Jon 1:9b).
Instead of the general verb for fear (phobeô), which one might expect to appear here as the translation of the Hebrew yr’, G employs the verb sebomai, which denotes the experience of reverential fear as well as the act of worshipping gods (→ 1588; e.g., Jo 4:24; 22:25; Is 29:13; 66:14).
This translation adds a measure of irony to Jonah’s response since those who truly fear and worship the Lord do not typically disobey him or flee from his presence. In contrast, the pagan sailors who are seized with a great visceral fear (ephobêthêsan…phobon megan) find Jonah’s behavior unfathomable (Jon 1:10) and demonstrate that they are primarily concerned with pleasing the God with whom they have just become acquainted, even offering him sacrifices (Jon 1:13-16).
The decision to render the adjective nāqî’ (“innocent”) with dikaion (“righteous”) may reflect a translational Tendenz to increase the irony of the story. Although a translational correspondence between the adjectives nāqî’ and dikaios is also found in Prv 1:11; 6:17; Jl 3:19, the Greek term athôᵢos (“innocent”) is used much more frequently in translating nāqî’ (over 25 times in G; cf. →, 1:30). 1906
Because the word “innocent” refers to a state of being free from guilt, while “righteous” refers also to the positive quality of being just or possessing rectitude of will, the sailors’ request that they not be charged with righteous blood in G increases, even if only slightly, their estimation of Jonah vis-à-vis M. It can thus be argued that the sailors’ characterization of Jonah’s impending demise as “righteous blood” (as opposed to “innocent blood”) intensifies the gravity of their imprecation and that this, in turn, heightens the irony of the story; although Jonah might be thought of as innocent in this story, he by no means acts with rectitude of will.
1:10b What is this you have done? Exclamation As in Jon 1:6, when the captain accuses Jonah, the sailors accuse Jonah by means of another rhetorical question. The force of the Hebrew expression (mâ zō’t) moves toward exclamation, inasmuch as it does not seek explanation (provided by the narrator’s aside) but rather expresses despair of the ship’s fate.
1:16b They offered a sacrifice to Yhwh and made vows Conventional Motif in Sea Stories The sailors make sacrifices and vows, both of which were especially common among sailors in the ancient world (cf. Jewish Tradition Jon 1:5b). Indeed, ancient sailors often offered sacrifices before embarking, in anticipation of a speedy and safe voyage, when passing significant locations, and upon arrival. We can see this practice at work in the Odyssey (e.g., → 9.720); trouble on board is even blamed on the sailors’ failure to sacrifice ( Od.→ 4.620). Moreover, one archetypically offers sacrifices at the end of flood accounts, as in the story of Noah ( Od.Gn 8:20) and the Epic of Gilgamesh (→, Tablet XI).
Likewise, making vows, as a means of bargaining, is especially natural within the context of sailing in a storm: if you keep me safe, I vow to do such and such. Consider, for example, Jacob’s vow to give a tithe in exchange for protection (Gn 28:20–22). Moreover, in some biblical accounts, vows are made in addition to sacrifices (Ps 50:14; 66:13; Is 19:21).
1:7b cast lots RELIGION Acceptable Divination Casting lots in antiquity was a form of divination, specifically, inductive divination (artificiosa divinatio).
Divination involved any number of procedures, depending on the skills and resources available. For example, haruspicy—the examination of entrails—required a sacrificial animal, a skilled butcher, and an expert diviner (the haruspex). Less involved procedures included tossing arrows (belomancy, Ez 21:21), throwing a staff (rhabdomancy, Hos 4:12), or, in this case, casting lots (probably small, marked stones). Coin tossing, drawing straws, and rock-paper-scissors are, in a way, latter-day methods of divination.
The aim of such procedures varied. Lots were cast to make such decisions as:
In general, casting lots was a way of discerning God’s will. Prv 16:33 states, “The lot is cast into the lap, the decision is the Lord’s alone.” Specific examples span the biblical canon, from the Pentateuch , wherein the casting of lots identifies the scapegoat (Lv 16:8), to the Acts of the Apostles, wherein the apostles cast lots to find a replacement for Judas (Acts 1:26). Thus, throughout Scripture, examples show that a kind of divination (esp. artificiosa divinatio) was considered acceptable.
Assuming that the storm is divine punishment and that God’s will is found in casting lots, the sailors seek to discover the guilty party. The initial casting of “lots” (gôrālôt) is plural, indicating that all on board submit to the procedure. The final “lot” (gôrāl), being singular, places fault squarely on Jonah alone.
1:13a to return to dry land ANCIENT NAVIGATION A Rash Decision? Was the decision to row to shore a wise one?
However they sailed, the sailors’ intentions to return to shore need not imply that they went mad. Boats of this period were not capable of withstanding a battering at sea like modern ships. Thus, there are a few possible explanations.
See further →.
1:9b I am a Hebrew : M | G: Interpretive Translations of Jonah’s Response
G's translation may be the result of attraction to G-2Kgs 14:25, where the phrase doulou autou Iôna huiou Amathi (“his servant, Jonah son of Amathi”) occurs. However, it is also possible that this is an intentional translational decision; by putting this phrase on Jonah’s lips after he has just run from God and endangered the ship and its crew, the translator has heightened the sense of irony in the story (cf. Literary Devices Jon 1:9b,14b).
Moreover, G’s translation may have arisen from a (mis)reading (or alternate tradition) of ‘bry as ‘bdy, since the Hebrew letters dalet and resh are easily confused (even in the Paleo-Hebrew script). If one presumes that the final yod in ‘bdy is an abbreviation for the divine name, then one would have ‘bd yh, “servant of Yhwh.”
1:11b,13b more stormy The Versions' Translation of the Auxiliary hlk The Hebrew phrase hôlēk wᵉsō‘ēr comprises an idiomatic grammatical construction wherein the verb hlk serves as an auxiliary of gradual progression (Grammar Jon 1:11b,13b). The versions have different approaches to rendering this idiomatic expression.
G does not seem to have understood the usage of hlk as an auxiliary verb since the translator glosses the verb hlk woodenly with poreuomai and then gives a loose translation of s‘r with the periphrastic phrase “raising up exceedingly rough water” (exêgeire mallon kludôna).
Because Syriac has a similar idiomatic use of the verb “to go” (’zl), S is able to translate the Hebrew with a pair of participles from the verbs ’zl and dlḥ (“to stir up,” “to agitate”): “the sea continues to grow rougher” (’āzel wametdalâ). For another example in S, see Gn 26:13. Cf. also the corresponding Aramaic construction in →Tg. Jon. Zep 3:5; →Tg. Chr. 1Chr 11:19; →b. Ta‘an. 25a.
V captures the sense of the Hebrew: quia mare ibat et intumescebat. It seems that Jerome translates much in the same way as G, i.e., he uses the verb ire to translate hlk, which might be considered a wooden translation. On the other hand, because the verb ire can mean “to flow,” it can be argued that V is closer to rendering M’s idiom than G.
1:14b innocent blood : M | G V S: Interpretive Translations?
G translates the adjective nāqî’ (“innocent”) with dikaion (“righteous”). This unexpected translation may have been intended as a narrative device, heightening the irony of the story. See Literary Devices Jon 1:9b,14b above for a further explanation.
S uses the cognate adjective zakkāy ("innocent, just") to translate the Hebrew. In later Aramaic, the concept of "righteousness" is also within the semantic range of this adjective, as is evidenced by Targumic (e.g., →Tg. Ps.-Jon. on Gn 22:1) and Midrashic (e.g., →Pesiq. Rab Kah. 16.9) usage.
As expected, V’s innocentem corresponds to the Hebrew.
1:11–16 TYPOLOGY Pattern for Jesus Calming a Storm The Synoptic passages of Jesus calming a storm (Mt 8:23–27 // Mk 4:35–41 // Lk 8:22–25) utilize the imagery and vocabulary of Jonah. Traveling to a Gentile region, a storm causes panic while the main character sleeps. The storm is calmed and the sailors are awed.
1:15a hurled Not So Fast
1:15b and the sea ceased Holy Things Settle the Storm Tossing Jonah overboard to settle the raging seas is reminiscent of an episode recorded in the Talmud wherein David stills the waters beneath the future Temple Mount by inscribing the tetragrammaton on a potsherd and tossing it into the deep. Does God’s prophet, in a mystical way, bear the name of God?
1:16c made vows (Fully) Converted Sailors
1:14c for you, O Yhwh, have done as you have willed The Sailors Recognize God's Justice
1:15a hurled him into the sea Literary Treatments
While there is nothing funny about the peril faced by the sailors who fear for their lives, many retellings for children seek to tone down this dangerous scene through the inclusion of humor or animals.
1:17a a great fish to swallow Jonah Fish Stories in the News In the 1890s several French, English, and American newspapers published reports of sailors swallowed at sea. Many of these concern one James Bartley, a whaler who worked near the Falkland Islands. The following are examples of such articles (the first few are nearly identical):
July 2, 1891–The Wheeling Daily Intelligencer, “A Modern Jonah”;
July 14, 1891–The Daily Independent, “The Modern Mr. Jonah”;
July 15, 1891–The Los Angeles Times, “A Modern Jonah”;
July 30, 1891–Wood County Reporter, “A Real Living Jonah”;
Aug. 19, 1891–The Somerset Herald, “Swallowed by a Whale”;
Aug. 22, 1891–The Yarmouth Mercury, “Rescue of a Modern Jonah”;
March 12, 1896–Journal des débats, politiques et littéraires, Thursday column;
April 12, 1896–The New York World, “A Modern Jonah Proves His Story”;
Nov. 17, 1896–The New York Times, under “Personal”;
Dec. 4, 1896–The New York Times, “A Shark Story of Great Merit” reports that two men were swallowed by a shark and then the next day were found inside the shark’s stomach when it was cut open.
In March 2019, at the time of the annual sardine migration (“Sardine Run”), off the coast of Port Elizabeth, South Africa, diver Rainer Schimpf was filming a small school of sardines being devoured by a group of sharks. He did not notice a 15-meter-long whale moving straight toward him with his mouth agape, intending to gulp a swarm of sardines drawn by a ball of bait; at the last moment, the whale tried to avoid Schimpf. A human being, however, cannot be swallowed whole by a whale of this type. Indeed, the upper jaw of this kind of whale has baleen, horny blades which filter the food. To feed, cetaceans open their mouths, and suck a large amount of water that is filtered by the baleen (“Diver Recounts Panic of Almost Being ‘Swallowed’ Alive by Massive Whale,” Today, 11 March, 2019).
