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.

4:5a So Jonah went out Transposed Verse? See Textual Criticism Jon 3:4. 

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

• 4QXII^g (see 4Q82 f88-91i:5): following lmḥrt ("the next [day]"), it adds hywm ( "the day"; →DJD XV, 312).

3:7a the decree of the king Aramaic Influence?

• The Hebrew ṭa‘am can mean “taste” or “authority” (see Literary Devices Jon 3:7ab). 
• Its Aramaic cognate developed the sense of an “official command” or “decree.”

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 (→Zlotowitz and Scherman 1978, 125–126; →Limburg 1993, 80; →Simon 1999, 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 (→Sasson 1990, 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 →Miller 2003, 196; →Tucker 2006, 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.

• G: ôligopsuchêsen “he was discouraged,” or “he was faint”;
• V: aestuabat “he was agitated,” or “he was burnt”;
• S: we’tᵉṭarap “and he was overwhelmed,” or “he was exhausted” (Comparison of Versions Jon 2:7a).

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).

G: “commanded”

• The four occurrences of the pi‘el of mnh (“to appoint,” “to send”) in Jon 1:17; 4:6,7,8 are all translated by prostassô. 
• These are the only four places where this correspondence is found (→Hatch and Redpath 1906, 2:1220).
• Thus, G slightly shifts the language used to depict God’s providential direction of events in the Book of Jonah; whereas his direction of creation is somewhat general and behind-the-scenes in M, G conveys an implicit verbal dimension and a degree of anthropomorphism. This aspect of the translation is addressed by some of the Church Fathers who are uncomfortable with the notion that God would talk to an irrational creature (cf. Christian Tradition Jon 1:17a).
• It moreover emphasizes that God’s word directs the created world.
• As one might expect, the Vetus Latina translates G’s prostassô uniformly with the verb praecipere (“to order,” “to instruct”).

V: Variation in Language

V does not reflect the uniformity of M. Did Jerome prefer the elegance of variatio over philological consistency?

• praeparare (“to prepare”) is used in Jon 1:17 and Jon 4:6;
• parare (“to provide”) is used in Jon 4:7;
• praecipere (“to order,” “to instruct”) is used in Jon 4:8.

S: “prepared” or “commanded”

Like G, S implies that God’s direction of created works involves speech.

• S translates mnh with tyb only at Jon 1:17.
• The remaining three instances (Jon 4:6,7,8) are rendered by pqd + l- (“to command,” “to give an order to”).

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

• M reads lēk (qal imperative).
• 4QXII^g (4Q82 f78ii+82-87:11) attests lē[k]â, which is a qal imperative with a paragogic -he as a suffix (→DJD XV, 311).

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 | QXII^a: the proclamation according to which (Clarifying Variant?)

• 4QXII^a (4Q76 f22:2) contains a plus compared to M: kzwt (“according to that”; →DJD XV, 231).
• This is reflected in the text of G: kata (“according to”).

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.

A Second Time

• Jeremiah receives a second (new) word (Jer 1:13; 13:3).

• 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).

Second Chances

• 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.

3:1–5,10 Use in Lectionary

• →RML: 3^rd Sunday in Year B.
• →RCL: 3^rd Sunday after Epiphany, Year B.

3:1 second Two or Three Calls?

• Considering both Jon 3:1 and 2Kgs 14:25, some suggest that Jonah received a total of three messages: two concerning Nineveh, and one concerning territory taken by foreign conquest. 
• Others suggest that the restoration of land in 2Kgs was analogous to the earlier restoration of Nineveh under Jonah’s preaching (→b. Yebam. 98a).
• Rabbinic tradition recognizes total repentance when a sinner presented with identical circumstances chooses otherwise: thus the story demonstrates Jonah’s complete repentance in Jon 3:1 (→Rambam Hilch. Tesh. 2.1).  

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. 

• For the significance of the distinction, rabbis compared the proclamation of trouble in Lam 1:16 (a “cry against”) to Jon 1:2 and considered the more favorable connotation of the “cry to” in Ez 36:29 as the apt parallel of Jon 3:2.
• If such a distinction in the language is confirmed, it reintroduces the question of Jonah’s repentance since the circumstances of each call differ (→Zlotowitz and Scherman 1978, 119).

3:1 Now, the word Jonah, a Type of Christ’s Agony

• →Gloss. ord. "All of this is fitting for Christ according to the form of a servant: that he is ordered; that he obeys; that he does not want it; that he is compelled once again to want it; that the second time he follows his Father's will" (cf. Lk 22:42–44).

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.

• Emphasis falls on the final participle “will be overturned” (nehpāket), which recalls the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah (Gn 19:21,25,29).
• Based on the oracle’s cadence, it may be reminiscent of a lament (i.e., qînâ, →Limburg 1993, 80).

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.

• It lacks an opening formula such as “Thus says the Lord...” (cf. 1Sm 15:2; Is 10:24; Hg 2:6).
• It does not make formulaic curses using the term hôy (“woe”; Is 5:8; 28:1; 33:1; Hb 2:6,9,12,15; Am 5:18). 
• Likewise, it does not conclude with anathemas, such as “cursed is anyone who...” (Gn 9:25; Dt 27:15–26). 

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)?

• →Kimchi Comm.: lē’lōhîm is an idiom that denotes utter immensity. E.g., 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”).

• →Rashbam Comm. Pent.: likewise Nimrod is described in Gn 10:9 as a hunter lipné YHWH, meaning, “an exceedingly mighty hunter.”

• →Baḥya Kad: the phrase means that Nineveh’s greatness is due to God’s power, not Assyria’s.

• →ibn Ezra Comm.: Nineveh was previously God-fearing, but had degenerated by Jonah’s time.

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. 

• →Malbim Gé’ ḥizzāyôn says that Jonah waited one day before delivering his prophecy; but his meaning unites the two possible interpretations, since Jonah waited by walking one day's journey into the city before beginning to prophesy.
• →Baḥya Kad says that Jonah "waited in anticipation" for God to reveal exactly what his prophecy should be. This came only after Jonah had spent a day walking through the city. 

3:3b belonging to God A Great City to God

• →Calvin Prael. proph. min. Jon 3:5 "Jonah said that Nineveh was a city great to God. This form of speech is common in Scripture: for the Hebrews call that Divine, whatever it be, that is superior or excellent: so they say, the cedars of God, the mountains of God, the fields of God, when they are superior in height or in any other respect. Hence a city is called the city of God, when it is beyond others renowned" (cf. Jewish Tradition Jon 3:3b).

3:4f Jonah’s Preaching: Deception for the Purpose of Salvation?

• →Origen Hom. Jer. 19.7 "Does God for our salvation deceive and say certain things so that the sinner ceases doing what he might do if he had not heard certain of these words? Was the one who says, ‘Yet three days and Nineveh shall be destroyed,’ speaking as one who speaks truly or not? Or as one who deceives by a deceit that converts? If that kind of conversion did not happen, what was said no longer a deceit but already truth, there would have been a destruction that followed for Nineveh. It was up to those who hear."

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 3^rd person imperative, Hebrew employs jussive commands in both positive and negative (’al) forms (→GK 109). Given similar limitations in the Latin language, V employs an analogous construction—the hortatory subjunctive; Greek, however, has a 3^rd 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:

• the “news” or “rumor” of recent events in the city,
• the “word” that was proclaimed by Jonah.

3:7b human nor animal Merism?

• →Trible (1994, 185) suggests that this expression, which she translates “the-human and-the-animal,” is a merism referring to all manner of life.
• The second entity (“herd nor flock”) may define what is meant by the term “animal.” The king declares that the people and their domestic animals are bound by the decree, not all manner of life.

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?

• In M there is a series of three merisms (human-animal; herd-flock; human-animal) that strongly emphasizes the fast’s comprehensiveness.
• The nouns used in these merisms are all collective singular nouns in M, whereas in G and V they are translated with plural nouns.
• In S, however, there is an interesting stylistic alternation between plural and collective singular forms: “humans nor beasts…oxen nor sheep…people and beast.”

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

• bᵉḥāzqâ ("with force," "loudly"): M | G: ektenôs ("earnestly," "fervently")

This translation decision reflects the translator’s freedom in rendering individual terms.

3:8d violence : M | G: unrighteousness | V: iniquity (Semantic Range)

Glosses for ḥāmās (“violence”)

• 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:

Acceptance

• When David receives the word from Nathan regarding his sin with Bathsheba (2Sm 12:1–13), he immediately admits, “I have sinned against the Lord.”
• When besieged by the Assyrians—who demand that the Hebrews surrender—Hezekiah rends his clothes, covers himself with sackcloth, and goes into the House of God (2Kgs 19:1).

Rejection

• 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).

Delay

• When deciding whether to move as a coalition in war, Jehoshaphat inquires whether there were other prophets to consult because “Micaiah the son of Imlah…doth not prophesy good concerning me, but evil” (1Kgs 22:8, JPS).

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).

10f Use in Lectionary

• →RCL: Proper 20, Year A.

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.

Actions

Jonah's actions have taught the reader how often the hero has refused to reply to God.

Words

In his story, Jonah makes two statements about God:

• In Jon 1:9, he made a statement about his ethnic identification, closely connecting God and the Hebrews.
• In Jon 4:2, he utters words that, if spoken in a different context, would amount to a beautiful hymn extolling God's most wonderful qualities. The abundance of similar statements in the context of praise makes this not simply a matter of conjecture (Biblical Intertextuality Jon 4:2).

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

• Jonah twice clearly expresses a wish to die (Jon 4:3,8), and this contributes to the negative characterization of the prophet as exceedingly stubborn.
• In Jon 4:9, readers encounter a third, indirectly-stated wish for death that nonetheless amounts to a reinforcement of this wish.
• Additionally, one could argue that Jonah had earlier assumed that being thrown into the sea would kill him (cf. Jon 1:12), in which case this could be counted as another implicit wish for death.

See also Biblical Intertextuality Jon 4:3,8f.

4:2b my thought : M | G: my words

• G reads hoi logoi mou (“my words”);
• whereas M has dᵉbārî (“my word/thought”).

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 (→Zlotowitz and Scherman 1978, 132–133).

• →Rashi Comm. has Jonah conclude, “Now the nations will claim that I am a false prophet.”

• →Kimchi 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.

Some rabbis teach that Jonah understood that whereas Nineveh would repent, Israel would not.

• →Kimchi Comm.: Jonah grieved “because of Israel who did not repent.”

• →Abarbanel Comm.; →Malbim Gé’ ḥizzāyôn: 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.

See also Christian Tradition Jon 3:4b,10b; 4:1 .

