Unlike Moses and Jeremiah, who protest against the mission with which they are entrusted, Jonah simply indicates, by his actions rather than his words, his refusal to obey. Amos claimed that when the prophets were commissioned with God’s message, they could not but proclaim it (3.8), but Jonah attempts to escape, like a deserter.
The conjunction however is particularly important at this point, since it marks the contrast between God’s command and Jonah’s decision to do something quite different. Sometimes this adversative emphasis can be indicated simply by an introductory conjunction such as “but.” In other instances it may be necessary to reinforce this contrast by saying “but in contrast with this” or “but on the contrary.”
According to King James Version Jonah “rose up to flee,” since the verb used here is the same as in verse 2; so here set out is mentioned, and Good News Translation arrives at the sense by translating the first occurrence as set out in the opposite direction. He had been told to go east, so instead he tries to go as far as possible in a westerly direction, in order to avoid carrying out God’s command. Tarshish is rendered as Spain in the other two occurrences in this verse in Good News Translation. The reader is likely to have a clearer idea of where Spain is rather than to be able to identify Tarshish. Just where Tarshish was located is not known, but it is generally identified with a place on the coast of Spain. By introducing the verse with the words “But Jonah was afraid to go,” Living Bible misrepresents the thought of the writer. The Hebrew does not indicate this, and it contradicts 4.2.
It may not always be easy to render the expression the opposite direction, for the term opposite involves rather complex relationships. Therefore one may need to translate “he did not set out toward Nineveh, but he went in a direction away from Nineveh” or “rather than going toward Nineveh, he went away from Nineveh.”
To get away from the LORD may be rendered simply as “to escape from the Lord,” but it may also be necessary in certain instances to describe Jonah’s intent as “to go to a place where the Lord would not be.” Such an expression highlights the futility of what Jonah was attempting to do, since he later declares that the Lord is the God of heaven, who made both the land and the sea. It is this very contradictory situation that the author of the book of Jonah apparently wished to emphasize.
He “went down to Joppa” (New English Bible) because that town, the modern Jaffa, was a port on the coast of the Mediterranean (see Acts 9.36). If the difference in elevation between central Palestine and the seacoast is not thought to be worth emphasizing, some such rendering as Good News Translation is sufficient. At Joppa he found a ship, but the verb masa here, as often, does not indicate the conclusion of a search for something lost, but simply coming across something by chance—as in the Chinese Union Version here (as also in Gen 4.14; 1 Sam 9.11).
The ship was about to go, in the sense indicated by the Hebrew participle denoting future action shortly to take place. The verb used here in Hebrew generally indicates motion towards the speaker or writer, but here in a direction away from the writer (compare Isa 47.5). There is no clear indication of the size of the ship in modern terms, but since its destination was Tarshish, it would have been large by the standards of those days. In fact, the expression “ships of Tarshish” was sometimes used to indicate large “ocean-going” vessels (Isa 2.16; 23.1, 14; 60.9; and elsewhere). As is clear later in the chapter, the ship was propelled by rowing, though it may well have had sails in addition.
In a number of languages it may be necessary to be specific with verbs of “going,” since the means of travel may have obligatory features. Therefore He went to Joppa may be best rendered as “he walked to Joppa,” for this was probably his means of travel. But in speaking about a ship about to go to Spain, it may be necessary to use a term applicable only to ships, for example, “to sail” or “to be rowed.”
About to go to Spain must be expressed in some languages as “which the sailors were preparing for sailing to Spain” or “on which people would soon be leaving for Spain.” It may be quite wrong to speak simply of “a ship about to go to Spain,” since the implication might be that the ship went to Spain on its own rather than under the direction of a helmsman and with the help of a crew.
He paid his fare. This is a more likely meaning than “he paid for the ship,” as claimed by some Jewish and a few modern commentators. Living Bible‘s “he bought a ticket” is unnecessarily anachronistic. The Hebrew word elsewhere always has the meaning of “wages” or “reward.”
And went aboard conveys the sense rather more naturally than King James Version “went down into it,” with its literal correspondence with the Hebrew verb “to go down.” Here again Living Bible brings additional factors into the translation that are not justified by the Hebrew, “and climbed down into the dark hold of the ship to hide there from the Lord.” For, after all, this verse states clearly that Jonah’s purpose in fleeing to Tarshish was to avoid the Lord’s presence there, and not simply in the ship.
With the crew is required to make clear the meaning of the Hebrew “with them” (so King James Version). New English Bible leaves this to be understood, and substitutes “to travel by it.”
A literal rendering of went aboard with the crew might suggest that he became a part of the crew. It may be necessary, therefore, to change the order somewhat and say “went aboard to sail to Spain with the crew.”
The Hebrew repeats “to Tarshish from the presence of the LORD,” and Good News Translation achieves this emphasis, but by varying the wording. At the beginning of the verse the purpose of Jonah’s journey to the west is emphasized, whereas at the end of the verse the expected consequence of this move is emphasized. So Jerusalem Bible: “decided to run away from Yahweh, … to get away from Yahweh.” The repetition may be intended by the writer to emphasize the irony of imagining that one could escape from God by any journey, however long. The New Jewish Version (New Jerusalem Bible) brings out the thought of Jonah’s prophetic commission by “from the LORD’s service … away from the service of the LORD.”
A literal translation of where he would be away from the LORD can be misleading, since it might suggest that Spain was a place where the Lord’s presence would not be felt or where the Lord would not be present. This final clause of verse 3 indicates the intent of Jonah and not an actual fact of the absence of the Lord, and accordingly it may be necessary to render the clause as “where he thought he would be away from the Lord” or “where he thought the Lord would not be.”
Quoted with permission from Clark, David J. et al. A Handbook on the Book of Jonah. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1978, 1982, 1993. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .