sn See N. C. Habel, “The Narrative Art of Job,” JSOT 27 (1983):101-111; J. J. Owens, “Prologue and Epilogue,” RevExp 68 (1971):457-467; and R. Polzin, “The Framework of the Book of Job,” Int 31 (1974):182-200.
¹sn The Book of Job is one of the major books of wisdom literature in the Bible. But it is a different kind of wisdom. Whereas the Book of Proverbs is a collection of the short wisdom sayings, Job is a thorough analysis of the relationship between suffering and divine justice put in a dramatic poetic form. There are a number of treatises on this subject in the ancient Near East, but none of them are as thorough and masterful as Job. See J. Gray, “The Book of Job in the Context of Near Eastern Literature,” ZAW 82 (1970):251-269; S. N. Kramer, “Man and His God, A Sumerian Variation on the ‘Job’ Motif,” VTSupp 3 (1953):170-182; R. G. Albertson, “Job and Ancient Near Eastern Wisdom Literature,” in Scripture and Context II, ed. by W. Hallo et. al. (Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 1983), pp. 213-230. While the book has fascinated readers for ages, it is a difficult book, difficult to translate and difficult to study. Most of it is written in poetic parallelism. But it is often very cryptic, it is written with unusual grammatical constructions, and it makes use of a large number of very rare words. All this has led some scholars to question if it was originally written in Hebrew or some other related Semitic dialect or language first. There is no indication of who the author was. It is even possible that the work may have been refined over the years; but there is no evidence for this either. The book uses a variety of genres (laments, hymns, proverbs, and oracles) in the various speeches of the participants. This all adds to the richness of the material. And while it is a poetic drama using cycles of speeches, there is no reason to doubt that the events represented here do not go back to a real situation and preserve the various arguments. Several indications in the book would place Job’s dates in the time of the patriarchs. But the composition of the book, or at least its final form, may very well come from the first millennium, maybe in the time of the flowering of wisdom literature with Solomon. We have no way of knowing when the book was written, or when its revision was completed. But dating it late in the intertestamental period is ruled out by the appearance of translations and copies of it, notably bits of a Targum of Job in the Dead Sea Scrolls. Among the general works and commentaries, see A. Hurvitz, “The Date of the Prose Tale of Job Linguistically Reconsidered,” HTR 67 (1974):17-34; R. H. Pfeiffer, “The Priority of Job over Isaiah 40-55,” JBL 46 (1927):202ff. The book presents many valuable ideas on the subject of the suffering of the righteous. Ultimately it teaches that one must submit to the wisdom of the Creator. But it also indicates that the shallow answers of Job’s friends do not do justice to the issue. Their arguments that suffering is due to sin are true to a point, but they did not apply to Job. His protests sound angry and belligerent, but he held tenaciously to his integrity. His experience shows that it is possible to live a pure life and yet still suffer. He finally turns his plea to God, demanding a hearing. This he receives, of course, only to hear that God is sovereignly ruling the universe. Job can only submit to him. In the end God does not abandon his sufferer. For additional material, see G. L. Archer, The Book of Job: God’s Answer to the Problem of Understanding Suffering (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1982); H. H. Rowley, “The Book of Job and Its Meaning,” BJRL 41 (1958,59):167-207; J. A. Baker, The Book of Job: Unity and Suffering (Sheffield: JSOT, 1978); C. L. Feinberg, “The Book of Job,” BSac 91 (19??):78-86; R. Polzin and D. Robertson, “Studies in the Book of Job,” Semeia 7 (Missoula: Scholars Press, 1977). Of the very many commentaries written on the Book of Job, some that have retained their usefulness more than others include: Clines (Word), 1989; Habel (CUP), 1985; Gordis (JTS), 1978; Rowley (NCB Nelson), 1970; Pope (Anchor), 1965); Holscher (Tübingen), 1937; S. R. Driver and G. B. Gray (ICC), 1921); Dhorme (Gabalda/Nelson), 1926/1967; Buttemwiser (Hodder and Stoughton), 1922; Ball (Oxford), 1922; Peake (London), 1904; Davidson (Cambridge), 1884; as well as Merx (1871), Dillmann (1891) and Buidde (1896).
²tn The construction has “a man was,” using ‘is haya rather than a preterite first. This simply begins the narrative.
³sn The term Uz occurs several times in the Bible: a son of Aram (Gen 10:23), a son of Nahor (Gen 22:21), and a descendant of Seir (Gen 36:28). If these are the clues to follow, the location would be north of Syria or south near Edom. The book tells how his flocks were exposed to Chaldeans, the tribes between Syria and the Euphrates (1:17), and in another direction to attacks from the Sabaeans (1:15). The most prominent man among his friends was from Teman, which was in Edom (2:11). Uz is also connected with Edom in Lamentations 4:21. The most plausible location, then, would be east of Israel and north east of Edom, in what is now North Arabia. The Greek has: “on the borders of Edom and Arabia.” An early Christian tradition placed his home in an area about 40 miles south of Damascus, in Baashan at the south east foot of Hermon.
⁴tn The simple co-ordination of the relative clause by the waw introduces a noun-clause to define the substantive (GKC, #155e).
⁵sn The name “Job” is mentioned by Ezekiel as one of the greats in the past—Noah, Job and Daniel (14:14). The suffering of Job was probably well known in the ancient world, and this name was clearly part of that tradition. There is little reason to try to determine the etymology and meaning of the name, since it may not be Hebrew. If it were Hebrew, it might mean something like “persecuted,” although some suggest “aggressor.” If Arabic it might have the significance of “the one who always returns to God.”
⁶tn The word tam has been translated “perfect.” The verbal root tamam means “to be blameless, complete.” The word is found in Gen 25:27 where it describes Jacob as “even-tempered.” It also occurs in Ps 44:5 and Prov 29:10. The meaning is that a person or a thing is complete, perfect, flawless. It does not mean that he was sinless, but that he was wholeheartedly trying to please God, that he had integrity and was blameless before God.
⁷tnThe word yasar, “upright,” is complementary to “blameless.” The idea is “upright, just,” and applies to his relationships with others (Ps 37:37 and 25:21).
⁸sn These two expressions indicate the outcome of Job’s character. “Fearing God” and “turning from evil” also express two correlative ideas in scripture; they signify his true piety—he had reverential fear of the LORD, meaning he was a truly devoted worshipper who shunned evil.
⁹sn The numbers used in the chapter, seven, three, and five, carry the symbolism in the Bible of perfection and completeness (see John Davis, Biblical Numerology (Baker, 1968). Job’s “seven sons” are listed first because in the East sons were considered more valuable than daughters (recall Ruth, who is better than seven sons”).
¹⁰tn The verb begins the sentence: “and there were born.” This use of the preterite with waw consecutive, especially after the verb haya, is explanatory: there was a man…and there was born to him…” (Bruce K. Waltke and M. O’Connor, An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, p. 551—hereafter referred to as WO).
¹¹tn The word means “cattle, livestock, possessions” (see also Gen 26:14). Here it includes the livestock, but also the entire substance of his household.
¹²tn The word `abudda indicates that he had a very large body of servants, meaning a very large household.
¹³tn The expression is literally “sons of the east.” The use of the genitive after “sons” in this construction may emphasize their nature (like “sons of belial”); it would refer to them as easterners (like our “sons of the south”). BDB says “dwellers in the east” (p. 869).
¹⁴tn The perfect tense with the waw, w^ehal^eku, indicates their characteristic action, actions that were frequently repeated (GKC #112dd).
¹⁵tn Heb “make a feast.”
¹⁶tn The tense is cryptic; it literally says “house—a man—his day.” The word “house” is an adverbial accusative of place: “in the house.” “Man” is the genitive; it also has a distributive sense: “in the house of each man.” And “his day” is an adverbial accusative: “on his day.” The point is that they feasted every day of the week in rotation.
¹⁷tn The use of qara’ followed by the lamed usually has the force of “to summon.” Here the meaning would not be so commanding, but would refer to an invitation (see also 1 Kgs 1:19, 25,26).
¹⁸tn The verse begins with the temporal indicator, which need not be translated “and it happened” or “and it came to pass.” The particle ki with the initial verbal form indicates it is a temporal clause.
¹⁹tn The verb is the hiphil perfect of naqap, “go around,” here it means “to make the round” or “complete the circuit” (BDB, p. 669). It indicates that when the feasting had made its circuit of the seven sons, then Job would sanctify them.
²⁰tn The form is a preterite with waw consecutive. The same emphasis on repeated or frequent action continues here in this verse. The idea here is that Job would sent for them, because the sanctification of them would have consisted of washings and changes of garments as well as the sacrifices (see Gen 35:2; 1 Sam 16:5).
²¹tn The first verb could also be joined with the next to form a verbal hendiadys: “he would rise early and he would sacrifice” would then simply be “he would sacrifice early in the morning” (see M. Delcor, VT 25 (1975):307-322). This section serves to explain in more detail how Job sanctified his children.
sn In the patriarchal society it was normal for the father to act as priest for the family, making the sacrifices as needed. Job here is exceptional in his devotion to the duty. The passage shows the balance between the greatest earthly rejoicing by the family, and the deepest piety and affection of the father.
²²tn The text does not have “according to”; the noun “number” is an accusative that defines the extent of his actions (GKC, #118e and h).
²³tn The clause stands as an accusative to the verb, here as the direct object introduced with “perhaps” (WO, p. 645,6).
²⁴tn The Hebrew verb is barak, which means “to bless.” Here is a case where the writer or a scribe has substituted the word “curse” with the word “bless” to avoid having the expression “curse God.” For similar euphemisms in the ancient world, See Kenneth Kitchen, Ancient Orient and Old Testament (Chicago: InterVarsity, 1966), p. 166. It is therefore difficult to know exactly what Job feared they might have done. The opposite of “bless” would be “curse,” which normally would convey disowning or removing from blessing. Some commentators try to offer a definition of “curse” from the root in the text, and noting that “curse” is too strong, come to something like “renounce.” The idea of blaspheming is probably not meant; rather, in their festivities they may have said things that renounced God or their interest in him. Job feared this momentary turning away from God in their festivities, perhaps as they thought their good life was more important than their religion.
²⁵tn The imperfect tense expresses continual action in past time, i.e., a customary imperfect (GKC, #107e).
²⁶sn The text draws the curtain of heaven aside for the reader to understand the background of this drama. God extols the virtue of Job, but Satan challenges the reasons for it. He receives permission to try to dislodge Job from his integrity. In short, God is using Job to prove Satan’s theory wrong.
²⁷tn The beginning Hebrew expression “and there was—the day” indicates that “there came a day when” or more simply “the day came when.” It emphasizes the particular day. The succeeding clauses is then introduced with a preterite with the waw consecutive (see Dhorme, p. 5).
²⁸sn The “sons of God” in the OT refers to angels. They are not actually “sons” of Elohim; the idiom is a poetic way of describing their nature and relationship to God. The phrase indicates their supernatural nature, and their submission to God as the sovereign Lord. It may be classified as a genitive that expresses how individuals belong to a certain class or type, i.e., the supernatural (GKC, #128v). In the pagan literature, especially of Ugarit, “the sons of God [‘el]” refers to the lesser gods or deities of the pantheon. See H. W. Robinson, “The Council of Yahweh,” JTS 45 (1943):151-157; G. Cooke, “The Sons of (the) God(s),” ZAW 76 (1964):22-47; M. Tsevat, “God and the Gods in the Assembly,” HUCA 40,41 (1969/70):123-137.
²⁹tn The preposition `al in this construction after a verb of standing or going means “before” (GKC, #119cc).
³⁰ sn The word means “adversary” or with the article “the adversary”—here the superhuman adversary or Satan. The word with the article means that the meaning of the word should receive prominence. A denominative verb meaning “to act as adversary” occurs. Satan is the great accuser of the saints (see Zech 3 where “Satan was standing there to ‘satanize’ Joshua the priest”; and see Rev 12 which identifies him with the Serpent in Genesis). He came among the angels at this time because he is one of them, and has access among them. Even though fallen, Satan has yet to be cast down completely (see Rev 12).
³¹tn The imperfect tense may be classified as progressive imperfect; it indicates action that although just completed is regarded as still lasting into the present (GKC, #107h).
³²tn The verb sut means “to go or rove about” (BDB, pp. 1001,2). Here the infinitive construct serves as the object of the preposition.
³³tn The hithpael (here also an infinitive construct after the preposition) of the verb halak means “to walk to and fro, back and forth, with the sense of investigating or reconnoitering (see e.g. Gen 13:17).
sn As the words are spoken by Satan, there is no self-condemnation in them. What the signify is the swiftness and thoroughness of his investigation of humans. The good angels are said to go to and fro in the earth on behalf of the suffering righteous (Zech 1:10, 11; 6:7), but Satan goes seeking whom he may devour (1 Pet 5:8).
³⁴ tn The Hebrew has “have you placed your heart on Job?” This means “direct your mind to” (cf. BDB, p. 963, #c2).
sn The question is undoubtedly rhetorical, for it is designed to make Satan aware of Job as God extols his fine qualities.
³⁵tn The same expressions that appeared at the beginning of the chapter appear here in the words of God. In contrast to that narrative report about Job, the emphasis here is on Job’s present character, and so the participle form is translated here as present durative (“turns”). It modifies “man” as one who is turning from evil.
³⁶tn The Hebrew form has the interrogative he’ on the adverb hinnam, a derivative of the verb hanan, “to be gracious, show favor.” The adverb has the sense of “free, gratis, gratuitously, for nothing, for no reason. (see BDB, p. 336). The idea is that Satan does not disagree that Job is pious, but that he is loyal to God because of what he receives from God. He will test the sincerity of Job.
³⁷tn The use of the independent personal pronoun here emphasizes the subject of the verb: “Have you not put up a hedge.”
³⁸tn The verb suk means “to hedge or fence up, about” something (BDB, p. 962). The original idea seems to have been to surround with a wall of thorns for the purpose of protection (Dhorme, p. 7). The verb is an implied comparison between making a hedge and protecting someone.
³⁹sn Here the verb”bless” is used in one of its very common meanings. The verb means “to enrich,” often with the sense of enabling or empowering things for growth or fruitfulness. See further Claus Westermann, Blessing in the Bible and the Life of the Church (Fortress, 1968).
⁴⁰tn Or “substance.”
⁴¹tn The verb paras means “to break through.” It has the sense of abundant increase, as in breaking out, overflowing (see also Gen 30:30 and Exod 1:12).
⁴²tn The particle ‘ulam (“but”) serves to restrict the clause in relation to the preceding clause (WO, pp. 672,3, n. 107).
⁴³tn The force of the imperatives in this sentence are almost conditional—if God were to do this, then surely Job would respond differently.
sn The two imperatives (“stretch out” and “strike”) and the word “hand” all form a bold anthropomorphic sentence. It is as if God would deliver a blow to Job with his fist. But the intended meaning is that God would intervene to destroy Job’s material and physical prosperity.
⁴⁴sn The formula used in the expression is the oath formula: “if not to your face he will curse you” meaning “he will surely curse you to your face.” Satan is so sure that the piety is insincere that he can use an oath formula.
⁴⁵tn See the comments on Job 1:5. Here too the idea of “renounce” may fit well enough; but the idea of actually cursing God may no be out of the picture if everything Job has is removed. Satan thinks he will denounce God.
⁴⁶tn The particle hinneh introduces a foundational clause upon which the following volitional clause is based.
⁴⁷tn The versions add a verb here: “delivered to” or “abandoned to” the hand of Satan.
⁴⁸tn Heb “in your hand.” The idiom means that it is now Satan’s to do with as he pleases.
⁴⁹tn The word order emphatically holds out Job’s person as the exception: “only to/upon him.”
⁵⁰tn The Targum to Job adds “with permission” to show that he was granted leave from God’s presence.
⁵¹sn So Satan, having received his permission to test Job’s sincerity, goes out from the LORD’s presence. But Satan is bound by the will of the Most High not to touch the life of Job. The sentence gives the impression that Satan’s departure is with a certain eagerness and confidence.
⁵²sn The series of catastrophes and the piety of Job is displayed now in the most ideal terms. Everything that can go wrong goes wrong, and yet Job, the pious servant of Yahweh, continues to worship him in the midst of the rubble. This section, and the next, will lay the foundation for the great dialogues in the book.
⁵³tn The Targum to Job clarifies that it was the first day of the week. The fact that it was in the house of the firstborn is the reason.
⁵⁴tn The use of the verb “to be” with the participle gives emphasis to the continuing of the action in the past (GKC, #116r).
⁵⁵tn The Greek has “the spoilers” instead of Sabaeans. They apparently connected the word to saba, “to take captive,” rather than s^eba’.
sn The name Sheba is used to represent its inhabitants, or some of them. The verb is feminine because the name is a name of a place. The Sabaeans were a tribe from the Arabian peninsula. They were traders mostly (6:19). The raid came from the south, suggesting that this band of Sabaeans were near Edom. The time of the attack seems to be winter since the cattle were plowing.
⁵⁶tn The Hebrew is simply “fell” (from napal). To “fall upon” something in war means to attack quickly and suddenly.
⁵⁷sn Job’s servants were probably armed and gave resistance, which would be the normal case in that time. This was probably why they were killed by the sword.
⁵⁸tn Heb “the edge/mouth of the sword”; see T. J. Meek, “Archaeology and a Point of Hebrew Syntax,” BASOR 122 (1951):31-33.
⁵⁹tn The pleonasms in the verse emphasize the emotional excitement of the messenger.
⁶⁰tn The particle `od is used with the participle to express the past circumstances when something else happened (WO, pp. 624,5).
⁶¹tn The Hebrew expression is literally “yet/this/speaking/and this/ arrived.” The sentence uses the two demonstratives as a contrasting pair. It means “this one was still speaking when that one arrived” (WO, p. 309).
⁶²sn The “fire of God” would refer to lightning (1 Kgs 18:38; 2 Kgs 1:12). The Greek text simply has “fire.” The first blow came from enemies; the second from heaven, which might have confused Job more as to the cause of his troubles. The use of the divine epithet could also be an indication of the superlative degree; see D. Winton Thomas, “A Consideration of Some Unusual Ways of Expressing the Superlative in Hebrew,” VT 3 (1953):209-224.
⁶³sn The name may have been given to the tribes that roamed between the Euphrates and the lands east of the Jordan. These are the nomadic Kaldu who are part of the ethnic Aramaeans. The Greek text simply has “horsemen.”
⁶⁴tn The verb pasat means “to hurl themselves” upon something (see Judg 9:33, 41). It was a quick, plundering raid to carry off the camels.
⁶⁵tn Heb “with the edge/mouth of the sword.”
⁶⁶tn The use of the particle hinneh in this sentence is deictic, pointing out with excitement the events that happened as if the listener was there.
⁶⁷tn The word me`eber is simply “from the direction of”; the word `eber indicates the area the whirlwind came across.
⁶⁸tn The verb wayyaqom, “and he arose,” indicates the intentionality and the rapidity of the actions to follow. It signals the beginning of his response to the terrible news.
⁶⁹sn It was the custom to tear the robe in a time of mourning, to indicate that the heart was torn (Joel 2:13). The “garment, mantel” here is the outer garment frequently worn over the basic tunic. See further D. R. Ap-Thomas, “Notes on Some Terms Relating to Prayer,” VT 6 (1956):220-224.
⁷⁰sn In mourning one normally put off every adornment that enhanced or embellished the person, including that which nature provided (Jer 7:29; Mic 1:16).
⁷¹tn This last verb is the hishtaphel of the word hawah (in BDB s.v. sahah); it means “to prostrate oneself, to cause oneself to be low to the ground.” In the OT it is frequently translated “to worship” because that is usually why the individual would kneel down and then put his or her forehead to the ground at the knees. But the word essentially means “to bow down to the ground.” Here “worship” would convey more than what is taking place—although Job’s response is worshipful. See G. I. Davies, “A Note on the Etymology of histah^awah,” VT 29 (1979):493-495; and J. A. Emerton, “The Etymology of histah^awah,” OTS (1977):41-55.
⁷²tn The adjective “naked” is functioning here as an adverbial accusative of state, explicative of the state of the subject. While it does include the literal sense of nakedness at birth, Job is also using it symbolically to mean “without possessions.”
⁷³sn While the first half of the couplet is to be taken literally as referring to his coming into this life, this second part must be interpreted only generally to refer to his departure from this life. It is parallel to 1 Tim 6:7, “We brought nothing into this world, and it is certain we can carry nothing out.”
⁷⁴tn The two verbs are simple perfect tenses. They can be given the nuance of gnomic imperfect, expressing what the sovereign God always does. Or, they could be referring specifically to his own experience: “Yahweh gave (definite past, referring to his coming into this good life) and Yahweh has taken away” (present perfect, referring to his great losses).
⁷⁵sn Some commentators are troubled by the appearance of the word Yahweh on the lips of Job, assuming that the narrator slipped and inserted his own religion into the story-telling. Such thinking assumes that Yahweh was only a national god of Israel, unknown to anyone else in the ancient world. But here is a clear indication that a non-Israelite Job knew and believed in Yahweh.
⁷⁶tn The last clause is difficult to translate. It simply reads, “and he did not give unseemliness to God.” The word tiplah means “unsavoriness” or “unseemliness” in a moral sense. The sense is that Job did not charge God with any moral impropriety in his dealings with him. God did nothing worhtless or tasteless. The ancient versions saw the word connected with “foolishness” or “stupidity” (tapel, “to be tasteless”). It is possible that “folly” would capture some of what Job meant here. See also M. Dahood, “Hebrew-Ugaritic Lexicography XII,” Biblica 55 (1974):381-393.
¹tn This last purpose clause has been omitted in some Greek versions.
²tn The form is the hiphil participle, “make strong, seize, hold fast.” It is the verbal use here; joined with `odennu it emphasizes that “he is still holding firmly.” The testing has simply strengthened Job in his integrity.
³tn This is the same word used to describe Job as “blameless, pure.” Here it carries the idea of “integrity”; Job remained blameless, perfect.
⁴tn The waw with the preterite is used here to express the logical conclusion or consequence of what was stated previously. God is saying that Job has maintained his integrity, so that now it is clear that Satan moved against him groundlessly (GKC, #111 l).
⁵tn The verb literally means “to swallow”; it forms an implied comparison in the line, indicating the desire of Satan to ruin him completely. See A Guillaume, “A Note on the Root bala`,” JTS NS 13 (1962):320-323; and N. M. Sarna in JBL 76 (1957):13-25, for a discussion of the Ugaritic deity Mot swallowing up the enemy.
⁶sn Once again the adverb hinnam is used. It means “graciously, gratis, free, without cause, for no reason.” Here the sense has to be gratuitously, for no reason.” The point of the verb hanan (“to be gracious”) and its derivatives is that the action is undeserved. In fact, they would deserve the opposite. Sinners seeking grace deserve punishment. Here, Job deserves reward, not suffering.
⁷tn The form is the simply preterite with the waw consecutive. However, the speech of Satan is in contrast to what God said, even though in narrative sequence.
⁸tn The preposition b^e`ad designates interest or advantage arising from the idea of protection for (for the benefit of) (WO, p. 202).
⁹sn The meaning of the expression is obscure. It may come from the idea of sacrificing an animal or another person in order to go free, suggesting the expression that one type of skin that was worth less was surrendered to save the more important life. Satan would then be saying that Job was willing for others to die for him to go free, but not himself. “Skin” would be a synecdoche of the part for the whole (like the idiomatic use of skin today for a person in a narrow escape). The second clause indicates that God has not even scratched the surface because Job has been protected. His “skin” might have been scratched, but not his flesh and bone! But if his life had been put in danger, he would have responded differently.
¹⁰tn The Greek has “give as a ransom.”
¹¹sn The “bones and flesh” are idiomatic for the whole person, his physical and his psychical/spiritual being (see further H. W. Wolff, Anthropology of the Old Testament [Fortress, 1974], pp. 26-28).
¹²tn The particle hinno is literally, “here he is!”God presents Job to Satan, with the restriction on his life.
¹³tn The Greek has “I deliver him up to your power.”
¹⁴sn The irony of the passage comes through with this choice of words. The verb samar means “keep, guard, preserve.” The exceptive clause casts Satan in the role of a savior—he cannot destroy this life but must protect it.
¹⁵tn The verb is “struck, smote” (nakah); it can be rendered in a more idiomatic way.
¹⁶sn The general consensus is that Job was afflicted with a leprosy known as elephantiasis, named because the rough skin and the swollen limbs are animal-like. The Hebrew word s^ehin can indicate an ulcer as well. Leprosy begins with such, but so do other deseases. Leprosy normally begins in the limbs and spreads; but Job was afflicted everywhere at once. It may be some other disease also characterized by such a malignant ulcer. Clines’ commentary has a good bibliography on all the possible diseases linked to this description (p. 48).
¹⁷tn Heb “crown.”
¹⁸tn The verb garad is a hapax (only occurring here). Modern Hebrew has retained a meaning “to scrape,” which is what the cognate Syriac and Arabic indicate. In the hithpael it would mean “scrape himself.”
¹⁹sn The disease required constant attention. The itching had to be scraped with a piece of broken pottery, and the infections scraped away. The skin was so disfigured that even his friends did not recognize him (2:12). The book will add that the disease afflicted him inwardly, giving him a foul breath and a loathesome smell (19:17, 20). The sores bred worms; they opened and ran, and closed and tightened (16:8). He was tormented with dreams (7:14). He felt like he was choking (7:14). His bones were racked with burning pain (30:30). And he was not able to rise from his place (19:18). The disease was incurable; but it would last for years, leaving the patient longing for death.
²⁰tn The construction uses the disjunctive waw with the independent pronoun with the active participle. The construction connects this clause with what has just been said, making this a circumstantial clause.
²¹sn It is likely that the “ashes” refers to the place outside the city where the rubbish was collected and burnt, i.e., the ash-heap. This is the understanding of the Greek translation which has “dung-hill outside the city.”
²²tn The versions have some information here that is interesting, albeit fanciful. The Targum calls her “Dinah.” The Greek has “when a long time had passed.” But the whole Greek rendering is paraphrastic: “How long will you hold out, saying, ‘Behold, I wait yet a little while, expecting the hope of my deliverance?’ for behold, your memorial is abolished from the earth, even your sons and daughters, the pangs and pains of my womb which I bore in vain with sorrows, and you yourself sit down to spend the night in the open air among the corruption of worms, and I am a wanderer and a servant from place to place and house to house, waiting for the setting sun, that I may rest from my labors and pains that now beset me, but say some word against the Lord and die.”
²³sn See R. D. Moore, “The Integrity of Job,” CBQ 45 (1983):17-31.
²⁴tn The verb is literally “bless” (barek). As in the earlier uses, the meaning probably has more to do with renouncing God than of speaking a curse. The actual word is a theological euphemism for the verb qillel.
sn The church fathers were quick to see here again the role of the wife in the temptation—she acts as the intermediary between Satan and Job, pressing the cause for him.
²⁵tn The imperative with the conjunction in this expression serves to express the certainty that will follow as the result or consequence of the previous imperative (GKC, # 110f).
²⁶tn The word “foolish” (nabal) has to do with godless more than silly (Ps 14:1). To be foolish in this sense is to deny the nature and the work of God in life its proper place. See A. Phillips, “NEBALA—A Term for Serious Disorderly Unruly Conduct,” VT 25 (1975):237-241; and W. M. W. Roth, “NBL,” VT 10 (1960):394-409.
²⁷tn The verb qibbel means “to accept, receive.” It is attested in the Amarna letters with the meaning “receive meekly, patiently.”
²⁸tn The adverb gam is placed here before the first clause, but belongs with the second. It intensifies the idea (see GKC, #153). See alkso C. J. Labuschagne, “The Emphasizing Particle GAM and Its Connotations,” Studia Biblica et Semitica FS Th. C. Vriezen), ed. by W. C. Van Unnik et. al. (Wageningen: Veenan and Zonen, 1966), pp. 193-203.
²⁹tn The two verbs in this sentence, piel imperfects, are deliberative imperfects; they express the reasoning or deliberating in the interrogative sentences.
³⁰tn A question need not be introduced by an interrogative particle or adverb. The natural emphasis on the words is enough to indicate it is a question (GKC, #150a).
sn The Hebrew words “good” (tob) and “evil” (ra`) have to do with what effects life. That which is good produces, promotes and protects life; that which is evil harms, pains, or destroys life.
³¹sn See N. C. Habel, “‘Only the Jackal is My Friend,’ On Friends and Redeemers in Job,” Int 31 (1977):227-236.
³²tn Heb “a man from his place”; this is the distributive use, meaning “each man came from his place.”
³³sn Commentators have tried to analyze the meanings of the names of the friends and their locations. Not only has this proven to difficult (Teman is the only place that is known), it is not necessary for the study of the book. The names are probably not symbolic of the things they say.
³⁴tn The verb can mean that they “agreed together”; but it also and more likely means that they came together at a meeting point to go visit Job together.
³⁵tn The verb “to show grief” is nud; it literally signfies “to shake the head.” It may be that his friends came to show the proper sympathy and express the appropriate feelings. They were not ready for what they found.
³⁶tn The second infinitive is from naham, “to comfort, console” in the piel. This word may be derived from a word with a meaning of sighing deeply.
³⁷sn The idiom “lift the eyes” or “lift the voice” is intended to show a special intensity in the effort. Here it would indicate that they were trying to see Job from a great distance away.
³⁸tn The hiphil perfect here should take the nuance of potential perfect—they were not able to recognize him. The point does not mean that they did not know it was Job, only that he did not look anything like Job.
³⁹tn The word k^e’eb means “pain”—both mental and physical pain. The translation of “grief” captures only part of its emphasis.
⁴⁰sn The three friends went into a more severe form of mourning, one that is usually reserved for a death. Dhorme says it is a display of grief in its most intese form (A Commentary on the Book of Job, p. 23); for one of them to speak before the sufferer spoke would have been wrong.
¹sn The detailed introduction to the speech with “he opened his mouth” draws the readers attention to what was going to be said.
²tn The verb “cursed” is the piel preterite from the verb qalal, “to be light” in the qal stem, but here “to treat lightly, with contempt, curse.” See in general H. C. Brichto, The Problem of “Curse” in the Hebrew Bible (Philadelphia: SBL, 1963); and A. C. Thiselton, “The Supposed Power of Words in the Biblical Writings,” JTS NS 25 (1974):283-299.
³sn The Syriac has “the day on which he was born.” But there is no need to add the reading, for the context makes it clear that Job meant the day of his birth. But some have tried to offer a different interpretation, such as his destiny, or his predicament.
⁴tn The text has wayya`an, literally, “and he answered.” The Greek text simply has “saying” for the entire verse. The Syriac, Targum, and Greek A have what the MT has.
⁵tn The relative clause is carried by the preposition with the resumptive pronoun: “the day [which] I was born in it” meaning “the day in which I was born” (see GKC, ##155 f and i).
⁶tn The verb is the niphal imperfect. It may be interpreted in this dependent clause as representing a future event from some point of time in the past—”the day on which I was born” or “would be born” (see GKC #107k). Or, it may simply serve as a preterite indicating action that is in the past.
⁷tn The MT simply has “and the night—it said….” By simple juxtaposition with the parallel construction (“on which I was born”) the verb “it said” must be a relative clause explaining “the night.” Rather that supply “in which” and make the verb passive (which is possible since no specific subject is provided, but leaves open the question of who said it), it is preferable to take the verse as a personification. First Job cursed the day; now he cursed the night that spoke about what it witnessed. See A. Ehrman, “A Note on the Verb ‘amar,” JQR 55 (1964-5):166-167.
⁸tn The word is gaber, “a man.” The word usually distinguishes a man as strong, distinct from children and women.
⁹sn The announcement at birth is to the fact that a male was conceived. The same parallelism between “brought forth/born” and “conceived” may be found in Ps 51:7. The motifs of the night of conception and the day of birth will be developed by Job. For the entire verse, which is more a wish or malediction than a curse, see S. H. Blank, “Perish the Day, A Misdirected Curse (Job 3:3),” Prophetic Thought, Essays and Addresses (Cincinnati: HUCA, 1977):61-63.
¹⁰tn The first two words should be treated as a casus pendens (see Clines, p. 69).
¹¹sn This expression by Job is the negation of the divine decree at creation—“Let there be light,” and that was the first day. Job wishes that his first day be darkness: “As for that day, let there be darkness.” Since only God has this prerogative, Job adds the wish that God on high would not regard that day.
¹²tn The verb daras means “to seek, inquire,” and “to address someone, be concerned about something” (cf. Dt. 11:12; Jer 30:14,17). Job wants the day to perish from the mind of God.
¹³tn The verb is the hiphil of yapa`, which means here “cause to shine.” The subject is the hapax n^eharah, “light,” which is from the verb “to gleam” (see Isa 60:5).
¹⁴sn The translation of salmawet, “shadow of death,” seems to indicate a dark, death shadow (supported in the Greek); but many think it may not represent the best etymological analysis of the word. The word may be connected to an Arabic word (slm) which means “to be dark,” and an Akkadian word salmu, “black.” It would then have to be re-pointed throughout its uses to salmut, forming an abstract ending. It would then simply mean “darkness” rather than “shadow of death.” In the line since “darkness” has already been used, if this were the translation also then the two together would probably form a nominal hendiadys: “Let the deepest darkness….” There is a good deal of literature on this; one may begin with W. L. Michel, “SLMWT, `Deep Darkness’ or `Shadow of Death’?” BR 29 (1984):5-20.
¹⁵tn The verb is ga’al, “redeem, claim.” Dhorme thinks that this is too simple, and that the verb is the homonym “pollute.” This is the reading in the Targum, Syriac, Vulgate, and Rashi, who quotes from Mal 1:7,12. See A. R. Johnson, “The Primary Meaning of ga’al,” VT Supp 1 (1953):67-77.
¹⁶tn The expression “the blackness of the day,” kimrire yom, probably means everything that makes the day black, such as supernatural events like eclipses. Job wishes that all ominous darknesses would terrify that day. It comes from a word kamar, “to be black,” related to Akkadian kamaru, “to overshadow, darken.” The versions seem to have ignored the first letter and connected the word to marar, “be bitter.”
¹⁷tn The verb is simply laqah, “to take.” Here it conveys a strong sense of seizing something and not letting it go.
¹⁸tn The pointing of the verb is meant to connect it with the root hadah, “rejoice.” But the letters in the text were correctly understood by the versions to be from yahad, “to be combined, added.” See G. Rendsburg, “Double Polysemy in Genesis 49:6 and Job 3:6,: CBQ 44 (1982):48-51.
¹⁹sn The use of this word for “moons,” y^erahim, instead of hadasim, illustrates that this is not normal Hebrew writing.
²⁰tn The particle hinneh in this sentence focuses the readers attention on the statement to follow.
²¹tn The word galmud probably has here the idea of “barren” rather than “solitary.” See the parallelism in Isa 49:21. In Job it seems to carry the idea of “barren” in 15:34, and “gloomy” in 30:3. Barrenness can lead to gloom.
²²tn The word is from ranan, “to give a ringing cry” or “shout of joy.” The sound is loud and shrill.
²³tn The verb is simply bo’, “to enter.” The NIV translates interpretively “be heard in it.” A shout of joy, such as at a birth, that “enters” a day is certainly heard on that day.
²⁴tn Not everyone is satisfied with the reading of the MT. Gordis thought “day” should be “sea,” and “cursers should be “rousers” (changing ‘alep to `ayin). This is an unecessary change, for there is no textual problem, in the line (Clines, p. 71). Others have taken the reading “sea” as a personification and accepted the rest of the text, gaining the sense of “those whose magic binds even the sea monster of the deep” (NEB, for example).
sn Those “cursers of days” are probably the professional enchanters and magicians who were thought to cast spells on days and overwhelm them with darkness and misfortune. The myths explained eclipses as the dragon throwing its folds around the sun and the moon, thus engulfing or swallowing the day and the night. This interpretation matches the parallelism better than the interpretation that says these are merely professional mourners.
²⁵tn The verb is probably “execrate, curse,” from qabab. But E. Ellendorff took it from naqab, “pierce,” and gained a reading “Let the light rays of day pierce it (i.e. the night) apt even to rouse Leviathan” (VT 11 [1961]:350,1).
²⁶tn The adjective `atid means “ready, prepared.” Here it is a substantival use. It is followed by the po`lel infinitive construct `orer. The infinitive without the preposition serves as the object of the preceding (GKC #114m).
²⁷sn Job employs here the mythological figure Leviathan, the monster of the deep or chaos. Job wishes that such a creation of chaos could be summoned by the mourners to swallow up that day. See E. Ullendorff, “Job 3:8,” VT 11 (1961):350-51.
²⁸tn The word nesep can mean “twilight” or “dawn.” In this context the morning stars are in mind. Job wishes that the morning stars—that should announce the day—go out.
²⁹tn The verb “wait, hope” has the idea of eager expectation and preparation. It is used elsewhere of waiting on the LORD with anticipation.
³⁰tn The absolute state ‘ayin, “there is none,” is here used as a verbal predicate (see GKC, #152k). The concise expression literally says “and none.”
³¹sn The expression is literally “the eyelids of the morning.” This means the very first rays of dawn (see also Job 41:10). There is some debate whether it refers to “eyelids” or “eyelashes” or “eyeballs.” If the latter, it would signify the flashing eyes of a person. See for the Ugaritic background H. L. Ginsberg, The Legend of King Keret (New Havon: ASOR, 1946), p. 39; see also J. M. Steadman, “‘Eyelids of Morn’: A Biblical Convention,” HTR 56 (1963):159-67.
³²sn Dhorme sees the flow of the discussion interrupted by the present word order; he would put v. 9 after v. 6, and then continue 7, 8, and 10.
³³tn The subject is still “that night.” Here, at the end of this first section, Job finally expresses the crime of that night—it did not hinder his birth.
³⁴sn This use of doors for the womb forms an implied comparison; the night should have hindered conception (see Gen 20:18 and 1 Sam 1:5).
³⁵tn The Hebrew has simply “my belly/womb.” The suffix on the noun must be objective—it was the womb of his mother in which he lay. See however N. C. Habel, “The Dative Suffix in Job 33:13,” Biblica 63 (1982), pp. 258,9; he thinks it is deliberately ambiguous.
³⁶tn The word `amal means “work, heavy labor, agonizing labor, struggle” with the idea of fatigue and pain.
³⁷sn Job follows his initial cry with a series of rhetorical questions. His argument runs along these lines: since he was born (v. 10), the next chance he had of escaping this life of misery would have been to be still born (vv. 11-12, 16). In vv. 13-19 Job considers death as falling into a peaceful sleep in a place where there is no trouble.
³⁸tn The negative only occurs with the first clause, but it extends its influence to the parallel second clause (GKC, #152z).
³⁹tn The two verbs in this verse are both prefix conjugations; they are clearly referring to the past and should be classified as preterites. Dhorme notes that the verb “I came out” is in the perfect tense to mark its priority in time in relation to the other verbs (p. 32).
⁴⁰tn The translation “at birth” is very smooth, but catches the meaning and avoids the tautology in the verse. The line literally reads “from the womb.” The second half of the verse has the verb “I came out/forth” which does double duty for both parallel lines. The second half uses “belly” for the womb.
⁴¹tn The two halves of the verse use the prepositional phrases (“from the womb” and “from the belly I went out”) in the temporal sense of “on emerging from the womb.”
⁴²tn The verb qidd^emuni (the piel from qadam) means “to come before, meet, prevent.” Here it has the idea of going to meet or welcome someone. In spite of various attempts to connect the idea to the father or to adoption rites, it probably simply means the mother’s knees that welcome the child for nursing.
sn The sufferer is looking back over all the possible chances of death, including when he was brought forth, placed on the knees or lap, and breastfed.
⁴³tn There is no verb in the second half of the verse. The idea simply has, “and why breasts that I might suck?”
⁴⁴sn The commentaries mention the parallel construction in the writings of Assurbanipal: “You were weak, Assurbanipal, you who sat on the knees of the goddess, queen of Nineveh; of the four teats that were placed near to your mouth, you sucked two and you hid your face in the others” (Streck, Assurbanipal, p. 348).
⁴⁵tn The verb is the qal imperfect of yanaq. Here the clause is subordinated to the preceding question and so function as a final imperfect.
⁴⁶tn The word “now” (`attah) has a logical nuance here, almost with the idea of “if that had been the case…” (WO, p. 668).
⁴⁷tn The copula on the verb indicates a sequence for the imperfect tense: “and then I would….” In the second half of the verse it is paralleled by “then” (‘az).
⁴⁸tn The verbs in this verse are difficult. The text uses a combination of the perfect (lie down/sleep) and imperfect (quiet/rest). The particle “now” (`attah) gives to the perfect tense its conditional nuance. It presents actions in the past that are not actually accomplished but seen as possible (GKC #106p; see WO p. 377).
⁴⁹tn The last part uses the impersonal verb “it would be at rest for me.”
⁵⁰tn The difficult term horabot is translated “desolate [places]”. The Greek confused the word and translated it “who gloried in their swords.” One would expect a word for monuments, or tombs (T. K. Cheyne emended it to “everlasting tombs” [“More Critical Gleanings in Job,” ExT 10 (1898,99):380-383]). But this difficult word is of uncertain etymology and therefore cannot simply be made to mean “royal tombs.” The verb means “be desolate, solitary.” In Isa 48:21 there is the clear sense of a desert. That is the meaning of Assyrian huribtu. It may be that like the pyramids of Egypt these tombs would have been built in the desert regions. Or it may describe how they rebuilt ruins for themselves. He would be saying then that instead of lying here in pain and shame if he had died he would be with the great ones of the earth. Otherwise, the word could be interpreted as a metonymy of effect, indicating that the once glorious tomb now is desolate. But this does not fit the context—the verse is talking about the state of the great ones after their death.
⁵¹tn The expression simply has “or with princes gold to them.” The noun is defined by the noun clause serving as a relative clause (GKC, #155e).
⁵²sn There is no reason here to take “houses” to mean tombs. The reference is not to the practice of burying treasures with the dea. It is simply saying that if Job had died he would have been with the rich and famous in death.
⁵³tn The verb is governed by the interrogative of v. 12 that introduces this series of rhetorical questions.
⁵⁴tn The verb is again the prefix conjugation, but the narrative requires a past tense, or preterite.
⁵⁵tn The Greek paraphrases: “an untimely birth, proceeding from his mother’s womb.”
⁵⁶tn The noun nepel is the abortive thing that falls (hence the verb) from the womb before the time is ripe (Ps 58:9). The idiom using the verb “to fall” from the womb means to come into the world (Isa 26:18). The epithet tamun, “hidden,” is appropriate to the verse. The child comes in vain, and disappears into the darkness—it is hidden forever.
⁵⁷tn The word `ol^elim normally refers to “nurslings.” Here it must refer to infants in general since it refers to a stillborn child.
⁵⁸tn The relative clause does not have the relative pronoun; the simple juxtaposition of words indicates that it is modifying the infants.
⁵⁹sn The refernce seems to be death, or Sheol, the place where the infant who is stillborn is hidden and does not see the light.
⁶⁰sn The “wicked” are the ungodly, those who are not members of the covenant (normally) and in this context especially those who oppress and torment other people.
⁶¹tn The parallelism uses the perfect tense in the first parallel part, and the imperfect tense opposite it in the second. Since the verse projects to the grave or Sheol (“there”) where the action is perceived as still continuing or just taking place, both receive an English present tense translation (GKC, #106 l).
⁶²tn Here the form rogez refers to the agitation of living as opposed to the peaceful rest of dying. The verb means “to be agitated, excited.” The expression indicates that they cease from troubling, meaning all the agitation of their oown lives.
⁶³tn The word yagia` means “exhausted, wearied”; it is clarified as a physical exhaustion by the genitive of specification.
⁶⁴tn “There” is not in the Hebrew text, but is supplied from the context.
⁶⁵tn The Greek omits the verb and translates the noun not as prisoners but as “old men” or “men of old time.”
⁶⁶tn The verb sa’ananu is the pa`lel of sa’an, which means “to rest.” It refers to the normal rest or refreshment of individuals; here it is contrasted with the harsh treatment normally put on prisoners.
⁶⁷sn See further J. C. de Moor, “Lexical Remarks Concerning yahad and yahdaw,” VT 7 (1957):350-355.
⁶⁸sn The same Hebrew word is used for the taskmasters in Exod 3:7.
⁶⁹tn The versions have taken the pronoun hu’ in the sense of the verb “to be.” Others give it the sense of “the same thing,” rendering the verse as “small and great, there is no difference there.” GKC follows this idea with a meaning of “the same” (see #135a N).
⁷⁰tn The Greek renders this as “unafraid,” although the negative has disappeared in some MSS to give the reading “and the servant that feared his master.” See I. Mendelsohn, “The Canaanite Term for `Free Proletarian’,” BASOR 83 (1941):36-39; also “New Light on hupsu,” BASOR 139 (1955):9-11.
⁷¹tn The plural “masters” could be taken here as a plural of majesty rather than as referring to numerous masters.
⁷²sn Since he has survived birth, Job wonders why he could not have died a premature death. He wonders why God gives light and life to those who are in misery. His own condition throws gloom over the life, and so he poses the question first generally, for many would prefer death to misery (20-22); then he comes to the individual, himself, who would prefer death (23). He closes his initial complaint with some depictions of his suffering that afflicts him and gives him no rest (24-26).
⁷³tn Heb “he”; the referent (God) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
⁷⁴tn The verb is the simple imperfect tense, expressing the progressive imperfect nuance. But there is no formal subject to the verb, prompting some translations to make it passive in view of the indefinite subject. Job clearly means God, but he stops short of naming him (see also the note on “God” earlier in this verse).
sn In vv. 11, 12, and 16 there was the first series of questions in which Job himself was in question. Now the questions are more general for all mankind—why should the sufferers in general been afflicted with life?
⁷⁵sn In v. 10 the word was used to describe the labor and sorrow that comes from it; here the one in such misery is called the `amel.
⁷⁶tn The second colon now refers to people in general because of the plural construct mare napes, “those bitter of soul/life.” One may recall the use of marah by Naomi to describe her pained experience as a poor widow, or the use of the word to describe the bitter oppression inflicted on Israel by the Egyptians. Those who are “bitter of soul” are those whose life is overwhelmed with painful experiences and suffering.
⁷⁷tn The verse simply begins with the participle in apposition to the expressions in the previous verse describing those who are bitter. The preposition is added from the context.
⁷⁸tn The verb is the piel participle of hakah, “to wait for” Yahweh (see Isa 8:17; 64:3; Ps 30:20). Here death is the supreme hope of the miserable and the suffering.
⁷⁹tn The verse simply has the form ‘en, “there is not” with a pronominal suffix and a conjunction—“and there is not it” or “and it is not.” The Greek and the Vulgate add a verb to explain this form: “and obtain it not.”
⁸⁰tn The parallel verb is now a preterite with a waw consecutive; it therefore has the nuance of a characteristic perfect or gnomic perfect—the English present tense.
sn The verb hapar means “to dig, excavate.” It may have the accusative of the thing that is being sought (Exod 7:24); but here it is followed by a comparative min. The verse therefore describes the sufferers who excavate or dig the ground to find death, more than others who seek for treasure.
⁸¹tn Here too the form is the participle in apposition “to him who is in misery” in v. 20. In continues the description of those who are destitute and would be delighted to die.
⁸²tn The Syriac has “and gather themselves together,” possibly reading gil as gal, “heap.” Some have tried to emend the text to make the word mean “heap” or “mound,” as in a funerary mound. While one could argue for a heap of stones as a funerary mound, the passage has already spoken of digging a grave, which would be quite different. And while such a change would make a neater parallelism in the verse, there is no reason to force such; the idea of “jubilation” fits the tenor of the whole verse easily enough and there is no reason to change it. A similar expression is found in Hos 9:1, which says, “rejoice not, O Israel, with jubilation.” Here the idea then is that these sufferers would rejoice “to the point of jubilation” at death.
⁸³tn This sentence also parallels an imperfect tense with the substantival participle of the first colon. It is translated as an English present tense.
⁸⁴tn The particle could be “when” or “because” in this verse.
⁸⁵sn The expression “when they find a grave” means when they finally die. The verse describes the relief and rest that the sufferer will obtain when the long-awaited death is reached.
⁸⁶tn This first part of the verse is supplied from the context. The verse simply begins with “to a man….” It is also in apposition to the construction in v. 20. But after so many qualifying clauses and phrases, clarity requires a restatement.
⁸⁷sn After speaking of people in general (in the plural in vv. 21 and 22), Job returns to himself specifically (in the singular). He is the man whose way is hidden. The clear path of his former life has been broken off, or as the next clause says, been hedged in so that he is confined to a life of suffering. The statement includes the spiritual perplexities that this involves. It is like saying that God is leading him in darkness and he can no longer see where he is going.
⁸⁸tn The Greek text has translated qeber in the last verse as “death,” and then has a very vague paraphrase of “whose way is hidden” in the following: “death is rest to [such] a man.”
⁸⁹tn The verb is the hiphil of suk, “to hedge in.” The key parallel passage is Job 19:8, which says, “He has barred my path so I cannot pass, and my ways he has covered with darkness.” To be hedged in is an implied metaphor, indicating that the pathway is concealed and enclosed.
⁹⁰tn For the prepositional lipne, the temporal meaning “before” (“my sighing comes before I eat”) makes very little sense here (as the versions have it). The meaning “in place of, for” fits better (see 1 Sam 1:16, “count not your handmaid for a daughter of Belial”).
⁹¹sn The line means that his sighing, which results from the suffering (metonymy of effect) is his constant, daily food. Parallels like Psalm 42:4 which says “my tears have been my bread/food” shows a similar figure.
⁹²tn The word normally describes the “roaring” of a lion (Job 4:10); but it is used for the loud groaning or cries of those in distress (Ps 22:2; 32:3).
⁹³tn This second colon is paraphrased in the Greek text to say, “I weep being beset with terror.” The idea of “pouring forth water” while groaning can be represented by “I weep.” The word “fear, terror” anticipates the next verse.
⁹⁴tn The construction uses the cognate accusative with the verb: “the fear I feared,” or “the dread thing I dreaded” (pahad pahadti). The verb pahad has the sense of “dread” and the noun the meaning “thing dreaded.” The structure of the sentence with the perfect tense followed by the preterite indicates that the first action preceded the second—he feared something but then it happened. Some commentaries suggest reading this as a conditional clause followed by the present tense translation: “If I fear a thing it happens to me” (see Davidson, p. 24). The reason for this change is that it is hard for some to think that in his prime Job had such fears. He did have a pure trust and confidence in the Lord (16:12, 29:18ff). But on the other hand, he did make sacrifices for his sons because he thought they may sin. There is evidence to suggest that he was aware that calamity could strike, and this is not necessarily incompatible with trust.
⁹⁵tn The verb ‘atah is Aramaic and is equivalent to the Hebrew verb bo’, “come, happen.”
⁹⁶tn The final verb is yabo’, “has come.” It appears to be an imperfect tense, but since it is parallel to the preterite of the first colon it should be given than nuance here. Of course, if the other view of the verse is taken, then this would simply be translated as “comes,” and the preceding preterite also given an English present tense translation.
⁹⁷tn The Greek “peace” bases its rendering on salam and not salah (which retains the original waw). The verb means “to be quiet, to be at ease.”
⁹⁸tn The verb is literally “and I do/can not rest.” A potential perfect nuance fits this passage well. The word nuah implies “rest” is every sense, especially in contrast to rogez, “turmoil, agitation” (vv. 26 and 17).
⁹⁹tn The last clause simply has “and trouble came.” Job is essentially saying that since the trouble has come upon him there is not a moment of rest and relief.
¹⁰⁰sn The speech of Eliphaz can be broken down into three main sections. In 4:1-11 he wonders that Job who had comforted so many people in trouble, and who was so pious, should fall into such despair, forgetting the great truth that the righteous never perish under aflliction—calamity only destroys the wicked. Then in 4:12—5:7 Eliphaz tries to warn Job about complaining against God because only the ungodly resent the dealings of God and by their impatience bring down his wrath upon them. Finally in 5:8-27 Eliphaz appeals to Job to follow a different course, to seek after God, for God only smites to heal or to correct, to draw people to himself and away from evil. See K. Fullerton, “Double Entendre in the First Speech of Eliphaz,” JBL 49 (1930):320-374; J. C. L. Gibson, “Eliphaz the Temanite: A Portrait of a Hebrew Philosopher,” SJT 28 (1975):259-272; and J. Lust, “A Stormy Vision: Some Remarks on Job 4:12-16,” Bijd 36 (1975):308-311.
¹tn The verb has no expressed subject, and so may be translates with “one” or “someone.”
²tn The piel perfect is difficult here. It would normally be translated “has one tried (words with you)?” Most commentaries posit a conditional clause, however.
³tn The verb means “to be weary.” But it can have the extended sense of being either exhausted or impatient (see v. 5). Davidson takes it in the sense of “will it be too much for you?” (p. 29). There is nothing in the sentence that indicates this should be an interrogative clause; it is simply an imperfect tense. But in view of the juxtaposition of the first part, this seems to make good sense. Dhorme has it, “Shall we address you? You are dejected” (p. 42).
⁴tn The construction uses a noun with the preposition: “and to refrain with words—who is able?” The Aramaic plural of “words” (millin) occurs 13 times in Job, with the Hebrew plural ten times. The commentaries show that Eliphaz’s speech had a distinctly Aramaic coloring to it.
⁵tn The deictic particle hinneh summons attention; it has the sense ogf “consider, look.”
⁶tn The verb yasar in the piel means “to corruct,” whether by words with the sense of teach, or by chastening with the sense of punish, discipline. The double meaning of “teach” and “discipline” is also found with the noun musar.
⁷tn The parallelism again uses a perfect tense in the first colon and an imperfect tense in the second; but since the sense of the line is clearly what Job has done in the past, the second verb may be treated as a preterite, or a customary imperfect—what Job repeatedly did in the past (GKC, #107e). The words in this verse may have double meanings. The word yasar may have the idea of instruction and correction, but also the connotation of strength (see Y. Hoffmann, “The Use of Equivocal Words in the First Speech of Eliphaz [Job IV—V],” VT 30 [1980]:114-119).
⁸tn The “feeble hands” are literally “hands hanging down.” This is a sign of weakness, helplessness, or despondency (see 2 Sam 4:1; Isa 13:7).
⁹tn Both verbs in this line are imperfect tenses, and probably carry the same nuance as the last verb in v. 3, namely, either customary imperfect or preterite. The customary has the aspect of stressing that this was what Job used to do.
¹⁰tn The form is the singular active participle, interpreted here collectively. The verb is used of knees that give way (Isa 35:3; Ps 109:24).
¹¹tn The expression is often translated as “feeble knees,” but it literally says “the bowing (or tottering) knees.” The figure is one who may be under a heavy load whose knees begin to shake and buckle (see also Heb 12;12).
sn Job had been successful at helping others not be crushed by the weight of trouble and misfortune. It is easier to help others than to preserve a proper perspective when one’s self is afflicted (Dhorme, p. 44).
¹²tn The sentence has no subject, but the context demands that the subject be the same kind of trouble that has come upon people that Job has helped.
¹³tn This is the same verb used in v. 2, meaning “to be exhausted” or “impatient.” Here with the waw consecutive the verb describes Job’s state of mind that is a consequence of the trouble coming on him. In this sentence the form is given a present tense translation (see GKC, #111t).
¹⁴tn This final verb in the verse is vivid; it means “to terrify, dismay” (here the niphal preterite). Job will go on to speak about all the terrors that come on him.
¹⁵tn The word “fear” (yir’eh) in this passage refers to Job’s fear of the LORD, his reverential devotion to God. Rowley says that on the lips of Eliphaz the word almost means “your religion.” He refers to Moffatt’s translation, “Let your religion reassure you” (p. 46).
¹⁶tn The word kislateka, “your confidence,” is rendfered in the Greek by “founded in folly.” The word kesel is confidence (see 8:14), and elsewhere “folly.” Since it is parallel to “your hope” it must mean confidence here.
¹⁷tn This second half of the verse simply has “your hope and the integrity of your ways.” The expression “the perfection of your ways” is parallel to “your fear,” and “your hope” is parallel to “your confidence.” This sentence is an example of casus pendens: “as for your hope, it is the integrity of your ways” (see GKC, #143d).
sn Eliphaz is not being sarcastic to Job. He knows that Job is a God-fearing man who lives out his faith in life. But he also knows that Job should apply to himself the same things he tells others.
¹⁸sn Eliphaz will put his thesis forward first negatively and then positively (vv. 8ff). He will argue that the suffering of the righteous is disciplinary and not for their destruction. He next will argue that it is the wicked who deserve judgment.
¹⁹tn The use of the independent personal pronoun is emphatic, almost as an enclitic to emphasize interrogatives: “who indeed….” (GKC, #136c).
²⁰tn The perfect tense in this line has the nuance of the past tense to express the unique past—the uniqueness of the action is expressed with “ever” (“who has ever perished”).
²¹tn The adjective is used here substantivally. Without the article the word stresses the meaning of “uprightness.” Job will use “innocent” and “upright” together in 17:8.
²²tn The niphal means “to be hidden” (see the piel in 6:10; 15:18; and 27:11); the connotation here is “destroyed,” annihilated.”
²³tn The perfect tense here represents the indefinite past. It has no specific sighting in mind, but refers to each time he has seen the wicked do this.
²⁴sn The figure is an implied metaphor. Plowing suggests the idea of deliberately preparing (or cultivating) life for evil. This describes those who are fundamentally wicked.
²⁵tn The Greek renders this with a plural “barren places.”
²⁶tn Heb “reap it.”
²⁷tn The Greek text in the place of “breath” has “word” or “command,” probably to limit the anthropomorphism. The word is minnismat, min + nismat (the construct of n^esamah): “from/at the breath of.” The “breath of God” occurs frequently in Scripture. In Gen 2:7 it imparts life; but here it destroys it. The figure probably does indicate a divine decree from God (e.g., “depart from me”)—so the Greek text may have been simply interpreting.
²⁸sn The statement is saying that if some die by misfortune it is because divine retribution or anger has come upon him. This is not necessarily the case, as the NT declares (see Luke 13:1-5).
²⁹tn The word ruah is now parallel to n^esamah; both can mean breath or wind. To avoid using “breath” for both lines, “blast” has been emplyed here. The word is followed by ‘appo, which could be translated “his anger” or “his nostril.” If “nostril” is retained, then it is a very bold anthropomorphism to indicate the fuming wrath of God. It is close to the picture of the hot wind coming off the desert to scorch the plants (see Hos 13:15).
³⁰tn “There is” has been supplied to make a smoother translation out of the clauses.
³¹sn Eliphaz takes up a new image here to make the point that the wicked are destroyed—the breaking up and scattering of a den of lions. There are several words for “lion” used in this section. Clines observes that it is probably impossible to distinguish them (see pp. 109, 110, which records some bibliography of those who have tried to work on the etymologies and meanings). The first is ‘aryeh, the generic term for lion. It is followed by sahal, which like k^epir is a “young lion.” Some have thought that the sahal is a lion-like animal, perhaps a panther or leopard. KBL takes it by metathesis from Arabic hsl, “young one.” The Greek text for this verse has “the strength of the lion, and the voice of the lioness and the exulting cry of serpents are quenched.”
³²tn Heb “voice.”