4:2f Confessional Polemic: The Moral Contents of Jonah's Prayer

• →Calvin Prael. proph. min. Jon 4:2 "Whenever the Papists read that any work has pleased God, they imagine that all was perfection and cleanness: but there is no work which is not infected with some pollution, unless it be purified by a free pardon. This I say is evident to us in this prayer, which was not so rejected by God, as though it retained not the character of prayer: and yet it is certain that Jonah was by no means rightly influenced when he prayed so clamorously, finding fault, as it were, with God, and retaining still some portion of his own obstinacy; for he boasted of his flight. But this flight, as we have stated, was a proof of manifest rebellion, since, by shaking off the yoke, he despised the call of God. We must therefore acknowledge that there was some piety in this prayer of Jonah, as well as many faults. It was an act of piety that he addressed his complaints to God."

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.”

• →Qur’an 37.145–146 “But We cast him forth on the naked shore in a state of sickness, and we caused to grow, over him, a spreading plant of the gourd kind.”

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?

• In M, V, and S the plant provides Jonah “deliverance/relief” (Heb. hip‘il of nṣl, Lat. protegere, Syr. ʾrwḥ).
• In G, however, the gourd “shades” Jonah (skiazô). This produces a redundant reading: “it [i.e., the gourd] rose up above Jonah’s head to be a shade (einai skian) over his head to shade (skiazô) him from his calamities (lit. ‘evils’).”
• 4Q82 f88-91i:2 (4QXII^g) attests the consonants lhṣl. This could be analyzed as a lamed plus the hip‘il infinitive construct of the root ṣll (III), meaning “to give shade” (cf. Neh 13:19; Ez 31:3). Such an alternate reading might be the basis of G’s translation (cf. →DJD XV, 312). 

4:7a when dawn arose Hebrew Variant: "as the morning rose"

• M: b‘lwt reads the preposition bᵉ: “in the raising of dawn”;
• 4QXII^g (see 4Q82 f88-91i:5) reads “as the morning rose” (k‘lwt).
• →Tg. Jon. reads bᵉmîsaq, which supports M. 

The variant in 4QXII^g 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 (→Wyatt 1996, 354–356)—can signify:

• space, “the east”;
• time, “the past,” “before,” or “antiquity.”

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:

• It emphasizes Jonah's strong positive response to the presence of the plant.
• It contrasts Jonah's current positive response (delight) with his earlier negative response (Grammar Jon 4:1).

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

• does not reply to God in response to his commission (Jon 1:3; 2:3); 
• does not answer the captain (Jon 1:6); 
• replies to the sailors' questions (Jon 1:9,12); 
• speaks to God unprompted (Jon 2:1,4:2); 
• replies to God’s question (Jon 4:9); 
• fails to answer God’s direct questions (Jon 4:4,11). 

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? 

• G: Jonah sits apenanti (“opposite,” “in front of”) the city;
• S: Jonah sits bᵉmadnḥāy (“at the east”) of the city;
• V seems to combine both readings: Jonah sits contra orientem (“against the 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: An Elegant Solution

• 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 →Plutarch Luc. 42.5; →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: A Wooden Translation

• 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.

S: Inversion of the Syntax

• 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.

• Hosea marries a prostitute, has children with her, and gives them strange names (Hos 1–3).
• Jeremiah breaks clay vessels (Jer 19) and wears wooden yokes (Jer 27). 

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).

East Land(s)

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).

East Wind

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).

People of the East

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).

Exegetical Meaning of “East” in Jonah

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. 

• Each protagonist receives beneficence from the hand of God. Jonah has a shade-giving plant (Jon 4:6). Job has prosperous lands, many flocks, and a large family (Jb 1:1–3). 
• Then, with God’s command or consent, each one's fortune is taken away (Jon 4:7 // Jb 1:12–19). 
• Likewise, their bodies are struck (Jon 4:8a // Jb 2:7–8). 
• Both attacks involve a devastating rû^aḥ (“wind”; Jon 4:8a // Jb 1:19). 
• Both protagonists are led to question the value of their existence (Jon 4:8b // Jb 3:3–26). 

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:

• a creature that devours plants (here and Dt 28:39);

• a creature that thrives on putrefaction (Ex 16:20; Is 14:11; 66:24);

• a weak person, metaphorically (Jb 25:6; Ps 22:6).

4:8c he wished for his life to end Jonah's Agony The heat is so powerful that Jonah experiences excruciating pain.

• →Altschuler and Altschuler_Metzudah: Jonah could not endure the combination of the wind and the heat.
• →ibn Ezra Comm.: Jonah had become extra sensitive to the heat due to his time in the fish's belly.
• →Kimchi Comm.: Jonah nearly dies from the heat.

Jonah asks for death as a result of such agony. 

• →Alshich Jonah "A righteous man finds death difficult since he would thereby forfeit his opportunity to perform mitzvos; and therefore he prays for long life. But Jonah, feeling himself the irremediable sinner, seeks death as preferable to life" (cited in →Zlotowitz and Scherman 1978, 139).

4:5a out of the city Jonah Awaits Nineveh's Punishment

• →Cyril of Alexandria Comm. Jon. "Jonah understood that God had pity on Nineveh. Still he does not give up all hope, and thinks that a respite of the evil has been granted them on their willingness to repent, but that some effect of his displeasure would come, since the pains of their repentance had not equaled their offenses. So thinking in himself apparently, he departs from the city and waits to see what will become of them. He expected, apparently, that it would either fall by an earthquake or be burned with fire, like Sodom."

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.

• →Marzollo 2004 “As a child, I had never heard about the worm. This puzzles me because the worm is important and interesting.”

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

Back to Eden or a New Endymion?

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.

Patiently Waiting for the End?

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

• →Kimchi Comm. "You pitied it only because of your discomfort…nevertheless you had nothing to do with it..and one usually grieves the loss of something he toiled over."
• →Rashi Comm. "You grieved over its loss not because it was your handiwork, but only because you recognized its usefulness to you in providing shade."

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. →Zlotowitz and Scherman 1978, 140–141.

• →ibn Ezra Comm. "The analogy is not exact for God cannot be said to toil over his handiwork. Nevertheless, it is couched in human terms, so that the message would be clearly understood: You took pity on something you did nothing to create, how shall I, by contrast, refrain from taking pity on My handiwork?"
• →Altschuler and Altschuler_Metzudah "The Ninevites are My handiwork; how could I not take pity on such a large city?"

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.

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 Anger

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 (→Sherwood 2001, 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.

Jonah’s Ironic Encomium

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. 

God’s Ironic Question to His Prophet 

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.

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.

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 (→Ziegler 1984 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 an exotic term, employed to reinforce the impression of a foreign, exotic setting. Perhaps it was drawn from a foreign language; the exact meaning of qîqāyôn may even have been unknown to the author.

• 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). 

4:7b,8b struck RHETORIC Repetition Verbal repetition, common in Jonah, appears here:

• the worm strikes (nkh) the qîqāyôn (Jon 4:7); 
• the sun subsequently strikes (nkh) Jonah’s head (Jon 4:8). 

This repetition emphasizes the larger sequence of divine appointment (Jon 4:6–8). 

4:10b pity on the qîqāyôn God's Lesson for Jonah

• →Calvin Prael. proph. min. "Here God explains the design he had in suddenly raising up the gourd, and then in causing it to perish or wither through the gnawing of a worm; it was to teach Jonah that misconduct towards the Ninevites was very inhuman. Though we find that the holy Prophet had become a prey to dreadful feelings, yet God, by this exhibition, does in a manner remind him of his folly; for, under the representation of a gourd, he shows how unkindly he desired the destruction of so populous a city as Nineveh."

4:6ad,7b,9b,10b qîqāyôn The Plant in Film

• In Jonah: A VeggieTales Movie, not only is the plant and its destruction featured at the end, Jonah's companion throughout is the worm which will consume it (Cinema Jon 1:1–4:11).

3:5–8 The Fast: Animals Participating in Religious Activity?

A Parallel Decree for Fasting

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. 

Creatures Praising God

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

• If Nineveh turns/repents (šwb) from their violence (v. 8),
• God may turn/relent (šwb) from punishing them (v. 9).

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.

LANGUAGE Hebrew Idiom

• 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.

CHARACTER Other Desperate Biblical Heroes

• Moses, when struggling to feed the Israelites, calls upon God to kill him if his lot does not improve (Nm 11:15).

• 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.

God

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

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?

3:8abc let sackcloths cover + call out + turn — The Septuagint Translator’s Construal of Verbs

The Differences between M and G

• 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.

Significance

• 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.

• Many of the Church Fathers note this response and hold up the example of the Ninevites as examples of repentance (Christian Tradition Jon 3:5–10). 

3:5,7; 4:11 LANGUAGE Ancient Pairing: Humans and Animals Two terms are used to designate the Ninevites:

• ’îš (’anšé nînewê, Jon 3:5),
• hā’ādām, when animals are mentioned (Jon 3:7; 4:11).

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

• →Gloss. ord. "Allegorically, Christ is rightly said to have risen after hell, and to preach when he sends the apostles to baptize people in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit; this is the journey of three days. But this sacrament of human salvation is a journey of one day—that is, it is completed by the confession of the one God. With Jonah—that is, Christ—preaching among the apostles, [it is] Christ who said, 'I am with you even to the end of the age'" (Mt 28:20; cf. Jewish Tradition Jon 1:1: Jonah's passion, like Christ's, begins on a Thursday and ends three days later).

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

Emphasis on the Same Message in G

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. →Ziegler 1984 ad loc.).

Relating G to M

• 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?

• M: miggᵉdôlām and ûgᵉdōlâw (lit. “their great ones” and “his great ones”)—the repetition of the term implies that there is some overlap in the two groups.
• G: megalou autôn and tôn megistanôn autou (lit. “their great ones” and “his grandees”)—there is not a direct repetition of the term (i.e., tôn megalôn autou), though the similarity of the terms used by the translator invites a similar understanding.
• V: maiore and principum eius (“greater” and “his princes”)—the difference in terms potentially introduces a distinction between the two groups; though the implied reader might make a conceptual link between the groups, there is no textual link inviting the connection as in M and S (and G to a lesser extent).
• S: rôrbᵉnayhôn and rôrbᵉnaw (“their great ones” and “his great ones”)—the identical terms employed by S strengthens the invitation already present in M to associate the great ones from v. 5 with the nobles of v. 7; in fact, it is possible to read them as coterminous groups of people in S.

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.

1:1; 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,

• “Now the word of the LORD came unto Jonah” (KJV);
• “Now the word of the Lord came to Jonas” (DRV);
• “Now the word of the Lord came to Jonas” (Brenton).

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).

1:2–3:8 Leitwort "Call Out": Jonah as a Story about "Calling" The verb qr’, “to call, to cry out,” occurs eight times within the story.

Main Theme?

"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.

Structural Repetition

Its occurrences reveal the basic structure of the narrative.

