“At last” (New English Bible) implies an interval of time between verses 6 and 7, but this is not necessary to the narrative. In any event, the scene shifts from the hold, where Jonah was lying, to the sailors on deck. Prayer had so far achieved nothing; perhaps if they could find out who was to blame for the storm, some other remedy might be found. New English Bible and Bible in Basic English follow King James Version in a rather literalistic use of the word “come.” But the Hebrew word is merely an introductory signal to indicate that a suggestion is being put forward (compare 2 Kgs 5.5 King James Version). Often languages use other expressions, such as “Look!” to introduce a proposal for action. Jerusalem Bible with “come on” is certainly more idiomatic than New English Bible.

Because of the shift of location and at least some period of time involved in the transition between verses 6 and 7, it may be important to introduce verse 7 by “Then the sailors said” or “Later, after Jonah had joined them on deck, the sailors said.”

Let’s draw lots. Every culture has its own method of determining who is to be held responsible in a situation such as this; for example, tossing a coin (Winding Quest “let’s toss up”), or drawing straws from a bundle. Jonah’s name was drawn implies a situation where names were written on pieces of wood.

The techniques of divination differ very widely, and therefore expressions related to such methods may be quite diverse; for example, “throw the stones,” “drop the pieces of wood,” or “scatter the feathers.” In some instances the appropriate expression would be “Let us consult the spirits” or “Let us ask the gods.”

In any event, it was believed (compare Prov 16.33) that God, or the gods, would be able to control the “luck of the draw” in such a way as to indicate who is to blame. This represents a somewhat uncommon way of saying in Hebrew “on whose account,” by using a shortened form of the relative particle. The superstitious outlook of the sailors is implied by New English Bible‘s reference to “this bad luck.”

Who is to blame may be rendered in some languages as a causative, for example, “who has caused us to be in such danger” or “who has caused us to almost die.”

The verb did in the clause They did so is a typical substitute verb; that is to say, it substitutes for a verb expression such as draw lots. In other languages, however, it may be necessary to repeat the verb; for example, “they consulted the gods.”

In place of Jonah’s name was drawn, a more typical expression may be “the stick pointed to Jonah,” or “the stone was Jonah’s” (referring to techniques of divination), or “Jonah was named,” or possibly “they learned that it was Jonah.”

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 .

The introductory adverbial expression Now, then can rarely be translated literally, since “now” would refer to the immediate time and “then” would refer to a subsequent time or perhaps a prior time. Though in English both of the adverbial expressions are temporal, they actually suggest a causal relationship; for example, “Therefore,” or “As a result of all this,” or even “So.”

I am better off dead than alive may be expressed as “to be dead is better for me than to be alive” or “if I were dead, it would be better for me than for me to be alive.” Jonah feels that his victory has been achieved at the cost of the satisfaction he would have felt at seeing the destruction of Nineveh. So he asks the Lord, “take my life” (New English Bible), since it is better to be dead than alive. The word used for “life” is the same Hebrew word as in 2.7, and it occurs again later in this chapter.

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 .

This verse marks a turning point in the book, as Jonah himself now prays. Up to this point there is no indication that he followed the example of the heathen sailors by praying on board ship. The usual verb “to pray” is only used twice in the book, here and in 4.2; elsewhere the verb used is “to call.”

A literal rendering of From deep inside the fish might suggest that Jonah was at “the bottom of the fish.” This, of course, is not necessarily implied; it simply means that Jonah was “well inside the fish.” Therefore an equivalent rendering might be “From the very inside of the fish” or “From right there inside the fish.”

The expression his God implies in this context the existence of other gods, as in 1.5, where “god” has no capital letter, the point being that there the reference is to the gods of the heathen sailors, but here to the LORD, the God of Israel. The genitive here bears no sense of exclusive possession, but simply means the God whom Jonah worshiped (1.9). As a prayer from inside the fish, the language of thanksgiving may seem somewhat premature.

