Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry? 9042949996, 9789042949997

Citation preview

École biblique et archéologique française de Jérusalem

• • • •

THE BIBLE IN ITS TRADITIONS Jonah Is It Good for You to Be Angry? Isaac M. Alderman, A. Jordan Schmidt o.p., Eric M. Trinka, Eric J. Wagner c.r.

Under the direction of Łukasz Popko o.p., Olivier-Thomas Venard o.p.

PEETERS

École biblique et archéologique française de Jérusalem

The Bible in Its Traditions

Jonah Is It Good for You to Be Angry? Contributors Isaac M. Alderman — A. Jordan Schmidt — Eric M. Trinka — Eric J. Wagner Joseph Ahmad — Jakub Bluj — Olivier Catel — Bruno Clifton — Angela Parchen Rasmussen — Jean-David Richaud-Mammeri — Hannah Stork — Jorge Vargas Corvacho Under the direction of Łukasz Popko — Olivier-Thomas Venard Edited by Joseph Ahmad — A. Jordan Schmidt

PEETERS LEUVEN – PARIS – BRISTOL, CT

2023

A Note of Gratitude This edition of the Book of Jonah was made possible thanks to a generous grant of The Confraternity of Christian Doctrine through the Catholic Biblical Association in 2019. BEST AISBL, the main contributors to this volume, and its readers express their heartfelt thanks to them.

A catalogue record for this book is available from the Library of Congress.

ISBN 978-90-429-4999-7 eISBN 978-90-429-5000-9 D/2023/0602/70 © 2023, Peeters, Bondgenotenlaan 153, B-3000 Leuven, Belgium

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any electronic or mechanical means, including information storage or retrieval devices or systems, without prior written permission from the publisher.

God has spoken once — twice have I heard this Ps 62:11

Jonah Introduction

Suggestions for Reading The annotations provided in this text are intended to introduce the reader to the breadth of the historical, artistic, linguistic, and theological reflections on the Book of Jonah. They can lead the reader through many different approaches to the story. An account as entertaining and deeply engaging as the Book of Jonah cannot be reduced to a single reading, but neither can one elaborate on all possibilities; choices must be made and many insightful and helpful readings must be excluded. The *Suggestions for Reading are just one path through the story. The *Suggestions for Reading view the Book of Jonah as a theological discussion focused on God’s mercy. The text is a sophisticated thought-experiment rendered as historical fiction. Presented here is a scenario of extremes: a prophet, who resists God to the utmost, is sent to Nineveh, a city comparable to Sodom in iniquity. In turn, this sets the stage for a lesson on the magnitude of God’s mercy. The story engages Israel’s theological and textual tradition, drawing on deeply held beliefs and fundamental myths. Making statements about creation, cosmology, wisdom, and using entertaining narrative and rhetorical forms, the author promotes an expansive view of God’s mercy, using both the city and the prophet to engage the reader in this theological discussion. At the same time, the author is critical of another fundamental biblical tradition which holds a narrower view of God’s mercy, perhaps best epitomized by the character and text of Ezra. While the author presents the reader with this theological back-and-forth, we are also led to question the role of knowledge and fear; specifically, who has knowledge and what, or whom, does one fear? Although Jonah is often presented as a woeful figure, he always seems to have confidence amidst storms. He knows who God is: “I know that you are a gracious and compassionate God, slow to anger, and abounding in love, and relenting from evil” (Jon 4:2). While Jonah knows these things, others in the story come to learn them. Even as the people around Jonah are fearful, he is fearless even though, or perhaps because, he professes to be one who fears God. As one reads through the story, even with its fantastical and exaggerated elements, this is not a comedy or a satire on the prophetic tradition. It engages and utilizes the prophetic tradition to make a theological point, without which the prophetic tradition is incomprehensible: God wants to relent from punishing.

Jonah’s representation in art, drama, music, and pedagogy testifies to its literary value. The massive amount of theological reflection on this short book by both Jews and Christians bespeaks its rich theological content. The notes invite the reader to engage with Jewish reflections on penance, cosmologies of creation, and scripture, as well as joining Christians in their vast array of Christological typologies and theology of God’s redemption of all creation. Plausible Literary Structures Both the structure and the writing of Jonah are straightforward, perhaps in contrast to its less-than-straightforward plot twists and theology. The story’s narration (not including the poetic prayer of ch. 2) follows an unambiguous linear sequence, illustrating a journey upon which the reader must embark. The Hebrew is also straightforward with few ambiguities; wawconsecutives abound to delineate the way. Although the narrative moves ahead rapidly at times, only pausing now and then for conversation, the reader is often drawn by repetitions and allusions to reflect on events and moments that have already happened. Traditional Divisions The ancient manuscript tradition employs three paragraph demarcations to separate the narrative into three parts; these divisions suggest an approach to interpreting the book as a whole (cf. *tex2:9–10; 4:3–4). Our additional subdivisions below are proposed for reader’s convenience. Jon 1:1–2:9 (M-1:1–2:10): Jonah’s Insubordination, Descent, and Restoration • Jon 1:1–3: God Commissions and His Prophet Flees: God Surprises the Prophet; Jonah Surprises the Reader • Jon 1:4–6: The Storm Rages: Jonah and the Sailors React to the Storm • Jon 1:7–16: Attempt to Save the Ship: The Sailors Learn to Fear God • Jon 1:17: A Fish Swallows a Prophet…and His Entire Story? • Jon 2:1–9 (M-2:1–10): Jonah Prays from the Belly of the Fish • Jon 2:10 (M-2:11): Jonah Vomited Out on the Ground: His Restoration Provokes Theological Reflection Jon 3:1–4:3: Jonah’s Lateral Movement, Preaching, and Impact • Jon 3:1–3a: God Commissions His Prophet Again



Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?

• Jon 3:3b–5: Jonah Preaches and the Ninevites Believe: Minimal Effort Generates an Immediate Response • Jon 3:6–10: Nineveh’s King Orders Repentance: Creation Repents and God Relents • Jon 4:1–4: God’s Mercy and His Prophet’s Disappointment: Competing Views of Mercy

keywords) that will punctuate the whole story (e.g., *dev1:2 evil), and typological allusions to the cycle of Elijah and Elisha (*bib1:1–2) participate in a chiseled dispositio (*dev1:3), possibly servicing an ironic telling (*dev1:2–3).

Text Jon 4:5–11: God Teaches Jonah the Tale’s Lesson • Jon 4:5–8: Parable in Acts • Jon 4:9–11: Divine Lesson in Mercy Each of the three movements begins with a divine utterance and each of the first two ends with a clearly identified poetic utterance delivered by Jonah. The last movement is different: instead of hearing a third response from Jonah, the reader is left with an unanswered question posed by none other than God himself!

These annotations describe the text as a linguistic and literary object. Following a stepwise logic that proceeds from small linguistic units to large ensembles present in the text, they begin with the material reality of the writing itself (*Textual Criticism) and continue to the point of determining the *Literary Genre of the book as a whole.

Translation

Four Units • Each chapter includes unique prayers, protective acts of God, miraculous events, etc. See further →Sasson 1990; →Limburg 1993; →Jenson 2008.

Main Principles In general two large families of translations can be distinguished: those that strive for fidelity and those that strive for clarity. The former strive to be transparent to the language of the original text, while the latter strive above all to produce the most limpid and immediately comprehensible translation possible. The Septuagint, for example, belongs to the first: it so adheres to the Hebrew that it is often obscure. The translations in collections such as Budé or Sources chrétiennes belong to the second group, prioritizing clarity and readability in their translations. While adhering to the original text, The Bible in Its Traditions tries to find a balance between these two aims of fidelity and clarity: translation cannot be done mechanically, but rather, it is an art that requires finesse. A general tendency among the vast majority of Bible translations is to ‘explain,’ ‘interpret’ or ‘smooth over’ the difficulties inherent in the translated text. Distinctively, The Bible in Its Traditions transmits the difficulties as they are found in the original texts themselves. Our underlying principle in translating is ‘neither more obscure, nor clearer than the original.’

A Shaped Narrative Whatever one’s opinion regarding the historicity of the person of Jonah or of this particular story, its form has been shaped by a skilled author. • Narratively, the opening verses give the reader important information in the form of the story’s characters and locations (*bib1:2; *bib1:3b): God, Jonah, Nineveh, Joppa, Tarshish—symbolic and scripturally overloaded locations indeed! All other characters are grouped (the sailors, the Ninevites, the king’s nobles) or left unnamed (the captain, the king). • Thematically, these first few verses introduce directionality: since God is above—the evil of the Ninevites rises up before him—the reader knows that Jonah flees not only from Nineveh but also from God when Jonah goes downward (*dev1:3b,5d; 2:6a). • Rhetorically, anadiplosis (*dev1:3–4), assonance (*dev1:3b), the introduction of Leitworte (repeated

Versification In presenting the biblical text, The Bible in Its Traditions forgoes standard punctuation and layout, preferring instead to follow the advice of Jerome and the example of certain late antique manuscripts. To facilitate comprehension, Jerome recommends that the biblical text be laid out per cola et commata, that is, not as a continuous column of text, but broken up according to logical rhetorical units. Examples of this practice can be seen in a number of late antique and medieval manuscripts, as well as the Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft’s edition of the Vulgate. Dispositio per cola et commata richly enhances the meaning of the text. For example, it makes it possible to reduce punctuation to a strict minimum—if not to do away with it altogether—and to reproduce, in the target language, certain intentionally polysemic constructions present in the original language. It also produces rhythmic effects of acceleration or deceleration in narrative and in discourse. Thus, as far as possible, an effort will be made to

Alternative Propositions Two Units →Trible (1994, 110–111) divides the book into two major sections (ch. 1–2 and ch. 3–4) that parallel one another: • The opening (Jon 1:1–3) is echoed in the repetition of God’s call (Jon 2:1–3). • Jon 1 and Jon 3 are about Jonah and Gentiles, while Jon 2 and Jon 4 are about Jonah and God. • Likewise, based on an analysis of vocabulary and style, one can divide Jonah into two units: Jon 1 and 3, and Jon 2 and 4. • Other parallelisms: the sailors of Jon 1 can be likened to the Ninevites of Jon 3; the captain of the ship of Jon 1 can be likened to the king of Nineveh of Jon 3.

Introduction

divide the text according to the Vulgate in its present reference edition.



of some variants (e.g., “Hebrew” [M] vs. “servant” [G] at Jon 1:9; “forty” [M] vs. “three” [G] at Jon 3:4), these variations can be explained as interpretations proposed by ancient translators.

1.1. Textual Criticism: Largely Unified Textual Tradition — tex* 1.2. Vocabulary — *voc This rubric comments on the diversity of extant texts for a given biblical passage. Our translation already includes the variants found in the most influential ancient translations, indicating the primary traditions of interpretation over the course of the text’s reception and transmission. In turn, the notes here in *Textual Criticism present secondary variants. Editions Consulted As with most of the Hebrew scriptures, the Masoretic Text of Jonah exhibits a unified and carefully transmitted textual tradition. For this volume, we have consulted the following editions of the Masoretic Text: • Elliger Karl and Rudolph Wilhelm (eds.), Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia, 5th ed., Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1997. • Gelston Anthony (ed.), Biblica Hebraica Quinta, fasc. 13, Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1997. For the sake of brevity, we shall refer to the Hebrew text as “M.” Likewise, “G” corresponds to the LXX, and “S” to the Peshitta (for editions thereof, see below: §3.1. Comparison of Versions). Qumran Fragments from Qumran allow us to trace divergent readings with respect to orthography (e.g., *tex1:7e; *tex2:5a) and grammar (*tex1:8a), with a small number of potential stylistic variants, such as *tex2:6c. The Qumran witness to Jonah is contained in the following edition: • Fuller Russel (ed., trans.), “The Twelve,” in Ulrich Eugene, Cross Frank Moore, et al. (eds., trans.), Qumran Cave 4. X: The Prophets (DJD XV), Oxford: Clarendon, 1997, 221– 318. On the other hand, other ancient witnesses to the Hebrew text, like Mur88 are invaluable for grasping the most ancient divisions of the text (*tex2:9–10; 4:3–4). We have consulted the following edition thereof: • Benoit Pierre, Milik Józef Tadeusz, and de Vaux Roland (eds., trans.), Les grottes de Murabba‘ât (DJD II), Oxford: Clarendon, 1961, 190–191. Emendations Our commentary mentions most of the emendations commonly proposed by modern commentators (*tex3:4), yet, in every case, they are neither compelling nor necessary. Versions The divergent readings in G do not suggest a significantly different Hebrew original (Vorlage). With the possible exception

Here, semantic comments bearing on the most important words and phrases are concisely presented. If necessary, the text’s lexical (literary, theological, technical, etc.) field is characterized, a date for the vocabulary is suggested, and the Hebrew verbal roots or Greek radicals are analyzed. The meanings of proper names or of idiomatic expressions are given, and if need be, other biblical usages of the same term are cited. The hapax legomena (terms that appear only once in the given corpus) are indicated. Certain aspects of the vocabulary of Jonah are worth noting. Some help to identify its date, while others can contribute to a better understanding of the style and biblical genre of Jonah. Maritime Terminology The Book of Jonah is full of nautical and maritime vocabulary. Some are general words repurposed for the telling of this story, while others appear to be technical terms that are rarely, if ever, found elsewhere in M. Examples include: • sa‘ar (Jon 1:4): “storm” is a figure of divine wrath (*voc1:4b,11b,12c,13b); here the storm aims at the prophet. • mallaḥ (Jon 1:5): this technical term for “sailor” is only found here and in Ez 29:9,27,29 (*voc1:5a). • kēlîm (Jon 1:5): the general term “vessels” is used to denote the cargo on the ship (*voc1:5c). • sᵉpînâ (Jon 1:5): this denotes “boat” or a type of vessel (*voc1:5d). • rab haḥōbēl (Jon 1:6): this compound term for “captain” might be more literally translated as “chief roper” or “chief rigger” (*voc1:6a). • ḥtr (Jon 1:13): literally meaning “to dig,” it is also used to mean “to row,” presumably suggested by the plunging and scooping of oars at sea (*voc1:13a; *com1:13a). It may likewise indicate the author’s lack of seafaring vocabulary. Cosmological Vocabulary of Jonah’s Prayer In Jonah’s prayer of Jon 2:2–9, the sea becomes a figure for Sheol (Jon 2:2). Even nāhār (“river”) may have some mythological connotations (*voc2:3a). Mention of tᵉhôm (“the primordial deep”; *voc2:5a), qiṣbé hārîm (“the roots of the mountains”), and bᵉrîaḥ (“the bars of the earth”; *voc2:6ab) place this poem in the world of ancient cosmology. Rare Words Some hapax legomena occur at crucial moments in the story. They grab the reader’s attention and demonstrate the author’s creativity and stylistic sensibilities. • qᵉrî’â (Jon 3:2): for “proclamation” (*voc3:2b).



Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?

• qîqāyôn (Jon 4): this plant, the precise identification of which remains unknown, is only found in Jon 4. The appearance of such a specific plant could be evidence that the author had especial knowledge of botany (*voc4:6ad,7b,9b,10b). In addition, the plant contributes to the narrative’s vividness (*dev4:6ad,7b,9b,10b). There are also some words that are known from other biblical texts as key words. They place the Book of Jonah within the same literary canon and are also important for exegesis. • rdm (Jon 1:5; “to sleep deeply”): in some contexts, this state of deep sleep is connected to divine revelation (*voc1:5e; *dev1:5e; *com1:5e; *bib1:5e). • yabbāšâ (Jon 1:9,13; 2:10; “dry land/ground”) and bᵉhēmâ (Jon 3:7–8; 4:11 “animals”): both terms are evocative of the creation narrative in Gn 1 (*voc1:9b,13a; 2:10; *voc3:7b–8a; 4:11b). • sûp (Jon 2:5; “seaweed”): this rare term is best known from its prominence in the Book of Exodus (*voc2:5b). • ḥannûn and raḥûm (Jon 4:2; “gracious” and “compassionate”): these two attributes used of Yhwh echo his self-description elsewhere in the Bible (*voc4:2d). Late Biblical Hebrew The use of Hebrew vocabulary derived from or influenced by Imperial Aramaic suggests that Jonah employs Late Biblical Hebrew (LBH) and Biblical Aramaic. Although the limited corpus of classical Hebrew prevents us from knowing with certainty whether these words and phrases predate the Persian period, it is likely that the Hebrew of Jonah was influenced by Imperial Aramaic. Hence it was likely composed in the post-exilic period (see §2.1. Historical and Geographical Notes). For example, the following words or expressions from Jonah are typically considered specimens of LBH: • sᵉpînâ (“boat”; *voc1:5d); • ‘št (“to think”; *voc1:6c; *com1:6c); • bᵉšellᵉmî (“on whose account”; *voc1:7c); • ’Ělōhé haššāmayim (“God of the heavens”; Jon 1:9); • štq (“to calm down”; Jon 1:11); • ḥtr (“to row or dig”; *voc1:13a; *com1:13a); • ṭa‘am (“decree”; Jon 3:7) For more examples of LBH in Jonah, see →Sasson (1990, 22).

1.3. Grammar —*gra From phonetics to morphology and syntax, this rubric describes the most salient grammatical traits in the text, highlighting other possible translations or untranslatable nuances suggested by the grammar of the text in its original language.

1.4. Literary Devices — *dev In this rubric, the stylistic, rhetorical, poetic, or narrative devices that make up the richness of the edited text are identified by

name. When necessary, their importance is explained. The text is analyzed according to the literary approaches most adapted to the genre: ancient and modern rhetoric, prosody and narrative, as well as stylistics and the study of enunciation. The story combines hyperbole, exaggeration, and surprise to present the reader with over-the-top events and characters. Sailors prefer to save the life of a stranger over their valuable cargo and their own lives. The storm, the city, and, of course, the fish are all oversized. Events can occur at a rapid pace, and directions can be changed suddenly. Even if the story is not to be characterized as a comedy or farce, there are outlandish moments (see below: §1.5. Literary Genre: Comedy or Tragedy?). Repetition is an important device in the author’s toolbox. According to Trible, “repetition provides the backbone for discerning structures and meanings.” Sometimes translations hide or forge repetition. If your translation must deviate from faithfully conveying repetition, inform the reader (→Trible 1994, 102–103). • Key elements of repetition in Jonah illuminate the interplay between the text’s form and function: great (*dev1:2); face (*dev1:2,3a,10c); evil (*dev1:2); descend (*dev1:3b,5d; 2:6a); call (*dev1:2–3:8); hurl (*dev1:4a,5b,12b,15a); perish (*dev1:6c,14b; 3:9b; 4:10c); appoint (*dev1:17a; 4:6a,7a,8a).

1.5. Literary Genre — *gen It is impossible to interpret a text properly without determining its genre. This rubric attempts to identify the literary genre or subgenre of the text (or of a portion of the text when the genre of text as a whole cannot be directly determined). Fixing the genre helps to apprehend both the milieu in which the text might have been written and, in turn, its impact on the text’s meaning when interpreted in its original historical context. The author chose a relatively obscure prophetic figure from the past to be the main character of his story (*dev1:1). Some elements suggest that we are dealing with a prophetic book. We find the common prophetic formula (Jon 1:1; 3:1) declaring that the word of the Lord, dᵉbar-Yhwh, “was to” Jonah, a phrase which is ubiquitous in the Former and Latter Prophets (*gen1:1). Similarly, the divine order to “call out” (qr’) is commonly addressed to the prophets and explains the origin of their mission (*bib1:2; 3:2b). Yet, the book also subverts the norms of prophetic literature in two respects: first, Jonah’s prophetic proclamation amounts to only a single line in the book (Jon 3:4); and second, in a surprising twist, Jonah proves to be more problematic than his addressees. Comedy or Tragedy? Elements of Jonah have long struck readers as unique and even strange when viewed alongside other narratives in the Hebrew Bible. Identifying elements of the text as comedic or farcical has led to a lively scholarly discussion on the intentions underlying



Introduction

their use, including two interrelated sets of questions about the genre of the book and literary devices employed within. • Some interpreters have suggested that the text is a tragedy with moments of comic relief sprinkled judiciously throughout (→Sasson 1990, 331–334). • Others classify the Book of Jonah as a parody or farce with pedagogical aims (e.g., →Miles 1975, 169–170; →Ackerman 1981, 227–229). This classification does not discount the book from containing serious elements, as is evidenced by its venerable association with Yom Kippur. • Those in favor of interpreting the book as comedic argue that Jonah’s association with Yom Kippur actually supports their position. On the one hand, comedy has always been an apt response to tragedy, and on the other hand, God’s forgiveness transforms tragedy into comedy, much in the same way that Yom Kippur gives way to the joyous (and messianic) season of Sukkot (→Whedbee 2009, 192–193). • Through her work on “tragic laughter,” →Claassens (2015) has shown that laughter can be a transformative form of engagement with trauma. In the context of Jonah, comedic elements may be a means of coping with the claim that God can be merciful to Ninevites despite the atrocities committed by the Assyrians. Caution One must take caution when identifying humor in an ancient text: just because an element of a text is funny to a modern reader does not mean that it was humorous in the text’s original cultural context. One must read with a sensitivity to the cultural differences between our epoch and that of the ancients. Sasson warns of a tendency among interpreters to find humor which the text itself does not substantiate (→Sasson 1990, 331). At the same time, the whole book need not be humorous for it to be classified as comedy. Likewise, seriousness, darkness, and tragedy are not necessarily antonyms of humor, but can also be catalysts and vehicles for it. Adequate readings of the text will account for these humorous elements. Exceptional readings will evaluate them through comparative study of the text in its various contexts of authorship and reception. Comparative Approach One strategy that can assist readers in discerning humor or farce in the text of Jonah is to evaluate its structure as a prophetic text in light of similar biblical forms. The text’s structure follows generic conventions of prophetic texts in the Hebrew Bible; however, the narrative energy of the book turns on satirical and subversive appropriations of those norms. This is nowhere more apparent in the book than in the motif of the prophetic call. Any reader familiar with the conventions of prophetic literature will quickly recognize the unsettling nature of Jonah’s negative response to the Lord’s call which sets the tone for the rest of the text (Jon 1:1–3). →Whedbee (2009) has explored the tension between disobedience (Jon 1:1–2:10) and obedience (Jon 3:1–4:11) cultivated through the text’s twopart structure. He pushes this paradoxical relationship further

through readings that illuminate uses of space throughout the book, noting that Jonah’s obedience and disobedience become recognizable to the reader primarily through the matrix of space and place. Although Yhwh’s person and presence know no boundaries in the text, consonance or dissonance between divine will and Jonah’s will are intelligible through widening and closing gaps of physical space. Hence the book plays on the comedy of Jonah’s absurd attempts and consistent inability to escape the domain of the Lord. The comedy presses on further in the Lord’s provision of a fish to save Jonah. Even the one who wishes to escape his prophetic call through death will not be granted his desire. The tragedies of Jonah’s disobedience and self-loathing become laughable affairs in light of a God who will not permit flight, but instead provides both salvation from Jonah’s tragedies of self and delivery to the site of his original call (even if absurdly so by means of a vomiting fish).

Context Ever since the 19th c. the phenomena of the past have been analyzed according to the categories of time, space, and culture. Such an approach makes it possible to reconstitute—at least approximately—the original resonances of past human discourse that have been preserved in writing of various forms. The biblical text is no exception. The notes herein quote or summarize ancient sources in the usual editions and translations, the bibliographical references of which appear as an annex to the volume.

2.1. Historical and Geographical Notes: Dating Jonah — *hge The text and its contents are situated in their historical frame. It is necessary to assess the text’s importance during the period in which it was written and, at the same time, to understand the period in which its narrative is supposed to have taken place. These guidelines are more complex if the text has undergone several compilations and rewritings before reaching its canonical status. Determining the date of Jonah is challenging due to limited and difficult data. Historical Clues? Traditionally dated to the Neo-Assyrian period, significant evidence has pointed most scholars to place its date of composition in the later Persian period. Evidence for dating the Book of Jonah falls within three basic categories: narratival/rhetorical, source-critical, and linguistic (cf. →Jenson 2008, 29–30). Treating these categories in this order takes us from the traditional date to that accepted by most scholars. • The Book of Jonah famously recounts Jonah’s mission to Nineveh, the capital of the Neo-Assyrian Empire, which suggests an 8th-c. b.c. setting for the narrative. In addition, the reference to Nineveh provides a terminus post quem (date after which) the Book of Jonah must be dated.



Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?

Rhetorical Clues: Intended Audience Inasmuch as many scholars consider Jonah a fictional tale of some sort (e.g., parable, satire, parody), it need not have been composed in the 8th c. b.c. Rhetorically speaking, Jonah exhibits a rigorous structure that ultimately directs Jonah to “make a right decision about past events,” namely, to bear his election as willed by God without resentment (→Trible 1994, 224). Recognizing that the target audience consisted of ancient Hebrews, the rhetoric of Jonah invites readers to consider the story as a means of collectively processing past misfortune and trauma (e.g., the kind that would follow from foreign military occupation, conquest, deportation). Thus, Jonah may serve as a type of the Hebrew people in exile—the exile is willed by God so that Israel might bear witness to the nations. • This clue leads us to place Jonah’s composition after one of ancient Israel/Judah’s collective traumas; this does not rule out Assyria’s occupation of Israel in the late 8th c. b.c. • Alternatively, it may suggest a date following the 6th-c. b.c. Babylonian occupation and exile. Admitting the complexity of adjudicating a date for this (or any) text based on aesthetic and/or ideological data, one turns to its source-critical data. Source-Critical Data Among sources that reference Jonah, few biblical books provide evidence. • Mention of a prophet Jonah, son of Amittai, appears in 2Kgs 14:25, during the reign of Jeroboam II. If this Jonah is responsible for the composition of the eponymous book, then the terminus post quem is again the 8th c. b.c. • The Book of Sirach mentions “the twelve prophets” (Sir 49:10), which could be taken as evidence for a terminus ante quem (date before which the book must have been composed) of about 180 b.c. • G-Tb 14:4 mentions Jonah’s prophecy against Media. This is lacking, however, in the Aramaic text and V, which follows the Aramaic. Between these dates, the text of Jonah may have interacted with pre-exilic (Nahum), exilic (Jer 1:8,11; 26:3,15), or post-exilic sources (Jl 1:13; 2:13–14). Interaction with literature, however, does not prove dependence. At most, if Jonah interacted with the biblical sources of these periods, the possibility of moving the terminus post quem later remains open. Stronger evidence is needed: one must also consult linguistic data. History of Hebrew Language Linguistic evidence (cf. above: §1.2. Vocabulary) moves the terminus post quem for Jonah to the Persian period (or later) and its terminus ante quem remains around the early 2nd c. b.c.

2.2. Ancient Cultures — *cul A human being always lives with and among others. Every community obeys its own laws of common life, its rules of

behavior, its ethics, what is permitted and what is forbidden. Knowing the culture or cultures of the author and of the people to whom he speaks allows today’s reader to gauge how much a text’s author and subjects are integrated into their surrounding cultures.

2.3. Ancient Texts — *anc The library called “the Bible” did not emerge as an independent or autonomous cultural artifact. Like any text or literary collection, it originated within its own particular context: the Bible arose in and from a Near Eastern and Mediterranean milieu which conditioned its writing and reception. Nota bene—The inscriptions adduced in this rubric of notes are sometimes cited according to commentaries rather than according to editions.

In this volume, the notes concerning ancient texts focus primarily on identifying locations and “characters” within the Book of Jonah in order to give the reader a fuller sense of the narrative’s setting. • For example, the city of Joppa has a long history and was well-known in the Levant: this can be inferred from its frequent mention in texts ranging from the annals of Sennacherib to the onomasticon of Eusebius. • Or again, in the Greek text, the sea-monster (kêtos) is a mythic creature that appears in many different works, from the Iliad to Andromeda. In addition, there are several notes highlighting the mythopoetic language of Jonah’s prayer in ch. 2, including: • imagery and vocabulary that is similar to that of the Baal Cycle, • general similarities to Greek literature and language.

Reception

3.1. Comparison of Versions — *com “God has spoken once—twice have I heard this” (Ps 62:11). The notes in *Comparison of Versions describe the wealth of meaning and interpretation contained in the Bible’s different textual traditions. Over and above the simple textual variants indicated in the section TEXT, the major traditional witnesses often attest to creative interpretations in the text’s reception within different communities. The notes comparing the ancient translations of the Masoretic Text (M)—i.e., the Septuagint (G), the Vulgate (V), and the Peshitta (S)—focus on the most salient differences among them. While some of these differences likely reflect a conscious attempt to refine or interpret M on the part of the translator, others are better explained in terms of the limits of the target language or even the translator’s knowledge of Hebrew. Hypotheses regarding the reasons for translation decisions are typically given within each note, though not always. In an

Introduction



attempt to avoid prejudicing one tradition over another, we shall denote extra text or textual additions with the word plus; likewise, lacking, missing, or omitted text will be denoted with the word minus. These will always be italicized. For the first occurrence of proper names of people, the vocalization of the text follows the literal English transliteration, Jonah is Yona (M), Ionas (G, V), and Yaunon (S). Whereas in M we keep the tetragrammaton  Yhwh, in the versions we mark the corresponding word by small caps, Lord, God, etc.

• Although the general quality of the Greek translation of Jonah is similar to that of the other Twelve Minor Prophets, the Greek Jonah is arguably the closest to the Hebrew text represented by M (compare Amos, Habakkuk). • Much debate has occurred over the issue of the number of translators for this corpus. This volume’s translators follow Ziegler and hold that the evidence supports the hypothesis that a single translator (perhaps later corrected) is responsible for the present form of the text.

Editions Consulted • M: See above: §1.1. Textual Criticism. • G: Ziegler Joseph (ed.), Septuaginta: Vetus Testamentum Graecum: Auctoritate Academiae Scientiarum Gottingensis editum, vol. 13: Duodecim prophetae, 3rd ed., Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1984. • V: Weber Robert and Gryson Roger (eds.), Biblia sacra iuxta vulgatam versionem, 5th ed., Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2007. For the cola et commata, we follow the Vulgate from the Pontifical Abbey of St. Jerome in-the-City, which Weber-Gryson also employs. • S: Khayyath Georgius Ebed-Jesus and David Clement Joseph (eds.), Biblia sacra juxta versionem simplicem quae dicitur Pschitta, 3 vols., Mosul: Typis Fratrum Praedicatorum, 1887–1891. Although this is not a critical edition, it is nearly identical to the text of the Leiden edition. Note, however, that variant readings are taken from the Leiden edition: • Gelston Anthony, Dodekapropheton – Daniel-Bel-Draco (The Old Testament in Syriac according to the Peshitṭa Version 3/4), Leiden: Brill, 1980.

Tight Correspondence to M Overall, G-Jonah maintains the structure and syntax of M, which does not always result in idiomatic Koine Greek (e.g., Jon 3:3b), and therefore may be characterized as “translation Greek,” an aspect that we have attempted to convey in our own translation of G. Further, G-Jonah is more or less an isomorphic translation in which the translator renders each Hebrew word with one Greek word. • For example, the isomorphic rendering of the auxiliary verb hlk in Jon 1:11,13b makes for a somewhat awkward translation and also necessitates some plusses (cf. also Jon 3:3b,4). In addition, there are several cognate accusatives that appear in the Hebrew text of Jonah, which are given rather wooden renderings in an atypical Greek. This was perhaps an intentional decision intended to capture the emphatic power of the Hebrew’s repetition. • For example, in Jon 1:10, the Hebrew reads, wayyı̂rʾû hāʾănāšım ̂ yirʾâ gᵉdôlâ (lit. “and the men feared a great fear”) while the Greek reads kai ephobêthêsan hoi andres phobon megan (lit. “and the men feared a great fear”). The idiomatic nature of the Hebrew, better translated as, “the men were greatly afraid,” is lost through the Greek’s literalism. Elsewhere, G likewise maintains M’s repetitive vocabulary and phrases in order to capture the tension of upward and downward momentum throughout the narrative. Two important examples are: • the consistent translation of the words gādôl (“great”) and rā‘â (“evil”); • qûm lēk (“get up, go”) and yrd (“to go down”) are consistently rendered as anastêthi kai poreuthêti (“get up and go”; Jon 1:2; 3:2) and katabainô (“descend”; Jon 1:3,5; 2:7), respectively.

General Observations • In general, there is little evidence to suggest that G, V, and S had a Vorlage different from the text of M. • The translations of G, V, and S each provide, more or less, a word-for-word translation of M, and sometimes this pushes the limits of the syntax of the target language. • Both V and S seem to have consulted G when translating M. In the case of V, this is certain since Jerome speaks about this in his commentary (→Jerome Comm. Jon.). • Even where differences are the result of a transmission error or a misreading of M, these can result in a meaningful theological shift or nuance. For example, whereas in M-Jon 3:4 Jonah warns the Ninevites that the city will be overturned in forty days, in G it is only three days. This is likely not an intentional change, though it inspired patristic reflections on the nature of God’s mercy and the importance of repentance (*chr3:4b). Septuagint (G-Jonah) Initial Observations • Given the high level of congruence between M and G— higher than any other extant Hebrew text—it is assumed here that the Vorlage of G was essentially the same text as M.

“Free” Translation Found in G Although the translation style of the book is isomorphic, the translator takes license on a few occasions in rendering individual terms. Examples include: • Jon 1:5: regchô (“snore”) for rdm (“sleep deeply”); • Jon 1:6c: diasozô (“save”) for ‘št (“think on”); • Jon 1:9b: doulos kuriou (“a servant of the Lord”) for ‘ibrî (“Hebrew”). In addition, there are a handful of places where G contains plusses compared to M—indicating either small differences in the textual tradition or the translators’ elaboration—though these do not drastically change the meaning of the text. A few examples are as follows:



Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?

• Jon 1:2: the noun hê kraugê; • Jon 3:2b: the prepositions kata and emprosthen; • Jon 3:8: the participle legontes. Finally, the translation’s nuanced rendering of Hebrew kî-clauses testifies to the translator’s knowledge of Hebrew style. Instead of translating each in the same way, G draws from Greek’s broader prepositional arsenal in a way that preserves the integrity of the Hebrew while also presenting palatable Greek. This is, moreover, further evidence that the awkward, literal translations mentioned above were made intentionally. Theological Outlook of M and G On the whole, there is much theological continuity across M and G, albeit with some differences (for a detailed analysis of these differences, cf. →Perkins 1987; →Beck 2000). Perhaps the most significant theological difference arises in Jon 3:7–10, which narrates the repentance of the Ninevites. In M, the king’s decree spans vv. 7–9, while it is limited to a single verse, v. 7, in G (*com3:8abc). Thus, in the Hebrew, the king commands that sackcloth be worn and God be sought so that He might relent (“Who knows?! God may turn and relent”), but in G, the people don sackcloth and pray of their own accord, asking amongst themselves, “Who knows if the god will change his mind?” Although the difference between M and G may be due to the translator’s misconstrual of the Hebrew verbs, it proved theologically meaningful inasmuch as it invited the interpretation that the people of Nineveh went above and beyond their king’s orders to repent and also expressed a deep hope in the potential for God’s mercy (*chr3:5–10; *com3:9). In any case, God’s response to the Ninevites (Jon 3:10) is the same in both versions. Vulgate (V-Jonah) As noted above, the Vorlage of V-Jonah corresponds quite closely to M. This makes sense given Jerome’s desire to translate directly from the Hebrew. Similarly, the Weber-Gryson edition strives to bring V in line with M as much as the manuscript tradition allows, even if the readings chosen are not necessarily the most common or the most ancient. For example, in Jon 1:2, the Sixto-Clementine Vulgate (→C) reads surge et vade, following a tradition established by G. Weber-Gryson prefers surge vade, which accords with M. The earliest attestation of the former reading is from the 8th c., whereas the earliest witness to the latter is from the 9th c. See also Jon 3:2, and Jon 1:6 (surge invoca, not surge et invoca). Thus, it is not surprising that V aligns frequently with M against G. Sometimes this agreement occurs at the level of innocuous syntax, such as the aforementioned use of conjunctions. At other times this is reflected in more significant features of the text. • In Jon 3:7–9, V follows M in attributing a longer and more specific decree to the king and his nobles, whereas G limits it to v. 7. This emphasizes the king’s action, while G accentuates the response of the people. • The divine names in Jon 3:5 and Jon 3:10 have been aligned with the Hebrew (and Greek) version despite evidence in

multiple primary and secondary Latin manuscripts to utilize “Lord” (Domino/us) rather than “God” (Deo/us). Thus, the example in Jon 3:5 has the men of Nineveh believing in God (or gods) rather than the Lord, and in Jon 3:10 it is God, rather than the Lord, who sees the Ninevites’ conversion “and showed mercy” (et misertus est). Peshitta (S-Jonah) As stated above, for our translation of S-Jonah we have followed the Mosul edition, which is nearly identical to the Leiden edition. Where proper names have a standard English equivalent, this spelling has been used; for example, “Jonah” is used throughout the translation for the title character’s name, though “Yawnān” would be a more faithful rendering of the Syriac spelling. For less standardized names, the vocalization of the Mosul edition has been followed. It seems likely that the Syriac translator consulted G in the process of translating M. While Hebrew syntax and cognates are largely preserved throughout the Syriac text, a few minor deviations may have been influenced by the Greek. • For example, in M the ship captain suggests that God might “think upon” (yit‘aššēt) those aboard the struggling ship, which is rendered in G with diasozô, a verb that most often means “save,” but can also mean “keep in mind.” Thus, it is plausible that S consulted G and translated nepṣᵉyan (“he might deliver us”; *com1:6c). • Also of note is the apparent preservation of the Greek postpositive de: three out of four occurrences of the word in G-Jonah appear in S as dyn, while the Hebrew features no specifically contrastive particle or conjunction in these places. While the Syriac translation is largely a faithful, word-for-word rendering of the Hebrew text—with a few translation decisions guided by G—there are a few places where a lexeme in S does not seem to correspond to anything in M or G. • At Jon 3:5 M and G have the king of Nineveh removing his robe in order to don sackcloth; S, on the other hand, states that the king removed his crown. • At Jon 4:7 M and G report that after the worm attacked the gourd-plant, the plant “withered”; at the same point in the Syriac, it says rather, the worm “cut it [i.e., the gourd] off.” Inconsistencies like these with no immediately apparent linguistic or theological motivation are difficult to explain. In addition, there are a few minor differences between M (and G) and S that may reflect a specific theological reading of the text. • In Jon 3:10, after the Ninevites have repented of their evil ways, M and G indicate that God “relented” from the “evil” he had planned to do to the city, but S says that God “turned his fierce anger away from them,” which corresponds very closely to the people’s petition in the previous verse (i.e., that God might “turn his fierce anger away from us”). This translation appears to be intended to highlight the connection between repentance and mercy; seeing the genuine

Introduction

repentance of the Ninevites, God fulfills their tentative hope for mercy. • Further, in Jon 4:8 when Jonah wishes for death, he simply states that death is better than life in M and G. In S, though, Jonah first emphasizes God’s agency (“It has come into your hands, Lord”) and then adds “For I am not better than my fathers.” While the meaning of this line in context is somewhat opaque, it seems to identify Jonah’s flawed behavior as a continuation of the legacy of previous generations, especially considering that Jonah’s words are a nearly verbatim repetition of Elijah’s words in S-2Kgs 19:4 (*com4:8d; *bib1:1–2). Considering these two apparent interventions in Jon 3:10 and 4:8, one might begin to assemble a tentative understanding of the Syriac translator’s reading of Jonah—that is, as a book emphasizing the stark difference between God’s limitless capacity for mercy and mankind’s comparative inadequacy throughout history.

3.2. Biblical Intertextuality — *bib These notes inventory the biblical passages that shed light on the text. While examining the biblical text from the point of view of the reader in a resolutely dialogical perspective, these notes describe the factual connections within the biblical corpus on a scale that goes from a simple word to the entire work, from the use of one simple expression to a complete narrative pattern, by way of a particular narrative motif, idea, story, or practice. The traditional hermeneutic of intra-biblical “typology” and of the “fulfillment of the Scriptures” has its place here. Canonicity and Jonah among the Twelve Prophets The Minor Prophets are often referred to as the Book of the Twelve because, given the books’ brevity, they were often gathered into a single scroll. A 2nd-c. a.d. scroll of the twelve texts was found at Wadi Murabba‘at, which has Jonah at its current location between Obadiah and Micah. →Shepherd (2018) provides an extensive overview of the place of the Twelve Prophets within the canon, and the place of Jonah within the Twelve. Both are stable, but not perfectly so. Regardless of slight movement of canonical order, it is accepted that Jonah was considered a prophetic text and not simply a narrative tale (like Tobit), for it is always included among other prophetic texts. It was ubiquitously known to rabbinic and Christian exegetes, none of whom seemed to express doubt about its value or validity. If one views the Twelve as a collection, Jonah chronologically precedes Nahum, in which Judah rejoices over God’s destruction of Nineveh. Jonah and the NT There is no mention of the name “Jonah” outside of the Gospels of Matthew and Luke. They refer to either “the sign of Jonah” or Peter, who is called “Simon bar Jonah.”



“The Sign of Jonah” Matthew and Luke are the only two NT texts that refer explicitly to Jonah (Mt 12:39–41; 16:4; Lk 11:29–30,32). • In Matthew’s passage, the “sign of Jonah” concerns Jonah’s three days in the whale; while in the Lucan passage, it concerns the repentance of the Ninevites. • Both Matthew and Luke use the phrase “the sign of Jonah” (Mt 12:39; Lk 11:29) in a saying in which Jesus’ audience is condemned for hard-heartedness. In both cases, they are compared to the Ninevites, who will stand in judgment of them on the Day of the Lord as those who recognized God’s call to repentance in the past and who are able to see God’s continued work through Christ. • Only Matthew (12:40) explicitly identifies Jonah’s experience as a type of Jesus’ death and resurrection. There is, however, a stark difference: Jesus is wholly obedient to the Father’s call, preaching repentance and the coming of the Kingdom, submitting to God’s will to the point of death. Jonah and Resurrection Jonah’s rescue from the belly of the great fish resonates with stories of resurrection in the NT, particularly Jesus’. • Jesus’ ministry of healing contains several instances of raising individuals from the dead, including the son of the widow of Nain (Lk 7:11–17), Jarius’ daughter (Lk 8:49–54), Lazarus (Jn 11:1–44), and the emptying of tombs on the day of Jesus’ resurrection (Mt 27:51–53). • Accounts of Jesus’ disciples performing acts of resurrection include the miraculous revivification of Tabitha (Dorcas) by Peter (Acts 9:36–40) and that of Eutychus by Paul (Acts 20:7–12). “Simon Bar Jonah” In Mt 16:17, Jesus refers to Peter as Simon bar (“son of ”) Jonah (cf. *bib1:1 “Simon, Son of Jonah”). • This is curious, since the name “Jonah” was quite rare in Jesus’ time. • There are significant connections between Peter and Jonah: both deal extensively with fish and water; both flee God’s call and then repent; both are saved by God’s mercy from drowning; both are inconstant, whereby God demonstrates his steadfastness; both are called to preach repentance to the Gentiles.

3.3. Peritestamental Literature — *ptes Here are cited Jewish texts (written in Hebrew, Greek, or Aramaic) of biblical inspiration from the so-called Second Temple period which have not been retained in the canon. These texts offer expressions, motifs, ideas, story-lines, or practices that are parallel to the annotated text. The Book of Jonah is not widely mentioned in peritestamental literature. There are, however, a few places where the figure of Jonah is mentioned within prayers as an example of God’s



Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?

merciful action in the world (*ptes1:1; *ptes2:10). In addition, the language of Jonah’s prayer (Jon 2:2–9) is similar to prayers found in Qumran and elsewhere (*ptes2:5a; *ptes2:6c).

3.4. Liturgies — *lit The liturgy, the Gesamtkunstwerk that appeals to all the senses, describes itself as the actualization of a mystery outlined in the Scriptures, namely, human participation in the eternal, angelic worship of God. It manifests the unique context in which the Scriptures are received and understood in faith. In addition, many ritual texts are a mélange of Scripture. The notes under *Liturgy present the biblical text’s reception in the worship of the Synagogues, Christian Churches, and ecclesial communities, both Western and Eastern. They describe the use of the annotated passage in lectionaries, rituals, and popular devotion. Jewish Liturgy: Yom Kippur On the Day of Atonement, a day of prayer and fasting, the full text of Jonah is read in the afternoon service (minḥâ). This is an ancient practice, as it is noted in the Babylonian Talmud. While the Talmud gives various reasons for this practice, it is most likely due to the book’s overriding theme of repentance (tešûbâ). • →b. Ta‘an. 15a “Scripture does not say of the people of Nineveh: ‘And God saw their sackcloth and their fasting,’ but: ‘and God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way’ (Jon 3:10); and in the prophets it is said, ‘rend your heart and not your garments’ (Jl 2:13).” Christian Liturgy This volume has attempted to provide the reader with a sense of the most important ways that the Book of Jonah has had an impact on Christian liturgical prayer and art. In general, the figure of Jonah features more prominently in the prayers of the Greek Orthodox and Syriac Churches. The Syriac rite contains a special season dedicated to the memory of the Ninevites’ repentance, while in the Byzantine rite, the entire Book of Jonah is read during the Vesperal liturgy of Holy Saturday. Nonetheless, Jonah is represented quite extensively in liturgical art of Latin churches. The liturgical notes in this volume identify the specific details from the story of Jonah that have continued to be reflected in Christian liturgies. These include the following: • Readings from the Book of Jonah that appear in the Lectionary of the Latin rite of the Catholic Church; • The “Jonah” pulpits and reliefs found in Catholic churches in Europe (*lit2:10); • The mention of Jonah in the prayers of both the Shimo (Syriac Book of Common Prayer) and the Hôrologion (Greek Book of Hours; *lit1:1–17; *lit2:1–9; *lit3:5–10); • The celebration of the Rogation of the Ninevites in the Syriac Church, which is perhaps the single greatest liturgical celebration of the Book of Jonah (*lit3:5–10).

3.5. Jewish Tradition — *jew The Bible in Its Traditions employs the Roman Catholic canon. The Jewish or Reformed reader will at times find certain references in the rubric *Biblical Intertextuality, which he or she would have expected to find under *Jewish Tradition. Likewise, the reception of the Scriptures by Jewish liturgists, literary authors, visual artists, composers, or movie producers has its place in the rubrics dedicated to these arts respectively. If our bibliography does not mention otherwise, the English citations of the Jewish sources come from the database of www. sefaria.org. The Wideness of God’s Mercy: A Call to Repentance The Jewish reception of Jonah—drawn from the Targum, the Talmud, and rabbinical commentaries—interprets the text as a testimony of God’s ever-present mercy. Everything that happens—indeed everything God does, from allowing Jonah to find a boat in Jaffa (*jew1:3b) to his playful rebukes at the end of the book—is intended to guide Jonah toward repentance. A word from the Wisdom of Solomon seems a fitting summary of the book’s message (Ws 11:23–26). God rebukes in order to induce repentance, lest he, by reason of justice, must destroy the unrepentant. In the book, this takes place on both a large-scale—God sends Jonah to preach against Nineveh’s sins so that he might spare such a multitude of his handiwork—and on an individual level—God sends the storm and the great fish to bring about Jonah’s repentance. Given a peculiarity in the Hebrew, Jonah may have been swallowed by as many as three fish before being brought to repentance (*jew1:17; 2:1,10). Furthermore, the book shows how God works his mercy through imperfect actors, even when they directly contradict God’s commands: despite himself, Jonah brings about the conversion of the pagan sailors and half-heartedly converts the Ninevites. A midrash handed down by Rabbi Eliezer exposits this theme of repentance to the point of hyperbole: the king of Nineveh was none other than the Pharaoh of the Exodus, whom God had given another chance to repent (*jew3:6a). The episode with the gourd further emphasizes God’s desire to show mercy upon his creation. Thus, the Jewish tradition emphasizes that Jonah is a model of repentance. Indeed, this is why Jonah is read in its entirety on Yom Kippur. A Foretaste of the Messianic Age In turn, the Jewish tradition places the story of Jonah within a broader cosmological and eschatological context, looking back to the fifth day of creation and looking forward to the messianic age when Israel will be redeemed and, through God’s rather imperfect servants, “the earth is full of the knowledge of the Lord as waters covering the sea” (Is 11:9). According to Rabbi Eliezer, Jonah flees God on the fifth day of the week, the same day of the creation of sea-creatures, including Leviathan and the “great fish” (*jew1:1). On this day, God makes clear his dominion of the waters, an ancient symbol for chaos, unreality, and death (cf. *jew1:15b; *bib2:3a,5a). Looking forward, the

Introduction

Talmud, in a number of places, says that when the Messiah comes, he will slay Leviathan, build a sūkkâ with the sea-monster’s skin, and invite all the nations of the world to feast on Leviathan’s flesh (*jew1:17–2:10). Jonah is a precursor of this messianic promise. As is clear from the biblical text itself, he is God’s agent for converting the Gentiles. In addition, the Jewish tradition teaches that while Jonah was in the fish, he saves the fish from certain death at the jaws of Leviathan. When Jonah shows Leviathan “his seal from Abraham,” that is, his circumcision (*jew1:17–2:10), the monster flees. We may also add here that the saving of the great fish, the settling of the sea, and God’s mercy shown toward Nineveh’s great multitude of cattle point toward the restoration and redemption of the whole of creation in the messianic age (cf. G-Dn 3:51–90). Mystagogy There is also a mystical dimension to the story. The Jewish tradition hands down speculations of what Jonah saw while he was contained in the great fish for three days. After saving the fish from the jaws of Leviathan, the fish agrees to show Jonah profound mysteries, “all that is in the sea and in the depths.” Jonah is shown important sites from biblical history; his journey concludes at the foundations of the Temple, where the fish encourages Jonah to pray. At this point Jonah prays the prayer of Jon 2. That Jonah is restored at the foundation stone of the Temple connects the story’s message of redemption with the liturgy of the Temple. The Temple itself was both a model of the restored cosmos and the means by which God worked to bring order to the cosmos (cf. →Barker 1991, passim).

3.6. Law — *law Though there are only a few notes about the story of Jonah under this rubric in this volume, the reader may find the invocation of the Book of Jonah in legal cases in the USA quite interesting. In particular the “trial of the century,” State of Tennessee vs. John Thomas Scopes (1925), otherwise known as the “Scopes Monkey Trial,” featured Jonah prominently (*law1:17a).

3.7. Christian Tradition — *chr From the Fathers of the Church and the medieval Doctors to the great authors of the Reformation and of the Catholic CounterReformation, the main Christian interpretations are cited here. The breadth of the corpus is such that the works considered to be commentaries on Jonah in the narrower sense will be given priority. The works that merely cite the text in passing will be indicated only in cases of exceptional importance because of their authority or their known consequences. Jonah among the Fathers It is difficult to overstate the influence that the Book of Jonah has had on Christian exegesis and theology through the



centuries. This influence, which stems, no doubt, from Christ’s references to Jonah (Mt 12:39–41; 16:4; Lk 11:29–30,32), is reflected in several areas of interpretation, ranging from typology to moral exhortation to historical inquiry. The present commentary gives the reader a sense of the broad scope of this influence by offering a selection of patristic passages from works of formal exegetical commentaries as well as from homilies and letters. While this selection is in no way exhaustive, it offers a representative cross-section of patristic thought that incorporates major exegetical traditions, including those of Rome, Alexandria, Antioch, and Edessa. In particular, the early commentaries (of Jerome, Cyril of Alexandria, Theodore of Mopsuestia, and Theodoret of Cyrus) as well as metrical hymns and homilies (of Ephrem and Jacob of Serug) are included and brought into conversation with one another wherever possible. Hopefully, the selection of patristic citations provided by this commentary will convey both the unity and diversity of the patristic reception of the Book of Jonah. Typological Interpretation of the Book of Jonah When the many patristic typological readings of Jonah are brought together, one gets the distinct impression that the Church Fathers see the book as a prophetic microcosm of the Gospels. In particular, these readings typically focus upon the following typological relationships: • Jonah’s directive to be thrown into the sea ~ Christ’s willing sacrifice on the cross (*chr1:4,11,15); • Jonah’s three days in the great fish ~ Christ’s three days in the tomb (*chr1:17–2:10); • Jonah’s prayer in the great fish ~ Christ’s prayer for salvation (*chr2:1–9); • Jonah’s preaching to the Ninevites ~ Christ’s preaching to the Gentiles (*chr3:5–10). Though less common, the book is also sometimes interpreted as a symbolic representation of God’s economy of salvation unfolding within history. Within this typological framework, the book is read as an illustration of doctrinal teachings. • Jonah can represent human nature, one of the passions, or Israel. • Nineveh often represents human sin, the Gentile nations, or the Church. • God’s dealings with the characters in the book reflect how God deals with these entities in the world. Unfortunately, this kind of typological inquiry sometimes led to vitriolic statements criticizing the Jewish people for refusing to believe in Jesus Christ and for being distraught over the salvation of the Gentiles (*chr3:5–10; *chr4:1–3). Finally, it should be noted that several patristic authors recognize the limits of typological readings and acknowledge that they can become strained. This is first of all because not every detail prefigures Jesus Christ in the Gospel or symbolically reflects God’s saving action in the world. In addition, as a few patristic authors recognize, such typological readings can have an inordinate effect on one’s understanding of the characters within the text.



Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?

The Book of Jonah in Christian Exhortation and Preaching In terms of Christian exhortation, the Book of Jonah occupies an important, though less central, place in the Christian tradition. Frequently in homilies and treatises on prayer, the Church Fathers point to Jonah’s prayer in the belly of the great fish as a model for Christian prayer, particularly in dire circumstances. In such works, Jonah is presented as a figure to be emulated in two respects: first, Christians, like Jonah, should trust that prayer has the power to elicit divine aid and protection in any circumstance; and second, they should cultivate an awareness of their need for God’s help as Jonah did (*chr2:1–9). Perhaps even more ubiquitous in homilies and exhortative writings are references to the repentance and fasting of the Ninevites. These references are made in order to instruct the Christian faithful about the proper disposition during fasting as well as the theological basis for doing so (*chr3:5–10). Questions about the Details of the Narrative Primarily in exegetical writings and commentaries, some of the Church Fathers demonstrate a concern for establishing contours of the book’s historical setting (e.g., who Jonah is and where he is from, where Tarshish is, the state and location of Nineveh at the time Jonah lived). In addition, many of their writings deal with the plausibility of various details mentioned in the book. • Did Jonah spend three days and nights in the fish (*chr1:17–2:10)? • Did the sailors convert (*chr1:16a)? • What was the content of Jonah’s preaching, and how long did he preach (*chr3:4b)? • How long did the Ninevites really fast (*chr3:4b)? The Character of Jonah One last feature of patristic interpretation of Jonah that deserves mention is the assessment of the character within the book. Quite often, typological interpretation and moral exhortation leave Jonah’s motivations and personality unexamined. Yet, this is not universally so. While some Fathers, especially in the Antiochene school, are concerned to safeguard the dignity of the prophetic office, there are examples of patristic authors, particularly in the school of Edessa, who examine the negative aspects of Jonah’s character (*chr1:5e; *chr4:1–5). Jonah in the Middle Ages The Glossa ordinaria—the Latin West’s chief biblical commentary from the High Middle Ages until the 16th c.—assembles many of the same themes seen in the Fathers. While the backbone of the Glossa’s section on Jonah is Jerome’s commentary, the Glossa contains a number of anonymous additions, and, moreover, the various source texts are cut up and rearranged around the relevant passages in the biblical text. Thus, various interpretations of a particular passage are presented together, granting a kaleidoscopic vision of the text. Subjects covered by the glosses include history (e.g., Josephus’ speculations on the

location of Tarshish), philology (e.g., noting divergences between the Greek and the Hebrew), narrative (i.e., rephrasing the narrative or supplying missing dialogue to aid understanding of the story itself), and allegory (e.g., connecting Jonah to Christ). At times, the Glossa simply asks provocative questions of the reader, intended to inspire reflection and contemplation. For example, when Jonah tells the sailors that he worships the creator of heaven and earth, a commentator asks (ad loc. Jon 1:9), given Jonah’s confession, “Why does he think that, leaving the land, he is able to avoid the creator of the sea in the sea?” Perhaps this mosaic-like vision of the text’s meaning— assembled from various hands over the preceding centuries and brought into a somewhat harmonious whole—is the most characteristically medieval trait of the Glossa. The Glossa’s polyphonic approach to Scripture can be seen in the way it interprets the character of Jonah, particularly his flight. Generally, throughout the book, the Glossa follows the Fathers in identifying Jonah with Christ. Just as Jonah volunteered to be tossed into the sea to save the ship, so Christ gave himself to be swallowed up by the seas of death for the sake of the Church. But Jonah is also an everyman. Everyone has sinned and thereby flees from God’s mission for his life: it is only when the storminess of a life without God becomes unbearable (Jonah literally “bottoms out”) that one repents. But at the same time, Jonah’s movement from Nineveh (the World) to Tarshish (the diametric opposite of the World, namely rest in and contemplation of God) through Jaffa (yph “to be beautiful,” particularly the beauty of salvation) typifies the life of a sage. In this way, the whole book is food for theological contemplation in the hands of the Glossa. Jonah in the Protestant Tradition Many Reformation era commentators identify elements of Jonah with the theological and ecclesial concerns of the time. Chief among them is a conviction of salvation via sola fide. Calvin, Luther, and others admonish their own congregants to emulate the obedience of the Ninevites who take Jonah, and therefore God, at his word. In the same way, they often go to great lengths to clarify that the acts of repentance observed among Nineveh’s inhabitants were not works performed in service to salvation, but were responses to grace received through faith. These proclamations often come in tandem with others regarding a doctrine of sola gratia by which God has extended undeserved grace to the people of Nineveh as Israel’s enemy par excellence. In this way, reformed commentators continued the interpretation of Nineveh as an archetype of Gentile peoples to whom God’s grace was now extended. The city of Nineveh plays more roles for Protestant authors than that of a model for divine grace. While the repentant Nineveh is lauded, the pre-repentant city from which a cry of evil rises to God represents unbridled sinfulness, and a more recent rendition of Sodom. Similar critiques are marshaled against the sailors before they come to recognize the power of the true God. Some commentators extend these judgments to their contemporary circumstances by leveling ecclesial polemics

Introduction

against what they see as debased elements of the Catholic Church and the papacy. Unfortunately, while these authors extol the faith of the Ninevites—an interpretation which the text can bear—they sometimes rely on a negative caricature of Israel and subsequently, of Judaism, to do so. Jonah’s unwillingness to respond appropriately to God’s gracious actions was thus understood as Israel’s own recalcitrance. This negative example further stoked growing anti-Semitic sentiments. It should be noted that not all Reformation commentary on Jonah is focused on polemics. Readings highlighting God’s care and provision for Jonah as a prophet, and God’s control over the forces and facets of nature, maintain consistency with pre-Reformation exegetes. Most importantly, the identification of Jonah’s experience as a prefiguration of Christ’s death and resurrection carries through from the earliest Christian interpretations.

3.8. Mysticism — *myst This rubric presents commentaries and amplifications on the writings by canonized saints and mystical authors (but not by religious poets, who appear under the rubric *Literature).

3.9. Theology — *theo Under this rubric the text’s multiform reception in the teaching tradition of the councils and popes and in the writings of the great theologians in the history of Christianity are presented in their contexts. The notes are organized according to the classical distinctions in Latin theology (dogmatic theology, moral theology, and spiritual or mystical theology, with all their necessary sub-categories), and as far as possible discussed in a chronological order. Given that the Book of Jonah is a narrative that defies any easy categorization regarding genre (much like the rest of the OT), it is impossible and perhaps inadvisable to present “a theology” of the Book of Jonah in the sense of a systematic treatise of the nature of God. Instead, the following seeks to discern general theological principles—beliefs that the author seems to have held about God—that are at work in the narrative. Theology “ad extra” One possible way of approaching the theology of the Book of Jonah is to consider it as an expression of theology ad extra, a term referring to how God relates to the world. The Book of Jonah does not focus on the nature of God in himself, but on the way that God interacts with the world that he created. • In general, the Book of Jonah depicts God as both directing nature and acting within the natural world in order to bring about his will. This divine interaction with the world is often referred to as providence, i.e., God’s governance of the world according to his good will (→CCC 302, 306–308). • In addition, Jonah (esp. Jon 1–2) illustrates that the reach of God’s providential power is limitless; it is not circumscribed



by borders, nor is it thwarted by human intransigence. God’s providential power is on full display in the course of this book in which he directs not only the actions of human beings, but also the weather and living creatures (*dev1:17a; 4:6a,7a,8a). • Similarly, the book (esp. Jon 3–4) expresses that God’s solicitude for and protection of his creation is limitless. This point is made in a particularly forceful way by using familiar articulations of God’s attributes—that God is gracious, compassionate, slow to anger, and forgiving (Jon 4:2; cf. Ex 34:6; Nm 14:18; Ps 86:15; 103:8; 145:8; Jl 2:13; Mi 7:18–20)—and then applying them to the situation concerning the repentance of the Ninevites. • This means that the unfolding of God’s providential plan is surprising at times: for example, God allows Jonah the freedom to reject his prophetic call, but then marshals the powers of the natural world and the great fish to nullify that choice; God sends the prophet to preach destruction, but then relents and pardons Nineveh; God comforts Jonah by arranging a plant for him, but then willingly destroys it for a pedagogical purpose. Theological Anthropology Another possible approach to the theology of Jonah is to think in terms of its anthropology, or what it says about human nature and the divine-human relationship, including how humans are supposed to respond to God (cf. →Cary 2008, 17–27; →Timmer 2011, 22–25, 40–42). • One of the major elements within the book is Jonah’s prophetic mission; God sends Jonah to convey his message to the Ninevites, and as such, employs him as an instrument of his merciful plan for the Ninevites. To the degree that one is comfortable viewing Jonah as a type for humanity or as providing a moral lesson, this very fact can be adduced as a theological lesson that God desires human beings to participate in the unfolding of his providential plan for the world. • It is also important to observe that God does not “appoint” Jonah, as he does with the great fish, the plant, the worm, and the scorching wind (*dev1:17a; 4:6a,7a,8a; *com1:17a; 4:6a,7a,8a); rather, Jonah is commissioned when God’s word comes to him (Jon 1:1; 3:1). This application of the prophetic motif in the story indicates that, in contrast to other created works, Jonah must assent to his divine commission. • Of course, God does not allow Jonah’s decision to stand, but instead prevents Jonah from making his escape by sending the storm and then the great fish. On the one hand, this fact significantly qualifies the preceding observation about Jonah’s freedom; it is not absolute, but is rather subordinated to God’s divine will. On the other hand, one can see how this part of the story operates as an apophatic moral exhortation that humans are meant to obey God. • In summary, then, the preceding observations point to one important aspect of the theological anthropology of Jonah: humans can (and should) participate consciously and willingly in the unfolding of God’s providential plan.



Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?

Creation Theology and Divine Revelation A third major theological theme in the book is the importance of the created world in God’s revelation (cf. →Sasson 1990, 137–138, 141–142; →Jenson 2008, 37–39). • The cosmology of the book, esp. Jon 2, has much in common with the rest of the OT. In its current place in Jonah, it serves to underscore the limited nature of human knowledge, especially in comparison to the omniscience of the one who constructed the universe (cf. Jb 38), as well as the boundless nature of God’s merciful forgiveness (*cul2:1–9). • One can also discern an important theological principle at work in the depiction of the sailors’ behavior during the storm: at least in some extreme circumstances, it is possible for people to come to know God through their experience of the created world. In fact, it is possible to characterize their experience as a theophany, at least in an extended sense, since they profess their belief in Yhwh, not just God in a generic sense (cf. Jon 1:14–16). • Finally, it is difficult to deny that the theme of God’s solicitude for and protection of the created world is present in the book. In addition to what has been said above, the events of Jon 3–4 clearly depict various animals as an important part of the story of Nineveh’s repentance. The inclusion of animals in Nineveh’s fasting and repentance could perhaps be a playful echo of the Psalms’ descriptions of praise that creatures 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. Special Issues of Jonah’s Theological Interpretation Typology in the Christian Tradition Perhaps the most ubiquitous theological reading of the Book of Jonah in the Christian tradition has been a typological one. Such a reading treats the Old and New Testaments as a wisely arranged unity in which the Book of Jonah serves as a typological protoevangelium (prefiguration of the Gospel). • Jesus Christ’s reference to the sign of Jonah in the Gospels has, no doubt, served as a great impetus for such a reading (*chr1:17–2:10). • →DV 16 describes the theological understanding underlying such an approach: “God, the inspirer and author of both Testaments, wisely arranged that the New Testament be hidden in the Old and the Old be made manifest in the New.” See also →Augustine of Hippo Quaest. Hept. 2.73. The “Miracle” of Jonah in Christian Theology At various points in the history of biblical interpretation, the concept of divine intervention in the world became a point of serious contention. For some, it was a source of embarrassment to be explained away or subjected to the rigors of a rationalist worldview. For others, it was something to be defended in the name of orthodox, faithful Christianity. • Of all of the material in the Book of Jonah, these theological concerns have affected the interpretation of Jon 1:17–2:10

(M-2:1–11) most acutely. The fantastic story of a prophet being swallowed by a great fish, taken to the depths of the sea, and then vomited forth three days later was deemed— first by pagans and later by rationalists—far too absurd for anyone to believe (*theo1:17b). • Reactions to such challenges were common through the centuries. In addition to focusing on the same details of the story (the size of the fish, the heat within the stomach of the fish, the ability to breath within the fish, etc.), these reactions are all founded on the assumption that the Book of Jonah is meant to be a historical account, as opposed to a didactic story or any other type of account (cf. above: §1.5. Literary Genre; *theo1:17b). • There is, however, one important point that distinguishes ancient responses from those of the modern period. Whereas some modern authors attempted to rationalize the miracle by explaining how a human being could be swallowed by a whale and survive, the responses of the ancient and patristic eras never deviate from the conviction that only God’s divine intervention made such an incredible event believable. Thus, their belief in the miracle of Jonah was ultimately an expression of their belief in God’s power (and will). Modern Views on Jonah Julius Bewer’s introduction to the 1912 International Critical Commentary on Jonah would seem to summarize modern studies of Jonah when he calls the book “an occasion for jest to the mocker, a cause of bewilderment to the literalist believer, but a reason for joy to the critic.” He continues, “It is sad that men have so often missed the spirit by fastening their attention on the form of the story” (→Bewer 1912, 3). Looking at the scholarship of the 19th and 20th centuries, it is apparent that several different trends emerged as intellectual concerns progressed. In 19th-century scholarship on Jonah, one frequently sees an emphasis on the question of historicity with regard to the great fish. Thanks to the whaling industry, which hunted tens of thousands of whales in the early modern period, a great deal was learned about cetological anatomy. Because it seemed very clear that no whale could accord with Jonah’s great fish, the book was often viewed as thus debunked. “Jonah Historically Regarded,” Melville’s survey of commentaries in Moby Dick, gives us an impression of the scholarly approach of the time. One possibility he cites is that the prophet was not actually in the whale’s belly, but in its mouth, “For truly, the Right Whale’s mouth would accommodate a couple of whist-tables, and comfortably seat all the players” (→Melville Moby Dick, 406). Another suggestion from “a German exegetist” is that it was not a live whale, but rather a carcass in which Jonah took refuge and floated (→Melville Moby Dick, 407). A final explanation he notes is that a nearby ship, “some vessel with a whale for a figurehead; and, I would add, possibly called ‘The Whale,’” rescued Jonah “from a watery doom” (→Melville Moby Dick, 407). Hence we get a glimpse of the naturalistic tendencies in 19th-c. exegesis of Jonah.

Introduction



At the very end of the century, one can find examples of attempts to describe Jonah as ahistorical, while approaching the text from the perspective of faith. Though “assailed by the infidels,” Jonah stands up to these critics and emerges as an example of great literature. At greater fault than those who attack its qualities are those who affirm its historicity, asserting that if Jonah is not historical then the whole Bible must be disregarded. They “affirm that if Jonah goes, [then] the Bible goes and Jesus goes” (→MacArthur 1899, 211). Such exegetes make the question of Jonah’s historicity equal to that of Christ’s divinity. See also Trumbull’s remarks in *theo1:17b. In light of advances in the study of anthropology, folklore, and myth, some critics held that Jonah ought to be read as a piece of ancient literature in dialogue with ancient Near Eastern and Greco-Roman mythology. →Doane (1910), for example, compares Jonah with the myth of Hercules’ rescue of Hesione from a sea-monster. Hercules defeats the monster by leaping inside of it and fighting the monster from within for three days. Likewise, Jonah’s story is similar to that of Arion, who was thrown overboard and saved by a propitious dolphin. Finally, Jonah and similar myths are traced back to a primitive solar myth wherein the sun is swallowed by night: Jonah personifies the sun, while the fish personifies the night or the storm (76–80). In the 20th century, text-critical commentaries came into greater production, such as →Bewer (1912) mentioned above. With a critical focus on the text itself, as well as a concern for the language, the ICC provides the best text-critical information available at the time. This growth in scholarship, however, took place before many 20th-century extra-textual discoveries. In light of the data, →Bewer (1912) holds that Jonah simply does not belong to the genre of history: “Surely this is not the record of actual historical events nor was it ever intended as such. It is a sin against the author to treat as literal prose what he intended as poetry. This story is poetry not prose. It is a prose poem not history. That is the reason why it is so vague at many points where it should have been precise, if it had been intended as a historical record” (4). Some 20th-century scholars have defended the veracity of the biblical account by appealing to further observations and accounts that would support the veracity of the account. Whalers, for example, reported finding men—sometimes alive, sometimes dead—inside of whales. Other scholars employed other strategies to defend Jonah’s veracity. →Archer (1996) contends that disbelief in miracles and the supernatural is a metaphysical position; by definition, inquiry into natural causes cannot determine the nature of causality or whether the supernatural exists, since these both supervene any aggregate of observed natural phenomena. Finally, scholars like John Bergsma and Brant Pitre argue that Jonah was historical, but he dies in the fish and is miraculously resurrected (see *theo1:17b).

stimulating the production of commentaries and translations. In The Jerusalem Bible, the translation and commentary produced by the École biblique in the 1950s, the Book of Jonah was translated by the renowned scholar and author J.R.R.  Tolkien. Although the published translation was edited to have stylistic uniformity with the rest of The Jerusalem Bible, Tolkien’s unedited translation has now been published separately (→Tolkien “Jonah”). See his comments upon the Book of Jonah in §3.13. Literature. Today, many commentaries are available. Because of its short length, Jonah is often included with commentaries on other Minor Prophets or even the whole Book of the Twelve (e.g., →Jenson 2008), and sometimes is grouped with other ancient works (e.g., →Bickerman 1967; →Salters 1994; →Roop 2002). There are also several highly detailed, stand-alone commentaries that focus on grammatical and lexical analysis (e.g., →Simon 1999; →Tucker 2006) as well as historical and social backgrounds (e.g., →Sasson 1990; →Weimar 2017) and reception history (→Limburg 1993; →Erickson 2021; →Tiemeyer ). Since these last two commentaries were published subsequent to the conclusion of the present work, we were not able to consult them. Finally, although not a commentary, the work of →Trible (1994) deserves mention since it is helpful in analyzing the structure, language, and literary devices of the Book of Jonah.

Recent Commentaries and Translations of Jonah The promulgation of the encyclical Divino afflante Spiritu (1943) opened the doors to modern Catholic biblical scholarship,

The Character Yunus He is found among lists of other prophets (→Qur’an 4.163; 6.86); fittingly, he is referred to as Dhū’l-Nūn, “The Man of the

3.10. Philosophy — *phi This rubric aims to present a sort of philosophical Midrash on the margins of the Scriptures. The ways in which various philosophers use the biblical text in their own works (ever since their discipline declared its independence from theology) are recalled. The rubric also presents philosophical developments that are not necessarily directly linked to the biblical text at hand, but that can shed light on the reading together with other disciplines, such as theology and literature.

3.11. Islam — *isl Jonah, known as Yunus, is the namesake of →Qur’an sura 10, which is an exhortation to the people of Mecca—and by extension, all unbelievers—to repent and return to the primordial one religion of mankind, namely the worship of the one God of Israel. Jonah is invoked as an exemplary predecessor. The Story Yunus’ narrative is related twice at length (→Qur’an 10.97–103; 37.139–148) and twice again more briefly (→Qur’an 21.87–88; 68.48–50).



Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?

Fish,” in popular Islam, and once in the Qur’an (→Vicchio and Birch 2008, 67). The Teaching: Complete and Joyful Submission to the Will of Allah Yunus boards a ship to flee from the call of Allah, but, like a fugitive slave, he brings bad luck. He is consequently thrown overboard and swallowed by the great fish. Upon repenting, however, he is cast upon a beach where a plant grows to shade him. He then goes to preach in Nineveh, and a hundred thousand repent. • Abdullah Yusuf Ali (note on →Qur’an 68.48): The lessons are that no one should judge Allah’s wrath or mercy; Allah forgives the repentant no matter what, and his will cannot be opposed.

3.12. History of Translations — *tra This rubric reviews earlier translations of the text, focusing on those which have been authoritative in past or contemporary culture. Nota bene—We consider the history of translations to be a phenomenon of reception history. We have placed it before the rubric *Literature since these translations were themselves literary undertakings and since the majority of writers of literature inspired by the Bible took their lead from these translations. Nota bene—This rubric is not concerned with commenting upon or justifying the translation presented in the commentary.

3.13. Literature — *liter The notes in *Literature explore non-biblical intertextuality, particularly in those literary works for which the biblical text was a major source of inspiration. The study of literary reception makes it possible to assess the text’s influence and the transformation of its understanding in the course of the cultural changes experienced by a given society. “Literature” will thus be understood not only in the sense of fine arts but also in a more sociological sense of literary production, even without any poetic claim: the works resulting from “contextual” approaches inspired by the “humanities” will have their place here. English Literature The following inventory assembles English language texts inspired by (in whole or in part) the Book of Jonah (cf. →DBTEL, 409–411). • Lodge Thomas and Greene Robert, A Looking Glasse for London and England (ca. 1590). This play accuses England of the sins of Nineveh. • Quarles Francis, A Feast for Wormes (1620). This piece focuses on God’s mercy and repentance, with Christological imagery. • Defoe Daniel, Robinson Crusoe (1719). When Crusoe is presumed to have brought bad luck to the ship, the captain compares him to Jonah and asks him a series of questions similar to those in Jon 1:8.

• Blake William, The Four Zoas (1797). Jonah is oppressed by an evil spirit. • Tennyson Alfred Lord, The Princess (1847). A transient good is referred to as a “Jonah’s gourd.” • Huxley Aldous, Jonah (1917). Huxley idealizes the fish’s innards. • Bridie James, Jonah and the Whale (1932). Jonah is a terrible person whose behavior undermines his religious claims. • Klein Abraham Moses, Jonah (1933). Klein likewise idealizes the fish’s innards; Jonah’s vomiting forth from the fish is likened to the expulsion from paradise. • Housman Laurence, The Burden of Nineveh (1942). This book gives a naturalist interpretation of the story, while also emphasizing obedience to God. • Frost Robert, A Masque of Mercy (1947). In a contemporary setting, Jonah, Paul, and an egalitarian discuss God’s justice and mercy. • Mankowitz Wolf, It Should Happen to a Dog (1956). Jonah is a timid and resentful salesman. • Bennett Gordon, So Why Does That Weirdo Prophet Keep Watching the Water? (1972). Famed author J.R.R. Tolkien, who translated the Book of Jonah for The Jerusalem Bible, commented upon the book’s central meaning in a letter. • J.R.R. Tolkien (1892–1973), Letter to his grandson Michael, 24 April 1957: “Incidentally, if you ever look at the Old Testament, and look at Jonah you’ll find that the ‘whale’—it is not really said to be a whale, but a big fish—is quite unimportant. The real point is that God is much more merciful than ‘prophets’, is easily moved by penitence, and won’t be dictated by high ecclesiastics whom he has himself appointed” (British Library MS Add. 71657, cited in →Scull and Hammond 2006, 2:438). Children’s Adaptations of the Book of Jonah The Book of Jonah is frequently included in contemporary children’s adaptations of the Bible. It often closes out the Christian OT and is often—and perhaps most often—found depicted on the cover of children’s Bibles. Jonah has several characteristics that may lead to its selection for children’s books: brevity, the giant fish, and a clear moral—especially if one focuses on Jon 1–2. Yet the Book of Jonah also poses some challenges to those adapting the story for children, the most significant of these surely being the ending. While most adaptations fashion Jonah into a moral tale with a flawed, but ultimately positive role-model (→Dalton 2007, 306–307), a few make use of elements either from the text itself or its later interpretations to portray Jonah with creativity and humor. Morals: Dealing with an Open-Ended End The open-ended conclusion to the story is challenging for its adaptation as a children’s book. Although many do not even include Jon 4, those that do frequently add material to conclude the story more satisfactorily for children, such as a moral lesson (e.g., Jonah has a change of heart, or learns how

Introduction

to forgive) or humor (Jonah goes scuba diving in Tarshish; *liter4:11a). Ellipsis of Chapters 3 and 4 While some adaptations wrestle with the book’s open ending, others remove chapters three and four, focusing on Jonah’s decision to go to Tarshish and on his change of heart due to the time spent in the belly of the fish. This narrower scope makes presenting a moral easier (*liter3:3a). Beyond Morals: Historical or Scientific Information The educational aspects of children’s adaptations are not limited to morals. Several books include historical content regarding Nineveh or proposals about how Jonah could survive in the fish (*liter1:2). Having Fun with Jonah Some adaptations highlight or incorporate humor into the narrative. The depiction of sailors throwing Jonah overboard may be deemed inappropriate for young children (although it is frequently included in the retellings). The grim scene can be mitigated with humor, such as throwing a tea party (*liter1:15a). Several adaptations humorously describe the fish’s vomiting of Jonah, supply additional characters for comic relief (*liter1:15a), or give Jonah humorous lines (*liter4:6ad,7b,9b,10b). Jewish and Christian Adaptations Although Christian adaptations make many changes, they are generally unconnected to Midrash and traditional interpretations of the book, as is the case with Jewish adaptations. Gerstein’s (1997), for instance, is an example of a children’s adaptation of Jonah that consciously makes use of these traditions to creatively depict the story for children. Others use Jonah to reflect on Jewish traditions connected with Yom Kippur (*jew1:17a). What about the Worm? Very few adaptations include information about the worm. Those that do are notable for going beyond a simple moralizing tale about obedience (*liter4:7a). Primary Works Cited • Balsley Tilda, Oh No, Jonah!, Minneapolis MN: Kar-Ben, 2012. • Davidson Alice Joyce, The Story of Jonah, Norwalk CT: Gibson, 1984. • Glaser Rebecca, Jonah and the Big Fish and Other Bible Stories, Minneapolis MN: Spark House Family, 2015. • Greene Rhonda Gowler, Jonah and the Great Big Fish, Grand Rapids MI: Zonderkidz, 2007. • Hoffman Mary, Animals of the Bible, New York NY: Phyllis Fogelman Books, 2003. • Hutton Warwick, Jonah and the Great Fish, New York NY: Atheneum, 1983.