• The first divine mandate (Jon 1:2) is that Jonah “calls out against Nineveh.” Since he himself is disobedient to this divine call, the order is echoed by the sailors (Jon 1:6): “Get up! Call out!” When Jonah still does not follow this order of calling, it is the sailors who “called out” to YHWH (Jon 1:14).
• It is only in the innards of the fish that Jonah follows their example and calls out to YHWH (Jon 2:2 [V-2:3]).
• After that turning point, God repeats his first order (Jon 3:2), and Jonah accomplishes his mission (Jon 3:4). As a result, the people of Nineveh “called for a fast” (Jon 3:5) and their own king orders them to “call out” to YHWH (Jon 3:8).

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). 

3:3a according to the word of YHWH : M | G: as the Lord said (Further Emphasis)

• kidᵉbar-YHWH: M | G: kathôs elalêsen kurios.

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.

• This narrows the scope of the story to a moralizing tale about obedience that includes a fish adventure (see →Lorenz 1946; →Greene 2007; →Glaser 2015).
• Sometimes chapters 3 and 4 can be included, nearly reduced to a postscript: “Jonah went to Ninevah [sic] as the Lord commanded. And the people of Nineveh gave up their evil ways and believed in the Lord” (→Hutton 1983).
• →Davidson 1984 distills three lessons from the story: obedience, God is everywhere, and God forgives when we are sorry. The combination of Jonah disobeying and being found by God may make the moral lesson of obedience for children even more appealing to creators of children’s adaptations of Jonah.

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.

Immediate Response

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.

Minimal Effort

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

Enormity of the City

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 :

• accentuate the enormity of the task before Jonah;
• highlight the drama of the Ninevites’ response;
• underscore the extent of God’s authority over cities, even such a great one.

The Ninevites’ Relationship to God

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.

• Do Ninevites even know this God (Yhwh) who would seem to claim possession of their city?
• Although foreign and committed to other deities, Yhwh has authority over it and thus calls it to repentance. This is, of course, contrary to the general notion in Near Eastern and Mediterranean polytheism that each city and tribe has its own particular god.
• Arguably lē’lōhîm could be rendered “to the gods,” emphasizing the city’s polytheistic devotion.

Imagined Geography

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 7^th 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 is silent about where Jonah emerged from the fish, Jonah’s journey to Nineveh, and urbanistic details of the city itself, such as its quarters or gates.
• The historical city was large, but not as large as in the narrative (120,000 inhabitants or a three-day walk to cross).

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 :

• the gods in general;
• Nineveh’s patronal deity—Ishtar;
• the God of Jonah, Yhwh.

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)

• ‘îr-gᵉdôlâ lē’lōhîm: M | G: polis megalê tôᵢ theôᵢ.

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 

• ’arbā‘îm: M | G: treis hêmerai.

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.

G Is Original: M Bolsters Jonah’s résumé

• 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.

M Is Original: G Is a Change Due to Attraction

• The phrase “three days” (š^ᵉlōšâ/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

Periods of Judgment

• 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).

Stages of Life

• Isaac is forty years old when he marries Rebekah (Gn 25:20).

• David rules over Israel for forty years (1Kgs 2:11; 11:42).

• 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.

The Exodus Account

• 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?

• →ibn Ezra Comm.: the sailors also went to Nineveh, corroborating Jonah's account.

• →Abarbanel Comm.: 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.

• →Malbim Gé’ ḥizzāyôn: The Ninevites realized that God would not have sent such a prophet if he had not intended them to use the 40-day grace period to mend their ways.

See →Zlotowitz and Scherman 1978, 123.

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.

Literal

• YLT: “A great city before God”;
• NASB note: “lit.: a great city to God."

Idiomatic – Size

• DRB: “a large city”;
• NIV: “a very large city”;
• NASB 2020: “an exceedingly large city”;
• NET: “an enormous city”;
• NLT: “A city so large...”

Idiomatic – Status

• (N)KJV, ESV, ASV, (N)RSV, NASB 1995: “an exceedingly great city”;
• NJB: “a great city beyond compare”;
• NABRE: “an awesomely great city."

3:8b to God Or: "Upon God" (Hebrew Variant)

• M attests the preposition ’el in the phrase "to God."
• MurXII (Mur88 11:18) contains the variant ‘al, "upon God" (→DJD II, 191).
• G's pros supports M. 

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,

• “the word” is to be understood as the word of Yhwh recorded in Jon 3:4 and not as the report concerning the events in the repenting city described in the preceding verse, Jon 3:5;

• the king of Nineveh is depicted as a subject of Yhwh.

3:7ab by the decree of the king + shall taste — Wordplay

• The Hebrew term ṭa‘am can mean “taste,” “authority,” or “judgement.”

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 (→Sasson 1990, 256).

3:10

A Well-Structured Conclusion

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.

Vocabulary

• ABBA chiasm based on keywords (āśâ/rā‘ā/rā‘ā/‘āśâ; →Trible 1994, 183; →Jenson 2008, 80). 

Grammar

• clause - object clause | clause - object clause - clause;
• clause - causal clause | clause - object clause - clause (→Sasson 1990, 263-264).

NARRATION Characterization of God: Not above Changing His Mind

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:

• Tiglath-pileser III (745–727 B.C.) dominated Israel through exacting tribute and installing Hoshea as king (2Kgs 15:19–16:12).
• Shalmaneser V (727–722 B.C.) began the attack on the Israelite capital of Samaria (2Kgs 17–18).
• Sargon II (722–705 B.C.) completed the conquest of Samaria (Is 20).
• Sennacherib (705–681 B.C.) besieged Jerusalem, making Hezekiah a vassal (2Kgs 18:13–19:36).
• Esarhaddon (681–669 B.C.) replaced his father, who was assassinated by other sons (2Kgs 19:37).

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 31^st 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:

• “I received the tribute of Iaua (Jehu) son of (the people of the land of) Omri: silver, gold, a golden bowl, a golden vase with pointed bottom, golden tumblers, golden buckets, tin, a staff for a king [and] spears” (→Ackerman 2010, 127).

3:8c,9a turn + God may turn — LANGUAGE Theological Play on Words?

LANGUAGE Prophecy

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).

PRAGMATICS Specular Relationship between God and Humanity

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.

Exodus 3

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, I am who I am,” 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.”

Isaiah 7

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).

• Echoes of this passage resonate in 2Chr 20:20 (ha’ămînû…tē’āmēnû).

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

• Abarbanel states that the Ninevites repented of their deeds, not their pagan beliefs. Nevertheless, God forgave them, because their wicked deeds were the cause of God's judgement (→Zlotowitz and Scherman 1978, 129–130).

3:6ff Sola Scriptura: The King Does Not Prescribe Any Penance beyond That Described in the Bible

• →Calvin Prael. proph. min. "Now, if anyone objects and says that nothing ought to be done in the worship of God beyond what his word warrants, the answer is—that the king of Nineveh had not appointed any kind of expiation, neither did he intend that they should thus worship God, but regarded only the end which I have mentioned; and that end fully harmonizes with the word of God and his command."

3:6a the king The Lofty Are the Last to Believe

• →Gloss. ord. "After the weak and ignoble people had been chosen, at last the word of Christ arrived to the philosophers and powerful ones who seemed to rule the world. First Peter the fisherman enters, then Cyprian [of Carthage], formerly a champion of idolatry, finally believes, and having become a champion of truth after he heard the message of Jonah, he summons the Carthaginians to repentance and publicly preaches Christ. Behold the king of Nineveh rises from his throne and exchanges purple-dyed cloth for sackcloth, lotions for mud, purity for filth. It is a difficult thing for the powerful and eloquent of the world to convert to the humility of Christ."

3:10a God saw their deeds Justification by Faith

God's Mercy Is His Justice

• →Gloss. ord. "At that time God threatened the Ninevites and every day he threatens the people of the world so that they might do penance. If they have converted, God also converts his judgment and is changed by the conversion of the people. He did not hear the words that Israel often used to send up—‘All that the Lord has spoken, we will do’ (Ex 24:7)—but he, who desires the life more than the death of a sinner, saw their works. Seeing their changed works, he gladly changes his mind. Rather let us say that he persisted in his purpose, wishing from the beginning to show mercy. For he did not want to punish, nor was he who threatened going to punish."

Confessional Polemic: Salvation by Faith Alone

• →Calvin Prael. proph. min. "We must first see what works he means, that no one may snatch at a single word, as hypocrites are wont to do; and this, as we have said, is very commonly the case under the Papacy. God had respect to their works—what works? not sackcloth, not ashes, not fasting; for Jonah does not now mention these; but he had respect to their works—because they turned from their evil way. We hence see that God was not pacified by outward rites only, by the external profession of repentance, but that he rather looked on the true and important change which had taken place in the Ninevites, for they had become renewed. These then were their works, even the fruits of repentance. And such a change of life could not have taken place, had not the Ninevites been really moved by a sense of God’s wrath. The fear of God then had preceded; and this fear could not have been without faith. We hence see that he chiefly speaks here not of external works, but of the renovation of men."
• →Luther Lect. Jon. "Here, yes, here the works are lauded. What are we to say against that? Here the work-righteous have carried the day. Far from it! Scrutinize the text! It reads: ‘God saw what they did,’ that is God was pleased with what they did. And what did they do? The prophet mentions it himself: ‘They turned from their evil way.’ If you perform and teach that type of work, we are not only willing to listen to your exalting it, but we will join you in your praise of it. ‘To turn from one’s evil way’ is not a trivial work; it does not involve fasting and wearing sackcloth, but believing in God with all one’s heart and loving the neighbor as one’s self; that is, it demands piety and righteousness in one’s whole being, both inwardly and outwardly, in body and soul. God wants the entire person. He has an aversion to shilly-shallying and hypocritical people."  

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.

Translation of ḥrh in G

In General

• 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).

In the Book of the Twelve

• Four of seven instances of ḥrh are found in Jon 4:1,4,9.

• 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 Jonah

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 W^c and the Syro-Hexaplar, the latter of which →Ziegler (1984, 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.

Translation of ḥrh in S

Jonah

• 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.

Exegetical Impact: The Softening of Jonah’s Response

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. →Jerome Comm. Jon. 4:1).

• 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

• →RML: Wednesday, Week 27, Year I.

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).

• “Violent” wind: ḥărîšît appears in the Hodayot in the context of a wind that threatens a ship (cf. →1QH^a 15:7–8 [7:4–5 in Sukenik’s numbering]).
• “Deafening” wind (cf. the root ḥrš [II] “to be silent,” “to be speechless”). Were one to draw on later developments in Hebrew, it would also be possible to analyze the word as a pi‘el participle of ḥrš “deafening.” The Targums translate it as “silent,” “gentle” (štyqt’; cf. Jewish Tradition Jon 4:8a). 

4:5f NARRATION Modest Realism Why does Jonah need a plant when he already has a booth?