Only the sperm whale, which feeds on giant squid weighing several hundred pounds, is anatomically capable of swallowing a human being. From 19th-century whale fisheries we have stories of men who were swallowed whole and then rescued; but there is very little evidence that any of these stories is true. There is, however, a reliable report from 1947, which states that a man was pulled from the carcass of a whale “badly crushed, decomposed, and extremely dead” (→, 1228). 2009
1:17–2:10 Fish in Folklore: "Island" and "Swallow" Tales Two types of fish-tale are found in folklore:
The former kind usually involves sailors who spot an island upon which they disembark and encamp. Having lit a bonfire, the sailors learn the “island” is actually a huge fish when, in reaction to the fire, it sinks to the depths drowning some or all of the travelers.
The latter kind of tale usually consists of seafarers who are swallowed by a fish and strive to free themselves by various means and with varying success.
1:17–2:1; 2:10 fish Sea Monsters in Greek Literature
1:17b–2:1 innards
Jonah is briefly mentioned in a prayer contained in →Const. ap., a 4th-c. work that collects authoritative apostolic prescriptions on moral conduct, liturgy, and the proper order in the Church (cf. →, 73–87).
The mention of Jonah “in the belly of the sea-monster” (Iôna en têᵢ koiliaᵢ tou kêtous; →Const. ap. 7.37.4) appears in one of sixteen prayers collected in the seventh treatise of the Constitutions (→Const. ap. 7.33–45). These prayers seem to be liturgical in nature (cf. →, 73–87), and in the case of prayer six, the one in which Jonah is mentioned, there is a clear focus on petitionary prayer.
Cf. similarities with the prayers of the Roman Canon after the consecration, which entreat the Father to accept the priest’s sacrifice by invoking the memory of righteous figures from the OT:
→Miss. Rom. 1570 “Upon which vouchsafe to look with a propitious and serene countenance, and to accept them, as Thou wert graciously pleased to accept the gifts of Thy just servant Abel, and the sacrifice of our patriarch Abraham, and that which Thy high priest Melchisedech offered to Thee, a holy Sacrifice, an unspotted Victim” (Supra quae propitio ac sereno vultu respicere digneris: et accepta habere, sicuti accepta habere dignatus es munera pueri tui iusti Abel, et sacrificium Patriarchae nostri Abrahae: et quod tibi obtulit summus sacerdos tuus Melchisedech, sanctum sacrificium, immaculatam hostiam).
The Canons (largely composed by John of Damascus and Cosmas of Maiuma) sung during the great feasts of the Byzantine Liturgy contain several references to Jonah's time in the whale. Together they summarize the Church's typological interpretation of the book.
1:17–2:10 Midrashic Retelling and Expansion of Jonah as a Redemption Story In →Tanḥ., great attention is given to Jonah’s sojourn in the fish. Reworked as a redemption story, here, Jonah rescues the fish from Leviathan and is, in turn, rewarded with a vision of hidden mysteries.
Midrash Tanḥuma is a late midrash (ca. 7th-9th c. A.D) on the five books of the Torah, and it is arranged as a series of sermons on the opening verses of each paragraph. It is named after the Talmudic sage Rabbi Tanhuma, who appears throughout the text, though it is also sometimes referred to as “Tanḥuma-Yelammedenu” (“teach us Tanḥuma”). Though English translations have been published (e.g., →Tanḥ. Vayikra 8. Thus, in the following citations of the material mentioning Jonah, we have relied on the Sefaria Community Translation.
1996; 1989-2003), these are incomplete and omit→Tanḥ. Vayikra 8.1 “And the Lord designated a great fish to swallow Jonah, and Jonah was in the innards of the fish three days and three nights’ (Jon 1:17), and Jonah entered its mouth, like a man that enters a large synagogue, and the two eyes of the fish were like opened windows giving light to Jonah. Rabbi Meir said: ‘A pearl was hanging in the innards of the fish, and it would give light to Jonah, like the sun lights up in its strength in the afternoon. And Jonah could see everything that was in the sea and that was in the depths, as it is stated: ‘Light is planted for the righteous, and joy for the righteous of heart’ (Ps 97:11).”
→Tanḥ. Vayikra 8.1 “The fish said to Jonah: ‘Do you not know that my time has come to be eaten into the mouth of the Leviathan?’ He said to it, ‘Take me there and I will save you, and my soul.’ It took him to the Leviathan. He said to the Leviathan, ‘Because of you have I come to see your dwelling place in the sea. And not only that, but in the future I will come down to put a rope on your neck and to bring you up for the great meal of the righteous ones.’ He showed it his seal from Avraham (ḥwtmw šl ’brhm), our father (his circumcision) [according to →Pirqe R. El. 10 where it is called “the seal of the covenant”: hbṭ lbryt]. The Leviathan saw it and fled a journey of two days from before Jonah.”
Note the apocalyptic dimension of this retelling. The underwater exploration of the world thereafter amounts to a reversed apocalyptic travel in the heavens.
Note the liturgical and ritual dimension of the story, particularly the apotropaic effect of the circumcision (construed as a sacrifice), the sign of the covenant, which frightens Leviathan; the foundation stone of the Temple; and the encounter with the sons of Korah, the prestigious guild of cantors in the Temple.
Note also its messianic and eschatological dimension: “the great meal of the righteous ones” is the messianic banquet promised to the just, where Leviathan will be eaten and its skin transformed in a vast gleaming tent, or sūkkâ. Leviathan’s flesh may not be kosher—since he is often said to be a serpent or dragon: this is a sign of the abolition of the commandments, miṣwôt, in the (messianic) world to come, ‘ôlām habbâ (cf. →b. B. Bat. 75a–b; →Tanḥ. Shemini 7; but see also →b. Ḥul. 67b which argues that Leviathan’s flesh is kosher).
Note too its protological dimension. The foundation stone of the world (’eben hašetiyyâ), uncovered in Jonah’s mystical travel, is also the cornerstone of the Temple on Mount Moriah, traditionally identified as the place where God molded Adam, where Abraham “sacrificed” Isaac, where Jacob saw the heavenly ladder, etc. (cf. →Pirqe R. El. 35). The place is thus connected with the Creation itself (Jewish Tradition Jon 1:17a).
According to the midrash, Jonah’s prayer summarizes his journey under the sea:
In this last place, the prophet sees the sons of Korah (i.e., performing their service in the Temple) who advise him to pray, for he is under the Temple of God and therefore he will be answered. Jonah orders the fish to stand still and it obeys.
Here the tradition clarifies what it is that Jonah vowed, namely, to bring Leviathan before the Lord, in anticipation of Israel’s future salvation.
→Tanḥ. Vayikra 8.1 “Immediately Jonah said to the fish, ‘Stand in the place that you are standing, as I would like to recite a prayer.’ And the fish stopped. And Jonah began to pray in front of the Holy One, blessed be He, ‘Master of the Universe, You have been called the One that brings down and raises up—behold, I have gone down, [now] raise me up; You have been called the One that brings death and that brings life—behold, my soul has reached death, [now] bring me life.’ And he was not answered until [this] came out from his mouth: ‘that which I have vowed, I will fulfill, etc.’ (Jon 2:9)—‘That which I have vowed’ to bring up the Leviathan in front of You, ‘I will fulfill’ on the day of Israel’s salvation, as it is stated, ‘But I, with loud thanksgiving, will sacrifice to You that which I have vowed.’”
→Pirqe R. El. 10 “Jonah began to pray before the Holy One, blessed be He, and he said: ‘Sovereign of all the Universe! Thou art called ‘the One who kills’ and ‘the One who makes alive,’ behold, my soul has reached unto death, now restore me to life’ [cf. Theology Jon 1:17b Bergsma]. He was not answered until this word came forth from his mouth, ‘What I have vowed I will perform’ (Jon 2:9), namely, ‘I vowed to draw up Leviathan and to prepare it before Thee, I will perform (this) on the day of the Salvation of Israel,’ as it is said, ‘But I will sacrifice unto thee with the voice of thanksgiving’ (Jon 2:9).”
→Yal. on Nach 550.2 “He said: Master of the World! Where can I go to escape Your spirit and to where can I flee from before You? ‘If I ascend to the heavens, You are there…’ (Ps 139:8). You are King over all kingdoms and Master over all rulers of the world. The high heavens are Your throne and the earth is Your footstool. Your kingdom is on high and Your dominion in the depths, the actions of all humanity are revealed before You and the secrets of all men spread out before You. You search out the ways of all people and examine the footsteps of all living things. You know the hidden things of the kidneys and the secrets of the heart You understand. All which is hidden is revealed before You, there are no secrets before the throne of your glory and nothing shielded from Your eyes. You collect every secret and tell every single thing. You are there in every place. Your eyes see evil and good. I beseech You, answer me from the belly of Sheol and save me from the depths. Let my cry come into Your ears and fulfill my request because You sit far away and hear as if near. You are called the One who lifts up and casts down, please lift me up! You are called the One who kills and gives life, I have reached the point of death—revive me! He was not answered until he said this: that which I vowed to bring up Leviathan and prepare him before them, I will fulfill on the day of Israel’s salvation. ‘But I—with a voice of thanks will I sacrifice to You’ (Jon 2:10).”
The citation of Jon 2:9 is reminiscent of the kol nidré (Liturgies Jon 2:1–9). Yet this rite seems to contrast with Jonah’s prayer, which is answered only when Jonah promises to fulfill his vow.
Others, following Rabbi Akiva’s judgment in →b. Menaḥ. 83b, say that the sailors offered ‘ôlôt (“whole-burnt offerings”), which may be accepted from Gentiles.
1:17; 2:1,10 fish He-fish or She-fish? Several commentators have attempted to account for the discrepancy present in the text’s use of both the masculine and feminine forms of the Hebrew word for “fish” in the book’s narrative. God appoints a male fish, Jonah prays within the belly of a female fish, and, finally, a male fish spits Jonah out onto the beach (cf. Grammar Jon 1:17; 2:1,10; Visual Arts Jon 1:17–2:1; 2:10).
The association between the great fish and Leviathan in G (Comparison of Versions Jon 1:17–2:1; 2:10) is also reflected in a midrash on Jonah. See Jewish Tradition Jon 1:17–2:10.
After recounting the midrash found in →Tanḥ., →Yal. continues its imaginative interpretation, devising a reason why a second, female, fish would intervene in the story:
1:17a YHWH appointed a great fish When Was the Fish Appointed? The Fish among the Protoctist Entities A Jewish tradition maintains that the “fish was specially appointed from the six days of Creation to swallow up Jonah.”