³³tn The verb belongs to the subject “teeth” in this last colon; but it is used by zeugma of the three subjects (see Rowley, pp. 46,47).
³⁴tn The word layis, traditionally rendered “strong lion,” occurs only here and in Prov 30:30 and Isa 30:6. It has cognates in several of the Semitic languages, and so seems to indicate lion as king of the beasts.
³⁵tn The form of the verb is the qal active participle; it stresses the continuous action of the verb as if a standard universal truth.
³⁶tn The text literally has “sons of the lioness.”
³⁷tn The Greek text of this verse offers special problems. It reads, “But if there had been any truth in your words, none of these evils would have fallen upon you; shall not my ear receive excellent [information] from him?” The major error involves a dittography from the word for “secret,” yielding “truth.”
³⁸tn The verb ganab means “to steal.” The pual form in this verse is probably to be taken as a preterite since it requires a past tense translation: “it was stolen for me” meaning it was brought to me stealthily (see 2 Sam 19:3).
³⁹tn Heb “received.”
⁴⁰tn The word semes, “whisper,” is found only here and in Job 26:14. A cognate form simsah is found in Exod 32:25 with the sense of a whisper. In post-biblical Hebrew the word comes to mean “a little.” The point is that Eliphaz caught just a bit, just a whisper of it, and will recount it to Job.
⁴¹tn Here too the word is rare. The form s^e`ippim occurs only here and in 20:2. A possible related form sar`appim (by dissimilation) occurs in Ps 94:19 and 139:23. There seems to be a connection with s^e`ippim in 1 Kgs 18:21 with the meaning “divided opinion”; this is related to the idea of s^e`appah, “bough.” Rowley concludes that the point is that like branches the thoughts lead off into different and bewildering places (p. 47). Dhorme links the word to an Arabic root (“to be passionately smitten”) for the idea of “intimate thoughts” (p. 50). The idea here and in Ps 139 has more to do with anxious, troubling, disquieting thoughts, as in a nightmare.
⁴²tn Heb “visions” of the night.
⁴³tn The word tardemah is a “deep sleep.” It is used in the creation account when the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall on Adam; and it is used in the story of Jonah when the prophet was asleep during the strom. The Greek texts interprets it to mean “fear,” rendering the whole verse “but terror falls upon men, with dread and a sound in the night.”
⁴⁴tn The two words “trembling” (pahad) and “terror” (r^e`adah) strengthen each other as synonyms (see also Ps 55:6). The subject of the verb (qara’/qarah) is pahad; its compound subject has been placed at the end of the colon.
⁴⁵tn The subject of the hiphil verb hiphid is pahad, which is why it is in the singular. The cognate verb intensifies and applies the meaning of the noun. BDB translate it “fill my bones with dread.” In that sense “bones” would have to be a metonymy of subject representing the framework of the body, so that the meaning is that his whol being was filled with trembling.
⁴⁶tn The word ruah can be “spirit” or “breath.” The implication here is that it was something that Eliphaz felt—what he saw follows in v. 16. The commentators are divided on whether this is an apparition, a spirit, or a breath. The word can be used in either the masculine or the feminine, and so the gender of the verb does not favor the meaning “spirit.” In fact, in Isa 21:1 the same verb halap is used with the subject being a strong wind or hurricane “blowing across.” It may be that such a wind has caused Eliphaz’ hair to stand on end here. Clines also concludes it means “wind,” noting that in Job a spirit or spirits would be called r^epa’im, ‘elohim, or ‘ob (p. 111).
⁴⁷tn The verbs in this verse are imperfect tenses. In the last verse the verbs were perfect tenses when Eliphaz reported the fear that seized him. In this continuation of the report the description becomes vivid with the change in verbs, as if the experience were in progress.
⁴⁸tn The subject of this verb is also ruah, since it can assume either gender. The “hair of my flesh” is the complement and not the subject; therefore the piel is to be retained and not changed to a qal as some suggest (and compare with Ps 119:120).
⁴⁹tn The Greek has the first person of the verb—“I arose and perceived it not, I looked and there was no form before my eyes; but I only heard a breath and a voice.”
⁵⁰tn The imperfect tense is to be classified as potential imperfect. Eliphaz is unable to recognize the figure standing before him.
⁵¹sn The colon reads “a silence and a voice I hear.” Some have rendered it “there is a silence, and then I hear.” The verb damam does mean “remain silent” (Job 29:21; 31:34) and then also “cease.” The noun d^emamah refers to the calm after the storm in Ps 107:29. Joined with the true object of the verb, “voice,” it probably means something like stillness or murmuring or whispering here. It is joined to “voice” with a conjunction, indicating that it is a hendiadys, “murmur and a voice” or a “murmuring voice.”
⁵²tn The imperfect tenses in this verse express obvious truths known at all times (GKC, #107f).
⁵³tn The word for man here is first ‘enos, stressing man in all his frailty, his mortality. This is paralleled with gaber, a word that would stress more of the strength or might of man. The verse is not making a great contrast between the two, but in its rhetorical question merely stating that no human being of any kind is righteous or pure before God the Creator. See H. Kosmala, “The Term geber in the OT and in the Scrolls,” VT Supp 17 (1969):159-169; and E. Jacob, Theology of the Old Testament (London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1958), pp. 156-157.
⁵⁴tn The imperfect tense in this interrogative sentence could also be interpreted with a potential nuance: “Can a man be righteous?”
⁵⁵tn The classification of min as a comparative in this verse does not seem the most probable. The idea of someone being more righteous than God is too strong to be reasonable. Job will not do that—but he will imply that God is unjust. In addition, Eliphaz had this vision before hearing of Job’s trouble, and so is not addressing the idea that Job is making himself more righteous than God. He is stating that no man is righteous before God. Verses 18ff will show that no one can claim righteousness before God. In 9:2 and 25:4 the preposition “with” is used. See also Jer 51:5 where the preposition should be rendered “before” [the Holy One].
⁵⁶sn In Job 15:14 and 25:4 the verb yizkeh is paralleled with yisdak.
⁵⁷tn The double question here merely repeats the same question with different words (see GKC #150h). The second member could just as well have been connected with a waw.
⁵⁸tn The particle hen introduces a conditional clause here, although the older translations used “behold.” The clause forms the foundation for the point made in the next verse, an argument by analogy—if this be true, then how much more/less the other.
⁵⁹tn The verb ya’min ( a hiphil imperfect from ‘aman) followed by the bet preposition, means “trust in.”
⁶⁰sn The servants here must be angels in view of the parallelism. The Targum to Job interpreted them to be the prophets. In the book we have already read about the “sons of God” who take their stand as servants before the LORD (1:6; 2:1). And in Ps 104:4 identifies the angels as servants (using sarat).
⁶¹tn The verb sim with the bet preposition has the snese of “impute” or “attribute something to someone.”
⁶²tn The word toholah is a hapax, and so has created some confusion in the various translations. It seems to mean “error, folly.” The word is translated “perverseness” in the Greek; but Symmachius connects it with the word for “madness. “Some commentators have repointed the word to t^ehillah, “praise,” making the line read: “he finds no [cause for] praise in his angels.” Others suggest tiplah, a bigger change; this matches the idiom in Job 24:12. But if the etymology of the word is halal, “to be mad,” then that change is not necessary. The feminine noun “madness” still leaves the meaning of the line a little uncertain: “[if] he does not impute madness to his angels.” The point of the verse is that God finds flaws in his angels and does not put his trust in them.
⁶³sn Those who live in houses of clay are human beings, for the human body was made of clay (Job 10:9; 33:6; and Isa 64:7). In 2 Cor 5:1 the body is an “earthen vessel”—a clay pot. The verse continues the analogy: houses have foundations, and the house of clay is founded on dust, and will return to dust (Gen 3:19; Ps 103:14). The reasoning is that if God finds defects in angels, he will surely find them in humans who are inferiro to the angels because they are but dust. In fact, they are easily crushed like the moth.
⁶⁴tn The imperfect tense is in the plural, suggesting “they crush.” But since there is no subject expressed, the verb may be given an impersonal subject, or more simply, treated as a passive (see GKC #144g).
⁶⁵tn The prepositional compound lipne normally has the sense of “before,” but it has been used already in 3:24 in the sense of “like.” That is the most natural meaning of this line. Otherwise, the interpretation must offer some explanation of a comparison between how quickly a moth and a human can be crushed. There are suggestions for different readings here; see for example G. R. Driver, “Linguistic and Textual Problems: Jeremiah,” JQR 28 (1937, 38):97-129 [121], for a change to “bird’s nest”; and J. A. Rimbach, “`Crushed before the Moth’ (Job 4:19),” JBL 100 (1981):244-246, for a change of the verb to “they are pure before their Maker.” These are unnecessary emendations.
⁶⁶tn The form yukkattu is the hophal imperfect of the root katat, “to be pounded, pulvarized, reduced to ashes” (Jer 46:5; Mic 1:7). It follows the Aramaic formation (see GKC, #67y). This line appears to form a parallelism with “they are crushed like a moth,” the third unit of the last verse; but it has its own parallel idea in this verse. See D. J. A. Clines, “Verb Modality and the Interpretation of Job 4:20, 21,” VT 30 (1980):354-357.
⁶⁷sn “From morning to evening” probably is not a merism, but rather describes the time between the morning and the evening, as in Isa 38:12: “from day to night you make an end of me.”
⁶⁸sn The second colon expresses the consequence of this daylong redcuing to ashes—they perish forever! (see 20:7 and 14:20).
⁶⁹tn This rendering is based on the interpretation that mibb^eli mesim uses the hiphil participle with an understood object “heart” to gain the idiom of “taking to heart, considering, regarding it”—hence, “without anyone regarding it.” Some commentators have attempted to resolve the difficulty by emending the text, a procedure that has no more support than positing the ellipses. One suggested emendation does have the Greek text in its favor, namely, a reading of mosia` in place of mesim. This would lead to “without one who saves they perish forever” (Dhorme, p. 55).
⁷⁰tn The word yeter (here with the suffix, yitram) can mean “what remains” or “rope.” Of the variety of translations, the most frequently used idea seems to be “their rope,” meaning their tent cord. This would indicate that their life was compared to a tent—perfectly reasonable in a passage that has already used the image of houses of clay. The difficulty is that the verb nissa` means more properly “tear up, uproot.” and not “cut off.” A similar idea is found in Isa 38:12, but their the image is explicitly that of cutting the life of from the loom. Some have posited that the original must have said their tent peg was pulled up” as in Isa 33:20 (Davidson, p. 34). But perhaps the idea of “what remains” would be easier to defend here. Besides, it is used in 22:20. The wealth of an individual is what has been acquired, and usually is left over when he dies. Here it would mean that the superfluous wealth would be snatched away. The preposition bet would carry the meaning “from” with this verb.
⁷¹tc The Greek text does not seem to be connected to the Hebrew of v. 21a. It reads something like “for he blows on them and they are withered” (see Isa 40:24b). The Targum to Job has “Is it not by their lack of righteousness that they have been deprived of all support?”
tn On the interpretation of the preposition in this construction, see N. Sarna, “The Interchange of the Prepositoon bet and min in Biblical Hebrew,” JBL 78 (1959):310-316.
⁷²sn This clear verb interprets all the images in these verses—they die. When the house of clay collapses, when the tent peg is pulled up—or when their excess perishes, their life is over.
⁷³sn This expression, “without wisdom,” is parallel to the previous “without anyone taking it [to heart].” Both verses describe how easily humans perish—there is no concern for it, nor any sense to it. Humans die without attaining wisdom which can solve the mystery of human life.
¹tn Some commentators transpose this verse with the following paragraph, placing it after v. 7 (see Dhrome, p. 62). But the reasons for this are based on the perceived development of the argument and are not that compelling.
sn The imperative is here a challenge for Job. If he makes his appeal against God, who is there who will listen? The rhetorical questions are intended to indicate that no one will respond, not even the angels. Job would do better to realize that he is guilty and his only hope is in God.
²tn The participle with the suffix could be given a more immediate translation to accompany the imperative: “Call now! Is anyone listening to you.”
³tn The Greek has rendered “holy ones” as “holy angels.” The verb of the colon the Greek has interpreted to freely: “if you will see.”
⁴sn The point being made is that the angels do not represent the cries of people to God as if mediating for them. But if Job appealed to any of them to take his case against God, there would be no response whatsoever for that.
⁵tn One of the reasons that commentators transpose vers 1 is that the ki here seems to follow 4:21 better. If people die without wisdom, it is folly that kills them. But the verse also makes sense after 5:1. He is saying that complaining against God will not bring deliverance (v. 1), but rather, by such impatience the fool will bring greater calamity on himself.
⁶tn The two words for “foolish person” are common in wisdom literature. The first, ‘ewil, is the fool who is a senseless person; the poteh is the naive and silly person, the simpleton, the one who is easily led astray. The direct object is introduced with the preposition lamed in this verse (see GKC #117n).
⁷tn The two parallel nouns are similar; their related verbs are also paralleled in Deut 32:16 with the idea of “vex” and “irritate.” The first word ka`as refers to the inner irritation and anger one feels, whereas the second word qin’ah refers to the outward expression of the anger. In Job 6:2 Job will respond “O that my impatience [ka`as] were weighed….”
⁸tn The use of the pronoun here adds emphasis to the subject of the sentence (see GKC #135a).
⁹tn This word is ‘ewil, the same word for the “senseless man” in the preceding verse. Eliphaz is citing an example of his principle just given—he saw such a fool for a brief while appearing to prosper (i.e., taking root).
¹⁰sn Davidson argues that the verse does not mean that Eliphaz cursed his place during his prosperity. This line is metonymical (giving the effect). God judged the fool and his place was ruined; consequently, Eliphaz pronounced it accursed of God (see Davidson, p. 36). Many emend the verb slightly to read “and it was suddenly cursed” [wayyukab instead of wa’eqqob](see Rowley, p. 51).
¹¹tn The imperfect tenses in this verse describe the condition of the accursed situation. Some commentators follow the Greek rendering and take these as jussives, making this verse the curse that the man pronounced upon the fool. Rashi adds “This is the malediction with which I have cursed him.” That would make the speaker the one calling down the judgment on the fool rather than responding by observation how God destroyed the habitation of the fool.
¹²tn The verb yiddakk^e’u could be taken as the passive voice, or in the reciprocal sense (“crush one another”) or reflexive (“crush themselves”). The context favors the idea that the children of the foolish person will be destroyed because there is no one who will deliver them.
¹³sn The gate was the place of both business and justice. The sense here seems to fit the usage of gates as the place of legal disputes.
¹⁴tn The text simply says “and there is no deliverer.” The entire clause could be subordinated to the preceding clause, and rendered simply “without a deliverer.”
¹⁵tn The MT reads “whose harvest.” Some commentators want to follow the Greek and repoint q^esiro (“his harvest”) to qas^eru, “[what] they have reaped.” The reference as it stands in the MT seems to be to the image of taking root in v. 3; whatever took root—the prosperity of his life—will not be his or his sons’ to enjoy. If the emendation is accepted, then the reference would be immediately to the “sons” in the preceding verse.
¹⁶sn The “hungry” are other people, possibly the hungry poor to whom the wealthy have refused to give bread (22:7). The sons are so helpless that even the poor take their property.
¹⁷tn The line is difficult; it reads literally “and unto from thorns he takes it.” The idea seems to be that even from within an enclosed hedge of thorns other people will take the harvest. Many commentators either delete the line altogether or try to repoint it to make more sense out of it. Driver had taken the preposition ‘el as the noun ‘el, “stong man,” and the noun sinnim connected to Aramaic sinna, “basket”; he read it as “a strong man snatches it from the baskets” (ThZ 12 [1956], pp. 485,6). Dhorme changed the word slightly to maspunim (instead of missinnim) to get the translation “and unto hiding places he carries it” (p. 60). This fits the use of the verb laqah with the preposition ‘el, “carry to” someplace. There seems to be no easy solution to the difficulty of the line.
¹⁸tn The word sammim has been traditionally rendered “robbers.” But it has been connected by some of the ancient versions to the word for “thirst,” making a nice parallel with “hungry.” This would likely be pointed s^eme’im.
¹⁹tn The verb has been given many different renderings, some more radical than others: “engulf,” “draws,” “gather,” “swallow” (see Rowley’s survey, p. 53). The idea of “swallow” is found in Job 20:15. The general sense of the line is clear, in spite of the difficulties of determining the exact meaning of the verb.
²⁰tn The Greek version has several variations for the line. It reads something like the following: “for what they have collected the just shall eat, but they shall not be delivered out of calamities; let their strength be utterly exhausted.” The Greek may have gotten the idea of the “righteous” as those who suffer from hunger. Instead of “thorns” the Greek has the idea of “trouble.” The Targum to Job interprets it with “shield” and adds “warriors” as the subject.
²¹sn The previous discussion shows how trouble rises, namely, from the rebelliousness of the fool. Here Eliphaz simply summarizes the points made with this general principle—trouble does not come from outside man, nor does it come as a part of the natural order, but rather it comes from the evil nature of man.
²²tn There is a slight difficulty here in that vv. 6 and 7 seem to be saying the opposite thing. Many commentators, therefore, emend the niphal (“is born”) to an active participle yoled (“begets”) to place the source of trouble in man himself (Duhm, Budde, Buttenweiser, Dhorme, Weiser). But the Greek text seems to retain the passive idea, “man is born to trouble.” The contrast between the two verses does not seem too difficult, for it still could imply that trouble’s source is within the man.
²³tn For the Hebrew b^ene resep, “sons of the flame,” we have the rendering “sparks.” Dhorme thinks it refers to some kind of bird, but renders it “sons of the lightning” because the eagle was associated with lightning in ancient interpretations. Sparks, he argues, do not soar high above the earth (p. 62). Other suggestions include Resheph, the Phoenician god of lightning (Pope), the fire of passion (Buttenwieser), angels (Peake) or demons (Targum Job). None of these are convincing; the idea of sparks flying upward fits the translation well and makes clear sense in the passage.
²⁴tn The simple translation of the last two words is “fly high” or “soar aloft” which would suit the idea of an eagle. But, as Rowley concludes, the argument to identify the expression preceding this with eagles is far-fetched (p. 53).
²⁵tn The Greek of this line has the name of a bird—”the the vulture’s young seek the high places.” The Targum to Job has “sons of demons” or “the sparks which shoot from coals of fire.”
²⁶sn Eliphaz affirms that if her were in Job’s place he would take refuge in God, But Job has to acknowledge that he has offended God and accept this suffering as his chastisement. Job eventually will submit to God in the end, but not in the way that Eliphaz here advises, for he does not agree that the sufferings are judgments from God.
²⁷tn The word ‘ulam is a strong adversative “but.” This forms the contrast with what has been said previously, and so marks a new section.
²⁸tn The independent personal pronoun here adds emphasis to the subject of the verb, again strengthening the contrast with what Job is doing (see Williams, Hebrew Syntax, #106i).
²⁹tn The imperfect tenses in this verse express not so much what Eliphaz does as what he would do if he were in Job’s place (even though in 13:3 we have the affirmation). The use fits the category of the imperfect used in conditional clauses (see GKC #107x).
³⁰tn The verb “to seek” (daras) followed by the preposition ‘el has the meaning of addressing oneself to (God). See 8:19 and 40:10.
³¹tnThe Greek text uses kurios, “Lord,” in both places in this verse. However, in the second colon it also has “Lord of all.” This is replaced in Greek (Aquila) by pantokratora. On the basis of this information, Orlinsky suggests that the second name for God in the verses should be “Shaddai” (JQR NS 25 [1934-35]:271).
³²tn The Hebrew simply has “my word”; but in this expression that uses sim with the meaning of “lay before” or “expound a cause” in a legal sense, “case” or “cause” would be a better translation.
³³tn It is common for such doxologies to begin with participles; they follow the pattern of the psalms in this style.
³⁴tn The Hebrew has w^e’en heqar, literally, “and no investigation.” The use of the conjunction on the expression follows a form of the circumstantial clause construction, and so the entire expression describes the great works as “unsearchable.”
³⁵tn The preposition before ‘en is stereotypical; it conveys the sense of having no number (see Job 9:10; Ps 40:13).
³⁶sn Rowley notes that the verse fits Eliphaz’ approach very well, for he has good understanding of the truth, but has difficulty in making the correct conclusions from it (p. 54).
³⁷tn The participle continues the doxology here. But the article is necessary because of the distance between this vers and the refernce to God.
sn The use of natan, “gives,” underscores the idea that rain is a gift from God. This would be more keenly felt in the Middle East were water is scarce.
³⁸tn In both halves of the verse the literal rendering would be “upon the face of the earth” and “upon the face of the fields.”
³⁹tn The second participle is simply co-ordinated to the first and therefore does not need the definitie article repeated (see GKC #126b).
⁴⁰tn The Hebrew term husot basically means “outside,” or what is outside. It could refer to streets if what is meant is outside the house; but it refers to fields here (parallel to the more general word) because it is outside the village. See Ps 144:13 for the use of the expression for “countryside.” The Greek text gives a much wider interpretation—“what is under heaven.”
⁴¹tn The infinitive construct clause is here taken as explaining the nature of God, and so parallel to the preceding descriptions. Dhorme, however, leaves it as a purpose infinitive and subordinates it to v. 12. If read simply as a purpose clause after the previous verse, it would suggest that the purpose of watering the earth was to raise the humble. Davidson makes a case for this interpretation, saying that God’s gifts in nature have the wider purpose of blessing man; but Davidson prefers to see the line as another benevolence, parallel to v. 10, and so suggests a translation “setting up” rather than “to set up” (p. 39).
⁴²tn The word s^epalim refers to “those who are down.” This refers to the lowly and despised of the earth. They are the opposite of the “proud” (see Ps 138:6). Here there is a deliberate contrast beween “lowly” and “on high.”
⁴³tn The meaning of the word is “to be dark, dirty”; therefore, it refers to the ash-sprinkled head of the mourner (Rowley, p. 54). The custom was to darken one’s face in sorrow (see Job 2:12; Ps 35:14; 38:7).
⁴⁴tn The perfect tense means “to be set on high, raised up.” Dhorme notes that the perfect is parallel to the infinitive of the first colon, and so he renders it in the same way as the infinitive, comparing the construction to that of 28:25 (p. 64).
⁴⁵tnThe hiphil form meper is the participle from parar, “to annul, frustrate, to break.” It continues the doxological descriptions of God; but because of the numerous verses in this section, it may be clearer to start a new sentence with this form (rather than translating it “who…”).
⁴⁶tn The word is related to the verb “to think, plan, devise,” and so can mean “thoughts, plans, imagination.” Here it refers to the plan of the crafty that must be frustrated (see also Isa 44:25 for the contrast).
⁴⁷tn The word `arumim means “crafty, shrewd.” It describes the shrewdness of some to achieve their ends (see Gen 3:1, where the serpent is more cunning than all the creatures, meaning, he knows where the dangers are and will attempt to bring down the innocent). In the next verse it describes the clever plans of the wise—those who are wise in their own sight.
⁴⁸tn The consecutive clause showing result or purpose is simply introduced with the waw and the imperfect/jussive (see GKC #166a).
⁴⁹tn The word tusiyah is a technical word from wisdom literature. It has the idea of the faculty of foresight, or prudence in general (see12:6; 26:3). It can be parallel in the texts to “wisdom,” “counsel,” “help,” or “strength.” Here it refers to what has been planned ahead of time.
⁵⁰tn The participles continues the description of God. Here he captures or ensnares the wise in their wisdom. See also Ps 7:16, where the wicked are caught in the pit they have dug. The “craftiness” here refers to the clever plans of the wicked—they are only wise in their own eyes.
⁵¹sn This is the only quotation from the Book of Job in the NT (although Rom 11:35 seems to reflect 41:11, and Phil 1:19 is similar to 13:6). Paul cites it in 1 Cor 3:19.
⁵²tn The etymology of niptalim suggests a meaning of “twisted” (see Prov 8:8) in the sense of tortuous. See Gen 30:8; Ps 18:26 [27].
⁵³tn The niphal of maher means “to be hasty, irresponsible.” The meaning in the line may be understood in this sense: the counsel of the wily is hastened, that is, precipitated before it is ripe, i.e., frustrated (Davidson (p. 39). Dhorme suggests that the meaning is that those who have schemed well-thought-out plots will be no more successful than those who quickly plotted something, so he renders it “the counsel of the wily becomes foolishness.”
⁵⁴sn God so confuses the crafty that they are unable to fulfill their plans—it is as if they encounter darkness in broad daylight. This is like the Syrians in 2 Kgs 6:18ff.
⁵⁵tn The verb masas expresses the idea of groping about in the darkness. This is part of the fulfillment of Deut 28:29, which says, “and you shall grope at noonday as the blind grope in darkness.” This image is also in Isa 59:10.
⁵⁶sn The verse provides a picture of the frustration and bewilderment in the crafty who cannot accomplish their ends because God thwarts them.
⁵⁷tn The verb, the hiphil preterite of yasa`, “and he saves,” indicates that by frustrating the plans of the wicked God saves the poor. So the waw consecutive shows the result in the sequence of the verses.
⁵⁸tnThe juxtaposition of “from the sword from their mouth” poses translation difficulties. Some MSS do not have the preposition on “their mouth,” but render the expression as a construct: “from the sword of their mouth.” This would mean their tongue, and by metonymy, what they say. The expression “from their mouth” corresponds well with “from the hand” in the next colon. And as Dhorme notes, what is missing is a parallel in the first part with “the poor” in the second. So he follows Cappel in repointing “from the sword” as a hophal participle, mohorab, meaning “the ruined” (p. 67). If a change is required, this has the benefit of only changing the pointing. The difficulty with this is that the word “desolute, ruined” is not used for people, but only to cities, lands, or mountains. The sense of the verse can be supported from the present pointing: “from the sword [which comes] from their mouth”; the second phrase could also be in apposition, meaning, “from the sword, i.e., from their mouth.”
⁵⁹tn If the word “poor” is to do double duty, i.e., serving as the object of the verb “saves” in the first colon as well as the second, then the conjunction should be explanatory.
⁶⁰tn The verse summarizes the result of God’s intervention in human affairs, according to Eliphaz’ idea that even-handed justice prevails. Ps 107:42 parallels v. 16b.
⁶¹tn The particle links this section to the preceding; it points this out as the logical consequence of the previous discussion, and more generally, as the essence of Job’s suffering.
⁶²tn The word ‘asre, “blessed,” is often rendered “happy.” But “happy” relates to what happens. “Blessed” is a reference to the heavenly bliss of the one who is right with God.
⁶³tn The construction is am implied relative clause. The literal rendering would simply be “the man God corrects him.” The suffix on the verb is a resumptive pronoun, completing the use of the relative clause. The verb yakah is a legal term; it always has some sense of a charge, dispute, or conflict. Its usages show that it may describe a strife breaking out, a charge or quarrel in progress, or the settling of a dispute (Isa 1:18). The derived noun can mean “reproach, recrimination, charge” (13:6; 23:4). Here the emphasis is on the consequence of the charge brought, namely, the correction.
⁶⁴tn The noun musar is parallel to the idea of the first colon. It means “discipline, correction” (from yasar). Prov 3:11 says almost the same thing as this line.
⁶⁵sn The name Shaddai occurs 31 times in the book. This is its first occurrence. It is often rendered “Almighty” because of the Greek translation and some of the early fathers. The etymology and meaning of the word otherwise remains uncertain, in spite of attempts to connect it to “mountains” or “breasts.”
⁶⁶sn Verses 18-23 give the reasons why someone should accept the chastening of God—it is the same hand that wounds that heals. But, of course, the lines do not apply to Job because his suffering is not due to divine chastening.
⁶⁷tn The addition of the independent pronoun here makes the subject emphatic, as if to say, “For it is he who makes….”
⁶⁸tn The imperfect tenses in this verse describe the characteristic activities of God; the classification as habitual imperfect fits the idea, and is to be rendered with the English present tense.
⁶⁹tn The verb is the hiphil imperfect of nasal. These verbs might have been treated as habitual imperfects if it were not for the use of the numerical images—in six calamities…in seven. So the nuance will be specific future.
⁷⁰tn The use of a numerical ladder as we have here—“six // seven” is frequent in wisdom literature to show completeness. See Prov 6:16; Amos 1:3, Mic 5:5. A number that seems to be sufficient for the point is increased by one, as if to say there is always one more. By using this Eliphaz simply means “in all troubles” (see Rowley, p. 56).
⁷¹sn Targum Job here sees an allusion to the famine of Egypt and the war with Amalek.
⁷²tn Heb “from the hand of the sword.” This is idilmatic for “the power of the sword.” The expression is also metonymical, meaning from the effect of the sword, which is death.
⁷³tn The Hebrew verbs essentially means “you will be hidden.” In the niphal the verb means “be hidden, be in a hiding place,” and protected (Ps 31:20).
⁷⁴tn Sir. 26:9 and 51:2 show usages of these kinds of expressions—the lash of the tongue” or the “blow of the tongue.” The expression indicates that a malicious gossip is more painful than a blow.
⁷⁵sn The Targum saw here a reference to Balaam and the devastation brought on by the Midianites.
⁷⁶tn The word is sod; it means “destruction.” But some commentators wish to change it to “desolation” (so’ah) here (Driver); or “demon” (sed) (so Pope), or “tempest” (see R. Gordis, JTS 41 [1940]:40-42).
⁷⁷tc The repetition of “destruction” and “famine” here has prompted scholars like Beer, Budde, Duhm, and Fohrer to delete the whole verse. Others try to emend the text; Ball has “at the lion and the cobra you will laugh.” The Greek renders them as “the unrighteous and the lawless.” But there is no difficulty in having the repetition of the words as the MT has it.
tn The word for “famine” is an Aramaic word found again in 30:3. The book has a number of Aramaisms that are used to form an alternative parallel expression.
⁷⁸tn The negated jussive is used here to express the conviction that something cannot or should not happen (GKC, #109e).
⁷⁹tn The line has been variously interpreted and translated. It says “your covenant is with the stones of the field.” It is omitted in the Greek. It seems to mean there is a deep sympathy between man and nature. Some think it means that the boundaries will not be violated by enemies; Rashi thought it represented some species of beings, like genii of the field, and so read ‘adone, “lords,” for ‘abne, “stones.” Ball takes the word as b^en, “sons of the field,” to get the idea that the reference is to the beasts. Dhorme rejects these ideas as too contrived; he says to have a pact with the stones of the field simply means the stones will not come and spoil the ground, making it less fertile (p. 71).
⁸⁰tn This is the only occurrence of the hophal of the verb salem, “to make or have peace” with someone. Compare Isa 11:6-9, and Ps 91:13. The form is the perfect tense; here it is the perfect consecutive following a noun clause (see GKC, #159g).
⁸¹sn Verses 19-23 described the immunity from evil and trouble that Job would enjoy—if he were restored to peace with God. Now, v. 24 descrobes the safety and peace of the homestead and his possessions if he were right with God.
⁸²tn The verb is again the perfect tense, but in sequence to the previous structure so that it is rendered as a future. This would be the case if Job were right with God.
⁸³tn The text has “tent.”
⁸⁴tn The word “peace” (salom) means peace, safety, security, wholeness.” The same use appears in 1 Sam 25:6; 2 Sam 20:9.
⁸⁵tn The verb is paqad, “to visit.” The idea here is to gather together, look over, investigate, possibl;y even “number” as it is used in the book of Numbers. The verb is the perfect tense with the waw consecutive; it may be subordinated to the imperfect tense that follows to form a temporal clause.
⁸⁶tn The verb is usually rendered “to sin”; but in this context the more specific primary meaning of “to miss the mark” or “to fail to find something.” Neither Job’s tent nor his possessions will be lost.
⁸⁷tn The word means “your shoots” and is parallel to “your seed” in the first colon. It is found here is used in Isa 34:1 and 42:5 for the produce of the earth. Some commentators suggest that Eliphaz seems to have forgotten or was insensitive to Job’s loss of his children; Rowley says his conventional theology is untouched by human feeling (p. 57).
⁸⁸tn The word has been given an array of meanings: health, integrity (Syriac), like a new blade of corn (Herz), in your strength or vigour (Beer, Cheyne). The numerical value of the letters in the word b^ekelah, “in old age,” was 2, 20, 30, and 8, or 60. This led some of them to say that at 60 one would enter the ripe old age (Dhorme, p. 73).
⁸⁹tn To make a better parallelism, some commentators have replaced the imperative with another finite verb, “we have found it.”
⁹⁰tn The preposition with the suffix (referrred to as the ethical dative) strengthens the imperative.
⁹¹sn With this the speech by Eliphaz comes to a close. His two mistakes with it are: (first) that the tone was too cold, and (second) the argument did not fit Job’s case (see further, Davidson, p.42).
¹tn The conjunction lu introduces the wish, an unrealisable wish, with the niphal imperfect.
²tn Job pairs ka`si, “my grief,” and hayyati, “my misfortune.” The first word, used in Job 4:2, refers to his whole demeanor that he shows his friends—the impatient and vexed expression of his grief. The second word expresses his misfortune, the cause of his grief. Job wants these placed together in the balances so that his friends could see the misfortune is greater than the grief. The word for “misfortune” is a k^ethiv-q^ere reading. The two words have essentially the same meaning; they derive from the verb hawah, “to fall,” and so mean a misfortune.
³tn The qal infinitive absolute is here used to intensify the niphal imperfect (see GKC, #113w). The infinitive absolute intensifies the wish as well as the idea of weighing.
⁴tn The third person plural verb is used here; it expresses an indefinite subject and is treated as a passive (see GKC, #144g).
⁵tn The adverb normally means “together,” but it can also mean “similarly, too.” In this verse it may not mean that the two things are to be weighed together, but that the whole calamity should be put on the balances (see Davidson, p. 43).
⁶tn Dhorme notes that ki `attah has no more force than “but”; and that the construction is the same as in 17:4; 20:19-21; 23:14-15. The initial clause is causative, and the second have of the verse gives the consequence (“because”…“that is why”; see p. 76). Others take 3a as the apodosis of v. 2, and translate it “for now it would be heavier…” (see Davidson, p. 43).
⁷sn The point of the comparison with the sand of the sea is that the sand is immeasurable. So the grief of Job cannot be measured.
⁸tn The verb la`u was traced by Dhorme to a root la`ah, cognate to an Arabic root meaning “to chatter” (p. 76). He showed how modern Hebrew has a meaning for the word “to stammer out.” But that does not really fit Job’s outbursts. The idea in the context is rather that of speaking wildly, rashly, or charged with grief (Sutcliff, Biblica 31 [1950]:367,8). This would trace the word to a hollow or geminate word and link it to Arabic “talk wildly” (see Clines, p. 158). In the older works the verb was taken from a geminate root meaning “suck, swallow.” but that yields a very difficult sense to the line.
⁹sn Job uses an implied comparison here to describe his misfortune—it is as if God had shot poisoned arrows into him (see Dhorme, pp. 76-77 for a treatment of poisoned arrows in the ancient world).
¹⁰sn Job here clearly states that his problems have come from the Almighty, which is what Eliphaz said. But whereas Eliphaz said Job provoked the trouble by his sin, Job is perplexed because he does not think he did.
¹¹tn The Greek knew that a liquid should be used with the verb “drink”; but they took the line to be “whose violence drinks up my blood.” For the rest of the verse they came up with, “whenever I am going to speak they pierce me.”
¹²tn Most commentators take “my spirit” as the subject of the participle “drinks” (except the NEB, which follows the older versions to say that the poison “drinks up [or soaks in] the spirit.” The image of the poisoned arrow represents the calamity or misfortune from God, which is taken in by Job’s spirit and enervates him.
¹³tn The word is found only here and in Psalm 88:16[17]. G. R. Driver notes that the idea of suddenness is present in the root, and so renders this word as “sudden assaults” (VT Supp 3 [1955]:73).
¹⁴tn The verb `arak means “to set in battle array.” The suffix on the verb is dative (see GKC, #117x). Many suggestions have been made for changing this word. These seem unnecessary since the MT pointing yields a good meaning: but for the references to these suggestions, see Clines, p. 158. Rowley, nonetheless, follows the suggestion of Driver that connects it to a root meaning “wear me down” (p. 59). This change of meaning requires no change in the Hebrew text. The image is of a beleaguering army; the host is made up of all the terrors from God. The reference is to the terrifying and perplexing thoughts that assail Job (Davidson, p. 44).
¹⁵tn There have been suggestions to identify this animal as something other than a wild donkey, but the traditional interpretation has been confirmed (see P. Humbert in ZAW 62 [1950]:199-207).
¹⁶tn The verb nahaq occurs in Arabic and Aramaic and only in Job 30:7 in Hebrew, where it refers to unfortunate people in the wilderness who utter cries like the hungry wilddonkey.
¹⁷sn In this little section Job indicates that it would be wiser to seek the reason for the crying than to complain of the cry. The wild donkey will bray when it finds no food (see Jer 14:6).
¹⁸tn The construction forms a double question (ha / ‘im) but not in this instance to express mutually exclusive questions but rather to repeat the same question in different words (see GKC, #150h).
¹⁹tc The Greek text captures the meaning of the verse, but renders it in a more expansive way.
tn This word occurs here and in Isa 30:24. In contrast to the grass that grows on the fields for the wild donkey, this is fodder prepared for the domesticated animals.
²⁰tn Some commentators are not satisfied with the translation “white of an egg”; they prefer something connected to “slime of purslane” (Rowley, p. 59). This meaning is based on the Syriac and Arabic version of Sa`adia. The meaning “white of the egg” comes from the rabbinic interpretation of “slime of the yolk.” Others carry the idea further and interpret it to mean “saliva of dreams” or after the Greek “in dream words.” Rowley does not think that the exact edible object can be identified. The idea of the slimy glaring white around the yolk of an egg seems to fit best. This is another illustration of something that is tasteless or insipid.
²¹tn The traditional rendering of napsi is “my soul.” But since nepes means the whole person, body and soul, it is best to translate it with its suffix simply as an emphatic pronoun.
²²tn For the explanation of the perfect tense with its completed action in the past and its remaining effects, see GKC #106g.
²³tn The phrase “such things” is not in the Hebrew text but has been supplied.
²⁴tn The second colon of the verse is difficult. The word d^ewe means “sickness of” and yields a meaning “like the sickness of my food.” This could take the derived sense of dawah, and mean “impure” or “corrupt” food. The Greek has “for I loathe my food as the smell of a lion” and so some commentators emend “they” (which has no clear antecedent) to mean “I loathe it (like the sickness of my food).” Others have more freely emended the text to “my palate loathes my food” (McNeile) or “my bowels resound with suffering” (Eitan, JBL 53 [1934]:271). Pope has “they are putrid as my flesh [my meat].” Clines prefers the suggestion in BHS, “it (my soul) loathes them as my food” (p. 159). Dhorme repoints the second word of the colon to get k^ebodi, “my heart [glory] loathes/is sickened by my bread” (p. 80).
²⁵tn The Hebrew expresses the desire (desiderative clause) with “who will give?” (see GKC, #151d).
²⁶tn The verb bo’ has the sense of “be realized, come to pass, be fulfilled.” The optative “Who will give [that] my request be realized?” is “O that my request would be realized.”
²⁷tn The text has “my hope” (tiqwati). There is no reason to change the text to “my desire” (as Driver and others do) if the word is interpreted metonymically—it means “what I hope for.” What Job hopes for and asks for is death.
sn See further W. Riggans, “Job 6:8-10: Short Comments,” ExpT 99 (1987):45-46.
²⁸tn The verb ya’al in the hiphil means “to be willing, to consent, to decide.” It is here the jussive followed by the dependent verb with a waw: “that God would be willing and would crush me” means “to crush me.” Gesenius, however, says that the conjunction introduces not subordination but coordination; he says the principal idea is introduced in the second verb, the first verb containing the definition of the manner of the action (see GKC, #120d).
²⁹tn The verb is used for loosening shoe straps in Isa 58:6, and of setting prisoners free in Ps 105:20 and 146:7. Job thinks that God’s hand has been restrained for some reason, and so desires that God be free to destroy him.
³⁰tn The final verb is an imperfect (or jussive) following the jussive (of natar); it thus expresses the result (“and then” or “so that”) or the purpose (“in order that”). Job longs for death, but it must come from God.
³¹tn The Greek reads this verse as “Let the LORD begin and wound me, but let him not utterly destroy me.” Dhorme says the Greek text is a paraphrase based on a pun with “free hand” (p. 81). Targum Job has, “God has begun to make me poor; may he free his hand and make me rich,” apparently basing the reading on a metaphorical interpretation.
³²tn The text literally reads “and it will/may be yet my comfort.” The comfort or consolation that he seeks, that he wishes for, is death. The next colon in the verse simply intensifies this thought, for he affirms if that should happen he would rejoice, in spite of what death involves. The Greek text, apparently confusing letters (reading `ir instead of `od, which then led to the mistake in the next colon, helah, “his wall” for hilah, “suffering”), has “Let the grave be my city, upon the walls of which I have leaped.”
³³tn In the apodosis of conditional clauses (which must be supplied from the context preceding), the cohortative expresses the consequence (see GKC, #108d).
³⁴tn The piel verb silled is a hapax. Both BDB and KBL give the meaning “jump for joy,” which would certainly fit the passage. Others have emended the text, but unnecessarily. The Greek “I jumped” and Targum Job’s “exult” support the sense in the dictionaries, although the jumping is for joy and not over a wall (as the Greek has). Clines follows Driver in thinking this is untenable, choosing a meaning “recoiled in pain” for the line (p. 159).
³⁵tn The word hilah also occurs only here, but is connected to the verb hil/hul, “to writhe in pain.” Dhorme says that by extension the meaning denotes the cause of this trembling or writhing—terrifying pain. The final clause, lo’ yahmol, “it has no pity,” serves as a kind of epithet, modifying “pain” in general. If that pain has no pity or compassion, it is a ruthless pain (Dhorme, p. 82).
³⁶tn The ki functions here to explain “my comfort” in the first colon; the second colon simply strengthens the first.
³⁷sn The “words” are the divine decrees of God’s providence, the decisions that he makes in his dealings with people. Job cannot conceal these—he knows what they are. What Job seems to mean by this clause in this verse is that there is nothing that would hinder his joy of dying for he has not denied or disobeyed God’s plan.
³⁸tn Several commentators (Duhm, Peake, and others) delete the colon as having no meaning in the verse, and because (in their view) it is probably the addition of an interpolator who wants to make Job sound more pious. But Job is at least consoling himself that he is innocent, and at the most anticipating a worth-while afterlife (see Rowley, p. 60).
³⁹sn Now, in vv. 11-13, Job proceeds to describe his hopeless condition. In so doing, he is continuing his defence of his despair and lament. The section begins with these rhetorical questions in which Job affirms that he does not have the strength to wait for the blessings that Eliphaz is talking about.
⁴⁰tn The word translated “my end” is qissi. It refers to the termination of his life. In Ps 39:5 it is parallel to “the measure of my days.” In a sense, Job is asking what future he has. To him, the “end” of his affliction can only be death.
⁴¹sn The questions imply a negative answer. Job is saying that it would take great strength to hold up under these afflictions; but he is but flesh and bone. The sufferings have almost completely overwhelmed him. To endure all of this to the end he would need a strength he does not have.
⁴²tn For the use of the particle ‘im in this kind of interrogative clause, see GKC, #150g, N.
⁴³tn The word means something like “recovery,” or the powers of recovery; it was used in Job 5:12. In 11:6 it applies to a condition of the mind, such as mental resource. Job is thinking not so much of relief or rescue from his troubles, but of strength to bear them.
⁴⁴tn The Hebrew of this verse is extremely difficult, and while there are many suggestions, none of them has caught on. The first colon simply has “to the despairing // from his friend // kindness.” Several commentators wish to change the first word lammas to a verb of some sort of verb; several adopt the reading “the one who withholds/he withholds mercy from his friend forsakes….” Dhorme has it read “his friend has scorned compassion and forsaken…”; but then he deletes the entire verse anyway. The point of the first half of the verse seems to be that one should expect kindness from a friend in times of suffering.
⁴⁵tn The relationship of the second colon to the first is difficult. The line just reads literally “and the fear of the Almighty he forsakes.” The waw could be interpreted in several different ways: “else he will forsake…,” “although he forsakes…,” “even the one who forsakes…,” or “even if he forsakes…”—the reading adopted here. If the first colon receives the reading Dhorme suggests, “His friend has scorned compassion,” then this clause would be simply coordinated with “and forsakes the fear of the Almighty.” The sense of the verse seems to say that kindness should be shown to the despairing, even to the one who is forsaking the fear of the LORD, meaning, saying outrageous things, like Job has been doing.
⁴⁶sn Here the brothers are all his relatives as well as these his intimate friends of Job. In contrast to what a friend should do (show kindness), these friends have provided no help whatsoever.
⁴⁷tn The verb “dealt treacherously,” bag^edu, has been translated “dealt deceitfully,” but it is a very strong word. It means to act treacherously, deceitfully. The deception is the treachery, because the deception is not innocent—it is in the place of a great need. The imagery will compare it to the brook that may or may not have water. If one finds no water when one expected it and needed it, there is deception and treachery. The Greek softens it considerably: “have not regarded me.”
⁴⁸tn The “brook” is nahal; this word differs from words for rivers or streams in that it describes a brook with intermittent flow of waters. A brook where the waters are not flowing is called a deceitful brook (Jer 15:18; Mic 1:14); one where the waters flow is called faithful (Isa 33:16).
⁴⁹tn The text has “and as a stream bed of brooks/torrents.” The word ‘apiq is the river bed or stream bed where the water flows. What is more disconcerting than finding a well-known torrent whose bed is dry when one expects it to be gushing with water (Dhorme, p. 86).
⁵⁰tn The verb is rather simple—ya`aboru. But some translate it “pass away” or “flow away,” and others “overflow.” In the rainy season they are deep and flowing, or “overflow” their banks. This is a natural sense to the verb, and since the next verse focuses on this, some follow this interpretation (Rowley, p. 15). But this idea does not parallel the first part of v. 15. So it makes better sense to render it “flow away” and see the reference to the summer dry spells when one wants the water but is disappointed.
⁵¹tn The article on the participle joins this statement to the preceding noun; it can have the sense of “they” or “which.” The parallel sense then can be continued with a finite verb (see GKC, #126b).
⁵²tn Haqqod^erim, often rendered “which are black” would better be translated “dark,” for it refers to the turbid waters filled with melting ice or melting snow, or to the frozen surface of the water, but not waters that are muddied. The versions failed to note that this referred to the waters introduced in v. 15.
⁵³tn The verb yit`allem has been translated “is hid” or “hides itself.” But this does not work easily in the sentence with the preposition “upon them.” Torczyner suggested “pile up” from an Aramaic root `alam; and Dhorme defends it without changing the text, contending that the form we have was chosen for alliterative value with the prepositional phrase before it (p. 87).
⁵⁴tn The Greek paraphrases the whole verse: “They who used to reverence me now come against me like snow or congealed ice.”
⁵⁵tn The verb y^ezor^ebu occurs only here. A good number of interpretations take the root as a by-form of sarab, which means in the niphal “to be burnt” (Ezek 21:3). The expression then would mean “in the time they are burnt,” a reference to the scorching heat of the summer (“when the great heat comes”) and the rivers dry up. Qimchi connected it to the Arabic mizrab, “canal”; and this has led to the suggestion by Dhorme that the root zarab would mean “to flow.” In the piel it would “cause to flow,” and in the passive “made to flow,” or “melt” (p. 88). This is attractive, but it does require the understanding (or supplying) of “ice/snow” as the subject. Driver took the same meaning but translated it “when they (the streams) pour down in torrents, they (straightway) die down” (ZAW NS 24 [1953]:216,7). Both interpretations capture the sense of the brooks drying up.
⁵⁶tn The verb nid`aku literally means “they are extinguished, (or, “they vanish” (cf. 18:5-6; 21:17). The Greek, perhaps confusing the word with the verb yada`, “to know,” has “and it is not known what it was.”
⁵⁷tn This is the usual rendering of the Hebrew ‘orah, “way, path.” It would mean that the course of the wadi would wind down and be lost in the sand. Many commentators either repoint the text to ‘or^ehot when in construct (as in Isa 21:13), or simply re-define the existing word to mean “caravans” as in the next verse, and translate something like “caravans deviate from their route.” Clines allows that even though “caravans” will be introduced in the next verse, but urges retention of the usual sense (pp. 160,161). The two verses together will yield the same idea in either case—the river dries up and caravans looking for the water deviate from their course looking for it.
⁵⁸tn The verb literally means “to go up,” but here no real ascent is intended for the wasteland. It means that they go inland looking for the water. The streams wind out into the desert and dry up in the sand and the heat. Davidson notes the difficulty with the interpretation of this verse as a reference to caravans is that Ibn Ezra says that it is not usual for caravans to leave their path and wander inland in search of water (p. 47).
⁵⁹tn The word tohu was used in Genesis for “waste,” meaning without shape or structure. Here the term refers to the trackless, unending wilderness 12:24).
⁶⁰sn If the “paths” of the brook forms the subject, then this verb would mean it dies in the desert; if caravaneers are intended, then when they find no water they perish. The point in the argument would be the same in either case. Job is saying that his friends are like this water, and he like the caravaneer was looking for refreshment, but found only that the brook had dried up.
⁶¹sn Tema is the area of the oasis SE of the head of the Gulf of Aqaba; Sheba is in South Arabia. In Job 1:15 the Sabeans were raiders; here they are traveling merchants.
⁶²tn The verb nabat means “to gaze intently”; the looking is more intentional, more of a close scrutiny. It forms a fine parallel to the idea of “hope” in the second part. The NIV translates the second verb qiwwu as “look in hope.” In the previous verbs the imperfect tense was used, expressing what generally happens (so the English present tense was used). Here the verb usage changes to the perfect tense. It seems that Job is narrating a typical incident now—they looked, but were disappointed.
⁶³tn In Ps 68:25 this word has the meaning of “processions”; here that procession is of traveling merchants forming convoys or caravans.
⁶⁴tn The verb bos basically means “to be ashamed”; however, it has a wider range of meaning such as “disappointed” or “distressed.” The feeling of shame or distress is because of their confidence that they knew what they were doing. The verb is strengthened here with the parallel “hapar, “to be confounded, disappointed.”
⁶⁵tn The perfect tense has the nuance of past perfect here, for their confidence preceded their disappointment. Note the contrast, using these verbs, in Ps 22:6: “they trusted in you and they were not put to shame (disappointed).”
⁶⁶tn The Greek text misread the prepositional phrase as the noun “their cities”; it has the line read “They too that trust in cities and riches shall come to shame.”
⁶⁷tn There is a textual problem in this line, a k^etib-q^ere’. Some read the form with Q as the preposition with a suffix referring to “the river,” with the idea “you are like it.” Others would read the form with the K as the negative “not,” meaning “for now you are nothing.” The Greek and the Syric read the word as “to me.” RSV follows this and change “for” to “thus” (ki to ken). The simplest reading is “for now you have become [like] it.” The meaning seems clear enough in the context that the friends, like the river, proved to be of no use. But Clines points out that the difficulty with this is that all references so far to the rivers have been in the plural (p. 161).
⁶⁸tn The Greek has a paraphrase: “But you also have come to me without pity.”
⁶⁹tn The word hatat is a hapax. The word hat means “terror” in 41:25). The form hittat (construct) is found in Gen 35:5; and hittit is found in Ezek 26:17, 32:23). The Akkadian cognate means “terror.” It probably means that in Job’s suffering they recognized some dread thing from God and were afraid to speak any sympathy towards him.
⁷⁰tn The Hebrew haki literally says “Is it because….”
⁷¹sn For the next two verses Job lashes out in sarcasm against his friends. If he had asked for charity, for their wealth, he might have expected their cold response. But all he wanted was sympathy and understanding (Rowley, p. 63).
⁷²tn The word koah basically means “strength, force”; but like the synonym hayil, it can also mean “wealth, fortune.” Dhorme notes that to the Semite riches bring power (Dhorme, p. 90).
⁷³tn The verb sihadu means “give a sohad.” The significance is simply “make a gift” (especially in the sense of corrupting an official [Ezek 16:33]). For the spelling of the form in view of the guttural, see GKC, #64a.
⁷⁴tn The verse now gives the ultimate reason why Job might have urged his friends to make a gift—if it were possible. The Greek text, avoiding the direct speech in the preceding verse and this, does make this verse the purpose statement—“to deliver from enemies….”
⁷⁵tn The `arisim are tyrants, the people who inspire fear (Job 15:20; 27:30); the root verb `aras means “to terrify” (Job 13:25).
⁷⁶tn The verb now is the imperfect tense; since it is parallel to the imperative in the first half of the verse it is imperfect of instruction, much like English uses the future for instruction. The verb padah means “to ransom, redeem,” often in contexts where payment is made.
⁷⁷tn The verb “teach” or “instruct” is the hiphil horu[ni], from the verb yarah; the basic idea of “point, direct” lies behind this meaning. The verb is cognate to the noun torah, “instruction, teaching, Law.”
⁷⁸tn The independent personal pronoun makes the subject of the verb emphatic: “and I will be silent.”
⁷⁹tn The verb is hebin, “to cause someone to understand”; with the lamed following it has the sense of “explain to me.”
⁸⁰tn The verb sagah has the sense of wandering, getting lost, or being mistaken.
⁸¹tn The word nimr^esu may be connected to maras, “to be ill.” This would give the idea of “how distressing,” or “painful” in this stem. Driver (JTS 29 [1927-28]:390-396) connected it to an Akkadian cognate “to be ill” and rendered it “bitter.” It has also been linked with maras, “to be hard, strong,” giving the idea of “how persuasive” (see N. S. Doniach and W. E. Barnes, “Job 4:25: The Root Maras,” JTS [1929,30]:291-292). There seems more support for the meaning “to be ill” (cf. Mal 2:10). Others follow Targum Job “how pleasant [to my palate are your words]”; Dhorme follows this without changing the text but noting that the word has an interchange of letter with malas for maras (p. 92).
⁸²tn The waw here introduces the antithesis (GKC, #154a).
⁸³tn The infinitive hokeah (<yakah) becomes the subject of the verb from the same root, yokiah, and so serves as a noun (see GKC, #113b). This verb means “to dispute, quarrel, argue, contend” (see BDB, p. 407a). He is saying, “What does reproof from you prove?”
⁸⁴tn The Greek again paraphrases this line: “But as it seems, the words of a true man are vain, because I do not ask strength of you.” But the rest of the versions are equally divided on the verse.
⁸⁵tn This, in the context, is probably the meaning, although the Hebrew simply has the line after the first half of the verse read: “and as/to wind the words of a despairing man.” The line could be translated “and the words of a despairing man, [which are] as wind.” But this translation follows the RSV, NIV, and NAB which take the idiom of the verb (“think, imagine”) with the preposition on “wind” to mean “reckon as wind”—”and treat the words of a despairing man as wind.”
⁸⁶tn The word “lots” is not in the text; the verb is simply “you cast” (tappilu). But the word “lots” is also omitted in 1 Sam 14:42. Some commentators (Ball, Duhm, and others) follow the Greek and repoint the word and divide the object of the preposition to read “and fall upon the blameless one.” Fohrer deletes the verse. Peake transfers it to come after v. 23. Even though it does not follow quite as well here, it nonetheless makes sense as a strong invective against their lack of sympathy. He is saying they are the kind of people who would cast lots over the child of a debtor, who, after the death of the father, would be sold to slavery.
⁸⁷tn The verb tikru is from karah, which is found in 40:30 with `al, to mean “speculate” on an object. The form is usually taken to mean “barter for,” which would be an expression showing great callousness to a friend (NIV). NEB has “hurl yourselves,” perhaps following the Greek “rush against”; but Driver thinks that meaning very precarious.
⁸⁸tn The second verb, the imperative “turn,” is subordinated to the first imperative even though there is no waw present (see GKC, #120a and g).
⁸⁹tn The line has “and now, be pleased, turn to me [face me].” The Greek reverses the idea, “And now, having looked upon your countenances, I will not lie.” The expression “turn to me” means essentially to turn the eyes toward someone to look at him.
⁹⁰tn The construction uses ‘im as in a negative oath to mark the strong negative. He is underscoring his sincerity here. See M. R. Lehmann, “Biblical Oaths,” ZAW 81 (1969):74-92.
⁹¹tn The Hebrew verb subu would literally be “return.” It has here the sense of “begin again, adopt another course,” that is, proceed on another supposition other than my guilt (Davidson, p. 49). The Greek text takes the word from yasab, reading “sit down now.”
⁹²tn The word `awlah is sometimes translated “iniquity.” The word can mean “perversion, wickedness, injustice” (cf. 16:11). But here he means in regards to words. Unjust or wicked words would be words that are false and destroy.
⁹³tn The verb here is also subu (although there is a k^ethib-q^ere’ reading). See R. Gordis, “Some Unrecognized Meanings of the Root Shub,” JBL 52 (1933):153-162.
⁹⁴tn The text has simply “yet my right is in it.” Davidson thinks this means that in his plea against God Job has right on his side (pp. 49,50). It may mean this; it simply says “my righteousness is yet in it.” If the “in it” does not refer to Job’s cause, then it would simply mean “is present.” It would have very little difference either way.
⁹⁵tn The word `awlah is repeated from the last verse. Here the focus is clearly on wickedness or injustice spoken.
sn These words make a fitting transition to chapter 7, which forms a renewed cry of despair from Job. Job still feels himself innocent, but in the hands of cruel fate which is out to destroy him.
⁹⁶tn Heb “my palate.” Here “palate” is used not so much for the organ (metonymy) of speech as of discernment. In other words, what he says indicates what he thinks.
⁹⁷tn The final word, hawwot, is usually understood as “calamities.” He would be asking if he could not discern his misfortune. But some argue that the word has to be understood in the parallelism to “wickedness” of words (Clines, p. 162). Gordis connects it to Mic 7:3 and Ps 5:10[9] where we have the meaning “deceit, falsehood.” The Greek has “and does not my throat meditate understanding?”
¹tn The word saba’ is actually “army”; it can be used for the hard service of military service as well as other toil. As a military term it would include the fixed period of duty (the time) and the hard work (toil). Job here is considering the lot of all humans, not just himself.
²tn The sakir is a hired man, either a man who works for wages, or a mercenary soldier (Jer 46:21). The latter sense may be what is intended here in view of the parallelism, although the next verse seems much broader.
³tn This term (`ebed) is the servant or the slave. He is compelled to work through the day, in the heat; but he longs for evening, when he can rest from the slavery.
⁴tn The expression yis’ap-sel could also be taken as a relative clause (without the relative pronoun): “as a servant [who] longs for the evening shadow” (see GKC, #155g). In either case, the expressions in v. 2 emphasize the point of the comparison, which will be summed up in v. 3.
⁵tn The two verbs in this verse stress the eager expectation and waiting. The first, sa’ap, means “long for, desire”; and the second, qawah, has the idea of “hope for, look for, wait.” The words would give the sense that the servant/hired man had the longing on their minds all day.
⁶tn The word po`al means “work.” But here the word should be taken as a metonymy, meaning the pay for the work that he has done (compare Jer 22:13).
⁷tn “Thus” indicates a summary of vv. 1 and 2: like the soldier, the mercenary and the slave, Job has labored through life and looks forward to death.