• Assuming a modicum of realism in the narrative, one should recall that Jonah is a “stranger in a strange land.” His booth is likely makeshift and perhaps less effective than desired. A plant presumably provides better protection from the heat than a booth does, since it gives both shade and air-flow, hence adding to Jonah’s happiness.
• A more theological reading is possible. Whereas Jonah builds the booth himself, God sends the plant. This is an image of divine-human cooperation. Moreover, the miraculous plant is a sign that God is still with Jonah, even after their dispute in Jon 4:2–4. This continues the book’s central theme: though Jonah tries to flee God, God never abandons him.
• More prosaic is an appeal to text criticism. According to →Wolff (1986, 171), the passage may incorporate several independent traditions.

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 East

• 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.

Other Cardinal Directions

• 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. →Wyatt 2001, 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.

• G: kolokuntha (“gourd-vine”);
• Vetus Latina: cucurbita (“gourd-vine”);
• V: hedera (“ivy”);
• S: bašrurā dᵉqar’ā (“tendril of a gourd-vine”).

→Jerome Ep. 112.22 cites his Jewish teachers when he asserts that the plant is a type of ivy and not a fruit-bearing gourd-plant (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:

• G: huper kephalês tou Iôna;
• V: super caput Ionae.

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 (→Zlotowitz and Scherman 1978, 139).

• →Altschuler and Altschuler Metzudah 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.

• →Malbim Gé’ ḥizzāyôn 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.

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.”

• →Rashi Comm. says that this wind is so powerful that it silences all other winds. In his commentary on Ex 14:21, he further adds that “the east wind is the most powerful of all winds. This is the wind by which the Holy One, blessed be He, exacts punishments from the wicked.”
• →Kimchi Comm. adds that this wind is deafening to those who hear it.
• Mahari Kara adds that the wind totally swept away Jonah’s hut and the remains of the qîqāyôn (→Zlotowitz and Scherman 1978, 139).

4:6ad,7b,9b,10b ivy (V) The Ivy as Israel

• →Gloss. ord. "Gourd (cucurbita) or ivy (hedera) is a kind of brushwood or shrub that has broad leaves and supports a very dense canopy, which creeps along the ground, and without props to lean on it does not seek higher parts. But God prepared this so that it might provide for the prophet a bower suddenly rising into the sky without any supports—in which God’s power was shown. Israel is compared to this ivy or gourd. Israel once protected Jonah under its own shade—that is, Christ—awaiting the conversion of the nations. The vine provided no small joy, making for him a bower, which has the appearance of a house but is not one, because it does not have foundations."

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.

• →Augustine of Hippo Ep. 102.35 "But the worm that came in the morning and made the gourd plant dry up because of its gnawing strikes me as the same Christ once again, for when the Gospel was preached from his lips, all those things that flourished for a time among the Israelites or had a meaning that foreshadowed what was to come faded away deprived of their meaning."
• →Augustine of Hippo Ep. 102.36 "Let us recognize Christ the worm, and let us suffer human reproach in return for divine salvation. He is a worm on account of the lowliness of the flesh, perhaps also on account of his birth from a virgin. For this creature is usually generated from flesh or any other earthly stuff without any sexual union. He is a worm of the morning because he rose at dawn.”
• →Maximus the Confessor Quaest. Thal. 64.20 “For in the same way that worms are born without copulation or any prior sexual mingling, so too the birth of the Lord in the flesh was not preceded by any prior mingling…This then is the worm that ‘smote the gourd plant and caused it to wither,’ by which I mean the one who abolished the observance of the Law, as if it were but a shadow, and withered the prideful conceit that the Jews took in it."

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:

• →Marzollo 2004: While sitting in the shade, Jonah comically summarizes his motivations by saying, “Thank you, God. The vine makes waiting for the destruction of Nineveh much easier!”

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 8^th 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.

Structure of Qal Waḥomer Argument

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. 

• The plant corresponds to the city, Jonah to God, and the destruction wrought by the worm and scorching wind to the potential destruction of Nineveh.
• If Jonah, who had nothing to do with the creation of the qîqāyôn-plant, was so distressed about its destruction, how much more would God, who did in fact create Nineveh as well as every person and animal within it, be distressed about its destruction?

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.

Contrast with Usual Happy Endings

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. 

• For example, the conclusion to Judith relates that no one attacked Israel again during her lifetime, or for long after her death (Jdt 16:30 [G-16:25]). 

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.

4:10c overnight Orthographic Variant or Scribal Mistake in 4Q82?

• 4Q82 f88-91i:10 (4QXII^g) reads lyly (masc. pl. cstr.?; →DJD XV, 312).
• M and Mur88 11:27 (MurXII) read lylh (masc. sg. abs.; →DJD II, 191).

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

• This idiom is found only in Jonah.
• In a similar construction, Barzillai blames old age for not knowing between one thing and another (2Sm 19:35).
• Do the Ninevites not know what they are doing? Or is the city so big and populated they don't know their neighbors (→Sasson 1990, 315)? Or is it a very simple matter, such as knowing which direction to go, beyond their understanding?

See also Jewish Tradition Jon 4:11b; Christian Tradition Jon 4:11b.

4:11b do not know their right hand from their left hand

Request for Analogical Interpretation

• →Maximus the Confessor Quaest. Thal. 64.1 "The literal sense provides no solution to the problem. For example, the text did not say 'children,' so that I might think it is speaking of infants, but rather it says 'men.' But what kind of man, being sound of mind, is unable to distinguish his right hand from his left? Tell me, then, who these 'men' are, and what are the 'right hand' and the 'left hand' according to an analogical interpretation?"

Ignorance and Innocence

• →Salvian Ep. 4 "When at one time, God had been offended by the sins of the Ninevites, he was appeased by the crying and wailing of children. For though we read that the whole people wept, yet the lot of innocence of the little ones merited the greatest mercy…He thereby declared that because of the purity of the innocent ones, he was also sparing the faults of the guilty ones."
• →Calvin Prael. proph. min. "God then shows here to Jonah that he had been carried away by his own merciless zeal. Though his zeal, as it has been said, arose from a good principle, yet Jonah was influenced by a feeling far too vehement. This God proved, by sparing so many infants hitherto innocent. And to infants he adds the brute animals. Oxen were certainly superior to shrubs. If Jonah justly grieved for one withering shrub, it was far more deplorable and cruel for so many innocent animals to perish. We hence see how apposite are all the parts of this similitude, to make Jonah to loathe his folly, and to be ashamed of it; for he had attempted to frustrate the secret purpose of God, and in a manner to overrule it by his own will, so that the Ninevites might not be spared, who yet labored by true repentance to anticipate the divine judgment."

Cf. Literary Devices Jon 4:11.

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” (→Dalton 2007, 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.

• Many read Jonah’s silence after God’s question as indicating a change of heart. E.g., →Hoffman 2003, 28 “And Jonah was silent, because he knew God was right.”
• An ending is attached that describes God’s mercy (→McKissack 1998) or the repentance of the Ninevites (→Spier 1985).
• Comedy lightens the ending, as in Jonah the Moaner, where Jonah goes scuba diving in Tarshish (→Page and Page 2006, 24–25).

• 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?” ( →Mackall 2016, 20).

• Finally, several adaptations note the abrupt and unusual way to end a story, such as →Balsley 2012 “The story ends right there and then. / A big fish tale from way back when, / Still telling us how we should live, / And showing us how to forgive.”
• When the story ends in Jonah: A VeggieTales Movie, a character responds, “Wait a minute…it’s over?” Another asks, “But what did Jonah learn?” The answer given is: “The question, my friends, is not ‘What did Jonah learn?’ The question is—‘What did you learn?’”

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. →Zlotowitz and Scherman 1978, 141–142).

• →Rashi Comm. "This refers to the innocent children who would have been swept away only by virtue of their fathers’ iniquities. But having repented, no punishment was due them."
• →Ḥiyya Hegyon: These are the adults who were too simple-minded to deserve punishment.
• →Malbim Gé’ ḥizzāyôn: These are “those who cannot differentiate between the service of Hashem and their idolatrous ways, in contrast to Israel who, by having received the Torah, are more accountable for their actions than are the Ninevites, and who, by implication, are deserving of more severe punishment for having practiced idolatry."

The remark about animals likewise is interpreted to refer to innocence.

• →Rashi Comm. "This figuratively refers to the adults who had beast-like sensibilities inasmuch as they do not know their creator."
• →Kimchi Comm. "Certainly [the animals] are innocent and deserving of compassion. Especially since they were many!"'

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).

• →Magonet (1983) suggests that the generic name is used in the context of punishment, whereas the Tetragrammaton is used in the context of mercy and forgiveness.
• →Sasson (1990, 17–18) charts their usage and concludes that the only sensible solution is to admit to no discernable pattern.

1:1–4:11 Veracity of Jonah as a Miraculous Account

• →Luther Tischr. 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.”

1:6c,14b; 3:9b; 4:10c perish + perished — Isotopy of Death: Structuring Repetition

Sailors and the Ninevites: “We might not perish”

Hope for salvation from death is expressed by:

• The captain of the ship (Jon 1:6);
• The sailors (Jon 1:14);
• The king and nobles of Nineveh (Jon 3:9).

Jonah: “hurl me into the sea”

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 Dead Shrub

• The shrub which perishes overnight (Jon 4:10) inspires more pity in Jonah than the potential massacre of Nineveh’s population.

2:9f; 4:3f Mur88 Paragraph Demarcations

Paragraph Demarcations in Jonah

Closed paragraph demarcations (pārāšôt sᵉtûmôt) appear between:

• Jon 2:9 (M-2:10) and Jon 2:10 (M-2:11);
• Jon 4:3 and Jon 4:4.

An open paragraph demarcation (pārāšâ pᵉtûḥâ) appears between:

• Jon 2:10 (M-2:11) and Jon 3:1.

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:

• An empty line between Jon 2:9 and Jon 2:10;
• A short gap between Jon 2:10 and Jon 3:1;
• One half-empty line and one full empty line between Jon 4:3 and Jon 4:4.

Such correspondence indicates the antiquity of the M textual tradition (→DJD II, 190–191; →Sasson 1990, 270–271).

Literary Significance

One possible interpretation of these demarcations is that they correspond to ancient perceptions of the plot's development:

• Jon 1:1–2:9 (M-1:1–2:10) portrays Jonah’s insubordination, descent, and restoration;
• Jon 2:10–4:3 (M-2:11–4:3) conveys Jonah’s lateral movement, preaching, and impact;
• Jon 4:4–11 conveys Jonah’s stationary status as he “wrongly evaluates the drama he has witnessed” (→Sasson 1990, 271).

In addition, these demarcations highlight certain points within the story.

• The closed paragraph demarcations follow clearly identified poetic utterances of the prophet.
• As such, these closed demarcations indicate that the book reaches its zenith when the prophet who refused his mission finally preaches (Jon 3:4).
• The open demarcation suggests that a minor transition in the narrative has taken place when Jonah, now ready to accept his mission, is expelled from the sea-monster onto the beach and makes his way to Nineveh.

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!