The rabbis here allude to the ancient concept of →protoctist entities—creatures that were created at the foundation of time—which were progressively elaborated in the Jewish tradition. In turn, linking the fish with a plan of salvation fore-ordained at the beginning of time provided early Christianity with a solid basis for a Christological reading of the Book of Jonah.
1:17a great fish Legal Disputes Involving the Whale
It is generally understood today that whales are mammals. This was not always the case. Before the 18th c., it was assumed that whales were fish. In 1758 Carl Linnaeus had pointed out all of their mammalian qualities, but his classification did not become common knowledge. Moreover, jurists and biologists have different priorities. Even if whales are not fish biologically, the case Maurice vs. Judd (New York State, 1818) decided that whales were fish in the eyes of New York State law (cf. →, 90–91).
The logic that led to the decision that whales are fish is as follows: in Jon 1:17, Jonah is swallowed by a “great fish” (KJV). In Mt 12:40, the KJV says that Jonah was swallowed by a “whale.” Therefore, by the authority of Scripture, a whale and a fish are interchangeable. The jury took only 15 minutes to agree.
Similar reasoning is found in → ( Moby DickLiterature Jon 1:17a; cf. History of Translations Jon 1:17–2:1; 2:10).
One of the great American cultural debates in the 20th c. concerned the teaching of evolution in public schools. One flashpoint of this debate was the so-called “Scopes Monkey Trial.” In State of Tennessee vs. John Thomas Scopes (1925), Scopes was accused of violating the law by teaching evolution. William Jennings Bryan, a politician and religious opponent of evolution—particularly social Darwinism and eugenics (cf. his 1909 lecture The Prince of Peace),—was called to testify as an expert witness about the Bible and was asked about Jonah.
→ “Q: You have given considerable study to the Bible, haven’t you, Mr. Bryan? — A: Yes, sir, I have tried to. — Q: Then you have made a general study of it? — A: Yes, I have; I have studied the Bible for about fifty years, or sometimes more than that, but, of course, I have studied it more as I have become older than when I was but a boy. — Q: You claim that everything in the Bible should be literally interpreted? — A: I believe everything in the Bible should be accepted as it is given there: some of the Bible is given illustratively. For instance: ‘Ye are the salt of the earth’ (Mt 5:13). I would not insist that man was actually salt, or that he had flesh of salt, but it is used in the sense of salt as saving God’s people. — Q: But when you read that Jonah swallowed the whale, or that the whale swallowed Jonah, excuse me please, how do you literally interpret that? — A: When I read that a big fish swallowed Jonah—it does not say whale…That is my recollection of it. A big fish, and I believe it, and I believe in a God who can make a whale and can make a man and make both what He pleases. — Q: Now, you say, the big fish swallowed Jonah, and he there remained how long, three days, and then he spewed him upon the land. You believe that the big fish was made to swallow Jonah? — A: I am not prepared to say that; the Bible merely says it was done. — Q: You don’t know whether it was the ordinary run of fish, or made for that purpose? — A: You may guess; you evolutionists guess…— Q: You are not prepared to say whether that fish was made especially to swallow a man or not? — A: The Bible doesn’t say, so I am not prepared to say. — Q: But do you believe He made them—that He made such a fish and that it was big enough to swallow Jonah? — A: Yes, sir. Let me add: One miracle is just as easy to believe as another — Q: Just as hard? — A: It is hard to believe for you, but easy for me. A miracle is a thing performed beyond what man can perform. When you get beyond what man can do, you get within the realm of miracles; and it is just as easy to believe the miracle of Jonah as any other miracle in the Bible. — Q: Perfectly easy to believe that Jonah swallowed the whale? — A: If the Bible said so; the Bible doesn’t make as extreme statements as evolutionists do…” (285). 1925
The scene was recreated for the movie Inherit the Wind (Cinema Jon 1:17a).
1:17–2:10
Many early patristic authors respond to doubts raised by non-Christians about the truth of Jonah’s experience.
→ 5.5.2 “If, however, anyone imagines it is impossible that people should survive for such a length of time, and that Elijah was not caught up in the flesh but that flesh was consumed in the fiery chariot, let them consider that Jonah, when he had been cast into the deep and swallowed down into the whale’s belly, was by the command of God again thrown out safe upon the land.” Haer.
→ 1:17, after posing a couple of representative questions doubting the event, states: “Our explanation, therefore, is that the event would rightly be taken to be truly remarkable and surpassing rhyme or reason. If God were said to be responsible, however, who would still demur? The Divinity is powerful, and easily changes the nature of living things to whatever he chooses, nothing standing in the way of his ineffable wishes; what is by nature corruptible would prove superior even to corruption if he willed it.” Comm. Jon.
→ 102.31–32, in response to a point raised by Porphyry: “…to pass over the great size of the monsters of the sea, which scientists have reported, who could not guess how many human beings could be contained in the vault of a belly enclosed by those ribs that were displayed in a public square in Carthage and were quite familiar to the people? Who could not imagine the large opening of that mouth, which was like a door to that cavern? Or was the clothing, as our friend put it, perhaps an impediment to Jonah’s being swallowed unharmed, as if he had to squeeze himself through narrow passages, when he was in fact hurled through the air and thus received in the belly of the beast before he could be injured by its teeth?…But these people really find it something incredible in the divine miracle that the heat of the belly, by which food is digested, could have been tempered so that it would preserve a man’s life. How much more incredible, then, would they find it that those three men cast into the furnace by the wicked king walked about in the middle of the fire uninjured!” Ep.
Interestingly, others focus on the whale’s spitting Jonah out onto dry land. Here the early commentators assert that the events took place, but admonish the reader not to subject them to human reason:
→ 2:10 “It would, in fact, be a mark of extreme folly, after such extraordinary things happened to him, and most of all his deliverance from the sea monster, to pry into the prophet’s egress from the sea monster, and to think that one could grasp it by human reasoning and explain how it happened in human terms.” Comm. Jon.
→ “And let no one be senselessly curious about (polupragmoneitô) how the whale vomited him forth, for when God wills, everything is possible; nor let anyone be excessively concerned as to the kind of shore that God led him out upon, for this is also [a trait] of those who are excessively curious (tôn agan perittôn). But let all who are pious be satisfied with the teaching of the Spirit” (PG 81:1733B). Interpr. Jon.
Patristic writers, led by Christ’s references to Jonah (Mt 12:39–41; 16:4; Lk 11:29–30,32), see Jonah’s three days in the fish as a prefiguration of Christ’s burial and resurrection. This is perhaps the single most commented upon feature of the book of Jonah in the Church Fathers.
→ 102.34 “Just as, then, Jonah went from the ship into the belly of the whale, so too Christ went from the tree into the tomb or into the depth of death. And just as Jonah did this for those who were endangered by the storm, so Christ did this for those who are tossed about in this world.” Ep.
→ 122 repeatedly describes Jonah’s time in the fish as a burial, which is the principle way in which Jonah prefigures Christ. This is perhaps most clearly stated in section 35, where Jacob first describes Jonah as “representing” (ṣwr) the Son ( Hom. 1910, 4:422.15; cf. ibid., 4:414.11); a few lines later he says that by being in the whale, Jonah is “being buried” (qbr) into the heart of the earth (ibid., 4:422.17). According to Jacob, Jonah, though buried, was not corruptible (dᵉlâ mētḥabal), and in this he prefigures Christ, who did not suffer corruption in death (dᵉlâ mētḥabal; ibid., 4:414.5, 11). Thus, Jacob indicates that this burial in the fish typifies Christ’s path to the tomb (tētpašaq wāt; cf. ibid., 4:422.18) and concludes that Jonah’s burial in the great fish was engraved (mētramšâ wāt) onto that of Christ (ibid., 4:423.8).
Already in the 4th c. B.C., this typological interpretation was so ubiquitous that Jerome did not feel the need to include it in his comments on the text. Yet, it continued to be commented upon through the end of the patristic era, as the writings of Maximus the Confessor show.
→ 2:1 “The Lord explains the mystery of this passage in the Gospel, and it is superfluous to say either the same thing or something else, rather than what he himself who suffered has explained.” Comm. Jon.
→ 64.27 “Jonah remained for three days in the belly of the whale, it is obvious that this mystery, as a figure, would manifest the truth in a completely new way, which nonetheless follows the figure, namely, that the Lord spent three days and nights in the heart of the earth” (cf. Quaest. Thal. 2018, 509).
A few patristic authors stress the need to be discerning in presenting Jonah as a type of Christ, since much of the prophet’s behavior does not prefigure Christ’s. Christ’s willingness to embrace his passion is typically presented as something that breaks down the typological relationship with Jonah, who, although eventually willing to die for the sailors, initially fled from God.
→ 14.7 “Though Jonah fled, not knowing what was to come, Jesus came willingly, to grant repentance for salvation…Jonah was cast into the belly of a great fish, but Christ of his own will descended to the abode of the invisible fish of death.” Cat. illum.
→ Preface “Christ even underwent death willingly; he remained in the heart of the earth three days and three nights, came to life again, later went to Galilee, and gave orders for the beginning of the preaching to the nations.” Comm. Jon.
Some patristic authors present Jonah’s prefiguration of Christ as unique and singularly important, most likely because of Christ’s reference to the sign of Jonah in Mt 12:40–41.
→ 143–152 employs hyper-realistic description to emphasize that in the whale (cetus) Jonah became intimately acquainted with death before witnessing God’s victory over it, while also explaining that he thus typified Christ: “…his sails the intestines of the fish / Inspired with breath ferine; himself, shut in; / By waters, yet untouched; in the sea’s heart, / And yet beyond its reach; ’mid wrecks of fleets / Half-eaten, and men’s carcasses dissolved / In putrid disintegrity: in life / Learning the process of his death— / To be a sign hereafter of the Lord— / A witness was he (in his very self), / Not of destruction, but of death’s repulse.” Jona
→ 65(66):3 observes that “One can find a parallel of any other miracle that the Lord performed in the prophets, that is why when the Lord was asked for a sign he gives them the sign of Jonah,” which Augustine describes as “a unique sign, one proper to himself, one that would take place in himself alone.” He then further explains that “What the whale was for Jonah, the underworld was for the Lord; and so he drew their attention to this unique sign, this sign proper to himself, this most powerful of all signs. It is a mightier deed to come to life after being dead than not to have died.” Enarr. Ps.
→ 122 is also quite creative in his illustration of how Jonah is a type of Christ; a personification of “Mystery” (rā’zâ) speaks to Jonah and invites him to cooperate with God by becoming a type (tūpsâ) of Christ: “Mystery called to him, ‘Go down and touch the depths, for your Lord will come and go down to touch the depths of Sheol and he will empty it. Go down to the deepest part and become the type of the son of the living one who goes down into the whirlpool of death like a diver’” ( Hom. 1910, 4:413.20–21). For Jacob, it is because Jonah did so that he became the prophet who most closely prefigured Jesus Christ; this leads Jacob to describe mémrâ 122 as “exalted above us” (rām hû menan) because it concerns Jonah’s Christological prefiguration (ibid., 4:423.15).