• Lorenz Graham, How God Fix Jonah, New York NY: Reynal & Hitchcock, 1946. • Mackall Dandi Daley, Jonah and the Fish, Carol Stream IL: Tyndale House, 2016. • Marzollo Jean, Jonah and the Whale (and the Worm), New York NY: Little, Brown, and Company, 2004. • McKissack Patricia and McKissack Fredrick, Let My People Go: Bible Stories Told by a Freeman of Color, New York NY: Atheneum, 1998. • Page Nick and Page Claire, Jonah the Moaner, Berkhamsted: Make Believe Ideas, 2006. • Powell Smith Brendan, Jonah and the Whale: The Brick Bible for Kids, New York NY: Sky Pony, 2014. • Prenzlau Sheryl, Deuteronomy, New York NY: Pitspopany, 1999. • Spier Peter, The Book of Jonah, New York NY: Doubleday, 1985.

3.14. Visual Arts — *vis The biblical texts have been received non-verbally. This rubric gives an account of the main visual representations (drawings, paintings, sculptures) of the scenes and episodes recounted in the texts. As far as possible, the first known representation will be described, and the history of the representations is given according to periods and cultural areas, pausing at major works up to the present. Jonah Imagery in Antiquity Given the vividness of the narrative, a number of scenes present themselves for artistic depiction. In particular, artists have focused on Jonah’s expulsion from the whale, and his resting either on the beach (after his expulsion) or outside the city of Nineveh, awaiting its destruction. Less commonly do artists depict Jonah aboard the Tarshish-bound ship. Jewish Mosaics Some of our earliest depictions of Jonah come from synagogues built in the beginnings of the Common Era. Far from conforming to the older scholarly view of Judaism as aniconic throughout history, the benefactors of these synagogues clearly valued elaborate decoration, seen particularly in their stunning mosaic floors. The latter depict biblical as well as historical and mythological imagery throughout. In Israel today, one can go to the synagogues excavated at Beit Alpha and Sepphoris to find mosaic images of zodiacs, wild creatures, and biblical scenes, such as the sacrifice of Isaac. • For example, a recent excavation at Huqoq has revealed many biblical and non-biblical mosaic scenes. Among these is a depiction of Jonah (*vis1:17–2:1,10). Here one does not find a narrative, but a single scene. Jonah is swallowed by a great fish, but that fish is swallowed by another, which is in turn swallowed by a fish the size of the ship. The prophet and the three fish are surrounded by all manner of sea-creatures,



Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?

including a dolphin and an octopus, which look on at this amazing event. Excavator Jodi Magness (UNC–Chapel Hill) suggests that the artist is working from an account different from that found in the Bible. Perhaps this artist might have drawn from one of several Midrashic accounts which describe more than one creature, including Leviathan (*jew1:17; 2:1,10). Early Christian Art: Resurrection and Baptism The story of Jonah was a favorite subject for early Christian artists in the first few centuries a.d. Artists drew from a range of scenes that even went beyond what one finds in the biblical narrative. Jonah is depicted with some identifiable characteristics: he often has his palms facing upward in an orans position, he is often depicted lounging under a tree, and, of course, the sea-monster, often a serpent, makes an appearance. In the Catacombs The story of Jonah appears as early as the first Christian paintings, in the context of burial and profession of faith in eternal life initiated by baptism. Representations of Jonah frequently adorned funerary art. In the Christian catacombs of Rome, there are 57 frescoes that feature Jonah (→Duchet-Suchaux 1994, 198). Jonah is often depicted along other biblical stories of deliverance, types of baptism and resurrection. These include Noah’s safely exiting the ark after the flood (Gn 7–8), the salvation of the three youths in Nebuchadnezzar’s furnace (Dn 3), and Daniel’s protection from the lions (Dn 6). Clearly, the many depictions of Jonah in the catacombs testify to the fervency of early Christian devotion to the prophet (see *vis1:7–15). Some general points: • Early Christians connected Jonah with death and resurrection because of Jesus’ words: “For just as Jonah was in the belly of the whale for three days and three nights, so too will the Son of man be in the heart of the earth for three days and three nights” (Mt 12:40). As evidenced by early Christian art and literature, such as →Irenaeus of Lyons Haer. 3.20.1, 5.5.2, Jesus’ typological interpretation of Jonah as a sign of death and resurrection was well known. In line with the so-called Christus Victor understanding of the atonement, Jonah often bursts forth triumphantly from the fish in these depictions. • Jonah is sometimes depicted as a Christianized Endymion lounging amid abundance (*vis4:5–8). These funerary images seem to have little to do with the biblical narrative. It may be an eschatological depiction of redeemed and transfigured creation, which Jonah was understood to depict allegorically; a lightly Christianized pagan motif; or both. • Not limited to funerary art, images of Jonah are found in many contexts, including elaborate luxury items such as ivory boxes, seals, and jewelry. One example of a luxury good is the Roman gold glass medallion preserved at the Louvre (*vis1:7–15). Jonah Sarcophagus Episodes of Jonah are also common on the sarcophagi of the 3rd and 4th c. A particularly well known example is the 3rd-c. Jonah Sarcophagus (Museo Pio Cristiano, Vatican City, Cat.

31448). The narrative cycle of Jonah, composed of three scenes, dominates this lavish piece of funeral art, and stretches almost the full length of it, as does the sea below. Primary Theme: Resurrection • Central diptych: Jonah is thrown into the maw of the seamonster (above the sail the faces of Juno—note her characteristic diadem—and Aeolus—wings and puffing cheeks— the gods who stirred the seas against Aeneas) and then released by it onto the shore. • In the upper register, from left to right, viewers find scenes of resurrection and salvation. In the left corner, one sees the raising of Lazarus from a temple-like tomb (Jn 11:1-44). Next to it, the Israelites (dressed in short tunics) complain of thirst, so Moses (in toga) strikes a rock with his rod and water pours out from it, at Massah and Meribah (Ex 17:1–7). Then, above the depiction of the sea-monster, we find almost certainly the first known image of the risen Christ. There might be here a conflation of stories, however, with women grasping his feet (Mt 28:9) and perhaps (as →Fuchs [, –] argues) the male disciples encountering Jesus on the road to Emmaus (Lk 24:13–32). • Upper right and left corners: the temple-like structure from which Lazarus has emerged, in the left, parallels the small temple. Secondary Theme: Salvation A small portrait of Noah in his ark features just above the fish that is releasing Jonah. 1Pt 3:20–21 interprets the ark as a type of baptism. As Noah takes the olive branch from the dove, he looks up to the left toward Moses, so that we may take that scene also as a figure of baptism. • Lower register: fishermen emphasize the abundant life in the water and remind the viewer of Jesus’ call to Peter and Andrew, “Follow me, and I will make you fishers of men” (Mt 4:19; cf. Mk 1:17). Note that about half of the heads on the sarcophagus are 18th-c. restorations (→Fuchs 2013, 67 n. 72). • In the upper right, balancing the tomb of Lazarus, we see sheep emerging from a sheep fold, perhaps a general metaphor for salvation or a more specific reference, such as Jesus’ self-referential metaphor of a sheep-gate (Jn 10:9). • In both corners, we have what might be generic imagery of goods and abundance, although the image on the left could also be read as part of the Jonah narrative, as the loading of the ship in preparation to sail. On the right, we have a peaceful scene of a man fishing and a bird drinking from the water. • Jonah’s nakedness suggests the rite of baptism: catechumens were naked before immersion in the baptismal pool. • Jonah resting nude under the tree is like Adam’s before the Fall and signifies the innocence restored by baptism. Graeco-Roman Forms At the same time, the sarcophagus draws upon common symbolic grammar in pagan Roman art. Here, Jonah is a naked

Introduction

youth asleep; his pose faces us, with his legs leisurely crossed and one arm raised over the head while the weight of the body rests on the other arm and the left hip: • His position recalls depictions of river gods known throughout the Greek and Roman world. • It is also the pose of the resting Endymion, a shepherd boy in Greek mythology, who slept eternally underneath a tree, and symbolized repose, peace, and well-being. The Jonah Marbles A beautiful depiction of the Jonah narrative in a non-funerary context can be seen in a hoard of 3rd-c. statuettes dubbed the Jonah Marbles (ca. 280–290 a.d.), now at the Cleveland Museum of Art: • Jonah Swallowed, 50.4 × 15.5 × 26.9 cm; Cleveland Museum of Art (1965.237). • Jonah Cast Up, 41.5 × 36 × 18.5 cm; Cleveland Museum of Art (1965.238). • Jonah under the Gourd-Vine, 32.3 × 46.3 × 18 cm; Cleveland Museum of Art (1965.239). • Jonah Praying, 47.5 × 14.8 × 20.3 cm; Cleveland Museum of Art (1965.240). It is possible that each of the four statuettes depicts one of the four chapters of the book, according to the usual cycle: swallowing, praying, deliverance, and rest. The first two depict a creature that is no familiar fish or whale: the sea-monster (kêtos) is a chimera, with a fish’s tail, the body of a serpent, wings, a dog’s head, and the paws of a dog or lion. If the artist conceived of the “great fish” as Leviathan, then his depiction is reminiscent of traditional descriptions of Leviathan as a serpent-like monster (*jew1:1). The third image depicts Jonah looking upward with his palms facing outward. Either he is at prayer, using the early Christian orans pose of a priest, or he is preaching to the Ninevites, employing a rhetorical gesture of entreaty. The final image of Jonah resting beneath the gourd is arguably reminiscent of imagery of Endymion (as seen above in the sarcophagus), though Jonah is fully clothed and bearded. Aesthetics The stylistic cohesion between the statuettes indicates that they were meant to be displayed together: this is most clearly seen in the two statuettes of the sea-creature. The composition in both is essentially the same—only Jonah’s position, either entering or leaving the fish, indicates which scene is depicted. Origin? The statuettes were allegedly found in a large pithos jar along with three pairs of Late Roman marble busts of a Roman aristocratic couple and one statuette of a youthful sheep-bearer, probably the Good Shepherd. The group’s exact location of discovery, as well as their place of production, remains elusive. The Roman imperial quarries at Dokimeion in ancient Phrygia (near the modern Turkish city of Afyon) are the source for the statuettes’ highly crystalline white marble.



Function? Likewise, the original context and purpose for these statuettes are unknown. They may have decorated a Christian household, either alongside or instead of more traditional pagan statuary; their aquatic and floral imagery might have made them ideal for placing them around a fountain in a private garden. Still, it is arguable that in the 3rd c. Jonah’s funerary symbolism was unavoidable, and so it is more likely that these adorned a grave or a shrine. The Murano Diptych Held in the Museo Nazionale di Ravenna, the Murano Diptych presents a Christological conflation of themes related to resurrection and baptism. Upper register: As an Emperor Surrounded by His “Court” of Evangelists, Christ Sits in Glory under a Canopy • Left Panel: Christ heals the blind man (Jn 9:1–41) in the upper panel, and the Gadarene demoniac in chains (Mk 5:1–15) in the lower one. • Right Panel: the raising of Lazarus (Jn 11:1–44), while the crippled man picks up his bed and walks (Mk 2:1–12). • Beneath the central panel: the three youths in the fiery furnace with the angel (Dn 3) add one more typological layer to this rich composition. Bottom Register: Jonah’s Story • Right Panel: Jonah is thrown into the sea; the monster swallows him. • Left Panel: the monster releases Jonah at the command of God delivered by an angel; Jonah sleeps on a cot under the gourd-tree (Jon 4:6–12). Coptic Art Coptic Christians in Egypt also drew inspiration from the story of Jonah, using their own aesthetic style to convey a theology similar to that above. The Louvre holds a fragmentary 5th-c. Egyptian wall-hanging that depicts Jonah and the whale (E 26820). Therein one does not find repurposed images of Endymion, but rather a single scene that encompasses several elements at once. As the prophet emerges from the creature, he is already in the orans pose and set under the vine. The Jonah portion is very well preserved, while much of the rest of the wall-hanging has not fared so well. From what remains, however, it is clear that the work focused on the theme of resurrection. In addition to Jonah, one finds a cross combined with an Egyptian ankh, which symbolizes life. There is also a peacock, a symbol of eternal life, holding another ankh. Western Middle Ages: One Prophet among Others Jonah is usually a bearded old man. The connection with baptism is nearly forgotten: indeed, baptism is not mentioned once in the Glossa ordinaria’s survey of exegesis of the Book of Jonah. The Augsburg Cathedral (Dom Mariä Heimsuchung)



Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?

contains an 11th–12th-c. stained glass window of Jonah as an aged prophet. His hat may be a distinctive marker of his Hebrew heritage. Sometimes Jonah is identified as a bald man by contrast with the other prophets: see his statue on the Dreikönigenschrein (Cathedral of Cologne, ca. 1200), or on the choir barriers of the Cathedral of Bamberg (ca. 1220). There might be one exception, though: in a 13th-c. German manuscript of the Bible (MsWettF 11, f. 295v, Aargauer Kantonsbibliothek), an illuminated capital depicts Jonah emerging from the fish as a child. This conjures a baptismal interpretation of Jonah’s sojourn in the fish. “Born again,” as it were, Jonah has a baby’s big eyes, chubby pink cheeks, and a bald, disproportionately large head. Renaissance: Back to Antiquity? The ideal youth of antiquity reappears, but more for aesthetic than theological reasons. We can see this in Michelangelo’s depiction of Jonah in his painting of the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel (1508). Michelangelo has managed to depict the whole book in a single tableau: a youthful Jonah lounges by a tree, as in his ancient depictions, but he has a distraught look towards heaven, while a large fish rests next to him. Likewise, Lorenzo Lotti’s marble sculpture of Jonah (1520)—situated in Santa Maria del Popolo, Rome—depicts him as a youth seated upon the sea-monster, with his foot upon its jaw. He holds drapery above his head, in a triumphant posture similar to Michelangelo’s David. See also: • Filippo Lippi, fresco in the apse of Santa Maria Assunta, Cathedral of Spoleto (1468). • Antonio da Correggio, painting in the dome of San Giovanni Evangelista in Parma (1526–1530). Baroque Baroque painters tend to depict Jonah as an older, bearded man. For example, • Jacopo Tintoretto, Jonah Leaves the Whale’s Belly (ca. 1577– 1578), Scuola Grande di San Rocco, Venice. • Peter Paul Rubens, Jonah Thrown into the Sea (ca. 1618), Musée des beaux-arts, Nancy. Classical “Marine” Decorative Painting Later, the story of Jonah was viewed more as an “adventure at sea”; hence it was sometimes a mere pretext for dramatic seascapes. See, for example, • Gaspard Dughet, Marine avec Jonas rejeté par la baleine (17th c.), oil on canvas, Musée des beaux-arts, Rouen. • Joseph Vernet, Jonas et la baleine (1753), oil on canvas, Musée des beaux-arts, Lyon. Modern and Contemporary Monumental Sculptures: Whale as Playground The oversized nature of both the fish and the narrative have made Jonah and the whale a frequent theme for large artworks.

The story is so well known that the whale alone is needed to invoke the rest. • With his 1932 Jonah and the Whale, installed at the Cranbrook Art Museum (CAM 1934.67), Swedish sculptor Carl Milles succeeded in his initial intent to make his fountain “a joke for the children.” His amusing “Buddha-like Jonah” has a huge surprise on his face as he is spit high into the air. • In the city of Akko in northern Israel, a sculpture of a large whale (by P. Shash, 2003) invites visitors to climb inside the whale. Like many of its depictions in children’s books, the whale’s center is open so that one can climb inside. The sculpture is a memorial to those who have lost their lives at sea. It not meant to be a depiction of the Jonah story, yet the hole in the middle of the whale—large enough for people to crawl in—is reminiscent of Jonah’s salvation by the whale. Below the sculpture, inscribed in Hebrew and Arabic are the words: “In memory of those who loved the sea and remained in its lap forever.” • In Jaffa, Israel, near the port, one can find Ilana Goor’s bronze-cast Smiling Whale (1985). Goor was directly inspired by the story of Jonah and wished to commemorate Jaffa’s role in the story. She gave the whale a pleasant countenance to highlight the playfulness of Jonah’s story, as well as its message of mercy. Theology Maintained: Baptismal and Resurrection Themes Found at the entrance to Shandon Baptist Church (Columbia SC), Robert Allison’s Jonah and the Whale (2007), fountain and bronze sculpture, is a good example of modern sacred art that focuses on the typology of Jonah. This sculpture calls to mind both baptism—being located in the traditional location of a baptismal font—and, with its dramatic depiction of Jonah leaping from the whale, resurrection. Moreover, this “sign of Jonah” cannot but be Christological. Folk Art In a way similar to these large scale sculptures from professional artists, Jonah has influenced folk artists. See, for example, • Fred Webster, Jonah and the Whale (1983–1987), painted wood, Birmingham Museum of Art (AFI.269.2013); • Sulton Rogers, Jonah and the Whale (1980s), painted wood, High Museum of Art, Atlanta GA (2010.321). From God to Children: Playing with Jonah (Kitsch and Toys) In the biblical tale, a playful God (especially with maritime entities; cf. Ps 104:26) plays a pedagogic game with his prophet to teach him mercy. Could the frequency of Jonah as a theme for games and toy be a remote echo of such mysterious and divine ways? Games Because of the whale’s Leviathan stature and the ease of adapting the story of Jonah into a simple morality tale, Jonah is often used in art and toys for children.

Introduction

• Parker Brothers (Hasbro), Pawtucket RI, Jonah and the Whale, board game (cardboard, wood, paper, twine, metal, 1929), Whaling Museum, New Bedford MA (2001.100.4283). Toys and Curios • Bank (iron, 19th c.), Whaling Museum, New Bedford MA (00.53.415). This toy bank stores coins in the whale’s belly. • Precious Moments Company, Carthage MO, Jonah and the Whale, figurine. • OneBelieve, Santa Clarita CA, Jonah and the Big Fish – Tales of Glory, 2-piece set (PVC). Children can make this story come to life with this interactive Jonah playset, featuring everything you need to help a child learn about this fascinating tale. • OneBelieve, Santa Clarita CA, Bible Toys Jonah and the Whale, 2-piece set (plush). Children can make this story come to life with this cuddly, soft playset. The set includes a 7˝ plush Jonah and a 12˝ plush whale with zipper: Jonah fits in the whale’s mouth!

3.15. Music — *mus Classical Music From Giacomo Carissimi’s classical oratorio to Jack Perla’s 21stc. opera, Jonah has never ceased to inspire great composers. Oratorios • Giacomo Carissimi (1605–1674), Jonas. • Giovanni Battista Bassani (ca. 1650–1716), Il Giona (1689). • Samuel Felsted (1743–1802), Jonah (1775). • Rudolf Tobias (1873–1918), Jonah’s Mission (1908). • Henk Badings (1907–1987), Jonah (1962). • Dominick Argento (1927–2019), Jonah and the Whale (1973). • Emil Petrovics (1930–2011), The Book of Jonah (1969). • Daniel Pinkham (1923–2006), Jonah (1967). • John Tavener (1944–2013), The Whale (1968). • Francesco Lannitti (b. 1962), Jonas (1980). • Olivier Kaspar (b. 1962), Jonas ou l’ouverture aux nations (2015). • Boaz Ben-Moshe (b. 1962), Jonah (2016). Lieder and Choral Music • Vinzenz Lachner (1811–1893), Scherz im Ernst und Ernst im Scherz, op. 33 (1862): 9. Jonas: Im schwarzen Walfisch zu Ascalon. Text from “Altassyrisch” by Joseph Viktor von Scheffle (1826–1886). • Carl Reinecke (1824–1910), Acht Gesänge für vierstimmigen Männerchor, op. 103 (1870): 7. Jonas. Text from “Altassyrisch” by Joseph Viktor von Scheffle. • Josef Gabriel Rheinberger (1839–1901), In der Zechstube, op. 74 (1873): 1. Der Jonas kehrt im Walfisch ein. • Frederick Bridge (1844–1924), When My Soul Fainted within Me (ca. 1890): Jon 2:7,6,9.



• Johannes Pache (1857–1897), Bilder aus Jena. Ein Cyklus von 6 Gesängen: op. 90 (1889): 3. Die Historie vom Herrn Jonas: Herr Jonas sass im Wallfischbauch. • Donald Waxman (b. 1925), Jonah’s Prayer from the Belly of the Whale (psalm). • Peter Schickele (b. 1935), Jonah’s Song. • Dominique Mercier (b. 1958), Cantique de Jonas. Opera • Jack Perla and Velina Hasu Houston, Jonah and the Whale (Los Angeles Opera, presented in Los Angeles’ The Cathedral of Our Lady of the Angels, 2014): the LA Opera orchestra and hundreds of singers and performers depict the story of Jonah. Popular Music • Louis Armstrong (1901–1971), Louis and the Good Book: “Jonah and the Whale” (1958). • Old Man Luedecke, Tender Is the Night: “Jonah & the Whale” (2012). • Kelly Joe Phelps, Brother Sinner & the Whale (2012). • David Benjamin Blower, The Book of Jonah (). Theater and Musicals Because Jonah is well known and has such fantastic imagery and humorous possibilities, it has been readily adapted to the stage. The most straightforward are retellings that are meant to instruct and entertain, emphasizing a faith-based pedagogical message. Other stage productions include remakes, in which the setting and characters are changed to the point that the original story only serves as a framework, not unlike the utilization of the story in funerary art. Some examples of theatrical productions: • David Darrow, Jonah and The Whale: A New Musical (first performed at the Guthrie Theater, Minneapolis MN, 2014). It is set in the 1920s along the Mississippi River, and features a folk/rock score. • Len Jenkin, Jonah (first produced by Undermain Theater, Dallas TX, 2016). This is a contemporary adaptation in which Jonah rides on a carnival cruise ship, becomes drunk, and falls into the sea. It features some love stories involving the evil city of Nineveh, a Dairy Queen, and, of course, the whale. Because Jonah has become, in many ways, a children’s story, there are many adaptations of the stories which are designed to be presented by and for children in churches and other religious contexts. Additionally, the story has also been adapted for family-oriented productions. • Allen Pote and Carole McCann, Oh, Jonah (Choristers Guild, 1987). A half-hour play for children that teaches about personal responsibility. • Mary Cliff and Kelly Fort, Jonah – A Fishy Tail (Out of the Ark Music, 2012). Geared for primary school children, this play for churches and schools has additional characters such as a crab, and “Peg It and Leg It, the nasty Ninevites.”



Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?

• Sight & Sound Theaters, Jonah: On Stage! (2017). At nearly two hours, this production emphasizes that God offers second chances to everyone.

3.16. Cinema — *cin A Full-Length Feature Film for Children: Jonah: A VeggieTales Movie Phil Vischer and Mike Nawrocki, Jonah: A VeggieTales Movie, Tustin CA: Big Idea Production, 2002, is an adaptation of the Book of Jonah as a full-length feature film for children that received mostly positive critical reviews. VeggieTales is a popular computer-animated production of anthropomorphized vegetables that includes retellings of biblical stories, moral tales, and humorous songs. The creator, Phil Vischer, made VeggieTales in response to MTV. He wanted to create “something healthy and beneficial,” that was also entertaining, with good storytelling and humor (→Vischer , 30). Jonah employs a narrative frame in which Bob the Tomato and Dad Asparagus drive children to a concert, experience a conflict, and end up with two flat tires. While they await help at a restaurant, The Pirates Who Don’t Do Anything (a grape, a cucumber, and a gourd) tell one of the children the biblical tale of Jonah. As storytellers, the Pirates connect the frame narrative and the story of Jonah; they also play minor roles within the tale itself—namely the sailors on the ship with Jonah. The film’s depiction of Jonah is noteworthy because it depicts the episode with Jonah, the gourd, and the worm (named Khalil). This is usually excised from children’s adaptations of the story. Jonah and the worm part ways without a real resolution. Jonah states that he wishes he were back in the whale, and Khalil declares that he has run out of patience with Jonah and leaves. Jonah calls after him, struggling to remember the worm’s

name (a reference to Jonah’s self-importance). The storytellers suddenly shout, “The end!,” and close a divider between them and their audience at the restaurant, humorously conveying the tale’s abrupt and unsatisfying ending. When one of the children asks what Jonah learned, one of the Pirates opens the divider and says, “The question, my friends, is not ‘What did Jonah learn?’ The question is—‘What did you learn?’” At that point, the movie concludes with a moral. The narrative frame allows the biblical character of Jonah to have little in the way of ethical growth as a character while the movie as a whole ties up the secondary story with a moralizing ending. The decision to incorporate a narrative frame was a factor in Jonah becoming a full-length film instead of a 45-minute film as Vischer first envisioned (→Vischer , 162). As Vischer describes in his memoir, the financial difficulties of making the full-length Jonah precipitated the bankruptcy of his production company, Big Idea (→Vischer , 185). The decisions involved in creating an adaptation that is both faithful to the biblical text and culturally acceptable as children’s media entail not only creative possibilities, but also financial and business risks. Besides the VeggieTales animated movie for children and the allusions embedded in famous scenes of Disney’s Pinocchio (*cin1:17a), Jonah features in several movies, either as a biblical book raising such topics as the nature of historical truth and faith in God, or just as a rich source of comic moments. * Nota bene—The reader will without doubt find shortcomings in the present edition of the Book of Jonah. Rather than distancing readers, may they stimulate readers to join us in our great project! The edition of Jonah and the inventory made of his reception in our cultures does not end with this printed book: it continues in the online laboratory, on the digital site of The Bible in Its Traditions (scribe.bibletraditions.org). Every suggestion for correction, every enrichment will be welcome. The progress will be made accessible on our digital scroll: scroll.bibletraditions.org.

Translation

Jonah 1 M 1

G

Now, the word of Yhwh was to Yona son of Amittai, saying, —

1

And the word of the Lord was to Ionas of Amathi, saying, —

2

Get up, go to Nineveh, the great city, and call out against it for their evil has come up before my face.

2

Get up and go to Nineveh, the great city, and preach in it for the outcry of its wickedness has come up to me.

3

And Jonah got up to flee to Tarshish from the face of Yhwh. He descended to Yapho and found a ship going to Tarshish. He paid its fare and descended into it to go with them to Tarshish from the face of Yhwh.

3

And Jonah got up to flee to Tharsis from the face of the Lord. And he descended to Joppa and found a ship going to Tarshish. And he paid its fare and boarded it to sail with them to Tarshish from the face of the Lord.

4

But Yhwh hurled a great wind onto the sea. There was a great storm on the sea and the ship thought it would break up.

4

But the Lord raised a wind onto the sea. There was a great storm on the sea and the ship was in danger of breaking up.

5

The sailors became afraid and each man cried out to his god. They hurled the vessels which were in the ship into the sea to make it lighter for them. But Jonah descended into the recesses of the boat and lay down and fell fast asleep.

5

The sailors became afraid and each man cried out to their god. They jettisoned the vessels which were in the ship into the sea to make it lighter for them. But Jonah descended into the recesses of the ship and was sleeping and snoring.

6

The captain approached him and he said to him, — What is it with you that you are sleeping? Get up! Call out to your god! Perhaps the god might think of us that we might not perish.

6

The bowman approached him and he said to him, — Why are you snoring? Get up! Call on your god! So that your god might think of us that we might not perish.

7

And each man said to his companion, — Come, let us cast lots that we might know on whose account this evil is upon us. They cast lots and the lot fell upon Jonah.

7

And each one said to his neighbor, — Come, let us cast lots that we might know on whose account this evil is upon us. And they cast lots and the lots fell upon Jonah.

8

They said to him, — Tell us, [you] on whose account this evil is upon us: What is your occupation and where do you come from? What is your land and from what people are you?

8

They said to him, — Tell us, on whose account is this evil upon us? What is your occupation and where do you come from? And from which country and from what people are you?

9

And he said to them, — I am a Hebrew. And Yhwh, God of the heavens, [him] do I fear, he who made the sea and the dry land.

9

And he said to them, — I am a servant of the Lord, God of heaven, I worship the one who made the sea and the dry land.

10

The men were greatly afraid. They said to him, — What is this you have done? For the men knew that from the face of Yhwh he was fleeing, for he had told them.

10

And the men feared a great fear. And they said to him, — What is this you have done? For the men knew that from the face of the Lord he was fleeing, for he had told them.

11

They said to him, — What shall we do to you, that the sea might calm down from [raging] against us? For the sea continued to become more stormy.

11

They said to him, — What shall we do to you, that the sea might abate from us? For the sea kept coming and stirring up exceedingly rough water.

12

He said to them, — Pick me up and hurl me into the sea that the sea might calm down from [raging] against you. For I myself know that because of me this great storm is upon you.

12

Jonah said to them, — Pick me up and throw me into the sea and the sea will abate from you.

Now the men rowed to return to dry land, but they could not because the sea continued to become more stormy against them.

13

13

For I myself know that because of me this great rough water is upon you. And the men struggled to return to dry land, but they could not because the sea was coming and stirring up more upon them.

Jonah 1 V 1

S

And the word of the Lord happened to Ionas son of Amathi, saying, —

1

Now, the word of the Lord was upon Yaunon son of Matthai, saying, —

2

Get up, go to Nineveh, the great city, and preach in it for their evil has come up before me.

2

Get up, go to Nineveh, the great city, and preach against it for their evil has come up before me.

3

And Jonah got up to flee to Tharsis from the face of the Lord. And he descended to Joppa and found a ship going to Tarshish. And he paid its fare and descended into it to go with them to Tarshish from the face of the Lord.

3

And Jonah got up to flee to Tarshish from the presence of the Lord. He descended to Joppa and found a ship going to Tarshish. He paid its fare and descended into it to go with them to Tarshish from the presence of the Lord.

4

But the Lord sent a great wind onto the sea. There was a great storm on the sea and the ship was in danger of breaking up.

4

But the Lord cast down a great wind onto the sea. There was a great storm on the sea and the ship was bending to the point of breaking up.

5

The sailors became afraid and the men cried out to their god. They hurled the vessels which were in the ship into the sea to make it lighter for them. And Jonah descended into the recesses of the ship and was sleeping in a deep sleep.

5

The sailors became afraid and each man cried out to his god. They threw away the vessels from the ship into the sea to make it lighter for them. But Jonah descended into the recesses of the ship and he slept.

6

And the captain approached him and he said to him, — What is it with you that you are sleeping? Get up! Invoke your god! Perhaps the god might recollect on us that we might not perish.

6

The bowman approached him and he said to him, — Why are you sleeping? Get up! Call out to your god! Perhaps the god might deliver us that we might not perish.

7

And each man said to his companion, — Come, let us cast lots that we might know why this evil is upon us. And they cast lots and the lots fell upon Jonah.

7

And each man said to his companion, — Come, let us cast lots that we might know because of whom this evil has come upon us. And they cast lots and Jonah’s lot fell out.

8

They said to him, — Tell us, on what account is this evil upon us? What is your occupation, what is your land? And where from or from what people are you?

8

They said to him, — Tell us, why has come this evil upon us? What is your occupation and where do you come from? And what is your land and from what people are you?

9

And he said to them, — I am a Hebrew. And the Lord, God of heaven, [him] do I fear, he who made the sea and the dry land.

9

And Jonah said to them, — I am a Hebrew. And the Lord, God of the heavens, [him] do I fear, he who made the sea and the dry land.

10

And the men feared with a great fear. And they said to him, — Why have you done this? For the men knew that from the face of the Lord he was fleeing, for he had told them.

10

Those men were greatly afraid. They said to him, — What did you do? For each of them knew that from the presence of the Lord he had fled.

11

They said to him, — What shall we do to you, that the sea might hold back from us? For the sea was flowing and swelling.

11

When he told them, they said to him, — What shall we do to you, that the sea might abate from us? For behold the sea keeps growing rougher against us.

12

He said to them, — Pick me up and hurl me into the sea and the sea will hold back from you.

12

Jonah said to them, — Pick me up and throw me into the sea and the sea will abate from you.

For I myself know that because of me this great storm is upon you. 13

And the men rowed to return to dry land, but they could not because the sea was flowing and swelling upon them.

For I myself know that because of me this great storm has come upon you. 13

And each of them strove to return to dry land, but they could not because the sea kept growing rougher against them.

26

Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?

M

G

14

And they called out to Yhwh and said, — Please, O Yhwh, may we not perish on account of this man’s life. And do not place innocent blood upon us, for you, O Yhwh, have done as you have willed.

14

And they cried out to the Lord and said, — By no means, O Lord, should we be destroyed on account of this man’s life. And do not place righteous blood upon us, for you, O Lord, have done as you willed.

15

So they lifted Jonah and hurled him into the sea and the sea ceased from its raging.

15

So they took Jonah and cast him into the sea and the sea ceased from its surging.

16

The men greatly feared Yhwh. They offered a sacrifice to Yhwh and made vows.

16

And the men feared with a great fear the Lord. They sacrificed a sacrifice to the Lord and made vows.

17

And Yhwh appointed a great fish to swallow Jonah and Jonah was in the innards of the fish three days and three nights.

17

And the Lord commanded a great sea-monster to swallow Jonah and Jonah was in the belly of the sea-monster three days and three nights.

Jonah 2 M 1

G

And Jonah prayed to Yhwh his God from the innards of the fish.

1

And Jonah prayed to the Lord his God from the belly of the sea-monster.

2

And he said, — I called out from my distress to Yhwh and he answered me. From the belly of Sheol I cried out. You heard my voice.

2

And he said, — I called out in my distress to the Lord my God and he heard me. From the belly of Hades I cried out. You heard my voice, my cry.

3

And you cast me into the depths, into the heart of the seas, and a river would have surrounded me. All your breakers and waves passed over me.

3

And you cast me into the depths of the heart of the sea, and rivers surrounded me. All your swells and waves passed over me.

4

And I myself said, — I have been driven away from before your eyes. Nevertheless, I will again look upon your holy Temple.

4

And I myself said, — I have been driven away from before your eyes. Will I again look upon your holy Temple?

5

Waters enveloped me as far as the throat, [the] deep surrounded me, seaweed was wrapped about my head.

5

Water enveloped me as far as the soul, abyss surrounded me, into the fissures of mountains my head went down.

6

I descended to the roots of the mountains; the bars of the earth were behind me for ever. And you raised my life from the pit, O Yhwh my God.

6

I descended to the earth; the bars of which are eternal barriers. And let the corruption of my life be raised, O Lord my God!

7

When my breath was growing weak within me, I remembered Yhwh and my prayer came to you, to your holy Temple.

7

When my soul was departing from me, I remembered the Lord and my prayer may come to you, to your holy Temple.

8

Those who revere vain illusions forsake their fidelity.

8

Guarding vanities and lies, they have forsaken their mercy.

9

Yet I myself, with a voice of thanksgiving, let me sacrifice to you; what I have vowed let me pay. Salvation belongs to Yhwh.

9

Yet I myself, with a voice of praise and thanksgiving, will sacrifice to you; what I have vowed, I will pay for my salvation to the Lord.

10

And Yhwh spoke to the fish, and it vomited Jonah out on the dry land.

10

And it was commanded to the sea-monster, and it cast out Jonah on the dry land.

27

Translation

V

S

14

And they cried out to the Lord and said, — Please, O Lord, may we not perish on account of this man’s life. And do not place innocent blood upon us, for you, O Lord, have done as you have willed.

14

And they called out to the Lord and said, — Please, O Lord, may we not perish for this man’s life. And do not count innocent blood against us, for you are the Lord and you do as you willed.

15

So they lifted Jonah and hurled him into the sea and the sea ceased from its raging.

15

So they lifted Jonah and cast him into the sea and the sea was at rest from its storms.

16

And the men feared with a great fear the Lord. They immolated sacrifices to the Lord and vowed vows.

16

Then each of them greatly feared before the Lord. They offered sacrifices to the Lord and made vows.

17

And the Lord prepared a great fish to swallow Jonah and Jonah was in the belly of the fish three days and three nights.

17

And the Lord prepared a great fish and it swallowed Jonah and Jonah was in the belly of the fish three days and three nights.

Jonah 2 V

S “The Prayer of Jonah”

1

And Jonah prayed to the Lord his God from the womb of the fish.

1

And Jonah prayed before the Lord his God from the womb of the fish.

2

And he said, — I called out from my distress to the Lord and he answered me. From the belly of Hell I cried out and you heard my voice.

2

And he said, — I called out in my distress to the Lord and he answered me. From the belly of Sheol I cried out and you heard my voice.

3

And you cast me into the depths, into the heart of the sea, and a river surrounded me. All your whirlpools and waves passed over me.

3

And you cast me into the depth, into the heart of the sea, and a river went around me. All your storms and waves passed over me.

4

And I myself said, — I have been driven away from the sight of your eyes. Nevertheless, I will again look upon your holy Temple.

4

And I myself said, — I have kept myself away from before your eyes. Now I will again see your holy Temple.

5

Waters enveloped me as far as the soul, abyss surrounded me, the sea covered my head.

5

Water enveloped me as far as the soul, [the] deep surrounded me, at the bottom of the sea my head was held captive.

6

I descended to the limits of the mountains; the bars of the earth confined me for ever. And you will raise my life from corruption, O Lord my God.

6

I descended to the lowest parts of the mountains; the earth closed her bars on my face for ever. And you raised my life from corruption, O Lord my God.

7

When my soul was distressed within me, I remembered the Lord, so that my prayer might come to you, to your holy Temple.

7

When my soul was overwhelmed, I remembered the Lord and my prayer came before you, to your holy Temple.

8

Those who guard vanities in vain forsake his mercy.

8

All those who revere vain idols forsake your mercy.

9

Yet I myself, with a voice of praise, will sacrifice to you; what I have vowed, I will pay for my salvation to the Lord.

9

Yet I myself, with a voice of thanksgiving, will sacrifice to you; what I have vowed, I will pay [as] recompense to the Lord.

10

And the Lord spoke to the fish, and it vomited Jonah out on the dry land.

10

And the Lord ordered to the fish, and it vomited Jonah out on the dry land.

28

Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?

Jonah 3 M 1

G

Now, the word of Yhwh was to Jonah a second time, saying, —

1

2

Get up, go to Nineveh, the great city, and call to it the proclamation that I am telling you.

2

Get up and go to Nineveh, the great city, and proclaim in it according to the previous proclamation that I spoke to you.

3

And Jonah got up and went to Nineveh according to the word of Yhwh.

3

And Jonah got up and went to Nineveh just as the Lord said.

And Nineveh was a great city belonging to God, a journey of three days. 4

And the word of the Lord was to Jonah a second time, saying, —

And Nineveh was a great city to God, a road journey of about three days.

And Jonah started to enter the city one day’s journey and he called out and said, — Forty days more, and Nineveh will be overturned.

4

And Jonah started to enter the city about one day’s journey and he proclaimed and said, — Three days more, and Nineveh will be overturned.

5

The men of Nineveh believed in God and they called for a fast and put on sackcloth, from their great ones to their small ones.

5

And the men of Nineveh believed in God and they proclaimed a fast and put on sackcloth, from their great ones to their small ones.

6

And the word reached the king of Nineveh and he got up from his throne and he removed his robe from himself and covered [himself] with sackcloth and sat in ashes.

6

And the word approached the king of Nineveh and he got up from his throne and he removed his robe from himself and put on sackcloth and sat in ashes.

7

And he cried out and said in Nineveh by the decree of the king and his great ones, saying, — Neither human nor animal, herd nor flock, shall taste anything,

7

And it was proclaimed and it was said in Nineveh by the decree of the king and his nobles, saying, — Neither humans nor beasts of burden, oxen nor sheep, shall taste anything, nor shall they feed, nor shall they drink water.

nor shall they feed, nor shall they drink water. 8

And let sackcloths cover human and animal and let them call out to God mightily and let each man turn from his evil way and from the violence that is in their hands.

8

And people and animals put on sackcloths and they cried out to God earnestly and each man shall turn away from his way of evil and from the unrighteousness that is in their hands. Saying, —

9

Who knows?! God may turn and relent and turn away from his fierce anger, that we might not perish.

9

Who knows if the god will change his mind and turn away from his fierce anger, that we might not perish?

10

And God saw their deeds, how they turned from their evil way, and God relented concerning the evil that he said he would do to them. And he did not do it.

10

And God saw their deeds, how they turned away from their evil ways, and God changed his mind concerning the evil that he spoke of doing to them. And he did not do it.

29

Translation

Jonah 3 V 1

S

And the word of the Lord happened to Jonah a second time, saying, —

1

2

Get up, go to Nineveh, the great city, and proclaim in it the proclamation that I am telling you.

2

Get up, go to Nineveh, the great city, and proclaim against it the proclamation that I am telling you.

3

And Jonah got up and went to Nineveh according to the word of the Lord. And Nineveh was a great city of God, with a journey of three days.

3

And Jonah got up and went to Nineveh according to the word of the Lord. And Nineveh was a city great to God, a journey of three days.

4

And Jonah started to enter the city one day’s journey and he called out and said, — Forty days more, and Nineveh will be overturned.

4

And Jonah started to enter the city one day’s journey and he proclaimed and said, — Forty days from now, Nineveh will be overturned.

5

And the men of Nineveh believed in God and they proclaimed a fast and put on sackcloth, from greater to smaller.

5

And the men of Nineveh believed in God and they decreed a fast and put on sackcloth, from their great ones to their small ones.

6

And the word reached the king of Nineveh and he got up from his throne and he removed his robe from himself and was clothed with sackcloth and sat in ashes.

6

And the word reached the king of Nineveh and he got up from his throne and he removed his crown and put on sackcloth and sat in ashes.

7

And he cried out and said in Nineveh by the decree of the king and his nobles, saying, — Neither humans nor beasts of burden, oxen nor sheep, shall taste anything, nor shall they feed, nor shall they drink water.

7

And he proclaimed and said in Nineveh by the decree of the king and his great ones, saying, — Neither humans nor beasts of burden, oxen nor sheep, shall taste anything, nor shall they feed, nor shall they drink water.

8

And let men and beasts be covered with sackcloths and let them call out to God mightily and let each man be turned from his evil way and from the iniquity that is in their hands.

8

But rather people and beast shall be covered with sackcloths and they shall call out to God with groaning and each person shall turn from his evil way and from the plunder that is in his hands.

9

Who knows if God will turn back and forgive and turn away from his fierce anger, that we might not perish?

9

Who knows if God will turn back and have mercy on us and turn his fierce anger away from us, that we might not perish?

10

And God saw their deeds, how they were turned from their evil way, and God showed mercy concerning the evil that he had said that he would do to them. And he did not do it.

10

And God saw their deeds, how they turned from their evil ways, and he turned his fierce anger away from them. And he did not destroy them.

Now, the word of the Lord was upon Jonah a second time, saying, —

30

Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?

Jonah 4 M 1

G

And [this] great evil displeased Jonah and he was enraged.

1

2

And he prayed to Yhwh and said, — Please, O yhwh! Was this not my thought while I was still in my land? This is why I first fled to Tarshish for I know that you are a gracious and compassionate God, slow to anger and abounding in love, and relenting from evil.

2

And he prayed to the Lord and said, — O Lord! Were these not my words while I was still in my land? Because of this I first fled to Tarshish for I know that you are merciful and compassionate, patient and having great mercy, and repenting from evil.

3

And now, O yhwh, please take my life from me, for my death is better than my life.

3

And now, O Sovereign, my Lord, take my soul from me, for it is better for me to die than for me to live.

4

And Yhwh said, — Is it good for you to be angry?

4

And the Lord said to Jonah, — Have you been greatly grieved?

5

So Jonah went out of the city and sat down to the east of the city and he made for himself there a booth and sat beneath it in the shade until [such time] that he might see what might become of the city.

5

So Jonah went out of the city and sat down opposite the city and he made for himself there a tent and sat beneath it in its shadow until [such time] that he might see what might become of the city.

6

And Yhwh God appointed a qîqāyôn and it went up over Jonah to be a shade over his head to protect him from his evil.

6

And the Lord God commanded a gourd and it rose up above Jonah’s head to be a shade over his head to shade him from his calamities.

And Jonah was greatly delighted on account of the qîqāyôn. 7

And Jonah grieved a great grief and he was confused.

And Jonah rejoiced a great joy at the gourd.

And God appointed a worm when dawn arose the next day and it struck the qîqāyôn and it withered.

7

And God appointed a worm early the next day and it struck the gourd and it withered.

8

And it happened, as the sun rose, that God appointed a scorching east wind and the sun struck upon Jonah’s head. And he became faint and he wished for his life to end and he said, — My death is better than my life.

8

And it happened, as the sun rose, that God commanded a hot and burning wind and the sun beat upon Jonah’s head. And he was discouraged and he renounced his soul and he said, — It is better for me to die than to live.

9

And God said to Jonah, — Is it good for you to be angry over the qîqāyôn? And he said, — It is good for me to be angered to death.

9

And God said to Jonah, — Have you been greatly grieved about the gourd? And he said, — I have been greatly grieved to death.

10

And Yhwh said, — You have shown pity on the qîqāyôn for which you did not labor and you did not grow, which came to be overnight and perished overnight.

10

And the Lord said, — You treated the gourd leniently though you did not suffer over it and you did not raise, which came to be overnight and perished overnight.

11

But I, should I not show pity on Nineveh, the great city, in which there are more than a hundred and twenty thousand humans who do not know their right hand from their left hand, and many animals?

11

But I, should I not spare Nineveh, the great city, in which dwell more than a hundred and twenty thousand humans who do not know their right hand from their left hand, and many animals?

31

Translation

Jonah 4 V 1

S

And Jonah was afflicted by a great affliction and he was angry.

1

2

And he prayed to the Lord and said, — I beseech [you], O Lord! Is this not my word while I was still in my land? Because of this I first fled to Tarshish for I know that you are a lenient and merciful God, patient and abounding in pity, and forgiving concerning evil.

2

And he prayed before the Lord and said, — O Lord! Was this not my thought while I was still in my land? Because of this I arose early [and] fled to Tarshish for I know that you are a merciful and compassionate God, slow to anger and abounding in love, and relenting from evil.

3

And now, O Lord, take, I ask, my soul from me, for to me death is better than life.

3

Therefore, my Lord, take my soul from me, for it is better for me to die than for me to live.

4

And the Lord said, — Do you think it is good for you to go on being angry?

4

And the Lord said to him, — Did it grieve you greatly?

5

So Jonah went out of the city and sat down against the east of the city and he made for himself there a shady place and sat beneath it in the shade until [such time] that he might see what might befall the city.

5

So Jonah went out of the city and sat down to the east of the city and he made for himself there a tent and sat beneath it in the shade until [such time] that he might see what would happen to the city.

6

And the Lord God prepared an ivy and it went up over Jonah’s head that it might be a shade over his head and protect him, for he had labored. And Jonah rejoiced with great joy on account of the ivy.

6

And the Lord God commanded the tendril of a gourd and it sprouted and rose above Jonah and it was a shade over his head and relieved him of his evil.

7

And God prepared a worm when dawn arose the next day and it struck the ivy and it withered.

7

But the next day, the Lord God commanded a worm at the rising of dawn and it struck the tendril of the gourd and cut it off.

8

And when the sun had been raised, God prepared a hot and burning wind and the sun struck upon Jonah’s head. And he was agitated and he desired in his soul that he might die and he said, — It is better for me to die than to live.

8

And it happened, as the sun rose, that the Lord God commanded a hot wind, and it dried up the gourd and the sun beat upon Jonah’s head. And he was overwhelmed and he requested death for his soul and he said, — It has come into your hands, Lord, to take my life from me, for I am not better than my fathers.

9

And the Lord said to Jonah, — Do you think you are rightly angry about the ivy? And he said, — I am rightly angry to death.

9

And the Lord God said to Jonah, — Are you greatly grieved about the tendril of the gourd? And Jonah said, — I am greatly grieved to death.

10

And the Lord said, — You grow sorrowful over the ivy for which you did not labor, nor did you do [anything] that it might grow, that was born in one night and perished in one night.

10

And the Lord said to him, — You took pity on the tendril of the gourd for which you did not labor and which you did not raise, that sprouted in a night and dried up in a night.

11

But I, should I not spare Nineveh, the great city, in which there are more than a hundred and twenty thousand humans who do not know what is between their right hand and their left hand, and many beasts of burden?

11

But I, should I not show pity on Nineveh, the great city, in which there are more than a hundred and twenty thousand humans who do not know their right hand from their left hand, and many animals?

And a great sorrow grieved Jonah and distressed him greatly.

And Jonah was greatly delighted at the tendril of the gourd.

Annotated Pericopes

35

Jon :- God Commissions and His Prophet Flees

Jon 1:1–3 God Commissions and His Prophet Flees M

1 Now, the word of Yhwh was to

Yona son of Amittai, saying, —

GV

And the word of the Lord was V happened to Ionas Vson of Amathi, saying, —

S

Now, the word of the Lord was upon Yaunon son of Matthai, saying, —

MGVS G

2 Get up and go to Nineveh, the great city, and call out against GV S

3a

b c d

preach in preach against it for their evil G the outcry of its wickedness has come

up before my face. G to me. S before me. And Jonah got up to flee to Tarshish from the face S presence of Yhwh. GVS the Lord. GV And he descended to Yapho GVS Joppa and found a ship going to Tarshish. GV And he paid its fare and descended into G boarded it to go G sail with them to Tarshish from the face S presence of Yhwh. GVS the Lord.

1 Yona son of Amittai 2Kgs 14:25 — 2 Get up, go Jon 3:2; 1Kgs 17:9; 21:18 — 2 Nineveh Gn 10:11; 2Kgs 19:36; Is 37:37; Na 1:1; 2:8; 3:7; Zep 2:13; Mt 12:41; Lk 11:32 — 2 the great city Jon 3:2–3; 4:11 — 2 call out against 1Kgs 13:2; Ps 105:16 — 2 their evil has come up Gn 6:5; 18:2; Lam 1:22 — 3a Tarshish Gn 10:4; 1Kgs 10:22; 2Chr 9:21; Ps 48:7; Is 23:10 — 3b Yapho 2Chr 2:16; Ezra 3:7; Acts 9:36

Y‚Suggestions for Reading‚Z 1–3 God Surprises the Prophet; Jonah Surprises the Reader An (a)typical prophetic commission comes to a typical prophet, characterizing Nineveh as a new Sodom. Will the prophet respond in the manner of Abraham and heed God? Will his response fit the reader’s expectations of a prophet? In a book of surprises, the first is that a prophet is sent to Nineveh. The second is that he flees. An Unusual Prophetic Beginning It is never announced that Jonah is a prophet, but the structure of the opening leaves no doubt. The story opens the way many stories about prophets open (*bib1:1 the word), with the commissioning of a task (*gen1:1). The surprise, though, is the response of the prophet who, when commanded to get up and go, gets up and flees. Nineveh as a New Sodom Nineveh, steeped in biblical intertextuality, is presented in overtly negative ways (esp. Nahum) (*bib1:2 Nineveh). The subtle allusion to Sodom in M is emphasized in later textual traditions (*com1:2; *bib1:2 their evil) and noted in the reception history (*chr1:1–11; *chr1:2). Focus on the Character of Jonah The opening indicates that we are dealing with prophetic material, but unlike other prophetic texts, readers are given little information about the

prophet himself (other than his patronym), his time, and his location (*dev1:1). This allows for reflection on • his name (*voc1:1), • biblical intertextuality (*bib1:1 Yona son of Amittai), • historicization (*hge1:1; *jew1:1 Yona son of Amittai). Jonah Flees The motivation for Jonah’s flight is not given at this point, and the reader must wait several chapters for more information on this. The curiosity of the reader is piqued, and many interpreters have reflected on the prophet’s surprising behavior (*jew1:3a; *chr1:3a to flee).

Text Y‚Textual Criticism‚Z 3d to Tarshish Hebrew Variant: With Them of Tarshish • 4QXIIg (4Q82 f76–78i+79–81:7) omits the directional marker (-h) in the third occurrence of the word “Tarshish” (→DJD XV, 309). • It is possible that 4QXIIa (4Q76 5:6) also omits the directional marker, but its fragmentary state leaves this uncertain since only one letter of the word (the second shin) is visible (→DJD XV, 229).

36

Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?

• One possible reading of this variant is “to go with them of Tarshish,” thus identifying the sailors as citizens of the city.

nature is fortified by the content of Jonah’s message when he does, in fact, call out against Nineveh (Jon 3:4).

Y‚Vocabulary‚Z

2 for Causal Clause The kî (“for”) clause is most probably causal, given the general theme of the book; moreover, the message’s content is not specified. Less likely the clause is objective.

1 Yona son of Amittai A Multivalent Name Jonah Jonah’s name means “dove,” which is used throughout Scripture and conveys multiple nuances (*bib1:1). Amittai Derived from the verb he’ĕmîn, “to believe,” although its form is closer to the noun ’ĕmet, “truth,” the name includes a theophoric ending and could be translated as “Yhwh is true.” 3b ship And Not: Fleet • ’ŏniyyâ (feminine) refers to a single ship. • The masculine form, ’ŏnî, is the collective noun “fleet.” 3b going to Tarshish Or: Coming to Tarshish? The author could have conveyed that Jonah found a ship that was “going to” Tarshish with either the locative -he (*gra1:3d) or the verb hālak. • The usual sense of the verb retained, bô’, is movement toward, rather than away, and the translations “returning to Tarshish” (→Trible 1994, 129) and “had just come from Tarshish” (→Sasson 1990, 66 and 82–84) convey this. As the ship’s destination is clear, while its origin is less so, it is simply rendered “going to.” Y‚Grammar‚Z 1 Now Narrative Marker The first word of the book, wayhî can carry at least six nuances, including a temporal one: • “When Yhwh’s command”; • “And it came to pass”; • “And so it was”; etc. As a narrative marker, it may be simply rendered as “Now” (cf. *gen1:1). 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 *gen1:1).

3a And Jonah got up to flee Syntax The phrase wāyyāqām…librōaḥ echoes the divine order from Jon 1:2 (*gra1:2). See also *bib1:2; 3:2b. Waw-consecutive The wayyiqtol verb that opens the sentence is a regular narrative form suggesting a smooth continuation of the story. Jonah does “get up” but—to the reader’s surprise—to do the reverse of the second command: “And Jonah got up to flee”! This syntax and Jonah’s half-way obedience, i.e., disobedience, reinforce the staggering effect of Jonah’s unexpected flight. Auxiliary Use of the Verb qwm Like the two asyndetic imperatives in Jon 1:2, the phrase can be interpreted as verbal hendiadys, in which the first verb is interpreted as an auxiliary that conveys an ingressive force: “Jonah set out to flee” (see →Dobbs-Allsopp 1995, 31–37). Adversative Verb Form? As mentioned above, the wayyiqtol conveys subsequent action. Most of the time, it is simply translated as “and then he…” or “it came to pass that…” Since, however, Jonah gets up to flee from God’s mission, a number of translators choose to begin Jon 1:3 with an adversative conjunction such as “but” or “instead,” thereby moving the prophet’s surprising disobedience to the beginning of the clause. E.g., • “But Jonah rose up to flee” (JPS; KJV). Some translators choose to insert an adversative halfway through the clause instead: • “Rise up he did, but his thought was, he would escape to Tharsis” (Knox); • “Jonas donc se mit en chemin, mais il résolut d’aller à Tharsis” (de Sacy). 3b a ship going to Tarshish Going or Coming? (Ambiguous Construction) The usual sense of the verb bô’ is movement toward (coming to) rather than going away. Translated literally, this would mean that Jonah looked in Joppa for a ship “coming to Tarshish.” The author could have conveyed that Jonah found a ship that was “going to Tarshish” with either the locative -he or a proposition using the verb hãlak. Several options are possible for translation: • “returning to Tarshish”; • “had just come from Tarshish”; • “about to leave”; • “going to.” 3d to Tarshish Use of the Locative -he Taršîšâ (cf. *tex1:3d). Y‚Literary Devices‚Z

2 Get up, go Or: Set Out for! (Asyndetic Verbal Hendiadys: Auxiliary Use of the Verb?) The two opening verbs are imperatives: qûm and lēk. • On its own, each verb is easily translated as “Get up!” and “Go!” However, the imperative qûm is often used as an auxiliary verb (having an adverbial function) when preceding another verb with no conjunction. • If this is the case, qûm can remain untranslated and the two verbs work together to mean something like “Set out for,” “Go immediately,” or, as in the NRSV and JPS, “Go at once.” Nevertheless, in this particular case, it is better to render the verb, for, while it does not make a significant change in meaning, it does preserve the (somewhat ironic) structure of the book’s opening (*dev1:2–3). 2 call out against Or: to (Meaning of the Preposition) • The verb qr’ + the preposition ‘al can be understood in diverse ways (*tra1:2). Our translation emphasizes that the sense of qr’ + the preposition ‘ālêhā is oppositional: calling out against, rather than calling upon. The oppositional

1:1–4:11 Significance of the Names for God? Throughout Jonah readers find several names for God: Yhwh (22 ×); ’Ēl/’Ĕlôhîm (13 ×); and Yhwh ’Ĕlôhîm (4 ×). • →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. 1–3 Narrative Trigger The introduction consists of two roughly equal parts: • the message from Yhwh (Jon 1:1–2); • Jonah’s silent response to it (Jon 1:3). The common denominator of both parts is the divine presence, God’s “face.” His message to Jonah is the result of the wickedness of the Ninevites entering before God’s face, and Jonah then tries to flee from that same face (cf. Jon 1:10).

Jon :- God Commissions and His Prophet Flees

1 Yona son of Amittai Relative De-contextualization Although we are given the prophet’s name and patronym, we do not have any other indication of historical context, unlike other prophetic books. See, for example, • Hos 1:1: “The word of the Lord that was to Hosea the son of Beeri, in the days of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah, kings of Judah, and in the days of Jeroboam the son of Joash, king of Israel”; • Am 1:1: “The words of Amos, who was among the herdmen of Tekoa… in the days of Uzziah king of Judah, and in the days of Jeroboam the son of Joash king of Israel, two years before the earthquake.” The author seems to be unconcerned, maybe intentionally so, with informing us of the story’s historical circumstances. Similarly, the Books of Joel, Obadiah, Nahum, Habakkuk, and Malachi provide little context. 1:2–3:8 Leitwort “Call Out”: Jonah as a Story about “Calling” The verb qr’, “to call, to cry out,” occurs eight times within the story. 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). 2–3 Irony of Jonah’s Flight: Inversion of the “We Will Do and We Will Listen” Motif? After the revelation of the Torah on Mount Sinai, the Israelites famously pledged na‘ăśê wenišmā‘ (“We will do and we will listen [to all that God has declared],” Ex 24:7), making two promises: to do/obey and to listen/learn. • Jonah here, who is about to dub himself “a Hebrew” (Jon 1:9), responds to the twofold command (Jon 1:2 qûm lēk) by getting up (Jon 1:3 wayyāqām) and…fleeing. • Moreover, instead of getting up, Jonah “descends” twice in Jon 1:3, as Jonah goes down to Joppa and down into a ship (*dev1:3b,5d; 2:6a). • Lastly, one needs only very basic geography (*hge1:2) to know that if Jonah heads out to sea, then he is heading away from Nineveh. 2,6c Get up NARRATION Repetition, Meaning The captain’s command to Jonah echoes the prophet’s call from God (Jon 1:2) verbatim. Jonah’s prior refusal of the divine command by “rising and fleeing,” rather than “rising and going,” now results in repetition of the same command to rise expressed in the mouth of a human character. Echo of God’s Words in the Captain’s? Such repetition may have startled Jonah, as though God was speaking through the captain, reminding Jonah of his earlier call. Ellipsis Yet, this time Jonah’s response to the captain’s command is never narrated. He simply appears in the company of the sailors. If Jonah rises at the command of the captain, it is a gap in the text for readers to fill. This increases the contrast between the captain’s (and sailors’) prayerful response to the storm and Jonah’s total rejection of his personalized divine mandates. 2 Get up NARRATION Characterization of God as the First Speaker The author’s choice to present God as the first speaker sets the tone for the exchanges that follow. God’s speaking first gives Jonah an opportunity to respond, yet Jonah does not accept the invitation. In this way, Jonah might be seen as a foil to Samuel who hears the divine call and willingly responds. Jonah calls to God from the belly of the fish, but God does not respond. These two only begin to speak to one another in chapter four.

37

2 great Leitwort (cf. also Jon 1:4,10,12,16; 2:1; 3:2–3,5,7; 4:1,6,11). Through its repetitive usage, the term “great” contributes to the story’s larger than life character. In the Context of Jonah: Trace of Orality? • The adjective “great” (gādôl) occurs 14 times in Jonah, with four of them referring to Nineveh (Jon 1:2; 3:2–3; 4:11); the others to great wind and storm (Jon 1:4,12), fear of sailors (Jon 1:10,16), fish (Jon 2:1), the “great ones” of Nineveh (Jon 3:5,7), evil and joy in Jonah’s eyes (Jon 4:1,6). • Repetition, rather than utilizing synonyms, suits story and mythology more so than history—a hint to how we should read the Book of Jonah. Literarily, it achieves simplicity and emphasizes the book’s orality. In the Context of the Twelve: Exaggeration • The instances of the adjective gādôl in Jonah comprise 25% of its appearances in the Book of the Twelve, a sign of the story’s tendency toward exaggeration. A Narrative Characterization of God through His Works? • A focus on the superlative trades on the multivalence of the term which can at once intimate the magnitude and power of Nineveh and the natural elements of wind, sea, and fish that are put to work by Yhwh. In doing so, the narrative conveys indirect qualitative assessments of the essential goodness and importance of these entities, which God recognizes despite Jonah’s inability to do so. • Though God is not described as gādôl in the text, readers are drawn to the conclusion that greatness of cities and the natural world cannot compare to Yhwh’s own greatness as “God of the heavens…who made the sea and the dry land” (Jon 1:9). 2 against it for their evil Number Variation • Rendered most simply, ‘ālêhā is “to/against her,” • while rā‘ātām is plural, “their evil.” The author could have written that Jonah was to call out against the city because “her wickendness” has come up. By switching to plural, the author is drawing attention more concretely to the citizens of the city for the first time. 2 evil Leitwort in the Service of Irony (cf. also Jon 1:7–8; 3:10; 4:1–2,6). The noun rā‘â has a very generic meaning and expresses • either evil that one produces (wickedness), • or evil that one suffers (calamity). Human Within the story, evil functions as an unwanted and dangerous object that is passed around. • It is produced by the Ninevites and ascends (seemingly of its own volition) to the Divine presence in Jon 1:2. • From there, Jonah’s disobedience brings it upon the sailors (Jon 1:7–8). Divine? The enactment of “evil” is not only the domain of human beings. • Via the prophet, God threatens to do “evil” to the Ninevites (Jon 3:10). • When they repent, Jonah determines that God’s refraining from retributive calamity is unjust, believing it was a “great evil” (Jon 4:1). • In response, Jonah recognizes (and laments) that one of God’s core attributes is that in his mercifulness, he relents from bringing calamity on those who might deserve it (Jon 4:2). • The story ends in a rather ironic way, when a God-sent plant “protected him from his evil” (Jon 4:6)—here, hopefully not from the presumed calamities Jonah suffered, but from the evil he himself was cultivating in his own unmerciful heart. 2,3a,10c face Leitwort • The face of Yhwh is mentioned thrice at Jon 1:2–3a,10c. God calls Jonah because the wickedness of the Ninevites has ascended before God’s face; Jonah then tries to flee from before the face of God. 3–4 RHETORIC Dispositio: Anadiplosis (Repetition) • The author both concludes Jon 1:3 and begins Jon 1:4 with the divine name. In order to do this, the typical Hebrew word order is ignored and the subject is moved to the head of the sentence.

38

Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?

Thus is emphasized Jonah’s failure to escape from the presence of the Lord. 3 RHETORIC Chiseled Dispositio This verse offers a concentric structure: • the presence of the Lord (A-A’), • going down (to Joppa B, inside the ship B’), • finding (C) and paying for (C’) the ship, • going to Tarshish (D), the toponym which is also found in A and A’. This structure is enriched with a pair of triads, with the verse focusing on the intent, activity, and goal. • Jonah seeks to escape, goes down to Joppa, finds a ship. • He then pays, boards, and sails. Moreover, there is a reflection effect between Jon 1:3 and Jon 1:2 (*dev1:2–3; *dev1:3–4). 1:3b,5d; 2:6a descended Repetition, Meaning: Inverted Symbolism of Directions Ever Higher Elsewhere in the Bible, departure from Jerusalem is always descent while movement toward the Holy City is always ascent. Movement to and from Egypt is similarly rendered. Ever Lower In Jonah the verb yārad appears four times. Whereas Jon 1:2 suggests that to get to the Lord’s face, one needs to “ascend,” Jonah decisively takes the opposite direction. He descends first to Joppa, then to the ship (Jon 1:3) (2 ×), then to the bottom of it (Jon 1:5), to finish with a descent to the “roots of the mountains” in his prayer (Jon 2:6 [V-2:7]). • In one sense, the terminology bears the weight of prophetic call and response. The cry of Nineveh’s evil has come up to Yhwh and Jonah is commissioned to “go down” to Nineveh. • On another level, the theme of descent gathers narrative weight throughout the story. First Jonah goes down to Joppa and finds a ship that he goes down into (Jon 1:3). Later, when the sea is raised to rage by the wind of God, the reader finds that Jonah has already gone down further into the ship’s bowels and is fast asleep (Jon 1:5). In their attempts to calm the storm, the sailors follow Jonah’s command to throw him overboard. Cast from the ship, Jonah begins the unexpected journey further down into the sea inside the belly of the great fish. Therein, his prayer records his descent (I descended) to “rock bottom”—the ’ereṣ at the bottom of the sea which is the gates of the Pit—and declares Yhwh’s ability to redeem from the deepest depths (Jon 2:6). 3b found a ship PROSODY Assonance (Wordplay) • The name of the prophet and the word for ship bear a playful similarity, yônâ and ’ŏniyyâ. Evidence of this type of wordplay can be found elsewhere (*cul1:3b). Y‚Literary Genre‚Z 1 Now, the word of Yhwh was to Yona son of Amittai Prophetic Word Formula “Now”: A Prophetic or Narrative Marker? The wayyiqtol form of hyh is a common grammatical feature opening narratives (*gra1:1; *dev1:1–3), but it is uncommon at the opening of a prophetic book. Jonah alone among the Minor Prophets begins this way. • Some see this as suggesting that Jonah is one tale among others that previously circulated together. • Others view this as an acceptable opening form for beginning a narrative, akin to a drop-capital or a decorated initial (→Wolff 1986, 95). “The word of YHWH was to”: Wortereignisformel A prophetic commission is regularly conveyed with this phrase (*gra1:1; 3:1). As the most formulaic expression for establishing a prophetic commission, the examples are too numerous to list (*bib1:1 the word of Yhwh was to). • This expression follows the pattern “the word of the king is to…” (2Sm 14:17; 24:4). • An analogous formula occurs as an epistolary introduction in the Neo-Assyrian, Neo-Babylonian, and Late Babylonian periods. It is applied to the

words of individuals vested with some authority (→Meier 1992, 314–316). “Yona son of Amittai” See *bib1:1.

Context Y‚Historical and Geographical Notes‚Z 1 Yona son of Amittai The Same as the One from Gath-Hepher? 2Kgs 14:25 contains the OT’s only other mention of a prophet named Jonah the son of Amittai. There one learns that Jonah was from Gath-Hepher, which was the eastern boundary of the tribe of Zebulun as noted in Jo 19:13 (cf. *jew1:1; *chr1:1). • Since the name Gath-Hepher combines gat (“winepress”) and ḥēper (“well” or “pit”), viticulture may have been the town’s chief industry. • The modern Arab village of Meshed, east of Sepphoris, is often identified as Gath-Hepher, and there is a grave of Jonah there. 2 Nineveh Assyria’s Last Capital (cf. Jon 3:2–7; 4:5,11). Mention in the Scriptures • The city is first referred to in the Bible at Gn 10:11–12, where the term “great city” is also used, although it may be a reference to Calah. • Jonah contains nine of the OT’s fourteen references to the city. • By metonymy, the terms Nineveh, Assyria, or the king of Assyria, often all refer to the empire, as well as its military and political power. See more at *bib1:2 Nineveh. Topography An extremely ancient city (6000 b.c.), Nineveh (Nînewé) is on the banks of the Tigris, near modern Mosul. Archaeology Archaeological excavations of Tell Kuyunjik (not of Tell Nebi Yunus due to its sanctity among Muslims) by the French and British have been conducted since the mid-19th c., generating volumes of scholarly publications (see →Thompson and Hutchinson 1929; →Petit and Bonacossi 2017). The British Museum houses many of the great finds. • These include carved wall panels of the palaces of Sennacherib and Ashurbanipal, complete with depictions of lion hunts, gardens, and the construction of great monuments. • Similarly grand is the collection of cuneiform textual deposits from Kuyunjik. Name • Based on the cuneiform for Nineveh (Ninua), which is a fish within a house, the city may have derived its name from a fish goddess. • Beginning in the Old Assyrian period, the city was dedicated to “Ishtar of Nineveh.” History: Neo-Assyrian Development • Sennacherib (704–681 b.c.) fortified the city, enclosing an area of 750 ha. He saw to the construction of the Jerwan aqueduct as a means of irrigating the surrounding region and bringing fresh water to the city from the local mountains (see photos in →Jacobsen and Lloyd 1935, 17). Evidence of grand public works, especially for irrigation, has led to a scholarly discussion about the possibility of identifying Nineveh (rather than Babylon) as the site of the famous hanging gardens of ancient Mesopotamia (→Dalley 2015). Ultimately, Sennacherib made Nineveh the capital of the Neo-Assyrian Empire. • The city functioned as the capital until the Babylonians and Medes conquered it in 612 b.c. Size Nineveh looms large in the archaeological record. Its size is mentioned in Jon 3:3 and again in Jon 4:11. Still, evidence from Kuyunjik by no means confirms that its size would have necessitated a three-day walk. The reference to Nineveh’s size in Jonah (Jon 3:3; 4:11) may serve more to accentuate the enormity of the task before Jonah and the enormity of the Ninevites’ response.

Jon :- God Commissions and His Prophet Flees

3–16 Ships and Seafaring in the ANE Water travel was practiced in the ANE at least as early as 10,000 b.c. Given the likely deterioration and decomposition of ships over millennia, little survives that could be excavated, and the best information comes from artistic renderings. Attestations The best preserved example of an ancient boat is the • Solar bark of Khufu (= King Kheops), woodcraft in Lebanon cedar planks, cords of Halfah grass, tenons of Paliurus spina-christi, ca. 2500 b.c., L  43.6 m (143 ft) × W 5.9 m (19.5 ft), exhibited at the Giza Solar Boat Museum. It was excavated near the Giza pyramids. See →Wachsmann 1998, 219. The world’s oldest intact ship, Khufu’s “solar bark,” is a masterpiece of woodcraft that could sail today if put into water. Ironically, the vessel may not have been designed for sailing (there is, for example, no rigging) or paddling (there is not enough room). Is it a “solar barge” (i.e., a ritual vessel intended to carry the resurrected king with the sun god Ra across the heavens)? a “funerary barge” (i.e., one used to carry the king’s embalmed body from Memphis to Giza)? or a “pilgrimage ship” (i.e., one used by the king to visit holy places, then buried for his use in the afterlife)? History • The earliest boats were towed or punted; the earliest evidence for sails dates to around 3500 b.c. • By 2500 b.c., there is ample evidence of long distance seafaring, which likely gave rise to developments in mathematics and astronomy. • Egyptian maritime interests were concerned with imports, whereas the Phoenicians developed colonies throughout the Mediterranean basin. • Solomon is said to have partnered with Hyram of Tyre to build a fleet to sail out of Ezion-Geber (near present-day Aqaba) on the Red Sea (1Kgs 9:26–28; 10:11,22; 2Chr 8:18; 9:21). • By the Persian period, sea-going vessels tended to be shallow, being 10–18 m long, having a width of 1/3 the length, and employing rounded hulls and single sails. They were able to transport up to 250 tons. As we see in Jonah, these ships were often fully or partially decked—since Jonah is able to go below deck—and tended to follow the coastline, suggested by the fact that the sailors hoped to be able to row back to shore. A Boat from Jonah’s Era • The Ma‘agan Michael Ship, discovered off the coast of Ma‘agan Michael, Israel, in 1985, is a unique example of a Levantine ship built in the same era that Jonah was composed. In fact, it is the oldest extant ship from the era of Persian dominance in the ANE. At 12.5 m long and 4 m wide it bore a single sail and was likely maintained by a crew of 4–6 sailors as it plied the open waters of the Mediterranean. At the time of its demise, it was carrying a cargo of Greek blueschist stone, used primarily for roofing. Today the boat is on display at Haifa University’s Hecht Museum. • At the same museum, one can consult a model of an 8th-c. Phoenician merchant ship after an Assyrian relief from the palace of Sargon at Khorsabad. 3a Tarshish An Enigmatic Location The location of Tarshish (Taršîš) is unknown, although there are a few clues as to its whereabouts. The most obvious of these is that Jonah aims to travel there by ship: hence it must lie somewhere along the Mediterranean coast. Throughout the ancient sources, including the Bible, inconsistent spelling and usage further complicate an inquiry into Tarshish’s exact location. Indeed, the presumed location of the city depends on which biblical passages one follows. • Ez 27:12 suggests that the city traded in silver, iron, tin, and lead, which leads some to suggest it could be in southern Spain. This identification is further strengthened by →Herodotus Hist. 1.163 and →Strabo Geogr. 3.2.11, which both speak of an Iberian city named Tartêssos. • If one follows 1Kgs 10:22 and 1Kgs 22:48, then Tarshish would be situated in the direction of the lands of Ophir or Ezion-Geber, south of the land of Israel. On the other hand, the parallel mention of the city with Cyprus in Is 23:1 indicates that the city lies to the west of Israel. • G-Is 23 identifies Jonah’s destination as Carthage, although this could also be New Carthage (present-day Cartagena, Spain).

39

• →Josephus A.J. 9.208 identifies the city as Thrassos in Cilicia. Regardless of its actual location, it serves as a foil to Nineveh within the narrative. 3b Yapho Brief History of an Ancient Port Joppa (Hebrew Yāpô, Greek Ioppê and Iopê), also Iapu, Yafo, or Yafa, is an ancient major port city located 35 miles NW of Jerusalem and just south of the modern city of Tel Aviv. The Site’s History according to Ancient Historians • During the Hellenistic period, Joppa was said to have been founded by Cepheus, the father of Andromeda (→Stephanus Byzantinus Ethn., s.v. Iopê). Throughout Antiquity, many historians noted that Andromeda was chained up on the bank of large rocks at the foot of the promontory and given over to the local sea-monster (→Strabo Geogr. 16.2.28; →Ps.Scylax Peripl. 104; →Pliny Nat. 5.69; →Pomponius Mela Chor. 1.64; →Josephus B.J. 3.420; →Pausanias Descr. 4.35.9; →Jerome Comm. Jon. 1:3). Some of them mention that the marks left by the chains on the rock were still visible during their lifetime. • →Pliny Nat. 9.11 records that, in 58 b.c., the aedile Marcus Scaurus brought the skeleton of the sea-monster, which was more than 40 feet long, from Joppa to Rome. • Joppa saw several battles during the war of the Diadochi. Antigonus stormed the city in 315 b.c. (→Diodorus of Sicily Bib. hist. 19.59.2), and Ptolemy Lagos destroyed it in 312 b.c. (ibid., 19.93.7). • Joppa was taken by Pompey and joined to the province of Syria (→Josephus A.J. 14.76; →Josephus B.J. 1.156). Caesar restored it to the Jews under Hyrcanus (→Josephus A.J. 14.205). It was among the cities given by Antony to Cleopatra (→Josephus A.J. 15.95). Augustus added it to the kingdom of Herod (→Josephus A.J. 15.217; →Josephus B.J. 1.396); after the king’s death, Joppa was passed on to his son Archelaus (→Josephus A.J. 17.320; →Josephus B.J. 2.97). At his deposition it was reattached to the Roman province of Syria. See also *bib1:3b and *anc1:3b. Archaeological Sources The Site • According to the site’s excavator between 1956 and 1974, Jacob Kaplan, Joppa was first settled during the Middle Bronze Age; the site was fortified between 1800 and 1700 b.c., as attested by the discovery of an earthen rampart topped with a mudbrick wall and the localization of a city gate (→Burke 2011, 66–67). • Royal scarabs bearing the name of the pharaoh Amenhotep III (14th c. b.c.) were found during the excavations. • A monumental gateway inscribed with the name of Pharaoh Ramesses II implies that an Egyptian garrison was stationed in Joppa in the 13th c. b.c. This gate was destroyed by an intense conflagration and rebuilt afterwards. • Excavations unearthed a long hall from the late 13th c.–early 12th c. b.c. with an adjacent citadel; it boasts wooden columns and a plastered floor. Moreover, archaeologists discovered a lion’s skull within. • A considerable amount of Philistine ceramics dated to the 12th c.–11th c. b.c. was recovered on the site; two graves where cattle were buried were found, suggesting cultic use. • Domestic remains from the Late Iron Age were discovered, including a winery and pottery. An earthen rampart and mudbrick glacis were also located (→Burke 2011, 73). • Several walls were found from the Persian period, suggesting that the city was rebuilt according to a Hippodamian plan (see →Burke, Peilstöcker, and Pierce 2014). A large storage unit was identified, with walls made of spaced ashlar piers and filled with fieldstones; the remnants of a forge were also found. • During the Hellenistic period, the walls were rebuilt following the previous layout; a building made of ashlar from the same time period was also excavated. • A house was identified from the early Roman period; inside, typical Judean artefacts were recovered. A stamped roof tile of the Tenth Legion Fretensis was also found. The City • The city was destroyed sometime around the end of the 13th c. b.c., perhaps from a conflict with the newly arriving Sea Peoples.

40

Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?