3:2b proclamation Hapax Legonomenon in M

• The word qᵉrî’â is a nominal form built off of the verb qr’ and is glossed as “proclamation” in the present translation.
• It is possible that the author invented this word in order to form an internal adjunct with the imperative q^erā’: “proclaim…the proclamation.”

3:1f RHETORIC Repetition and Change

Repetition

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 (ûq^erā’).

Change

Although the vocabulary is very similar, there are some differences:

• There is no dagesh lene in “word” (d^ebar).

• 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:

• 2Kgs 14:25: Jonah had demonstrated readiness to undertake his prophetic task which he did with competence.
• 1Kgs 17:5–10: Elijah, a model prophet for Jonah, manifests a ready response to God's call.

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

• →RML: Wednesday, 1^st Week in Lent, Years I and II.
• →RML: Tuesday, Week 27 in Year I.
• →Miss. Rom. 1570: Monday after Passion Sunday.
• →Miss. Rom. 1570: Holy Saturday, 10^th Reading.

3:1 second time Remarkable Proof of God's Grace

• →Calvin Prael. proph. min. "There is here set before us a remarkable proof of God’s grace—that he was pleased to bestow on Jonah his former dignity and honor. He was indeed unworthy of the common light, but God not only restored him to life, but favored him again with the office and honor of a prophet."

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). 

• →Qur’an 10.96–98 "Those against whom the word of thy Lord has been verified would not believe even if every Sign was brought unto them until they see (for themselves) the Penalty Grievous. Why was there not a single township (among those We warned) which believed so its Faith should have profited it except the people of Jonah? When they believed, We removed from them the Penalty of Ignominy in the life of the Present and permitted them to enjoy (their life) for a while."
• →Qur’an 37.147–148 "And We sent him (on a mission) to a hundred thousand (men) or more. And they believed. So We permitted them to enjoy (their life) for a while."

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.

Semantics of the Elements

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. →Kimchi Comm.; →Waltke and O'Connor 1990, 268; Jewish 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.

Semantics of Their Syntactic Combination

When the semantics of the words and preposition combine, the ambiguity multiplies.

Large or Great?

• 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,” →Wolff 1986, 144). Thus, concepts like the supernatural or incomparability come to the fore.

• 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. →Price and Nida 1978, 52–53).

Since “large” tends to convey scale alone, whereas “great” has ambiguous connotations, the latter is to be preferred.

Circumlocution: God, the Owner

• 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” (→Tucker 2006, 67–68; cf. Literary 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

Practices

• The rending of garments, donning of sackcloth or specific attire for mourning (2Kgs 19:1; Ps 30:11; Jer 6:26);
• putting ashes or earth on one’s head (Jo 7:6; Lam 2:10);
• fasting (2Sm 1:2–12; Neh 1:4).

Duration

• 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).

Goals

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

• In G, the preposition "about" (hôsei) in vv. 3b and 4a is a plus compared to M.
• The term mahălak is rendered with two words, poreias hodou, in v. 3b, but simply with poreian in the majority reading of v. 4a (there are several mss. that also include hodou in v. 4a, including the uncials A and Q, and minuscules 198, 233, 534, 544, 764; cf. →Ziegler 1984 ad loc.). 

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

Ramsho of Thursday

The repentance of the Ninevites is referenced as a positive example in the Ramsho (evening prayer) of Thursday in the Syriac Church:

• →Shimo "The Ninevites trembled at the voice of Jonah, the son of Mathai, and took refuge in repentance by watching and fasting and prayer; and by tears and groans the sentence of judgment was annulled which Jonah had pronounced concerning the destruction of Nineveh; blessed be the Compassionate one who turned them from evil to good."

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.

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.

Celebration

• 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).

Origins

• Though there is some discrepancy about the precise date of its origin, the Rogation seems to be traceable to the early to mid-7^th 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 →Fiey 1965, 497–99; →Walker 2011, 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.

Texts

• 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) (→Narsai Hom. in Mingana 1905, 1:134).

• Gewargis Warda Arbillaya (ca. 13^th 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” (→Malko 2002, 84).

• There are also turgamé, or liturgical prose homilies, composed for use during the Rogation that are preserved in a 16^th c. ms. held at the Hill Monastic Manuscript Library in Collegeville MN (CCM 00425; →Scher 1908).

Further Reading: History of Syriac Christianity in Nineveh

• →Stronach and Lumsden 1992; →Fiey 1993; →Fiey 2004; →Simpson 2005.

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.”

• →Luzzatto Derek 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.”

• 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.

• →Kimchi Comm. suggests that the word “overturned” is a reference to the destruction of Sodom (Gn 19:25; Dt 29:23), since the sins of the two cities were similar.

Cf. Christian Tradition Jon 3:4b,10b; 4:1 .

3:3b great city Jonah's Account of Nineveh's Size Is True

• →Calvin Prael. proph. min. "Some toil much in untying a knot, which at last is no knot at all; for it seems to them strange that one city should be in compass about thirty leagues according to our measure. When they conceive this as being impossible, then they invent some means to avoid the difficulty—that no one could visit the whole city so as to go through all the alleys, all the streets, and all the public places, except in three days…And if we believe profane writers, Nineveh must have been a great city, as Jonah declares here…We shall farther see about the end of the book that this city was large, and so populous, that there were there 120,000 children. If anyone receives not this testimony, let him feed on the lies of the devil. But since there were so many children there, what else can we say but that the circumference of the city was very great?"

3:4a called out Model for Preaching?

Confessional Polemic: Anabaptists Compare Zurich to Nineveh

Zwingli records an episode in which Anabaptists exhorted the people of Zurich to repent, comparing them to the Ninevites.

• →Zwingli Cat. "Then when they learned this in great swarms they came into the city, unbelted and girded with rope or osiers, and prophesied, as they called it, in the market place and squares. They filled the air with their cries about the old dragon, as they called me, and his heads, as they called the other ministers of the word. They also commended their justice and innocence to all, for they were about to depart. They boasted that already they hold all things in common, and threatened with extremes others unless they do the same. They went through the streets with portentous uproar, crying Woe! Woe! Woe to Zurich. Some imitated Jonah, and gave a truce of forty days to the city. What need of more? I should be more foolish than they were I even to name all their audacity" (Jackson 1901, 134–135). 

Moral Exhortation: Jonah Is Not Afraid

• →Calvin Prael. proph. min. "[Jonah] again proves the courage of his soul; for he did not creep in privately, as men are wont to do, advancing cautiously when dangers are apprehended. He says that he cried: then this freedom shows that Jonah was divested of all fear, and endued with such boldness of spirit, that he raised himself up above all the hindrances of the world. And we ought, in the meantime, to remember how disliked must have been his message: for he did not gently lead the Ninevites to God, but threatened them with destruction, and seemed to have given them no hope of pardon. Jonah might have thought that his voice, as one says, would have to return to his own throat, ‘Can I denounce ruin on this populous city, without being instantly crushed? Will not the first man that meets me stone me to death?’ Thus might Jonah have thought within himself. No fear was, however, able to prevent him from doing his duty as a faithful servant, for he had been evidently strengthened by the Lord."

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.

• →Cyril of Alexandria Comm. Jon. 3:3-4 “…while the prophets often suggest the manner of their mission, they do not altogether deliver to us all the words that came to them from God, nor the words from them to God…Do you see that he did not state most things, including what was said without our knowledge by God and to God, alike through the Holy Spirit? It is therefore logical to attribute truth to the statements of the saints; they would hardly be guilty of falsehood, enriched as they were with the spirit of truth.”
• →Theodore of Mopsuestia Comm. Jon. “…on entering the city the prophet began to go round it part by part, and spent about a day preaching and saying ‘Three days more, and Nineveh will be destroyed,’ and as much else as he could say to those present in each part of the city in sequence by way of instructing the listeners…once the prophet began to do his preaching in a part of the city, the word passed on to everyone with great rapidity; everyone adopted an unquestioning response to what was said, and in the grip of deep fear they believed what was said.” He then explains that this must have been how events unfolded since “they could never have believed in God on the basis of this remark alone, from a completely unknown foreigner threatening them with destruction and adding nothing further, not even letting the listeners know by whom he was sent. Rather, it is obvious he also mentioned God.”
• →Theodoret of Cyrus Interpr. Jon. 3:3–4 “He did not immediately walk through the city, but was going around through assemblies, marketplaces, streets and alleys, preaching ‘Three days more, and Nineveh will be overturned'” (PG 81:1733B).

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.

• →Justin Martyr Dial. 107.2 “And he [i.e., Christ] showed that your generation was more evil and adulterous than that of the Ninevites, who, when Jonah, after being cast up on shore from the belly of the whale on the third day, warned them that they would all perish within three days, announced a fast…believing that God is merciful and benevolent toward all those who avoid sin.” 
• →Jerome Comm. Jon. "The number three, which is recorded by the Septuagint, is not appropriate to repentance, and I am quite amazed at why it was translated this way, since in the Hebrew there is no commonality between the letters, syllables, accents or the word. For the Hebrews express ‘three’ as shelosh, and ‘forty’ as ’arbayim. Moreover, a prophet who was sent from Judea to the Assyrians on such a lengthy journey would have demanded a penance worthy of his preaching, so that the old putrid wounds could be cured by a dressing placed upon them for a long time."
• →Theodoret of Cyrus Interpr. Jon. first notes that Aquila, Symmachus, and Theodotion all read “forty” along with the Hebrew and Syriac, and then concludes, “this number has the probability. For at one time, Jonah wandered throughout the whole city for three days, and at another time the Ninevites, offering to God that toilsome repentance (tên metanoian tên epiponon), had the benefit of salvation from him. And at yet another time he awaited the outcome of his prophecy while sitting before the gates. Therefore, it seems to me that the forty days is the most credible. And it is likely that the Seventy had put down the number that agrees with the others” (PG 81:1733C–D).
• →Augustine of Hippo Quaest. Hept. 1.169 mentions the Hebrew text of Jon 3:4b when giving biblical justifications for the practice of fasting during Lent: “It is not without purpose that forty days of fasting were established, during which Moses and Elijah and the Lord himself fasted, and the Church calls for a special forty-day observance of fasting. So too the Hebrew text attests what was written about the Ninevites in the prophet Jonah, ‘Forty days and Nineveh shall be destroyed’ (Jon 3:4), so that for this many days, suitable for the humbling of penitents, they may be understood to have wept for their sins by their fasts and to have obtained God’s mercy."
• →Augustine of Hippo Serm. 114B.2 follows the Greek text (likely received via the Vetus Latina): “What a short time three days is! Yet with so little time left them they didn’t despair of God’s mercy; they believed that even three days of lamentation and tears would be enough to win his indulgence.”
• →John Chrysostom Hom. Gen. 24.18 also highlights the brevity of three days of repentance: “That in fact is what happened in the case of the Ninevites; when they heard that ‘after three days Ninevi 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." 

