Praise from the Depths
The Book of Jonah has long attracted considerable attention. Among the prophetic books, it is distinctive in its literary genre, content, and historical setting. Its dramatic narrative is also readily accessible, making it a book of particular interest to readers ranging from children to scholars. Chapter 2 is itself distinctive within the book. It consists primarily of Jonah's prayer from within the belly of the fish, which may also be understood as a psalm of thanksgiving. Unlike the remainder of the book, which is written in narrative prose, this chapter is poetic in form. What follows is a close reading of Chapter 2, together with some preliminary observations.
Some Historical Background
With regard to the ancient textual witnesses to the book, most scholars follow the Masoretic Text, making only minor editorial emendations. Among English translations, Jonah 2:8 is the only verse that exhibits substantial differences in translation. The Chinese translations, by contrast, differ relatively little and broadly agree with the New International Version. This matter will be examined below.
The book makes no reference to major historical events or the regnal years of particular kings, making it difficult to establish either the date of the events narrated or the date of composition. If the Jonah of the book is identified with Jonah the prophet, the events would have taken place during the reign of Jeroboam II of Israel, approximately 800–750 BC, when Nineveh had not yet become the capital of Assyria. If the book was composed during this period, the relationship between Jonah's mission and the fate of the kingdom of Israel raises some intriguing questions. Was Nineveh being called to repentance so that it would refrain from attacking Israel? Or did Yahweh preserve Nineveh in order that it might subsequently serve as an instrument of judgement against Israel? These questions lie beyond the scope of the present discussion.
Alternatively, if Jonah 3:3, 'Nineveh was a great city', is understood as referring retrospectively to the city's former greatness, the book may have been composed after the fall of Nineveh in 612 BC. In that case, the author would not have been Jonah himself, but another writer who incorporated his story into the book. In any event, the Book of Jonah must have reached its written form and been included among the Twelve Prophets by the second century BC, since the deuterocanonical Book of Sirach already refers to 'the Twelve Prophets'. On this dating, the author would have been a Judaean, a supposition consistent with the poem in Chapter 2, in which the Temple is presented as a sign of Yahweh's presence.
Literary Form and Composition
The poem in Chapter 2 presents further complexities. Its relationship with the rest of the book is not entirely coherent, and both possibilities remain open: either the poem existed independently and the narrative was subsequently constructed around it, or the narrative existed first and the poem was inserted at a later stage. For instance, apart from references to the sea and water, the poem makes no mention of the great fish, the storm, the sailors, or other distinctive elements of the Jonah narrative. Furthermore, the entire poem is placed before Jonah's release from the fish, whilst its concluding declaration of deliverance appears incongruous with his circumstances.
On the other hand, Jonah's psalm of thanksgiving bears considerable resemblance to other poems of the same genre. There are numerous parallels between Jonah's prayer and the Psalter, particularly Psalm 30, with which several verses exhibit notable similarities. Scholars have also compiled tables comparing Jonah's prayer with other psalms. Nevertheless, since these are themselves psalms of thanksgiving, similarities in content are hardly surprising. A resemblance confined to a single verse is insufficient to establish a literary relationship between Jonah's prayer and any particular psalm.
Given both its apparent incongruity with the narrative setting and its similarities to other psalms, the poem may originally have been a more general hymn of thanksgiving used in worship. Although it is reasonable to suggest that the poem and the remainder of the book were composed at different times, it is difficult to determine their respective dates or the order in which they were written.
The Translation of Jonah 2:8
Translations of this verse differ considerably. The following comparison illustrates the variations (Chinese-English translations were done by the author):
The translations of the King James Version, the Old Testament scholar Robert Alter, and the New International Version all convey a sense of 'mercy' or 'steadfast love', broadly corresponding to the Chinese terms 慈愛 and 憐愛. Among these translations, only the New International Version explicitly adds 'God's' before the noun, in a manner comparable to the Chinese Union Version. Nevertheless, the noun in the New International Version remains 'love', whereas the Chinese Union Version employs 'Lord' as the object of the verb.
