107.  But, as I have learned from a man A man.  A Greek scholiast says that this was Origen (ob. a.d. 235), who gives this interpretation in his commentary on the prophecy of Jonah.  Elias says that he had read it in the commentary of Methodius (fl. a.d. 300), who usually combats Origen’s interpretations.  We know that Origen did comment on the book of Job, and that Methodius wrote on one at least of the Minor Prophets:  but both these works have been lost, so that we cannot absolutely decide the question, though the assurance with which both the notes are written makes us hesitate to consider either of them merely a happy guess.  Combefis thinks that S. Greg. alludes to one of his own instructors:  the gen. with ἀκόυω (cf. Plato, Gorg., 503, c.) favours this view, but the interpretation may well have been derived from one of the earlier writers. skilled in these subjects, and able to grasp the depth of the prophet, by means of a reasonable explanation of what seems unreasonable in the history, it was not this which caused Jonah to flee, and carried him to Joppa and again from Joppa to Tarshish, when he entrusted his stolen self to the sea: Jonah i. 3.  for it was not likely that such a prophet should be ignorant of the design of God, viz., to bring about, by means of the threat, the escape of the Ninevites from the threatened doom, according to His great wisdom, and unsearchable judgments, and according to His ways which are beyond our tracing and finding out; Rom. xi. 33. nor that, if he knew this he would refuse to co-operate with God in the use of the means which He designed for their salvation.  Besides, to imagine that Jonah hoped to hide himself at sea, and escape by his flight the great eye of God, is surely utterly absurd and stupid, and unworthy of credit, not only in the case of a prophet, but even in the case of any sensible man, who has only a slight perception of God, Whose power is over all.