The Glossa is aware of both readings and gives interpretations of both.

• →Gloss. ord. "According to the Septuagint, ‘Yet three days and Nineveh will be destroyed.’ The same Christ is signified, whether by ‘forty days’ or by ‘three days.’ It is by ‘forty,’ of course, because he brought to conclusion forty days with his disciples and ascended into heaven; by ‘three days’ because he rose again on the third day."
• →Gloss. ord. "A period of forty days is fitting for sinners for the sake of penitence and fasting and prayer and sackcloth and ashes and perseverance in begging for mercy. According to this number, Moses and Elijah and Christ himself fasted. This number is indicated for us for preparing our souls to eat the body of Christ."

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). 

Was God’s Message Untrue?

• →Augustine of Hippo Serm. 361.20 “But what are we to say? That the prophet lied? If you understand it literally, he does seem to have said something untrue; if you understand it in a spiritual way, what the prophet said did happen. Yes, Nineveh was overthrown. Consider what Nineveh was, and see how it was overthrown…It has been overthrown of course because it is no longer constituted by those previous activities.”
• →Augustine of Hippo Enarr. Ps. 51(50):8 “...the prophet’s prediction was verified. Consider what Nineveh was, and how it was overthrown. It was overthrown in respect of its evil ways, and built up in goodness.”
• →John Chrysostom Stat. 5.5 “Was Nineveh destroyed? Quite the contrary. It arose and became more glorious, and all this intervening time has not effaced its glory. And we all yet celebrate it and marvel at it, that subsequently it has become a most safe harbor to all who sin, not allowing them to sink into despair but calling all to repentance, both by what it did and by what it gained from the providence of God, persuading us never to despair of our salvation.”
• →Maximus the Confessor Quaest. Thal. 64.28 Q: “How is God being truthful when He gives the order for the destruction of the city but then does not destroy it?” A: “God in truth both destroys and saves the same city: the former, by making it desist from its error; the latter, by bringing about its acquisition of true knowledge.”
• →Gloss. ord. “According to Jerome: Nineveh, which was evil and well built, was overturned not with respect to its standing fortifications and buildings. The city was overturned in the destruction of its customs. And although what those men had feared did not happen, when Jonah prophesied the future, what he had predicted at God’s command did happen after all.”

Was Jonah Justified in Becoming Angry?

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).

• →Cyril of Alexandria Comm. Jon. 4:1–3 “It was not because the city had escaped destruction—the attitude of a wicked and envious man, unbecoming a saint—but because he gave the impression of being a liar and a braggart, idly alarming them, speaking his own mind and not at all what came from the mouth of the Lord.”
• →Theodore of Mopsuestia Comm. Jon. 4:1 “…he was alarmed at the thought that he was likely to gain the reputation for being a sham and charlatan for threatening that destruction would occur in three days, whereas nothing happened.”
• →Ephrem Hymn. virg.: On the contrary, Ephrem would likely disagree with the above commentators: Jonah was not justified in his anger (cf. Christian Tradition Jon 4:1–5). 

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.

The Ninevites Illustrate God’s Mercy

In a few places, the Fathers use the example of the Ninevites as pedagogical example of how God’s mercy is manifested and experienced:

• →1 Clem. 7: After affirming that the Blood of Christ won for the whole world the “grace of repentance” (metanoias charin), Clement explains that “the master” (ho despotês; cf. G-Jon 4:3) provides opportunities for repentance in every generation for those who desire to turn to him (→1 Clem. 7.4–5). He then holds up the examples of Noah (7.6) and Jonah (7.7), about whom he says “Jonah preached destruction (katastrophên) to the Ninevites, and those who repented from their sins appeased (exilasanto) God and those who beseeched (hiketeusantes) [God] received salvation, even though they were strangers to God.”
• →John Chrysostom Paenit. 5.4 “Why do you, God, foretell the sufferings that you will inflict upon Nineveh? So that I will not do what I announced. This is why he threatened with hell: so he would not lead anyone away to hell.” He expresses the same thought in a homily about Genesis (→John Chrysostom Hom. Gen. 24.18) where he compares the Ninevites’ repentance after three days to the seven-day warning that Noah received before the flood. 
• →John Chrysostom Laz. 6.1 refers to God’s mercy towards the Ninevites when consoling his congregation after an earthquake: “He shook us but He did not wish to destroy us. If He had wished to destroy us, He would not have shaken us. But since He did not wish to destroy us, the earthquake came in advance like a herald, forewarning everyone of the anger of God, in order that we might be improved by fear and prevent actual retribution. He has done this even for foreign nations. ‘Yet three days, and Nineveh shall be overthrown.’ Why do You not overthrow the city? You threaten to destroy it, but why do You not destroy it? ‘Because I do not wish to destroy, for this very reason I threaten.’” 
• →Augustine of Hippo Enarr. Ps. 51(50):8 uses the example of the Ninevites to illustrate the hidden ways of God’s mercy: “At this uncertain prospect the Ninevites did penance; for even after the prophet’s threats…they debated among themselves the possibility of asking for mercy saying to each other, ‘Who knows whether God may change his sentence for the better, and have mercy?’ (Jon 3:9). It was uncertain, as they acknowledged by asking, ‘Who knows?’ All the same, they did penance with uncertain prospects, and deserved certain mercy.” 

The Ninevites’ Exemplary Status

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.

• →Paulinus of Nola  Carm. 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.”

• →Jerome Comm. Jon. 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. 

• →John Chrysostom Hom. Gen. 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.”

• →John Chrysostom Paenit.  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.” 

• →John Chrysostom Stat. 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?”

• →Gloss. ord. "A beautiful sequence: God commands the prophet; the prophet preaches to the city; the men believe first; when they preach fasting, people of every age are clothed with sackcloth. The men do not preach sackcloth but only fasting, but those to whom penitence is commanded add sackcloth so that their empty belly and their mournful clothing might more boldly beseech God.
• →Luther Lect. Jon. 3:9 "It is, in the first place, a marvelous thing that such a powerful city and king became alarmed so soon, that they stand in such great awe of God, that they humble themselves so deeply before one man’s single sermon, and that they do not pause to ponder why just they should stand condemned as sinners before all other cities in the world. How obstinately Sodom and Gomorrah withstood Lot! How obdurately Pharaoh resisted Moses and Aaron! How hardened Jerusalem remained against Christ and the apostles! How furiously Rome raged and raved against all Christians! How princes and bishops still defy the Gospel! Indeed the whole world is composed of nothing but knaves, yes devils, when compared with these people of Nineveh. The latter appear as pure angels next to the former."

Why Can’t You Be More Like the Ninevites?

• →Aphrahat Dem. 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.”

• →John Chrysostom Hom. Gen. 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.” 

• →Gregory of Nazianzus Or. 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.”

• →Gregory of Nazianzus 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.”

• →Calvin Prael. proph. min. "Grant, Almighty God, that as there is so much timidity in us, that none of us is prepared to follow where thou mayest call us, we may be so instructed by the example of thy servant Jonah, as to obey thee in every thing, and that though Satan and the world may oppose us with all their terrors, we may yet be strengthened by a reliance on thy power and protection, which thou hast promised to us, and may go on in the course of our vocation, and never turn aside, but thus contend against all the hindrances of this world, until we reach that celestial kingdom, where we shall enjoy thee and Christ thy only begotten Son, who is our strength and our salvation: and may thy Spirit quicken us, and strengthen all our faculties, that we may obey thee, and that at length thy name may be glorified in us, and that we may finally become partakers of that glory to which thou invites us through Christ our Lord. Amen."

The Ninevites (Gentiles) Compared to the Israelites (Jews)

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).

• →Justin Martyr Dial. 108.1: Christ “pleaded with you [i.e., the Jews] to repent of your sins at least after his resurrection from the dead, and to lament before God as did the Ninevites that your nation and city might not be seized and destroyed, as it has been.”
• →Cyril of Alexandria Comm. Jon. 1:1–2 “At the same time, however, what happened was by way of condemnation of Israel; they were convicted of being forward, unresponsive, paying little heed to the laws of God. After all, at a single prophet’s preaching, the Ninevites were instantly brought around to a sense of obligation to repent, despite suffering from extreme deception, whereas those others set at naught Moses and prophets, and spurned Christ himself, the Savior of us all, despite his supporting his teachings with miracles, through which they should have been convinced quite easily that he was God by nature and became man to save the whole earth under heaven, and them before all others."

• →Cyril of Alexandria Comm. Jon. 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.”

• →Jerome Comm. Jon. 3:5 "Nineveh believed, and Israel perseveres in unbelief. The uncircumcision has believed, and the circumcision remains unfaithful."

• →Theodore of Mopsuestia Comm. Jon. Prol. "What happened in the case of blessed Jonah, the prophet, was similar: when Jews were unbelieving and reluctant to heed his prophecies, God had him go instead to the nations."
• →Theodore of Mopsuestia Comm. Jon. Prol. “The result was that they showed from the events of that time that in this fashion at the coming of Christ the Lord he would by his grace cause all the nations to take a turn for the better, even if Jews chose not to respond to the teaching in piety…He realized also that this occurred as a sign of what would happen with Christ the Lord, and the same thing would take place to a far greater degree, when the nations were called to divine grace and moved en masse to godliness, whereas Jews remained unresponsive and resistant to Christ the Lord, despite having in their midst from the beginning prophecy and teaching about him.”
• →Luther Lect. Jon. "I hold that none but saints inhabited the city and that Jonah rightly called it a ‘city of God.’ Show me another city in the wide world comparable to Nineveh, even if it were the holy city Jerusalem. Just look at this city! Jonah preached only a day’s journey, and not every citizen heard him; yet they were all converted. Neither Christ nor all the apostles and prophets were ever able to bring Jerusalem to that point by means of their words and their miracles, though they ministered to it for a long time and preached from one end of the city to the other."

The Importance of Concrete Forms of Repentance: Fasting

• →Aphrahat Dem. 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.”

• →Ephrem Hymn. virg. 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.

• →Ambrose of Milan Ep. 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.”

• →John Chrysostom Paenit. 5.4 “Like a heavenly power overseeing Nineveh’s charge, fasting snatched the city from these gates of death and returned Nineveh to life.”

• →Cyril of Alexandria Comm. Jon. 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.”

• →Calvin Prael. proph. min. "Whenever then Scripture mentions fasting, and ashes, and sackcloth, we must bear in mind that these things are set before us as the outward signs of repentance which when not genuine do nothing else but provoke the wrath of God; but when true, they are approved of God on account of the end in view, and not that they avail, of themselves, to pacify his wrath, or to expiate sins."