For languages that require a possessive relationship with “Lord,” it may be possible to translate “his Lord, that is, his God.” In other instances a more satisfactory rendering may be simply “his Lord God.” A rendering such as “his Lord who is God” would presume a kind of exclusive meaning of monotheism that may be judged inappropriate for this type of context. At the same time one must recognize that in a number of languages one cannot speak of “his God” but simply as “the God whom he worshiped,” since it may be quite inappropriate to speak of “possessing God.” Compare the statement made in connection with verse 5 of chapter 1.

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 .

The third verse of chapter 1 began by saying “Jonah arose,” and the remarks made there apply here also. This verse begins in the same way but continues by saying that he set out, not in the opposite direction (as in 1.3) but in the direction of Nineveh, in accordance with the Lord’s instructions. The journey there is not described, and Jonah obeys without reply or question.

It may seem illogical in some languages to employ the order obeyed … and went, since the going to Nineveh would seem to be the way in which Jonah obeyed. Therefore it may be necessary to restructure this sentence to read “Jonah obeyed the Lord by going to Nineveh” or, as in some instances, “Jonah went to Nineveh and in this way obeyed the Lord.”

The second half of the verse, which describes how large Nineveh was, is inserted in verse 4 in New English Bible. Good News Translation treats this description as appositional to the mention of Nineveh. The construction used in Hebrew inserts the description as a parenthetical explanation: “now Nineveh was an immensely great city, three days’ journey across.” The form of this explanatory note and its insertion here give every appearance of referring to a city that was once of importance, but at the time of writing was no more than a ruin. The timelessness of the expression a city so large corresponds to the form of the Hebrew verb used here, which does not indicate whether Nineveh was previously larger and was now reduced in size, or whether at the time of writing it was regarded as a large city. The construction is the same as in Gen 3.1, “the serpent was more crafty” (New English Bible), which does not tell us anything about the period during which the serpent was crafty.

New English Bible calls Nineveh “a vast city,” in this way translating an expression that is a form of the superlative, literally “great to God,” so perhaps, “of superhuman size” (compare Jerusalem Bible “great beyond compare,” Moffatt “great, great city”). There is no justification for the Living Bible rendering “a very large city, with extensive suburbs.”

The superlative used here (King James Version “an exceeding great city”) is similar to what is found in Gen 23.6; 30.8; Exo 9.28; 1 Sam 14.15; Psa 36.7; 80.11. In all of these passages King James Version uses an expression denoting the superlative, following in most cases medieval Jewish commentators. The Oxford Hebrew Lexicon compares the usage here in Jonah to Acts 7.20, “a very beautiful child.”

The last part of the verse, that it took three days to walk through it, has presented difficulty for some translators, in view of the contradiction between this statement and the size of Nineveh as revealed by archaeology. The circumference of the ruins is about eight miles, and even if this were the length from one end to the other, it would not require as much as one day to cross the city on foot. Even if the suburbs are included (compare Living Bible), the city would not extend for anything like a three days’ journey. Khorsabad, which may correspond to Rehoboth Ir of Gen 10.11 and has the best claim to be considered a “suburb” of Nineveh, is only a dozen miles away.

King James Version‘s “of three days’ journey” is too indefinite to be clear to the reader, and Revised Standard Version improves this with “three days’ journey in breadth.” Whereas most modern translations, though using different phraseology, agree with Good News Translation in the meaning of this phrase, there are some exceptions. New American Standard Bible uses the indefinite expression, “a three days’ walk,” in accordance with the pattern set by King James Version. Modern Language Bible is no more definite in its text: “requiring three days’ travel,” but the footnote (“that is, to go through the complex of turns that made up the city and its extensive suburbs”) reads like an attempt to evade the clear meaning of the text. Living Bible also avoids the clear meaning of the writer by saying “so large that it would take three days to walk around it.” As already noted, the city is described in Living Bible as having “extensive suburbs,” so these are doubtless thought of as included within the city’s circumference. But the Hebrew text speaks of walking across the breadth of the city, and not around it, as is clear from verse 4.