⁸tn The form is the hophal perfect of nahal, “I have been made to inherit,” or more simply, “I have inherited.” The form occurs only here. The Greek text must have confused the letters or sounds, a waw for the nun, for it reads “I have endured.” As a passive the form technically has two accusatives (see GKC, #121c). Job’s point is that his sufferings have been laid on him by another, and so he has inherited them.
⁹tn The word is saw’, “vanity, deception, nothingness, futility.” His whole life—marked here in months to show its brevity—has been futile. Dhorme suggests the meaning “disillusionment,” explaining that it marks the deceptive nature of mortal life (p. 98). The word describes life as hollow, insubstantial.
¹⁰tn “Sorrow” is `amal, used in 3:10. It denotes anxious toil, labor, troublesome effort. It may be that the verse expresses the idea that the nights are when the pains of his disease are felt the most. The months are completely wasted; the nights are agonizing.
¹¹tn The verb is literally “they have appointed”; the form with no expressed subject is to be interpreted as a passive (GKC, #144g). It is therefore not necessary to re-point the verb to make it passive. The word means “to number, count,” and so “determine, allocate.”
¹²tn This is the main clause, and not part of the previous conditional clause; it is introduced by the conjunction (see GKC, #112gg).
¹³tn The verb middad normally means “measure,” and here in the piel it has been given the sense of “extend.” But this is not well attested, and not widely accepted. There are many conjectural emendations. Of the most plausible one might mention the view of Gray, who changes middad to midde, “as often as evening comes.” Dhorme, following the Greek to some extent, adds the word “day” after “when/if” and replaces middad with another matay, “when,” to read “If I lie down, I say, `When comes the morning?’ If I rise up, I say, `How long till evening?’“ The Greek, however, may be based more on a recollection of Deut 28:67. One can make just as strong a case for the reading adopted here, that the night seems to drag on (so also NIV).
¹⁴tn n^edudim refers to the restless tossing and turning of the sick man at night on his bed. The word is a hapax derived from the verb nadad, “to flee, wander, be restless.” The plural form here sums up the several parts of the actions (GKC, #144f). Dhorme argues that because it applies to both his waking hours and his sleepless nights, it may have more of the sense of wanderings of the mind (p. 99). There is no doubt truth to the fact that the mind wanders in all this suffering; but there is no need to go beyond the contextually clear idea of the restlessness of the night.
¹⁵tn Heb “my flesh.”
¹⁶tn The implied comparison is vivid: the dirty scabs cover his entire body like a garment—so he is clothed with them.
¹⁷sn The word for worms (rimmah, a collective noun) is usually connected with rotten food (Exod 16:24), or the grave (Isa 14:11). Job’s disease is a malignant ulcer of some kind that causes the rotting of the flesh. One may recall that both Antiochus Epiphanes (2 Macc 9:9) and Herod Agrippa (Acts 12:23) were devoured by such worms in their diseases.
¹⁸tn The text has “clods of dust.” The word gis is a hapax form of gus, “clod.” Driver suggests the word has a medical sense, like “pustules” (G. R. Driver, VT Supp 3 [1955]:73) or “scabs” (JB, NEB, NAB, NIV). Driver thinks “clods of dust” is wrong; he repoints “dust” to make a new verb “cover,” cognate to Arabic, and reads “my flesh is clothed with worms, and scab covers my skin.” This refers to the dirty scabs that crusted over the sores all over his body. The Greek text links this with the second half of the verse: “And my body has been covered with loathsome worms, and I waste away, scraping off clods of dirt from my eruption.”
¹⁹tn The meaning of raga` is also debated here. Clines does not think the word can mean cracked because scabs show evidence of the sores healing (p. 163). But Dhorme argues that the usage of the word shows the idea of splitting, separating, make a break, or the like. Here then it would mean “my skin splits” and as a result festers (p. 100). This need not be a reference to the scabs, but to new places. Or, it could mean that the scabbing never heals, but is always splitting open.
²⁰sn The first five verses described the painfulness of his malady, his life; now, in vv. 6-10 he will focus on the brevity of his life, and its extinction with death. He introduces the subject with “my days,” a metonymy for his whole life and everything done on those days. He does not mean individual days—they drag on endlessly.
²¹tn The verb qalal means “to be light” (40:4), and then by extension “to be swift, rapid” (Jer 4:13; Hab 1:8).
²²sn The shuttle is the part which runs through the meshes of the web. In Judges 16:14 it is a loom (see BDB, p. 71a); but here it must be the shuttle. Hezekiah uses the imagery of the weaver, the loom and the shuttle for the brevity of life (see Isa 38:12). The Greek translation used, “My life is lighter than a word.”
²³tn The text includes a wonderful word play on this word. The noun is tiqwah, “hope.” But it can also have the meaning of one of its cognate nouns, qaw, “thread, cord” (as in Josh 2:18,21). He is saying that his life is coming to an end for lack of thread/for lack of hope (see further Dhorme, p. 101).
²⁴sn Job is probably turning here to God, as is clear from v. 11 on. The NIV supplies the word “God” for clarification. It was God who breathed breath into man’s nostrils (Gen 2:7), and so God is called to remember that man is but a breath.
²⁵tn The word “that” is supplied.
²⁶tn The verb with the infinitive serves as a verbal hendiadys: “return to see” means “see again.”
²⁷sn The meaning of the verse is that God will relent, but it will be too late. God now sees him with a hostile eye; when he looks for him, or looks upon him in friendliness, it will be too late.
²⁸tn This verse is omitted in the Greek text and so by several commentators. But, as Dhorme notes, the verb sur is so characteristic of Job (10x) that the verse seems appropriate here.
²⁹tn The comparison is implied; “as” is therefore supplied.
³⁰tn The two verbs (kalah and halak) mean “come to an end” and “go” respectively. The picture is of the cloud that breaks up, comes to an end, is dispersed so that it is no longer a cloud; it then fades away or vanishes. This line forms a good simile for the situation of a man who comes to his end and disappears.
³¹tn The noun is s^e’ol can mean “the grave, death, or Sheol”—the realm of departed spirits. In Job this is a land from which there is no return (10:21 and here). It is a place of darkness and gloom (10:21f), a place where the dead lie hidden (14:13); as a place appointed for all no matter what their standing on earth might have been (30:23). In each case the precise meaning has to be determined. Here the grave makes the most sense, for Job is simply talking about death.
³²sn It is not correct to try to draw theological implications from this statement, or the preceding verse (Rashi said Job was denying the resurrection). Job is simply stating that when people die they are gone—they do not return to this present life on earth. With the limited knowledge of theological doctrine at this early stage, the idea of a bodily resurrection and return to this life is not in his view.
³³tn M. Dahood suggests the meaning is the same as “his abode” (“Hebrew-Ugaritic Lexicography V,” Biblica 48 [1967]:421-438 [431]).
³⁴tn The verb means ‘to recognize” by seeing. “His place,” the place where he was living, is the subject of the verb. This personification is intended simply to say that the place where he lived will not have him any more. The line is very similar to Ps 103:16b—when the wind blows the flower away, its place knows it no more.
³⁵tn “Also I” has been rendered frequently as “therefore,” introducing a conclusion. BDB list Ps 52:7[5] as a parallel, but it also could be explained as an adversative (p. 169b).
³⁶sn “Mouth” here is metonymical for what he says—he will not withhold his complaints. Peake notes that in this section Job comes very close to doing what Satan said he would do. If he does not curse God to his face, he certainly does cast off restraints to his lament. But here Job excuses himself in advance of the lament.
³⁷tn The verb is not limited to mental musing; it is used for pouring out a complaint or a lament (see S. Mowinckel, “The Verb si^ah and the Nouns si^ah, siha,” ST 15 [1961]:1-10).
³⁸tn The word tannin could be translated “whale” as well as the more mythological “dragon” or “monster of the deep” (see Dhorme, p. 105). To the Hebrews this was part of God’s creation in Gen 1; in the pagan world it was a force to be reckoned with, and so the reference would be polemical. The sea is a symbol of the tumultuous elements of creation; in the sea were creatures that symbolized the powerful forces of chaos—Leviathan, Tannin, and Rahab. They required special attention.
³⁹tn The imperfect tense here receives the classification of obligatory imperfect. Job wonders if he is such a threat to God that God must do this.
⁴⁰tn The word mismar is “guard, barrier.” M. Dahood suggested “muzzle” based on Ugaritic, but that has proven to be untenable (“Mismar, “`Muzzle,’ in Job 7:12,” JBL 80 [1061]:270-271).
⁴¹tn The particle ki could also be translated “when”; but “if” might work better to introduce the conditional clause and to parallel the earlier reasoning of Job in v. 4 (using ‘im). See GKC, #112hh.
⁴²tn The verb literally means “say,” but here the connotation must be “think” or “say to oneself”—“when I think my bed….”
⁴³sn Sleep is the recourse of the troubled and unhappy. Here “bed” is metonymical for sleep. Job expects sleep to give him the comfort that his friends have not.
⁴⁴tn The verb means “lift up, take away” (nasa’). When followed by the preposition bet with the complement of the verb, the idea is “bear a part, take a share,” or “share in the burden” (cf. Num 11:7). The idea then would be that the sleep would ease the complaint. It would not end the illness, but the complaining for a while.
⁴⁵tn The piel of hatat occurs only here and in Jer 51:56 (where it is doubtful). The meaning is clearly “startle, scare.” The perfect tense with the waw is fitting in the apodosis of the conditional sentence.
sn Here Job is boldly saying that it is God who is behind the horrible dreams that he is having at night.
⁴⁶tn The piel of ba`at is one of the characteristic words in the book; it occurs in 3:5; 9:34; 13:11, 21; 15:24; 18:11; and 33:7.
⁴⁷tn The prepositions bet and min interchange here; they express the instrument of causality. See N. Sarna, “The Interchange of the Prepositions bet and min in Biblical Hebrew,” JBL 78 (1959):310-316 [313].
⁴⁸tn The word nepes is often translated “soul.” But since Hebrew thought does not make such a distinction between body and soul, it is usually better to translate it with “person.” When a suffix is added to the word, then that pronoun would serve as the better translation, as here with “my soul” = “I” (meaning with every fiber of my being).
⁴⁹tn The verb bahar followed by the preposition bet can have the sense of “prefer.”
⁵⁰tn The meaning of the hapax mahanaq is clear enough; the verb hanaq in the piel means “to strangle” (Nah 2:13), and in the niphal “to strangle oneself” (2 Sam 17:23). This word has tempted some commentators to take nepes in a very restricted sense of “throat.”
⁵¹tn The “and” is supplied. “Death” could also be taken in apposition to “strangling,” providing the outcome of the strangling.
⁵²tn This is one of the few words recognizable in the Greek translation: “You will separate life from my spirit, and yet keep my bones from death.”
⁵³tn The comparative min after the verb “choose” will here have the idea of preferring something before another (see GKC, #133b).
⁵⁴tn. The word me`asmotay means “more than my bones” (=life or being). The line is poetic; “bones” is often used in scripture metonymically for the whole living person (see Johnson, The Vitality of the Individual, p. 70 n.). So there is no need here for conjectural emendation. Nevertheless, there have been several suggestions made. The simplest and most appealing for those who desire a change is the re-pointing to me`ass^ebotay, “my sufferings” (adopted by NAB, JB, Moffatt, Driver-Gray, Dhorme, Rowley and others). Driver obtains this idea by positing a new word based on Arabic without changing the letters; it means “great”—but he has to supply the word “sufferings.”
⁵⁵tn Dhorme thinks the idea of loathing or despising is problematic since there is no immediate object. He notes the verb ma’as that is parallel to masas in the sense of “flow, drip” (Job 42:6). This would give the idea “I am fading away” or “I grow weaker,” or as Dhorme chooses, “I am pining away” (pp. 107-108).
⁵⁶tn There is no object for the verb in the text. But the most likely object would be “my life” from the last verse, especially since in this verse he will talk about not living forever. Some have thought the object should be “death,” meaning that Job despised death more than the pains. But that is a forced meaning; besides, as Rowley points out, the word here means to despise something to reject it. Job wanted death.
⁵⁷tn Heb “cease from me.” This construction means essentially “leave me in peace.”
⁵⁸tn This word hebel is difficult to translate. It means “breath, puff of air, vapor” and then figuratively “vanity.” Job is saying that his life is but a breath—it is brief and fleeting. Compare Ps 144:4: “man is like a breath, his days are like a passing shadow.”
⁵⁹tn The verse is a rhetorical question; it is intended to mean that man is too little for God to be making so much over him in all this.
⁶⁰tn The piel verb mean “to magnify.” The English word “magnify” might not be the best to translate here, for God, according to Job, is focusing inordinantly on him. It means to magnify in thought, appreciate, think highly of. God, he argues, is making too much of man by devoting so much bad attention on him.
⁶¹tn The expression “set your heart on him” means concentrate your mind on him, pay attention to him.
⁶²tn The verb paqad is a very common one in the Bible; while it is frequently translated “visit,” the “visit” is never comparable to a social call. When God visits people it always means a divine intervention for blessing or cursing—but the visit always changes the destiny of the one visited. Here Job is amazed that God Almighty would be so involved in the life of a human.
⁶³tn Now the verb “to test” is introduced and gives further explanation to the purpose of the “visit” in the parallel line (see the same parallelism in Ps 17:3). The verb bahan has to do with passing things through the fire or the crucible to purify the metal (see Job 23:10; Zech 13:3); metaphorically it means “to examine carefully” and “purify by testing.”
⁶⁴sn The amazing thing is the regularity of the testing. Job is at first amazed that God would visit him; but even more is he amazed that God is testing him every moment.
⁶⁵tn The text literally says, “How long [according to what] will you not look away from me.”
⁶⁶tn The verb sa`ah, “look,” with the preposition min means “to look away from, avert one’s gaze.” Job wonders if God would not look away from him even briefly, for the constant vigilance is killing him.
⁶⁷tn The hiphil of rapah means “to leave someone alone.”
⁶⁸tn The simple perfect tense can be used in a conditional sentence without a conditional particle present (see GKC, #159h).
⁶⁹sn Job is not here saying that he has sinned; rather, he is posing the hypothetical condition—if he had sinned, what would that do to God. In other words, he has not really injured God.
⁷⁰tn In the Bible God is often described as watching over people to protect them from danger (see Deut 32:10; Ps 31:23). However, here it is a hostile sense, for God may detect sin and bring it to judgment.
⁷¹tn This word is a hapax; being from the verb paga`, it would describe what is hit or struck (as nouns of this pattern can indicate the place of the action)—the target.
⁷²tn In the prepositional phrase `alay we have the results of a scribal change (called tiqqune sopherim, “corrections of the scribes” made to avoid using improper language about God). The [prepositional phrase would have been `aleka (as in the Greek text), “to you.” But it offended the Jews to think of Job’s being burdensome to God. His sin of Job could have repercussions on him, but not on God. For the literature on this, see C. D. Ginsburg, Introduction to a Masoretic-Critical Edition of the Hebrew Bible (New York: KTAV, reprint, 1966):347-363.
⁷³tn The Greek has, “for now I will depart to the earth.”
⁷⁴tn The verb sahar in the piel has been translated “to seek early in the morning” because of the possible link with the word “dawn.” But the verb more properly means “seek diligently” (by implication).
⁷⁵sn This speech of Bildad ignores Job’s attack on his friends and focuses rather on Job’s comments about God’s justice. Bildad cannot even imagine saying that God is unjust. The only conclusion open to him is that Job’s family brought this on themselves, and so the only recourse is for Job to humble himself and make supplication to God. To make his point, Bildad will appeal to the wisdom of the ancients, for his theology is traditional. The speech has three parts: vv. 2-7 form his affirmation of the justice of God; vv. 8-19 is his appeal to the wisdom of the ancients, and vv. 20-22 is his summation. See N. C. Habel, “Appeal to Ancient Tradition as a Literary Form,” ZAW 88 (1976):253-272; W. A. Irwin, “The First Speech of Bildad,” ZAW 51 (1953):205-216.
¹sn “These things” refers to all of Job’s speech, the general drift of which seems to Bildad to question the justice of God.
²tn The second colon of the verse simply says “and a strong wind the words of your mouth.” The simplest way to treat this is to make it an independent nominal sentence: “the words of your mouth are a strong wind.” Some have made it parallel to the first by apposition, understanding “how long” to do double duty. The line beginning with the waw can also be subordinated as a circumstantial clause, as here.
³tn The word kabbir, “great,” implies both abundance and greatness. Here the word modifies “wind”; the point of the analogy is that Job’s words are full of sound but without solid content.
⁴sn See though G. R. Driver’s translation, “the breath of one who is mighty are the words of your mouth” (“Hebrew Studies,” JRAS 1948:164-176 [170]).
⁵tn The piel verb y^e`awwet, means “bend, cause to swerve from the norm, deviate, pervert.” The Greek renders the first colon as “will the Lord be unjust when he judges?”
⁶tn The first word is mispat, “justice.” It can mean an act of judgment, place of judgment, or what is just, that is, the outcome of the decision. It basically describes an umpire’s decision. The parallel word is sedeq, “righteousness” or “what is right.” The basic idea here is that which conforms to the standard, what is right. See S. H. Scholnick, “The Meaning of Mishpat in the Book of Job,” JBL 101 (1982):521-529.
⁷tn Some commentators think that the second verb should be change in order to avoid the repetition of the same word and to reflect the different words in the versions. The suggestion is to read y^e`awweh instead; this would mean “cause s. to deviate,” for the root means “to bend.” The change is completely unwarranted; the Greek text probably chose different words for stylistic reasons (Gordis; see also Clines, p. 198). The repetition in the Hebrew text is a common type; it strengthens the enormity of the charge Job seems to be making (Ball, Fohrer, Gray).
⁸tn The AV and RV take the protasis down to the middle of v. 6. The Greek changes the “if” at the beginning of v. 5 to “then and makes that verse the apodosis. If the apodasis comes in the second half of v. 4, then v. 4 would be a complete sentence (Rowley, p. 71; Davidson, p. 60). The particle ‘im has the sense of “since” in this section.
⁹tn The verb is a piel preterite with a waw consecutive. The waw need not be translated if the second half of the verse is the apodasis of the first—since they sinned…he did this. The verb silleah means “to expel, thrust out” normally; here the sense of “deliver up” or deliver over” fits the sentence well. The verse is saying that sin carries its own punishment, and so God merely delivered the young people over to it.
¹⁰tn The literal wording is “into the hand of their rebellion.” The word “hand” often signifies “power.” The rebellious acts have the power to destroy, and so that is what happened—according to Bildad. Bildad’s point is that Job should learn from what happened to his family.
¹¹tn “But” is supplied to show the contrast between this verse and the preceding line.
¹²tn The verb sihar means “seek, seek earnestly” (see 7:21). With the preposition ‘el the verb may carry the nuance of “address, have recourse to” (see Dhorme, p. 114). The Greek text connected it etymologically to “early” and read, “Be early in prayer to the Lord Almighty.”
¹³tn The verb tithannan means “make supplication, seek favor, seek grace” (from hanan). Bildad is saying that there is only one way for Job to escape the same fate as his children—he must implore God’s mercy. Job’s speech had spoken about God’s seeking him and not finding him; but Bildad is speaking of the importance of Job’s seeking God.
¹⁴tn A verb form needs to be supplied here. Bildad is not saying to Job, “If you are pure (as you say you are).” Bildad is convinced that Job is a sinner. Therefore, “If you become pure” makes more sense here.
¹⁵tn Or “innocent” (i.e., acquitted).
¹⁶tn Many commentators delete this colon as a moralizing gloss on v. 5; but the phrase makes good sense, and simply serves as another condition. Besides, the expression is in the Greek text.
¹⁷tn The verb ya`ir is a strong anthropomorphism. The Greek has “he will answer your prayer” (which is probably only the Greek’s effort to avoid the anthropomorphism [Clines, p. 198]). A reading of “watch over you” has been adopted because of parallel texts (see H. L. Ginsberg, “Two North Canaanite Letters from Ugarit,” BASOR 72 [1938]:18-19; and H. N. Richardson, “A Ugaritic Letter of a King to His Mother,” JBL 66 [1947]:321-324). Others suggest “his light will shine on you” or “he will bestow health on you.” But the idea of “awake” is common enough in the Bible to be retained here.
¹⁸tn The piel of salam means “to make good, repay, restore something to its wholeness, re-establish. The best understanding here would be “restore [Job] to his place.” Some take the verb in the sense of “reward [Job himself] with a righteous habitation.”
¹⁹tn The construct n^ewat is feminine; only the masculine occurs in Hebrew. But the meaning “abode of your righteousness” is clear enough. The righteousness of Job is pictured as inhabiting an estate; or, it pictures the place where Job lives as a righteous man. A translation “rightful habitation” would mean “the habitation that you deserve”—if you are righteous.
²⁰tn The reference to “your beginning” is a reference to Job’s former estate of wealth and peace. The reference to “latter end” is a reference to conditions still in the future. What Job had before will seem so small in comparison to what lies ahead.
²¹tn The verb has the idea of “to grow”; here it must mean “flourish, grow considerable” or the like. The statement is not so much a prophecy; rather Bildad is saying that “if Job had recourse to God, then….” This will be fulfilled, of course, at the end of the book.
²²sn Bildad is not calling for Job to trace through the learning of antiquity, but of the recent generation. Hebrews were fond of recalling what the “fathers” have taught, for each generation recalled what their fathers had taught.
²³tn The verb konen (from kun) normally would indicate “prepare yourself” or “fix” one’s heart on something, i.e., give attention to it. The verb with the lamed preposition after it does mean “think on” or “meditate” (Isa 51:13). But some commentators wish to change the kaph to a bet in the verb to get “consider” (from bin). But Dahood shows a connection between knn and s’l in Ugaritic (“Hebrew-Ugaritic Lexicography,” Biblica 46 [1965]:311-332 [329]).
²⁴tn The Hebrew has “the search of their father,” but the word is probably intended to mean what that observation or search yielded (so “search” is a metonymy of cause).
²⁵tn The Hebrew has “we are of yesterday,” the adverb functioning as a predicate. Bildad’s point is that they have not had time to acquire great knowledge because they are recent.
²⁶tn Dhorme observes that the shadow is the symbol of ephemeral things (14:2; 17:7; Ps 144:4). The shadow passes away quickly (p. 116).
²⁷tn The sentence begins emphatically: “Is it not they.”
²⁸tn The “and” is not present in the line. The second clause seems to be in apposition to the first, explaining it more thoroughly: “Is it not they [who] will instruct you, [who] will speak to you.”
²⁹tn The noun may have been left indeterminate for the sake of emphasis (GKC, #125c), meaning “important words.”
³⁰tn Heb “from their heart.”
³¹sn Rowley observes the use of the words for plants that grow in Egypt and suspects that Bildad either knew Egypt or knew that much wisdom came from Egypt. The first word refers to papyrus, which grows to a height of six feet (so the verb means “grow tall, high”). The second word refers to the reed grass that grows on the banks of the river (see Gen 41:2, 18).
³²tn The two verbs, sagah and ga’ah, have almost the same meanings of “flourish, grow, become tall.”
³³tn The word has been traditionally translated “greenness,” but some modern commentators argue for “in flower.” The word is found only in the Song of Songs 6:11 (where it may be translated “blossoms”). From the same root is ‘abib, “fresh young ears of barley.” Here the word refers to the plant that is still in its early stages of flowering. So one cannot translate it to suggest the plant is flowering; but leaving it green is also not good enough, but perhaps safer for the meaning that it is early.
³⁴sn The idea is that as the plant begins to flower, but before it is to be cut down, there is no sign of withering or decay in it. But if the water is withdrawn, it will wither sooner than any other herb. The point Bildad will make of this is that when people rebel against God and his grace is withheld, they perish more swiftly than the water reed.
³⁵tn The imperfect tense here is the modal use of potential, “can wither away” if the water is not there.
³⁶tn Heb “before.”
³⁷tn The Greek interprets the line: “does not any herb wither before it has received moisture?”
³⁸tn The word ‘orhot is “ways, paths” in the sense of tracks of destiny or fate. The word derek is used in a similar way (Isa 40:27; Ps 37:5). However, many commentators emend the text to read ‘aharit, “end,” in harmony with the Greek. But Prov 1:19 (if not emended as well) confirms the primary meaning here without changing the text (see Clines, p. 199).
³⁹tn The word hanep is often translated “hypocrite.” But the root verb means “to be profane,” and this would be done by idolatry or bloodshed. It describes an irreligious person, a godless person. In Dan 11:32 the word seems to mean “make someone pagan.” The word in this verse is parallel to “those who forget God.”
⁴⁰tn The relative pronoun introduces the verse as a relative clause, working with the “godless person” of the preceding verse. The relative pronoun is joined to the resumptive pronoun in the translation: “who + his trust” = “whose trust.”
⁴¹tn The noun kesel in this half of the verse must correspond to “his security” in the second half. The meaning must be “his trust” (see 4:6). The two words will again be parallel in Job 31:24.
⁴²tn The word yaqot is not known anywhere else; here it looks like it should be a noun to parallel “spider’s house” in the next colon. But scholars have tried to identify it as a verb, perhaps an imperfect of qut (BDB, 876b), or related to an Arabic qatta, “cut.” Some versions have “break in sunder” (KJV, RV); others “cut off” (RSV). Apart from verbs, some commentators follow Sa`adia’s Arabic translation “sun cords,” meaning “gossamer.” Accordingly, we have emendations: “threads,” “threads of summer,” “spider threads” and the like. Clines agrees with those who conclude that emendations based on Sa`adia’s translation lack a sound philological basis. Dhorme “somewhat timidly” suggests yalqut, the shepherd’s bag or scrip (1 Sam 17:40). He suggests that an empty bag would be a symbol of something unstable and futile. It seems impossible to determine exactly what the word meant. One can only conclude that means something like “fragile” or “futile.” The Greek is of no help: “for his house shall be without inhabitants.”
⁴³sn The second half of the verse is very clear. What the godless person relies on for security is as fragile as a spider’s web—he may as well have nothing. The people of the Middle East view the spider’s web as the frailest of all “houses.”
⁴⁴tn The verb `amad, “to stand,” is almost synonymous with the parallel qum, “to rise, stand.” The distinction is that the first means “to remain standing” (so it is translated here “hold up”), and the latter “rise, stand up.”
⁴⁵sn The idea is that he grabs hold of the house, not to hold it up, but to hold himself up or support himself. But it cannot support him. This idea applies to both the spider’s web and the false security of the pagan.
⁴⁶tn The figure now changes to a plant that is flourishing and spreading and then suddenly cut off. The word ratab means “to be moist, watered.” The word occurs in Arabic, Aramaic, and Akkadian—but only twice in the Bible, here as the adjective, and in Job 24:8 as the verb.
⁴⁷tn The Hebrew is lipne, “before.” Does this mean “in the presence of the sun,” i.e., under a sweltering sun, or “before” the sun rises. Dhorme takes the latter, but it seems more natural to take lipne as “in the presence of” or “under.”
⁴⁸tn Heb “its shoot goes out.”
⁴⁹tn Some have emended to obtain “over the roofs.” Dhorme retains the MT and suggests “his garden” is the garden where he is rooted. The Greek has “out of his corruption.” Orlinsky has shown that this reading arose over in internal Greek change, saprias having replaced prasias, “garden” (JQR, NS, 26 [1935,6]:134,5).
⁵⁰tn Cheyne reads “spring” or “well” rather than “heap. But this does not fit the parallelism very well, and so he emends the second half as well. But the Hebrew text needs no emending here.
⁵¹tn The expression “of stones” is added for clarification of what the heap would be. It refers to the object around which the roots would grow. The parallelism with “house of stones” makes this reading sure.
⁵²tn The idea is that the plant grows, looking for a place to grow among the stones. Some trees grow so tightly around the rocks and stones that they are impossible to uproot. The rocky ground where it grows forms “a house of stones.” Dhorme thinks there is a problem with the verb, and so he emends it slightly from yehezeh to yihyeh, “it lives.” This is not very probable, even though it has support in the Greek. Others have tried to emend the text in a variety of ways: “pushes” (Budde), “cleave” (Gordis), “was opposite” (Driver), or “run against” (NEB, probably based on Driver). Buttenwieser wanted to change “house” for “between the stones.” If one were to make a change, the reading with the Greek would be the easier to defend. But there is no substantial reason to do that. The meaning is about the same without such a change.
⁵³sn The idea seems to be that the stones around which the roots of the tree wrap themselves suggest strength and security for the tree, but uprooting comes to it nevertheless (v. 18). The point is that the wicked may appear to be security and flourishing, yet can be quickly destroyed (Rowley, p. 74).
⁵⁴tc Ball reads ‘el instead of ‘im, “God destroys it”—but there is no reason for this. The idea would be implied in the context. Davidson rightly points out that who destroys it is not important, but that it is destroyed is.
tn The Hebrew has “if one destroys it”; the indefinite subject allows for a passive interpretation. The verb means “swallow” in the qal; but in the piel it means “engulf, destroy, ruin” (2:3; 10:8). It could here be rendered “removed from its place” (the place where it is rooted); since the picture is that of complete destruction, “uprooted” would be a good rendering.
⁵⁵sn The subject represented by “it” is “its place.” The place where it once grew will deny ever knowing it. Such is the completeness of the uprooting that there is not a trace left.
⁵⁶tn Here “saying” is supplied.
⁵⁷tn This line is difficult. If the MT stands as it is, the expression must be ironic. It would be saying that the joy (all the security and prosperity) of its way (its life) is short-lived—that is the way its joy goes. Most commentators are not satisfied with this. Dhorme, for one, changes m^esos to m^esos, “rotting,” and gets “behold him lie rotting on the path.” The sibilants can interchange this way. But Dhorme thinks the MT was written the way it was because the word was thought to be “joy,” when it should have been the other way. The word “way” then becomes an accusative of place. The suggestion is rather compelling, and would certainly fit the context. The difficulty is that a root sus, “to rot,” has to be proposed. Dhorme does this by drawing on Arabic sas “to be eaten by moths or worms,” “worm-eaten, decaying rotting.” The NIV may have followed this with “its life withers away.”
⁵⁸sn As with the tree, so with the godless man—his place will soon be taken by another.
⁵⁹sn This is the description that the book gave to Job at the outset, that was due to him according to God’s revelation. The theme “God will not reject the blameless man” becomes Job’s main point (see 9:20,21; 10:3).
⁶⁰sn To “grasp the hand” of someone means to support or help the person.
⁶¹tn The word `ad would give the reading “until he fills your mouth with laughter,” subordinating the verse to the preceding with some difficulty in interpretation. It would be saying that God will not reject the blameless man until he filled Job with joy. Almost all commentators and modern versions change the pointing to `od, “yet,” forming a hope for the future blessing of joy for Job.
⁶²sn “Laughter” (and likewise “gladness”) will here be metonymies of effect or adjunct, being put in place of the reason for the joy—restoration.
⁶³sn These verses show several points of similarity with the style of the Book of Psalms. “Those who hate you” and the “evil-doers” are fairly common words to describe the ungodly in the Psalms. “Those who hate you” are enemies of the righteous man because of the parallelism in the verse. By this line Bildad is showing Job that he and his friends are not among those who are his enemies, and that Job himself is really among the righteous. It is an appealing way to end the discourse. See further, G. W. Anderson, “Enemies and Evil-doers in the Book of Psalms,” BJRL 48 (1965,66):18-29.
⁶⁴tn “Shame” is compared to a garment that can be worn. The “shame” envisioned here is much more than embarrassment or disgrace—it is utter destruction. For parallels in the Psalms, see Pss 35:26; 132:18; 109:29.
⁶⁵sn This speech of Job in response to Bildad falls into two large sections, chapters 9 and 10. In chapter 9 he argues that God’s power and majesty prevent him from establishing his integrity in his complaint to God. And in chapter 10 Job tries to discover in God’s plan the secret of his afflictions. The speech seems to continue what Job was saying to Eliphaz more than it addresses Bildad. See K. Fullerton, “On Job 9 and 10,” JBL 53 (1934):321-349.
¹tn The adverb ‘omnam, “in truth,” is characteristic of the Book of Job (12:2; 19:4; 34:12; 36:4). The friends make commonplace statements, general truths, and Job responds with “truly I know this is so.” Job knows as much about these themes as his friends do.
²sn The interrogative is used to express what is an impossibility.
³tn The attempt to define ‘enos as “weak” or “mortal” man is not compelling. Such interpretations are based on etymological links without the clear support of usage (an issue James Barr raises in Comparative Philology and the Text of the Old Testament). This seems to be a poetic word for “human.”
⁴tn The preposition is `im, “with, before, in the presence of.” This is more specific than min in 4:17.
⁵sn The point of Job’s rhetorical question is that man cannot be justified as against God, because God is too powerful and too clever—he controls the universe. He is discussing now the question that Eliphaz raised in 4:17. Peake observes that Job is raising the question of whether something is right because God says it is right, or that God declares it right because it is right.
⁶tn Some commentators take God to be the subject of this verb, but it is more likely that it refers to the mortal who tries to challenge God in a controversy. The verb is used of Job in 13:3.
⁷tn The verb rib is a common one; it has the idea of “contention, dispute, legal dispute or controversy, go to law.” With the preposition `im the idea must be “contend with,” “dispute with.” The preposition reflects the prepositional phrase “with God” in v. 2, supporting the view that man is the subject.
⁸tn This use of the imperfect as potential imperfect assumes that the human is the subject, that in a dispute with God he could not answer one of God’s questions (for which see the conclusion of the book when God questions Job). On the other hand, if the interpretation were that God does not answer the demands of mortals, then a simple progressive imperfect would be required. In support of this is the frustration of Job that God does not answer him.
⁹sn The “heart” is the seat of intelligence and understanding, the faculty of decision-making. The genitive would be genitive of specification, specifying that the wisdom of God is in his intelligent decisions.
¹⁰sn The words ‘ammis and koah are synonyms, the first meaning “sturdy, mighty, robust,” and the second “strength.” It too can be interpreted as a genitive of specification—he is mighty with respect to his power. But that comes close to expressing a superlative idea (like “song of songs” or “anger of his wrath”)
¹¹tn The first half of the verse simply has “wise of heart and mighty of strength.” The entire line is a casus pendens that will refer to the suffix on ‘elayw in the second colon. So the question is “Who has resisted the one who is wise of heart and mighty of strength.” Again, the rhetorical question is affirming that no one has done this.
¹²tn The verb is the hiphil of the verb qasah, “to be hard.” It frequently is found with the word for “neck,” describing people as “stiff-necked,” i.e., stubborn, unbending. So the idea of resisting God fits well. The fact that this word occurs in Exodus with the idea of hardening the heart against God may indicate that there is an allusion to Pharaoh here.
¹³tn The use of salem in the qal is rare. It has been translated “remain safe” by Dhorme, “survived” by the NEB, “remained unscathed” by the NAB and NIV, or “succeeded” by KJV, Driver.
¹⁴tn The verb is plural—“they do not know it.” This suggests that the mountains would not know it. Some follow the Syriac with a singular verb, i.e., God does not know it, meaning, it is so trifling to God that he can do it without thinking. But the better interpretation may be “suddenly.” This would be interpreted from the MT as it stands; it would imply “before they know anything,” so suddenly (Gray, Dhorme, Buttenwieser, et. al.). D. Winton Thomas connects the meaning to another verb based on Arabic and translates it, “ so that they are no longer still” (“Additional Notes on the Root yada` in Hebrew,” JTS NS 15 [1964]:54-57). J. A. Emerton works with a possible root yada` meaning “be still” (“A Consideration of Some Alleged Meanings of yada` in Hebrew,” JSS 15 [1970]:145-80).
¹⁵sn This line beginning with the relative pronoun can either be read as a parallel description of God, or it can be subordinated by the relative pronoun to the first (“they do not know who overturned them”).
¹⁶sn The reference is probably to earthquakes, although some commentators protest against this in view of the idea of the pillars. In the ancient world the poetical view of the earth is that it was a structure on pillars, with water around it and under it. In an earthquake the pillars were shaken, and the earth moved.
¹⁷tn The verb hitpallas is found only here, but the root seems clearly to mean “to be tossed, thrown about,” and so in the hithpael “quiver, shake, tremble.” One of the three nouns from this root is pallasut, the “shudder” that comes with terror (see Job 21:6; Isa 21:4; Ezek 7:18; and Ps 55:6).
¹⁸tn The form could also be subordinated, “that it shine not” (see further GKC, #109g).
¹⁹tn The verb zarah means “rise.” This is the ordinary word for the sunrise. But here it probably has the idea of “shine, glisten,” which is also attested in Hebrew and Aramaic.
sn There are various views on the meaning of this line in this verse. Some think it refers to some mysterious darkness like the judgment in Egypt (Exod 10:21-23), or to clouds building (3:5), often in accompaniment of earthquakes (see Joel 2:10, 3:15-16; Isa 13:10-13). It could also refer to an eclipse. All this assumes that the phenomenon here is limited to the morning or the day; but it could simply be saying that God controls light and darkness.
²⁰tn The verb hatam with b^e`ad before its complement, means “to seal, wall up, enclose.” This is a poetic way of saying that God prevents the stars from showing their light.
²¹tn The reference is probably to the waves of the sea. This is the reading preserved in NIV and NAB, as well as by J. Crenshaw, “W^edorek `al-bamote ‘ares,” CBQ 34 [1972]:39-53 (see also John Day, God’s Conflict, p. 42). But many see here a reference to Canaanite mythology. The marginal note in the RSV has “the back of the sea dragon.” This was the suggestion for bmt by W. F. Albright, JBL 57 [1938]:228. The view would also see in “sea” the Ugaritic god Yammu.
²²sn The Hebrew has `as (although in 38:31f. it is `ayis). This has been identified as Aldebaran, a star in the constellation Taurus (Hoffmann, ZAW 3 [1883]:107). But there have been many other suggestions put forward by the commentaries.
²³sn There is more certainty for the understanding of this word as Orion, even though there is some overlap of the usage of the words in the Bible. In classical literature we have the same stereotypical reference to these three (see Dhorme, p. 131).
²⁴sn The identification of this as the Pleiades is accepted by most (the Vulgate has Hyades). In the classics, the seven Pleiades were seven sisters of the Hyades who were pursued by Orion until they were changed into stars by Zeus. The Greek myth is probably derived from an older Semitic myth.
²⁵tn The text has the poetic “chambers of the south.”
²⁶sn There is probably great irony in Job’s using this same verse as in 5:9. But Job’s meaning here is different than Eliphaz.
²⁷tn The NIV has “when” to form a temporal clause here. For the use of “if,” see GKC, #159w.
²⁸tn The imperfect tenses in this verse are consistent to the clauses. In the conditional clauses a progressive imperfect is used, but in the following clauses the verbs are potential imperfects.
²⁹tn The “him” is added here; it is not in MT, but the Syriac and Vulgate have it.
³⁰sn Like the mountains, Job knows that God has passed by and caused him to shake and tremble, but he cannot understand or perceive the reasons.
³¹tn Dhorme surveys the usages and concludes that the verb hatap normally describes the wicked actions of a man, especially by treachery or trickery against another. But a verb hatap is found nowhere else; a noun “robber” is found in Prov 23:28. Dhorme sees no reason to emend the text, because he concludes that the two verbs are synonymous (p. 133). Job is saying that if God acts like a plunderer, there is no one who can challenge what he does.
³²tn The verb is the hiphil imperfect (potential again) from sub. In this stem it can mean “turn back, refute, repel” (BDB, 999b, #5).
³³sn The meaning of the line is that God’s anger will continue until it has accomplished its purpose (23:13-14).
³⁴sn “Rahab” is not to be confused with the harlot from Jericho. “Rahab” is identified with Tiamat of the Babylonian creation epic, or Leviathan of the Canaanite myths. It is also used in parallelism to the sea (26:12), or the Red Sea (Ps 74:13), and so comes to symbolize Egypt (Isa 30:7). In the Babylonian Creation Epic there is reference to the helpers of Tiamat. In the Bible the reference is only to the raging sea, which the LORD controlled at creation. For more bibliography on this aspect, see the commentary by Clines.
³⁵tn The verb sahah means “to be prostrate” or “to crouch.” Here the enemies are prostrate under the feet of God—they are crushed.
³⁶tn The construction ‘ap ki-’anoki is an expression that means either “how much more” or “how much less.” Here it has to mean “how much less,” for if powerful forces like Rahab are crushed beneath God’s feet, how could Job contend with him?
³⁷tn The imperfect tense here is to be taken with the nuance of potential imperfect. The idea of “answer him” has a legal context, i.e., answering God in a court of law. If God is relentless in his anger towards greater powers, then Job realizes it is futile for him.
³⁸sn In a legal controversy with God it would be essential to choose the correct words very carefully (humanly speaking); but the calmness and presence of mind to do that would be shattered by the overwhelming terror of God’s presence.
³⁹tn The verb is supplied in this line.
⁴⁰tn The preposition `im, “with,” carries the idea of “in contest with” in a number of passages (compare vv. 2, 3; 16:21, e.g.).
⁴¹tn The Greek goes a different way after changing the first person to the third: “Oh then that he would hearken to me, or judge my cause.”
⁴²tn The line begins with ‘aser, which is omitted in the Greek and the Syriac. Dhorme translates it awkwardly, “I, who, though I am in the right….” The particle ‘im can introduce a concessive clause (GKC, #160a) or a conditional clause (GKC, #159n). The idea here seems to be “even if I were…I could not….”
⁴³tn The verb is sadaqti, “I am right, righteous.” The term here must be forensic, meaning “in the right,” or “innocent” (see 11:2; 13:18; 33:12; 40:8). Job is claiming to be in the right, but still has difficulty speaking to God.
⁴⁴tn The form is the qal imperfect of the verb “answer.” As the text stands, Job is saying that he cannot answer or could not answer (contend with) God if given a chance. Dhorme and Ginsberg and others think a niphal fits better here: “I am not answered,” meaning, God does not reply to him. This has the Greek, the Syriac, and Theodotion behind it. The advantage would be to avoid the repetition of the same word from v. 14. But Gray and others rightly reject this, because all Job is saying here is that he would be too overwhelmed by God to answer him in court. The Greek change to a passive is understandable in that it would be seeking a different idea in this verse, and without vocalization might have assumed a passive voice here.
⁴⁵tn The verb ‘ethannan is the hithpael of hanan, meaning “seek favor,” make supplication,” or “plead for mercy.” The nuance would again be a modal nuance; if potential, then the translation would be “I could [only] plead for mercy.”
⁴⁶tn The word m^esop^eti appears to be simply “my judge.” But most modern interpretations take the po’el participle to mean “my adversary in a court of law.” Others argue that the form is at least functioning as a noun, and means “judge” (see 8:5). This would fit better with the idea of appealing for mercy from God. The dilemma of Job, of course, is that the LORD would be both his adversary in the case and his judge.
⁴⁷sn The idea of “answer” in this line is that of responding to the summons, i.e., appearing in court. This preterite, like the perfect before it, have the nuance of hypothetical perfects since they are in conditional clauses (GKC, #111x). Clines translates literally, “If I should call and he should answer” (p. 219).
⁴⁸tn The hiphil imperfect in the apodasis of this conditional sentence expresses what would (not) happen if God answered the summons.
⁴⁹tn The relative pronoun indicates that this next section is modifying God, the Judge. Job does not believe that God would respond or listen to him, because this is the one who is crushing him.
⁵⁰tn The verb y^esupeni is the same verb that is used in Genesis 3:15 for the bruising of the serpent. The Targum to Job, the Greek and the Vulgate all translate it “crush, pound” or “bruise.” The difficulty for many exegetes is that this is to be done “with a tempest.” The Syriac and Targum Job see a different vocalization and read “with a hair.” Dhorme accepts this, explaining it is like a “trifle.” The text as it stands is understandable and so no change is needed. The fact that the word “tempest” is written with a different sibilant in other places in Job is not greatly significant in this consideration. Others offer bigger changes. Driver changes the verb to mean “swept close over” (JTS 30 [1928-29]:375-7; and this would not work with the change to “hair.”
⁵¹tn Hinnam is adverbial, meaning “gratuitously, without a cause, for no reason, undeservedly.” See its use in 2:4.
⁵²tn The verb natan essentially means “to give”; but followed by the infinitive (without the lamed here) it means “permit, allow.”
⁵³tn The hiphil of the verb means “to bring back”; with the object “my breath,” it means “get my breath” or simply “breathe.” The infinitive is here functioning as the object of the verb (see GKC, #114m).
⁵⁴sn The meaning of the word is “satiate, fill,” as in drink to the full (Dhorme translates “cause me to drink”), “be satisfied.” Job is satiated—in the negative sense—with bitterness. There is no room for more.
⁵⁵tn The MT has only “if of strength”
⁵⁶tn “Most certainly” translates the particle hinneh.
⁵⁷tn The verb has the idea of “who will summon me? (see Jer 49:19 and 50:44). This does not make immediate sense. Some have simply changed the suffix to “who will summon him.” If the MT is retained, then supplying something like “he will say” makes the last clause fit the whole passage.
sn Job is saying that whether it is a trial of strength or an appeal to justice, he is unable to go against God.
⁵⁸tn The idea is the same as that expressed in v. 15, although here the imperfect tense is used and not the perfect. Once again with the concessive clause (“although I am right”) Job knows that in a legal dispute he would be confused and would end up arguing against himself.
⁵⁹tn Some commentators wish to change this to “his mouth,” meaning God’s response to Job’s complaints. But the MT is for more expressive, and “my mouth” fits the context in which Job is saying that even though he is innocent, if he spoke in a court setting in the presence of God he would be overwhelmed, confused, and no doubt condemn himself.
⁶⁰tn The verb has the declarative sense in the hiphil, “declare guilty/wicked” or “condemn.”
⁶¹tn The verb `aqas means “to be twisted, tortuous.” The piel has a meaning “bend, twist” (Mic 3:9) and “pervert” (Jer 59:8). The form here is classified as a hiphil, with the softening of the vowel i (see GKC, #53n). It would then also be a declarative use of the hiphil.
⁶²tn Dhorme, in an effort to avoid tautology, makes this a question, “Am I blameless?” The next clause then has Job answering that he does not know. But through the last section Job has been proclaiming his innocence. The other way of interpreting these verses is to follow NIV and make all of them hypothetical (“If I were blameless, he would pronounce me guilty”) and then come to this verse with Job saying, “I am blameless.” The second clause of this verse does not fit either view very well.
⁶³sn The meaning of this seems to be, “I do not care.” NIV translates it, “I have no concern for my life.” Job believes he is blameless and not deserving of all this suffering; he will hold fast to that claim, even if the future is uncertain, especially if that future involved a confrontation with God.
⁶⁴sn The expression “it is one” means that God’s dealings with people is undiscriminating. The number “one” could also be taken to mean “the same”—“it is all the same.” The implication is that it does not matter if Job is good or evil, if he lives or dies. This is the conclusion of the preceding section. The Greek text omits it. Modern scholars either omit it or transpose it for clarity.
⁶⁵tn The relationships of these clauses is in some question. Dhorme and others think that the poet has inverted the first two, and so they should read, “That is why I have said: ‘It is all one.’” Others would take the third clause to be what was said.
⁶⁶tn The Greek has a paraphrase: “for the worthless die, but the righteous are laughed to scorn.”
sn The point of these verses is to show—rather boldly—that God does not distinguish between the innocent and the guilty.
⁶⁷sn This bold anthropomorphism means that by his treatment of the despair of the innocent, God is in essence mocking them.
⁶⁸tn The hapax word massat was translated “trial” in the older versions; but it is not from nasah, “tempt, test, try,” but from masas, “to flow.” It is used in the niphal to speak of the heart “melting” in suffering. So the idea behind this image is that of despair. This is the view that most adopt; it requires no change of the text whatsoever.
⁶⁹sn Job uses this word to refute Eliphaz; cf. 4:7.
⁷⁰tn Some would render this “earth,” meaning the whole earth, and having the verse be a general principle for all mankind. But Job may have in mind the more specific issue of individual land.
⁷¹sn The details of the verse are not easy to explain, but the meaning of the whole verse seems to be about the miscarriage of justice in the courts and the failure of God to do anything about it.
⁷²tn The subject of the verb is God. The reasoning goes this way: it is the duty of judges to make sure that justice prevails, that restitution and restoration is carried through; but when the wicked gain control of the land of other people, and the judges are ineffective to stop it, then God must be veiling their eyes.
⁷³sn That these words are strong, if not wild, is undeniable. But Job is only taking the implications of his friends’ speeches to their logical conclusion—if God dispenses justice in the world, and there is no justice, then God is behind it all. The Greek translation omitted these words, perhaps out of reverence for God.
⁷⁴tn This seems to be a broken-off sentence, and so is rather striking. The scribes transposed the words ‘epo’ and hu’ to make the smoother reading “If it is not he, who then is it?”
⁷⁵tn The text has “and my days” following the thoughts in the previous section.
⁷⁶sn Job returns to the thought of the brevity of his life (7:6). But now the figure is the swift runner instead of the weaver’s shuttle.
⁷⁷tn Heb “they flee.”
⁷⁸tn The word ‘ebah means “reed, papyrus,” but it is a different word than was in 8:11. What is in view here is a light boat with papyrus sides that glides swiftly along the Nile.
⁷⁹tn The verb yatus is also a hapax legomenon; the Aramaic cognate means “soar, hover in flight.” The sentence here requires the idea of swooping down while in flight.
⁸⁰tn Heb “food.”
⁸¹tn The construction here uses the infinitive construct with a pronominal suffix—“if my saying” is this, or, “if I say.” For the conditional clause using ‘im with a noun clause, see GKC, #159u.
⁸²tn The verbal form is a cohortative of resolve: “I will forget” or “I am determined to forget.” The same will be used in the second colon of the verse.
⁸³tn The construction here is unusual; the Hebrew literally says, “I will abandon my face,” i.e., change my expression. Driver connected it to an Arabic word `adaba, “made agreeable” (IV), and so interpreted this line to mean “make my countenance pleasant” (VT Supp 3 [1955]:76). Dahood found a Ugaritic root meaning “make, arrange” (“The Root `ZB II in Job,” JBL 78 [1959]:303-309), and said, “I will arrange my face.” But see H. G. Williamson, “A Reconsideration of `azab II in Ugaritic,” ZAW 87 (1985):74-85; Williamson shows it is probably not a legitimate cognate. Clines observes that with all these suggestions there are too many homonyms for the root (p. 219). The MT construction is still plausible.
⁸⁴tn Balag in the hiphil corresponds to Arabic balija which means “to shine” and “to be merry.” The shining face would signify cheerfulness and smiling. It could be translated “and brighten [my face].”
⁸⁵tn The word was used in Job 3:25; it has the idea of “dread, fear, tremble at.” The point here is that even if he changes his appearance, he still dreads the sufferings, because he knows that God is treating him as a criminal.
⁸⁶sn See Job 7:15; see also the translation by G. Perles, “I tremble in every nerve” (“The Fourteenth Edition of Gesenius-Buhl’s Dictionary,” JQR 18 [1905,06]:383-390).
⁸⁷tn The conjunction “for” is supplied in the translation.
⁸⁸sn Davidson appropriately notes that Job’s afflictions were the proof of his guilt in the estimation of God. If God held him innocent, he would remove the afflictions (p. 73).
⁸⁹tn The clause simply has “I am guilty.” It is the same type of construction found in v. 24. It is also the opposite of that in v. 20. GKC list this as an example of the use of the imperfect to express an obligation or necessity according to the judgment of others; it would therefore mean “if I am to be guilty” (#107n).
⁹⁰tn The demonstrative pronoun is included to bring particular emphasis to the question, as if to say, “Why in the world…” (see Williams, Hebrew Syntax, #118v).
⁹¹tn The verb means “tire oneself”; see 3:17.
⁹²tn Hebel is a “breath, vapor, vanity”; here it is used as an adverb (adverbial accusative).
⁹³tn The Syriac and Targum Job read with the Q^ere’ “with water of [b^eme] snow.” The k^ethiv simply has “in [b^emo] snow.” In Ps 51:9 and Isa 1:18 snow forms a simile for purification. Some protest that snow-water is not necessarily clean; but if fresh melting snow is meant, then the runoff would be very clear. The image would work well here. Nevertheless, others have followed the later Hebrew meaning for seleg—”soap” (NIV). Even though that makes a nice parallelism, it is uncertain that meaning was in use in the time of the writing of this text.
⁹⁴tn The word bor does not refer to purity (Syriac, AV), but refers to the ingredient used to make the hands pure or clean. It has the same meaning as borit, the alkali or soda made from the ashes of certain plants.
⁹⁵tn The pointing in the MT gives the meaning “pit” or “ditch.” A number of expositors change the pointing to suhot to obtain the equivalent of suhot, “filth” (Isa 5:25). This would make the contrast vivid—Job has just washed with pure water and soap, and now God plunges him into filth. Pope argues convincingly that the word “pit” in the MT includes the idea of “filth,” making the emendation unnecessary (“The Word sahat in Job 9:31,” JBL 83 [1964]:269-278).
⁹⁶tn The personal pronoun that would be expected as the subject of a noun clause is sometimes omitted (see GKC, #116s). here it has been supplied.
⁹⁷tn The consecutive clause is here attached without the use of the waw, but only by simple juxtaposition (see GKC, #166a).
⁹⁸tn The sense of the verb “come” with “together in judgment” means “to confront one another in court.” See Ps 143:2.
⁹⁹tn The participle mokiah is the “arbiter.” The word comes from the verb yakah, which is concerned with legal and non-legal disputes. The verbal forms can be used to describe the beginning of a dispute, the disputation in progress, or the settling of it (here, and in Isa 1:18).
sn The old translation of “daysman” came from a Latin expression describing the fixing of a day for arbitration.
¹⁰⁰tn The relative pronoun is understood in this clause.
¹⁰¹tn The jussive in conditional sentences retains its voluntative sense: let something be so, and this must happen as a consequence (see GKC, #109i).
¹⁰²sn The idiom of “lay his hand on the two of us” may come from a custom of a judge putting his hands on the two in order to show that he is taking them both under his jurisdiction. The expression can also be used for protection (see Ps 139:5). Job, however, has a problem in that the other party is God, who himself will be arbiter in judgment.
¹⁰³tn The verse probably continues the description from the last verse, and so a relative pronoun may be supplied here as well.
¹⁰⁴tn According to Dhorme, the reference of this suffix would then be to God. The arbiter would remove the rod of God from Job. But Davidson takes it as a separate sentence with God removing his rod.
¹⁰⁵sn The “rod” is a symbol of the power of God to decree whatever judgments and afflictions fall upon people.
¹⁰⁶tn “His terror” is metonymycal; it refers to the awesome majesty of God that overwhelms Job and causes him to be afraid.
¹⁰⁷tn There is no conjunction with this cohortative; but the implication is from the context that if God’s rod was withdrawn, if the terror was removed, then Job would speak up without fear.
¹⁰⁸tn The last half of the verse is rather cryptic: “but not so I with me.” NIV renders it “but as it now stands with me, I cannot.” This is very smooth and interpretive. Dhorme transposes the two halves of the verse to read, “Since it is not so, I with myself // will commune and not fear him.” He would be saying that since he cannot contend with God on equal terms, and since there is no arbiter, he will come on his own terms. For a survey of the various ways this has been translated, see Clines’ summary—e.g., “for I know I am not what I am thought to be” (NEB); “since this is not the case with me” (NAB); “I do not see myself like that at all” (JB); “he is not honorable with me” (Gordis and others); and “I am not honest with him” (Blommerde).
¹tn The Hebrew has napsi, usually rendered “my soul.”
²tn The verb is pointed like a qal form but is originally a niphal from qut. Some wish to connect the word to Akkadian cognates for a meaning “I am in anguish”; but the meaning “I am weary” fits the passage well.
³tn The verb `azab is “abandon.” It may have an extended meaning of “let go” or “let slip.” But the expression “abandon to myself” means to abandon all restraint and give free course to the complaint.
⁴tn The negated jussive is the hiphil jussive of rasa`; its meaning then would be literally, “do not declare me guilty.” The negated jussive stresses the immediacy of the request.
⁵tn The hiphil imperative of yada` would more literally be “cause me to know.” It is a plea for God to help him understand the afflictions.
⁶tn The verb is rib, meaning “to dispute, contend, strive, quarrel”—often in the legal sense. The precise words chosen in this verse show that the setting is legal. The imperfect tense here is progressive, expressing what is currently going on.
⁷tn Or, “Does it give you pleasure?” The expression could also mean, “Is it profitable for you?” or “Is it fitting for you?”
⁸tn The construction uses ki with the imperfect tense—”that you oppress.” Technically, this clause serves as the subject, and “good” is the predicate adjective. In such case one often uses an English infinitive to capture the point: “Is it good for you to oppress?” The Greek text changes the meaning considerably: “Is it good for you if I am unrighteous, for you have disowned the work of your hands.”
⁹tn Heb “that you despise.”
¹⁰tn Now, in the second half of the verse, there is a change in the structure. The conjunction on the preposition followed by the perfect tense represents a circumstantial clause.
¹¹tn The hiphil verb hopia` means “shine.” In this context the expression “you shine upon” would mean “have a glowing expression,” be radiant, or smile.
¹²sn “Flesh” is the sign of humanity. The expression “eyes of flesh” means essentially “human eyes,” i.e., the outlook and vision of humans.
¹³sn The verb “see” could also include the figurative category of perceive as well. The answer to Job’s question is found in 1 Sam 16:7: “The LORD sees not as a man sees; man looks on the outward appearance, but the LORD looks on the heart.”
¹⁴sn In this verse Job asks whether or not God is liable to making mistakes or errors of judgment. He wonders if God has no more insight than his friends have. Of course, the questions are rhetorical, for he knows otherwise. But his point is that God seems to be making a big mistake here.
¹⁵tn The Hebrew has repeated here “like the days of,” but some scholars think that this was an accidental replacement of what should be here, namely, “like the years of.” Clines notes that such repetition is not uncommon in Job, but suggests that the change should be made for English style even if the text is not emended (p. 221).
sn The question Job asks concerns the mode of life and not just the length of it (see Job 7:1). Humans spend their days and years watching each other and defending themselves. But there is also the implication that if God is so limited like humans he may not uncover Job’s sins before he dies.
¹⁶tn The clause seems to go naturally with v. 4: do you have eyes of flesh…that you have to investigate? For that reason some like Duhm would delete v. 5. But v. 5 adds to the premise: are you also like a human running out of time that you must try to find out my sin?
¹⁷tn The imperfect tenses in this verse are best given modal nuances. Does God have such limitations that he must make such an investigation? Rowley observes that Job implies that God has not yet found the iniquity, or extracted a confession from him (p. 84).
¹⁸tn The construction is literally “upon your knowledge” (`al da`t^eka). The use of the preposition means basically “in addition to your knowledge,” or “in spite of your knowledge,” i.e., “notwithstanding” or “although” (see GKC, #119aa N.2).
¹⁹tn Heb “and there is no deliverer.”
sn The fact is that humans are the work of God’s hands. They are helpless in the hand of God. But it is also unworthy of God to afflict his people.
²⁰tn The root `asab is linked by some to an Arabic word meaning “to cut out, hew.” The derived word `asabbim means “idols.” Whatever the precise meaning, the idea is that God formed or gave shape to mankind in creation.
²¹tn The verb in this part is a preterite with the waw consecutive. However, here it has merely an external connection with the preceding perfects, so that in reality it presents an antithesis (see GKC, #111e).
