Job 1:1-22, Job 2:1-131. Job’s Character and Course of Life. (Job 1:1-15.) 1There was a man in the land of Uz, whose name was Job; and that man was perfect and upright, and one that feared God, and eschewed evil. 2And there were born to him seven sons and three daughters. 3His substance also was seven thousand sheep, and three thousand camels, and five hundred yoke of oxen, and five hundred she asses, and a very great household; so that this man was the greatest of all the men [sons] of the East.—4And his sons went and feasted in their houses, every one his day [Now his sons were wont to hold a feast at the house of each one on his (birth)-day], and [they] sent and called for their three sisters to eat and to drink with them. 5And it was so, when the days of their feasting were gone about, that Job sent and sanctified them [that he might make atonement for them, Z.], and rose up early in the morning, and offered burnt offerings according to the number of them all: for Job said, It may be that my sons have sinned, and cursed, [renounced, bid farewell to] God in their hearts!—Thus did Job continually. 2. The Divine Determination to try Job through Suffering a. The milder form of trial by taking away his possessions(Job 1:6-22.)6Now there was a day [it came to pass on a day, or, on the day] when the sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord [Jehovah], and Satan came also among them. 7And the Lord said unto Satan, Whence comest thou? Then Satan answered the Lord, and said, From going to and fro in the earth, and from walking up and down in it. 8And the Lord said unto Satan, Hast thou considered my servant Job, that [for] there is none like him in the earth, a perfect and an upright man, one that feareth God and escheweth evil?—9Then Satan answered the Lord, 10and said, Doth Job fear God for nought? Hast thou not made an hedge about him, and about his house, and about all that he hath on every side? Thou hast blessed the work of his hands, and his substance is increased [spread abroad] in the land. 11But put forth Thine hand now, and touch all that he hath, and [verily] he will curse Thee to Thy face. 12And the Lord said unto Satan, Behold, all that he hath is in thy power [hand], only upon himself put not forth thine hand. So Satan went forth from the presence of the Lord. 13And there was a day [it came to pass on the day], when his sons and his daughters were eating and drinking wine in their eldest brother’s house: 14and there came a messenger unto Job, and said, The oxen were ploughing, and the [she] asses feeding beside them: 15and the Sabeans fell upon them, and took them away; yea, they have slain [smitten] the servants with the edge of the sword; and I only am escaped alone to tell thee. 16While he was yet speaking, there came also another, and said, The fire of God is fallen from heaven, and hath burned up the sheep and the servants, and consumed them; and I only am escaped alone to tell thee. 17While he was yet speaking there came also another, and said, The Chaldeans made out three bands, and fell upon the camels, and have carried them away, yea, and slain the servants with the edge of the sword: and I only am escaped alone to tell thee. 18While he was yet speaking there came also another, and said, Thy sons and thy 19daughters were eating and drinking wine in their eldest brother’s house: and behold, there came a great wind from [beyond] the wilderness, and smote the four corners of the house, and it fell upon the young men [people], and they are dead; and I only am escaped alone to tell thee. 20Then Job arose, and rent his mantle, and shaved his head, and fell down upon 21the ground, and worshipped, and said: Naked came I out of my mother’s womb, and naked shall I return thither: The Lord [Jehovah] gave, and the Lord [Jehovah] hath taken away; blessed be the name of the Lord [Jehovah]. 22In all this Job sinned not, nor charged God foolishly [nor uttered folly against God]. b. The severer trial, the loss of health.(Job 2:1-10).1Again there was a day [and it came to pass on a day (Z.), or: Now it was the day] when the sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord and Satan also came among them to present himself before the Lord. 2And the Lord said unto Satan, From whence comest thou? And Satan answered the Lord, and said, From going to and fro in the earth, and from walking up and down in it. 3And the Lord said unto Satan, Hast thou considered my servant Job, that [for] there is none like him in the earth, a perfect and an upright man, one that feareth God and escheweth evil? and still he holdeth fast his integrity, although thou movedst Me against him to destroy him without cause. 4And Satan answered the Lord and said, Skin for skin, yea [and] all that a man hath will he give for his life. 5But put forth Thine hand now, and touch his bone and his flesh, and he will curse Thee to Thy face. 6And the Lord said unto Satan, Behold he is in thine hand; but 7[only] spare his life. So Satan went forth from the presence of the Lord, and smote Job with sore boils from the sole of his foot unto his crown. 8And he took him a potsherd to scrape himself withal; and he sat down among the ashes. 9Then said his wife unto him, Dost thou still retain thine integrity. Curse [renounce] God, and die! 10But he said unto her, Thou speakest as one of the foolish women speaketh. What! shall we receive good at the hand of God, and shall we not receive evil? In all this did not Job sin with his lips. 3. The Visit of the Friends and their Mute Sympathy as an Immediate Preparation for the Action of the Poem Job 2:11-13.11Now when [or, Then] Job’s three friends heard of all this evil that was come upon him, [and] they came every one from his own place; Eliphaz the Temanite, and Bildad the Shuhite, and Zophar the Naamathite; for [and] they had made an appointment together to come [or: they met together by appointment] to mourn with him, and to comfort him. 12And when they lifted up their eyes afar off, and knew him not, they lifted up their voice and wept; and they rent every one his mantle, and sprinkled dust upon their heads toward heaven. 13So they sat down with him upon the ground seven days and seven nights, and none spake a word unto him: for they saw that his grief [affliction] was very great. AND 1. Job’s character and course of life. Job 1:1-15. Job 1:1. There was a man in the land of Uz, whose name was Job. Literally, A man was in the land of Uz, etc.: the order of the words as in 2 Samuel 12:1; Esther 2:5. On the name ΰִ ?ιּ ?εֹ ?α see Introduction, § 1, and Note.—αְּ ?ΰֶ ?ψֶ ?υςεּ ?υ, Vulg.: in terra Hus; LXX.: ἐνχώρᾳ τῇ ’Αυσίτιδι. Comp. the more precise definition: ἐντῇ Ἀυσίτιδιἐπὶ τοῖςὁρίοιςτῆςἸδουμαίαςκαὶ Ἀραβίας (in the addition at the end of the book) which gives with general accuracy the position of the country. For we are certainly constrained to place it in the region lying North-East of Edomitis towards the Arabian desert. We cannot identify it with any locality within the land of the Edomites, nor with that land itself, as some writers, ancient and modern, have undertaken to do. For 1. In Job 1:3 Job is represented in general terms as belonging to the αְּ ?πֵ ?ιχֶ ?γֶ ?ν, the “sons of the East,” i.e., as a North Arabian, an inhabitant of the Syro-Arabian desert which extends eastward from Transjordanic Palestine to the Euphrates (comp. 1 Kings 5:10 [A. V.: Job 4:30] Isaiah 11:14; Jeremiah 49:28; Ezekiel 25:4).—2. The Sabeans and Chaldeans are, according to Job 1:15; Job 1:17, neighbors, dwelling in adjacent territory.—3. The Αἰσῖται (Αἰσεῖται) mentioned by Ptolemy V., Job 19:2, as neighbors of Babylonia on the West, under the Caucabenes, are assuredly none other than the inhabitants of the country we are considering.—4. Jeremiah 25:20 sq., clearly and definitely distinguishes between Uz and Edom. The expression in Lamentations 4:21, “O daughter of Edom, that dwellest in the land of Uz,” does not affirm the identity of the two countries, but rather refers to an expansion of the boundaries of Edom which at some time took place, so as to include the land of Uz (comp. Nδgelsbach on both the passages cited).—5. In Genesis 10:23, Uz, the patriarchal founder of the country, after whom it was named, appears as the immediate descendant of Aram; in Genesis 22:21, as the son of Nahor, the brother of Abraham; and in Genesis 36:28 as the grand-son of Seοr, the ancestor of the Horite aborigines of Idumea. None of these passages in Genesis brings Uz into genealogical relation to Edom, though they clearly make him appear as geographically his neighbor.—6. Again Job 2:11 of our book (Eliphaz the Temanite), also Job 32:2 (Elihu the descendant of Buz; comp. Genesis 22:21, where the same Buz appears as the son of Nahor and the brother of Uz) argue for a relation of co-ordination between the countries of Uz and Edom.—7. Josephus (Ant. I., 6, 4) names Οὖσος, the son of Aram (Genesis 10:23) as the founder of Trachonitis and Damascus. This reference, resting as it does on a primitive tradition, contains an indirect contradiction of the supposition that Uz was an Idumean province; rather is the inference probable that at one time it extended further North, as far as South-eastern Syria.—8. The Syro-Arabian tradition of the Middle Ages and of modern times fixes the place where Job lived at a considerable distance North, or North-East from Seοr-Edom, to wit, in the fruitful East-Hauranitic province el-Bethenije (Nukra), which Abulfeda calls “a part of the territory of Damascus,” and within which at this day are pointed out a “Place of Job” (Makam-Ejϋb) and a Monastery of Job (Dair-Ejϋb), both situated south of Nawa on the road leading north to Damascus (comp. Fries in the Stud. und Krit., 1854, II.; and especially J. C. Wetstein: “The Monastery of Job in Hauran, and the Tradition of Job,” in the Appendix to Delitzsch’s Commentary, II. 395 sq., Clark, Edinb.). We are indeed scarcely to look for the home of our hero so far North as these sacred localities of the Christian-Mohamedan tradition concerning Job, or as the location favored by the hypothesis of Bochart, Ilgen, J. H. Michaelis, etc., which regards the valley al-Gutha situated not far from Damascus, as the Uz of Scripture. At the same time the considerations here presented make it far more probable that it belonged to the territory of East-Hauran (not necessarily of Hauran in Palestine, or the eastern portion of Manasseh), than that it was identical with any locality in Edom South, or South-West from Palestine. [“The so-called universalism of the writer is apparent here. His hero is a stranger to Judaism and the privileges of the peculiar people, living in a foreign country. The author saw that God was not confined to the Jew, but was and must be everywhere the father of His children, however imperfectly they attained to the knowledge of Him; he saw that the human heart was the same, too, everywhere, that it everywhere proposed to itself the same problems, and rocked and tossed amidst the same uncertainties; that its intercourse with heaven was alike, and alike awful in all places; and away down far in that great desert stretching into infinite expanse, where men’s hearts drew in from the imposing silence, deep, still thoughts of God, he lays the scene of his great poem. He knows, Jew though he be, that there is something deeper far than Judaism, or the mere outward forms of any dispensation, that God and man are the great facts, and the great problem their connection.” Davidson]. And that man was perfect and upright, and one that feared God and eschewed evil. These four attributes, of which ϊָּ ?ν (literally integer, whole, complete) here denotes moral integrity, and hence blamelessness, while ιָ ?ωָׁ ?ψ denotes uprightness, righteousness,—are not simply co-ordinate, but “the first furnishes the foundation of the second, and the last two conjointly of the first two,” (Hahn). For the fear of God and eschewing evil are obviously mentioned as the ground or source of blamelessness and uprightness (comp. Proverbs 1:7); the religious characteristics serve to explain the moral. The ε before ιְ ?ψֵ ?ΰ is thus explanatory, and might, as in Job 1:8 and Job 2:3, be dispensed with. [Lee remarks well on ϊָּ ?ν that it “seems to be synonymous with the Greek τέλειος, 1 Corinthians 2:6; 1 Corinthians 14:20, etc., and to signify complete in every requisite of true religion, ‘thoroughly furnished unto all good works,’ rather than perfect in the abstract; and hence ϊֻּ ?ξָּ ?δ Job 2:3 is rather the exercise of true religion, than perfection or integrity in the abstract.” Delitzsch defines thus: “ϊָּ ?ν, with the whole heart disposed towards God and what is good, and also well-disposed toward mankind; ιָ ?ωָׁ ?ψ in thought and action without deviation conformed to that which is right, ιְ ?ψֵ ?ΰΰֱ ?μֹ ?διν, fearing God. and consequently being actuated by the fear of God which is the beginning (i.e., principle) of wisdom; ρָ ?ψξֵ ?ψָ ?ς, keeping aloof from evil, which is opposed to God.” Ewald and Davidson cor-relate ϊָּ ?ν and ιְ ?ψֵ ?ΰΰֱ ?μֹ ?δִ ?ιν, as descriptive of the inner qualities of a righteous man, ιָ ?ωָׁ ?ψ and ρָ ?ψξֵ ?ψָ ?ς as descriptive of his outer life]. Job 1:2. And there were born to him seven sons and three daughters. The description of his piety is immediately followed by that of his prosperity, showing first of all how he prospered in his family, how rich he was in children. The high significance which attached to this species of wealth and happiness, according to the Old Testament view, may be seen from Job 21:8; Job 21:11; Job 29:5, of our book, and also Psalms 127, 128. The number of sons, it will be observed, far exceeds that of daughters; this being in accordance with the tendency, prevalent alike in ancient and in modern times, to magnify the importance of those by whom the family life and name are perpetuated, and to regard that man as specially fortunate, who is blessed with a preponderance of male descendants (comp. Proverbs 17:6). The number of sons, moreover, and the number of daughters, are sacred numbers of special symbolical significance, their sum likewise forming a sacred number; and again, in the summary which follows of the patriarch’s possessions, we find the same numbers recurring, as multiples of one thousand. It has already been shown in the Introduction, § 8, near the beginning, how in these unmistakably ideal numerals we recognize, notwithstanding the prose form, the essentially poetic character of the Prologue; and the same is true of the Epilogue (see Job 42:12-13). Job 1:3. His substance also was seven thousand sheep and three thousand camels, etc. [“It is a large, princely household.” Del.] “Although Job is not to be regarded as a wandering Bedouin, but as a settled prince, or Emir (Job 1:4; Job 1:18; Job 29:7; Job 31:32), who also engaged in agriculture (Job 1:14; Job 5:23; Job 31:8; Job 31:38 sq.), his wealth is nevertheless, after the manner of those countries, estimated according to the extent of his flocks and herds (ξִ ?χְ ?πֶ ?δ), together with the servants thereto appertaining.” Dillm.—Five hundred yoke of oxen, and five hundred she asses. φξγ, a yoke, i.e., pair, oxen being worked in pairs in tilling the land (Job 1:14). Only the she asses are mentioned (comp. on the other hand Genesis 12:16; Genesis 32:15), as forming the most valuable part of this species of cattle property. In Syria even yet they are far more numerously owned than the males, and sold at three times the value of the latter; and this not so much for the milk as for breeding (comp. Wetzstein in Delitzsch; also Rosenmόller’s Altes und Neues Morgenland, III., 319).—And a very great household (very many servants). ςֲ ?αֻ ?γָּ ?δψַ ?αָּ ?δ, precisely as in Genesis 26:14, brought into connection with wealth in cattle, which, as the more important, is mentioned first. The Targ. takes ςֲ ?αֻ ?γָּ ?δ to be the same with ςֲ ?αֹ ?γָ ?δ, 1 Chronicles 27:26, meaning husbandry. This interpretation, which the Septuagint seeks after its fashion to combine with the common one (καὶ ὑπηρεσίαπολλὴ σφόδρα, καὶ ἔργαμεγάλαἧναὐτῷ ἐπὶ τῆςγῆς), is condemned by the analogy of the parallel passage in Genesis 26:14, as well as by the singular unanimity with which exegetical tradition favors the signification we have given.—So that this man was the greatest of all the sons of the East. [“Vav consec. imperf. summing up the issue of the foregone: all which made Job the greatest of the Orientals.” Davidson.] On απιΞχγν see above on Job 1:1, also Introd., § 5. For βָּ ?γεֹ ?μ in the sense of rich and distinguished, see Genesis 24:35; Genesis 26:13; Ecclesiastes 2:9. [“The sons of the East are the inhabitants of the regions East of Palestine. Although elsewhere the term designates the Arabians, who constitute the principal element of the population between Canaan and the Euphrates, here it cannot be referred specially to them, for Job was not an Arabian, and Uz belonged rather to the Aramaic race.” Hengst. Schlottmann calls attention to the fact that the name “Saracen” is Arabic for “men of the East.” E.] Job 1:4-5 describe and illustrate Job’s remarkable piety, presenting a single characteristic of the same, which at the same time prepares the way for a better understanding of the narrative which follows. [These verses serve a threefold use in the narrative: primarily, they furnish the historical occasion for the terrible calamities which follow; incidentally, they contain a striking illustration of Job’s tender and conscientious piety; and, finally, they present a pleasing picture of patriarchal family life in its affectionate harmony and joyousness.—E.] Job 1:4. Now his sons were wont to hold a feast in the house of each one on his birth-day.—Lit.: “And his sons went and made a feast,” etc. The verb “went” here, as the perf. consec. εְ ?δָֽ ?μְ ?λεּ shows, refers not to an action which took place once, but to one which was wont to recur at definite times. [“It does not exhibit the whole religious expression of Job’s life, but only one remarkable custom in it; hence being independent, vav has not the imperf. consecutive, but the simple perf., expressing here a single past action which the connection shows to have been customary.” Dav.] Since ξִ ?ωְׁ ?ϊֶּ ?δ denotes not the ordinary daily meal, but, as the derivation from ωϊδ proves, a feast of entertainment, a banquet attended with wine-drinking (Job 1:13), a συμπόσιον, convivium, it is impossible to take ιεֹ ?