1:17b–2:1 the innards An Inspiring Place In Christian reception of the text, the ambiguity of the phrase “innards of the fish” is on full display (Vocabulary Jon 1:17b–2:1; Biblical Intertextuality Jon 1:17b–2:1).
In the writings of a few Syriac Fathers, Jonah’s time in the belly of the sea-monster is styled as a return to the womb.
1:17b Jonah was in the innards of the fish Do You Believe in Miracles?: The Age-Old Preoccupation with the Historicity of Jonah No matter what one believes about the historical existence of Jonah and the events of the book, one thing is abundantly clear from the account when it is read on its own terms: Jonah’s survival is the result of divine intervention. The miraculous nature of Jonah’s survival has provoked doubt, incredulity, defense, and debate over the centuries.
In the context of ancient polemics between Christians and pagans, the veracity of such stories as Jonah’s were heavily scrutinized. Typically, opponents of Christianity attacked both the philosophical principles and the doctrinal teachings of the early Church, including the miraculous occurrences recorded in the Bible.
Two of the earliest known treatises against Christianity, → and Doct. ver.→ (cf. Christ.Philosophy Jon 1:17b), mention the tale of Jonah as an example of Christian credulousness. In fact, Celsus argues that, given the fabulosity of Jonah’s story, Christians ought to worship him instead!
→ in Doct. ver.→ 7.53 “[A]nd Christ, who in his life was most reprehensible and in his death most miserable, you reverence as a God. How much more appropriately might you have bestowed this honour on Jonas when he was under the gourd, or on Daniel who was saved in the den of lions, or on others of whom more prodigious things than these are narrated!” Cels.
Ancient Christian responses to such challenges are quite similar to one another, and in general they are marked by four characteristics.
See, for example, → 7.57, Cels.→ 5.5.2, and the prologue of Haer.→ One should likewise keep in mind that these responses were meant for fellow Christians and were exhortative in nature. Comm. Jon.
Perhaps the lengthiest example of this mode of argumentation is found in → 102 (see the extract above: Ep.Christian Tradition Jon 1:17–2:10). Rather than rationalize Jonah’s tale by giving a naturalistic explanation, Augustine describes the precise elements of God’s intervention. The miracle of Jonah’s survival has two elements:
Moreover, Jonah’s survival is nothing compared to the incredible message of the Gospel.
In the Modern Period, the possibility of divine intervention in the story of Jonah was examined in “rational” terms. In general, the scope of this later debate accords quite closely with that of Late Antiquity.
Though less common than in previous periods, some contemporary scholars continue to aver the historicity of the Book of Jonah. They typically base their arguments upon a belief in the possibility of miracles.
1:17b three days and three nights Criticism by Porphyry
1:17–2:10 Jonah Swallowed by the Whale, Then Saved by Allah Islamic commentators point out that Jonah used to praise Allah in his youth; brought back to his childlike faith within the whale, Jonah glorifies God and is saved. Far from being a punishment, the whale brings Jonah back to his previous faith.
→Qur’an 34.142–144 “And the fish swallowed him while he was blameworthy. And had he not been one of those who glorify (Allah), he would have tarried in its belly till the day when they are raised.”
→Qur’an 21.87–88 “And remember Zun-nun when he departed in wrath: he imagined that We had no power over him! But he cried through the depths of darkness ‘There is no god but Thou! Glory to Thee ! I was indeed wrong!’ So We listened to him: and delivered him from distress: and thus do We deliver those who have faith.”
→Qur’an 68.48–50 “So wait with patience for the Command of thy Lord, and be not like the Companion of the Fish—when he cried out in agony. Had not grace from his Lord reached him, he would indeed have been cast off on the naked shore, in disgrace. Thus did his Lord choose him and make him of the company of the Righteous.”
Many exegetes, following Jewish and Christian commentators, insist that the whale symbolizes a womb from which Jonah is reborn. Ibn ‘Arabî (†1240) notes that Jonah has two births since the verse states that Jonah is released onto the beach as weak as a little child. Other Sufis likewise compare the whale’s womb to the mother’s womb (cf. Vocabulary Jon 1:17b–2:1).
Islam considers Jonah to be the perfect example of repentance. A hadith specifies that Muhammad said that if one uses Jonah’s Quranic prayer, he will be answered.
1:17–2:1; 2:10 Where Did the "Whale" Come From? The usual translation of “fish” as “whale” is in fact all but expected.
1:17a great fish Cinematic References to Jonah
Monstro, one of the antagonists in Disney’s 1940 animated film Pinocchio, calls to mind the giant fish in the Book of Jonah.
Based on the Italian children's novel The Adventures of Pinocchio by Carlo
, this amazing piece of animation is timeless. It was the second animated film in the Walt Disney Animated Classics series after Snow White (1937).Monstro is a “whale of a whale” who “swallows whole ships alive,” says Jiminy Cricket. In the film, Geppetto searches for Pinocchio while he is at Pleasure Island and is swallowed up by Monstro during his journey. While Geppetto’s survival inside the whale has obvious connections to the Book of Jonah, the whale mostly functions as a contrast to Jonah’s huge fish. In Pinocchio, the whale is part of the climax of the story rather than the beginning, as the fish is in Jonah. Whereas God controls the actions of the fish, and Jonah is the recipient of those actions, Pinocchio has real agency in this section of the film, throwing himself into the sea, searching for the whale, causing the whale to sneeze them out, and risking his life to rescue Geppetto from drowning. While the fish is provided by God and saves Jonah from death, Monstro is a malevolent creature. He prevents Geppetto from finding Pinocchio while he was in danger, and when they escape Monstro, he pursues them in an extended action sequence in which Geppetto nearly drowns. Finally, children’s adaptations of Jonah tend to be lighthearted, and it is no surprise that the Disney film was criticized for frightening children (→, 212). 1992
Yet both the film and most children’s adaptations of Jonah are moralizing tales, and the giant fish and Monstro play a key role in reinforcing moral values for children.
Jerome Lawrence and Robert E. Lee adapted the story of the "Scopes Monkey Trial" (Law Jon 1:17a) into a 1955 play, Inherit the Wind. This, in turn, received a 1960 film adaptation. The film was later remade for television in 1965, 1988, and 1999. Though ostensibly dramatizing the 1925 trial of John Scopes—who taught the theory of evolution contrary to Tennessee law—the 1955 play was actually written in response to the ongoing McCarthy investigations—similar to how Arthur Miller's 1953 play The Crucible employed the 17th-c. Salem Witch Trials to critique McCarthyism. Hence the play takes many liberties with its historical subject-matter. The names are also changed: Henry Drummond corresponds to Clarence Darrow, while Matthew Harrison Brady corresponds to William Jennings Bryan. Here is the play's recreation of Darrow's cross-examination of Bryan on the subject of Jonah.
2:9f; 4:3f Mur88 Paragraph Demarcations
Closed paragraph demarcations (pārāšôt sᵉtûmôt) appear between:
An open paragraph demarcation (pārāšâ pᵉtûḥâ) appears between:
These major textual divisions correspond to the ancient textual demarcations represented by the copy of Jonah found at Wadi Murabba‘at with the following exceptions:
Such correspondence indicates the antiquity of the M textual tradition (→DJD II, 190–191; →, 270–271).
One possible interpretation of these demarcations is that they correspond to ancient perceptions of the plot's development:
In addition, these demarcations highlight certain points within the story.
Given this pattern, the reader might expect the book to conclude with a denouement showing that Jonah has fully converted; instead, however, it ends with an unanswered question posed by none other than God!
2:6ab the roots of the mountains; the bars of the earth Vocabulary Rooted in Ancient Cosmology
The term qeṣeb is not very common in M, and its meaning here is somewhat obscure; thus the phrase qiṣbé hārîm is somewhat elusive.
Fortunately, the phrase also occurs in the Hebrew of Ben Sira, which reads (Sir 16:19):
In the context of this wisdom poem, it seems that the qṣby hrym are in a parallel relationship with the wyswdy tbl (“the foundations of the world”): thus it seems that the phrase denotes a cosmological aspect of the mountains. Hence “roots” or “extremities” are possible explanations.
The furthest extremities of the earth and mountains extend far below the surface of the earth and are sunk into some unknown substance. The fact that Job immediately goes on to describe the sea (Jb 38:8–11) implies that these pedestals are in fact sunk into a subterranean sea (→, 173–175).
It is thus possible to hypothesize that Jon 2:6 envisions the roots of the mountains as extending into a deep, primordial sea, which is why the sea-monster is able to take him down to the depths of the cosmos (Ancient Texts Jon 2:1–9; Jewish Tradition Jon 1:17–2:10).
If the above observations are taken into consideration, then it may be concluded that the phrase “bars of the earth” in Jon 2:6 is a poetic reference to the gates of underworld, which is actually beneath the sea and even the deep abyss (cf. Jb 28:14,22; Vocabulary Jon 1:5a; Biblical Intertextuality Jon 1:5e). Placed on Jonah’s lips, it amplifies his description of the peril he experienced in the belly of the great fish: it is as though he has been imprisoned in Sheol (Christian Tradition Jon 2:2–6; Christian Tradition Jon 2:3a).
2:6c from the pit Synonym of Sheol Regarding the noun šaḥat:
2:5b seaweed Intertextual Characterization of Jonah as a Prophet Throughout the Bible, there are several figures that are comparable to Jonah, such as Abraham, who bargains with God to save Sodom and Gomorrah. Two or three major prophetic types present themselves for comparison.
In the depths of the sea, sûp threatens to strangle Jonah. “Seaweed” is a natural translation for sûp, which can refer to any water plants (Vocabulary Jon 2:5b). Poetry, however, allows for deeper readings, multivalence, and allusions to be imported from outside of the text. By choosing the word sûp, the author subtly alludes to the crossing of the Sea of Reeds (Biblical Intertextuality Jon 1:9b,13a; 2:10; Biblical Intertextuality Jon 2:5b). These echoes should inspire reflection on the relationship between Jonah and the Exodus. Likewise Jonah’s dispositions and actions should be examined in light of Israel’s prophet par excellence, Moses. Like Jonah, Moses does not want to accept God’s mission, he argues with God, and he reluctantly becomes a prophet. Whereas Moses was argumentative, Jonah does not actually speak with God until the end of the story. Like the Egyptians, Jonah is brought to the bottom of the sea, but unlike them, he is spared. Finally, both stories ultimately concern God’s care for the salvation of his chosen people, achieved through the mediating work of his prophets. In the Exodus, this care is focused on the Hebrews; whereas in Jonah, God desires to call all of humanity to repentance.