• Later, it was a source of conflict between the Ptolemies and Seleucids. After the Maccabean revolt, it enjoyed significant autonomy until the end of the Jewish War of 66–70 a.d. It appears much later in a famous episode of early Christianity (Acts 9:36; cf. *bib1:3b). The Harbor From the early 2nd millennium b.c., its navigable harbor and natural breakwater made it a useful and frequently contested port. The École biblique de Jérusalem holds several photos of Jaffa from the late 19th c. taken by the Bonfils family. The port of Jaffa (depicted in image n° 15007-Bonfils 0237), in use ever since the time of the pharaohs, was the principal port of entry for pilgrims to the Holy Land in the 19th c. In shallow water, cluttered with reefs, the harbor could not allow large vessels to dock. Boats remained anchored offshore, and a system of large rowing boats was in service for passengers and luggage transportation. • Center of the image, front: one of the big boats is crossing the pass between the reefs. The small town is built on the flanks of a former fortified position of which few military traces remain. • In the foreground, on the wharf, a large new building at the time of the photograph: the Ottoman Customs House (this building is not yet built in a second snapshot of the Bonfils collection, which follows immediately in the École’s digitized series). Much of the waterfront buildings still exists today, some restored, such as the building in the center, above the customs, with arched windows surrounded by white and a large open bay on its right. Y‚Ancient Cultures‚Z 3b found a ship Archaeological Evidence for the Wordplay? An ancient seal bears the earliest representation of a ship with a Hebrew inscription: a dark gray Jasper scaraboid (ca. 8th–7th c. b.c.), 1.7 cm, said to be found near Samaria; Private Collection, USA. • The underside of the seal is engraved with a sailing ship at the top, having a single mast at the center, a prow terminating with a horse protome, and a stern with a steering oar. The gunwale displays a row of round shields. • It bears a Hebrew inscription in two registers, with a double line below each line of text and dots dividing the words l’nyhw bn myrb (“Belonging to Oniyahu son of Merab”). The Judahite name Oniyahu means “Yhwh is my strength,” but could easily be heard as “Yhwh is my ship.” Y‚Ancient Texts‚Z 1 Yona Another Witness to a Prophet Jonah? 2Kgs 14:25 mentions a prophet Jonah in the time of Jeroboam. According to Josephus’ retelling, despite Jeroboam’s wickedness—which had brought his people to misfortune—Jonah advised him to march against the Syrians in order to enlarge his territory. • →Josephus A.J. 9.205–207 “[Jeroboam] was guilty of contumely against God, and became very wicked in worshipping of idols, and in many undertakings that were absurd and foreign. He was also the cause of ten thousand misfortunes to the people of Israel. Now one Jonah, a prophet, foretold to him that he should make war with the Syrians, and conquer their army, and enlarge the bounds of his kingdom on the northern parts to the city Hamath, and on the southern to the lake Asphaltitis; for the bounds of the Canaanites originally were these, as Joshua their general had determined them. So Jeroboam made an expedition against the Syrians, and overran all their country, as Jonah had foretold.”

• Iapu is mentioned several times in the Amarna Letters (14th c. b.c.), where it appears as an Egyptian stronghold (→EA 138, 248a, 294, 296, 365). Biridiya, king of Meggido under Egyptian dominion, reported to the pharaoh that he collected taxes from Iapu (→EA 248a). • The transaction of wheat between the governor of Ugarit and the Egyptian governor of Canaan recorded in the Aphek letter took place in Joppa (→Owen 1981). • Joppa is featured on the Amara-West list of Ramesses II (→Kitchen 1996, 2:no. 55), among other Egyptian settlements of the Mediterranean coast (13th c. b.c.). The name also appears in a satirical letter dated to the same reign, the Papyrus Anastasi I, wherein the scribe Amenope visits Joppa to get his chariot repaired (→Gardiner 1911, 27*–28*). • In the →Annals of Sennacherib (ii 69–72), the Assyrian king records that he took Joppa from Sidqa, the king of Ashkelon, ca. 701 b.c. (→Grayson and Novotny 2012, 1:175 [Sennacherib 22]). • The inscription on the 5th-c. b.c. sarcophagus of Eshmunazar, “King of the two Sidons,” states that he was granted “Dor and Joppa” by the “king of kings,” that is, the Achaemenid king of Persia (→Oppert 1877, 114). • The kings Ptolemy I, Ptolemy II, and Ptolemy III minted coins in Joppa, thus attesting Lagid dominion over the area during the 3rd c. b.c. (→Ecker 2010, 151–176). • In the mid-3rd c. b.c., Joppa appears as a trade center in the Zenon papyri (→PCZ 1.59011 recto; 1.59093 and →P. Lond. 7.2086). • A marble slab bearing a dedicatory inscription related to Ptolemy IV was recovered on the site; it must have belonged to a temple linked with the Ptolemaic ruler-cult. • In →Ep. Arist. 115, Joppa is mentioned as a harbor. • According to →Strabo Geogr. 16.2.28, the population of Joppa was mixed in the beginning of the 1st c. a.d. • →Pliny Nat. 5.14 referred to Joppa as a “Phoenician city.” • Joppa was destroyed twice during the first Jewish revolt. Cestius Gallus captured it, killed 8,400 of its inhabitants, and burned it (→Josephus B.J. 2.507–509). Afterwards, Jews who fled the Roman armies gathered in the desolate Joppa and turned into pirates to subsist. Vespasian set out to attack the city, but most of the inhabitants, who sought refuge on their boats, were killed when “the black north wind” smashed their boats against each other. Vespasian then destroyed the city once again and set up a camp there, leaving soldiers to placate the area (→Josephus B.J. 3.414–431). • The coins minted at Joppa during the 3rd c. a.d. show that it was renamed Joppa Flavia at the end of the 1st c. a.d. (→Ecker 2010). • The number of Jewish epitaphs from the 2nd c. and 3rd c. a.d. found in Joppa (→CIJ 2.882–970) indicates that the city still had an important Jewish population at the time. • The rabbinic sources mention several sages from Joppa, among whom were Rabbi Adda (→b. Meg. 16b), Rabbi Nahman (→Lev. Rab. 6.5), and Rabbi Yudan (→Lev. Rab. 20.10). • In his Onomasticon, Eusebius does not have an entry for Joppê, but he briefly mentions it, stating that it was a Roman polis with a corresponding chôra in the 4th c. a.d. (→Eusebius of Caesarea Onom., s.v. Sarôn). In his translation, Jerome calls Joppa an oppidum. • The city developed as a place of pilgrimage, in relation to Peter’s miracle; it was thus visited by St. Paula (→Jerome Ep. 108.8; →Theodosius Situ 139; →Piacenza Pilg. v. 190), even though, according to →Epiphanius of Salamis Mens. pond. 75, the city lay in ruins by the late 4th c. a.d.

Reception Y‚Comparison of Versions‚Z

3b Yapho In Ancient Written Sources • The name ‘Iapu’ appears in the list of cities conquered by the pharaoh Thutmose III (15th c. b.c.) inscribed in the temple of Karnak (→Ahituv 1984, 121). • The story of the “Conquest of Joppa” by Djehuty, a commander of Thutmose III’s army who outwitted the rebellious ruler of the city, became a popular folktale in Egypt, as attested by the Papyrus Harris 500 (see →Goedicke 1968).

2 Get up, go G C: Syntactic Construction G and →C (the Sixto-Clementine Vulgate) smooth out the construction of the first two verses (*gra1:2) by inserting a conjunction: hence they read, “Get up and go.” 2 their evil: M | G: the outcry of its wickedness (Emphasis) G renders M’s rā‘ātām (“their evil”) with hê kraugê tês kakias autês (“the outcry of its wickedness”). The following are some possible reasons for this translation:

Jon :- God Commissions and His Prophet Flees

• There was a different Vorlage, though there is no evidence to suggest this in any of the ancient Hebrew manuscripts (e.g., 4QXIIa, 4QXIIg, Mur88) or in the versions V and S. • The motif of the cry of a city ascending to God is found elsewhere in G (e.g., G-Gn 18:20–21; 19:13; 1Sm 5:12; Is 5:7; Jer 14:2; 31:34). In the case of G-Gn 18:20–21 and G-Gn 19:13, it is the cry of evil cities (Sodom and Gomorrah) that rises to God, who then arranges for their destruction. Y‚Biblical Intertextuality‚Z 1–2 TYPOLOGY Elijah and Elisha as Types of Jonah (cf. Jon 1:17; 2:10; 3:1–2; 4:3,6–8). If Jonah is placed in the 8th c. b.c. (as noted in 2Kgs 14:25–28), he follows closely behind the other great Northern prophets Elijah and Elisha. There are many instances in which they are referenced in the account of Jonah. Plot: Commissions • The opening of Jonah recalls several commissions throughout biblical literature, particularly that of Elijah, who is told, in 1Kgs 17:9–10, to “Get up, go (qûm lēk) to Zarephath…So he got up and went to Zarephath.” By refusing God’s command, Jonah compares rather unfavorably. Agents: Natural World • The accounts of Elijah and Elisha frequently involve animals and other aspects of the natural world which are not typical of later prophets, but well at home in Jonah. For example, readers find ravens bringing food (1Kgs 17:1–8), a lion killing a man (1Kgs 20:35–36), a plant bringing shade (1Kgs 19:4), bears attacking youths (2Kgs 2:23–25), the appearance of fire and rain (1Kgs 18:21–39), and the parting of the Jordan river (2Kgs 2:8). Motif: Wish for Death • Finally, both Jonah and Elijah wish for death when they feel as though the situation has become too dire for them to continue. Elijah believes he is the only follower of God left. When persecuted by Jezebel, he begs God for death (1Kgs 19:4). Jonah, however, begs for death when the city repents and God relents from destroying it (Jon 4:3) and again when he loses the shade of the plant (Jon 4:7–8; *dev4:3,8–9; *bib4:3,8–9). 1 the word of Yhwh was to Prophetic Word Formula (Wortereignisformel) Prophetic Commission The phrase occurs more than 40 times in the Book of Ezekiel alone. It can be found regularly embedded within large narrative sections, such as with Elijah (1Kgs 17:2,8; 18:1). Divine Information The phrase does not necessarily bring about a prophetic commission; God may simply be communicating with a human being, as with Abram (Gn 15:1) or Solomon (1Kgs 6:11). In the Book of the Twelve The phrase is lacking only in Obadiah, Nahum, and Habakkuk. If one were to approach this phrase from a form-critical perspective, Jonah can easily be related to other prophetic literature. However, as →Trible (1994, 124– 125) points out, the formula as an opener with no content can lead readers to the conclusion that this story is about Jonah himself, rather than the words he is commissioned to speak. 1 Yona son of Amittai Inspirational Incipit of a Prophetic Book Opening Lines in the Minor Prophets The opening of the book provides us with the name and patronym of the prophet. While none of the Minor Prophets are left nameless, the introductions vary. With the exception of Obadiah and Habakkuk, the introductions give the name of the prophet’s father, the name of his home, and a chronological marker. • Patronym: Hosea, Joel, Jonah, Zephaniah, Zechariah. • Toponym: Amos, Micah, Nahum. • Chronological reference: Hosea, Amos, Micah, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah. • Prophetic status: Jonah is not here called a prophet, although this should not be too disconcerting since Joel, Obadiah, Micah, and Zephaniah are also not called prophets. Yet 2Kgs 14:25 does explicitly refer to Jonah as a prophet, as do numerous peritestamental texts (*ptes1:1).

41

A Name Loaded with Allusions Jonah, or “Dove” • Hos 7:11 refers to Ephraim as a silly dove who calls upon Egypt and goes to Assyria. • Doves symbolize affection (Sg 2:14) and good tidings (Gn 8:11). • The psalmist (Ps 55:6–8) wishes that he had the wings of a dove so that he could fly to safety. • Doves are passive (Na 2:7). • Doves are used in certain sacrifices (Lv 5:7). Amittai, Son of the Widow of Zarephath? • According to some interpreters, the relation between ’ĕmet and “Amittai” (*voc1:1) bespeaks a connection with the widow of Zarephath, for she proclaims the word of the Lord in Elijah’s mouth to be truth (’ĕmet), when he raises her son to life (1Kgs 17:17–24). Thus, some late traditions such as →Vit. proph. 10 seem to identify Jonah as the widow’s son. • According to 2Kgs 14:25, Jonah foretold Jeroboam II’s successful enlargement of Israel (*anc1:1). There we also learn that Jonah was from Gath-Hepher, which was the eastern boundary of the tribe of Zebulun as noted in Jo 19:13 (*hge1:1). 1 Yona “Simon, Son of Jonah” Jesus calls Peter by the name Simon bar (“son of ”) Jonah (Mt 16:17) in response to Simon’s recognition of him as “the Messiah, the Son of the living God” (Mt 16:16). Historical Philology Unlike the names of certain other prophetic characters in the Bible (e.g., Zechariah), Jonah does not appear to have been widely adopted as a personal name. Only two uses beyond Mt 16:17 are attested in the period 330 b.c.–200 a.d.: two ossuary inscriptions (pre-70 a.d.). The argument has sometimes been made that bariôna in Mt 16:17 is not a patronymic meaning “son of Jonah,” but corresponds rather to an expression found in rabbinic literature signifying an “outlaw” and used to designate a member of the Zealot party. Still, the evidence of Jn 1:42 and Jn 21:15 (“Simon, son of John”) points in a more conventional direction, suggesting some confusion or perhaps simply variation in the tradition regarding the name of Peter’s father. Analogies between Peter and Jonah Generally, Simon Peter’s identity as a fisherman relates to the imagery of sailing and sea-creatures in the Book of Jonah. Beyond this, the meaning of Jesus’ words is ambiguous and several metaphors likely co-occur. • The immediate context indicates that Jesus’ expression highlights the prophetic nature of Simon’s proclamation: “Flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father in heaven” (Mt 16:17). Moreover, Jesus’ confirmation of Peter as the rock on which he will build his Church meets with the assurance that “the gates of Hades will not prevail against it” (Mt 16:18)—a possible reference to Jonah’s expression of thanksgiving for deliverance from the netherworld in the psalm of Jonah (Jon 2:6). • The tension between Peter’s identity as a chosen mouthpiece of God and his fallibility as a disciple is reminiscent of Jonah’s election as a prophet in important, but not exact, ways: Jonah is called by God but flees via ship. Peter, on the other hand, is called and leaves his ship and life as a fisherman (Mt 4:18–21). • The parallel deepens as one considers later expansions in the demographic and geographic scales of Peter’s ministry. Like Jonah, Peter’s original understanding of his ministerial scope is to bring the Good News to the people of Israel, his staunchly entrenched position requires divine intervention (Acts 11:1–18). • Unlike Jonah, Peter’s waterborne experiences in the Gospels are confined to the inland freshwater Sea of Galilee which is a far cry from the open waters of the Mediterranean where sea-monsters and great fish dwell. He does have a Jonah-like experience of sinking into the depths of the waters. If the tradition is accurate that Peter eventually made it to Rome, his journey there would have almost certainly included time on an openwater vessel. • Notably, Peter’s vision in Joppa includes an othonê, the Greek word for sail (Acts 11:5). It is in this vision that Peter is introduced to God’s expansive vision of restoration—far beyond the Sea of Galilee and the people of Israel.

42

Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?

2 MOTIF An Israelite Sent to the Gentiles: Typological Motif in the Life of Paul? The motif of a member of Israel being redirected to Gentile ministry is also found in Acts’ account of Paul’s life. • Paul, who is deeply invested in Israel’s eschatological well-being, is diverted from his own journey and reoriented to the larger purposes of God among the Gentile world (Acts 9:1–9). • The sailing motif once again appears in reverse fashion as Paul’s obedience leads to his own voyages to deliver the Gospel throughout the Roman Empire (Acts 13). 2 Nineveh A City of Biblical Imagination Jonah contains nine of the Hebrew Bible’s fourteen direct references to Nineveh. The Book of Tobit also makes reference to Nineveh, while all explicit NT references to Nineveh occur in Matthew and Luke. Still, a keyword search for the city’s name does not suffice. Metonymic uses of the terms Nineveh, Assyria, or the king of Assyria often refer to the NeoAssyrian Empire and its military and political power. Subsequent use emphasizes the city’s foreignness and ultimately its symbolic value for the journey toward repentance. All major corpora of the Bible reference Nineveh, indicating the city’s significance in biblical imagination. Nineveh in the Pentateuch and Historical Books • The city of Nineveh first appears in the Bible in Gn 10:11–12 (*hge1:2). • In 2Kgs 19:36 (// Is 37:37) Sennacherib returns to Nineveh, sparing Jerusalem. Given the significant impact of the Neo-Assyrian Empire on Israel during the 8th–7th c. b.c., it is not surprising to find that the Assyrians loom large throughout the Books of Kings, Chronicles, and Isaiah. Nineveh in the Book of the Twelve • Within the Book of the Twelve, readers see prophets repeatedly announce the impending destruction of Nineveh. • Zep 2:13 claims that God “will stretch out his hand against the north, and destroy Assyria; and he will make Nineveh a desolation, a dry waste like the desert.” • Nahum explicitly refers to Nineveh three times (Na 1:1; 2:8; 3:7) and focuses on the downfall of Nineveh to the relief of the people of Judah. For Nahum, relief for Nineveh cannot and shall not be imagined. The prophet graphically announces that it is decreed that the city will be exiled (Na 2:3–9). Nineveh in Tobit • Tobit counsels his son to take his family and leave Nineveh because the promised destruction of the Assyrians is about to befall it (Tb 14:4–8; cf. *bib3:4b). Nineveh in the NT • The three NT references to Nineveh (Mt 12:41; Lk 11:30,32) show that the city (and especially its inhabitants) had become a symbol of repentance for the Jewish community of Jesus’ day. Nineveh, Babylon, and Empire across the Canon There is a deep-seated connection between the cities of Nineveh and Babylon in the biblical imagination. Assyria plays the role of both foe and ally before being replaced by Babylon. Both cities serve as real and metaphorical instantiations of God’s judgment and redemption. The biblical authors’ emphasis on Babylon is proportionally greater, a reality stemming from the Judahite nature of the texts. Nevertheless, these same authors integrate the memory of Nineveh as an agent of God’s justice and punishment, as an analog in the broader biblical trope of the foreign city and as a means of raising general intertextual critiques of empire. 1:2; 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. *dev1:2). 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). 2 their evil (G) Typological Allusion to the Episode of Sodom and Gomorrha It is possible that the translator of G chose to render M’s rā‘ātām (“their evil”) with hê

kraugê tês kakias autês (“the outcry of its wickedness”) in order to establish a connection between the story of Jonah and the story of Sodom and Gomorrah in Gn 18–19 (cf. *com1:2). • Both stories begin with a note that the outcry (kraugê) of an evil city has reached God (G-Gn 18:20–21; Jon 1:2; cf. G-Gn 19:13), which is a distinctive way of expressing that God has noticed the rampant injustice and violence that characterizes these cities. • In Jonah this outcry is connected with Nineveh’s wickedness (kakia), while in the Genesis narrative it is the sins (hamartiai) of the city that cause the outcry to reach God. Such a connection would invite the reader to consider Jonah as an anti-type of Abraham, and Nineveh as an anti-type of Sodom and Gomorrah. • Whereas Abraham was intently concerned for the plight of the innocent inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah, Jonah desires the complete destruction of Nineveh, regardless of the innocence or guilt of its people. • On the other hand, Sodom and Gomorrah are so depraved that they contain no righteous citizens (Gn 18:32; 19:4): no amount of pleading will spare them. Nineveh, though initially filled with iniquity, exhibits a kind of righteousness when the people respond to Jonah’s exceedingly tepid proclamation (Jon 3:4) with complete repentance. For an early comparison of Nineveh to Sodom, see Tertullian’s poem on Jonah (*chr1:1–11). 3b Yapho Elsewhere in Scripture • Initially, the area around Joppa is ascribed to Dan, but the tribe then re-settled in the east of Canaan (Jo 19:46). • After King Solomon enlisted the help of Hiram, the king of Tyre, to erect the Temple in Jerusalem, he received wood from Lebanon through Joppa’s harbor (2Chr 2:16). • When the newly returned Jews set out to rebuild the Temple, they asked permission from King Cyrus so that they could trade with the Tyrians and the Sidonians. From them they buy Lebanese cedarwood which is delivered at Joppa’s harbor (Ezra 3:7). • During the Maccabean revolt, Jonathan attacked Joppa, where the Seleucid general Apollonius had a garrison; the city surrendered to him (1Mc 10:67–89). Simon then garrisoned Joppa, and his envoy Jonathan, son of Absalom, chased off its inhabitants (1Mc 12:33–34). The capture of Joppa was considered a major achievement by the author of 1 Maccabees, since it gave access to the Mediterranean islands (1Mc 14:5); the fortification of Joppa was also noted in the honorific decree voted after Simon’s death in his honor (1Mc 14:34). 2 Maccabees reports that the inhabitants of Joppa set up a trap to murder their Jewish neighbors; they invited them to sea and then drowned them. In retaliation, Judas Maccabeus set the harbor and boats on fire (2Mc 12:3–6). • Peter dwelt in Joppa for some time; there, he raised a Christian woman named Tabitha/Dorcas from the dead (Acts 9:36–43). While staying there, the Lord sends him a vision indicating that no four-footed animal should be considered unfit to eat. Then the envoys from the centurion Cornelius of Caesarea find him there (Acts 10:9–23; 11:5–13). Y‚Peritestamental Literature‚Z 1 Yona Jonah Listed among Other Prophets Ascension of Isaiah Jonah is mentioned in the list of prophets in →Mart. Ascen. Isa. (4.22; →OTP 2:163), which is a composite apocryphal text from around the 2nd c. a.d. that has been preserved in its entirety in its Ethiopic version (Ergata Isayeyas). • The sequence of the Twelve Minor Prophets in this list matches neither M nor G. • Jonah is named in a section that is likely a Christian interpolation. Here Isaiah gives an apocalyptically charged description of the end of the world. He recounts the destruction of the wicked along with Satan (Sammael), the second coming of Jesus, the redemption of the world (esp. the Church), and the final judgment (→OTP 2:160–163). • In this context, Isaiah explains that these things were already written (i.e., foretold) “in the Psalms, in the parables of David the son of Jesse, and in

43

Jon :- God Commissions and His Prophet Flees

the Proverbs of Solomon his son, and in the words of Korah and of Ethan the Israelite, and in the words of Asaph, and in the rest of the psalms which the angel of the spirit has inspired, (namely) in those which have no name written, and in the words of Amos my father and of Hosea the prophet, and of Micah, and of Joel, and of Nahum, and of Jonah, and of Obadiah, and of Habakkuk, and of Haggai, and of Zephaniah, and of Zechariah, and of Malachi, and in the words of the righteous Joseph, and in the words of Daniel” (→Mart. Ascen. Isa. 4.21–22; →OTP 2:163). 4 Ezra Jonah is also listed among the prophets in →4 Ezra 1:39 (cf. V; →OTP 1:526), the first two chapters of which are conventionally referred to by scholars as 5 Ezra. Note that some Protestant scholars call 4 Ezra, 2 Ezra. • Here the list of the Twelve Minor Prophets matches the order in which they occur in G. • This list of the Twelve occurs at the end of Ezra’s prophecy of judgment directed at the Jewish people; after enumerating the many mercies that God showed to Israel throughout history, Ezra proceeds to accuse the people of having forsaken God; he concludes by pronouncing God’s judgment that the Jewish people will lose their inheritance which will be given instead to a new people. • In this context, God addresses Ezra as the father of a new people, directing him “to look with pride and see the people coming from the east” (nunc pater aspice cum gloria et vide populum venientem ab oriente) to whom God “will give the leadership (dabo ducatum) of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob and Hosea and Amos and Micah and Joel and Obadiah and Jonah and Nahum and Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi, who is also called the messenger of the Lord” (→4 Ezra 1.38–40). The Sibylline Oracles In a manner similar to 4 Ezra, Jonah is listed among a few patriarchs and prophets in →Sib. Or. (2:248; →OTP 1:351), an originally Jewish document composed in ca. 30 b.c.–30 a.d. that underwent significant Christian redaction in the 1st and early 2nd c. a.d. (→Kurfess 1941, 151–165). • The Sibylline Oracles contain a stylistic presentation of world history divided into ten generations, the last of which ushers in the end of the world. • Much like the aforementioned pseudepigraphic works, Jonah is named among other canonical biblical figures within an eschatological framework that details the end of the world and the last judgment (→Sib. Or. 2.238–250; cf. →OTP 1:351). • The mention of the second coming of Christ in glory on a cloud (→Sib. Or. 2.241–242) indicates a Christian redaction. What is striking, however, is that in his second coming Christ will be accompanied by Moses (2.245), Abraham (2.246), Isaac, Jacob, Joshua, Daniel, Elijah (2.247), Habbakuk, and Jonah (2.248). These biblical figures will apparently serve as witnesses, since judgment is passed first upon all the Hebrews from the time of Jeremiah (2.249) and then upon all the wicked (2.254). It is difficult to discern any clear principle behind the inclusion of these figures. Y‚Liturgies‚Z 1:1–2:1,10 Use in Lectionary →RML: Monday, Week 27 in Year I. 1–17 CALENDAR Feast of Jonah in the Eastern Orthodox Liturgy Calendar • The Greek Orthodox Church celebrates the Prophet Jonah’s feast day on September 21st. • The Orthodox Churches in the Slavic tradition celebrate it on September 22nd. Texts Jonah is mentioned in the following places of the liturgy for the day: • →Hôrologion to mega: Troparion antiphon for Jonah, “The memory of your Prophet Jonah, we celebrate today, O Lord. By his prayers we entreat you: O Christ God, save our souls!”—sung after the Our Father at Vespers or after the minor entrance at the Divine Liturgy.

• →Hôrologion to mega: Kontakion hymn for Jonah: “In the glorious entrails three days and nights, you show forth Christ’s descent into Hades; for when He had freely suffered His saving Passion, He arose out of the sepulchre on the third day. Therefore, we honour you, O Prophet Jonah, as a type of Christ”—sung during Matins and after the Troparia of the Divine Liturgy. • For the usage and placement of these texts, see the →Typikon. Y‚Jewish Tradition‚Z 1 Now The day of Jonah’s flight • →Pirqe R. El. 10 “On the fifth day [i.e., of creation; cf. Gn 1:20–23] Jonah fled before his God.” • →Pirqe R. El. 9: These also took place on the fifth day. “On the fifth day the waters in Egypt were changed into blood. On the fifth day our forefathers went forth from Egypt. On the same day the water of the Jordan stood still before the ark of the Covenant of God. On the same day Hezekiah stopped the fountains which were in Jerusalem, as it is said, ‘This same Hezekiah also stopped the upper spring of the waters of Gihon’ (2Chr 32:30). On the fifth day He brought forth from the water the Leviathan, the flying serpent, and its dwelling is in the lowest waters.” Identifying Jonah’s flight with the fifth day of creation—as well as the connections with Leviathan—situates the story within a broader Chaoskampf myth, the struggle between God and the chaotic forces of water (cf. *bib2:3a,5a). 1 the word of Yhwh was to Yona Targumic Amplification • →Tg. Jon. “There was a word of prophecy from before the Lord with Jonah.” The Aramaic preposition qŏdām “before” used with the reference to God expresses respect. It keeps the courtly tone in which various acts are performed “from before” the kings or nobles. 1 Yona son of Amittai Rabbis on Jonah (cf. Jon 1:3a,5,7,15,17; 2:1,10; 3:1,3; 4:1,5,8). Origins • →Pirqe R. El. 33: Rabbinic tradition maintains that Jonah was the son of the widow of Zarephath whom Elijah raised. After being raised, Jonah became the disciple of Elijah and then of Elisha after Elijah’s ascension (cf. *bib1:1). Noting the Zarephath tradition, • some suggest Jonah was of the tribe of Asher, • while others, noting the association of Jonah’s origins with Gath-Hepher (2Kgs 14:25), have concluded that he was a Zebulinite (cf. Jo 19:13; →Zlotowitz and Scherman 1978, 78). Prophet to the House of Jehu • Similarly, the rabbinic tradition identifies a young Jonah as the prophet sent by Elisha to anoint Jehu and to announce God’s desire that he dispatch the remnant of the house of Ahab (→Pirqe R. El. 10; →S. ‘Olam Rab. 19). • A young Jonah is also regarded by some rabbinic traditions as the prophet responsible for communicating the reward of a four-generation dynasty to Jehu for keeping God’s mandate (→Zlotowitz and Scherman [1978, xxv] refers to Rashi and →S. ‘Olam Rab. without specifying further). • One learns from the biblical tradition of a Jonah son of Amittai from Gath-Hepher who called for Jeroboam II (Jehu’s grandson) to restore the boundaries of Israel (2Kgs 14:25; cf. *anc1:1). • Finally, Jonah’s life is said to have ended during the reign of Zechariah (2Kgs 15:8–12) at the Moses-like age of 120 (→S. ‘Olam Rab. 18). As a result, the rabbinic tradition shows that Jonah serves as a prophet (like Moses) to the entire House of Jehu (→Zlotowitz and Scherman 1978, xxiv–xxvi, 78–79). 2 Nineveh Why Was God So Concerned with Saving Nineveh? • →ibn Ezra Comm. held that the Ninevites had only recently become sinful; nor were they guilty of idolatry, since the destruction of idols is not mentioned as part of their repentance.

44

Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?

• →Kimchi Comm. held that the sins of Nineveh, robbery and oppression, paralleled those of Sodom and the generation of the Deluge (Gn 6:11). Such sins were so destructive to the created order that God had to intervene. • →Malbim Gé’ ḥizzāyôn taught that God intended Assyria to be the “rod of his anger” (Is 10:5), by destroying the kingdom of Israel and exiling the Ten Tribes. In order to execute God’s justice against Israel, however, Assyria had to become more just than Israel. Hence, Jonah was dispatched. 2 call out against it Specification of a Generic Term • →Tg. Jon. “prophesy against it.” 3a flee Jonah’s Recalcitrance What motivates Jonah to flee God’s command? Rabbinic tradition explains that Jonah flees with righteous motivations and highly informed knowledge of the revelatory process between God and his prophets. Motivations Early rabbinic traditions note that Jonah had several motivations for fleeing his divine call. Some rabbis said that Jonah fled because he believed that the conversion of the Ninevites would have led to Israel’s indictment, because they had rejected the prophets. According to →Pirqe R. El., Jonah had been called upon to prophesy twice before the Book of Jonah begins. The Israelites spurned Jonah after God was merciful to them. Moreover, Jonah feared that the success of Nineveh’s repentance would actually be taken up by scoffers as proof that God was not going to destroy Nineveh anyway. Therefore, Jonah would be a false prophet: • →Pirqe R. El. 10 “Why did [Jonah] flee? Because on the first occasion when (God) sent him to restore the border of Israel, his words were fulfilled, as it is said, ‘And he restored the border of Israel from the entering in of Hamath’ (2Kgs 14:25). On the second occasion (God) sent him to Jerusalem to (prophesy that He would) destroy it. But the Holy One, blessed be He, did according to the abundance of His tender mercy and repented of the evil (decree), and He did not destroy it; thereupon they called him a lying prophet. On the third occasion, (God) sent him against Nineveh to destroy it. Jonah argued with himself, saying, ‘I know that the nations are nigh to repentance, now they will repent and the Holy One, blessed be He, will direct His anger against Israel. And is it not enough for me that Israel should call me a lying prophet; but shall also the nations of the world (do likewise)?” Jonah was so devoted to God that he could not abide the prospect of hearing converted Ninevites mock him and, by extension, God after having been given an opportunity to repent. • →Radal Comm. PRE “As is the way of wicked scoffers: they would not attribute the annulment of the decree to their repentance. Instead, they would complacently say that Jonah’s prophecy was unfounded to begin with, or that God lacked the power to punish them. They would not comprehend that God would change an evil decree once it was issued even after repentance.” Rabbi Baḥya ascribed Jonah’s reluctance to humility. • →BaḤya Kad “‘If Moses,’ Jonah says, ‘was reluctant to accept God’s call to redeem the righteous Jews from Egypt because he considered himself unequal to the task; then surely I, who am being sent to wicked people, should seek to avoid my mission by fleeing to a place where God will not reveal Himself to me.’” Function of Flight According to the rabbis, Jonah fled the land of Israel because revelation can only take place there. If Jonah remained in Israel, then God could send a second revelation confirming the first. This is what happens later when the fish spits Jonah on the beach. • →Pirqe R. El. 10 “Therefore, behold [Jonah says], I will escape from His presence to a place where His glory is not declared. (If) I ascend above the heavens, it is said, ‘Above the heavens is His glory’ (Ps 113:4). (If) above the earth, (it is said), ‘The whole earth is full of His glory’ (Is 6:3); ‘behold, I will escape to the sea, to a place where His Glory is not proclaimed.’”

• →Radal Comm. PRE “Jonah did not err by thinking that God’s dominion does not extend over the seas. Rather, he reasoned that God does not reveal Himself to His prophets in the sea since the sea is esoterically not conducive to the revelation of prophecy” (cf. →Zlotowitz and Scherman 1978, 82–83). 3a to Tarshish Targumic Exegesis • →Tg. Jon. “to sea.” The same rendering of Tharshish is also applied elsewhere (e.g., Is 2:16; 23:1,14). 3a from the face of Yhwh Targumic Expansion • →Tg. Jon. “to flee by sea before he would prophesy in the name of the Lord.” 3b found a ship God’s Providence Ensures That Jonah Can Flee • →Pirqe R. El. 10: “Jonah went down to Jaffa, but found no ship in port; the last ship had sailed two days previously. In order to test Jonah, God caused a storm on the sea which forced a Tarshish-bound ship to return to port. Jonah rejoiced since he considered this Divine approval for his action. 3c paid its fare How Much? There is both ancient and contemporary disagreement about how much Jonah paid and for what he paid. • →b. Ned. 38a: Some (e.g., R. Yohanan) contend that, in order to insure the ship’s immediate departure, Jonah paid for all the available spots on the ship so that the captain did not need to wait for others to come. This would have been an enormous expense, but it shows Jonah’s desperation or eagerness. • →ibn Ezra Comm. and others disagree, having the more common-sense interpretation that he paid the fare of a single passenger. →Sasson (1990, 83–84) conveys these opposing views and outlines contemporary differences of opinion. He himself sides with the position that Jonah hired the whole ship. Y‚Christian Tradition‚Z 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.” 1–11 Latin Poetic Retelling An ancient Latin poetic retelling of Jon 1 begins with a reference to the destroyed cities of Sodom and Gomorrah: • →Ps.-Tertullian Jona 1-9 “After the living, aye-enduring death / Of Sodom and Gomorrah; after fires / Penal, attested by time-frosted plains / Of ashes; after fruitless apple-growths, / Born but to feed the eye; after the death / Of sea and brine, both in like fate involved; / While whatsoe’er

Jon :- God Commissions and His Prophet Flees

is human still retains / In change corporeal its penal badge: / A city-Nineveh-by stepping o’er” (Post Sodomum et Gomorum viventia funera in aevum / Et cinerum senio signata incendia poenae / Et frustra solis oculis nascentia poma / Et pariter facti mortem maris et salis illic / Si quid homo est poenam mutati corpore servans / Paene alios ignes superi decusserat imbris / Urbs aequi iustique viam transgressa Ninive; *com1:2; *bib1:2). 1 The word of Yhwh Jonah Already an Active Prophet • →Calvin Prael. proph. min. “The word of God then was not for the first time communicated to Jonah, when he was sent to Nineveh; but it pleased God, when he was already a Prophet, to employ him among other nations…He had been previously not only a worshipper of the true God, but also a Prophet, and had no doubt faithfully discharged his office; for God would not have resolved to send him to Nineveh, had he not conferred on him suitable gifts; and he knew him to be qualified for undertaking a burden so great and so important.” 1 son of Amittai Identity and Symbolism of Jonah • →Ephrem Hymn. virg. 45.1–2 et passim refers to Jonah simply as the “son of Mattai,” but he never makes the connection to the prophet of the same name found in the Kings narrative (2Kgs 14:25). • →Gloss. ord. “The Hebrews say that Saint Jonah was the son of the widowed woman Sareptana, whom the prophet Elijah raised from the dead. Afterward Jonah’s mother said to Elijah, ‘Now I know that you are a man of God and the word of the Lord in your mouth is truth’ (1Kgs 17:24). For this reason they call this boy Amathi, for Amathi [’ĕmet] means ‘truth’ in our language…Therefore, a dove is born from truth since ‘Jonah’ means ‘dove’” (cf. *bib1:1; *jew1:1). • →Gloss. ord. “Argumentum—Jonah the beautiful dove, prefiguring the passion of the Lord by his shipwreck, calls the world back to repentance, and he announces salvation for the Gentiles under the name of ‘Nineveh.’” • →Gloss. ord.: Jonah signifies “Christ, over whom the Spirit in the appearance of a dove [appeared], who also is suffering on our behalf.” 2 the great city Nineveh, a Symbol of the World • →Gloss. ord. “Jonah…is sent to Nineveh, which is said to be splendid. Thus, Christ, full of the Holy Spirit, is sent to the world, which is called in the Greek tongue ‘cosmos’—that is, ‘ornate’ and ‘beautiful,’ because of the design of the Creator. Whence ‘God saw all the things that he had made, and they were very good’ (Gn 1:31). Therefore the whole world heeds him, whom Israel despises, so that the humble man, having set aside corruptive pride, might ascend into heaven through the Son of God’s descending.” 3a to flee What Was Jonah Thinking? Many patristic authors focus on the mention of Jonah’s flight to Tarshish, addressing two basic questions (cf. *jew1:3a): • Why would a true prophet of God want to flee from him? • How could a genuine prophet of God even think that it was possible to do so? Why Did Jonah Flee? • →Tertullian Pud. 10 asks if it was not the case that Jonah “foresaw that the mercy of God would be poured out on the heathen also, and so feared it would prove him a false prophet?” • →Gregory of Nazianzus Or. 2.106 “He fled from having to announce the dread of the awful message to the Ninevites and from being subsequently, if the city was saved by repentance, convicted of falsehood. It was not that he was displeased at the salvation of the wicked, but he was ashamed of being made an instrument of falsehood and exceedingly zealous for the credit of prophecy, which was in danger of being destroyed in his own person.” • →Ephrem Carm. Nis. 35.3 deems Satan responsible for Jonah’s defiance and concludes “on us [i.e., Satan and Death] He has begun retribution for Jonah son of Amittai. On Legion, therefore, He was avenging him when He seized and cast him into the sea.” • →Jerome Comm. Jon. “By an inspiration of the Holy Spirit within him, the prophet knows that the repentance of the Gentiles spells the downfall

45

of the Jews. Therefore, being a lover of his homeland, it is not so much that he is jealous of the salvation of Nineveh as unwilling that his own people perish…Jonah feared for Israel’s continued existence, for he knew by the same Spirit whereby the preaching to the Gentiles was trusted to him that the house of Israel would then perish, and he feared that what was at one time to be would take place in his own time.” • →Theodore of Mopsuestia Comm. Jon. also assumes that Jonah had a divinely bestowed premonition about what would later come to pass, namely that the Ninevites would repent and that this repentance would later be invoked as a sign by Christ against his fellow Jews. Thus, Theodore explains that Jonah “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. The fact that all people dwelling everywhere would be declared heirs to the kingdom of heaven, whereas Jews would be excluded from this gift on account of their own disobedience and impiety, despite appearing to be at an advantage with such wonderful instruction, necessarily depressed him” (191). According  to Theodore, it is for this reason that “the prophet opted for flight, thinking he would thus avoid prophesying to the Ninevites and prevent what would follow from it, of which the Jews’ wickedness clearly gave evidence.” • →Jacob of Sarug Hom. 122 has Justice (as a personified character) refer to Jonah as “the rebellious one” (mērîdyâ), an epithet that is quite close to a rare term used for Satan (mērūdâ; →Kitchen 2008, 374). Through this wordplay Jacob subtly implies that Satan is the reason for Jonah’s rebellion (Bedjan 2010, 4:397.14). Did Jonah Think He Could Escape? • →Gregory of Nazianzus Or. 2.108 uses Jonah’s attempted flight as a teachable moment about God: “For God alone of all things cannot be escaped from or contended with. If he wills to seize and bring them under his hand, he outstrips the swift, he outwits the wise.” • →Jerome Comm. Jon. asks the incredulous question of Jonah: “But if [God] made the sea and dry land, why do you think that by leaving the dry land, you are able at sea to escape the creator of the sea?” • →Theodore of Mopsuestia Comm. Jon. surmises that Jonah was laboring under the mistaken belief that God’s presence was limited to Judea and Jerusalem so that “if he had been in the former place [i.e., Jerusalem], God would have definitely appeared to him and prompted him to do his will, whereas if he was far away, he would have avoided that problem since God would not have been prepared to show himself in other places.” • →Cyril of Alexandria Comm. Jon. also suggests that Jonah initially held some false beliefs about God: “…some believed that the power of the God of all was confined to the land of the Jews, restricted to it, as it were, and excluding others…My view, therefore, is that the prophet had some such understanding, left Judea, and made for the Greek cities.” • →Jacob of Sarug Hom. 122, in a manner similar to Jerome, asks “What was he thinking was happening to him on the path that he took? What was the rebellious one thinking when he was being soaked by him? That there he was diminished, hiding from God?” (Bedjan 2010, 4:371.19–21). Jerome’s Typological Reading of Jonah’s Flight Though Jerome appears to change the subject with a Christological meditation, he seeks to answer the question “why did Jonah flee?” from God’s perspective. In this framework of thought, the ultimate purpose of Jonah’s flight is to prefigure the Incarnation. • →Jerome Comm. Jon. “But we can say of our Lord and Savior that he left his house and homeland, and when he assumed flesh, in a certain way he fled from heaven and came to Tharsis, that is, to the sea of this world.” Jerome goes on to explain how Christ’s flight results in salvation, and how this loosely parallels Jonah’s flight. Nonetheless, Jerome acknowledges the limits of typological reading: • →Jerome Comm. Jon. “The wise reader must be asked not to look for the same arrangement of the tropology that he finds in the history. For even the apostle applies Hagar and Sarah to the two covenants, and

46

Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?

yet not everything that is narrated in the history can be interpreted tropologically.” 3a flee to Tarshish Luther’s Jonah: A Warning to Us All • →Luther Lect. Jon. sees Jonah’s flight as a warning against disobeying God’s will. “All of this is recorded as a warning for us. From it we glean the lesson first of all that he who will not obey God’s will willingly must, in the end, bow to His will unwillingly.” 3a Tarshish The Meanings of Tarshish • →Gloss. ord. “According to Josephus, it is the city of Cilicia; according to Chronicles, the place is in India (cf. 2Chr 9:21). But the Hebrews believed that the sea generally is called Tharsis. Whence ‘with a vehement breath you will pound to pieces the ships of Tharsis (cf. Ps 48:7)—that is, the sea. It is more fitting for a fearful, fugitive man that he does not choose a specific place for his flight, but is content to be carried away wherever the sea takes him” (*hge1:3a). The Glossa also records a number of mystical interpretations of Tarshish and the flight in general. • →Gloss. ord. “Mystically, Christ, having assumed the flesh, in a certain way fleeing his homeland—that is heaven—comes to Tharsis—that is, the sea of this world—in which he called out, ‘My Father, if it be possible, let this chalice pass from me’ (Mt 26:39), for fear that, the people of the Jews having been damned, the multitude of the Gentiles would believe. And he loved that people so much, on account of his love for the patriarchs and the promise to Abraham, that on the cross he said, ‘Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do’ (Lk 23:34). For on account of this love, when he was on the farthest point of the shore (which was said to be the most beautiful because it was in Judea), he does not want to take bread from the children and give it to the dogs. But because he had come to the sheep of Israel, he pays the fare of the ferrymen so that he who had come at first to save his own people might save the people who dwell near the sea, and so that in the midst of storms—that is, his passion and cries on the cross—submerged in hell, he might save those whom he was neglecting, it would seem, by sleeping on a ship.” • →Gloss. ord. “The human race may be signified by the flight of the prophet, when, scorning the commands of God, it withdrew from his face and handed itself over to the world, and later, with the shipwreck of the world raging against it, it is compelled to turn back to him whom it fled. And those things which it had thought sources of salvation for itself are turned into destruction.” Y‚Mysticism‚Z 2–3 A Mystic Sympathizes with Jonah’s Flight In 1897, the Carmelite nun, St. Thérèse of Lisieux, wrote a letter to her Prioress wherein she describes the difficulty of training novices. In particular, she notes how she has become aware of the extent to which conversion is a divine act, something achieved by God’s grace, not by human action. Given this difficulty—as well as the need to remain humble while administering reproofs and instruction—she sympathizes with Jonah, who would rather flee than reproach Nineveh. • →Thérèse of Lisieux Autob. “In the abstract, it seems easy to do good to souls, to make them love God more, and to mould them to one’s own ideas. But, when we put our hands to the work, we quickly learn that without God’s help it is as impossible to do good to them, as to bring back the sun when once it has set. Our own tastes, our own ideas must be put aside, and in absolute forgetfulness of self we must guide souls, not by our way, but along that particular path which Our Lord Himself indicates. The chief difficulty, however, does not lie even here—what costs more than all else is to be compelled to note their faults, their slightest imperfections, and to wage a deadly war against them…ever since I placed myself in the arms of Jesus I have been like a watchman on the look-out for the enemy from the highest turret of a fortified castle. Nothing escapes me; indeed my clear-sightedness often gives me matter for surprise, and makes me think it quite excusable in the prophet Jonas to have fled before the face of the Lord rather than announce the ruin of Ninive. I would prefer to receive a thousand reproofs rather than inflict one, yet I feel it necessary that the

task should cause me pain, for if I spoke through natural impulse only, the soul in fault would not understand she was in the wrong and would simply think: ‘The Sister in charge of me is annoyed about something and vents her displeasure upon me, although I am full of the best intentions.’ But in this, as in all else, I must practise sacrifice and self-denial” (176–177). Y‚Islam‚Z 1 Yona son of Amittai Muslim Jonah Listed among the Prophets While the Book of Jonah does not call Jonah a prophet, the Qur’an lists him among the greatest of the tradition: • →Qur’an 4.163 “We inspire thee as We inspired Noah and the prophets after him, as We inspired Abraham and Ishmael and Isaac and Jacob and the tribes, and Jesus and Job and Jonah and Aaron and Solomon, and as We imparted unto David the Psalms” (cf. →Qur’an 6.84–86). • →Qur’an 10 bears his name. Jonah’s Parents • →Kisʼ Qiṣaṣ describes Jonah’s parents, the prophet Matthew and Sadaqa, as Jerusalemites who were unable to conceive. At the age of 70, Sadaqa gives birth to Jonah but soon finds herself as a poor widow, with only a wooden bowl which Allah fills with meat at night. Local shepherds allow the infant to suckle from their ewes. 2 go to Nineveh, the great city The Mosque of Nebi Yunus A mosque dedicated to Jonah sat atop a tell in Mosul, to the south of Esarhaddon’s palace, and was believed to be his burial place. The structure had been converted from a Nestorian church, and later a Turkish minaret was added. While the tell clearly contained important Ninevite ruins, the sanctity of the location prevented excavation. • The Islamic State (ISIS), however, called for this mosque to be demolished as part of their campaign to destroy all mosques that include shrines. On July 24, 2014, corresponding to 26 Ramadan 1435 AH, the mosque was destroyed by ISIS. • Since then, ruins and tunnels within the tell have been explored (cf. Arango, Tim. “Tears, and Anger, as Militants Destroy Iraq City’s Relics.” New York Times, July 31, 2014). Nineveh's Evil • →Kisʼ Qiṣaṣ describes the King of Nineveh, Thaalab ibn Sharid, as a haughty tyrant, who would raid Israelite towns and take captives. 3a Jonah got up to flee Reordering the Story • →Kisʼ Qiṣaṣ presents a different narrative sequence. After being commissioned, Jonah preaches to the Ninevites but is rejected. It is then that he boards a ship. This narrative differs from the biblical account because Islamic commentators were concerned by the notion of a prophet who refuses Allah’s mission—and who even gets angry with Allah. Thus, the tale has been modified in order to absolve Jonah from reproach and to preserve the impeccability of prophets. Y‚History of Translations‚Z 2 call out against Other Possibilities • call unto (cf. Is 34:14); cf. G, V, NJB; • call against (1Kgs 13:2); cf. KJV; • call about (Neh 6:7); cf. TNK. Y‚Literature‚Z 2 Nineveh, the great city Geography for Children Although the moral aspects of the story of Jonah are clear, especially in children’s adaptations, several books include historical content as well. • →Spier 1985 has several pages of historical content, including maps, details about the Assyrian Empire, the tomb of Jonah, ancient ships, and archaeological discoveries.

47

Jon :- The Storm Rages

• →Marzollo 2004 begins her book with a map and provides historical context for Jonah’s motivation: “Jonah did not want to teach the Ninevites because they were enemies of Israel.” 3a And Jonah got up to flee to Tarshish The Sermon in Moby Dick Father Mapple’s sermon focuses almost solely on Jon 1–2, elaborating often on aspects that the text neglects, such as the negotiation of the fare or the size of Jonah’s cabin below deck. The sermon is delivered to men about to embark on long whaling voyages, from a pulpit that has many characteristics of a ship, such as a rope ladder (*cin1:5–17). • →Melville Moby Dick, ch. 9 “With this sin of disobedience in him, Jonah still further flouts at God, by seeking to flee from Him. He thinks that a ship made by men will carry him into countries where God does not reign, but only the Captains of this earth. He skulks about the wharves of Joppa, and seeks a ship that’s bound for Tarshish. There lurks, perhaps, a hitherto unheeded meaning here. By all accounts Tarshish could have been no other city than the modern Cadiz. That’s the opinion of learned men. And where is Cadiz, shipmates? Cadiz is in Spain; as far by water, from Joppa, as Jonah could possibly have sailed in those ancient days, when the Atlantic was an almost unknown sea. Because Joppa, the modern Jaffa, shipmates, is on the most easterly coast of the Mediterranean, the Syrian; and Tarshish or Cadiz more than two thousand miles to the westward from that, just outside the Straits of Gibraltar. See ye not then, shipmates, that Jonah sought to flee world-wide from God? Miserable man! Oh! most contemptible and worthy of all scorn; with slouched hat and guilty eye, skulking from his God; prowling among the shipping like a vile burglar hastening to cross the seas” (45).

• “I was in St. Louis, looking out of a hotel room window at the sun coming up on the other side of the Mississippi. I’d been up all night, worrying about the things going on in my life. The song relates to the Jonah story in the Bible. It’s addressed to me. I’m Jonah, telling myself to get off my ass and do whatever I was supposed to be doing. Something about the track I was on was wrong. I was satisfied with the status quo. Get Up Jonah is about accepting an invitation, from the cosmos, to take the next step. I really like that song, though I haven’t done it for a long time” (Wheeler Brad, “Bruce Cockburn: A Life in Seven Songs,” Globe and Mail, interview on September 11, 2017). Lyrics • “I woke up thinking about Turkish drummers / It didn’t take long / I don’t know much about Turkish drummers / But it made me think of Germany and the guy who sold me cigarettes / Who’d been in the Afghan secret police / Who made the observation that it’s hard to live / Then I was reminded of the proprietor of a Vietnamese restaurant in Quebec / Who used to be head of the secret police in Da Nang / And it occurred to me I was thinking about all this stuff / To keep from thinking about something else / Isn’t that just what secret police are all about? / Somebody stands in a window / Watches the river roll / Trains rumble in the foreground / With the weight of approaching dawn / Flames from the refinery / Rise broken, red and riveting / And the high vault of heaven / Looks far away and cold / There’s howling in the factory yard / There’s pounding in my head / I’m swollen up with unshed tears / Bloated like the dead / (Instrumental break) / Blood and ashes—time burning / On the skyline dark against the stars / A solitary horseman, waiting / Lashed to the wheel  / Whipping into the storm / Get up, Jonah / It’s your time to be born.”

Y‚Music‚Z 2 Get up Jonah as an Invitation to Take the Next Step In the words of the singersongwriter Bruce Cockburn:



Jonah 1:4–6 The Storm Rages Y‚Suggestions for Reading‚Z 4–6 Jonah and the Sailors React to the Storm Thirteen action-packed verses (Jon 1:4–16) alternating between action and dialogue begin here. This long passage narrates an adventure on the high seas, unique in the OT, in which the ship’s crew reacts to God’s storm. The author grounds this story in the realism of seafaring, while allowing for the fabulous elements of the story to emerge. Like The Wizard of Oz, a realistic setting becomes the opportunity for an encounter with the fantastic. Adventure Story The author draws readers in through allusions and imagery anchored in seafaring vocabulary (*hge1:3–16) and practices (*hge1:5c; *anc1:3b), and drawn from maritime places (*hge1:3b). The adventure is conveyed through the sailors’ frantic struggle—and even the personification of the ship (*dev1:4c). There are similarities to the sea-going accounts of Jesus and the apostles (*bib1:4). Storm God God responds to Jonah’s flight by “hurling” a great wind like a spear (*dev1:4a,5b,12b,15a), thereby initiating the next phase of the story. The depiction of God/gods using natural elements to gain a response from human beings is not in itself unique to Jonah (cf. plagues, droughts, miraculous waters; *ref1:4a; *chr1:4,11,15). It functions in the narrative to express God’s command over the natural world. Desperate Sailors With the mention of the pagan sailors “hurling” vessels overboard, and the echo of God’s command (“Get up! Call out!”) in the voice of the captain

(*dev1:2–3:8), the narrative creates a parallel between their actions and God’s. Their calling out to their gods provides an antithetical parallel to Jonah’s reluctance to heed God’s call. Moreover, the captain’s exclamation to Jonah—to call on his god lest they all perish—serves as the first panel of a diptych, to be completed by the Ninevite king (Jon 3:9), which contrasts Jonah’s assuredness (Jon 4:2) with the uncertainty of others (Jon 4:11). Sleeping Jonah Instead of working to save the ship and himself, Jonah continues his descent away from God. Jonah, as in the story’s opening, does not heed God but descends—this time to the recesses of the ship to sleep. What does the reader expect? Again, the reader is not privy to Jonah’s motivation; why and when Jonah went to sleep has inspired a great deal of speculation (*chr1:5e). The Hebrew term may hint at a divinely induced sleep, which might lead to a revelation (*dev1:5e; *com1:5e). However, God does not appear in a dream but in the storm.

Text Y‚Textual Criticism‚Z 4a great Hebrew Vorlage of G G lacks the adjective at this point. • Because mega is found in Symmachus’ text (G Ms 86), this may suggest that the minus is due to an error (→Ziegler 1984, 244), • but it is also possible that the Vorlage lacked gdwlh.

48

Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?

5d But Jonah Paragraph Demarcation Place • In 4QXIIg (4Q82 f76–78i+79–81:10) there is a blank ruled line after v.  5a, which seems to indicate an interval or a paragraph demarcation (→DJD XV, 309). • A paragraph demarcation is not found after v. 5a in other textual traditions (e.g., M). Significance The blank interval in 4QXIIg likely indicates that a new sense unit begins after v. 5a. This division of sense units highlights the contrast between Jonah’s behavior and that of the sailors: whereas the sailors, fearful for their lives, cry to their gods and jettison cargo, Jonah inexplicably descends to the hold of the ship to go to sleep (*gra1:5d; *dev1:5d). Y‚Vocabulary‚Z 4b,11b,12c,13b storm Cognate Noun and Verb The participle sō‘ēr (“storming”) used at Jon 1:11b,13b is a cognate of the noun sa‘ar (“storm”) found at Jon 1:4b,12c. As a noun it appears three times in Jeremiah (Jer 23:19; 25:32; 30:23), and once in Amos (Am 1:14). As a verb it appears in 2Kgs 6:11; Is 54:11; Jer 30:23; Hos 13:3; Hb 3:14; Zec 7:14. Most often, it is used to denote storms at sea (*dev1:11ab,12bc,13b). 5a The sailors Technical Word (Etymology) The Hebrew and Aramaic word for “sailor,” mallaḥ, comes from Sumarian via the Akkadian malāhu (*dev1:5a). 5c the vessels which were in the ship Referent: Cargo in Jars? The banal Hebrew word kēlîm means “containers” or “jars,” probably amphorae for transporting goods (*hge1:5c). 5d boat Hapax legomenon: Aramaism? • The ancient versions considered the noun sepînâ to be a synonym for “ship.” It is well known in Aramaic. It must refer to a type of a ship with a deck and a hold for cargo. See →Introduction §1.2.

• When applied to humans, it refers to snoring (cf. →Aristophanes Nub. 5 “the slaves are snoring” [regkousin]).

MGVS

4a But Yhwh hurled G

the Lord raised the Lord sent S the Lord cast down a M V Sgreat wind onto the sea. There was a great storm on the sea and the ship thought it would break. GV was in danger of breaking. S was bending to the point of breaking up. The sailors became afraid and each man V the men cried out to his GV their god. They hurled G jettisoned S threw away the vessels which were in S from the ship into the sea to make it lighter for them. But V And Jonah descended into the recesses of the boat GVS ship and lay down and fell fast asleep. G was sleeping and snoring. V was sleeping in a deep sleep. S he slept. V

b c

5a b

c

d

e

MV

GS

V

And the captain The bowman S approached him and he captain approached said to him, — him and he said to him, — b What is it with you that Why are you snoring? S you are sleeping? sleeping? c Get up! Call out to Get up! Call on V S Invoke your out to your god! Perhaps the god god! So that your S might think of Perhaps the god V recollect on us might think of S that we might not deliver us that we perish. might not perish.

6a

4a hurled 1Sm 18:11; 20:33 — 4a a great wind 1Kgs 19:11; Jb 1:19 — 4b a great

6a captain Technical Term: “Chief of the Ropes”? • The Hebrew term rab haḥōbēl can be rendered woodenly as “chief rigger” or “roper.” The word ḥōbēl rarely occurs elsewhere (e.g., Ez 27:8,27–29). Since it seems clear that he is in charge of the ship in some capacity, “helmsman” or “captain” may be preferable. • The Greek term prôireus traditionally means “bowman” or “lookout.” Typically the prôireus would take command if the captain became incapacitated. →Sasson (1990, 103) bases his translation, “helmsman,” on his interpretation of iconographic depictions of Levantine ships in which a rudder is steered with ropes. 6c think of Hapax legomenon: Aramaism The Hebrew root ‘št rarely occurs in the OT. • In Jer 5:28 the stem is qal and appears to mean “grow sleek or smooth” evidently based on occurrences of the root in nominal forms (e.g., Sg 5:14 where a nominal form refers to “polished” ivory). • Here the stem is hitpa‘el (yit‘aššēt); it has the sense, “to think well of,” indicating an Aramaism (cf. Dn 6:3 [4]; →Wolff 1986, 107; →Limburg 1993, 51). Understandably, the versions diverge from this, employing a free translation. Y‚Grammar‚Z 5b each man cried out to his god Distributive Subject The verb form in the Hebrew is plural (“they cried”) but the subject is singular, ’îš (“man”). • The use of ’îš indicates a distributive subject: “each one cried to his god.” The behavior indicated by the verb is performed independently by each of the men. It is a further indication that the sailors worship multiple deities rather than the God of Israel.

storm Jer 25:32 — 5a sailors Ez 27:9,27,29 — 5b each man cried out to his god Mi 5e snoring (G) Dis legomenon 4:5 — 5c to make it lighter Acts 27:18–19,38,40 — 5e fast asleep Gn 2:21; Jgs 4:21; 5d descended SYNTAX Ambiguous Verbal • The verb regchô (alt. spelling: regkô) occurs only twice in G: Jon 1Sm 26:12; Jb 4:13; Prv 10:5; 19:15; Is 29:10; Dn 8:18; Mt 8:25 — 6a captain Ez Contrast Jonah is narrated using the 27:8,27–29 — 6c Perhaps the god might think of us Jon 3:9 — 6c we perish Mt 8:25 simple past preterite (wayyiqtol), but 1:5 and Jon 1:6. qal verbal forms punctuate the narThe verb was used in Greek literaration. These variations invite the reader to note the disruptions in the narture of the 5th–4th c. b.c. to denote the sound of strenuous breathing. • Applied to animals it denotes snorting or panting (cf. →Euripides Rhes. rative’s flow. Sometimes these disruptions demarcate turning points in the 785: “the horses snorted” [erregkon]; →Aristotle Hist. an. 537b.3, 566b.15). story. So here, in contrast to the repeated form depicting the actions of the

Jon :- The Storm Rages

sailors (wayyiqtol), Jonah’s descent (yārad) into the recesses of the ship is represented with a qal verbal form. The sense is adversative. Deeper analysis of the syntatical forms employed in this narrative disruption distinguishes them according to tense, aspect, and mood. Tense (Ambiguity) When the verbal system is considered in terms of tense, Jonah’s descent may be regarded as: • either simultaneous: “meanwhile he went down,” • or anterior (i.e., pluperfect): “he had gone down,” relative to the simple past preterite (wayyiqtol) actions of the sailors. They (sequentially) become afraid, cry out, and jettison the cargo. The Hebrew verbal system does not clarify tense any further. Aspect (Perfect) Grammatically, the verb used to describe Jonah’s descent has a perfect aspect. The narrative maintains an external vantage point while recounting in parallel two event sequences, the sailors’ (wayyiqtol) and Jonah’s (qal; *dev1:5d). Modality (Realis) Modality concerns the relative knowability or possibility of a given action. Some verb forms (wayyiqtol, qal) connote clearly known actions, conditions, states, or processes and therefore concern realia. By contrast, some verb forms (weqātal, yiqtol) reflect increased levels of contingency and concern irrealia, i.e., unreal, possible, statements (this includes the future). Verb forms in this category merit a more generous application of modal verbs (e.g., can, could, may, might, must, ought, shall, should, will, would) or adverbs in translation. Considering modality, then, Jonah’s descent is a realis. The narrator not only maintains a similar vantage point on Jonah and the sailors (aspect), but also presents the same level of knowledge concerning his actions. Just as the sailors clearly scramble to keep the ship afloat, Jonah clearly descends to the lower deck of the ship. For the narrator, it is clear that Jonah does not join the crew in doing all in their power to save the vessel. Y‚Literary Devices‚Z 4a But Yhwh hurled RHETORIC Dispositio: Emphasis through Inversion This verse emphasizes the subject—the Lord—by placing it before the verb rather than employing the standard verb-subject order found elsewhere in Biblical Hebrew. 4a,5b,12b,15a hurled + hurl — Leitwort • Forms of the verb ṭwl, “to hurl, cast, or throw,” are found in Jon 1:4a,5b,12b,15a. God hurls a great wind, and so the sailors hurl the cargo. Jonah asks them to hurl him (instead of cargo) and they do so. • Elsewhere the verb is used of weapons, as when Saul hurls a spear (1Sm 18:11; 20:33), just as a storm is a heavenly weapon (Jer 49:36—this latter example resonates with depictions of Baal, who hurls lightning, and thus draws on the convergence of Baal’s and Yhwh’s characteristic traits as storm deities [*cul1:4a]). Nowhere else in the Bible does God “hurl a wind.” This lends strength to the view that the word is consciously used to unify the various actions. 4a great Leitwort, Meaning See *dev1:2. 4ab the sea NARRATION Dialectic Characterization of the Sea (cf. Jon 1:5,9,11,12,13,15; 2:3) The representation of the sea in Jonah reflects a mytheme common among ancient cultures (*cul1:4a). One Creature among Others The Lord acts upon the sea (Jon 1:4); it responds as a creature should. Jonah later declares that the Lord made the sea (Jon 1:9). A Goddess? As the story progresses, the sailors appear to regard the sea as a deity (Jon 1:11) and its actions grow increasingly nefarious (Jon 1:11,13) until it is placated with the sailors’ offering of Jonah (Jon 1:15). This personification of the sea as a deity may continue into the psalm (Jon 2:3).

49

4b,11b,12c,13b storm + stormy — NARRATIVE Punctuation and Intensification At key points of the story, readers are given information about the severity of the storm. • God begins the action by hurling a great wind and producing a great storm (Jon 1:4; cf. Jon 1:12). • At the climax of the sailors’ interrogation of Jonah (“What shall we do to you…?”), the narrator adds to the urgency of this question by noting that the sea grew stormier (Jon 1:11). • The sailors try to row hard toward land once more, but the intensification of the storm makes this impossible (Jon 1:13). 4c the ship thought Personification: Anthropomorphic Language; Synecdoche The verb ḥšb (pi‘el, “to think upon”) is not used elsewhere of inanimate objects. Many translations avoid this difficulty with some periphrastic renderings such as “the ship was in danger of breaking up” (JPS). The text as found in the Hebrew may be considered as a personification or a synecdoche. • The personification of the ship could serve to heighten the fantastic nature of the story, in which one finds a sea that rages in anger (Jon 1:15) and animals that repent with fasting and sackcloths (Jon 3:7–8). • A synecdoche: “ship” in fact refers to the people on the ship. This appears to be the only example of personification in the story. The storm, the fish, the plant, and the worm all act because they are directed by God. Assonance Regardless of whether this refers to the ship itself or to its crew, it does provide the storyteller with an assonant turn of phrase: ḥiššebâ lehiššābēr. 5 RHETORIC Parallel Ternary Verbal Groups The actions of the sailors and that of Jonah are grouped into two sets of three verbs. • The sailors fear, pray, and hurl, • while Jonah descends, lays down, and sleeps. 5a The sailors NARRATION Characterization of Jonah’s Companions through Word Choice While the sailors are simply referred to later as “men,” the use of a technical term here (*voc1:5a) might serve to emphasize that even sailors (not simply unskilled men) were scared. 5d But Jonah descended Art of Telling RHETORIC Dispositio: Contrasting Word Order, Stressing Jonah’s Special Reaction to Divine Intervention As in Jon 1:4 (*dev1:4a), the word order of this verse emphasizes the subject, Jonah, by placing it before the verb. The context suggests that the conjunction waw contrasts Jonah with the sailors’ behavior. NARRATION External Focalization Although the characteristics of the Hebrew verb render the timing of Jonah’s actions ambiguous (*gra1:5d), a consistent external vantage point (identified in the perfective aspect of the qal form yārad) coupled with a clear articulation of the sailors’ fearful motivation (identified in the realis modality of the wayyiqtol form of wayyîr’û, v. 5a), can let us guess Jonah’s motivations, even though they are not overtly articulated. Based on the narrative, the reader is led to consider the following questions. • Why would someone fleeing the Lord descend into a ship when confronted with a life-threatening storm, rather than panic like the rest up on deck? • Why does Jonah fail to fear like the sailors? • How much does Jonah understand what is happening? If, as the narrator confidently articulates, Jonah is not on deck and not afraid, his motivations seem quite clear. In all probability, Jonah is not acting out of fear and knows what is going on. 5e lay down and fell fast asleep Art of Telling RHETORIC Hendiadys (M) and Amplification (G) • M presents an expressive hendiadys: wayyiškab wayyērādam. • G renders that figure with the verbs katheudô (“to sleep”) and regchô (“to snore”; *voc1:5e).

50

Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?

G’s precise diction may be intended to render the narrative more vivid and dramatic. The repetition of the word “snoring” in G-Jon 1:6 implies that the captain found Jonah asleep because he had heard Jonah’s snoring even amidst the great storm. NARRATION Characterization of Jonah: Inspired Prophet, or Stubborn Man? Since Jonah knows that his flight from God is the storm’s ultimate cause, it is unlikely that his deep sleep is a revelatory trance wrought by God (*bib1:5e). Rather, it is translated here as “fast asleep,” emphasizing the disjunct between his and the sailors’ actions. 6a He said NARRATION Pause in the Action, Shift to Speech Beginning with the captain’s comments to Jonah, the action, which has been non-stop since Jon 1:2, is here interrupted. Dialogue dominates for seven verses, only returning to action in Jon 1:13 when the sailors resume rowing against the storm. With this pause comes a great deal of information about Jonah, his character, and his view of God. 6b What is it with you that Accusing Question While the form is that of a question, the meaning need not be interrogative but accusatory (e.g., →Joüon and Muraoka [2008, §161.b] translate Jon 4:4 “you are really angry”; cf. Wolff 1986, 169). The Hebrew mâ lekā conveys an accusation in the form of a question, which, throughout the Bible, appears in exchanges from superiors to inferiors (see Gn 20:9; Is 3:15; 22:1; Ez 18:2). Likewise, Jesus’ exclamation ti emoi kai soi (Jn 2:4) may be a translation of this Hebrew idiom. 6c your god NARRATION Characterization of God: One among Others? When the captain specifies to Jonah that the object of his cries/prayers should be “your” (i.e., Jonah’s) deity, he tacitly recognizes multiple deities. • The captain is not a monotheist and exhibits no knowledge of Jonah’s devotion to “Yhwh, God of the heavens” (Jon 1:9). Yet, he does exhibit a modicum of belief that Jonah’s God may be powerful enough to have caused the storm and therefore is in need of appeasement. • As the story unfolds there is no clear indication that Jonah acquiesces to the captain’s command, apart from leaving the hull of the ship and going on deck. 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. *chr2:2–6). 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.

Context Y‚Historical and Geographical Notes‚Z 5c the vessels which were in the ship Amphorae? The excavation of shipwrecks can help us understand what the ancients were shipping. Jars, for example, are often marked with names, showing that a single ship served many merchants. →Gagarin and Fantham (2010, 3:96–97) provide a sample list of shipwrecks with their cargo.

Y‚Ancient Cultures‚Z 4a hurled a great wind Ancient Warrior and Storm Deities Ancient warrior imagery is often associated with verbs of throwing and casting. Divine warrior imagery associated with storm deities is present across ancient cultures, especially in Canaan, Anatolia, Mesopotamia, and Greece. The storm deity Ba‘al (H)adad typically casts lightning bolts as weapons in visual and literary representations. • E.g., Baal with Thunderbolt (sculpture on stone, 15th–13th c. b.c.), 142 × 50 × 28 cm, Ugarit, Musée du Louvre (AO 15775). God of the storm and the rain, Baal walks to the right, brandishing a club with his right arm and planting a spear in the ground. He wears a beard and high horned headdress, attributes of the deity. Dressed in a loincloth adorned with fine stripes, with a curved-end dagger at his waist, he dominates a little figure standing on a pedestal, wearing a robe with a braid shawl—the king of Ugarit in ceremonial dress, praying to invoke the protection of the god (see →Schaeffer 1933 for a more detailed description).

Reception Y‚Comparison of Versions‚Z 5e and lay down and fell fast asleep Jonah’s Sleep The Hebrew verb rdm, “to sleep heavily,” is sometimes connected to visions in M (*bib1:5e). G, V, and S, however, do not note this association. The Septuagint: A Vivid Translation G renders M’s wayyiškab wayyērādam with ekatheuden kai erregchen, which is not an exact translation. The first verb of the translation, katheudô (“to lie down to sleep,” “to sleep”), corresponds semantically to M’s škb and, as such, is frequently chosen to render škb in G (→Hatch and Redpath 1906, 2:700). However, the second verb of G, regchô (“to snore”), corresponds neither to rdm (“to sleep deeply”) nor to anything else in M. It is unlikely that this is a matter of a different Vorlage; rather, it appears to be a free decision of the translator. One possible reason for this translation choice may have been to make the narrative more vivid (*com1:6c). The Peshitta: A Simplifying Translation The phrase wayyiškab wayyērādam is translated by a single verb, wedmak (“and he slept”), in S. This appears to be the result of a translation decision, not a different Vorlage. The Vulgate: A Translation of Dynamic Equivalence The Vetus Latina, which reads et dormiebat et stertebat (“was sleeping and snoring”), follows G. V, on the other hand, translates M with dormiebat sopore gravi (“was sleeping in a deep sleep”). Jerome thus appears to have taken wayyiškab wayyērādam as referring to one single action rather than two; perhaps he understood the second verb, wayyērādam, to be an adverbial modification or clarification of the first. 6c think The Connection between Thinking and Saving Perhaps due to the rarity of the Hebrew verb yit‘aššēt (“think of ”), the versions offer diverging translations. The Septuagint: A Classically Nuanced Translation? At first G’s diasôsêi does not appear to be a close translation of yit‘aššēt, which is perhaps due to the rarity of the word in Hebrew. It is possible that the translator sought to make the sense of the Hebrew more explicit in this context—namely that God’s remembrance of them would bring about their salvation. On the other hand, the term diasôizô might have some semantic overlap with the Hebrew ‘št. In Greek literature of the 5th–4th c. b.c., diasôizô sometimes has the sense of keeping something in mind, i.e., “saving” what one has learned (cf. →Isocrates Hel. enc. 10.63; →Plato Resp. 395b; →Xenophon Hell. 7.2.17; →Xenophon Mem. 3.5.22). Though this is not the primary meaning of diasôizô, it may explain why it was used to translate yit‘aššēt. The Peshitta: Giving the Sense of M The Syriac translator uses a standard pa‘el verb (nepṣeyan) meaning “save” or “deliver” to translate M’s yit‘aššēt. This could be an interpretive translation

51

Jon :- The Storm Rages

that sought to replace a metaphorical expression with its signifié—a tendency reflected throughout S. According to the translator, “to think on them” means “to save them.” It is also possible that S was influenced by G’s use of diasôizô; indeed, S exhibits a degree of literary dependence on G, particularly in its translation of the Twelve Prophets (→Dirksen 1988, 264– 295; →Romney and Morrison 2011, 326–331). The Vetus Latina and Vulgate: Followers of G and M The Vetus Latina, which reads si quomodo salvos faciat nos Deus, appears to be a slightly awkward periphrastic translation of G. V’s rendering, si forte recogitet Deus, is a close translation of M. The correspondence between cogito and the Aramaic verb ‘št, which has more or less the same meaning as ‘št in Hebrew, is found in the Vulgate at Dn 6:4 as well.

• In Mt 26:40, the motif of sleeping during a moment of crisis is reversed when Jesus faces the tumultuous reality of his impending death while his disciples sleep, exhibiting, once more, their unawareness of his true identity and the things to come. • Luke’s presentation of the shipwreck on Malta contains an account of cargo being thrown overboard by the crew that is reminiscent of the sailors in Jonah (Acts 27:27–44). Paul counsels that no harm will come to the crew and passengers, whereas Jonah gives no word of consolation, but rather retires to the belly of the ship where he falls into a deep sleep. • According to Paul’s own words, he experienced three shipwrecks and spent a night and a day adrift in the open waters of the Mediterranean (2Cor 11:25).

Y‚Biblical Intertextuality‚Z

4a hurled a great wind Similar Imagery in the OT By depicting Yhwh as hurling a storm, the Book of Jonah merges the imagery of a divine warrior and storm deity. • Saul, for example, hurls (ṭwl) his spear at David (1Sm 18:11; 20:33). Likewise, the image of God as a storm deity who casts lightning bolts as weapons appears elsewhere in the OT, typically in its most ancient poetry (e.g., 2Sm 22:15; Ps 18:15). • Similar imagery appears in the Major Prophets who speak of God hurling (ṭwl) the people from the land (see Is 22:17; Jer 16:13; 22:26,28). • Among the Minor Prophets, Hb 3:11 is exemplary in likening God to a warrior that hurls arrows and spears.

1:4–2:10 TYPOLOGY Jonah and Noah The two best known nautically themed stories of the OT exhibit structural and thematic similarities. Plot • God sees the wickedness (rā‘â) of human beings: the evil’s scope is more universal in Genesis (Gn 6:5; Jon 1:2). • Forty days: the duration of the storm (Gn 7:17) and the grace period until God’s judgment (Jon 3:4). • Sacrifice: Noah, the sailors (Jon 1:16), and Jonah (Jon 2:9) offer sacrifices in response to God’s salvation from the waters (Gn 8:20–21). Characters and Actors • Animals: God’s concern for animals is ambiguous in Genesis, for, on the one hand, he saves the animals from the flood, but, on the other hand, he then gives them to Noah and his descendants to eat (Gn 7:2–3). His solicitude for animals in Jonah seems clearer (Jon 4:11). Incidentally, the presence of animals in these two stories may account for why they are the two most popular stories for biblical children’s literature (cf. →Introduction §3.13). • Large populations: Noah’s story emphasizes the multitude of people on the earth (Gn 6:1), while Jonah’s notes the immensity of Nineveh’s population (Jon 1:2; 4:11). • Dove: Noah releases a dove to check whether the floodwaters have receded (Gn 8:8), and Jonah’s name means “dove” (Jon 1:1). Motifs • Power over creation: divinely ordained storms prevail over the face of the earth (mountains, etc.; cf. Gn 7:19) and threaten Jonah’s ship (Jon 1:4). • Salvation from water: God rescues our two protagonists from the waters of chaos by commanding Noah to build an ark (Gn 6:14) and the sea-monster to swallow Jonah (Jon 1:17). • Sin and Forgiveness: depending on how one interprets Gn 6:3, God either gives humanity 120 years to repent—during which time, it is said, Noah exhorts repentance—or he simply chooses Noah and his family alone to be saved. At any rate, no one else has repented and joined Noah by the time the storms begin. Apart from the ark, all of humanity and animal life is destroyed in the flood (Gn 7:21–23). In the Book of Jonah, on the other hand, God’s call to conversion is wildly successful (Jon 3:10). Why God acts differently is unambiguous if one accepts the traditional interpretation that Noah spent 120 years calling for repentance. The Ninevites repented and found mercy, whereas the men of Noah’s time failed to repent. If, however, God does not call for repentance through Noah, we can wonder why the same offer of mercy is not made in the story of Noah. 4 MOTIF Stormy Sailing Scenes in the New Testament Several scenes in the Gospels and in the Acts of the Apostles are reminiscent of Jonah’s experience in the storm. • The Synoptic passages wherein Jesus calms a storm (Mt 8:23–27; Mk 4:35–41; Lk 8:22–25) use the imagery and vocabulary of Jonah. When traveling to a Gentile region, a storm causes panic while the main character sleeps. The storm is calmed and the disciples are awed. Unlike the sailors in Jonah who recognize the power of Yhwh and respond to the calming of the sea with worship, Jesus’ disciples remain uncertain of Jesus’ true identity.

5e fast asleep Motif of Divinely Induced Sleep? The verb rdm, “to sleep heavily,” is found 11 times in the Hebrew Bible. The following are examples of its usage. • Sisera sleeps deeply when exhausted from battle (Jgs 4:18–21). • The lazy sleep during harvest (Prv 10:5). • When Daniel hears the voice of a heavenly figure, he sleeps deeply, and upon waking, he has additional visions (Dn 8:18; 10:9). In other cases, the verb npl is used in conjunction with the derivative form tardēmâ, usually to express divinely induced sleep: • God puts Adam into a deep sleep in the garden before taking his rib (Gn 2:21). • A deep sleep falls upon Abraham, presumably at God’s behest, during which he has a vision that concludes with God making a covenant with him (Gn 15:12). • God puts Saul and his companions into a deep sleep, thus allowing David to take Saul’s spear and water jug (1Sm 26:12). • God pours out a spirit of deep sleep upon the prophets and others as part of his judgment against them (Is 29:10). • Jb 4:13; 33:15 likewise joins dreams and visions—perhaps of a more mundane sort—to a deep sleep. The use of this expression here could indicate that Jonah went down into the ship in order to enter a trance and receive a revelation. There is nothing else in the story, however, to suggest this was Jonah’s intent; so it is more likely that Jonah yet again seeks to flee God (*dev1:5e). 6c Perhaps Conjectural Religious Language The captain’s “perhaps” expresses uncertainty. He recognizes the need for divine intervention while avoiding a mandate or prediction of divine behavior. Evidently he recognizes from experience that prayers may go unanswered. • Identical conjectural language in religious contexts appears elsewhere in the Bible (Nm 23:3; 1Sm 6:5) and will be reflected in the response of the king of Nineveh (Jon 3:9). Y‚Jewish Tradition‚Z 4a Yhwh hurled Why Does God Punish Jonah? • →b. Sanh. 89a “One who suppresses his prophecy…is liable to the death penalty at the hands of heaven.” Further, the tractate elaborates, “one who suppresses his prophecy: for example, Jonah son of Amittai.” • →Malbim Gé’ ḥizzāyôn contends that Jonah was not guilty of suppressing a specific prophecy, but rather a general command to exhort the Ninevites to repentance. That is why he did not suffer death.

52

Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?