²²tn The second half of this verse is very difficult. The Hebrew reads “together round about and you destroy me.” Most commentators follow the Greek and connect the first two words with the second colon, rather than the first as the MT accents indicate. Instead of “together” they read “after.” Many of them see in sabib not so much an adjectival use but a verbal or adverbial use: “you turn and destroy, or as Dhorme has it, “you destroy utterly (all around).” This makes more sense than “turn.” In addition, the verb form in the line is the preterite with waw consecutive; this may be another example of the transposition of the copula (see 4:6).
²³tn The preposition “like” creates a small tension here. So some ignore the preposition and read “clay” as an adverbial accusative of the material (Greek; GKC, #117hh). The NIV got around the problem with a different meaning for the verb: “you molded me like clay.” Rowley, and probably Dhorme, suggest the meaning was “as [with] clay” (in the same manner that we have “as [in] the day of Midian” [Isa 9:4]).
²⁴tn The text has a conjunction: “and to dust….”
²⁵tn The verb natak means “to flow,” and in the hiphil, cause to flow.”
²⁶tn This verb qapa’ means “coagulate.” In the hiphil it means “stiffen, congeal.”
²⁷tn The verbs in v. 10 are prefixed conjugations; since the reference is to the womb, these would need to be classified as preterites.
sn These few verses describe the formation of the embryo in the womb. In this verse he describes how the seminal fluid is clotted to become the foetus.
²⁸tn The skin and flesh form the exterior of the body and so the image of “clothing” is appropriate. Once again the verb is the prefixed conjugation, expressing what God did.
²⁹tn This verb is found only here (related nouns are common) and in the parallel passage of Ps 139:13. The word sakak, here a po`el prefixed conjugation (preterite), means “knit together.” The implied comparison is that the bones and sinews form the tapestry of the person (compare other images of weaving the life).
³⁰tn Heb “you made with me.”
³¹tn Dhorme suggests that the relation between these two words is like a hendiadys. In other words, “life,” which he says is made prominent by the shift of the copula, specifies the nature of the grace. He renders it “the favor of life” (p. 150). Clines at least acknowledges that the expression “you made loyal love with me” is primary. There are many other attempts to improve the translate of this unusual combination.
³²tn The noun p^equddah, originally translated “visitation,” actually refers to any divine intervention for blessing on the life. Here it would include the care and overseeing of the life of Job. “Providence” maybe too general for the translation, but it is not far from the meaning of this line. The Greek has “your oversight.”
³³sn “These things” refers to the affliction that God had brought on Job. They were concealed by God from the beginning.
³⁴sn The meaning of the line is that this was God’s purpose all along. “These things” and “this” refer to the details that will now be given in the next few verses.
³⁵sn The contradiction between how God had provided for and cared for Job’s life and how he was now dealing with him could only be resolved by Job with the supposition that God had planned this severe treatment from the first as part of his plan.
³⁶sn The verbs “guilty” and “innocent” are actually the verbs “I am wicked,” and “I am righteous.”
³⁷tn The exclamation occurs only here and in Mic 7:1.
³⁸sn The action of lifting up the head is a symbol of pride and honor and self-respect (Judg 8:28)—like “hold your head high.” In 11:15 the one who is at peace with God lifts his head (face).
³⁹tn The expression s^eba` qalon may be translated “full of shame.” The expression literally means “sated of ignominy” (or contempt (qalal).
⁴⁰tnThe last clause is difficult to fit into the verse. It translates easily enough: “and see my affliction.” Many commentators follow the suggestion of Geiger to read r^eweh, “watered with” instead of r^e’eh, “see.” This could then be interpreted adjectivally and parallel to the preceding line: “steeped/saturated with affliction.” This would also delete the final yod as dittography (Dhorme, p. 152). But Clines notes more recent interpretations that suggest the form in the text is an orthographic variant of raweh meaning “satiated.” This makes any emendation unecessary (and in fact that idea of “steeped was not helpful any way because it indicatedimbibing rather than soaking). The NIV renders it “and drowned in my affliction” although footnoting the other possibility from the MT, “aware of my affliction” (assuming the form could be adjectival. The Greek text omits the last line.
⁴¹tn The MT has the 3rd person of the verb, “and he lifts himself up.” This can only be retained if one assumes the subject is “my head”—but that is rather far removed from the verb. Everyon agrees that Job is talking about himself in some way. Some commentators simply emend the text to make it 1st person. This has the support of Targum Job, which would be expected since it would be interpreting the passage in its context (seeD. M. Stec, “The Targum Rendering of WYG’H in Job X 16,” VT 34 [1984]:367-8). Pope and Gordis make the word adjectival, modifying the subject: “proudly you hunt me,” but support is lacking. Dhorme thinks the line should be parallel to the two preceding it, and so suggests yagea`, “exhausted,” for yig’ah. The contextual argument is that Job has said that he cannot raise his head, but if he were to do so, God would hunt him down.
⁴²sn There is some ambiguity here: Job could be the lion being hunted by God, or God could be hunting Job like a lion hunts its prey. The point of the line is clear in either case.
⁴³tn The text uses two verbs without a co-ordinating conjunction: “then you return, you display your power.” This should be explained as a verbal hendiadys, the first verb serving adverbially in the clause (see further GKC, #120g).
⁴⁴tn The form is the hithpael of pale’, “to be wonderful, surpassing, extraordinary.” Here in this stem it has the sense of “make oneself admirable, surpassing” or “render oneself powerful, glorious.” The text is ironic; the word that described God’s marvelous creation of Job is here used to describe God’s awesome destruction of Job.
⁴⁵tn The text has “you renew/increase your witnesses.” This would probably mean Job’s sufferings, which were witness to his sins. But Dhorme (Ehrlich) suggested a different word here, one that is cognate to Arabic `adiya, “to be an enemy, to be hostile.” He has it: “you renew your hostility against me.” Less convincing are suggestions that the word is cognate to Ugaritic “troops” (see W. G. E. Watson, “The Metaphor in Job 10,17,” Biblica 63 [1982]:255-57).
⁴⁶tn The Hebrew simply says “changes and a host are with me.” The “changes and a host” is taken as a hendiadys, meaning relieving troops (reliefs of the army). The two words appear together again in 14:14, showing that emendation is to be avoided. The imagery depicts blow after blow from God—always fresh attacks.
⁴⁷tn The two imperfect tenses in this section are used to stress regrets for something which did not happen (see GKC, #107n).
⁴⁸sn This means “If only I had never come into existence.”
⁴⁹tn The text has”are not my days few; cease/let him cease….” The Versions have “the days of my life” (reading y^eme heldi instead of yamay wahadal [Q]). Many commentators and the RSV accept this reading. The k^ethiv is an imperfect or jussive, “let it cease/ it will cease.” The q^ere’ is more intelligible for some interpreters—”cease” (as in 7:16). For a discussion of the readings, see D. Winton Thomas, “Some Observations on the Hebrew Root hadal,” VT Supp 4 [1057]:14). But the text is not impossible as it stands.
⁵⁰tn Taking the form as the imperative with the waw, the sentence follows the direct address to God (as in v. 18 as well as 7:16). This requires less changes. The point of the verse is clear in either reading—his life is short, and he wants the suffering to stop.
⁵¹tn In the different suggestions for the line, the yod of this word is believed to belong to the preceding word making “my life.” That would here leave an imperative rather than an imperfect. But if the q^ere’ is read, then it would be an imperative anyway, and there would be no reason for the change.
⁵²tn The Hebrew words simply say “put from me,” an expression found nowhere else. The q^ere’ has a waw and not a yod, forming an imperative rather than an imperfect. Rowley suggests that there is an ellipsis here, “hand” needing to be supplied. Job wanted God to take his hand away from him. That is plausible, but difficult.
⁵³tn The verb balag in the hiphil means “to have cheer, joy” (see 7:27; Ps 39:14). The cohortative following the imperatives shows the purpose or result—”in order that.”
⁵⁴sn The verbs are simple, “I go” and “I return”; but Job clearly means before he dies. A translation of “depart” comes closer to communicating this. The second verb may be given a potential imperfect translation to capture the point. NIV offered more of an interpretive paraphrase: “before I go to the place of no return.”
⁵⁵tn See Job 3:5.
⁵⁶tn The word seder, “order,” occurs only here in the Bible. G. R. Driver found a new meaning in Arabic sadira,, “dazzled by the glare” (VT Supp 3[1955}:76.77); this would mean “without a ray of light.” This is accepted by those who see chaos out of place in this line. But the word “order” is well-attested in later Hebrew (see J. Carmignac, VT 5 (1955):345-365).
⁵⁷tn The word literally means “it shines”; the feminine verb implies a subject like “the light” (but see GKC, #144c).
⁵⁸tn The verse multiplies images for the darkness in death. Several commentators omit “as darkness, deep darkness” (k^emo ‘opel salmawet) as glosses on the rare word `epatah drawn from v. 21 (see also RSV). The verse literally reads: “[to the] land of darkness, like the deep darkness of the shadow of death, without any order, and the light is like the darkness.”
⁵⁹sn Zophar begins with a strong rebuke of Job with a wish that God would speak (2-6); he then reflects for a few verses on the unsearchable wisdom of God (7-12); and finally, he advises Job that the way to restoration is repentance (13-20).
¹tc The Greek, Targum Job, Symmachus, and Vulgate all assume that the vocalization of rob should be rab, “great of words.” This would then mean “one who is abundant of words,” meaning, “a man of many words,” and make a closer parallel to the second half. But the MT makes good sense as it stands.
tn There is no article or demonstrative with the word; it has been added here simply to make a smoother connection between the chapters.
²tn The niphal verb ye`aneh would normally require a personal subject; but “abundance” functions as the subject in this sentence. The nuance of the imperfect is obligatory.
³tn The word is supplied here also for clarification.
⁴tn The bound construction “man of lips” means “a boaster” or “proud talker” (attributive genitive; and see GKC, #128t). Zophar is saying that Job pours out this stream of words, but he is still not right.
⁵tn The word is literally “be right, righteous.” The idea of being right has appeared before for this word (cf. 9:15). The point here is that just because Job talks a lot does not mean he is right, or will shown to be right through it all.
⁶tn The word means “chatter, pratings, boastings” (see Isa 16:6; Jer 48:30).
⁷tn The verb haras in the hiphil means “to silence” (41:4); here it functions in a causative sense, “reduce to silence.”
⁸tn The form maklim is the hiphil participle. The verb kalam has the meaning “cover with shame, insult (Job 20:3).
⁹tn The construction shows the participle to be in the circumstantial clause: “will you mock—and [with] no one mocking.”
¹⁰tn The word is related etymologically to the word “receive,” but that does not restrict the teaching to what is received.
¹¹sn The expression is “in his sight.” We would expect “in your sight” because Job addresses God that way.
¹²tn The wish formula mi-yitten (“who will give”) is not now expressed with the imperfect tense, but with the infinitive (Exod 16:3; 2 Sam 19:1). See GKC, #151b.
¹³sn Job had expressed his eagerness to challenge God; Zophar here wishes that God would take up that challenge.
¹⁴tn The text seems to be saying “that it [wisdom] is double in understanding.” The point is that it is different than Job conceived it—it far exceeded all perception. But some commentators have thought this still too difficult, and so have replaced the word kiplayim with kipla’im, “like wonders,” (or more simply “wonders” without the preposition). But it is still a little strange to talk about God’s wisdom being like wonders. Others have had more radical changes in the text; J. J. Slotki has, “for sound wisdom is his. And know that double [punishment] shall God exact of you” (“Job 11:6,” VT 35 [1985]:229-230).
¹⁵tn The verb is the imperative with a waw. Following the jussive, this clause would be subordinated to the preceding (see GKC, #110i).
¹⁶tn The text literally translated says, “God causes to be forgotten for you part of your iniquity.” The meaning is that God was exacting less punishment from Job than Job deserved, for Job could not remember all his sins. This statement is fitting for Zophar, who is the cruelest of Job’s friends (see Rowley, p. 88). Others in an attempt to improve the text make too many unwarranted changes. Dhorme, following Ehrlich and Torczyner would read yis’alka, “he asks of you” instead of yasseh l^eka, “he causes to be forgotten for you.” This would mean that God demands an account of Job’s sin. But, as Clines says, this change is weak and needless (pp. 254-55).
¹⁷tn The verb is masa’, “to find, discover.” Here it should be given the nuance of potential imperfect. And, in the rhetorical question it is affirming that Job cannot find out the essence of God.
¹⁸tn The word means “search, investigation”; but it here means what is discovered in the search (so a metonymy of cause for the effect).
¹⁹tn The same verb is now found in the second half of the verse, with a slightly different sense—“attain, reach.” A. R. Ceresko notes this as an example of antanaclasis (repetition of a word with a lightly different sense—”find/attain”). See “The Function of Antanaclasis in Hebrew Poetry,” CBQ 44 (1982):560-561.
²⁰tn The abstract taklit (from kalah, “to be complete, perfect”) may mean the end or limit of something, perhaps to perfection. So the NIV has “can you probe the limits of the Almighty?” The Greek has: “have you come to the end of that which the Almighty has made?”
²¹tn The Hebrew says “heights of heaven, what can you do?” Davidson suggested this was an exclamation, and should be left that way. But most commentators will repoint gobhe samayim, “heights of heven,” to g^ebohah missamayim, “higher than the heavens,” to match the parallel expression. The Greek may have rearranged the text: “heaven is high.”
²²tn Or “deeper than hell.” The word “Sheol” always poses problems for translation. Here because it is the opposite of heaven in this merism, hell would be a legitimate translation. It refers to the realm of the dead, the grave and beyond. The language is excessive; but the point is that God’s wisdom is immeasurable—and Job is powerless before it.
²³tn The verb yahalop is literally “passes by/through” (NIV “comes along” in the sense of “if it should so happen”). But many accept the emendation to yahatop, “he seizes” (Gordis), or yahatop, “snatches away” (Driver), but there is not much support for these.
²⁴tn The verb is the hiphil of sagar, “to close, shut,” and so here in this context it probably means something like “shut in, confine.” But this is a difficult meaning, and the sentence is cryptic. Dhorme thinks this word and the next have to be antithetical, and so he suggests from a meaning “to keep confined” the idea of keeping a matter secret; and with the next verb, “to convene an assembly,” he offers “to divulge it” (p. 162).
²⁵tn The pronoun “you” is not in the Hebrew text but has been supplied.
²⁶tn The denominative hiphil of qahal, “an assembly,” has the idea of “to convene an assembly.” In this context there would be the legal sense of convening a court, i.e., calling Job to account (Clines, p. 255). See E. Ullendorff, “The Meaning of QHLT,” VT 12 (1962):215; he defines the verb also as “argue, rebuke.”
²⁷tn The verb means “turn him back.” Zophar uses Job’s own words (see 9:12).
²⁸tn The expression is literally “men of emptiness” (see Ps26:4). These are false men, for saw’ can mean “vain, empty, or false, deceitful.”
²⁹tn Dhorme follows Reuss and some other commentators in reading the prepositional phrase “to him” rather than the negative; he translates the line as “he sees iniquity and observes it closely” (p. 162).
³⁰tn Some commentators do not take this last clause as a question, but simply as a statement, namely, that when God sees evil he does not need to ponder or consider it—he knows it instantly. In that case it would be a circumstantial clause: “without considering it.” Clines lists quite an array of other interpretations for the line (p. 255); for example, “and he is himself unobserved” (B. Jacob, ZAW 32 [1912]:278-287); taking the word lo’ as an emphatic (I. Eitan, VT 3 [1953]:372-380; and G. R. Driver, JANES 5 [1973]:107-114); taking the negative as a noun, “considering them as nothing” (M. Dahood, Biblica 47 [1966]:408); and others that change the verb to “they do not understand it.” But none of these are compelling; they offer no major improvement.
³¹tn As Davidson says, the one thing will happen when the other happens—which is never (p. 84). The word “empty” (nabub) means “hollow, witless,” and the word “become wise” (yillabeb) is “will get heart” (not to “lack heart” as Driver suggested”). Many commentators do not like the last line of the verse, and so offer even more emendations. E. F. Sutcliffe wanted to change pere’ to pered, “stallion,” rendering “a witless wight may get wit when a mule is born a stallion” (Biblica 30 [1949]:70-71); and others approached the verse by changing the verb from “is born” to “is taught”(yillamed), resulting in “a hollow man may get understanding, and a wild donkey’s colt may be taught (= tamed).”
³²tn The pronoun is emphatic, designed to put Job in a different class than the hollow men—at least to raise the possibility of his being in a different class.
³³tn The Hebrew uses the perfect tense of kun with the object “your heart.” The verb can be translated “prepare, fix, make firm” your heart. To fix the heart is to make it faithful and constant, the heart being the seat of the will and emotions. The use of the perfect tense here does not refer to the past, but should be given a future perfect sence—if you shall have fixed your heart, i.e., prove faithful (see Driver, Tenses, #138i). Job would have to make his heart secure, so that he was no longer driven about by differing views.
³⁴tn This half-verse is part of the protasis and not, as in the RSV, the apodosis to the first half. The series of “if” clauses will continue through these verses until v. 15.
³⁵sn This is the posture of prayer (see Isa 1:15). The expression means “spread out your palms,” probably meaning that the one praying would fall to his knees, put his forehead to the ground, and spread out his hands in front of him on the ground.
³⁶tn With Clines v. 14 should be taken as a parenthesis, and not a continuation of the protasis, because it does not fit with v. 13 in that way (p. 256).
³⁷tn Many commentators follow the Vulgate and read the line “if you put away the sin that is in your hand.” They do this because the imperative comes between the protasis (v. 13) and the apodasis (v. 15) and does not appear to be clearly part of the protasis. The idea is close to the MT, but the MT is much more forceful—if you find sin in your hand, get rid of it.
³⁸tn The absolute certainty of the statement is communicated with the addition of ki (see GKC, #159ee).
³⁹tn For this use of the preposition min see GKC, #119w.
⁴⁰tn The word “lift up” is chosen to recall Job’s statement that he could not lift up his head (10:15); and the words “without spot” recall his words “filled with shame.” The sentence here says that he will lift up his face in innocence and show no signs of God’s anger on him.
⁴¹tn The form mussaq is a hophal participle from yasaq, “to pour.” The idea is that of metal being melted down and then poured to make a statue, and so hard, firm, solid. The Greek text reads the verse, “for thus your face shall shine again, like pure water, and you shall divest yourself of uncleanness, and shall not fear.”
⁴²sn It is interesting to note in the book that the resolution of Job’s trouble did not come in the way that Zophar prescribed it.
⁴³tn The perfect tense forms an abbreviated relative clause (without the pronoun) modifying “water.”
⁴⁴tn Some translations add the pronoun to make it specifically related to Job (“your life”), but this is not necessary. The word used here has the nuance of lasting life.
⁴⁵tn This translation is an interpretation in the context. The line simply reads “and more than the noonday life will arise.” The connotation of “arise” in comparison with the noonday, and in contrast with the darkness, supports the interpretation.
⁴⁶tn The form in the MT is the 3fsg imperfect tense, “[though] it be dark.” Most commentators revocalize the word to make it a noun (t^e`upah), meaning “the darkness [of your life] will be like the morning.” The contrast is with Job 10:22; here the darkness will shine like the morning.
⁴⁷tn The Hebrew verb means “to dig”; but this does not provide a good meaning for the verse. Davidson offers an interpretation of “search,” suggesting that before retiring at night Job would search and find everything in order. Dhorme offers a better solution, namely, redefining the word on the basis of Arabic hafara, “to protect” (he follows Ehrlich here), and re-pointing it to hupparta. Other attempts to make sense of the line have involved the same process, but they are less convincing (for a couple of the more plausible ones, see Clines, p. 257).
⁴⁸tn The clause that reads “and there is no one making you afraid,” is functioning circumstantially here (see 5:4; 10:7).
⁴⁹sn The idiom is literally “they will stroke your face,” a picture drawn from the domestic scene of a child stroking the face of the parent. The verb is a piel, meaning “stroke, make soft.” It is used in the Bible of seeking favor from God (supplication); but it may on the human level also mean seeking to sway people by flattery. See further D. R. Ap-Thomas, “Notes on Some Terms Relating to Prayer,” VT 6 (1956):225-241.
⁵⁰tn The verb kalah means “to fail, cease, fade away.” Dhorme translates it “languish.” The fading of the eyes, i.e., loss of sight, loss of life’s vitality, indicates imminent death.
⁵¹tn Heb a place of escape” (with this noun pattern). There is no place to escape to because they all perish.
⁵²tn The word is to be interpreted as a metonymy; it represents what is hoped for.
⁵³tn The expression is “the breathing out of the soul.” This was interpreted in the older Bibles to say “give up the ghost.” The line is simply saying that the brightest hope that the wicked have is death.
⁵⁴sn This long speech of Job falls into three parts: in 12:2-25 Job expresses his resentment at his friends’ attitude of superiority and acknowledges the wisdom of God; then, in 13:1-28 Job expresses his determination to reason with God, expresses his scorn for his friends’ advice, and demands to know what his sins are; and finally, in 14:1-22 Job laments the brevity of life and the finality of death.
¹tn The expression “you are the people” is a way of saying that the friends hold the popular opinion—they represent it. The line is sarcastic. Commentators do not think the parallelism is served well by this, and so offer changes for “people.” Some have suggested “you are complete” (based on Arabic), “you are the strong one” (based on Ugaritic, and the like. J. A. Davies tried to solve the difficulty by making the second clause in the verse a paratactic relative clause: “you are the people with whom wisdom will die” (VT 25 [1975]:670-1).
²sn The sarcasm of Job admits their claim to wisdom, as if no one has it besides them. But the rest of his speech will show that they do not have a monopoly on it.
³tn The word is literally “heart,” meaning a mind or understanding.
⁴tn Because this line is repeated in 13:2, many commentators delete it from this verse (as does the Greek). The Syriac translates nopel as “little,” and the Vulgate “inferior.” Job is saying that he does not fall behind them in understanding.
⁵tn Heb “With whom are not such things as these?” The point is that everyone knows the things that these friends have been saying—they are commonplace.
⁶tn Some are troubled by the disharmony with “I am” and “to his friend.” Even though the difficulty is not insurmountable, some have emended the text. Some simply changed the verb to “he is,” which was not very compelling. C. D. Isbell argued that ‘ehyeh is an orthographic variant of yihyeh—”a person who does not know these things would be a laughingstock” (JANES 37 [1978]:227-236.
⁷tn The word simply means “laughter”; but it can also mean the object of laughter (see Jer 20:7). The Greek jumps from one “laughter” to the next, eliminating everything in between.
⁸tn The NIV took this collectively and rendered it smoothly, “to my friends.”
⁹tn The Hebrew has “one calling to God and he answered him.” Rowley contends that because Job has been saying that God is not answering him, these words must be part of the derisive words of his friends (p. 92).
¹⁰sn Dhorme notes that these two epithets are applied to Noah in Gen 6:9, and that Noah and Job are equated in Ezek 14:14, 20.
¹¹tn The first word, lappid, could be rendered “a torch of scorn,” but this gives no satisfying meaning. The lamed is often taken as an otiose letter, and the noun pid is “misfortune, calamity.”
¹²tn The noun `astot (preferably`astut) is an abstract noun from `asat, “to think.” The word sa’anan means “easy in mind, carefree,” and “happy.”
¹³tn The form has traditionally been taken to mean “is ready” from the verb kun, “is fixed, sure.” But many commentators look for a word parallel to “calamity.” So the suggestion has been put forward that nakon be taken as a noun from nakah—”a blow” (Schultens, Dhorme, Gordis).
¹⁴tn The verse gives the other side of the coin now, the fact that the wicked prosper.
¹⁵tn The plural is used to suggest the supreme degree of arrogant confidence (Dhorme, p. 171).
¹⁶sn The meaning of the line is that the person thinks he is invested with the power of God.
¹⁷tn The singular verb is used here with the plural collective subject (see GKC, #145k).
¹⁸tnThe word in the MT means “to complain,” not simply “speak”; and, one would expect animals as the object here in parallel to the last verse. So several commentators have replaced the word with words for animals or reptiles—totally different words. The RSV has here the word “bush” (see 30:4,7; and Gen 21:15). Dahood suggests “earth” refers to underworld (“Northwest Semitic Philology,” p. 58). But none of these suggestions have support, or are compelling.
¹⁹tn Davidson offers a solution by taking “earth” to mean all the lower forms of life that teem in the earth (a metonymy of subject; p. 90).
²⁰tn This line could also be translated “by all these,” meaning “who is not instructed by nature?” (Rowley, p. 93). But Clines points out that the verses have presented the animals as having knowledge and communicating it, so the former reading would be best (p. 279).
²¹tn Some commentators have trouble with the name Yahweh in this verse, which is not the pattern in the poetic section of Job. Three mss of Kennicott and 2 of de Rossi have “God.” Dhorme thinks the original was “God,” but the reminiscence of Isaiah 41:20 led the copyist to introduce the tetragrammaton. But one could argue equally that the few MSS with “God” were the copyists attempt to correct the text in accord with usage elsewhere.
²²sn The expression “has done this” probably refers to everything that has been discussed, namely, the way that God in his wisdom rules over the world, but specifically it refers to the infliction of suffering in the world.
²³tn Dhorme places vv. 9-10 after v. 12, and 11-12 before v. 9.
²⁴tn The construction with the relative clause includes a resumptive pronoun referring to God: “who in his hand” = “in whose hand.”
²⁵tn The two words, nepes and ruah, are synonymous in general. They could be translated “soul” and “spirit,” but “soul” is not precise for nepes, and so “life is to be preferred. Since that is the case for the first half of the verse, “breath” will be preferable in the second part.
²⁶tn Human life is made of “flesh” and “spirit.” So here the line reads “and the spirit of all flesh of man.” If the text had simply said “all flesh,” that would have applied to all flesh in which there is the breath of life (see Gen 6:17; 7:15). But “all mortal flesh” requires the qualification with “man.”
²⁷tn The waw introduces the comparison here (see 5:7; 11:12); see GKC, #161a.
²⁸tn Heb “the palate.”
²⁹tn The final preposition with its suffix is to be understood as a pleonastic dativus ethicus and not translated (see GKC, #135i).
sn In the rest of the chapter Job turns his attention away from creation to the wisdom of ancient men. In Job 13:1 when Job looks back to this part, he refers to both the eye and the ear. In vv. 13-25 Job refers to many catastrophes which he could not have seen, but must have heard about.
³⁰tn The statement in the Hebrew Bible simply has “among the aged—wisdom.” Since this seems to be more the idea of the friends than of Job, scholars have variously tried to rearrange it. Some have proposed that Job is citing his friends: “With the old men, you say, is wisdom” (Budde, Gray, Hitzig). Others have simply made it a question (Weiser). But others take lo from the previous verse and make it the negative here, to say, “wisdom is not….” But Job will draw on the wisdom of the aged, only with discernment, for ultimately all wisdom is with God.
³¹tn Heb “him”; the referent (God) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
³²sn Davidson says, “These attributes of God’s confound and bring to nought everything bearing the same name among men” (p. 91).
³³tn The use of hen (equivalent to hinneh) introduces a hypothetical condition.
³⁴tn The verse employs antithetical ideas: “tear down” and “build up,” “imprison” and “open.” The niphal verbs in the sentences are potential imperfects. All of this is to say that humans cannot reverse the will of God.
³⁵tn The Greek text has a clarification: “he will dry the earth.”
³⁶sn The verse is focusing on the two extremes of drought and flood. Both are described as being under the power of God.
³⁷tn The verb hapak means “to overthrow, destroy, overwhelm.” It was used in Job 9:5 for “overturning” mountains. The word is used in Genesis for the destruction of Sodom.
³⁸tn The word tusiyah is here rendered “prudence.” Some object that God’s power is intended here, and so a word for power and not wisdom should be included. But v. 13 mentioned wisdom. The point is that it is God’s efficient wisdom that leads to success. One could interpret this as a metonymy of cause, the intended meaning being victory or success.
³⁹tn The text now uses a word play: sogeg is “the one going astray,” i.e., the one who is unable to guard and guide his life. The second word is masgeh, from a different but historically related root sagah, which here in the hiphil means “the one who misleads, causes to go astray.” These two words are designed to include everybody—all are under the wisdom of God.
⁴⁰tn The personal pronoun normally present as the subject of the participle is frequently omitted (see GKC, #119s).
⁴¹tn GKC notes that almost as a rule a participle beginning a sentence is continued with a finite verb with or without a waw (#116x).
⁴²tn The word solal, from the root salal, “to plunder, strip,” is an adjective expressing the state (and is in the singular, as if to say, “in the state of one naked” [GKC, #118o]). The word is found in military contexts (see Mi. 1:8). It refers to the carrying away people in nakedness and shame by enemies who plunder (see also Isa 8:1-4). They will go away as slaves and captives, deprived of their outer garments. Some suggest “barefoot,” based on the Greek of Mic 1:8; but the meaning of that is uncertain. G. R. Driver wanted to derive the word from an Arabic root “to be mad, giddy,”forming a better parallel (see AJSL 53 [1935-36]:160).
⁴³tn Dhorme translates this “makes mad” as in Isa 44:25. But this gives the wrong connotation today; more likely God shows them to be fools.
⁴⁴sn The judges, like the counsellors, are nobles in the cities. God may reverse their lot, either by captivity or by shame, and they cannot resist his power.
⁴⁵tn The verb may be classified as a gnomic perfect, or possibly a potential perfect—“he can loosen.” The piel means “untie, unbind” (Job 30:11; 38:31; 39:5).
⁴⁶tc There is a textual difficulty here—the MT has musar, “discipline,” when it probably should have had moser, “bond, chain,” from ‘asar, “to bind.” The line is saying that if the kings are bound, God can set them free, and in the second half, if they are free, he can bind them. Others take the view that this word “bond” refers to the power kings have over others, meaning that God can reduce kings to slavery.
⁴⁷tn Some commentators want to change ‘esor, “girdle,” to ‘esur, “bond,” because binding the loins with a girdle was an expression for strength. But Rowley notes that binding the king’s loins this way would mean so that he would do servitude, menial tasks. Such a reference would certainly indicate troubled times.
⁴⁸tn The verb has to be defined by its context: it can mean “falsify” (Exod 23:8), “make tortuous” (Prov 19:3), or “plunge” into misfortune (Prov 21:12). God overthrows those who seem to be solid.
⁴⁹tn The original meaning of ‘etan is “perpetual.” It is usually an epithet for a torrent that is always flowing. It carries the connotations of permanence and stability; here applied to people in society, it refers to one whose power and influence does not change. These are the pillars of society.
⁵⁰tn Heb “removes the lip.”
⁵¹tn The Hebrew ne’emanim is the niphal participle; it is often translated “the faithful” in the Bible. The Rabbis rather fancifully took the word from n^e’um, “oracle, utterance,” and so rendered it “those who are eloquent, fluent in words.” But that would make this the only place in the Bible where this form came from that root, or any other root besides ‘aman. But to say that God takes away the speech of the truthful or the faithful would be very difficult. It has to refer to reliable men, because it is parallel to the elders or old men. The NIV has “faithful advisors,” which fits well with kings and judges and priests.
⁵²tn Heb “taste,” meaning “opinion or decision.”
⁵³tn The expression in Hebrew uses meziah, “belt,” and the piel verb rippah, “to loosen,” so that “to loosen the belt of the mighty” would indicate “to disarm/incapacitate the mighty.” Others have opted to change the text: P. Jouon emends to read “forehead”—“he humbles the brow of the mighty” (Biblica 11 [1930]:322-4).
⁵⁴tn The word ‘apaq, “to be strong,” is well-attested, and the form ‘apiq is a normal adjective formation. So a translation “mighty” is acceptable, and further emendations are unnecessary.
⁵⁵tn The word is the traditional “shadow of death”; see comments on Job 3:3.
⁵⁶tn Dhorme, Budde, Pope, Fohrer and others think that the verse belonged originally to another context.
⁵⁷tn The word masgi’, “makes great,” is a common Aramaic word, but only occurs in Hebrew here and in Job 8:11 and 36:24. Some MSS have a change, reading the form from sagah, “leading astray.” The Greek omits the line entirely.
⁵⁸tn The difficulty with the verb nahah is that it means “to lead, guide,” but not “lead away” or “disperse,” unless this passage provides the context for such a meaning. Moreover, it never has a negative connotation. Some vocalize it wayyannihem, from “nuah,” the causative meaning of “rest,” or “abandon” (Driver, Gray, Gordis). But even there it would mean “leave in peace.” Blommerde suggests the second part is antithetical parallelism, and so should be positive. So Ball proposed wayyimhem (< mahah), “and he cuts them off.”
⁵⁹sn The rise and fall of nations, which does not seem to be governed by any moral principle, is for Job another example of God’s arbitrary power (Rowley).
⁶⁰tn Heb “the heads of the people of the earth.”
⁶¹tn Heb “heart.”
⁶²tn The text has b^etohu lo’ darek, “in waste - no way,” or, “in a wasteland [where there is] no way” > trackless (see the discussion of negative attributes using lo’ in GKC, #152u).
⁶³tn The word is an adverbial accusative.
⁶⁴tn The verb is the same that was in v. 24, “He makes them [the leaders still] wander” (the hiphil of ta`ah). But in this passage some commentators emend the text to a niphal of the verb, and put it in the plural, to get the reading “they reel to and fro.” But even if the verse closes the chapter and there is no further need for a word of divine causation, the hiphil sense works well here—causing people to wander like a drunken man would be the same as making them stagger.
⁶⁵sn This chapter records Job’s charges against his friends for the way they used their knowledge (1-5), his warning that God would find out their insincerity (6-12), and his pleading of his cause to God in which he begs for God to remove his hand from him and that he would not terrify him with his majesty and that he would reveal the sins that caused such great suffering (13-28).
¹tn Hebrew has kol, “all”; there is no reason to add anything to the text to gain a meaning “all this.”
²tn Heb “Like your knowledge”; in other words Job is saying that his knowledge is like their knowledge.
³tn The pronoun makes the subject emphatic and stresses the contrast: “I know—I also.”
⁴tn The verb “fall” is used here as it was in Job 4:13 to express becoming lower than someone, i.e., inferior.
⁵tn The verb is simply the piel imperfect ‘adabber. It should be classified as a desiderative imperfect, saying, “I desire to speak.” This is reinforced with the verb “to wish, desire” in the second half of the verse.
⁶tn The Hebrew title for God here is ‘el-sadday.
⁷tn The infinitive absolute functions here as the direct object of the verb “desire” (see GKC, #113b).
⁸tn The infinitive hokeah is from the verb yakah, which means “to argue, plead, debate.” It has the legal sense here of arguing a case (cf. 5:17).
⁹tn The top^ele-saqer are “plasterers of lies” (Ps 119:69). The verb means “to coat, smear, plaster.” The idea is that of imputing something that is not true. Job is saying that his friends are inventors of lies. The Greek translation was influenced by the next line and came up with “false physicians.”
¹⁰tn The literal rendering of the construct would be “healers of worthlessness.” Ewald and Dillmann translated it “patchers” based on a meaning in Arabic and Ethiopic; this would give the idea “botchers.” But it makes equally good sense to take “healers” as the meaning, for Job’s friends came to minister comfort and restoration to him—but they failed. See P. Humbert, “Maladie et medicine dans l’AT,” RHPR 44 (1964):1-29.
¹¹tn The construction is the imperfect tense in the wish formula preceded by the infinitive that intensifies it. The hiphil is not directly causative here, but internally—“keep silent.”
¹²tn The text literally reads, “and it would be for you for wisdom,” or, “that it would become your wisdom.” Job is rather sarcastic here, indicating if they shut up they would prove themselves to be wise (see Prov 17:28).
¹³sn Job first will argue with his friends. His cause that he will plead with God begins in v. 13.
¹⁴tn The construction literally reads “speak iniquity.” The form functions adverbially. The noun `awlah means “perversion, injustice, iniquity” and “falsehood.” Here it is parallel to r^emiyah, “fraud, deceit, treachery.”
¹⁵tn The expression “for God” means “in favor of God” or “on God’s behalf.” Job is amazed that they will say false things on God’s behalf.
¹⁶sn The idiom used here is “Will you lift up his face?” Here Job is being very sarcastic, for this expression usually means that a judge is taking a bribe. Job is accusing them of taking God’s side.
¹⁷tn The verb hapar means “to search out, investigate, examine.” In the conditional clause the imperfect tense expresses the hypothetical case.
¹⁸tn Both the infinitive and the imperfect of talal retain the he’ (GKC, #53q). But for the alternate form, see F. C. Fensham, “The Stem HTL in Hebrew,” VT 9 (1959):310-311. The infinitive is used here in an adverbial sense after the preposition.
¹⁹tn The verbal idea is intensified with the infinitive absolute. This is the same verb used in v. 3; here it would have the sense of “rebuke, convict.”
sn Peake’s observation is worth noting, namely, that as Job attacks the unrighteousness of God boldly he nonetheless has confidence in God’s righteousness that would not allow liars to defend him.
²⁰sn The use of the word “in secret” or “secretly” suggests that what they do is a guilty action (31:27a).
²¹sn The word translated “His majesty” or “His splendor” (s^e’eto) forms a play on the word “show partiality” (tissa’un) in the last verse. They are both from the verb nasa’, “to lift up.”
²²tn On this verb in the piel, see 7:14.
²³tn Heb “His dread”; the suffix is a subjective genitive.
²⁴tn The word is zikronekem, “your remembrances.” The word zikkaron not only can mean the act of remembering, but also what is remembered—what provokes memory or is worth being remembered. In the plural it can mean all the memorabilia, and in this verse all the sayings and teachings. Rowley suggests that in Job’s speech it could mean “all your memorized sayings” (p. 99).
²⁵tn The parallelism of “dust” and “ashes” is fairly frequent in Scripture. But “proverbs of ashes” is difficult. The genitive is certainly describing the proverbs; it could be classified as a genitive of apposition, proverbs that are/have become ashes. Ashes represent something that at one time may have been useful, but now has been reduced to what is worthless.
²⁶tn There is a division of opinion on the source of this word. Some take it from “answer”, related to Arabic, Aramaic, and Syriac words for “answer,” and so translate it “responses” (JB). Others take it from a word for “back,” with a derived meaning of the “boss” of the shield, and translate it bulwark or “defenses” (NEB, RSV, NIV). The idea of “answers” may fit the parallelism better, but “defenses” can be taken figuratively to refer to verbal defenses.
²⁷sn Any defence made with clay would crumble on impact.
²⁸tn The Hebrew has a pregnant construction: “be silent from me,” meaning “stand away from me in silence,” or “refrain from talking with me.” See GKC, #119ff. The Greek omits “from me,” as do several commentators.
²⁹tn The verb is the piel cohortative; following the imperative of the first colon this verb would show purpose or result. The inclusion of the independent personal pronoun makes the focus emphatic—“so that I (in my turn) may speak.”
³⁰tn The verb `abar is used with the preposition `al to express the advent of misfortune, namely, something coming against him.
³¹tn The interrogative pronoun mah is used in indirect questions, here introducing a clause [with the verb understood] as the object—”whatever it be” (see GKC, #137c).
³²tn Most editors reject `al mah as dittography from the last verse. M. Dahood, on the other hand, took it to mean “till eternity” (Biblica et Orientalia 17 [1965]:16).
³³tn The expression has “why do I take my flesh in my teeth?” This expression occurs nowhere else. It seems to be drawn from animal imagery in which the wild beast seizes the prey and carries it off to a place of security. The idea would then be that Job may be destroying himself. An animal that fights with its flesh (prey) in its mouth risks losing it. Other commentators do not think this is satisfactory, but they are at a loss of finding anything useful.
³⁴tn There is a textual difficulty here that factors into the interpretation of the verse. The k^ethiv is lo’, “not,” but the q^ere’ is lo, “to him.” RSV takes the former: “Behold, he will slay me, I have no hope.” NIV takes it as “though he slay me, yet will I hope in him.” Job is looking ahead to death, which is not an evil thing to him. The point of the verse is that he is willing to challenge God at the risk of his life; and if God slays him, he is still confident that he will be vindicated—as he says later in this chapter. Other suggestions are not compelling. Dhorme makes a slight change of ‘ayahel, “I will hope,” to ‘ahil, “I will [not] tremble” (p. 187). Davidson keeps the text, but interprets the verb more in line with its use in the book: “I will not wait” (p. 98).
³⁵tn On ‘ak, “surely,” see GKC, #153, on intensive clauses.
³⁶tn The verb once again is yakah (in the hiphil), “argue a case, plead, defend, contest.” But because the word usually means “accuse” rather than “defend,” I. L. Seeligmann proposed changing “my ways” to “his ways” (see VT Supp 16 [1967]251-278). But the word can be interpreted appropriately in the context without emendation.
³⁷sn The fact that Job will dare to come before God and make his case is evidence—to Job at least—that he is innocent.
³⁸tn The infinitive absolute intensifies the imperative, which serves here with the force of an immediate call to attention.
³⁹tn The verb has to be supplied in this line, for the MT has “and my explanation in your ears.” In the verse, both “word” and “explanation” are Aramaisms (the latter appearing in Dan 5:12 for the explanation of riddles).
⁴⁰tn The particle hinneh functions almost as an imperative here, calling attention to what follows: “look” (archaic: behold).
⁴¹tn The verb `arak means “to set in order, set in array [as a battle], prepare” in the sense here of arrange and organize a lawsuit.
⁴²tn The pronoun is added because this is what the verse means.
⁴³tn The word mispat usually means “judgment, decision.” Here it means “lawsuit” (and so a metonymy of effect gave rise to this usage; see Num 27:5; 2 Sam 15:4).
⁴⁴tn The pronoun is emphatic before the verb: “I know that it is I who am right.” The verb means “to be right, righteous.” Some have translated it “vindicated,” looking at the outcome of the suit.
⁴⁵tn The interrogative is joined with the emphatic pronoun, stressing “who is he [who will contend,” or more emphatically, “who in the world will contend.” Job is confident that no one can bring charges against him. He is certain of success.
⁴⁶sn Job is confident that he will be vindicated. But if someone were to show up and have proof of sin against him, he would be silent and die (literally “keep silent and expire”).
⁴⁷tn The line reads “do not do two things.”
⁴⁸tn “God” is supplied to the verse, for the address is now to him. Job wishes to enter into dispute with God, but he first appeals that God not take advantage of him with his awesome power.
⁴⁹tn The imperative harhaq GKC, #29q), from rahaq, “far, be far,” means “take away (far away), remove.”
⁵⁰sn This is a common, but bold, anthropomorphism. The fact that the word used is kap, properly “palm,” rather than yad, “hand” (with the sense of power), may stress Job’s feeling of being trapped or confined (see also Ps 139:5 and 7).
⁵¹tn See Job 9:34.
⁵²tn The imperatives in the verse function like the future tense in view of their use for instruction or advice. The chiastic arrangement of the verb forms is interesting: imperative + imperfect, imperfect + imperative. The imperative is used for God, but the imperfect is used when Job is the subject. Job is calling for the court to convene—he will be either the defendant or the prosecutor.
⁵³tn The pronoun “my” is not in the Hebrew text, but has been supplied here.
⁵⁴sn Job uses three words for sin here: “iniquities,” which means going astray, erring; “sins,” which means missing the mark or the way; and “transgressions,” which are open rebellions. They all emphasize different kinds of sins and different degrees of wilfulness. Job is demanding that any sins be brought up. Both Job and his friends agree that great afflictions would have to indicate great offenses—he wants to know what they are.
⁵⁵sn The anthropomorphism of “hide the face” indicates a withdrawal of favor and an outpouring of wrath (see Ps 30:7 [8]; Isa 54:8; Ps 27:9). Sometimes God “hides his face” to make himself invisible or aloof (see 34:29). In either case, if God covers his face it is because he considers Job an enemy—at least this is what Job thinks.
⁵⁶tn The verb ta`aros is from `aras, which usually means “fear, dread,” but can also mean “make afraid, terrify” (Isa 2:19,21). The imperfect is here taken as a desiderative imperfect: “why do you want to”; but it could also be a simple future: “will you torment.”
⁵⁷tn The word niddap is “driven” from the root nadap. The words “by the wind” or the interpretation “windblown” has to be added for the clarification. Job is comparing himself to this leaf (so an implied comparison, called hypocatastasis)—so light and insubstantial that it is amazing that God should come after him. A. Guillaume suggests that the word is not from this root, but from a second root nadap cognate to Arabic nadifa, “to dry up” (“ A Note on Isaiah 19:7,” JTS NS 14 [1963]:382,3). But as Clines notes (p. 283), a dried leaf is a driven leaf—a point Guillaume allows as he says there is ambiguity in the term.
⁵⁸tn The word qas is “chaff, stubble,” or a wisp of straw. It is found in Job 41:20,21 for that which is so worthless, and insignificant, that it is hardly worth mentioning. If dried up, or withered, it too will be blown away in the wind.
⁵⁹tn The meaning is that of writing down a formal charge against someone (cf. Job 31:15).
⁶⁰sn Job acknowledges sins in his youth, but they are trifling compared to the suffering he now endures. Job thinks it unjust of God to persecute him now for those—if that is what is happening.
⁶¹tn The word occurs here and in Job 33:11. It could be taken as “stocks,” in which the feet were held fast; or it could be “shackles,” which allowed the prisoner to move about. The parallelism favors the latter, if the two lines are meant to be referring to the same thing.
⁶²tn The word is “ways, roads, paths,” but it is used here in the in which one goes about his activities.
⁶³tn The verb tithaqqeh is a hithpael from the root haqah (parallel to haqaq). The word means “engrave” or “carve out.” This hithpael would mean “to imprint something on oneself” (Dhorme says on one’s mind, and so derives the meaning “examine” [p. 192]). The object of this is the expression “on the roots of my feet,” which would refer to where the feet hit the ground. Since the passage has more to do with God’s restricting Job’s movement, the translation “you set a bound to the soles of my feet” would be better than Dhorme’s view. The image of inscribing or putting marks on the feet is not found elsewhere. It may be, as Pope suggests, a reference to marking the slaves to make tracking them easier. The Greek has “you have penetrated to my heels.”
⁶⁴tn The text has “and he.” Some have suggested “it,” making it refer to the root of the tree alluded to in the previous verse. But a tree would not be moth-eaten. Some of the commentators move the verse and put it after Job 14:2, 3 or 6.
⁶⁵tn The word raqab is used elsewhere in the Bible of dry rot in a house, or rotting bones in a grave. It is used in parallelism with “moth” both here and in Hos 5:12. The Greek text has “like a wineskin.” This would be from roqeb, “wineskin.” This word does not occur in the Hebrew Bible, but is attested in Sir 43:20 and in Aramaic. The change is not necessary.
¹tn The first of the threefold apposition for ‘adam is “born of a woman.” The genitive (“woman”) after a passive participle denotes the agent of the action (see GKC, #116 l).
²tn The second description is simply “[is] short of days.” The meaning here is that his life is short (“days” being put as the understatement for “years”).
³tn The third expression is “consumed/full/sated—with/of— trouble/restlessness.” The latter word, rogez, occurred in Job 3:17; see also the idea in 10:15.
⁴tn Heb “comes forth” (yasa’). The perfect tense expresses characteristic action and so is translated by the present tense (see GKC, #111s).
⁵tn The verb is wayyimmal, is from the root malal, “to languish, wither,” and not from a different root malal, “cut off.”
⁶tn The verb is “and he does not stand.” Here the verb means “stay fixed,” “abide.” The shadow does not stay fixed, but continues to advance toward darkness.
⁷tn The idiom “open the eye on” someone means to prepare to judge him.
⁸tn The opening ‘ap `al zeh, meaning “even on such a one!” It is an exclamation of surprise.
⁹tn The text clearly has “me” as the accusative; but many wish to emend it to say “him” (‘oto). But Clines rightly rejects this in view of the way Job is written, often moving back and forth from his own tragedy and others’ tragedies (p. 283).
¹⁰tn The expression is mi-yitten, “who will give” (see GKC, #151b). Some commentators (Rowley and Davidson) wish to take this as the optative formula: “O that a clean might come out of an unclean!” But that does not fit the verse very well, and still requires the addition of a verb. The exclamation here simply implies something impossible—man is unable to attain purity.
¹¹sn The point being made is that the entire human race is contaminated by sin, and therefore cannot produce something pure. In this context, since man is born of woman, it is saying that the woman and the man who is brought forth from her are impure. See Ps 51:5; Isa 6:5; and Gen 6:5.
¹²tn Heb “his days.”
¹³tn The passive participle is from haras, which means “determined.” The word literally means “cut” (Lev 22:22, “mutilated”). Dhorme takes it to mean “engraved” as on stone; from a custom of inscribing decrees on tablets of stone he derives the meaning here of “decreed.” This, he argues, is parallel to the way haqaq is used. The word hoq is an “ordinance” or “statute”; the idea is connected to the verb “to engrave” (see p. 197). The Greek text has, “if his life should be but one day on the earth, and his months are numbered by him, you have appointed him for a time and he shall by no means exceed it.”
¹⁴tn Heb “[is] with you.” This clearly means under God’s control.
¹⁵tn The word hoq has the meanings of “decree, decision, and limit” (cf. Job 28:26; 38:10).
sn Job is saying that God foreordains the number of the days of man. He foreknows the number of the months. He fixes the limit of human life which cannot be passed.
¹⁶tn The verb hadal means “desist, cease.” The verb would be here “and let him desist,” which some take to mean “and let him rest.” But since this is rather difficult in the line, commentators have suggested other meanings. Several slightly emend the text to make it an imperative rather than an imperfect; this is then translated “and desist.” The expression “from him” must be added. Another suggestion that is far-fetched is that of P. J. Calderone and D. Winton Thomas, having a new meaning of “be fat” (CBQ 23 [1961]:451-460; and VT Supp 4 [1957]:8-16).
¹⁷tn There are two roots rasah. The first is the common word “delight in, have pleasure in.” The second, most likely used here, means “pay, acquit a debt” (cf. Lev 26:34, 41, 43). Here with the mention of the simile with the hired man, the completing of the job is in view.
¹⁸tnThe genitive after the construct is one of advantage—it is hope for the tree.
¹⁹sn The figure now changes to a tree for the discussion of the finality of death. At least the tree will sprout again when it is cut down. Why, Job wonders, should what has been granted to the tree not also be granted to humans.
²⁰tn The hiphil of zaqan, “to be old,” is here an internal causative, “to grow old.”
²¹tn The hiphil is here classified as an inchoative hiphil (see GKC, #53e), for the tree only begins to die. In other words, it appears to be dead, but actually is not completely dead.
²²tn The Greek text translates “dust” [soil] with “rock,” probably in light of the earlier illustration of the tree growing in the rocks.
sn Job is thinking here of a tree that dies or decays because of a drought rather than being uprooted, because the next verse will tell how it can revive with water.
²³tn The personification adds to the comparison with people—the tree is credited with the sense of smell to detect the water.
²⁴tn The sense of “flourish” for this verb is found in Ps 92:12,13[13,14], and Prov 14:11. It makes an appropriate parallel with “bring forth boughs” in the second half.
²⁵tn Heb “and will make.”
²⁶tn There are two words for “man” in this verse. The first, geber, can indicate a “strong man” or “mighty man,” the hero; and the second, ‘adam, simply designates him as mortal.
²⁷tn The word halas in Aramaic and Syriac means “to be weak.” The derived noun “the weak” would be in direct contrast to “the mighty man.” In the transitive sense the verb means “to weaken, defeat” (Exod 17:13); here it may have the sense of “be lifeless, unconscious, inanimate” (cf. Dhorme, p. 199). Many commentators emend the text to yahalop, “passes on, away.” A. Guillaume tries to argue that the form is a variant of the other, the letters sin and pe’ being interchangeable (“The Use of halas in Exod 17:13, Isa 14:12, and Job 14:10,” JTS NS 14 [1963]:91-92). G. R. Driver connected it to Arabic halasa, “carry off suddenly” (“The Resurrection of Marine and Terrestrial Creatures,” JSS 7[1962]:12-22). But the basic idea of “be weak, powerless” is satisfactory in the text. Rowley says, “Where words are so carefully chosen, it is gratuitous to substitute less expressive words as some editors do” (p. 105).
²⁸tn This break to a question adds a startling touch to the whole verse. The obvious meaning is that he is gone. The Greek weakens it: “and is no more.”
²⁹tn The comparative clause may be signaled simply by the conjunction, especially when facts of a moral nature are compared with the physical world (see GKC, #161a).
³⁰tn The word yam can mean “sea” or “lake.”
³¹tn The Hebrew construction is “until not,” which is unusual if not impossible; it is found in only one other place. Aquila, Symmachus, Theodotion, Syriac, and Vulgate all have “till the heavens wear out.” Most would emend the text just slightly from `ad bilti to `ad b^elot, “until the wearing out of” (see Ps 102:26[27]; Isa 51:6). Gray laves the text alone, finding its unusual form in its favor. H. M. Orlinsky finds a cognate Arabic word meaning “will not awake” and translates it “so long as the heavens are not rent asunder” (JQR NS 28 [1937,38]:57). He then deletes the last line of the verse as a later gloss.
³²tn The verb is plural because the subject, ‘is, is viewed as a collective: “mankind.” The verb means “wake up, awake”; another root, qus, “split open,” cognate to Arabic qada and Akkadian kasu, was put forward by Orlinsky (“The Hebrew and Greek Texts of Job 14:12,” JQR 28 [1937-38]:57-68) and G. R. Driver (“Problems in the Hebrew Text of Job,” VT Supp 3 [1955]:72-93).
³³tn The optative mood is introduced here again with mi yitten, literally, “who will give?”
sn After arguing that man will die without hope, Job expresses his desire that there be a resurrection, and what that would mean. The ancients all knew that death did not bring existence to an end; rather, they passed into another place, but they continued to exist. Job thinks that death would at least give him some respite from the wrath of God; but this wrath would eventually be appeased, and then God would remember the one he had hidden in Sheol just as he remembered Noah. Once that happened, it is possible that Job might live again.
³⁴sn Sheol in the Bible refers to the place where the dead go. But it can have different categories of meaning: death in general, the grave, or the realm of the departed spirits [hell]. Alexander Heidel shows that in the Bible when hell is in view the righteous are not there—it is the realm of the departed spirits of the wicked. When the righteous go to Sheol, the meaning is usually the grave or death. See his third chapter on Death and Afterlife in his book The Gilgamesh Epic and the Old Testament Parallels (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1946).
³⁵tn The construction used here is the preposition followed by the infinitive construct followed by the subjective genitive, forming an adverbial clause of time.
³⁶tn This is the same word used in v. 5 for “limit.”
³⁷tn The verb zakar means more than simply “remember.” In many cases, including this one, it means “to act on what is remembered,” i.e., deliver or rescue (see Gen 8:1, “and God remembered Noah”). In this sense, a prayer “remember me” is a prayer for God to act upon his covenant promises.
³⁸tn The Greek translation removes the interrogative and makes the statement affirmative, i.e., that man will live again. This reading is taken by Gard (“The Concept of the Future Life according to the Greek Translator of the Book of Job,” JBL 73 [1954]:137,8). Clines follows this, putting both of the expressions in the wish clause: “if a man dies and could live again…(p. 332). If that is the way it is translated, then the verbs in the second half of the verse and in the next verse would all be part of the apodasis, and should be translated “would.” The interpretation would not greatly differ; it would be saying that if there was life after death, Job would long for his release—his death. If the traditional view is taken and the question was raised whether there was life after death, the implication of the question being there is, then Job would still be longing for his death. Dhorme transfers it to v. 19. The point the line is making is that if there is life after death, that would be all the more reason for Job to eagerly expect, to hope for, his death.
³⁹tn See Job 7:1.
⁴⁰tn The verb ‘ayahel may be rendered “I will/would wait” or “I will/would hope.” The word describes eager expectation and longing hope.
⁴¹tn The construction is the same as that found in the last verse: a temporal preposition `ad followed by the infinitive construct followed by the subjective genitive “release/relief.”
⁴²sn The idea would be that God would sometime in the future call Job into his fellowship again when he longed for the work of his hands (cf. Job 10:3).
⁴³tn The independent personal pronoun is emphatic, as if to say, “and I on my part will answer.”
⁴⁴tn The word kasap originally meant “to turn pale.” It expresses the sentiment that causes pallor of face, and so is used for desire ardently, covet. The object of the desire is always introduced with the lamed preposition (see Dhorme, p. 202).
⁴⁵sn The hope for life after death is supported now by a description of the severity with which God deals with people in this life.
⁴⁶tn If v. 16a continues the previous series, the translation here would be “then” (as in RSV). Others take it as a new beginning to express God’s present watch over Job, and interpret the second half of the verse as a question, or emend it to say God does not pass over his sins.
⁴⁷sn Compare Ps 130:3-4, which says, “If you should mark iniquity O LORD, Lord, who could stand? But with you there is forgiveness, in order that you might be feared.”
⁴⁸tn The second colon of the verse can be contrasted with the first, the first being the present reality and the second the hope looked for in the future. This is the view that Dhorme takes, and it seems to fit the context well without making any changes at all.
⁴⁹tn The passive participle hatum, from hatam, which is used frequently in the Bible, means “sealed up.” The image of sealing sins in a bag is another of the many poetic ways of expressing the removal of sin from the individual (see 1 Sam 25:29). Since the term most frequently describes sealed documents, the idea here may be more that of sealing in a bag the record of Job’s sins (see Clines, p. 334).
⁵⁰tn The idea has presented that the background of putting tally stones in a bag is intended (see A. L. Oppenheim, “On an Operational Device in Mesopotamian Bureaucracy,” JNES 18[1959]:121-128).
⁵¹tn This verb was used in Job 13:4 for “plasterers of lies.” The idea is probably that God coats or paints over the sins so that they are forgotten (see Isa 1:18). Davidson suggests that the sins are preserved until full punishment is exacted (p. 105). But the verse still seems to be continuing the thought of how the sins would be forgotten in the next life.
⁵²tn The indication that this is a simile is to be obtained from the conjunction beginning 19c (see GKC, #161a).
⁵³tn The word yibbol usually refers to a flower fading and so seems strange here. The Greek and the Syriac translate “and will fall”; most commentators accept this and repoint the preceding word to get “and will surely fall.” Duhm retains the MT and applies the image of the flower to the falling mountain. The verb is used of the earth in Isa 24:4, and so NIV, RSV, and NJPS all have the idea of “crumble away.”
⁵⁴tn Literally meaning “the overflowings of it,” the word s^epiheha in the text is changed by just about everyone. The idea of “its overflowings” or more properly “its aftergrowths” (Lev 25:5; 2 Kgs 19:29; etc.) does not fit here at all. Budde suggested reading s^ehipah, which is cognate to Arabic sahifeh, “torrential rain, rainstorm”—that which sweeps away” the soil. The word sahap in Hebrew might have a wider usage than the effects of rain.
⁵⁵tn Heb “[the] dust of [the] earth.”
⁵⁶sn The meaning for Job is that death shatters all of man’s hopes for the continuation of life.
⁵⁷tn D. Winton Thomas took nesah here to have a superlative meaning: “You prevail utterly against him” (JSS 1 [1956]:107). Death would be God’s complete victory over him.
⁵⁸tn The subject of the participle is most likely God in this context. Dhorme takes it to be man, saying “his face changes.” Others emend the text to read an imperfect tense, but this is not necessary.