A city so large that it took three days to walk through presents certain difficulties in translation, since there is no indication as to precisely who was walking through it. This statement can be best rendered as a type of general indication of size by saying “a city so large that a person would have to walk three days in order to walk across it” or “… through it.” Sometimes such an expression could be rendered as a condition; for example, “a person could go through the city if he walked for three days.”

In some languages there may be difficulties because of no clear distinction between “hamlet,” “village,” “town,” and “city.” In some instances only a rather generic term is used for any center of population, and the varying degrees of size are indicated as “a small village,” “a large village,” and “a very large village.”

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 .

This verse contains one of the few textual difficulties in the book. New English Bible omits the words that are represented in Good News Translation by Who is to blame for this? This was the very question which the drawing of lots was meant to determine; so its repetition is pointless, and the corresponding words are not found in some Hebrew manuscripts and in the best Greek manuscripts, though they may have fallen out by accident. Ziegler suggests that the omission of the question in codices Vaticanus, Sinaiticus, and Venetus of the Septuagint was due to the confusion arising from two occurrences of hēmin in the same verse (homoioteleuton). But it is much more likely that they wrongly found their way into the text as the result of a marginal note explaining the strange expression in verse 7 being accidentally inserted into verse 8. They simply repeat the question raised in the previous verse. King James Version and New Jerusalem Bible retain the words here in verse 8 but understand them as a participial clause referring to Jonah, “the-bringer-of-misfortune-upon-us,” or “the one who is to blame for all this,” so New Jerusalem Bible translates “Tell us, you who have brought this misfortune upon us.” But to do this strains the Hebrew construction and leaves one word unaccounted for.

It is possible to follow the Good News Translation rendering of the question Who is to blame for this? by assuming that the sailors at this point wished to have Jonah himself admit his blame and thus confirm what the process of divination had already indicated.

The next question, What are you doing here? may be understood in a variety of senses. The Hebrew expression normally refers to work in general; for example, Psa 107.23 “earning their living on the seas,” or even God’s work in creation (Gen 2.2, 3). So here, New English Bible has “what is your business?” which may be intended as a general question meaning “what is your occupation?” (so King James Version, Revised Standard Version, Bible in Basic English, Zürcher Bibel [Zürcher Bibel], Luther 1984), with the implication that his occupation may itself have been an unlucky one and hence displeasing to the gods. But if the meaning is, as in Good News Translation, “What is your business on this ship?” (so Jerusalem Bible, New American Bible, An American Translation), the implication may have been that the sailors were suspicious of the presence among them of an Israelite, since Israelites were not a seafaring people. This is the sense taken by Knox (“What is your errand?”) and Mowinckel Mowinckel “What is the purpose of your journey?”). If the word is associated with the similar word meaning “messenger,” the meaning here may well be “errand, mission,” but that meaning is scarcely found elsewhere (but compare Dan 8.27). The last three questions in the verse are combined into two in Good News Translation: What country do you come from? What is your nationality? In some languages it may not be necessary to distinguish between Jonah’s nationality, in political terms, and his race, in ethnic terms.

What country do you come from? may be rendered as “Where do you make your home?” or “Where do you normally live?” or “Where is your home?” The question What is your nationality? may be equivalent to “What is your race?” or “What people do you belong to?” or even “What is your tribe?” In a few instances the designation of nationality is expressed in linguistic terms, that is to say, “What is your language?” or even “What is the language of your home?”

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 .

There is a problem involved in the introductory expression The LORD answered, since what follows is actually a question. Therefore it may be necessary to translate “The Lord answered Jonah by asking a question” or “The Lord asked Jonah a question in reply.”

What right do you have to be angry? may be expressed as “How can you justify being angry?” or “What excuse do you have for being angry?”