5b each man A Gentile Microcosm The rabbinic tradition notes both the piety and the diversity of the sailors (→Zlotowitz and Scherman 1978, 86). • →Rashi Comm. says that the crew was drawn from each of the 70 nations, a microcosm of all humanity. • →b. Qidd. 82a notes that “sailors are generally pious.” 5b cried out to his god Targumic Polemical Amplification • →Tg. Jon. “…and each man prayed to his idol, but they saw that they were useless.” 5c vessels Idols The rabbis note that these “vessels” were actually the sailors’ idols. • →Pirqe R. El. 10 “…each one had his god in his hand, (each one) saying: ‘And the god who shall reply and deliver us from this trouble, he shall be god!’” 5c to make it lighter for them Explanatory Expansion • →Tg. Jon. “to make it lighter without it.” 5d Jonah Rabbis on Jonah See *jew1:1. 6c Call out to your god! Targumic Expansion The expansion in Targum Jonathan adds a degree of urgency to the captain’s words: • →Tg. Jon. ṣalé qŏdām ’ĕlāhāk mă’îm yitraḥém min qŏdām yy ‘ălānâ welâ nôbéd, “Pray before your god; perhaps there will be mercy from the Lord upon us, and we will not perish.” In addition, this expansion is likely an assimilation toward the words of the Ninevites found in Jon 3:9, thus creating a parallel between the sailors and the Ninevites: • →Tg. Jon. weyitraḥém ‘ălôhî min qŏdām yy…welâ nôbēd. 6c think of Targumic Free Translation • →Tg. Jon. “Have mercy” (yitraḥém). Maybe the rarity of the Hebrew root ‘št, “to think of,” led the Targum to translate it freely. Interestingly, the Targum does not appeal to the Aramaic use of the root in Dn 6:3 (M-6:4). Y‚Law‚Z 5c They hurled the vessels Halakhah Regarding Cargo • →b. B. Qam. 116b contains a rule regarding the jettisoning of cargo in case of an emergency. To lighten the vessel, the cargo to be thrown over is to be determined with regard to weight, not value, as long as this does not violate a different local maritime custom. That is, one might have to throw over a certain weight of gold while another jettisons the same weight of copper. The storm-tossed sailors do likewise in Acts 27:18. Y‚Christian Tradition‚Z 4,11,15 The Role of Nature in Jonah’s Attempted Escape God Uses the Forces of Nature to Prevent Jonah’s Escape • →Paulinus of Nola Carm. 22.105–118 “Again, what of the prophet who was fleeing to Tharsis, who was cast into the sea when the lot dictated by danger fell on him, and who was swallowed by the huge gaping maw of the whale and then vomited forth unscathed from its monstrous belly? He surely teaches us that sea and stars are moved under God’s control. By vainly seeking to flee from God the Controller of all things whom none can escape, he aroused the anger of both sky and sea. Nature, which belongs to the almighty Lord, realised that [Jonah] was revolting and she was afraid to play conspirator by transporting the guilty man safely through her demesne; she chained the runaway with winds and waves. That prophet was chosen by God to frighten sinning nations by his threatening advice. Once he had spoken of the calamitous outcome, had shattered the guilty and diverted God’s anger, he washed away his sins by the shedding of tears. Nineve reformed itself and so escaped its final end.”

• →Jacob of Sarug Hom. 122: In his mémrâ on the Book of Jonah, the personified figure Justice (kénûtâ) informs the sailors that Jonah is the cause of the storm and assures them that if they throw him overboard, peace will be restored. Here Jacob expresses his conviction that nothing falls outside of God’s providential guidance of the world. Justice’s speech concludes with the explanation that the wind is the means by which God brings back his fleeing servant, Jonah (Bedjan 1910, 4:397.5–10). The Calming of the Storm: A Typological Interpretation Jerome invites readers to pay special attention to the sailors’ care in handling Jonah and to Jonah’s willingness to be thrown overboard. He suggests that the plight of the sailors in the stormy sea prefigures the state of humanity before Christ, while Jonah prefigures Christ by offering himself as a sacrifice. • →Jerome Comm. Jon. 1:15 “The entire boat of humanity, that is, the creation of the Lord, was in peril. But then, after his passion, we see a world where there is the calm of faith, a world at peace and secure for everyone. We see a turning toward God. In this way we may understand how, after Jonah goes into the sea, the sea is alleviated of its turmoil.” 5c lighter The Weight of Sin • →John Chrysostom Paenit. 5.8 reckons that even though the sailors threw the cargo overboard, the ship was no lighter, “because the entire cargo still remained within it, the body of the prophet, the heavy cargo, not according to the nature of the body but from the weight of sin. For nothing is so heavy and onerous to bear as sin and disobedience.” 5e fast asleep Theological Meaning of “Sleep” • →Gloss. ord. “The heavy sleep of the prophet signifies man languishing in the slumber of his going astray, for whom it does not suffice to flee from the face of God, but beyond that, overcome by a certain madness, he ignores the wrath of God, and he sleeps without care, and his deep sleep resounds through raucous nostrils.” • →Gloss. ord. “Tropologiam: Many are those who, sailing with Jonah and having their own gods, hasten to go think of merrymaking, but after Jonah had been caught by lot, and by that man’s death the storm of the world was calmed, and peace was restored on the sea, then the one God will be adored, and spiritual offerings will be sacrificed, which according to the literal sense (iuxta litteram) they did not have in the midst of the waves.” Reading between the Lines: Why Did Jonah Go to Sleep? Several patristic authors offer their thoughts on how it is that Jonah could have gone to sleep in the middle of such a perilous storm. While some attribute it to Jonah’s emotional state, others opt to explain it away by reinterpreting the timeline of events. Jonah Slept for Psychological Reasons • →Jerome Comm. Jon. initially attributes Jonah’s ability to sleep to a natural disposition: “With respect to the history, the secure mental state of the prophet is being described; he is not disturbed by the storm, nor by the dangers, but he bears the same spirit in calm and when shipwreck threatens.” Yet, he immediately qualifies this, explaining that Jonah recognized the storm was a result of his actions and became depressed: “…the one who is sad hides himself, lest he should see that the waves, like God’s avengers, are swelling up against him. But his sleep is not out of a sense of security but out of grief…the ‘falling asleep’ of the prophet and the deepest sleep signify that man is groggy with the deep sleep of error, to whom it was not enough to have fled from the face of God, unless his mind, overwhelmed by a sort of madness, was ignorant of the anger of God.” • →Theodoret of Cyrus Interpr. Jon. surprisingly follows Jerome’s line of interpretation instead of that of his teacher, Theodore, when he suggests that “because Jonah was stung (kentoumenos) by his conscience, fell into despondency (athumiai), and could not bear the barbs of [his] thoughts, he obtained consolation (parapsuchên) from sleep” (PG 81:1725D). • →Jacob of Sarug Hom. 122 in a somewhat negative tone, attributes Jonah’s sleep to his depression and anxiety after having disobeyed God.

53

Jon :- Attempt to Save the Ship

Nonetheless, Jacob also presents Jonah’s sleep in the ship as an element that contributes to his status as a type of Christ since Jesus also slept in a boat while a storm raged and frightened his disciples (Lk 8:22–25; see Bedjan 1910, 4:385.7–387.10). Jonah Went to Sleep before the Storm Began • →Cyril of Alexandria Comm. Jon. 1:5–6 “Indifference about praying and a preference for sleeping are hardly appropriate to a prophet’s alertness in the face of danger, when the occasion and the situation call one to action, and the proper response would rather be to appease the God of all. Hence we might presume that the sleeping was done before the storm, and that his going down to the actual hold of the ship was a mark of one accustomed to being on his own…The prophet therefore was dozing, not ignoring his duty, but, as I said, doing so before the onset of the storm.”

• →Theodore of Mopsuestia Comm. Jon. “It was not that after this happened he went below and was sleeping: it would have been ridiculous if with such an alarm raised and everyone’s life at risk he had surrendered himself to sleep; rather, he did so as soon as he went on board.” Y‚Cinema‚Z 5–17 Moby Dick: Sermon on Jonah Although the film adaptation of Moby Dick (1956) must necessarily be trimmed to a reasonable length, a significant amount of time is given to Father Mapple’s sermon given to the whalers (cf. *liter1:3a). Father Mapple (played by Orson Welles) exhorts the sailors to bravery: “Delight is to him, who, against the proud gods and commodores of this earth, stands forth his own inexorable self.”



Jonah 1:7–16 Attempt to Save the Ship

Y‚Suggestions for Reading‚Z

Text

7–16 The Sailors Learn to Fear God The contrast between Jonah and the sailors is developed in these verses around the themes of fear and knowledge. In response to their perilous situation, the sailors seek knowledge through the casting of lots (*cul1:7b). • Jonah is not terrified of the storm, the sea, or even death. • The sailors, who do not fear God in this way, are terrified of everything around them, for they do not know the outcome. They could be cursed for murder, they could be saved, or they could die. By the end of the pericope, the sailors learn the fear of God from Jonah and from the sea. Because Jonah has said so little, his motivations remain unclear. Is his demand to be hurled into the sea suicide? Is he giving his life for the sailors? Is he certain that he will be saved from the sea? Sailors In a state of fear, the sailors seek knowledge—first from lots and then from Jonah. The information they receive further terrifies them. Instead of following his instructions, the sailors try to return to shore since they are afraid of incurring guilt for murder (Jon 1:14). Their fear of nature eventually gives way to fear of God, which they demonstrate through actions typical of sailors in the ancient world: making sacrifices and taking vows (*hge1:3–16). Jonah Jonah knows a great deal more than the sailors: who he is, who God is, the cause of the storm, and how to end it. The author continues to draw on biblical language: Jonah identifies himself as a Hebrew and a fearer of God, associating himself with such exemplars of obedience as Abraham (Gn  22:12), the Hebrew midwives (Ex 1:17), and the wisdom authors (Prv 1:7; 9:10; Sir 1:14; *voc1:9b; *cul1:9b). In response to the sailors’ questions, Jonah expresses what he knows, and what any reader of Scripture knows: that God (Yhwh) is the creator of the earth and sea. His surprising directive to the sailors—to hurl him into the sea—indicates his prophetic knowledge (like other prophets, Jonah just knows what to do: *bib1:1–2; *bib1:9b,13a; 2:10). Though he possesses knowledge about God, Jonah does not appear to understand what it means; his actions contradict his claim that he is a fearer of God. The Sea The inanimate sea, formerly operating in the background as a creature acted upon by God, now takes center stage in the narrative. In response to the sailors’ attempts to return to the shore, it rages more and more fiercely. Finally, the sea calms when the sailors hurl Jonah into the sea. Thus, the sea participates in teaching the sailors to fear God (*cul2:1–9; *bib2:3a,5a).

Y‚Textual Criticism‚Z 7e and the lot fell Hebrew Orthographic Variant • 4QXIIa (cf. 4Q76 5:7) and 4QXIIg (cf. 4Q81 1:4) attest the plene spelling of the verb (wayyapîlû; →DJD XV, 229, 309). • M contains the shorter spelling (wayyapilû). 8a Tell Hebrew Grammatical Variant • M spells the imperative haggîdâ (“tell”) plene with a paragogic -he attached. • 4QXIIa (see 4Q76 5:18) has the simple imperative haggēd without the paragogic -he (cf. →DJD XV, 229). Though this grammatical difference would be difficult to bring out in translation, it seems likely that the imperative form attested in M is more emphatic than that found in 4QXIIa. 8a on whose account A Secondary Insertion? Proposed Emendation Significant disruption in the text has led to the argument that the text originated as a marginal note meant to explain the relative in Jon 1:7 (i.e., š- = ’ăšer) and was later incorporated into the text at the wrong point (→Wolff 1986, 107). Minus in Some M Manuscripts • A few manuscripts (M) omit the expression (ba’ăšer lemî), perhaps due to homoioteleuton with Jon 1:7. • Mur88 10:13 also contains ba’ăšer lemî, thus supporting the majority reading of M (→DJD II, 190). Reconstructed Witnesses from Qumran • Although the phrase is often reconstructed in the lacunae of 4QXIIf (4Q81 1:5) and 4QXIIg (4Q82 f76–78i+79–81:15), such reconstructions are not suitable for use as textual evidence, especially since the lacunae in both mss. span nearly an entire line (→DJD XV, 269, 309). • Another ancient witness (4QXIIa) reads bešelmî (cf. 4Q76 5:18), which is possibly an assimilation to the word’s occurrence in a preceding line (cf. 4Q76 5:16; →DJD XV, 229) However, this is not certain since most of 4Q76 5:16, including the word bešelmî, must be reconstructed on the basis of M-Jon 1:7 and 4QXIIg (cf. 4Q82 f76–78i+79–81:13; →DJD XV, 309). M Confirmed by the Versions The mss. of G tend toward two different translations of ba’ăšer lemî:

54

Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?

• The majority reading (virtually all uncials, including B-S-V-W, and several minuscules) renders it with the phrase tinos heneken, while the phrase dia tina is found in all of the manuscripts of the Lucian recension except ms. 613, as well as ms. 68. It is possible to argue that both translations MGV capture the sense of M. 7a And each man • Likewise, V, which reads cuius G one said to causa, supports M’s reading. Given the above considerations of his companion, — G ancient sources as well as the princineighbor, — ple of lectio difficilior potior, the text b Come, let us cast lots of M should not be emended. The c that we might know on sense of the unemended text of M is explored below (see *gra1:8a Implied whose account Nominal Phrase). V 9b God of the heavens + “and earth” — Names of God • 4QXIIa (4Q76 6:2): after the word “heavens,” this fragment (frag. 19) contains the letter waw followed by ink traces that could possibly be construed as part of an aleph; though it is not certain, it is possible to reconstruct wā’āreṣ (“and earth”) here (→DJD XV, 230). • Three G miniscule manuscripts (39, 49, 764) contain the reading kai tês gês.

why this evil is upon us. GV And they cast lots d e and the lot GV lots fell upon Jonah. M

8a They said to him, — Tell

• Although the narrative describes the fear of the men (Jon 1:10a) and their response “What is this you have done?” (Jon 1:10b) prior to expositing their knowledge, “For the men knew” (Jon 1:10c), similar flashbacks are found elsewhere in late biblical narrative (e.g., Est 3:3–5; Neh 8:8–9). S • The absence of textual variants for And each man said to his Jon 1:10 renders the claim of intercompanion, — polation circumstantial. Contrary to Jon 1:8, if Jon 1:10 is an interpolation it must have occurred at the earliest stage of the text’s Come, let us cast lots transmission, for the text does not that we might know appear to have been deemed sufficiently awkward to merit emendabecause of whom this tion throughout its history of transevil has come upon us. mission, as is evident from the absence of variants in ancient manuscripts. Depending on how late one And they cast lots dates Jonah, the series may be conand Jonah’s lot fell out. sidered original. Interpolation is therefore unlikely.

GVS

They said to him, — Tell us, [you] on whose us, on whose account is V account this evil is on what account is S upon us: why has come this evil upon us? b What is your occupation What is your occupation and where do you and where do you come come from? from V , what is your land? And from which country c What is your land and and from what people are V where from or you? S what is your land and from what people are you?

Y‚Vocabulary‚Z 7c on whose account Persian Aramaic Calque? This expression might be an Aramaic calque (bldy) from the Persian period. Morphology The lemma (in Hebrew bešellemî) is a composite of four elements (lit. “on” + “whom” + “to” + “who?”): • the preposition b-; • the relative particle š-; • the preposition l-; • the interrogative pronoun mî. The force of the lemma, based on the first element, is that of a prepositional phrase. Date Although the relative particle shin (š) is derived from proto-Semitic, it was not used in Classical Biblical Hebrew (’ăšer was preferred), until Aramaic influenced the language. Hence Jonah’s use of bešellemî is evidence that its Hebrew is relatively late.

10c For the men Hypothesis in Redaction History: Interpolations? Yes A three-fold series of subordinate clauses introduced by kî concludes the verse: “For the men…that from…for he.” These are often thought to be later interpolations that at one time served as a marginal note and later came to be inserted into the text (cf. discussion in →Wolff 1986; →Simon 1999). Support for such a claim is as follows: • Jon 1:8, another significant textual MVS G variant, is likely an interpolation; • some chronological incongruity 9a And he And he said to them, — (the exclamation of the men’s conS Jonah said to them, cern precedes their knowledge of — its cause); 8b occupation Specification of the Term • stylistic awkwardness in the shift for Shipwork? I am a servant of the b I am a Hebrew. And from the direct speech of the sailYhwh Lord, God of heaven, I • melā’kâ generally means “occupaors to the narrative explanation of tion.” VS the Lord, God of worship the one who the kî-clauses (“For the men…that Ps 107:23 uses the same word to from…for he had told them”): the refer to shipping. the heavens, made the sea and the sailors’ questions would seem to V heaven, [him] do I dry land. 9b Hebrew Rare Word *cul1:9b; demand a response from Jonah in fear, he who made the *bib1:9b. direct speech rather than the narrator’s intrusion. sea and the dry land. 9b God of the heavens Late Biblical No Hebrew ’Ĕlōhé haššāmayim is an • The abrupt shift from direct speech 7b cast lots Jo 7:14; 14:2; 1Sm 10:20–21; 14:42; Jb 6:27; Prv 16:33; 18:18; Jl 3:3; Ob 1:11 to narrative can be defended as an — 8b occupation Ps 107:23; Prv 18:9; 22:29 — 8b where do you come from? Jgs 17:9; expression common to Persian era intentional rhetorical technique 19:17 — 9b God of the heavens Gn 24:3,7; 2Chr 36:23; Ez 1:1,4,28; Rv 11:13 — 9b [him] (or later) biblical literature (e.g., 2 Chronicles, Ezra-Nehemiah, Daniel). (see *dev1:10c). Likewise, early do I fear Gn 22:12; 42:18; Ex 18:21; 1Kgs 18:3; Jb 1:8; 2:3; Ps 66:16 • A segment of curses in a Neorabbinic commentary often incorAssyrian treaty between Esarhadporates multiple successive (and don and Tyre (→ANET 534) refers to a ship-sinking deity. even nested) subordinate clauses for explanatory means.

Jon :- Attempt to Save the Ship

1:9b,13a; 2:10 dry land vs. “earth, country”: Scriptural Connotations • ’ereṣ is the more common Hebrew term and has already occurred in the story (Jon 1:8). • yabbāšâ (used again in Jon 1:13 and Jon 2:10 [M-2:11]) is etymologically related to the root ybš (“to be dry”); it occurs in contrast to the “sea.” It also stresses Yhwh’s ability to separate the waters to reveal dry land in times of great need (*bib1:9b,13a; 2:10). 13a rowed Shift of Register from Earth to Sea The standard meaning of the Hebrew verb ḥtr is “to dig,” which can be ascertained from the following MGV contexts: GV • Jb 24:16 – digging a tunnel; 10a And the men were • Ez 8:8 – digging through a wall; greatly afraid. • Am 9:2 – digging down to Sheol. G feared a The use of the verb in Jon 1:13 (wayyaḥterû) to describe the sailors’ great fear. activity seems to indicate the lack of V feared a Hebrew word for rowing, and may with a great fear. also suggest a lack of familiarity with nautical terminology. The use of this b G VAnd they said to him, term for rowing still obtains in mod— What is this you ern Hebrew. Y‚Grammar‚Z 7a And each man said to his companion Syntax A more literal rendering of wayyō’merû ’îš ’el rē‘ēhû would be, “And they said, each to his companion,” which works well in English. Distributive Subject The construction of the plural verb and singular noun ’îš expresses that the same action is performed by the singular subjects: “each one said”; see also *gra1:5b. Reciprocal Action Likewise, this construction expresses reciprocity: “to each other” (as in Gn 11:1,3; Jgs 6:29; 1Sm 10:11; 20:41). Therefore one can translate it simply as, “they said to one another.”

55

As noted above (*voc1:7c), the latter (in Jon 1:7) is evidence of Aramaic influence. Perhaps the text intends to show us subtly that the sailors speak the lingua franca of the day, Aramaic, whereas Jonah speaks Hebrew. Yet such a reading likely assumes too much based on a single, small linguistic feature. Moreover, it would suggest that the sailors knew that Jonah preferred Hebrew prior to their speaking to him. Implied Nominal Phrase More likely, since the sailors now know through their casting of lots that it is on Jonah’s account that the storm is upon them, the subtle change in the relative marker reflects their change in perspective. No longer does the S lemma appear in a context colored by doubt, but instead serves to idenThose men were greatly tify a statement of fact regarding afraid. Jonah’s culpability. →Kimchi Comm. (also →Sasson 1990, 114–115) proposes that the lemma produces an implied nominal phrase: “you, on whose account.” That is, you (Jonah), on whose account we (sailors) find ourselves in this calamitous situaThey said to him, — tion, must explain yourself. What did you do?

have done? V Why have you done this? c For the men knew that For each of them knew from the face of Yhwh that from the presence GV the of the Lord he had Lord he was fleeing, fled. for he had told them. 11a They said to him, — When he told them, they What shall we do to said to him, — What you, that the sea might shall we do to you, that calm down from the sea might abate [raging] against from us? G abate from V hold back from us? b For the sea continued to For behold the sea keeps become more stormy. growing rougher G kept coming against us. and stirring up exceedingly rough water. V was flowing and swelling.

9b do I fear Participle: Durative Force Jonah begins his response with a verbless clause “I am a Hebrew.” The matching expression “do I fear” echoes the construction of Jonah’s initial claim with the same syntax but utilizes a participial construction which, as an echo of the first clause (*dev1:9b), must be taken as a verbal predicate. A participial predicate, which normally connotes present tense, evidently has a durative sense in the present context. That is, Jonah has feared and continues to fear Yhwh. 11a,12b calm down from [raging] against Two Expressions Condensed into One Composed Preposition mē‘ālénû and mē‘ălékem are composed of three elements: • min “from”; • ‘al “upon” or “against”; • -nû and -kem, the 1st and 2nd person plural pronomial suffixes. It has several meanings: • downwards from us (cf. Gn 24:64); • away from us (cf. Gn 38:14). Since min primarily expresses separation and distance, the composed proposition mē‘āl denotes relief from harassment, as in, “may the sea quiet down from [raging] against us” (cf. →Joüon and Muraoka 2008, §133.f).

8a [you] on whose account Syntax In Jon 1:7, the sailors want to discover, bešellemî hārā‘â hazzō’t lānû, “On whose account this evil [storm] is upon us.” After the lot falls upon Jonah and the answer is found, the appearance of a nearly identical expression ba’ăšer lemî hārā‘â hazzō’t lānû in Jon 1:8 has led some modern translators to omit either phrase 10b What is this you have done? Gn 3:13; 12:18; 26:10; 29:25; Ex 14:11; Jgs 2:2; 15:11 (*tex1:8a) or to render them simi- — 11a the sea might calm Jon 1:12; Ps 107:29–30; Prv 26:20 — 11b stormy Jon 1:12–13; larly (i.e., as a question). Jer 23:19; 25:32; Zec 7:14 On Whose Account? G, V, and S maintain the interrogaConstructio praegnans tive sense in light of the sailors’ subsequent questions. Jonah gives them his As a directional prepositional phrase, mē‘āl demands some sense of tribe (the Hebrews) and patronal deity (Yhwh, God of the heavens) in Jon motion; however, šātaq (“to be quiet”) does not belong to this category. 1:9, but he does not respond to all of the sailors’ questions. He tells nothing This apparent syntactic anomaly should most probably be understood as of his occupation or country of origin. a kind of brachylogy in which šātaq marks the goal of motion. That is, the The Sailors Speak Aramaic? sense of the phrase is, “that the sea might become quiet [by moving] away Moreover, the expression in v. 7 is not identical. The relative pronoun is from us/you.” made subtly distinct by using the Classical Hebrew form ’ăšer to replace š-.

56

Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?

11b For the sea Emphatic kî-Clause? Here the kî-clause can be interpreted as emphatic rather than explanatory: its sense is “indeed the sea.” 11b,13b continued to become more stormy Gradual Progression The lack of a finite verb within the kî-clause in which this construction appears effectively places its data in the background of the narrative. The pair of participles, hôlēk wesō‘ēr, here functions as a verbal hendiadys to describe the storm’s growing intensity. • In this construction the verb hlk acts as an auxiliary verb that denotes gradual progression and makes dynamic the typically static sense of the verb s‘r. • Since both verbs are participles, they convey a durative force: thus the sea “continued to become more stormy.” For other examples of this construction, see Ex 19:19; 1Sm 17:41; 2Sm 3:1; 15:12; Est 9:4; Prv 4:18.

whose lives totter on the brink, finally compel Jonah to respond. Although he faces the sailors’ questions, Jonah has still not ended his flight.

MV

GS

12a He said to them, — b Pick me up and hurl me

Jonah said to them, — Pick me up and throw into the sea that me into the sea and the V and the sea sea will abate from you. might calm down from [raging] against V will hold back from you. c For I myself know that For I myself know that because of me this because of me this great storm is upon great rough water is S you. storm has come upon you. MGVS

13a Now the men rowed G

And the men struggled And the men rowed S And each of them strove to return to dry land, but they could not b because the sea continued to become more stormy against G was coming and stirring up more upon V was flowing and swelling upon S kept growing rougher against them. V

Y‚Literary Devices‚Z 7c,8a evil Leitwort in the Service of Irony See *dev1:2 evil. 8 RHETORIC Interrogatio: The Sailors Question Jonah Jonah has answered God’s command with rejection and the captain’s inquiry with silence. The sailors, however, barrage him with a series of questions without pausing for an answer. These could be individually rendered (as in the KJV) or paired thematically, so that they comprise just two questions: what are you doing? who are you? PROSODY Alliteration Presented in two pairs of connected questions, one is able to hear the alliterative qualities of the Hebrew: • mâ…ûmē’ayin…mâ…we’é-mizzê. NARRATION The Sailors Relay God’s Command Even if one considers the opening to be a nominal phrase (*dev1:8a), the narrative’s focus conveys the force of the sailors’ questions. Having just learned through lot-casting that Jonah is responsible, the sailors confront him with an accusation and then interrogate him. As they lay out their direct, well-structured, alliterative series of unambiguous questions, the sailors, for the first time, evoke a direct response from Jonah. Having attempted to flee God (Jon 1:3) and man (Jon 1:6), Jonah can no longer evade his lot. These men,

MVS

14a And they called V

cried out to

G

And they cried out to the Lord and said, —

Yhwh the Lord and said, — By no means, O Lord, b Please, O Yhwh, VS should we be destroyed Lord, may we on account of this not perish on account man’s life. And do not of S place righteous blood for upon us this man’s life. And do not place S count innocent blood upon S against us VS

13b the sea continued to become more stormy Jon 1:11 — 14b innocent blood Dt  19:10; 21:8; 27:5; 1Sm 19:5; 2Kgs 21:16; 24:4; Ps 94:21; 106:38; Prv 6:17; Is 59:7; Jer 7:6; 19:4; 22:3; 26:15; Jl 3:19

8a They said to him, — Tell us, [you] on whose account this evil is upon us ENUNCIATION Ambiguity The opening phrase may be translated as another question: “Tell us, on whose account is this evil upon us?” • →Trible (1994, 139–140) suggests that this question connects with the preceding verse’s inquiry. • Moreover, this question may indicate that the sailors ask Jonah, not for his identity, but for the cause of the storm: “Tell us now, on which [god’s] account this evil is upon us?” • Its absence in several manuscripts of G suggests that the opening phrase might be a gloss that eventually became part of the scriptural text. The translators of this volume opted to render the opening phrase as a nominal (subject) clause: “Tell us now, [you] on whose account this evil is upon us,” based on historical grammar and the narrative context. 9 NARRATION Characterization of God The great storm which God hurls at the ship enacts Jonah’s declaration: “I fear the one who made the sea and the dry land.” Merism “The sea and the dry land” is a merism that signifies the whole of creation, as in Ps 95:5: “The sea is his, and he made it; and his hands formed the dry land.” This merism is likewise comparable to God’s common title as the creator or lord of “the heavens and the earth” (Gn 1:1). He is neither a sea-god nor a stormgod but an everything god! Moreover, Jonah’s full declaration involves all three zones of the cosmos: the heavens, the sea, and the earth (cf. Ps 135:6). God’s Control of Nature Many formulations like this one abound. Although it is not the main point of the story, it is abundantly clear that God controls the natural world. 9b I am a Hebrew. And Yhwh, God of the heavens, [him] do I fear Epistrophe The author pulls the predicate and the direct object forward, in front of the verbs for emphasis, and leaves the subjects ’ānōkî and ’ănî in the last positions.

Jon :- Attempt to Save the Ship

57

9b,14b Hebrew + fear + innocent — (G) Heightened Irony G’s rendering of Jonah’s 1:9b,13a; 2:10 the dry land Leitwort With all its theological significance response to the sailors’ questions appears to heighten the story’s irony. (*bib1:9b,13a; 2:10), “dry land” also appears as a Leitwort in Jonah. Hebrew vs. Servant of the LORD Instead of “I am a Hebrew” (‘ibrî ’ānōkî), which is found in M, Jonah’s 10–13 RHETORIC Concentration of kî-Clauses Clauses introduced by the Hebrew response found in G is “I am a servant of the Lord” (doulos kuriou egô particle kî can have various meanings and functions. Such clauses appear eimi). nine times throughout Jon 1 and three occur at the conclusion of Jon 1:10, • The phrase doulos kuriou is almost always applied to heroic figures, such having the effect of an anaphora: as Joshua (G-Jo 24:29; Jgs 2:8), Moses (G-2Kgs 18:12), David (G-Ps 36:1), • kî yāde‘û “for they knew”—causal; prophet-martyrs (2Kgs 9:7), and worshippers of God (G-Ps 134:1). • kî…hû’ bōrēaḥ “that he was fleeing”—introducing an object clause; • kî higgîd “for he had told them”—causal. At any rate, Jonah’s answer seems odd. After fleeing God, refusing to accept This three-fold repetition of his prophetic mission, and endankî-clauses is often explained as a later gering the ship and its crew, Jonah interpolation from an early marginal boldly calls himself a servant of the MVS G note (*tex1:10c). Considering the Lord. This is supremely ironic—even c for you, O Yhwh, have for you, O Lord, have broader context of Jon 1:10–13, the humorous—and may be why the series of kî-clauses expands signifitranslator chose to put this phrase on done done as you willed. cantly—from three to seven occurhis lips (cf. *com1:9b). V , O Lord, have rences. Within this broader context Fear vs. Revere (or Worship) done a clear rhetorical structure and pur• Instead of the general verb for fear S pose can be discerned (cf. →Trible (phobeô), which one might expect are the Lord 1994, 142). to appear here as the translation of and you do as you • The first three kî-clauses found in the Hebrew yr’, G employs the MV have willed. Jon 1:10 exhibit a repeated deictic verb sebomai, which denotes the function: they point out the sailexperience of reverential fear as MGVS ors’ new knowledge about Jonah, well as the act of worshipping gods 15a So they lifted a summation of Jonah’s behavior (→LSJ 1588; e.g., Jo 4:24; 22:25; Is G took Jonah and hurled (flight), and a terse indication of 29:13; 66:14). GS Jonah’s self-report. This translation adds a measure of cast him into the sea • The subsequent kî-clause (Jon irony to Jonah’s response since those b and the sea ceased 1:11) emphasizes the activity of who truly fear and worship the Lord S was at rest from its raging. the sea (“for [kî] the sea continued do not typically disobey him or flee G to become more stormy”) followed from his presence. In contrast, the surging. by a pair of deictic kî-clauses in pagan sailors who are seized with S storms. Jon 1:12 that explain Jonah’s a great visceral fear (ephobêthêsan… knowledge of the situation. phobon megan) find Jonah’s behavior MGV S • The series concludes in Jon 1:13 unfathomable (Jon 1:10) and demon16a G VAnd the men greatly Then each of them with another example of an strate that they are primarily confeared Yhwh. greatly feared before emphatic kî-clause, again emphacerned with pleasing the God with GV feared the Lord. sizing the activity of the sea like a whom they have just become refrain. acquainted, even offering him sacriwith a great fear the The series of kî-clauses in Jon 1:10 fices (Jon 1:13–16). Lord. and its accompanying shift to narraInnocent Blood vs. Righteous Blood They offered sacrifices to tival explanation may therefore be b They offered a sacrifice The decision to render the adjective G explained in two ways. nāqî’ (“innocent”) with dikaion sacrificed a sacrifice the Lord • First, the shift to narratival expla(“righteous”) may reflect a translaV immolated sacrifices nation permits rhetorical emphasis tional Tendenz to increase the irony to Yhwh on the storms activity. of the story. Although a translational GV • Second, as →Simon (1999) sugcorrespondence between the adjecthe Lord gests, the shift to narrative explatives nāqî’ and dikaios is also found in and made vows. c and made nation can convey “the sailors’ Prv 1:11; 6:17; Jl 3:19, the Greek term V vowed vows. athôios (“innocent”) is used much consciousness” of the situation’s more frequently in translating nāqî’ gravity (“For the men knew,” Jon (over 25 times in G; cf. →Hatch 14c as you have willed Ps 115:3; 135:6 — 16bc Sacrifice and Vows Ps 50:14; 66:13; Is 1:10) prior to Jonah’s (“For I myself and Redpath 1906, 1:30). know,” Jon 1:12). So, while the nar19:21 Because the word “innocent” rative highlights the storm’s refers to a state of being free from actions, Jonah’s interior state guilt, while “righteous” refers also to the positive quality of being just or recedes into the background. possessing rectitude of will, the sailors’ request that they not be charged with righteous blood in G increases, even if only slightly, their estimation of Jonah 10a,16a the men were greatly afraid + the men greatly feared YHWH — THEME Fear Properly Directed vis-à-vis M. It can thus be argued that the sailors’ characterization of Jonah’s The Sailors’ Fear impending demise as “righteous blood” (as opposed to “innocent blood”) Fear has a significant role in driving the sailors’ behavior: they abandon intensifies the gravity of their imprecation and that this, in turn, heightens precious cargo and cry out to their gods. Jon 1:10, with its cognate accusathe irony of the story; although Jonah might be thought of as innocent in tive, captures the intensification of the sailors’ fear, when they learn that this story, he by no means acts with rectitude of will. Jonah has angered Yhwh through his flight. Jon 1:16 emphasizes their redoubled fear of Yhwh when the sailors toss Jonah overboard. 9b,11–13,15 the sea See *dev1:4ab the sea.

58

Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?

Jonah’s Fear Jonah, on the other hand, is not afraid of the storm—evidenced by his nonchalant sleeping—but he is afraid of the God who brought it. A New Kind of Fear When the sailors do as Jonah tells them, and hurl him overboard, the storm ceases. With no more storm, the sailors might have nothing to fear. Instead, they become like Jonah, and fear a great fear of Yhwh and offer him worship. Whereas before, in the chaos of the storm, the sailors each cried out to his own god, now they are unified and safe, offering sacrifices and vows to Yhwh. 10a,12,16a greatly + great — Leitwort, Meaning See *dev1:2. 10b What is this you have done? Exclamation As in Jon 1:6, when the captain accuses Jonah, the sailors accuse Jonah by means of another rhetorical question. The force of the Hebrew expression (mâ zō’t) moves toward exclamation, inasmuch as it does not seek explanation (provided by the narrator’s aside) but rather expresses despair of the ship’s fate. 10c he had told them Art of Telling: Ellipsis of Details The narrator implies that Jonah had told the sailors more information than was conveyed in his earlier answer. →Jenson (2008, 54) suggests that this necessary information was omitted in Jonah’s reply to sharpen the focus of his answer on the essential details. 11a What shall we do End of Questions Having gathered all the necessary information about Jonah’s situation, the sailors ask the final question about what they must do to calm the storm. Moreover, they recognize not simply that they must do something but that they must do something to Jonah. 11ab,12bc,13b calm down + storm(y) — Quiet Storms and Stormy Humans Usage of weyištōq (“and it calmed”) and wesōʿēr (“and it stormed”) in parallel clauses invites readers to consider the blurring of literary personification and naturalization in Jonah. The word s‘r is used to describe storms (Jon 1:11–13; Jer 23:19; 25:32; Zec 7:14) and human anger (2Kgs 6:11). In Prv 26:20 we see štq used to describe the ceasing of a quarrel, while in Ps 107:30 the people rejoice in the new quiet (štq) of a stilled sea that was once stormy. 12b Pick me up and hurl me Characterization through a Contest of Wills The first clear inversion of the symbolism of descent, Jonah’s command for the sailors to pick him up (śāʾûnî), is followed immediately by his arresting command to hurl him into the sea (wehăṭîlūnî). His goal appears to be that of calming the storm. The contradictory nature of his two commands, however, may manifest a contest of wills within Jonah. God has commanded him to rise (qûm, Jon 1:2), but, at the same time, Jonah himself wishes to flee through descent. The pressing question is whether or not Jonah wants to die as a means of final escape. If he assumes that being tossed in the sea will result in his death, this will not be his only death wish (Jon 4:3,8). On one hand, his hope may be to avoid the guilt of having the sailors’ blood on his hands. Why should they die for his insolence? →Jerome Comm. Jon. suggests that Jonah does not want to add the murder of the crew to his crime of desertion. If this is the case, it is curious that Jonah does not throw himself into the sea but rather commands that the sailors pick him up and hurl him into the sea. It may be the case that a prohibitive stance toward suicide underlies the presentation of Jonah’s request. Further confounding matters, the sailors fear lest they incur the blood-guilt of an innocent man (Jon 1:14). It is difficult to discern the primary focus of this portion of the narrative. Should Jonah’s actions be interpreted as compassionate or even penitential? Limited narratorial comment on Jonah’s interior disposition exacerbates matters and raises more questions than answers. Is Jonah certain that God is going to forgive or save him from the sea and its monsters? To what extent does Jonah know that God is slow to anger and abounding in love and mercy? If Jonah is well informed about the Lord’s loving nature, might he

simply not want God to extend the same abounding love and mercy to non-Hebrews? It would seem that Jonah knows God and God’s will to forgive but does not want God to be God, at least not for the Ninevites. And he may be willing to pay the ultimate price for it—if perhaps others are willing to incur the guilt for it. 13a rowed Irony? The use of the word ḥtr (“to dig”; cf. *voc1:13a) conveys vigor and intensity: “rowed hard.” →Tucker (2006) adds a sense of futility in his translation, “desperately rowed.” 14a to Yhwh Change in Prayer Instead of calling out to their own gods, as the sailors did earlier (Jon 1:6), they now call out to the Lord. This does not need to reflect some sort of conversion; it simply expresses the sailors’ recognition that Jonah’s god has brought this storm upon them. 14b Please Pleading for Life NARRATION Motive Here one find’s language of entreaty in the particles ’ānnâ and -nâ. This language is reserved for extreme circumstances (*bib1:14b). ENUNCIATION Direct Discourse For the first time, the Lord is directly addressed. Even though the captain instructs Jonah to call out to his god, he did not do so. 15b the sea ceased Personification The verb used here to describe the sea’s raging (z‘p) is only used elsewhere for human beings (2Chr 16:10; 26:19; 28:9; Prv 19:12) or God (Is 30:30). 16 RHETORIC Triple Repetition of Verb Plus Cognate Accusatives This verse presents an unusual use of three verbs used along with their cognate accusatives. • The sailors fear a fear, sacrifice a sacrifice, and vow vows. This device allows the narrator to illustrate the emotional states of his characters. • In particular, the phrase wayyîr’û…yir’â gedôlâ (“they feared a great fear”) in Jon 1:16 echoes Jon 1:10 and its expressive internal accusative, wayyîr’û…yir’â gedôlâ. 16a the men greatly feared Yhwh NARRATION Characterization of the Sailors: Converts? This verse recalls the beginning of the drama when the sailors feared the storm and called on their own gods (Jon 1:5). Having been rescued from death, they now fear Yhwh and make sacrifices and vows to Yhwh. This may be an instance of conversion, as later Jewish tradition will emphasize (*jew1:16c). Alternatively, it may be another example in which they recognize the power of Yhwh inasmuch as Jonah had been called upon to pray to Yhwh (Jon 1:6) and they had prayed to Yhwh prior to hurling Jonah overboard (Jon 1:14). In any case, no word for conversion is explicitly stated. Y‚Literary Genre‚Z 16b They offered a sacrifice to Yhwh and made vows Conventional Motif in Sea Stories The sailors make sacrifices and vows, both of which were especially common among sailors in the ancient world (cf. *jew1:5b). Indeed, ancient sailors often offered sacrifices before embarking, in anticipation of a speedy and safe voyage, when passing significant locations, and upon arrival. We can see this practice at work in the Odyssey (e.g., →Homer Od. 9.720); trouble on board is even blamed on the sailors’ failure to sacrifice (→Homer Od. 4.620). Moreover, one archetypically offers sacrifices at the end of flood accounts, as in the story of Noah (Gn 8:20) and the Epic of Gilgamesh (→George 2003, Tablet XI). Likewise, making vows, as a means of bargaining, is especially natural within the context of sailing in a storm: if you keep me safe, I vow to do such and such. Consider, for example, Jacob’s vow to give a tithe in exchange for protection (Gn 28:20–22). Moreover, in some biblical accounts, vows are made in addition to sacrifices (Ps 50:14; 66:13; Is 19:21).

59

Jon :- Attempt to Save the Ship

Context

Reception

Y‚Ancient Cultures‚Z

Y‚Comparison of Versions‚Z

7b cast lots RELIGION Acceptable Divination Casting lots in antiquity was a form of divination, specifically, inductive divination (artificiosa divinatio). Procedure Divination involved any number of procedures, depending on the skills and resources available. For example, haruspicy—the examination of entrails— required a sacrificial animal, a skilled butcher, and an expert diviner (the haruspex). Less involved procedures included tossing arrows (belomancy, Ez 21:21), throwing a staff (rhabdomancy, Hos 4:12), or, in this case, casting lots (probably small, marked stones). Coin tossing, drawing straws, and rock-paper-scissors are, in a way, latter-day methods of divination. Purpose The aim of such procedures varied. Lots were cast to make such decisions as: • determining land inheritance (Nm 26:55; Jo 18:6); • identifying the leaders responsible for an attack (Jgs 20:9); • selecting a king (1Sm 10:20–21); • resolving disputes (Prv 18:18). In general, casting lots was a way of discerning God’s will. Prv 16:33 states, “The lot is cast into the lap, the decision is the Lord’s alone.” Specific examples span the biblical canon, from the Pentateuch, wherein the casting of lots identifies the scapegoat (Lv 16:8), to the Acts of the Apostles, wherein the apostles cast lots to find a replacement for Judas (Acts 1:26). Thus, throughout Scripture, examples show that a kind of divination (esp. artificiosa divinatio) was considered acceptable. In the Context of Jonah Assuming that the storm is divine punishment and that God’s will is found in casting lots, the sailors seek to discover the guilty party. The initial casting of “lots” (gôrālôt) is plural, indicating that all on board submit to the procedure. The final “lot” (gôrāl), being singular, places fault squarely on Jonah alone.

9b I am a Hebrew: M | G: Interpretive Translations of Jonah’s Response • M: “I am a Hebrew” (‘ibrî ’ānōkî). • G: “I am a servant of the Lord” (doulos kuriou egô eimi). G’s translation may be the result of attraction to G-2Kgs 14:25, where the phrase doulou autou Iôna huiou Amathi (“his servant, Jonah son of Amathi”) occurs. However, it is also possible that this is an intentional translational decision; by putting this phrase on Jonah’s lips after he has just run from God and endangered the ship and its crew, the translator has heightened the sense of irony in the story (cf. *dev1:9b,14b). Moreover, G’s translation may have arisen from a (mis)reading (or alternate tradition) of ‘bry as ‘bdy, since the Hebrew letters dalet and resh are easily confused (even in the Paleo-Hebrew script). If one presumes that the final yod in ‘bdy is an abbreviation for the divine name, then one would have ‘bd yh, “servant of Yhwh.”

9b I am a Hebrew Etic Demonym Jonah’s emic self-identification would be “I am an Israelite.” He uses here the etic identification of his people: “I am a Hebrew.” Jonah’s self-descriptive “I am a Hebrew” would be odd for him to use when talking to another Jew, although perfectly normal for him to use when speaking to sailors from other, various people groups. 13a to return to dry land ANCIENT NAVIGATION A Rash Decision? Was the decision to row to shore a wise one? • Commentators frequently note that the decision to row to shore during a storm is a risky one that contradicts accepted wisdom among ancient mariners, who reasoned that a ship would have a better chance of surviving the waves than the rocks and reefs along the shore. This leads some to conclude that the sailors must have lost their wits (e.g., →Sasson 1990, 341). • Still, the matter is not so simple. On the one hand, ships in the ancient Mediterranean typically sailed coastwise—that is, hugging the coast. On the other hand, larger ships certainly sailed the open seas with celestial navigation during the Persian era. Given the narrative’s lack of details, such as the size of the ship or the location of Tarshish, it is difficult to tell exactly how Jonah’s ship sailed. However they sailed, the sailors’ intentions to return to shore need not imply that they went mad. Boats of this period were not capable of withstanding a battering at sea like modern ships. Thus, there are a few possible explanations. • They would want to get closer to land. Should the storm destroy the ship, then they would at least have a chance to swim to safety. This is the process described in Acts 27:27–44, when the sailors intentionally try to run the ship aground and swim to safety. • The narrative might simply mean they were sailing towards land (i.e., a port) to get out of the storm, neither contrary to good seafaring nor necessarily implying that they intended to crash the boat onto land. See further →Wachsmann 1998.

9b do I fear: M | G: I worship (Insistence on the Religious Dimension) • G translates the Hebrew verb yr’ with sebomai, a verb which can connote the experience of reverential fear, especially toward deities, as well as the act of worshipping gods (*dev1:9b,14b). Thus, on the lexical level, G makes more explicit the sense of the Hebrew yr’, which can refer to any kind of fear. • Moreover, the contrast between fear of God and fear in general is brought out in the next verse (Jon 1:10), where the more common verb for “fear,” i.e., phobeô, is used in conjunction with the noun phobos in relation to the visceral fear of the sailors (*dev1:9b,14b; *dev1:10a,16a). 11b,13b more stormy The Versions’ Translation of the Auxiliary hlk The Hebrew phrase hôlēk wesō‘ēr comprises an idiomatic grammatical construction wherein the verb hlk serves as an auxiliary of gradual progression (*gra1:11b,13b). The versions have different approaches to rendering this idiomatic expression. The Septuagint: Testing the Bounds of Greek G does not seem to have understood the usage of hlk as an auxiliary verb since the translator glosses the verb hlk woodenly with poreuomai and then gives a loose translation of s‘r with the periphrastic phrase “raising up exceedingly rough water” (exêgeire mallon kludôna). Peshitta: An Idiom That Travels Well Because Syriac has a similar idiomatic use of the verb “to go” (’zl), S is able to translate the Hebrew with a pair of participles from the verbs ’zl and dlḥ (“to stir up,” “to agitate”): “the sea continues to grow rougher” (’āzel wametdalâ). For another example in S, see Gn 26:13. Cf. also the corresponding Aramaic construction in →Tg. Jon. Zep 3:5; →Tg. Chr. 1Chr 11:19; →b. Ta‘an. 25a. The Vulgate: Jerome’s Skill on Display V captures the sense of the Hebrew: quia mare ibat et intumescebat. It seems that Jerome translates much in the same way as G, i.e., he uses the verb ire to translate hlk, which might be considered a wooden translation. On the other hand, because the verb ire can mean “to flow,” it can be argued that V is closer to rendering M’s idiom than G. 13a rowed New Use of an Old Term Because M’s ḥātar (“to dig”) is a repurposed word—i.e., a familiar word given a new meaning—the ancient translators could not render it literally if they would maintain the intelligibility of the story. • G deals with the difficulty by using parabiazomai (“to use force,” “to prevail upon”), which is often used in contexts where one person urges another to undertake some action (e.g., 2Kgs 2:17; Lk 24:29; Acts 16:15). This translation choice may reflect the translator’s lack of exposure to nautical terminology. • Other books in G employ elaunô (lit. “to go through,” or “travel,” but commonly used for the act of rowing). In 1Kgs 9:27 Hiram’s sailors, who

60

Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?

in the Hebrew are “familiar with the sea” (yōd‘é hayyām), are described as “sailors knowledgeable of rowing [or traveling] on sea” (andras nautikous elaunein eidotas thalassan). • Much like G, S employs a more abstract word, the itpa‘al of the verb ktš (“to strive”), to render ḥtr, and this has the same generalizing effect. 14b innocent blood: M | G V S: Interpretive Translations? Septuagint: Amplifying the Sailors’ Claim about Jonah G translates the adjective nāqî’ (“innocent”) with dikaion (“righteous”). This unexpected translation may have been intended as a narrative device, heightening the irony of the story. See *dev1:9b,14b above for a further explanation. Peshitta: A Cognate Translation S uses the cognate adjective zakkāy (“innocent, just”) to translate the Hebrew. In later Aramaic, the concept of “righteousness” is also within the semantic range of this adjective, as is evidenced by Targumic (e.g., →Tg. Ps.-Jon. on Gn 22:1) and Midrashic (e.g., →Pesiq. Rab Kah. 16.9) usage. Vulgate: Following M As expected, V’s innocentem corresponds to the Hebrew.

imagery and vocabulary of Jonah. Traveling to a Gentile region, a storm causes panic while the main character sleeps. The storm is calmed and the sailors are awed. 11a,12b calm down Allusion to a Precise Psalm? The sailors ask Jonah how to calm the sea. In one of the only two other occurrences of “be calm” (štq), readers find sailors wishing for calm. • Ps 107:28–30 “Then they cried to the Lord in their trouble, and he brought them out from their distress; he made the storm be still, and the waves of the sea were hushed. Then they were glad because they had quiet (štq), and he brought them to their desired haven.” 13a the men rowed Calming of the Sea In the NT, both the Synoptic and Johannine Gospel traditions convey accounts in which the disciples of Jesus find themselves in a boat that struggles to make headway against a stormy sea (Mk 6:48; Jn 6:16–19). 14b Please Motif of Pleading for Life Similar language is used by: • Hezekiah on his sickbed (2Kgs 20:3); • Joseph’s brothers when they beg him to spare their lives (Gn 50:17).

Y‚Biblical Intertextuality‚Z 9b Hebrew Rare Word in the Bible “Hebrew” appears almost exclusively in the Pentateuch (and references thereto; e.g., Gn 14:13; Dt 15:12 // Jer 34:9,14) and in the narratives of the battles with Philistines (e.g., 1Sm 4:6; 13:3). 9b fear Fear of YHWH in the Storm While the sailors are greatly afraid of the storm, Jonah tells them that he fears the God “who made the sea and the dry land.” These two uses of fear, the human response to the dangers of nature on the one hand and reverence for God on the other, illustrate its primary functions in the Bible. Fear as Reverence or Obedience • About 80% of the references to fear concern God. • Abraham fears God because he was willing to sacrifice Isaac (Gn 22:12). • The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom (Prv 1:7). • An emphasis on the fear of the Lord provides the context for the Shema (Dt 6:2,13). Fear of God as Terror • While some might want to see God, Amos reminds them that the day of the Lord will be terrifying (Am 5:18–20). • The reader is encouraged to hide in the dust from the “terror of Yhwh” (Is 2:10). • In response to the natural fear of a theophany, God must often assure, “Do not fear” (Gn 15:1). 1:9b,13a; 2:10 dry land TYPOLOGY Motif of God’s Mighty Deeds The use of yabbāšâ is particularly interesting here. It is associated: • with the Chaoskampf mythology that undergirds the creation account (Gn  1:1–2:3; cf. Jon 1:9; yabbāšâ is also used in Ps 95:5 wherein God “formed the dry land”); • with Israel crossing the Yam Sûp (Sea of Reeds) in Ex 14:16,22,29; 15:19; Ps 66:6; Neh 9:11; • with Israel crossing the Jordan River (Jo 4:22; *bib2:5b). Referentially In Jon 1:13 it probably has a meaning similar to Jon 2:10 (i.e., the shore). In Ex 4:9 and Is 44:3 it underlines a contrast between (some) liquid and dry land. Typologically If one takes into account a possible link to the crossing of the Sea of Reeds (Jon 2:5c [M-2:6c]), it may suggest that—after all—God granted Jonah a safe passage, just as he did to Israel in Ex 14. →Jenson (2008, 53) suggests that the mention of “dry land” implies an inversion of the Exodus account: whereas the Egyptians are thrown into the sea and die, Jonah is thrown into the sea and lives. 11–16 TYPOLOGY Pattern for Jesus Calming a Storm The Synoptic passages of Jesus calming a storm (Mt 8:23–27 // Mk 4:35–41 // Lk 8:22–25) utilize the

14b innocent blood Motif of Killing the Undeserving The phrase dām nāqî’ (“innocent blood”) connotes the murder of the innocent. • This can be done on a personal level (Prv 6:17) or on a national scale (Jl 3:19). • Interestingly, the sailors’ concern for spilling innocent blood recalls Deuteronomy’s prohibition of killing the innocent (cf. Dt 27:25), showing that the sailors are righteous by Deuteronomic standards (cf. Ps 94:21; 106:38; Jer 7:6; 19:4; 22:3). Y‚Liturgies‚Z 1:10–2:7 Use in Lectionary • →CPL: Friday in Pasha Week, 12th Hour, 2nd Reading. Y‚Jewish Tradition‚Z 7e,15a Jonah Rabbis on Jonah See *jew1:1. 8a this evil An Unnatural Storm • →Rashi Comm. notes that the sailors would be able to see other ships sailing peacefully, and therefore they would know that the storm was unnatural. 8b What is your occupation Unloading the Sailors’ Questions • →Rashi Comm.: The series of questions is directly related to why the storm has come upon them. Have you sinned in your craft? Have your people issued a curse that followed you? Has your people sinned? 9b I am a Hebrew Targumic Variation: A Jew • →Tg. Jon. “I am a Jew.” This may simply reflect a preference for one term over another. 9b do I fear Targumic Change of Perspective • →Tg. Jon. “I am in fear before the Lord.” 10c fleeing Targumic Expansion • →Tg. Jon. “fleeing before he would prophesy in the name of the Lord.” The Targumist consistently inserts references to prophecy. 12b Pick me up Overboard Here, Jonah demonstrates his knowledge of Halakha. • →b. Sukkah 53b: Asphyxiation is the punishment for withholding knowledge, of which Jonah is guilty (cf. →b. Sanh. 89a). Drowning, then, would be the most appropriate punishment for Jonah (→Zlotowitz and Scherman 1978, 100).

Jon :- Attempt to Save the Ship

15a hurled Not So Fast • →Pirqe R. El. 10: Rabbi Simeon says that the sailors were so reluctant to throw Jonah into the sea that they first put Jonah’s legs in the water. When the storm stopped, they pulled Jonah back into the boat. The storm immediately began again, so they put Jonah in the water up to his neck and the storm stopped. When they pulled Jonah back into the boat and storm returned, they realized that they needed to throw him fully overboard. 15b and the sea ceased Holy Things Settle the Storm Tossing Jonah overboard to settle the raging seas is reminiscent of an episode recorded in the Talmud wherein David stills the waters beneath the future Temple Mount by inscribing the tetragrammaton on a potsherd and tossing it into the deep. Does God’s prophet, in a mystical way, bear the name of God? • →b. Sukkah 53b “When David dug the Pits, the Deep arose and threatened to submerge the world. ‘Is there anyone,’ David enquired, ‘who knows whether it is permitted to inscribe the [Ineffable] Name upon a sherd, and cast it into the Deep that its waves should subside?’ There was none who answered a word. Said David, ‘Whoever knows the answer and does not speak, may he be suffocated.’ Whereupon Ahitophel adduced an a fortiori argument to himself: ‘If, for the purpose of establishing harmony between man and wife, the Torah said, ‘Let My name that was written in sanctity be blotted out by the water,’ how much more so may it be done in order to establish peace in the world!’ He, therefore, said to him, ‘It is permitted!’ [David] thereupon inscribed the [Ineffable] Name upon a sherd, cast it into the Deep and it subsided sixteen thousand cubits. When he saw that it had subsided to such a great extent, he said, ‘The nearer it is to the earth, the better the earth can be kept watered’ and he uttered the fifteen Songs of Ascent, and the Deep re-ascended fifteen thousand cubits and remained one thousand cubits [below the surface].” 16c made vows (Fully) Converted Sailors • →Rashi Comm. asserts that the vows made were vows to convert. • →Pirqe R. El. 10 adds that, having seen not only the calming of the sea but also the swallowing of Jonah, the sailors reversed course back to Joppa. After docking, they made their way to Jerusalem, were circumcised, and offered sacrifices. Y‚Christian Tradition‚Z 7–12 Calvin’s Summarizing Prayer: Jonah as Negative Moral Example • →Calvin Prael. proph. min. “Grant, Almighty God, that as thou urgest us daily to repentance…grant that we might not grow stupid in our vices, nor deceive ourselves with empty flatteries, but that each of us may, on the contrary, carefully examine his own life, and then with one mouth and heart confess that we are all guilty, not only of light offenses but of such as deserve eternal death, and that no other relief remains for us but thine infinite mercy, and that we may so seek to become partakers of that grace which has been once offered to us by thy Son, and is daily offered to us by his Gospel.” 8–9,14 Typological Reading: The Sailors Prefigure Pilate A few patristic writers expand their typological reading of Jonah to include the sailors, with the result that their interrogation of Jonah (Jon 1:8–9) and their petition to be absolved of innocent blood (Jon 1:14) are seen as prefigurations of Pilate’s actions. • →Jerome Comm. Jon. 1:14 “They make God a witness that whatever they are about to do may not be reputed to them, and in a way they are saying: We do not wish to kill your prophet, but he himself has admitted to your anger, and the storm speaks, ‘for you, O Lord, have done as you willed.’ Your will is being carried out through our hands…Do not the words of the sailors seem to us to be the confession of Pilate, who washes his hands and says: ‘I am clean of the blood of this man’? The Gentiles do not want Christ to perish; they speak on behalf of his innocent blood.” • →Jacob of Sarug Hom. 122 develops his Christological reading of the Book of Jonah when he compares Jonah’s interrogation by the sailors

61

(Jon  1:8–9) to Jesus’, by Pilate; neither the sailors nor Pilate are able to avoid the death of their respective interlocutors. Although Jonah is far from innocent, and therefore differs from Christ in that respect, for Jacob, Jonah is nonetheless a type of Christ (Bedjan 1910, 4:415.4–13). 8a On whose account Moral Interpretation: The Sailors and Papacy Neglect Their Own Depravity The Sailors’ Scapegoat Jonah • →Calvin Prael. proph. min. “They would not indeed have thrown the blame on one man, if each had well considered what he deserved before God. When a calamity happens, it is the duty of every one to examine himself and his whole life before God: then every one, from the first to the last, must confess that he bears a just judgment. But when all demand together who is guilty before God, they thus exonerate themselves, as though they were innocent. And it is an evil that prevails at this day in the world, that every one is disposed to cast the blame on others and all would have themselves to be innocent before God; not that they can clear themselves of every fault, but they extenuate their sins, as though God could not justly pursue them with so much severity.” Confessional Polemic against the Papacy • →Calvin Prael. proph. min. continues, “This passage, then, shows what is even well known by common experience—that men, though they know themselves to be guilty before God, yet extenuate their sins and promise themselves pardon, as though they could make an agreement with God, that he should not treat them with strict justice, but deal with them indulgently. Hence, then, is the hope of impunity, because we make light offenses of the most grievous sins. Thus we find under the Papacy, that various modes are devised, by which they absolve themselves before God and wipe away their stains: the sprinkling of holy water cleanses almost all sins; except a man be either an adulterer, or a murderer, or a sorcerer, or ten times perjured, he hardly thinks himself to be guilty of any crime. Then the expiations which they use, avail, as they think, to obliterate all iniquities. Whence is this error? Even because they consider God to be like themselves, and think not their sins to be so great abominations before God.” 9b I am a Hebrew Why Does Jonah Identify Himself Thus? • →Calvin Prael. proph. min. “We now then perceive the reason why Jonah called himself here an Hebrew, and testified that he was the worshiper of the true God. First, by saying that he was an Hebrew, he distinguished the God of Abraham from the idols of the Gentiles…Secondly, he adds, I fear Jehovah the God of heaven. By the word fear is meant worship: for it is not to be taken here as often in other places, that is, in its strict meaning; but fear is to be understood for worship: ‘I am not given,’ he says, ‘to various superstitions, but I have been taught in true religion; God has made himself known to me from my childhood: I therefore do not worship any idol, as almost all other people, who invent gods for themselves; but I worship God, the creator of heaven and earth.’” 12b Pick me up and hurl me Jonah’s Strange Demand Musing over the Necessity of That Demand • →Calvin Prael. proph. min. “It may be asked whether Jonah ought to have of his own accord offered himself to die; for it seemed to be an evidence of desperation. He might, indeed, have surrendered himself to their will; but here he did, as it were, stimulate them, ‘Throw me into the sea,’ he says; ‘for ye cannot otherwise pacify God than by punishing me.’ He seemed like a man in despair, when he would thus advance to death of his own accord. But Jonah no doubt knew that he was doomed to punishment by God. It is uncertain whether he then entertained a hope of deliverance, that is, whether he confidently relied at this time on the grace of God. But, however it may have been, we may yet conclude, that he gave himself up to death, because he knew and was fully persuaded that he was in a manner summoned by the evident voice of God.” Jonah’s Internal Dialogue • →Luther Lect. Jon. “But you must visualize Jonah’s frame of mind and his dilemma. He does not see a spark of life left in him nor any hope of

62

Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?

rescue; nothing but death, yes, death, death confronts him, and he must despair of life and surrender to death.” 12c great storm Allegory of the Storm • →Gloss. ord. “Allegorice: these winds, these waves refer to Christ and to the Church in danger, or to the apostles when they awoke, deserting him in the passion, they are cast about in the waves. Therefore Christ says, ‘Since the world sees that I sail with you to the contemplation of joy, just as you also will be where I am, therefore it roars and wants to devour me, so that it might kill you likewise, nor does it understand that just as it seizes bait on a hook, so also it will die by my death.’” • →Gloss. ord.: Glossing “Pick me up and hurl me into the sea,” the Glossa, still speaking in the person of Jesus, continues, “The storm that rages against you on account of me will be calmed when I die. It is not yours to arrest death, but to accept a death that has freely been brought on by another, except where love is endangered.” • →Gloss. ord. “Before the passion of Christ, errors and diverse teachings were tossing about the little ship of the ecclesia and the whole human race like opposing waves, but after the passion there is the tranquility of faith, the peace of the world, all things secure. Thus after the headlong fall of Jonah, the sea desists from its fury.” 14c for you, O Yhwh, have done as you have willed The Sailors Recognize God’s Justice • →Jerome Pelag. 2.23 argues that the sailors do not know what wrong Jonah has committed and “do not question the justice of the judgment of God but acknowledge the veracity of the just Judge.” • →Calvin Prael. proph. min. “[T]he Lord so turned their hearts, that they now saw more clearly how grievous a sin it was to flee away from the call of God.”

though believing they benefited from those that were venerated out of deception and that laid claim to the glory due to God. They also made vows, despite being in the custom of doing this to the maritime demons. The pagans, you see, chose to attribute power over the sea to Poseidon; their religion consisted completely of fairy tales, quackery, and awful stupidity.” • →Jerome Comm. Jon. 1:14–16 “Though ignorant of the truth, they are not unaware of providence, and under a religious error they know that something ought to be worshiped.” Later, Jerome strengthens his stance on the conversion of the sailors, adding that “Jonah, a shipwrecked, dead fugitive at sea, saves the floundering boat. He saves the pagans who had been tossed about before by the error of the world into different beliefs.” • →Theodore of Mopsuestia Comm. Jon. takes Jon 1:16 not to mean “that they sacrificed to the Lord on the spot, being unlikely to perform sacrifices on board a boat,” but rather “that they completely gave up the idols and devoted themselves to the worship of God, promising in the future to join his service and offer due sacrifice to him.” • →Theodoret of Cyrus Interpr. Jon. 1:14–16 “…and awe (deos) was instilled into the souls of the men who saw this [calming of the sea] so that after their return journey to land (epanodon) they offered sacrifices to God, and they believed this one to be the only master (despotên) of all” (PG 81:1729A–B). Y‚Islam‚Z 7b cast lots Elaboration of the Scene • →Kisʼ Qiṣaṣ: Recognizing that the lots may be mistaken, the sailors and Yunus write their names on lead balls and cast them into the sea. Yunus’ name floats on the surface. Y‚Literature‚Z

16a feared Christ’s/Jonah’s Passion Reveals the True God • →Gloss. ord. “Before the passion, [the sailors] were shouting to their gods in fear; after the passion, they fear God by worshiping and honoring him, and they sacrifice offerings, which, according to the literal sense, they did not have among the waves but [they did have] the sacrifice of an afflicted spirit.” 16b offered a sacrifice Did God Approve of Such Sacrifice? • →Calvin Prael. proph. min. “It may, however, be inquired, whether that sacrifice pleased God. It is certain that whenever men bring forward their own devices, whatever is otherwise worthy of approbation in what they do, it cannot but be corrupted and vitiated by such a mixture; for God, as it is well known, allows of no associate…God there repudiates all the sacrifices which were wont to be offered by the people of Israel, because superstitions were blended with them. God then shows that such a mixture is so disapproved by him, that he chooses rather that the superstitious should wholly give themselves up to the devils than that his holy name should be thus profaned. Hence this sacrifice of itself was not lawful, nor could it have pleased God; but it was, so to speak, by accident and extrinsically that this sacrifice pleased God—because he designed thus to make known his glory.” 16bc offered a sacrifice + made vows – The Sailors’ Sacrifice: A Sign of Monolatry or Monotheism? Some early patristic commentators focus on the sailors’ reaction to the sea’s calming down, examining whether or not it should be taken as a genuine conversion to monotheism. Their opinions range from nonconversion (Cyril) to full conversion to Yhwh (Theodoret). • →Cyril of Alexandria Comm. Jon. does not seem to think that the sailors were totally converted from polytheism: “…they offered sacrifice to the one who alone is God by nature and in truth, bypassing their own,

15a hurled him into the sea Literary Treatments Theatric Re-enactment of the Hurling Scene • →Shakespeare Pericles Act III, Scene 1: Thaisa, Pericles’ wife, is considered a type of Jonah by the sailors, since they blame her for causing a storm. When she dies in childbirth, the sailors want to cast her overboard to calm the storm. At the time the play was written, English speakers used the term “a Jonah” to refer to a person who brings bad luck (→Hamlin 2018, 120–122). Children’s Bibles Add Humor to Peril While there is nothing funny about the peril faced by the sailors who fear for their lives, many retellings for children seek to tone down this dangerous scene through the inclusion of humor or animals. • →Page and Page 2006 “So the sailors picked him up / and they threw him in the sea; / The waves died down / and they all had tea. / (Except for Jonah).” • →Marzollo 2004 “Jonah ran away from God. But did God run away from Jonah? I don’t know. I’m only an octopus!” Y‚Visual Arts‚Z 7–15 Jonah Cast into the Sea in Early Christian Art • Jonah Cast into the Sea (fresco, 2nd –4th c.) in the Catacomb of Priscilla, Rome. • Jonah and the Whale (glass, églomisé, 4th c.) in the Musée du Louvre (S.2053). The “whale” (kêtos) is fittingly depicted as a serpentine seamonster. • Jonah Sarcophagus (central panel, 3rd c.) in the Museo Pio Cristiani. See →Introduction §3.14.



63

Jon : A Fish Swallows a Prophet

Jonah 1:17 A Fish Swallows a Prophet Y‚Suggestions for Reading‚Z

Text

Y‚Vocabulary‚Z 17 A Fish Swallows a Prophet In a way, the fish that swallows Jonah has also swallowed the story. After all, no one refers to the book as the story of 1:17b–2:1 innards Multivalence: Digestion and Reproduction “Jonah and the Ninevites,” or “Jonah and the worm-eaten plant.” Even those Literal Sense who may know nothing else about the book, know that Jonah is swallowed The term mē‘îm occurs only in the plural. Since knowledge of physiology by a whale. Such familiarity can, however, obscure the surprise of a divinelywas limited in Antiquity, it served as a nonspecific anatomical reference, appointed fish coming out of nowhere to gulp up the prophet. In fact, neicomparable to viscera in Latin or “guts” in English (cf. 2Sm 20:10; 2Chr ther the purpose nor the outcome of this unexpected development are clear 21:18–19). More specifically, the mē‘îm designate the organs involved in to the reader at this point in the narrative. Is God saving Jonah from drowndigestion, reproduction, and gestation. ing to give him a second chance? Or, is God punishing Jonah for disobedi• In Jb 20:14 it appears to refer to the digestive system. ence by having him suffer for three days inside a monstrous fish? • Elsewhere it refers to the loins (e.g., Is 16:11); hence the various idioms, God, the Director of the Narrative such as the “issue of one’s mē‘îm,” which denotes one’s paternity (Gn 15:4; When God appoints the fish to swallow Jonah, God reemerges as the pri2Sm 7:12; 2Chr 32:21). mary mover of the story. Whereas God first sent Jonah, and then prevented • It also refers to female reproduchis escape by hurling a wind and tive organs, especially the womb causing a storm, he now prevents, at MVS G (e.g., Gn 25:23; Ru 1:11). least momentarily, Jonah’s death. And the Lord Figurative Use God’s oversight of the unfolding of 17a And Yhwh appointed VS Mē‘îm can denote: events within the story is expressed the Lord prepared commanded a great • strong, visceral emotions: e.g., with the theologically-charged word a great fish to swallow sea-monster to swallow “boiling innards” in Jb 30:27. “appoint,” which connotes God’s S and it Jonah • one’s inmost being, his will, and control over the world and every intellect: Ps 40:8 (M-40:9). part of it. This emphasis on God’s swallowed Jonah The primary sense of the term as it command of the natural world will and Jonah was in the b and Jonah was in the appears in Jon 1:17b–2:1 appears to be revisited several more times in innards belly of the seabe “stomach,” but the multivalence of the narrative with the qîqāyôn-plant, VS the worm, and the scorching wind belly of the fish monster three days and the term is something reflected in both ancient translations and the (*dev1:17a; 4:6a,7a,8a; *com1:17a; three days and three three nights. exegesis of some Church Fathers 4:6a,7a,8a). nights. (*com1:17–2:1; *bib1:17b–2:1; *chr1: The Great Fish, God’s Fantastic Instrument 17–2:10). The fish appears suddenly and serves as God’s instrument for correcting 17a appointed Jon 4:6–8 — 17a to swallow Jonah Jb 2:3 — 17b; 2:1 innards 2Chr 32:21; Y‚Grammar‚Z the prophet. With the entrance of Jb 30:27; Sg 5:4; Is 16:11; 48:19; 49:1; 63:15; Jer 4:19; 31:20; Lam 1:20; Ez 3:3 — 17b three the great fish, the verisimilitude of days 1Sm 30:12; 1Kgs 12:5; 2Kgs 2:17; Mt 12:40 1:17; 2:1,10 fish He-Fish or She-Fish? the story seems to evaporate and the Shift in Gender Whereas in Jon 1:17a reader is confronted with a question the Lord appoints a dāg, “fish” in masculine form, one reads in Jon 2:1 that about the story’s purpose and genre. What had begun as a typical prophetic Jonah prays from the innards of a dāgâ, “fish” in feminine form. In Jon 2:10, narrative seems to have transformed into a fantastic tall tale. In fact, this however, the creature is again called a dāg. single verse has been a source of incredulity for many authors from late The text’s ambiguity inspired a number of Jewish explanations (*jew1:17; Antiquity through the Enlightenment (*hge1:17a; *anc1:17–2:1; *com1:17– 2:1,10) and may have influenced certain translation choices in Jerome’s Vul2:1; *chr1:17–2:10; *phi1:17b). gate (*com1:17–2:1). Yet, if this great fish is meant to be a literary feature of the story, we may well ask: what is its purpose? what is the author attempting to express? As Y‚Literary Devices‚Z will become clear in the course of ch. 2, the fish serves as a liminal space in which the prophet hangs between life and death, offering an anguished 1:17a; 4:6a,7a,8a Yhwh appointed + God Appointed — NARRATION Characterizaprayer of thanksgiving. tion of God through Continuity of Action In the Book of Jonah, the same verb mnh Jonah, Vessel of God’s Message (“appoint”) is used four times to describe God’s dealings with Jonah, Jonah has moved from being the primary actor within the story to a passive although it is sometimes translated differently depending on the context object. After the sailors hurl Jonah, the vessel of God’s message, into the sea (*com1:17a; 4:6a,7a,8a). He “appoints” different elements of his creation to with the other vessels, he is immediately swallowed by the great fish. Curishape the fate of his reluctant prophet and to communicate to him. Nature’s ously we, as readers, are told that Jonah remained within the fish for three role in the book manifests God’s control over the cosmos as a whole—even days and three nights, a detail which builds up suspense; though we know including stubborn human beings like Jonah. Indeed, as we have seen with that Jonah is not yet dead, we remain in the dark about his precise fate. Of the storm and the sea-monster, nature is more obedient than Jonah course, in the history of reception, this detail has sparked more theological himself. and typological reflection than any other within the book (*chr1:17–2:10).

64

Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?

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. 17a great Leitwort, Meaning See *dev1:2.

Context Y‚Historical and Geographical Notes‚Z 17a a great fish to swallow Jonah Fish Stories in the News In the 1890s several French, English, and American newspapers published reports of sailors swallowed at sea. Many of these concern one James Bartley, a whaler who worked near the Falkland Islands. The following are examples of such articles (the first few are nearly identical): • July 2, 1891–The Wheeling Daily Intelligencer, “A Modern Jonah”; • July 14, 1891–The Daily Independent, “The Modern Mr. Jonah”; • July 15, 1891–The Los Angeles Times, “A Modern Jonah”; • July 30, 1891–Wood County Reporter, “A Real Living Jonah”; • Aug. 19, 1891–The Somerset Herald, “Swallowed by a Whale”; • Aug. 22, 1891–The Yarmouth Mercury, “Rescue of a Modern Jonah”; • March 12, 1896–Journal des débats, politiques et littéraires, Thursday column; • April 12, 1896 –The New York World, “A Modern Jonah Proves His Story”; • Nov. 17, 1896 –The New York Times, under “Personal”; • Dec. 4, 1896 –The New York Times, “A Shark Story of Great Merit” reports that two men were swallowed by a shark and then the next day were found inside the shark’s stomach when it was cut open. Can a Whale Swallow a Man? In March 2019, at the time of the annual sardine migration (“Sardine Run”), off the coast of Port Elizabeth, South Africa, diver Rainer Schimpf was filming a small school of sardines being devoured by a group of sharks. He did not notice a 15-meter-long whale moving straight toward him with his mouth agape, intending to gulp a swarm of sardines drawn by a ball of bait; at the last moment, the whale tried to avoid Schimpf. A human being, however, cannot be swallowed whole by a whale of this type. Indeed, the upper jaw of this kind of whale has baleen, horny blades which filter the food. To feed, cetaceans open their mouths, and suck a large amount of water that is filtered by the baleen (“Diver Recounts Panic of Almost Being ‘Swallowed’ Alive by Massive Whale,” Today, March 11, 2019). Only the sperm whale, which feeds on giant squid weighing several hundred pounds, is anatomically capable of swallowing a human being. From 19th-century whale fisheries we have stories of men who were swallowed whole and then rescued; but there is very little evidence that any of these stories is true. There is, however, a reliable report from 1947, which states that a man was pulled from the carcass of a whale “badly crushed, decomposed, and extremely dead” (→Perrin 2009, 1228). Y‚Ancient Cultures‚Z 1:17–2:10 Fish in Folklore: “Island” and “Swallow” Tales Two types of fish-tale are found in folklore: • the “island” tale; • the “swallow” tale. The former kind usually involves sailors who spot an island upon which they disembark and encamp. Having lit a bonfire, the sailors learn the “island” is actually a huge fish when, in reaction to the fire, it sinks to the depths drowning some or all of the travelers. The latter kind of tale usually consists of seafarers who are swallowed by a fish and strive to free themselves by various means and with varying success.

“Island” Tales • In the →Avesta: Yasna 9.10–11, Keresaspa slays a horned monster upon whom he had begun to boil a kettle. “Hot grew this deceiver and began to sweat. Forth from under the kettle rushed he, and upset the boiling water.” • →Ps.-Callisthenes Alex. 224 contains a letter purportedly written by Alexander the Great to Aristotle, wherein he describes an “island” in India that reveals itself to be a sea-monster, “for the evil barbarians had said it was an island, but it was a whale.” • A similar story also appears in the First Voyage of Sindbad the Sailor (→1001 Nights 3:5–13). • The Vita metrica sancti Brendani contains an episode wherein Brendan says Mass on the back of a fish (→Act. S. Brend. 55–56). “Swallow” Tales • →Vishńú puráńa: Pradyumna, a six-day-old child, is swallowed by a large fish. • In →Somadeva Kath., the following are “swallow” tales: The Story of Bhímabhata, The Story of Keśata and Kandarpa, and The Story of the Two Princesses. • → Lucian of Samosata Ver. hist. 1.30–42 relates the story of a great fish measuring 170 miles in length who swallowed the protagonists’ ship, its interior containing an island with human and non-human inhabitants. First, the seafarers try to escape by tunneling out, but give up after halfa-mile leads to nothing. Secondly, they set fire to the interior forest which, after twelve days, weakens the monster, allowing their ship to be pushed out through its mouth. • In a footnote for the myth of Hesione and Hercules in →Ps.-Apollodorus Bibl. 2.5.9, Frazer amplifies the tale with an anecdote drawn from a medieval commentator: “Tzetzes says that Hercules, in full armour, leaped into the jaws of the sea-monster, and was in its belly for three days hewing and hacking it, and that at the end of the three days he came forth without any hair on his head. The Scholiast on Homer tells the tale similarly” (1:208). Emerging hairless from the fish is a common trope (cf. →Duan. Finn 60.16–17; →Coulter 1926; →Ziolkowski 1984). • The Vita metrica sancti Brendani likewise contains a “swallow” tale (→Act. S. Brend. 63–64). Y‚Ancient Texts‚Z 1:17–2:1,10 fish Sea-monsters in Greek Literature • →Homer Od. 12.97: kêtos refers to the great beast that Scylla eats. • →Homer Il. 20.147: kêtos refers to a menacing monster of the deep from which Heracles flees. • →Euripides Androm. fr. 1: kêtos refers to the sea-monster sent by Poseidon that nearly devoured Andromeda. Andromeda was the beautiful daughter of King Cepheus and Queen Cassiope of Joppa in Palestine. On one occasion, Cassiope boasted that Andromeda was more beautiful than the Nereids, sea-nymphs, thereby offending them. In order to obtain satisfaction, Poseidon sent a kêtos to devastate Cepheus’ kingdom, and it would only relent when Cepheus agreed to offer Andromeda as a sacrifice to it. Thus, Andromeda was chained to a rock on the coast near the city of Joppa and left to be devoured by the kêtos (*hge1:3b). Fortunately, Perseus slew the monster in exchange for Andromeda’s hand in marriage and she eventually bore him six sons and a daughter (cf. →Hamilton 1953, 204–207). • →Ps.-Apollodorus Bibl. 2.5.9: kêtos refers to the sea-monster sent by Poseidon that nearly devoured Hesione. The gods Apollo and Poseidon decided to test the justice of King Laomedon by taking on human form and agreeing to fortify the city of Pergamum for him for a wage. When Laomedon did not pay, Apollo sent a pestilence and Poseidon sent a kêtos that would snatch people away when carried up to the plain by a flood. Laomedon’s only recourse was to offer his daughter Hesione as a sacrifice to the kêtos, which he did by fastening her to the rocks near the sea. She was eventually saved by Hercules, who slew the kêtos in exchange for the mares which Zeus had given to Laomedon in compensation for the rape

65

Jon : A Fish Swallows a Prophet

of Ganymede. However, Laomedon reneged on the deal and Hercules threatened to make war on Troy. 17b three days and three nights A Motif in a Mesopotamian Myth • Inanna’s Descent to the Nether World 167–182 “The sick ‘woman’ was turned into a corpse, / The corpse was hung from a stake. / After three days and three nights had passed, / Her messenger Ninshubur, / Her messenger of favorable words, / Her carrier of true words, / Fills the heaven with complaints for her / … / ‘O, Father Enlil, let not thy daughter be put to death in the nether world’” (→ANET 55).