⁵⁹tn The clause may be interpreted as a conditional clause,. with the second clause beginning with the conjunction serving as the apodosis.
⁶⁰tn There is no expressed subject for the verb “they honor,” and so it may be taken as a passive.
⁶¹sn Death is separation from the living, from the land of the living. And ignorance of what goes on in this life, good or bad, is part of death. Compare Sir 9:5,6.
⁶²tn The verb is bin, “to perceive, discern.” The parallelism between “know” and “perceive” stress the point that in death a man does not realize what is happening here.
⁶³tn The prepositional phrases using `alaw, “for him[self],” express the object of the suffering. It is for himself that the dead man “grieves.”So this has to be joined with ‘ak, yielding “only for himself. Then, “flesh” and “soul/person” form the parallelism for the subjects of the verbs.
⁶⁴sn In this verse Job is expressing the common view of life beyond death, namely, that in Sheol there is no contact with the living, only separation, but in Sheol there is a conscious awareness of the dreary existence.
⁶⁵sn In the first round of speeches, Eliphaz had emphasized the moral perfection of God, Bildad his unwavering justice, and Zophar his omniscience. Since this did not bring the expected response from Job, the friends see him as a menace to true religion, and so they intensify their approach. Eliphaz, as dignified as ever, rebukes Job for his arrogance and warns about the judgment the wicked bring on themselves. The speech of Eliphaz falls into three parts: the rebuke of Job for his irreverence (2-6); the analysis of Job’s presumption about wisdom (7-16), and his warning about the fate of the wicked (17-35).
¹tn The Hebrew is da`at ruah. This means knowledge without any content, vain knowledge.
²tn The image is rather graphic. It is saying that he puffs himself up with the wind and then brings out of his mouth blasts of this wind.
³tn The word for “east wind,” qadim, is parallel to “spirit/wind” also in Hos 12:2. The east wind is maleficent, but here in the parallelism it is so much hot air.
⁴tn The infinitive absolute in this place is functioning either as an explanatory adverb (Dhorme), or as a finite verb.
sn Eliphaz draws on Job’s claim with this word (cf. Job 13:3), but will declare it hollow.
⁵tn The verb sakan means “to be useful, profitable.” It is found 5 times in the book with this meaning. The hiphil of ya`al has the same connotation. E. Lipinski offers a new meaning on a second root, “incur danger” or “run risks” with words, but this does not fit the parallelism (see FolOr 21 [1980]:65-82).
⁶tn The word parar in the hiphil means “to annul, frustrate, destroy, break,” and this fits the line quite well. The NEB reflects Driver’s suggestion of an Arabic cognate meaning “expel, banish” (VT Supp 3 [1955]:77).
⁷tn Heb “fear,” “reverence.”
⁸tn The word gara` means “to diminish,” regard as insignificant, occasionally with the sense of “pull down” (Deut 4:2; 13:1). It is here that Eliphaz is portraying Job as a menace to the religion of society because they dissuade people from seeking God.
⁹tn The word siah is “complaint, cry, meditation.” Job would be influencing people to challenge God and not to meditate before or pray to him.
¹⁰tn The verb ‘illep has the meaning of “teach, instruct,” but it is unlikely that the idea of revealing is intended. If the verb is understood metonymically, then “inspire, prompt” will be sufficient. Dahood and others find another root, and render the verb “increase,” reversing subject and object: “your mouth increases your iniquity.”
¹¹tn Heb “tongue.”
¹²tn The word means “shrewd, crafty, cunning” (see Gen 3:1). Job uses clever speech that is misleading and destructive.
¹³tn The hiphil of this root means “declare wicked, guilty” (a declarative hiphil), and so “condemns.”
¹⁴tn The verb `anah with the lamed preposition following it means “to testify against.” For Eliphaz, it is enough to listen to Job to condemn him.
¹⁵tn The meaning of sod is “confidence.” In the context the implication is “secret counsel” of the LORD God (see Jer 23:18). It is a question of confidence on the part of God, that only wisdom can know (see Prov 8:30,31). Job seemed to them to claim to have access to the mind of God.
¹⁶tn In v. 4 the word meant “limit”; here it has a slightly different sense, namely, “to reserve for oneself.”
¹⁷tn The last clause simply has “and it is not with us.” It means that one possesses something through knowledge. Note the parallelism of “know” and “with me” in Ps 50:11.
¹⁸tn The participle sab, from sib, “to have white hair” (1 Sam 12:2), only occurs elsewhere in the Bible in the Aramaic sections of Ezra. The word yasis, “aged,” occurred in 12:12.
¹⁹tn Heb “with us.”
²⁰tn The line reads: “[men] greater than your father [in] years.” The expression “in days” underscores their age—they were older than Job’s father, and therefore wiser.
²¹sn The word tanhumot occurs here and only in Job 21:34. The words of comfort and consolation that they have been offering to Job are here said to be “of God.” But Job will call them miserable comforters (16:2).
²²tn The formula “is it too little for you” or “is it too slight a matter for you” is also found in Isa 7:13 (see GKC, #133c).
²³tn The word “spoken” is not in the Hebrew text, but has been supplied in the translation.
²⁴tn The interrogative mah here has the sense of “why?” (see Job 7:21).
²⁵tn The verb simply means “to take.” RSV has it “carry you away.” And Dhorme goes further, saying that it implies being unhinged by passion, to be carried away by the passions beyond good sense (pp. 212-13). Driver suggests an Arabic cognate wakiha, and translates the line, “why has your heart emboldened you” (WO, 1 [1947-52]:235), but this has been unconvincing. Pope and Tur-Sinai suggest that the suffix on the verb is datival, and translate it, “What has taken from you your mind?” But the parallelism shows that “your heart” and “your eyes” are subjects.
²⁶tn Here is another word that occurs only here, and in the absence of a completely convincing suggestion, probably should be left as it is. The verb is razam. Targum Job and the Syriac equate it with a verb found in Aramaic and post-Biblical Hebrew with the same letters but metathesized—ramaz. It would mean “make a sign,” or “wink.” Budde, following the Greek probably, has “Why are your eyes lofty?” Others follow an Arabic root meaning “become weak.”
²⁷tn The Hebrew is ruheka, “your spirit” or “your breath.” But the fact that this is turned “against God,” means that it must be given a derived meaning, or a meaning that is metonymical. It is used in the Bible in the sense of anger—what the spirit vents (see Judg 8:3; Prov 16:32; and Job 4:9 with “blast”).
²⁸tn The verb is a hiphil perfect of yasa’, “to go out, proceed, issue forth.”
²⁹tn Eliphaz here reiterates the point made in Job 4:18.
³⁰sn The question here is whether the reference to material “heavens” (as in Exod 24:10), or to heavenly beings. The latter is required by the context.
³¹tn The two descriptions here used are “abominable,” meaning “disgusting” (a niphal participle with the value of a Latin participle [see GKC, #116e]), and “corrupt” (a niphal participle which occurs only in Ps 14:3 and 53:4), always in a moral sense. On the significance of the first description, see P. Humbert, ZAW 31 [1960]:217ff.). On the second word, G. R. Driver suggests from Arabic, “debauched with luxury, corrupt” (“Some Hebrew Words,” JTS 29 [1927,28]:390-396).
³²sn Man commits evil with the same ease and facility as he drinks in water—freely and in large quantities.
³³tn The demonstrative pronoun is used here as a nominative, to introduce an independent relative clause (see GKC, #138h).
³⁴tn Here the waw apodosis follows with the cohortative (see GKC, #143d).
³⁵tn The word “tradition” is not in the Hebrew text, but has been supplied in the translation.
³⁶tn Some commentators change one letter and follow the reading of the Greek version: “and their fathers have not hidden.” Pope tries to get the same reading by classifying the mem as an enclitic mem. The MT on first glance would read “and did not hide from their fathers.” Dhorme and others take the clause “and they did not hide” as adverbial and belonging to the first part of the verse: “what wise men declare, hiding nothing, according to the tradition of their fathers.”
³⁷sn Eliphaz probably thinks that Edom was the proverbial home of wisdom, and so the reference here would be to his own people. If, as many interpret, the biblical writer is using these accounts to put Yahwistic ideas into the discussion, then the reference would be to Canaan at the time of the fathers. At any rate, the tradition of wisdom to Eliphaz has not been polluted by foreigners, but has retained its pure and moral nature from antiquity.
³⁸tn The text literally has “all the days of the wicked, he suffers.” The word “all” is an adverbial accusative of time, stating along with its genitives (“of the days of a wicked man”) how long the individual suffers. When the subject is composed of a noun in construct followed by a genitive, the predicate sometimes agrees with the genitive (see GKC, #146a).
³⁹tn Mitholel is a hithpo`lel participle from hil, “to tremble.” It carries the idea of “torment oneself,” or “be tormented.” Some have changed the letter h for a letter h, and obtained the meaning “shows himself mad.” Theodotion has “is mad,” and Symmachus, Vulgate, Syriac have “boasts himself” (see Margolis, ZAW 25 [1905]:200). But the reading of the MT is preferable.
⁴⁰tn It is necessary, with Rashi, to understand the relative pronoun before the verb “they are stored up/reserved.”
⁴¹tn This has been translated with the idea of “oppressor” in Job 6:23; 27:13.
⁴²tn The word “fill” is not in the Hebrew text, but has been supplied in the translation.
⁴³tn The word soded means “a robber, plunderer” (see Job 12:6). With the verb bo’ the sentence means that the robber pounces on or comes against him (see GKC, #118f). Rowley observes that the text does not say that he is attack, but that the sound of fears is in his ears, i.e., that he is terrified by thoughts of this.
⁴⁴tn This is the meaning of the hiphil imperfect negated: “he does not believe” or “he has no confidence.” It is followed by the infinitive construct functioning as the direct object—he does not expect to return (to escape) from darkness.
sn The meaning of this line is somewhat in question. Rowley thinks it could mean that he is afraid he will not wake up from the night, or he dreads misfortune, thinking it will be final for him (see p. 111).
⁴⁵sn In the context of these arguments, “darkness” probably refers to calamity, and so the wicked can expect a calamity that is final.
⁴⁶tn The text literally says, “he is watched [or waited for] by the sword.” Driver reads it, “he is marked down for the sword” (VT Supp 3 [1955]:78). Ewald suggested “laid up for the sword.” Ball has “looks for the sword.” The MT has a passive participle from sapah, “to observe, watch,” which can be retained in the text; the meaning of the form can then be understood as the result of the inspection (Dhorme, p. 217).
⁴⁷tn The MT has “he wanders about for food—where is it?” The Greek translation has “he has been appointed for food for vultures,” reading ‘ayyah for ‘ayyeh. This would carry on the thought of the passage—he sees himself destined for the sword and food for vultures. Many commentators follow this reading while making a number of smaller changes in noded, “wandering,” such as nittan, “is given,” no`ad, “is appointed,” nodad, “is known,” or the like. The latter involves no major change in consonants. While the MT “wandering” may not be as elegant as some of the other suggestions, it is not impossible. But there is no reading of this verse that does not involve some change. The Greek has “and he has been appointed for food for vultures.”
⁴⁸tn This line is fraught with difficulties (perceived or real), which prompt numerous suggestions. The reading of the MT is “he knows that a day of darkness is fixed in his hand,” or, is certain. Many commentators move “day of darkness” to the next verse, after the Greek text. Then, suggestions have been offered for nakon, “disaster” (neker) instead of “ready”; and for b^eyado, “in his hand,” a number of ideas—l^e`ed, “calamity,” or pido, “his disaster.” Wright takes this last view and renders it “he knows that misfortune is imminent,” leaving the “day of darkness to the next verse.
⁴⁹tn If “day and darkness” are added to this line, then this verse is made into a tri-colon—the main reason for transferring it away from the last verse. But the newly proposed reading follows the Greek structure precisely, as if that were the approved construction. The Hebrew of MT has “distress and anguish terrify him.”
⁵⁰tn This last colon is deleted by some, moved to v. 26 by others; and the NEB puts it in brackets. The last word, “to battle,” occurs only here. KBL3 links it to an Arabic root kadara, “rush down,” as with a bird of prey. J. Reider defines it as “perturbation” from the same root (see VT 2 [1952]:127).
⁵¹sn The symbol of the outstretched hand is the picture of attempting to strike someone, or shaking a fist at someone; it is a symbol of a challenge or threat (see Isa 5:25; 9:21; 10:4).
⁵²tn The hithpael of gabar means “to act with might” or “to behave like a hero.” The idea is that the wicked boldly vaunts himself before the LORD.
⁵³tn The text literally has “he runs against/upon him with the neck.” RSV takes this to mean “with a stiff neck.” Several commentators (Dhorme, Kissane), influenced by the Greeks “insolently,” have attempted to harmonize with some idiom for neck (“outstretched neck,” for example). Others have made more extensive changes. Pope and Anderson follow Tur-Sinai in accepting “with full battle armor.” But the main idea seems to be that of a headlong assault on God.
⁵⁴tn The second line literally says “with the thickness of the bosses of his shield.” The bosses are the convex sides of the bucklers, turned against the foe. This is a defiant attack on God.
⁵⁵sn This verse tells us that he is not in any condition to fight, because he is bloated and fat from luxurious living.
⁵⁶tn D. Winton Thomas defends a meaning “cover” for the verb `asah (see “Translating Hebrew `asah,” BiTrans 17 [1966]:190-193).
⁵⁷tn The hapax pimah is explained by the Arabic fa’ima, “to be fat.” Pope renders this “blubber.”
⁵⁸sn Delitzsch rightly explains that these are not cities that he, the wicked, has destroyed, but that were destroyed by a judgment on wickedness. Accordingly, Eliphaz is saying that the wicked man is willing to risk such a curse in his confidence in his prosperity (see further Rowley, p. 113).
⁵⁹tn The verbal idea serves here to modify “houses” as a relative clause; so a relative pronoun is added.
⁶⁰tn The Hebrew has simply “they are made ready for heaps.” The Greek translates it, “what they have prepared, let others carry away.” This would involve a complete change of the last word.
⁶¹tn This word also is a hapax, although almost always interpreted to mean “possession” (with Arabic manal) and repointed as m^enolam. Dahood further changes “earth” to the netherworld, and interprets it to mean “his possessions will not go down to the netherworld (“Northwest Semitic Philology,” p. 60; and Biblica 40 [1959]:164-166). Others suggest it means “ear of grain,” either from the common word for “ears of grain” (sibbolim) or a hapax in Deuteronomy 23:26[25].
⁶²tn Some editions and commentators delete the first line of this verse, arguing that it is simply a paraphrase of v. 22a, and that it interrupts the comparison with a tree that falls (although that comparison only starts next).
⁶³tn This last line in the verse is the difficult one. The MT has “he shall depart by the breath of his mouth.” If this reading stands, then it must be understood that it is the breath of God’s mouth that is intended. In place of “his mouth” the Greek text has “flower” (reading pirho [properly, “his fruit”] instead of piw), and “fall” instead of “depart.” Modern commentators, and the RSV, alter yasur, “depart,” to something like y^eso`ar (<sa`ar, “drive away”), or the like, to get “will be swept away.” The result is a reading: “and his blossom will be swept away by the wind.” The Greek may have read the Hebrew exactly, but harmonized it with v. 33 (see H. Heater, A Septuagint Translation Technique in the Book of Job [CBQMS 11, 1982]:61-62).
⁶⁴tn The word, although difficult in its form, is “vanity,” i.e., that which is worthless. Dhorme thinks that the form saw’ conceals the word si’o, “his stature.” But Dhorme reworks most of the verse. He changes nit`ah, “deceived,” to neda`, “we know,” to arrive at “we know that it is vanity.” The last two words of the verse are then moved to the next (p. 224). The Greek has “let him not think that he shall endure, for his end shall be vanity.”
⁶⁵tn This word is found in Job 20:18 with the sense of “trading.” It can mean the exchange of goods or the profit from them. Some commentators change t^emurato, “his reward,” because they wish to put it with the next verse as the Greek seems to have done (although the Greek does not represent this). Houbigant suggests timorato, “his palm tree”; Dhorme has z^emorato, “his vine shoot.” A number of writers simply delete all of v. 31. Rowley suggests the best reading (assuming one were going to make changes) would be, “Let him not trust in his stature, deceiving himself, for it is vanity.” And then put “his palm tree” with the next verse, he thinks that achieves the proper balance (p. 115).
⁶⁶tn Heb “before his day.”
⁶⁷tn Those who put the last colon of v. 31 with v. 32 also have to change the verb timmale’, “will be fulfilled.” Dhorme says, in a rather cavalier fashion, “a mere glance at the use of yimmal…abundantly proves that the original text had timmal (G, Syr., Vulg), which became timmale’ through the accidental transposition of the ‘alep of b^esi’o…in verse 31…” (p. 225). This, of course, is possible, if all the other changes up to now are granted. But the meaning of a word elsewhere in no wise assures it should be the word here. The Greek has “his harvest shall perish before the time,” which could translate any number of words that might have been in the MS. A commercial metaphor is not out of place here, since parallelism does not demand that the same metaphor appear in both lines.
⁶⁸tn Now, in the second half of the verse, the metaphor of a tree with branches begins.
⁶⁹tn The verb means “to treat violently” or “wrong.” It indicates that the vine did not nourish the grapes well enough for them to grow, and so they dry up and drop off.
⁷⁰sn The point is that like the tree the wicked man shows signs of life but produces nothing valuable. The olive tree will have blossoms in the years that it produces no olives, and so eventually drops the blossoms.
⁷¹tn The Greek renders this line: “for death is the witness of an ungodly man. “Death” represents “barren/sterile,” and “witness” represents “assembly.”
⁷²sn This may refer to the fire that struck Job (cf. 1:16).
⁷³tn The word “bribery” can mean a “gift,” but most often in the sense of a bribe in court. It indicates that the wealth and the possessions that the wicked man has gained may have been gained unjustly.
⁷⁴tn Infinitives absolute are used in this verse in the place of finite verbs. They lend a greater vividness to the description, stressing the basic meaning of the words.
⁷⁵tn At the start of the speech Eliphaz said Job’s belly was filled with the wind; now it is there that he prepares deception.
⁷⁶sn In the next two chapters we have Job’s second reply to Eliphaz. Job now feels abandoned by God and by his friends, and so complains that this all intensifies his sufferings. But he still holds to his innocence ass he continues his appeal to God as his witness. There are four sections to this speech: in vv. 2-5 he dismisses the consolation his friends offered; in vv. 6-17 he laments that he is abandoned by God and man; in 16:8—17:9 he makes his appeal to God in heaven as a witness; and finally, in 10-16 he anticipates death.
¹tn The expression uses the piel participle in construct: m^enahame `amal, “comforters of trouble,” i.e., comforters who increase trouble instead of relieving it. D. Winton Thomas translates this “breathers out of trouble” (“A Note on the Hebrew Root naham,” ExT 44 [1932-33]:192).
²tn Disjunctive questions are introduced with the sign of the interrogative; the second part is introduced with ‘o (see GKC, #150g).
³tn Heb “words of wind.”
⁴tn The hiphil of maras does not occur anywhere else. The word means “compel, force” (see 6:25).
⁵tn The Greek seems to have gone a different way: “What, is there any reason in vain words, or what will hinder you from answering?”
⁶tn For the use of the cohortative in the apodosis of conditional sentences, see GKC, #109f.
⁷tn The conjunction lu is used to introduce the optative, a condition that is incapable of fulfillment (see GKC, #159 l).
⁸tn This verb ‘ahbirah is usually connected to habar, “to bind.” There are several suggestions for this word. J. J. Finkelstein proposed a second root, a homonym, meaning “make a sound,” and so here “harangue” (“Hebrew habar and Semitic HBR,” JBL 75 [1956]:328-331; see also O. Loretz, “HBR in Job 16:4,” CBQ 23 [1961]:293-294—he renders it “I could make noisy speeches”). Other suggestions have been for new meanings based on cognate studies, such as “make beautiful” (i.e., make polished speeches). Of the emendations, Dhorme’s ‘akbirah, “I would multiply words” (see 35:16). But this is similar to Tur-Sinai’s usage from Ugaritic, “I could heap up words.”
⁹sn The action is a sign of mockery (see Ps 22:7[8]; Isa 37:22; Matt 27:39).
¹⁰tn “But” has been added in the translation to strengthen the contrast.
¹¹tn The piel of ‘amas means “to strengthen, fortify.”
¹²tn Heb “my mouth.”
¹³tn The verb yahsok means “restrain, withhold.” There is no object, so many make it first person subject, “I will not restrain.” The Greek and the Syriac have a different person—“I would not restrain.” G. R. Driver, arguing that the verb is intransitive here, made it “the solace of my lips would not [added] be withheld” (see JTS 34 [1933]:380). Clines says that what is definitive is the use of the verb in the next line, where it clearly means “soothed, assuaged.”
¹⁴tn “But” is supplied in the translation to strengthen the contrast.
¹⁵tn The niphal yehasek means “be soothed, assuaged.”
¹⁶tn Dhorme argues that mah in the text is the Arabic ma, the simple negative. This would then means “it does not depart far from me.” But the interrogative used rhetorically amounts to the same thing. So the suggestion is not necessary.
¹⁷tn In poetic discourse there is often an abrupt change from person to another. See GKC, #144p. Some take the subject of this verb to be God, others the pain (“surely now it has worn me out”).
¹⁸tn The verb is qamat, which is used only here and in 22:16; it means “seize, grasp.” By God’s seizing him, Job means his afflictions.
¹⁹tn The subject is “my calamity.”
²⁰tn The verb is used in Ps 109:24 to mean “be lean”; and so “leanness” is accepted here for the noun by most. Otherwise the word is “lie, deceit.” Accordingly, some take it here as “my slanderer” or “my liar” (gives evidence against me).
²¹tn The referent of these pronouns in v. 9 (“his anger…he has gnashed…his teeth…his eyes”) is best taken as God.
²²sn The figure used now is that of a wild beast. God’s affliction of Job is compared to the attack of such an animal. In line with Amos 1:11, Dhorme renders this “his anger has found a prey.”
²³tn The verb satam is translated “hate” in the RSV, but this is not accepted by very many. Many emend it to samat, reading “and he dropped me” (from his mouth). But that suggests escape. Clines notes that usage shows it reflects ongoing hatred represented by an action such as persecution or attack (p. 370).
²⁴tn The verb is used of sharpening a sword in Ps 7:12; here it means “look intently” as an animal looks for prey. The verse describes God’s relentless pursuit of Job.
²⁵tn “Men” is supplied; the verb is third plural. The colon reads, “they have opened against me with [instrument] their mouth.” The gestures here follow the animal imagery; they reflect destructive opposition and attack (see Ps 22:13 among others).
²⁶tn This is an “insult” or a “reproach.”
²⁷tn The verb yitmalla’un is taken from male’, “to be full,” and in this stem, “pile up, press together.” The term has a military connotation, such as “to mobilize” (see D. Winton Thomas, JJS 3 [1952]:47ff.). Job sees himself surrounded by enemies who persecute him and mock him.
²⁸tn The word `awil means “child,” and this cannot be right here. If it is read as `awwalas in Job 27:7 it would be the unrighteous.
²⁹sn Job does not refer here to his friends, but more likely to the wicked men who set about to destroy him and his possessions, or to the rabble in chapter 30.
³⁰tn The word yirteni does not derive from the root ratah as would fit the pointing in the MT, but from yarat, cognate to Arabic warrata, “throw, hurl.” Dhorme thinks that since the normal form would have been yir^eteni, it is probable that one of the yods would have affected the word `awil (p. 236)—but that does not make much sense.
³¹tn The verb parar means “to shake.” In the hiphil it means “to break, shatter” (5:12; 15:4). The pilpel means “break in pieces,” and in the po`el in Jer 23:29 “to smash up.” So Job was living at ease, and God shattered his life.
³²tn Here is another pilpel, now from pasas, with a similar meaning to the other verb. It means “to dash into pieces” and even scatter the pieces. The Greek translates this line, “he took me by the hair of the head and plucked it out.”
³³tn The meaning of “his archers” is supported for rabbaw in view of Jer 50:29. The Greek, Syriac, Vulgate, Targum Job, followed by several translations and commentators prefer “arrows.” They see this as a more appropriate figure without raising the question of who the archers might be (see 6:4). The point is an unnecessary distinction, for the figure is an illustration of the affliction that God has brought on him.
³⁴tn The expression is literally “and he does not pity,” but the clause is functioning adverbially in the line.
³⁵tn The verb palah in the piel means “to pierce” (see Prov 7:23). A fuller comparison should be made with Lam 3:12-13.
³⁶tn This word m^ererati, “my gall,” is found only here. It is close to the form in Job 13:26, “bitter things.” In Job 20:14 it may mean “poison.”The thought is also found in Lam 2:11.
³⁷tn The word paras means “to make a breach” in a wall (Isa 5:5; Ps 80:13). It is used figuratively in the birth and naming of Peres in Gen 38:29. Here the image is now of a military attack that breaks through a wall. The text uses the cognate accusative, and then with the addition of `al p^ene, “in addition,” it repeats the cognate noun. A smooth translation that reflects the three words is difficult. Dhorme has “he batters me down, breach upon breach” (p. 237).
³⁸tn Heb “runs.”
³⁹sn The language is hyperbolic; Job is saying that the sackcloth he has put on in his lamentable state is now stuck to his skin as if he had stitched it into the skin. It is now a habitual garment that he never takes off.
⁴⁰tn The po`el `olalti, from `alal, “to enter,” has here the meaning of “thrust in.” The activity is the opposite of “raising high the horn,” a picture of dignity and victory.
⁴¹tn There is no English term that captures exactly what “horn” is meant to do. Drawn from the animal world, the image was meant to convey strength and pride and victory. Some modern commentators have made other proposals for the line. The NEB translation of “forelock” is drawn from an Arabic cognate proposal from W. R. Arnold and the Driver (see Arnold, AJSL 21 [1904,05]:167-172). Svi Rin suggested from Ugaritic that the verb be translated “lower” or “dip” (“Ugaritic—Old Testament Affinities,” BZ 7 [1963]:22-33).
⁴²tn An intensive form, a qetaltal form of the root hamar is used here. This word has as probable derivatives homer, “(red) clay,” and hamor, “(red) ass,” and the like. Because of the weeping, his whole complexion has been reddened (Greek says, “my belly”).
⁴³sn Davidson notes that spontaneous and repeated weeping is one of the symptoms of elephantiasis (p. 122).
⁴⁴sn See Job 3:5. Just as joy brings light and life to the eyes, sorrow and suffering bring darkness. The “eyelids” here would be synecdoche, reflecting the whole facial expression as sad and sullen.
⁴⁵tn For the use of the preposition `al to introduce concessive clauses, see GKC, #160c.
⁴⁶sn Job knows that he will die, and that his death, signified here by blood on the ground, will cry out for vindication.
⁴⁷tn The word is simply “a place”; but in the context it surely means a hidden place, a secret place that would never be discovered (see 18:21). Dahood finds parallel ideas in the inscriptions and offers a translation of “burial place” or “tomb” (The Bible in Current Catholic Thought, ed. by McKenzie, pp. 61-62). But this evidence is highly suspect.
⁴⁸sn The witness in heaven must be God, to whom the cries and prayers come. Job’s dilemma is serious, but common to the human experience: the hostility of God towards him is baffling, but he is conscious of his innocence and can call on God to be his witness.
⁴⁹tn The parallelism now uses the Aramaic word—the one who testifies on my behalf. The word again appears in Gen 31:47 for Laban’s naming of the “heap of witness” in Aramaic—“Sahadutha.”
⁵⁰tn The first two words of this verse are problematic: m^elisay re`ay, “my scorners are my friends.” The word melis, from or related to the word for “scorner” (lis) in wisdom literature especially, can also mean “mediator” (33:23), “interpreter” (Gen 42:23). This gives the idea that “scorn” has to do with the way words are used. It may be that the word here should have the singular suffix and be taken as “my spokesman.” This may not be from the same root as “scorn” (see N. H. Richardson, “Some Notes on lis and Its Derivatives,” VT 5 [1955]:434-436). This is the view of the NIV, NJPS, JB, NAB, as well as a number of commentators. Irwin took it as “my mediator is my friend” (cf. Lindblom, Composition de livre de Job, p. 62), and Pope has it “mediator of my thoughts.” The idea of “my friends are scorners” is out of place in this section, unless taken as a parenthesis. Other suggestions are not convincing. The Greek has, “May my prayer come to the LORD, and before him may my eye shed tears.” Some have tried to change the Hebrew to fit this. The word “my friends” also calls for some attention. Instead of a plural noun suffix, most would see it as a singular, a slight vocalic change. But others think it is not the word “friend.” Clines accepts the view that it is not “friends” but “thoughts” (rea`). Dhorme takes it as “clamor,” from rua`, and so interprets “my claimant word has reached God.” J. B. Curtis tries “My intercessor is my shepherd ro`i (“On Job’s Witness in Heaven,” JBL 102 [1983]:549-562).
⁵¹tn The word means “drip, stream, flow”; the expression is cryptic, but understandable: “my eye flows [with tears as I cry out] to God.” But many suggestions have been made for this line too. Driver suggested in connection with cognate words that it be given the meaning “sleepless” (JTS 34 [1933]:375-385), but this would also require additional words for a smooth reading. See also E. A. Speiser, “The Semantic Range of dalapu,” JCS 5 (1951):64-66, for the Akkadian connection. But for the retention of “dripping eyes” based on the Talmudic use, see J. C. Greenfield, “Lexicographical Notes I,” HUCA 29 (1958):203-228.
⁵²tn Dhorme alters this slightly to read “Would that” or “Ah! if only” (p. 240).
⁵³tn This is the simple translation of the expression “son of man” in Job. But some commentators wish to change the word ben to ben, “between.” It would then be “[as] between a man and [for] his friend.” Even though a few MSS have this, it is to be rejected. But see James Barr, “Some Notes on `ben’ in Classical Hebrew,” JSS 23 (1978):1-22.
⁵⁴tn The verb is supplied from the parallel clause.
⁵⁵tn The expression is “years of number,” meaning that they can be counted, and so “the years are few.” The verb simply means “comes” or “lie ahead.”
⁵⁶tn The verbal expression “I will not return” serves here to modify the journey that he will take. It is “the road [of] I will not return.”
¹tn The verb habal, “to act badly,” in the piel means “to ruin.” The pual translation with “my spirit” as the subject means “broken” in the sense of finished (not in the sense of humbled as in Ps 51).
²tn The verb za`aq (equivalent of Aramaic da`aq) means “to be extinguished.” It only occurs here in the Hebrew.
³tn The plural “graves” could be simply an intensification, a plural of extension (see GKC, #124c), or a reference to the graveyard. Coverdale had: “I am harde at deathes dore.” The expression simply has “graves for me.” It probably means that graves await him, but Dhorme has “grave is what I need.”
⁴tn The noun is the abstract noun, “mockery.” It indicates that he is the object of derision. But many commentators either change the word to “mockers” (Tur-Sinai, NEB), or argue that the form in the text is a form of the participle (Gordis).
⁵tn Dhorme interprets the preposition to mean “aimed at me” (p. 243).
⁶tn The meaning of hamm^erotam is unclear, and the versions offer no help. If the MT is correct, it would probably be connected to marah, “to be rebellious, and the derived form something like “hostility, provocation.” But some commentators suggest it should be related to marar, “bitter things.” Others have changed both the noun and the verb to obtain something like “My eye is weary of their contentiousness” (Holscher), or mine eyes are wearied by your stream of peevish complaints” (Driver, VT Supp 3 [1955]:78). There is no alternative suggestion that is compelling.
⁷tn The MT has two imperatives: “Lay down, pledge me, with me.” Most commentators think that the second imperative should be a noun, and take it to say, “Lay my pledge with/beside you.” Davidson suggests that the first verb means “give a pledge,” and so the two similar verbs would be emphatic: “Give a pledge, be my surety” (p. 126). Other than such a change (which would involve changing the vowels) one would have to interpret similarly by seeing the imperatives as a kind of hendiadys, with the main emphasis being on the second imperative, “make a pledge.”
⁸sn The idiom is “to strike the hand.” Here the wording is a little different, “Who is he that will strike himself into my hand?”
⁹tn This half-verse gives the reason for the next half-verse.
¹⁰sn The pronoun refers to Job’s friends. They have not pledged security for him because God has hidden or sealed off their understanding.
¹¹tn The object “them” is added. This is the simplest reading of the line, taking the verb is an active polel. Dhorme suggests that the subject is “their hand” and the verb is to be translated “is not raised.” This would carry through the thought of the last verse, but it is not necessary to the point.
¹²tn This verse is rather obscure. The words are not that difficult, but the sense of them in this context is. Some take the idea to mean “he denounces his friends for a portion,” and others have a totally different idea of “he invites his friends to share with him.” The former fits the context better, indicating that Job’s friends speak out against him for some personal gain. The second half of the verse then promises that his children will suffer loss for this attempt at gain. The line is surely proverbial. For a number of other interpretations, see the commentaries.
¹³tn The verb is the third person, and so God is likely the subject. The Greek has “you have made me.” So most commentators clarify the verb in some such way. But without an expressed subject it can also be taken as a passive.
¹⁴tn The word “byword” is also the word translated “proverb” in the Bible, masal. Job’s case is so well known that he is synonymous with afflictions and with abuse by people.
¹⁵tn The word topet is a hapax. The expression is “and a spitting in/to the face I have become,” i.e., “I have become one in whose face people spit.” Various suggestions have been made, including a link to Tophet, but they are weak. The verse as it exists in the MT is fine, and fits the context well.
¹⁶tn See the usage of this verb in Gen 27:1 and Deut 34:7. Usually it is age that causes the failing eyesight, but here it is the grief.
¹⁷tn The word y^esurim, here with a suffix, occurs only here in the Bible. The word is related to yasar, “to form, fashion.” And so Targum Job has “my forms,” and Vulgate “my members.” The Syriac uses “thoughts” to reflect yeser. Some have followed this to interpret, “all my thoughts have dissolved into shadows.” But the parallel with “eye” would suggest “form.” The plural “my forms, all of them” would refer to the whole body.
¹⁸tn This verb samam is the one found in Isa 52:14, translated there “astonished.”
¹⁹tn The verb means “to rouse oneself to excitement.” It naturally means “to be agitated, stirred up.”
²⁰sn The commentators debate whether these verses, 8-10 usually, belong here, or anywhere. For the various opinions, see the commentators. Davidson and Dhorme and Ball defend their authenticity.
²¹tn The last two words are the imperfect tense yosip which means “he adds,” and the abstract noun “energy, strength.” This noun is not found elsewhere; its piel verb occurs in Job 4:4 and 16:5. “he increases strength.”
²²tn The form says “all of them.” Several editors would change it to “all of you,” but the lack of concord is not surprising; the vocative elsewhere uses the third person (see Mic 1:2; see also GKC, #135r).
²³tn The first verb, the jussive, means “return”; the second verb, the imperative, means “come.” The two could be taken as a hendiadys, the first verb becoming adverbial: “come again.”
²⁴tn Instead of the exact correspondence between coordinate verbs, other combinations occur—here we have a jussive and an imperative (see GKC, #120e).
²⁵tn. This term usually means “plans, devices” in a bad sense, although it can be used of God’s plans (see e.g., Zech 8:15).
²⁶tn Although not in the Hebrew text, “even” is supplied in the translation, because this line is in apposition to the preceding.
²⁷tn This word has been linked to the root yaras, “to inherit,” yielding a meaning “the possessions of my heart.” But it is actually to be connected to ‘aras, “to desire,” cognate to the Akkadian eresu, “desire.” The Greek has “limbs,” which may come from an Aramaic word for “ropes.” An emendation based on the Greek would be risky.
²⁸sn The verse simply has the plural, “they change.” But since this verse seems to be a description of his friends, a clarification in the reading is helpful.
²⁹tn The same verb sim is used this way in Isa 5:20: “…who change darkness into light.”
³⁰tn The rest of the verse makes better sense if it is interpreted as what his friends say.
³¹tn This expression is open to a couple of translations. It could also mean that they say in the face of darkness, “Light is near.” It could also be “The light is near the darkness” or “The light is nearer than the darkness.”
³²tn The clause begins with ‘im, which here has more of the sense of “since.” Dhorme takes a rather rare use of the word to get “Can I hope again” (see p. 253; see also GKC, #150f for the caveat).
³³tn This is understood because the conditional clauses seem to run to the apodosis in v. 15.
³⁴tn The word sahat may be the word “corruption” from a root sahat, “to destroy,” or a word “pit” from suah, to sink down. The same problem surfaces in Ps 16:10, where it is parallel to “Sheol.” Sutcliffe, The Old Testament and the Future Life, pp. 76ff., defends the meaning “corruption.” But many commentators here take it to mean “the grave” in harmony with “Sheol.” But in this verse “worms” would suggest “corruption” is better.
³⁵tn The adverb ‘epo plays an enclitic role here (see Job 4:7).
³⁶tn The repetition of “my hope” in the verse has thrown the versions off, and their translations have led commentators also to change the second one to something like “goodness,” on the assumption that a word cannot be repeated in the same verse. The word actually carries two different senses here. The first would be the basic meaning “hope,” but the second a metonymy of cause, namely, what hope produces, what will be seen.
³⁷sn It is natural to assume that this verse continues the interrogative clause of the preceding verse.
³⁸tn The plural form of the verb probably refers to the two words, or the two senses of the word in the preceding verse. Hope and what it produces will perish with Job.
³⁹tn The word baddim is “bars” or “bolts” of Sheol, referring (by synecdoche) to the “gates of Sheol.” The Greek has “with me to Sheol,” and many adopt that, as “by my side.” Dahood, however, retains the MT but interprets it as a contraction for bide, “into the hands of” (The Bible in Current Catholic Thought, p. 62).
⁴⁰tn The conjunction ‘im confirms the interrogative interpretation.
⁴¹tn The translation follows the Greek and the Syriac with the change of vocalization in the MT. The MT has the noun “rest,” yielding, “will our rest be together in the dust?” The verb nahat in Aramaic is “go down, descend.” If that is the preferred reading—and it almost is universally accepted here—then it would be spelled nehat. In either case the point of the verse is clearly describing death and going to the grave.
⁴²sn Bildad attacks Job with less subtlety than Eliphaz. He describes the miserable existence of the wicked, indicating that it is the proof of sin. His speech falls into two main parts: why is Job so contemptuous toward his friends (Job 18:2-4), and the fate of the wicked (18:5-21). On this chapter see N. M. Sarna, “The Mythological Background of Job 18,” JBL 82 (1963):315-318; and W. A. Irwin, “Job’s Redeemer,” JBL 81 (1962):217-229.
¹tn The verb is plural, and so most commentators make it singular. But it seems from the context that Bildad is addressing all of them, and not just Job.
²tn The construction is qinse l^emillin, which is often taken to be “end of words,” as if the word was from qes. But a plural of “end” is not found in the OT. Some will link the word to Arabic qanasa, “to hunt, give chase,” to get an interpretation of “snares for words.” But Dhorme objects that this does not fit the speech of Bildad (as well as it might Job’s). He finds a cognate qinsu, “fetters, shackles,” and reads “how long will you put shackles on words” (p. 257). But Driver had pointed out that this cognate does not exist (VT Supp 3 [1955]:72-93). So it would be preferable to take the reading “ends” and explain the nun as from a Aramaizing by-form. This is supported by 11QtgJob that uses sop, “end.” On the construction, GKC explain this as a use of the construct in rapid narrative to connect the words; in such cases a preposition is on the following noun (#130a).
³tn The imperfect tense, again plural, would be here taken in the nuance of instruction, or a modal nuance of obligation. So Bildad is telling his listeners to be intelligent. This would be rather cutting in the discourse.
⁴tn Heb “afterward.”
⁵tn The verb nitminu has been explained from different roots. Some take it from tame’, “to be unclean,” and translate it “Why should we be unclean in your eyes?” Most would connect it to tamam, “stop up,” meaning “be stupid” in the niphal. Another suggestion is to follow the Greek and read from damam, “to be reduced to silence.” Others take it from damah with a meaning “be like.” But what is missing is the term of comparison—like what? Dhorme accepts this and simply “restores” the phrase “like cattle” before it.
⁶tn The construction uses the participle and then 3rd person suffixes: “O tearer of himself in his anger.” But it is clearly referring to Job, and so the direct second person pronouns should be used to make that clear. The Greek is an approximation or paraphrase here: “Anger has possessed you, for what if you should diewould under heaven be desolate, or shall the mountains be overthrown from their foundations?”
⁷tn There is a good deal of study on this word in this passage, and in Job in general. Dahood suggested a root `azab meaning “arrange, rearrange” (“The Root `azab II in Job,” JBL 78 [1959]:303-309. But this is refuted by H. G. M. Williamson, “A Reconsideration of `azab II in Biblical Hebrew,” ZAW 97 [1985]:74-85.
⁸sn Bildad is asking if Job thinks the whole moral order of the world should be interrupted for his sake, that he may escape the punishment for wickedness.
⁹tn Hebrew gam, “also, moreover,” in view of what has just been said.
¹⁰sn The lamp or the light can have a number of uses in the Bible. Here it is probably an implied metaphor for prosperity and happiness, for the good life itself.
¹¹tn The expression is literally “the flame of his fire,” but the pronominal suffix qualifies the entire bound construction. The two words together intensifies the idea of the flame.
¹²tn The Greek interprets a little more precisely: “his lamp shall be put out with him.”
sn This thesis of Bildad will be questioned by Job in 21:17—how often is the lamp of the wicked snuffed out?
¹³tn Heb “the steps of his vigor,” the genitive being the attribute.
¹⁴tn The verb sarar means “cramped, straitened, hemmed in.” The trouble has hemmed him in, so that he cannot walk with the full, vigorous steps he had before. The Greek text has “Let the meanest of men spoil his goods.”
¹⁵tn The Greek has “causes him to stumble,” which many commentators accept; but this involves the transposition of the three letters. The verb is salak, and not kasal.
¹⁶tn See Ps 25:15.
¹⁷tn The word s^ekabah is used in scripture for the lattice window (2 Kgs 1:2). The Arabic cognate means “to be intertwined.” So the term could describe a net, matting, grating or lattice. Here it would be the netting stretched over a pit.
¹⁸tn This word pah specifically refers to the snare of the fowler—thus a bird trap. But its plural seems to refer to nets in general (see Job 22:10).
¹⁹tn This word does not occur elsewhere. But another word from the same root means “plait of hair,” and so this term has something to do with a net like a trellis or lattice.
²⁰tn The word is “his rope.” The suffix must be a genitive expressing that the trap was for him, to trap him, and so objective.
²¹tn Here to it is “his trap” in the text, but the pronominal suffix is objective as well.
²²sn Bildad is referring here to all the things that afflict a person and cause terror. It would then be a metonymy of effect, the cause being the afflictions.
²³tn The verb pus in the hiphil has the meaning “pursue” and “scatter.” It is followed by the expression “at his feet.” So the idea is easily derived: they chase him at his feet. But some commentators have other proposals. The most far-fetched is that of Ehrlich and Driver (ZAW NF 24 [1953]:259-60) which has “and compel him to urinate on his feet,” one of many similar readings the NEB accepted from Driver. Dhorme is correct to dismiss this as needlessly coarse.
²⁴tn The jussive is occasionally used without its normal sense and only as an imperfect (see GKC, #109k).
²⁵tn There are a number of suggestions for ‘ono. Some take it as “vigor,” “his strength is hungry”; others take it as “iniquity,” “his iniquity/trouble is hungry.” Dhrome emends it to say “[he is hungry] amid his wealth” (b^e’ono; he suggests the bet has fallen out due to haplography).
²⁶tn The expression means that misfortune is right there to destroy him whenever there is the opportunity.
²⁷tn The expression “the limbs of his skin” makes no sense, unless a poetic meaning of “parts” is taken. The parallelism has “his skin” in the first colon, and “his limbs” in the second. One plausible suggestion is to take badde, “limbs of,” in the first part to be bidway, “by a disease” (Dhorme, Wright, RSV). The verb has to be made passive, however. The versions have different things: The Greek has “let the branches of his feet be eaten”; the Syriac has “his cities will be swallowed up by force”; the Vulgate reads “let it devour the beauty of his skin”; and Targum Job has “it will devour the linen garments that cover his skin.”
²⁸tn The “firstborn of death” is the strongest child of death (Gen 49:3), or, the deadliest death (like the “firstborn of the poor, the poorest). The phrase means the most terrible death (Davidson, p. 134).
tn The MT has literally “from his tent, his security.” The apposition serves to modify the tent as his security.
tn The verb is the hiphil of sa`ad, “to lead away.” The problem is that the form is either a third feminine (Rashi thought it was referring to his wife) or the second person (which is the view of Dhorme). There is a good deal of debate over the possibility of the prefix t- being a variant for the third masculine form. The evidence in Ugaritic and Akkadian is mixed, stronger for the plural than the singular. But see the discussions in Sarna (JBL 82 [1963]:318); Moran (JCS 5 [1951]:33-35); and van Dijk (VT 19 [1969]:440-447). Gesenius has some samples where the third feminine form might also be used for the passive if there is no expressed subject (see GKC, #144b), but the evidence is not strong. The simplest choices are to change the prefix to a yod, or argue that the taw can be masculine, or follow Gesenius.
³⁰sn This is a reference to death, the king of all terrors. Pope identifies him as Mot, the Ugaritic god of death. Dhorme identifies him with Nergal of the Babylonians, Molech of the Canaanites, the one to whom people sent emissaries.
³¹tn This line is difficult as well. The verb, again a third feminine form (or second masculine according to Dhorme) says “it dwells in his tent” (or with Dhorme, “you may dwell in his tent”). But the next part, mibb^eli lo, means something like “things of what are not his.” The best that can be made of the MT is “There shall live in his tent they that are not his.” Dahood suggested a reading mabbel and a connection to Akkadian nablu, “fire” (cf. Ugaritic nbl). The interchange of m and n is not a problem, and the parallelism with the next line makes good sense (Biblica 38 [1957]:312ff.). Others suggest an emendation to get “night-hag” or vampire. This suggestion, as well as Driver’s “mixed herbs,” are linked to the idea of exorcism. But if a change is to be made, Dahood’s is the most compelling.
³²tn Heb “outside.” Dhorme took this to mean the wilderness, in contrast to the earth of the first colon.
³³tn The verbs in this verse are plural; without the expressed subject they should be taken in the passive sense.
³⁴tn The two words nin and neked are always together and form an alliteration. This is hard to capture in English, but some have tried: Moffatt had “son and scion,” and Tur-Sinai had “breed or brood.” But the words are best simply translated as “lineage and posterity” or as in the NIV “offspring or descendants.”
³⁵tn Heb “in his sojournings.” The verb gur means “to reside, sojourn” temporarily, without land rights. Even this word has been selected to stress the temporary nature of his stay on earth.
³⁶tn The word ‘aharonim means “those [men] coming after.” And the next word, qadmonim, means “those [men] coming before. Some commentators have tried to see here references to people who lived before and people who lived after, but that does not explain their being appalled at the fate of the wicked. So the normal way this is taken is in connection to the geography, notably the seas—“the hinder sea” refers to the Mediterranean, the West, and the “the front sea” refers to the Dead Sea (Zech 14:8), namely, the East. The versions understood this as temporal: “the last groaned for him, and wonder seized the first” (Greek).
³⁷tn Heb “his day.”
³⁸tn The expression has “they seize horror.” The RSV renders this “horror seizes them.” The same idiom is found in Job 21:6: “laid hold on shuddering.” The idiom would solve the grammatical problem, and not change the meaning greatly; but it would change the parallelism.
³⁹tn The term is in the plural, “the tabernacles”; it should be taken as a plural of local extension (see GKC, #124b).
⁴⁰tn The word “place” is in construct; the clause following it replaces the genitive: “this is the place of—he has not known God.”
⁴¹sn Job is completely stunned by Bildad’s speech, and feels totally deserted by God and his friends. Yet from his despair a new hope emerges with a stronger faith. Even though he knows he will die in his innocence, he knows that God will vindicate him and that he will be conscious of the vindication. There are four parts to this reply: Job’s impatience with the speeches of his friends (2-6), God’s abandonment of Job and his attack (7-12), Job’s forsaken state and appeal to his friends (13-22), and Job’s confidence that he will be vindicated (13-19).
¹tnThe MT has a verb from yagah, “to afflict, torment.” This is supported by the versions. But the Greek has “tire” which is apparently from yaga`. The form in the MT is unusual because it preserves the final (original) yod in the hiphil (see GKC, #75gg). So this unusual form has been preserved, and is the correct reading. A modal nuance for the imperfect fits best here: how long do you intend to do this?
²tn The MT has daka’, “crush” in the piel. The Greek, however, has a more general word “destroy.”
³tn The Greek adds to the verse: “only know that the Lord has dealt with me thus.”
⁴sn The number “ten” is a general expression to convey that this has been done often (see Gen 31:7; Num 14:22).
⁵tn The hiphil of the verb kalam means “outrage, insult, shame.” The verbs in this verse are prefixed conjugations, and may be interpreted as preterites if the reference is to the past time. But since the action is still going on, progressive imperfects work well.
⁶tn The second half of the verse uses two verbs, the one dependent on the other. It could be translated “you are not ashamed to attack me” (see GKC #120c), or “you attack me shamelessly.” The verb hakar poses some difficulties for both the ancient versions and the modern commentators. The verb seems to be cognate to Arabic hakara, “oppress, ill-treat.” This would mean that there has been a transformation of het to he’. Three Hebrew MSS actually have the het. This has been widely accepted. other suggestions are irrelevant.
⁷tn Job has held to his innocence, so the only way that he could say “I have erred” (sagiti) is in a hypothetical clause like this.
⁸tn There is a long addition in Greek: “in having spoken words which it is not right to speak, and my words err, and are unreasonable.”
⁹tn The word m^esugah is a hapax. It is derived from sug, “wander, err,” (root parallels with sagag and sagah). What Job is saying is that even if it were true that he had erred, it did not injure them—it was solely his concern.
¹⁰tn The introductory particles repeat ‘omnam but now with ‘im. It could be interpreted to mean “is it not true,” or, as here, in another conditional clause.
¹¹tn The verb is the hiphil of gadal; it can mean “to make great” or as an internal causative “to make oneself great” or “to assume a lofty attitude, to be insolent.” There is no reason to assume another root here with the meaning of “quarrel” (as Gordis does).
¹²sn Job’s friends have been using his shame, his humiliation in all his sufferings, as proof against him in their case.
¹³tn The imperative is used here to introduce a solemn affirmation. This verse proves that Job was in no way acknowledging sin in v. 4. Here Job is declaring that God has wronged him, and in so doing, perverted justice.
¹⁴tn The piel of `awat means “to warp justice” (see 8:3), or here, to do wrong to someone (see Ps 119:78). The statement is chosen to refute the question that Bildad asked in his first speech.
¹⁵tn The verb naqap means “to turn, make a circle, encircle.” It means that he has encircled or engulfed Job with his net.
¹⁶tn The word m^esudo is usually connected with sud, “to hunt,” and so is taken to mean “a net” (cf. BDB). Gordis and Habel, however, interpret it to mean “siegeworks” thrown up around a city—but that would require changing the dalet to a resh. The Greek text, though, has “bulwark.” Besides, the previous speech used several words for “net.”
¹⁷tn The particle is used here as in 9:11 (see GKC, #159w).
¹⁸tn The Greek has “I laugh at reproach.”
¹⁹tn The same idea is expressed in Jer 20:8 and Hab 1:2. The cry is a cry for help, that he has been wronged, that there is no justice.
²⁰tn The niphal is simply “I am not answered.” See Prov 21:13b.
²¹tn The verb gadar means “to wall up, fence up, block.” God has blocked his way so that he cannot get through. See also Lam 3:7.
²²tn Guillaume, and others before him, take the word to be hasak, related to an Arabic word for “thorn hedge” (Promise and Fulfillment, ed. by F. F. Bruce, p. 114).
²³sn The images here are fairly common in the Bible. God has stripped Job’s honorable reputation. The crown is the metaphor for the esteem and dignity he once had. See 29:14; Isa 61:3; see Ps 8:5[6].
²⁴tn The metaphors are changed now to a demolished building and an uprooted tree. The verb natas is “to demolish.” Since it is Job himself who is the object, the meaning cannot be “demolish” (as of a house so that an inhabitant has to leave), but more of the attack or the battering.
²⁵tn The text has halak, “to leave.” But in view of Job 14:20, “perish” or “depart” would be a better meaning here.
²⁶tn The verb nasa` means “to travel” generally, but specifically it means “to pull up the tent pegs and move.” The hiphil here means “uproot.” It is used of a vine in Ps 80:9. The idea here does not contradict Job 14:7, for there the tree still had roots and so could grow.
²⁷tn The NEB has “my tent rope,” but that seems too contrived here. It is absurd to pull up a tent-rope like a tree.
²⁸tn This second half of the verse is a little difficult. The Hebrew has “and he reckons me for him like his adversaries.” Most would change the last word to a singular in harmony with the versions, “as his adversary.” But some retain the MT pointing and try to explain it variously: Weiser suggests that the plural might have come from a cultic recitation of Yahweh’s deeds against his enemies; Fohrer thinks it refers to the primeval enemies; Gordis takes it as distributive, “as one of his foes.” If the plural is retained, this latter view makes the most sense.
²⁹sn Now the metaphor changes again. Since God thinks of Job as an enemy, he attacks with his troops, builds the siege ramp, and camps around him to besiege him. All the power and all the forces are at God’s disposal in his attack of Job.
³⁰tn The verb salal means “to build a siege ramp,” or “throw up a ramp.” Here the object is “there way.” The latter could be taken as an adverbial accusative, “as their way.” But as the object it fits just as well. Some delete the middle clause; the Greek has “Together his troops fell upon me, they beset my ways with an ambush.”
³¹tn The Greek apparently took ‘ak and zaru together as if it was the verb ‘akzaru, “they have become cruel” (as in 20:21). But the grammar in the line would be difficult with this. Moreover, the word is most likely from zur, “to turn away.” See L. A. Snijders, “The Meaning of zar in the Old Testament,” OTS 10 (1964):1-154 [9].
³²tn The pual participle is used for those “known” to him, or with whom he is “familiar,” whereas qarob, “near,” is used for a relative.
³³tn Many commentators add the first part of v. 15 to this verse, because it is too loaded and this is too short. That gives the reading “My kinsmen and my familiar friends have disappeared, they have forgotten me (15) the guests I entertained.” There is not much support for this, nor is there much reason for it.
³⁴tn The Hebrew gare beti, “the guests of my house,” those who sojourned in my house—not residents, but guests.
³⁵tn The form of the verb is a feminine plural, which would seem to lend support to the proposed change of the lines. But the form may be feminine primarily because of the immediate reference. On the other side, the suffix of “their eyes” is a masculine plural. So the evidence lies on both sides.
³⁶tn This word nokri is the person from another race, from a strange land, the foreigner. The previous word, ger, is a more general word for someone who is staying in the land but is not a citizen, a sojourner.
³⁷tn The verb qara’ followed by the lamed preposition, means “to summon.” Contrast Ps 123:2.
³⁸tn The Hebrew appears to have “my breath is strange to my wife.” This would be the meaning if the verb was from zur, “to turn aside, to be a stranger.” But it should be connected to zir, cognate to Assyrian zaru, “to feel repugnance toward.” Here it is used in the intransitive sense, “to be repulsive.” Snijders, in the previously mentioned article, following Driver, doubts the existence of this second root, and retains “strange.”
³⁹tn The normal meaning here would be based on the root hanan, “to be gracious.” And so we have versions reading “although I entreated” or “my supplication.” But it seems more likely it is to be connected to another root meaning “be offensive, loathsome.” For the discussion of the connection to the Arabic, see Dhorme, p. 278.
⁴⁰tn The text has “the sons of my belly [= body].” This would normally mean “my sons.” But they are all dead. And there is no suggestion that Job had other sons. The word “my belly” will have to be understood as “my womb,” i.e., the womb I came from.
⁴¹sn The use of the verb “rise” is probably fairly literal. When Job painfully tries to get up and walk, the little boys make fun of him.
⁴²tn The verb dibber followed by the preposition bet indicates speaking against someone, namely, scoffing or railing against someone (see Ps 50:20; 78:19). Some commentators find another root with the meaning “turn one’s back on, turn aside from.” The argument is rendered weak philologically because it requires a definition “from” for the preposition bet. See among others I. Eitan, “Studies in Hebrew Roots,” JQR 14 (1923-24):31-52 [38-41].
⁴³tn Heb “men of my confidence,” or “men of my council,” i.e., intimate friends, confidants.
⁴⁴tn The pronoun zeh functions here in the place of a nominative (see GKC, #138h).
⁴⁵tn T. Penar translates this “turn away from me” (“Job 19,19 in the Light of Ben Sira 6,11,” Biblica 48 [1967]:293-295).
⁴⁶tn The meaning would be “I am nothing but skin and bones” in our idiom. Both lines of this verse need attention. The first half seems to say, “My skin and my flesh sticks to my bones.” Some think that this is too long, and that the bones can stick to the skin, or the flesh, but not both. Dhorme proposes, “in my skin my flesh has rotted away” [raqab]. This involves several changes in the line, however. He then changes the second line to read “and I have gnawed my bone with my teeth” (transferring “bone” from the first half and omitting “skin”). There are numerous other renderings of this; some of the more notable are: ““I escape, my bones in my teeth” (Merx); “my teeth fall out” (Duhm); “my teeth fall from my gums” (Pope); “my bones protrude in sharp points” (IKissane). Davidson retains “the skin of my teeth,” meaning “gums. This is about the last thing that Job has, or he would not be able to speak. For a detailed study of this verse, Clines devotes two full pages of textual notes (pp. 430-31). He concludes with “My bones hang from my skin and my flesh, I am left with only the skin of my teeth.”
⁴⁷tn Or “I am left.”
⁴⁸sn Strahan comments, “The whole tragedy of the book is packed into these extraordinary words.”
⁴⁹sn The idiom of eating the pieces of someone means “slander” in Arabic and Akkadian.
⁵⁰tn The optative is again expressed with the interrogative clause “Who will give that they be written? Job wishes that his words be preserved long after his death.
⁵¹tn While the sense of this line is clear, there is a small problem and a plausible solution. The last word is indeed seper, “book,” usually understood here to mean “scroll.” But the verb that follows it in the verse is yuhaqu, from haqaq, “to engrave, carve.” While the meaning is clearly that Job wants his words to be retained, the idea of engraving in a book, although not impossible, is unusual. And so many have suggested that the Akkadian word siparru, “copper, brass,” is what is meant here (see Isa 30:8; Judg 5:14). The consonants are the same, and the vowel pattern is close to the original vowel pattern of this segholate noun. Writing on copper or bronze sheets has been attested from the 12th to the 2nd centuries, notably in the copper scroll, which would allow the translation “scroll” in our text (see for more bibliography, Clines, p. 432). But Gehman notes that in Phoenician our word can mean “inscription” (JBL 63 [1944]:303ff.), making the proposed substitution unnecessary.
⁵²sn There is some question concerning the use of the lead. It surely cannot be a second description of the tool, for a lead tool would be of no use in chiseling words into a rock. It was Rashi’s idea, followed by Dillmann and Duhm, that lead was run into the cut-out letters (see K. Galling, WO, 2 [1954-59]:6). The suggestion that they wrote on lead tablets does not seem to fit the verse. Dhorme suggests that molten lead was used to mark out where the letters were to be cut into the rock. See further A. Baker, “The Strange Case of Job’s Chisel,” CBQ 31 (1969):370-379.