ξεֹ (Accus. tempor.) in the sense of a daily recurrence of these meals, thus assuming that every week the dinner passed round in rotation to each of the seven brothers (Hirzel, Oehler, Kamph., Del. [Hengstenberg, Words.]). This would be a living in riot and revelry, all the more unbecoming since by such an arrangement the parents would be excluded altogether from the family-circle, whereas the sisters would be, contrary to Eastern custom, the habitual companions of their brothers at the table. Evidently ιεֹ ?ν denotes a day marked by special observance and feasting (comp. Hosea 1:11; Hosea 2:15; Hosea 7:5); whence it would seem to have been either some annual festival, of general observance, such as the harvest festival, so widely observed in antiquity, or the spring festival (so Ewald, Vaih., Heil., Hahn, Dillm. [Dav.]); or else the birth-day festival of either one of the seven brothers (Rosml., Umbr., Welte, Schlott. [Wem., Carey, Rod., Bar., Elz.]). The latter seems to be most favored by Job 3:1, where ιεֹ ?ν (as also in Hosea 7:5) evidently stands in the sense of birth-day (Genesis 40:20); with this moreover stands in special harmony what we find in Job 1:13; Job 1:18, to wit, that special prominence is twice given to the circumstance that Job’s calamities came to pass on the day when his firstborn son was lost; this very coincidence of those fearful visitations with the birth-day festival of his first-born (the ψֵ ?ΰωִׁ ?ιϊΰεπεֹ, the firstling of his strength, comp. Genesis 49:3). constituting for the unfortunate father a tragic climax of sorrow, such as could not have befallen him had any other festivity been the occasion which brought the children together to undergo their common doom. The opening words of the verse following are indeed cited against this view; the fact, it is alleged, that we find mentioned there a cycle of days as “the days of their feasting,” and that it was not until they were ended that Job performed his purification, requires, on the assumption that these days were the birth-days of the seven sons, that the cycle should be distributed over the entire year, which would lead us to the untenable conclusion that but one expiation was offered in the year, namely, at the end of the last birth-day festival (comp. Dillm.). But why this conclusion should be pronounced untenable certainly does not appear. Moreover there is nothing at all to prevent our supposing that the birth-days of the seven sons, or indeed of all the ten children, were not very far apart, that, e.g., they all fell within one half-year. And then, over and above all, it would seem that excessively fine-spun speculation as to the question how the author conceived the circulation or the expiration (δִ ?χִּ ?ισ) of the festal days must result in some violence to the character of the narrative, which is not rigidly historical, but poetic and ideal. For this reason we must reject Schlottmann’s endeavor to represent each of the birth-day festivals mentioned in the account as lasting several days, thus assuming that Job’s expiatory sacrifice was made at the close of each such festival. This supposition would make it necessary for us to read quite too much between the lines, to say in Job 1:4 that ιεֹ ?ξεֹ means the first in each series of feast-days, while in Job 1:5, by ιְ ?ξֵ ?ιδַ ?ξִּ ?ωְׁ ?ϊֶּ ?δ are meant the several days of each festival of days (with which, however, the verb δִ ?χִּ ?ισ, to go round, devolvi, does not agree). [Zφckler’s argument in favor of the birth-day theory is ingenious and suggestive, but not altogether satisfactory. The account in the text is so brief and general as to make absolute certainty impossible. The impression, however, which the narrative most naturally makes on the reader is: (1) That the days of the feast followed each other in immediate succession; in other words, that the seven feasts were given on seven successive days in the houses of the seven brothers in regular order from the oldest to the youngest; and (2) that at the end of the week, probably on the morning of the eighth day, Job’s sacrifice was offered. This is the simple and natural deduction from the narrative as it stands, and it is not easy to harmonize with it the theory that the feasts were held on a series of birth-days, separate from each other by an interval, longer or shorter. The suggestion that each birth-day feast lasted several days, and that Job’s sacrifice was offered at the end of those days, is clearly shown by Z to be unwarranted, and at variance with the statement conveyed by the δִ ?χִּ ?ισ. We are thus reduced either to (a) the daily theory, advocated by Hirzel, etc.; or to (b) the theory of an annual festival (spring or harvest, or both). But such an interminable carousal as (a) would imply, is, as Z. shows, highly improbable, and not to be assumed without the gravest necessity. In favor of (b), on the contrary, may be urged: (1) The prevalence in antiquity of those simple season-festivals. (2) The especial probability that such feasts would be observed in a patriarchal community, like Job’s family, belonging, as it evidently does, to the period of transition from a pastoral nomadism to a settled agricultural life. (3) The correspondence between the number of Job’s sons and the seven days of the festival week. (4) The absence of Job, which would be unnatural if these were birth-day festivals, may be at least more readily accounted for on such an occasion of simple secular merry-making as, e.g., a harvest festival. (Schlottmann well remarks that if the festival had been religious in its character, Job, as patriarchal priest, would have stood more in the foreground). Z.’s remark that the double mention of the fact that the fatal feast was held in the house of the first-born, becomes doubly significant, if the day were his birth-day, is certainly striking, but of less weight than the other considerations presented above. The specification of the place of entertainment imparts greater reality to the narrative; the further specification of the house of the first-born still further deepens the tragic impression of the story, by suggesting that the calamity struck the banqueters on the very first day of their festivities.—E.]—And sent and called for their three sisters to eat and to drink with them.—This invitation which was always extended to the sisters (who, we are to suppose, were living with their mother), is made specially prominent as showing “the inner mutual relation which the father had established among his children” (Hirzel). [“And they used to send and invite—an independent fact; the author lifts it out of dependence to emphasize it, for the purpose of showing the beautiful harmony and affection of Job’s family one to another, and the generous and free-hearted magnificence of the sons, and also the possibility of the coming catastrophe which swept away sons and daughters at once. The father had no relish for this kind of enjoyment; but no peevish dislike of it, or of those who had, being a wise and liberal man, wishing the happiness of all about him, and pleased to see them enjoy themselves in their own, not his way, so only they do it innocently and religiously. The sons of Job seem to have had establishments of their own, and the daughters lived apart with the mother. On the irregularity of fem. ωְׁ ?μωֶׁ ?ϊ with fem, noun, comp. Genesis 7:13; Jeremiah 36:23(where the gend. are both right and wrong); Zechariah 3:9.” Dav.] Job 1:5. And it was so, when the days of their feasting were gone about, i.e., when the period through which their mutual invitations ran, that which embraced their frequent birth-day festivals, had run its course (δִ ?χִּ ?ισ, comp. that which has been said above against Schlott). [Good: “And it came to pass, as the days of such banquets returned,” etc., which is not only opposed to the plain meaning of the verb, but at variance with the obvious design of Job’s sacrifice, which was retrospective, not anticipatory, offered for the sins which he feared they had committed, not for those which he feared they might commit. A similar rotatory system of banquets is said to prevail in China. “They have their fraternities which they call the brotherhood of the months; this consists of months according to the number of the days therein, and in a circle they go abroad to eat at one another’s houses by turns.” Semedo’s History of China, quoted by Burder, Oriental Customs.—E.] ιְ ?ξֵ ?ιδַ ?ξִּ ?ωְׁ ?ϊֶּ ?δ is to be understood collectively, “the days of the banquets, of entertaining” not as a strict singular, of one feast distributed over several days.—That Job sent that he might atone for them.—He sent for them for this end; for the efficacy of sacrifices of purification depended on the presence of those in whose behalf they were made. εַ ?ιְ ?χַ ?γְּ ?ωֵׁ ?ν, literally: “and sanctified, consecrated them,” defining the object of ειωμη. How the sanctification took place, we are told in what follows. The term expresses not merely the preparation for the expiation, the lustration or washing preceding the sacrifice, as Rosmlr., Arnh., Hirz., Vaih., Heil., Dillm. affirm, on the strength of passages like Exodus 19:10; Joshua 7:13; 1 Samuel 16:5. [Zφckler seems to regard the “sanctification” here as a part of the general rite of expiation which Job performed, and thus as taking place at the same time. The other theory, maintained by the majority of commentators (including, in addition to those named above, Hengst., Dav., Con.), is supported by the following considerations: “(1) The general usage of the verb χγω, the essential signification of which in its transitive forms is to dedicate, purify for holy service. See Ges. and Fόrst’s Lex. (2) The analogy of the Mosaic and other rituals, in which preparatory rites of purification are the rule. It is true that the author of the book is careful to put himself and his characters outside of the Mosaic system, and avoids even here, as we shall see below, any identification of Job’s sacrifices with the Mosaic. Preparatory riles, lustrations, and the like, are however common to all religions, and there is no reason to suppose that the author would shrink from introducing a feature of such general observance because it belongs to the Mosaic ritual. It is in harmony with this that we find (3) in Exodus 19:10 the direct recognition of a preparatory rite of purification (the same word being used there as here), before the Sinaitic code had been given, whereby the prevalence of such a rite in the pre-Mosaic period is clearly implied (comp. Genesis 35:21). (4) The order of terms in the passage under consideration—“sent,” “purified,” “rose early,” “offered”—certainly agrees best with the supposition that on the evening of the seventh day he sent and secured the purification of his children, their preparation for the solemn holocaust of the morrow, and then rose early on the morning of the eighth day, and in presence of his assembled children consummated the sacrifice. Had only one sacrificial rite been designated, the natural order would have been “rose,” “sent,” “purified,” “offered.” (5) The absolute use of ειωμη makes it exceedingly doubtful whether we can with Z. render it: “and he sent for them.” At the same time, as Z. admits, the impressiveness and efficacy of the sacrifice required that those for whom it was made should be present. This leaves us no alternative but to regard the sanctification and the offering as two distinct rites, the former secured by Job’s mandate in his absence, the latter performed by him in person, and in the presence of his children. When to this we add the separation of the two verbs “sanctified” and “offered” by the verb “rose early,” the conclusion here reached seems irresistible.—E.]—And rose up early in the morning, and offered burnt-offerings, according to the number of them all.—The comprehensive magnificence of the sacrifice made it necessary that he should rise early. [His rising early may also be taken as an indication of his zeal, and of his earnest desire to make the expiation as promptly as possible. “Job made his offering in the morning because in the morning the feelings are most freely and most strongly inclined toward religious contemplation. The saying: Morgenstunde hat Gold im Munde (the morning hour has gold in its mouth), is true not only of work, but also of prayer.” Hengst.—E.] ειωλν perf. consec. as in Job 1:4. [“δֶֽ ?ςֱ ?μָ ?δ refers not so much to bringing it up to the raised altar, as to causing it to rise in flame and smoke, causing to ascend to God who is above.” Del]. ξρτּ ?ψλμν, and according to the number of them all (accus. of nearer definition, Ewald, § 300, c. [Green, § 274, 2]). Job, it will be observed, offered burnt-offerings, not sin-offerings (so again in Job 42:8). This is quite in accordance with the pre-Mosaic patriarchal period, which, as all the historical references to sacrifices in the book of Genesis also show, was not yet acquainted with the sin-offering instituted later by Moses. [An indication of the care and skill with which our author preserves the antique coloring of his narrative.—E.] Another genuinely patriarchal trait is furnished in the fact that Job, in his character as father, appears also in the character of priest of the household, offering its sacrifices. Comp. Introduction, § 2.—For Job said: in the first instance, naturally, to himself, or in prayer to God; but surely also in speech to others, as a formal statement of his principle, and explanation of his course. It is a needless weakening of the ΰξψ to explain with Ewald, Hahn, etc.: “for Job thought.”—It may be that my sons have sinned, and renounced God in their hearts; to wit, in the intoxication of their abandonment to pleasure, in the wanton or presumptuous spirit produced by their merrymaking (comp. Proverbs 20:1; Isaiah 5:11; Isaiah 28:7, etc.). Thus it is that Job gives utterance here to that extraordinary earnestness and zeal in fulfilling the Divine will, which leads him to ascribe the highest importance to the avoidance, or, when necessary, the expiation of all sins, even of the heart and the thought. Comp. Job 31:24, sq. αֵּ ?ψֵ ?κְ, “to bless, to salute,” is also used (e.g., Genesis 47:10; 1 Kings 8:66) of bidding farewell to” [taking leave of], here, however, still more definitely in a bad sense, taking leave of one in a hostile spirit; dismissing, renouncing. So also in Job 1:11 and Job 2:5; Job 2:9. The word also admits of the signification “to curse” (comp. Psalms 10:3 [?]; 1 Kings 21:10); but most surely this is not the meaning here, where sins of thought simply are referred to. [The bifurcation of definitions, so that the same word is used in a good and a bad sense, is a well-known characteristic of the Hebrew in common with other Semitic languages. Thus ηֶ ?ρֶ ?γ, grace, is used Proverbs 14:34 in the sense of disgrace. Or, the word in its radical signification is a vox media, acquiring its ethical character from the specific application made of it, of which we have a happy illustration in αֵּ ?ψֵ ?κְ, primarily to kneel, and so to invoke; hence to bless, or to curse, according to the nature of the invocation. And still further: from the meaning to invoke, comes to salute, which again may be to salute with good-will, or with ill-will; in the latter case (if at parting) to dismiss, warn off, renounce. Compare the analogous uses of χαίρειν and valere. Of the harsher definition, to curse, it may be observed that: (1) We are not restricted to it. The context does not absolutely require it. We are justified both by usage and analogy in adopting the milder definition, to forsake, dismiss. (2) It is more natural to suppose that the children of Job, nurtured, as they must have been, by so tender and conscientious a father, should have been betrayed, during their festivities, into a wanton thoughtlessness, a pleasure-loving alienation from God, than into positive blasphemy. (3) It is more natural to assume that the pious patriarch would be accustomed to fear the former, than the latter more heinous evil, in the case of his children. Mark the statement: “thus did Job continually.” (4) The qualifying predicate, “in their hearts,” agrees better with the idea of forgetting, or forsaking God in feeling, than with that of blasphemy. The latter would seek some overt expression. (5) Job’s loving and faithful solicitude for the spiritual welfare of his children is much more strikingly exhibited, if we regard it as prompted by anxiety lest they should have been guilty of even the most secret infidelity in thought or disposition, than if we assume the graver offence to be intended. Lee, following Parkhurst, thinks that Job suspected his children of a tendency to idolatry, and translates: “It may be my sons have sinned and blessed the gods in their hearts.” It is sufficient answer to this to say that it violates the usus loquendi of ΰֱ ?μֹ ?δִ ?ιν, and especially of αֵּ ?ψֵ ?κְ ΰֱ ?μֹ ?δִ ?ιν in our book, that we are not constrained to render the verb: “to bless,” and that it is opposed to the internal probabilities of the case. “The only false religion we know, from the internal evidence of the poem itself, to have existed at this period, was that of Sabiism, or the worship of the heavenly bodies; but there is nothing to render it even probable that the sons of Job were attached to this.” Good. The author just quoted (Good) seeks to avoid what he considers the difficulty in the case by giving to the particle ε here a negative sense, under “a philological canon,” which he lays down as follows: “that the imperfect negative may be employed alone in every sentence compounded of two opposite propositions, where it becomes the means of connecting the one with the other, such propositions being in a state of reciprocal negation;” and he would translate: “peradventure my sons may have sinned, nor blessed God in their hearts.” His own illustrations, however, fail to establish his choice, as in every instance the connective particle has of itself a negative force, such as does not belong to the ε. It is certainly inapplicable to the simple structure of the Hebrew. Merx in his recent version violently and arbitrarily assails the integrity of the text here and elsewhere, where the like expression occurs. In his own text he substitutes χμμ for αψκְ. It is enough to say of this change that, as appears from what has been said above, the necessity for it is altogether imaginary, and that the sole authority for it is the subjective non possumus of the critic.