Reception Y‚Comparison of Versions‚Z 1:17–2:1,10 fish: M | G: a sea-monster The Greek kêtos does not closely correspond to M’s dāg; in Greek the term ichthus (“fish”) is the semantic counterpart of dāg. This translation decision is both an homage to Greek culture and a product of ancient exegesis that creates a link between Jon 1:17 (M-2:1) and other biblical texts. Kêtos in Greek Literature • See *anc1:17–2:1. Kêtos in the Septuagint The term kêtos “sea-monster” has cosmological associations in G. • It occurs in the description of the fifth day of creation in Gn 1:21. The first sea-creatures are the “great tannînim” (= kêtê). • In Jb 3:8, the same term translates Hebrew liwyātān, and in Jb 9:13; 26:12, it translates rāhab (see also *jew1:17a). • In Sir 43:25 the great sea-monsters are the proof of the Creator’s might. • In the Song of the Three Youths the kêtê praise and bless the Lord (G-Dn 3:79).

17a swallow ALLUSION A Fish Tries to Swallow Tobias While journeying, Tobias is attacked by a fish which leaps from the Tigris and tries to devour him (Tb 6:2). With Uriel’s help, Tobias kills and guts the fish. The fish’s entrails are later integral to the book’s happy resolution, restoring Tobit’s sight and protecting Sarah and Tobias from death on their wedding night (cf. Tb 6:7–9).  1:17b–2:1 innards Transforming mē îm The Hebrew term “innards” can denote both the stomach (and digestion) and the womb (and reproduction; *voc1:17b–2:1); hence, its contents can either be destroyed or confected. Figuratively, they are a site of transformation. • Upon entering, the content is broken down and absorbed: this is usually food, but also includes the bitter scroll which Ezekiel consumes in Ez 3:3. • “Exiting the innards” is an idiomatic phrase for birth or origin (cf. 2Chr 32:21; Is 48:19). Isaiah hears God’s call, as it were, from within his mother’s mē‘îm (Is 49:1). Jonah has a figurative “rebirth” when he accepts his vocation and is expelled from the great fish. By metonymy mē‘îm refers to the seat of such emotions as love (Sg 5:4), compassion, and anguish (Jb 30:27; Jer 4:19; Lam 1:20). In the context of Jonah, this last connotation is significant: in parallel with the root rḥm, mē‘îm is associated with compassion and mercy (cf. Is 16:11; 63:15; Jer 31:20). Jonah finds himself in the mē‘îm: when he departs, he will be, in a way, “the son of a fish.” Those mē‘îm, which could have destroyed him, let him live. Y‚Peritestamental Literature‚Z 17b three days and three nights TYPOLOGY Allusion to Joseph? • →T. Zeb. 4.4 “He [i.e., Joseph] remained in the cistern (Gn 37:23–28) three days and three nights, so that when he was sold he was starving” (→OTP 1:806; cf. *anc1:17b). Y‚Liturgies‚Z

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 (*dev1:17a; 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. *chr1:17a). • 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”). Y‚Biblical Intertextuality‚Z 17 TYPOLOGY Elijah and Elisha as Types of Jonah See *bib1:1–2.

17b–2:1 innards Jonah, between Jewish and Christian Liturgies: His Presence in the Constitutions of the Holy Apostles Jonah is briefly mentioned in a prayer contained in →Const. ap., a 4th-c. work that collects authoritative apostolic prescriptions on moral conduct, liturgy, and the proper order in the Church (cf. →Bradshaw 2002, 73–87). Jonah in the Context of Prayer: Litany of the Righteous The mention of Jonah “in the belly of the sea-monster” (Iôna en têi koiliai tou kêtous; →Const. ap. 7.37.4) appears in one of sixteen prayers collected in the seventh treatise of the Constitutions (→Const. ap. 7.33–45). These prayers seem to be liturgical in nature (cf. →Bradshaw 2002, 73–87), and in the case of prayer six, the one in which Jonah is mentioned, there is a clear focus on petitionary prayer. • →Const. ap. 7.37.1: The opening of the prayer invokes the mediation of Jesus Christ, entreating God to listen to the supplication of his people just as he received the gifts (i.e., offerings and prayers) of the righteous throughout history. • →Const. ap. 7.37.2–4 proceeds to enumerate some 35 examples of such righteous people from the OT, arranged more or less chronologically, from Abel to the priest Mattathias. • →Const. ap. 7.37.5: the prayer concludes with another invocation of Christ along with the Holy Spirit: “and now therefore receive the petitions (proseuchas) of your people, which are offered (prospheromenas) to you with recognition (met’ epignôseôs) through Christ in the Spirit.” It is likely that this final invocation would have introduced the specific petitions of the contemporary Christian community. Jonah’s prayer is thus presented as one of many historical examples of God’s beneficence in listening to his people that was meant to inform Christian worship. Cf. similarities with the prayers of the Roman Canon after the consecration, which entreat the Father to accept the priest’s sacrifice by invoking the memory of righteous figures from the OT:

66

Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?

• →Miss. Rom. 1570 “Upon which vouchsafe to look with a propitious and serene countenance, and to accept them, as Thou wert graciously pleased to accept the gifts of Thy just servant Abel, and the sacrifice of our patriarch Abraham, and that which Thy high priest Melchisedech offered to Thee, a holy Sacrifice, an unspotted Victim” (Supra quae propitio ac sereno vultu respicere digneris: et accepta habere, sicuti accepta habere dignatus es munera pueri tui iusti Abel, et sacrificium Patriarchae nostri Abrahae: et quod tibi obtulit summus sacerdos tuus Melchisedech, sanctum sacrificium, immaculatam hostiam). Affinities with Jewish Prayers • →3 Macc. 6.1–15: In his entreaty for God’s aid, Eleazar recounts the history of God’s faithfulness to and solicitude for Israel, namely, the Exodus, the miraculous defeat of the Assyrians, the salvation of the three youths (Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego) from the furnace, Daniel’s protection in the den of lions, and, finally, Jonah’s restoration from the belly of the “sea-born monster.” Eleazar thus concludes in a manner reminiscent of Jonah’s prayer in the whale: “Let it be shown to all heathen that thou art with us, O Lord, and hast not turned thy face away from us; but as thou hast said, ‘Not even when they were in the land of their enemies have I forgotten them’ (Lv 26:44), even so bring it to pass, O Lord” (→3 Macc. 6:15; Emmet 1918, 38–39; cf. *ptes2:10). • Jewish synagogue prayers: Some early 20th-c. scholars observe that the sixteen prayers found in the seventh treatise of →Const. ap. resemble Jewish synagogal prayers, and argue that the historical context of the diaspora would have provided ample opportunity for Christian adaptation of these prayers (→Bousset 1916, 438–485; →Kohler 1924, 410–425; →Goodenough 1935, 306–316). • Further, it is noteworthy that in the sixth prayer, the long list of historical exemplars is entirely focused on the OT; Christ is only mentioned preceding and following this litany (→Const. ap. 7.37.1,5). According to →Bousset (1916, 445–446), this suggests that it was a Christian adaptation of what was originally a Jewish prayer. Jonah and Byzantine Liturgical Poetry The Canons (largely composed by John of Damascus and Cosmas of Maiuma) sung during the great feasts of the Byzantine Liturgy contain several references to Jonah’s time in the whale. Together they summarize the Church’s typological interpretation of the book. • →Hapgood Service Book First Canon, Nativity of the Theotokos: “From within the whale Jonah cried unto the Lord: ‘Lead me forth, I beseech thee, from the depths of Hell unto thee; that unto thee, as the deliverer, with the voice of praise, and in the spirit of truth, I may offer sacrifice’” (165). • →Hapgood Service Book First Canon, Elevation of the Holy Cross: “Jonah, when he stretched forth his arms in the form of a cross within the belly of the sea-monster, did clearly typify the Redeeming Suffering; and when he came forth thence after three days, he imaged forth by anticipation the supernatural Resurrection of Christ our God, who was crucified in the flesh and hath illumined the world by his rising on the third day” (168). • →Hapgood Service Book Canticle VI, Nativity of Christ: “The sea-monster cast forth Jonah from its belly unharmed as it had swallowed him. And when the Word took up his abode in a Virgin, and was made flesh, He came forth preserving her undefiled. For in that He Himself suffered not corruption, He preserved unharmed her who bare Him” (178). • →Hapgood Service Book Canon of Holy Thursday: “The nethermost abyss of sins hath compassed me about, and unable to endure the billows thereof, like Jonah I cry aloud unto thee, O Master: ‘Lead me forth from corruption’” (209). • →Hapgood Service Book Canon of Matins, Holy Saturday: “Jonah was seized but was not held in the belly of the whale, in that he represented the type of thee, who didst suffer and give thyself over unto burial; and he came forth from the monster as from a chamber of repose, and spake unto the guards: ‘Ye that regard lying vanities have forsaken your own mercy’” (222). • →Hapgood Service Book Canticle VI, Easter: “Thou didst descend into the nethermost parts of the earth, O Christ, and didst shatter the bonds eternal which held the prisoners in captivity: and after three days thou didst rise again from the grave, like Jonah from the whale” (230).

• →Hapgood Service Book Canon of Pentecost: “Sailing on the stormy sea of earthly cares, drowning in the billows of the sins which compass me round about, and cast forth unto the soul destroying monster, like Jonah I cry unto thee, O Christ: ‘Lead thou me forth from the death dealing abyss’” (247). Y‚Jewish Tradition‚Z 1:17–2:10 Midrashic Retelling and Expansion of Jonah as a Redemption Story In →Tanḥ., great attention is given to Jonah’s sojourn in the fish. Reworked as a redemption story, here, Jonah rescues the fish from Leviathan and is, in turn, rewarded with a vision of hidden mysteries. Background of Midrash Tanh.uma and Its Translation Midrash Tanḥuma is a late midrash (ca. 7th-9th c. a.d.) on the five books of the Torah, and it is arranged as a series of sermons on the opening verses of each paragraph. It is named after the Talmudic sage Rabbi Tanhuma, who appears throughout the text, though it is also sometimes referred to as “Tanḥuma-Yelammedenu” (“teach us Tanḥuma”). Though English translations have been published (e.g., Berman 1996; Townsend 1989–2003), these are incomplete and omit →Tanḥ. Vayikra 8. Thus, in the following citations of the material mentioning Jonah, we have relied on the Sefaria Community Translation. The Fish as a Living-Room • →Tanḥ. Vayikra 8.1 “And the Lord designated a great fish to swallow Jonah, and Jonah was in the innards of the fish three days and three nights’ (Jon 1:17), and Jonah entered its mouth, like a man that enters a large synagogue, and the two eyes of the fish were like opened windows giving light to Jonah. Rabbi Meir said: ‘A pearl was hanging in the innards of the fish, and it would give light to Jonah, like the sun lights up in its strength in the afternoon. And Jonah could see everything that was in the sea and that was in the depths, as it is stated: ‘Light is planted for the righteous, and joy for the righteous of heart’ (Ps 97:11).” Descent in the Depths of the Sea-World and Ascension to the Origins of Creation Jonah Saves Himself and the Fish from Leviathan Thanks to His Circumcision • →Tanḥ. Vayikra 8.1 “The fish said to Jonah: ‘Do you not know that my time has come to be eaten into the mouth of the Leviathan?’ He said to it, ‘Take me there and I will save you, and my soul.’ It took him to the Leviathan. He said to the Leviathan, ‘Because of you have I come to see your dwelling place in the sea. And not only that, but in the future I will come down to put a rope on your neck and to bring you up for the great meal of the righteous ones.’ He showed it his seal from Avraham (ḥwtmw šl ’brhm), our father (his circumcision) [according to →Pirqe R. El. 10 where it is called “the seal of the covenant”: hbṭ lbryt]. The Leviathan saw it and fled a journey of two days from before Jonah.” Jonah Is Rewarded with the Revelation of Divine Entities • →Tanḥ. Vayikra 8.1 “He said to the fish, ‘Behold, I saved you from the mouth of the Leviathan; [now] show me all that is in the sea and in the depths.’ And [so] it showed him the great river of the waters of the ocean, as it is stated (Jon 2:5), ‘up to my soul was the deep.’ And it showed him the paths of the Red (lit. ‘Reed’) Sea, as it is stated, ‘reeds are twined around my head.’ And it showed him the place from where the breakers of the sea and its waves go out, as it is stated (Jon 2:3), ‘all Your breakers and waves passed over me.’ And it showed him the pillars of the Earth in its foundation, as it is stated (Jon 2:6), ‘the bars of the earth were around me forever.’ And it showed him Gehinnom, as it is written (Jon 2:2), ‘from the belly of the pit I cried out; You heard my voice.’ And it showed him under the Chamber of God, as it is stated (Jon 2:6), ‘I descended to the bases of the mountains.’ From here readers learn that Jerusalem stands on seven mountains. And he saw the Stone of the Foundation there, set in the depths. And he saw the sons of Korah, standing and praying upon it. It said to Jonah, ‘Behold, you are standing under the Chamber of the Lord; pray and you shall be answered.’” Note the apocalyptic dimension of this retelling. The underwater exploration of the world thereafter amounts to a reversed apocalyptic travel in the heavens. Note the liturgical and ritual dimension of the story, particularly the apotropaic effect of the circumcision (construed as a sacrifice), the sign of the

Jon : A Fish Swallows a Prophet

covenant, which frightens Leviathan; the foundation stone of the Temple; and the encounter with the sons of Korah, the prestigious guild of cantors in the Temple. Note also its messianic and eschatological dimension: “the great meal of the righteous ones” is the messianic banquet promised to the just, where Leviathan will be eaten and its skin transformed in a vast gleaming tent, or sūkkâ. Leviathan’s flesh may not be kosher—since he is often said to be a serpent or dragon: this is a sign of the abolition of the commandments, miṣwôt, in the (messianic) world to come, ‘ôlām habbâ (cf. →b. B. Bat. 75a–b; →Tanḥ. Shemini 7; but see also →b. Ḥul. 67b which argues that Leviathan’s flesh is kosher). Note too its protological dimension. The foundation stone of the world (’eben hašetiyyâ), uncovered in Jonah’s mystical travel, is also the cornerstone of the Temple on Mount Moriah, traditionally identified as the place where God molded Adam, where Abraham “sacrificed” Isaac, where Jacob saw the heavenly ladder, etc. (cf. →Pirqe R. El. 35). The place is thus connected with the Creation itself (*jew1:17a). Summary of Jonah’s Itinerary According to the midrash, Jonah’s prayer summarizes his journey under the sea: • The great river of the waters of the Ocean (Jon 2:5); • The Sea of Reeds (yām sûp) through which Israel passed (Jon 2:5; cf. *jew2:5b); • The place whence the waves of the sea and its billows flow (Jon 2:3); • The pillars of the earth and its foundations (‘mwdy ’rṣ wmkwnyh; cf. Jon 2:6 hā’āreṣ beriḥêhâ); • Gehinnom (gyhnm; cf. Jon 2:6 šaḥat); • The lowest Sheol (š’wl tḥtyt; cf. Jon 2:2 beṭen še’ôl); • The Temple of God (Jon 2:6 qiṣbé hārîm). In this last place, the prophet sees the sons of Korah (i.e., performing their service in the Temple) who advise him to pray, for he is under the Temple of God and therefore he will be answered. Jonah orders the fish to stand still and it obeys. Prayer of Jonah Here the tradition clarifies what it is that Jonah vowed, namely, to bring Leviathan before the Lord, in anticipation of Israel’s future salvation. • →Tanḥ. Vayikra 8.1 “Immediately Jonah said to the fish, ‘Stand in the place that you are standing, as I would like to recite a prayer.’ And the fish stopped. And Jonah began to pray in front of the Holy One, blessed be He, ‘Master of the Universe, You have been called the One that brings down and raises up—behold, I have gone down, [now] raise me up; You have been called the One that brings death and that brings life—behold, my soul has reached death, [now] bring me life.’ And he was not answered until [this] came out from his mouth: ‘that which I have vowed, I will fulfill, etc.’ (Jon 2:9)—‘That which I have vowed’ to bring up the Leviathan in front of You, ‘I will fulfill’ on the day of Israel’s salvation, as it is stated, ‘But I, with loud thanksgiving, will sacrifice to You that which I have vowed.’” • →Pirqe R. El. 10 “Jonah began to pray before the Holy One, blessed be He, and he said: ‘Sovereign of all the Universe! Thou art called ‘the One who kills’ and ‘the One who makes alive,’ behold, my soul has reached unto death, now restore me to life’ [cf. *theo1:17b Bergsma]. He was not answered until this word came forth from his mouth, ‘What I have vowed I will perform’ (Jon 2:9), namely, ‘I vowed to draw up Leviathan and to prepare it before Thee, I will perform (this) on the day of the Salvation of Israel,’ as it is said, ‘But I will sacrifice unto thee with the voice of thanksgiving’ (Jon 2:9).” Further Amplification • →Yal. on Nach 550.2 “He said: Master of the World! Where can I go to escape Your spirit and to where can I flee from before You? ‘If I ascend to the heavens, You are there…’ (Ps 139:8). You are King over all kingdoms and Master over all rulers of the world. The high heavens are Your throne and the earth is Your footstool. Your kingdom is on high and Your dominion in the depths, the actions of all humanity are revealed before You and the secrets of all men spread out before You. You search out the ways of all people and examine the footsteps of all living things. You

67

know the hidden things of the kidneys and the secrets of the heart You understand. All which is hidden is revealed before You, there are no secrets before the throne of your glory and nothing shielded from Your eyes. You collect every secret and tell every single thing. You are there in every place. Your eyes see evil and good. I beseech You, answer me from the belly of Sheol and save me from the depths. Let my cry come into Your ears and fulfill my request because You sit far away and hear as if near. You are called the One who lifts up and casts down, please lift me up! You are called the One who kills and gives life, I have reached the point of death—revive me! He was not answered until he said this: that which I vowed to bring up Leviathan and prepare him before them, I will fulfill on the day of Israel’s salvation. ‘But I—with a voice of thanks will I sacrifice to You’ (Jon 2:10).” The citation of Jon 2:9 is reminiscent of the kol nidré (*lit2:1–9). Yet this rite seems to contrast with Jonah’s prayer, which is answered only when Jonah promises to fulfill his vow. Happy Ending: Everybody Gets Circumcized! • →Tanḥ. Vayikra 8.1 “And immediately the Holy One, blessed be He, commanded [to the fish], and it spewed Jonah out to the dry land, as it is stated (Jon 3:1), ‘And the Lord spoke to the fish, and it spewed Jonah out to the dry land.’ When the sailors saw all of the great miracles, signs and wonders that the Holy One, blessed be He, did with Jonah, they got up and every man cast away his god, as it is stated (Jon 2:8), ‘They who preserve the vanities of emptiness forsake their kindness.’ And they went back to Jaffa and went up to Jerusalem, and they circumcised the flesh of their foreskin, as it is stated (Jon 1:16), ‘And the men feared a great fear of the Lord, and they slaughtered a sacrifice to the Lord and they made vows’— and did they slaughter a sacrifice? Rather, [this was] circumcision, which is like the blood of a sacrifice. And each man of them vowed to bring his children and everything that he had to the God of Jonah. And they vowed and they fulfilled [it]. And about them is it said, the converts were righteous converts.” • →Pirqe R. El. 10 “The sailors saw all the signs, the miracles, and the great wonders which the Holy One, blessed be He, did unto Jonah, and they stood and they cast away every one his god, as it is said, ‘They that regard lying vanities forsake their own shame’ (Jon 2:8). They returned to Joppa and went up to Jerusalem and circumcised the flesh of their foreskins… Did they offer sacrifice? Is it not a fact that šelāmîm (‘sacrifices’) are not accepted from Gentiles? But this (sacrifice) refers to the blood of the covenant of circumcision…And they made vows every one to bring his children and all belonging to him to the God of Jonah.” Others, following Rabbi Akiva’s judgment in →b. Menaḥ. 83b, say that the sailors offered ‘ôlôt (“whole-burnt offerings”), which may be accepted from Gentiles. 1:17; 2:1,10 fish He-fish or She-fish? Several commentators have attempted to account for the discrepancy present in the text’s use of both the masculine and feminine forms of the Hebrew word for “fish” in the book’s narrative. God appoints a male fish, Jonah prays within the belly of a female fish, and, finally, a male fish spits Jonah out onto the beach (cf. *gra1:17; 2:1,10; *vis1:17–2:1,10). There Was Only One Fish • →b. Ned. 51b “Rab Pappa said to Abaye: From where is it derived that the phrase: ‘Fish [dāg] is konam for me, and for that reason I will not taste it,’ is a reference to a large fish? As it is written: ‘And the Lord prepared a great fish (dāg) to swallow up Jonah’ (Jon 1:17). The Gemara asks: ‘But isn’t it written in the following verse: Then Jonah prayed to the Lord his God out of the belly of the fish (dāgâ)’ (Jon 2:1)? This indicates that a large fish can be referred to as a dāgâ as well.” There Were Two Different Animals The association between the great fish and Leviathan in G (*com1:17–2:1,10) is also reflected in a midrash on Jonah. See *jew1:17–2:10. Midrashic Commentary on the “She-fish”: A Divine Enticement to Pray After recounting the midrash found in →Tanḥ., →Yal. continues its imaginative interpretation, devising a reason why a second, female, fish would intervene in the story:

68

Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?

• →Yal. on Nach 550.2 “Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the fish without praying. The Holy One said: ‘I made a broad space for him in the belly of a male fish in order that he not be distressed and he isn’t praying! I will prepare a fish that is pregnant with three hundred and sixty-five thousands and tens of thousands of little fish in order that he be distressed and pray before me.’ This is because the Holy One desires the prayers of the righteous. In that hour the Holy One brought a pregnant fish and she said to the other fish: ‘The Holy One sent me to swallow up the prophet who is in your belly. If you will spit him out, good. If not, I will swallow you with him.’ He said to her: ‘Who knows if what you say is true?’ She replied: ‘Leviathan.’ They went to Leviathan and she said to him: ‘Leviathan, king over all the fish of the sea! Do you not know that the Holy One sent me to this fish to swallow the prophet who is in his belly?’ He said to her: ‘Yes.’ The fish said to Leviathan: ‘When?’ He replied: ‘In the last three hours, when the Holy One descends to play with me. Thus I heard.’ He immediately spit out Jonah. The female fish right away swallowed him and he was in great distress because of the confinement and the filth. He immediately focused his heart in prayer, as it says ‘And Jonah prayed to the Lord his God, from the belly of the fish’ (Jon 2:1).” • →Rashi Comm. likewise suggests that although Jonah was first swallowed by a male fish, its spacious belly allowed Jonah room to stand and so he was not compelled to pray. God then caused the male fish to spit Jonah into the mouth of a female fish, whose belly was full of roe. Now cramped and uncomfortable, the distressed Jonah was moved to prayer. 17a Yhwh appointed a great fish When Was the Fish Appointed? The Fish among the Protoctist Entities A Jewish tradition maintains that the “fish was specially appointed from the six days of Creation to swallow up Jonah.” • →Pirqe R. El. 10 “‘And the Lord had prepared a great fish to swallow up Jonah’ (Jon 1:17). Rabbi Ṭarphon said: That fish was specially appointed from the six days of Creation to swallow up Jonah, as it is said, ‘And the Lord had prepared a great fish to swallow up Jonah.’ He entered its mouth just as a man enters the great synagogue, and he stood (therein). The two eyes of the fish were like windows of glass giving light to Jonah.” • →Yal. on Nach 550.2 “R. Meir says: The fish was appointed to swallow Jonah from the six days of creation, as it says, ‘And the Lord appointed a huge fish’ (Jon 1:17).” The rabbis here allude to the ancient concept of →protoctist entities—creatures that were created at the foundation of time—which were progressively elaborated in the Jewish tradition. In turn, linking the fish with a plan of salvation fore-ordained at the beginning of time provided early Christianity with a solid basis for a Christological reading of the Book of Jonah. 17a a great fish Adapting Jewish Traditions for Children A children’s adaptation, Jonah and the Two Great Fish, makes use of the rich speculation and ritual use of Jonah in the Jewish tradition. • →Gerstein (1997) writes in the introduction, “In the Jewish tradition many legends have arisen about the characters and events in the Bible. These legends fill in the gaps in the stories with all the details that everyone wants to know: what things and people really looked like, exactly how much of something there was, why something happened, and what happened before and after. Jonah was said to have been a disciple, or student, of the prophet Elisha. It is also told that at what should have been the end of his life, God allowed Jonah to enter Heaven and remain there alive! Here, then, is the story of the prophet Jonah, enriched by these legends. The adaptation therefore includes two fish, the first ‘spacious and well-furnished inside. There was a diamond that shone like the sun. The fish’s eyes were windows and through them Jonah could see all the wonders of the deep,’ while for the second, ‘Inside it was dark and crowded with thirty-six thousand, five hundred baby fish of all kinds.’” • Some Jewish adaptations explain the reading of Jonah on Yom Kippur and how it relates to the observance of that holiday (e.g., →Prenzlau 1999). 17b Jonah Rabbis on Jonah See *jew1:1.

Y‚Law‚Z 17a great fish Legal Disputes Involving the Whale Taxing Fish Products: Is a Whale a Fish? It is generally understood today that whales are mammals. This was not always the case. Before the 18th c., it was assumed that whales were fish. In 1758 Carl Linnaeus had pointed out all of their mammalian qualities, but his classification did not become common knowledge. Moreover, jurists and biologists have different priorities. Even if whales are not fish biologically, the case Maurice vs. Judd (New York State, 1818) decided that whales were fish in the eyes of New York State law (cf. →Burnett 2010, 90–91). • Fish oil was taxed and inspected according to certain laws. This case was brought to decide if spermaceti (wax derived from sperm whale oil) should be considered fish oil with respect to these laws. One should note that sperm whale oil was quite valuable—and spermaceti wax was even more precious. • The logic that led to the decision that whales are fish is as follows: in Jon 1:17, Jonah is swallowed by a “great fish” (KJV). In Mt 12:40, the KJV says that Jonah was swallowed by a “whale.” Therefore, by the authority of Scripture, a whale and a fish are interchangeable. The jury took only 15 minutes to agree. Similar reasoning is found in →Melville Moby Dick (*liter1:17a; cf. *tra1: 17–2:1,10). Argument over Teaching Evolution: Scopes Monkey Trial One of the great American cultural debates in the 20th c. concerned the teaching of evolution in public schools. One flashpoint of this debate was the so-called “Scopes Monkey Trial.” In State of Tennessee vs. John Thomas Scopes (1925), Scopes was accused of violating the law by teaching evolution. William Jennings Bryan, a politician and religious opponent of evolution— particularly social Darwinism and eugenics (cf. his 1909 lecture The Prince of Peace),—was called to testify as an expert witness about the Bible and was asked about Jonah. • →Metzger 1925 “Q: You have given considerable study to the Bible, haven’t you, Mr. Bryan? — A: Yes, sir, I have tried to. — Q: Then you have made a general study of it? — A: Yes, I have; I have studied the Bible for about fifty years, or sometimes more than that, but, of course, I have studied it more as I have become older than when I was but a boy. — Q: You claim that everything in the Bible should be literally interpreted? — A: I believe everything in the Bible should be accepted as it is given there: some of the Bible is given illustratively. For instance: ‘Ye are the salt of the earth’ (Mt 5:13). I would not insist that man was actually salt, or that he had flesh of salt, but it is used in the sense of salt as saving God’s people. — Q: But when you read that Jonah swallowed the whale, or that the whale swallowed Jonah, excuse me please, how do you literally interpret that? — A: When I read that a big fish swallowed Jonah—it does not say whale…That is my recollection of it. A big fish, and I believe it, and I believe in a God who can make a whale and can make a man and make both what He pleases. — Q: Now, you say, the big fish swallowed Jonah, and he there remained how long, three days, and then he spewed him upon the land. You believe that the big fish was made to swallow Jonah? — A: I am not prepared to say that; the Bible merely says it was done. — Q: You don’t know whether it was the ordinary run of fish, or made for that purpose? — A: You may guess; you evolutionists guess…— Q: You are not prepared to say whether that fish was made especially to swallow a man or not? — A: The Bible doesn’t say, so I am not prepared to say. — Q: But do you believe He made them—that He made such a fish and that it was big enough to swallow Jonah? — A: Yes, sir. Let me add: One miracle is just as easy to believe as another — Q: Just as hard? — A: It is hard to believe for you, but easy for me. A miracle is a thing performed beyond what man can perform. When you get beyond what man can do, you get within the realm of miracles; and it is just as easy to believe the miracle of Jonah as any other miracle in the Bible. — Q: Perfectly easy to believe that Jonah swallowed the whale? — A: If the Bible said so; the Bible doesn’t make as extreme statements as evolutionists do…” (285). The scene was recreated for the movie Inherit the Wind (*cin1:17a).

Jon : A Fish Swallows a Prophet

Y‚Christian Tradition‚Z 1:17–2:10 The Veracity of Jonah’s Experience in the Great Fish Many early patristic authors respond to doubts raised by non-Christians about the truth of Jonah’s experience. • →Irenaeus of lyons Haer. 5.5.2 “If, however, anyone imagines it is impossible that people should survive for such a length of time, and that Elijah was not caught up in the flesh but that flesh was consumed in the fiery chariot, let them consider that Jonah, when he had been cast into the deep and swallowed down into the whale’s belly, was by the command of God again thrown out safe upon the land.” • →Cyril of Alexandria Comm. Jon. 1:17, after posing a couple of representative questions doubting the event, states: “Our explanation, therefore, is that the event would rightly be taken to be truly remarkable and surpassing rhyme or reason. If God were said to be responsible, however, who would still demur? The Divinity is powerful, and easily changes the nature of living things to whatever he chooses, nothing standing in the way of his ineffable wishes; what is by nature corruptible would prove superior even to corruption if he willed it.” • →Augustine of Hippo Ep. 102.31–32, in response to a point raised by Porphyry: “…to pass over the great size of the monsters of the sea, which scientists have reported, who could not guess how many human beings could be contained in the vault of a belly enclosed by those ribs that were displayed in a public square in Carthage and were quite familiar to the people? Who could not imagine the large opening of that mouth, which was like a door to that cavern? Or was the clothing, as our friend put it, perhaps an impediment to Jonah’s being swallowed unharmed, as if he had to squeeze himself through narrow passages, when he was in fact hurled through the air and thus received in the belly of the beast before he could be injured by its teeth?…But these people really find it something incredible in the divine miracle that the heat of the belly, by which food is digested, could have been tempered so that it would preserve a man’s life. How much more incredible, then, would they find it that those three men cast into the furnace by the wicked king walked about in the middle of the fire uninjured!” Interestingly, others focus on the whale’s spitting Jonah out onto dry land. Here the early commentators assert that the events took place, but admonish the reader not to subject them to human reason: • →Theodore of Mopsuestia Comm. Jon. 2:10 “It would, in fact, be a mark of extreme folly, after such extraordinary things happened to him, and most of all his deliverance from the sea monster, to pry into the prophet’s egress from the sea monster, and to think that one could grasp it by human reasoning and explain how it happened in human terms.” • →Theodoret of Cyrus Interpr. Jon. “And let no one be senselessly curious about (polupragmoneitô) how the whale vomited him forth, for when God wills, everything is possible; nor let anyone be excessively concerned as to the kind of shore that God led him out upon, for this is also [a trait] of those who are excessively curious (tôn agan perittôn). But let all who are pious be satisfied with the teaching of the Spirit” (PG 81:1733B). The Typology of Jonah’s Experience in the Great Fish Patristic writers, led by Christ’s references to Jonah (Mt 12:39–41; 16:4; Lk  11:29–30,32), see Jonah’s three days in the fish as a prefiguration of Christ’s burial and resurrection. This is perhaps the single most commented upon feature of the Book of Jonah in the Church Fathers. Representative Examples • →Augustine of Hippo Ep. 102.34 “Just as, then, Jonah went from the ship into the belly of the whale, so too Christ went from the tree into the tomb or into the depth of death. And just as Jonah did this for those who were endangered by the storm, so Christ did this for those who are tossed about in this world.” • →Theodoret of Cyrus Interpr. Jon. 2:3 “And above all, as a type of the master (despotou) Christ, who spent three days and nights in the heart of the earth, he himself rightly (eikotôs) says that he had been in the belly (koilia) of Hades…the one who tasted true death said he would be in the belly (koilia) of the earth three days and three nights, but the one under

69

the shadow of death calls the belly of the sea-monster the belly of Hades.” It is noteworthy that Theodoret seems to have modified Mt 12:40 (from kardia tês gês to koilia tês gês) in order to strengthen the connection between Jonah and Christ (PG 81:1729C–D). • →Jacob of Sarug Hom. 122 repeatedly describes Jonah’s time in the fish as a burial, which is the principle way in which Jonah prefigures Christ. This is perhaps most clearly stated in section 35, where Jacob first describes Jonah as “representing” (ṣwr) the Son (Bedjan 1910, 4:422.15; cf. ibid., 4:414.11); a few lines later he says that by being in the whale, Jonah is “being buried” (qbr) into the heart of the earth (ibid., 4:422.17). According to Jacob, Jonah, though buried, was not corruptible (delâ mētḥabal), and in this he prefigures Christ, who did not suffer corruption in death (delâ mētḥabal; ibid., 4:414.5, 11). Thus, Jacob indicates that this burial in the fish typifies Christ’s path to the tomb (tētpašaq wāt; cf. ibid., 4:422.18) and concludes that Jonah’s burial in the great fish was engraved (mētramšâ wāt) onto that of Christ (ibid., 4:423.8). A Well-Worn Typological Path Already in the 4th c. b.c., this typological interpretation was so ubiquitous that Jerome did not feel the need to include it in his comments on the text. Yet, it continued to be commented upon through the end of the patristic era, as the writings of Maximus the Confessor show. • →Jerome Comm. Jon. 2:1 “The Lord explains the mystery of this passage in the Gospel, and it is superfluous to say either the same thing or something else, rather than what he himself who suffered has explained.” • →Maximus the Confessor Quaest. Thal. 64.27 “Jonah remained for three days in the belly of the whale, it is obvious that this mystery, as a figure, would manifest the truth in a completely new way, which nonetheless follows the figure, namely, that the Lord spent three days and nights in the heart of the earth” (cf. Constas 2018, 509). Jonah: Not a Perfect Type A few patristic authors stress the need to be discerning in presenting Jonah as a type of Christ, since much of the prophet’s behavior does not prefigure Christ’s. Christ’s willingness to embrace his passion is typically presented as something that breaks down the typological relationship with Jonah, who, although eventually willing to die for the sailors, initially fled from God. • →Cyril of Jerusalem Cat. illum. 14.7 “Though Jonah fled, not knowing what was to come, Jesus came willingly, to grant repentance for salvation…Jonah was cast into the belly of a great fish, but Christ of his own will descended to the abode of the invisible fish of death.” • →Cyril of Alexandria Comm. Jon. Preface “Christ even underwent death willingly; he remained in the heart of the earth three days and three nights, came to life again, later went to Galilee, and gave orders for the beginning of the preaching to the nations.” The Distinctiveness of Jonah’s Sign Some patristic authors present Jonah’s prefiguration of Christ as unique and singularly important, most likely because of Christ’s reference to the sign of Jonah in Mt 12:40–41. • →Ps.-Tertullian Jona 143–152 employs hyper-realistic description to emphasize that in the whale (cetus) Jonah became intimately acquainted with death before witnessing God’s victory over it, while also explaining that he thus typified Christ: “…his sails the intestines of the fish, / Inspired with breath ferine; himself, shut in; / By waters, yet untouched; in the sea’s heart, / And yet beyond its reach; ’mid wrecks of fleets / Half-eaten, and men’s carcasses dissolved / In putrid disintegrity: in life / Learning the process of his death; but still— / To be a sign hereafter of the Lord— / A witness was he (in his very self), / Not of destruction, but of death’s repulse.” • →Augustine of Hippo Enarr. Ps. 65(66):3 observes that “One can find a parallel of any other miracle that the Lord performed in the prophets, that is why when the Lord was asked for a sign he gives them the sign of Jonah,” which Augustine describes as “a unique sign, one proper to himself, one that would take place in himself alone.” He then further explains that “What the whale was for Jonah, the underworld was for the Lord; and so he drew their attention to this unique sign, this sign proper to himself, this most powerful of all signs. It is a mightier deed to come to life after being dead than not to have died.”

70

Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?

• →Jacob of Sarug Hom. 122 is also quite creative in his illustration of how Jonah is a type of Christ; a personification of “Mystery” (rā’zâ) speaks to Jonah and invites him to cooperate with God by becoming a type (tūpsâ) of Christ: “Mystery called to him, ‘Go down and touch the depths, for your Lord will come and go down to touch the depths of Sheol and he will empty it. Go down to the deepest part and become the type of the son of the living one who goes down into the whirlpool of death like a diver’” (Bedjan 1910, 4:413.20–21). For Jacob, it is because Jonah did so that he became the prophet who most closely prefigured Jesus Christ; this leads Jacob to describe mémrâ 122 as “exalted above us” (rām hû menan) because it concerns Jonah’s Christological prefiguration (ibid., 4:423.15). 17a appointed Does God Speak to His Creatures? Some patristic writers examine what it means for God to command the great fish (*com1:17a; 4:6a,7a,8a). • →Cyril of Alexandria Comm. Jon. takes great care to emphasize that God does not command his angels and prophets in the same way as he does other creatures or elements of the created world: whereas when God commands his prophets, “he communicates to their minds what has to be done and instills in their hearts the knowledge of whatever he wants,” yet “it would be silly and close to insanity…to think seriously that the God of all deals with even monsters in this manner.” • →Theodoret of Cyrus Interpr. Jon. 2:1–2 notes that when the text says that God commanded, this means that the whale swallowed Jonah “by divine assent” (theôi neumati) in a general sense (PG 81:1729B). • →Jerome Comm. Jon. 2:1 has an interpretation reminiscent of some of the rabbinical commentaries mentioned above (cf. *jew1:17a): “…when it says he prepared, it means either from the beginning, when he created it, of which it is written in a Psalm, ‘This is the dragon which you formed to play therein’ (Ps 104:26), or certainly he made it come next to the ship to receive Jonah into its belly, who had been thrown headlong, and to offer him a little living space instead of death.” 17a a great fish Devouring Whole Ships • →Tertullian Res. 58.8 “Jonah was swallowed by the monster (belva) of the deep, in whose belly whole ships were devoured (in cuius alvo naufragia digerebantur), and after three days was vomited out again safe and sound.” 1:17b–2:1 the innards An Inspiring Place In Christian reception of the text, the ambiguity of the phrase “innards of the fish” is on full display (*voc1:17b–2:1; *bib1:17b–2:1). Syriac Patristic Tradition: Meditations on the Whale as a Womb In the writings of a few Syriac Fathers, Jonah’s time in the belly of the sea-monster is styled as a return to the womb. • →Ephrem Hymn. virg. 42.14–27 offers an extended, fanciful meditation on Jonah’s time in the belly of the whale wherein Ephrem compares Jonah’s natural conception in his mother’s womb with his unnatural conception in the belly of the whale. Ephrem points out that in the former “a woman endowed with speech conceived him” as a fetus who could not speak, while in the latter “a speechless whale conceived him” as a man endowed with speech. In this way, Ephrem depicts Jonah’s ordeal in the whale as a period of prophetic gestation; there he learned to plead earnestly to God, and once he was given birth by being spewed forth on the land, he immediately carried out his prophetic mission. • →Jacob of Sarug Hom. 122 describes Jonah’s being swallowed by the great fish as a return to the womb. However, Jacob goes so far as to categorize it as a miraculous conception that prefigures Jesus’ conception in the Virgin Mary (Bedjan 1910, 4:418.7–8). • →Narsai Hom. briefly mentions that “The (Divine) Symbol kept him in the proper place of fetuses within wombs” (rēmzâ naṭrah beṭekkesâ de‘ullâ begaw karsātâ; Mingana 1905, 1:141). The Great Fish Was a Holy Place • →Ephrem Hymn. virg. 43.30–31, drawing inspiration from the mention of the Temple in Jon 2:4,7, asks: “Who has seen a priest in a fish / who offered a prayer to his God? / A pure temple the fish became for him, / and the mouth of Jonah [became] a censer.”

• →Cassiodorus Exp. Ps. 130(129):1 “The whale was a house of prayer for the prophet, a harbor for him when shipwrecked, a home amid the waves, a happy resource at a desperate time.” A Pessimistic View: The Great Fish Was a Prison • →Paulinus of Nola Carm. 24.219–224 “Translated to the deep belly of the massive beast, [Jonah] was imprisoned in a living jail. He walked in the cavern of the whale’s body, a prisoner both captive and free.” • →Theodoret of Cyrus Interpr. Jon. 2:10 “Thus also the admirable Jonah has handed on with an account (historiai) the flight, the punishment inflicted upon him, and the salvation given [to him]. And the kind master, after he received the prayer, led forth the prophet from the belly of the sea-monster, as from a kind of prison” (heirktês; PG 81:1732D). 17b three days and three nights Prefiguration of the Christian Experience: Persecuted but Victorious • →Tertullian Res. 32.3 “Now I apprehend that in the case of Jonah we have a fair proof of this divine power, when he comes forth from the fish’s belly uninjured in both his natures—his flesh and his soul. No doubt the bowels of the whale would have had abundant time during three days for consuming and digesting Jonah’s flesh, quite as effectually as a coffin, or a tomb, or the gradual decay of some quiet and concealed grave; only that he wanted to prefigure even those beasts (which symbolize) especially the men who are wildly opposed to the Christian name, or the angels of iniquity, of whom blood will be required by the full exaction of an avenging judgment.” Y‚Theology‚Z 17b Jonah was in the innards of the fish Do You Believe in Miracles?: The Age-Old Preoccupation with the Historicity of Jonah No matter what one believes about the historical existence of Jonah and the events of the book, one thing is abundantly clear from the account when it is read on its own terms: Jonah’s survival is the result of divine intervention. The miraculous nature of Jonah’s survival has provoked doubt, incredulity, defense, and debate over the centuries. Ancient Polemics in Late Antiquity (2nd–4th c.) In the context of ancient polemics between Christians and pagans, the veracity of such stories as Jonah’s were heavily scrutinized. Typically, opponents of Christianity attacked both the philosophical principles and the doctrinal teachings of the early Church, including the miraculous occurrences recorded in the Bible. Against the Christians Two of the earliest known treatises against Christianity, →Celsus Doct. ver. and →Porphyry Christ. (cf. *phi1:17b), mention the tale of Jonah as an example of Christian credulousness. In fact, Celsus argues that, given the fabulosity of Jonah’s story, Christians ought to worship him instead! • →Celsus Doct. ver. in →Origen Cels. 7.53 “[A]nd Christ, who in his life was most reprehensible and in his death most miserable, you reverence as a God. How much more appropriately might you have bestowed this honour on Jonas when he was under the gourd, or on Daniel who was saved in the den of lions, or on others of whom more prodigious things than these are narrated!” Patristic Responses Ancient Christian responses to such challenges are quite similar to one another, and in general they are marked by four characteristics. • They tend to assume that the account was meant to be historical, not pedagogical or allegorical. • They note that the miracle of Jonah is not the most incredible thing Christians believe; it pales in comparison to the incarnation, passion, death, and resurrection of Christ. • They all describe stories that the pagans believe about the gods that, according to them, are much more absurd and incredible. • Thus, they focus on the pagans’ incoherence and self-referential contradictions. See, for example, →Origen Cels. 7.57 →Irenaeus of Lyons Haer. 5.5.2, and the prologue of →Jerome Comm. Jon. One should likewise keep in mind that these responses were meant for fellow Christians and were exhortative in nature.

71

Jon : A Fish Swallows a Prophet

Perhaps the lengthiest example of this mode of argumentation is found in →Augustine of Hippo Ep. 102 (see the extract above: *chr1:17–2:10). Rather than rationalize Jonah’s tale by giving a naturalistic explanation, Augustine describes the precise elements of God’s intervention. The miracle of Jonah’s survival has two elements: • God ordains a great fish that was naturally large enough to swallow a person; • God takes care to reduce the heat of the great fish’s digestive system. Moreover, Jonah’s survival is nothing compared to the incredible message of the Gospel. Rationalism in the Late Modern Period (19th–20th c.) In the Modern Period, the possibility of divine intervention in the story of Jonah was examined in “rational” terms. In general, the scope of this later debate accords quite closely with that of Late Antiquity. • The earliest article on Jonah published in the Journal of Biblical Literature points out that two key questions have haunted the study of Jonah: the historicity of the great fish, which is a scientific problem, and the immediate repentance of Nineveh, which is a historical and sociological problem. The author, somewhat counterintuitively, appeals to the reasonableness of these miracles. More so than the fantastic stories found in other literature, these events are easy to believe due to “the simplicity of their reasonable supernaturalness, as contrasted with the rational unnaturalness of their spurious imitations” (→Trumbull 1892, 54). • In his Sixty-Three Years of Engineering: Scientific and Social Work, Sir Francis Fox details an episode in which a sailor on a whaling ship, James Bartley, was swallowed by a whale and survived for a day (*hge1:17a). Upon catching and killing the whale, the sailors noticed something strange: “The next day they attached some tackle to the stomach, which was hoisted on deck. The sailors were startled by something in it, which gave spasmodic signs of life, and inside was found the missing sailor, doubled up and unconscious. He was laid on the deck and treated to a bath of seawater, which soon revived him” (→Fox 1924, 298). • In an article published in The Princeton Theological Review in 1927, Ambrose John Wilson argues both that it is physically possible for one to survive in the stomach of a whale and that there are historically verifiable accounts of such incidents (→Wilson 1927, 630–642). In answer to the question “Could a man live in a whale?,” he asserts “he certainly could, though in circumstances of great discomfort” (→Wilson 1927, 634), explaining that even though it would be quite hot inside the whale, there would be air to breathe. He also refers to a few accounts of men who survived such an ordeal, including Marshall Jenkins and James Bartley. He vehemently asserts that the latter case had been verified by M. de Parville, a scientist of some regard in Paris and editor of the Journal des débats. Wilson thus cites de Parville: “I end by believing that Jonah really did come out from the whale alive, as the Bible records” (→Wilson 1927, 635). The Contemporary Period (1945–present) Though less common than in previous periods, some contemporary scholars continue to aver the historicity of the Book of Jonah. They typically base their arguments upon a belief in the possibility of miracles. • Responding to Otto Eissfeldt’s claim that it was impossible for Jonah to be swallowed by the great fish (→Eissfeldt 1965, 547), the prominent 20th-c. Evangelical biblical scholar Gleason L. Archer argues that “Eissfeldt’s objection is based upon the premise of the impossibility of miracles. Deductions drawn from this a priori assumption cannot be regarded as any more trustworthy than the assumption itself ” (→Archer 1996, 295). In a lengthy footnote to his treatment of the question, Gleason also argues for the possibility of a man being swallowed by a whale and yet surviving, citing both Wilson and Fox (→Archer 1996, 296). • More recently, John Bergsma and Brant Pitre have adopted a different interpretive strategy to address the question of the historical veracity of Jonah. In their introduction to the OT, they affirm that Jonah was a historical person and that the Book of Jonah records the events of his life. In order to explain Jon 1:17 in this context, they seize on the ambiguity of the phrase “and Jonah was in the belly of the fish,” arguing that there is nothing to suggest that Jonah survived being swallowed by the whale. In support of this interpretation, they turn to Jon 2, noting that “the prayer

of Jonah actually suggests that he does not remain alive for three days but rather dies and descends into Sheol, the realm of the dead” (→Bergsma and Pitre 2018, 922). On the basis of this observation, they proceed to explain that the episode of Jonah and the great fish is not so much a story of miraculous survival as it is a death-and-resurrection story that becomes the basis for Jesus’ foreshadowing of his own death (cf. Mt 12:40). Y‚Philosophy‚Z 17b three days and three nights Criticism by Porphyry • →Augustine of Hippo Ep. 102.30 “Question VI. The last question proposed is concerning Jonah, and it is put as it were not from Porphyry, but as being a standing subject of ridicule among the Pagans; for his words are: ‘In the next place, what are we to believe concerning Jonah, who is said to have been three days in a whale’s belly? The thing is utterly improbable and incredible, that a man swallowed with his clothes on should have existed in the inside of a fish. If, however, the story is figurative, be pleased to explain it. Again, what is meant by the story that a gourd sprang up above the head of Jonah after he was vomited by the fish? What was the cause of this gourd’s growth?’ Questions such as these I have seen discussed by Pagans amidst loud laughter, and with great scorn.” Y‚Islam‚Z 1:17–2:10 Jonah Swallowed by the Whale, Then Saved by Allah Islamic commentators point out that Jonah used to praise Allah in his youth; brought back to his childlike faith within the whale, Jonah glorifies God and is saved. Far from being a punishment, the whale brings Jonah back to his previous faith. • →Qur’an 34.142–144 “And the fish swallowed him while he was blameworthy. And had he not been one of those who glorify (Allah), he would have tarried in its belly till the day when they are raised.” • →Qur’an 21.87–88 “And remember Zun-nun when he departed in wrath: he imagined that We had no power over him! But he cried through the depths of darkness ‘There is no god but Thou! Glory to Thee ! I was indeed wrong!’ So We listened to him: and delivered him from distress: and thus do We deliver those who have faith.” • →Qur’an 68.48–50 “So wait with patience for the Command of thy Lord, and be not like the Companion of the Fish—when he cried out in agony. Had not grace from his Lord reached him, he would indeed have been cast off on the naked shore, in disgrace. Thus did his Lord choose him and make him of the company of the Righteous.” Many exegetes, following Jewish and Christian commentators, insist that the whale symbolizes a womb from which Jonah is reborn. Ibn ‘Arabî (†1240) notes that Jonah has two births since the verse states that Jonah is released onto the beach as weak as a little child. Other Sufis likewise compare the whale’s womb to the mother’s womb (cf. *voc1:17b–2:1). Islam considers Jonah to be the perfect example of repentance. A hadith specifies that Muhammad said that if one uses Jonah’s Quranic prayer, he will be answered. 17a a great fish And a Talkative One • →Kisʼ Qiṣaṣ: The fish speaks to Jonah, telling him that he has come to him from India. In response, he jumps into the sea. At other points in the account, a wolf speaks to him. Y‚History of Translations‚Z 1:17–2:1,10 Where Did the “Whale” Come From? The usual translation of “fish” as “whale” is in fact all but expected. • Etymologically, the English “whale” from Old English hwæl is related to the Latin squalus, a kind of large sea-fish, via the Proto-Indo-European *(s)kwálos (→Harper OED). • The entry point may have been Mt 12:40, wherein V renders the Greek têi koiliai tou kêtous as in ventre ceti (“the belly of a whale”), though in the Latin of Jerome’s time, cetus—the Latin analogue of kêtos—could likewise denote any large fish or sea-monster.

72

Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?

• According to the →OED, whale (“whall”) was used to denote the “great fish” as early as the 10th-c. Lindisfarne Gospels. • →WYC has a “a greet fisch” swallow Jonah, but at Mt 12:40, Jesus says that “Jonas was in the wombe of a whal.” • Likewise, →TYN has “greate fyshe” in Jon 1:17, but opts for “whale” when rendering kêtos in Mt 12:40. Y‚Literature‚Z 17a great fish What Is That Fish? Symbolic Use of the “Whale” as a Miser • →Shakespeare Pericles Act II, Scene 1: After he is shipwrecked, Pericles overhears a group of fishermen comparing a miser to a whale. He swallows all the little ones and would not be contented until he swallowed a whole church. Another replied that if he was in the bell tower when the church was swallowed, he would ring the bells until the whale had to spit him out (cf. →Hamlin 2018, 120–122). Pseudo-Naturalistic Explanation of the Whale as a Fish A century after Carl Linnaeus described the mammalian qualities of whales, Moby Dick’s Ishmael had a wealth of information at his disposal; he composed an entire treatise on cetological categories, appealing to the most important 18th and 19th-c. naturalists. At the end of many arguments that the whale is not a fish, however, Ishmael has to disagree. • →Melville Moby Dick ch. 32, Cetology: “Be it known that, waiving all argument, I take the good old-fashioned ground that the whale is a fish, and call upon holy Jonah to back me” (108–109). Ishmael shares the reasoning used in a near contemporary court case, in which it was decided that whales are legally fish (*law1:17a). Y‚Visual Arts‚Z 1:17–2:1,10 fish Three Consecutively Swallowed Fish? The floor of the 5th-c. synagogue uncovered in 2014–2017 by Dr. Jodi Magness at Huqoq, Israel, depicts the story of Jonah. Therein Jonah is eaten by three consecutive fish (→Introduction §3.14). The three fish may refer to the rabbinic exegesis identifying three different animals, because of the apparent shift in grammatical gender (*gra1:17a; 2:1,10). Y‚Cinema‚Z 17a great fish Cinematic References to Jonah The Book of Jonah and Pinocchio’s Monstro, the Whale • Sharpsteen Ben and Luske Hamilton (superv. dirs.), Pinocchio (animated movie, U.S.A., 1940, 88’), Sears Ted et al. (screenplay), Harline Leigh and Smith Paul J. (score). Walt Disney Productions. Based on the Italian children’s novel The Adventures of Pinocchio by Carlo Collodi, this amazing piece of animation is timeless. It was the second animated film in the Walt Disney Animated Classics series after Snow White (1937). Monstro, one of the antagonists in Disney’s 1940 animated film Pinocchio, is reminiscent of the giant fish in the Book of Jonah.

Monstro is a “whale of a whale” who “swallows whole ships alive,” says Jiminy Cricket. In the film, Geppetto searches for Pinocchio while he is at Pleasure Island and is swallowed up by Monstro during his journey. While Geppetto’s survival inside the whale has obvious connections to the Book of Jonah, the whale mostly functions as a contrast to Jonah’s huge fish. In Pinocchio, the whale is part of the climax of the story rather than the beginning, as the fish is in Jonah. Whereas God controls the actions of the fish, and Jonah is the recipient of those actions, Pinocchio has real agency in this section of the film, throwing himself into the sea, searching for the whale, causing the whale to sneeze them out, and risking his life to rescue Geppetto from drowning. While the fish is provided by God and saves Jonah from death, Monstro is a malevolent creature. He prevents Geppetto from finding Pinocchio while he was in danger, and when they escape Monstro, he pursues them in an extended action sequence in which Geppetto nearly drowns. Finally, children’s adaptations of Jonah tend to be lighthearted, and it is no surprise that the Disney film was criticized for frightening children (→Wunderlich 1992, 212). Yet both the film and most children’s adaptations of Jonah are moralizing tales, and the giant fish and Monstro play a key role in reinforcing moral values for children. Inherit the Wind Jerome Lawrence and Robert E. Lee adapted the story of the “Scopes Monkey Trial” (cf. above *law1:17a) into a 1955 play, Inherit the Wind. This, in turn, received a 1960 film adaptation. The film was later remade for television in 1965, 1988, and 1999. Though ostensibly dramatizing the 1925 trial of John Scopes—who taught the theory of evolution contrary to Tennessee law—the 1955 play was actually written in response to the ongoing McCarthy investigations—similar to how Arthur Miller’s 1953 play The Crucible employed the 17th-c. Salem Witch Trials to critique McCarthyism. Hence the play takes many liberties with its historical subject-matter. The names are also changed: Henry Drummond corresponds to Clarence Darrow, while Matthew Harrison Brady corresponds to William Jennings Bryan. Here is the play’s recreation of Darrow’s cross-examination of Bryan on the subject of Jonah. • “Drummond: Now tell me. Do you feel that every word that’s written in this book should be taken literally? — Brady: Everything in the Bible should be accepted, exactly as it is given there. — Drummond: (Leafing through the Bible) Now take this place where the whale swallows Jonah. Do you figure that actually happened? — Brady: The Bible does not say ‘a whale,’ it says ‘a big fish.’ — Drummond: Matter of fact, it says ‘a great fish,’ but it’s pretty much the same thing. What’s your feeling about that? — Brady: I believe in a God who can make a whale and who can make a man and make both do what He pleases! — Voices: Amen, amen!” 17a to swallow Jonah Captain Jonah and the Whale • Yarbrough Jean (dir.), The Abbott and Costello Show: “Jonah and the Whale” (Sitcom, T.C.A. Productions, U.S.A., 1952, 30’ p. episode), Yarbrough Jean and Gottlieb Alex (prod.), Merrick Mahlon (mus.). The American comedy duo of Bud Abbot and Lou Costello, whose careers peaked in the 1940s, had a popular routine wherein Costello would try to tell a new joke about “Captain Jonah” but is frustrated by Abbot’s persistent, extraneous questions, such as “What type of whale was it?”



Jon :- Jonah Prays from the Belly of the Fish

73

Jonah 2:1–9 Jonah Prays from the Belly of the Fish Y‚Suggestions for Reading‚Z

to observe that his prayer is self-interested. Further, the words of the prayer, especially Jon 2:5–7, reveal something the reader has not yet encountered in the story: Jonah describes how he feels. 1–9 The Fish as Womb, Tomb, Temple, or Prison? Yes, All of These As the progress of the The Prayer narrative comes to a stop, readers are privileged to hear Jonah’s psalmic Like many of the psalms, we are given the context for Jonah’s prayer: he prayer from within the great fish. In the course of his prayer, we see that he prays from the belly of the she-fish. As noted above, the prayer gives the has continued his descent; whereas he initially descended to Joppa and then reader a glimpse of Jonah’s inner-emotional state, and for many within descended into the recesses of the ship to flee from God, he now describes the history of interpretation, its repentant tone redeems him as a prophet. how he descended into the depths as far as the primordial features of the Further, this prayer serves as a model within the Christian tradition; like world that no mortal has seen. This prayer in the fish is the culmination of Jonah, we are to pray in the midst of his experience, as he recollects sinkdistress for help and salvation from ing to the depths and then his rescue MGVS God. The prayer itself is comprised by God. Jonah says that he went to S of a patchwork of psalmodic lanthe roots of the mountains, with the “The Prayer of Jonah” guage (*tex2:9a; *bib2:1–9), includbars closed upon him forever; it is at 1 And Jonah prayed to Yhwh ing references to cult, particularly this point that God brings him up GV to the Lord the Temple and thanksgiving sacrifrom the pit and rescues him (Jon S 2:6). Does this prayer reflect the before the Lord his God from the fices. Thus it has found a home in liturgy (*lit2:1–9). With references to knowledge and fear of God that innards mythical elements, such as the roots Jonah professed in the first chapter— G belly of the mountains and Sheol, some that the God who controls the sea VS have viewed the prayer as the and the dry land can save him? The womb of the fish. G description of a cosmological jourfish is an instrument of Jonah’s salvasea-monster. ney through the depths and to the tion, a supreme demonstration of 2a And he said, — beginnings of creation. mercy at the most critical moment. Although it is likely that the prayer In many ways, the commentary trab I called out from is secondary to the story, we read dition has argued that the fish gave GS in my distress to Yhwh Jonah as a unified text regardless Jonah a veritable tour of the deep G the Lord my God of its historical development (*gen2: (*dev1:3b,5d; 2:6a). VS 1–9). The Fish the Lord With a subtle change in grammatical and he answered gender, the great fish transforms G heard me. Text from a he-fish into a she-fish (*voc2:2c), a fact that reinforces its c From the belly of Sheol Y‚Textual Criticism‚Z fantastical qualities. Though this G Hades mythopoeic fish has played a large V Hell I cried out V Sand you 3a depths Possible Insertion? role in two short verses (Jon 1:17– G 2:1), it immediately recedes into Yes heard my voice, my cry. the background, becoming a liminal →Wolff (1986, 126) argues that 3a And you cast me into the depths, into stage on which Jonah prays (Jon meṣûlâ (“depths”) is an insertion— G 2:2–9). Within the history of Jewish probably of a marginal note—for depths of S reception, the androgynous fish three reasons: depth, into the heart of (*gra1:17; 2:1,10; *jew1:17; 2:1,10) is • The unequivocal meaning (“depths the seas, eventually listed among the entities of the seas”) clarifies the ambiguGVS sea, and a river would have surrounded that were with God when he created ous “heart of the seas.” G the world (→Protoctist Entities: What • The term lacks an “indispensable” rivers surrounded Was with God at the Creation?; preposition. V a river surrounded *jew1:17a). In the Christian tradi• The term disrupts the meter, fallS a river went around me. tion, on the other hand, some patrising in the middle of a “five-stress tic authors think that Jonah’s time line.” b All your breakers in the fish is, in fact, a period of No G swells prophetic gestation; his time in the →O’Connor (1980, 146–163) has V whirlpools fish prepares him to obey God’s shown that meter inadequately S commission (*com1:17–2:1; *com2:1; describes the Hebrew poetic system storms and waves passed over me. *com2:2b). and, at most, appears to be a tertiary Jonah feature; whereas matching (or paralAt least in terms of his external 2b = Ps 120:1 — 2c Cry from the Sheol Ps 130:1; Lam 3:55 — 3a,5a depths + deep lelism) plays a much more important behavior, Jonah demonstrates a Gn 7:11; 8:2; Ps 71:20; 104:6; 106:9; 107:24; Is 44:27; Hb 3:10 — 3b = Ps 42:7 role in the system of syntactic conchange. Though he complies with straints that underlie Hebrew verse. neither directive to call out (qr’: Jon 1:2,6), here, in the belly of the great fish, As a result, Wolff ’s final point need not be accepted. In like manner, his in the depths of the sea, he finally does call out (qr’; *dev1:2–3:8). While this account of the parallel “depths of seas” // “heart of seas” can be dispensed difference in behavior may also signal a change within Jonah, it is important with. Finally, one need only acknowledge that small particles (like

74

Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?

prepositions) often fall away in poetry and consistently remain difficult to account for (→Holladay 1999a; →Holladay 1999b). 4b Nevertheless Or: “How?” (Hebrew Variant) • M contains the adverb ’ak at the beginning of v. 4b. • 4QXIIg (4Q82, f78ii+82–87:3) exhibits the interrogative adverb ’ēkā[h] with a defective spelling, thus: “how will I again look…?” (→DJD XV, 310). • Theodotion’s reading of pôs supports that of 4QXIIg, while Symmachus (isôs) and G (ara), though inconclusive, would seem to support M (→Ziegler 1984, 247). • S and V are aligned with M.

4a

b

5a 5a enveloped Orthographic Variant • 4QXII g f84 contains an orthographic variant: instead of the plene ’ppwny, it has ’ppny (→DJD XV, 310). 6c you raised: S | S Manuscript: you raised towards you • One old Syriac lectionary (11l4, 11th c.) adds lwtk (towards you). This variant makes explicit that God not only has saved Jonah (delivered from the corruption) but has drawn the prophet to himself as well. 6c my life: M | Potential Plus in 4QXIIg: the life of my soul • 4QXIIg (4Q82 f85) clearly reads “my soul” (npšy). It is possible to reconstruct ḥyy (“my life”) in the lacunae between frs. 82, 84, and 85, all of which contain ink traces that are commensurate with such a reconstruction. The phrase npšy ḥyy can be translated as “the life of my soul” (→DJD XV, 310–311).

b

6a

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 And I myself said, — I have been driven to ancient perceptions of the plot’s S kept myself away from development: • Jon 1:1–2:9 (M-1:1–2:10) portrays before Jonah’s insubordination, descent, V the sight of your eyes. and restoration; • Jon 2:10–4:3 (M-2:11–4:3) conveys Nevertheless, I will G Jonah’s lateral movement, preachWill I ing, and impact; S Now I will again look upon • Jon 4:4–11 conveys Jonah’s staS see your holy tionary status as he “wrongly evaluates the drama he has witnessed” Temple. (→Sasson 1990, 271). G ? In addition, these demarcations highlight certain points within the Waters story. GS Water enveloped me as far as the throat, [the] • The closed paragraph demarcadeep tions follow clearly identified GV poetic utterances of the prophet. soul, abyss • As such, these closed demarcaS soul, [the] deep tions indicate that the book surrounded me, reaches its zenith when the prophet who refused his mission seaweed was wrapped about finally preaches (Jon 3:4). G into the fissures of mountains • The open demarcation suggests V the sea covered that a minor transition in the narS rative has taken place when Jonah, at the bottom of the sea my head Ø. now ready to accept his mission, is G went down. expelled from the sea-monster S was held onto the beach and makes his way to Nineveh. captive. Given this pattern, the reader might MVS G expect the book to conclude with I descended to the roots I descended to the earth; a denouement showing that Jonah V has fully converted; instead, howlimits ever, it ends with an unanswered S lowest question posed by none other than parts of the mountains; God!

b the bars of the earth were the bars of which are

behind me eternal barriers. V bars of the earth confined me S earth closed her bars on my face for ever. And let the corruption of c And you raised V will raise my life my life be raised, O from the pit, O Yhwh Lord my God. VS corruption, O Lord my God.

9a let me sacrifice: M | 4QXIIg: I will sacrifice The cohortative ’ăšallēmâ is found in M, while the pi‘el yiqtol 2:9–10; 4:3–4 Mur88 Paragraph ’ăšallēm occurs in 4QXIIg (4Q82 Demarcations f78ii+82–87:9; →DJD XV, 310). Paragraph Demarcations in Jonah Usage Closed paragraph demarcations This occurrence in 4QXIIg accords (pārāšôt setûmôt) appear between: well with its usage in the Book of • Jon 2:9 (M-2:10) and Jon 2:10 Psalms in M. (M-2:11); • The same form ’ăšallēm occurs five • Jon 4:3 and Jon 4:4. times (Ps 22:25 [M-22:26]; 56:12 An open paragraph demarcation [M-56:13]; 66:13; 116:14,18), (pārāšâ petûḥâ) appears between: always in contexts where vows • Jon 2:10 (M-2:11) and Jon 3:1. are paid to the Lord God by the These major textual divisions correspeaker. Furthermore, it is found spond to the ancient textual demar- 4a = Ps 31:22 — 4b look upon your holy Temple Ps 5:7 — 5 Overwhelmed Ps once in Psb (4Q84 f28i:15; →DJD cations represented by the copy of 69:1–2 — 6c = Ps 30:3; cf. Ps 16:10 XVI, 44), which corresponds to Jonah found at Wadi Murabba‘at M-Ps 116:18. with the following exceptions: • In contrast, there are two other instances of the cohortative ’ăšallemâ in M • An empty line between Jon 2:9 and Jon 2:10; (Ps 41:10 [M-41:11]; Prv 20:22): both occur in contexts where the speaker • A short gap between Jon 2:10 and Jon 3:1; desires to repay evil. • One half-empty line and one full empty line between Jon 4:3 and Jon 4:4.

Jon :- Jonah Prays from the Belly of the Fish

75

Significance under the earth, during which he passes through the foundations of the • Though it is possible that the difference between M and 4QXIIg is simply cosmos (*cul2:1–9). a matter of a copyist’s error, it is also possible that the change was intended to bring this prayer into closer alignment with the Psalms. 5b seaweed Contextual Meaning • Further, the future form of the verb (“I will sacrifice”) can convey greater • The word sûp, a singular collective noun, could denote any aquatic plant, certitude compared to the cohorsuch as seaweed, in the present tative (“let me sacrifice”); in this context. case, the speaker is not simply • Throughout the OT, however, sûp MGVS entreating God to enable him to is most closely associated with the 7a When my breath pay vows, but rather affirming Exodus. Moses is found among the GVS soul was growing weak within me, with conviction that he will fulfill reeds (sûp) as an infant (Ex 2:5); V his vows. likewise, he leads the Hebrews distressed within me, across the “Sea of Reeds” (yamG departing from me, Y‚Vocabulary‚Z sûp) on dry land (Ex 14:16,21–22; S overwhelmed, cf. V in *com2:5b). 2c the belly of Sheol Semantic Field of I remembered Yhwh “Belly” Beṭen means “belly.” Like Eng6ab the roots of the mountains; the GVS the Lord lish, beṭen has several literal and figbars of the earth Vocabulary Rooted in b and urative senses: Ancient Cosmology V • physical (Sg 7:2 [M-7:3]); Roots of the Mountains so that my prayer came to • physiological (digestion: Ez 3:3; The term qeṣeb is not very common G may come to procreation: Gn 25:23–24); in M, and its meaning here is someV might come to • psychological, especially as the what obscure; thus the phrase qiṣbé S seat of the emotions (cf. the synhārîm is somewhat elusive. came before you, to your onymous “innards” in *voc1: Fortunately, the phrase also occurs holy Temple. 17b–2:1). in the Hebrew of Ben Sira, which MVS G Sheol is often personified as having reads (Sir 16:19): S a hearty appetite. • ’p qṣby hrym wyswdy tbl bhbyṭw Guarding vanities and 8 All those who revere • It opens wide its mouth (Is 5:14) to ’lyhm r‘š yr‘šw (“even the roots of vain illusions lies, they have forsaken swallow (Prv 1:12), the mountains and the foundaV guard their mercy. • but it is not sated (Hb 2:5). tions of the world will shudder While the “beṭen of Sheol” is only and quake when God looks at vanities in vain S found here, it is in keeping with this them”; →Beentjes 2006, 46). revere vain imagery, and so “belly” seems preferIn the context of this wisdom poem, idols forsake able to “womb” (see also *jew2:2c). it seems that the qṣby hrym are in their fidelity. a parallel relationship with the V 3a heart of the seas Polysemous Phrase wyswdy tbl (“the foundations of the his mercy. • This phrase typically refers to the world”): thus it seems that the phrase S your mercy. (unsearchable) open “high seas” denotes a cosmological aspect of the (e.g., Prv 23:34; 30:19; Ez 27:4,26). mountains. Hence “roots” or “extremM GVS • Likewise, it also refers to the ities” are possible explanations. 9a Yet I myself, with a voice Yet I myself, with a voice (unfathomable) “depths of the • Jb 38:6 refers to a similar feature of of thanksgiving, let me of praise and seas” (e.g., Ps 46:2; Ez 28:8). the earth (“upon what were its pedestals [’ădānêhā] sunk?”) that sacrifice to you; thanksgiving, V 3a river Possible Contextual Meanings helps to fill out the cosmological praise, Since nāhār most often means picture. S thanksgiving, will “river,” one wonders why it is menThe furthest extremities of the earth sacrifice to you; tioned in parallel with the “seas.” and mountains extend far below the • The word nāhār can denote “cursurface of the earth and are sunk b what I have vowed let me what I have vowed, I will rent”: see Is 44:27, where the Lord into some unknown substance. The pay. Salvation belongs pay for my salvation says to the deep (ṣûlâ) “I will dry fact that Job immediately goes on to S to Yhwh. [as] recompense to up your currents (nahărōtayk).” describe the sea (Jb 38:8–11) implies See likewise Ps 24:2; 89:25; Hb 3:8, that these pedestals are in fact sunk the Lord. which are poetic texts that seem to into a subterranean sea (→Clines associate nāhār with the sea 2016, 173–175). 7 = Ps 18:6 — 8 vanities Ps 31:6 — 9a Sacrifice with a voice of thanksgiving Ps (*jew1:17–2:10). It is thus possible to hypothesize • It could also be a proper name: the 50:14; Hos 14:2; Heb 13:15 — 9b = Ps 3:8 — 9b vowed Ps 22:25 that Jon 2:6 envisions the roots of the figure of Yam-Nahar (the sea-river mountains as extending into a deep, god) is found in Ugaritic literature, where the cognate term is clearly primordial sea, which is why the sea-monster is able to take him down to applied to the sea. A translation that alludes to this figure might also be the depths of the cosmos (*anc2:1–9; *jew1:17–2:10). possible: “And Nahar kept going around me” (*anc2:3a). Bars of the Earth • The term berîaḥ (“bar”) most often refers to a part of a door or gate used to secure it against entry (cf. Dt 3:5; Jgs 16:3; 2Chr 8:5; Ps 147:13; Jer 49:31; 5a [the] deep Cosmological Term Jonah descends into tehôm (G: abussos), the Neh 3:3,6,13). primordial depths from which Creation is brought forth (Gn 1:2; • In some cases, especially in poetic and prophetic texts, the term seems to *bib2:3a,5a). The use of this term, which is associated with transcendent stand in for the gate as a whole (e.g., Jer 51:30; Lam 2:9). space-time realities, fosters later interpretations of Jonah’s cosmological tour

76

Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?

• While the term ’ereṣ is usually used in reference to the “earth” in a general sense, it also seems to refer specifically to Sheol in a few places (1Sm 28:13; Ps 71:20; 106:17; Is 29:4). If the above observations are taken into consideration, then it may be concluded that the phrase “bars of the earth” in Jon 2:6 is a poetic reference to the gates of underworld, which is actually beneath the sea and even the deep abyss (cf. Jb 28:14,22; *voc1:5a; *bib1:5e). Placed on Jonah’s lips, it amplifies his description of the peril he experienced in the belly of the great fish: it is as though he has been imprisoned in Sheol (*chr2:2–6; *chr2:3a). 6c from the pit Synonym of Sheol Regarding the noun šaḥat: • The literal meaning is a “pit,” i.e., a trap for wild animals, from which even the strongest cannot escape (Ez 19:4). • Most often the word is used as a synonym for Sheol; in turn, “to descend to the pit” (Jb 33:24) and “to see the pit” (Ps 16:10) are images depicting the fate of a dying person. 8 vain illusions A Metaphorical Expression An Emphatic Expression of Nothingness • The Hebrew phrase hablé šāw’ can be translated literally as “empty vapor,” and figuratively as “empty vanity” or “empty illusion” (*bib2:8). Hebel: A Tricky Term in Hebrew On its own, the term hebel means “vapor” or “breath,” though this basic meaning is not always, or even often, the one that is found in the Hebrew Bible. Thus, lexicons often gloss hebel as “vanity.” • It can denote the transitory nature of human life: Jb 7:16; Ps 62:10; 144:4. • It is also found in a few places in prophetic literature in contexts where idolatry is condemned: Is 57:13; Jer 10:3,15; 51:18, where it may underscore the idols’ non-existence (hbl) and deceitfulness (šw’). • It is perhaps best known as the Leitwort of Ecclesiastes—occurring some 30 times—where it is normally translated as “vanity.” 8 their fidelity H.esed: A Notoriously Difficult Term The word ḥesed—often translated as eleos in Greek and “loving-kindness” in English—is polysemous; it denotes, for example, God’s mercy and fidelity, as well as human kindness and loyalty. In some contexts, it accords with the theological term “grace.” Though much has been written on the word, it remains difficult to map the semantic range in a systematic and consistent manner. See →TLOT; →HALOT, s.v. ḥesed. • In the context of Jon 2:8, it seems to be used in its religious sense: it denotes the fidelity that human beings are to show to God (piety) in return for God’s faithfulness and grace (mercy). • The multivalence of the term had led to some divergent readings in the versions (*com2:8). Y‚Grammar‚Z 3a,5a surrounded Poetic Non-Sequential Use of the Yiqtol Form In Hebrew poetry the qatal and yiqtol forms sometimes alternate to achieve grammatical parallelism. →Berlin (2008, 36) observes that this kind of qatal-yiqtol shift occurs for stylistic rather than semantic reasons (i.e., it does not indicate a temporal sequence). Thus, the yiqtol of sbb in this verse refers to an action in the past (*gra2:3b).

Depending on the context, however, it can express restriction, in which case it should be translated: • “yet,” • “nevertheless.”  8 those who revere Unique Pi el Form Mešammerîm is the pi‘el plural participle of the verb šmr (in qal “to keep,” “to observe,” “to celebrate”). Although the pi‘el usually has as an emphatic or intensive sense, here the verb should be understood as having a factitive or causative nuance. Hence it could be woodenly rendered, “those who bring it about that they are observed,” or, more elegantly, “adore,” “worship,” or “revere.” An echo of this passage in qal can be found at Ps 31:6 (M-31:7); perhaps the author intended to link Jonah’s prayer with the psalm (*bib2:8). 8 vain illusions Superlative or Not The Hebrew phrase hablé šāw’ is a construct chain of two synonyms: • It usually denotes a superlative (→Joüon and Muraoka 2008, §141.m). Literally meaning “nothingnesses of emptiness” or “the nought of nought,” the expression means to convey “the most nought” or “the ultimate nothingness”; cf. such similar expressions as “King of Kings” and “Holy of Holies.” • Likewise, hablé šāw conveys two similar but different aspects of “illusion,” namely, non-existence (hbl) and deceitfulness (šw’; *voc2:8; *bib2:8). 8 forsake Epistemic Modality of Yiqtol Though its form is yiqtol, ya‘ăzōbû here should not be understood as describing future, speculative, or unreal action; rather, it describes a general truth, one that is always the case. The act is certain and obvious; compare similar usage in sayings, precepts, and proverbs (e.g., Prv 10:1). Perhaps the most famous example of this kind of yiqtol is the translation of the divine name at G-Ex 3:14: egô eimi ho ôn “I am he who is.” 9b Salvation Ancient Accusative? M divides the phrase as if the last two words of the verse were to create a nominal sentence. Nevertheless, the morphology suggests that the unusual form of the noun, yešû‘ātâ instead of yešû‘â, can be interpreted as a trace of the ancient Hebrew accusative (thus →Gesenius 1847). In that case, the renderings of G and V are accurate. Y‚Literary Devices‚Z 2c belly of Sheol Intentional Intestinal Metaphor The phrase “belly of Sheol” only appears in Jonah (*voc2:2c). • Already in M, there may be an intentional parallel between this metaphor and Jonah’s presence in the belly of the fish in Jon 2:1, although different words for “belly” appear in the Hebrew (Jon 2:1: mē‘îm “innards”; Jon 2:2 beṭen). • G, however, employs the same term on both occasions (koilia), meaning “womb” or “stomach.” Moreover, G has “sea-monster” instead of “fish” and “Hades” instead of “Sheol.” 3a the seas See *dev1:4ab the sea. 3a,5a surrounded “Growing Phrase” →Magonet (1983, 40) indicates that two instances of sbb (“to surround”) should be interpreted as cumulative or progressive, given the change of subject. First the “river” (or “current”) surrounds Jonah (Jon 2:3) and then, the “abyss” (Jon 2:5). This progressive action—or “growing phrase,” in Magonet’s words—emphasizes downward movement from the water’s surface to the depths (cf. *dev1:3b,5d; 2:6a).