Though similar, Jonah compares unfavorably with Elijah and Elisha. See Biblical Intertextuality Jon 1:1f.
2:1–9 Thanksgiving Prayer with a Twist
The prayer of thanksgiving is usually linked to the sacrifice of thanksgiving; it is sung by worshippers and believers just before the offering (Jon 2:9). See Biblical Intertextuality Jon 2:1–9.
This poem is a mosaic of Psalm-texts, constructed along the conventional pattern of thanksgiving psalms, that exhibits a five-part structure (cf. →, 472):
Contrary to the usual order of a thanksgiving prayer, Jonah acknowledges God’s salvation (Jon 2:6b) before entreating God’s aid (Jon 2:7). Jonah thanks God for deliverance (from drowning), but, according to the narrative, he still needs to be saved from the fish (cf. Suggestions for Reading Jon 2:1–9).
It seems that Jonah presumes that YHWH’s salvation has already come (Jon 2:6–7), but he is actually freed from the fish several verses later (Jon 2:10). Unlike a psalm of complaint—usually prayed amidst ongoing oppression—the prayer of thanksgiving is usually sung once the danger has passed.
The use of past-tense verbs in vv. 6–7 (already noted as problematic in G and V; cf. Comparison of Versions Jon 2:6c) could be interpreted as anticipating Jonah’s salvation from the fish. Thereby a prayer of thanksgiving could be inserted without amending verb forms.
See “Individual Thanksgiving Songs” in →, §7 (English trans. in 1998, 199–221); Erhard , “Psalms” in →, 202–205; and →, 64–66.
2:2a And he said Greek Parallel: Prayer of a Woman Cast into the Sea (Simonides' "Prayer of Danae")
2:1 innards : M | V S: womb
V and S preserve something of that multivalence:
While V is content to mark the fish’s ambiguous gender subtly, the question of the fish’s gender inspired much speculation in the Jewish tradition (Jewish Tradition Jon 1:17; 2:1,10; Visual Arts Jon 1:17–2:1; 2:10). Similarly, Syriac exegesis made much use of the multivalence of m‘ayyā (Christian Tradition Jon 1:17b–2:1).
2:2b my distress Aramaic Spatial Semantics The noun "trouble" (‘āqtâ) in some Aramaic dialects means “narrowness,” possibly closer to the Hebrew “distress” (ṣārâ), which also contains the idea of narrowness.
2:2c the belly of Sheol A Unique Metaphor in G The phrase “belly of Sheol” only appears in Jonah. In M and S, the phrases “innards of the fish” (Jon 1:17-2:1) and “belly of Sheol” (Jon 2:2) are expressed by different words for “belly” (Vocabulary Jon 1:17b–2:1). G, however, employs the same term in all occasions: koilia, meaning “womb” or “stomach.” Similarly, L uses venter in reference to both the belly of the fish and the “belly” of hell (infernus) (Jon 1:17; 2:2); however, L employs utero in Jon 2:1, presumably to mark the change in grammatical gender from male to female in M (Comparison of Versions Jon 2:1; Literary Devices Jon 2:2c).
2:6c And you raised : M | G: And let…be raised | V: And you will raise — Jonah Is Still Not Safe Whereas M abruptly passes from Jonah’s experience of death to a prolepsis of salvation already come, by artful use of the wayyiqtol, G and V convey that Jonah still awaits his salvation. The imperative anabêtô (“let it be raised”) in Jon 2:6 (G-2:7) and the optative elthoi (“may it come”) in Jon 2:7 (G-2:8) make it clear that as long as Jonah is in the belly of the monster, he is not yet safe. V also renders the same Hebrew verbs in the future tense: sublevabis (“you will raise”) in V-2:7, and ut veniat…oratio mea (“so that my prayer might come”) in V-2:8. See also Literary Genre Jon 2:1–9.
2:5b seaweed TYPOLOGY Allusion to the Crossing of the Sea of Reeds? Nearly every instance of sûp in the Hebrew Bible refers to the Red Sea or the Sea of Reeds. Both the use of sûp and the frequent use of the phrase “dry land” in Jonah draw the reader to connect Jonah’s story with the Israelites’ miraculous passage through the Sea of Reeds in the Exodus (Biblical Intertextuality Jon 1:9b,13a; 2:10).
2:5a waters enveloped me An Echo in Qumran's Hodayot (Thanksgiving Hymns)
2:1–9 From the Biblical Prayer of Jonah to Jewish and Christian Prayers
The citation of Jon 2:9 in the midrashic retellings of the Jonah story is reminiscent of kol nidré ("all vows"), the prayer of entrance of Yom Kippur.
This Aramaic declaration is recited in the synagogue before the beginning of the evening service on every Yom Kippur. Strictly speaking, it is not a prayer, although commonly spoken of as if it were. This dry legal formula and its ceremonial accompaniment have been charged with emotional undertones.
In this ceremony, all vows—except for legally ratified ones, such as contracts—taken since the previous Yom Kippur are cancelled. This prayer has sometimes elicited resentment or anger from non-Jews, who construe it as "religious" trickery that justifies the breaking of promises. From the standpoint of faith, however, this prayer serves to acknowledge both the power of the spoken word and the fallibility of human judgment. More prosaically, it discourages the infraction of the third commandment.
Some Greek and Syriac biblical manuscripts contain the Book of Odes, a collection of canticles drawn from both the OT and NT. This was most likely a liturgical collection, as these canticles are still employed in the liturgies of East and West today. Jonah's prayer forms part of this collection. In →, Odes 6:1–7 corresponds to Jon 2:2–9.
The episode is referenced in the Saphro (Morning prayer) for Wednesday in the Syriac Church:
→Shimo “God, who heard the prayer of the son of Mattai in the sea and commanded the mighty fish and in three days it cast him up; hear our prayer and be reconciled with us and respond in your mercy to our requests; and if we have angered you, there are those who will reconcile you with us, the just who died for love of you.”
→ 45.1 is perhaps the first to refer to Jonah simply with the liturgical epithet “son of Mattai.” Hymn. virg.
This weekly prayer reflects Jonah’s continued importance, especially as an example of repentance, in the tradition of Syriac Christianity.
2:2c the belly of Sheol
→y. Ta‘an. 2:9 “It is written ‘And he said: I called out from my distress to the Lord, and He answered me…’ (Jon 2:2). There was no need to mention David and Shlomo and afterwards Jonah and Eliyahu, except in order to end with ‘who has mercy on the land.’ On the seventh: They said in the name of Sumchus, ‘Blessed is He who brings low the lofty.’ This makes sense regarding Shlomo, of whom it is written, ‘I have surely built You a house to dwell in…’ (1Kgs 8:13), but why David? Because he attempted to count Israel. Rabbi Abahu said: It is written, ‘When I call, answer me, O God of my righteousness; in my distress You have relieved me…’ (Ps 4:1). David said before the Holy One, ‘Master of the World! Every distress into which I came, You opened it out for me. I entered into the distress of Bat Sheva, You brought me Shlomo. I entered into the distress of counting Israel, You brought me the Holy Temple.’”
→b. ‘Erub. 19a “She’ol, as it is written: ‘Out of the belly of the netherworld (šᵉ’ôl) I cried and You did hear my voice’ (Jon 2:2). Avadon, as it is written: ‘Shall Your steadfast love be reported in the grave or Your faithfulness in destruction (’ăbaddôn)?' (Ps 88:11). Be’er Shaḥat, as it is written: ‘For You will not abandon my soul to the netherworld; nor will You suffer Your pious one to see the pit (šāḥat)’ (Ps 16:10). And Bor Shaon and Tit HaYaven, as it is written: ‘He brought me up also out of the gruesome pit (bôr šā’ôn), out of the miry clay (ṭîṭ hayyāwēn)’ (Ps 40:2). And Tzalmavet, as it is written: ‘Such as sat in darkness and in the shadow of death (ṣalmāwet), bound in affliction and iron’ (Ps 107:10). And with regard to Eretz Taḥtit, i.e., the underworld, it is known by tradition that this is its name.”
→Tanḥ. Vayikra 8.1 “And it showed him Gehinnom, as it is written, ‘From the belly of the pit I cried out; You heard my voice’ (Jon 2:2).”
2:1–9 Interpretations of Jonah's Prayer
While Jonah’s prayer is considered a model for Christians, it is likewise considered a prefiguration of aspects of Christ’s life, passion, death, and resurrection.
→Gloss. ord. likewise employs a Christological allegory, likening portions of Jonah’s prayer with that of Jesus’ work of salvation.
2:2–6 Where Is Jonah? Several verses in Jonah’s prayer from the belly of the whale seem to imply that he has died or is dying. He cries to God from the belly of šᵉ’ôl (G: haᵢdês; V: infernus), the realm of the dead, and he appears to be drowning or to have drowned. Has he died? Where has he gone—is he damned, dead, or just poetic?
2:9b I will pay [as] recompense (S) MORALS An Act of Religion How can Jonah recompense God for his salvation? Jonah cannot literally repay God for his salvation; rather, the fulfillment of his vows serves as an analogical recompense to God.
2:1–9 Pastiche in the Form of a "Noble Canticle" In Moby Dick, before Fr. Mapple begins his sermon, the congregation sings a hymn.
2:10 Plot Device Leads to Theological Reflection A short transitional verse conveys an important development in the plot: Jonah emerges from the depths of the sea and from the belly of the fish.
The reader cannot say if God responds to Jonah’s prayer or if, more simply, it was God’s intention all along to return Jonah to shore. In the history of reception, however, this verse is deep with meaning. There is reflection on the sign of Jonah, mentioned in the NT (Christian Tradition Jon 1:17–2:10); commentators draw out Christological interpretations on the themes of death and resurrection, rebirth and baptism. Similarly, a great deal of art regarding Jonah revolves around those themes (Visual Arts Jon 2:10). Finally, verses from the first two chapters have made their way into various liturgical settings (Liturgies Jon 2:10).
The reader does not know if Jonah has changed as a result of his experience, but Jonah is alive and thus able to receive God’s commission a second time.
2:10 Example of the Lord's Saving Wonders
Here, Jonah is invoked as an exemplary recipient of God’s mercy toward Israel. Notably this passage references Jonah’s restoration to his household, which must depend on an early extra-biblical tradition about Jonah.