—E. “Job is afraid lest his children may have become somewhat unmindful of God during their mirthful gatherings. In Job’s family, therefore, there was an earnest desire for sanctification, which was far from being satisfied with mere outward propriety of conduct.” Del. “It is curious that the sin which the father’s heart dreaded in his children, was the sin to which he himself was tempted, and into which he almost fell. The case of his sons shows one kind of temptation—seduction; and his own case the other—compulsion and hardship.”—Dav.]—Thus did Job continually.—ιַ ?ςֲ ?ωֶׂ ?δ, was wont to do. Comp. Ewald § 136, c. [Green § 263, 4]. λμδιξιν, literally, “all the days,” i.e., continually, always, so long as the particular occasion continued, or so often as it occurred anew. Comp. Deuteronomy 4:10; Deuteronomy 6:24; Deuteronomy 11:1; 1 Samuel 2:32. [“Where now such piety was to be found, and such conscientious solicitude to keep his whole house free from sin, there we might expect, judging after the manner of men, that prosperity would abide permanently. This at least we might expect from the stand-point of theory, which regards the outward lot as an index of the moral worth, which assumes piety and prosperity to be inseparable and convertible conceptions But in Heaven it was otherwise decreed.” Dillmann]. 2. The Divine determination to try Job through suffering. a. The milder trial, the taking away of his possessions, a. The preparatory scene in heaven, Job 1:6-12. [“Against human expectation and beyond human conception the direst suffering overtakes the pure, pious Job. Whence it came no believer could doubt; but why it came was for the sufferer and his contemporaries a great and difficult problem, with the solution of which they grappled in vehement conflict. The reader of the book would also have remained in entire ignorance of the Divine decree, and would have followed the labyrinthine sinuosities of the contending parties, not with superior discriminating judgment, but with an uncomfortable uncertainty, if the poet had here simply related the calamity into which the pious Job had been plunged by God. It was therefore a correct feeling which influenced the poet to indicate at the outset to the reader the Divine grounds of the decree, and thus to provide for him a polestar which would guide him through all the entanglement of the succeeding conflicts. This he does by disclosing to us those events, occurring in heaven, which led to the Divine decree concerning Job, the execution of which thereupon follows. No less fine a conception of the poet is the circumstance that the calamity which Job must bear does not overwhelm him all at once, but comes upon him in two visitations, lying somewhat apart in time; the first visitation deprives him of the greatest part of his riches and his children, the second plunges him into the most fearful, and, at the same time, the most hopeless [disease. Both visitations wound his feelings in different ways, until on all sides they are tried most thoroughly. Between the two is an interval of rest, in which the stricken one can collect his feelings, and set himself right before God. And as in the second visitation his suffering reaches its climax, so also does his virtue.” Dillmann]. Job 1:6. Now it came to pass on a day.—Gesenius, Ewald, Dillmann, etc., would translate δַ ?ιּ ?εֹ ?ν, “the day,” or “that day,” giving to the article a retrospective construction. But this favorite mode of expression is found at the beginning of a narrative even when it cannot be considered to have any reference to what has preceded, and where accordingly the translation “at the time specified” is out of the question; e.g., 2 Kings 4:18. The article here, therefore, is used “because the narrator in thought connects the day with the following occurrence, and this frees it from absolute indefiniteness.” Del. [“We are justified by no analogy in explaining the article as designating the definite day to which that which follows belongs. Ewald rightly explains ‘the day’ as an indefinite chronological link connecting what follows with what precedes. So also 1 Samuel 1:4; 1 Samuel 14:1; 2 Kings 4:18. Compare ἐνἐκείνῃ τῆ ἡμέρα. Matthew 13:1.” Schlott. Others (Dav., Bar., Con.) explain it of the day appointed for the Divine Court (Chald.: day of judgment at the new year), which is not essentially different from the view of Del. adopted by Zφck. In any case it is to be observed that δַ ?ιּ ?εֹ ?ν is not nominative, but accusative of time.—E.]—When the sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord.—These words describe the convening of a heavenly assembly, of a celestial ρεֹ ?γ (Job 15:8; comp. Jeremiah 23:18; Psalms 89:8). Compare the similar description in 1 Kings 22:19 sq., also Isaiah 6:1 sq. αְּ ?πֵ ?ιδָ ?ΰֱ ?μֹ ?δִ ?ιν, the sons of God, i.e., the angels, heavenly spirits; a name to be found also in Job 38:7; Genesis 6:2 [?]; and with slight modification in Psalms 29:1; Psalms 89:7; Daniel 3:25. Elsewhere in our book we find them called “servants,” “messengers” (Job 4:18), or “saints” (holy ones, Job 5:1; Job 15:15). The name “sons of God” points to the peculiar manner of their creation, which took place before the lower spheres of nature or mankind were made (Job 38:4-7), as well as to the peculiarly high degree in which they partake of the Divine likeness, and enjoy inward communion with God. [“The word son naturally expresses descent; and hence various related notions such as inheritor, the idea of similarity, relation, etc. So a son of God will be one inheriting the nature or character of God, one descended from Him, or like Him. This similarity may be of two kinds: first, in essential nature, that is, spirit—hence the angels as distinguished from man and agreeing with God completely in this respect are called sons of God; second, in ethical character, that is, holiness, in which sense pious men are called sons of God (Genesis 6:2). In the former and in the latter sense the holy angels have a right to the title; and in the former sense, though not in the latter, Satan is still named a son of God as inheriting a spiritual nature, and appears in the celestial court.” Dav]. μְ ?δִ ?ϊְ ?ιַ ?φֵּ ?αςַ ?μιְ ?δεָֹ ?δ, literally, to set themselves over, i.e., before Jehovah. ςַ ?μ (instead of which we have elsewhere, e.g., Proverbs 22:29μִ ?τְּ ?πֵ ?ι) “is a usage of language derived from the optical illusion of the one who is in the foreground seeming to range above the one in the background.” Del. Comp. Job 2:1; Zechariah 6:5; also the similar expression ςξγςμ in 1 Kings 22:19. [ςַ ?μ, “as if the King sat, and the courtiers stood over him (Isaiah 6:2, ξִ ?ξַּ ?ςַ ?μ in a higher degree of the seraphim floating around him off the ground. Drechsler); but this is dubious, for ςַ ?μ is used where such sense is inadmissible (Judges 3:19; with Judges 6:31; Genesis 24:30” Dav.] To set themselves before Jehovah is to assume the customary attitude of servants awaiting the command of their master.—And Satan also came among them.—[Literally, the Satan. “In 1 Chronicles 21:1 the name is used without the art.; i.e., has ceased to be appellative and become proper—Satan. In our book and Zechariah the art. is used, and we should perhaps render: the Satan, the adversary. In 1 Kings 22:19, where a scene greatly resembling the present is discovered, the tempter bears no name; but his individuality is distinct, for he is characterized as the spirit. The use of the art. cannot be of any great weight as an argument as to the era of our book.” Dav.] Concerning the signification of the name δָ ?ωָּׂ ?θָ ?ζ (instead of which we are not, with Eichhorn, Herder, Ilgen, Stuhlmann, etc., to read ηַ ?ωָּׁ ?θָ ?ο, ὁ περιοδεύτης, the world-spy, from ωׁ ?εּ ?θ, Job 1:7), as also concerning the relation of the representation of Satan in our book, to that of the other Old Testament books generally, see Doctrinal and Ethical remarks. Job 1:7. And the Lord said unto Satan, Whence comest thou?—ξֵ ?ΰַ ?ιִ ?κϊָּ ?αֹ ?ΰ, the sense being: whence art thou just now coming? the imperf. expressing the immediate present [Satan being conceived as in the act of making his appearance.—E.] (Ewald, § 136, b). The question is certainly not simply “for the purpose of introducing the transaction” (Dillm.); there lies more in it, to wit, the intimation that Satan’s ways are not God’s ways; that it is his wont to roam about, a being without stability, malicious, intent upon evil; that there is in his case a reason, which does not exist in the case of God’s true children, the angels, why God should inquire after his crooked and crafty ways, and compel him thereby to give an account of his restless, arbitrary movements. As Cocceius has truly said: “Satan is represented as transacting his own affairs as it were without the knowledge, i.e., without the approbation of God.” (Comp. Seb. Schmidt, p. 25, and Lud w. Schulze, in the Allg. literar. Anzeiger, 1870, Oct., p. 270). From going to and fro in the earth, and from walking up and down in it.—Umbreit is right in calling attention to the curt brevity of this reply of Satan’s. It is also to be noted, however, that the answer is of necessity somewhat general, giving rise to the expectation that Jehovah will follow with a more particular question (comp. Delitzsch). ωׁ ?εּ ?θαְּ describes the more rapid passage through a place, scouring it from one end to another (comp. Numbers 11:8) [of the people scattering themselves to collect manna]; 2 Samuel 24:2 [of the census taken when David numbered the people]; likewise the Synon. ωׁ ?εֹ ?θֵ ?θ (Amos 8:12; Jeremiah 5:1; Zechariah 4:10; 2 Chronicles 16:9): δִ ?ϊְ ?δַ ?μֵּ ?κְ describes the more deliberate movement of one who is traveling for observation (Zechariah 1:10-11; Zechariah 6:7; comp. Genesis 3:8; also the περιπατεῖν of the adversary, who goes about espying whom he may devour, 1 Peter 5:8). [Acc. to Ges., ωׁ ?εּ ?θ is a verb denominative from ωׁ ?εּ ?θ, whip, scourge; and is used in Kal. of rowing (Ezekiel 27:8), i.e. lashing the sea with oars, and of running to and fro in haste, pr. so as to lash the air with one’s arms as with oars, “happily enough describing Satan’s functions, ‘going about,’ inspecting, tempting, trepanning, taking up evil reports of all men” (Dav.). The signification “to compass” (Sept. περιελθων) is not exact.—E.]. Here belongs the Arabic designation of the devil as El-Harith, the busy-body, ever-active, zealous one. [“In the life of Zoroaster (see Zend Avesta, by J. G. Kleuker, vol. 3., p. 11), the prince of the evil demons, the angel of death, whose name is Engremeniosch, is said to traverse the whole earth far and wide, with intent to oppose and injure in every possible way all good men.” Rosenm.] Job 1:8. Hast thou considered my servant Job?—Literally, hast thou set thine heart on, etc.ωִׂ ?ινμֵ ?α = animadvertere [“animum advertere, for μֵ ?α is animus, πֶ ?τֶ ?ωׁ, anima,” Del.], construed here with ςַ ?μ [“of the object on which the attention falls,” Del.], as in Haggai 1:5; Haggai 1:7; below, Job 2:3, with ΰֶ ?μ [“of the object towards which it is directed,” Del.]. For there is none like him in the earth, a perfect and an upright man, etc.λִּ ?ι, “for,” giving the reason not for the title, “my servant” (Hirz.), but for the circumstance that Jehovah makes special inquiry after this man. The four qualities predicated concerning Job are repeated here from Job 1:1 (with the omission, however, of the Vav connective between the two pairs). In this, the impress of the epic-narrative character of this section of the book is visible, and it appears again in the refrain-like repetitions of Job 1:16-18. The same may be observed in the Mosaic account of the creation, Genesis 1. [“The Deity reiterates the description of Job given by the historian; it is, therefore, a first principle and action of the drama that Job was sinless, keeping all the commandments with a perfect heart, and in spite of this—which Job himself knew, and which the author knew—nay, because of this, he was grievously tormented. And herein just lay the problem for Job and the overwhelming strength of the temptation, leading him in the madness of despair, both physical and speculative, to renounce God to his face, and assert the government of the world to be hopelessly chaotic and unjust. Spirits like that of Job could not be reached in meaner ways; passion has long been mastered; there is nothing but his very strength and calmness and faith to work upon; his first principles, the laborious deductions of a religious life, and the deepest experience of a loving heart—confusion must be introduced there, between the man’s notions of God and providence, and his necessary ideas of right on the one side, and on the other the actual appearance of the universe fearfully contravening them, thus leading him into atheism.… His trial was not for his sin, but for his sinlessness, to prove and establish it.… Job’s sufferings had no doubt relation to his sin, they gave him deeper views of it, and of God’s holiness; but that is not the great truth the book teaches.” Dav. It is significant, as Hengstenberg observes, that in these preliminary transactions, which at length issued in Job’s trial, Jehovah takes the initiative. He directs Satan’s attention to the piety of Job; it is his use of the argument which Job’s character furnishes in favor of the reality of godliness in a human life that evokes the Adversary’s malignity in the challenge which fires the train of Job’s calamities. To such an extent is the agency of Satan secondary and subordinate throughout, that not only must he receive God’s permission before he can proceed one step against Job, but the very occasion through which he obtains that permission is gratuitously provided for him by God. So absolute is the Divine Sovereignty. Thus completely are even the occasions of evil within the limitations of the Divine will. And thus is our confidence strengthened at the outset in the ultimate inevitable triumph of the Divine purpose.—E.]. Job 1:9. Doth Job fear God for naught? [A little more literally: For naught hath Job feared God? ηִ ?πָּ ?ν, emphatic by position; ιָ ?ψֵ ?ΰ, which above in Job 1:1; Job 1:8 is a participle, here a Pret. (Perf.) of that which has been hitherto, and still is.—E.]. ηִ ?πָּ ?ν, gratis, from ηֵ ?ο, gratia, here equivalent to gratuitously, groundlessly, without good reason [LXX. δωρεάν comp. the δωρεάν of John 15:25) without reward, or profit. [“Genuine love loves God, ηִ ?πָּ ?ν; it loves Him for His own sake; it is a relation of person to person, without any actual stipulations and claim.” Del. Satan denies this of Job. Compare the three-fold use of ηִ ?πָּ ?ν in this book; by Satan of Job here; by God of Satan, Job 2:3; by Job of God, Job 9:17.—E.] The question, which is asked in order to throw suspicion on the pure and disinterested character of Job’s piety, is thoroughly characteristic of Satan in his character of Accuser of men (κατήγωρ, Revelation 12:10; διάβολος, Matthew 4:1, etc.). [“This question: Does Job serve God for naught? is the problem of the book.” Dav.]. Job 1:10. Hast thou not made a hedge about him, and about his house, and about all that he hath on every side?—The figure used here, borrowed from the enclosure of a garden or a field for protection against wild beasts (Matthew 21:33), is somewhat analogous to the modern figurative expression: “to make one’s bed warm and soft for him. [ΰַ ?ϊָּ (without the final δ) emphatic: Hast not Thou made a hedge about him? Thou—the Almighty One, whose protection is all-sufficient. Ought he not to serve Thee, his Defender and Benefactor? Would not self-interest prompt him to this?—E.]. ωׂ ?εּ ?κְ, sepire, to hedge about, as in Hosea 2:8. [Here in a good sense, for protection; below, Job 3:23, in a bad sense, to straiten. Good remarks that “to give the original verb the full force of its meaning, it should be derived from the science of engineering, and rendered: ‘Hast thou not raised a palisade about him?’ But this last term is not sufficiently colloquial.” Wemyss unnecessarily assumes the hedge here to be a guard of angels. The Arabic has: “Hast thou not protected him with thy hand?” The Chald. Paraphrase: “Hast thou not covered him with thy word?” The Coptic: “Hast thou not been a fence to his possessions?”—E.] The preposition αְּ ?ςַ ?γ it is much better to derive from a verb αָּ ?ςַ ?γ, synonymous with the root αβγ, to cover, to veil [with which root it is also cognate: see Ewald, § 217, m], than from the prepositions αְּ and ςַ ?γ, of which most regard the word as compounded (as is held even yet by Delitzsch, and Dietrich in his Ed. of Gesen. Lex.). There lies in the three-fold repetition of this word a special emphasis, which is still further strengthened by the addition, at the close of the question, of ξִ ?ρָּ ?αִ ?ια, round about, on every side, “without leaving a gap through which harm might enter.” Dillm.—LXX.: “Hast thou not hedged round the parts without him, and the inner parts of his house, and that which is without all his possessions round about?”] Thou hast blessed the work of his hands. ξַ ?ςֲ ?ωֵׂ ?ϊιָ ?γָ ?ιε (as in Psalms 90:17; Deuteronomy 2:7; Deuteronomy 14:29, etc.), a general designation of all a man’s enterprises and activities. Compare as to sense the parallel passage, Genesis 39:3 (where it is said of Joseph: the Lord made all that he did to prosper in his hand”).—And his herds spread in the land: literally, his stock of cattle, τָ ?ψַ ?υ, breaks through in the land, like a flood breaking through an embankment (ξַ ?ιִ ?ναְּ ?τֶ ?ψֶ ?υ, 2 Samuel 5:20), or like a herd breaking out of a fold. Comp. Genesis 28:14; Genesis 30:30; Genesis 30:43; 2 Chron. 2:23; Isaiah 45:2—[So the versions of Junius and Tremellius and Piscator: And his cattle for multitude have burst forth through the land. Conant: “his substance is spread abroad in the earth,” which, he thinks, “is better than in the land, as it is the Adversary’s object to express, in the strongest terms, the extent of Job’s possessions.” On “Thou hast blessed,” etc., Wordsworth remarks: “Even Satan confesses that God’s benediction is the source of all good to man.”—E.] Job 1:11. But put forth thy hand now, and touch all that he hath.—εְ ?ΰεּ ?μָ ?ν, nevertheless, verum enim vero, introducing with strong emphasis the direct opposite of Jehovah’s eulogy on Job (comp. Job 11:5; Job 12:7; Job 17:10; Job 33:1). [ωְֽׁ ?μַ ?δΞπָֽ ?