The Lord replies with a question like that addressed to Cain (Gen 4.6), “What right have you to be angry?” The Hebrew verb used here can mean “to do (something) well” (for example, 1 Sam 16.17), but it can also mean “to do right,” as in Isa 1.17; Jer 4.22. So here the sense seems to be “Are you doing right in being angry?” or, as in Moffatt, Jerusalem Bible, “Are you right to be angry?” Bible in Basic English is close to Good News Translation with “Have you any right to be angry?” while the reasonableness, rather than the rightfulness, of Jonah’s anger is questioned in Chinese Union Version, “Is it reasonable for you to be as angry as this?” (compare Modern Language Bible, New American Standard Bible “Do you have good reason to be angry?”). Knox acknowledges in a note the uncertainty of the meaning here: “The exact force of the Hebrew idiom used here is uncertain. Some think it means ‘Hast thou good reason to be angry?’; others would translate ‘Art thou very angry?’ ” While Knox himself suggests “Why, what anger is this?” An American Translation prefers his alternative “Are you so very angry?” and New Jerusalem Bible has “Are you that deeply grieved?” This is no doubt the basis of New English Bible “Are you so angry?” the meaning of which is not clear at first sight. This treatment of the question is based on the meaning of the Hebrew verb in its sense of “to do (something) thoroughly,” as in Deut 13.14; 17.4, and has the support of the Septuagint. New English Bible‘s translation suits the similar question in verse 9 reasonably well but is not so suitable here as Knox‘s first alternative, which is supported by other ancient translations.

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 .

At this point Good News Translation quotes the wording of the prayer, though Hebrew introduces the prayer by “and he said,” which can, of course, be rendered by some such expression as “saying” or “as follows.”

The form of Good News Translation obscures the fact that there is a change halfway through the verse from a statement about the Lord in the third person to an acknowledgment of his help in the second person. A similar change occurs in verse 7, but for the sake of clarity Good News Translation keeps to second person throughout as being appropriate for a prayer. In view of the fact that the Lord is referred to by a second person singular pronoun you, it may be wrong in some languages to employ a title of direct address, as in Good News Translation O LORD. This may be particularly inappropriate in view of the fact that there is a mention in verse 1 of the prayer as being addressed to the LORD.

The phrase In my distress may be rendered in a number of languages by a clause, “when I was in great trouble,” or in a more figurative expression, “when great troubles overwhelmed me.”

The tense of the verbs I called and you answered has been interpreted as implying that the prayer is uttered by someone looking back in gratitude to a deliverance that has already taken place, not looking forward to some future rescue. Knox evades this difficulty by using the present tense.

In some languages a literal rendering of you answered me may imply merely that God responded verbally. This is what is specifically meant in this passage, but the implication is of course much greater, and a literal rendering might suggest that God only answered verbally and paid no further attention to Jonah. Obviously the Lord answered by helping; therefore it may be better in some instances to render you answered me as “you came to my help” or “you answered by helping me.”

In the second half of the Hebrew text, the Lord is addressed directly, but in other respects, it is a close parallel to the first half, in that it speaks of the worshiper’s prayer arising out of his dangerous situation, and the answer he receives from the Lord.

The prayer is described as coming from deep in the world of the dead, or “out of the belly of Sheol” (New English Bible). In other words the worshiper is pictured as having “one foot in the grave,” to use an English idiom, or in “the jaws of death,” as Luther 1984 expresses it. The expression used in Good News Translation, the world of the dead, corresponds to the Hebrew word Sheol (for example, An American Translation “heart of Sheol”). The word occurs often in the Psalms and the book of Job to refer to the place to which all dead people go. It is represented as a dark place, in which there is no activity worthy of the name. There are no moral distinctions there, so “hell” (King James Version) is not a suitable translation, since that suggests a contrast with “heaven” as the dwelling place of the righteous after death. In a sense, “the grave” in a generic sense is a near equivalent, except that Sheol is more a mass grave in which all the dead dwell together.