3b passed over Interpretation of Qatal One could justifiably translate ‘br using the pluperfect tense, instead of the simple past: hence, the breakers “had passed over.” Though the qatal is typically rendered with the simple past, it can be more broadly understood to denote action that takes place prior to a given narrative’s time-frame. This translation choice would make even more sense if one wishes to emphasize that the storm has already passed when Jonah finds himself in the calm innards of the fish. See also *gra2:3a,5a.

4b,7b your holy Temple Same Phrase In vv. 4b and 7b the same phrase appears (’el hékal qodšekā), linking the two verses. What is impossible for vision, is possible through prophetic insight. See the Sitz im Leben in *gen2:1–9.

4b Nevertheless Contextual Meaning of the Adverb Generally, ’ak expresses affirmation. Hence it can be rendered: • “surely,” • “indeed.”

5b seaweed Intertextual Characterization of Jonah as a Prophet Throughout the Bible, there are several figures that are comparable to Jonah, such as Abraham, who bargains with God to save Sodom and Gomorrah. Two or three major prophetic types present themselves for comparison.

77

Jon :- Jonah Prays from the Belly of the Fish

Is He Like Moses? In the depths of the sea, sûp threatens to strangle Jonah. “Seaweed” is a natural translation for sûp, which can refer to any water plants (*voc2:5b). Poetry, however, allows for deeper readings, multivalence, and allusions to be imported from outside of the text. By choosing the word sûp, the author subtly alludes to the crossing of the Sea of Reeds (*bib1:9b,13a; 2:10; *bib2:5b). These echoes should inspire reflection on the relationship between Jonah and the Exodus. Likewise, Jonah’s dispositions and actions should be examined in light of Israel’s prophet par excellence, Moses. Like Jonah, Moses does not want to accept God’s mission, he argues with God, and he reluctantly becomes a prophet. Whereas Moses was argumentative, Jonah does not actually speak with God until the end of the story. Like the Egyptians, Jonah is brought to the bottom of the sea, but unlike them, he is spared. Finally, both stories ultimately concern God’s care for the salvation of his chosen people, achieved through the mediating work of his prophets. In the Exodus, this care is focused on the Hebrews; whereas in Jonah, God desires to call all of humanity to repentance. Like Elijah or Elisha? Though similar, Jonah compares unfavorably with Elijah and Elisha. See *bib1:1–2. 8 revere vain illusions Antithetic Parallel Within the context of Jon 2, as well as in Ps 31 (*bib2:8), the text mentions those who “revere vain illusions,” not so much to condemn idol worship, but rather to affirm the importance of worshipping God alone. That is, the text wishes to emphasize what one should not do. NARRATION Characterization of the Speaker Jonah thereby creates an antithetical parallel between himself and idol worshippers which emphasizes his own rectitude as one who worships the God of Israel. PRAGMATICS Question to the Reader Finally, the abstract nature of the phrase hablé šāw’ leaves the door open for “relecture”—what are the vain illusions that later readers, including ourselves, might revere? 9a sacrifice Sacrifices and Vows Jonah promises to offer a sacrifice and make vows if God saves him. This calls to mind the actions of the Gentile sailors who offered sacrifices and vowed vows after the storm’s miraculous cessation (Jon 1:16).

Unlike a psalm of complaint—usually prayed amidst ongoing oppression— the prayer of thanksgiving is usually sung once the danger has passed. Prolepsis? The use of past-tense verbs in vv. 6–7 (already noted as problematic in G and V; cf. *com2:6c) could be interpreted as anticipating Jonah’s salvation from the fish. Thereby a prayer of thanksgiving could be inserted without amending verb forms. Sources and Further Reading See “Individual Thanksgiving Songs” in →Gunkel 1933, §7 (English trans. in Nogalski 1998, 199–221); Erhard Gerstenberger, “Psalms” in →Hayes 1974, 202–205; and →Limburg 1993, 64–66.

Context Y‚Ancient Cultures‚Z 1–9 Cosmological Background of Jonah’s Prayer It is important to keep →General Israelite Cosmology in mind when reading the Book of Jonah, especially Jon  2, since its language is undoubtedly infused with these cosmological concepts. • In his prayer, Jonah says that he has been taken down into the furthest depths of the sea, enveloped by its waters, and enclosed by the bars of the earth. • Thus, he is not describing the physical seabed just beyond the port of Jaffa; rather he is speaking of a region beneath the earth (and sea) where one finds the primordial waters of chaos (cf. Gn 1:2). • In addition, his prayer associates the location of these cosmological waters with Sheol, the realm of the dead. Such a cosmological worldview has much in common with that of Jb 38:16–18; in these poetic lines, the sea, the abyss, and the gates of death are placed in parallel with one another, thus creating a strong link between the underworld and the primordial waters. • Hence we can surmise that Jonah was, in fact, given a privileged glimpse of the deep structure of the cosmos, the full knowledge of which belongs to God alone (cf. Jb 38:4–18; *jew1:17–2:10). This tour, however, is portentous, for Jonah does not know if he will reemerge. See likewise *voc2:6ab; *voc2:6c; *bib2:3a,5a; *jew2:2c.

Y‚Literary Genre‚Z 1–9 Thanksgiving Prayer with a Twist Sitz im Leben The prayer of thanksgiving is usually linked to the sacrifice of thanksgiving; it is sung by worshippers and believers just before the offering (Jon 2:9). See *bib2:1–9. Generic Features This poem is a mosaic of Psalm-texts, constructed along the conventional pattern of thanksgiving psalms, that exhibits a five-part structure (cf. →Stuart 1987, 472): vv. 2–7: Description of Sufferings Undergone • Introduction to the psalm (Jon 2:2). • Description of past distresses (Jon 2:3–6a). • Reference to the rescue God provided (Jon 2:6b). • Appeal to God for help (Jon 2:7). vv. 8–10: Account of Deliverance • Vow of praise before the thanksgiving sacrifice (Jon 2:8–9). Specific Elements Rescued but Still Asking for Help Contrary to the usual order of a thanksgiving prayer, Jonah acknowledges God’s salvation (Jon 2:6b) before entreating God’s aid (Jon 2:7). Jonah thanks God for deliverance (from drowning), but, according to the narrative, he still needs to be saved from the fish (cf. *interp2:1–9). Thanksgiving within Persisting Oppression? It seems that Jonah presumes that Yhwh’s salvation has already come (Jon 2:6–7), but he is actually freed from the fish several verses later (Jon 2:10).

Y‚Ancient Texts‚Z 1–9 Myth and Mythemes in Jonah’s Psalm Numerous mythic fragments (mythemes) from ancient Canaan and Mesopotamia appear throughout Scripture. Jonah’s thanksgiving prayer offers a prime example (*bib2:1–9). • Repeated references to the sea (*bib2:3a,5a) and the waters recall related personified nature deities from ancient cultures. • References to mountain crevasses and the bars of the earth (i.e., the netherworld; cf. *voc2:6ab), as well as Jonah’s drowning and strangulation, indirectly invoke the deity Death (*anc2:6a). 2a And he said Greek Parallel: Prayer of a Woman Cast into the Sea (Simonides’ “Prayer of Danae”) • →Dionysius of Halicarnassus Comp. 26 cites a poem wherein Danae prays amidst distress in the sea: “And when, in the carved ark lying, / She felt it through darkness drifting / Before the drear wind’s sighing / And the great sea-ridges lifting, / She shuddered with terror, she brake into weeping, / And she folded her arms round Perseus sleeping; / And ‘Oh my baby,’ she moaned, ‘for my lot / Of anguish!—but thou, thou carest not / … / Would hearken my words—nay, nay, my dear, / Hear them not thou! / Sleep, little one, sleep; / And slumber thou, unrestful deep! / Sleep, measureless wrongs; let the past suffice: / And oh, may a new day’s dawn arise / On thy counsels, Zeus! Change them now! / But if aught be presumptuous in this my prayer, / If aught, O Father, of sin be there, / Forgive it thou.’”

78

Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?

2c the belly of Sheol Underworld (“Mot”) as a Voracious Monster, in Ugaritic Literature Thus speaks Baal to his messengers: • Cycle of Baal 1.4.8.15–19 “But take care, attendants of the god / do not draw near divine Mot, / lest he offer you up like a lamb in his mouth, / like a kid in the opening of his maw!” (→Wyatt 2002, 113). 3a the seas and a river A Synonymous Parallel: Sea and River In Ugaritic myth, Yam (Sea) and Nahar (River) are used in parallel, as if they are synonyms: • Baal Cycle 1.2.1.45–46: Baal says, “I say to Yam your master, to your l[ord, Ruler Nahar]: hear the word of Hadd the Avenger” (→Wyatt 2002, 63). • Baal Cycle 1.2.4.19,22 “All-Driver, drive Yam away, drive Yam from his throne, Nahar from the siege of his dominion!…Strike the skull of Prince Yam, between the eyes of Ruler Nahar” (→Wyatt 2002, 67). 6a I descended Underworld in Ugaritic Literature A myth about the feast and drunkenness of El (Ilu) assimilates downward motion with the dead and the underworld: • Myth of El’s Banquet 1.114.22–23 “El fell down as though dead / El was like those who go down into the underworld” (→Wyatt 2002, 412). Likewise, consider Baal’s words to his messengers to Mot, the god of earth and underworld: • Baal Cycle 1.4.8.5–9 “Raise the mountain on your hands / the hill on top of your hands / and go down into the house of the couch of the earth / be numbered among those who go down into the earth” (→Wyatt 2002, 112–113; cf. the parallel in 1.5.5.13–16, this time said to Baal himself).

Reception Y‚Comparison of Versions‚Z 1 “The Prayer of Jonah” Syriac Heading S includes a heading to this section. 1 innards: M | V S: womb • M: the meaning of the Hebrew mē‘îm is multivalent (cf. *voc1:17b–2:1; *bib1:17b–2:1). V and S preserve something of that multivalence: • V: although Jerome’s translation, de utero piscis, may be understood as either the “womb of the fish” or the “belly of the fish,” it seems that he intends to convey the ambiguous gender of the fish present in M (*gra1:17; 2:1,10; in Jon 2:1 it is feminine). By contrast, Jerome has in ventre piscis (“in the belly of the fish”) at Jon 1:17 [V-2:1], where the fish is male in M. • S renders M with the noun m‘ayyā, which has a similar semantic range as its Hebrew cognate; it can refer to the inner organs generally, the intestines (S-2Sm 20:10), or the womb (S-Gn 25:23), depending on the context. While V is content to mark the fish’s ambiguous gender subtly, the question of the fish’s gender inspired much speculation in the Jewish tradition (*jew1:17; 2:1,10; *vis1:17–2:1,10). Similarly, Syriac exegesis made much use of the multivalence of m‘ayyā (*chr1:17b–2:1). 2b my distress Aramaic Spatial Semantics The noun “trouble” (‘āqtâ) in some Aramaic dialects means “narrowness,” possibly closer to the Hebrew “distress” (ṣārâ), which also contains the idea of narrowness. 2c the belly of Sheol A Unique Metaphor in G The phrase “belly of Sheol” only appears in Jonah. In M and S, the phrases “innards of the fish” (Jon 1:17– 2:1) and “belly of Sheol” (Jon 2:2) are expressed by different words for “belly” (*voc1:17b–2:1). G, however, employs the same term in all occasions: koilia, meaning “womb” or “stomach.” Similarly, L uses venter in reference to both the belly of the fish and the “belly” of hell (infernus) (Jon 1:17; 2:2); however, L employs utero in Jon 2:1, presumably to mark the change in grammatical gender from male to female in M (*com2:1; *dev2:2c). 3b breakers G: swells G: meteôrismoi (“lifting up”) is related to the verb meteôrizô (“to raise to a height”) in the context of being on the high sea.

5b seaweed: M | G: fissures of mountains | S: bottom of the sea | V: sea The Hebrew sûp (usually “seaweed” or “reeds”) is here used to denote aquatic flora (*voc2:5b). It is interesting that none of the versions translate sûp accurately, suggesting that the use of sûp to refer to seaweed was not well known. The Furthest Abyss: A Misreading by G • G probably read sûp as sôp (“end”) and thus translated it as eschatê, an adjective that modifies abussos: hence, “the fissures.” • The translator then merged the end of v. 5b with the beginning of the next verse (Jon 2:6a: leqiṣbé hārîm), resulting in “into the fissures of mountains my head went down.” S: A Misreading That Is Closer than G • S seems also to have misread M as sôp in v. 5b since it translates with the term ’št’ (“lowest part,” “bottom”). S did not misconstrue the lines by associating sôp with the preceding material in v. 5a and merging the rest of v. 5b with v. 6a. • Yet, it is interesting that the translator did not choose the cognate term swp (“end,” “furthest part”). Instead, S opts for the specificity provided by ’št’; the translator wanted to make clear that the furthest part of the sea under consideration is its bottom (as opposed to a distant shore). • S repeats the same term at the beginning of v. 6 in its rendering of “the roots (qiṣbé) of the mountains” as “lowest parts of the mountains.” This translation decision is typical of S, which often gravitates toward repetitive parallelism (→van Peursen 2007, 62–67). V: A Rare Misreading • V, which reads pelagus operuit caput meum, is difficult to relate to the Hebrew sûp. Jerome obviously did not read swp as sûp, but it is not clear why he rendered swp as pelagus (“the sea”). This is perhaps why he is silent on this line in his commentary (see →Jerome Comm. Jon.). 6b behind me: M | G: eternal barriers (Greek Allusion to Ancient Magic?) • G: katochoi aiônioi. In addition to denoting anything that “binds” or “inhibits,” the substantivized adjective katochos (from the verb katechô) may mean “tombstone” and even a binding or inhibiting spell (cf. the similarly used katadesmoi and Latin defixiones). 6c And you raised: M | G: And let…be raised | V: And you will raise — Jonah Is Still Not Safe Whereas M abruptly passes from Jonah’s experience of death to a prolepsis of salvation already come, by artful use of the wayyiqtol, G and V convey that Jonah still awaits his salvation. The imperative anabêtô (“let it be raised”) in Jon 2:6 (G-2:7) and the optative elthoi (“may it come”) in Jon  2:7 (G-2:8) make it clear that as long as Jonah is in the belly of the monster, he is not yet safe. V also renders the same Hebrew verbs in the future tense: sublevabis (“you will raise”) in V-2:7, and ut veniat…oratio mea (“so that my prayer might come”) in V-2:8. See also *gen2:1–9. 7a was growing weak G vs. V and S: Physical vs. Emotional Affliction • behit‘aṭṭēp: M | G: ekleipein (“was departing”)—the translation of G features a temporal construction consisting of the preposition en + the infinitive, rather than a middle or passive form. • V: angustiaretur (“was distressed”) is a passive subjunctive imperfect. • S: ’tṭrpt (“he was overwhelmed” or “he was exhausted”), the itpa‘al of ṭrp can have both a physical and emotional nuance. This is useful to note, particularly in the interpretation of S-Jon 4:8 (*com4:8b). Whereas G develops the sense that the speaker was near physical death, both V and S denote an emotional, or spiritual, anguish. This may be because G interpreted M’s npš as “life,” while V and S understood it as “inner-spirit” or “soul.” 8 their fidelity: M | G: their mercy | V: his mercy | S: your mercy The Differences M’s ḥasdām (“their fidelity/loyalty”) is a multivalent term that proved to be somewhat difficult for the translators in this context (*voc2:8). • G: eleos autôn (“their mercy”) is unclear: in the context of the poem, “their mercy” would seem to refer to the mercy of God that the people who guard vanities and lies have forsaken. Yet, in the wider context of the Book

Jon :- Jonah Prays from the Belly of the Fish

of Jonah, it could refer to the sailors who forsook mercy by throwing Jonah overboard. • V: misericordiam suam (“his mercy”), although there is no referent for the possessive pronoun “his,” the mercy of God is clearly in view. • S: mrḥmnwt’ (“your mercy”), by using the 2nd person singular masculine suffix, S turns the statement into direct address, and thus the phrase refers to God’s mercy. A Possible Explanation of the Difficulty • In M, it is clear that the ḥesed belongs to those who revere vain illusions (subjective genitive); by worshipping idols, they have abandoned their fidelity to God and his covenant. • Yet, it appears that the translators did not understand ḥesed as a term that can refer to both God’s faithful, gracious actions towards humans (“mercy”) and the fidelity that humans ought to show to God in return (“piety”). Thus, the phrase, “their ḥesed,” referring to the idolators, did not make sense to them (cf. *ancHos 1:6b; *comHos 2:19b). • In the case of G, it is likely that eleos (“compassion”) had become something of a standard translation for ḥesed. 9a thanksgiving Harmonization in G? M’s tôdâ is rendered by a doublet in G: ainesis kai exomologêsis. This doublet often appears in liturgical texts (G-Is 51:3; Jdt 15:14; Sir 39:20). In turn, M employs a similar doublet, hōdôt wehallēl, in 1Chr 25:3 (cf. 2Chr 20:22). 9b Salvation: M | S: recompense S: pwr‘n’ (“recompense”) has both positive and negative connotations. Much closer to the Hebrew yešû‘ātâ would be pwrqn’ (“salvation”). • Because a scribal error (the letter ‘ayin mistakenly written in place of the qop) does not seem to be very probable, it is likely a conscious translation decision. Y Biblical Intertextuality Z 1–9 Thanksgiving Prayers Thanksgiving psalms seem to have been inserted in other narratives of the Old Testament, usually after overcoming a providential trial or ordeal. • The Prayer of Hannah (1Sm 2:1–10). • David’s Psalm of praise (2Sm 22). • Hezekiah’s prayer (Is 38:9–20). • Azariah’s thanksgiving psalm (G-Dn 3). • The prayers of Mordecai and Esther (G-Est 4:17–19). Psalmodic Language in Jonah’s Prayer Jonah’s prayer employs many themes, words, and phrases from the psalms. • Jon 2:2 // Ps 120:1 “In my distress I cry to Yhwh, that he may answer me.” • Jon 2:3 // Ps 42:7 “Deep calls to deep at the thunder of thy cataracts; all thy waves and thy billows have gone over me”; Ps 18:4–5 “The cords of death encompassed me, the torrents of perdition assailed me; the cords of Sheol entangled me, the snares of death confronted me.” • Jon 2:4 // Ps 31:22 “I had said in my alarm, ‘I am driven far from thy sight.’ But thou didst hear my supplications, when I cried to thee for help.” • Jon 2:5 // Ps 69:1–2 “Save me, O God! For the waters have come up to my neck. I sink in deep mire, where there is no foothold; I have come into deep waters, and the flood sweeps over me.” • Jon 2:6 // Ps 30:3 “O Lord, thou hast brought up my soul from Sheol, restored me to life from among those gone down to the Pit.” • Jon 2:7 // Ps 18:6–7 “In my distress I called upon the Lord; to my God I cried for help. From his Temple he heard my voice, and my cry to him reached his ears.” • Jon 2:8 // Ps 31:6 “Thou hatest those who pay regard to vain idols; but I trust in the Lord.” • Jon 2:9 // Ps 3:8 “Deliverance belongs to Yhwh; thy blessing be upon thy people!”; Ps 116:17–18 “I will offer to thee the sacrifice of thanksgiving and call on the name of Yhwh. I will pay my vows to Yhwh in the presence of all his people.” 3a,5a depths + [the] deep — Waters of Chaos and of Creation Jonah’s immersion into the depths (meṣûlâ) in v. 3 and the deep (tehôm; G: abussos) in v. 5

79

recalls several instances throughout the Bible where water (mayim) is a cosmological force of chaos and creation (→van der Toorn, Becking, and van der Horst 1995, 737). For biblical authors, God maintains the balance between water’s chaotic and creative aspects. Chaos • Water is associated with the sea-god Yam, the river-god Nahar, and the primordial dragon of chaos—identified variously as Tiamat, Leviathan, and Rehab—who lives in the sea (Jb 3:8; 41:1; Ps 104:26; Is 51:9–10). This divine struggle to maintain power over the forces of water is known broadly as the Chaoskampf (chaos-struggle) motif. This motif runs throughout ancient Near Eastern texts, including the Bible (cf. →Miller 2018). • The creation account in Gn 1 indirectly concerns this motif, while passages like Hb 3:8 and Ps 104:1–14 directly refer to Yhwh’s battle with the sea (Yam) and river (Nahar). Biblical authors frequently cite the Exodus as such a battle (Ps 77:17–21; 106:9; 107:23–24; Is 44:27; 63:11–12; Hb 3:10). • In the NT, the Chaoskampf motif is recapitulated in the story of Jesus walking on the water: as God, he victoriously tramples the head of the primordial sea-dragon (Mt 14:22–33). The revelation of the New Heaven and New Earth, when John reports that “the sea is no more” (Rv 21:1), is the culmination of this motif. This only spells the end of the chaotic aspect of water, for the river of life continues to flow forth from the throne of God (Rv 22:1–2). • The deep waters are sometimes associated with Sheol (Jb 7:9; Ps 24:7–10; 88:6), as well as near-death experiences. In Jonah—as in Dt 32:39; 1Sm 2:6; 2Kgs 5:7—Yhwh is the only one who has the power to take and give life. Likewise, only he has power over the waters. Thus, both droughts (1Kgs  17:1; Jer 14:1–6; Hg 1:10–11) and floods (Gn 5–9) are means of divine punishment. Creation • Water is not only destructive, however; it is life-giving too. Oftentimes these two aspects are juxtaposed. The waters that cover the face of the earth in Gn 1 are the chaotic cosmic depths (tehoˆm) that Yhwh restrains and with which he creates. Yhwh separates the waters: rain nourishes plants and animals, while the sea below teems with life. • Likewise, Eden, God’s garden, is situated at the confluence of four great rivers. Throughout the OT, the water is repeatedly employed as a metaphor of God’s provision, blessing, and salvation (Ex 17:4–5; Is 49:10; 55:10; Jer 17:13; Zec 14:8–9). In the NT, Jesus is the incarnation of living water (Jn 4:14; 7:37–38). • Immersion into water builds on the Jewish practice of ritual bathing and symbolizes one’s descent (confession and death) and reemergence (salvation, Mt 28:19–20; Mk 16:15–16; Jn 3:3–7). A Tenuous Boundary • No clear demarcation of water’s simultaneously destructive and creative powers can be made. Very often, one sees both attributes at play in a single passage. This is seen in the Exodus in which Israel is saved, while Egypt’s army is wiped out by the sea. Ultimately, Yhwh is the one who wields power over all water, able to put it to use for whatever means he desires. Jonah’s prayer is both a recognition of this and a proclamation of thanksgiving that mirrors the language of the Psalmist who is rescued by Yhwh from “the depths of the earth” (tehōmôt hā’āreṣ, Ps 71:20). God’s Presence Is Unbounded • While Jonah is himself bounded by bars, seaweed, and the great fish itself, Jonah’s prayer invokes the imagery of Ps 139; there the psalmist considers that one cannot escape God’s presence, even if one could descend to the deepest places. 5b seaweed TYPOLOGY Allusion to the Crossing of the Sea of Reeds? Nearly every instance of sûp in the Hebrew Bible refers to the Red Sea or the Sea of Reeds. Both the use of sûp and the frequent use of the phrase “dry land” in Jonah draw the reader to connect Jonah’s story with the Israelites’ miraculous passage through the Sea of Reeds in the Exodus (*bib1:9b,13a; 2:10). • In Ex 2:5, the reeds play a role in saving Moses, and later the Sea of Reeds helps save the Israelites and destroy the Egyptians (Ex 15:4). • In Jon 2:5, the reference to sûp seems to indicate that the prophet is about to participate in similar events.

80

Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?

8 vain illusions Prophetic Language • The Hebrew expression hablé šāw’ (*voc2:8) appears only twice in M: here and in Ps 31:6. The latter is a thanksgiving psalm in which the speaker criticizes those who adhere to or worship the hablé šāw’, noting that the Lord hates them. • In both cases, it is a direct object of a plural participle based on the verb šmr (qal in Ps 31:6; pi‘el in Jon 2:8 [M-2:9]). In Ps 31:6 these worshippers are castigated by the psalmist (M) or by God (G, S); they likewise serve as a foil to the psalmist who trusts (bṭḥ) in Yhwh (*dev2:8).

• →Shimo “God, who heard the prayer of the son of Mattai in the sea and commanded the mighty fish and in three days it cast him up; hear our prayer and be reconciled with us and respond in your mercy to our requests; and if we have angered you, there are those who will reconcile you with us, the just who died for love of you.” • →Ephrem Hymn. virg. 45.1 is perhaps the first to refer to Jonah simply with the liturgical epithet “son of Mattai.” This weekly prayer reflects Jonah’s continued importance, especially as an example of repentance, in the tradition of Syriac Christianity.

Y‚Peritestamental Literature‚Z

2–4,7 Use in Lectionary →RML: Monday, Week 27 in Year I – Responsorial Canticle.

5a waters enveloped me An Echo in Qumran’s Hodayot (Thanksgiving Hymns) • →1QHa 14:22–24 “[I am] like a sailor in a ship—in the raging sea, its waves and torrents roar over me, a whirlwind [without a] lull for taking breath, without tracks which direct the path over the surface of the sea” (→DJD XL, 197). 6c my life from the pit Descent to the Pit in Qumran’s Hodayot • →1QHa 16:29 “And with the dead my spirit hides, because my life has gone down to the pit” (→Martínez and Watson 1992, 347; →DJD XL, 224). Y‚Liturgies‚Z 1–9 From the Biblical Prayer of Jonah to Jewish and Christian Prayers ῾Amidah of Yom Kippur • →b. Ta‘an. 15a “For the sixth blessing he recites: ‘He Who answered Jonah from within the innards of the fish’ (see Jon 2:1–3:1), He will answer you and hear the sound of your cry on this day. Blessed are You, Lord, Who answers in a time of trouble. For the conclusion of the seventh blessing, which is actually the sixth additional blessing, as the first blessing listed here is an expanded version of a regular weekday blessing, he recites: ‘He Who answered David and Solomon his son in Jerusalem’ (see 1Kgs 8:12– 53), He will answer you and hear the sound of your cry on this day. Blessed are You, Lord, Who has mercy on the Land.” The Synagogal Rite of Kol Nidré The citation of Jon 2:9 in the midrashic retellings of the Jonah story is reminiscent of kol nidré (“all vows”), the prayer of entrance of Yom Kippur. This Aramaic declaration is recited in the synagogue before the beginning of the evening service on every Yom Kippur. Strictly speaking, it is not a prayer, although commonly spoken of as if it were. This dry legal formula and its ceremonial accompaniment have been charged with emotional undertones. • →Machzor “All vows, renunciations, promises, obligations, oaths, taken rashly, from this Day of Atonement till the next, may we attain it in peace, we regret them in advance. May we be absolved of them, may we be released from them, may they be null and void and of no effect. May they not be binding upon us. Such vow shall not be considered vows: such renunciations, no renunciations; and such oaths, no oaths” (ben Zion 1959, 258). In this ceremony, all vows—except for legally ratified ones, such as contracts—taken since the previous Yom Kippur are cancelled. This prayer has sometimes elicited resentment or anger from non-Jews, who construe it as “religious” trickery that justifies the breaking of promises. From the standpoint of faith, however, this prayer serves to acknowledge both the power of the spoken word and the fallibility of human judgment. More prosaically, it discourages the infraction of the third commandment. Book of Odes Some Greek and Syriac biblical  manuscripts contain the Book of Odes, a collection of canticles drawn from both the OT and NT. This was most likely a liturgical collection, as these canticles are still employed in the liturgies of East and West today. Jonah’s prayer forms part of this collection. In →Rahlfs 2006, Odes 6:1–7 corresponds to Jon 2:2–9. Syriac Morning Prayer: Emulating Jonah’s Prayer of Repentance The episode is referenced in the Saphro (Morning prayer) for Wednesday in the Syriac Church:

Y‚Jewish Tradition‚Z 1 Jonah Rabbis on Jonah See *jew1:1. 2c the belly of Sheol • →y. Ta‘an. 2:9 “It is written ‘And he said: I called out from my distress to the Lord, and He answered me…’ (Jon 2:2). There was no need to mention David and Shlomo and afterwards Jonah and Eliyahu, except in order to end with ‘who has mercy on the land.’ On the seventh: They said in the name of Sumchus, ‘Blessed is He who brings low the lofty.’ This makes sense regarding Shlomo, of whom it is written, ‘I have surely built You a house to dwell in…’ (1Kgs 8:13), but why David? Because he attempted to count Israel. Rabbi Abahu said: It is written, ‘When I call, answer me, O God of my righteousness; in my distress You have relieved me…’ (Ps  4:1). David said before the Holy One, ‘Master of the World! Every distress into which I came, You opened it out for me. I entered into the distress of Bat Sheva, You brought me Shlomo. I entered into the distress of counting Israel, You brought me the Holy Temple.’” • →b. ‘Erub. 19a “She’ol, as it is written: ‘Out of the belly of the netherworld (še’ôl) I cried and You did hear my voice’ (Jon 2:2). Avadon, as it is written: ‘Shall Your steadfast love be reported in the grave or Your faithfulness in destruction (’ăbaddôn)?’ (Ps 88:11). Be’er Shaḥat, as it is written: ‘For You will not abandon my soul to the netherworld; nor will You suffer Your pious one to see the pit (šāḥat)’ (Ps 16:10). And Bor Shaon and Tit HaYaven, as it is written: ‘He brought me up also out of the gruesome pit (bôr šā’ôn), out of the miry clay (ṭîṭ hayyāwēn)’ (Ps 40:2). And Tzalmavet, as it is written: ‘Such as sat in darkness and in the shadow of death (ṣalmāwet), bound in affliction and iron’ (Ps 107:10). And with regard to Eretz Taḥtit, i.e., the underworld, it is known by tradition that this is its name.” • →Tanḥ. Vayikra 8.1 “And it showed him Gehinnom, as it is written, ‘From the belly of the pit I cried out; You heard my voice’ (Jon 2:2).” 5a as far as the throat Targumic Abstraction • →Tg. Jon. “The waters surrounded me until the death.” The Targum chooses to translate nepeš as the abstract concept “death” rather than the concrete body part “throat.” This translation changes the passage from a representational description of an imminent near-death experience to an abstract description of ultimate fate. 5b seaweed Explicit Link to the Sea of Reeds • →Tg. Jon. “Sea of Reeds is suspended over my head.” This amplified translation, yām sûp (rather than M: sûp), makes explicit M’s implicit allusion to the Exodus (*voc2:5b; *bib2:5b). Y‚Christian Tradition‚Z 1–9 Interpretations of Jonah’s Prayer Jonah’s Prayer, a Model for the Faithful The Patristic Period • →Origen Or. 13.3–4; 14.2,4; 16.3 focuses on prayer’s ability to deliver one from moral and physical evil, which then becomes a means of conversion: “Who is there who has escaped the belly of the whale that swallows up every fugitive from God but has been subdued by Jesus our Savior, that

Jon :- Jonah Prays from the Belly of the Fish

does not become like Jonah a saint filled with the Holy Spirit?” Likewise, Jonah’s prayer both demonstrates the power of prayer for others and prefigures Christ’s own prayer. • →Aphrahat Dem. 4.1,8,12 invokes Jonah’s example in a few places. He begins by speaking of the need for “pure prayer” (ṣelûtâ dekîtâ)—i.e., prayer that is not self-seeking, uttered out of a pure mind and heart— because it can become a “pure offering” (qûrbānâ dakyâ) to God. He directs the reader to the example of the righteous of the OT in a kind of litany. Not surprisingly, he includes an allusion to Jonah along with Daniel and the three youths: “and it caused one to ascend from the pit, and it saved one from the fire, and it delivered one from the sea” (wehî ’asqat men gûbâ wepelṭat men nûrâ wešawzbat men yamâ). Later in the demonstration he elaborates on this by saying that Jonah’s prayer “pierced the depths, overcame the waves, overpowered the storms, pierced the cloud, flew through the air and opened the heaven, and came near before the throne of the Most High by means of Gabriel who brings prayers before God. The depths threw up the prophetic man, and the fish brought forth Jonah to the dry land.” • →John Chrysostom Exp. Ps. 4:4: Chrysostom thus responds to the question, “what is the meaning of ‘he has worked wonders for him’ (Ps 4:4)?” “He has made remarkable, notable, conspicuous, obvious the one devoted to him.” He then clarifies more precisely what this means by turning to examples of God’s servants in the Bible; the current running through them is that God’s protection and deliverance are the wonders he works for his servants who pray to him. In this context, he mentions Jonah: “This happened with the three young men, with the lions, with the great fish and Jonah, and in every case he saves not simply people of all sorts but his holy one.” • →Augustine of Hippo Enarr. Ps. 130(129):1, commenting on the verse “out of the depths I cry to you, O Lord; Lord, hear my voice”: “Each one of us must assess what a deep place he or she is in; we must take stock of the depth from which we have to cry to the Lord. Jonah cried out from a very deep place indeed, from the belly of a whale. He was not only submerged under the waves but even hidden in the stomach of a sea monster, yet neither that vast body nor the water blocked his prayer or prevented it from reaching God. Not even the beast’s vitals could smother the voice of a man who prayed. It broke down all obstacles, burst its way through, and arrived at God’s ears.” • →Cyril of Alexandria Comm. Jon. 2:7 describes Jonah as a positive example of prayer inasmuch as he turned to God in the face of hardship and suffering: “He cried aloud to him, note, and longed for his assistance; aware as he was of his clemency and the abundance of his power, he addressed supplication to him, begging for his life to be rescued from death and corruption. It is therefore a wonderful and praiseworthy thing to avoid depression in hardship, and rather to appease the Lord with entreaty and supplication, and seek from him repeal of the trouble and relief from misfortune.” Cyril goes on to describe Jonah’s prayer as a song of praise, as sweet smelling incense, and as a spiritual sacrifice. • →Theodoret of Cyrus Interpr. Jon. 2:10, in a somewhat different vein, points to Jonah’s prayer and deliverance as a didactic illustration of God’s mercy, which he recorded for the benefit of later generations: “The blessed Jonah fulfilled [these things] and handed on in writing (suggraphêi) the things that happened, so that not only the people then but also those born later might learn. As also the blessed David has made his own sin a public record (anagrapton), both proclaiming God’s kindness (philanthrôpian) and showing the remedy of repentance (ta pharmaka tês metanoias) to sinners” (PG 81:1732D). The Reformation Period • →Calvin Prael. proph. min. “Grant, Almighty God, that as thou hast once given us such an evidence of thy infinite power in thy servant Jonah, whose mind, when he was almost sunk down into hell, thou hadst yet raised up to thyself, and hadst so supported with firm constancy, that he ceased not to pray and to call on thee—O grant, that in the trials by which we must be daily exercised, we may raise upwards our minds to thee, and never cease to think that thou art near us; and that when the signs of thy wrath appear, and when our sins thrust themselves before our eyes, to

81

drive us to despair, may we still constantly struggle, and never surrender the hope of thy mercy, until having finished all our contests, we may at length freely and fully give thanks to thee, and praise thy infinite goodness, such as we daily experience that being conducted through continual trials, we may at last come into that blessed rest which is laid up for us in heaven, through Christ one Lord. Amen.” • →Fisher Comm. Pen. Ps. 130(129) “Every sinner breaking the commandment of God goeth away from Him, and draweth backward into many great and perilous deep dangers, falling down more and more toward the horrible pit of Hell: which thing Holy Scripture hath shewed figuratively in the story of the prophet Jonas, describing certain degrees and orders of his descensions…if in all these tribulations [Jonah] had not shortly remembered Almighty God and been succoured by His help, could not have escaped; but, anon as he had been digested in that great fish’s belly, should have been voided out from him in the manner of dung, and so slipped down into the bottom of the great sea” (Phillimore 1915, 2:56– 57; cf. *voc1:17b–2:1). Jonah’s Exemplary Prayer Prefigures Christ While Jonah’s prayer is considered a model for Christians, it is likewise considered a prefiguration of aspects of Christ’s life, passion, death, and resurrection. • →Jacob of Sarug Hom. 122 repeatedly describes Jonah’s being swallowed by the fish as a burial, which is the principle way that Jonah prefigures Christ (Bedjan 1910, 4:413.19–21, 414.3–6, 422.17–18, 423.8). • →Ephrem Hymn. virg. 43.29–33 “The servant bore the Symbols of his Lord / in his conception and his birth and in his raising to life / … / and the mouth of Jonah [became] a censer. / The smell of incense rose up from within the abyss / to the High One Who sits in the highest heaven. / His Savior came down; He became the key of the mouth. / Silence delivered the Herald of words.” • →Jerome Comm. Jon. 2:2–3 suggests that the content of Jonah’s prayer prefigures that of the Lord’s prayer: “If Jonah refers to the Lord, and he reveals the Savior’s passion from the fact that he spent three days and nights in the belly of a whale, then his prayer ought to be a type of the Lord’s prayer.” • →Jacob of Sarug Hom. 122 notes that because Jonah is the only one ever to have prayed after being buried, his prayer prefigures that of Christ’s passion and death, which he understands as a kind of atoning prayer (Bedjan 1910, 4:423.12–13). →Gloss. ord. likewise employs a Christological allegory, likening portions of Jonah’s prayer with that of Jesus’ work of salvation. • “I called out” (v. 2b): “He remembers that he is in the heart of the sea— that is, in the middle of storms, and among the bitter waters ‘tempted in all things without sin’ (Hb 4:15)…in [Christ] every temptation lost its power, so that in him those who were accustomed to be imperiled might be freed through his conquering.” • “you cast me” (v. 3a): “I who took on the form of a slave, having imitated the frailty of man…so that through this I might lead the human race back to you [i.e., the Father].” • “your holy Temple” (vv. 4b,7b): “Just as the temple of the Father is the Son, so also the temple of the Son is the Father, about whom he himself said, ‘I went forth from the Father and have come into the world’ (Jn 16:28).” See also Jn 17:5. • “Waters enveloped me” (v. 5a): “In Christ as a man, the soul was the principal part and, as it were, the head, which descended toward the lower regions where the souls of men were being held under the power of the devil.” • “so that my prayer might come” (v. 7b): “And he prays because he is the high priest, so that his prayer might ascend to God so that in his own body the people might be freed.” • “what I have vowed” (v. 9b): “In the passion he vowed all of us to the Father, so that none of those whom the Father had given him might perish. He promised for the salvation of all. Let us not make him a liar; let us be pure so that he might offer us to the Father.” 2–6 Where Is Jonah? Several verses in Jonah’s prayer from the belly of the whale seem to imply that he has died or is dying. He cries to God from the belly

82

Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?

of še’ôl (G: haidês; V: infernus), the realm of the dead, and he appears to be drowning or to have drowned. Has he died? Where has he gone—is he damned, dead, or just poetic? • →Cassiodorus Exp. Ps. 130(129):1 “The word for depth (profundum) stands for porro fundum, the far bottom, whose lowest levels are wholly submerged. From here the prophet cried to the Lord so that he could be more easily heard…Finally from these depths, Jonah, who was set in the whale’s belly and had entered hell alive, spoke to the Lord with silent vehemence…What an outstandingly and wholly glorious repentance, a humility that experiences no fall, grief that rejoices people’s hearts, tears that water the soul! Indeed this depth, which conveys us to heaven, has no inkling of hell.” • →Maximus the Confessor Quaest. Thal. 64.27 interprets Jon 2:2–6 in light of Jb 10:21–22 and argues that “it should be obvious that this is the depth of the final, ultimate abyss,” i.e., Hades. 2b answered me God Is Present in the Sea-Monster’s Belly • →Cyril of Alexandria Comm. Jon. 2:3 “‘I,’ says Jonah, ‘who previously thought that God appears to prophets only in Jerusalem, found him present even in the sea-monster’s belly. And having prayed to him, I was delivered by his love of humanity.’” 3a you cast me God, Not the Sailors, Cast Jonah into Sea • →Calvin Prael. proph. min. “Jonah shows here what dreadful temptations presented themselves to him while he was endeavoring to offer up prayers. It came first to his mind that God was his most inveterate enemy. For Jonah did not then think of the sailors and the rest who had cast him into the sea; but his mind was fixed on God: this is the reason why he says, ‘Thou, Lord, hadst cast me into the deep, into the heart of the sea’; and then, ‘Thy billows, Thy waves.’”

becoming manner. But order comes under the aspect of good, just as mode and species, according to Augustine (→Nat. bon. 3). Since then it belongs to religion to pay due honor to someone, namely, to God, it is evident that religion is a virtue.” Thus, inasmuch as a human being pays honor as is worthy of God, a human being can, in a human way, recompense God. • In S, the phrase “what I have vowed, I will pay [as] recompense to the Lord” suggests that the speaker owes something to God; the vows are to be paid to God in response to the gratuitous salvation already received (*com2:9b). Y‚Literature‚Z 1–9 Pastiche in the Form of a “Noble Canticle” In Moby Dick, before Fr. Mapple begins his sermon, the congregation sings a hymn. • →Melville Moby Dick ch. 9 “The ribs and terrors in the whale, / Arched over me a dismal gloom, / While all God’s sun-lit waves rolled by, / And lift me deepening down to doom. -- I saw the opening maw of hell, / With endless pains and sorrows there; / Which none but they that feel can tell— / Oh, I was plunging to despair. -- In black distress, I called my God, / When I could scarce believe him mine, / He bowed his ear to my complaints— / No more the whale did me confine. -- With speed he flew to my relief, / As on a radiant dolphin borne; / Awful, yet bright, as lightning shone / The face of my Deliverer God. -- My song for ever shall record / That terrible, that joyful hour; / I give the glory to my God, / His all the mercy and the power. /…What a noble thing is that canticle in the fish’s belly! How billow-like and boisterously grand! We feel the floods surging over us; we sound with him to the kelpy bottom of the waters; sea-weed and all the slime of the sea is about us!” (44–45). Y‚Visual Arts‚Z

8 Those who revere vain illusions Theological Polemic: Jonah’s Reliance on Faith over Works • →Luther Lect. Jon. “With this verse Jonah rebukes the foolish workrighteous and hypocrites, who do not rely solely on God’s grace but on their own works. He rebukes the same people because they do not know what faith is, because they have never been in distress where they might have learned how beneficial faith is and how ineffective good works are, and because they do not change but they depreciate grace and appreciate their own doing. Jonah declares that this is vanity.”

1–9 Medieval Illumination The Psalter of Eleanor of Aquitaine (ca. 1185), fol. 088r (Dutch National Library, KB 76 F 13) features Jonah in the beautifully illuminated initial of Ps 69 (V-Ps 68). • The “S” of “Salvum me fac Deus” is a sea-serpent, perhaps a reference to Leviathan (cf. *jew2:1–10). • The upper half of the initial depicts a sailor tossing Jonah into the sea. • The bottom half depicts Jonah praying within the fish. His gesture suggests prayer. It may also be rebuke directed to Leviathan.

9b what I have vowed Confessional Polemic: Calvin Compares Jonah’s Vow to Those of the Church Fathers and the Papists • →Calvin Prael. proph. min. “And he afterwards mentions his vows, I will pay, he says, my vows. We have stated elsewhere in what light we are to consider vows. The holy Fathers did not vow to God, as the Papists of this day are wont to do, who seek to pacify God by their frivolous practices; one abstains for a certain time from meat, another puts on sackcloth, another undertakes a pilgrimage, and another obtrudes on God some new ceremony. There was nothing of this kind in the vows of the holy Fathers; but a vow was the mere act of thanksgiving, or a testimony of gratitude: and so Jonah joins his vows here with the sacrifice of praise. We hence learn that they were not two different things; but he repeats the same thing twice. Jonah, then, had declared his vow to God for no other purpose but to testify his gratitude.”

4b your holy Temple Stained-Glass of Jonah Stained-glass window of Jonah (11th–12th c.), in the southern clerestory of the Augsburg Cathedral (Dom Mariä Heimsuchung), Germany. • Jonah bears a scroll that reads rursum videbo templum sanctum domini (“Again shall I see the holy Temple of the Lord”).

Y‚Theology‚Z 9b I will pay [as] recompense (S) MORALS An Act of Religion How can Jonah recompense God for his salvation? Jonah cannot literally repay God for his salvation; rather, the fulfillment of his vows serves as an analogical recompense to God. • →Aquinas ST IIa-IIae 81.2 resp. “Now it is evident that to render anyone his due has the aspect of good, since by rendering a person his due, one becomes suitably proportioned to him, through being ordered to him in a

Y‚Music‚Z 1–9 Christian Application of Jonah’s Prayer In an album whose title obviously turns Jonah into a type of the human condition, American blues singer and guitarist Kelly Joe Phelps mixes country, blues, and gospel, offering an emotional song that re-interprets the themes of Jonah’s prayer within the context of a sinful yet repentant Christian (cf. allegories of Jonah’s flight in *chr1:3a). • Kelly Joe Phelps, Brother Sinner & the Whale (2012), Track 4: “Pilgrim’s Reach”: “I’m afraid I’ve gone the wrong way again, / Walking away from Calvary and right back into sin, / Them ol’ demons, no, they don’t like me at all, / They love to beat my heart to hell, everytime I fall. / Why do I choose to suffer when I can live with God? / Lone dark valley, all my peace has gone, / Pray to Heaven, have mercy on me. / Hold my knees on the ground, Lord, help my faith, / My disbelief is killing me, I surely need Your grace, / I’ll open up the word and let You lead me on Your way, / Pray my eyes and ears are open, and I will hear You say. / ‘You are my sons and daughters, / I gave my own to buy your crown, / All of Heaven is buried in your heart, / Turn to Jesus and come to Me.’”



83

Jon : Jonah Vomited Out on the Ground

Jonah 2:10 Jonah Vomited Out on the Ground Y‚Suggestions for Reading‚Z

• The divine passive “it was commanded” (prosetagê) forms an inclusio with Jon 1:17 where the same verb (prosetaxen) is used. This explains why the translator chose to render wayyō’mer with prosetagê in Jon 2:10, since this is not a particularly close correspondance. • Similarly, the verb “cast out” (exebalen) concludes the sea scene begun in Jon 1:15 when the sailors “cast” (exebalon) Jonah into the sea.

10 Plot Device Leads to Theological Reflection A short transitional verse conveys an important development in the plot: Jonah emerges from the depths of the sea and from the belly of the fish. The reader cannot say if God responds to Jonah’s prayer or if, more simply, it was God’s intention all along to return Jonah to shore. In the history of reception, however, this verse is deep 10 vomited Possible Connotation in S: Givwith meaning. There is reflection on ing Birth The Syriac verb plṭ can genMVS G the sign of Jonah, mentioned in the erally be glossed as “eject” or “escape” 10 And Yhwh spoke And it was commanded NT (*chr1:17–2:10); commentators in the pe‘al stem. Depending on the V draw out Christological interpretathe Lord spoke to the sea-monster, and context, it can have more specific S tions on the themes of death and the Lord ordered to it cast out Jonah on the meanings such as “vomit,” “spit out,” resurrection, rebirth and baptism. or even “to be removed from an the fish, and it vomited dry land. Similarly, a great deal of art regardenclosed space.” Perhaps related to Jonah out on the dry ing Jonah revolves around those this last possible meaning of the themes (*vis2:10). Finally, verses verb, there are instances where plṭ is land. from the first two chapters have used figuratively for the act of giving made their way into various liturgibirth. See, for example, cal settings (*lit2:10). • →bar Hebraeus Laugh. St. 105.19: “My brother and I are twins and were The reader does not know if Jonah has changed as a result of his experiremoved (or ‘escaped’) from the womb at the same time.” ence, but Jonah is alive and thus able to receive God’s commission a second Although the translator of S may not have intended to evoke this figurative time. connotation of plṭ, it is this very term—along with m‘ayyā in Jon 1:17–2:1— that inspired a particular exegetical thread among the Syriac Fathers (*com2:1; *chr1:17b–2:1).

Text

Y‚Biblical Intertextuality‚Z Y‚Textual Criticism‚Z 10 TYPOLOGY Elijah and Elisha as Types of Jonah See *bib1:1–2. 10 And Yhwh Paragraph Demarcations • At Jon 2:10 (M-2:11), M has paragraph demarcations (vacant spaces) prior to (setûmâ) and following (petûḥâ). • 4QXIIg has a vacant space only prior to Jon 2:10. Thus, this verse appears to belong to the next unit of Jon 3 (cf. →DJD XV, 311).

Context Y‚Ancient Texts‚Z 10 vomited Aquila’s Use of Homeric Greek The verb exemeô “vomit forth, disgorge,” used by Aquila’s translation, is used of Charybdis in The Odyssey (→Ziegler 1984 ad loc.). • →Homer Od. 12.235–239 “For on one side lay Scylla and on the other divine Charybdis terribly sucked down the salt water of the sea. Verily whenever she belched it forth (exemeseise), like a cauldron on a great fire she would seethe and bubble in utter turmoil.” 10 on the dry land The Euxine or Black Sea • →Josephus A.J. 9.212–213 “It is also reported that Jonah was swallowed down by a whale, and that when he had been there three days, and as many nights, he was vomited out upon the Euxine Sea, and this alive, and without any hurt upon his body.”

Reception Y‚Comparison of Versions‚Z 10 Yhwh spoke Literary Structures in G: A Double Inclusio In G, there is a double inclusio between Jon 1:17 and Jon 2:10:

Y‚Peritestamental Literature‚Z 10 Example of the Lord’s Saving Wonders 3 Maccabees • →3 Macc. 6.7–9 “When, through the slanderous accusations brought against him out of envy, Daniel was thrown to the lions underground as food for beasts, you brought him up to the light unscathed. When Jonah was pining away unpitied in the belly of the monster of the deep, you, Father, restored him uninjured to all his household. So now, you who hate insolence, full of mercy, protector of all, manifest yourself swiftly to those of the people of Israel who are outrageously treated by the abominable and lawless heathen” (→OTP 2:526). Here, Jonah is invoked as an exemplary recipient of God’s mercy toward Israel. Notably this passage references Jonah’s restoration to his household, which must depend on an early extra-biblical tradition about Jonah. The Context In his prayer for deliverance from the persecutions of Ptolemy IV Philopator in →3 Macc. 6.1–15, the priest Eleazar enumerates five mighty acts of the Lord God’s mercy: • His destruction of Pharaoh and his host of chariots (→3 Macc. 6.4); • His demolition of Sennacherib after the siege of Jerusalem (→3 Macc. 6.5); • His sending of miraculous dew to save “the three friends” (Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego) from the fiery furnace in the land of Babylon (→3 Macc. 6.6); • His rescue of Daniel from the lion’s den (→3 Macc. 6.7); • Jonah’s deliverance from the belly of the sea-monster (→3 Macc. 6.8). In each of these acts, God showed mercy to his people. Eleazar thus calls upon the Lord to act again by rescuing his people from Greek persecution (cf. Sir 36:1–22). According to Eleazar’s prayer, God shows mercy in two ways: first, through destroying (apollumi / thrauô) Israel’s enemies, which is tantamount to protecting Israel; and second, through God’s miraculous

84

Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?

protection of individuals whom he delivers from distress “unharmed” (apêmantos / asinês). Y‚Liturgies‚Z 10 vomited Jonah RITUAL Jonah in Liturgical Furnishings While Jonah’s imagery has frequently been used to adorn the walls, ceilings, and floors of churches and synagogues, at various times it was fashionable to use its imagery on ambos and pulpits. See, for example, excellent examples in 11th–12th-c. Italy and in the Lands of the Bohemian Crown in the 18th c. • Anonymous, command of bishop Costantino Rogadeo (1094–1150), Ambo of the Epistles (mosaics in colored marbles, red porphyry, green serpentine, glass tesserae, on carved white marble, 12th c.), Cathedral of Ravello, Italy. This ambo employs both Cosmatesque ornament—typical of medieval Italy—and mosaics depicting peacocks, Jonah, and the sea-monster (a typological reference to Christ’s death and resurrection). One mosaic depicts Jonah being swallowed by the sea-monster, and the other shows him emerging from its belly three days later. The representation of the character is steep, almost in silhouette, because the Cosmatesque style is essentially abstract. Indeed this geometric art requires advanced mathematical knowledge and fascinates as much as some contemporary artwork. • Michael Kössler (1670–1734) and Michael Klahr (1693–1742), Pulpit in the Form of Jonah’s Fish, sculptures on wood (pulpit: 1730; statues: 1732), Saints Peter and Paul Church, Duszniki-Zdrój, Poland. Such a direct connection of the story of Jonah with preaching might both admonish reluctant preachers and remind the congregation—who play the role of the Ninevites—that they are in need of repentance and forgiveness. Y‚Jewish Tradition‚Z 10 Jonah Rabbis on Jonah See *jew1:1. Y‚Christian Tradition‚Z 10 Yhwh spoke to the fish The Fish Hears God’s Voice • →Wesley Notes “Though fishes understand not as man, yet they have ears to hear their Creator.” 10 vomited Jonah Preserved by Miraculous Means • →Calvin Prael. proph. min. “It was an incredible miracle, that Jonah should have continued alive and safe in the bowels of the fish for three

days. For how was it that he was not a thousand times smothered or drowned by waters? We know that fish continually draw in water: Jonah could not certainly respire while in the fish; and the life of man without breathing can hardly continue for a minute. Jonah, then, must have been preserved beyond the power of nature. Then how could it have been that the fish should cast forth Jonah on the shore, except God by his unsearchable power had drawn the fish there? Again, who could have supernaturally opened its bowels and its mouth? His coming forth, then, was in every way miraculous, yea, it was attended with many miracles.” Y‚Visual Arts‚Z 10 vomited Jonah Expelled from the Fish • Jonah Sarcophagus (stone relief, 3rd c.), Museo Pio Cristiano (no. 31448), Vatican City (→Introduction §3.14). Contrary to the biblical text, Jonah is not vomited onto the shore but rather disgorged into a sea swarming with creatures (three fish, a crab, a snail, and a salamander). The scene of Jonah begging to a fisherman and his boy may be reminiscent of those standing “over the waters” in Ezekiel’s vision of the future Temple, Ez 47:10 “Fishermen will stand beside the sea; from Engedi to Eneglaim it will be a place for the spreading of nets; its fish will be of very many kinds, like the fish of the Great Sea.” 10 on the dry land Heading Back to Israeli Shore with Jonah • Jean David (1908–1993), Israel–The Land of the Bible (offset, 1954, 97 × 62 cm). The Romanian-Israeli artist Jean David was active in Israel from the 1940s onward. Some of his most well-known work consists of travel posters and advertisements done for El Al airlines. In this piece, David does not draw upon traditional and expected imagery when depicting Jonah in the whale. Jonah is not in distress; instead, his time in the whale is an image of comfortable travel back to Israel! • Eugene Abeshaus (= Evgeny Abezgauz, 1939–2008), Jonah and the Whale in Haifa Port (acrylic on canvas, 1985–1992, 65 × 80 cm), Ein Hod, Israel. Eugene Abeshaus moved to Israel from Russia in the 1970s and joined the artist community in Ein Hod, which David had helped to found more than three decades prior. In keeping with the sensibility of David’s piece above, Abeshaus likens an immigrant’s arrival at the port of Haifa to Jonah’s expulsion from the whale.



85

Jon :-a God Commissions His Prophet Again

Jonah 3:1–3a God Commissions His Prophet Again Y‚Suggestions for Reading‚Z

• It is possible that the author invented this word in order to form an internal adjunct with the imperative qerā’: “proclaim…the proclamation.”

1–3a God Commissions His Prophet Again Just as the book began with God comY‚Grammar‚Z missioning Jonah for a task (*bib3:1), the story resets, with a nearly identical commission (*dev3:1–2). 1 the word of Yhwh was to Semantics See *gra1:1; *gen1:1. • One may dispense with reducing it to a doublet through redaction criticism: the repetition reads well as an intentional parallel, emphasizing this Y‚Literary Devices‚Z time the brevity of time between divine mandates to prophesy. • Retellings of “Jonah and the Whale” for children often end here, assuming 1–2 RHETORIC Repetition and Change that the point of the story is that Repetition Jonah has learned his lesson, MGVS Jon 3:1 is a nearly verbatim repetinamely, to obey God (*liter3:3a). tion of Jon 1:1. Even readers who do not stop here 1 Now, • Just as in Jonah’s first call (Jon 1:2), might subscribe to that interpretaGV And the word of Yhwh was to he is directed to get up (qûm), go tion. Over-familiarity with the G the Lord was to (lēk), and cry out (ûqerā’). story and with typical interpretaV Change tions can lead to interpretive ruts the Lord happened to Although the vocabulary is very and limit one’s ability to read S the Lord was upon Jonah a similar, there are some differences: imaginatively. second time, saying, — • There is no dagesh lene in “word” • A slow reading of the text with a (debar). kind of intentional forgetting can G 2a Get up and go to Nineveh, the great city, • Jonah’s patronym is omitted. lead us to ask fresh questions b and call to • The call comes a “second time” about what we find: Has Jonah GV (šēnît). been changed by his experience? proclaim in S Greater than the difference in vocabHas he been convinced to do proclaim against it the ulary is the change of behavior: “what is right”? Or is he simply G according to the previous • In Jon 3:3 one finds the expected resigned and complying because proclamation that I am telling response of a prophet to the word he knows he cannot get out of it? G of Yhwh; instead of fleeing, Jonah Jonah’s internal disposition is hidden spoke to you. got up (wayyāqām) and went from readers who have not yet MVS G (wayyēlek) to Nineveh. learned why he fled. Judging by his behavior, we can conclude that he 3a And Jonah got up and And Jonah got up and has learned something new: he canwent to Nineveh went to Nineveh just as 2a great Leitwort, Meaning See *dev1:2. not hope to flee from his task. Moreaccording to the word the Lord said. 2b call to + proclamation — The Internal over, we can tell that he does not Adjunct Returns The verb qr’ and the immediately return to it since God of Yhwh. VS cognate noun qerî’â form an internal must again tell him to go to Nineveh. the Lord. adjunct, which is a stylistic device Text the author employs several times in 1–2 God commissions Jonah Jon 1:1–2 – 2a Get up, go Jon 1:2 – 2a great city Jon 1:2; 3:3; the book. 4:11 Y‚Textual Criticism‚Z • In this context, the use of the device seems to highlight Jonah’s 2a Go Morphological Variant compliant behavior. • M reads lēk (qal imperative). • Further, it should be noted that it is possible that the author created this • 4QXIIg (4Q82 f78ii+82–87:11) attests lē[k]â, which is a qal imperative noun form for the sake of this construction, thus demonstrating his crewith a paragogic -he as a suffix (→DJD XV, 311). ativity (cf. →Introduction §1.2; *voc3:2b). The imperative lēkâ is a form which occurs several times in M (e.g., Context Gn 31:44; Ex 3:10), though it is usually followed by a cohortative verb. 2b the proclamation that: M | QXIIa: the proclamation according to which (Clarifying Variant?) • 4QXIIa (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. Y‚Vocabulary‚Z 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.

Y‚Historical and Geographical Notes‚Z 2–7 Nineveh Assyria’s Last Capital See *hge1:2.

Reception Y‚Comparison of Versions‚Z 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).

86

Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?

• 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. *tex3:2b), 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. 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 (*com3:2b). Y‚Biblical Intertextuality‚Z 1–3 TYPOLOGY Elijah and Elisha as Types of Jonah See *bib1:1–2. 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). 2–7 Nineveh A City of Biblical Imagination See *bib1:2 Nineveh. 2b call to Common Imperative Directed to the Prophets See *bib1:2; 3:2b. 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. Y‚Liturgies‚Z 1–10 Use in Lectionary • →RML: Wednesday, 1st 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, 10th Reading.

1–5,10 Use in Lectionary • →RML: 3rd Sunday in Year B. • →RCL: 3rd Sunday after Epiphany, Year B. Y‚Jewish Tradition‚Z 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). 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). Y‚Christian Tradition‚Z 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). 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.” 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. *jew1:1: Jonah’s passion, like Christ’s, begins on a Thursday and ends three days later). Y‚Islam‚Z 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.”

Jon :b- Jonah Preaches and the Ninevites Believe

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). Y‚Literature‚Z 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.

87

• 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.



Jonah 3:3b–5 Jonah Preaches and the Ninevites Believe Y‚Suggestions for Reading‚Z

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, G RSV). And Nineveh was a great Because the message is so brief (*bib3:4b), some have concluded that city to God, a road this must be an abridged report, journey of about three maybe the title of his sermon rather days. than the content of it (*chr3:4b). Regardless, God does not accuse Jonah of neglecting his task.

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 MVS needed to reach the city center, and 3b And Nineveh was a great utters one sentence. It is only now that readers learn the content of the city belonging to word of the Lord. The oracle is terse V great and Jonah does not repeat himself— city of but the results are effective: the peoS ple of Nineveh believe God. The city prophet does not need to plead or great to God, make an elaborate display. V with a journey of Immediate Response Text It is clear that Nineveh is a “great three days. city” in a tale that focuses on the MGVS Y‚Textual Criticism‚Z extraordinary. This great size is 4a And Jonah started to enter the city Gabout one day’s matched only by the speed at which 4 Transposed Verse? the whole city engages in ritual acts journey and he called out • Around 11 to 20 mss. of M move of repentance. Nineveh might even GS proclaimed and said, — Jon 4:5 to the end of Jon 3:4. be a great city belonging to God or b Forty • This is apparently because in Jon to the gods (Jon 3:3; see *tra3:3b). G 4:5 Jonah awaits Nineveh’s demise. Likewise, it is ambiguous whether Three days more, and But why would he await its demise the Ninevites repent because they S from now Nineveh will be overturned. after its visible conversion? Thus, believe God, believe in God, or, simin the mind of an ancient redacply, believe the gods in general (Jon 5a G V SAnd the men of Nineveh believed in God tor, the events of Jon 4:5 must 3:5). However one translates this b and they called for have taken place after Jonah’s passage, it cannot be translated to GV proclaimed preaching, but before the Ninevites’ say that they believed Jonah. NinevS conversion. eh’s size is foregrounded in the text’s decreed a fast and put on sackcloth, According to the principle of lectio description as an indication not so from their great ones to their small ones. difficilior, the internal evidence of M, much of the enormity of Jonah’s task, V greater to smaller. and the external evidence of G, V, but of the proportion of God’s conand S, the verse in Jon 4:5 should not cern for the city’s repentance. be moved. Minimal Effort 4 Preaching in Nineveh Mt 12:41; Lk 11:32 – 4b Forty days Gn 7:12,17; 25:20; Ex 16:35; Jonah seems to do the absolute min- 24:18; Nm 13:25; 14:34; 32:13; Dt 29:5; 1Kgs 2:11; 11:42; 19:8; Ez 4:6; 29:11–13 – Y‚Grammar‚Z imum to fulfill his duty. He delivers 4b overturned Gn 19:21,25,29; Ex 7:15,17,20; Dt 23:5; 1Sm 10:6; Est 9:1; Jb 30:21; his oracle, but does not elaborate. He Ps 30:11; 66:6; Is 34:9; Jer 2:21; 20:16; Jl 2:31; Am 4:11; Zep 3:9 3b a great city belonging to God Mulseeks no one out and does not go to tivalent Prepositional Phrase The Hebrew the king (*dev3:6a). Instead, readers expression ‘îr-gedôlâ lē’lōhîm (lit. “a city-of great/large to-g/God[s]”) is are told that, although the city is three days across, Jonah does not even ambiguous. The challenge to understand it lies in coordinating its numerous make it into the center before he delivers his line. Compare Jonah’s terse semantic and grammatical variables. message with the extravagant pleading one hears from Jeremiah, who calls

88

Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?

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 *dev3:3b,5a,8–10. 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]; 80:10 [M-80:11]; Sg 8:6): “an exceedingly large city” (cf. →Kimchi Comm.; →Waltke and O’Connor 1990, 268; *jew3:3b). 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. *dev3:3b,5a,8–10; *tra3:3b). Y‚Literary Devices‚Z 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 7th c. b.c.), the narrative’s choice to avoid geographic details, especially with regard to Nineveh, presses readers to go beyond the bare meaning of the text. Indeed, the narrative seems to

employ geography as a plot device—to press for historical accuracy might miss the point of the narrative (cf. the mystical interpretations of Jonah’s flight to Tarshish at *chr1:3a). • 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. 3b,5b great Leitwort, Meaning See *dev1:2. 3b,5a,8–10 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. *gra3:3b; *jew3:3b). 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). 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. Y‚Literary Genre‚Z 4b Forty days more, and Nineveh will be overturned (Prophetic) Oracle? Several devices make this phrase sound like an oracle (*dev3:4b), though it differs from other oracles seen in the Bible (*bib3:4b). 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. *jew3:4b; *chr3:4b,10b; 4:1).

Context Y‚Ancient Cultures‚Z 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).

Jon :b- Jonah Preaches and the Ninevites Believe

• 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).

Reception Y‚Comparison of Versions‚Z 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 (*gra3:3b), it is more likely that this is an instance of word-for-word “translation Greek” that is characteristic of G’s Jonah. 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.” 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” (šelōšâ/šelōšet yāmîm) occurs over 35 times in M, and twice in Jonah (Jon 1:17; 3:3). • In an unpointed text, the absolute and construct of “three” would have looked quite similar—the difference would be between a final he or taw. • Thus, it is possible that “forty days” was original and it became “three days” as the result of attraction to the three days found in v. 3b. This difference inspired much interpretation in the book’s reception history. Many Church Fathers (following G) reflected upon the brevity of time given for repentance: that is, they understood the passage to mean that after three days of repentance, God would relent—hence it is remarkable that God would show mercy even after such a short period of repentance. Since V follows M, the Glossa ordinaria is aware of both traditions and finds both fruitful for exegesis (*chr3:4b). 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

89

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. Y‚Biblical Intertextuality‚Z 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: *bib1:2 Nineveh). 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). 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).

90

Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?

• Elijah recapitulates Moses’ experience with forty days on Mt. Horeb (1Kgs 19:8). 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. *jew3:4b; *chr3:4b,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). 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. 3:5,7; 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. *jew1:1). Y‚Liturgies‚Z 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 SyroMalankara 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-7th c. a.d., 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. 13th c.) composed several ‘anyūthâ (“antiphons”) for the Rogation, one of which addresses a crisis of leadership in the Church by playing on the double meaning of ba‘ûtâ: “Our Lord heed the rogation (ba‘ûtâ) of the Babylonians and Assyrians (’atūrāy) now that Church leadership is distressed and confused. Our Lord heed the request (ba‘ûtâ) of our destitute country, I glorify your Godliness and ask for your forgiveness” (→Malko 2002, 84). • There are also turgamé, or liturgical prose homilies, composed for use during the Rogation that are preserved in a 16th-c. ms. held at the Hill Monastic Manuscript Library in Collegeville MN (CCM 00425; →Scher 1908). Further Reading: History of Syriac Christianity in Nineveh • →Stronach and Lumsden 1992; →Fiey 1993; →Fiey 2004; →Simpson 2005. Y‚Jewish Tradition‚Z 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 *gra3:3b; *dev3:3b.

Jon :b- Jonah Preaches and the Ninevites Believe

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. 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. *chr3:4b,10b; 4:1. 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. Y‚Christian Tradition‚Z 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?” 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. *jew3:3b).

91

4–5 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.” 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.” 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

92

Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?

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). 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. *jew3:4b). 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 (*jew4:1). • →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. *chr4:1–5). 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)

Jon :b- Jonah Preaches and the Ninevites Believe

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

93

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 (*chr4:1–3; see also *jew1:3a; *jew4:11b). • →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.”

94

Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?

• →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. Y‚Theology‚Z 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.’” Y‚History of Translations‚Z 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: *gra3:3b; *jew3:3b. 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.” 4a Jonah Tobit: Jonah or Nahum? Tobit predicts the destruction of Nineveh based on the prophecy of Jonah (Tb 14:4–8; *bib3:4b). 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.



95

Jon :- Nineveh's King Orders Repentance

Jonah 3:6–10 Nineveh’s King Orders Repentance

MGVS

6a And the word reached G

b c d

7a

b c

approached the king of Nineveh and he got up from his throne and he removed his robe from himself S crown and covered [himself] with GS put on V was clothed with sackcloth and sat in ashes. And he cried out G it was proclaimed S he proclaimed and Git was said in Nineveh by the decree of the king and his great ones, GV nobles, saying, — Neither human nor animal, herd nor flock, GVS humans nor beasts of burden, oxen nor sheep, shall taste anything, nor shall they feed, nor shall they drink water. MV

G

8a And let sackcloths cover human and And people and animals put on

animal V men and beasts be covered with sackcloths b and let them call out to God mightily c and let each man turn V be turned from his evil way d and from the violence V iniquity that is in their hands.

sackcloths

and they cried out to God earnestly and they shall call out to God with groaning and each man shall turn away from and each person shall turn from his his way of evil evil way and from the unrighteousness that and from the plunder that is in his is in their hands. Saying, — hands.

M

9a Who knows?! God may turn and

relent b and turn away from his fierce

anger, that we might not perish.

S

But rather people and beast shall be covered with sackcloths

GVS

Who knows if the god will change his mind V God will turn back and forgive S God will turn back and have mercy on us and turn away from his fierce anger, S his fierce anger away from us, that we might not perish?

6–8 Fasting, sackcloth, and ashes 1Kgs 21:27; Jer 6:26; Ez 27:30–31 – 9a Who knows?! Jon 1:6; 2Sm 12:22; Jl 2:14

Y‚Suggestions for Reading‚Z 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

96

Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?

MGV

S

10a And God saw their deeds, how they And God saw their deeds, how they turned from their evil ways,

turned turned away V were turned from their evil way, G ways, b and God relented G changed his mind V showed mercy concerning the evil that he said he would do G spoke of doing V had said that he would do to them. And he did not do it. G

and he turned his fierce anger away from them. And he did not destroy them.

10b God relented Ex 32:14; 1Kgs 21:29; Jer 18:8; Am 7:3

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 (*dev1:2 evil; *dev3:8c,9a; *bib3:8c,9a). Creation The King The king’s decree reminds readers of the captain’s command to Jonah to “Call out!” (Jon 1:6; *dev1:2–3:8; *dev3:7a; *bib3:6a). 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; *dev3:8d; *com3:8d). 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 (*bib3:5,7; 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 (*bib3:5–8). 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 (*chr3:5–10). 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 (*chr4:1–3); 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 (*com3:9; *dev3:10). 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.

Text Y‚Textual Criticism‚Z 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. Y‚Vocabulary‚Z 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. 7a the decree of the king Aramaic Influence? • The Hebrew ṭa‘am can mean “taste” or “authority” (see *dev3:7ab). • Its Aramaic cognate developed the sense of an “official command” or “decree.” 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 (*com3:7b,8a; *bib3:5,7; 4:11).

97

Jon :- Nineveh's King Orders Repentance

Y‚Grammar‚Z 7–8 Series of Jussive Clauses: A Solemn Command Lacking a genuine 3rd 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 3rd person imperative, which G uses. We have translated the jussive clauses of v. 7 using a modal verb instead of the typical English jussive: “neither human…shall taste anything,” rather than “let neither human…taste anything” (cf. RSV; JPS). Our translation seems to give more force to the king’s command.

relationship is later encompassed by the concept of co-operative (or synergistic) grace. 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). 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.

Y‚Literary Devices‚Z 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. 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). 7a great Leitwort, Meaning See *dev1:2. 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. 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. 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; *bib3:8c,9a). In Christian theology, this

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 (*com3:9). 10b evil Leitwort in the Service of Irony See *dev1:2.

Context Y‚Ancient Cultures‚Z 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 Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser III (BM 118885; cf. →Rawlinson 1850, 430–449). Records of victories of Shalmaneser III feature on the top and the bottom of the reliefs, in cuneiform inscriptions. They enumerate the campaigns which the king and his commander-in-chief headed every year, until the 31st year of the reign. Further down is purportedly the scene of King Jehu making obeisance and bearing tribute. The Assyrian cuneiform inscription above the scene reads:

98

Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?

• “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).

Reception Y‚Comparison of Versions‚Z 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. 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 (*chr3:5–10).

• In contrast to G, the Naḥal Ḥever Greek fragments, when reconstructed, read epistrepsei kai paraklêthêsetai ho theos kai epistrepsei, a word-forword 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 hopedfor 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 wordfor-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 and 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. Y‚Biblical Intertextuality‚Z

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. 8d violence: M | G: unrighteousness | V: iniquity (Semantic Range) Glosses for h.a¯ma¯s (“violence”) • G: adikia (“unrighteousness”); • V: iniquitas (“iniquity”). The semantic overlap obtains throughout G and V where ḥāmās is glossed with either of these terms. 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.

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).

99

Jon :- Nineveh's King Orders Repentance

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). 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. 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. *dev3:10; *com3:9). Y‚Liturgies‚Z 3:10–4:11 Use in Lectionary • →RCL: Proper 20, Year A. Y‚Jewish Tradition‚Z 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).”

100

Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?

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). 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.” 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). Y‚Christian Tradition‚Z 6–8 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.” 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.” 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.” 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.” 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.” Y‚Theology‚Z 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).”



101

Jon :- God's Mercy and His Prophet's Disappointment

Jonah 4:1–4 God’s Mercy and His Prophet’s Disappointment

M

1 And [this] great evil displeased

Jonah and he was enraged.

GV

And Jonah grieved V was afflicted by a great grief V affliction and he was confused. V angry.

MS

2a And he prayed to Yhwh S

before the Lord and

b

c

d

e

said, — Please, O Yhwh! S O Lord! Was this not my thought while I was still in my land? This is why S Because of this I first S arose early [and] fled to Tarshish for I know that you are a gracious S merciful and compassionate God, slow to anger and abounding in love, and relenting from evil.

V

Lord, take, I ask, my

life soul from me, for my V to me death is M better than my life.

And a great sorrow grieved Jonah and distressed him greatly.

G

And he prayed to the Lord and said, —

V

And he prayed to the Lord and said, —

O Lord! Were these not my words I beseech [you], O Lord! Is this not while I was still in my land? my word while I was still in my land? Because of this I first fled to Tarshish

Because of this I first fled to Tarshish

for I know that you are merciful and compassionate,

for I know that you are a lenient and merciful God,

patient and having great mercy, and repenting from evil.

patient and abounding in pity, and forgiving concerning evil.

MV

3 And now, O Yhwh, please take

S

GS

And now, O sovereign Therefore, my Lord, take my soul from me, for it is better for me to die than for me to live.

S

V

MV

4 And Yhwh V

the Lord said, — Is it V Do you think it is good for you to be V go on being angry?

G

And the Lord said to Jonah, — Have you been greatly grieved?

S

And the Lord said to him, — Did it grieve you greatly?

1 displeased Jon 4:9; Neh 2:10 – 2de God’s attributes Ex 34:6; Nm 14:18; 2Chr 30:9; Ps 86:15; 103:8; 145:8; Na 1:2–3; Jl 2:13; Mi 7:18–20 – 3 take my life 1Kgs 19:4 – 3 my death

is better than my life Jon 4:8 – 4 Is it good for you to be angry? Jon 4:9

102

Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?

Y‚Suggestions for Reading‚Z

Y‚Vocabulary‚Z

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 (*bib4:2). 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 (*bib1:2), 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 (*jew1:3a; *jew4:1). 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 (*chr4:1–3). 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; *chr4:11). 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 (*bib4:2), the traditional divine qualities (*voc4:2d) listed by Jonah (*dev4:1–3) engender here great resentment and anger (*dev4:3,8–9). His wish for death is extreme, but in itself, not without scriptural antecedents (*bib4:3,8–9). 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 (*tex2:9–10; 4:3–4) and featuring a Leitwort, anger (*com4:1,4,9bc), God’s direct question to Jonah triggers the readers’ attention to the important theological problem at the heart of the book.

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. *bib4:2).

Text Y‚Textual Criticism‚Z 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.

Y‚Grammar‚Z 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. *dev1:10a,16a; *dev1:16). Y‚Literary Devices‚Z 1–3 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 (*bib4:2). 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. 1,2e evil Leitwort in the Service of Irony See *dev1:2. 1 great Leitwort, Meaning See *dev1:2. 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. 3,8–9 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 *bib4:3,8–9.

Jon :- God's Mercy and His Prophet's Disappointment

Reception Y‚Comparison of Versions‚Z 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 h.rh 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 Wc 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 h.rh 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 (*chr3:4b,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. *chr4:1–5).

103

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”). 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”). Y‚Biblical Intertextuality‚Z 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 (*dev4:1–3), 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.

104

Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?

• 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. 3,8–9 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. *bib1:1–2), though Jonah’s dejection may likewise be for Israel’s sake (*jew4:3). • 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. *bib4:6–8). Y‚Liturgies‚Z 1–11 Use in Lectionary • →RML: Wednesday, Week 27, Year I. Y‚Jewish Tradition‚Z 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 *chr3:4b,10b; 4:1. 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. Y‚Christian Tradition‚Z 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. 1–3 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

105

Jon :- God's Mercy and His Prophet's Disappointment

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. *jew4:3. • →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.” 2–3 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.” Y‚Theology‚Z 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.’” Y‚Islam‚Z 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.



106

Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?

Jonah 4:5–8 Parable in Acts MGVS

5a So Jonah went out of the city b and sat down to the east of G

opposite against the east of the city c and he made for himself there a booth GS tent V shady place d and sat beneath it in the shade G its shadow e until [such time] that he might see what might become of V might befall S would happen to the city. V

M

GS

V

6a And Yhwh God appointed a

And the Lord God commanded S qîqāyôn the tendril of a gourd b and it went up over Jonah and it rose up above Jonah’s head S sprouted and rose above Jonah to be c to be a shade over his head to S protect him from his evil. and it was a shade over his head to shade him from his calamities. S and relieved him of his evil. d And Jonah was greatly delighted on And Jonah rejoiced a great joy S was greatly delighted at account of the qîqāyôn. S the tendril of the gourd. MGV

7a And God appointed V

prepared dawn arose

And the Lord God prepared an ivy and it went up over Jonah’s head

that it might be a shade over his head and protect him for he had labored.

And Jonah rejoiced with great joy on account of the ivy. S

But the next day, the Lord God commanded a worm at the rising of a worm when dawn G

early

the next day b and it struck the qîqāyôn G gourd V ivy withered.

and it struck the tendril of the gourd and cut it off. and it

5c booth Lv 23:40–42 – 6a appointed Jon 1:17; 4:7–8 – 7b withered Ez 17:10

Y‚Suggestions for Reading‚Z 5–8 God Begins to Show Jonah Having ignored God’s question, Jonah heads eastward (*bib4:5b), 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.

107

Jon :- Parable in Acts

M

8a And it happened, as the sun rose,

that God appointed a scorching east wind b and the sun struck upon Jonah’s

head. And he became faint c and he wished for his life to end

and he said, — d My death is better than my life.