ΰ, Methegh accompanying Sheva. Green, § 45, 4],—πβς with αְּ (as in Job 19:21), sometimes with ΰֶ ?μ (as in Job 2:5), to touch, to lay the hand on anything, with intent to injure or destroy. [“Touch, or as it may be translated, smite, as below in Job 1:19. But the former sense is more appropriate here, as indicating how easily all this worldly prosperity would vanish at the touch of the Almighty.” Conant. “πָ ?βַ ?ς frequently of the evil touch which blasts; of the scattering wind (Ezekiel 17:10); of the consuming touch of God (Job 19:21; Isaiah 53:4; Psalms 73:14); the fiery effect of the divine touch (and look) marvellously told Psalms 104:32.” Dav. “Satan wishes to make God the author of evil; but God does not inflict evil on Job; but allows Satan to put forth his hand (Job 1:12), and afflict him.” Didymus, quoted by Wordsworth]. Verily he will curse Thee to Thy face.—ΰִ ?ρΞμֹ ?ΰεβεﬡ, not, “will he not curse, etc.” (and thus = an non, as in Job 17:2; Job 22:20), but the formula of an oath, with the apodosis omitted,=“truly, verily” (LXX.: εἰ μήν). It is more suitable to Satan’s insolent, reckless character to represent him as swearing that God is mistaken, than as questioning and calling upon God to watch and see, whether he is not mistaken [as e.g. Renan’s version: et on verra s’il ne te renie pas en face.] αֵּ ?ψֵ ?κְ, here again=valedicere, take leave of, as in Job 1:5, but strengthened here, so as to emphasize the shameless arrogance of the deed by the addition of ςַ ?μΞτָּ ?πֶ ?ικָ, “to thy face,” literally “upon thy face,” as in Job 6:28; Job 21:31; Isaiah 65:3; comp. ΰֶ ?μΞτָּ ?πִ ?ιν, Job 2:5; Job 13:15; αְּ ?τָ ?πִ ?ιν, Job 16:8. [The refusal of Good and Lee to entertain any other meaning for αֵּ ?ψֵ ?κְ than “to bless” leads them here, as also in Job 2:5, to forced and untenable constructions. Good’s rendering: “Will he then, indeed, bless thee to thy face?” is entirely against the usage of the particles, ΰִ ?ρΞμֹ ?ΰ, which elsewhere are strongly affirmative, not negative, and, moreover, leaves the qualifying clause, “to thy face,” meaningless. Lee’s rendering is even more objectionable: “But put forth thine hand now, and touch all that he hath: if not (i.e. if thou continue thy favors), then in thy presence will he bless thee.” A forced construction, and a feeble conclusion, entirely unworthy of the Satan of our book.—E.]. Job 1:12. Behold, all that he hath is in thy power: literally, is in thy hand; is delivered to thee. The divine permission appears here at the same time as a divine command; for such a permissive activity, on the part of God, as would admit of his remaining purely passive, is altogether unknown to the Old Testament (comp. Isaiah 45:7). Rather do we find that whenever men are tempted, it is because they are left by God to be tried, because He forsakes them, or withdraws His hand from them (2 Chronicles 32:31; Psalms 27:9, and often)—simple representations, parallel to that in the passage before us, and substantially equivalent to it (comp. Vilmar, Theol. Mor., 1871, I., p. 163). God, indeed, in decreeing that Job shall be tempted, has altogether other ends in view than those which are sought by the Adversary, who is commissioned to carry on the work of the temptation. While the latter desires, through his art as tempter, to compass the fall of Job, it is God’s will rather that he should endure the test, that thereby he may be not only lifted up by purification to the highest degree of virtue and piety, but also proved to be in truth a man of piety, who feared God, Satan and all other doubters to the contrary notwithstanding. That which is here put in operation is thus, on the part of God, a trial of Job, putting him to the proof; on the part of Satan, a veritable temptation to lead him astray. The motive from which the divine decree ordaining the trial proceeds is naught else than love, delivering and preserving the soul; that from which proceeds the action of the agent for the fulfilment of that decree is hate, the spirit which would murder body and soul, a diabolical satisfaction in causing a poor man’s body and soul to be destroyed in hell (Matthew 10:28; Luke 12:4 [where, however, God is meant, not the devil.—E.]). Therefore does God annex to the permission which He here grants Satan the warning prohibition: “only upon himself put not forth thy hand.” For He well knows the lust of murder and the thirst for destruction which possesses him who is a murderer and a liar from the beginning. So Satan went forth from the presence of the Lord.—εַ ?ιֵּ ?φֵ ?ΰ, literally, “and Satan went out,” i.e. out of the hall where the celestial assembly was convened. Immediately upon receiving the Divine license, he left the place, to begin the work of temptation in which he longed to engage. [“He went forth at once, the ardor with which he entered on his work being thus set forth.” Dillm. “As Cain did (Genesis 4:16), and as Judas did from the presence of Christ (John 13:30).” Words.] 3. (b) Job’s actual trial in the execution of the decree on his possessions and family, Job 1:13-19. [“In the opening verses the author gave us a glimpse of the calm sunshine of Job’s domestic life, its happy unity and religious simplicity. In the next few verses he took us elsewhere, and showed the first far-gatherings of the storm; and now it breaks in unheard-of fury, scattering ruin and scathing all that was beautiful in earth and man. The heavenly and the earthly combine, and there results a tumultuous mixture absolutely appalling in its workings. Heaven and earth unite to sow destruction around Job; all the destructive forces in nature, men’s evil passions and heaven’s lurking fire, are drawn out to overwhelm him. Man and heaven alternate in their eager fury for his ruin—first the Sabean horde, then the lightnings, then the “hasty and bitter” Chaldeans, and finally the tempest. Only one escapes each stroke, and yet one, for the man must know the outside of his ruin, and he must know it at once; each wave must come higher than the foregoing—the cattle, least numerous; the flocks, a deeper loss; the camels, more precious still; and, cruelest of all, a loss unlike all else—the children—and each wave comes up before the preceding has time to recede. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/lange/ FIRST CHIEF OF THE POEMTHE —OR THE OF JOB AND HIS FRIENDS Job 3-28The Outbreak of Job’s Despair as the Theme and Immediate Occasion of the ColloquyJob 3a. Job curses his existenceJob_3:1-101         After this opened Job his mouth, and cursed his day. 2And Job spake, and said, 3    Let the day perish wherein I was born, and the night in which it was said, There is a man-child conceived! 4    Let that day be darkness; let not God regard it from above, neither let the light shine upon it! 5    Let darkness and the shadow of death stain it; let a cloud dwell upon it; let the blackness of the day terrify it! 6    As for that night, let darkness seize upon it; let it not be joined unto the days of the year, let it not come into the number of the months! 7    Lo, let that night be solitary; let no joyful voice come therein! 8    Let them curse it that curse the day, who are ready to raise up their mourning! 9    Let the stars of the twilight thereof be dark; let it look for light but have none; neither let it see the dawning of the day! 10    —because it shut not up the doors of my mother’s womb, nor hid sorrow from mine eyes. b. He wishes that he were in the realm of the dead rather than in this lifeJob_3:11-1911    Why died I not from the womb? why did I not give up the ghost when I came out of the belly? 12    Why did the knees prevent me? or why the breasts that I should suck? 13    For now should I have lain still, and been quiet; I should have slept, then had I been at rest, 14    With kings and counsellors of the earth, which built desolate places for themselves; 15    or with princes that had gold, who filled their houses with silver: 16    or as a hidden untimely birth I had not been, as infants which never saw light. 17    There the wicked cease from troubling, and there the weary be at rest. 18    There the prisoners rest together; they hear not the voice of the oppressor. 19    The small and great are there; and the servant is free from his master. c. He asks why he, being weary of life, must still liveJob_3:20-2620    Wherefore is light given to him that is in misery, and life unto the bitter in soul; 21    which long for death, but it cometh not; and dig for it more than for hid treasures; 22    which rejoice exceedingly, and are glad, when they can find the grave? 23    Why is light given to a man whose way is hid, and whom God hath hedged in? 24    For my sighing cometh before I eat, and my roarings are poured out like the waters. 25    For the thing which I greatly feared is come upon me, and that which I was afraid of is come unto me. 26    I was not in safety, neither had I rest, neither was I quiet; yet trouble came! AND 1. The caption or prose introduction of Job’s out-gushing lamentation. Job 3:1-2. Job 3:1. After this opened Job his mouth and cursed his day. [ΰַ ?ηֲ ?ψֵ ?ιΞλֵ ?ο: after the appearance of the friends, their seven days’ silence, and after their conduct had wrought its full effect on the mind of Job.—E. “Opened his mouth; τָּ ?ϊַ ?η in conformity to the sensuous and poetic nature of Hebrew speech and thought, which uses the physical action to represent the mental.” Dav.]. “His day,” viz.: his birthday—the day on which he had come into the world. Comp. Job 1:4. Job 3:2. And Job began and spake.—The verse consists only of these three words: ΰִ ?ιּ ?εֹ ?αεַ ?ιּ ?ΰֹ ?ξַ ?ψεַ ?ιַּ ?ςַ ?ο. The literal meaning of εַ ?ιַּ ?ςַ ?ο is, “and he answered;” for ςָ ?πָ ?δ is, in general, to begin to speak when incited to it, whether the antecedent occasion consist of words or of actions; precisely the same as the New Testament ἀποκρίνεσθαι. [See Conant’s note in loco, proving that “in most of the cases quoted in support of the signification to speak up, to begin speaking (Ges. Lex. 2, and others), the reference to something prior, as the occasion of speaking, is clear, and in all of them there is ground for the writer’s choice of this form of expression.”] Here accordingly it is the persistent and expressive silence of the friends to which Job replies, not to any question, nor to any uttered remark of theirs.—εַ ?ιּ ?ΰֹ ?ξַ ?ψ, with Pattach in the final syllable, although the word is Milel, is found only in the prose captions of the discourses in our book; here, however, in every case: comp. Job 4:1; Job 6:1; Job 8:1, etc.—After these brief words of introduction, begins the poetic part of the book, distinguished by the poetic accentuation of the Masoretes. Comp. Introd. § 3. “From this point on the epic calmness with which the hero has suffered, and the poet told his story, yields to the pathos of the drama.” Dillmann. The contents of this first tragic, high-soaring, poetic discourse of Job are expressly given in the caption in Job 3:1 as being the cursing of the day of his own birth, an ardently expressed longing for death. Comp. Jeremiah’s abbreviated imitation in Job 20:14-18. [“There is a passage of Jeremiah so exactly similar that it might almost be imagined a direct imitation: the meaning is the same, nor is there any very great difference in the phraseology; but Jeremiah fills up the ellipses, smooths and harmonizes the rough and uncouth language of Job, and dilates a short distich into two equal distichs, consisting of somewhat longer verses.… The imprecation of Jeremiah has more in it of complaint than of indignation; it is milder, softer, and more plaintive, peculiarly calculated to excite pity, in moving which the great excellence of this prophet consists: while that of Job is more adapted to strike us with terror than to excite our compassion.” Lowth. And to the same effect Michaelis: Jobi est tragica illa et regia tristitia, dicam, an desperatio: Jeremiζ flebiles elegi, misericordiam provocantes, nec lacrimis major luctus.”] In respect of form, this mournful lamentation, which contains the theme and starting point of the following discussions, falls into three strophes of about equal length; Job 3:3-10; Job 3:11-19; and Job 3:20-26, of which the last alone gives evidence of a slight abridgement at the end, and that no doubt intentional, as the short, blunt breaking off of the second member of Job 3:26, which consists of only two words, εַ ?ιָּ ?αֹ ?ΰψβֶ ?ζ, gives us to understand. That, with the majority of modern expositors, we are to adopt this three-fold division of the strophes, and not, with Stickel and Delitzsch, a greater number of divisions, longer or shorter, is made certain by the μָ ?ξָּ ?δ, which recurs at the beginning of the 2d and 3d strophes (comp. Introd. l. c.). 2. First Long Strophe: Job curses his existence; Job 3:3-10.—First strophe: Job 3:3-5. Job 3:3. Perish the day wherein I was born.—ιֹ ?ΰαַ ?γ, with Pattahh in the last syllable, the accent having been retracted on account of the tone-syllable following (Ewald, § 139, b).—The elliptical relative clause, ΰִ ?εָּ ?μֶ ?γαּ ?εֹ, as also the like clause (ΰָ ?ξַ ?ψ) in the following member, are to be explained by the excited, rapid movement of the poetic style. The Imperf. [alias Fut.], (instead of which the parallel passage in Jeremiah 20:14 exhibits the Perf. [Prζt.] ιֻ ?μַּ ?γְ ?ϊִּ ?ι), is the Imperf. of the Past, as is ΰָ ?ξεּ ?ϊ, Job 3:11. Comp. Ewald, § 136, b [who calls it the prζsens prζteriti, ΰִ ?εָּ ?μֵ ?γ = nascendus eram: and see Green, Gr. § 263, Job 5 : “the speaker, by a bold figure, places himself before his birth, and prays that the day which was to give him existence might be annihilated, so that he might be saved from the misery of living.”]—And the night which said: A man-child is conceived.—The night of Job’s conception is poetically personified, as a living being, endowed with the gift of speech (comp. Psalms 19:3). It weakens the expression, and furthermore is by no means required by the masc. ΰξψ (for μַ ?ιְ ?μָ ?δ is masc.), to supply αַּ ?ΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψ before ΰָ ?ξַ ?ψ, “the night in which it was said” (Pesh., Vulg. [E. V.], etc.). In the deep excitement of feeling which now possesses him, all the objects of his thought become living powers, concrete, plastic forms. This is the case here with the night of his conception. For this is the night which is meant—not that of his birth, as the invariable usage of the verb δψδ, “to be conceived,” shows. Had the second member been intended to be synonymous in thought and expression with the first, ηεμμ would have been used, the usual synonym elsewhere in poetry of πεμγ. It is not only the language, however, which may be urged in favor of the literal construction of δֹ ?ψָ ?δ, but the general style of the discourse, which is characterized by poetic vividness and restless alternation. To this add that in what follows each of these two epochs of the life is made the object of a separate and vehement curse; to wit, first, in Job 3:4-5, the day of birth, and then, in Job 3:6-10, the night of conception. For this sharp and obviously intentional distinction between these two initial points of the life, comp. Psalms 51:7. [βָ ?αֶ ?ψ, “not a man-child, Eng. Ver., but a man, the name proper to the mature state being applied by anticipation to the infant or embryo. The emphasis is not upon the sex, implying greater joy at the birth of a son than a daughter; Job says, ‘a man,’ because he is speaking of himself.” Green. Heb. Chrest.] Job 3:4-5. A special curse of the day of birth: an expansion of Job 3:3 a. Job 3:4. That day—let it be darkness.—Let it be a dies ater s. infaustus. Whether the thought particularly intended is, that at each annual return of the birth-day darkness, that is to say, stormy weather, should prevail instead of bright and clear weather (Hirz., Dillmann), may well be doubted in view of the indefinite brevity of the language. Moreover such a meteorological interpretation would have something trivial about it.—Let not God from above ask after it:i.e. let not God, who is throned on high above (Job 31:2; Job 31:28), interest himself in it from thence (comp. γψω in Deuteronomy 11:12), let him not bring it forth out of its dark hiding-place. [“Let it pass away as a thing lost and unsought.” Con.] And let not light shine forth upon it.—πְ ?δָ ?ψָ ?δ, “radiance of light, brightness of day,” found only here; one of the many feminine forms of nouns peculiar to our book, such as ςֲ ?πָ ?πָ ?δ, Job 3:5; λִּ ?ρְ ?μָ ?δ, Job 4:6; ϊָּ ?δֳ ?μָ ?δ, Job 4:18; γִּ ?αְ ?ψָ ?δ, Job 5:8 (Hirz.). Job 3:5. Let darkness and death-shade reclaim it.—βָּ ?ΰַ ?μ, to redeem, reclaim, to make good one’s right to (not=βςμ, to defile, Targ.), [“stain” E. V. The expression seems to refer back to Genesis 1:2, which mentions the primeval darkness, out of which by the Divine Fiat the light, together with its product, the day, was evolved. That Darkness was thus the original proprietor of the days, and is here called on to reclaim Job’s birth-day. E. “The idea being that that day was a stray portion of the kingdom of death in the midst of light, and to be reclaimed again by death.” Dav.] The conceptions “darkness and death-shade” form a sort of hendiadys, signifying “the thickest darkness, the deepest death-gloom:” comp. Job 10:21; Job 34:22, etc.; also Luke 1:79 (φμξεϊ is, with Ew. § 270 c, and with Dillm., to be read φַ ?μְ ?ξεּ ?ϊ, and defined “black darkness”). Let clouds encamp above it: continually to hide it [ςππδ, collective: ϊωλε, to pitch one’s tent; fig. for settling or spreading]. Comp. ιֹ ?ενςָ ?πָ ?οεַ ?ςֲ ?ψָ ?τֶ ?μ. Joe 2:2.—Let the obscuration of the day terrify it: or literally “the obscurations of the day” [i.e. all that makes a day dark and dismal. E.]. Instead of the λִּ ?ξְ ?ψִ ?ιψֵ ?ιιΧ of the Masora (to which reading Ges., Schlott., Hahn, adhere: [“the Chireq is an attenuated Pattach from the lessening of the tone in the construct state:” Con.]), we are to read λִּ ?ξְ ?ψִ ?ιψֵ ?ιιΧ, and take the sing. of this construct plural as a synonym of ηַ ?λְ ?μִ ?ιμ (“duskiness”), a noun of the same formal structure (comp. also ωֵׁ ?τְ ?ψִ ?ιψ, “tapestry,” and other similar words of like structure in Ewald, § 157, a): [“with the third radical repeated, as is customary in words descriptive of color.” Dillmann]. The “darkening,” blackening of the day (λַּ ?ξְ ?ψִ ?