TYPOLOGY Nineveh Prefigures the Redemption of Humanity

• →Ephrem  Hymn. virg. 17.9 "Blessed are you, O Shechem, in which the True One disavowed His own words for the sake of your life: ‘Go not in the way of the pagans, nor into a Samaritan city’ (Mt 10:5). Blessed are you, like Nineveh, absolved by the Just One; He passed judgment but saved it. Jonah grieved over Nineveh’s repentance but in you our Lord rejoiced."
• →Maximus the Confessor Quaest. Thal. 64.12 “Inasmuch, then, as Nineveh is understood as our common human nature, or as the Church of the Gentiles, we see Jonah, who symbolizes the word of prophetic grace that is always preaching within it, and every day turning back to God those who are lost and wandering. If, on the other hand, we apply the understanding of Nineveh to the contemplation of each particular person, we would say that the great city is each and every soul, to which, in transgression, the Word of God is sent, preaching repentance unto life.” He goes on to make the following allegorical identifications: King = intellect; nobles = innate powers; men = impassioned thoughts; cattle = movements of desire in body; oxen = covetous movements of irascibility toward material objects; sheep = movements of its senses.

3:4b Nineveh will be overturned Prophetic Revelation and Knowledge

• →Aquinas ST IIa-IIae 171.6 ad. 2 “Sometimes, however, the prophetic revelation is an imprinted likeness of the Divine foreknowledge as knowing the order of causes to effects; and then at times the event is otherwise than foretold. Yet the prophecy does not cover a falsehood, for the meaning of the prophecy is that inferior causes, whether they be natural causes or human acts, are so disposed as to lead to such a result. On this way we are to understand the saying of Is 38:1: ‘Thou shalt die, and not live;’ in other words, ‘The disposition of thy body has a tendency to death': and the saying of Jon 3:4, ‘Yet forty days, and Nineveh shall be destroyed,’ that is to say, ‘Its merits demand that it should be destroyed.’ God is said ‘to repent,’ metaphorically, inasmuch as He bears Himself after the manner of one who repents, by ‘changing His sentence, although He changes not His counsel.’”

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).

Creation

The King

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).

The Animals 

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

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.

God: Divine Repentance

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

Hebrew

• M: yāšûb wᵉniḥam hā’ĕlōhîm wᵉšāb.

Greek: An Economy of Words

• 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. →Barthélemy 1992 ad loc.).

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.

Syriac: Focusing on the Ninevites

• 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.

• Though Syriac has twb, a cognate of šwb, the translator of S opted instead to use pny, which reflects a marked tendency in S’s method of translation: of the more than 110 occurrences of the verb twb, none have God as the subject, while pny is used in several contexts to refer to God turning towards those whom he loves to save them (e.g., S-Dt 13:17; 30:9; Ps 6:4; 90:13; 126:1; Is 52:8; Na 2:2).
• The translator of S employs the cognate rḥm to render the second verb in M’s verbal hendiadys (i.e., nḥm). This usage too reflects that of S: the verb rḥm is used of God when he shows mercy to those he loves (e.g., S-Gn 43:29; Ps 30:10; Bar 3:2). However, the sense of S is somewhat different as compared to M, since S has a pa‘el participle (“have mercy”) whereas M has a nip‘al perfect (“relent”). This is related to the plus in S: since the participle is transitive, it governs an object.
• The final verb in S, an ’aphel participle, changes the sense of wᵉšāb in M. Though both have God as the subject, M is intransitive (God might turn away from his fierce anger), while S is transitive (God might turn his fierce anger away from the Ninevites).

Latin: Emphasizing the Power of Repentance

• 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).

• There is some semantic distance between ignoscat (“forgive”) and niḥam (“relent” or “repent”). This could either be an interpretative translation or the result of the translator analyzing the verb as a pi‘el.
• The two occurrences of šwb (yāšûb, wᵉšāb) are translated by deponent verbs (converto and reverto), which are close synonyms of each other, thus preserving the semantic repetition of M, while introducing some variation.

3:9a Who knows?! MOTIF Changing God's Mind

Hope or Desperation?

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 passage is reminiscent of the words and behavior of King David. When told by the prophet that his infant son will die, he mourns, sits on the ground, and says, “While the child was still alive, I fasted and wept; for I said, ‘Who knows whether the Lord will be gracious to me, that the child may live?’” (2Sm 12:22, RSV).

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.

God Relents from Punishing

• 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

• According to →Yal. on Nach 550.3, the king was Osnapper (Ezra 4:10).
• →Rashi Comm., in turn, identifies him with Sennacherib.
• →Pirqe R. El. 43 identifies the king of Nineveh with the Pharaoh of the Exodus: “Know thou the power of repentance. Come and see from Pharaoh, king of Egypt, who rebelled most grievously against the Rock, the Most High, as it is said, ‘Who is the Lord, that I should hearken unto his voice?’ (Ex 5:2). In the same terms of speech in which he sinned, he repented, as it is said, ‘Who is like thee, O Lord, among the mighty?’ (Ex 15:11). The Holy One, blessed be He, delivered him from amongst the dead. Whence (do we know) that he died? Because it is said, ‘For now I had put forth my hand, and smitten thee’ (Ex 9:15). He went and ruled in Nineveh. The men of Nineveh were writing fraudulent deeds, and everyone robbed his neighbour, and they committed sodomy, and such-like wicked actions. When the Holy One, blessed be He, sent for Jonah, to prophesy against (the city) its destruction, Pharaoh hearkened and arose from his throne, rent his garments and clothed himself in sackcloth and ashes, and had a proclamation made to all his people, that all the people should fast for two days, and all who did these (wicked) things should be burnt by fire. What did they do? The men were on one side, and the women on the other, and their children were by themselves; all the clean animals were on one side, and their offspring were by themselves. The infants saw the breasts of their mothers, (and they wished) to have suck, and they wept. The mothers saw their children, (and they wished) to give them suck. By the merit of 4123 children, more than twelve hundred thousand men (were saved)…For forty years was the Holy One, blessed be He, slow to anger with them, corresponding to the forty days during which He had sent Jonah. After forty years they returned to their many evil deeds, more so than their former ones, and they were swallowed up like the dead, in the lowest Sheol, as it is said, ‘Out of the city of the dead they groan’ (Jb 24:12).” 

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.

• →b. Ta‘an. 16a: The Ninevites "separated the animals from their young, and they said, 'Master of the Universe! If You wil not have mercy on us, we will not show mercy to these.'"
• Midrash Jonah "they held their infants heavenward and cried out to the Holy One, blessed be He: 'For the sake of these innocent babes who have never tasted sin, hear our prayers and cause us not to perish!'" (cited in →Zlotowitz and Scherman 1978, 126).

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:

• →Tg. Jon. "Whoever knows that he has guilt in his hands, let him turn from them, and from the Lord we will be pitied, and we will not be destroyed.”

3:7a he cried out Leading by Example

• →Augustine of Hippo Ep. 185.19 "A sovereign serves God one way as a man, another way as a king. He serves him as man by living according to faith. He serves him as king by exerting the necessary strength to sanction laws that command goodness and prohibit its opposite…Thus the king of the Ninevites served him by compelling the city to appease the Lord."

3:10b God relented Nineveh Not Destroyed but Exalted

• →Tertullian Marc. 4.10 "I see how the Ninevites obtained forgiveness of their sins from the Creator—not to say from Christ [by way of anticipation], even then, because from the beginning he was acting in the Father's name."
• →John Chrysostom  Stat. 5.5 "Was Nineveh destroyed? Quite the contrary. It arose and became more glorious, and all this intervening time has not effaced its glory. And we all yet celebrate it and marvel at it, that subsequently it has become a most safe harbor to all who sin, not allowing them to sink into despair but calling all to repentance, both by what it did and by what it gained from the providence of God, persuading us never to despair of our salvation."
• →Luther Lect. Jon. "This is a wonderfully sweet expression of the Divine Majesty; this is a very complete promise of the incomprehensible goodness and mercy of God. This shows how much God does not desire the death of a sinner; He desires rather that the sinner be converted and live."

3:6d sackcloth Coarse Clothes Are Appropriate for Penitents

• →Aquinas ST IIa-IIae 187.6 resp. “…coarseness of attire is sometimes a sign of sorrow: wherefore those who are beset with sorrow are wont to wear coarser clothes, just as on the other hand in times of festivity and joy they wear finer clothes. Hence penitents make use of coarse apparel, for example, the king who ‘was clothed with sackcloth’ (Jon 3:6), and Achab who ‘put hair-cloth upon his flesh’ (1Kgs 21:27).”

4:3 YHWH : M | G: sovereign Lord — Minus in M? 

• The tetragrammaton in v. 3 is rendered by despota kurie in G, which is almost always used to render the double name for God ’ādôn(āy) YHWH (e.g., Gn 15:8; Is 1:24; 3:1; 10:33; Jer 1:6; 4:10).

This might indicate that ’ādôn(āy) has dropped out of M. 

4:2d God Minus in the Septuagint

• G does not read ’Ēl (“God”), and thus has a minus compared to M.

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

LANGUAGE

Divine Attributes

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).

Praise the Lord

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).

→Sasson (1990, 280) presents a chart of more than a dozen comparable instances.

SCENARIO One Instance of Many

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.

Pentateuch

• God’s sparing of the Ninevites can be contrasted with his desire to destroy the people of Israel after the episode of the Golden Calf (Ex 32:9–10; Dt 9:15–24).

• Jonah’s complaint likewise contrasts with Moses’ plea for mercy (Ex 32:11–14; Dt 9:25–29).

Prophets

• 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).

Writings

• 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.

Psalms

• 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

• →ibn Ezra Comm. thus completes Jonah’s request to die: “and spare me the sight of the destruction of my people since I was instrumental in bringing it about."
• →Kimchi Comm. calls to mind Ex 32:32 wherein Moses would rather die than see the destruction of the Hebrews.

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.

• →Ephrem Carm. Nis. 55.3-4, which imagines an argument between Satan and Death: “Satan: Jonah who conquered thee and returned back from Sheol, became my advocate in asking, ‘Why were sinners spared?’ — Death: Slander not, O Evil One, the son of Amittai: he showed a face of anger, that they might praise thee more.”

→Ephrem Hymn. virg. 43–44, 47–50 focuses on Jonah’s anger at God’s sparing the Ninevites, depicting him in a negative light.

• →Ephrem Hymn. virg. 43.1–2 contrasts Jonah unfavorably with Peter; whereas the former became distressed when he cast his net “and gathered in it thousands of dead for life” (cf. Jon 3:4–10), the latter obediently responded when he was commanded by Christ, “you have caught for death, [now] make disciples for life” (cf. Mt 4:19; Mk 1:17).
• →Ephrem Hymn. virg. 44 likewise contrasts Jonah with both Abraham and Moses. Whereas Abraham besought mercy for Sodom, Jonah wished for Nineveh’s destruction (str. 1). Again, Abraham sought mercy for the Sodomites, who would outrage even the angels, whereas Jonah was despondent over the Ninevites, whose repentance gave the angels cause for joy. Finally, Ephrem compares Jonah and Moses: the latter was a righteous man who struggled with a rebellious people; the former was a disobedient man who was brought low by an obedient people (str. 15–16).