GS

V

And it happened, as the sun rose, that Sthe Lord God commanded a hot Gand burning wind, Sand it dried up the gourd and the sun beat upon Jonah’s head. And he was discouraged S overwhelmed and he renounced S requested death for his soul and he said, — It is better for me to die than to live. S has come into your hands, Lord, to take my life from me, for I am not better than my fathers.

And when the sun had been raised, God prepared a hot and burning wind and the sun struck upon Jonah’s head. And he was agitated and he desired in his soul that he might die and he said, — It is better for me to die than to live.

8a east wind Ez 17:10 – 8d Let me die Jon 4:3; 1Kgs 19:4

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?

Text

• 4Q82 f88–91 i:2 (4QXIIg) 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). 7a when dawn arose Hebrew Variant: “as the morning rose” • M: b‘lwt reads the preposition be: “in the raising of dawn”; • 4QXIIg (see 4Q82 f88–91 i:5) reads “as the morning rose” (k‘lwt). • →Tg. Jon. reads bemîsaq, which supports M. The variant in 4QXIIg is most likely the result of a (mis)reading of kaph for beth (→DJD XV, 312). 7a the next day Hebrew Variant: Addition • 4QXIIg (see 4Q82 f88–91 i:5): following lmḥrt (“the next [day]”), it adds hywm (“the day”; →DJD XV, 312). Y‚Vocabulary‚Z 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 (*bib4:5b; *cul4:5b).

Y‚Textual Criticism‚Z 5a So Jonah went out Transposed Verse? See *tex3:4. 6a Yhwh God Hebrew Variant in the Formulation of the Divine Name • 4Q82 f88–91 i:2 (4QXIIg): the Lord Yhwh (’dwny Yhwh; →DJD XV, 312). • M and MurXII (cf. Mur88 11:20): Yhwh God (Yhwh ’lwhym; →DJD II, 191). 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’).”

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 (*hge4:6ad,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 (*dev4:6ad,7b,9b,10b). 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).

108

Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?

• “Violent” wind: ḥărîšît appears in the Hodayot in the context of a wind that threatens a ship (cf. →1QHa 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. *jew4:8a). Y‚Grammar‚Z 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 (*gra4:1). 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. Y‚Literary Devices‚Z 5–6 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. 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. 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). 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.” 6ad,7b,9b,10b qîqāyôn Neologism? It is possible that the author did not intend to designate a specific plant by qîqāyôn (*voc4:6ad,7b,9b,10b; *hge4:6ad,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). 6c evil Leitwort in the Service of Irony See *dev1:2. 6d greatly Leitwort, Meaning See *dev1:2. 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).

Context Y‚Historical and Geographical Notes‚Z 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. *com4:6ad,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. *tra4:6ad,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. Y‚Ancient Cultures‚Z 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

109

Jon :- Parable in Acts

indicative of the valuations of directionality, with dexia/dexter indicating both the right hand and “right-morality” while aristeros/sinister signify evil. 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).

Reception

• 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”).

Y‚Comparison of Versions‚Z 5b east Divergent Translations As noted above, qedem is polysemous (*voc4:5b), 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. 6ad,7b,9b,10b qîqāyôn The Identity of the Plant in the Versions While the precise identity of the plant in M remains unknown (*hge4:6ad,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 (*tra4:6ad,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). 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. 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” (*com2:7a). 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.

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. *bib1:1–2). 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. Y‚Biblical Intertextuality‚Z 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. 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 (*cul4:5b). 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).

110

Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?

• 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. 6–8 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 rûaḥ (“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).

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). 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). Y‚Christian Tradition‚Z 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.”

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.

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.”

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

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

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). Y‚Jewish Tradition‚Z

111

Jon :- Parable in Acts

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.” 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 (*bib4:7a)—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.” Y‚History of Translations‚Z 6ad,7b,9b,10b gourd + ivy — High Stakes Translation in the 5th c. When Jerome published his translation of the Book of Jonah, it caused something of a controversy in the Church. 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. Y‚Literature‚Z 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!” 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. Y‚Visual Arts‚Z 5–8 Resting in the Shade in Early Christian Art • Jonah Sarcophagus (ca. 3rd c.), Museo Pio Cristiano (Cat. 31448), Vatican City (→Introduction §3.13). 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. Y‚Cinema‚Z 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 (→Introduction §3.16).



112

Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?

Jonah 4:9–11 Divine Lesson in Mercy M

GS S

9a And God said to Jonah, — b

c

10a b

c

And the Lord God said to Jonah, — Is it good for you to be angry over Have you been S the qîqāyôn? Are you greatly grieved S about the tendril of the gourd? And he said, — It is good for me to And he S be angry to death. Jonah said, — I have been S am greatly grieved to death. And Yhwh said, — And the Lord said Sto him, — You have shown pity on the You treated the gourd leniently qîqāyôn for which you did not though you did not suffer over it S labor and you did not grow, took pity on the tendril of the gourd for which you did not labor and you did not raise, which came to be overnight and which came to be overnight and perished overnight. perished overnight. S that sprouted in a night and dried up in a night.

V

And the Lord said to Jonah, — Do you think you are rightly angry about the ivy? And he said, — I am rightly angry to death.

And the Lord said, — You grow sorrowful over the ivy for which you did not labor, nor did you do [anything] that it might grow, that was born in one night and perished in one night.

MGVS

11a But I, should I not show pity on GV

spare

Nineveh, the great city,

b in which there are G

more than a hundred and twenty thousand humans who do not know their right hand from V what is between their right hand and their left hand, and many animals? V beasts of burden? dwell

9b Is it good for you to be angry? Jon 4:4 – 9c Displeasure Jon 4:1 – 11a the great city Jon 1:2; 3:2–3

Y‚Suggestions for Reading‚Z 9–11 Divine Lesson in Mercy God repeats the question posed in v. 4, thereby forming a narrative frame that encapsulates the object lesson of the plant and worm. Whereas Jonah previously remained silent, here he answers, repeating his desire for death. As the book concludes with a final poignant question regarding the welfare of 120,000 ignorant persons as well as many animals, the narrative is left unresolved; there is no tying up of loose ends, no response from Jonah, and no indication of how the prophet’s story ended. Why would the author leave the audience with such an unsatisfying ending? Perhaps it is because the purpose of the book is not so much to tell the story of an 8th-c. prophet as it is to examine a theological topic: God’s mercy. On the one hand, the interrelationship of knowledge and culpability underlies God’s final question. God’s mercy toward the Ninevites has to do with their lack of knowledge; compared to Jonah (and, by extension, Israel), who has the

privilege of divine revelation, they might as well be ignorant of right and left. Moreover, the narrative implies that Jonah has never considered their position. It is therefore possible that Jonah receives new knowledge about God’s mercy, namely that God has special care for those who are ignorant of him. This message, however, seems to contradict that of many other biblical prophets, such as Amos and Jeremiah. For them, ignorance is a sign of idolatrous pride, not a reason for mercy. As usual with the Bible, paradoxical contradictions are to be held together. God is compassionate towards the ignorant yet will bring judgment to the idolatrous. Is it possible, then, that the author of Jonah seeks to direct the book’s final question to his contemporary audience—Jewish(?) readers who might have a one-sided understanding of the extent and meaning of God’s mercy? In order to be thoughtfully provocative in this manner, the author places the reader in a position of knowledge that is greater than that of Jonah, since this enables the reader to make judgments about Jonah’s attitudes and behaviors.

113

Jon :- Divine Lesson in Mercy

Structure of Qal Wah.omer 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.

Text Y‚Textual Criticism‚Z 10c overnight Orthographic Variant or Scribal Mistake in 4Q82? • 4Q82 f88–91 i:10 (4QXIIg) reads lyly (masc. pl. cstr.?; →DJD XV, 312). • M and Mur88 11:27 (MurXII) read lylh (masc. sg. abs.; →DJD II, 191). Y‚Literary Devices‚Z 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). 10–11 Qal Wah.omer (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. 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. 11a great Leitwort, Meaning See *dev1:2. 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 *jew4:11b; *chr4:11b.

Context Y‚Historical and Geographical Notes‚Z 11a Nineveh Assyria’s Last Capital See *hge1:2.

Reception Y‚Biblical Intertextuality‚Z 11a Nineveh A City of Biblical Imagination See *bib1:2. Y‚Jewish Tradition‚Z 10–11 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?” 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!” Y‚Christian Tradition‚Z 10b pity on the qîqāyôn God’s Lesson for Jonah

114

Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?

• →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.” 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 sixscore 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.” 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. *dev4:11. Y‚Literature‚Z 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 and 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?’”



Synthetic Notes

Annals of Sennacherib The annals of the Assyrian king Sennacherib were found inscribed on a number of objects and their final versions appear on three clay prisms featuring the same text: • The Taylor Prism at the British Museum (BM 91032): in 1830 the prism was acquired by Colonel R. Taylor, British Consul General at Baghdad. The British Museum purchased it from his widow in 1855. • The prism of the Oriental Institute of Chicago (OIM A2793): the Oriental Institute acquired the prism, dated to 689 b.c., via a Baghdadi auction in 1919. • The prism of the Israel Museum in Jerusalem: the Israel Museum acquired the prism, dated to 691 b.c., at an auction in 1970. These prisms present six cuneiform paragraphs written in Akkadian. They were discovered and acquired over the last two centuries. On the Taylor Prism, inscriptions occupy 82 + 83 + 82 + 80 + 85 + 75 lines. The annals describe the siege of Jerusalem during the reign of King Hezekiah and offer a striking contrast to the narratives of 2Kgs 18:13–19:36; 2Chr 32:1–22; Is 36–37. 2Kgs 19 recounts a successful Assyrian attack on Samaria, after which the population was deported, and the halting of an attack on Lachish thanks to the intervention of Hezekiah: his bid for peace was granted upon agreeing to give a tribute of 300 talents of silver and 30 talents of gold (drawn from the gates and ornaments of the palace and the Temple) to Sennacherib. The Annals state that 46 fortified towns and innumerable smaller settlements were conquered by the Assyrians with more than 200,150 people deported; the conquests were distributed among the three kings of the Philistines. It claims that Sennacherib’s siege confined Hezekiah in Jerusalem “like a bird in a cage,” abandoned by his mercenaries.

• Annals of Sennacherib iii 18–49 “Moreover, (as for) Hezekiah of the land Judah, who had not submitted to my yoke, I surrounded (and) conquered forty-six of his fortified cities, fortresses, and small(er) settlements in their environs, which were without number, by having ramps trodden down and battering rams brought up, the assault of foot soldiers, sapping, breaching, and siege engines. I brought out of them 200,150 people, young (and) old, male and female, horses, mules, donkeys, camels, oxen, and sheep and goats, which were without number, and I counted (them) as booty. As for him (Hezekiah), I confined him inside the city Jerusalem, his royal city, like a bird in a cage. I set up blockades against him and made him dread exiting his city gate. I detached from his land the cities of his that I had plundered and I gave (them) to Mitinti, the king of the city Ashdod, Padî, the king of the city Ekron, and Ṣilli-Bēl, the king of the city Gaza, and (thereby) made his land smaller. To the former tribute, their annual giving, I added the payment (of) gifts (in recognition) of my overlordship and imposed (it) upon them. As for him, Hezekiah, fear of my lordly brilliance overwhelmed him and, after my (departure), he had the auxiliary forces and his elite troops whom he had brought inside to strengthen the city Jerusalem, his royal city, thereby gaining reinforcements, along with 30 talents of gold, 800 talents of silver, choice antimony, large blocks of…, ivory beds, armchairs of ivory, elephant hide(s), elephant ivory, ebony, boxwood, every kind of valuable treasure, as well as his daughters, his palace women, male singers, (and) female singers brought into Nineveh, my capital city, and he sent a mounted messenger of his to me to deliver (this) payment and to do obeisance” (→Grayson and Novotny 2012, 1:176–177 [Sennacherib 22]).

General Israelite Cosmology Generally speaking, Israel’s cosmology was similar to that of its neighbors, such as the Canaanites or Babylonians. It should be recognized, however, that it is difficult, if not impossible, to outline a single cosmology of the Old Testament, since the many statements about the created world in its various poetic and narrative texts cannot be perfectly synthesized into one unified presentation of the universe. • According to some texts, the universe was essentially tripartite, consisting of the heavens, the earth, and an area under the earth that comprised Sheol and the primeval waters (cf. Ex 20:4; Ps 115:15–17; Sir 16:24–17:14). • There are also texts in which the merism “heaven and earth” denotes the whole cosmos or universe (e.g., Gn 1:1; 2:1,4; Ex 31:17; Ps 102:25; Is 48:13; 51:13,16). The World: Sky, Dry Land, Sea Sky • As indicated in Gn 1, the sky is a firmament (rāqîa‘) or solid vault that separates the terrestrial and heavenly oceans (cf. also Ps 19:1; 150:1; Dn 12:3; and the Hebrew text of Sir 43:1 [→Beentjes 2003, 118]). • This vault is fixed above the earth and has its foundation on the earth (Am 9:6; cf. 2Sm 22:8). • It formed a perfect seal with the earth so as to prevent leakage of the cosmic waters above the firmament (→Stadelmann 1970, 43). Dry Land • Sometimes the dry earth is presented as a flat object, perhaps in the shape of a great disc, that floated on the primeval waters (Jb 26:10; Prv 8:27; Is 40:22). • Elsewhere the earth is firmly set on pillars (1Sm 2:8) or foundations (Is 24:18; 40:21; Jer 31:37; Mi 6:2) that are perhaps sunk into the primeval waters (Jb 38:4–8). • Although the precise shape of the dry land is not clearly described, there are many references to the limits of the earth in the OT: the border(s), edge(s) of the earth (qeṣé/ qeṣôt) in Jb 28:24; Ps 135:7; Is 5:26; 40:28; 41:5,9; Jer 10:13; 51:16; the four corners of the earth (ʾarbaʿ kanepôt hāʾāreṣ) in Is 11:12; the ends of the earth (ʾapsé [hā]ʾāreṣ) in Dt 33:17; 1Sm 2:10; Jb 37:3; 38:13. Sea Sometimes the sea is described as one might expect. • The water of the sea is one of the basic elements from which the universe was formed (cf. Gn 1:9–10).

• The sea is the home of fish and other water creatures (e.g., Gn 1:20,22,26). • The sea enables travel and trade (e.g., Ps 104:25–26; 107:23; Prv 30:19; Ez 27:9). Beneath the surface, however, the sea takes on a mythological or other-worldly aspect. • Water is associated with the sea god Yam, the river god Nahar, and the primordial chaos dragon, identified variously as Tiamat, Leviathan, and Rehab (Jb 3:8; 40:25; Ps 104:26; Is 51:9–10), who lives in the sea. The divine struggle to maintain power over water elements is known broadly as the Chaoskampf (chaos-struggle) motif (cf. *bib2:3a,5a). • This cosmological background is present in Jonah’s prayer (Jon 2), which is indicated by the use of the word tehôm (G: abussos). In Gn 1:2, tehôm denotes the earth, formless and void, totally covered by the waters (cf. *voc2:5a). Above the Earth: The Heavens As noted above, the firmament separates the terrestrial and heavenly oceans, but it also contains openings that are referred to as windows, doors, or channels (→Stadelmann 1970; →Clines 2016, 179–181). • There are also several places where the firmament is closely associated with God, and particularly praise of God (Ps 19:1; 150:1; G-Dn 3:56; Sir 43:1 [MsMas: →Beentjes 2003, 118]). • The texts of Qumran develop the cosmology of the OT by conceptualizing God as existing above the heavenly ocean (cf. 4QPrQuot 1.31; 4QShirShabbd 1.143; 4QShirShabbf 6.4; 4QShirShabb 1.2–7; cf. also G-Dn 3:56). Under the Earth: Sheol and the Deep The realm under the earth has two components: the primeval waters and the underworld called Sheol. Primeval Waters • These are subterranean waters, sometimes identified with chaos (cf. Gn 1:1; Ex 20:4; Jb 38:16; G-Dn 3:77). The Underworld: Sheol • In some places, it is described as a pit or grave where the dead lead a shadowy existence; though one could metaphorically “dig” down to Sheol, it is separate from earth just as heaven is (Jb 26:5; Ps 139:8; Am 9:2). In other places, the underworld is simply referred to as “the earth” (1Sm 28:13; Ps 71:20; 106:17; Is 29:4).

Protoctist Entities: What Was with God at the Creation? How does the perfect, one creator-God relate to the diverse, plural cosmos? If God is one, uncreated, and totally transcendent, what does he have to do with that which is manifold, created, and contingent? This question, in various forms, is quite ancient; under a different guise and with different parameters—viz., as the problem of the one and the many—it is a fundamental theme in philosophy. Whereas Heraclitus tended to deny unity for the sake of plurality, and Parmenides denied plurality for the sake of unity, both Plato and Aristotle sought, in different ways, to harmonize oneness and plurality while preserving both. Later neoplatonists, in turn, sought to synthesize the Academic and the Peripatetic (see the beginning of →Proclus Elem. theol. for a summary of Platonic-Aristotelian ideas concerning the relationship between the one and the many). Still, the need for positing some answer to this question was felt outside the Academy and the Lyceum. Both Jewish and Hellenistic mysticism attempted a solution by positing middle terms between necessary being and contingent being. That is, a chain of semi-divine beings form a bridge between the cosmos and the totally transcendent creator. These entities were created before time, and so are, in some sense, co-eternal with God, albeit created. Hence they are dubbed “protoctists,” from the Greek prôtoktistês (from prôtos “first” and ktistos “wrought, made”). In turn, they are supposed to have assisted God in the creation of the cosmos. Examples include the Torah and the name of the Messiah. How these entities exist is unclear. Are they creative intentions in the mind of God? Are they schemata? Are they different hypostases of God? Though such questions are left unresolved in much of the biblical and peritestamental literature that treat protoctist entities, they are treated in the writings of such luminaries as Philo of Alexandria, Dionysius the Areopagite, and Maximus the Confessor, who arguably synthesize the mystical, theological, and philosophical ideas about these entities that are present in both Jewish and Hellenistic sources. 1 – In Scripture Intermediaries Present at Creation The first line of the Scriptures displays astonishing polysemic richness. • Gn 1:1: berē’šît can signify “in / by means of / through” (be) – “heads / beginning / first thing / principle” (rē’šît). Christian writers were aware of this polysemy. For example, →Irenaeus of Lyons Epid. 43 contends that Gn 1:1 should be translated, “The Son in the beginning: God established then the heaven and the earth” (Robinson 1920, 108). Presumably Irenaeus follows a tradition that likened rē’šît to ri’šôn, which can mean “firstborn son.” Two other witnesses to this tradition include: 1) →Hilary of Poitiers Tract. Ps. 2,§2, who remarks that berē’šît can be

translated in principio, in capite, or in filio, though he prefers in principio since it is closest to G; and 2) →Clement of Alexandria Ecl. 4.1, who, in commenting on Hos 1:10–11, explains hoti de archê ho huios Ôsêe didaskei saphôs “for also ‘beginning’ [or ‘principle’] is the son, as Hosea clearly teaches.” As the canonical Scriptures developed, speculation arose surrounding this “first principle.” What was “with God” in the beginning? Biblical Allusions to Protoctist Entities? Already within the biblical canon—and then progressing in Judaeo-Hellenistic mysticism—two fundamental aspects of God came to be seen as distinct and yet co-existent and co-eternal: his Word (Ps 33:6) and his Wisdom (Ps 104:24, Prv 8:22– 31). Although it is well known that, for Christians, these came to be understood as the uncreated persons (or processions) of a single tri-hypostatic God, they could be interpreted in other ways. Moreover, additional co-eternal entities can be teased out of Scripture: • God’s eternal Word and Wisdom can just as much be interpreted as his Torah. In general, see Ps 119, the great hymn to God’s Torah, particularly Ps 119:89 and Ps 119:130 (this accords well with the Gospels’ depiction of Jesus: he is not only the new Moses but also God’s Word and Torah incarnate); • repentance (Ps 90:2–3); • the divine throne (Ps 93:2) and the Temple (Jer 17:12); • the name of the Messiah (Ps 72:17) and his “goings forth” (Mi 5:2; cf. →Pirqe R. El. 3); • the Patriarchs (Hos 9:10); • the Garden of Eden (Gn 2:8), interpreting miqqedem as “beforehand,” not “eastward”; • Gehenna, interpreting toptê (“Tophet”) as such in Is 30:33. 2 – Peristestamental Reflections on the Protoctist Entities Apocryphal books and apocalyptic compositions developed the theological images found in the Scriptures and identified several pre-existing people or things: • the throne of glory “was the first thing created by God” (→2 En. 25.4); • paradise prepared from the beginning (→2 Bar. 4.3,7; →1 En. 60.8; 70.4; →2 En. 9.1; →4 Ezra 8.52); • Leviathan and Behemoth (→2 Bar. 29.4; →4 Ezra 6.49); • the glory or light of the first day (→2 Bar. 48.49; 66.7); • Gehenna and its torments, prepared for the wicked (→2 Bar. 59.2; →2 En. 10.4; →4 Ezra 7.84,93; 8.59; 13.37); • Abraham and Isaac, according to “The Prayer of Joseph,” a peritestamental text quoted in →Origen Comm. Jo. 2.25 (2§189, on Jn 1:6), “I [Jacob] am an angel of God and a primordial spirit, the firstborn of all creatures and Abraham and Isaac were created before any other work of God, I



Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?

am invested with the highest office in the face of God and I invoke him by his ineffable name”; • Moses: →T. Mos. 1.14 “He conceived and prepared me before the foundation of the world for me to be the mediator of the Covenant”; • Jerusalem (→2 Bar. 4.3–4; →4 Ezra 7.26; 8.52); • the Messiah bringing hidden treasures to light (→1 En. 46.3; 49.4; →4 Ezra 12.32; 14.9). 3 – Early Christian Reflections on Protoctist Entities According to →Stroumsa (1996, 42–43, 109–131), following →Daniélou (1962), Clement of Alexandria’s speculations on protoctist entities are drawn from the aforementioned texts just quoted, and his ideas possibly reflect wider Christian speculation at the time. Clement develops themes similar to the Talmud’s esoteric doctrine of creation and divine union—either through ascending upward or by calling down angels—respectively dubbed the Ma‘aseh Bereshit (“work of the beginning”) and the Ma‘aseh Merkavah (“work of the chariot”). • →Clement of Alexandria Strom. 4.3.2: The Gnostic tradition according to the canon of truth includes: (1) a record of the birth of the world, beginning with “the prophetic statements of Genesis”; (2) an ascent to “the central subject of theology.” The organizing principle (archê) of the hierarchy is the “Face of God,” an important theme in the apocalyptic literature of Second Temple Judaism, further amplified in emerging Christianity. Based on a theological tradition inherited from Judeo-Christian “presbyters”—quoted with reverence in →Clement of Alexandria Ecl. 11.1; 27.1; →Clement of Alexandria Adumbr. in 1Jn 1:1; →Clement of Alexandria Frag. (in →Eusebius of Caesarea Hist. eccl. 6.13.9; 6.14.5)—Clement lays out a complete hierarchical structure of the universe. The Firstborn More than a luminous aspect of the anthropomorphic dimension of God or a coded expression for a vision of the glory of the divine throne, the “Face of God” is for Clement—as for certain traditions of Hekhalot literature—a hypostatic face, the Son’s: • →Clement of Alexandria Exc. 10.5–6 “And he is said to be ‘inapproachable Light’ as ‘Only-Begotten,’ and ‘FirstBorn,’ ‘the things which eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, and which have not entered into the heart of man,’—and such a one shall not be found either among the First-Created or among men—but they ‘always behold the face of the Father’ (Mt 18:10) and the face of the Father is the Son, through whom the Father is known.” Angelic Cosmogony The first level of celestial entities contemplating the Face is constituted by the seven prôtoktistoi. They emanate from the Son: • →Clement of Alexandria Exc. 10.4 “For among the Seven there is neither inferiority nor superiority and no advance is left for them, since they have received perfection from the

beginning, at the time of the first creation from God through the Son.” The Creative Process Is a Series of Emanations from the Son-Savior • →Clement of Alexandria Exc. 47.1–3 “Now the Saviour became the first universal creator. ‘But Wisdom,’ the second, ‘built a house for herself and hewed out seven pillars’ and first of all she put forth a god, the image of the Father, and through him she made heaven and earth, that is ‘heavenly things, and the earthly’—the things on the right hand and on the left. This, as an image of the Father, then became a father and put forth first the psychic Christ, an image of the Son, then the archangels as images of the Aeons, then the angels of the archangels from the psychic and luminous substance to which the prophetic word refers.” On the one hand, these protoctists are counted with the angels and archangels, their subordinates. On the other hand, they carry the divine name and, as such, are called “gods.” Clement likens them to the “seven eyes of the Lord” (Zec 3:9; 4:10; Rv 5:6), to “thrones” (Col 1:16) and to “angels always contemplating the face of God” (Mt 18:10). The seven protoctists are characterized by simultaneous unity and multiplicity. Liturgically, they function as “high priests” vis-à-vis the archangels, just as the archangels are “high priests” to the angels, and so on: • →Clement of Alexandria Exc. 27.3 “…the archangels became the high priests of the angels, and the First-Created the high priests of the archangels.” Models for the Perfection of the Soul In their incessant contemplation of the face of God, the protoctists represent the model of souls that have become perfect. • →Clement of Alexandria Exc. 11 “When, therefore, the Lord said, ‘Despise not one of these little ones. Verily, I say unto you, their angels do always behold the face of the Father’ (Mt 18:10), [as is the pattern, such will be the elect,] when they have received the perfect advance.’ But ‘blessed are the pure in heart for they shall see God’ (Mt 5:8). And how could there be a face of a shapeless being? Indeed the Apostle knows heavenly, beautiful and intellectual bodies. How could different names be given to them, if they were not determined by their shapes, form, and body? There is one glory of the heavenly, another of the earthly, another of angels, another of archangels, because in comparison with bodies here, like the stars, they are incorporeal and formless, as in comparison with the Son, they are dimensional and sensible bodies; so also is the Son, if compared with the Father, and each one of the spiritual beings has its own power and its own sphere of action just as those who were first created both came into being together, and received completion, their common and undivided service.” Further Early Christian Speculation The Ps.-Clementine homilies (2nd–4th c.) have Peter exposit a cosmology similar to what we have seen above.

Protoctist Entities: What Was with God at the Creation?

• →Ps.-Clement Hom. 17.9 “One, then, is the God who truly exists…which sends forth from Him as from a centre the life-giving and incorporeal power; the whole universe with the stars and regions of the heaven, the air, the fire, and if anything else exists, is proved to be a substance infinite in height, boundless in depth, immeasurable in breadth, extending the life-giving and wise nature from Him over three infinites. It must be, therefore, that this infinite which proceeds from Him on every side exists, having as its heart Him who is above all, and who thus possesses figure; for wherever He be, He is as it were in the centre of the infinite, being the limit of the universe.” 4 – Rabbinic Reflections on Protoctist Entities Based on Scripture and its apocryphal reception, many Jewish writings (rabbinical and mystical) contend that, prior to creation, there existed various entities that would play major roles in sacred history. Protoctist Letters The →Sef. Yetzirah, “The Book of Creation/Formation” (ca. 2nd  c. a.d.), which would later be fundamental for Kabbalah, teaches that God created by means of the letters of the Hebrew alphabet. • →Sef. Yetzirah 1.2 “Ten are the ineffable Sephiroth. Twenty-two are the Letters, the Foundation of all things; there are Three Mothers, Seven Double and Twelve Simple letters.” • →Sef. Yetzirah 1.9–10 “The ineffable Sephiroth give forth the Ten numbers. First; the Spirit of the God of the living; Blessed and more than blessed be the Living God of ages. The Voice, the Spirit, and the Word, these are the Holy Spirit. Second; from the Spirit He produced Air, and formed in it twenty-two sounds—the letters; three are mothers, seven are double, and twelve are simple; but the Spirit is first and above these. Third; from the Air He formed the Waters, and from the formless and void made mire and clay, and designed surfaces upon them, and hewed recesses in them, and formed the strong material foundation. Fourth; from the Water He formed Fire and made for Himself a Throne of Glory with Auphanim, Seraphim and Kerubim, as his ministering angels; and with these three he completed his dwelling, as it is written, ‘Who maketh his angels spirits and his ministers a flaming fire’ (Ps 104:4).” • →Sef. Yetzirah 2.1 “He hath formed, weighed, and composed with these twenty-two letters every created thing, and the form of everything which shall hereafter be.” Further Rabbinic Reflections • →m. ’Abot 5.6 “Ten things were created on the eve of the Sabbath at twilight, and these are they: [1] the mouth of the earth, [2] the mouth of the well, [3] the mouth of the donkey, [4] the rainbow, [5] the manna, [6] the staff [of Moses], [7] the Shamir, [8] the letters, [9] the writing, and [10] the tablets. And some say: also the demons, the grave of Moses, and the ram of Abraham, our father. And some say: and also tongs, made with tongs.”



• →b. Pesaḥ. 54a “Seven phenomena were created before the world was created, and they are: Torah, and repentance, and the Garden of Eden, and Gehenna, and the Throne of Glory, and the Temple, and the name of Messiah.” • →Gen. Rab. 1.4 “In the beginning God created. Six things preceded the creation of the world; some of them were actually created, while the creation of the others was already contemplated. The Torah and the Throne of Glory were created. The Torah, for it is written, ‘The Lord made me as the beginning of His way, prior to His works of old’ (Prv 8:22). The Throne of Glory, as it is written, ‘Thy throne is established of old, etc.’ (Ps 93:2). The creation of the Patriarchs was contemplated, for it is written, ‘I saw your fathers as the firstripe in the fig-tree at her first season’ (Hos 9:10). [The creation of] Israel was contemplated, as it is written, ‘Remember Thy congregation, which Thou hast gotten aforetime’ (Ps 74:2). [The creation of] the Temple was contemplated, for it is written, ‘Thou throne of glory, on high from the beginning, the place of our sanctuary’ (Jer 17:12). The name of Messiah was contemplated, for it is written, ‘His name existeth ere the sun’ (Ps 72:17). R. Ahabah b. R. Ze’ira said: Repentance too, as it is written, ‘Before the mountains were brought forth, etc.’ (Ps 90:2), and from that very moment, ‘Thou turnest man to contrition, and sayest: Repent, ye children of men’ (Ps 90:3). I still do not know which was first, whether the Torah preceded the Throne of Glory or the Throne of Glory preceded the Torah.’ Said R. Abba b. Kahana: The Torah preceded the Throne of Glory, for it says, ‘The Lord made me as the beginning of His way, ere His works of old,’ which means, ere that whereof it is written, ‘Thy throne is established of old.’” • →Pirqe R. El. 10 “‘And the Lord had prepared a great fish to swallow up Jonah’ (Jon 1:17). Rabbi Ṭarphon said: That fish was specially appointed from the six days of Creation to swallow up Jonah, as it is said, ‘And the Lord had prepared a great fish to swallow up Jonah.’ He entered its mouth just as a man enters the great synagogue, and he stood (therein). The two eyes of the fish were like windows of glass giving light to Jonah.” The Torah was created before the creation of the world and was used as a blueprint for creation (→Gen. Rab. 1.10; →Tanḥ. Bereshit 1, Vayeshev 4.2). • →Gen. Rab. 1.1 “R. Oshaya commenced [his exposition thus]: ‘Then I was by Him, as a nursling (amon); and I was daily all delight’ (Prv 8:30). Amon means ‘tutor’; amon means ‘covered’; amon means ‘hidden’; and some say, amon means ‘great.’ Amon is a tutor, as you read, ‘As an omen (nursing-father) carrieth the sucking child’ (Nm 11:12). Amon means ‘covered,’ as in the verse, Ha’emunim (they that were clad—i.e., covered) in scarlet (Lam 4:5). Amon means ‘hidden,’ as in the verse, ‘And he concealed (omen) Hadassah’ (Est 2:7). Amon means ‘great,’ as in the verse, ‘Art thou better than No-amon’ (Na 3:8)? which is rendered, ‘Art thou better than Alexandria the Great, that is situate among the rivers?’ Another interpretation: amon is a workman (uman). The Torah declares: ‘I was the working tool of the Holy One, blessed be He.’ In human practice, when a mortal king builds a palace, he



Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?

builds it not with his own skill but with the skill of an architect. The architect moreover does not build it out of his head, but employs plans and diagrams to know how to arrange the chambers and the wicket doors. Thus God consulted the Torah and created the world, while the Torah declares, ‘In the beginning God created’ (Gn 1:1), ‘beginning’ referring to the Torah, as in the verse, ‘The Lord made me as the beginning of His way’ (Prv 8:22).” • →Zohar Parashat Toledot 1.134a “When the blessed Holy One desired, when it arose in His will, to create the world, He gazed into Torah and created it. For every act of creation throughout the world, the blessed Holy One gazed into Torah and created…As He was about to create Adam, Torah exclaimed: ‘If a human being is created and then proceeds to sin, and You punish him, why should the work of Your hands

be in vain, since he will be unable to endure Your judgement?’ He replied, ‘I have already prepared teshuvah [‘repentance’], before creating the world.’ Once He made the world and created Adam, the blessed Holy One exclaimed, ‘O world, world! You and your laws are based solely upon Torah. That is why I created the human being in you, so that he might engage in her, strive for her. If not, I will turn you back into chaos and void.’” Other entities include, • the Patriarchs (→Gen. Rab. 72.7); • the glory and light of the first day (→Gen. Rab. 3.6); • the Torah and the Temple (→b. Pesaḥ. 54a; →b. Ned. 39b; →Gen. Rab. 1.3; →Sifre Deut. 37.3; →Pirqe R. El. 3); • the children of Israel (→Midr. Ps. 74:2).

Bibliography

A AAS

Acta Apostolica Sedis

113 vols., Rome: Typis Polyglottis Vaticanis, 1909–.

Abarbanel Comm.

Isaac ben Judah Abarbanel (1437–1508), Commentary on the Book of Jonah

Bob Steven (trans.), Go to Nineveh: Medieval Jewish Commentaries on the Book of Jonah, Eugene OR: Pickwick, 2013.

’Abot

Pirqe ’Abot [“Chapters/Ethics of the Fathers,” 9th tractate in the order Nezîqîn, “Damages”]

Taylor Charles (ed., trans.), Sayings of the Jewish Fathers: Comprising Pirqe Aboth and Pereq R. Meir, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1877.

Ackerman 2010

Ackerman Susan, “Assyria in the Bible”

in Cohen Ada and Kangas Steven (eds.), Assyrian Reliefs from the Palace of Ashurnasirpal II: A Cultural Biography, Hanover NH: University Press of New England, 2010, 124–142.

Act. S. Brend.

Acta Sancti Brendani (ca. 8th–9th c. a.d.)

Moran Patrick F. (ed.), Acta Sancti Brendani: Original Latin Documents Connected with the Life of Saint Brendan, Dublin: Kelly, 1872.

Ahituv 1984

Ahituv Shmuel, Canaanite Toponyms in Ancient Egyptian Documents

Jerusalem: Magnes, 1984.

Alshich Jonah

Moshe Alshich (1508–1593), Jonah: Mar’os ha-Tzoveos

Shahar Ravi (trans.), The Book of Jonah: The Voyage of the Visionary: The Commentary of Rabbi Moshe Alshich on the Book of Jonah, Jerusalem: Feldheim, 1992.

Altschuler and Altschuler Metzudah

David Altschuler (1687–1769) and Hillel Altschuler (d. 1840?), Metzudah Zion, Metzudah David

2 vols., Livorno, 1780–1782.

Ambrose of Milan Ep.

Ambrose of Milan (ca. 340–397 a.d.), Epistulae

Beyenka Mary Melchior (trans.), Saint Ambrose: Letters 1–91 (The Fathers of the Church 26), New York NY: Fathers of the Church, 1954.

ANET

Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament

Pritchard James B. (ed.), 3rd ed., Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press, 1969.

ANF

Schaff Philip, Coxe Arthur Cleveland, Roberts Alexander, and Donaldson James (eds., trans.), Ante-Nicene Fathers

10 vols., Buffalo NY: Christian Literature Company, 1885– 1896.

Aphrahat Dem.

Aphrahat the Persian Sage (ca. 280–345 a.d.), Demonstrationes

Graffin René (ed.), Patrologia Syriaca: pars prima, 2 vols., Paris: Firmin-Didot, 1894–1907. Valavanolickal Kuriakose (trans.), Aphrahat: Demonstrations, 2 vols. (Moran Etho 23–24), Piscataway NJ: Gorgias Press, 2011.

Aquinas ST

Thomas Aquinas (1225–1274), Summa theologiae

The English Dominican Province (trans.), Saint Thomas Aquinas: Summa theologica, 10 vols., New York NY: Benziger, 1947.

Archer 1996

Archer Gleason L., A Survey of Old Testament Introduction

3rd ed., Chicago IL: Moody Press, 1994.

Aristophanes Nub.

Aristophanes (ca. 446–386 b.c.), Nubes

Henderson Jeffrey (ed., trans.), Aristophanes: Clouds, Wasps, Peace (Loeb Classical Library 488), Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press, 1998.



Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?

Aristotle Hist. an.

Aristotle (384–322 b.c.), Historia animalium

Peck Arthur L. and Balme D. M. (eds., trans.), Aristotle: History of Animals, 3 vols. (Loeb Classical Library 437– 439), Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press, 1965– 1991.

Augustine of Hippo Civ.

Augustine of Hippo (354–430 a.d.), De civitate Dei contra Paganos

Dyson Robert W. (ed., trans.), Augustine: The City of God against the Pagans (Cambridge Texts in the History of Political Thought), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998.

Augustine of Hippo Enarr. Ps.

Augustine of Hippo, Enarrationes in Psalmos

Boulding Maria (trans.), Saint Augustine: Expositions of the Psalms, 6 vols. (Works of Saint Augustine 3/15–20), New York NY: New City Press, 2000–2004.

Augustine of Hippo Ep.

Augustine of Hippo, Epistulae

Caillau Armand B. and Guillon D.M.N.S. (eds.), Sancti Aurelii Augustini opera omnia, vols. 38–41, Paris: Desbarres, 1835–1836. Teske Roland J. (trans.), Saint Augustine: Letters, 4 vols. (Works of Saint Augustine 2/1–4), Hyde Park NY: New City Press, 2001–2005.

Augustine of Hippo Nat. bon.

Augustine of Hippo, De natura boni contra Minachaeos

Zycha Joseph (ed.), Sancti Aureli Augustini operum, vol. 6/2: Contra Felicem; De natura boni; Epistula Secundini; Contra Secundinum; accedunt Evodii De fide contra Manichaeos et Commonitorium Augustini quod fertur (Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum 25/2), Vienna: Tempsky, 1892, 855–889.

Augustine of Hippo Quaest. Hept.

Augustine of Hippo, Quaestiones in Heptateuchum

Lienhard Joseph T. and Sean Doyle. (trans.), “Questions on the Heptateuch,” in Ramsey Boniface (ed.), Writings on the Old Testament (Works of Saint Augustine 1/14), New York NY: New City Press, 2016, 3–477.

Augustine of Hippo Serm.

Augustine of Hippo, Sermones

Hill Edmund (trans.), Sermons (The Works of Saint Augustine: A Translation for the 21st Century 3/1–11), Hyde Park NY: New City Press, 1990–1997.

Avesta: Yasna

Avesta: Yasna (ca. 3rd–6th c. a.d.)

Mills Lawrence Heyworth (trans.), The Zend-Avesta, vol. 3: The Yasna, Visparad, Āfrīnagān, Gāhs, and Miscellaneous Fragments, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1965.

B b.

Babylonian Talmud (ca. 500 a.d.)

Epstein Isidore et al. (eds., trans.), Hebrew-English Edition of the Babylonian Talmud: Translated into English with Notes, Glossary and Indices, 30 vols., London: Soncino, 1960–1990. Steinsaltz Adin Even-Israel (ed., trans.), The William Davidson Talmud, 44 vols., Jerusalem: Koren Noé, 2017.

Balsley 2012

Balsley Tilda, Oh No, Jonah!

Minneapolis MN: Kar-Ben, 2012.

B. Bat.

Baba Batra [“The Last Gate,” 3rd tractate in the order Nezîqîn, “Damages”]

See *b., *m., *t., and *y.

B. Qam.

Baba Qamma [“The first door,” 1st tractate in the order Nezîqîn, “Damages”]

See *b., *m., *t., and *y.

Bibliography



BaḤya Kad

BaḤya ben Asher ibn Halawa (1255– 1340), Kad ha-Kemach

Chavel Charles B. (ed.), Kitvei Rabbenu Baḥya, Jerusalem: Mossad ha-Rav Kook, 1970.

2 Bar.

2 Baruch (1st c. a.d.)

Klijn Albertus F.J. (trans.), OTP 2:621–652. Stone Michael Edward and Henze Matthias (trans.), 4  Ezra and 2 Baruch: Translations, Introductions, and Notes, Minneapolis MN: Fortress, 2013.

bar Hebraeus Laugh. St.

Gregory bar Hebraeus (1226–1286), The Laughable Stories

Budge Ernest A. Wallis (ed., trans.), The Laughable Stories: Collected by Mâr Gregory John Bar Hebræus, London: Luzac, 1897.

Barker 1991

Barker Margaret, The Gate of Heaven: The History and Symbolism of the Temple in Jerusalem

London: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, 1991.

Barthélemy 1992

Barthélemy Dominique, Critique textuelle de l’Ancien Testament

vol. 3 (Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis 50/3), Fribourg: Éditions universitaires de Fribourg, 1992.

Beck 2000

Beck John, Translators as Storytellers: A Study in Septuagint Translation Technique

(Studies in Biblical Literature 25), Bern: Peter Lang, 2000.

Beentjes 2003

Beentjes Pancratius, The Book of Ben Sira in Hebrew: A Text Edition of All Extant Hebrew Manuscripts and A Synopsis of All Parallel Hebrew Ben Sira Texts.

(Vetus Testamentum: Supplements 68), Leiden: Brill, 2003.

Bergsma and Pitre 2018

Bergsma John and Pitre Brant, A Catholic Introduction to the Bible: The Old Testament

San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2018.

Berlin 2008

Berlin Adele, The Dynamics of Biblical Parallelism

2nd ed. (The Biblical Resource Series), Grand Rapids MI: Eerdmans, 2008.

Bewer 1912

Bewer Julius A., “A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Jonah”

in Mitchell Hinkcley, Smith John, and Bewer Julius (ed.), A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi, and Jonah (International Critical Commentary), Edinburg: T&T Clark, 1912.

BHS

Elliger Karl and Rudolph Wilhelm (eds.), Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia

Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelstiftung, 1977.

Bickerman 1967

Bickerman Elias, Four Strange Books of the Bible: Jonah, Daniel, Koheleth, Esther

Tel Aviv: Schocken, 1967.

Bousset 1916

Bousset Wilhelm, “Eine jüdische Gebetssammlung im siebenten Buch der apostolischen Konstitutionen”

Nachrichten von der Königlichen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Göttingen: Philologisch-historische Klasse (1915) 438–485.

Bradshaw 2002

Bradshaw Paul F., The Search for the Origins of Christian Worship: Sources and Methods for the Study of Early Liturgy

New York NY: Oxford University Press, 2002.

Burke 2011

Burke Aaron, “Early Jaffa: From the Bronze Age to the Persian Period”

in Peilstöcker Martin and Burke Aaron (eds.), The History and Archaeology of Jaffa, vol. 1, Los Angeles CA: Cotsen Institute of Archaeology Press, 2011, 63–78.

Burke, Peilstöcker, and Pierce 2014

Burke Aaron, Peilstöcker Martin, and Pierce George, “Hellenistic Architecture in Jaffa: The Excavations of the Jaffa Cultural Heritage Project in the Visitor’s Centre”

Palestine Exploration Quarterly 146 (2014) 40–55.



Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?

Burnett 2010

Burnett D. Graham, Trying Leviathan: The Nineteenth-Century New York Court Case That Put the Whale on Trial and Challenged the Order of Nature

Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press, 2010.

BV

Benedictine Vulgate

Pontifical Abbey of St Jerome-in-the-City (ed.), Biblia Sacra iuxta latinam vulgatam versionem ad codicum fidem, 18 vols., Rome: Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 1926– 1995.

C C

Sixto-Clementine Vulgate (1592–1598)

Colunga Alberto and Turrado Lorenzo (eds.), Biblia Sacra iuxta vulgatam Clementinam (Biblioteca de autores cristianos 14), Madrid: Editorial Católica, 1946.

CAD

Roth Martha et al. (eds.), The Assyrian Dictionary of the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago

21 vols., Chicago IL: University of Chicago, 1956–2010.

Calvin Prael. proph. min.

John Calvin (1509–1564), Praelectiones in XII prophetas minores

Cunitz Edouard et al. (eds.), Joannis Calvini opera quae supersunt omnia, vols. 42–44 (Corpus Reformatorum 70–72), Brunswick: Schwetschke, 1890. Owen John (trans.), Commentaries on the Twelve Minor Prophets, 5 vols., Edinburgh: Calvin Translation Society, 1846–1849.

Cary 2008

Cary Phillip, Jonah

(Brazos Theological Commentary on the Bible), Grand Rapids MI: Brazos Press, 2008.

Cassiodorus Exp. Ps.

Flavius Magnus Aurelius Cassiodorus, (ca. 485–585 a.d.), Expositio Psalmorum

Walsh Patrick Gerard (trans.), Cassiodorus: Explanation of the Psalms (Ancient Christian Writers 53), New York NY: Newman Press, 1991.

CCC

United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, Catechism of the Catholic Church (1993)

2nd ed., Vatican City: Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 2000.

Celsus Doct. ver.

Celsus (2nd c. a.d.), De doctrina vera

Taylor Thomas (trans.), Arguments of Celsus, Porphyry, and the Emperor Julian, Against the Christians, London: Rodd, 1830.

CIJ

Corpus inscriptionum Judaicarum

Frey Jean-Baptiste (ed.), Corpus inscriptionum Judaicarum. Recueil des inscriptions juives qui vont du IIIe siècle avant Jésus-Christ au VIIe siècle de notre ère, 2 vols. (Sussidi allo studio delle antichità cristiane 1, 3), Rome: Pontificio Istituto di Archeologia Cristiana, 1936–1952.

Claassens 2015

Claassens L. Julianna, “Tragic Laughter: Laughter as Resistance in the Book of Job”

Interpretation: A Journal of Bible and Theology 69 (2015) 143–55.

1 Clem.

Clement of Rome (1st c. a.d.), First Letter to the Corinthians

Roberts Alexander and Donaldson James (trans.), ANF 1:1–22.

Clement of Alexandria Adumbr.

Clement of Alexandria (ca. 150–215 a.d.), Adumbrationes in epistulas canonicas

Zahn Theodor (ed.), Forsuchungen zur Geschichte des neutestamentlichen Kanons und der altkirchlichen Literatur, vol. 3: Supplementum Clementinum, Erlangen: Deichert, 1884, 64–103. Wilson William (trans.), ANF 2:571–577.



Bibliography

Clement of Alexandria Ecl.

Clement of Alexandria, Eclogae ex Scripturis propheticis

(PG 9), Paris: Migne, 1857, col. 697–728.

Clement of Alexandria Exc.

Clement of Alexandria, Excerpta ex Theodoto

Casey Robert Pierce (ed., trans.), The Excerpta ex Theodoto of Clement of Alexandria (Studies and Documents 1), London: Christophers, 1934, 40–91.

Clement of Alexandria Frag.

Clement of Alexandria, Fragmenta

Wilson William (trans.), ANF 2:569–588.

Clement of Alexandria Strom.

Clement of Alexandria, Stromata

Wilson William (trans.), ANF 2:299–568.

Clines 2016

Clines David J. A., “One or Two Things You May Not Know about the Universe: The Cosmology of the Divine Speeches in Job”

in Jarick John (ed.), Perspectives on Israelite Wisdom: Proceedings of the Oxford Old Testament Seminar (Library of Hebrew Bible/Old Testament Studies 618), London: Bloomsbury, 2016, 172–186.

Const. ap.

Constitutiones apostolicae (4th c. a.d.)

Donaldson James (trans.), ANF 7:391–505. Funk Franz Xavier (ed.), Didascalia et Constitutiones apostolorum, 2 vols., Paderborn: Schoeningh, 1906.

Coulter 1926

Coulter Cornelia Catlin, “The ‘Great Fish’ in Ancient and Medieval Story”

Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association 57 (1926) 32–50.

CPL

Oriental Orthodox Coptic Lectionary

Boutros Shenouda Doss (trans.), Katameros, 4 vols., Ottawa: St. Mary Coptic Orthodox Church, 1995–2004.

Craig 1999

Craig Kenneth, The Poetics of Jonah

Macon GA: Mercer, 1999.

Cyril of Alexandria Comm. Jon.

Cyril of Alexandria (ca. 376–444 a.d.), Commentarius in Jonam prophetam

Hill Robert Charles (trans.), St. Cyril of Alexandria: Commentary on the Twelve Prophets, 2 vols. (The Fathers of the Church: A New Translation 116, 124), Washington DC: The Catholic University of America Press, 2008–2012.

Cyril of Jerusalem Cat. illum.

Cyril of Jerusalem (ca. 315–387 a.d.), Catechesis illuminandorum

McCauley Leo P. and Stephenson Anthony A. (trans.), The Works of St. Cyril of Jerusalem, 2 vols. (The Fathers of the Church: A New Translation 61, 64), Washington DC: Catholic University of America, 1969–1970.

D Dalley 2015

Dalley Stephanie, The Mystery of the Hanging Garden of Babylon: An Elusive World Wonder Traced

New York NY: Oxford University Press, 2015.

Dalton 2007

Dalton Russell W., “Perfect Prophets, Helpful Hippos, and Happy Endings: Noah and Jonah in Children’s Bible Storybooks in the United States”

Religious Education 102 (2007) 298–313.

Daniélou 1962

Daniélou Jean, “Les traditions secrètes des Apôtres”

Eranos Jahrbuch 31 (1962) 199–215.

Davidson 1984

Davidson Alice Joyce, The Story of Jonah

Norwalk CT: Gibson, 1984.

DBTEL

Jeffrey David Lyle (dir.), A Dictionary of Biblical Tradition in English Literature

Grand Rapids MI: Eerdmans, 1992.



Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?

Diodorus of Sicily Bib. hist.

Diodorus of Sicily (ca. 90–21 b.c.), Bibliotheca historica

Oldfather Charles Henry et al. (eds., trans.), Diodorus Siculus: Library of History, 12 vols. (Loeb Classical Library 279, 303, 340, 375, 384, 399, 389, 422, 377, 390, 409, 423), London: Heinemann, 1933–1967.

Dionysius of Halicarnassus Comp.

Dionysius of Halicarnassus (ca. 60–67 b.c.), De compositione verborum

Roberts William Rhys (ed., trans.), Dionysius of Halicarnassus: On Literary Composition, London: MacMillan, 1910.

Dirksen 1988

Dirksen Piet B., “The Old Testament Peshitta”

in Mulder Martin J. and Sysling Harry (eds.), Mikra: Text, Translation, Reading, and Interpretation of the Hebrew Bible in Ancient Judaism and Early Christianity (Compendia Rerum Iudaicarum ad Novum Testamentum 2/1), Philadelphia PA: Fortress, 1988, 255–297.

DJD

Discoveries in the Judaean Desert

de Vaux Roland, Benoit Pierre, Ulrich Eugene, Tov Emmanuel, et al. (eds.), 40 vols., Oxford: Clarendon, 1955–2008. Volumes cited in this commentary: Benoit Pierre, Milik Józef Tadeusz, and de Vaux Roland (eds., trans.), Les grottes de Murabba‘ât (DJD II), Oxford: Clarendon, 1961. Ulrich Eugene, Cross Frank Moore, et al. (eds., trans.), Qumran Cave 4. X: The Prophets (DJD XV), Oxford: Clarendon, 1997. Ulrich Eugene, Cross Frank Moore, et al. (eds., trans.), Qumran Cave 4. XI: Psalms to Chronicles (DJD XVI), Oxford: Clarendon, 2000. Stegemann Hartmut, Schuller Eileen, and Newsom Carol (eds., trans.), Qumran Cave 1.III: 1QHodayota: With Incorporation of 1QHodayotb and 4QHodayota-f (DJD XL), Oxford: Clarendon, 2009.

Doane 1910

Doane Thomas W., Bible Myths, and Their Parallels in Other Religions

7th ed., New York NY: The Truth Seeker, 1910.

Dobbs-Allsopp 1995

Dobbs-Allsopp F. W., “Ingressive qwm in Biblical Hebrew”

Zeitschrift für Althebraistik 8 (1995) 31–55.

Duan. Finn

Duanaire Finn (12th–17th c.)

MacNeil Eoin and Murphy Gerard (eds., trans.), Duanaire Finn: The Book of the Lays of Fionn, 3 vols., London: Irish Texts Society, 1908–1953.

Duchet-Suchaux 1994

Duchet-Suchaux Gaston and Pastoureau Michel, The Bible and the Saints

Paris: Flammarion, 1994.

DV

Vatican II, Dei Verbum (Nov. 18, 1965) [Constitution on the Word of God]

Acta Apostolicae Sedis 58 (1966) 817–835. Flannery Austin (ed.), Vatican Council II: The Conciliar and Postconciliar Documents, rev. ed., Collegeville MN: Liturgical Press, 1996.

E EA

el-Amarna Tablets (14th c. b.c.)

Rainey Anson F. (ed., trans.), Schniedewind William, and Cochavi-Rainey Zipora (eds.), The El-Amarna Correspondence: A New Edition of the Cuneiform Letters from the Site of El-Amarna Based on Collations of All Extant Tablets, 2 vols. (Handbook of Oriental Studies. Section 1: The Near and Middle East 110), Leiden: Brill, 2015.



Bibliography

Ecker 2010

Ecker Avner, “The Coinage of Jaffa in the Roman Period”

Israel Numismatic Journal 17 (2010) 151–176.

Eissfeldt 1965

Eissfeldt Otto, Einleitung in das Alte Testament

rd ed., Tübingen: Mohr, 1964. Ackroyd Peter (trans.), The Old Testament: An Introduction, Oxford: Blackwell, 1965.

1 En.

1 Enoch = Ethiopian Enoch (2nd c. b.c.– 1st c. a.d.)

Isaac Ephraim (trans.), OTP 1:5–90. Nickelsburg George W.E. and VanderKam James C. (eds., trans.), 1 Enoch: A New Translation, Minneapolis MN: Fortress, 2004.

2 En.

2 Enoch = Slavonic Enoch (1st c. a.d.)

Andersen Francis I. (trans.), OTP 1:101–221. Macaskill Grant (ed.), The Slavonic Texts of 2 Enoch (Studia Judaeoslavica 6), Leiden: Brill, 2013.

Ep. Arist.

Epistle of Aristeas (3rd c. b.c.–1st c. a.d.)

Pelletier André (ed., trans.), Lettre d’Aristée à Philocrate (SC 89), Paris: Cerf, 1962. Thackeray Henry St. John (trans.), The Letter of Aristeas, London: SPCK, 1917.

Ephrem Carm. Nis.

Ephrem the Syrian (ca. 306–373 a.d.), Carmina Nisibena

Stopford J.T. Sarsfield (trans.), NPNF2 13/2:167–219.

Ephrem Hymn. virg.

Ephrem the Syrian , Hymni de virginitate

McVey Kathleen (trans.), Ephrem the Syrian: Hymns (Classics of Western Spirituality), Mahwah NJ: Paulist Press, 1989, 259–460.

Epiphanius of Salamis Mens. pond.

Epiphanius of Salamis (ca. 315–403 a.d.), De mensuris et ponderibus

Dean James Elmer (ed., trans.), Epiphanius’ Treatise on Weights and Measures: The Syriac Version (Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilization 11), Chicago IL: University of Chicago, 1935.

Erickson 2021

Erickson Amy, Jonah: Introduction and Commentary

(Illuminations), Grand Rapids MI: Eerdmans, 2021.

‘Erub.

‘Erubin [“Mixtures,” 2nd tractate in the order Mô‘ēd, “Festivals”]

See *b., *m., *t., and *y.

Euripides Androm.

Euripides (480–406 b.c.), Andromeda

Collard Christopher and Cropp Martin (eds., trans.), Euripides: Fragments: Aegeus-Meleager (Loeb Classical Library 504), Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press, 2008.

Euripides Rhes.

Euripides, Rhesus

Kovacs David (ed., trans.), Euripides: Bacchae; Iphigenia at Aulis; Rhesus (Loeb Classical Library 495), Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press, 2003.

Eusebius of Caesarea Hist. eccl.

Eusebius of Caesarea, Historia ecclesiastica

Lake K., Oulton J.E.L., and Lawlor H.J. (eds., trans.), Eusebius: The Ecclesiastical History, 2 vols. (Loeb Classical Library 153, 256), London: Heinemann, 1926–1932.

Eusebius of Caesarea Onom.

Eusebius of Caesarea (ca. 260–339 a.d.), Onomasticon

Freeman-Grenville Greville Stewart Parker, Chapman III Rupert L., and Taylor Joan E. (eds., trans.), The Onomasticon by Eusebius of Caesarea: Palestine in the Fourth Century a.d., Jerusalem: Carta, 2003.

4 Ezra

4 Ezra (1st c. a.d.)

Metzger Brian M. (trans.), OTP 1:525–559. Weber Robert and Gryson Roger (eds.), Biblia sacra iuxta vulgatam versionem, Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1969, 1931–1974.



Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?

F Fiey 1965

Fiey Jean Maurice, Assyrie chrétienne  : contribution à l’étude de l’histoire et de la géographie ecclésiastiques et monastiques du nord d’Iraq

2 vols. (Recherches publiées sous la direction de l’Institut de lettres orientales de Beyrouth 22–23), Beirut: Imprimerie catholique, 1965.

Fiey 1993

Fiey Jean Maurice, Pour un Oriens christianus novus: répertoire des diocèses syriaques orientaux et occidentaux

2 vols. (Beiruter Texte und Studien 49–50), Beirut: DMG Orient-Institut, 1993.

Fiey 2004

Fiey Jean Maurice, Saints syriaques

(Studies in Late Antiquity and Early Islam 6), Princeton NJ: Darwin Press, 2004.

Fisher Comm. Pen. Ps.

John Fisher (1469–1535), Commentary on the Seven Penitential Psalms (1509)

Phillimore John Swinnerton (ed.), John Fisher, Bishop of Rochester: Commentary on the Seven Penitential Psalms, 2 vols., London: Manresa, 1914–1915.

Fox 1924

Fox Francis, Sixty-Three Years of Engineering: Scientific and Social Work

London: John Murray, 1924.

Fuchs 2013

Fuchs Linda Møskeland, “Iconographic Structure: Recognizing the Resurrected Jesus on the Vatican Jonah Sarcophagus”

in Romaine James and Stratford Linda (eds.), ReVisioning: Critical Methods of Seeing Christianity in the History of Art, Eugene OR: Cascade Books, 2013, 45–70.

Gagarin and Fantham 2010

Gagarin Michael and Fantham Elaine (eds.), The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Greece and Rome

7 vols., New York NY: Oxford University Press, 2010.

G Gardiner 1911

Gardiner Alan H. (ed., trans.), Egyptian Hieratic Texts

Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1911.

Gen. Rab.

Genesis Rabbah (5th–6th c. a.d.)

Freedman Harry and Simon Maurice (eds., trans.), Midrash Rabbah, vols. 1–2, London: Soncino, 1961. Scherman Nosson and Zlotowitz Meir (eds., trans.), Kleinman Edition: The Midrash Rabbah: Sefer Bereshit, 4 vols., New York NY: Mesorah, 2014.

George 2003

George Andrew R. (ed.), The Babylonian Gilgamesh Epic: Introduction, Critical Edition and Cuneiform Texts

2 vols., Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003.

Gerstein 1997

Gerstein Mordicai, Jonah and the Two Great Fish

New York NY: Simon & Schuster, 1997.

Gesenius 1847

Gesenius Wilhelm, Lexicon manuale Hebraicum et Chaldaicum in Veteris Testamenti libros

Leipzig: Vogel, 1847. Prideaux Tregelles Samuel (trans.), Hebrew and Chaldee Lexicon to the Old Testament Scriptures, London: Bagster, 1859.

GK

Gesenius Wilhelm and Kautzsch Emil (rev.), Hebräische Grammatik

Leipzig: Vogel, 1909. Cowley Arthur Ernest (trans.), Gesenius’ Hebrew Grammar, Oxford: Clarendon, 1910.

Glaser 2015

Glaser Rebecca, Jonah and the Big Fish and Other Bible Stories

Minneapolis MN: Spark House Family, 2015.



Bibliography

Gloss. ord.

Glossa ordinaria (7th–12th c.)

McDermott Ryan (trans.), “The Ordinary Gloss on Jonah,” Publications of the Modern Language Association 128 (2013) 424–438. Morard Martin (ed.), Glossae Scripturae Sacrae-electronicae, database, Centre national de la recherche scientifique, online: gloss-e.irht.cnrs.fr.

Goedicke 1968

Goedicke Hans, “The Capture of Joppa”

Chronique d’Égypte 43 (1968) 219–233.

Goodenough 1935

Goodenough Erwin R., By Light, Light: The Mystical Gospel of Hellenistic Judaism

New Haven CT: Yale University Press, 1935.

Grayson and Novotny 2012, 2014

Grayson Albert Kirk and Novotny Jamie, The Royal Inscriptions of Sennacherib, King of Assyria (704–681 BC)

2 vols. (The Royal Inscriptions of the Neo-Assyrian Period 3/1–2), Winona Lake IN: Eisenbrauns, vol. 1: 2012, vol. 2: 2014.

Greene 2007

Greene Rhonda Gowler, Jonah and the Great Big Fish

Grand Rapids MI: Zonderkidz, 2007.

Gregory of Nazianzus Or.

Gregory of Nazianzus (321–390 a.d.), Orationes

Browne Charles Gordon and Swallow James Edward (trans.), NPNF 7:203–436.

Gunkel 1933

Gunkel Herman and Begrich Joachim (ed.), Einleitung in die Psalmen: Die Gattungen der religiosen Lyrik Israels

(Göttinger Handkommentar zum Alten Testament: Abt. 2 Suppl.), Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1933. Nogalski James D. (trans.), An Introduction to the Psalms (Mercer Library of Biblical Studies), Macon GA: Mercer University Press, 1998.

H Ḥag.

Ḥagigah [“Feast Offerings,” 12th tractate in the order Mô‘ēd, “Feast”]

See *b., *m., *t., and *y.

HALOT

Koehler Ludwig, Baumgartner Walter, Stamm Johann Jakob, et al., Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament

5 vols., Leiden: Brill, 1995–2000.

Hamilton 1953

Hamilton Edith, Mythology: Timeless Tales of Gods and Heroes

New York NY: New American Library, 1953.

Hamlin 2018

Hamlin Hannibal, The Bible in Shakespeare

New York NY: Oxford University Press, 2018.

Hapgood Service Book

Hapgood Isabel Florence (ed., trans.), Service Book of the Holy Orthodox-Catholic Apostolic (Greco-Russian) Church

Boston MA: Houghton Mifflin, 1896.

Harper OED

Harper Douglas (ed.), Online Etymology Dictionary

etymonline.com.

Hatch and Redpath 1906

Hatch Edwin and Redpath Henry, A Concordance to the Septuagint and the Other Greek Versions of the Old Testament (Including the Apocryphal Books)

2 vols., Oxford: Clarendon, 1897–1906.

Hayes 1974

Hayes John Haralson (ed.), Old Testament Form Criticism

(Trinity University Monograph Series in Religion 2), San Antonio TX: Trinity University Press, 1974.

Herodotus Hist.

Herodotus (ca. 484–425 b.c.), Historiae

Godley Alfred Denis (ed., trans.), Herodotus: The Persian Wars, 4 vols. (Loeb Classical Library 117–120), London: Heinemann, 1920–1925.



Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?

Hilary of Poitiers Tract. Ps.

Hilary of Poitiers (ca. 315–367 a.d.), Tractatus super Psalmos

Doignong Jean and Demeulenaere Roland (eds.), Sancti Hilarii Pictaviensis episcopi Tractatus super Psalmos, 2 vols. (Corpus Christianorum: Series Latina 61, 61B), Turnhout: Brepols, 1997–2009.

Ḥiyya Hegyon

Abraham bar Ḥiyya (ca. 1070–1136), Sefer Hegyon ha-Nefesh ha-’Atzuvah

Wigoder Geoffrey (trans.), Abraham bar Ḥayya: The Meditation of the Sad Soul (Littman Library of Jewish Civilization), New York NY: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1969.

Hoffman 2003

Hoffman Mary, Animals of the Bible

New York NY: Phyllis Fogelman Books, 2003.

Holladay 1999a

Holladay William L., “‘Hebrew Verse Structure’ Revisited (I): Which Words ‘Count’?”

Journal of Biblical Literature 118 (1999) 19–32.

Holladay 1999b

Holladay William L., “‘Hebrew Verse Structure’ Revisited (II): Which Words ‘Count’?”

Journal of Biblical Literature 118 (1999) 401–416.

Homer Il.

Homer (ca. 8th c. b.c.), Ilias

Murray Augustus T. (ed., trans.) and Wyatt William F. (rev.), Iliad, 2 vols. (Loeb Classical Library 170–171), London: Heinemann, 1924–1925.

Homer Od.

Homer, Odyssea

Murray Augustus T. (ed., trans.) and Dimock George E. (rev.), The Odyssey, 2nd ed., 2 vols. (Loeb Classical Library 104–105), Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press, 1995.

Hôrologion to mega

Hôrologion to mega periechon hapasan tên anêkousan autôi akolouthian, kata tên taxin tês Anatolikês tou Christou Ekklêsias kai exairetôs tôn hypokeimenôn autêi euagôn monastêriôn

Koutloumousianos Bartholomaios (ed.), Hôrologion to mega periechon, Venice: Zerbos, 1851. The Great Horologion: Translated from the Greek by the Holy Transfiguration Monastery, Brookline MA: Holy Transfiguration, 1997.

Horsch 1916

Horsch John, Menno Simons: His Life, Labors, and Teachings

Scottdale PA: Mennonite Publishing House, 1916.

Ḥul.

Ḥullin [“Ordinary/Mundane Things,” 3rd tractate in the order Qodāšîm, “Holy Things”]

See *b., *m., *t., and *y.

Hutton 1983

Hutton Warwick, Jonah and the Great Fish

New York NY: Atheneum, 1983.

I ibn Ezra Comm.

Abraham ibn Ezra (ca. 1089–1164), Commentary on the Minor Prophets (ca. 1151–1161)

Nby’ym ’ḥrwnym [Latter Prophets], Tel Aviv: Schocken, 1959. Bob Steven (trans.), Go to Nineveh: Medieval Jewish Commentaries on the Book of Jonah, Eugene OR: Pickwick, 2013.

Irenaeus of Lyons Epid.

Irenaeus of Lyons (ca. 130–200 a.d.), Epideixis

Robinson J. Armitage (trans.), St. Irenaeus: The Demonstration of the Apostolic Preaching (Translations of Christian Literature), London: SPCK, 1920.

Irenaeus of Lyons Haer.

Irenaeus of Lyons, Adversus haereses

Roberts Alexander and Rambaut William (trans.), ANF 1:309–567.

Isocrates Hel. enc.

Bibliography



Isocrates (436–388 b.c.), Helenae encomium

Van Hook Larue (ed., trans.), Isocrates, vol. 3 (Loeb Classical Library 373), Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press, 1945.

J Jacob of Sarug Hom.

Jacob of Sarug (ca. 451–521 a.d.), Homiliae selectae Mar-Jacobi Sarugensis

Bedjan Paul (ed.), 5 vols., Leipzig: Harrassowitz, 1905– 1910.

Jacobsen and Lloyd 1935

Jacobsen Thorkild and Lloyd Seton, Sennacherib’s Aqueduct at Jerwan

Chicago IL: OIC, 1935.

Jenson 2008

Jenson Philip, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah: A Theological Commentary

(Library of Hebrew Bible/Old Testament Studies 496), London: T&T Clark, 2008.

Jerome Comm. Jon.

Jerome of Stridon (ca. 347–420 a.d.), Commentarium in Jonam

Adriaen Marc (ed.), S. Hieronymi presbyteri opera, part 1, vol. 6: Commentarii in prophetas minores: Osee, Ioelem, Amos, Abdiam, Ionam, Michaeam, 2 vols. (Corpus Christianorum: Series Latina 76–76A), Turnhout: Brepols, 1969– 1970, 1:377–419. Scheck Thomas P. et al. (trans.), Commentaries on the Twelve Prophets: Jerome, 2 vols. (Ancient Christian Texts), Wheaton IL: IVP Academic, 2016, 1:244–275.

Jerome Ep.

Jerome of Stridon, Epistulae

Fremantle William Henry, Lewis George, and Martley William Gibson (trans.), NPNF2 6:1–295.

Jerome Pelag.

Jerome of Stridon, Adversus Pelagianos

Hritzu John N. (trans.), St. Jerome: Dogmatic and Polemical Works (The Fathers of the Church: A New Translation 53), Washington DC: Catholic University of America Press, 1965, 223–378.

Jerome Ruf.

Jerome of Stridon, Adversus Rufinum, or Apologia contra Rufinum

Lardet Pierre (ed.), S. Hieronymi presbyteri opera, part 3, vol. 1: Contra Rufinum (Corpus Christianorum: Series Latina 79), Turnhout: Brepols, 1982.

John Chrysostom Exp. Ps.

John Chysostom (349–407 a.d.), Expositio in Psalmos

(PG 55), Paris: Migne, 1862, cols. 35–528. Hill Robert Charles (trans.), St. John Chrysostom: Commentary on the Psalms, 2 vols., Brookline MA: Holy Cross Orthodox Press, 1998.

John Chrysostom Hom. Gen.

John Chrysostom, Homiliae in Genesim

Hill Robert Charles (trans.), St. John Chrysostom: Homilies on Genesis, 2 vols. (The Fathers of the Church: A New Translation 74, 82), Washington DC: Catholic University of America Press, 1990–1999.

John Chrysostom Laz.

John Chrysostom, De Lazaro

Roth Catharine (trans.), St. John Chrysostom: On Wealth and Poverty, Crestwood NY: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1984.

John Chrysostom Paenit.

John Chrysostom, De Paenitentia

Christo George (trans.), St. John Chrysostom: On Repentance and Almsgiving (The Fathers of the Church: A New Translation 96), Washington DC: Catholic University of America Press, 1947.

John Chrysostom Stat.

John Chrysostom, Antiochenum de statuis

Stephens W.R. Wood (trans.), NPNF 9:331–489.

Ad

populum



Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?

Josephus A.J.

Josephus (ca. 37–100 a.d.), Antiquitates judaicae

Thackeray Henry St. John et al. (eds., trans.), Josephus: Jewish Antiquities, 9 vols. (Loeb Classical Library 242, 281, 326, 365, 410, 433, 456, 489–490), London: Heinemann, Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press, 1926– 1965.

Josephus B.J.

Josephus, Bellum judaicum

Thackeray Henry St. John et al. (eds., trans.), Josephus: The Jewish War, 3 vols. (Loeb Classical Library 203, 210, 487), London: Heinemann, Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press, 1926–1965.

Joüon and Muraoka 2008

Joüon Paul and Muraoka Takamitsu, A Grammar of Biblical Hebrew

Rome: Editrice Pontificio Istituto Biblico, 2008.

Justin Martyr Dial.

Justin Martyr (ca. 100–165 a.d.), Dialogus cum Tryphone

Falls Thomas B. (trans.), St. Justin Martyr: Dialogue with Trypho, 2nd ed. (The Fathers of the Church: A New Translation 3), Washington DC: Catholic University of America Press, 2003.

K Kimchi Comm.

David Kimchi (1160–1236), Commentary on the Minor Prophets

Nby’ym ’ḥrwnym [Latter Prophets], Tel Aviv: Schocken, 1959. Bob Steven (trans.), Go to Nineveh: Medieval Jewish Commentaries on the Book of Jonah, Eugene OR: Pickwick, 2013.

Kisʼ Qiṣaṣ

Muḥammad ibn ʻAbd Allāh Kisʼ (11th c.), Qiṣaṣ al-anbiyāʼ

Thackston Wheeler M. (trans.), Tales of the Prophets, Chicago IL: Great Books of the Islamic World, 1997.

Kitchen 1996

Kitchen Kenneth Anderson, Ramesside Inscriptions: Translated & Annotated, part 2: Ramesses II, Royal Inscriptions

2 vols., Oxford: Blackwell, 1996–1999.

Kitchen 2008

Kitchen Robert, “On the Road to Nineveh: Dramatic Narrative in Jacob of Serug’s Mēmrā on Jonah”

in Kiraz George Anton (ed.), Malphono w-Rabo d-Malphone: Studies in Honor of Sebastian P. Brock (Gorgias Eastern Christianity Studies 3), Piscataway NJ: Gorgias, 2008, 367–383.

Kohler 1924

Kohler Kaufmann, “The Essene Version of the Seven Benedictions as Preserved in the VII Book of the Apostolic Constitutions”

Hebrew Union College Annual 1 (1924) 410–425.

Kurfess 1941

Kurfess Alfons, “Oracula Sibyllina I/II”

Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft 40 (1941) 151–165.

L Lev. Rab.

Leviticus Rabbah (5th c. a.d.)

Scherman Nosson and Zlotowitz Meir (eds., trans.), Kleinman Edition: The Midrash Rabbah: Sefer Vayikra, 2 vols., New York NY: Mesorah, 2014.



Bibliography

Limburg 1993

Limburg James, Jonah: A Commentary

(Old Testament Library), Louisville KY: Westminster John Knox, 1993.

Lorenz 1946

Lorenz Graham, How God Fix Jonah

New York NY: Reynal & Hitchcock, 1946.

LSJ

Liddell Henry, Scott Robert, Jones Henry Stuart, and McKenzie Roderick, A Greek–English Lexicon

9th rev. ed., Oxford: Clarendon, 1996.

Lucian of Samosata Ver. hist.

Lucian of Samosata (ca. 120–180 a.d.), Verae historiae

Harmon Austin Morris (ed., trans.), Lucian, vol. 1 (Loeb Classical Library 14), London: Heinemann, 1913, 247–302.

Luckenbill 1926–1927

Luckenbill Daniel David (trans.), Ancient Records of Assyria and Babylonia

2 vols., Chicago IL: University of Chicago, 1926–1927.

Luther Lect. Jon.

Martin Luther (1483–1546), Lectures on Jonah (1524–1526)

Froehlich Charles D. (trans.) and Oswald Hilton C. (ed.), Luther’s Works, vol. 19: Lectures on the Minor Prophets II: Jonah; Habakkuk, St. Louis MO: Concordia Publishing House, 1974, 1–104.

Luther Tischr.

Martin Luther, Tischreden (1531–1544)

Hazlitt William (ed., trans.), The Table Talk of Martin Luther, London: Bohn, 1857. Knaake Karl et al. (eds.), D. Martin Luthers Werke: Weimarer Ausgabe, part 2: Tischreden, 6 vols., Weimar: Böhlaus, 1912–1921.

Luzzatto Derek

Moshe Chaim Luzzatto (1707–1746), Derek ha-Šēm

Jerusalem: Itzhak Malzan, 1914. Kaplan Aryeh (trans.), Rabbi Moshe Chaim Luzzatto: The Way of God, New York NY: Feldheim, 1977.

M m.

Mishnah (ca. 200 a.d.)

Danby Herbert (trans.), The Mishnah, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1933.

MacArthur 1899

MacArthur Robert Stuart, Bible Difficulties and Their Alleviative Interpretation: Old Testament

New York NY: Treat, 1899.

3 Macc.

3 Maccabees (ca. 1st c. b.c.–2nd c. a.d.)

Anderson Hugh (trans.), OTP 2:517–529. Emmet Cyril William (trans.), The Third Book of Maccabees, London: SPCK, 1918.

Machzor

Machzor, or High Holiday Prayerbook

Ben Zion Bokser (ed., trans.), The High Holyday Prayerbook: Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur, New York NY: Hebrew Publishing Company, 1959.

Mackall 2016

Mackall Dandi Daley, Jonah and the Fish

Carol Stream IL: Tyndale House, 2016.

Magonet 1983

Magonet Jonathan, Form and Meaning: Studies in Literary Technique in the Book of Jonah

(Bible and Literature Series), Sheffield: Almond Press, 1983.

Malbim Gé’ ḥizzāyôn

Malbim (Meir Leibush ben Yechiel Michel, 1809–1879), Gé’ ḥizzāyôn in Nevî’îm û-ketûvîm ‘im pārûš miqrā’é qōdeš

Bob Steven (trans.), Go to Nineveh: Medieval Jewish Commentaries on the Book of Jonah, Eugene OR: Pickwick, 2013.



Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?

Malko 2002

Malko Odisho and Baaba Yuel A. (trans.), “We Are Assyrians”

Journal of Assyrian Academic Studies 16 (2002) 77–95.

Mart. Ascen. Isa.

Martyrdom and Ascension of Isaiah (1st–2nd c. a.d.)

Knibb Michael A. (trans.), OTP 2:156–176.

Martínez and Watson 1992

Martínez Florentino García (ed.) and Watson Wilfred G.E. (trans.), The Dead Sea Scrolls Translated: The Qumran Texts in English

Leiden: Brill, 1992.

Marzollo 2004

Marzollo Jean, Jonah and the Whale (and the Worm)

New York NY: Little, Brown, and Company, 2004.

Maximus the Confessor Quaest. Thal.

Maximus the Confessor (ca. 580–662 a.d.), Quaestiones ad Thalassium

Constas Maximos (trans.), St. Maximos the Confessor: On Difficulties in Sacred Scripture; The Responses to Thalassios (The Fathers of the Church: A New Translation 136), Washington DC: Catholic University of America Press, 2018.

McKissack and McKissack 1998

McKissack Patricia C. and McKissack Fredrick L. Jr., Let My People Go: Bible Stories Told by a Freeman of Color

New York NY: Atheneum, 1998.

Meg.

Megillah [“Scroll,” 10th tractate in the order Mô‘ēd, “Festivals”]

See *b., *m., *t., and *y.

Meier 1992

Meier Samuel A., Speaking of Speaking: Marking Direct Discourse in the Hebrew Bible

(Vetus Testamentum: Supplements 46), Leiden: Brill, 1992.

MekRI

Mekilta de-Rabbi Ishmael (ca. 3rd c. a.d.)

Lauterbach Jacob Zallel (ed., trans.), Mekilta de-Rabbi Ishmael: A Critical Edition on the Basis of the Manuscripts and Early Editions with an English Translation, Introduction and Notes, 3 vols. (Schiff Library of Jewish Classics), Philadelphia PA: Jewish Publication Society, 1933–1935.

Melville Moby Dick

Herman Melville (1819–1891), Moby Dick, or The Whale (1851)

Parker Hershel (ed.), Moby-Dick: An Authoritative Text, Contexts, Criticism, New York NY: Norton & Company, 2018.

Menaḥ.

Menaḥot [“Offerings,” 2nd tractate in the order Qodāšîm, “Holy things”]

See *b., *m., *t., and *y.

Metzger 1925

Metzger George Oren (ed.), The World’s Most Famous Trial: The Tennessee Evolution Case

Cincinnati OH: National Book Company, 1925.