ιψ from the root λξψ, “to be burnt, blackened”) is a result produced in a specially marked and striking manner by the eclipse of the sun; for which reason we are here to associate solar eclipses with the dark mass of clouds, thus intensifying the effect (Olsh., Dillm., Del., etc.). If we adhere to the Masoretic reading we should have to follow Aquila, the Targum, the Vulgate, in translating: terreant eum quasi amaritudines diei [Marg. of E. V.: “let them terrify it, as those who have a bitter day.” Hengst.: “May whatever is bitter to a day terrify it:” according to his explanation, Job would have retribution overtake that day; and as he himself had been filled with bitternesses, he would have the day from which all his sufferings took their origin, be afflicted with whatever might be bitter to it. E.]. But this instead of a strengthening, would be a weakening of the thought. Umbreit’s explanation: “let it be terrified as by incantations (comp. Arab. marξr, incantamentum), which darken the day,” anticipates that which is not expressed until further on, in Job 3:8, and is furthermore chargeable with being excessively artificial. [With Umbreit’s may be classified the rendering of Merx, who, reading λֹ ?ξְ ?ψֵ ?ιιֹ ?εν, translates: “May the priests of day frighten it away!” There can be little doubt that the rendering “darkenings of the day” is the one best suited to the context, and this whether with Ges., Con., etc., we retain the Masoretic Chiriq, or with Ewald, Zφckler, etc., change it to Pattach.—E.] Second Strophe: Job 3:6-10. A special curse of the night of conception: an expansion of Job 3:3 b. The reason why this expansion is twice as long as that of Job 3:3 a, is found by Hirzel and Dillmann to lie in the fact that it was in particular the night of his conception which gave Job his existence (see Job 3:10). [“Twice as many verses, for it was twice as guilty, and the crime of his existence lay chiefly with it.” Dav.] This, however, would be attributing to the author altogether too much premeditation and systematic deliberation. Job 3:6. That night—let thick darkness take it;i.e. let everlasting darkness seize on it and hold it fast as its possession, so that it can never come forth into the light of day. [“ΰֹ ?τֶ ?μ, an intenser gloom than ηωֶׁ ?κְ, deepest primitive darkness, chaos and ‘old night.’ ” Dav.] Let it not rejoice among the days of the year.—ΰַ ?μιִ ?ηַ ?γְּ (for ΰַ ?μιִ ?ηְ ?γְּ, with an auxiliary Pattach [furtive]; comp. Ewald, § 224, c. [Green, § 109, 2], from ηָ ?γָ ?δ, gaudere (Exodus 18:9), is evidently equivalent to: “let it not be glad of its existence among the days of the year.” [“The night is not considered so much to rejoice on account of its own beauty—fingitur pulchra nox de se ipsa gandere, Ges.—as to form one of the joyous and triumphant choral troop of nights, that come in harmonious and glittering procession.” Dav.] More insipid is the sense given by the reading followed by the Targum and Symmachus: ΰַ ?μιֵ ?ηַ ?γ, “let it not be joined to the days of the year, let it not be enrolled among them,” Comp. Ges. 49:6. [So E. V., Ren., Merx]. [“Of course not natural days, as in Job 3:3-4, but civil days, embracing the entire diurnal period, in which sense they include the night.” Green. Chrest.] Let it not come into the number of the months:i.e. let it not be numbered among the days, the sum of which constitutes the twelve months of the year (LXX. correctly: μηδὲ ἀριθμηθείηεἰςἡμέραςμηνῶν). Comp. Wieseler, Beitrδge zur richtigen Wόrdigung der Evangelien und der evangel. Geschichte, Gotha, 1869, p. 291; which correctly finds here a reference to the fact that the ancient Hebrews reckoned according to the lunar year; i.e. by years of 354 days (consisting of twelve months, alternating in length between 30 and 29 days, and equalized with the solar year by an intercalary month of 30 days about every three years). Job 3:7. Ha, that night!—let it be barren. βַּ ?μְ ?ξεּ ?γ, lit. “stony hard,” here and also in Isaiah 49:21 (where it is used of [Zion, personified as] a woman), the same as “barren.” [“Sitting in the everlasting darkness, that Night remains barren. It utters no shout of joy over the children born to it.” Schlott. This sense is in better harmony with the etymology, and the vivid personification of the passage, as well as Job’s vindictive feeling over the fact that that night had conceived him, than the “solitary” of the Eng. Ver. (Vulg. “desolate,” Syr.—E.] Let no shout of joy come therein.—ψְ ?πָ ?πָ ?δ, not “a song of the spheres” (Fries), [a conception and expression foreign to the Heb.: see the opposite thought, expressed Psalms 19:3.—E.]; but a jubilant shout of joy over the birth (or conception) of a man. Job 3:8. Let them curse it who curse days, they who are skilled to rouse up the dragon [leviathan]. [“He wishes everything dire and dreadful to be heaped upon it, or employed against it, not only all real evils, but even such as are imaginary and fictitious. He therefore invokes the aid of sorcerers, who curse the day, who claim the power of inflicting curses on it.” Green, Chrest.] ΰֹ ?ψְ ?ψֵ ?ιΞιεֹ ?ν, “cursers of the day,” i.e. sorcerers, who, according to the superstition of the old oriental world, knew how by their ban to make dies infausti, and who, therefore, had the power so to bewitch any particular day as to make it a day of misfortune. This art of sorcery, the actual existence of which the poetic style of the discourse concedes and assumes without going further, is characterized still more particularly, and with vivid gradation in the language, by the following clause: “they who are skilled (capable, empowered) to rouse up (ςֹ ?ψֵ ?ψ in poetry for μְ ?ςֹ ?ψֵ ?ψ, comp. Ewald § 285, c) leviathan,” i.e. the great dragon, who is the enemy of the sun and the moon, and seeks accordingly by swallowing them up to create darkness. That there is here an allusion to this well-known superstition in respect to solar and lunar eclipses, which is found among several other nationalities, e.g. the ancient inhabitants of India (see Bohlen, Das alte Indien, I. 290), the Chinese (Kδuffer, Das chines. Volk, p. 123), the North-African natives of Algeria (comp. Delitzsch 1:79) appears: (1) From the connection, which forbids our taking μִ ?εְ ?ιָ ?ϊָ ?ο either as in 40:25 seq.; Psalms 104:26, in its usual sense, of the crocodile, or again of terrestrial serpents (dragons), and so, with Umbreit and others, to think of snake-charmers or crocodile-tamers. (2) From the parallel passage in Job 26:13, where the mention of “the fleeing serpent” points to the same astronomical superstition. (3) From Isaiah 27:1, where the collocation of the words μִ ?ψֳ ?ϊָ ?οπָ ?ηָ ?ωׁ αָּ ?ψִ ?ιηַ designate the same mythical being (the dragon rβhu or kκtu of the Hindϋs). The poet accordingly in the passage before us gives to the curse that is to be pronounced on the day this highly poetic turn, by wishing that the sorcerers might secure the consummation of the curse by instigating the celestial dragon against the sun and moon, thus producing an eclipse of those bodies. To identify that dragon here (and in Job 26:13) with a constellation, by a reference to the dragon whose convolutions lie between the Great and Little Bear, or to any other serpent-figure among the stars (Hirz., Hahn, Schlott., etc.), does not harmonize well with the unmistakable meaning of ςֹ ?ψֵ ?ψ, “to excite, rouse up.” [The explanation of Umbreit, Rosenm., Noy., Bar., etc., a little more fully stated, is that “the verse probably refers to a class of persons who were supposed to have the power of making any day fortunate or unfortunate, to control future events, and even to call forth the most terrific monsters from impenetrable forests, or from the deep, for the gratification of their own malice, or that of others. Balaam, whom Balak sent for to curse Israel, affords evidence of the existence of a class of persons who were supposed to be capable of producing evil by their imprecations.” Noyes. One objection to this view is stated above by Zφckler, that it is not favored by the connection. Another objection suggested by Dav. is that “it is somewhat flat. The second member, instead of rising in significance, seems to fall, for to curse the day appears a much profounder exercise of power, reaching much further, and laying a spell much deeper, even on the hidden principles of nature and time, than any mere charming of an animal, however terrible.” According to the Fathers (whom Lee and Words. follow), Leviathan here is typical of Satan, “the great spiritual Leviathan.” When it is remembered that the same writers find the same typical significance in the description of “leviathan” in chap. 41., the extravagance of the fancy will at once appear. Davidson objects that “it cannot be shown that the superstition [above referred to] was current in Semitic lands; it belongs to India.” It is true, however, that among the Egyptians, with whose institutions the author of this book was well acquainted, eclipses were attributed to the victory of Typhon over the sun-god, that the crocodile (the leviathan of chap. 41.) was a representative of Typhon, and moreover that Egypt was celebrated above all lands for her sorcery. These three facts taken together would of themselves suffice to account for and to explain Job’s language in the passage before us.—E.] Job 3:9. Let the stars of the twilight be dark; the stars, namely, of its morning twilight, the precursors of approaching day-light, the meaning accordingly being: Let this night be followed by no genuine day’s radiance. In favor of this sense of πֶ ?ωֶׁ ?σ, to wit, morning twilight, crepusculum, may be urged, apart from the two following members of the verse, the analogy of Job 7:4; Psalms 119:147, where πֶ ?ωֶׁ ?σ has the same signification, though elsewhere certainly it signifies the evening twilight (diluculum), as e.g. Job 24:15; Proverbs 7:9; 2 Kings 7:5. And let it not gaze upon the eye-lashes of the dawn. Delitzsch: “let it not refresh itself with the eye-lashes of the dawn:” correctly as to the sense; for here, as always ψָ ?ΰָ ?δαְ denotes beholding with the feeling of pleasure, enjoying the sight of anything. “The eye-lashes of the dawn” (the same expression is found in Job 41:10) are the first rays of the rising dawn, opening as it were its eyes: comp. χρυσέηςἡμέραςβλέφαρον, Soph. Antiq. 103. [To be noted is the full form of the fut. ιִ ?ψְ ?ΰֶ ?δ, instead of the apocopated.] Job 3:10. The λִּ ?ι with which the verse begins refers back to the beginning of the period in Job 3:6, and thus gives the ground of the violent curse just pronounced upon the night of his conception. Because it shut not up the doors of my mother’s womb;i.e. did not make the same barren, did not prevent his conception: comp. Genesis 16:2; Genesis 20:18; 1 Samuel 1:5. αִּ ?θְ ?βִ ?ι, a poetic ellipsis for αֶּ ?θֶ ?οΰִ ?ξִּ ?ι. [Comp. Job 19:17, where the expression αְּ ?πֵ ?ιαִ ?θְ ?πִ ?ι, acc. to Ges., means brethren born out of the same mother’s womb. See, however, on the passage. “Juvenal has used the same liberty of expression, Sat. 6:1:124: Ostenditque tuum, generose Britannice, ventrem.” Con.]—And so hide sorrow from my eyes. The force of the negation extends out of the first over this, the second member of the verse, as is the case also in Job 3:11. Comp. Gesen. § 152 [§ 149], 3. [The influence of the negative extended here by means of Vav consecutive. See Ewald § 351 a.] The indefinite, and, so to speak, absolute term, ςָ ?ξָ ?μ, denotes some great and fearful affliction which Job was even then suffering. 3. Second Long Strophe: Job utters his choice to be in the realm of the dead rather than in this life, Job 3:11-19. The strophe embraces three sub-divisions, or strophes, of equal length, each consisting of three verses. a. Job 3:11-13. [The wish that he had died at birth.] Job 3:11. Why died I not from the womb?i.e., immediately after birth, immediately after I saw the light of this world.—So should ξֵ ?ψֶ ?ηֶ ?ν be explained here, according to the parallelism of the second member of the verse, not according to Jeremiah 20:17, which passage speaks rather of dying in the womb (ξִ ?ο being used there in the local, not the temporal sense), of dying, therefore, as an embryo, a thought which is foreign to our author. (So in opposition to Schlott. and Del.) [The view of Junius, as given by Schlott., of the gradation of thought in this verse and the following, is at least striking enough to be stated here. It represents Job as here cursing his life in four stages of its development: in the womb, immediately after birth, when taken up by the father, and finally when put to the mother’s breast. It may be doubted nevertheless whether Job’s impassioned outburst is characterized by such careful and minute discrimination. The future ΰָ ?ξεּ ?ϊ, like ΰִ ?εִּ֭ ?μֶ ?γ in Job 3:3, is an example of the poet’s bold idealization, which, taking its position back of the moment of birth, asks, ‘Why may I not die from the womb?’ See Green, § 263, 5; Ew. § 136, 6.—E.] Come forth out of the womb and expire?—Expire, to wit, immediately after coming forth. On the extension of the negation over the second member, comp. notes on Job 3:10. [The Fut. (or Imperf.) ΰֶ ?βְ ?εַ ?ς expressing that which is subsequent to the Pret. (Perf.) ιָ ?φָ ?ΰϊִ ?ι.] Job 3:12. Why did knees anticipate me? [Con.: Why were the knees ready for me?—“Prevent,” in A. V., in the obsolete sense, to come before, and so to anticipate]: i.e., the knees or lap of the father, joyfully saluting the newly-born child. Comp. Genesis 50:23; Isaiah 66:12. It is less natural to understand the knees of a woman to be meant, to wit, the knees of an attendant midwife or nurse. Comp. Genesis 30:3. [“The longing and anxious desire of the yearning mother to nurse her unborn darling has never been so happily expressed elsewhere.” Good.] There is certainly nothing in the passage which points to any custom of heathen antiquity, involving the formal recognition of the child by the father, as Hirzel supposes. [At all events, as Dillm. observes, such a recognition is not the leading thought of the passage.—E.] And what (=why) the breasts that I should suck?—[“There is a certain impatience and disgust in the ξָ ?δ: Why, what were the breasts that I should suck?” Dav. The dual forms of the original, “two knees,” “two breasts,” are preserved in the translation by Dav. and Renan, perhaps with needless literality.] λּ ?ι consecutive, as in chs. Job 6:11; Job 7:12; Job 10:6—and often. The Imperf. (Fut.) ΰֵ ?ιπַ ?χ describing an action immediately following after that which is previously mentioned, like ΰֶ ?βְ ?εַ ?ς, Job 3:11; ΰֶ ?ωְׁ ?χεֹ ?θ and ιָ ?πεּ ?ηַ, Job 3:13, etc. Job 3:13. For now I should have lain down and been quiet. A reason for the wish contained in the questions of Job 3:10; Job 3:12; therefore λִּ ?ι here=“for,” not “surely” (Del.)—ςַ ?ϊָּ ?δ, like ΰָ ?ζ elsewhere, “then, by this time.” Comp. Job 13:19; 1 Samuel 13:13. I should have slept (lit.: “I should have fallen asleep;” and so also in the first member: “I should have laid myself down”), then would there be rest for me, viz., the rest of the dead in the under-world, of the shades in Sheol, which, as compared with the inexpressible misery of this upper world, is evermore rest and repose. For the impersonal use of πεּ ?ηַ comp. Isaiah 23:12; Nehemiah 9:28. b. Job 3:14-16. A more particular description of the rest in the realms of the dead, which Job longs for. Job 3:14-15 are still dependent on the verbs in Job 3:13. Job 3:14. With kings and counsellors of the land.—ιֹ ?ςֲ ?φֵ ?ιΰֶ ?ψֶ ?υ, the counsellors of a land, i.e., the highest officers of the state, royal advisers, not kings themselves. Who built ruins for themselves.—If the reading ηֳ ?ψָ ?αεֹ ?ϊ is correct, then the passage certainly speaks of the building of ruins (comp. the same word in Isaiah 58:12; Isaiah 61:4; Malachi 1:4). The expression, however, can scarcely mean the rebuilding of fallen structures, a thought which many of the ancient writers found in it, but which is obviously far-fetched and foreign to the context, especially if the rebuilding of ruined edifices is taken as of the same meaning with the expression, “to be rich, to be well endowed, opibus abundare.” Neither can it refer to the building of mausoleums, houses for the dead, or, in particular, pyramids; an interpretation defended by Hirzel, Ewald, Fόrst, Delitzsch, Dillmann [Kamphausen, Wemyss, Bernard, Barnes, Wordsworth, Carey, Renan, Rodwell, Elzas, Merx], but not sufficiently verified etymologically. The Coptic πι—χραμ cannot, without further evidence, be identified with ηψαεϊ, even admitting that the interchange of α and ξ is not something unheard of. In any case it could not be proved that the author had in mind the pyramids of Egypt, so that the passage cannot be wrested to favor the theory of the Egyptian nationality of the poet; comp. Introd. § 7. The simplest and most obvious way of explaining it is, with Umbreit, Hahn, Schlottmann, Vaihinger, Heiligstedt [Gesenius, Noyes, Hengstenberg, Green in Chrestom.], to recognize in the ηֳ ?ψָ ?αεֹ ?ϊ an ironical designation of great, splendid palaces, which, notwithstanding their grandeur, must at last fall into ruin—a process which, in the East, as every where in hot countries, takes place with startling rapidity and suddenness. The expression is thus to be taken in a catachrestic sense, of that which is not yet indeed a ruin, but which will inevitably become such (comp. “dust,” “ashes,” “grass,” “a worm,” etc., used to designate man: Job 10:9; Psalms 103:14-15; Psalms 90:5, etc.). The difficulty of the expression has suggested several attempts to amend the text, as, e.g., by Bφttcher (de inferis, § 298), ψַ ?ηֲ ?αεֹ ?ϊ, “streets, courts;” by Olshausen, ΰַ ?ψְ ?ξְ ?πεֹ ?ϊ, “palaces;” by J. D. Michaelis (Suppl. p. 905), ηֳ ?ψָ ?ξεֹ ?ϊ, which, according to the Arabic, would be “temples, sanctuaries.” Comp. also the LXX., which translates by ἐγαυριῶντοἐπὶ ξίφεσιν, the text of which would be δַ ?βַּ ?ΰֲ ?ιεֹ ?πִ ?ιναַּ ?ηֲ ?ψָ ?αεֹ ?