This is by no means the only place where Sheol is personified in such a way as to be represented as having bodily parts. Here “belly” (New English Bible) simply means the innermost part, hence deep in the world of the dead in Good News Translation. This is the only place where Sheol is said to have a “belly” or a “womb”; the Hebrew word may have either meaning. Sheol has a “throat” and “jaws” in Isa 5.14 (New English Bible), and there we find the same kind of imagery, with the underworld represented as a vast cavern into which one may go down, but out of which it is not possible to come up. Sheol has a mouth (Psa 141.7) with which it can swallow people (Prov 1.12), and it has a great appetite (Hab 2.5; Prov 27.20). The use of this particular imagery may have been considered suitable here in view of Jonah’s imprisonment in the interior of the fish, though the word used in Hebrew is not the same as in the previous verses.

The world of the dead is rendered in a number of languages as “the place where the dead are” or “… dwell.” A literal rendering of world might suggest that there are two distinct earths, one for the living and another for the dead. An adequate equivalent for deep may be simply “down in the place where the dead are.”

The use of the perfect tense “heard” in New English Bible (“have heard” in Jerusalem Bible) is not based on any difference in the form of the Hebrew verb from that of “cried,” but may be justified by supposing that Jonah here is speaking of an action in the past continuing into the present. Elsewhere in the Old Testament, those in the world of the dead are completely cut off from God, with no possibility of any prayer being heard (for example, Psa 88.5, 10, 11; Isa 38.18).

I cried for help must frequently be rendered as “I shouted for help” or “I shouted to you, ‘Help me.’ ” One should avoid a rendering of cried that would suggest “weeping” or “lamenting.”

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 .

This verse begins by describing what happened when Jonah reached the large city of Nineveh. Jonah started through the city, that is, began to walk through it, but did not start to proclaim his message until he had walked one day’s journey, presumably not halfway to the other side. Only then did he proclaim his message: “In forty days Nineveh will be destroyed!” New English Bible, no doubt intentionally, uses the verb “overthrown,” to correspond to the verb used in Hebrew, which is the same as that associated with the destruction of the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah in Gen 19.21-29. It is also used in Jer 20.16; Lam 4.6, and generally God is the subject when the reference is to the destruction of a city, usually in some violent manner (compare Amos 4.11, and the imagery of God “overturning” Jerusalem in 2 Kgs 21.13). Winding Quest translates suitably, “this city will become a heap of ruins.” Nowhere else in the book is there a proclamation or announcement by Jonah, and we hear nothing more of him in this chapter.

Jonah’s only message to the people of Nineveh consisted of the unconditional assertion that only forty days remained before the total destruction of their city, or “within forty days Nineveh will have been overthrown.” The expression forty days is often used in the Bible as a round number; for example, Exo 24.18; 34.28; Num 13.25; 1 Sam 17.16; 1 Kgs 19.8, where most scholars believe that an exact period is not intended. It is clear from the mention here of Jonah’s single day’s journey, using the same kind of expression as in the previous verse, that the reference in verse 3 must be to the diameter of the city and not to its circumference.

It is frequently necessary to indicate clearly who are the persons who received the proclamation announced in verse 4. Therefore it may be necessary to say “he proclaimed to the people,” or “he announced to the inhabitants of the city,” or “… to those who lived there.”

No reason is given to the people for the threat of destruction and no alternative of repentance is offered. It is as though Jonah is only concerned to carry out his commission to the absolute minimum, and he seemingly has no concern for the well-being of those to whom he preached.

In a number of languages the method of destruction must always be indicated by a verb such as destroyed; for example “conquered by an enemy,” “destroyed by fire,” or “leveled by an earthquake.” The most generic expression may simply be “will not exist any longer.” In this context such a general statement may be preferable, for it would be reading a good deal into the text to suggest the specific way in which Nineveh would be destroyed.

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 .