Midr. Ps.

Midrash on the Psalms (ca. 1050–1450 a.d.)

Braude William Gordon (trans.), The Midrash on Psalms, 2 vols. (Yale Judaica Series 13/1–2), New Haven CT: Yale University Press, 1959.

Miles 1975

Miles Jack A., “Laughing at the Bible: Jonah as Parody”

The Jewish Quarterly Review 63 (1975) 168–181.

Miller 2003

Miller Cynthia L., The Representation of Speech in Biblical Hebrew Narrative: A Linguistic Analysis

(Harvard Semitic Museum Monographs 55), Winona Lake IN: Eisenbrauns, 2003.

Miller 2018

Miller II Robert D., The Dragon, the Mountain, and the Nations: An Old Testament Myth, Its Origins, and Its Afterlives

(Explorations in Ancient Near Eastern Civilizations 6), Winona Lake IN: Eisenbrauns, 2018.



Bibliography

Miss. Rom. 1570

Missale Romanum ex decreto sacrosancti concilii Tridentini restitutum (1570)

28th ed., Bonn: Aedibus Palmarum, 2004.

N Narsai Hom.

Narsai (ca. 405–500 a.d.), Homiliae

Mingana Alphonse (ed.), Narsai doctoris Syri homiliae et carmina, 2 vols., Mosul: Typis Fratrum Praedicatorum, 1905.

Ned.

Nedarim [“Vows”, 3rd tractate in the order Nāšîm, “Women/Wives”]

See *b., *m., *t., and *y.

1001 Nights

The Thousand and One Arabian Nights (post 8th c. a.d.)

Poole Edward Stanley (ed.) and Lane Edward Williams (trans.), The Thousand and One Nights, 3 vols., rev. ed., London: Chatto & Windus, 1889.

NPNF1

Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: First Series

Schaff Philip (ed.), A Select Library of Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of the Christian Church, 14 vols., Buffalo NY: Christian Literature Company, 1886–1890.

NPNF2

Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Second Series

Schaff Philip and Wace Henry (eds.), A Select Library of Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of the Christian Church, 14 vols., Buffalo NY: Christian Literature Company, 1890–1900.

O O’Connor 1980

O’Connor Michael P., Hebrew Verse Structure

Winona Lake IN: Eisenbrauns, 1980.

OED

Simpson John Andrew and Weiner Edmund S.C. (eds.), Oxford English Dictionary

20 vols., 2nd ed., Oxford: Clarendon, 1989.

Oppert 1877

Oppert Jules (trans.), “Inscription on the Sarcophagus of King Esmunazar”

in Birch Samuel (ed.), Records of the Past, vol. 9, London: Samuel Bagster, 1877, 109–114.

Origen Cels.

Origen (ca. 184–253 a.d.), Contra Celsum

Chadwick Henry (ed., trans.), Origen: Contra Celsum, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1965.

Origen Comm. Jo.

Origen, Commentarii in evangelium Joannis

Menzies Allan (trans.), ANF 10:297–410.

Origen Hom. Jer.

Origen, Homiliae in Jeremiam

Clark Smith John. (trans.), Origen: Homilies on Jeremiah; Homily on 1 Kings 28 (The Fathers of the Church: A New Translation 97), Washington DC: Catholic University of America Press, 1998, 3–318.

Origen Or.

Origen, De oratione

Greer Rowan A. (trans.), Origen: An Exhortation to Martyrdom; Prayer; First Principles: Book IV; Prologue to the Commentary on the Song of Songs; Homily XXVII on Numbers (The Classics of Western Spirituality), New York NY: Paulist Press, 1979, 81–170.

OTP

Charlesworth James H. (ed.), Old Testament Pseudepigrapha

2 vols., New York NY: Doubleday, 1983–1985.

Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?

 Owen 1981

Owen David, “An Akkadian Letter from Ugarit at Tel Aphek”

Tel Aviv 8 (1981) 1–17.

P Page and Page 2006

Page Nick and Page Claire, Jonah the Moaner

(Read with Me), Berkhamsted: Make Believe Ideas, 2006.

Paulinus of Nola Carm.

Paulinus of Nola (354–431 a.d.), Carmina

Walsh Patrick G. (trans.), The Poems of St. Paulinus of Nola (Ancient Christian Writers 40), New York NY: Newman Press, 1975.

Pausanias Descr.

Pausanias (ca. 115–180 a.d.), Graeciae descriptio

Jones William Henry S. and Ormerod Henry A. (eds., trans.), Pausanias: Description of Greece, 5 vols. (Loeb Classical Library 93, 188, 272, 297, 298), London: Heinemann, 1918–1935.

PCZ

Zenon Papyri

Edgar Campbell Cowan (ed.), Zenon Papyri, 4 vols. (Catalogue général des antiquités égyptiennes du Musée du Caire 79, 82, 85, 90), Cairo: Institut français d’archéologie orientale, 1925–1931. Edgar Campbell Cowan, Guéraud Octave, and Jouguet Pierre (eds.), Zenon Papyri, vol. 5 (Publications de la Société Fouad I de papyrologie. Textes et documents 5), Cairo: Institut français d’archéologie orientale, 1940.

Perkins 1987

Perkins Larry, “The Septuagint of Jonah: Aspects of Literary Analysis Applied to Biblical Translation”

Bulletin of the International Organization for Septuagint and Cognate Studies 20 (1987) 43–53.

Perrin 2009

Perrin W.F., Würsig Bernd G., and Thewissen J.G.M., Encyclopedia of Marine Mammals

San Diego CA: Academic Press, 2009.

Pesaḥ.

Pesaḥim [“Passover Festival”, 3rd tractate in the order Mô‘ēd, “Festivals”]

See *b., *m., *t., and *y.

Pesiq. Rab Kah.

Pesiqta de-Rab Kahana (ca. 6th c. a.d.)

Braude William Gordon and Kapstein Israel James (trans.), Pesikta de-Rab Kahana: R. Kahana’s Compilation of Discourses for Sabbaths and Festal Days, 2nd ed., Philadelphia PA: Jewish Publication Society, 2002.

Petit and Bonacossi 2017

Petit Lucas P. and Bonacossi Daniele Morandi (eds.), Nineveh, the Great City: Symbol of Beauty and Power

(Papers on Archaeology of the Leiden Museum of Antiquities 13), Leiden: Sidestone, 2017.

PG

Migne Jacques-Paul et al. (eds., trans.), Patrologiae Cursus Completus: Series Graeca

161 vols. in 166, Paris: Imprimerie catholique, 1857–1866.

Piacenza Pilg.

Pilgrim of Piacenza (ca. 570 a.d.)

Wilkinson John (trans.), Jerusalem Pilgrims before the Crusades, Warminster: Aris & Phillips, 2002, 129–151.

Pirqe R. El.

Pirqe de-Rabbi Eliezer (ca. 800 a.d.)

Friedlander Gerald (trans.), Pirḳê de Rabbi Eliezer (The Chapters of Rabbi Eliezer the Great): According to the Text of the Manuscript Belonging to Abraham Epstein of Vienna, London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner, 1916.

Plato Resp.

Plato (ca. 428/423–348/347 b.c.), Respublica

Jones C. Emlyn-Jones and Preddy W. (eds., trans.), Plato: Republic, 2 vols. (Loeb Classical Library 237, 276), Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press, 2013.

Bibliography



Pliny Nat.

Pliny the Elder (23–79 a.d.), Naturalis historia

Rackham Harris, Jones William Henry Samuel, and Eichholz David E. (eds., trans.), Pliny: Natural History, 10 vols. (Loeb Classical Library 330, 352–353, 370–371, 392–394, 418–419), London: Heinemann, 1938–1963.

P. Lond.

Kenyon Frederic G. et al. (eds.), Greek Papyri in the British Museum

7 vols., London: British Museum, 1893–1974.

Plutarch Luc.

Plutarch (ca. 46–120 AD), Lucullus

Perrin Bernadotte (ed., trans.), Plutarch: Lives, vol. 2: Themistocles and Camillus; Aristides and Cato Major; Cimon and Lucullus (Loeb Classical Library 47), London: Heinemann, 1914, 469–609.

Plutarch Nic.

Plutarch, Nicias

Perrin Bernadotte (ed., trans.), Plutarch: Lives, vol. 3: Pericles and Fabius Maximus; Nicias and Crassus (Loeb Classical Library 65), London: Heinemann, 1916, 207–312.

Plutarch Sol.

Plutarch, Solon

Perrin Bernadotte (ed., trans.), Plutarch: Lives, vol. 1: Theseus and Romulus; Lycurgus and Numa; Solon and Publicola (Loeb Classical Library 46), London: Heinemann, 1914, 403–500.

Pomponius Mela Chor.

Pomponius Mela (1st c. a.d.), Chorographia

Silberman Alain (ed., trans.), Pomponius Mela: Chorographie, Paris: Les Belles Lettres, 1988.

Porphyry Christ.

Porphyry (ca. 234–305 a.d.), Contra Christianos

von Harnack Adolf (ed.), Porphyrius, “Gegen die Christen”, 15 Bücher: Zeugnisse, Fragmente und Referate (Abhandlungen der Königlich Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften: Philosophisch-historische Klasse 1), Berlin: Verlag der Königlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1916. Taylor Thomas (trans.), Arguments of Celsus, Porphyry, and the Emperor Julian, Against the Christians, London: Rodd, 1830.

Prenzlau 1999

Prenzlau Sheryl, Deuteronomy

New York NY: Pitspopany, 1999.

Price and Nida 1978

Price Brynmor F. and Nida Eugene A., A Translators Handbook on the Book of Jonah

(Helps for Translators), London: UBS, 1978.

Proclus Elem. theol.

Proclus (c. 412–485 a.d.), Elementatio theologica

Dodds Eric Robinson (ed., trans.), Proclus: The Elements of Theology, 2nd ed., Oxford: Clarendon, 1963.

Ps.-Apollodorus Bibl.

Pseudo-Apollodorus (post 1st c. b.c.), Bibliotheca

Frazer James George (ed., trans.), Apollodorus: The Library; Epitome, 2 vols. (Loeb Classical Library 121–122), London: Heinemann, 1921.

Ps.-Callisthenes Alex.

Pseudo-Callisthenes, Historia Alexandri magni (2nd–3rd c. a.d.)

Wolohojian Albert Mugrdich (trans.), The Romance of Alexander the Great by Pseudo-Callisthenes: Translated from the Armenian Version (Records of Civilization: Sources and Studies 82), New York NY: Columbia University Press, 1969.

Ps.-Clement Hom.

Pseudo-Clement, Homiliae (3rd c. a.d.)

Rehm Bernhard and Strecker Georg (eds.), Die Pseudoklementinen, vol. 1: Homilien (Die griechischen christlichen Schriftsteller der ersten Jahrhunderte 42), 3rd ed., Berlin: Akademie-Verlag, 1992. Smith Thomas, Peterson Peter, and Donaldson James (trans.), ANF 8:223–346.

Ps.-Scylax Peripl.

Pseudo-Scylax (4th c. b.c.), Periplus

Shipley Graham (ed., trans.), Pseudo-Skylax’s Periplous: The Circumnavigation of the Inhabited World, Exeter: Bristol Phoenix, 2011.

 Ps.-Tertullian Jona

Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?

Pseudo-Tertullian, Carmen de Jona propheta

Oehler Franz (ed.), Tertulliana omnia opera: Editio maior, vol. 2, Leipzig: Weigel, 1851, 769–711. Thelwall Sydney (trans.), ANF 4:127–129.

Q 1QHa

Qumran Cave 1, Hodayota [“Thanksgiving Hymns”] (2nd c. b.c.)

Stegemann Hartmut, Schuller Eileen, and Newsom Carol (eds., trans.), Qumran Cave 1.III: 1QHodayota: With Incorporation of 1QHodayotb and 4QHodayota–f (DJD XL), Oxford: Clarendon, 2009.

Qidd.

Qiddušin [“Betrothal,” 7th tractate in the order Nāšîm, “Women/Wives”]

See *b., *m., *t., and *y.

Qur’an

Ali Abdullah Yusuf (trans.), The Glorious Qur’an: Translation and Commentary

Kashmiri Bazar, Lahore: Muhammad Ashraf, 1934.

R Radal Comm. PRE

Radal (Rabbi David Luria, 1798–1855), Commentary on Pirqê de-Rabbi Eliezer

Warsaw: Bomberg, 1852.

Rahlfs 2006

Rahlfs Alfred (ed.), Septuaginta: id est Vetus Testamentum Graeca iuxta LXX interpretes (1935)

Rahlfs Alfred and Hanhart Robert (eds.), 2nd ed., Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2006.

Rambam Hilch. Tesh.

Rambam (Rabbi Moses ben Maimon or Maimonides, 1137–1204), Hilchot Teshuva [“The Laws of Repentance”]

Touger Eliyahu (ed., trans.), Mishneh Torah, vol. 4, New York NY: Moznaim, 1998.

Rashbam Comm. Pent.

Rashbam (Rabbi Shmuel bar Meir, ca. 1085–1158), Commentary on the Pentateuch

Rosin David (ed.), Breslau: Schottlaender, 1882.

Rashi Comm.

Rashi (Rabbi Shlomo ben Yitzhak, 1040– 1105), Commentary on the Minor Prophets

Bob Steven (trans.), Go to Nineveh: Medieval Jewish Commentaries on the Book of Jonah, Eugene OR: Pickwick, 2013. Cohen Abraham (ed., trans.), The Twelve Prophets (Soncino Books of the Bible), London: Soncino, 1948.

Rawlinson 1850

Rawlinson Henry Creswicke, “On the Inscriptions of Assyria and Babylonia”

Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland 12 (1850) 401–483.

RCL

The Consultation on Common Texts, Revised Common Lectionary

Nashville TN: Abingdon, 1992.

RML

United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, The Roman Missal: The Lectionary for Mass

New York NY: Catholic Book Publications, 1970.

Romeny and Morrison 2011

Romeny Bas ter Haar and Morrison Craig, “Peshitta”

in Brock Sebastian et al. (eds.), Gorgias Encyclopedic Dictionary of the Syriac Heritage, Piscataway NJ: Gorgias, 2011, 326–331.

Roop 2002

Roop Eugene F., Ruth, Jonah, Esther

(Believers Church Bible Commentary), Scottdale PA: Herald Press, 2002.



Bibliography

S Salters 1994

Salters Robert B., Jonah & Lamentations

(Old Testament Guides), Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1994.

Salvian Ep.

Salvian the Presbyter (405–490 a.d.), Epistulae

O’Sullivan Jeremiah F. (trans.), The Writings of Salvian, the Presbyter (The Fathers of the Church: A New Translation 3), Washington DC: Catholic University of America Press, 1947, 233–264.

Sanh.

Sanhedrin [“Court of Justice,” 4th tractate in the order Nezîqîn, “Damages”]

See *b., *m., *t., and *y.

Sasson 1990

Sasson Jack M. (trans.), Jonah: A New Translation with Introduction, Commentary, and Interpretation

(The Anchor Bible 24B), New York NY: Doubleday, 1990.

Schaeffer 1933

Schaeffer Claude F.A., “Les fouilles de Minet-el-Beida et de Ras-Shamra. Quatrième campagne (printemps 1932) : rapport sommaire”

Syria 14 (1933) 93–127.

Scher 1908

Scher Addai, “Notice des mss. syriaques et arabes conservés dans la bibliothèque de l’évêché chaldéen de Mardin”

Revue des bibliothèques 8 (1908) 64–95.

Scull and Hammond 2006

Scull Christina and Hammond Wayne G., The J.R.R. Tolkien Companion & Guide

2 vols., Boston MA: Houghton Mifflin, 2006.

Sef. Yetzirah

Sefer Yetzirah [Book of the Creation/Formation] (ca. 2nd c. a.d.)

Goldschmidt Lazarus (ed., trans.), Sepher Jeṣirah: Das Buch der Schöpfung, Frankfurt am Main: Kaffmann, 1894. Westcott William Wynn (trans.), Sepher Yetzirah: The Book of Formation and the Thirty-Two Paths of Wisdom, 2nd ed., London: Theosophical Society, 1893.

Shakespeare Pericles

William Shakespeare (1564–1616), Pericles, Prince of Tyre

The Complete Works of William Shakespeare, New York NY: Collier, 1905.

Shepherd 2018

Shepherd Michael B., A Commentary on the Book of the Twelve: The Minor Prophets

(Kregel Exegetical Library), Grand Rapids MI: Kregel Academic, 2018.

Sherwood 2001

Sherwood Yvonne, A Biblical Text and Its Afterlives: The Survival of Jonah in Western Culture

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001.

Shimo

Shimo: The Book of Prayers of the Common Hebdomadary of the Syriac Church

Griffiths Bede (trans.), The Book of Common Prayer (Shimo) of the Syrian Church, Piscataway NJ: Gorgias, 2011.

Sib. Or.

Sibylline Oracles (1st–4th c. a.d.)

Collins John J. (trans.), OTP 2:327–472. Lightfoot Jane L. (ed., trans.), The Sibylline Oracles, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007.

Sifre Deut.

Sifre to Deuteronomy (ca. 3rd c. a.d.)

Neusner Jacob (trans.), Sifre to Deuteronomy: An Analytical Translation, 2 vols. (Brown Judaic Studies Monograph Series 98, 101), Atlanta GA: Scholars Press, 1987.

Simon 1999

Simon Uriel (ed.) and Schramm Lenn J. (trans.), Jonah: The Traditional Hebrew Text with the New JPS Translation

(JPS Bible Commentary), Philadelphia PA: JPS, 1999.



Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?

Simpson 2005

Simpson St. John, “Christians at Nineveh in Late Antiquity”

Iraq 67 (2005) 285–294.

S. ‘Olam Rab.

Seder ‘Olam Rabbah (2nd c. a.d.)

Girón Blanc Luis-Fernando (trans.), Seder ‘Olam Rabbah: El gran orden del universo: Una cronología Judía (Biblioteca Midrásica 18), Estella: Verbo Divino, 1996.

Somadeva Kath.

Somadeva (11th c. a.d.), Kathasaritsagara

Penzer Norman Mosley (ed.) and Tawney Charles Henry (trans.), The Ocean of Story, being C. H. Tawney’s Translation of Somadeva’s Kathā sarit sāgara (or Ocean of Streams of Story), 10 vols., London: Sawyer, 1924–1928.

Spier 1985

Spier Peter, The Book of Jonah

New York NY: Doubleday, 1985.

Stadelmann 1970

Stadelmann Luis, The Hebrew Conception of the World

(Analecta Biblica 39), Rome: PIB, 1970.

Stephanus Byzantinus Ethn.

Stephanus Byzantinus (6th c. a.d.), Ethnica

Holstenius Lucas et al. (eds.), Stephanus Byzantinus cum annotationibus, Leipzig: Kühn, 1825.

Strabo Geogr.

Strabo (ca. 64 b.c.–20 a.d.), Geographica

Jones Horace L. (ed., trans.), Strabo: Geography, 8 vols. (Loeb Classical Library 49–50, 182, 196, 211, 223, 241, 267), London: Heinemann, 1917–1932.

Stronach and Lumsden 1992

Stronach D. and Lumsden S., “UC Berkeley’s Excavations at Nineveh”

Biblical Archaeologist 55/4 (Dec. 1992) 227–233.

Stroumsa 1996

Stroumsa Gedaliahu Guy, Hidden Wisdom: Esoteric Traditions and the Roots of Christian Mysticism

(Studies in the History of Religions 70), Leiden: Brill, 1996.

Stuart 1987

Stuart Douglas R., Hosea–Jonah

(World Biblical Commentary 31), Grand Rapids MI: Zondervan, 1987.

Sukkah

Sukkah [“Holiday of Sukkot,” 6th tractate in the order Mô‘ēd, “Festivals”]

See *b., *m., *t., and *y.

T t.

Tosefta (3rd c. a.d.)

Lieberman Saul (ed.), The Tosefta, 5 vols., New York NY: Jewish Theological Seminary of America, 1955–1988. Neusner Jacob (trans.), The Tosefta, 6 vols., New York NY: KTAV, 1977–1981.

Ta‘an.

Ta‘anit [“Fasting,” 9th tractate in the order Mô‘ēd, “Festivals”]

See *b., *m., *t., and *y.

Tanḥ.

Midrash Tanḥuma (9th c. a.d.)

Berman Samuel A. (trans.), Midrash Tanhuma-Yelammedenu: An English Translation of Genesis and Exodus from the Printed Version of Tanhuma-Yelammedenu with an Introduction, Notes, and Indexes, Hoboken NJ: KTAV, 1996. Townsend John T. (trans.), Midrash Tanhuma (S. Buber Recension), 3 vols., Hoboken NJ: KTAV, 1989–2003.

Tertullian Marc.

Tertullian (ca. 160–230 a.d.), Adversus Marcionem

Holmes Peter (trans.), ANF 3:269–475.

Tertullian Pud.

Tertullian, De pudicitia

Le Saint William P. (trans.), Tertullian: Treatises on Penance: On Penitence and On Purity (Ancient Christian Writers 28), New York NY: Newman Press, 1959, 53–130.



Bibliography

Tertullian Res.

Tertullian, De resurrectione carnis

Holmes Peter (trans.), ANF 3:545–594.

Tg. Chr.

Targum of Chronicles (8th–9th c. a.d.)

McIvor J. Stanley (trans.), The Targum of Chronicles (The Aramaic Bible 19), Collegeville MN: Liturgical Press, 1994.

Tg. Jon.

Targum Jonathan (4th–5th c. a.d.)

Cathcart Kevin J. and Gordon Robert P. (trans.), The Targum of the Minor Prophets (The Aramaic Bible 14), Wilmington DE: Glazier, 1989. Levine Étan (ed., trans.), The Aramaic Version of Jonah, Jerusalem: Jerusalem Academic Press, 1975.

Tg. Ps.-Jon.

Targum Pseudo-Jonathan = Targum Yerushalmi I (ca. 650 a.d.)

McNamara Martin J. and Clarke Ernest G. (trans.), Targum Neofiti 1 and Pseudo-Jonathan: Numbers (The Aramaic Bible 4), Wilmington DE: Glazier, 1995.

Theodore of Mopsuestia Comm. Jon.

Theodore of Mopsuestia (ca. 352–428 a.d.), Commentarius in Jonam prophetam

Hill Robert Charles (trans.), Theodore of Mopsuestia: Commentary on the Twelve Prophets (The Fathers of the Church: A New Translation 108), Washington DC: Catholic University of America Press, 2004.

Theodoret of Cyrus Interpr. Jon.

Theodoret of Cyrus (ca. 393–460 a.d.), Interpretatio Jonae prophetae

(PG 81), Paris: Migne, 1864, cols. 1719–1740.

Theodosius Situ

Theodosius, De situ terrae sanctae (ca. 530 a.d.)

Geyer Paul et al. (eds.), Itineraria et alia geographica (Corpus Christianorum: Series Latina 175), Turnhout: Brepols, 1965, 113–125.

Thérèse of Lisieux Autob.

Marie-Françoise Thérèse Martin (1843– 1897), Manuscrits autobiographiques, or Histoire d’une âme

Taylor Thomas N. (trans.), Saint Thérèse of Lisieux, the Little Flower of Jesus: A Revised Translation of the Definitive Carmelite Edition of Her Autobiography & Letters, together with the Story of Her Canonization, and an Account of Several of Her Heavenly Roses, New York NY: Kenedy, 1927.

Thompson and Hutchinson 1929

Thompson Reginald Campbell and Hutchinson Richard Wyatt, A Century of Exploration at Nineveh

London: Luzac, 1929.

Tiemeyer 2021

Tiemeyer Lena-Sofia, Jonah: Through the Centuries

(Wiley Blackwell Bible Commentaries), Hoboken NJ: Wiley Blackwell, 2021.

Timmer 2011

Timmer Daniel, A Gracious and Compassionate God: Mission, Salvation and Spirituality in the Book of Jonah

(New Studies in Biblical Theology), Downers Grove IL: IVP Academic, 2011.

TLOT

Jenni Ernst, Westerman Claus (eds.), and Biddle Mark (trans.), Theological Lexicon of the Old Testament

3 vols., Peabody MA: Hendrickson, 1997.

T. Mos.

Testament of Moses (1st c. a.d.)

Charles Robert H. (trans.), The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament, vol. 2, Oxford: Clarendon, 1913, 407–424.

Tolkien “Jonah”

John Ronald Reuel Tolkien (1892–1973), “The Book of Jonah”

Journal of Inklings Studies 4 (Oct. 2014) 5–9.

Trible 1994

Trible Phyllis, Rhetorical Criticism: Context, Method, and the Book of Jonah

(Guides to Biblical Scholarship: Old Testament Series), Minneapolis MN: Fortress, 1994.

Trumbull 1892

Trumbull H. Clay, “Jonah in Nineveh”

Journal of Biblical Literature 11 (1892) 53–60.

Tucker 2006

Tucker W. Dennis, Jonah: A Handbook on the Hebrew Text

(Baylor Handbook on the Hebrew Bible), Waco TX: Baylor University Press, 2006.



Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?

TYN

William Tyndale (1494–1536) et al. (trans.), The Tyndale Bible (1530–1537)

Daniell David (ed.), Tyndale’s New Testament, New Haven CT: Yale, 1989. Daniell David (ed.), Tyndale’s Old Testament, New Haven CT: Yale, 1992.

Typikon

Violakes George (ed.), Typikon tês tou Christou Megalês Ekklêsias

Athens: Saliberos, 1900.

V van der Toorn, Becking, and van der Horst 1995

van der Toorn Karel, Becking Bob, and van der Horst Pieter W. (eds.), Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible

2nd rev. ed., Leiden: Brill, 1999.

van Peursen 2007

van Peursen Wido Th., Language and Interpretation in the Syriac Text of Ben Sira: A Comparative and Linguistic Study

(Monographs of the Peshitṭa Institute, Leiden 16), Leiden: Brill, 2007.

Vicchio and Birch 2008

Vicchio Stephen and Birch Bruce, Biblical Figures in the Islamic Faith

Eugene OR: Wipf & Stock, 2008.

Vischer 2006

Vischer Phil, Me, Myself & Bob: A True Story of God, Dreams, and Talking Vegetables

Nashville TN: Thomas Nelson, 2006.

Vishńú puráńa

Vishńú puráńa (ca. 1000 b.c.–1000 a.d.)

Wilson Horace Hayman (trans.) and Hall Fitzedward (ed.), The Vishńú puráńa: A System of Hindu Mythology and Tradition, London: Trubner, 1864–1877.

Vit. proph.

Vitae prophetarum (1st c. a.d.)

Hare Douglas R.A. (trans.), OTP 2:385–399. Torrey Charles Cutler (ed., trans.), The Lives of the Prophets (Journal of Biblical Literature: Monograph Series 1), Philadelphia PA: Society of Biblical Literature and Exegesis, 1946.

W Wachsmann 1998

Wachsmann Shelley, Seagoing Ships & Seamanship in the Bronze Age Levant

College Station TX: Texas A&M University Press, 1998.

Walker 2011

Walker Joel, “Nineveh”

in Brock Sebastian P. et al. (eds.), Gorgias Encyclopedic Dictionary of the Syriac Heritage, Piscataway NJ: Gorgias, 2011, 308–310.

Waltke and O’Connor 1990

Waltke Bruce K. and O’Connor Michael P., An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax

Winona Lake IN: Eisenbrauns, 1990.

Weimar 2017

Weimar Peter, Jona: Übersetzt und ausgelegt

(Herders Theologischer Kommentar zum Alten Testament), Freiburg: Herder, 2017.

Wesley Notes

John Wesley (1703–1791), Explanatory Notes upon the Old Testament

3 vols., Bristol: Pine, 1765.



Bibliography

Whedbee 1998

Whedbee J. William, The Bible and the Comic Vision

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998.

Wilson 1927

Wilson Ambrose John, “The Sign of the Prophet Jonah and Its Modern Confirmations”

The Princeton Theological Review 25 (1927) 630–642.

Wolff 1986

Wolff Hans Walter and Kohl Margaret (trans.), Obadiah and Jonah: A Commentary

(Continental Commentary), Minneapolis MN: Augsburg, 1986.

Wunderlich 1992

Wunderlich Richard, “The Tribulations of Pinocchio: How Social Change Can Wreck a Good Story”

Poetics Today 13 (1992) 197–219.

Wyatt 1996

Wyatt Nicolas, “The Vocabulary and Neurology of Orientation: The Ugaritic and Hebrew Evidence”

in Wyatt Nicolas, Watson Wilfred G.E., and Lloyd Jeffery B. (eds.), Ugarit, Religion and Culture: Proceedings of the International Colloquium on Ugarit, Religion and Culture, Edinburgh, July 1994: Essays Presented in Honour of Professor John C.L. Gibson (Ugaritisch-Biblische Literatur 12), Münster: Ugarit-Verlag, 1996, 351–380.

Wyatt 2001

Wyatt Nicolas, Space and Time in the Religious Life of the Near East

Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2001.

Wyatt 2002

Wyatt Nicolas, Religious Texts from Ugarit

(Biblical Seminar 53), 2nd ed., Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2002.

WYC

Wycliffe Bible (ca. 1382–1395)

Forshall Josiah and Madden Frederic (eds.), The Holy Bible: Containing the Old and New Testaments, with the Apocryphal Books, in the Earliest English Versions Made from the Latin Vulgate by John Wycliffe and His Followers, 4 vols., Oxford: University Press, 1850.

X Xenophon Hell.

Xenophon (ca. 430–350 b.c.), Hellenica

Brownson Carleton L. (ed., trans.), Xenophon: Hellenica, 2 vols. (Loeb Classical Library 88–89), London: Heinemann, 1918–1921.

Xenophon Mem.

Xenophon, Memorabilia

Marchant Edgar C., Todd O.J. (eds., trans.), and Henderson Jeffrey (rev.), Xenophon, vol. 4: Memorabilia; Oeconomicus; Symposium; Apology, rev. ed. (Loeb Classical Library 168), Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press, 2013, 3–380.

Y y.

Talmud Yerushalmi (ca. 400 a.d.) [Jerusalem Talmud]

Neusner Jacob, Zahavy Tzvee, et al. (trans.), The Talmud of the Land of Israel: A Preliminary Translation and Explanation, 35 vols., Chicago IL: University of Chicago Press, 1982–1995.

Yal.

Yalqut Shimoni (ca. 11th–16th c.) [“Gathering of Simon”]

Yalkut Shimoni: Midrash al Torah, Nevi’im u-Khetuvim, Jerusalem: Yarid ha-Sefarim, 2006. Midrash Yalkut Shimoni: Torah, Nevi’im u-Khetuvim, Jerusalem: Machon HaMeor, 2001.

 Yebam.

Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?

Yebamot [“Brothers/sisters-in-law,” 1st tractate in the order Nāšîm, “Women/ Wives”]

See *b., *m., *t., and *y.

Z Ziegler 1984

Ziegler Joseph (ed.), Septuaginta: Vetus Testamentum Graecum: Auctoritate Academiae Scientiarum Gottingensis editum, vol. 13: Duodecim prophetae

3rd ed., Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1984.

Ziolkowski 1984

Ziolkowski Jan, “Folklore and Learned Lore in Letaldus’s Whale Poem”

Viator 15 (1984) 107–118.

Zlotowitz and Scherman 1978

Zlotowitz Meir and Scherman Nosson (eds., trans.), Yonah/Jonah: A New Translation with a Commentary Anthologized from Talmudic, Midrashic and Rabbinic Sources

(ArtScroll Tanach Series: The Twelve Prophets), Brooklyn NY: Mesorah, 1978.

Zohar

Sefer ha-Zohar (ca. 13th c. a.d.)

Matt Daniel Chanan (trans.), The Zohar: Pritzker Edition, 12 vols., Stanford CA: Stanford University Press, 2004– 2017.

Zwingli Cat.

Huldrych Zwingli (1484–1531), In catabaptistarum strophas elenchus (31  July 1527)

Egli Emil (ed.), Huldreich Zwinglis sämtliche Werke, vol. 6/1 (Corpus Reformatorum 93/1), Zürich: Berichthaus, 1961, 21–196. Jackson Samuel Macauley (trans.), Selected Works of Huldreich Zwingli (1484–1531), the Reformer of German Switzerland, Philadelphia PA: University of Pennsylvania, 1901, 123–258.

Index

‚Z Old Testament Z Genesis Gn 1-3 Gn 1:1-2:3 Gn 1 Gn 1:1 Gn 1:2 Gn 1:20-23 Gn 1:21 Gn 1:31 Gn 2:1,4 Gn 2:8 Gn 2:21 Gn 3:13 Gn 3:24 Gn 4:5 Gn 4:16 Gn 5-9 Gn 6:1,3 Gn 6:5 Gn 6:11 Gn 6:14 Gn 7-8 Gn 7:2-3 Gn 7:4,12,17 Gn 7:11 Gn 7:12,17 Gn 7:17-24 Gn 8:2 Gn 8:6 Gn 8:8 Gn 8:11 Gn 8:20-21 Gn 8:20 Gn 9:25 Gn 10:4,11 Gn 10:9 Gn 10:11-12 Gn 11:1,3 Gn 12:18 Gn 14:13 Gn 15:1 Gn 15:4 Gn 15:8 Gn 15:12 Gn 18-19 Gn 18 Gn 18:2 Gn 18:20-21 Gn 19:13 Gn 19:21,25,29 Gn 19:25 Gn 20:9 Gn 22:1 Gn 22:12 Gn 24:3,7 Gn 24:64 Gn 25:6 Gn 25:20 Gn 25:23-24 Gn 25:23 Gn 26:10 Gn 26:13

90, 96 60 4, 79, 118 56, 119, 122 75, 77 43 65 45 118 109, 119 48, 51 55 109 103 109 79 51 35, 51 44 51 18 51 89 73 87, 89 51 73 89 51 41 51 58 89 35 90 38, 42 55 55 60 41, 60 63 102 51 42 99 35 41 41 87, 88 91 50 60 53, 54, 60 54 55 109 87, 89 75 63, 78 55 59

Gn 28:20-22 Gn 29:1 Gn 29:25 Gn 31:44 Gn 37:23-28 Gn 38:14 Gn 39:14-15 Gn 41:5 Gn 41:6,23,27 Gn 42:18 Gn 43:29 Gn 50:17

58 110 55 85 65 55 97 86 109 54 98 60

Exodus Ex 1:17 Ex 2:5 Ex 3-4 Ex 3 Ex 3:10 Ex 3:14 Ex 4:9 Ex 5:2 Ex 6 Ex 7:7 Ex 7:15,17,20 Ex 9:15 Ex 10:13 Ex 14 Ex 14:11 Ex 14:16,21-22 Ex 14:21 Ex 15:1 Ex 15:4 Ex 15:11 Ex 15:19 Ex 16:20 Ex 16:35 Ex 17:1-7 Ex 17:4-5 Ex 18:21 Ex 19:19 Ex 20:4 Ex 20:8-11 Ex 22:27 Ex 24:7 Ex 24:18 Ex 25:4 Ex 31:17 Ex 32 Ex 32:9-14 Ex 32:14 Ex 32:22 Ex 32:32 Ex 34 Ex 34:1-28 Ex 34:6-7 Ex 34:6

53 75, 79 86 99 85 76 60 99 113 89 87 99 110 60 55 75 110 97 79 99 60 110 87, 89 18 79 54 56 118 96 102 37, 100 87, 89 110 118 99 103 96 103 104 99 89 103, 104 13, 101, 102

Leviticus Lv 5:7 Lv 16:8 Lv 23:40-42

41 59 106

Lv 23:42-43 Lv 26:44

109 66

Numbers Nm 11 Nm 11:12 Nm 11:15 Nm 13:25 Nm 14 Nm 14:18 Nm 14:34 Nm 16 Nm 21 Nm 22:27 Nm 23:3 Nm 24:10 Nm 26:55 Nm 30:1 Nm 32:13

99 122 104 87, 89 99 13, 101, 103 87, 89 99 99 103 51 103 59 97 87, 89

Deuteronomy Dt 1:39 Dt 3:5 Dt 4:31 Dt 5:12-15 Dt 6:2,13 Dt 9:9,11,18 Dt 9:15-29 Dt 10:10 Dt 13:17 Dt 15:12 Dt 19:10 Dt 21:8 Dt 23:5 Dt 27:5 Dt 27:15-26 Dt 27:25 Dt 28:39 Dt 29:5 Dt 29:23 Dt 30:9 Dt 32:39 Dt 33:17 Dt 34:7 Dt 34:8

114 75 102, 103 96 60 89 103 89 98 60 56 56 87 56 89 60 110 87, 89 91 98 79 118 89 88

Joshua Jo 4:22 Jo 4:24 Jo 7:6 Jo 7:14 Jo 9:22-23 Jo 14:2 Jo 18:6 Jo 19:13 Jo 19:46 Jo 22:25 Jo 24:29

60 57 88 54 97 54 59 38, 41, 43 42 57 57

Judges Jgs 2:2 Jgs 2:8

55 57

Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?

 Jgs 3:9-11,15-30 Jgs 4:4-5:31 Jgs 4:18-21 Jgs 4:21 Jgs 6:3,33 Jgs 6:11-8:32 Jgs 6:29 Jgs 7:12 Jgs 8:10 Jgs 15:11 Jgs 16:3 Jgs 16:18 Jgs 17:9 Jgs 19:17 Jgs 20:9 Jgs 20:24-28 Jgs 21:10-11

89 89 51 48 110 89 55 110 110 55 75 97 54 54 59 89 97

Ruth Ru 1:11

63

1 Samuel 1Sm 2:1-10 1Sm 2:8,10 1Sm 4:6 1Sm 5:12 1Sm 6:5 1Sm 7 1Sm 7:3-14 1Sm 10:6 1Sm 10:11 1Sm 10:20-21 1Sm 13:3 1Sm 14:42 1Sm 15:2 1Sm 17:41 1Sm 18:11 1Sm 19:5 1Sm 20:33 1Sm 20:41 1Sm 26:12 1Sm 28:13 1Sm 30:12 1Sm 31:12-13

79 118 60 41 51 99 89 87 55 54, 59 60 54 89 56 48, 49, 51 56 48, 49, 51 55 48, 51 76, 118 63 89

2 Samuel 2Sm 1:2-12 2Sm 3:1 2Sm 7:12 2Sm 10:1 2Sm 12:1-13 2Sm 12:22 2Sm 14:17 2Sm 15:12 2Sm 19:35 2Sm 20:10 2Sm 22 2Sm 22:8 2Sm 22:15 2Sm 24:4

88 56 63 102 98 95, 99 38 56 113 63, 78 79 118 51 38

1 Kings 1Kgs 2:11 1Kgs 4:30

87, 89 110

1Kgs 6:11 1Kgs 8:12-53 1Kgs 9:2 1Kgs 9:26-28 1Kgs 9:27 1Kgs 10:11 1Kgs 10:22 1Kgs 11:42 1Kgs 12:5 1Kgs 13 1Kgs 13:2 1Kgs 13:32 1Kgs 17:1-10 1Kgs 17:1 1Kgs 17:5-10 1Kgs 17:9 1Kgs 17:17-24 1Kgs 17:24 1Kgs 18:1 1Kgs 18:3 1Kgs 18:21-39 1Kgs 19:4 1Kgs 19:8 1Kgs 19:11 1Kgs 20:35-36 1Kgs 21:8-14 1Kgs 21:18 1Kgs 21:27 1Kgs 21:29 1Kgs 22:8,12-15,22 1Kgs 22:48 2 Kings 2Kgs 2:8 2Kgs 2:17 2Kgs 2:23-25 2Kgs 5:7 2Kgs 6:11 2Kgs 9:7 2Kgs 14:25-28 2Kgs 14:25

41 80 86 39 59 39 35, 39 87, 89 63 86 35, 46 42 41 79 86 35 41 45 41 54 41 41, 101, 104, 107, 109 87, 89, 90 48 41 89 35 95, 100 96 99 39

2Kgs 15:8-12 2Kgs 15:19-16:12 2Kgs 17-19 2Kgs 18:12 2Kgs 18:13-19 2Kgs 19:1 2Kgs 19:4 2Kgs 19:36 2Kgs 20:3 2Kgs 21:16 2Kgs 22:14-20 2Kgs 24:4

41 59, 63 41 79 48, 58 57 41 6, 35, 38, 40, 43, 44, 45, 59, 86, 97 43 97 97 57 117 88, 98, 99 9 35, 42 60 56 99 56

1 Chronicles 1Chr 12:17 1Chr 25:3

97 79

2 Chronicles 2Chr 2:16 2Chr 8:5 2Chr 8:18 2Chr 9:21

35, 42 75 39 35, 39, 46

2Chr 16:10 2Chr 20:20 2Chr 20:22 2Chr 21:18-19 2Chr 26:19 2Chr 28:9 2Chr 30:9 2Chr 32:1-22 2Chr 32:21 2Chr 32:30 2Chr 36:23

58 99 79 63 58 58 101, 102 117 63, 65 43 54

Ezra Ezra 3:7 Ezra 4:10 Ezra 8:21-23 Ezra 10

35, 42 99 89 99

Nehemiah Neh 1:4 Neh 2:10 Neh 3:3,6,13 Neh 5:6 Neh 6:7 Neh 8:8-9 Neh 9:1-2 Neh 9:11 Neh 9:17 Neh 9:31 Neh 13:19

88 101 75 103 46 54 103 60 102, 103 102 107

Tobit Tb 6:2,7-9 Tb 14:4-8 Tb 14:4 Tb 14:14-15

65 42, 90, 94 6 90

Judith Jdt 4:9-11 Jdt 15:14 Jdt 16:30

90 79 113

Esther Est 2:7 Est 3:3-5 Est 4:17-19 Est 8:17 Est 9:1 Est 9:4

122 54 79 96 87, 96 56

1 Maccabees 1Mc 10:67-89 1Mc 12:33-34 1Mc 14:5,34

42 42 42

2 Maccabees 2Mc 12:3-6

42

Job Jb 1-3 Jb 1:8 Jb 1:19 Jb 2:3 Jb 2:13

110 54 48 54, 63 89



Index: Old Testament

Jb 3:8 Jb 3:11,20-22 Jb 4:13 Jb 6:27 Jb 7:9 Jb 7:16 Jb 9:13 Jb 10:21-22 Jb 16:17 Jb 20:14 Jb 24:12 Jb 24:16 Jb 25:6 Jb 26:5,10 Jb 26:12 Jb 28:14,22 Jb 28:24 Jb 30:21 Jb 30:27 Jb 33:15 Jb 33:24 Jb 37:3 Jb 38 Jb 38:4-18 Jb 38:4-8 Jb 38:6,8-11 Jb 38:13,16 Jb 40:25 Jb 41:1

65, 79, 118 104 48, 51 54 79 76 65 82 97 63 99 55 110 118 65 76 118 87 63, 65 51 76 118 14 77 118 75 118 118 79

Psalms Ps 3:8 Ps 4:1 Ps 4:4 Ps 5:7 Ps 6:4 Ps 7:3 Ps 16:10 Ps 17:8 Ps 18:4-7 Ps 18:6 Ps 18:15 Ps 19 Ps 19:1 Ps 22 Ps 22:6 Ps 22:25 Ps 24:2 Ps 24:7-10 Ps 29 Ps 30:3 Ps 30:10 Ps 30:11 Ps 31 Ps 31:6 Ps 31:20 Ps 31:22 Ps 33:6 Ps 36:1 Ps 36:6 Ps 36:7 Ps 40:2 Ps 40:8 Ps 41:10

75, 79 80 81 74 98 97 74, 76, 80 113 79 75 51 14, 90 118 111 110 74, 75 75 79 14, 90 74, 79 98 87, 88 77 75, 76, 79, 80 122 74, 79 119 57 88, 90 113 80 63 74

Ps 42:7 Ps 46:2 Ps 48:7 Ps 50:14 Ps 55:6-8 Ps 56:12 Ps 62:10 Ps 62:11 Ps 66:6 Ps 66:13 Ps 66:16 Ps 68-69 Ps 69:1-2 Ps 71:20 Ps 72:17 Ps 74 Ps 74:2 Ps 77:17-21 Ps 78:38 Ps 80:10 Ps 86:5 Ps 86:15 Ps 88:6 Ps 88:11 Ps 89:25 Ps 90:2-3 Ps 90:13 Ps 91:4 Ps 93:2 Ps 94:21 Ps 95:5 Ps 96:11-13 Ps 97:11 Ps 98:7-9 Ps 102:25 Ps 103:8-9 Ps 103:8 Ps 103:12 Ps 104:1-14 Ps 104:4 Ps 104:6 Ps 104:24 Ps 104:25-26 Ps 104:26 Ps 105:16 Ps 106:9 Ps 106:17 Ps 106:38 Ps 107:10 Ps 107:23-24 Ps 107:23 Ps 107:24 Ps 107:28-30 Ps 107:29-30 Ps 107:30 Ps 111:4 Ps 112:4 Ps 113 Ps 113:4 Ps 115:3 Ps 115:15-17 Ps 116:5 Ps 116:14,18 Ps 116:17-18

73, 79 75 35, 46 57, 58, 75 41 74 76 6 60, 87 57, 58, 74 54 82 74, 79 73, 76, 79, 118 119, 121 122 121 79 102, 104 90 103 13, 101, 102, 103 79 80 75 119, 121 98 113 119, 121 56, 60 56, 60 14, 90 66 14, 90 118 103, 104 13, 101, 102 104 79 121 73 119 118 20, 70, 79 35 73, 79 76, 118 56, 60 80 79 54, 118 73 60 55 58 102, 104 102 122 44 57 118 102, 104 74 79

Ps 119 Ps 120:1 Ps 126:1 Ps 130:1 Ps 134:1 Ps 135:6 Ps 135:7 Ps 139 Ps 139:8 Ps 144:4 Ps 145:8 Ps 147:13 Ps 148 Ps 150 Ps 150:1

119 73, 79 98 73 57 56, 57 118 79 67, 118 76 13, 101, 102, 104 75 14, 90 14, 90 118

Proverbs Prv 1:7 Prv 1:11 Prv 1:12 Prv 4:18 Prv 6:17 Prv 8:22-31 Prv 8:22 Prv 8:27 Prv 8:30 Prv 9:10 Prv 10:1 Prv 10:5 Prv 16:33 Prv 18:9 Prv 18:18 Prv 19:12 Prv 19:15 Prv 20:22 Prv 22:29 Prv 23:34 Prv 26:20 Prv 30:19

53, 60 57 75 56 56, 57, 60 119 121, 122 118 121 53 76 48, 51 54, 59 54 54, 59 58 48 74 54 75 55, 58 75, 118

Song of Songs Sg 2:14 Sg 5:4 Sg 5:14 Sg 7:2 Sg 8:6

41 63, 65 48 75 88, 90

Wisdom Ws 11:23-26

10

Sirach Sir 1:14 Sir 16:19 Sir 16:24-17:14 Sir 36:1-22 Sir 39:20 Sir 43:1 Sir 43:25 Sir 49:10

53 75 118 83 79 118 65 6

Isaiah Is 1:8 Is 1:24 Is 2:10

109 102 60

Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?

 Is 2:16 Is 3:1 Is 3:15 Is 5:7 Is 5:8 Is 5:14 Is 5:26 Is 6:3 Is 7:9 Is 10:5 Is 10:24 Is 10:33 Is 11:6-9 Is 11:9 Is 11:12 Is 14:11 Is 16:11 Is 19:21 Is 20 Is 22:1 Is 22:17 Is 23 Is 23:1,14 Is 23:10 Is 24:18 Is 28:1 Is 29:4 Is 29:10 Is 29:13 Is 30:30 Is 30:33 Is 33:1 Is 34:9 Is 34:14 Is 36-37 Is 37:37 Is 38:1 Is 38:9-20 Is 40:2,6 Is 40:21-22,28 Is 41:5,9 Is 44:3 Is 44:27 Is 46:8 Is 48:13 Is 48:19 Is 49:1 Is 49:10 Is 51:3 Is 51:9-10 Is 51:13,16 Is 52:8 Is 54:11 Is 55:10 Is 57:13 Is 58:1 Is 59:6 Is 59:7 Is 63:11-12 Is 63:15 Is 66:14 Is 66:24

44 102 50 41 89 75 118 44 99 44 89 102 96 10 118 110 63, 65 57, 58 97 50 51 39 44 35 118 89 76, 118 48, 51 57 58 119 89 87 46 117 35, 42 94 79 42 118 118 60 73, 75, 79 98 118 63, 65 63, 65 79 79 79, 118 118 98 48 79 76 42 97 56 79 63, 65 57 110

Jeremiah Jer 1:6

102

Jer 1:8,11 Jer 1:13 Jer 2:21 Jer 3:12 Jer 4:8 Jer 4:10 Jer 4:14 Jer 4:19 Jer 4:28 Jer 5:28 Jer 6:26 Jer 7:2 Jer 7:6 Jer 10:3,15 Jer 10:13 Jer 11:6 Jer 13:3 Jer 14:1-6 Jer 14:2 Jer 15:7 Jer 16:13 Jer 17:12 Jer 17:13 Jer 18:8 Jer 18:11 Jer 19 Jer 19:2 Jer 19:4 Jer 20:16 Jer 20:17 Jer 22:3 Jer 22:26,28 Jer 23:19 Jer 23:22 Jer 25:5 Jer 25:32 Jer 26:3 Jer 26:15 Jer 26:18-19 Jer 27 Jer 30:23 Jer 31:20 Jer 31:34 Jer 31:37 Jer 34:9,14 Jer 36:3,7 Jer 36:20-26 Jer 49:28 Jer 49:31 Jer 49:36 Jer 51:16 Jer 51:18 Jer 51:30

6 86 87 42 87 102 87 63, 65, 87 99 48 88, 95 42 56, 60 76 118 42 86 79 41 99 51 119, 121 79 96 99 109 42 56, 60 87 104 56, 60 51 48, 55, 58 99 99 48, 55, 58 6, 99 6, 56 99 109 48 63, 65 41 118 60 99 98 110 75 49 118 76 75

Lamentations Lam 1:16 Lam 1:20 Lam 1:22 Lam 2:9 Lam 2:10 Lam 3:55 Lam 4:5

86 63, 65 35 75 88 73 122

Baruch Bar 3:2

98

Ezekiel Ez 1:1,4,28 Ez 3:3 Ez 3:19 Ez 4:6 Ez 8:8 Ez 13:22 Ez 17:10 Ez 18:2 Ez 19:4 Ez 19:12 Ez 21:21 Ez 24:14 Ez 25:4,10 Ez 27:4,26 Ez 27:8-9,27-29 Ez 27:9 Ez 27:12 Ez 27:26 Ez 27:30-31 Ez 28:8 Ez 29:9,27,29 Ez 29:11-16 Ez 29:11-13 Ez 31:3 Ez 36:29 Ez 47:10

54 63, 65, 75 99 87, 89 55 99 106, 107, 110 50 76 110 59 99 110 75 48 118 39 110 95 75 3 89 87 107 86 84

Daniel Dn 3 Dn 3:51-90 Dn 3:56 Dn 3:57-90 Dn 3:77 Dn 3:79 Dn 6 Dn 6:3 Dn 6:4 Dn 8:18 Dn 9:3-5 Dn 10:9 Dn 12:3

18, 19, 79 11 118 14, 90 118 65 18 48, 52 51 48, 51 89 51 118

Hosea Hos 1-3 Hos 1:1 Hos 1:10-11 Hos 4:12 Hos 7:11 Hos 8:5 Hos 9:10 Hos 13:3 Hos 14:2

109 37 119 59 41 103 119, 121 48 75

Joel Jl 1:13 Jl 2:12-14 Jl 2:12 Jl 2:13-14 Jl 2:13 Jl 2:14 Jl 2:31 Jl 3:3 Jl 3:9 Jl 3:19

6 103 89 6 10, 13, 99, 101, 102 95 87 54 42 56, 57, 60



Index: New Testament

Amos Am 1:1 Am 1:14 Am 3:7 Am 4:11 Am 5:18-20 Am 5:18 Am 7:3,6 Am 7:3 Am 9:2 Am 9:6

37 48 91 87 60 89 99 96 55, 118 118

Obadiah Ob 1:11

54

Jonah Jon 1:1 Jon 1:2 Jon 1:3 Jon 1:4 Jon 1:5 Jon 1:6 Jon 1:7 Jon 1:8 Jon 1:9 Jon 1:10 Jon 1:11 Jon 1:12 Jon 1:13 Jon 1:14 Jon 1:15 Jon 1:16 Jon 1:17

Jon 2:1 Jon 2:2

Jon 2:3 Jon 2:4 Jon 2:5 Jon 2:6 Jon 2:7 Jon 2:8 Jon 2:9 Jon 2:10 Jon 3:1 Jon 3:2 Jon 3:3 Jon 3:4

4, 13, 36, 51, 85 7, 8, 36, 37, 38, 42, 50, 51, 58, 73, 85, 86, 88, 112 36, 37, 38, 43, 56, 86, 102, 108 3, 37, 48, 49, 51 3, 4, 7, 38, 43, 48, 49, 58 3, 7, 8, 37, 42, 48, 50, 56, 58, 73, 95, 96, 99, 108 37, 43, 53, 55 16, 37, 54, 55, 61 3, 4, 7, 12, 37, 49, 50, 55, 60, 61, 88, 102, 108 7, 36, 37, 54, 57, 58, 59, 102 4, 7, 48, 49, 56, 57, 58 37, 48, 49, 55, 57, 58, 102, 108 3, 4, 7, 48, 49, 50, 55, 57, 58, 60, 96 37, 42, 50, 53, 57, 58, 61, 88, 96 43, 49, 57, 83 37, 51, 57, 58, 62, 67, 77, 102 41, 43, 51, 63, 65, 66, 67, 68, 71, 72, 73, 78, 83, 89, 106 43, 37, 63, 67, 68, 73, 76, 78, 83, 108 3, 37, 42, 66, 67, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80

Jon 3:5 Jon 3:6 Jon 3:7 Jon 3:8 Jon 3:9 Jon 3:10 Jon 4:1 Jon 4:2 Jon 4:3 Jon 4:4 Jon 4:5 Jon 4:6 Jon 4:7 Jon 4:8

Jon 4:9 Jon 4:10 Jon 4:11

Micah Mi 3:12 Mi 4:5 Mi 5:2

49, 66, 67, 76, 77, 79, 108 70, 77, 79 4, 60, 66, 67, 73, 76, 77, 79 38, 41, 66, 67, 73, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79 7, 70, 73, 77, 78, 79 67, 76, 77, 79, 80 51, 67, 74, 79, 80 4, 41, 43, 55, 60, 63, 67, 74, 77, 83, 108 4, 13, 41, 67, 74, 85, 86 3, 7, 8, 35, 37, 41, 42, 86, 112 7, 35, 37, 38, 42, 43, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 112 3, 4, 7, 36, 37, 42, 51, 74, 87, 92, 94, 96 8, 37, 42, 87, 90, 96, 98 100 4, 8, 37, 49, 90 4, 8, 37, 42, 49, 88, 96, 98 8, 47, 48, 50, 51, 52, 88, 93, 97 8, 9, 10, 37, 51, 97, 98, 99 37, 43, 102, 103, 105, 108, 109, 112 4, 13, 37, 47, 86, 97, 102, 107, 109 41, 58, 74, 92, 97, 102, 103, 107 50, 74, 103, 108, 112, 113 38, 42, 43, 87, 113 37, 64, 65, 102, 108, 110, 113 8, 41, 64, 65, 106, 108, 110, 111 9, 41, 43, 50, 58, 64, 65, 78, 101, 102, 104, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110 50, 101, 102, 103, 108, 113 50 4, 35, 37, 38, 42, 47, 51, 85, 87, 88, 90, 108, 114

Mi 6:2 Mi 7:18-20

118 13, 101

Nahum Na 1:1-3 Na 1:1 Na 1:2-3 Na 1:3 Na 2:2 Na 2:3-9 Na 2:7 Na 2:8 Na 3:1 Na 3:7 Na 3:8

94 35, 42 101 103 98 42 41, 94 35, 42, 103 103 35, 42, 103 122

Habakkuk Hb 2:5 Hb 2:6,9,12,15 Hb 3:8 Hb 3:10 Hb 3:11 Hb 3:14 Hb 4:15

75 89 75, 79, 103 73, 79 51 48 81

Zephaniah Zep 2:12 Zep 2:13 Zep 3:9

89 35, 42 87

Haggai Hg 1:10-11 Hg 2:6 Hg 2:20

79 89 86

Zechariah Zec 1:3 Zec 1:14,17 Zec 3:9 Zec 4:10 Zec 7:14 Zec 8:14 Zec 10:3 Zec 14:8-9

97 42 120 120 48, 55, 58 99 103 79

99 48 119

Malachi Mal 3:7

97

Mt 28:19-20 Mt 28:20

79 86

Mark Mk 1:17 Mk 2:1-12 Mk 4:35-41 Mk 5:1-15 Mk 6:48 Mk 7:27 Mk 15:34 Mk 16:15-16

18, 104 19 51, 60 19 60 105 111 79

Z New Testament Z Matthew Mt 4:18-21 Mt 4:19 Mt 5:8 Mt 5:13 Mt 8:23-27 Mt 8:25 Mt 10:5 Mt 12:39-41 Mt 12:40 Mt 12:41 Mt 14:22-33

41 18, 104 120 68 51, 60 48 94 9, 11, 69 18, 63, 68, 71, 72 35, 42, 87 79

Mt 15:26 Mt 16:4 Mt 16:16-18 Mt 16:17 Mt 18:10 Mt 23:37-39 Mt 26:38 Mt 26:39 Mt 26:40 Mt 27:46 Mt 27:51-53 Mt 28:9

105 9, 11, 69 41 9 120 89 105 46 51 111 9 18

Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?

 Luke Lk 7:11-17 Lk 8:22-25 Lk 8:49-54 Lk 11:29-30,32 Lk 11:30 Lk 11:32 Lk 19:41-44 Lk 22:42-44 Lk 23:34 Lk 24:13-32 Lk 24:29

John Jn 1:6 Jn 1:42 Jn 2:4 Jn 3:3-7 Jn 4:14 Jn 6:16-19 Jn 7:37-38 Jn 9:1-41 Jn 10:9

9 51, 53, 60 9 9, 11, 69 42 35, 42, 87 89 86 46 18 59

119 41 50 79 79 60 79 19 18

Jn 11:1-44 Jn 16:28 Jn 17:5 Jn 21:15

9, 18, 19 81 81 41

Acts Acts 1:26 Acts 9:1-9 Acts 9:36-43 Acts 9:36-40 Acts 9:36 Acts 10:9-23 Acts 11:1-18 Acts 11:5-13 Acts 13 Acts 16:15 Acts 20:7-12 Acts 27:18-19,38,40 Acts 27:18 Acts 27:27-44 Romans Rom 3:28-29 Rom 9:3

59 42 42 9 35, 40 42 41 42 42 59 9 48 52 51, 59

105 105

2 Corinthians 2Cor 11:25

51

Colossians Col 1:16 Col 2:17

120 110

Hebrews Heb 13:15

75

James Jas 4:8

97

1 Peter 1Pt 3:20-21

18

1 John 1Jn 1:1

120

Revelation Rv 5:6 Rv 11:13 Rv 21:1 Rv 22:1-2

120 54 79 79

PLUTARCH Luc. 42.5

109

POMPONIUS MELA Chor. 1.64

39

PORPHYRY Christ.

70

PROCLUS Elem. theol.

119

PSEUDO-APOLLODORUS Bibl. 2.5.9

64

PSEUDO-CALLISTHENES Alex. 224

64

PSEUDO-SCYLAX Peripl. 104

39

STEPHANUS BYZANTINUS Ethn.

39

STRABO Geogr. 3.2.11 Geogr. 16.2.28

39 39, 40

XENOPHON Hell. 7.2.17 Mem. 3.5.22

50 50

Z Ancient Texts Z

DIONYSIUS OF HALICARNASSUS Comp. 26 77

JOSEPHUS A.J. 9.205-207 A.J. 9.208 A.J. 9.212-213 A.J. 14.76 A.J. 14.205 A.J. 15.95 A.J. 15.217 A.J. 17.320 B.J. 1.156 B.J. 1.396 B.J. 2.97 B.J. 2.507-509 B.J. 3.414-431 B.J. 3.420

40 39 83 39 39 39 39 39 39 39 39 40 40 39

EPIPHANIUS OF SALAMIS Mens. pond. 75

LUCIAN OF SAMOSATA Ver. hist. 1.30-42

64

ARISTOTLE Hist. an. 537b.3 Hist. an. 566b.15

48 48

CELSUS Doct. ver.

70

Corpus inscriptionum Judaicarum CIJ 2.882-970 40 DIODORUS OF SICILY Bib. hist. 19.59.2

EURIPIDES Androm. fr. 1 Rhes. 785 HERODOTUS Hist. 1.163 HOMER Il. 20.147 Od. 4.620 Od. 9.720 Od. 12.97 Od. 12.235-239 ISOCRATES Hel. enc. 10.63

39

40

64 48

39

64 58 58 64 83

50

Papyri in the British Museum P. Lond. 7.2086 40 Papyri of the Zenon archive PCZ 1.59011 40 PAUSANIAS Descr. 4.35.9

39

PLATO Resp. 395

50

PLINY Nat. 5.69 Nat. 9.11

39, 40 39



Index: Ancient Texts, Peritestamental Literature, Liturgies, Jewish Tradition

Z Peritestamental Literature Z 2 Baruch 2 Bar. 4.3-4 2 Bar. 4.7 2 Bar. 29.4 2 Bar. 48.49 2 Bar. 59.2 2 Bar. 66.7

119, 120 119 119 119 119 119

1-2 Enoch 1 En. 46.3 1 En. 49.4 1 En. 60.8 1 En. 70.4 2 En. 9.1 2 En. 10.4

120 120 119 119 119 119

2 En. 25.4

119

4 Ezra 13.37 4 Ezra 14.9

119 120

Epistle of Aristeas Ep. Arist. 115

40

3 Maccabees 3 Macc. 6.1-15

66, 83

4 Ezra 4 Ezra 1.38-40 4 Ezra 3-10 4 Ezra 6.49 4 Ezra 7.26 4 Ezra 7.84,93 4 Ezra 7.132-140 4 Ezra 8.52 4 Ezra 8.59 4 Ezra 12.32

43 103 119 120 119 103 119, 120 119 120

Martyrdom and Ascension of Isaiah Mart. Ascen. Isa. 4.21-22 42-43 Sibylline Oracles Sib. Or. 2.238-250 43 Testament of Moses T. Mos. 1.14

120

Z Liturgies Z Constitutiones apostolicae Const. ap. 7.37.1-5 65-66 HAPGOOD Service Book

66

Hôrologion to mega

43

Missale Romanum ex decreto sacrosancti concilii Tridentini restitutum Miss. Rom. 1570 66, 86, 111 Revised Common Lectionary RCL 86, 99

Roman Missal: Lectionary for Mass RML 43, 80, 86, 104 Shimo

80, 90

Vitae prophetarum Vit. proph. 10

41

RASHBAM Comm. Pent.

90

Z Jewish Tradition Z ABARBANEL Comm.

91, 100, 104

ALSHICH Jonah

110

ALTSCHULER AND ALTSCHULER Metzudah 110, 113 BAH. YA Kad Genesis Rabbah Gen. Rab. 1.1 Gen. Rab. 1.4 Gen. Rab. 1.10 Gen. Rab. 3.6 Gen. Rab. 72.7

44, 90, 91

121 121 121 122 122

KIMCHI Comm. Leviticus Rabbah Lev. Rab. 6.5 Lev. Rab. 20.10

91

Machzor

80

MALBIM Gé’ ḥizzāyôn

44, 51, 91, 104, 110, 113

Midrash on the Psalms Midr. Ps. 74:2 122 Pesiqta de-Rab Kahana Pesiq. Rab Kah. 16.9 60 Pirqe de-Rabbi Eliezer Pirqe R. El. 3 Pirqe R. El. 9 Pirqe R. El. 10

43, 44, 90, 91, 104, 110, 113

Pirqe R. El. 33 Pirqe R. El. 35 Pirqe R. El. 43

119, 122 43 43-44, 52, 61, 66, 67, 68, 121 43 67 99

44, 55, 90, 91, 104, 110, 113

RADAL Comm. PRE

44

RAMBAM Hilch. Tesh. 2.1

86

IBN EZRA

Comm.

LUZZATTO Derek 3.4.7

40 40

RASHI Comm.

52, 60, 61, 68, 104, 110, 113

Seder ‘Olam Rabbah S. ‘Olam Rab. 18-19 43 Sefer Yetzirah Sef. Yetzirah 1.2 121 Sef. Yetzirah 1.9-10 121 Sef. Yetzirah 2.1 121 Sifre to Deuteronomy Sifre Deut. 37.3

122

Talmud of Babylonia B. Bat. 75a-b B. Qam. 116b ‘Erub. 19a Ḥul. 67b Meg. 16b Menaḥ. 83b Ned. 38a Ned. 39b Ned. 51b Pesaḥ. 54a

67 52 80 67 40 67 44 122 67 121-122

Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?

 Qidd. 82a Sanh. 89a Sanh. 89b Sukkah 53b Ta‘an. 15a Ta‘an. 16a Ta‘an. 25a Yebam. 98a

52 51, 60 91, 104 60-61 80 100 59 86

Talmud of Jerusalem Ta‘an. 2:9

80

Midrash Tanh. uma Tanḥ. Bereshit 1 Tanḥ. Shemini 7 Tanḥ. Vayeshev 4.2 Tanḥ. Vayikra 8.1

121 67 121 66-67, 80

Targums Tg. Chr. 1Chr 11:19 Tg. Jon. Tg. Jon. Zep 3:5 Tg. Ps.-Jon. Gn 22:1

59 43, 44, 52, 60, 80, 100, 107 59 60

Yalqut Shimoni Yal. on Nach 550

67-68, 99

Zohar Parashat Toledot 1.134a

122

Z Christian Tradition Z Acta Sancti Brendani Act. S. Brend. 55-56 Act. S. Brend. 63-64 AMBROSE OF MILAN Ep. 44 APHRAHAT THE PERSIAN SAGE Dem. 3.7 Dem. 4.1,8,12 Dem. 7.9 AUGUSTINE OF HIPPO Enarr. Ps. 51(50):8 Enarr. Ps. 65(66):3 Enarr. Ps. 130(129):1 Ep. 71.5 Ep. 85.35 Ep. 102.30 Ep. 102.31-32 Ep. 102.34 Ep. 102.35 Ep. 102.36 Ep. 185.19 Quaest. Hept. 1.169 Quaest. Hept. 2.73 Serm. 114B.2 Serm. 361.20

64 64

94

94 81 93

CALVIN Prael. proph. min.

CASSIODORUS Exp. Ps. 130(129):1 CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA Adumbr. 1Jn 1:1 Ecl. 4.1 Ecl. 11.1 Ecl. 27.1 Exc. 10.4-6 Exc. 11 Exc. 27.3 Exc. 47.1-3

120

CLEMENT OF ROME 1 Clem. 7

Haer. 3.20.1 Haer. 5.5.2

18 18, 69, 70

92

JACOB OF SARUG Hom. 122

45, 52, 61, 69, 70, 81

CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA Comm. Jon.

45, 53, 62, 69, 70, 81, 82, 91, 92, 93, 94, 105, 110

JEROME OF STRIDON Comm. Jon.

Ep. 108.8 Ep. 112.22 Pelag. 2.23 Pelag. 3.6 Ruf. 1.30

39, 45, 52, 58, 61, 62, 69, 70, 81, 92, 93, 94, 103 40 109, 111 62 105 111

JOHN CHRYSOSTOM Exp. Ps. 4:4 Hom. Gen. 1.7 Hom. Gen. 24.18 Laz. 6.1 Paenit. 5.4 Paenit. 5.8 Stat. 5.5 Stat. 5.6

81 93 92, 93 93 93, 94 52 92, 100 93

JUSTIN MARTYR Dial. 107.2 Dial. 108.1

92 93

CYRIL OF JERUSALEM Cat. illum. 14.7

69

92, 93 69 81 111 111 71 69 69 104, 110, 111 111 100 92 14 92 92

EPHREM THE SYRIAN Carm. Nis. 35.3 Carm. Nis. 55.3-4 Hymn. virg. 17.9 Hymn. virg. 42.14-27 Hymn. virg. 43.29-33 Hymn. virg. 43.30-31 Hymn. virg. 43-44 Hymn. virg. 45.1-2 Hymn. virg. 47-50 Hymn. virg. 47.1-10

45 104 94 70 81 70 104 45, 80 104 94

EUSEBIUS OF CAESAREA Hist. eccl. 6.13.9 Hist. eccl. 6.14.5 Onom., s.v. Sarôn

120 120 40

83

FISHER Comm. Pen. Ps. 130(129) 81

LUTHER Lect. Jon.

Glossa ordinaria Gloss. ord.

Tischr. 3705

46, 61, 82, 93, 94, 100, 105, 110 44

MAXIMUS THE CONFESSOR Quaest. Thal. 64.1 Quaest. Thal. 64.12 Quaest. Thal. 64.18 Quaest. Thal. 64.20 Quaest. Thal. 64.27 Quaest. Thal. 64.28

114 94 104 111 69, 82 92

NARSAI Hom.

70, 90

ORIGEN Cels. 7.53,57 Comm. Jo. 2.25

70 119

BAR HEBRAEUS

Laugh. St. 105.19

Strom. 4.3.2

45, 61, 62, 81, 82, 84, 86, 91, 93, 94, 100, 105, 114

70, 82

120 119 120 120 120 120 120 120

45, 46, 52, 62, 81, 86, 92, 93, 100, 105, 110

GREGORY OF NAZIANZUS Or. 2.106 Or. 2.108 Or. 16.14 Or. 39.17

45 45 93 93

HILARY OF POITIERS Tract. Ps. 2,§2

119

IRENAEUS OF LYONS Epid. 43

119



Index: Christian Tradition, Mysticism, Theology, Islam, Literature

Hom. Jer. 19.7 Or. 13.3-4 Or. 14.2,4 Or. 16.3

91 80 80 80

Jona 143-152

69

SALVIAN Ep. 4

114

PAULINUS OF NOLA Carm. 22.105-118 Carm. 24.219-224 Carm. 26.92-93

52 70 93

PSEUDO-CLEMENT Hom. 17.9

TERTULLIAN Marc. 4.10 Pud. 10 Res. 32.3 Res. 58.8

121

THEODORE OF MOPSUESTIA Comm. Jon.

PSEUDO-TERTULLIAN Jona 1-9

100 45 70 70

THEODORET OF CYRUS Interpr. Jon.

52, 62, 69, 70, 81, 92

THEODOSIUS Situ 139

40

WESLEY Notes

84, 114

ZWINGLI Cat.

91

VATICAN II DV 16

14

Qur’an 34.142-144 Qur’an 37.139-148 Qur’an 37.145-146 Qur’an 37.147-148 Qur’an 68.48-50

71 15 105 86 15-16, 71

SOMADEVA Kath.

64

Vishńú puráńa 60.16-17

64

45, 53, 62, 69, 91, 92, 94, 105

44-45 Z Mysticism Z

THÉRÈSE OF LISIEUX Autob.

46 Z Theology Z

AQUINAS, Thomas of ST IIa-IIae 81.2 ST IIa-IIae 171.6 ST IIa-IIae 187.6

ST Suppl. 99.3 82 94 100

105

Catechism of the Catholic Church CCC 302, 306-308 13 Z Islam Z

KISĀ’Ī Qiṣaṣ

46, 62, 71

Qur’an Qur’an 4.163

15, 46

Qur’an 6.84-86 Qur’an 10 Qur’an 10.96-98 Qur’an 10.97-103 Qur’an 21.87-88

15, 46 46 86 15 15, 71, 105

Z Literature Z 1001 Nights

Avesta: Yasna 9.10-11

64

Duanaire Finn Duan. Finn 234-239

64

MELVILLE Moby Dick

47, 68, 72, 82

PIACENZA Pilg. v. 190 SHAKESPEARE Pericles

64

40

62, 72

Table of Contents Introduction Suggestions for Reading

1

Text Translation 1.1. Textual Criticism: Largely Unified Textual Tradition 1.2. Vocabulary 1.3. Grammar 1.4. Literary Devices 1.5. Literary Genre

2 3 3 4 4 4

Context 2.1. Historical and Geographical Notes: Dating Jonah 2.2. Ancient Cultures 2.3. Ancient Texts

5 6 6

Reception 3.1. Comparison of Versions 3.2. Biblical Intertextuality 3.3. Peritestamental Literature 3.4. Liturgies 3.5. Jewish Tradition 3.6. Law 3.7. Christian Tradition 3.8. Mysticism 3.9. Theology 3.10. Philosophy 3.11. Islam 3.12. History of Translations 3.13. Literature 3.14. Visual Arts 3.15. Music 3.16. Cinema

6 9 9 10 10 11 11 13 13 15 16 16 16 17 21 22

Translation

23

Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?



Annotated Pericopes Jonah 1 1-3 God Commissions and His Prophet Flees 4-6 The Storm Rages 7-16 Attempt to Save the Ship 17 A Fish Swallows a Prophet

35 47 53 63

Jonah 2 1-9 Jonah Prays from the Belly of the Fish 10 Jonah Vomited Out on the Ground

73 83

Jonah 3 1-3a God Commissions His Prophet Again 3b-5 Jonah Preaches and the Ninevites Believe 6-10 Nineveh’s King Orders Repentance

85 87 95

Jonah 4 1-4 God’s Mercy and His Prophet’s Disappointment 5-8 Parable in Acts 9-11 Divine Lesson in Mercy

101 106 112

Synthetic Notes Annals of Sennacherib General Israelite Cosmology Protoctist Entities: What Was with God at the Creation?

117 118 119

Bibliography

123

Index

149

The Bible in Its Traditions: Towards a New Glossa ordinaria For rather more than sixty years the École biblique of Jerusalem has been involved in translating and publishing a Bible with notes, known throughout the world as The Jerusalem Bible. As a new century gets under way, we are developing a new project, The Bible in Its Traditions. The idea of the project is to provide the reader with the different forms of the biblical text, together with the textual and historical notes that have always formed part of The Jerusalem Bible tradition—and also notes about the reception of the Bible in the various faith communities for which it is a sacred text. Managed in the heart of Jerusalem, confidently Catholic, it is therefore open to the cultural, denominational, and even interfaith polyphony of people seeking truth. It aims at serving knowledge and mutual understanding.

The scribe.bibletraditions.org Collaborative Platform The platform brings together dozens of scholars of various disciplines in open laboratories, biblical book by biblical book. Each one contributes according to his or her competences. Biblical scholars translate the texts in the diversity of the traditional versions and critical editions, and situate them in both their physical and cultural contexts. Specialists in disciplines linked to about thirty rubrics of annotation join them: Jewish studies, patristics, the ancient Near East, archaeology, liturgy, theology, classic and modern literature, history of art, film, etc. The platform is open to researchers who wish to conserve (and share) the fruit of their work in the form of notes throughout the biblical text. It is also open to teachers wishing to make pedagogical use of it, for instance, as a resource for courses and seminars.

The Series The Bible in Its Traditions The series is a fruit of this program. In addition to its online version, The Bible in Its Traditions produces printed volumes that are useful to scholars concerned with placing Scripture in its proper hermeneutical context. Every other year or so, the École biblique chooses a significant biblical book (or part of a book) that is already well elaborated by one of the program’s teams and amplifies the work, to be printed in gloss form thanks to the expertise of Peeters Publishers—thus connecting again in the 21st century with a tradition that was alive already at the time of the pioneers of the École, such as Fr. Marie-Joseph Lagrange. We welcome any comment or proposal.

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

Collection La Bible en ses Traditions | Series The Bible in Its Traditions Commencements. Définitions, suivies de douze études, Louvain: Peeters, (2010) 2020. Saint Paul : Épître aux Philippiens, Louvain: Peeters, 2016. Hosea: The Word of the Lord That Happened to Hosea, Louvain: Peeters, 2017. La passion selon saint Matthieu (Mt 26–28), 2 vols., Louvain: Peeters, 2021. Jonah: Is It Good for You to Be Angry?, Louvain: Peeters, 2023. Le Psautier : Livre I (Ps 1–41). Bonheurs de l’homme, Louvain: Peeters, forthcoming.

En préparation | To Be Published The Epistle of Saint James; Le Psautier : Livre II (Ps 42–72); Cantique des cantiques; Épîtres pastorales; Qohélet; etc.

La Bible en ses Traditions : pour une nouvelle Glossa ordinaria Pendant plus de soixante ans, l’École biblique de Jérusalem a été engagée dans l’édition d’une Bible annotée, La Bible de Jérusalem. En ce début du 21e s., elle ouvre un nouveau chantier : La Bible en ses Traditions. Ce projet vise à offrir au lecteur à la fois les différentes formes textuelles de la Bible, assorties d’une annotation philologique et historique, et les diverses traditions de son interprétation au sein des communautés qui la reçoivent comme un texte sacré. Mené depuis le cœur de Jérusalem, sereinement catholique, il est donc ouvert à la polyphonie culturelle et confessionnelle des personnes en quête de vérité. Il vise à servir la connaissance et la compréhension mutuelle.

La plateforme collaborative scribe.bibletraditions.org Cette plateforme réunit des spécialistes de diverses disciplines dans des laboratoires ouverts sur internet, livre biblique par livre biblique. Les biblistes établissent et traduisent les textes dans la diversité des versions traditionnelles et des éditions critiques, et les situent dans leurs contextes. Ils sont rejoints par des spécialistes de disciplines liées à une trentaine de rubriques d’annotation : études juives, patristique, le Proche-Orient ancien, archéologie, liturgie, théologie, littérature classique et moderne, histoire de l’art, cinéma, etc. La plateforme est offerte à tout chercheur désireux de conserver (et partager) le fruit de sa recherche sous forme de notes tout au long du texte biblique. Elle est également ouverte aux enseignants qui souhaitent en faire un usage pédagogique, par exemple, en tant que support de cours et de séminaires.

La collection La Bible en ses Traditions Cette collection est un fruit de ce programme : en plus de sa version en ligne, La Bible en ses Traditions édite des volumes imprimés à l’intention de biblistes soucieux de placer l’Écriture dans son contexte herméneutique spécifique. Au fil des ans, l’École biblique de Jérusalem choisit un livre biblique (ou un fragment d’un livre) important déjà bien élaboré par l’une des équipes du programme, et porte ce travail à un premier achèvement qui permette de l’imprimer, grâce au savoir-faire de la maison d’édition Peeters, dans la présente collection comme une glose biblique—renouant ainsi avec une tradition éditoriale qui inspirait déjà les pionniers de l’École comme le Père Marie-Joseph Lagrange. Toute remarque ou proposition sera la bienvenue.

Plateforme | Platform: scribe.bibletraditions.org Comité éditorial | Steering Committee: [email protected] Nouvelles | Keep in touch: bibletraditions.org École biblique et archéologique française de Jérusalem, Nablus Road 83–85 POB 19053, IL-9119001 Jerusalem