ϊ. [The expression as it stands in the text is certainly a difficult one, and unquestioning confidence in regard to the true interpretation is scarcely to be looked for. The rendering adopted by Zφckler, “who have built themselves ruins,” is indeed, as he claims, the simplest and most obvious rendering of the words as they now read. But, on the other hand, it may be urged: (1) This proleptic ironical use of the word “ruins” in the connection would be an unlooked for and an artificial interruption of the pathetic flow of thought—of the ardent, plaintive yearning for death, or for the condition in which death would place him. (2) The kind of irony which would thus be expressed is unsuited to the state of Job’s feelings in this discourse. Irony there is in the passage doubtless, but it is the irony of personal feeling, suggested by the contrast between his present misery and destitution, and the rest and equality of the grave. The irony which would have led him to see ruins in the palaces of the great would have been altogether alien to the intense subjectivity of his mood. Job is here thinking of himself—of what he would have been—of the rest, and the equality with earth’s greatest, which would have been his, had he died at his birth. To interject here a sudden satire on the destiny awaiting the external splendor of others would be untrue to nature, and so unworthy of the poet’s art. (3) The anticipation of ruin seems scarcely in harmony with the particular object of the immediate context, which is to describe the greatness of kings and counsellors, as of men high in rank and rich in their possessions. As Davidson says of this interpretation, it is “a sense which does not magnify, but minishes, the reputation of the great dead.” On the other hand, the interpretation “mausoleums” or “pyramids” is in harmony with the particular object of the context, enhancing the greatness of the persons spoken of, as well as with the general train of thought and feeling in this strophe, dwelling as it does on the condition and surroundings of the dead. It does not seem unreasonable, therefore, to conclude either that the word in its present form may be thus defined, or that the word in its original form being an unusual one, or of foreign origin, it was afterwards modified under the influence of the familiar Hebrew phrase, “to build ruins,” αָּ ?πָ ?δηֳ ?ψָ ?αεֹ ?ϊ.—E.] Job 3:15. Or with princes that had gold, who filled their houses with silver.—If the ηψαεϊ of the preceding verse are not “pyramids,” the αָּ ?ϊִּ ?ιν of this verse cannot possibly be understood to mean “houses of the dead,” as Hirzel explains. But even if that construction of the former verse be the true one, it would still be in the highest degree unnatural, artificial, and forced, to understand the expression in the passage before us as meaning any thing else than the riches which princes during life heap up in their palaces. Comp. Job 22:18. Job 3:16. Or like a hidden untimely birth I should not be.—I should not exist, have no being. πֶ ?τֶ ?μ, lit. a “falling away” (ἔκτρωμα), an abortion, as in Psalms 58:9; Ecclesiastes 6:8. For θָ ?ξַ ?ο in the sense of “to hide in the ground, to bury,” comp. Genesis 35:4; Exodus 2:12. The second member more particularly describes the condition of these abortions, as of those who never saw the light (“the light of life;” comp. Job 33:30). Furthermore, as to its contents, the entire verse, although varying in construction from the verse preceding, is by the ΰεֹ at the beginning made co-ordinate with it; and this immediate juxtaposition of the founders of great palaces [or pyramids], of rich millionaires, and—of still-born babes! produces a contrast most bizarre and startling in its effect. “All these are removed from the sufferings of this life in the quiet of their grave—be their grave a ‘ruin’ gazed upon by their descendants, or a hole dug out in the earth, and again filled in as it was before.” Delitzsch. c. Job 3:17-19. Exhibiting more in detail the extent to which death equalizes the inequalities of men’s lots in life. Job 3:17. There the wicked have ceased their raging.—ωָׁ ?ν, in the state of the dead, in the under-world [“conceived of after the analogy of sepulchral caves, and where the dead were deemed to preserve the same relations which they had held during their life.” Ren.]. ψְ ?ωָׁ ?ςִ ?ιν, the godless, the abandoned, who are ruled by evil passions and lusts, as in Isaiah 48:22; Isaiah 57:21; Psalms 1:4, etc. Hence ψֹ ?βֶ ?ζ is the stormy agitation, or inward raging of such men [“corresponds to the radical idea of looseness, broken in pieces, want of restraint, therefore of Turba, contained etymologically in ψָ ?ωָׁ ?ς.”—Del.]; comp. Isaiah 57:20; Jeremiah 6:7. Dillmann understands by the “raging of the wicked” the furious ravaging of insolent tyrants, with which is then vividly contrasted in the second member the enfeebled, powerless condition of those who are “exhausted of strength.” But there is nothing in the connection to show that any such contrast was intended between tyrants and the oppressed, between persecutors and the persecuted; and even the mention of the “taskmaster” in Job 3:18 has nothing in it to confirm this interpretation, which arbitrarily attributes to ψְ ?ωָׁ ?ςִ ?ιν the sense of ςψιφιν. Comp. Job 15:20; Job 27:13; Isaiah 13:11; Isaiah 25:3; Psalms 37:25, etc. [in most of which passages, however, it will be found that the parallelism sustains the notion of the equivalence of the two terms, and of the frequent use of the former in the sense assigned to it by Dillmann. Do we not hear in these words an echo of Job’s own calamities? Were not the turbulent, restless, fierce Chaldeans and Sabeans fit types of the ψְ ?ωָׁ ?ςִ ?ιν with their ψֹ ?βֶ ?ζ? and was not Job himself in his present helplessness one of the very ιְ ?βִ ?ιςֵ ?ιλֹ ?ηַ ??—E.] Job 3:18. Together rest the prisoners.—ιηγ, all together, so many as there are of them, as in Job 24:4. [“The Pilelωַׁ ?ΰֲ ?πַ ?ο signifies perfect freedom from care.” Del.]—They hear not the taskmaster’s voice, i.e., the voice of the overseer, or slave-driver, issuing his orders, urging to work, and threatening with blows. Comp. Genesis 3:7; Genesis 5:6; Genesis 5:10; Zechariah 9:8. Job 3:19. Small and great are there the same.—δεּ ?ΰωָׁ ?ν; not “are there, are found there” (LXX., Vulg., Hirz., Hahn, Schl. [Hengstenb.; Ren., Good, Lee, Con., Dav., Rod.]), but “are there the same, equal in rank and worth.” δεּ ?ΰ here accordingly is emphatic=ὁ αὐτός, idem, as also in Isaiah 41:4; Psalms 102:28. [So Umbr., Ew., Del., Wem., Elz. The thought is substantially the same, according to either view. According to the former, δεּ ?ΰ refers with emphasis to each subject, individually, “he, each is there,” implying equality of condition; according to the latter, δεּ ?ΰ has more the quality of a predicate, expressing equality of condition. The former is preferable, as being simpler, more customary, and better suited to the double subject, “small” and “great.” Elsewhere in the sense of idem it is used of a single subject. Comp. ref. above.—E.] Furthermore, the second member: “and free (is) the servant from his master,” shows in a special manner that our verse is parallel in sense to the preceding; as there “prisoners” and “taskmasters” are contrasted, so here in the first member “small” and “great,” in the second “servant” and “master.” [Davidson, perhaps, finds too much in these words when he says (although the remark is a striking one): “It is this last that fascinates Job in the place of the dead—the slave is free from his master; and Job is the slave, and one whom he will not name is the master—Has not man a hard service on the earth, and as the days of a hireling are his days?” Job 7:1. 4. Third Long Strophe (divided into two shorter strophes of three and four verses respectively): Job asks, why must he, who is weary of life, still live? Job 3:20-26. a. Job 3:20-22. [The question in a general form.] Job 3:20. Wherefore gives He light to the wretched one?—The name of God, who is unmistakably the subject of the clause, is not expressly mentioned, from a motive of reverential awe; it is presupposed as a thing self-evident that he who gives light is God, and none other. Comp. Job 24:22. [The Eng. Ver. takes the verb impersonally: “Wherefore is light given, etc.?” And so Good, Lee, Wemyss, Ren., etc. Schlottmann and Green also prefer the impersonal construction on the ground that it is better suited to the present discourse and the state of feeling from which it proceeds, and that supplying ‘God’ as the subject “gives an uncalled-for appearance of open and conscious murmuring to these moanings of uncontrollable anguish.” It is to be observed, however, that in verse 23 the hedging of man about is directly ascribed to God; and that although God is not formally challenged by name as yet, there is through the whole discourse an audible under-tone of suppressed defiance, which seems all the time on the point of expressing itself. At the same time, one cannot but feel that this Curse is a cry of anguish rather than a cry of defiance, and that the suppression of God’s name in this connection is a most natural manifestation of Job’s feelings in their present stage of development—although, as Hirzel has shown, it is quite in our author’s manner thus to omit the name of God. See Job 8:18; Job 12:13; Job 16:7; Job 20:23; Job 22:21; Job 25:2; Job 27:22; Job 30:19. “Gives he, a distant fling at God, though a certain reverence refuses to utter His name, but He is at the base of such awful entanglement and perverse attitude of things.” (Dav.).—E.] Parallel with μְ ?ςָ ?ξֵ ?μ, “to the wretched,” stands in the second member, μְ ?ξָ ?ψֵ ?ιπֶ ?τֶ ?ωׁ, “to the troubled in soul,” those whose heart is troubled [lit. “the bitter in soul,” i.e., those whose souls have known life’s bitterness.—E.] The same expression is found in Proverbs 31:6; 1 Samuel 1:10; 1 Samuel 22:2. Job 3:21-22 contain specifications in participial form of the phrase ξָ ?ψֵ ?ιπֶ ?τֶ ?ωׁ, with finite verbs attached in the second member of each verse, a construction which elsewhere also is not unfrequently met with (see Ew. § 350, b). Job 3:21. Who wait long for death—and it comes not (lit. “and it is not,” εְ ?ΰֵ ?ιπֶ ?πּ ?εּ, comp. verse 9), and dig for it more than for [hidden] treasures.—The Imperf. consec. εַ ?ιַּ ?ηְ ?τְּ ?ψεּ is used here in the sense of the Present, as also elsewhere occasionally (see Ew. § 342. a). [The Vav. consec. would indicate that the digging for death is consequent upon waiting for it—the passive waiting and longing being succeeded by the more active digging and searching for it. A terrible picture of the progress of human misery.—E.] It is not necessary (with Hahn and Schlottmann) to translate by the subjunctive form, “who would dig” (would willingly do so). Delitzsch’s assumption, that the fut. consec. is used “because the sufferers are regarded as now at last dead,” is altogether too artificial. The discourse presents rather an ardent longing after death on the part of those who are as yet living—and this longing is described so as to harmonize with the figurative representation of a “digging after pearls or treasures.” Comp. chap, Job 28:1 sq., 9 sq. [Ewald, not inaptly: “for death, like such treasures, seems to come out of earth’s most secret womb, even as Pluto is the god of both.”] On ητּ ?ψ with accus. of the thing which is dug out, comp. Exodus 7:24 [showing the incorrectness of the assertion that in the sense of digging, the verb takes only the accusative of the cavity produced by digging, and so justifying the rendering “to dig” here.—E.] Job 3:22. Who are joyful, even to rapture—heightening the thought: usque ad exultationem, exactly as in Hosea 9:1. In like manner the following ιָ ?ωִׂ ?ιωׂ ?εּ contains a still further advance in the strength of the thought. [“The verse is a climax, (1) rejoice, (2) to exultation, (3) dance for joy.” Dav. “Who rejoice, even to exultation, And are triumphant, when they can find out the grave.”— Good.] Job 3:23-26. [The individual application of Job’s question.] Job 3:23 resumes, after the parenthesis contained in the two preceding verses, the dative construction begun in Job 3:20, and governed by the verb ιִ ?ϊֵּ ?ο of that verse. To a man whose way is hidden:viz. to me, to Job himself; comp. the following verses, in which the speaker’s own person appears as the prominent theme of discourse. [μְ ?βֶ ?αֶ ?ψ, “to a man,” a general expression as yet, although evidently the speaker is thinking of himself. The verse forms the transition from the general description of the verses preceding to the direct description of the verses following.—E.] For a similar use of the figurative expressions “covering and hedging the way” to represent the act of putting a man in a helpless, forsaken, inextricable situation; comp. Job 19:8; also Lamentations 3:5; Isaiah 40:27. [Renan translates: “To the man whose way is covered with darkness, And whom God has environed with a fatal circle.” “He means, by having his way hid, being bewildered and lost: the world and thought and providence become a labyrinth to him, out of which and in which no path can be found, his speculative and religious belief hopelessly entangled, and his heart palsied and paralyzed by its own conflicting emotions and memories, so that action and thought were impossible, a hedge being about him, his whole life and condition being contradiction and inexplication, a step or two leading to a stand-still in any direction.” Dav.] Job 3:24. For [λִּ ?ι, personal confirmation of the preceding statement] instead of my bread comes my sighing.—μִ ?τְ ?πֵ ?ι here not in the local sense, “before” [“in presence of it, and hence in effect along with it. Meaning: even at that season of enjoyment and thankfulness, when food is partaken, I have only pain and sorrow.” Con.], but as also in Job 4:19; 1 Samuel 1:16, “for, instead of” (comp. the Latin pro). [Akin to this is the definition “like,” from the idea of comparison involved in that of presence or nearness. So Schult., Dav., Ren.] Less suitable is the temporal construction: “before my food [=before I eat] sighing still comes to me.” [“My groans anticipate my food.” Wem.] (so Hahn, Hirz., Schl., etc., after the LXX., Vulgate, etc.) [The temporal sense is somewhat differently given by Green, Chrest., “before, sooner than; perpetually repeated, with greater frequency than his regular food.” The suggestion found in Rosenm., Bar., etc., that Job’s disease made his food loathsome in the act of eating gives a meaning needlessly offensive, and is not suited either to the connection or to the terms employed. The fut. ϊָּ ?αֹ ?ΰ is used in the frequentative sense.—E.] And my groans pour themselves forth like water:i.e. as incessantly as water, which flows ever onward, or is precipitated from a height. As is evident, a strong comparison, and one which would be greatly weakened by the explanation of Hirzel and others, who find in it an allusion to the water of Job’s daily drink, parallel with μην, his daily bread. For the masc., εַ ?ιִּ ?ϊְּ ?λεּ before the fem. subj. ωַׁ ?ΰֲ ?βϊַ ?ι, comp. Job 16:22; Ewald § 191 b. [Future frequentative like ϊָּ ?αֹ ?ΰ], For ωַׁ ?ΰֲ ?βָ ?δ, lit. roaring (Job 4:10) in the sense of groaning, the moaning of a sufferer. Comp. Psalms 22:2; Psalms 32:3. Job 3:25. For if I trembled before anything, it forthwith came upon me. Lit.: “For a fear have I feared, and forthwith it has overtaken me.” [“Let me but think of a terror,” τηγτΧΧ is present and concessive, ΰִ ?ν understood, suppose me to fear a fear, to conceive a terror; it is no sooner conceived than realized: and not past and positive, I feared a fear, as if Job, in the height of his felicity, had been haunted by the presentiment of coming calamity, a meaning which is opposed to the whole convictions of antiquity, and contradicted by the anguish and despair of the man under his suffering, which was to him inexplicable and unexpected. The picture refers exclusively to the present misery of the man.… It overtakes me, εַ ?ιֶּ ?ΰֶ ?ϊָ ?ιֵ ?πִ ?ι, vav consec. introduces the issue of the dread: the thing dreaded immediately comes.” Dav. So Green in Chrest.: “The meaning is not that he had apprehensions in his former prosperity, which have now been fulfilled; but all that is dreadful in his esteem has been already, or is likely soon to be (ιָ ?αֹ ?ΰ, fut.), realized in his experience. He endures all that he has ever conceived that is frightful.”] For the poetic full-sounding form ιֶ ?ΰֱ ?ϊָ ?ιֵ ?πִ ?ι, comp. chap, Job 12:6; Job 16:22; Job 30:14 (Ew. § 252, a. [Green, § 172, 3]). [Merx, transposing Job 3:23, introduces it here, as immediately following Job 3:25. His version accordingly reads as follows: For the Terror, of which I was afraid, overtook me; And that which with shuddering I looked for came to me, To the man whose path was covered; Whom Eloah hedged in round about. He thus makes the μְ before βֶ ?αֶ ?ψ a repetition of the μִ ?ι, end of Job 3:25, and not of μְ ?ςָ ?ξֵֹ ?μ, Job 3:20, according to the old position. He further would make the verse in its new position an ironical echo of Satan’s words in Job 1:10.—The conjecture is certainly highly ingenious. But there are decisive objections to the change. The first and weightiest is that the irony loses all its force, and the words themselves become all but meaningless in Job’s mouth when it is remembered that the words were first spoken by Satan in the heavenly council, where Job was not present. It is an essential part of the mystery of the drama here unfolded that Job knows nothing whatever of the transactions between God and Satan. Any conscious allusion to anything in those transactions on the part of Job would be a blunder of art of which our author is incapable; and without such conscious intent the words lose all their pertinency. Moreover, the verse in its old position, as is remarked in the notes above, furnishes the transition from the general description of Job 3:20-22 to the more personal application of Job 3:24-26.—E.] Job 3:26. I have no quiet, no repose, no rest; and still trouble comes. On the abrupt brevity of the second member, comp. above, No. 1.—ψֹ ?βֶ ?