In his prayer for deliverance from the persecutions of Ptolemy IV Philopator in →3 Macc. 6.1–15, the priest Eleazar enumerates five mighty acts of the Lord God’s mercy:
In each of these acts, God showed mercy to his people. Eleazar thus calls upon the Lord to act again by rescuing his people from Greek persecution (cf. Sir 36:1–22). According to Eleazar’s prayer, God shows mercy in two ways: first, through destroying (apollumi / thrauô) Israel’s enemies, which is tantamount to protecting Israel; and second, through God’s miraculous protection of individuals whom he delivers from distress “unharmed” (apêmantos / asinês).
3:2b proclamation Hapax Legonomenon in M
3:1f RHETORIC Repetition and Change
Jon 3:1 is a nearly verbatim repetition of Jon 1:1.
Just as in Jonah’s first call (Jon 1:2), he is directed to get up (qûm), go (lēk), and cry out (ûqerā’).
Although the vocabulary is very similar, there are some differences:
There is no dagesh lene in “word” (debar).
Jonah’s patronym is omitted.
The call comes a “second time” (šēnît).
Greater than the difference in vocabulary is the change of behavior:
In Jon 3:3 one finds the expected response of a prophet to the word of YHWH; instead of fleeing, Jonah got up (wayyāqām) and went (wayyēlek) to Nineveh.
3:3a according to the word of YHWH MOTIF "Expected" Prophetic Response Finally, after a second calling, Jonah responds as one might anticipate a prophet to respond—affirmatively. Among prior examples of prophets making positive response to a divine mandate, two examples stand out:
The sole reference to Jonah outside of the book that bears his name shows he had already manifested willingness to respond to God as had his prophetic forbearer Elijah. Yet, Jonah's unwillingness to respond affirmatively to God's call on this occasion (Jon 1:3) is also not without significant precedent (e.g., Moses in Ex 3–4). Thus, both in his flight from and acceptance of his prophetic mandate, Jonah appears as a paradigmatic biblical prophet.
3:1–10 Use in Lectionary
3:1 second time Remarkable Proof of God's Grace
3:1–10 The Exception of Nineveh Nineveh’s conversion is an exceptional case in the Qur’an. Most of the people to whom God sends his prophets do not convert and are destroyed by God (see for instance the stories of Luth, Nawa, Salih, and Hud).
A hadith clarifies that Muhammad understood the expression “or more” to signify 20,000 people, thus harmonizing the quranic figure with the biblical text (see Jon 4:11).
3:3b a great city belonging to God Multivalent Prepositional Phrase The Hebrew expression ‘îr-gᵉdôlâ lē’lōhîm (lit. “a city-of great/large to-g/God[s]”) is ambiguous. The challenge to understand it lies in coordinating its numerous semantic and grammatical variables.
Only the word “city” (‘îr) is unambiguous. The other words are problematic.
The term “great/large” (gᵉdôlâ) can indicate physical size or it can refer to a non-physical quality, such as the esteem with which the city is held.
The preposition “to” (lᵉ) connotes various spatial, temporal, ideological, and procedural relationships, including means, designation (of a group or one among a group), attribution, possession (belonging to), distribution, and dedication.
For the word “g/God(s),” see Literary Devices Jon 3:3b,5a,8ff. It is also often suggested that ’ĕlōhîm works as a kind of superlative. Such a reading is often based on comparison to other OT passages (Ps 36:6 [M-36:7]; Ps 80:10 [M-80:11]; Sg 8:6): “an exceedingly large city” (cf. →; Comm.→, 268; andJewish Tradition Jon 3:3b). The context may support this if the phrase “a walk of three days” is understood to be an independent clarification of the expression.
When the semantics of the words and preposition combine, the ambiguity multiplies.
In light of the fact that greatness may refer to another, non-physical, attribute, the use of the term ’ĕlōhîm may simply be a means of referring to one or more attribute(s) associated with the divine (e.g., ineffability; cf. “totally unusual among humans,” →, 144). Thus, concepts like the supernatural or incomparability come to the fore. 1986
Alternatively, the “walk of three days” may be part of the entire expression: thus the phrase may signify an immeasurable scope (i.e., “a city so large that it took three days to walk through it”; cf. →, 52–53). and 1978
Since “large” tends to convey scale alone, whereas “great” has ambiguous connotations, the latter is to be preferred.
Assuming that the plural term ’ĕlōhîm refers to the definite God (Yhwh) of the prophet, then the grammar suggests that the God possesses a great city. This relation is expressed in Hebrew by circumlocution using the preposition lᵉ-; hence, “a great city belonging to God” (→, 67–68; cf. 2006Literary Devices Jon 3:3b,5a,8ff; History of Translations Jon 3:3b).
3:3b,5b great Leitwort, Meaning See Literary Devices Jon 1:2.
3:5–8 Cultural Resonances of the Fast: Mourning and Fasting in Ancient Israel
Deuteronomy recounts a thirty-day mourning period following Moses’ death (Dt 34:8).
A seven-day period of mourning is observed following Saul's and his sons’ deaths (1Sm 31:12–13).
Job and his friends observe seven days of ritual silence and contemplation (Jb 2:13).
Fasting can serve functions other than mourning:
political intrigue (1Kgs 21:8–14);
petition (Dn 9:3–5);
penitence (1Sm 7:3–14; Jl 2:12);
preparation for a journey (Ezra 8:21–23);
preparation for battle (Jgs 20:24–28).
3:3b a journey of three days : M | G: a road journey of about three days
From these observations, it is clear that the genitive phrase in G-v. 3b is a clarification that mahălak is an attribute of the city Nineveh, i.e., it is a city "of a journey of the road of about three days."
3:5–10 Christian Rituals
The repentance of the Ninevites is referenced as a positive example in the Ramsho (evening prayer) of Thursday in the Syriac Church:
The invocation of the repentance of the Ninevites every week at the Thursday Ramsho demonstrates the ongoing significance of this story for Syriac Christians, a fact which is also reflected by their continued observance of the Rogation of the Ninevites.
The Rogation of the Ninevites (ba‘ûtâ d-ninwayé), also known as the Fast of the Ninevites, is a festival observed by many Christians who trace their heritage to Syriac Christianity, including the Church of the East, the Oriental Orthodox Churches, the Chaldean Catholic Church, and the Syro-Malankara Catholic Church.
The festival is observed from Monday to Wednesday during the third week before Lent.
The observance of the festival comprises three days of fasting followed by the reception of the Eucharist (qûrbānâ).
Though there is some discrepancy about the precise date of its origin, the Rogation seems to be traceable to the early to mid-7th century, when a severe plague broke out in Nineveh and the surrounding area.
In response to the people’s suffering, the local bishop enjoined all the Christians of Nineveh to fast in imitation of the Ninevites, who had been delivered from divine wrath through their repentance and fasting.
The first Maphrian of the Church of the East, Marutha of Tikrit (†649), proclaimed an annual fast in order to commemorate both the events of the Book of Jonah and of the cessation of the plague. This gradually developed into the practice known as the Rogation of the Ninevites. See →, 497–99; 1965→, 309.
Preparatory fasting in the weeks just before Lent is generally common in Christianity, as can be seen in the Western season of Septuagesima and the Byzantine analogue, Meatfare week and Cheesefare week.
Narsai’s mémrâ on Jonah may have been used during the observance of the Rogation; it is found in Alphonse Mingana’s edition with the subheading “and it is spoken on the Rogation (bᵉbā‘ūtâ, lit. 'petition') of the Ninevites,” and is followed by another heading indicating that it is to be recited as a responsive chant (‘unnāyâ) (→ in Hom. 1905, 1:134).
Gewargis Warda Arbillaya (ca. 13th c.) composed several ‘anyūthâ (“antiphons”) for the Rogation, one of which addresses a crisis of leadership in the Church by playing on the double meaning of ba‘ûtâ: “Our Lord heed the rogation (ba‘ûtâ) of the Babylonians and Assyrians (’atūrāy) now that Church leadership is distressed and confused. Our Lord heed the request (ba‘ûtâ) of our destitute country, I glorify your Godliness and ask for your forgiveness” (→, 84).
There are also turgamé, or liturgical prose homilies, composed for use during the Rogation that are preserved in a 16th c. ms. held at the Hill Monastic Manuscript Library in Collegeville MN (CCM 00425; →). 1908
3:4b overturned The Prophecy's Dual Meaning The rabbis emphasize that the conversion of the Ninevites did not nullify Jonah’s prophecy. The root hpk can mean “overturned,” either as in “destroyed” or “transformed.”
→ 3.4.7 “It is further possible for a prophet to comprehend the truth of his prophecy yet not to perceive all of the truths which may be included in it. For example, Jonah’s prophecy. He was told Nineveh shall be ‘overturned.’ This statement actually contained two true meanings; one, the punishment due them as a result of their sins; and second, what was revealed before God that would actually occur, that they would be transformed from evil to good. However, if only the punishment had been implied by the prophecy, then God would have revealed to His prophets, and especially to Jonah, that He was later relenting, and that a new decree had supplanted the first.” Derek
Likewise, →b. Sanh. 89b cites the double-meaning of “overturn” to explain why God did not inform Jonah that the Ninevites were forgiven, in apparent contradiction to Am 3:7.
→ suggests that the word “overturned” is a reference to the destruction of Sodom ( Comm.Gn 19:25; Dt 29:23), since the sins of the two cities were similar.
3:3b great city Jonah's Account of Nineveh's Size Is True
3:4a called out Model for Preaching?
Zwingli records an episode in which Anabaptists exhorted the people of Zurich to repent, comparing them to the Ninevites.
3:4b Forty days more, and Nineveh will be overturned More to the Message Than Meets the Eye Early commentators, including Cyril of Alexandria, Theodore of Mopsuestia, and Theodoret of Cyrus, assert that Jonah’s message must have been longer and speculate about its content. The Antiochene commentators deemed it historically implausible that such a short message would have such a great effect. Cyril sees in the shortness of Jonah’s reported speech a concern for accuracy. Jerome, by contrast, does not feel the need to provide any explanation.
3:4b Forty days How Long Did the Ninevites Repent and Fast? The different readings of the Hebrew and Greek, i.e., forty days vs. three days, are reflected in the interpretations of various patristic authors, sometimes giving them a different nuance or emphasis.
The Glossa is aware of both readings and gives interpretations of both.
3:4b,10b; 4:1 overturned + relented + displeased + enraged — Was Jonah a Liar? As with the rabbinical commentators mentioned above, patristic exegetes were concerned to absolve Jonah from any charge of falsehood (cf. Jewish Tradition Jon 3:4b).