By contrast, the Revised Standard Version and the New American Standard Bible render the Hebrew term as 'loyalty' and 'faithfulness' respectively, conveying the sense of fidelity, steadfastness, or an unwillingness to abandon one's allegiance. This dimension of meaning is not apparent in the Chinese translations listed above. The Lü Zhenzhong Version and the Studium Biblicum Version, however, may have attempted to convey something closer to this sense of loyalty or faithfulness.
From these comparisons, we may infer that the Hebrew term encompasses notions of both steadfast love and fidelity. Different understandings of the term have led translators to adopt different constructions and renderings of the verse. There appears to be no complete consensus among translators concerning how the word should best be represented.
In view of this semantic ambiguity, translations intended for a general readership, such as the Chinese Union Version and the New International Version, appear to seek greater clarity by interpreting the love in question as the love of the Lord or God. Translations directed towards scholars or readers engaged in more detailed biblical study, by contrast, may refrain from supplying additional explanatory words, thereby leaving greater scope for interpretation.
If the intention is to preserve such interpretative possibilities and allow readers to consider the meaning of a term for which there is no universally accepted rendering, the Orthodox Jewish Bible adopts an especially distinctive approach: it retains the transliterated Hebrew word chesed without translating it at all. This approach may also suggest that the term evokes a richer range of associations for readers of the Hebrew text than any single Chinese or English equivalent can adequately convey. The translators evidently consider that no one translated expression can fully represent its multiple dimensions of meaning.
At this point, readers may reasonably ask: apart from the rendering adopted by the Chinese Union Version, which supplies 'Lord', what other plausible interpretation is possible if 'Lord' or 'God' is not inserted into the text?
The Chinese Union Version and the New International Version, by explicitly introducing 'Lord' or 'God', convey a relatively direct accusation: those who worship worthless idols forsake the Lord, who is loving and faithful. Within the psalm of Chapter 2, this interpretation establishes a coherent connection between verses 8 and 9. It also accords with the contrast introduced by 'but' at the beginning of verse 9 in both Chinese and English translations.
If, however, we set aside the supplied reference to 'Lord', the verse may be understood from another perspective. Some scholars working within Jewish interpretative traditions favour an interpretation that recalls the narrative of Chapter 1: those who worship worthless idols abandon their allegiance to those deities and turn instead towards the true God.
Such a reading corresponds more closely to the portrayal of the sailors in the opening chapter. Initially, 'every man cried unto his god' (Jonah 1:5, KJV). Yet after they had cast Jonah into the sea and the storm had ceased, 'the men feared the LORD exceedingly, and offered a sacrifice unto the LORD, and made vows' (Jonah 1:16, KJV). Their conduct may therefore be understood as a movement away from their former religious allegiances towards the worship of Yahweh.
We have thus considered two possible interpretations of the verse. The discussion, however, is by no means exhausted by these alternatives, and a more detailed examination lies beyond the scope of the present essay.
From the preceding comparison, we can observe that most translations preserve broadly the same grammatical sequence: 'forsake — their — mercy', or an equivalent construction. Although the rendering of the final term, chesed, varies considerably, the comparison provides some indication of its semantic range and demonstrates how different interpretations may be connected coherently with the surrounding narrative of Jonah. This, in turn, contributes to a fuller understanding of the psalm in Chapter 2.
The Significance of Translation Comparison
We are, of course, unable to reach a definitive conclusion here concerning either the most appropriate translation or the correct interpretation. Nevertheless, the value of comparing biblical translations does not necessarily lie in identifying the best translation or arriving at a single correct answer.
A translation that adheres closely to the wording of the original text may not always communicate its intended meaning effectively to contemporary readers, owing to differences in historical circumstances, sociocultural contexts, or changes in the meanings and associations of words. Through comparison, however, readers may acquire both an understanding of the general sense of the passage and a deeper appreciation of the vocabulary employed, thereby enriching their study of Scripture.
Such comparisons also provide insight into the different approaches adopted by translators, enabling readers to make more informed choices when selecting translations for future study. As the present discussion illustrates, reading English translations alongside Chinese versions—and, where possible, consulting the original languages—can encourage readers to reconsider their existing understanding of Scripture and appreciate the reasoning underlying different interpretations.
In this way, the very process of reading, comparing, and investigating the biblical text becomes a means by which the insights gained from Scripture are incorporated into our everyday thinking.