ζ, here certainly more in the sense of grief, pain, trembling, than of passionate excitement, or rage, and so with a meaning different from Job 3:17 : but always (and so in Job 3:17, as well as here) of an inward affection, not of external “distress” (Schlott.), or of a “storm” (Hahn), etc. Vaihinger’s rendering: “restless life,” is correct as to sense, but fails of doing justice to the pointed brevity of the expression. [The Vulgate reads this verse interrogatively: “Was I not in safety? had I no rest? was I not in comfort? Yet trouble came.” So also the Targ. with curious amplifications: “Did I not dissimulate when it was told me concerning the oxen and the asses? did I not sleep when it was told me concerning the fire?” etc.] AND ETHICAL1. In so far as we may be disposed to find the theme of the following discussion in the preceding chapter, it behooves us in any case to hold for certain that this theme is expressed only partially, and altogether formally, or only, so to speak, in an interrogative form. Job certainly does not come across the question in this discourse. To curse his existence, to ask again and again after the incomprehensible Wherefore of that existence—this constitutes the whole of this violent outbreak of feeling, with which Job initiates the discussion which follows. He does not give the slightest intimation in regard to the right way of solving the problem which torments him—the problem touching the enigma of his sorrowful existence; indeed he makes not the slightest attempt at such a solution. He pours forth in all its bitterness and harshness his despairing lamentation concerning the helpless misery of man, who is become the object of the divine anger. What he puts forth vividly reminds us from beginning to end of those well-known utterances of the Greek poets, which declare it best never to have been born, and next best to die as quickly as possible. Comp. Theognis: ΙΙάντωνμὲνμὴ φῦναιἐπιχθονίοισινἄριστονμηδ̓ ἐσιδεἰναὐγὰςοξέοςἠελίου·φυνταδ̓ ὅπωςὥκισταπύλαςΑΐδαοπερῆσαικαὶ κε͂ισθαιπολλὴνγῆνἐπαμησάμενον,– also the similar expressions of Bacchylides (Fragm. 3), Ζsop (Anthol. Gr. x. 123), Sophocles (Oed. Col. 1225: μὴ φῦναιτὸνἄπαντανικᾷ λόγοντὸ δ̓ ἐπῇνφανῆ, βῆναικεῖθεν, ὄθενπερἤκει, πολὺ δεύτερον, ῶςτάχιστα: not to have been born surpasses everything which can be said: or if one has come to the light, to descend there whence he came as quickly as possible is by far the second best thing), of Alexis (in Athenζus, Deipnos. iii. 124, 6), of Pliny (Hist. Nat. vii. 1), etc. Especially current in heathen literature, although indeed often enough hinted at by the singers of the Old Testament, especially in the Psalms and the Lamentations of Jeremiah, is this manifoldly uttered lament over the ruined estate, the bankruptcy of the natural man in his unredeemed condition, left to himself, delivered over without remedy to the consequences of sin—a lament which here falls on our ears, without a single ray of comfort from on high to shine on its deep gloom, without any alleviating influence whatever from the hope of a better Hereafter, of which not a trace is as yet visible here. 2. Notwithstanding all this, however, Job does not altogether fall into the tone of those heathen, of those ἐλπίδαμὴ ἔχοντεςκαὶ ἅθεοιἐντὡ κόσμῳ (Ephesians 2:12; comp. 1 Thessalonians 4:13). He does indeed ask: Why does God give light to the sorrowful, and life to the bitter in soul (Job 3:20)? He is not found now, as aforetime (Job 1:21 seq.), praising God in the midst of his sufferings; in so far as with all earnestness he curses his birth and conception, he is palpably guilty of “sinning with his lips” (Job 2:10), instead of exhibiting, as he had previously done, a childlike pious submission. But he by no means goes over to the side of Satan, that enemy of God, who is the author of his temptation. He does not go so far astray as presumptuously to “curse God to His face” (Job 1:11; Job 2:7), as Satan had purposed that he should. He curses indeed the divine act of creation which had given him being, but not the Creator himself; the curse which he pronounces on his day does not put forth that wicked blasphemous sentiment which H. Heine expresses in one of his last poems: “ ’Tis well to die; but better still It were had mother never borne us.” His words are words of lamentation and despondency, of doubt and questioning, but not words of blasphemy, nor even of atheistic doubt, renouncing all faith in a living, good and just God. They show, indeed, that the trust which he had hitherto exercised in God had been violently shaken, that there was a wavering and faltering in the child-like obedience which, with touching loyalty, he had hitherto constantly yielded to God. But they are nevertheless only preparatory to the later, and far more passionate outbreaks of discontent with God’s dealings to which he gives way. Even when he mentions here a man whose way God has “hidden and hedged about” (Job 3:23), he is still far from indulging in any accusation of God as a cruel and unjust persecutor; it is as yet a comparatively harmless complaint, in the utterance of which the bitter accusation of his later discourses is only remotely anticipated. It is a fact, however, that he who has hitherto lived blamelessly in his fidelity to God does, in the complaints which in this discourse gush forth from his heart, enter on that downward path which, in proportion as his friends prove themselves to be unskilful comforters, and as physicians accomplished only in torturing, not in healing, leads him ever further from God and ever deeper into the abyss of joyless despair. Comp. Delitzsch (1:84): “Job nowhere says, that he will have nothing more to do with God; he does not renounce his former faithfulness. In the mind of the writer, however, as may be gathered from Job 2:10, this speech is to be regarded as the beginning of Job’s sinning. If a man, on account of his sufferings, wishes to die early, or not to have been born at all, he has lost his confidence that God, even in the severest suffering, designs his highest good; and this want of confidence is sin. There is, however, a great difference between a man who has in general no trust in God, and in whom suffering only makes this manifest in a terrible manner, and the man with whom trust in God is a habit of his soul, and is only momentarily repressed, and, as it were, paralyzed. Such interruption of the habitual state may result from the first pressure of unaccustomed suffering; it may then seem as though trust in God were overwhelmed, whereas it has only given way to rally itself again. It is, however, not the greatness of the affliction in itself which shakes his sincere trust in God, but a change of disposition on the part of God, which seems to be at work in the affliction. The sufferer considers himself as forgotten, forsaken and rejected of God; therefore he sinks into despair; and in this despair expression is given to the profound truth (although with regard to the individual that expression is a sinful weakness), that it is better never to have been born, or to be annihilated, than to be rejected of God (comp. Matthew 26:24, καλὸνἦναὐτῷ εἰ οὐκἐγεννήθηὁ ἄνθρωποςἐκεῖνος). In such a condition of spiritual, and, as we know from the prologue, of Satanic temptation (Luke 22:31; Ephesians 6:16), is Job. He does not despair when he contemplates his affliction, but when he looks at God through it, who, as though He were become his enemy, has surrounded him with his affliction as with a rampart. … It is indeed inconceivable that a New Testament believer, even under the strongest temptation, should utter such imprecations, or especially such a question of doubt as in Job 3:20 : Wherefore is light given to the miserable? But that an Old Testament believer might very easily become involved in such conflicts of belief may be accounted for by the absence of any express divine revelation to carry his mind beyond the bounds of the present.” AND The above chapter presents as a whole but little material for homiletic use. The description of human misery, as here elaborated by Job, before the coming of the Redeemer, is too much pervaded by a passionate one-sidedness, to be susceptible of practical application in the way of exhortation or encouragement. Unless, as with many of the ancient and most of the Romish commentators, the discourse of Job be idealized, and that which is objectionable in it be set aside, after the fashion of an artificial, moralistic and allegoristic exegesis, it presents more which from the Christian point of view is to be censured than to be accepted as sound and authoritative teaching. It behooves us at all events to treat it critically, and from the stand-point of a higher and maturer evangelical perception of the truth to discriminate in Job’s complaints and doubtful questionings that which belongs wholly to the Old Testament era, before Christ, and to an imperfectly regenerated humanity, and which is incompatible with the spirit and belief of a suffering saint under the New Dispensation. It behooves us, in a word, to set beside each other the impatient sufferer, Job, with the most patient of all sufferers, Christ. It behooves us to show the contrast between him, who, oppressed by the weight of his sufferings, cursed the day of his birth, and Him, who, when confronted by a yet more bitter and terrible cup of suffering, prayed: “O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me: nevertheless not as I will, but as Thou wilt!” It must be noted that Job, in cursing his existence, and thereby (at least indirectly) calling in question God’s goodness and justice, departs from the stand-point of the pious sufferers of the Old Testament, and seemingly betakes himself to that of the heathen in their disconsolate and hopeless estate (comp. Doctrinal Remarks, No. 1), whereas the strongest utterance of lamentation and anguish which Christ puts forth is that exclamation from the Psalms: “My God, my God, why hast Thou forsaken me?” Let this question of the Crucified One accordingly be taken, and put alongside of the two questions of Job beginning with the interrogative “why” (Job 3:11 seq. and Job 3:20 seq.), and this comparison be formulated thus: The “Why” of the suffering Job, and that of Christ; or: Job and Christ, the sorely tried sufferers, and the different questions addressed by them to God. Comp. Brentius in his introductory Meditation on the Chap.: Christ exclaims that He is forsaken, because the Lord appears solely in the character of Judge, inflicting sentence of death, thus hiding in the meanwhile His paternal στοργὴ. This the Scriptures call sometimes forsaking, sometimes being asleep. There is the same judicial character in the treatment of Job. For during his first trials (chap. 1–2) he feels the Lord to be as yet his Father, and His hand to be supporting him; and so he stands without difficulty, being founded on a firm rock. But now, the Father being hidden from him, a horrible sentence of death is set before him. No longer therefore do you hear thanksgivings from him, but blasphemies and curses, so that you may say, that the Lord alone is good and true, but that every man, however just and pious, is a liar. Particular Passages. Job 3:3-10 : Osiander: If a man’s heart be not ruled and curbed by the grace of the Holy Spirit, it fumes and rages under the cross, instead of bearing it patiently.—Wohlfarth: This saying (“Cursed be the day wherein I was born,” etc.) is rightly imputed to the tried sufferer as a great sin by the Holy Scripture, and by himself, because the day of our birth comes to us from God, the best Father, and makes us witnesses of so many instances of His grace.… Job’s case may warn you against incurring such guilt, as to murmur against your Lord, and teach you, so far from cursing the day of your birth, much rather to thank God for it, Psalms 134:14 sq. Job 3:11-19. Brentius: The godly and the ungodly alike declare that death is the last limit of earthly affairs, that it is a quiet deliverance from life’s ills. But the one class declare this in unbelief, the other in faith. For the godly man … wishes to depart and to be with Christ, seeing that he has no other release from the sinfulness of the flesh than death, which nevertheless is not his death, but his redemption. But the ungodly, feeling in himself the heavy scourgings of Divine judgment, desires death as rest and deliverance from these scourgings. It is unbelief, however, that produces this wish, which longs after death, not because of the sinfulness of the flesh, but on account of the scourgings.—v. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/lange/ FIRST SERIES OF IN ITS Job 4-14I. Eliphaz and Job: Chap. 4–7A.—The Accusation of Eliphaz: Man must not speak against God like JobJob 4-51. Introductory reproof of Job on account of his unmanly complaint, by which he could only incur God’s wrath: Job 4:2-111         Then Eliphaz the Temanite answered and said: 2    If we assay to commune with thee, wilt thou be grieved? but who can withhold himself from speaking? 3    Behold, thou hast instructed many, and thou hast strengthened the weak hands. 4    Thy words have upholden him that was falling, and thou hast strengthened the feeble knees. 5    But now it is come upon thee, and thou faintest; it toucheth thee, and thou art troubled. 6    Is not this thy fear, thy confidence, thy hope, and the uprightness of thy ways? 7         Remember, I pray thee, who ever perished, being innocent? or where were the righteous cut off? 8    Even as I have seen, they that plough iniquity, and sow wickedness, reap the same. 9     By the blast of God they perish, and by the breath of His nostrils are they consumed. 10    The roaring of the lion, and the voice of the fierce lion, and the teeth of the young lions are broken. 11    The old lion perisheth for lack of prey, and the stout lion’s whelps are scattered abroad. 2. An account of a heavenly revelation, which declared to him the wrongfulness and foolishness of weak sinful man’s raving against God: Job 4:12 to Job 5:712         Now a thing was secretly brought to me, and mine ear received a little thereof, 13    in thoughts from the visions of the night, when deep sleep falleth on men— 14    fear came upon me, and trembling, which made all my bones to shake. 15    Then a spirit passed before my face; the hair of my flesh stood up! 16    It stood, but I could not discern the form thereof: an image was before mine eyes; there was silence, and I heard a voice, saying, 17    “Shall mortal man be more just than God? shall a man be more pure than his Maker? 18    Behold, He put no trust in His servants; and His angels He charged with folly: 19    how much less in them that dwell in houses of clay, whose foundation is in the dust, which are crushed before the moth? 20    They are destroyed from morning to evening; they perish forever without any regarding it. 21    Doth not their excellency which is in them go away? they die, even without wisdom.” Job 5:1         Call now, if there be any that will answer thee; and to which of the saints will thou turn? 2    For wrath killeth the foolish man, and envy slayeth the silly one. 3    I have seen the foolish taking root; but suddenly I cursed his habitation. 4    His children are far from safety, and they are crushed in the gate, neither is there any to deliver them: 5    whose harvest the hungry eateth up, and taketh it even out of the thorns, and the robber swalloweth up their substance. 6    Although affliction cometh not forth of the dust, neither doth trouble spring out of the ground; 7    yet man is born unto trouble, as the sparks fly upward. 3. Admonition to repentance, as the only means by which Job can recover God’s favor and his former happy estate: Job 5:8-278    I would seek unto God, and unto God would I commit my cause; 9    which doeth great things and unsearchable, marvellous things without number; 10    who giveth rain upon the earth, and sendeth waters upon the fields;— 11    to set up on high those that be low, that those which mourn may be exalted to safety. 12    He disappointeth the devices of the crafty, so that their hands cannot perform their enterprise. 13    He taketh the wise in their own craftiness, and the counsel of the froward is carried headlong. 14    They meet with darkness in the day-time, and grope in the noonday as in the night. 15    But He saveth the poor from the sword, from their mouth, and from the hand of the mighty. 16    So the poor hath hope, and iniquity stoppeth her mouth. 17    Behold, happy is the man whom God correcteth; therefore despise not thou the chastening of the Almighty. 18    For He maketh sore, and bindeth up; He woundeth, and His hands make whole. 19    He shall deliver thee in six troubles; yea, in seven there shall no evil touch thee. 20    In famine He shall redeem thee from death, and in war from the power of the sword. 21    Thou shalt be hid from the scourge of the tongue, neither shalt thou be afraid of destruction when it cometh. 22    At destruction and famine thou shalt laugh; neither shalt thou be afraid of the beasts of the earth. 23    For thou shalt be in league with the stones of the field, and the beasts of the field shall be at peace with thee. 24    And thou shalt know that thy tabernacle shall be in peace; and thou shalt visit thy habitation, and shalt not sin. 25    Thou shalt know also that thy seed shall be great, and thine offspring as the grass of the earth. 26    Thou shalt come to thy grave in a full age, like as a shock of corn cometh in his season. 27    Lo this, we have searched it, so it is: hear it, and know thou it for thy good. AND 1. Job 4:1. Then answered Eliphaz,… and said.