⁵³tn Or “my Vindicator.” The word is the active participle from ga’al, “to redeem, protect, vindicate.” The word is well-known in the OT because of its identification as the kinsman-redeemer (see the Book of Ruth). This is the near kinsman who will pay off one’s debts, defend the family, avenge a killing, marry the widow of the deceased. The word “redeemer” evokes the wrong connotation for people familiar with the NT alone; a translation of “Vindicator” would capture the idea more. The concept might include the description of the Mediator already introduced in Job 16:19, but surely here Job is thinking of God as his Vindicator. The interesting point to be stressed here is that Job has said clearly that he sees no vindication in this life, that he is going to die. But he knows he will be vindicated, and even though he will die, his Vindicator lives. The dilemma remains though: his distress lay in God’s hiding his face from him, and his vindication lay only in beholding God in peace.
⁵⁴tn The word ‘aharon, “last,” has triggered a good number of interpretations. Here it is an adjectival form and not adverbial; it is an epithet of the Vindicator. Dhorme translates it “as the Last,” almost a title for the Vindicator as “the First and the Last” in Isa 44:6; 48:12. Some commentators, followed by the RSV, change the form to make it adverbial, and translate it “at last.” T. H. Gaster translates it “even if he were the last person to exist” (VT, 4 [1954]:78). The suggestion by Dhorme has the advantage of including the adverbial interpretation, for if the Vindicator is the “Last,” it will be at the end of the age.
⁵⁵tn The Hebrew has “and he will rise/stand upon [the] dust.” The verb qum is properly “rise, arise,” and certainly also can mean “to stand.” Both English ideas are found in the verb. The concept here is that of God rising up to mete out justice. And so to avoid confusion with the idea of resurrection (which although implicit in these words which are pregnant with theological ideas yet to be revealed, is not explicitly stated or intended in this context) the translation “stand” has been used. The Vulgate had “I will rise,” which introduced the idea of Job’s resurrection. The word “dust” is used as in 41:33. The word “dust” is associated with death and the grave, the very earthly particles. Job assumes that God will descend from heaven to bring justice to the world. The use of the word also hints that this will take place after Job has died and returned to dust. Again, the words of Job come to mean far more than he probably understood.
⁵⁶tn This verse on the whole has some serious interpretation problems that have allowed commentators to go in several directions. The verbal clause is “they strike off this,” which is then to be taken as a passive in view of the fact that there is no expressed subject. Some have thought that Job was referring to this life, and that after his disease had done its worst he would see his vindication (see Meek, VT 6 [1956]:100ff.; Sutcliffe, Biblica 31 [1950]:377; and others). But Job has been clear—he does not expect to live and see his vindication in this life. There are a host of other interpretations that differ greatly from the sense expressed in the MT. Duhm, for example, has “and another shall arise as my witness.” Dhorme argues that the vindication comes after death; he emends the verb to get a translation: “and that, behind my skin, I shall stand up.” He explains this to mean that it will be Job in person who will be present at the ultimate drama. But the interpretation is forced, and really unnecessary (pp. 284-85).
⁵⁷tn The Hebrew phrase is “and from my flesh.” This could mean “without my flesh,” i.e., separated from my flesh, or “from my flesh,” i.e., in or with my flesh. The former view is taken by those who think Job’s vindication will come in this life, and who find the idea of a resurrection unlikely to be in Job’s mind. The latter view is taken by those who interpret the preceding line as meaning death and the next verse underscoring that it will be his eye that will see. This would indicate that Job’s faith rises to an unparalleled level at this point. Dhorme, of course, see the vindication in the next life, but continues his interpretation with the idea “from behind” my flesh.
⁵⁸tn Rowley says, “The text of this verse is so difficult, and any convincing reconstruction is so unlikely, that it seems best not to attempt it” (p. 140). His words have gone unheeded, even by himself, and rightly so. There seem to be two general interpretations, the details of some words notwithstanding. An honest assessment of the evidence would have to provide both interpretations, albeit still arguing for one. Here Job says he will see God. This at the least means that he will witness his vindication, which it seems clear from the other complaints of Job will occur after his death (it is his blood that must be vindicated). But in what way, exactly, Job will see God is not clarified. In this verse the verb that is used is often used of prophetic visions; but in the next verse the plain word for seeing—with his eye—is used. The fulfillment will be more precise than Job may have understood. Rowley does conclude: “Though there is no full grasping of a belief in a worthwhile Afterlife with God, this passage is a notable landmark in the program toward such a belief.” The difficulty is that Job expects to die—he would like to be vindicated in this life, but is resolved that he will die. Some commentators think that vv. 25 and 26 follow the wish for vindication now, others (traditionally) see it as in the next life. Some of the other interpretations that take a different line are less impressive, such as Kissane’s, “did I but see God…were I to behold God”; or Waterman’s translation in the English present, making it a mystic vision in which Job already sees that God is his vindicator (see JBL 19 [1950]:379-380).
⁵⁹tn The emphasis is on “I” and “for myself.” No other will be seeing this vindication, but Job himself will see it. Of that he is confident. Some take li, “for myself,” to mean favorable to me, or on my side (see Davidson, p. 143). But Job is expecting (not just wishing for) a face-to-face encounter in the vindication.
⁶⁰tn Hitzig offered another interpretation that is somewhat forced. The “other” (zar) or “stranger” would refer to Job. He would see God, not as an enemy, but in peace.
⁶¹tn Literally “kidneys,” a poetic expression for the seat of emotions.
⁶²tn The Hebrew has “fail/grow faint in my breast.” Job is saying that he has expended all his energy with his longing for vindication.
⁶³tc The MT says “in me.” If that is retained, then the question would be in the first colon, and the reasoning of the second colon would be Job’s. But over 100 MSS have “in him,” and so this reading is accepted by most editors. The verse is a little difficult, but it seems to form a warning by Job that God’s appearance which will vindicate Job will bring judgment on those who persecute him and charge him falsely.
⁶⁴tn The word “wrath” probably refers to divine wrath for the wicked. Many commentators change this word to read “they,” or more precisely, “these things.”
⁶⁵tn The word is “iniquities”; but here as elsewhere it should receive the classification of the punishment for iniquity (a category of meaning that developed from a metonymy of effect).
⁶⁶tn The last word is problematic because of the textual variants in the Hebrew. In place of saddin, some have proposed sadday, and read it “that you may know the Almighty” (Ewald, Wright). Some have read it yes dayyan, “there is a judge” (Gray, Fohrer). Dhorme defends the traditional view, showing that the sin is the abbreviated relative particle on the word for “judgment,” din.
⁶⁷sn Zophar breaks in with an impassioned argument about the brevity and prosperity of the life of the wicked. But every statement that he makes is completely irrelevant to the case at hand. The speech has four sections: after a short preface (2-3) he portrays the brevity of the triumph of the wicked (4-11), retribution for sin (12-22), and God’s swift judgment (23-29). See further, B. H. Kelly, “Truth in Contradiction, A Study of Job 20 and 21,” Int 15 (1961):147-156.
¹tn The ordinary meaning of laken is “therefore,” coming after an argument. But at the beginning of a speech it is an allusion to what follows.
²tn The verb is sub, “return,” but in the hiphil, “bring me back,” i.e., prompt me to make another speech. The text makes good sense as it is, and there is no reason to change the reading to make a closer parallel with the second half—indeed, the second part explains the first.
³tn The word is normally taken from the root “to hasten,” and read “because of my haste within me.” But Delitzsch proposed another root, and similarly, but closer to the text, Dhorme found an Arabic word with the meaning “feeling, sensation.” He argues that from this idea developed the meanings in the cognates of “thoughts” as well (pp. 289,90). Similarly, Gordis translates it “my feeling pain.”
⁴tn There is no indication that this clause is to be subordinated to the next, other than the logical connection, and the use of the waw in the second half.
⁵tn See Job 19:3.
⁶tn The phrase actually has ruah mibbinati, “a spirit/wind/breath/impulse from my understanding.” Some translate it “out or my understanding a spirit answers me.” The idea is not that difficult, and so the many proposals to re-write the text can be rejected. The spirit of his understanding prompts the reply.
⁷tn To take this verb as a simple qal and read it “answers me,” does not provide a clear idea. The form can just as easily be taken as a hiphil, with the sense “causes me to answer.” It is Zophar who will “return” and who will “answer.”
⁸tn The MT has “Do you not know?” The question can be interpreted as a rhetorical question affirming that Job must know this. The question serves to express the conviction that the contents are well-known to the audience (see GKC, #150e).
⁹tn The literal reading is “from the putting of man on earth.” The infinitive is the object of the preposition, which is here temporal. If “man” is taken as the subjective genitive, then the verb would be given a passive translation.
¹⁰tn The expression in the text is “quite near.” This indicates that it is easily attained, and that its end is near.
¹¹tn For the discussion of hanep, see Job 8:13.
¹²tn The phrase is “until a moment,” meaning it is short-lived. But see James Barr, “Hebrew `ad, especially at Job 1:18 and Neh 7:3,” JSS 27 (1982):177-188.
¹³tn The word si’ has been connected with the verb nasa’, “to lift up,” and so interpreted here as “pride.” The form is parallel to “head” in the next part, and so here it refers to his stature, the part that rises up and is crowned. But the verse does describe the pride of such a person, with his head in the heavens.
¹⁴tn There have been attempts to change the word here to “like a whirlwind,” or something similar. But many follow Peake’s view that there is no reason to remove a coarse expression from Zophar. Dhorme had thought of Akkadian gallu, an evil demon—but such does not pass away (Dhorme translated it “vanish”). But CAD shows that the word does not mean a ghost.
¹⁵tn Heb “and they do not find him.” The verb has no expressed subject, and so here is equivalent to a passive. The clause itself is taken adverbially in the sentence.
¹⁶tn The versions confused the root of this verb, taking it from rasas and not from rasah. So it was taken to mean, “Let inferiors destroy his children.” But the verb is rasah. This has been taken to mean “his sons will seek the favor of the poor.” This would mean that they would be reduced to poverty and need help from even the poor. Dhorme, Tur-Sinai, and Pope all see this as the root rasah, “to compensate, restore.” This fits the parallelism well, but not the whole context that well. Dhorme also moves the verse to follow v. 19.
¹⁷tn Some commentators are surprised to see “his hands” here, thinking the passage talks about his death. Budde changed it to “his children,” by altering one letter. Gordis argued that “hand” can mean offspring, and so translated it that way without changing anything in the text (JBL 62 [1943]:343).
¹⁸tn “Bones” is often used metonymically for the whole person, the bones being the framework, meaning everything inside, as well as the body itself.
¹⁹sn This line means that he dies prematurely—at the height of his youthful vigor.
²⁰tn The conjunction ‘im introduces clauses that are conditional or concessive. With the imperfect tense in the protasis it indicates what is possible in the present or future. See GKC, #159q).
²¹sn The wicked person holds on to evil as long as he can, savoring the taste or the pleasure of it.
²²tn Heb “in the middle of his palate.”
²³tn The perfect tense in the apodosis expresses the suddenness of the change (see Driver, Hebrew Tenses, p. 204). The niphal perfect simply means “is turned” or “turns”; “sour is added to clarify what is meant.
²⁴tn The word is “in his loins” or “within him.” Some translate specifically “bowels.”
²⁵sn Some commentators suggest that the ancients believed that serpents secreted poison in the gall bladder, or that the poison came from the gall bladder of serpents. In any case, there is poison (from the root “bitter”) in the system of the wicked person; it may simply be saying it is that type of poison.
²⁶tn Heb “swallowed.”
²⁷tn The choice of words is excellent. The verb yaras means either “to inherit” or “disinherit, dispossess.” The context makes the figure clear that God is administering the emetic to make the wicked through up the wealth; but since wealth is the subject there is a disinheritance meant here.
²⁸tn The word is a homonym for the word for “head,” which has led to some confusion in the versions.
²⁹sn To take the possessions of another person is hereby compared to sucking poison from a serpent—it will kill eventually.
³⁰tn Some have thought this verse is a gloss on v. 14 and should be deleted. But the word for “viper” (‘ap`ah) is a rare word, occurring only here and in Isa30:6 and 59:5. It is unlikely that a rarer word would be used in a gloss. But the point is similar to v. 14—the wealth that was greedily sucked in by the wicked proves to be their undoing. Either this is totally irrelevant to Job’s case, a general discussion, or the man is raising questions about how Job got his wealth.
³¹tn The word p^elaggot simply means “streams, channels.” Because the word is used elsewhere for “streams of oil” (cf. 29:6), and that makes a good parallelism here, some add “oil.” But the second colon of the verse is probably in apposition to the first. The verb “see” followed by the preposition bet, “to look on, over,” means “to enjoy as a possession,” an activity of the victor.
³²tn The construct nouns here have caused a certain amount of revision. It says “rivers of, torrents of.” The first has been emended by Klostermann to yishar, “oil,” and connected to the first colon. Older editors argued for a nahar that meant “oil” but that was not convincing. On the other hand, there is support for having more than one construct together serving as apposition (see GKC, #130e). If the word “streams” in the last colon is a construct, that would mean three of them; but that one need not be construct. The reading would be “He will not see the streams, [that is] the rivers [which are] the torrents of honey and butter.” It is unusual, but workable.
³³sn This word is often translated “curds.” It is curdled milk, possibly a type of butter.
³⁴tn The idea is the fruit of his evil work. The word yaga` occurs only here; it must mean ill-gotten gains. The verb is in 10:3.
³⁵tn This is literally “and he does not swallow.” In the context this means “consume” for his own pleasure and prosperity. The verbal clause is here taken adverbially.
³⁶sn The expression is “according to the wealth of his exchange.” This means he cannot enjoy whatever he gained in his business deals. Some MSS have bet preposition, making the translation easier; but this is evidence of a scribal correction.
³⁷tn The verb indicates that after he oppressed the poor he abandoned them to their fate. But there have been several attempts to improve on the text. Several have re-pointed the text to get a word parallel to “house.” Ehrlich came up with `ozeb, “mud hut,” Kissane had “hovel” (similar to Neh 3:8). Dahood did the same (JBL 78 [1959]:pp. 306,7). J. Reider came up with `ezeb, the “leavings,” what the rich were to leave for the poor (HUCA 24 [1952,53]:103-141). But an additional root `azab is questionable. And while the text as it stands is general and not very striking, there is absolutely nothing wrong with it. Dhorme reverses the letters to gain b^e`oz, “with force, violence.”
³⁸tn The last clause says, “and he did not build it.” This can be understood in an adverbial sense, supplying the relative pronoun to the translation.
³⁹tn This line has been translated literally here because the explanatory translations have to be too paraphrastic. The “belly” represents his cravings, his desires and appetites. The satisfaction is actually the word for “quite, peace, calmness, ease.” He was driven by greedy desires, or, he felt and displayed an insatiable greed.
⁴⁰tn The verb is difficult to translate in this line. It basically means “cause to escape, rescue.” Dhorme translates it “it is impossible to escape”; this may work, but is uncertain. Others translate the verb in the sense of saving something else: Sarna says, “Of his most cherished possessions he shall save nothing” (JBL 78 [1959]: 315,16). RSV has “he will save nothing in which he delights.” NIV has “he cannot save himself by his treasure.”
⁴¹tn The verb is the passive participle of the verb hamad, which is one of the words for “covet, desire.” This person is controlled by his desires; there is no escape. He is a slave.
⁴²tn The Hebrew has “for his eating,” which is frequently rendered “for his gluttony.” It refers, of course, to all the desires he has to take things from other people.
⁴³sn The point throughout here is that insatiable greed and ruthless plundering to satisfy it will be recompensed with utter and complete loss.
⁴⁴tn The word sapaq occurs only here; it means “sufficiency, wealth, abundance (see D. Winton Thomas, “The Text of Jesaia 2:6 and the Word sapaq,” ZAW 75 [1963]:88-90).
⁴⁵tn The expression is “there is straitness for him.” The root sarar means “to be narrowed in straits, to be in a bind.” The word here would have the idea of pressure, stress, trouble. One could say he is in a bind.
⁴⁶tnThe text has for this line: “every hand of trouble comes to him.” The pointing of `amel indicates it would refer to one who brings trouble; Greek and Latin read an abstract noun `amal here: “trouble.” Dhorme has it: “all the blows of misfortune rain down upon him.” This is interesting, but a little interpretive for bo’ for this context (but see Job 15:21).
⁴⁷tn Clines observes that to do justice to the three jussives in the verse, one would have to translate “May it be, to fill his belly to the full, that God should send…and rain” (p. 477). The jussive form of the verb at the beginning of the verse could also simply introduce a protasis of a conditional clause (see GKC, #109h-i). This would mean, “if he [God] is about to fill his [the wicked’s] belly to the full, he will send….” Dhorme has “when he is occupied in filling his belly.” NIV reads “when he has filled his belly.” These fit better for the context is talking about the wicked in his evil pursuit being cut down.
⁴⁸tn “God” is understood as the subject of the judgment.
⁴⁹tn Heb “the anger of his wrath.” Both words are related to words that mean heat.
⁵⁰tn The Hebrew strangely has “rain down upon him, on his flesh.” Dhorme changes `alemo, “upon him,” to “his arrows”; he translates the line as “he rains his arrows upon his flesh.” The word “his flesh” (bilhumo) has been given a wide variety of translations: “as his food,” “on his flesh,” “upon him, his anger,” or “missiles or weapons of war.”
⁵¹tn The MT has “he draws out (or as a passive, “it is drawn out/forth”) and comes/goes out of his back.” For the first verb salap, many commentators follow the Greek and use selah, “a spear.” It then reads “and a shaft comes out of his back,” a sword flash comes out of his liver.” But the verse could also be a continuation of the preceding.
⁵²tn Possibly a reference to lightnings.
⁵³tn The MT literally has “all darkness is hidden for his laid up things.” All darkness refers to the misfortunes and afflictions that await. The verb “hidden” means “is destined for.”
⁵⁴tn Heb “not blown upon,” i.e., not kindled by man. But Driver reads “unquenched” (JBL 53 [1934):289).
⁵⁵tn For the word ‘imro, some propose reading “his appointment,” and the others, “his word.” Driver shows that “the heritage of his appointment” means “his appointed heritage” (see GKC, #135n).
⁵⁶sn In this chapter Job actually answers the ideas of all three of his friends. Here Job finds the flaw in their argument—he can point to wicked people who prosper. But whereas in the last speech, when he looked on his suffering from the perspective of his innocence, he found great faith and hope, in this chapter when he surveys the divine government of the world, he sinks to despair. The speech can be divided into five parts: he appeals for a hearing (2-6), he points out the prosperity of the wicked (7-16), he wonders exactly when the godless suffer (17-22), he shows how death levels everything (23-26), and he reveals how experience contradicts his friends’ argument (27-34).
¹tn The intensity of the appeal is again expressed by the imperative followed by the infinitive absolute for emphasis.
²tc The Greek text negates the sentence, “that I may not have this consolation from you.”
³tn The word tanhumotekem is literally “your consolations,” the suffix being a subjective genitive. The friends had thought they were offering Job consolation (Job 14:11), but the consolation he wants from them is that they listen to him and respond accordingly.
⁴tn The verb nasa’ means “lift up, raise up”; but in this context it means “endure, tolerate” (see Job 7:21).
⁵tn The conjunction and the independent personal pronoun draw emphatic attention to the subject of the verb: “and I on my part will speak.”
⁶tn The adverbial clauses is constructed of the preposition “after” and the piel infinitive construct with the subjective genitive suffix: “my speaking,” or, “I speak.”
⁷tn The verb is the imperfect tense of la`ag. The hiphil has the same basic sense as the qal, “to mock, deride.” The imperfect tense here would be modal, expressing permission. The verb is in the singular, suggesting that Job is addressing Zophar; however, most of the versions put it into the plural. Note the singular in 16:3 between the plural in 16:1 and 16:4.
⁸tn The addition of the independent pronoun at the beginning of the sentence (“Is it I / against a man / my complaint”) strengthens the pronominal suffix on “complaint”(see GKC, #135f).
⁹sn The point seems to be that if his complaint were merely against men he might expect sympathy from other men; but no one dares offer him sympathy when his complaint is against God. So he will give free expression to his spirit (Rowley, p. 147).
¹⁰tn On disjunctive interrogatives, see GKC, #150g.
¹¹tn The text literally says, “why should my spirit/breath not be short” (see Num 21:4; Judg 16:16).
¹²tn The verb p^enu is from the verb “to turn,” related to the word for “face.” In calling for them to turn towards him, he is calling for them to look at him. But here it may be more in the sense of their attention rather than just a looking at him.
¹³tn The idiom is “put a hand over a mouth,” the natural gesture for keeping silent and listening (cf. Job 29:9; 40:4; Mic 7:16).
¹⁴tn The verb is zakar, “remember.” Here it has the sense of “keep in memory, meditate, think upon.”
¹⁵tn The main clause is introduced here by the conjunction, following the adverbial clause of time.
¹⁶tn Some commentators take “shudder” to be the subject of the verb, “a shudder seizes my body.” But the word is feminine (and see the usage, especially in Job 9:6 and 18:20). It is the subject in Isa 21:4; Ps 55:6; and Ezek 7:18.
¹⁷sn Davidson clarifies that Job’s question is of a universal scope. In the government of God, why do the wicked exist at all (p. 154). The verb could be translated “continue to live.”
¹⁸tn The verb `ataq means “move, proceed, advance.” Here it is “advance in years” or “grow old.” This clause could serve as an independent clause, a separate sentence; but it more likely continues the question of the first colon and is parallel to the verb “live.”
¹⁹tn Heb “their seed.”
²⁰tn The text uses “before them, with them” (lipnehem `immam). Many editors think that these were alternative readings, and so omit one or the other. Dhorme moved `immam to the second half of the verse and emended it to read `om^edim, “abide.” Kissane and Gordis changed only the vowels and came up with `ammam, “their kinfolk.” But Gordis thinks the presence of both of them in the line is evidence of a conflated reading (p. 229).
²¹tn The word salom is here a substantive after a plural subject (see GKC, #141c, note 3).
²²tn The form mippahad is translated “without fear,”; literally “from fear,” the preposition is similar to the alpha privitive in Greek. The word “fear, dread” means nothing that causes fear or dread—they are peaceful, secure. See GKC, #119w.
²³sn In 9:34 Job was complaining that there was no umpire to remove God’s rod from him, but here he observes no such rod is on the wicked.
²⁴tn Heb “his bull,” but it is meant to signify the bulls of the wicked.
²⁵tn The verb used here means “impregnate,” and not to be confused with the verb `abar, “pass over.”
²⁶tn The use of the verb ga`ar in this place is interesting. It means “rebuke, abhor, loathe.” In the causative stem it means “to occasion impurity” or “reject as loathsome.” The rabbinic interpretation is that it does not emit semen in vain, and so the meaning is it does not fail to breed (see Dhorme, p. 311; Gordis, p. 229).
²⁷tn The verb salah means “to send forth,” but in the piel “to release, allow to run free.” The picture of children frolicking in the fields and singing and dancing is symbolic of peaceful, prosperous times.
²⁸tc M. Dahood emends the text in an effort to introduce the sword dance into the scene (The Bible in Current Catholic Thought, p. 65).
²⁹tn The verb is simply “they take up, lift up,” but the understood object is “their voices,” and so it means “they sing.”
³⁰tc The k^ethiv has “they wear out” (y-b-l-w) but the q^ere’ and the versions have “bring to an end” (y^ekallu). The verb kalah means “to finish, complete,” and here with the object “their days,” it means that they bring their life to a (successful) conclusion. Both readings are acceptable in the context, with very little difference in the overall meaning (which, according to Gordis is proof the Q does not always correct K).
³¹tc The MT has yehattu, “they are frightened, broken,” taking the verb from hatat. But most would slightly repoint it to yehatu, an Aramaism, “they go down,” from nahat. See Job 17:16.
³²tn The word rega` has been interpreted as “in a moment” or “in peace” (on the basis of Arabic raja`a, “return to rest.” Gordis thinks this is a case of talhin—both meanings present in the mind of the writer.
³³tn The absence of the preposition before the complement adds greater vividness to the statement: “and knowing your ways—we do not desire.”
³⁴sn Contrast Ps 25:4, which affirms that walking in God’s ways means to obey God’s will—the Torah.
³⁵tn The interrogative clause is followed by ki, similar to Exodus 5:2, “Who is Yahweh, that I should obey him?”
³⁶tn The verb paga` means “to encounter, meet,” but also “meet with request, intercede, interpose.” The latter meaning is a derived meaning by usage.
³⁷tn The verse is not present in the Greek. It may be that it was considered too blasphemous.
³⁸sn The implication of this statement is that their well-being is from God, which is the problem Job is raising in the chapter. A number of commentators make it a question, interpreting it to mean that the wicked enjoy prosperity as if it is their right. Some emend the text to say “his hands”—Gordis reads it, “Indeed, our prosperity is not in his hands.”
³⁹sn Even though their life seems so good in contrast to his own plight, Job cannot and will not embrace their principles—“far be from me their counsel.”
⁴⁰tn The interrogative “How often” occurs only with the first colon; it is supplied for smoother reading in the next two.
⁴¹tn The pronominal suffix is objective; it re-enforces the object of the preposition, “upon them.” The verb in the clause is bo’ followed by `al, “come upon, against,” may be interpreted as meaning attack or strike.
⁴²tn Habalim can mean “ropes, cords,” but that would not go with the verb “apportion” in this line. The meaning of “pangs (as in “birth-pangs”) seems to fit best here. The wider meaning would be “physical agony.” Dhorme gives meanings to the verb and the noun that are not found elsewhere: “does he destroy evil-doers?”
⁴³tn The phrase “to them” is understood and thus is supplied in the translation for clarification.
⁴⁴tn To retain the sense that the wicked do not suffer as others, this verse must either be taken as a question or a continuation of the question in v. 17.
⁴⁵tn The verb used actually means “rob.” It is appropriate to the image of a whirlwind suddenly taking away the wisp of straw.
⁴⁶tn These words are supplied. The verse records an idea that Job suspected they might have, namely, that if the wicked die well God will make their children pay for the sins (see Job 5:4; 20:10; as well as Exod 20:5).
⁴⁷tn The text simply has ‘ono, “his iniquity,” but by usage, the punishment for the iniquity.”
⁴⁸tn The verb salam in the piel has the meaning of restoring things to their normal, making whole, and so reward, repay (if for sins), or recompense in general.
⁴⁹tn The text simply has “let him repay (unto) him.”
⁵⁰tn The imperfect tense after the jussive carries the meaning of a purpose clause, and so taken as a final imperfect: “in order that he may know” or “realize.”
⁵¹tc This word occurs only here. The word kid was connected to Arabic kaid, “fraud, trickery,” or “warfare.” The word is emended by the commentators to other ideas, such as pid, “[his] calamity” (Dhorme). Dahood and others alter it to “cup”; Wright to “weapons.” A. F. L. Beeston argues for a meaning “condemnation” for the MT form, and so makes no change in the text (Le Museon 67 [1954]:315,6). If the connection to Arabic “warfare” is sustained, or if such explanations of the existing MT can be sustained, then the text need not be emended. In any case, the sense of the line is clear.
⁵²tn The text has “his desire.” The meaning is that after he is gone he does not care about what happens to his household (“house” meaning “family” here).
⁵³tn The text just has “after him,” but clearly means after he is gone.
⁵⁴tc The rare word hussasu is probably a cognate of hassa in Arabic, meaning “cut off.” There is also an Akkadian word “cut in two” and “break.” These fit the verse here rather well. The other Hebrew words that are connected to the root hasas do not offer any help.
⁵⁵tn The imperfect tense in this question should be given the modal nuance of potential imperfect. The question is rhetorical—it is affirming that no one can teach God.
⁵⁶tn The clause begins with the disjunctive waw and the pronoun, “and he.” This is to be subordinated as a circumstantial clause. See GKC, #142d.
⁵⁷tc The Hebrew has ramim, a plural masculine participle of rum, “to be high, exalted.” This is probably a reference to the angels. But Dahood restores an older interpretation that it refers to “the Most High.” (Biblica, 38 [1957}:316-17). He would take the word as a singular form with an enclitic mem. He reads the verse, “will he judge the Most High?”
⁵⁸tn The line has “in the bone of his perfection.” The word `esem which means “bone” is used pronominally to express “the same, very”; here it is “in the very fullness of his strength” (see GKC, #139g). The abstract tom is used here in the sense of physical perfection and strengths.
⁵⁹tn The verb `atan has the precise meaning of “press olives.” But because here it says “full of milk,” the derived meaning for the noun has been made to mean “breasts” or “pails” (although in later Hebrew this word occurs—but with olives and not milk). Dhorme takes it to refer to “his sides,” and repoints the word for “milk” (halab) to get “fat” (heleb)—“his sides are full of fat.” But this weakens the parallelism.
⁶⁰tn This interpretation, adopted by several commentaries and modern translations, is a general rendering to capture the sense of the line.
⁶¹tn The verb saqah means “to water” and here “to be watered thoroughly.” Dhorme interprets this to mean “fresh.” The picture in the line is that of health and vigor.
⁶²tn The expression “this (v. 23)…and this” (v. 25) means “one…the other.”
⁶³tn The text literally has “and this (man) dies in soul of bitterness.” Some simply reverse it and translate “in the bitterness of soul.” Dhorme has “with bitterness in his soul.” The genitive “bitterness” may be an attribute adjective, “with a bitter soul.”
⁶⁴tn Heb “eaten what is good.” It means he died without having enjoyed the good life.
⁶⁵tn The word is “your thoughts.” The word for “thoughts” (from hasab, “to think, reckon, plan”) has more to do with their intent than their general thoughts. He knows that when they talked about the fate of the wicked they really were talking about him.
⁶⁶tn For the meaning of this word, and its root zamam, see Job 17:11. It usually means the “plans” or “schemes” that are concocted against someone.
⁶⁷tn Dhorme distinguishes the verb hamas from the noun for “violence.” He propose a meaning of “think, imagine”: “and the ideas you imagined about me” (p.321).
⁶⁸sn The question implies the answer will be “vanished, gone.”
⁶⁹tn “And where is the tent, the dwellings of the wicked.” The word “dwellings of the wicked” is in apposition to “tent.” A relative must be supplied.
⁷⁰tn The idea is that the merchants who travel widely will talk about what they have seen and heard. These travellers give a different account of the wicked; the tell how he is spared.
⁷¹tn The Greek has, “Ask those who go by the way, and do not disown their signs.”
⁷²tn The verb means “led forth.” To be led forth in the day of trouble is to be delivered. Dhorme be emendations sees “he is merry.”
⁷³tn The expression “and he has done” is taken here “what he has done.”
⁷⁴tn The verb says “he will watch.” The subject is unspecified, so the translation is passive.
⁷⁵tn The word refers to the tumulus, the burial mound that is erected on the spot where the person is buried.
⁷⁶tn The clods are those that are used to make a mound over the body. And, for a burial in the valley, see Deut 34:6. The verse here sees him as participating in his funeral and enjoying it. Nothing seems to go wrong with the wicked.
⁷⁷tn The word ma`al is used for “treachery, deception, fraud.” Here Job is saying that their way of interpreting reality is dangerously unfaithful.
⁷⁸sn The third and final cycle of speeches now begins with Eliphaz’ final speech. Eliphaz will here underscore the argument that man’s ills are brought about by sin; he will then deduce from Job’s sufferings the sins he must have commitment and the sinful attitude he has about God. The speech has four parts: Job’s suffering is proof of his sin (2-5), Job’s sufferings demonstrate the kinds of sin Job committed (6-11), Job’s attitude about God (12-20), and the final appeal and promise to Job (21-30).
¹tn Some do not take this to be parallel to the first colon. Dhorme translates it “It is rather to himself that a wise man is useful,” probably influenced by Prov 9:12. But the parallel expressions here suggest the question is repeated.
²tn The word hepes in this passage has the nuance of “special benefit, favor.” It does not just express the desire for something or the interest in it, but the profit one derives from it.
³tn The verb tattem is the hiphil imperfect of tamam, following the Aramaic form of the geminate verb with a doubling of the first letter.
⁴tn The word “your fear” or “your piety” refers to Job’s reverence—it is his fear of God (so subjective genitive). When “fear” is used of religion, it includes faith and adoration on the positive side, fear and obedience on the negative.
⁵sn Of course the point is that God does not charge Job because he is righteous; the point is he must be unrighteous.
⁶sn Dhorme adds a couple of words to make this parallel: “Is it not because your wickedness is great.” This is unnecessary, for the context will make the connection clear between the verses.
⁷tn The verb habal means “to take pledges.” In this verse Eliphaz says that Job not only took as pledge things the poor need, like clothing, but he did it for no reason.
⁸tn The “naked” here refers to people who are poorly clothed. Otherwise, a reading like the NIV would be necessary: “you stripped the clothes…[leaving them] naked.” So either he made them naked by stripping their garments off, or they were already in rags.
⁹tn The term `ayep can be translated “weary, faint. or exhausted” and “tired.” Here it may refer to the fainting because of thirst—that would make a good parallel to the second part.
¹⁰tn The idiom is “a man of arm” (= “powerful”; see Ps 10:15). This is in comparison to the next line, “man of face” (= “dignity, high rank”; see Isa 3:5).
¹¹tn The line simply has “and a man of arm, to whom [was] land.” The line is in contrast to the preceding, and so the waw here introduces a concessive clause.
¹²tn The expression is unusual: “the one lifted up of face.” This is the “honored one,” the one to whom the dignity will be given.
¹³tn Many commentators simply delete the verse or move it elsewhere. Most take it as a general reference to Job, perhaps in apposition to the preceding verse. Dhorme comes up with a different reading: “and the man of brute force got the land, and the favored was settled in it.” This requires a number of changes that are gratuitous. He simply sees Job as the accomplice of this favoritism.
¹⁴tn The “arms of the orphans” are their helps or rights on which they depended for support.
¹⁵tn The verb in the text is pual: y^edukka’, “was [were] crushed.” GKC would explain “arms” as the complement of a passive imperfect (#121b). But if that is too difficult, then a change to piel imperfect, second person will solve the difficulty. In its favor is the parallelism, the use of the second person all through here, and the reading in all the versions. The versions may have simply assumed the easier reading, however.
¹⁶tn Heb “or dark you cannot see.” Some commentators and RSV follow the Greek in reading ‘o as ‘or, “light,” and translate it “The light has become dark” or “Your light has become dark.” Davidson suggests the reading “Or seest thou not the darkness.” This would mean Job does not understand the true meaning of the darkness and the calamities.
¹⁷tn The word sip`at is “multitude of.” It is used of men, camels, horses, and here of waters in the heavens.
¹⁸tn This reading preserves the text as it is. The nouns “high” and “heavens” would then be taken as adverbial accusatives of place (see GKC, #118g).
¹⁹tn The parallel passage in Isa 40:26-27, as well as the context here, shows that the imperative is to be retained here. The Greek has “he sees.”
²⁰tn Heb “head of the stars.”
²¹sn Eliphaz is giving to Job the thoughts and words of the pagans, for they say, “How does God know, and is there knowledge in the Most High?” (see Ps 73:11; 94:11).
²²sn The word is “circle, dome”; here it is the dome that covers the earth, beyond which God sits enthroned. Davidson suggests “on the arch of heaven” that covers the earth (p. 165).
²³sn The idea suggested here is that God is not only far off, but he is unconcerned as he strolls around heaven—this is what Eliphaz says Job means.
²⁴tc The “old way” here is the way of defiance to God. The text in these two verses is no doubt making reference to the Flood in Genesis, one of the perennial examples of divine judgment. To make this clearer, there have been several proposals made. Chajes proposed changing the vowels in `olam and getting “evil-doers”—“the way of evil-doers” (GSAI 19 [1906]:182,3; see also Ball, Tur-Sinai). There is no support for this in the versions. Dahood tried the reading “the way of ignorance” (The Bible in Current Catholic Thought, p. 65).
²⁵tn The word “Men” is not in the Hebrew text, but has been supplied to clarifiy the relative pronoun “who.”
²⁶tn The verb qamat basically means “seize, tie together, make a bundle.” So the pual will mean “bundled away, carried off.”
²⁷tn The clause has “and [it was] not the time.” It may be used adverbially here.
²⁸tn The word is nahar, “river, current”; it is taken here in its broadest sense of the waters on the earth that formed the current of the flood (Gen 7:6, 10).
²⁹tn The verb yasaq means “pour out, shed, spill, flow.” The pual means “to be poured out” (as in Lev 21:10 and Ps 45:3).
³⁰tn This word is then to be taken as an adverbial accusative of place. Another way to look at this verse is what Davidson proposes: “whose foundation was poured away and became a flood.” This would mean that that on which they stood sank away (p. 165).
³¹tn The form in the text is “to him.” The Greek and the Syriac have “to us.”
³²tn The pronoun is added for this emphasis; it has “but he” before the verb.
³³tn See Job 10:3.
³⁴tc The Greek has “from him,” and this is followed by several commentators. But the MT is to be retained, for Eliphaz is recalling the words of Job. Verses 17 and 18 are deleted by a number of commentators as a gloss because they have many similarities to 21:14-16. But Eliphaz is recalling what Job said, in order to say that the prosperity to which Job alluded was only the prelude to a disaster he denied (Rowley, p. 156).
³⁵tn The line is talking about the rejoicing of the righteous when judgment falls on the wicked. An object has to be supplied here to clarify this (see Ps 52:6[8]; 69:32[33]; 107:42).
³⁶tn In Ps 2:4 it was God who mocked the wicked by judging them.
³⁷tc The word translated “our enemies” is found only here. The word means “hostility,” but used here as a collective for those who are hostile—“enemies.” Some commentators follow the Greek and read “possessions,” explaining its meaning and derivation in different ways. Gordis simply takes the word in the text and affirms that this is the meaning. On the other hand, to get this, Dhorme repoints qimanu of the MT to y^equmam, arguing that y^equm means “what exists, has substance” (although that is used of animals). He translates: “have not their possessions been destroyed” (p. 336).
³⁸tn The verb sakan meant “to be useful, profitable” in v. 2. Now, in the hiphil it means “to be accustomed to” or “to have experience with.” Joined by the preposition “with” it means “to be reconciled with him.” W. B. Bishai cites Arabic and Ugaritic words to support a meaning “acquiesce” (see JNES 20 [1061]:258,9).
³⁹tn The two imperatives in this verse imply a relationship of succession and not consequence.
⁴⁰tc Dahood has “write his words” (see Biblica 47 [1966]:108-9).
⁴¹tc The MT has “you will be built up” (tibbaneh). But the Greek has “humble yourself” (reading te`aneh apparently). Many commentators read this; Dahood has “you will be healed.”
⁴²tc The form is the imperative. Eliphaz is telling Job to get rid of his gold as evidence of his repentance. Many commentators think that this is too improbable for Eliphaz to have said, and that Job has lost everything anyway, and so they make proposals for the text. Most would follow Theodotion and the Syriac to read w^esatta, “and you will esteem….” This would mean that he is promising Job restoration of his wealth.
⁴³tn The word for “gold” is the rare basar, which may be derived from a cognate of Arabic basara, “see, examine.” if this is the case, the word here would refer to refined gold. The word also forms a fine word play with b^ezur, “in the rock.”
⁴⁴tn The text simply has “Ophir,” a metonymy for the gold that comes from there.
⁴⁵tn The form for “gold” here is plural. Dhorme therefore makes it “ingots.” It could just be a plural of extension. The Greek and Latin have “The Almighty will be your helper against your enemies.”
⁴⁶tn Dhorme connects this word with an Arabic root meaning “to be elevated, steep.” From that he gets “heaps of silver” (p. 339).
⁴⁷tc This is the same verb as in Ps 37:4. Driver suggests the word comes from another root that means “abandon oneself to, depend on” (VT Supp 3 [1955]:84).
⁴⁸tn The word is gazar, “to cut, “ in the sense of deciding a matter.
⁴⁹tn There is no expressed subject here, and so the verb is taken as a passive voice again.
⁵⁰tn The word gewah means”loftiness, pride.” Here it simply says “Up,” or “pride.” The rest is paraphrased. Of the many suggestions, the following provide a sampling: “he abases pride” (Rowley); “[he abases] the lofty and the proud” (Beer); “[he abases] the word of pride” [Duhm]; “[he abases] the haughtiness of pride” [Fohrer and others]; “[he abases] the one who speaks proudly” [Weiser]; “[he abases] the one who boasts in pride” [Kissane]; and “God [abases] pride” [Budde, Gray].
⁵¹tc The Hebrew has ‘i naqi, ewhich could be taken as “island of the innocent” (so Ibn-Ezra), or “him that is not innocent” (so Rashi). But some have changed ‘i to ‘is, “the innocent man.” Others differ. Guillaume links ‘i to Arabic ‘ayya “whosoever,” and so leaves the text alone (Promise and Fulfillment, ed. F. F. Bruce [1963], p. 115). Dahood secures the same idea from Ugaritic, but reads it ‘e (Biblica, 49 [1968]:363).
⁵²tc The MT has “he will escape/be delivered.” Theod. has the second person, “you will be delivered.” C. Thexton turns the clause into a question, “and will you be delivered by the cleanness of your hands” (ET 78 [1966,67]:324,5). But this is less probable.
⁵³sn Job answers Eliphaz, but not until he introduces new ideas for his own case with God. His speech unfolds in three parts: Job’s longing to meet God (23:2-7), the inaccessibility and power of God (23:8-17), the indifference of God (24:1-25).
¹tcThe MT reads here “rebellious,” m^eri. The word is related to the verb marah, “to revolt.” Many commentators follow the Vulgate, Targum Job, and the Syriac to read “bitter,” Hebrew mar. The Greek offers no help here. Gordis and Dhorme both retain the word “rebellious” in the translation.
²tc The MT has “my hand is heavy on my groaning.” This would mean “my stroke is heavier than my groaning” (an improbable view from Targum Job). A better suggestion is that the meaning would be that Job tries to suppress his groans but the hand with which he suppresses them is too heavy (Rowley, p. 159). Both the Greek and the Syriac have “his hand,” and many modern commentators follow this, along with the present translation. In this case the referent of “his” would be God, whose hand is heavy upon Job in spite of Job’s groaning.
³tn The preposition can take this meaning; it could be also translated simply “upon.” Gordis reads the preposition “more than,” saying that Job had been defiant (he takes that view) but God’s hand had been far worse (p. 260).
⁴tn The optative here is again expressed with the verbal clause, “who will give [that] I knew….”
⁵tn The form in Hebrew is w^e’emsa’ehu, simply “and I will find him.” But in the optative clause this verb is subordinated to the preceding verb: “O that I knew where [and] I might find him.” It is not unusual to have the perfect tense followed by the imperfect tense in such co-ordinate clauses (see GKC, #120e). This could also be translated making the second verb a complementary infinitive: “knew how to find him.”
sn Rowley quotes Strahan without reference: “It is the chief distinction between Job and his friends that he desires to meet God and they do not” (Rowley, p. 159).
⁶tn This verb also depends on mi-yitten of the first part, forming an additional clause in the wish formula.
⁷tn The word is from kun, “prepare, arrange” in the po`lel and the hiphil conjugations. The noun refers to a prepared place, a throne, a seat, a sanctuary. Davidson and others take the word to mean “judgment seat” or “tribunal” in this context (p. 169).
⁸tn The word mispat is normally “judgment, decision.” But in these contexts it refers to the legal case that Job will bring before God. The verb `arak, “set in order, lay out,” the whole image of drawing up a lawsuit is complete.
⁹tn The phrase “with which” is not in the Hebrew text, but has been supplied.
¹⁰tn The verb is now rib and not yakah; rib means “quarrel, dispute, contend,” often in a legal context. Here it is still part of Job’s questioning about this hypothetical meeting—would God contend with all his power?
¹¹tn The verbal clause yasim bi has been translated “he would pay [attention] to me.” But Dhorme wishes to add an `ayin to the verb to get the expression “listen to me.” But there is no reason or support for this. Job is saying that God will not need all his power—he will just have pay attention to Job’s complaint. Job does not need the display of power—he just wants a hearing.
¹²tn The adverb “there” has the sense of “then”—there in the future.
¹³tn The form of the verb is the niphal nokah. Dhorme is troubled by this verbal forms and so changes it and other things in the line to say, “he would observe the upright man who argues with him” (p. 346). The niphal is used for “engaging discussion, arguing a case, and settling a dispute.
¹⁴sn The text has “the left hand,” the Semitic idiom for directions. One faces the rising sun, and so left is north, right is south.
¹⁵tc The form ba`asoto would be the temporal clause using the infinitive construct with a pronoun (subject genitive). This would be “when he works.” Several follow the Syriac with “I seek him.” The Greek translation has “[when] he turns.” Gordis notes that there is no need to emend the text; he shows a link to the Arabic cognate ghasa, “to cover” To him this is a perfect parallel to ya`atop, “covers himself (p. 261).
¹⁶tn The verb is the apocopated form of the imperfect. The object is supplied.
¹⁷tn The MT has “he turns,” but the Syriac and Vulgate have “I turn.”
¹⁸tn The expression derek `immadi means “the way with me,” i.e., “the way that I take.” The Syriac has “my way and my standing.” Several commentators prefer “the way of my standing,” meaning where to look for me. J. Reider offers “the way of my life” (HUCA 3 [1926]:115). Whatever the precise wording, Job knows that God can always find him.
¹⁹tn There is a perfect tense followed by an imperfect tense in this clause with the protasis and apodosis relationship (see GKC, #159).
²⁰tn Heb “my foot.”
²¹tn Heb “held fast.”
²²tn The last clause, “and I have not turned aside,” functions adverbially in the sentence. The form ‘at is a pausal form of ‘atteh, the hiphil of natah.
²³tc The form in the MT, mehuqqi, means “more than my law.” This meaning was expanded to get “more than my necessary food” (see Ps 119:11). The Greek and the Latin and many commentators have b^eheqi, “in my bosom.”
²⁴tc The MT has “But he [is] in one.” Many add the word “mind” to capture the point that God is resolute and unchanging. Some commentators find this too difficult, and so change the text from b^e’ehad to bahar, “he has chosen.” Dhorme has it: “he has made his choice.” The wording in the text is idiomatic and should be retained. Gordis translates it, “he is one, i.e., unchangeable, fixed, determined” (p. 262). The preposition bet is a bet essentiae—“and he [is] as one,” or, “he is one” (see GKC, #119i).
²⁵tn Heb “cause him to return.”
²⁶tn Or “his soul.”
²⁷tn The text has “my decree,” which means “the decree [plan] for/against me.” The suffix is objective, equivalent to a dative of disadvantage. The Syriac and the Vulgate actually have “his decree.” Gordis suggests taking it in the same sense as in Job 14:5, “my limit” (p. 262).
²⁸sn The text is saying that many similar situations are under God’s rule of the world—his plans are infinite.
²⁹tn The verb herak means “be tender”; in the piel it would have the meaning “soften.” The word is used in parallel construction s with the verbs for “fear.” The implication is that God has made Job fearful.
³⁰tn This is a very difficult verse. The Hebrew text literally says: “for I have not been destroyed because of darkness, and because of my face [which] gloom has covered.” Most commentators omit the negative adverb, which gives the meaning that Job is enveloped in darkness and reduced to terror. The verb nisamti means “I have been silent” (as in Arabic and Aramaic), and so obviously the negative must be retained—he has not been silent.
¹tn The preposition min is used to express the cause (see GKC, #121f).
²tc The Greek has “Why are times hidden from the Almighty?” This reading is accepted by Dhorme, as if to say that God is not interested in the events on the earth. The MT reading is saying that God fails to set the times for judgment and vindication.
³tn The line is short: “they move boundary stones.” So some commentators have supplied a subject, such as “wicked men.” The reason for its being wicked men is that to move the boundary stone was to encroach dishonestly on the lands of others (Deut 19:14; 27:17).
⁴tc The Greek reads “and their shepherd.” Many commentators accept this reading. But the MT says that they graze the flocks that they have stolen. The difficulty with the MT reading is that there is no suffix on the final verb—but that is not an insurmountable difference.
⁵sn Because of the violence and oppression of the wicked, the poor and needy, the widows and orphans, all are deprived of their rights and forced out of the ways and into hiding just to survive.
⁶tc The verse begins with hen; but the Greek, Vulgate, and Syriac all have “like.” Gordis takes hen as a pronoun “they” and supplies the comparative (p. 265). The sense of the verse is clear in either case.
⁷tn That is, “the poor.”
⁸tc The MT has “in the working/labor of them,” or, “when they labor. Some commentators simply omit these words. Dhorme retains them and moves them to go with `arabah, which he takes to mean “evening”; this gives a clause, “although they work until the evening.” Then, with many others, he takes lo to be a negative, and finishes the verse with “no food for the children.” Others make fewer changes in the text, and as a result do not come out with such a hopeless picture—there is some food found. The point is that they spend their time foraging for food, and they find just enough to survive, but it is a day-long activity. For Job, this shows how unrighteous the administration of the world actually is.
⁹tn The verb is not in the Hebrew text but is supplied in the translation.
¹⁰tc The word b^elilo is “his fodder.” It is unclear to what this refers. If the suffix is taken as a collective, then it can be translated “they gather/reap their fodder.” The Versions all have “they reap in a field which is not his” (taking it as b^eli lo). A conjectural emendation would change the word to ballaylah, “in the night.” But there is no reason for this.
¹¹tn The verbs in this verse are uncertain. In the first line “reap” is a used, and that would be the work of a hired man (and certainly not done at night). The meaning of this second verb is uncertain; it has been taken to mean “glean,” which would be the task of the poor. Dhorme suggested this too would be a paid job, like gathering grapes. But if the reaping was unauthorized, then this would be gleaning.
¹²tn Heb “embrace, hug.”
¹³tn The verb with no expressed subject is here again taken in the passive: “they snatch” becomes “[child] is snatched.”
¹⁴tn This word is usually defined as “violence, ruin.” But elsewhere it does mean “breast” (Isa 60:16; 66:11), and that is certainly what it means here.
¹⁵tc The MT has a very brief and strange reading: “they take as a pledge upon the poor.” Kamphausen suggested that instead of `al we should read `ul, “suckling.” This is supported by the parallelism. “They take as pledge” is also made passive here.
¹⁶sn The point should not be missed—amidst abundant harvests, carrying sheaves about, they are still going hungry.
¹⁷tc Hebrew has surotam, which may be translated “terraces, olive rows.” But that would not be the proper place to have a press to press the olives and make oil. Dhorme proposes on the analogy of an Arabic word that this should be read as “millstones” (which he would also write in the dual). But the argument does not come from a clean cognate, but from a possible development of words (see pp. 360, 361). Sutcliffe changed the text more radically to “without their songs” (p. 176), referring to the usual practice of singing in the vineyards. The meaning of “olive rows” works well enough.
¹⁸tn The final verb, a preterite with the waw consecutive, is here interpreted as a circumstantial clause.
¹⁹tc The MT as pointed reads “from the city of men they groan.” Most commentators change one vowel in m^etim to get metim to get the active participle, “the dying.” This certainly fits the parallelism better, although sense could be made out of the MT.
²⁰tc The MT has the noun tiplah, which means “folly, tastelessness” (cf. 1:22). The verb, which normally means “place, put,: would then be rendered “impute, charge.” This is certainly a workable translation in the context. Many commentators have emended the text, changing the noun to t^epillah, “prayer,” and so then also the verb to yisma`, “hear.” It reads: “But God does not hear the prayer”—referring to the groans.
²¹tn Heb “They are among those who.”
²²tn The text simply has la’or, “at light” or “at daylight,” probably meaning just at the time of dawn.
²³tn In a few cases the jussive is used without any real sense of the jussive being present (see GKC, #109k).
²⁴sn The point is that he is like a thief in that he works during the night, just before the daylight, when the advantage is all his and the victim is most vulnerable.
²⁵tn Heb “saying.”
²⁶tn The phrase “the robber” has been supplied in the English translation for clarification.
²⁷tc This is not the idea of the adulterer, but of the thief. So some commentators reverse the order and put this verse after v. 14.
²⁸tc The verb hitt^emu is the piel from the verb hatam, “seal.” The verb is now in the plural, covering all the groups mentioned that work under the cover of darkness. The suggestion that they “seal,” i.e., “mark” the house they will rob, goes against the meaning of the word “seal.”
²⁹tc Some commentators join this very short colon to the beginning of v. 17: “they do not know the light. For together…” becomes “for together they have no known the light.”
³⁰tn Heb “together.”
³¹tc Many commentators find vv. 18-24 difficult on the lips of Job, and so identify this unit as a misplaced part of the speech of Zophar. They describe the enormities of the wicked. But a case can also be made for retaining it in this section. Gordis thinks it could be taken as a quotation by Job of his friends’ ideas.
³²tn This verb is not in the text; it is supplied here to indicate that this is a different section.
³³sn The wicked person is described here as a spray or foam upon the waters, built up in the agitation of the waters but dying away swiftly.
³⁴tn The text reads, “he does not turn by the way of the vineyards.” This means that since the land is cursed, he/one does not go there. Bickell emended “the way of the vineyards” to “the treader of the vineyard” (see RSV). This would mean that “no wine-presser would turn towards” their vineyards.
³⁵tn Heb “the waters of the snow.”
³⁶tn This is the meaning of the verse, which in Hebrew only has “The grave / they have sinned.”
³⁷tc The form in the text is the active participle, “feed, graze, shepherd.” The idea of “prey” is not natural to it. Gordis argues that Third he’ verbs are often by-forms of geminate verbs, and so the meaning here is more akin to ra`a`, “to crush” (p. 270). The Greek seems to have read something like hera`, “oppressed.”
³⁸tn Heb “the childless [woman] she does not give birth.” The verbal clause is intended to serve as a modifier here for the woman. See on subordinate verbal clauses GKC, #156d-f.
³⁹tn God has to be the subject of this clause. None is stated in the Hebrew text, but “God” has been supplied in the translation for clarity.
⁴⁰tn This line has been given a number of interpretations due to its cryptic form. The verb yaqum is “he rises up.” It probably is meant to have God as the subject, and be subordinated as a temporal clause to what follows. The following verb w^elo’ ya’amin, by its very meaning of “and he does not believe,” cannot have God as the subject, but the wicked.
⁴¹tn The expression labetah, “in security,” precedes the verb that it qualifies—God “allows him to take root in security.” For the meaning of the verb, see Job 8:15.
⁴²sn The meaning of the verse is that God may allow the wicked to rest in comfort and security, but all the time he is watching them closely with the idea of bringing judgment on them.
⁴³tn The Hebrew throughout this section (vv. 18-24) interchanges the singular and the plural. Here again we have “they are exalted…but he is not.” The verse is clear nonetheless: the wicked rise high, and then suddenly they are gone.
⁴⁴tn The verb is the hophal of the rare verb makak, which seems to mean “to bend, collapse.” The text would read “they are made to collapse like all others.” There is no reason here to change “like others” just because the MT is banal. But many do, following the Greek translation with “like mallows.” The Greek was making an ad sensum translation. Gordis prefers “like grass” (p. 271).
⁴⁵tn The verb actually means “shut in,” which does not provide exactly the idea of being gathered, not directly at least. But a change to qatap, while attractive, is not necessary.
⁴⁶sn This marks the end of the disputed section, taken here to be a quotation by Job of their sentiments.
⁴⁷tn The word ‘al is used here substantivally.
⁴⁸sn The third speech of Bildad takes up Job 25, a short section of six verses. It is followed by two speeches from Job; and Zophar does not return with his third. Does this mean that the friends have run out of arguments, and that Job is just getting going? Many scholars note that in chapters 26 and 27 there is material that does not fit Job’s argument. Many have rearranged the material to show that there was a complete cycle of three speeches. In that light, 26:5-14 is viewed as part of Bildad’s speech. Some, however, take Bildad’s speech to be only chapter 25, and make 26:5-14 an interpolated hymn. For all the arguments and suggestions, one should see the introductions and the commentaries.
¹tn The word hamsel is a hiphil infinitive absolute used as a noun. It describes the rulership or dominion that God has, what gives power and authority.
²tn The word pahad literally means “fear, dread,” but in the sense of what causes the fear or the dread.
³tn Heb “[are] with him.”
⁴sn The line says that God “makes peace in his heights.” The heights are usually interpreted to mean the highest heaven. There may be a reference here to combat in the spiritual world between angels and Satan. The context will show that God has a heavenly host at his disposal, and nothing in heaven or on earth can shatter his peace. “Peace” here could also signify the whole order he establishes.
⁵tn Heb “Is there a number to his troops?” The question is rhetorical: there is no number to them!
⁶tc In pleace of “light” here the Greek has “his ambush,” perhaps reading ‘or^ebo instead of ‘orehu. But while that captures the idea of troops and warfare, the change should be rejected because the armies are linked with stars and light. The expression is poetic; the Greek interpretation tried to make it concrete.
⁷sn Bildad here does not come up with new expressions; rather, he simply uses what Eliphaz had said (see Job 4:17-19 and 15:14-16).
⁸tc The first line is different (cf. Job 15:15). While the sense is clear in the MT, Driver changed it to read “Lo the moon goes around her course and shows herself unworthy” (AJSL 52 [1935-6]:161). This involved the change of one vowel and the derivation of the second verb from an Arabic cognate. Dhorme takes the verb ya’ahil from halal, “shine [>praise],” and not from ‘ahal, a rare word for “shine,” and would repoint the text to yahel. This is not necessary, though.
⁹tn The text just has “maggot” and in the second half, “worm.” Something has to be added to make it a bit clearer. Dhorme has “that maggot!” The terms “maggot” and “worm” describe man in his lowest and most ignominious shape.
¹⁰sn These two chapters will be taken together under this title, although most commentators would assign Job 26:5-14 to Bildad and Job 27:7-23 to Zophar. Those sections will be noted as they emerge. For the sake of outlining, the following sections will be marked off: Job’s scorn for Bildad (26:2-4); a better picture of God’s greatness (26:5-14); Job’s protestation of innocence (27:2-6); and a picture of the condition of the wicked (27:7-23).
¹tn The interrogative clause is used here as an exclamation, and sarcastic at that. Job is saying “you have in now way helped the powerless.” The verb uses the singular form, for Job is replying to Bildad.
²tn The “powerless” is expressed here by the negative before the word for “strength, power”—“him who has no power” (see GKC, #152u and v).
³tn Heb “the arm [with] no strength.” Here too the negative expression is serving as a relative clause to modify “arm,” the symbol of strength and power. “Man of arm” denoted the strong in 22:8. It is hard to see how Dhorme derived “nerveless man.”
⁴tc The phrase larob means “to abundance, in a large quantity. It is also used ironically like all these expressions. This makes very good sense, but some wish to see a closer parallel and so offer emendations. Reiske and Kissane thought “to the tender” for the word. But the timid are not the same as the ignorant and unwise. So Graetz supplied “to the boorish” by reading l^eba`ar. Driver did the same with less of a change: labbor (see HTR, 29 [1936]:172).
⁵tn The verse begins with the preposition and the interrogative: ‘et mi, “with who[se help]?” Others take it as the accusative particle introducing the indirect object: “for whom did you utter…” (see GKC, #117gg). Both are possible.
⁶tn Heb “has gone out.”