A number of commentators hold that Jonah becomes angry in Jon 4, not because he expected the city’s destruction, but because he feared that he would acquire the reputation of a false prophet (Jewish Tradition Jon 4:1).
3:5–10 The Repentance of the Ninevites in Patristic Exhortation In the writings of many Church Fathers, the repentance of the Ninevites serves as both an historical illustration of God’s mercy and an example of repentance for the faithful.
In a few places, the Fathers use the example of the Ninevites as pedagogical example of how God’s mercy is manifested and experienced:
Many patristic authors point to the fact that the Ninevites trusted in God’s mercy even though (1) they only had three days to repent; and (2) they were not fully acquainted with God.
→ 26.92-93 “The power of prayers and the healing efficacy of tears in the presence of God our Father is the lesson we must learn from Nineveh saved by its grief.” Carm.
→ 4:9 “There was no response to their repentance; rather, God met their questioning with silence. Thus [the outcome of] their repentance is left uncertain, that being doubtful of their salvation, they may repent more vehemently and know the mercy, patience and compassion of God even more. Comm. Jon.
→ 1.7 “Animals as well as human beings were included in the fast, so that all living things would abstain from evil practices. This total response won the favor of the Lord of all.” Hom. Gen.
→ 5.4 “Why does he establish the appointed time to be only a period of three days? So that you may learn even the virtue of the barbarians…and for you to marvel at the philanthropy of God, who was satisfied with three days of repentance for so many transgressions; and furthermore, so you will not sink into despair, although you have innumerable sins.” Paenit.
→ 5.6 “They do not know the issue, and yet they do not neglect repentance. They are unacquainted with the method of the lovingkindness of God, and they are changed amid uncertainty...They had not read the prophets or heard the patriarchs, or benefited by counsel, or partaken of instruction, nor had they persuaded themselves that they should altogether propitiate God by repentance. For the threat did not contain this. But they doubted and hesitated about this, and yet they repented with all carefulness. What account then shall we give, when these, who had no good hopes held out to them as to the issue, gave evidence of such a change?” Stat.
→ 7.9 “See, my beloved, how great advantage there is when someone confesses and leaves his wrongdoing. And our God does not reject the penitent; the men of Nineveh were weighed down with their sins, but they received Jonah’s preaching when he preached ruin against them, and they repented and God had mercy on them.” Dem.
→ 24.18 “When we are on the verge of something that can cause us pain, then we are likely to humble ourselves and give evidence of change for the better. That is in fact what happened in the case of the Ninevites; when they heard that ‘after three days Nineveh will be demolished,’ not only did they not lose heart but they responded to the warning and practiced such abstinence from evil and gave evidence of scrupulous confession…without being sure that they would escape punishment.” Hom. Gen.
→ 16.14 “Let us sow in tears, so that we may reap in joy. Let us show ourselves people of Nineveh, not of Sodom. Let us amend our wickedness, lest we be consumed with it. Let us listen to the preaching of Jonah, lest we be overwhelmed by fire and brimstone.” Or.
→ 39.17 “Yet I know a fifth [baptism], that of tears; but it is more laborious, received by one who each night washes his bed and his couch with tears, whose bruises also stink with wickedness, who goes in mourning with a sad face, who imitates the turnaround of Manassas and the humiliation of the Ninevites that brought them mercy, who utters the words of the tax collector in the temple and is justified instead of the arrogant Pharisee, who bends down like the Canaanite woman and seeks compassion and crumbs, the food of a dog that is very hungry.” Or.
The Israelites compare unfavorably to the Ninevites, who repented within a short amount of time. Some Fathers likewise see in Jonah a prefiguration of the Jewish people (Christian Tradition Jon 4:1ff; see also Jewish Tradition Jon 1:3a; Jewish Tradition Jon 4:11b).
→ 3:5 “While this was the situation of the Ninevites, however, Israel in its stupidity did not obey the Law, mocking the provisions of Moses and setting no store by the statements of the prophets. Why do I make this claim? They also turned killers of the Lord, not even believing Christ himself, Savior of us all. The position of the Ninevites was therefore better…In other words, the people of foreign tongue, unintelligible and of obscure accents—namely, the Ninevites—respected the oracles and without delay moved to repent, whereas contentious Israel did not respect them.” Comm. Jon.
→ 3:5 "Nineveh believed, and Israel perseveres in unbelief. The uncircumcision has believed, and the circumcision remains unfaithful." Comm. Jon.
→ 3.7 “…the sons of Nineveh observed a pure fast…they ordered a continuous fast and an urgent supplication as they sat on sackcloth and ashes. They put on sackcloth instead of their luxurious clothes; children were withheld from the breasts of their mothers; sheep and cattle from pasture…The fast was pure; the fast which the Ninevites observed was accepted, when they returned from their evil ways and from plundering which is in their hands. The pure fast which the Ninevites observed was well pleasing.” Dem.
→ 47.1–10 likens the Ninevites’ repentance, especially their fasting, to the cultivation of fruit for which God hungers. When this exchange takes place, it results in God’s and the Ninevites’ mutual joy. Hymn. virg.
→ 44 “One who does not fast is uncovered and naked and exposed to wounds. Finally, if Adam had uncovered himself with fasting, he would not have become naked. Nineveh freed itself from death by fasting.” Ep.
→ 5.4 “Like a heavenly power overseeing Nineveh’s charge, fasting snatched the city from these gates of death and returned Nineveh to life.” Paenit.
→ 3:8–9 “Now the Ninevites were very wise, devoting themselves to an abandonment of depravity by means of fasting, this being the single authentic and blameless form of repentance.” Comm. Jon.
3:4b Nineveh will be overturned Prophetic Revelation and Knowledge
3:6–10 Creation Repents and God Relents The Ninevites’ repentance moves spatially and socially upward where it is made official and universal by the king’s decree. At the king’s word, petition through fasting and mourning expands to the animals of Nineveh, who are introduced for the first time in the pericope. What is the point of including the animals? Is it an attempt at comic relief in the midst of a very serious situation? Although this scene is often highlighted in purposefully “comic” readings that present Jonah as a farce or satire of prophets (→Introduction §1.5), the humor of Jonah lies elsewhere.
Returning to the premise of our proposed thought-experiment, the element of the narrative that should surprise readers most is the rapid repentance of the Ninevites, who know what to do in response to Jonah’s declaration even though they do not receive any explicit directions from him. In this most-extreme scenario, even the king and his nobles respond positively to a word from God. Thus, this section epitomizes one of the most daring teachings of the Hebrew prophets: human repentance can move God to relent and change his mind (Literary Devices Jon 1:2 evil; Literary Devices Jon 3:8c,9a; Biblical Intertextuality Jon 3:8c,9a).
The king’s decree reminds readers of the captain’s command to Jonah to “Call out!” (Jon 1:6; Literary Devices Jon 1:2–3:8; Literary Devices Jon 3:7a; Biblical Intertextuality Jon 3:6a). Likewise, the king’s comments on the nature of this repentance and his call for Nineveh’s inhabitants to turn “from the violence that is in their hands” (Jon 3:8) echoe the sailors’ concern that their hands would bear innocent blood should they hurl Jonah into the sea (Jon 1:13–14; Literary Devices Jon 3:8d; Comparison of Versions Jon 3:8d).
In line with similar parts of the Bible, the animals of Nineveh assume a prominent role in the narrative. We have already seen that both the weather and the “great fish” play an important role in Jonah’s narrative. In Jon 3:6–10, readers of the Hebrew will quickly hear echoes of Gn 1–3 in its use of such vocabulary as bᵉhēmôt and ’ādām (Biblical Intertextuality Jon 3:5,7; 4:11). That these non-human actors are active participants in creation further develops the Bible’s theology of creation (cf. Gn 1:20–25; Dt 5:12–15; Ex 20:8–11; Is 11:6–9). Throughout the Bible, creatures praise God, join in Shabbat, and partake of the eschaton. In fact, it is likely that early readers of this text did not find the mention of animals humorous. Why should we deride or belittle their participation in this repentance? Perhaps it is only from our highly—and, compared to the whole of human history, abnormally—urbanized lifestyles and perspectives, that such a role for animals appears odd and droll (Biblical Intertextuality Jon 3:5–8).
The city’s response to Jonah’s message is nothing short of miraculous. They are moved to repentance not by certainty, but by the hope that God might relent. The Ninevites’ speedy response is often a welcome turn of events for readers who see themselves among their ranks (Christian Tradition Jon 3:5–10). At the same time, however, this typology has a Janus-like counterpart whereby Jonah typifies Israel’s recalcitrant response to Jesus and his expansion of the covenant to the Gentiles (Christian Tradition Jon 4:1ff); such an interpretation has all too frequently and wrongly been extrapolated from this portion of the tale.
Up to this point, readers have seen God’s responsiveness to human action. This is the first instance in the narrative in which God relents. God is not above changing his mind (Comparison of Versions Jon 3:9; Literary Devices Jon 3:10). This is not the God of the systematic theologian. Here, God seems to be in suspense and is genuinely gladdened when the Ninevites actually do repent.
3:9 God may turn and relent and turn away : M | G, V, S: Divergent Translations
M: yāšûb wᵉniḥam hā’ĕlōhîm wᵉšāb.
G: metanoêsei ho theos kai apostrepsei (“the god will change his mind and turn away”)—the translator renders the verbal hendiadys in M (yāšûb wᵉniḥam) with a single verb.
In contrast to G, the Naḥal Ḥever Greek fragments, when reconstructed, read epistrepsei kai paraklêthêsetai ho theos kai epistrepsei, a word-for-word translation of M (cf. → ad loc.). 1992
It seems this minus in G is best explained as a conscious decision intended both to achieve a smooth Greek translation and to avoid redundancy, since šwb occurs again in the second half of the verse. In G metanoeô always translates nḥm, with one exception: in Is 46:8 it renders the hip‘il of šwb.
S: metpᵉnē ’ᵉlāhā wᵉmarḥem ‘ᵉlayn wᵉmahpak (“God will turn back and have mercy on us and turn away”).
S has two significant differences from M: first, S moves the subject, God, between the first two verbs; and second, S contains a plus, ‘ᵉlayn, which is a prepositional phrase that explicitly identifies the object of God’s hoped-for mercy, i.e., the Ninevites who are speaking. These two differences effectively transform the verbal hendiadys in M into two separate verbal clauses.
V: convertatur et ignoscat Deus et revertatur (“God will turn back and forgive and turn away”).
As compared to G and S, the translator of L has provided the closest word-for-word translation. L uses two verbs that correspond to those in the verbal hendiadys in M (yāšûb wᵉniḥam).