• →Ephrem 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).

• →Ephrem 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.

• →Ephrem 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).

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

TYPOLOGY Gone Bad: Anti-Semitic/Anti-Judaic Interpretations

Patristic Period

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.

• →Augustine of Hippo Ep. 102.35 “For he symbolized the carnal people of Israel. After all, this people was saddened over the salvation of the Ninevites, that is, over the redemption and deliverance of the nations…And now that people, which has lost the kingdom of Jerusalem, their priesthood, and their sacrifice, all of which foreshadowed what was to come, is being burned with the great heat of tribulation in its dispersion in captivity, just as Jonah, as scripture says, also suffered gravely from the blazing sun, and yet the salvation of the nations and those who do penance is valued more highly than his pain and the shade that he loved.”
• →Maximus the Confessor Quaest. Thal. 64.18 “I had said that the great Jonah prefigured in his person the folly of the Jews, not that he himself suffered from any of the things associated with the Jews…but rather, in his own person he refuted in advance the impiety for which the Jews fell away from their former glory, as if from a kind of Joppa…And this is true even if the envious Jewish people—those ungrateful, graceless misanthropes, who are hostile to all philanthropy, and who are thus pained by the salvation of mankind, and so dare to fight against the goodness of God—grind their teeth, renounce life, and make the salvation of the Gentiles in Christ a cause for mourning.”

Reformation Period

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.

• →Luther Lect. Jon. sees all this through the lens of Rom 3:28–29: Jonah cannot see past rigorous adherence to the Law, “snub[bing] the Gospel of grace.”

Jonah Dreads a Tarnished Reputation

• →Cyril of Alexandria Comm. Jon. “It was not because the city had escaped destruction—the attitude of a wicked and envious man, unbecoming a saint—but because he gave the impression of being a liar and a braggart, idly alarming them, speaking his own mind and not at all what came from the mouth of the Lord.”
• →Jerome Pelag. 3.6 “Jonah was indignant because, at God’s command, he had spoken falsely; but his sorrow was proved to be ill founded, since he would rather speak truth and have a countless multitude perish than speak falsely and have them saved.”
• →Theodore of Mopsuestia Comm. Jon. 4:1 “…he was alarmed at the thought that he was likely to gain the reputation for being a sham and charlatan for threatening that destruction would occur in three days, whereas nothing happened.”
• →Calvin Prael. proph. min. Jon 4:1 “Jerome commends this grief of Jonah, and compares it to the holy zeal of Paul when he wished himself to be an anathema for his brethren (Rom 9:3), for he denies that he grieved because God had showed mercy to so illustrious a city; but because the conversion of the Gentiles was a certain presage of the destruction of the chosen people. As then Jonah perceived as in a mirror the near ruin of Israel, he on this account grieved, if we believe Jerome: but this notion is extremely frivolous; for, immediately after, God reproved Jonah. What then will the foolish and puerile apology of Jerome avail the Prophet, since God has declared that he acted perversely in grieving? Nay, the dullness of Jerome is thus become evident (thus indeed do I speak of a man, who, though learned and laborious, has yet deprived himself of that praise, which otherwise he might have justly earned). His wayward disposition everywhere betrayed itself; and he is evidently disproved in this very context, where Jonah shows clearly that the cause of his grief was another, even this—that he was unwilling to be deemed a false or a lying prophet: hence was his great grief and his bitterness. And this we see, had God not expressed his mind, was unjust and inconsistent with every reason.”

Jonah Is Envious of God’s Glory

• →Calvin Prael. proph. min. Jon 4:3 “Jonah openly declares why he bore so ill the deliverance of Nineveh from destruction, because he was thus found to have been false and lying. But it may seem strange that the Prophet had more regard for his own reputation than for the glory of God; for in this especially shines forth the glory of God, that he is reconcilable as soon as men return to the right way, and that he offers himself to them as a father. Ought then Jonah to have preferred his own honor to the glory of God? I answer—that the Prophet was not so devoted to himself, but that a concern for the glory of God held the first place in his soul; this is certain. For he connected, and justly so, his own ministry with the glory of God; as it proceeded from his authority.”

Jonah Is in Anguish for Unrepentant Israel

• →Gloss. ord. “He is not grieved that great number of the Gentiles are being saved, but that he sees his own people perish, and he, chosen out of such a great number of prophets, who announced the ruin of his own people through the salvation of others, is now in a certain way despairing of the salvation of Israel. Thus the Lord wept over Jerusalem, and ‘he did not want to cast the bread of the children,’ etc. (Mt 15:26; Mk 7:27). The apostles also preach first to Israel. Paul also wishes to be cursed for the sake of his brethren (Rom 9:3); cf. Jewish Tradition Jon 4:3. 
• →Gloss. ord. “Beautifully Jonah—that is, ‘suffering’ [a pun likening yônâ to the root ‘nh, ‘to torment’]—is troubled even unto death [an interlinear note adds Mt 26:38, ‘My soul is sorrowful even unto death’] because he endured many things, to the extent he was able, so that the people of the Jews might not perish; the prophet is weighed down by his labors, his travels, and his shipwreck.”

4:1 displeased Thomas Aquinas: Jonah as an Example of the Prophecy of Commination 

• →Aquinas ST Suppl. 99.3 obj. 3 refers to Jon 4:1 when articulating an objection to the concept of eternal punishment for sin: “Further, God’s foretelling of the punishment of the damned belongs to the prophecy of commination. Now the prophecy of commination is not always fulfilled: as appears from what was said of the destruction of Nineve (Jon 3); and yet it was not destroyed as foretold by the prophet, who also was troubled for that very reason (Jon 4:1). Therefore it would seem that much more will the threat of eternal punishment be commuted by God’s mercy for a more lenient punishment, when this will be able to give sorrow to none but joy to all.”
• →Aquinas ST Suppl. 99.3 ad. 3: In response, Aquinas counters this objection with Augustine’s reinterpretation of Jonah’s prophecy. “Since the merits of the damned cannot be changed, the threatened punishment will ever be fulfilled in them. Nevertheless the prophecy of commination is always fulfilled in a certain sense, because as Augustine says (→Civ. 21.24): ‘Nineve has been overthrown, that was evil, and a good Nineve is built up, that was not: for while the walls and the houses remained standing, the city was overthrown in its wicked ways.’”

4:6a YHWH God Hebrew Variant in the Formulation of the Divine Name

• 4Q82 f88-91i:2 (4QXII^g): the Lord Yhwh (’dwny YHWH; →DJD XV, 312).
• M and MurXII (cf. Mur88 11:20): Yhwh God (YHWH ’lwhym; →DJD II, 191).

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:

• “out of the city…east of the city…what might become of the city.”

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. →Wolff 1986, 170–171).

• It may be a climbing ivy, as in V and Symmachus (→Ziegler 1984 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 →Kimchi Comm.). On the other hand, the plant is rather small.

4:6–9 From Allegory to Antijudaism: Interpretations of Plant and Worm

Allegory for Contents of Scripture

The Old Testament

• →Augustine of Hippo Ep. 102.35 "But the shadow of the vine over his head was the promise of the Old Testament. Its law manifested, as the apostle says, ‘a shadow of things to come’ (Col 2:17). God was offering shade from the heat of temporal evils in the land of promise."

The Gospel of Christ

• →Augustine of Hippo Ep. 102.35 "But the worm came in the morning. It gnawed at the vine and withered it. For when the Gospel had been published by Christ’s mouth, all those things withered and faded away. The shade of the vine symbolized temporal prosperity for the Israelites. And now those people have lost the kingdom of Jerusalem and their priesthood and sacrifice. All of this was a foreshadowing of the future."

Supercessionist Allegories

• →Luther Lect. Jon. "Finally we have the plant and the worm which attacked the former at the dawn of the day. This phase of the story pertains not only to Jonah, to his anger and his thoughts described in the text, but it is applicable also to Judaism, which was a real wild plant…And now while the Jews complacently rely on being God’s people to the exclusion of all others, and just as Jonah is basking in the enjoyment of this wild plant, God appoints a worm to smite the plant. This signifies that Christ appeared with his Gospel at a time when the Jews vaunted most vaingloriously that they alone were God’s people. He attacked the wild plant, that is, He preached against it and abolished the Law through his Holy Spirit and liberated us all from the Law and its power. Therefore Judaism withered and decayed in the world, and thus we see it today. Its verdure is gone, it flourishes no longer, nor is there a saint or a prophet sitting in its shade today."

4:6ad,7b,9b,10b gourd + ivy — High Stakes Translation in the 5^th c.  When Jerome published his translation of the Book of Jonah, it caused something of a controversy in the Church.

Accusation of Sacrilege

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.

• →Jerome Ruf. 1.30 “At that point a certain Canterius…is said to have accused me of sacrilege for translating ‘ivy’ instead of ‘gourd-plant’” (in hoc loco quidam Cantherius…dicitur me accusasse sacrilegii quod pro cucurbita hederam transtulerim).

Augustine's Objection and Jerome's Response

Although Augustine did not consider Jerome’s translation sacrilegious, he thought it wrong to use a novel translation in the liturgy.

• →Augustine of Hippo Ep. 71.5 "For, when a certain brother bishop of ours began to have your translation read in the church over which he presides, a particular passage in the prophet Jonah caused disturbance because it was presented in far different language than had become familiar to the senses and memory and had been chanted for so many ages." 
• →Jerome Ep. 112.22: Jerome suggests that Augustine’s description of events is an exaggeration. A more accurate translation better facilitates the communication of divine truth. Thus his translation should be preferred because hedera (“ivy”) better corresponds to the Hebrew qîqāyôn, which is reflected in Aquila’s translation, kissos.

Augustine's Rebuttal

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.

• →Augustine of Hippo Ep. 85.35 “I did not want your translation from the Hebrew to be read in the churches for fear that, by introducing something new opposed to the authority of the Septuagint, we might disturb the people of God to their great scandal, for their ears and hearts are accustomed to that translation that even the apostles approved. Hence, if in Jonah that plant is in Hebrew neither an ivy nor a gourd plant, but something else that supports itself by its own trunk without any stakes, I would prefer that we read ‘gourd plant’ in all the Latin translations."

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

Confessional Polemic: Anabaptist Proof Text against Infant Baptism

• Menno Simons, Christian Baptism, "Luther writes that infants should be baptized because of their own faith, and adds, if infants had no faith their baptism would be blaspheming the sacrament. I believe it to be a great error of so learned a man through whom the Lord at the beginning of his writing affected not a little good, to hold that infants who are unable to hear and to understand, have faith, while the Scriptures so plainly state that they know neither good nor evil, that they can not discern right from wrong (Dt 1:39; Jon 4:11)" (→Horsch 1916, 264).

God’s Mercy for Nineveh and Jonah

• →Wesley Notes “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.”