⁷sn This is the section, Job 26:5-14, that many conclude makes better sense coming from the friend. But if it is attributed to Job, then he is showing he can surpass them in his treatise of the greatness of God.
⁸tn The text has “the shades” (the r^epa’im), the “dead,” or the elite among the dead (see Isa 14:9; 26:14; Ps 88:10[11]). For further discussion, start with A. R. Johnson, The Vitality of the Individual, 2nd edition, pp. 88ff.
⁹tn The verb is a po`lal from hil which means “to tremble.” It shows that even these spirits cannot escape the terror.
¹⁰tc Most commentators wish to lengthen the verse and make it more parallel, but nothing is gained by doing this. Dhorme takes “from beneath” and puts it with the first part; then he adds a verb to the second, to read: “The shades tremble beneath the earth, the waters and their inhabitants become terrified.”
¹¹tn Heb “before him.”
¹²tn The line has “and there is no covering for destruction.” “Destruction” here is another name for Sheol, ‘abaddon, or Abaddon.
¹³sn The word is sapon. Some see here a reference to Mount Zaphon of the Ugaritic texts, the mountain that Baal made his home (see Eissfeldt, Baal Zaphon, 1932). The Hebrew writers often equate and contrast Mount Zion with this proud mountain of the north. Of course, the word just means north, and so besides any connotations for pagan mythology, it may just represent the northern skies—the stars. Since the parallel line speaks of the earth, that is probably all that was intended here.
¹⁴sn There is an allusion to the creation account, for this word is tohu, translated “without form” in Gen 1:2.
¹⁵sn Buttenwieser suggests that Job had outgrown the idea of the earth on pillars, and was beginning to see it was suspended in space. But in v. 11 he will still refer to the pillars.
¹⁶tn The verb means “hold, seize,” here in the sense of shutting up, enshrouding, or concealing.
¹⁷tc The MT has kisseh, which is a problematic vocalization. Most certainly keseh, “full moon,” is intended here. The MT is close to the form of “throne,” which would be kisse’. But here God is covering the face of the moon by hiding it behind clouds.
¹⁸tn The expression hoq hag means “he has drawn a limit as a circle.” According to Dhorme the form should have been haq-hug, “He has traced a circle.” But Gordis argues that the text is fine, and can be interpreted as “a limit he has circled.” The roots are haqaq, “engrave, sketch out, trace,” and hug respectively.
¹⁹sn Rowley says these are the great mountains, perceived to hold up the sky (p. 173).
²⁰sn The idea here is that when the earth quakes, or when there is thunder in the heavens, this all represent God’s rebuke, for they create terror.
²¹tn The verb raga` has developed a Semitic polarity, i.e., having totally opposite meanings. It can mean “disturb, stir up: or “calm, still.” Gordis thinks both meanings have been invoked here. But it seems more likely that “calm” fits the context better.
²²sn Here again there are possible mythological allusions or polemics. The god Yam, “Sea,” was important in Ugaritic as a god of chaos. And Rahab is another name for the monster of the deep (see Job 9:13).
²³sn Here too is a reference to pagan views indirectly. The fleeing serpent was a designation for Leviathan, whom the book will simply describe as an animal, but the pagans thought to be a monster of the deep. God’s power over nature is associated with defeat of pagan gods (see further Albright, Yahweh and the Gods of Canaan; and, BASOR 53 [1941]:39.
²⁴tn Heb “the ends of his ways,” meaning “the fringes.”
²⁵tn The expression is literally “how little is the word.” “Little” is really a “fraction,” or an “echo.”
¹tn The word masal is characteristically “proverb, by-word.” It normally refers to a brief saying, but can be used for a discourse (see A. R. Johnson, VT Supp 3 [1955]:162ff.).
²tn The expression hay ‘el is the oath formula: “as God lives.” In other words, the speaker is staking God’s life on the credibility of the words. It is like saying, “As truly as God is alive.”
³tn “My judgment” would here, as before, be “my right.” God has taken this away by afflicting Job unjustly (Davidson, p. 187).
⁴tn The verb hemar is the hiphil perfect from marar, “to be bitter,” and hence, “make bitter.” The object of the verb is “my soul,” which is better translated as “me” or “my life.”
⁵tn The adverb `od was originally a noun, and so here it could be rendered “all the existence of my spirit.” The word comes between the noun in construct and its actual genitive (see GKC, # 128e).
⁶tn The word n^esamah is the “breath” that was breathed into Adam in Gen 2:7. Its usage includes the animating breath, the spiritual understanding, and the functioning conscience—so the whole spirit of the person. The other word in this verse, ruah, is “breath, wind, spirit.” But since it talks about the nostrils, in this verse it should be translated “breath.”
⁷tn The verse begins with ‘im, the formula used for the content of the oath (“God lives…if I do/do not…). Thus, the content of the oath proper is here in v. 4.
⁸tn The verb means “to utter, mumble, mediatate.” The implication is that he will not communicate deceitful things, no matter how quite or subtle.
⁹tn The text uses halilah-lli, “far be it from me,” or more strongly, something akin to “sacrilege.”
¹⁰tn The prepositional phrase “from my days” probably means “from the days of my birth,” or, “all my life.” But Dhorme has “my heart is not ashamed of my days.”
¹¹sn Of course, he means like his enemy when he is judged, not when he is thriving in prosperity and luxury.
¹²tn The form is the hithpolel participle from qum, “those who are rising up against me,” or, “my adversary.”
¹³tc The Greek translation made a free paraphrase: “No, but let my enemies be as the overthrow of the ungodly, and they that rise up against me as the destruction of transgressors.”
¹⁴tn The verb yibsa` means “cut off.” It could be translated transitively or intransitively—the latter is better here (“when he is cut off”). Since the next line speaks of prayer, some have thought this verse should be about prayer. Mandelkern, in his concordance (p. 228b), suggested the verb should be “when he prays” (reading yipga` in place of yibsa`).
¹⁵tn The verb yesel is found only here. It has been related to nasal, “cast off”; salal, “carry booty, sheaves”; sa’al, “ask,” nasa’, “lift up” (i.e., pray), and a host of others.
¹⁶tn The object suffix is in the plural, which gives some support to the idea Job is speaking to them.
¹⁷tn Heb “the hand of.”
¹⁸tn Heb “with Shadday.”
¹⁹tn The interrogative uses the demonstrative pronoun in its emphatic position: “Why in the world….”
²⁰tn The text has the noun “vain thing, breath, vapor,” and then a denominative verb from the same root: “become vain with a vain thing,” or “do in vain a vain thing.” This is an example of the internal object, or a cognate accusative (see GKC, #117q). The Greek has “you all know that you are adding vanity to vanity.”
²¹tn The expression “allotted by God” interprets the simple prepositional phrase in the text: “with/from God.”
²²tn Gordis identifies this as a breviloquence (p. 294). Compare Ps 92:8 where the last two words also constitute the apodosis.
²³tn Heb “will not be satisfied with bread/food.”
²⁴tn The text says “will be buried in/by death.” There are enough passages in the Bible where “death” means the plague that kills (see Jer 15:2; Isa 28:3; and see BDB p. 89b). In this sense it is like the English expression for the plague, “the Black Death.”
²⁵tc The Greek has “their widows” to match the plural, and most commentators harmonize.
²⁶tn The text simply repeats the verb from the last clause. It could be treated as a separate short clause: “He may lay it up, but the righteous will wear it. But it also could be understood as the object of the following verb, “[what] he lays up the righteous will wear.” The Greek text simply has, “All these things shall the righteous gain.”
²⁷tn Heb “like a moth” (ka`as), but this leaves room for clarification. Some commentators wanted to change it to “bird’s nest” or just “nest” (to make the parallelism; see Job 4:14). But the word is not found. The Greek has a double word, “as moths, as a spider.” So several take it as the spider’s web, which is certainly unsubstantial (see Job 8:14).
²⁸tn The word is the word for “booth,” as in the Feast of Booths. The word describes something that is flimsy; it is not substantial at all.
²⁹tc The verb is the niphal ye’asep, from ‘asap, “to gather.” So, “he lies down rich, but he is not gathered.” This does not make much sense. It would mean “he will not be gathered for burial,” but that does not belong here. Many commentators accept the variant yo’sip stood for yosip, “will [not] add.” This is what the Greek and the Syriac have. This leads to the interpretive translation that “he will do so no longer.”
³⁰tn Heb “and he is not.” One view is that this must mean that he dies, not that his wealth is gone. Gordis says the first part should be made impersonal: “when one opens one’s eyes, the wicked is no longer there” (p. 295). Dhorme has it more simply: “He has opened his eyes, and it is for the last time” (p. 396). But the other view is that the wealth goes overnight. In support of this is the introduction into the verse of the wealthy. RSV takes it that “wealth is gone.”
³¹tn Many commentators want a word parallel to “in the night.” And so we are offered bayyom, “in the day,” for kammayim, as well as a number of others. But “waters” sometimes stand for major calamities, and so may be retained here. Besides, not all parallel structures are synonymous.
³²tn The verb is once again functioning in an adverbial sense. The text has “it hurls itself against him and shows no mercy.”
³³tn If the same subject is to be carried through here, it is the wind. That would make this a bold personification, perhaps suggesting the force of the wind. Others argue that it is unlikely that the wind claps its hands. They suggest taking the verb with an indefinite subject: “he claps” means “one claps. The idea is that of people rejoicing when the wicked are gone. But the parallelism is against this unless the second line is changed as well. Gordis has “men will clap their hands…, men will whistle upon him” (p. 296).
³⁴sn As the book is now arranged, this chapter forms an additional speech by Job, although some argue that it comes from the writer of the book. The mood of the chapter is not despair, but wisdom; it anticipates the divine speeches in the end of the book. This poem, like many psalms in the Bible, has a refrain (vv. 12 and 20). These refrains outline the chapter, giving three sections: there is no known road to wisdom (1-11); no price can buy it (12-19); and only God has it, and only by revelation can man posses it (20-28).
¹tn The poem opens with ki. Some commentators think this should have been “for,” and that the poem once stood in another setting. But there are places in the Bible where this word occurs with the sense of “surely” and no other meaning (cf. Gen 18:20).
²tn The word mosa’ (from yasa’) is the word for “mine,” or more simply, “source.” Mining was not an enormous industry in the land of Canaan or Israel; mined products were imported. Some editors have suggested alternative readings: Dahood found in the word the root for “shine” and translated MT as “smelter.” But that is going too far. Jouon suggested “place of finding,” reading mimsa’ for mosa’ (see Biblica, 11 [1930]:323).
³tn The verb yazoqqu, translated “refined,” comes from zaqaq, a word that basically means “to blow.” From the meaning “blow, distend, inflate, derives the meaning for refining.
⁴tn Heb “from dust.”
⁵tn The verb yasuq is usually translated as a passive participle “is smelted” (from yasaq, “to melt”) or, “from the stone, copper is poured out” (as an imperfect from suq). But the rock becomes the metal in the process. So according to Gordis (p. 304) the translation should be: “the rock is poured out as copper.” Dhorme, however, defines the form in the text as “hard,” and simply has it “hard stone becomes copper” (p. 400).
⁶sn The idea seems at first to be saying that by opening up a mine shaft, or by taking lights down below, the man dispels the darkness. But the clause might be more general, meaning that man goes deep into the earth as if it were day.
⁷tn The verse ends with “the stone of darkness and deep darkness.” The genitive would be location, describing the place where the stones are found,
⁸tc The first part of this verse has received a lot of attention. It says, “He cuts a shaft far from the place where people live.” The word for “live” is gar. Some of the proposals are: “limestone,” on the basis of the Greek; “far from the light,” reading ner; “by a foreign people,” taking the word to means “foreign people”; “a foreign people opening shafts”; or taking gar as “crater” based on Arabic. Driver puts this and the next together: “a strange people who have been forgotten cut shafts” (see AJSL 3 [1935]:162). Waterman had “the people of the lamp” (see JBL 71[1952]:167ff). And there are others. Since there is really no compelling argument in favor of one person’s interpretation, the MT should be preserved until shown to be wrong.
⁹tn This means that there are people walking above on the ground, and the places below, these mines, not noticed by the pedestrians.
¹⁰sn The description here is of the mining procedures. Hanging by a rope would be a necessary part of the job of going up and down the shafts.
¹¹sn The verse has been properly understood, on the whole, with comparing the earth above and all its produce with the upheaval down below.
¹²tn It is probably best to take “place” in construct to the rest of the colon, with an understood relative clause: “a place, the rocks of which are sapphire.”
sn Our modern stone known as sapphire is thought not to have been used until Roman times, and so some other stone is probably meant here, perhaps lapis lazuli.
¹³sn Rowley suggests that if it is lapis lazuli, then the dust of gold would refer to the particles of iron pyrites found in lapis lazuli which glitter like gold (p. 181).
¹⁴sn The “path” could be the mine shaft or it could be wisdom. The former seems more likely in the present discussion.
¹⁵sn The kind of bird mentioned here is debated. The Greek has “vulture,” and so some commentaries follow that. The emphasis on the sight favors the view that it is the falcon.
¹⁶tn Heb “the sons of pride.” In Job 41:26 the expression refers to carnivorous wild beasts.
¹⁷tn This word refers to “lion” throughout the Bible. S. Mowinckel suggests that here it refers to some mythical serpent, and that the “sons of pride” are also mythical creatures (Hebrew and Semitic Studies, ed. D. Winton Thomas, pp. 95ff.). But the context calls for real animals.
¹⁸tn The verb is simply “stretch out, send” (salah). With yado, “his hand,” the idea is that of laying one’s hand on the rock, i.e., getting to work on the hardest of rocks.
¹⁹tn The Hebrew missores means “from/at [their] root” or “base.” In mining, people have gone below ground, under the mountains, and overturn rock and dirt. It is also interesting that here in a small way humans do what God does—overturn mountains (cf. 9:5).
²⁰tn The word is y^e’orim, the word for “rivers” and in the singular, the Nile River. Here it would be tunnels or channels through the rocks.
²¹tn Or, “every precious thing.”
²²tn The translation “searched” fits hippes better.
²³tc The older translations had “he binds the streams from weeping,” i.e., from trickling (mibb^eki). But the Ugaritic parallel has changed the understanding, reading “toward the spring of the rivers” (`m mbk nhrm) and so on (see Cyrus Gordon, Ugaritic Manual, 1955, p. 249). Earlier than that discovery, the versions had taken the word as a noun as well. Some commentators had suggested repointing the Hebrew. Some chose mabb^eke, “sources.” Now there is much Ugaritic support for the reading (see G. M. Landes, BASOR 144 [1956]:32f.; and Ginsberg, JBL 62 [1943]:111).
²⁴tc The Greek has “its way, apparently reading darkah in place of `erkah. This is adopted by most modern commentators. But Gordis shows that this change is not necessary, for ‘erek in the Bible means “order, row, disposition,” and here “place” (p. 308).
²⁵sn The t^ehom is the “deep” of Gen 1:2, the abyss or primordial sea. It was always understood to be a place of darkness and danger. As remote as it is, it asserts that wisdom is not found there (personification). So here we have the abyss and the sea, then death and destruction—but they are not the places that wisdom resides.
²⁶tn The bet preposition is taken here to mean “with” in the light of the parallel preposition.
²⁷tn The word actually means “weighed,” that is, lifted up on the scale and weighed, in order to purchase.
²⁸tn The exact identification of these stones is uncertain.
²⁹tn The word is from zakak, “clear.” It describes a transparent substance, and so glass. In the ancient world it was precious and so expensive.
³⁰tc The MT has “vase”; but the versions have a plural here, suggesting jewels of gold.
³¹tn The word mesek comes from a root meaning “grasp, seize, hold,” and so the derived noun means “grasping, acquiring, taking possession,” and therefore, “price” (see the discussion in Gordis, p. 309). Gray renders it “acquisition” (so A. Cohen, AJSL 40 [1923,24]:175). Others have interpreted differently: Dhorme has “extraction”: “the extraction of wisdom is far more difficult than that of pearls.” But that adds too much to the text.
³²tn In Lam 4:7 these are described as red, and so have been identified as rubies or corals.
³³tn Or “Ethiopia.”
³⁴tn The refrain is repeated, except now the verb is tabo’, “come.”
³⁵tn The waw on the verb is unexpressed in the Greek. It should not be overlooked, for it introduces a subordinate clause of condition (Gordis, p. 310).
³⁶tn The form is the infinitive construct with the lamed preposition. Some have emended it to change the preposition to the temporal bet on the basis of some of the versions (Latin and Syriac) that have “who made.” This is workable, for the infinitive would then take on the finite tense of the previous verbs. An infinitive of purpose does not work well, for that would be saying God looked everywhere in order to give wind its proper weight (see Gordis, p. 310).
³⁷tn The verb is the piel perfect, meaning “to estimate the measure” of something. In the verse, the perfect tense continues the function of the infinitive preceding it, as if it had a waw prefixed to it. Whatever usage that infinitive had, this verb is to continue it (see GKC, #114r).
³⁸tn Or “decree.”
³⁹tn The verb sapar in the piel basically means “tell, declare, show” or “count, number.” Many commentators offer different suggestions for the translation. “Declared” as in the RSV would be the simplest—but to whom did God declare it? Besides “appraised” which is the view of Pope, Dhorme and others, Reider has suggested “probed” (VT 2 [1952]:127), Strahan has “studied,” and Kissane has “reckoned.” The difficulty is that the line has a series of verbs, which seem to build to a climax; but without more details it is hard to know how to translate them when they have such a range.
⁴⁰tc The verb kun means “to establish, prepare” in this stem. There are several MSS that have the form from bin, “he discerned it,” making more of a parallel with the first colon. But the weight of the evidence supports the traditional MT reading.
⁴¹tn The verb haqar means “to examine, search out.” Some of the language used here is anthropomorphic, for the sovereign Lord did not have to research or investigate wisdom. The point is that it is as if he did this human activity, meaning that as in the results of such a search God knows everything about wisdom.
⁴²tc Many commentators delete this verse because (1) the divine name Yahweh occurs here, and (2) it is not consistent with the argument that precedes it. But as Rowley points out, there is inconsistency in this reasoning, for many of the critics have already said that this chapter is an interpolation. Following that line of thought, then, one would not expect it to conform to the rest of the book in this matter of the divine name. And concerning the second difficulty, the point of this chapter is that wisdom is beyond human comprehension and control. It belongs to God alone. So the conclusion that the fear of the LORD is wisdom is the necessary conclusion. Rowley concludes: “It is a pity to rob the poem of its climax and turn it into the expression of unrelieved agnosticism” (p. 185).
⁴³sn Now that the debate with his friends is over, Job concludes with a soliloquy, just as he had begun with one. Here he does not take into account his friends or their arguments. The speech has three main sections: Job’s review of his former circumstances (29:1-25); Job’s present misery (30:1-31); and Job’s vindication of his life (31:1-40).
¹tn The verse uses a verbal hendiadys: “and he added (wayyosep)…to raise (s^e’et) his speech.” The expression means that he continued, or he spoke again.
²tn The optative is here expressed with mi yitt^eneni, “who will give me,” meaning, “O that I [could be]…” (see GKC, #151b).
³tn The preposition kap is used here in an expression describing the state desired, especially in the former time (see GKC, #118u).
⁴tn The expression is literally “days of before [old, past].” The word qedem is intended here to be temporal and not spatial; it means days that preceded the present.
⁵tn The construct state (“days of”) governs the independent sentence that follows (see GKC, #130d): “as the days of […] God used to watch over me.”
⁶tn The imperfect tense here has a customary nuance—“when God would watch over me” (back then), or “when God used to watch over me.”
⁷tn This clause is in apposition to the preceding (see GKC, #131o). It offers a clarification.
⁸tn The form b^ehillo is unusual; it should be parsed as a hiphil infinitive construct with the elision of the he’. The proper spelling would have been with a patah under the preposition, reflecting hahillo. If it were qal, it would just mean “when his light shone.”
⁹sn Lamp and light are symbols of God’s blessings of life and all the prosperous and good things it includes.
¹⁰tn Here too the imperfect tense is customary—it describes action that was continuous, but in a past time.
¹¹tn The accusative (“darkness”) is here an adverbial accusative of place, namely, “in the darkness,” or because he was successfully led by God’s light, “through the darkness” (see GKC, #118h).
¹²tn The MT literally reads “in the days of my ripeness.” The word horep denotes the time when the harvest is gathered in because the fruit is ripe. Since this is the autumn, many translate that way here—but “autumn” has a different connotation now. The text is pointing to a time when the righteous reaps what he has sown, and can enjoy the benefits. The translation “productivity” seems to capture the point better than “autumn” or even “prime.”
¹³tc The word sod in this verse is an infinitive construct, prefixed with the temporal preposition and followed by a subjective genitive. It forms a temporal clause. There is some disagreement about the form and its meaning. The confusion in the versions shows that they were paraphrasing to get the general sense. In the Bible the derived noun (from yasad) means (a) a circle of close friends; (b) intimacy. Others follow the Greek and the Syriac with a meaning of “protect,” based on a change from dalet to kap, and assuming the root was sakak. This would mean, “when God protected my tent.” D. Winton Thomas tries to justify this meaning without changing the text (see JBL 65 [1946]:63ff.).
¹⁴tc Some commentators like Dhorme suggest that “with me” (`immadi) of the second colon of v. 6 (which is too long) belongs to the second colon of v. 5, and should be pointed as the verb `amadu, “they stood,” meaning the boys stood around him (p. 417). But as Gordis notes, there is a purpose for the imbalance of the metric pattern at the end of a section (see p. 319).
¹⁵tn The word is a hapax, but the meaning is clear enough. It refers to the walking, the steps, or even the paths where one walks. It is figurative of his course of life.
¹⁶tn The word means “to wash, bathe”; here it is the infinitive construct in a temporal clause, “my steps” being the genitive: “in the washing of my steps in butter.”
¹⁷tn Again, as in Job 21:17, “curds.”
¹⁸tn The MT reads literally, “and the rock was poured out [passive participle] for me as streams of oil.” There are some who delete the word “rock” to shorten the line because it seems out of place. But olive trees thrive in rocky soil, and the oil presses are cut into the rock; it is possible that by metonymy all this is intended here (Rowley, p. 186).
¹⁹sn The area referred to here should not be thought of in terms of modern western dimensions. The wide space, plaza, or public square mentioned here is the open area in the gate complex where legal and business matters were conducted. The area could be as small as a few hundred square feet.
²⁰tn The verb means “to hide, withdraw.” The young men out of respect would withdraw, or yield the place of leadership to Job. The old men would rise and remain standing until Job took his seat—a sign of respect.
²¹tn The verb is “hidden” here as well. But this is a strange expression for voices. Several argue that the word was erroneously inserted from 8a and needs to be emended. But the word “hide” can have extended meanings of “withdraw, be quiet, silent” (see Gen 31:27). Guillaume relates the Arabic habi’a, “the fire dies out,” applying the idea of “silent” only to v. 10 (it is a form of repetition of words with different senses, called jinas). See Guillaume, Promise and Fulfillment, p. 119. The point here is that whatever conversation was going on would become silent or hushed to hear what Job had to say.
²²tn The words “these things” and “them” in the next colon are not in the Hebrew text, but have been supplied in the translation for clarity.
²³tn The main clause is introduced by the preterite with the waw consecutive (see GKC #111h); the clause before it is therefore temporal and circumstantial to the main clause.
²⁴tn The negative introduces a clause that serves as a negative attribute; literally it says, “and had no helper” (see GKC, # 152u).
²⁵tn The verb is simply bo’, “to come, enter.” With the preposition `al it could means “came to me, or came upon me, i.e., descended (see Gordis, p. 320).
²⁶tn The verb ‘arnen is from ranan, “to give a ringing cry,” but here, cause to give a ringing cry, i.e., shout of joy. The rejoicing envisioned in this word is far greater than what the words “sing” or “rejoice” suggest.
²⁷tn Both verbs in this first half-verse are from labas, “to clothe, put on clothing.” P. Jouon changed the vowels to get a verb “it adorned me” instead of “it clothed me” (Biblica, 11 [1930]:324). The figure of clothing is used for the character of the person: to wear righteousness is to be righteous.
²⁸tn The word mispati is simply “my justice, my judgment.” It refers to the decisions he made in settling issues, how he dealt with other people justly.
²⁹sn The word “father” does not have a wide range of meanings in the OT. But there are places that it is metaphorical, especially in a legal setting like this where the poor need aid.
³⁰tn The word rendered “fangs” actually means “teeth,” i.e., the molars probably; it is used frequently of the teeth of wild beasts. Of course, the language is here figurative, comparing the oppressing enemy to a preying animal.
³¹tn “I made [him] drop.” The word means “throw, cast,” throw in the sense of “throw away.” But in the context with the figure of the beast with prey in its move, “drop” or “cast away” is the idea. Driver finds another cognate meaning “rescue” (see AJSL 52 [1935,36):163).
³²tc The expression in the MT is “with my nest.” The figure is satisfactory for the context—a home with all the young together, a picture of unity and safety. In Isa 16:2 the word can mean “nestlings,” and with the preposition “with” that might be the meaning here, except that his children had grown up and lived in their own homes. The figure cannot be pushed too far. But the verse apparently has caused enormous problems, because the versions offer a variety of readings and free paraphrases. The Greek has “My age shall grow old as the stem of a palm tree, I shall live a long time.” The Vulgate has, “In my nest I shall die and like the palm tree increase my days.” Driver found an Egyptian word meaning “strength” (PEQ 87 [1955]:138.9). Several read “in a rip old age” instead of “in my nest” (Pope, Dhorme; see Saydon, CBQ 23 [1961]:252). This requires the verb zaqan, i.e., bizqunay, “in my old age,” instead of qinni, “my nest.” It has the Greek support.
³³tc For hol, “sand,” the Greek has a word that is “like the palm tree,” but which could also be translated “like the phoenix.” This latter idea was developed further in rabbinical teaching (see Gordis, p. 321). See also Dahood, Biblica 48 (1967):542f. But the MT yields a proper sense here.
³⁴tn The word is “my glory,” meaning his high respect and his honor. Hoffmann proposed to read kidon instead, meaning “javelin” (as in 1 Sam 17:6), to match the parallelism (RQ 3 91961-62]:388). But the parallelism does not need to be so tight.
³⁵tn Heb “new.”
³⁶tn “Men” is supplied; the verb is plural.
³⁷tc The last verb of the first half, “wait hope,” and the first verb in the second colon, “be silent,” are usually reversed by the commentators (see Driver, VT Supp 3 [1955]:86). But if “wait” has the idea of being silent as they wait for him to speak, then the second line would say they were silent for the reason of his advice. The reading of the MT is not impossible.
³⁸tn The verb simply means “dropped,” but this means like the rain. So the picture of his words falling on them like the gentle rain, drop by drop, is what is intended (see Deut 32:2).
³⁹tn The phrase “men wait for” is not in the Hebrew text, but has been supplied in the translation.
⁴⁰sn The analogy is that they received his words eagerly as the dry ground opens to receive the rains.
⁴¹tn The kap preposition is to be supplied by analogy with the preceding phrase. This leaves a double proposition, “as for” (but see Job 29:2).
⁴²tn The connection of this clause with the verse is difficult. The line simply reads: “[if] I would smile at them, they would not believe.” Obviously something has to be supplied to make sense out of this. The view of Dhorme, adopted here, makes the most sense, namely, that when he smiled at people, they could hardly believe their good fortune. Other interpretations are strained, such as Kissane’s, “If I laughed at them, they believed not,” meaning, people rejected the views that Job laughed at.
⁴³tn The meaning, according to Gordis, is that they did nothing to provoke Job’s displeasure.
⁴⁴tn All of these imperfects describe what Job used to do, and so they all fit the category of customary imperfect.
⁴⁵tn Heb “their way.”
⁴⁶tn The text simply has “and I sat [as their] head.” The adverbial accusative explains his role, especially under the image of being seated. He directed the deliberations as a king directs an army.
⁴⁷tc Most commentators think this last phrase is odd here, and so they either delete it altogether, or emend it to fit the idea of the verse. Ewald, however, thought it appropriate as a transition to the next section, reminding his friends that unlike him, they were miserable comforters. Herz made the few changes in the text to get the reading “where I led them, they were willing to go” (ZAW 20 [1900]:163). The two key words in the MT are ‘abelim y^enahem, “he [one who] comforts mourners.” Following Herz, Dhorme has these changed to ‘obilam yinnahu (p. 422). Gordis has, “like one leading a camel train” (p. 324). But Kissane also retains the line as a summary of the chapter, noting its presence in the versions.
¹tn Heb “smaller than I for days.”
²tn The text simply says, “who I disdained their fathers to set…,” meaning “whose fathers I disdained to set.” The relative clause modifies the young fellows who mock; it explains that Job did not think highly enough of them to put them with the dogs. The next verse will explain why.
³sn Job is mocked by young fellows who come from low extraction. They mocked their elders and their betters. The scorn is strong here—dogs were despised as scavengers.
⁴tn The reference is to the fathers of the scorners, who are here regarded as weak and worthless.
⁵tn The word kelah only occurs in Job 5:26; but the Arabic cognate gives this meaning “strength.” Others suggest “old age” (kalah), “all vigor” (kol-hayil), “all freshness” (kol-leah), and the like. But there is no reason for such emendation.
⁶tn This word galmud describes something as lowly, desolate, bare, gaunt like a rock.
⁷tn The form is the plural participle with the definite article—“who gnaw.” The article, joined to the participle, joins on a new statement concerning a preceding noun (see GKC, #126b).
⁸tn The MT has “yesterday desolate and waste.” The word “yesterday” is strange here. Among the proposals for ‘emes, Duhm suggested “they grope” (y^emass^esu), which would require darkness; Pope renders “by night,” instead of “yesterday, which evades the difficulty; and Fohrer suggested with more reason ‘eres, “a desolate and waste land.” Gordis suggests yamisu/yamusu, “they wander off” (p. 331).
⁹tn Here too the form is the participle with the article.
¹⁰tn The word gew is an Aramaic term meaning “midst,” indicating “midst [of society].” But there is also a Phoenician word that means “community” (see Jean-Hoftijzer, Dictionnaire des inscriptions semitiques de l’ouest, p. 48).
¹¹tn The form simply is the plural verb, but it means those who drove them from society.
¹²tn The text just says “as thieves,” but it obviously compares the poor to the thieves.
¹³tn This use of the infinitive construct expresses that they were compelled to do something (see GKC, #114h-k).
¹⁴tn The adjectives followed by a partitive genitive take on the emphasis of a superlative: “in the most horrible of valleys” (see GKC, #133h).
¹⁵tn The verb nahaq means “to bray.” It has cognates in Arabic, Aramaic, and Ugaritic. So there is no call for emendation. It is the sign of an animal’s hunger.
¹⁶tn The pual of the verb sapah (“join”) also brings out the passivity of these people—“they were huddled together” (Dhorme, p. 434).
¹⁷tn The “sons of the senseless” (nabal) means they were mentally and morally base and defective; and “sons of no-name” means without honor and respect, worthless (because not named).
¹⁸tn The idea is that Job has become proverbial, people think of misfortune and sin when they think of him. The statement uses the ordinary word for “word,” millah, but in this context it means more.
¹⁹tn Heb “they are far from me.”
²⁰tn The verb patah means “to untie, undo” a rope or bonds. In this verse yitro (the k^ethiv, Greek, and Vulgate) would mean “his rope” (see yeter in Judg 16:7-9). The q^ere’ would be yitri, “my rope, cord,” meaning “me.” The word could mean “rope, cord” or “bowstring.” If the reading “my cord” is accepted, the cord would be something like “my tent cord” (as in Job 29:20), more than Delitzsch’s “cord of life.” If it was “my bowstring,” it would give the sense of disablement. If “his cord” is taken, it would signify that the restraint that God had in afflicting Job was loosened—nothing was held back.
²¹sn The line means that when people saw how God afflicted Job, robbing him of his influence and power, then they turned on him with unrestrained insolence (Rowley, p. 193).
²²tn This word occurs only here. The word pirhah is a quadriliteral, from parah, “to bud.” The derivative ‘eproah in the Bible is a young bird. In Arabic farhun means both “young bird” and “base man.” Perhaps “young rabble” is the best meaning here (see Gordis, p. 333).
²³tn The MT literally reads, “they cast off my feet” or “they send my feet away.” Many delete the line as troubling and superfluous. Dhorme forces the lines to say “they draw my feet into a net” (p. 438).
²⁴sn See Job 19:12.
²⁵tn This verb nat^esu is found nowhere else. It is probably a variant of the verb in Job 19:10. Gordis notes the Arabic noun natsun, “thorns,” suggesting a denominative idea “they have placed thorns in my path” (pp. 333,4). Most take it to mean they ruin the way of escape.
²⁶tc The MT has “they further my misfortune.” The line is difficult, with slight textual problems. The verb yo`ilu means “profit,” and so “succeed” or “set forward.” Bickell proposed redividing the line to put this verb with the last colon, and changing it to read ya`alu, meaning “they go up,” i.e., “they prevail.” Dhorme accepted this, and finished the verse with “no one checks them.” But good sense can be made from the MT as it stands, and too many changes like this are suspect.
²⁷tn The sense of “restraining” for “helping” was proposed by Dillmann and supported by Driver (see AJSL 52 [1935-6]:163).
²⁸tn The MT has “under the crash,” with the idea that they rush in while the stones are falling around them (which is continuing the figure of the military attack). Driver took the expression to mean in a temporal sense “at the moment of the crash” (AJSL 52 [1935,6]:163,4). Guillaume, drawing from Arabic, has “where the gap is made.
²⁹tn The verb, the hithpalpel of galal, means “they roll themselves.” This could mean “they roll themselves under the ruins” (Dhorme), “they roll on like a storm” (Gordis), or “they roll on” as in waves of enemy attackers (see Rowley). This particular verb form is found only here (but see Amos 5:24).
³⁰tn The passive singular verb (hophal) is used with a plural subject (see GKC, #121b).
³¹tc This translation assumes that “terrors” (in the plural) is the subject. Others emend the text in accordance with the Greek, which has, “my hope is gone like the wind.”
³²tn This line can either mean that Job is wasting away (i.e., his life is being poured out), or it can mean that he is grieving. The second half of the verse gives the subordinate clause of condition for this.
³³tn The subject of the verb “pierces” can be the night (personified), of it could be God (understood), leaving “night” to be an adverbial accusative of time—“at night he pierces.”
³⁴tc The MT concludes this half-verse with “upon me.” That is not in the Greek, and so many commentators delete it as making the line too long. Dhorme deletes the phrase as well, but keeps the mem and adds that to the verb to make a plural form niqqarim, reading “my bones are pierced.” There is no need for this change.
³⁵tn The text has “my gnawers,” which is open to a few interpretations. RSV and NIV take it as “gnawing pains.” Some suggest worms in the sores (7:5). The Greek has “my nerves,” a view accepted by many commentators.
³⁶tc This whole verse is difficult. The first problem is that this verb in the MT means “is disguised, disfigured,” indicating that Job’s clothes hang loose on him. But many take the view that the verb is a phonetic variant of habas, “bind, seize,” and that the hithpael form is a conflation of the third and second person because of the interchange between them in the passage (Gordis, p. 335). The commentaries list a number of conjectural emendations, but the image in the verse is probably that God seizes Job by the garment and throws him down.
³⁷tn The phrase “like the collar” is difficult, primarily because their tunics did not have collars. A translation of “neck” would suit better. Some change the preposition to bet, getting a translation “by the neck of my tunic.”
³⁸tn The implication from the sentence is that this is a cry to God for help. The sudden change from third person to second person is indicative of the intense emotion of the sufferer.
³⁹sn The verb is simple, but the interpretation difficult. In this verse it probably means he stands up in prayer (Jer 15:1), but it could mean that he makes his case to God. Others suggest a more figurative sense, like the English expression “stand pat,” meaning “remain silent” (see Job 29:8).
⁴⁰tn If the idea of prayer is meant, then a pejorative sense to the verb is required. Some supply a negative and translate “you do not pay heed to me.” This is supported by one MS and the Vulgate. The Syriac has the whole colon read with God as the subject, “you stand and look at me.”
⁴¹tn The idiom uses the niphal verb “you are turned” with “to cruelty.” See Job 41:20b, as well as Isa 63:10.
⁴²tc The Greek reads this verb as “you scourged/whipped me.” But there is no reason to adopt this change.
⁴³sn Here Job changes the metaphor again, to the driving storm. God has sent his storms, and Job is blown away.
⁴⁴tn The verb means “to melt.” The imagery would suggest softening the ground with the showers (see Ps 65:10 [11]). The idea of the translation “toss” comes from the Arabic cognate that is used for the surging of the sea.
⁴⁵tc The q^ere’is tusiyah, “counsel,” which makes no sense here. the k^ethiv tswh is a variant orthography for t^esu’ah, “storm.”
⁴⁶tn The imperfect tense would be progressive imperfect, it is future, but it is also underway.
⁴⁷tc Here is another very difficult verse, as is attested by the commentaries and translations. The MT has “surely not against a ruinous heap will he (God) put forth his (God’s) hand.” But Davidson takes Job as the subject, reading “does not one stretch out his hand in his fall?” RSV suggests a man walking in the ruins and using his hand for support. Dillmann changed it to “drowning man” to say “does not a drowning man stretch out his hand?” Beer has “have I not given a helping hand to the poor?” Dhorme has, “I did not strike the poor man with my hand.” Kissane follows this but retains the verb form, “one does not strike the poor man with his hand.”
⁴⁸tc The second colon is also difficult; it reads, “if in his destruction to them he cries.” Dhorme (pp. 425-6) explains how he thinks “to them” came about, and he restores “to me.” This is the major difficulty in the line, and this the simplest resolution.
⁴⁹tn Heb “for the hard of day.”
⁵⁰tn Heb “my loins,” “my bowels [archaic],” “my innermost being.”
⁵¹tn Heb “boils.”
⁵²tn The last clause reads “and they [it] are not quiet” or “do not cease.” The clause then serves adverbially for the sentence—“unceasingly.”
⁵³tn The construction uses the word qoder followed by the piel perfect of halak, “I go about.” The “blackened” refers to Job’s skin, that has been marred by the disease. Adjectives are often used before verbs to describe some bodily condition (see GKC, #118n).
⁵⁴sn The point of this figure is that Job’s cries of lament are like the howls and screeches of these animals, not that he lives with them. In Job 39:13 the female ostrich receives the name “the wailer.”
⁵⁵tn The MT has “become dark from upon me,” prompting some editions to supply the verb “falls from me” (RSV, NRSV), or “peels” (NIV).
⁵⁶tn The word “my bones” may be taken as a metonymy of subject, the bony framework indicating the whole body.
⁵⁷tn The word horeb also means “heat.” The heat in this line is not that of the sun, but obviously a fever.
⁵⁸tn The verb hayah followed by the preposition lamed means “to serve the purpose of” (see Gen 1:14ff., 17:7, etc.).
¹tn The idea of cutting a covenant for something may suggest a covenant that is imposed, except that this construction elsewhere argues against it (see 2 Chr 29:10).
²tn This half-verse is the effect of the covenant. The interrogative mah may have the force of the negative, and so translated “not to pay attention.”
³tn The text’s “lot of Shadday,” must mean “the lot from Shadday,” a genitive of source.
⁴tn The normal appraoch is to take this as the protasis, and then have it resumed in v. 7 after a parenthesis in v. 6. But some take v. 6 as the apodosis and a new protasis in v. 7.
⁵tn The “if” is understood by the use of the consecutive verb.
⁶sn The verbs “walk” and “hasten” (of the foot) are used metaphorically for the manner of life Job lived.
⁷tn “God” is undoubtedly the understood subject of this jussive. However, “him” is retained in the translation at this point to avoid redundancy since “God” occurs in the second half of the verse.
⁸tn The word sedeq, “righteousness,” forms a fitting genitive for the scales used in trade or justice. The “scales of righteousness” are scales that conform to the standard (see the illustration in Deut 25:13-15). They must be honest scales to make just decisions.
⁹tn The verb is w^eyeda`, “and [then] He [God] will know.” The verb could also be subordinated to the preceding jussive, “so that God may know.” The meaning of “to know” here has more the idea of “come to know, discover.”
¹⁰sn The meaning is “been led by what my eyes see.”
¹¹tc The word m^e’um could be taken in one of two ways. One reading is to represent mum, “blemish” (see the Masorah); the other is for m^e’umah, “anything” (see the versions and the k^ethiv). Either reading fits the passage.
¹²tn The cohortative is often found in the apodosis of the conditional clause (see GKC, #108f).
¹³tn The word means “what sprouts up” (from yasa’ with the sense of “sprout forth”). It could refer metaphorically to children (and so Kissane and Pope), as well as in its literal sense of crops. The latter fits here perfectly.
¹⁴tn Gordis notes that the word for “door,” petah, has sexual connotations in rabbinic literature, based on Prov 7:6ff. (see b. Ket. 9b). See also the use in Song 4:12 using a synonym.
¹⁵tn Targum Job interpreted the verb tahan in a sexual sense, and this has influenced other versions and commentaries. But the literal sense fits well in this line. The idea is that she would be a slave for someone else. The second line of the verse then might build on this to explain what kind of a slave—a concubine (see Davidson, p. 215).
¹⁶sn The idea is that if he were guilty of adultery it would be an offense against the husband, and so by talionic justice another’s adultery with his wife would be an offense against him. He is not wishing something on his wife; rather, he is simply looking at what would be offenses in kind.
¹⁷tn The word for “shameful act” is used especially for sexual offenses (cf. Lev 18:27).
¹⁸tc Some have deleted this verse as being short and irrelevant, not to mention problematic. But the difficulties are not insurmountable, and there is no reason to delete it. There is a k^ethiv-q^ere’ reading in each half verse; in the first the K is masculine for the subject but the Q is feminine going with “shameless deed.” In the second colon the K is the feminine agreeing with the preceding noun, but the Q is masculine agreeing with “iniquity.”
tn The expression `awon p^elilim is “an iniquity of the judges.” The first word is not spelled as a construct noun, and so this has led some to treat the second word as an adjective (with enclitic mem). The sense is similar in either case, for the adjective occurs in Job 31:28 meaning “calling for judgment” (See GKC, #131s).
¹⁹tn The verb means “root out,” but this does not fit the parallelism with fire. Wright changed two letters and the vowels in the verb to get the root sarap, “to burn.” RSV has “burn to the root.”
²⁰tn This construction is an adverbial clause using the temporal preposition, the infinitive from rib, and the suffix which is the subjective genitive.
²¹tc The verb is simply “arise.” The Greek text has “take vengeance,” an interpretation that is somewhat correct but unnecessary. The verb “to rise” would mean to confront in judgment.
²²tn The verb paqad means “visit,” but with God as the subject it means any divine intervention for blessing or cursing, anything God does that changes our life. Here it is “visit to judge.”
²³tc The MT has “from my youth.”
²⁴tn The verb is “he grew up with me.” Several commentators have decided to change the pronoun to “I,” and make it causative.
²⁵tn The expression “from my mother’s womb” is obviously hyperbolic. It is a way of saying “all his life.”
²⁶tn The text has “I guided her” and so the reference is to the widow mentioned in v. 16.
²⁷tn The MT has simply “if his loins did not bless me.” In the conditional clause this is another protasis. It means, “if I saw someone dying and if he did not thank me for clothing them.” It is Job’s way of saying that whenever he saw a need he met it, and he received his share of thanks—which prove his kindness. Driver has it “without his loins having blessed me,” taking “If…not” as an Aramaism, meaning “except” (AJSL 52 [1935,6]:164f.).
²⁸tn This clause is interpreted here as a subordinate clause to the first half of the verse. It could also be a separate clause: “was he not warmed….”
²⁹sn This would be in a threatening manner in the court.
³⁰sn Here is the apodosis, the imprecation Job pronounces on himself if he has done any of these things just listed.
³¹tn The point is that if he has raised his arm against the oppressed it should be ripped off at the joint. The MT has “let fall my shoulder (k^etepi) from the nape of the neck/shoulder blade (missikmah).”
³²tn The word qaneh is “reed, shaft, beam,” and here “shoulder joint.” All the commentaries try to explain how “reed” became “socket, joint.” This is the only place that it is used in this sense. Dhorme connects it to the beam of a balance, showing how if the arms are stretched out they resemble the balance. Kissane thought “socket” referred to the elbow joint. Pope thought it meant “upper arm” while “arm” meant the lower arm. Whatever the exact explanation—and there seem to be no convincing view—the point of the verse is nonetheless clear.
³³tc The Greek has “For the terror of God restrained me” Several commentators changed it to “came upon me.” Driver had “The fear of God was burdensome.” Eitan suggested “The terror of God was mighty upon me” (JBL 42 [1923]:22ff.). But the MT makes clear sense as it stands.
³⁴tn The form is u-miss^e’eti; the preposition is causal. The form, from the verb nasa’, “to raise, lift high,” refers to God’s exalted person, his majesty (see Job 13:11).
³⁵tn Heb “light”; but parallel to the moon it is the sun. This section speaks of false worship of the sun and the moon.
³⁶tn Heb “and my hand kissed my mouth.” The idea should be that of “my mouth kissed my hand.” Rowley suggests that the hand was important in waving or throwing the kisses of homage to the sun and the moon, and so it receives the focus. This is the only place in the OT that refers to such a custom. Outside the Bible it was known.
³⁷tn Heb “it.”
³⁸tn See v. 11 for the construction. In Deut 17:2ff. false worship of heavenly bodies is a capital offence. In this passage, Job is talking about just a momentary glance at the sun or moon and the brief lapse into a pagan thought. But it is still sin.
³⁹tn The verb kahas in the piel means “to deny.” The root meaning is “deceive, disappoint, grow lean.” Here it means that he would have failed or proven unfaithful because his act would have been a denial of God.
⁴⁰tn There is a problem if this is taken as “if,” introducing a conditional clause, and that is finding the apodosis, if there is one. It may be that the apodosis is understood, or summed up at the end. This is the view taken here. But Gordis wishes to take this word as the indication of the interrogative, forming the rhetorical question to affirm he has never done this (p. 352). But then the parenthetical verses inserted become redundant.
⁴¹sn The Law required people to help their enemies if they could (Exod 23:4; also Prov 20:22)). But often in the difficulties that ensued they did exult over their enemies misfortune (Ps 54:7; 59:10 [11], etc.). But Job lived on a level of purity that few ever reach. Duhm said, “If chapter 31 is the crown of all ethical developments of the O.T., verse 29 is the jewel in that crown.”
⁴²tn The hithpael of `ur has the idea of “exult.”
⁴³tn The word is ra`, “evil,” in the sense of anything that harms, interrupts, or destroys life.
⁴⁴tn This verse would then be a parenthesis in which he stops to claim his innocence.
⁴⁵tn Heb “I have not given my palate.”
⁴⁶tn The infinitive construct with the lamed preposition serves in an epexegetical capacity here, explaining the verb of the first colon. To seek a curse on anyone would be a sin.
⁴⁷tn Now Job picks up the series of clauses serving as the protasis.
⁴⁸sn The line is difficult to sort out. Job is saying it is sinful “if his men have never said, ‘O that there was one who has not been satisfied from his food.’” If they never said that it would mean there were people out there who needed to be satisfied with his food.
⁴⁹tn The optative is again expressed with “who will give?”
⁵⁰tn Heb “his meat.”
⁵¹tn This verse forms another parenthesis. Job stops almost at every point now in the conditional clauses to affirm his purity and integrity.
⁵²tn The word ‘orah, “way,” is a contraction from ‘oreah, “wayfarer.” The same parallelism is found in Jer 14:8. The reading here “on/to the road” is meaningless otherwise.
⁵³tn Now the protasis continues again.
⁵⁴sn Some commentators suggest taking the meaning here to be “as Adam,” referring to the Paradise story of the sin and denial.
⁵⁵tn The infinitive is epexegetical, explaining the first line.
⁵⁶tn The MT has “in my bosom.” This is the only place in the OT where this word is found. But its meaning is well attested from Aramaic.
⁵⁷tn Here too the verb will be the customary imperfect—it explains what he continually did in past time.
⁵⁸tn Heb “the great multitude.” But some commentators tool rabbah adverbially, “greatly” (see RSV). Chajes change the vocalization of “multitude to make it construct, and then the word rabbah to rab, and derived “the hubbub of the city” (GSAI 20 [1907]:307). Dhorme accepts this reading.
⁵⁹sn There is no clear apodosis for all these clauses. Some commentators transfer the verses around to make them fit the constructions. But the better view is that there is no apodosis, that Job broke off here, feeling it was useless to go further. Now he will address God and not men. But in vv. 38-40b he does return to a self-imprecation. But there is not sufficient reason to start rearranging all the verses.
⁶⁰tn The optative is again introduced with “who will give to me hearing me? —O that someone would listen to me!”
⁶¹tn The text has hen tawi, “here is my `taw’.” The letter taw is the last letter of the alphabet in Hebrew. In paleo-Hebrew the letter was in the form of a cross or an “x,” and so used for one making a mark or a signature. In this case Job has signed his statement and delivered it to the court—but he has yet to be charged. Kissane thought that this being the last letter of the alphabet, Job was saying, “This is my last word.” Others take the word to mean “desire”—“this is my desire, that God would answer me” (see Sutcliffe, Biblica 30 [1949]:71,2; Driver, AJSL 3 [1935,6]:166; Saydon, CBQ 23 [1961]:252). Gordis also argues strongly for this view (see page 355).
⁶²tn The last line is very difficult; it simply says, “a scroll [that] my [legal] adversary had written.” The simplest way to handle this is to see it as a continuation of the optative (RSV).
⁶³tn The clause begins with the positive oath formula, “‘im lo’. Dhorme, however, takes it as a question, “Shall I not wear it…?”
⁶⁴tn This verb is only found in Prov 6:21. But Dhorme suggests that (with metathesis) we have a derivative ma`adannot, “bonds, ties,” in Isa 38:31 (p. 470).
⁶⁵sn Many commentators place vv. 38-40b at the end of v. 34, so that there is no return to these conditional clauses after his final appeal.
⁶⁶sn Some commentators have suggested that the meaning behind this is that Job might not have kept the year of release (Deut 15:1), and the law against mixing seed (Lev 19:19). But the context will make clear that the case considered is obtaining the land without paying for it and causing the death of its lawful owner (see Rowley, p. 206). Similar to this would be the case of Naboth’s vineyard.
⁶⁷tn Heb “silver.”
⁶⁸tc The versions have the verb “grieved” here. The Hebrew verb means “breathe,” but the form is hiphil. This verb in that stem could mean something of a contemptuous gesture, like “sniff” in Mal 1:13. But with nepes in Job 11:20 it means “cause death,” i.e., cause to breathe out, expire.” This is likely the meaning here, although it is possible that it only meant “cause suffering” to the people.
⁶⁹tn There is some debate over the meaning of b^e`aleyha, usually translated “its owners.” Dahood, following others (although without their emendations), thought it referred to “laborers” (see Biblica,41 [1960]:303; 43 [1962]:362).
⁷⁰tn The word bo’sah (from ba’as, “to have a foul smell”) must refer to foul smelling weeds.
⁷¹sn There are now four speeches from another friend of Job, Elihu. But Job does not reply to any of these, nor does the LORD. The speeches show a knowledge of the debate that has gone on, but they take a different approach entirely. Elihu’s approach is that suffering is a discipline from God, to teach his people. In other words, Job was suffering to vindicate God’s confidence in him. His speeches are an interesting part of the book, but they too are irrelevant to Job’s actual case.
⁷²sn There is a short introduction (32:1-5), and then the speech proper with these sections: Elihu will speak because his youth is wiser (32:6-14), and his friends arguments failed (32:15-22); he calls for Job’s attention (33:1-7), claims Job’s case is wrong (33:8-13), and Job’s argument that God does not answer is false (33:14-28), and then makes an appeal to Job (33:29-33).
¹tn The form is the infinitive construct functioning as the object of the preposition; the phrase forms the complement of the verb “they ceased.”
²tc The Greek, Syriac, and Symmachus have “in their eyes.” This is adopted by some commentators, but it does not fit the argument.
³tn The verse begins with wayyihar ‘ap, “and the anger became hot,” meaning Elihu became very angry.
⁴tn The second comment about Elihu’s anger comes right before the statement of its cause. Now the perfect tense is used: “he was angry.”
⁵tn The explanation is the causal clause `al sadd^eqo napso, “because he justified himself.” It is the preposition with the piel infinitive construct with a suffixed subjective genitive.
⁶tc The Greek and Latin soften it a bit by saying “before God.”
⁷tn The perfect tense should be given the category of potential perfect here.
⁸tc This is one of the eighteen “corrections of the scribes” (tiqqune sopherim); it originally read, “and they declared God (in the wrong).” The thought was that in abandoning the debate they had conceded Job’s point.
⁹tc This reading requires repointing the word bidbarim, “with words,” to b^edabb^eram, “while they spoke [with Job].” If the MT is retained, it would mean “he waited for Job with words,” which while understandable is awkward.
¹⁰tn The first clause beginning with a waw consecutive and the preterite can be subordinated to the next similar verb as a temporal clause.
¹¹tn The text has “small in days.”
¹²tn The verb zahalti is found only here in the OT; but it is found in a ninth century Aramaic inscription as well as in Biblical Aramaic. It has the meaning of “be timid” (see Rowley, p. 208).
¹³tn The piel infinitive with the preposition, mehawwot, means “from explaining.” The phrase is the complement, explain what he feared.
¹⁴tn Heb “days.”
¹⁵tn The imperfect here is to be classified as an obligatory imperfect.
¹⁶tn Heb “abundance of years.”
¹⁷tn Dhorme translates this “inspiration.”
¹⁸tn This is the word n^esamah, “breath”; according to Gen 2:7 it was breathed into Adam to make him a living person (“soul”). With that divine impartation came this spiritual understanding. Some commentators identify the ruah in the first line as the Spirit of God; this “breath” then would be the human spirit. Whether Elihu knew that much is hard to prove.
¹⁹tn The MT has “the great” or “the many,” meaning great in years according to the parallelism.
²⁰tc In most MSS this imperative is singular, and so addressed to Job. But two MSS and the versions have the plural. Elihu was probably addressing all of them.
²¹tn The word means “understanding.” It refers to the faculty of perception and comprehension; but it also can refer to what that produces, especially when it is in the plural (see Ps 49:4). See Gordis, p. 368. Others translate it “reasonings, arguments” and the like.
²²tn The verb again is from bin, “to perceive, understand”; in this stem it means to “give close attention.”
²³tn The particle hinneh has a deictic force here, calling attention to the thought that is now presented.
²⁴tn The participle mokiah is from the verb yakah that has been used frequently in the book. It means “to argue, contend, debate, prove, dispute.” The usage of the verb shows that it can focus on the beginning of an argument, the debating itself, or the resolution of the conflict. here the latter is obviously meant, for they did argue and contend and criticize—but could not prove Job wrong.
²⁵tn The Hebrew has “lest you say.” Gordis calls this a breviloquence: “beware lest [you say].” He then suggests the best reading for their quote to be, “We have attained wisdom, but only God can refute him, not man” (p. 368). Rowley suggests the meaning is a little different, namely, that they are saying they have found wisdom in Job, and only God can deal with it. Elihu is in effect saying that they do not need God for he is quite capable for this (p. 209).
²⁶tn The root is nadap, “to drive away, off.” Here it is in the abstract sense of “succeed in doing something, confound,” and so “refute, rebut.” Dhorme wants to change the meaning of the word with a slight emendation in the text, deriving it from ‘alap, the form becoming yall^epenu instead of yidd^epenu, obtaining the translation “God will instruct us.” This makes a smoother reading, but does not have much support for it.
²⁷tn The verb `arak means “to arrange in order, set forth, direct, marshal.” It is used in military contexts for setting the battle array; it is used in legal settings for preparing the briefs.
²⁸sn Elihu now will give another reason why he will speak—the arguments of these friends failed miserably. But before he gets to his argument, he will first qualify his authority.
²⁹tn The verb hattu is from hatat, which means “to be terrified.” But here it stresses the resulting dilemma. Gordis has it, “they are shattered, beaten in an argument” (p. 369). P. Jouon suggested “speechless” (MFO 5,2 [1912]:428,9).
³⁰tn The expression literally says “words have moved away from them”—are gone from them, meaning they have nothing to say.
³¹tn Some commentators take this as a question: “And shall/must I wait because they do not speak?” (Davidson, Gordis). But this is not convincing because the silence of the friends is the reason for him to speak, not to wait.
³²tn The verb suq means “constrain, urge, press.” It is used in Judg 14:17; 16:16 with the sense of wearing someone down with repeated entreaties. Elihu cannot withhold himself any longer.
³³tn The first line says literally “in my belly I am like wine that is not opened” (a niphal imperfect), meaning sealed with no place to escape.
³⁴tc The Hebrew text has k^e’obot hadasim, traditionally rendered “like new wineskins.” But this only here does this have this meaning. The Greek text has “smiths” for new; and Tur-Sinai follows that and has “like smith’s bellows.” A. Guillaume connects the word with an Arabic word for a wide vessel for wine shaped like a cup (PEQ 93 [1961]:147ff.). Some have been found in archaeological sights. The poor would use skins, the rich would use jars. Gordis reads it “like skins filled with new wine.” The key to putting this together is the verb at the end of the line, yibbaqea`, “that are ready to burst.” And Dhorme reads it “like a wine that bursts wineskins,” but this involves different pointing. The point of the statement is that Elihu is bursting to speak, and until now has not had the opening.
³⁵tn The cohortative expresses Elihu’s resolve to speak.
³⁶tn The idiom is “I will not lift up the face of a man.” Elihu is going to show no favoritism, but speak his mind.
³⁷tn The verb means “to confer an honorary title, to give a mark of distinction,” but it is often translated with the verb “flatter.” Elihu will not take sides, he will not use pompous titles.
³⁸tn The construction uses a perfect tense followed by the imperfect tense. This is a form of subordination equivalent to a complementary infinitive (see GKC, #120c).
³⁹tn The words “if I did” are supplied to make sense out of the two clauses.
¹tn Heb “give ear,” the hiphil denominative verb from “ear.”
²tn The perfect tenses in this verse should be classified as perfects of resolve: “I have decided to open…speak.”
³sn Rowley says, “The self-importance of Elihu is boundless, and he is the master of banality.” He adds that whoever wrote these speeches this way clearly intended to expose the character rather than exalt him (p. 210).
⁴tc This expression is unusual; Gordis says it can be translated, “the purity of my heart [is reflected] in my words,” but that is far-fetched and awkward (p. 371). So there have been suggestions for emending yoser. Kissane’s makes the most sense if a change is desired: “shall reveal” (an Arabic sense of yaser), although Holscher interpreted “shall affirm” (yaser, with a Syriac sense). Dhorme has “my heart will repeat” (yasur), but this is doubtful. If Kissane’s view is taken, it would say, “my heart will reveal my words.” Some commentators would join “and knowledge” to this colon, and read “words of knowledge”—but that requires even more emendations.
⁵tn This more literally would read “and the knowledge of my lips they will speak purely.”
⁶tc Some commentators with to put this verse after v. 6. Some omit the verse entirely. Elihu is claiming here that he is inspired by God.
tn The verb t^ehayyeni is the piel imperfect of the verb “to live.” It can mean “gives me life,” but it can also me “quickens me, enlivens me.”