3:9a Who knows?! MOTIF Changing God's Mind
Like the sailors (Jon 1:6), the king reacts by doing something to appease the deity. There is no certainty here, though. Rather, “Who knows?!” is an expression of hope or even desperation.
The responses of the sailors, the king, and David are very natural. Instead of accepting their fate as determined, they try to persuade God to relent.
There are instances in which God’s mind is unchangeable: “For this the earth shall mourn, and the heavens above be black; for I have spoken, I have purposed; I have not relented nor will I turn back” (Jer 4:28, RSV). This would seem to illustrate that God’s just punishment is unavoidable. See also Ez 24:14; Zec 8:14.
God does, however, relent from punishing Nineveh (Jon 3:10). The verb wayyinnāḥem (nip‘al, “to relent”) occurs more than thirty times, nearly all referring to God. See also Jl 2:13; Am 7:3,6.
God sometimes relents from punishing, and even regrets previous decisions. For example, Micah prophesies that “because of you Zion shall be plowed as a field; Jerusalem shall become a heap of ruins, and the mountain of the house a wooded height” (Mi 3:12, RSV). When Hezekiah changes his ways, God relents from punishing Jerusalem. This incident is explicitly referenced as an example in Jer 26:18–19.
Figures such as Abraham (Gn 18), Moses (Ex 32; 34; Nm 11; 14; 16; 21), Samuel (1Sm 7), and Ezra (Ezra 10) recognize, as Jonah did, that God is quick to forgive.
Because Nineveh is not overturned, some interpreters hold that Jonah is afraid of having given a false prophecy: this is the source of Jonah’s anger in the opening verses of Jon 4. Nonetheless, this interpretation is forgetful of the many instances in which God relents from punishing. It also fails to recognize that prophecy is not limited to true predictions of the future; the prophet’s role is to deliver God’s message regardless of the outcome (e.g., 1Kgs 22:12–15,22; 2Kgs 22:14–20; cf. Literary Devices Jon 3:10; Comparison of Versions Jon 3:9).
3:6a the king of Nineveh The King's Identity
3:8a mightily Mightily or Hard-heartedly? The Talmud and certain rabbis understand bᵉḥāzᵉqâ in a more negative sense, whereby the Ninevites try to force God's compassion.
3:9a Who knows?! Tg. Influenced by Yom Kippur Jonah’s connection to Yom Kippur led the Targum’s translators to convey a more definite statement about God’s forgiveness:
3:7a he cried out Leading by Example
3:10b God relented Nineveh Not Destroyed but Exalted
3:6d sackcloth Coarse Clothes Are Appropriate for Penitents
4:2d God Minus in the Septuagint
Jonah’s ironic encomium is thus more direct in G (“I know that you”) than in M (“I know that you are a God who”).
4:2 Jonah's Testimony to the Mercy of God
Similar lists of divine attributes appear throughout the Bible.
God lists these attributes himself in the Pentateuch (e.g., Ex 34:6–7; Nm 14:18; Dt 4:31), following them with a warning that the consequences of sin will last for generations.
Likewise they are typical in OT prayers (e.g., Neh 9:17; Ps 86:15; 103:8; Jl 2:13; Na 1:3).
As already mentioned (Literary Devices Jon 4:1ff), Jonah’s statement would be a paean in another context, as in the Psalms.
Ps 86:5 “For you, O Lord, are good and forgiving, abounding in steadfast love to all who call on thee” (RSV).
→, 280) presents a chart of more than a dozen comparable instances.
Ex 34:6–7 is most likely the foundational text for this litany of divine attributes, though this does not necessarily imply that Jonah is directly quoting Exodus, as some interpreters believe.
Jonah’s complaint likewise contrasts with Moses’ plea for mercy (Ex 32:11–14; Dt 9:25–29).
In Jl 2:12–14, as the people and animals suffer an infestation of locusts, the people are encouraged to return to God who, in mercy, might grant the restoration of both land and people.
God’s positive attribute of being slow to anger is used contrastively in Jon 4:3 and Na 1:3. Jonah recognizes and even knows from the very start that God will grant mercy to the city of Nineveh. Nahum, an earlier text, recognizes God’s slowness to anger but hedges his proclamation of God’s mercy with a stern reminder of God’s justice, which holds the guilty responsible, and will eventuate in Nineveh’s destruction (Na 2:8; 3:1,7).
The Ninevites’ current state of collective repentance, which includes wearing sackcloth, fasting, and covering their heads with earth, resembles the exilic returnees standing before Ezra (Neh 9:1). Ezra’s prayer invokes the very language of Ex 34:6–7 as he proclaims God’s mercy and forgiveness. Perhaps Jonah, like Ezra, is not interested in seeing God’s mercy extended to people beyond the covenant community (Neh 9:2).
Ezra again takes up the task of declaring God’s readiness to forgive. In his conversations with the angel Uriel (→4 Ezra 3–10), Ezra recounts God’s words of Ex 34:6–7 directly to Uriel and supplements them with Ps 103:8–9 (→4 Ezra 7.132–140). Redirecting his account of God’s character from Uriel toward God, he extols God’s merciful nature. Yet again, Ezra’s wish is for God’s mercy to be shown exclusively to those who are members of the covenant community.
Ps 86:5,15 contains a cry for God’s goodness, steadfast love, mercy, and faithfulness to come in a time of great need.
Ps 103:8–9 further draws out the core motifs of Ex 34:6–7 in praising God’s mercy towards undeserving sinners. Likewise, the psalmist’s proclamation that God removes sin “as far as the east is from the west” (Ps 103:12) evokes the memory of Jonah’s attempts to distance himself from God’s command.
Ps 78:38 extols God’s self-restraint and compassion. The refrain of God’s graciousness and mercy is repeated in Ps 111:4 and Ps 116:5. These attributes are once again sung with a praise of God’s slowness to anger in Ps 145:8.
4:3 Jonah Grieves for the Fate of "Stiff-Necked" Israel
4:1–5 A Small-Spirited Prophet: Negative Depictions of Jonah in the Fathers Particularly in the Syriac Christian tradition, there is some willingness to think about the negative aspects of Jonah’s character.
→ 43–44, 47–50 focuses on Jonah’s anger at God’s sparing the Ninevites, depicting him in a negative light. Hymn. virg.
→ 47.19,24 depicts Jonah as a sailor who wants his own ship, Nineveh, to sink: “Every sailor rescues his ship / Jonah expected to sink his ship” (str. 19); “By mercy he came up, but he forgot mercy. / What he learned at sea, he rejected on land” (str. 24). Hymn. virg.
→ 48, the second half of the reverse acrostic poem begun in 47, shows that Jonah’s disobedience and lack of mercy wrought an upheaval in the created order, which is only restored through God’s mercy. Hymn. virg.
→ 49–50, a single acrostic poem, likewise compares Jonah unfavorably to other biblical figures, especially in their dealings with God and their people (49.1–13). Whereas Joshua, Moses, and Isaac have merciful forbearance in the face of their people’s disobedience, Jonah expresses unjust anger even after the Ninevites have repented (49.14–17). Ephrem then has God speak directly to Jonah, explaining that divine anger is only intended to bring about repentance (50.13–23); but once repentance is engendered, God shows mercy. Since Jonah is slow to understand how God works with humanity, God repeats this lesson by means of the gourd plant (50.24–27). Hymn. virg.
At the same time, Ephrem counterbalances these critiques of Jonah with a positive characterization of the efficacy of Jonah’s prayer and preaching in the latter half of this hymn (50.1–10). Together, these two dimensions of Jonah’s character comprise a paradox, a literary device of which Ephrem is quite fond.
4:1ff Interpretations of Jonah’s Anger
For many patristic authors, Jonah typologically prefigures the Jewish people during the time of Christ. These readings range from being mildly critical to openly hostile to Judaism.
In the Reformation and Enlightenment (as well as before), the Book of Jonah is viewed as a universalist polemic against the particularist Jew. Jonah epitomizes the envious and jealous Jew who cannot see the greater scope of God’s concern. For many interpreters following the Reformation, the point of the book is to show to the Jews that the Gentiles excelled them in goodness.
4:1 displeased Thomas Aquinas: Jonah as an Example of the Prophecy of Commination
4:5abe the city RHETORIC Triple Epistrophe While Jonah is going about his business, this verse remains focused on the city, which is mentioned at the end of each phrase:
4:6ad,7b,9b,10b qîqāyôn BOTANICS Unknown Plant Based on the flora of the region, one can hazard some guesses as to the plant’s identity (cf. Comparison of Versions Jon 4:6ad,7b,9b,10b).
It may be some type of climbing gourd (e.g., bryonia cretica). This is supported by G, Vetus Itala, and S (cf. →, 170–171). 1986
It may be a climbing ivy, as in V and Symmachus (→ ad loc.; cf. History of Translations Jon 4:6ad,7b,9b,10b).
Finally, it could be the castor-oil plant—ricinus communis—which grows rapidly, has broad leaves, and provides excellent shade (first identified as such by R. Samuel ben Hofni; see also →). On the other hand, the plant is rather small. Comm.
4:6–9 From Allegory to Antijudaism: Interpretations of Plant and Worm
4:6ad,7b,9b,10b gourd + ivy — High Stakes Translation in the 5th c. When Jerome published his translation of the Book of Jonah, it caused something of a controversy in the Church.
Jerome’s decision to translate directly from the Hebrew, rather than from the Septuagint—which was traditional and liturgical—was considered sacrilegious by some critics.
Although Augustine did not consider Jerome’s translation sacrilegious, he thought it wrong to use a novel translation in the liturgy.
Not content to leave the matter, Augustine responded to Jerome with an articulation of his view on the authority of the Septuagint and the liturgical (public) proclamation of the Scripture.
In fact, the Western liturgical tradition largely sided with Augustine. The propers and lectionary of →Miss. Rom. 1570 are largely drawn from the Vetus Latina, not the Vulgate, indicating perhaps that they pre-date Jerome's translation and had already been liturgically established.
4:11 Mercy to the Ignorant
→ “The God of infinite compassions and goodness. ‘That great city’—Wouldest thou have me less merciful to such a goodly city, than thou art to a weed? ‘Who cannot discern?’—Here are more than six-score innocents who are infants. Much cattle—Beside men, women and children who are in Nineveh, there are many other of my creatures that are not sinful, and my tender mercies are and shall be over all my works. If thou wouldest be their butcher, yet I will be their God. Go Jonah, rest thyself content and be thankful: that goodness, which spared Nineveh, hath spared thee in this thy inexcusable forwardness. I will be to repenting Nineveh what I am to thee, a God gracious and merciful, slow to anger, and of great kindness, and I will turn from the evil which thou and they deserve.” Notes