⁷tn The text does not have “words” in it; but this verb has been used already for preparing or arranging a defense.
⁸tn The verb means “nipped off,” as a potter breaks off a piece of clay when molding a vessel.
⁹tc The noun means “my pressure, my burden” in the light of the verb ‘akap, “to press on, grip tightly.” In the parallel passages the text used “hand” and “rod” in the hand to terrify. The Greek text has “hand” here for this word. But simply changing it to “hand” is ruled out because the verb is masculine.
¹⁰tn See Job 9:34 and 13:21.
¹¹tn Heb “in my ears.”
¹²sn See Job 9:21; 10:7; 23:7; 27:4; chapter 31.
¹³tn The word is a hapax; hap is from hapap. it is used in New Hebrew as “to wash” the head. Cognates in Syriac and Akkadian support the meaning “wash, clean.”
¹⁴sn See Job 10:13ff.; 19:6ff.; and 13:24.
¹⁵tn The Hebrew means “frustrations” or “oppositions.” RSV chose “displeasure,” and NIV uses “faults.” Rashi chose the word found in Judg 14:4—with metathesis—meaning “pretexts” (to’anot).
¹⁶sn See Job 13:27.
¹⁷tn The meaning of this verb is “this is my answer to you.”
¹⁸tc The Greek text has “he that is above men is eternal.” Elihu is saying that God is far above Job’s petty problems.
¹⁹tc The MT has “all his words.” This must refer to “man” in the previous verse. But many wish to change it to “my words,” since it would be summarizing Job’s complaint to God.
²⁰tn The Syriac and the Vulgate have “and he does not repeat it,” a reading of the text as it is according to Dhorme (p. 403). But his argument is based upon another root with this meaning—which root does not exist (see L. Dennefeld, RB 48 [1039}:175). The verse is saying that God does speak to man.
²¹tn The idiom is “he uncovers the ear of mean.” This expression means “inform” in Ruth 4:4; 1 Sam 20:2, etc. But when God is the subject it means “make a revelation” (see 1 Sam 9:15; 2 Sam 7:27).
²²tc This reading is derived only by emending the text. The text reads “and seals their bonds.” Aquila, the Vulgate, Syriac, and Targum Job have “their correction” for “their bond,” which is what the KJV used. But the Greek, Aquila, and the Syriac have “terrifies” for the verb. This involves a change in pointing from yahtom to y^ehittem. The Greek has “appearances of fear” instead of “bonds,” so Dhorme chose “and by apparitions he terrifies them.” The point of the verse seems to be that by terrifying dreams God makes people aware of their ways.
²³tc The MT simply has “deed” (ma`aseh). The Greek has “from his iniquity” which would have been me`awlah. The two letters may have dropped out by haplography. The MT is workable, but would have to mean “[evil] deeds.”
²⁴tc Here too the sense of the MT escapes us. Some translations took it to mean that God hides pride from man. Many commentators changed “covers” (y^ekasseh) to y^ekasseah, “he cuts away,” or y^ekalleh, “he puts an end to.” The various emendations are not all that convincing.
²⁵tn Some take this as “the pit” (see Job 17:14).
²⁶tc Here is another difficult line. The verb normally means “pass through, over,” and so this word would normally mean “from passing through/ over.” The word selah does at times refer to a weapon, but most commentators look for a parallel with “the pit/corruption.” One suggestion is s^e’olah, “to Sheol,” proposed by Duhm. Dhorme thought it was salah and referred to the passageway to the underworld (see M. Tsevat, VT 4 [1954]:43; and Svi Rin, BZ 7 [1963]:25). The idea of crossing the river of death fits the idea of the passage well, although a reading with “sword” makes sense.
²⁷tc The MT has the passive form, and so a subject has to be added: “[a man] is chastened.” The Greek has the active form, indicating “[God] chastens,” but the object “a man” has to be added. It is understandable why the Greek thought this was active, within this sequence of verbs; and that is why it is the inferior reading.
²⁸tc The k^ethiv “the strife of his bones is continual,” whereas the q^ere’ has “the multitude of his bones are firm.” The former is the better reading in this passage. It indicates that the pain is caused by the ongoing strife.
²⁹tn Heb “food of desire.”
³⁰tc This is the q^ere’ reading; the k^ethiv means “bare height.” Gordis reverses the word order: “his bones are bare [i.e., crushed] so that they cannot be looked upon.” But the sense of that is not clear.
³¹tn Heb “his soul (nepes, “life”) draws near.”
³²tn The MT uses the hiphil participle, “to those who cause death.” This seems to be a reference to the belief in demons that brought about death, an idea not mentioned in the Bible itself. Thus many proposals have been made for this expression. Hoffmann and Budde divide the word into l^emo metim and simply read “to the dead.” Dhorme adds a couple of letters to get limqom metim, “to the place [abode] of the dead.”
³³sn The verse is describing the way God can preserve someone from dying by sending a messenger, who could be human or angelic. This one will interpret/mediate God’s will. There are thousands at God’s disposal.
³⁴tn This is a smoother reading. The MT has “to tell to a man his uprightness,” to reveal what is right for him. The Greek translated this word “duty”; the choice is adopted by some commentaries. That is too far from the text, which indicates that the angel/messenger is to call the person to uprightness.
³⁵tn This verse seems to continue the protasis begun in the last, the apodosis coming in the next verse.
³⁶tn Heb “he”; the referent (God) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
³⁷tc The verb is either taken as an anomalous form of padah, “rescue, redeem,” or “exempt him,” or it is emended to some similar word, like para`, “let loose” (Wright).
³⁸tc The word rutapas is found nowhere else. One suggestion is that it should be yirtab, “become fresh,” connected to ratab, “to be well watered, moist.” It is also possible that it was a combination of ratab and tapas, “grow fat.” But these are all guesses in the commentaries.
³⁹tn The word describes the period when the man is healthy and vigorous, ripe for what life brings his way.
⁴⁰tn Heb “he”; the referent (God) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
⁴¹sn This usually means that as a worshipper he comes into the presence of the LORD in prayer, and in the sanctuary he sees God, i.e., he sees the evidence of God’s presence.
⁴²tc Many commentators think this line is superfluous and so delete it. The RSV changed the verb to “he recounts,” making the idea that the man publishes the news of his victory or salvation (taking “righteousness” as a metonymy of cause).
⁴³tc The verb yasor is unusual. The normal view is to change it to “yasir, “he sings,” but that may seem out of harmony with a confession. Nevertheless, see Gordis’ discussion. Dhorme suggest a root sur, “to repeat,” but this is a doubtful root. J. Reider reads it yaser and links it to an Arabic word “confesses” (ZAW 24 [1953]:275).
⁴⁴tn The verb sawah has the impersonal meaning here, “it has not been requited to me.” The meaning is that the sinner has not been treated in accordance with his deeds.
⁴⁵sn Elihu will repeat these instructions for Job to listen, over and over in painful repetition. Such is the arrogance of this young man who has all the answers and wants to be heard.
⁴⁶tn “In his dealings” is not in the Hebrew text, but has been added for clarification.
⁴⁷tn Heb “if there are words.”
⁴⁸tn The infinitive construct serves as the complement or object of “I desire.” It could be rendered “to justify you” or “your justification, “namely, “that you be justified.”
⁴⁹sn This speech of Elihu focuses on defending God. It can be divided into these sections: Job is irreligious (2-9), God is just (10-15), God is impartial and omniscient (16-30), Job is foolish to rebel (31-37).
¹tn Heb “give ear to me.”
²tn The word means “the men who know,” and without a complement it means “possess knowledge.”
³tn Or, “examines, tests, tries.”
⁴tn The word is “palate”; it means the tongue, or the mouth in general.
⁵sn Elihu means “choose after careful examination.”
⁶tn The word is mispat again with the sense of what is right of just.
⁷tn The verb is the piel imperfect of kazab, meaning “to lie.” It could be a question: “Should I lie [against my right?]—when I am innocent. If it is repointed to the pual, then it can be “I am made to lie,” or “I am deceived.” Taking it as a question makes good sense here, and so emendations are unnecessary.
⁸tn The Hebrew text has only “my arrow.” Some commentators emend that word slightly to get “my wound.” But the idea could be derived from “arrows” as well, the wounds caused by the arrows. The arrows are symbolic of God’s affliction.
⁹tn Heb “without transgression”; but this is parallel to the first part where the claim is innocence.
¹⁰tn Heb “he drinks,” but coming after the question this clause may be subordinated.
¹¹tn The scorn or derision mentioned here is not against Job, but against God. Job scorns God so much, he must love it. So to reflect this idea, Gordis has translated it “blasphemy.”
¹²tn The perfect tense with the waw consecutive carries the sequence forward from the last description.
¹³tn The word hebrah is a hapax. But its meaning is clear enough from the connections to related words and this context as well.
¹⁴tn The infinitive construct with the lamed preposition may continue the clause with the finite verb (see GKC, #114p).
¹⁵tn The expression is literally “men of wickedness”; the genitive is attributive.
¹⁶tn But Gordis takes it in the sense of “being in favor with God.”
¹⁷tn Heb “men of heart.” The “heart” is used for the capacity to understand and make the proper choice. It is often translated “mind.”
¹⁸tn For this construction, see Job 27:5.
¹⁹tn The wording is literally, “for the work of man, He repays him.”
²⁰tn The text means that God will cause a man to find/receive the consequences of his actions.
²¹tn The verb paqad means “to visit, appoint, number.” Here it means “entrust” for care and governing. The implication would be that there would be someone higher than God—which is what Elihu is repudiating by the rhetorical question. No one entrusted God with this.
²²tn The preposition is implied from the first half of the verse.
²³tn Heb “he”; the referent (God) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
²⁴tc This is the reading following the q^ere’. The k^ethiv and the Syriac and the Greek suggest a reading yasib, “if he [God] recalls.” But this would require leaving out “his heart,” and would require redividing the verse to make “his spirit” the object. It makes better parallelism, but may require too many changes.
²⁵tn The phrase “you have” is not in the Hebrew text, but is understood.
²⁶tn The force of ha’ap is “Is it truly the case?” The point is being made that if Job were right God could not be judging the world.
²⁷tn The verb habas has the basic idea of “bind,” as in binding on the yoke, and then in the sense of subduing people under authority (cf. Assyrian absanu. The imperfect tense here is best expressed with the potential nuance.
²⁸tn The two words could be taken separately, but they seem to form a fine nominal hendiadys, because the issue is God’s justice. So the word for power becomes the modifier.
²⁹tc The rendering of the MT is ““Does one say,” although some smooth it out to say “Is it fit to say?” For the reading “who says, the form has to be repointed to ha’omer, meaning, “who is the one saying.” This reading is supported by the Greek, Vulgate and Syriac. Also it seems to flow better with the following verse. It would be saying that God is over the rulers and can rebuke them. The former view is saying that no one rebukes kings, much less Job rebuking God.
³⁰tn The word b^eliya`al means both worthless and wicked. It is common in proverbial literature; and in later writings it became a description of Satan. it is usually found with “son of.”
³¹tn The verb means “to give recognition, take note of” and in this passage with lipne, “before,” it means to show preferential treatment to the rich before the poor. The word for “rich” here is an unusual word, found parallel to “noble” (Isa 32:2). P. Jouon thinks it is a term of social distinction (Biblica 18 [1937]:207,8).
³²tn Dhorme transposes “in the middle of the night” with “they pass away” to get a smoother reading. But the MT emphasizes the suddenness by putting both temporal ideas first. Sutcliffe leaves the order in the text, but adds a verb “they expire” after “in the middle of the night” (Biblica 30 [1949}79ff.).
³³tn Gordis thinks “people” here mean the people who count, the upper class (p. 389).
³⁴tn The verb means “be violently agitated.” There is no problem with the word in this context, but commentators have made suggestions for improving the idea. The one that has the most to commend it, if one were wont to chose a new word, is the change to yigw^e`u, “they expire” (Ball, Holscher, Fohrer, and others).
³⁵tn Heb “not by hand.” This means without having to use force.
³⁶tn Heb “his”; the referent (man) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
³⁷tn The construction of this colon uses the niphal infinitive construct from satar, “to be hidden, “to hide.” The resumptive adverb makes this a relative clause in its usage: “where the evildoers can be hidden.”
³⁸tn The MT has “for he does not put upon man yet.” This has been given a wide variety of interpretations, all of which involve a lot of additional thoughts. The word `od, “yet, still,” has been replaced with mo`ed, “an appointed time” (Reiske and Wright), with the mem having dropped out by haplography. This makes good sense. If the MT is retained, the best interpretation would be that God does not and more consider (from place upon the heart) man that he might appear in judgment.
³⁹tn Heb “no investigation.”
⁴⁰tn The direct object “them” is implied and has been supplied in the translation for clarity.
⁴¹tn “Night” is an accusative of time.
⁴²tn The MT has “under wicked men,” or “under wickednesses.” J. C. Greenfield shows that the preposition can mean “among” as well (ZAW NF 32 [1961]):227). That would allow “among wicked men.” It could also be “instead of” or even “in return for [their wickedness]” which is what the RSV does.
⁴³tn The text simply uses ro’im, “[in the place where there are] seers” or spectators.
⁴⁴tn The verb hiskilu means “to be prudent, wise.” From this is derived the idea of “be wise in understanding God’s will,” and “be successful because of prudence”—i.e., successful with God.
⁴⁵tn The verse begins with the infinitive construct of bo’, showing the result of their impious actions.
⁴⁶tn The verb here is the imperfect tense; the clause is circumstantial to the preceding clause, showing either the result, or the concomitant action.
⁴⁷tn Heb “he”; the referent (God) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
⁴⁸tn The verb in this position is a little difficult, although it does make good sense in the sentence—it is just not what the parallelism would suggest. So several emendations have been put forward, for which see the commentaries.
⁴⁹tn The line simply reads “and over a nation and over a man together.” But it must be the qualification for the points being made in the previous lines, namely, that even if God hides himself so no one can see, yet he is still watching over them all (see Rowley, p. 222).
⁵⁰tn The word “together” has bothered some interpreters. In the reading taken here it is perfectly fine. But others have emended it to gain a verb, such as “he visits” (Beer), “he watches over” (Duhm), “he is compassionate” (Kissane) and so on. But it is sufficient to say “he is over.”
⁵¹tn This last verse is difficult because it is unbalanced and cryptic. Some have joined the third line of v. 29 with this entire verse to make a couplet. But the same result is achieved by simply regard this verse as that purpose of the v. 29. But there still are some words that must be added. In the first colon, “[he is over the nations]…preventing from ruling.” And in the second colon, “laying” has to be supplied before “snares.”
⁵²tn The Hebrew text has only “I lift up” or “I bear.” The reading “I have been led astray” is obtained by changing the vowels to read a passive. If the MT is retained, an object has to be supplied, such as “chastisement” as in RSV. If not, then a different reading would be followed.
⁵³tn Heb “what I do not see,” more specifically, “apart from [that which] I see.”
⁵⁴tn Heb “is it from with you,” an idiomatic expression meaning “to suit you” or “according to your judgment.”
⁵⁵tn There is no object on the verb, and the meaning is perhaps lost. The best guess is that Elihu is saying Job has rejected his teaching.
⁵⁶tn The hiphil infinitive construct is here functioning as a substantive. The word means “prudence, understanding.”
⁵⁷tn The MT has ‘abi, “my father,” which makes no sense. Some follow the KJV and emend the word to make a verb “I desire” or use the noun “my desire it.” Others follow an Arabic word meaning “entreat, I pray.” The Greek and the Syriac have “but” and “surely” respectively. Since this is the only MS support, albeit weak, this may be the best choice. In this sense Elihu would be saying that because of Job’s attitude God will continue to test him.
⁵⁸tn If this reading stands, it would mean that Job shows contempt, meaning that he mocks them and accuses God. It is a bold touch, but workable. Of the many suggested emendations, Dhorme alters some of the vowels and obtains a reading “and casts doubt among us,” and then takes “transgression” from the first colon for the complement. Some commentators simply delete the line.
⁵⁹sn This short speech falls into two sections: he refutes Job’s claim that goodness avails nothing (35:2-8), asserting that when the cry of the afflicted goes unanswered they have not learned their lesson (35:9-16).
¹tn The line could be read as “do you reckon this for justice? Here “to be” is understood.
²tn The word “when” is not in the Hebrew text, but is implied.
³tn The brief line could be interpreted in a number of ways. The MT simply has “my right from God.” It could be “I am right before God,” or “I will be right before God,” “My just cause against God.”
⁴tn I.e., profit God.
⁵tn The Hebrew text merely says, “What do I gain from my sin?” But Job has claimed that he has not sinned, and so this has to be elliptical: “more than if I had sinned” (Rowley, p. 224). It could also be, “What do I gain without sin?”
⁶tn The emphatic pronoun calls attention to Elihu who will answer these questions.
⁷tn The preposition is taken here as a comparative min. The line could also read “that are high above you.” This idea has appeared in the speech of Eliphaz (22:12), Zophar (11:7ff.), and even Job (9:8ff.).
⁸tn See Job 7:20.
⁹tn The phrase “affects only” is supplied in the translation of this nominal sentence.
sn Strahan says, “Elihu exalts God’s greatness at the cost of His grace, His transcendence at the expense of His immanence. He sets up a material instead of a spiritual stand of profit and loss. He does not realize that God does gain what He desires most by the goodness of men, and loses what He most loves by their evil.”
¹⁰tn The word “people” is supplied, because the sentence only has the masculine plural verb.
¹¹tn The final noun is an abstract plural, “oppression.” There is no reason to change it to “oppressors” to fit the versions. The expression is literally “multitude of oppression.”
¹²tn There have been several attempts to emend the line, none of which are particularly helpful or interesting. Rowley says, “It is a pity to rob Elihu of a poetic line when he creates one” (p. 225).
¹³tn The form in the text, the piel participle from ‘alap is written in a contracted form; it should be m^e’all^epenu.
¹⁴tn Some would render this “teaches us by the beasts.” But Elihu is stressing the unique privilege humans have.
¹⁵tn The adverb sam connects this verse to v. 12. “There” can be locative or temporal—and here it is temporal.
¹⁶tn The MT simply has “surely—vanity, he does not hear.” The cry is an empty cry, not a prayer to God. Dhorme translates it, “It is a pure waste of words.”
¹⁷sn The point is that if God does not listen to those who do not turn to him, how much less likely is he to turn to one who complains against him.
¹⁸tn The expression “and now” introduces a new complaint of Elihu—in addition to the preceding. Here the verb of v. 14, “you say,” is understood after the temporal ki.
¹⁹tn The verb paqad is the word “to visit” (also “appoint, muster, number”). When God visits, it means that he intervenes in one’s life for blessing or cursing (punishing, destroying).
²⁰tn The word pas is a hapax. Delitzsch derived it from an Arabic word meaning “belch,” leading to the idea of “overflow.” BDB defines it as “folly.” Several define it as “transgression” on the basis of the versions Theodotion, Symmachus, Vulgate. The RSV took it as “greatly heed,” but that is not exactly “greatly know,” when the text beyond that requires “not know at all.” The NIV has “he does not take the least notice of wickedness.”
²¹tn The word hebel means “vanity, futility, to no purpose.”
²²sn This very lengthy speech can be broken down into these sections: the discipline of suffering (36:2-25), the work and wisdom of God (36:26—37:24).
¹tn The use of wayyosep is with the hendiadys construction: “and he added and said,” means “and he said again, further.”
²tn The verb kattar is the piel imperative; in Hebrew the word means “surround” and is related to the noun for crown. But in Syriac it means “to wait.” This section will have a few Aramaic words.
³tn The text simply has “for yet for God words.”
⁴tn The expression, literally “to-from afar,” means that he will give a wide range to knowledge, that he will speak comprehensively.
⁵tn This line gives the essence of all of Elihu’s speech—to give or ascribe righteousness to God against the charges of Job. Dhorme translates this “I will justify my Maker,” and that is workable if it carries the meaning of “declaring to be right.”
⁶tn The word is tamim, often translated “perfect.” It is the same word used of Job in 2:3. Elihu is a complete stranger to modesty.
⁷tn The object “men” is not in the Hebrew text but is implied.
⁸tn The text simply repeats “mighty.”
⁹tn The last two words are simply koah leb, “strong in heart,” meaning something like “strong, firm in his decisions.”
¹⁰tc There are several problems in this verse: the repetition of “mighty,” the lack of an object for “despise,” and the meaning of “strength of heart.” Many commentators reduce the verse to a single line, reading something like “Lo, God does not reject the pure in heart” (Kissane). Dhorme and Pope follow Nichols with: “Lo, God is mighty in strength, and rejects not the pure in heart.” This reading moved “mighty” to the first line and took the second to be “pure” (bar). See AJSL 27 [1910-11]:162).
¹¹tn Or “he does not keep the wicked alive.”
¹²tc Many commentators accept the change of “his eyes” to “his right” (reading dino for `enayw). There is no compelling reason for the change; it makes the line commonplace.
¹³tn Some interpret this verse to say that God seats kings on the throne, making a change in subject in the middle of the verse. But it makes better sense to see the righteous as the subject matter throughout—they are not only protected, but are exalted.
¹⁴tn Dhorme thinks that the verse is still talking about kings, who may be in captivity. But this diverts attention from Elihu’s emphasis on the righteous.
¹⁵tn The verb nagad means “to declare, tell.” Here it is clear that God is making known the sins that caused the enslavement or captivity, so “reveal” makes a good interpretive translation.
¹⁶tn The idiom once again is “He uncovers their ear.”
¹⁷tn The revelation is in the preceding verse, and so a pronoun must be added to make the reference clear.
¹⁸tn The verb sub, “to turn, return,” is one of the two major words in the OT for “repent”—to return from evil. Here the imperfect should be obligatory—they must do it.
¹⁹tc Some commentators delete this last line for metrical considerations. But there is no textual evidence for the deletion; it is simply the attempt by some to make the meter rigid.
²⁰tn This is the same kind of expression found in Job 33:18, where the suggestion was made by many that it means crossing over the canal or river of death. Some retain the earlier interpretation of “perish by the sword.”
²¹tn The expression “godless/hypocrite in heart” is an intensification of the description. It conveys that they are intentionally godless. See Matt 23:28.
²²tn Heb “they put anger.” This is usually interpreted to mean they lay up anger, or put anger in their hearts.
²³tn The text expresses this with “their soul dies.”
²⁴tn This is a general rendering of the sense of the line. The text seems to say “among the male prostitutes” who were at the temple—the “holy ones,” only, “holy” in that sense of separated to that form of temple service. So uncleanness and shame are some of the connotations of the reference.
²⁵tn The preposition bet in these two lines is not location but instrument, not “in” but “by means of.” The affliction and the oppression serve as a warning for sin, and therefore a means of salvation.
²⁶tn Heb “he uncovers their ear.”
²⁷tn The word means “entice, lure, allure, seduce,” but these have negative connotations. The English “persuade, draw” might work better. The tense of the is the hiphil perfect of sut. But the nuance of the verb is difficult. It can be the English present to express what God is doing (Peake). But the subject is contested as well. Since the verb is usually with an evil connotation, there have been attempts to make the “plaza” the subject—“the wide place has led you astray” (Ewald).
²⁸tn Heb “a broad place where there is no cramping beneath/under it.”
²⁹tn The word nahat could be translated “set” if it is connected with the verb nuah (“rest,” but then “lay to rest, set”). Kissane translates it “comfort.” Dhorme thinks it could come from nuah, “rest, or nahat, “descend.” But his conclusion is that it is a dittography after “under it” (p. 545).
³⁰tn Heb “filled with fat.”
³¹tn The first expression is idiomatic: the text says, “for wrath lest it entice you”—thus, beware.
³²tn The word is koper, often translated “ransom,” but frequently in the sense of a bribe.
³³tn This part has only two words lo’ b^esar, “not in distress.” The negated phrase serves to explain the first colon.
³⁴tc For the many suggestions and the reasoning here, see the commentaries.
³⁵tn The meaning of this line is difficult. There are numerous suggestions for emending the text. Kissane takes the first verb in the sense of “oppress,” and for “the night” he has “belonging to you,” meaning your people. This reads: “Oppress not them that belong not to you, that your kinsmen may mount up in their place.”
³⁶tn The word moreh is the hiphil participle from yarah. It is related to the noun torah, what is taught, the Law.
³⁷tn The expression is “that you extol,” serving as an object of the verb.
³⁸tn The last part has the verbal construction, “and we do not know.” This clause is to be used adverbially: “beyond our understanding.”
³⁹tn The verb means “filter, refine,” and so a plural subject with the drops of water as the subject will not work. So many read the singular, “he distills.”
⁴⁰tn This word ‘ed occurs also in Gen 2:6. The suggestion has been that instead of a mist it represents an underground watercourse that wells up to water the ground. See W. F. A. Albright, JBL 68 (1939):102ff.).
⁴¹tn Heb “his booth.”
⁴²tn The word actually means “spread,” but with lightning as the object, “scatter” appears to fit better.
⁴³tn The word is “light,” but taken to mean “lightning.” Theodotion had “mist” here, and so most commentators follow that because it is more appropriate to the verb and the context.
⁴⁴tn Or “depths.”
⁴⁵tn The verb is yadin, “he judges.” Houbigant proposed yazun, “he nourishes.” This has found wide acceptance among commentators. Driver retained the MT but gave a meaning “enriches” to the verb (VT Supp 3 [1955]:88ff.).
⁴⁶tn Gordis prefers to link this word with the later Hebrew word for “arch,” not “hands” (p. 422).
⁴⁷tn Because the image might mean that God grabs the lightning and hurls it like a javelin, some commentators want to change “covers” to other verbs. Dhorme has “lifts” (nissah for kissah). This fit the idea of God directing the lightning bolts.
⁴⁸tn Peake knew of over thirty interpretations for this verse. Literally rendered the MT says, “He declares his purpose [or his shout] concerning it; cattle also concerning what rises.” Dhorme has it: “The flock which sniffs the coming storm has warned the shepherd.” Kissane: “The thunder declares concerning him, as he excites wrath against iniquity.” Gordis translates it: “His thunderclap proclaims his presence, and the storm his mighty wrath.” Many more could be added to the list.
¹tn The imperative is followed by the infinitive absolute from the same root to express the intensity of the verb.
²tn The word is the usual word for “meditate, murmur, groan”; the low building of the thunder as it rumbles in the sky is the sense here. The thunder is the voice of God (see Ps 29).
³tn Heb “wings,” and then figuratively for the extremities of garments, of land, etc.
⁴tn The verb simply has the pronominal suffix, “them.” The idea must be that when God brings in all the thunderings he does not hold back his lightnings either.
⁵tn The form is the niphal participle, “wonders,” from the verb pale’, “to be wonderful, extraordinary.” Some commentators suppress the repeated verb “thunders,” and supply other verbs like “shows” or “works,” enabling them to make “wonders” the object of the verb rather than leaving it in an adverbial role. But as Rowley notes, no change it needed, for one is not surprised to find repetition in Elihu’s words (p. 236).
⁶tn Heb “and we do not know.”
⁷tn The verb actually means “be” (found here in the Aramaic form). The verb “to be” can mean “to happen, to fall, to come about.”
⁸tn Heb “and [to the] shower of rain and shower of rains, be strong.” Many think the repetition grew up by variant readings; several MSS delete the second pair, and so many editors. But the repetition may have served to stress the idea that the rains were heavy.
⁹tn Heb “by the hand of every man he seals.” This line is intended to mean with the heavy rains God suspends all agricultural activity.
¹⁰tc This reading involves a change in the text, for in MT “men” is in the construct. It would say, “all men whom he made” (i.e., all men of his making”). Olshausen suggested that the word should have been ‘anasim with the final mem being lost to haplography.
¹¹tn D. Winton Thomas suggested a meaning of “rest” for the verb, based on Arabic. He then reads ‘enos for man, and supplies a mem to “his work” to get “that every man might rest from his work [in the fields]” See JTS NS 5 (1954):56,7.
¹²sn The driving winds reflects the Hebrew “from the scatterers.” This is seen to refer to the north winds that bring the cold air and the ice and snow and hard rains.
¹³tn The word “moisture” is drawn from ri as a contraction for r^ewi. Others emended the text to get “hail,” or “lightning,” or even “the Creator.” For these, see the various commentaries. There is no reason to change the text when it makes perfectly good sense.
¹⁴tn This is added; the sentence itself actually starts: “and it goes round,” referring to the cloud.
¹⁵tn Or, “to do them.”
¹⁶tn Heb “rod,” i.e., a rod used for punishment.
¹⁷tn This is interpretive; Heb “he makes find it.” The lightning could be what it intended here, for it finds its mark. But Gordis suggests man is the subject—let him find what it is for, i.e., the fate appropriate for him (p. 429).
¹⁸tn The verb is b^esum, so the idea is how God lays/sets [a command] for them. The suffix is proleptic, to be clarified in the second colon.
¹⁹tn Dhorme reads this “and how his stormcloud makes lightning to flash forth?”
²⁰tn The verb means “beat out, flatten,” and the analogy in the next line will use molten metal. From this verb is derived the word for the “firmament” in Gen 1:6-8, that canopy-like pressure area separating water above and water below.
²¹tn The imperfect tense here carries the obligatory nuance, “what we should say.”
²²tn The verb means “arrange, set in order.” From the context the idea of a legal case is included.
²³tn This imperfect works well as a desiderative imperfect.
²⁴tn The light here must refer to the sun in the skies that had been veiled by the storm. Then, when the winds blew the clouds away, it could not be looked on because it was so dazzling. Elihu’s analogy will be that God is the same—in his glory one cannot look at him, nor challenge him.
²⁵tn The verb has an indefinite subject, and so should be a passive here.
²⁶tn There is another reading of this verse. The word “bright” means “dark, obscured” in Syriac. So Delitszch suggested that the second line would mean “it was darkened by the clouds.” So the first line would mean that they could not see the sun, because it was darkened by the clouds, but then the wind came. Dhorme, Gray and several others take it this way.
²⁷tc The MT has “out of the north comes gold.” Left in that sense the line seems irrelevant. To say “golden splendour” with RV, RSV, NRSV, NIV is to add to the idea. Others suggest it is golden rays (Dhorme), the aurora borealis (Graetz, Gray), or some mythological allusion (Pope), such as Baal’s palace. The idea of golden rays is what is intended, but not a natural phenomenon—it is something that would suggest the glory of God (see Guillaume, in Promise and Fulfillment, edited by F. F. Bruce, p. 109). He uses the Arabic dihbah for “light rain” with shafts of light, and translates it “golden splendor.”
²⁸tn The name “Almighty” is here a casus pendens, isolating the name at the front of the sentence and resuming it with a pronoun.
²⁹sn The phrase “wise of heart” was used in Job 9:4 in a negative sense.
³⁰sn Now we come to the culmination of it all, the revelation of the LORD to Job. Most interpreters see here the style and content of the author of the book, a return to the beginning of the book. Here the LORD speaks to Job and displays his sovereign power and glory. Job has lived through the suffering—without cursing God. He has held to his integrity, and nowhere regretted it. But he was unaware of the real reason for the suffering, and will remain unaware through these speeches. God intervenes to resolve the spiritual issues that surfaced. Job was not punished for sin. And Job’s suffering had not cut him off from God. In the end the point is that Job cannot have the knowledge to make the assessments he made. It is wiser to bow in submission and adoration of God than to try to judge him. The first speech of God has these sections: the challenge (38:1-3), surpassing mysteries of earth and sky beyond Job’s understanding (4-38), and the mysteries of animal and bird life that surpassed his understanding (38:39—39:30).
¹sn This is not the storm described by Elihu—in fact, the LORD ignores Elihu. The storm is a common accompaniment for a theophany (see Ezek 1:4; Nah 1:3; Zech 9:14).
²tn The demonstrative pronoun is used here to emphasize the interrogative pronoun (see GKC, #136c).
³sn The reference of “counsel” is not to the debate between Job and the friends, but to the purposes of God (see Ps 33:10; Prov 19:21; Isa 19:17). Dhorme translates it “Providence.”
⁴tn This is the literal reading of the text. It basically describe taking the hem of the long garment or robe and pulling it up between the legs and tucking it into the front of the belt, allowing easier and free movement of the legs. Girding the loins meant the preparation for some difficult task (Jer 1:17), or for battle (Isa 5:27), or for running (1 Kgs 18:46). C. Gordon suggests that it includes belt-wrestling, a form of hand-to-hand mortal combat (see HUCA 23 [1950,51]:136).
⁵tn The construction is the infinitive construct in a temporal clause, using the preposition and the subjective genitive suffix.
⁶tn The verb is the imperative; it has no object “me” in the text.
⁷tn The particle ki is taken here for a conditional clause, “if you know” (see GKC, #159dd). Others take it “surely” with a biting irony.
⁸tn For the interrogative serving as a genitive, see GKC, #136b.
⁹sn The world was conceived of as having bases and pillars, but these poetic descriptions should not be pressed too far (e.g., see Ps 24:2, which may be worded as much for its polemics against Canaanite mythology as anything).
¹⁰sn The “stars of the morning” is here placed in parallelism to the angels, “the sons of God.” It may refer to the angels under the imagery of the stars, or, as some prefer, it may poetically include all creation. There is a parallel also with the foundation of the temple which was accompanied by song (see Ezra 3:10,11). But then the account of the building of the original tabernacle was designed to mirror creation (see Michael Fishbane, Text and Texture).
¹¹tn The construction, an adverbial clause of time, uses ranan, which is often a ringing cry, an exultation. The parallelism with “shout for joy” shows this to be enthusiastic acclamation. The infinitive is then continued in the next colon with the preterite and a waw consecutive.
¹²tn Heb “together.” This is Dhorme’s suggestion for expressing how they sang together.
¹³tn See Job 1:6.
¹⁴tn The MT has “and he shut up.” The Vulgate has “Who?” and so many commentaries and editions adopt this, if not from the Vulgate, from the sense of the sequence in the text.
¹⁵tn The line uses two expressions, first the temporal clause with giah, “when it burst forth,” and then the finite verb yese’ to mark the concomitance of the two actions.
¹⁶tn The temporal clause here uses the infinitive from sim, “place, put, make.” It underscores the sovereign placing of things.
¹⁷tn This noun is found only here. The verb is in Ezek 16:4, and a related noun is in Ezek 30:21.
¹⁸tc The MT has “and I broke,” which cannot mean “set, prescribed” or the like. The Greek and the Vulgate have such a meaning, suggesting a verb ‘asit. Guillaume finds an Arabic word (Promise and Fulfillment, p. 123) with a meaning “measured it by span by my decree.” Would God give himself a decree? Gordis simply argues that the basic meaning “break” develops the connotation of “decide, determine” (2 Sam 5:24; Job 14:3; Dan 11:36).
¹⁹tn Dhorme suggested reversing the two verbs, making this the first, and then “shatter” for the second colon.
²⁰tn The imperfect tense receives the permission nuance here.
²¹tn The text has “and you may not add” (tosip), which is often used idiomatically (as in verbal hendiadys constructions).
²²tn The MT literally says, “here he will put on the pride of your waves.” The verb has no expressed subject and so is made a passive voice. But there has to be some object for the verb “put,” such as limit, boundary; the translations “confined, halted, stopped” all serve to paraphrase such. The Greek text has at this point “broken,” suggesting the verse might have been confused—but braking the pride of the waves would mean controlling them. Some commentators have followed this, exchanging the verb in v. 11 with this one.
²³tn The idiom is “have you from your days?” It expresses never in your life (see 1 Sam 25:28; 1 Kgs 1:6).
²⁴tn The verb is the piel of yada` with a double accusative.
²⁵sn The poetic image is that darkness or night is like a blanket that covers the earth, and at dawn it is taken by the edges and shaken out. Since the wicked function under the cover of night, they are included in the shaking when the dawn comes up.
²⁶sn The verse needs to be understood in the context: as the light shines in the dawn the features of the earth take on a shape or form. The language is phenomenal.
²⁷tn “They” refers to the objects or features on the earth.
²⁸tn This is an odd statement for garments. So Ehrlich suggested tissaba`, “is dyed [like a garment].” This gives the colors now to the appearing earth under daylight.
²⁹sn What is active at night, the violence symbolized by the raised arm, is broken with the dawn. G. R. Driver thought the whole verse referred to stars, and that the arm is the navigator’s term for the line of stars (JTS NS 4 [1953]:209ff.).
³⁰tn The verb is “uncovered to you.”
³¹tn Some still retain “shadow of death.” The reference is to the entrance to Sheol (see Job 10:21).
³²tn The interrogative with derek means “in what road” or “in what direction.”
³³tn The suffixes are singular, referring to either the light or the darkness.
³⁴tn The imperfect tense after the adverb ‘az functions as a preterite: “you were born.” The line is sarcastic.
³⁵sn Snow and ice are thought of as being in store, brought out by God for specific purposes, such as times of battle (see Josh 10:11; Exod 9:2ff.; Isa 28:17; Isa 30:30; and Ps 18:12[13]).
³⁶tn Because the parallel with “light” and “east wind” is not tight, Hoffmann proposed ‘ed instead, “mist.” This has been adopted by many. G. R. Driver suggests “parching heat” (FT Supp 3 [1955]:91,2).
³⁷tn Heb “on a land, no man.”
³⁸tn Heb “a desert, no man in it.”
³⁹tn Heb “to cause to sprout a source of vegetation.” The word mosa’ is rendered “mine” in Job 28:1. The suggestion with the least changes is Wrights, same’, “thirsty.” But others choose “from the steppe” (missiyyah).
⁴⁰tn Several suggest that the verb is not from habe’, “to hide,” but from a homonym, “to congeal.” This may be too difficult to support.
⁴¹tn This word is found here and in 1 Sam 15:32. Dhorme suggests, with others, that there has been a metathesis, and it is the same word that is in Job 31:36 (“bind”). Driver takes it as “cluster” without changing the text (JTS NS 7 [1956]:3).
⁴²tn The word mazzarot is taken by some to be the constellations (see 2 Kgs 23:5), and by others as connected to the word for “crown,” and so “corona” (see Dhorme).
⁴³sn See Job 9:9.
⁴⁴tc The Greek has “answer you,” and some editors have adopted this. The reading of the MT makes better sense in the verse.
⁴⁵tn This verse is difficult because of the two words, tuhot (rendered here “clouds”) and sekwi (here “mists”). They have been translated a number of ways: “meteor” and “celestial appearance”, the stars “Procyon” and “Sirius”, “heart” and “mind,” “inward part” and “mind,” even as birds, “ibis” and “cock.” One expects them to have something to do with nature—clouds and the like. The RSV accordingly took them to mean “meteor” (from a verb “to wander”) and “a celestial appearance.” But these meanings are not well-attested.
⁴⁶tn The word actually means “cause to lie down.”
⁴⁷tn The word means “to flow” or “cast” (as in casting metals). So the noun developed the sense of hard, as in cast metal.
⁴⁸tn Heb “fill up the life of.”
⁴⁹tn The verse is difficult, making some suspect that a line has dropped out. The little birds in the nest hardly go wandering about looking for food. Dhorme suggest “and stagger for lack of food.”
¹tn The text uses the infinitive as the object: “do you know the giving birth of?”
²tn Or “ibex.”
³tn Here the infinitive is again a substantive: the time of their giving birth.
⁴tc The verb here means “cleave,” and this would not have the object “their young.” Olshausen and others after him change the het to tet and get a verb “drop” as used in Job 21:10. Driver holds out for the MT, arguing it is an idiom, “breach the womb” (VT Supp 3 [1955]:92, 3).
⁵tn This word usually means “birth pangs” but here can mean what caused the pains (metonymy of effect). This fits better with the parallelism, and the verb—”cast forth.”
⁶tn The idea is that of the open countryside. The Aramaism is found only here.
⁷sn The animal is happier in open countryside than in a busy town, and on its own than being driven by a herdsman.
⁸tn Some commentators think that the addition of the “wild ox” here is a copyist’s error, making the stich too long. They therefore delete it. Also, binding an animal to the furrow with ropes is unusual. So with a slight emendation Kissane came up with “Will you bind him with a halter of cord?” While the MT is unusual, the sense is understandable, and no changes, even if slight, are absolutely necessary.
⁹tn Heb “leave.”
¹⁰tn The word is normally translated “believe” in the Bible. The idea is that of considering something dependable and acting on it. The idea of reliability is found also in the niphal stem usages.
¹¹tc There is a textual problem here: yasub (yswb) is the k^ethiv, meaning “[that] he will return”; yasib is the q^ere’, meaning “that he will bring in.” This is the preferred reading, since the object follows it. For commentators who think the line too unbalanced for this, the object is moved to the second colon, and the reading “returns” is taken for the first. But the MT is perfectly clear as it stands.
¹²tn Heb “your seed”; this must be interpreted figuratively for what the seed produces.
¹³tn Simply, the MT has “and your threshing floor gather.” The “threshing floor has to be an adverbial accusative of place.”
¹⁴tc This whole section on the ostrich is not in the Greek translation. Many feel it is an interpolation and should be deleted. The pattern of the chapter changes from the questions being asked to observations being made.
¹⁵tn The word occurs only here and means “shrill cries.” If the MT is correct, this is a poetic name for the ostrich (see Lam 4:3).
¹⁶tn Many proposals have been made here. MT has a verb “exult.” Strahan had “flap joyously,” followed by the NIV. RSV uses “wave proudly.”
¹⁷tn The point of this would be to say that the ostrich cannot compare to the stork. But there are many other proposals for this line—just about every commentator has a different explanation for it Of the three words here, the first means “pinion,” the third “plumage,” and the second probably “stork,” although the Greek has “heron.” The point of this whole section is that the ostrich is lacking in parental care, whereas the stork is characterized by it. The word for “stork” is the same word for “love”—hasidah. The most likely reading then is “or are they the pinions and plumage of the stork?” The ostrich may flap about, but cannot fly and does not care for its young.
¹⁸tn The meaning may have the connotation of “lays, places,” rather than simply abandoning (see M. Dahood, JBL 78 [1959]:307f.).
¹⁹tn Heb “an animal of the field.”
²⁰sn This verb, “deal harshly, harden, treat cruelly,” is used for hardening the heart elsewhere (see Isa 63:17).
²¹tn The colon poses a slight problem here. The literal meaning “lifts herself on high” might suggest flight. But some of the proposals focus on a reading something about readying herself to run.
²²tn The second half of the verse has this hapax, which is usually connected with the word ra`am, “thunder.” Davidson thought it referred to the quivering of the neck, and not the mane. Gray thought the sound and not the movement was the point. But without better evidence, a reading that has “quivering mane” may not be far off the mark. But it may be simplest to translate it “mane” and assume that the idea of “quivering” is part of the meaning.
²³sn The same ideas are found in Joel 2:4. The leaping motion is compared to the galloping of the horse.
²⁴tn The word could mean snorting as well (see Jer 8:16). It comes from the root “to blow.” If the horse is running and breathing hard, this might be the sense here.
²⁵tc The text has a plural verb, “they paw.”
²⁶tn The armies would prepare for battles that were usually fought in the valleys, and so the horse was ready to charge. But in Ugaritic the word `mk means “force” as well as “valley.” The idea of “force” would fit the parallelism here (see Dahood, Biblica 40 [1959]:166).
²⁷tn Or “in strength.”
²⁸tn This may be the scimitar (see G. Molin, JSS 1 [1956]:334ff.; A. Dupont-Sommer, RHR 148 [1955]:143n).
²⁹tn Gray renders the line: “quivering and excited he dashes into the fray.”
³⁰tn The use of ‘aman in the hiphil in this place is unique. Such a form would normally mean “believe.” But its basic etymological meaning comes through here. The verb means to be firm, reliable, dependable. The causative here would mean “make firm” or “stand firm.”
³¹tn This word occurs only here. It is connected to “pinions” in v. 13. Dhorme suggests “clad with feathers,” but the line suggests more the use of the wings.
³²tn Heb “your mouth.”
³³tn Heb “upon the tooth of a rock.”
³⁴tn The word could be taken as the predicate, but because of the conjunction it seems to be adding another description of the place of its nest.
³⁵tn The word means “search,” but can be used for a wide range of matters, including spying.
³⁶tn Heb “food.”
³⁷tn The word halalim designates someone who is fatally wounded, literally the “pierced one,” meaning anyone or thing that dies a violent death.
¹tn The form rob is the infinitive absolute from the verb rib. Dhorme wishes to repoint it to make it the active participle, the “one who argues with the Almighty.”
²tn The verb yissor is found only here, but comes from a common root meaning “correct, reprove.” Several suggestions have been made to improve on the MT. Dhorme read it yasur in the sense of “turn aside, yield.” Ehrlich read this emendation as “come to an end.” But the MT could be read as “correct, instruct.”
³tn The word qalloti means “to be light, of small account, unimportant.” From this comes the meaning “contemptible, which in the causative stem would mean “to treat with contempt, curse.” Dhorme tries to make the sentence a conditional clause and ease this meaning: “If I have been thoughtless.” There is really no “if” in Job’s mind.
⁴tn The perfect tense here should be classified as an instantaneous perfect; the action is simultaneous with the words.
⁵tn Heb “I will not add.”
⁶sn The speech can be divided into three parts: Job is invited to assume the throne and rule the world (40:7-14), the description of Behemoth (40:15-24), and the description of Leviathan (41:1-34).
⁷tn The verb parar means “to annul, break, frustrate.” It was one thing for Job to claim his own integrity, but it was another matter altogether to nullify God’s righteousness in the process.
⁸tn The verb was used for scattering lightning (Job 37:11). God is challenging Job to unleash his power and judge wickedness in the world.
⁹tn Heb “the overflowings.”
¹⁰tn The word was just used in the positive sense of excellence or majesty; now the exalted nature of the person refers to self-exaltation, or pride.
¹¹tn The expression is the prepositional phrase “under them,” tahtam. “Under them” means in their place. But it can also mean “where someone stands, on the spot” (see Exod 16:29; Jos. 6:5; Jud. 7:21, etc.).
¹²tn The word “dust” can mean “ground” here, or more likely, “grave.”
¹³tn The verb habas means “to bind.” In Arabic the word means “bind” in the sense of “imprison,” and that fits here.
¹⁴tn Heb “their faces.”
¹⁵tn The word is “secret place,” the place where he is to hide them, i.e., the grave. The text uses the word “secret place” as a metonymy for the grave.
¹⁶tn The verb is usually translated “praise,” but with the sense of a public declaration or acknowledgement. It is from yadah.
¹⁷tn The imperfect tense has the nuance of potential imperfect—can, is able to save.
¹⁸sn The next ten verses are devoted to a portrayal of “the beast,” Behemoth. It does not fit any of the present material very well, and so many think it a later addition. Its style is more textbook. Moreover, if the animal is a real animal, the hippopotamus, then the location of such an animal is Egypt and not Palestine. Some have identified these creatures Behemoth and Leviathan as mythological creatures (Gunkel, Pope). Most would say they are real animals, but probably mythologized by the pagans. So the pagan reader would have an additional impact from this point of God’s sovereignty over all nature.
¹⁹sn By form the word is the feminine plural of the Hebrew word for a “beast.” It is an abstract word, a title.
²⁰tn In both of these verses hinneh has the deictic force (the word is from Greek deiknumi, “to show”). It calls attention to something by pointing it out. The expression goes with the sudden look, the raised eye, the pointing hand—“O look!”
²¹tn The verb hapas occurs only here. It may have the meaning “make stiff, taut” (Arabic). The Greek and the Syriac support this with “erects.” But there is another Arabic word that could be cognate, meaning “arch, bend.” This would give the idea of the tail swaying. The other reading makes better sense here.
²²sn This may be a reference to Gen 1:24, where the first of the animal creation was the cattle—b^ehemah!
²³tc The literal reading of the MT is “let the one who made him draw near [with] his sword.” The sword is apparently a reference to the teeth or tusks of the animal, which cut vegetation like a sword. But the idea of a weapon is easier to see, and so the people who take the mythology background see here a reference to God’s slaying the Beast. There are again many suggestions on how to read the line. The RV probably has the safest: “He that made him has furnished him with his sword” (the sword being a reference to the sharp tusks with which he can attack).
²⁴tn The word bul probably refers to food. Many take it as an abbreviated form of y^ebul, produce of the field.” The vegetation that is produced on the low hills is what is meant.
²⁵tn The suffix is singular, but must refer to the trees’ shade.
²⁶tn The word ordinarily means “oppress.” So many commentators have proposed suitable changes: “overflows” (Beer), “gushes” (Duhm), “swells violently” (Dhorme, from a word that means “be strong”). Guillaume gave it “rises and falls” from an Arabic cognate (Promise and Fulfillment, p. 126).
²⁷tn Or “he remains calm.”
²⁸tn The idea would be either while he is watching, or in some way disabling his eyes before the attack. But others change the reading; Ball suggests “with hooks” and this has been adopted by most modern translations.
²⁹tn Ehrlich altered it slightly to get “with thorns,” a view accepted by Driver and Dhorme and Pope.
³⁰sn Beginning with 41:1, the verse numbers through 41:9 in the English Bible differ from the verse numbers in the Hebrew text (BHS), with 41:1 ET = 40:25 HT, 41:2 ET = 40:26 HT, etc., through 41:9 ET = 41:1 HT. The Hebrew verse numbers in the remainder of the chapter differs from the verse numbers in the English Bible.
³¹tn The verb masak means “extracting from the water, fishing.” The question here includes the use of a hook to fish the creature out of the waters so that its jaw can be tied safely.
³²tn The verb saqa` means “cause to sink,” if it is connected with the word in Amos 8:8 and 9:5. But it may have the sense of “tie, bind.” If the rope was put around the tongue and jaw, binding tightly would be the sense.
³³tn The line asks if the animal, when caught and tied and under control, would keep on begging for mercy. Absolutely not. It is not in the nature of the beast. The construction uses yarbeh, “[will] he multiply,” with the object, “supplications”—prayers for mercy.
³⁴tn The rhetorical question again affirms the opposite. The poem is portraying the creature as powerful and insensitive.
³⁵tn Heb “will he cut a covenant.”
³⁶tn The imperfect tense serves to express what the covenant pact would cover, namely, “that you take.”
³⁷tn The verb is sahaq, “sport, trifle, play” (Ps 104:26).
³⁸tn The idea may include putting him on a leash. D. Winton Thomas suggested on the basis of an Arabic cognate that it could be rendered “tie him with a string like a young sparrow” VT 14 [1964]:114ff.).
³⁹tn The word habbar is a hapax; but the meaning is “associate” since it is etymologically related to the verb “join together.” The idea is that fishermen usually work in companies or groups, and then divide up the catch when they come ashore—which involves bargaining.
⁴⁰tn The word karah means ‘to sell”. With the preposition `al it has the sense of bargain over something.
⁴¹tn The verb means “cut up, divide up” in the sense of selling the dead body (see Exod 21:35). This will be between them and the merchants (k^ena`anim).
⁴²tn The verse uses two imperatives which can be interpreted in sequence: do this, and then this will happen.
⁴³sn Job 41:9 in the English Bible is 41:1 in the Hebrew text (BHS). From here to the end of the chapter the Hebrew verse numbers differs from those in the English Bible. See also the note on 41:1.
⁴⁴tn The line is difficult. “His hope” must refer to any assailant who hopes or expects to capture the creature. Because there is no antecedent, Dhorme and others transpose it with the next verse. The point is that the man who thought he was sufficient to confront the crocodile soon finds his hope, his expectation false (a derivative from the verb kasab is used for a mirage).
⁴⁵tn There is an interrogative particle in this line, which most commentators ignore. But others freely emend as usual. Gunkel, following the mythological reading, has “his appearance casts down even a god.” Cheyne also: “even divine beings the fear of him brings low” (JQR 9 [1896,7]:579). Pope has, “Were not the gods cast down at the sight of him?” There is no need to bring in this mythological element.
⁴⁶sn The description is of the animal, not the hunter/fisherman. Leviathan is so fierce that no one can take him on alone.
⁴⁷tc The text has “before me,” but it has to be “before him.”
⁴⁸tn The verb qadam means “come to meet, come before, confront” to the face.
⁴⁹sn The verse seems an intrusion (and so Dhorme, Rowley, and many others change the pronouns to make it refer to the animal). But what the text is saying is that it is more dangerous to confront God than to confront this animal.
⁵⁰tn This line also has no connection to Leviathan, but to the sovereign God. But Rowley wants to change li hu’ (“it [belongs] to me”) into lo’ hu’ (“there is no one”). So it would say that there is no one under the whole heaven who could challenge Leviathan and live, rather than saying it is more dangerous to challenge God to make him repay.
⁵¹tn Dhorme changes the noun into a verb, “I will tell,” and the last two words into ‘en `erek, “there is no comparison.” And so “I will tell of his incomparable might.”
⁵²tn The “face of his garment” is the outer garment. Some take it to be the front as opposed to the back.
⁵³tc The word has often been rendered “bridle” because of resen, but that leaves a number of unanswered questions. The Greek reads siryon, with the transposition of letters, but that means “coat of armor.” If the metathesis stands, there is also support from the cognate Akkadian.
⁵⁴tn Heb “his face.”
⁵⁵tc The MT has “his pride” (ga’aweh) but the Greek, Aquila, the Vulgate all read “his back” (gewoh). Almost all the modern translations follow the variant reading, speaking about “his back.”
⁵⁶tn Instead of “closely” (sar) the Greek has “stone (sor) to say that the seal was rock hard.
⁵⁷tn The expression “each one…to the next” is literally “one with one.”
⁵⁸tn Heb “a man with his brother.”
⁵⁹tn Heb “the eyelids,” but it represents the early rays of the dawn as the cover of night lifts.
⁶⁰sn For the animal, the image is that of pent-up breath with water in a hot-steam coming from its mouth, like a stream of fire in the rays of the sun. The language is hyperbolic, probably to reflect the pagan ideas of the dragon of the deep in a polemical way—they feared it as a fire breathing monster, but in reality it is a steamy crocodile.
⁶¹tn The word “burning” is supplied. The Syriac and Vulgate have “a seething and boiling pot” (reading ‘ogem for ‘agmon). This view is widely accepted.
⁶²tn This word d^e’abah is a hapax. But the verbal root means “to languish, pine.” A related noun talks of dejection and despair in Deut 28:65. So here “dismay” is better than “terror.”
⁶³tn Heb “fallings.”
⁶⁴tn The last clause says “it cannot be moved.” But this part will function adverbially in the sentence.
⁶⁵tn The description of his heart being hard means that he is cruel and fearless. The word for “hard” is the word encountered before for molten or cast metal.
⁶⁶tc This verse has created all kinds of problems for the commentators. The first part is workable: “when he raises himself up, the mighty [the gods] are terrified.” The mythological approach would render ‘elim as “gods.” But the last two words, which could be rendered “at the breaking [crashing, breakers] they fail,” receive much attention. Dhorme suggests “majesty” for “raising up” and “billows” (gallim) for ‘elim, and gets a better parallelism: “the billows are afraid of his majesty, and the waves draw back” (p. 639). But Rowley does not thinks this is relevant to the context, which is talking about the creatures defence against attack. The RSV works well for the first part, but the second part need some change; so Rowley adopts: “in their dire consternation they are beside themselves” (p. 263).
⁶⁷tn This is the clearest reading, following Davidson (p. 285). The versions took different readings of the construction.
⁶⁸tn The verb qum with b^eli has the sense of “does not hold firm,” or, gives way.”
⁶⁹tn Heb “the son of the bow.”
⁷⁰tn The verb is plural, but since there is no expressed subject it is interpreted as a passive here.
⁷¹tn Heb “under him.”
⁷²tn Here only the word “sharp” is present, but in passages like Isa 41:15 it is joined with “threshing sledge.” Here, and in Amos 1:3 and Isa 28:27 the word stands alone, but represents the “sledge.”
⁷³sn The idea is either that the sea is stirred up like the foam from beating the ingredients together, or it is the musk-smell that is the point of comparison.
⁷⁴tn Heb “one who was made.”
⁷⁵tn Heb “the sons of pride.” Dhorme repoints the last word to get “all the wild beasts,” but this misses the point of the verse. This animal looks over every proud creature—but he is king of them all in that department.
¹tn The expression “you asked” is added here to clarify the presence of the line to follow. Many commentators delete it as a gloss from Job 38:2. If it is retained, then Job has to be recalling God’s question before he answers it.
²tn The word laken is simply “but” as in Job 31:37.
³tn Heb “and I do not understand.” The expression serves here in an adverbial capacity. It also could be subordinated as a complement: “I have declared [things that] I do not understand.”
⁴tn The last clause is “and I do not know.” This is also subordinated to become a dependent clause.
⁵tn This too is added to introduce the recollection of God’s words.
⁶sn This statement does not imply there was a vision. He is simply saying that this experience of God was real and personal. In the past his knowledge of God was what he had heard—hearsay. This was real.
⁷tn Or “despise what I said.” There is no object on the verb; Job could be despising himself, or the things he said (see L. J. Kuyper, VT 9 [1959]:91ff.).
⁸tn The form n^ekonah is from kun, “to be firm, fixed, established. Here it means “the right thing,” “truth.” The Akkadian word kenu (from kun) connotes justice and truth.
⁹tn The imperatives in this verse are plural, so all three had to do this together.
¹⁰tn The verb “pray” is the hithpael from the root palal. That root has the main idea of arbitration; so in this stem it means “to seek arbitration [for oneself],” or pray, or intercede.
¹¹tn Heb “I will lift up his face,” meaning, “I will regard him.”
¹²tn This clause is a result clause, using the negated infinitive construct.
¹³tn The word “folly” can also be taken in the sense of “disgrace.” If the latter is chosen, the word serves as the direct object. If the former, then it is an adverbial accusative.
¹⁴sn The difference between what they said and what Job said, therefore, has to do with truth. Job was honest, spoke the truth, poured out his complaints, but never blasphemed God. For his words God said he told the truth. He did so with incomplete understanding, and with all the impatience and frustration one might expect. Now the friends, however, did not tell what was right about God. They were not honest; rather, they were self-righteous and condescending. They were saying what they thought should be said, but it was wrong.
¹⁵tn The expression “had respect for Job” means God answered his prayer.
¹⁶tn The paragraph begins with the disjunctive waw, “Now as for the LORD, He….”
¹⁷sn The expression here is interesting: “he returned the captivity of Job,” a clause used elsewhere in the Bible of Israel (see e.g., Ps 126). Here it must mean “the fortunes of Job”—what he had lost. There is a good deal of literature on this; for example, see R. Borger, ZAW NF 25 [1954]:315,16; and E. Baumann, ZAW NF 6 [1929]:17ff.
¹⁸tn This is a temporal clause, using the infinitive construct with the subject genitive suffix. By this it seems that this act of Job was also something of a prerequisite for restoration—to pray for them.
¹⁹tn The construction uses the verb “and he added” with the word “repeat, twice.”
²⁰sn The Hebrew word refers to a piece of silver, yet uncoined. It is the kind used in Gen 33:19 and Jos. 24:32. It is what would be expected of a story set in the patriarchal age.
²¹sn This gold ring was worn by women in the nose, or men and women in the ear.
²²tn The word for “seven” is spelled in an unusual way. From this some have thought it means “twice seven,” or fourteen sons. Several commentators take this; but it is probably stretching.
²³sn The Hebrew name Jemimah means “dove.”
²⁴sn The Hebrew name Keziah means “cassia.”
²⁵sn The Hebrew name Keren Happuch means “horn of eye-paint.”