—It is beyond question the poet’s aim in this first discourse of Eliphaz to put forward as the first arraigner of Job a man venerable through age and experience, calm and dispassionate, godly after his manner, but at the same time entangled in a one-sided eudemonism and theory of work-righteousness. It is a genuine sage who discourses here: not indeed another Job, but still a character of marked superiority over his two associates, Bildad and Zophar, in experimental insight and sterling personal worth, who here “with the self-confident pathos of age and the mien of a prophet” communicates his experiences, annexing thereto warnings, exhortations and admonitions. [“He, the oldest and most illustrious, the leader and spokesman, appears here at once in his greatest brilliancy. What a fullness in the argument, which at first sight seems unanswerable! How well he knows how to produce illustrations and proofs from revelation and from experience, from among the inhabitants of heaven and of earth! And what poetic beauty irradiates it all! How he strikes with equal skill each various chord of mild reproach, of self-assured conviction, of the awful, of the elevated, of calm instruction, of friendly appeal! How clearly and sharply marked are its divisions, alike as to thought and poetic form! Every strophe is a rounded completed whole in itself: and with what freedom, and, at the same time, with what internal necessity does one strophe link itself to another! One might say that as an artistic discourse this part is the completest in the whole book of Job, that it seems as though the poet wished to show at the very beginning the perfection of his art.” Schlottmann. “The speech is wonderfully artistic and exhaustive, unmistakably manifesting the speaker’s high standing and self-conscious superiority, and his conviction of Job’s guilt, yet showing a desire to spare him, even while being faithful with him, and to lead him back to rectitude and humility rather by an exhibition of the goodness of God than of his own sin. The speech is exquisitely climactic, rising, as Ewald says, from the faint whisper and tune of the summer wind to the loud and irresistible thunder of the wintry storm.” Dav.] The discourse opens with a sharp attack on Job’s comfortless and hopeless lamentation, as something which was adapted to bring down on him God’s wrath, which, as experience shows, is visited on every ungodly man (Job 4:2-11). He strengthens this admonition by describing a heavenly vision which had appeared to him during the night, and which had spoken to him, teaching him how foolish and how wrong it is for man to rebel against God (Job 4:12 to Job 5:7). The close of his discourse consists of a kindly admonition to Job to return accordingly to God in a spirit of prayer and penitent humility, in which case God would certainly deliver him out of his misery, and exalt him out of his present low estate (Job 5:8-27). The first and shortest of these three divisions forms at the same time the first of the five double strophes, into which the entire discourse falls. The two following divisions are subdivided each into two double strophes of almost equal length, as follows: Div. Job 2 : a. Job 4:12-21; b. Job 5:1-7.—Div. Job 3 : a. Job 5:8-16; b. Job 5:17-27. 2. First Division and Double Strophe: Introductory reproof of Job’s faint-hearted lamentation, whereby he could only call down on himself God’s anger: Job 4:2-11. First Strophe: Job 4:2-6. Retrospective reference to Job’s former godly and righteous life. Job 4:2. Should one venture a word to thee, wilt thou be grieved?—[The friendly courtesy of these opening words of Eliphaz is worthy of note. They are at once dignified, sympathetic and considerate. At the same time, as Dillmann observes, there is a certain “coldness and measured deliberation” about them, which not improbably grated somewhat on Job’s sensibilities, yearning, as his heart now did, for more tangible and soulfull sympathy. Eliphaz speaks less as a sympathizing friend, than as a fatherly adviser, and a benevolent but critical sage.—E.] The interrogative particle δֲ, referring to the principal verb ϊִּ ?μְ ?ΰֶ ?δ, is prefixed to the first word of the sentence. [See Green, Gr. § 283, a.] It is immediately followed by an elliptical conditional clause, πִ ?ρָּ ?δγָ ?αָ ?ψΰֵ ?μֶ ?ικָ (comp. the same construction in Job 4:21; also in Numbers 16:22; Jeremiah 8:4), forming an antecedent clause to the principal verb. To be rendered accordingly: “Wilt thou find it irksome, take it hard, will it offend thee, if one attempts a word to thee?” πִ ?ρָּ ?δ is most simply regarded as third pers. sing. Piel of πρδ, tentare, after Ecclesiastes 7:23. It is less natural, with Umbreit, etc., to take it as Pret. Niph. in the same sense, or following the old versions, to see in it a variant form of πִ ?ωָּׂ ?ΰ (comp. Psalms 4:7), as though it were πωΰγαψ, “to speak a word:” Job 27:1; Psalms 15:3; Psalms 81:3. In the latter case the word must be taken either as 3d sing. Niph. in the passive sense (“should a word be spoken”) or, more probably, as 1st plur. Imperf. Kal (“should we speak”), in which latter case again two interpretations are possible, namely either: “wilt thou, should we speak a word against thee, take offence” (Rosenm., etc., comp. the Ancient Versions)? or: “shall we speak a word against thee, with which thou wilt be offended” (Ewald, Bib. Jahrb. ix. 37; Bφttcher)? Against the first rendering may be urged the unusual construction of an Imperf. in an elliptical conditional sentence; against the latter the unheard of transitive rendering which it assumes for μΰδ. [In favor of taking πρδ here in the sense of: “to attempt, to venture,” it may be said: (1) This meaning is entirely legitimate. (2) It is more expressive. (3) It is more in harmony with the courtesy which marks these opening words of Eliphaz. Hengstenberg’s rendering is somewhat different from any of those given above: “Shall one venture a word to thee, who art wearied?” But the elliptical construction thus assumed seems less simple and natural than the one adopted above.—E.] And yet to hold back from words [or speaking] who is able? For the use of ςφψ with αְּ, “to hold back from [or, in respect to] anything,” comp. Job 12:15; Job 29:9. For the sharpened form εַ ?ςְ ?φֹ ?ψ instead of εַ ?ςֲ ?φֹ ?ψ, see Ew. § 245, b.—ξִ ?μִּ ?ιο, Aram. plur. ending (comp. Job 12:11; Job 15:13) of ξִ ?μָּ ?δ, which occurs in our book thirty times, whereas ξִ ?μִּ ?ιν occurs but ten times in all. Job 4:3. Behold, thou hast admonished many.—ιִ ?ρַּ ?ψְ ?ϊָּ, lit. thou hast chastised, disciplined, namely, with words of reproof and loving admonition. The Perf. here points back to Job’s normal conduct in former days when revered by all, and thus furnishes the standard by which the time of the following Imperf. verb is to be determined. The general sense of Job 4:3-4 is: “Thou wast wont formerly to conduct thyself in regard to the sufferings of others so correctly and blamelessly, to show such a proper understanding of the cause and aim of heavy judgments inflicted by God, to deal with sufferings in a way so wise and godlike! But now when suffering has overtaken thyself, etc. … And slack hands hast thou strengthened.—“Slack hands:” a sensuous figure representing faint-heartedness and despondency, as also in 2 Samuel 4:1; Isaiah 35:3. In the last member of Job 4:4 the expression “stumbling [lit. bowing, i.e. sinking] knees” is used in essentially the same sense (and so in Hebrews 12:12). Job 4:5. Because it is now come to thee, to wit, suffering, misfortune. This construction of the impersonal or neutral ϊָּ ?αεֹ ?ΰ is suggested by the context, [and this indefinite statement of the subject is at once more considerate and impressive than if it had been expressed.—E.] λּ ?ι is construed by Hirzel, Hahn, Schlottmann, Delitzsch, etc., as a particle of time: “Now when it is come to thee.” But the position, λִּ ?ιςַ ?ϊָּ ?δ favors rather the causal rendering of the first particle, “because now,” etc. Comp. Dillmann. [Others explain by supplying an omitted clause: e.g. “I say these things because,” etc. Ewald: “How strange that thou now faintest.” The adversative use of λִּ ?ι, (“but now”), except after a negative clause, is too doubtful to be relied on here.—E.] It toucheth thee (ϊִּ ?βַּ ?ςςָ ?γֶ ?ικָ, comp. Isaiah 16:8; Jeremiah 4:10; Micah 1:9), and thou art confounded. εַ ?ϊִּ ?αָּ ?δֵ ?μ, lit. “art seized with terror, and thereby put out of countenance;” comp. Job 21:6; Job 23:15. [“It is unfair to Eliphaz to suppose that he utters his wonder with any sinister tone—as if he would hint that Job found it somewhat easier to counsel others than console himself; his astonishment is honest and honestly expressed that a man who could say such deep things on affliction, and things that reached so far into the heart of the afflicted, that could lay bare such views of providence and the uses of adversity, and thus invigorate the weak, should himself be so feeble and desponding when suffering came to his own door.” Dav. Doubtless the words express surprise on the part of Eliphaz, and were spoken with a kind intent; but also with a certain severity, a purpose to probe Job’s conscience, to lead him to self-examination, and to the discovery of the hidden evil within, of the existence of which Eliphaz, with his theodicy, could have no doubt.—E.] Job 4:6. Is not thy godly fear thy confidence? thy hope—the uprightness of thy ways? The order of the words is chiastic [decussated, inverted]: in the first member the subject, ιִ ?ψְ ?ΰָֽ ?ϊְ ?κָ, stands at the beginning; in the second member it is found at the end, ϊֹּ ?νγְּ ?ψָ ?λֶ ?ικָ, evidently synonymous with ιִ ?ψְ ?ΰָ ?δ. A similar case is found in Job 36:26. Altogether too artificial and forced, and too much at variance with the principles which govern the structure of Hebrew verse, is the explanation attempted by Delitzsch: “Is not thy piety thy confidence, thy hope? And the uprightness of thy ways?” (viz. and is not the uprightness of thy ways thy confidence and thy hope?) Eliphaz twice again makes use of the ellipsis ιִ ?ψְ ?ΰָ ?δ for ιִ ?ψְ ?ΰַ ?ϊΰֱ ?μֹ ?διν in his discourses (Job 15:4; Job 22:4 : and comp. δַ ?γַּ ?ςַ ?ϊ, Hosea 4:6 for γςϊΰμδν). [“The word fear is the most comprehensive term for that mixed feeling called piety, the contradictory reverence and confidence, awe and familiarity, which, like the centripetal and centrifugal forces, keep man in his orbit around God.” Dav.] λִּ ?ρְ ?μָ ?δ, confidence, assurance (the same which elsewhere=λֶ ?ρֶ ?μ, Job 8:14; Job 31:24), not “folly” (LXX.). [The Vav in the second member is the Vav of the apodosis, or of relation. See Green, Gr. § 287, 3.—The rendering of E. V.: “Is not this thy fear, thy confidence, thy hope, and the uprightness of thy ways?” overlooks the parallelism, and is unintelligible. Some (Hupfeld, Merx) cut the knot by transposing δִּ ?χְ ?εָ ?ϊְֽ ?κָ to the end of the verse. The construction as it stands is certainly peculiar, yet not enough so to justify any change. Moreover it seems to have escaped all the commentators that the very harshness and singularity of the construction is intentional, having for its object to arrest more forcibly the attention of Job, to stir up his consciousness on the subject of his piety and rectitude, and thus to further the process of probing his soul on which Eliphaz is in this part of his discourse engaged.—E.] Job 4:7-11 Second Strophe: More explicit expansion of Job 4:6, wherein it is shown as the conclusion of experience that the pious never fall into dire affliction, whereas on the contrary the ungodly and the wicked do so often and inevitably. Job 4:7. Remember now! who that was innocent has perished? [“It would be unfair to Eliphaz (as well as quite beside his argument, the purpose of which is to reprove Job’s impatience, and lead him back by repentance to God), to suppose that he argued in this way: Who ever perished being innocent? Thou hast perished; therefore thy piety and the integrity of thy ways have been a delusion. On the contrary his argument is: Where were the pious ever cut off? Thou art pious: why is not thy piety thy hope? Why fall, being a pious man, and as such of necessity to be finally prospered by God, into such irreligious and wild despair? Eliphaz acknowledges Job’s piety, and makes it the very basis of his exhortation; of course, though pious, he had been guilty (as David was) of particular heinous sins, which explained and caused his calamities. The fundamental axiom of the friends produced here both positively and negatively as was meet for the first announcement of it by Eliphaz is, that whatever appearance to the contrary and for a time, yet ultimately and always the pious were saved and the wicked destroyed.” Dav.] The δεּ ?ΰ annexed to the ξִ ?ι gives greater vivacity to the question; comp. Job 13:19; Job 17:3; also the similar phrase ξִ ?ιζֶ ?δ (Gesen. § 122, 2). Job 4:8. So far as I have seen, they who plough mischief and sow ruin reap the same.—λַּ ?ΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψψָ ?ΰִ ?ιϊִ ?ι, not “when (or if) I saw” (Vaih., Del.), for this construction of λΰωψ does not allow the omission of the Vav Consec. before the apodosis. But either the whole sentence is to be taken as a statement of the comparison with that which precedes, to which it is annexed, thus: “As I have seen: they who plough … reap the same” (Hirz., Schlott. [Con.]). Or we are to explain with most of the later commentators;” “So far as I have seen,” i.e. so far as my experience goes (Rosenm., Arnh., Stick., Welte, Heiligst., Ew., Dillm. [Dav., Merx], etc.). ΰָ ?εֶ ?ο, lit. “nothingness,” then “sin, wickedness, mischief.”—ςָ ?ξָ ?μ as in Job 3:10. The agricultural figure of sowing (or ploughing) and reaping, emphatically representing the organically necessary connection of cause and effect in the domain of the moral life; to be found also in Hosea 8:7; Hosea 10:13; Proverbs 22:8; Galatians 6:7 seq.; 2 Corinthians 9:6, and often. Job 4:9. By the breath of Eloah they perish: like plants, which a burning hot wind scorches (Genesis 41:6). The discourse thus carries forward the preceding figure. On the use of the divine name ΰֱ ?μεֹ ?δַּ in our poem, see Introd. § 5. The πִ ?ωְׁ ?ξַ ?ϊΰֱ ?μεֹ ?δַּ is in b. still more specifically defined as ψεּ ?ηַ ΰַ ?τε, lit. “breath of his nostril,” i.e. blast of his anger. Both synonyms are still more closely bound together in Psalms 18:16. [“As the previous verse describes retribution as a natural necessity founded in the order of the world, so does this verse trace back this game order of the world to the divine causality.” Schlott. Lee, criticising the A. V.’s rendering of πְ ?ωָׁ ?ξָ ?δ in the first member by “blast,” says: “I know of no instance in which the word will bear this sense. It rather means a slight or gentle breathing.… The sentiment seems to be: they perish from the gentlest breathing of the Almighty .. It is added: and from the blast of his nostril, or wrath, they come to an end. From the construction here, blast or storm is probably meant. See Psalms 11:6; Hosea 13:15, etc., and if so, we shall have a sort of climax here.”] Job 4:10-11. From the vegetable kingdom the figurative representation of the discourse passes over to that of animal life, in order to show, by the destruction of a family of lions, how the insolent pride of the wicked is crushed by the judgment of God.—The cry of the lion, and the voice of the roaring lion, and the teeth of the young lions are broken; the strong [lion] perishes for lack of prey, and the whelps of the lioness are scattered.—[Merx rejects these two verses as spurious; but their appropriateness in the connection will appear from what is said below.—E.] Not less than five different names of the lion are used in this description, showing the extent to which the lion abounded in the lands of the Bible, and especially in the Syro-Arabian country, which was the scene of our poem. The usual name ΰַ ?ψְ ?ιֵ ?δ stands first; next follows the purely poetic designation, ωַׁ ?ηַ ?μ, “the roarer” (Vaih.), comp. Job 10:16; Job 28:8; Psalms 91:13; Proverbs 26:13; Hosea 5:14; Hosea 13:7; then in Job 4:10 b comes the standard expression for young lions, λְּ ?τִ ?ιψִ ?ιν, comp. Judges 14:5; Psalms 17:12; Psalms 104:21; then follows in Job 4:11 aμַ ?ιִ ?ωׁ, “the strong one,” from μִ ?ιωׁ, “to be strong,” found again in Proverbs 30:30, and being thus limited to the diction of poetry, and finally in Job 4:11 b the no less poetic μָ ?αִ ?ιΰ, which here, as well as in Job 38:29; Genesis 49:9; Numbers 24:9, denotes the lioness, for which, however, we have also the distinctive feminine form μְ ?αִ ?ιָ ?ΰ in Ezekiel 19:2. [“The young lions are mentioned along with the old in order to exemplify the destruction of the haughty sinner with all his household.” Schlott.] πִ ?ϊָּ ?ςεּ (from πϊς, frangere, conterere, an Aramaizing alternate form of πϊφ, comp. Psalms 58:7) signifies: “are shattered, are dashed out;’ an expression which, strictly taken, suits only the last subject ωִׁ ?πֵּ ?ιλּ, but may by zeugma be referred to both the preceding subjects, to which such a verb as “are silenced” would properly correspond. Observe the use of the perf. πִ ?ϊָּ ?ςεּ in making vividly present the sudden destruction of the rapacious lions, which is then followed in Job 4:11, first by a present partic. (ΰֹ ?αֵ ?ψ), then by a present Imperf. (ιִ ?ϊְ ?τָ ?ψָ ?γεּ), describing them in their present condition, shattered, broken in strength, and restrained in their rage. [Delitzsch remarks that “the partic. ΰֹ ?αֵ ?γ is a stereotype expression for wandering about prospectless and helpless,” a definition which here, as well as in the passages to which he refers, would considerably weaken the sense. See Hengsten. in loco.—E.] ξִ ?αְּ ?μִ ?ι, “for the lack of;” the same as “without;” comp. Job 4:20; Job 6:6; Job 24:7-8; Job 31:19. [“From wicked man his imagination suddenly shifts to his analogue among beasts, the lion, and there appears before him one old and helpless, his teeth dashed out, his roar silenced, dying for lack of prey, and being abandoned by all his kind; a marvellous picture of a sinner once powerful and bloody, but now destitute of power, and with only his bloody instincts remaining to torture and mock his impotency.” Dav.] 3. Second Division: describing a heavenly revelation which declared to him the wrongfulness and the folly of frail, sinful man’s anger against God.—a. Second Double Strophe: the heavenly revelation itself, introduced by a description of the awful nocturnal vision through which it was communicated: Job 4:12-21. First Strophe: Job 4:12-16. The night-vision. Job 4:12. And to me there stole a word.—Lit. “and to me there was stolen, there was brought in a stealthy, mysterious manner.” The imperf. ιְ ?βֻ ?πָּ ?α is ruled by the following imperf. consec. [“The speaker is thrown back again by the imagination into the imposing circumstances of the eventful night.… The Pual implies that the oracle was sent.” Dav.] The separation of the ε which properly belongs to the verb ιְ ?βֻ ?πָּ ?α, but which is placed here, at the beginning of the verse, before ΰֵ ?μַ ?ι [“because he desires, with pathos, to put himself prominent,” Del.] rests on the fact that that which is now about to be related, and especially the γָּ ?αָ ?ψ which came to Eliphaz, is hereby designated as something new, as something additional to that which has already been observed. [This separation is quite often met with in poetry. Comp. Psalms 69:22; Psalms 78:15; Psalms 78:26; Psalms 78:29, etc. See Ew. Gr. § 346 b.] And mine ear caught a whisper therefrom:i.e., proceeding therefrom, occasioned by that communication of a mysterious γαψ. The ξε in ξֶ ?πְ ?δεּ (poetic form, for ξִ ?ξֶּ ?πּ ?εּ, Ew. § 263 b) is therefore causative, not partitive, as Hahn and Delitzsch regard it. ωֶׁ ?ξֶ ?υ signifies here, as in Job 26:14, a faint whisper, or lisp [or murmur], ψιθυρισμός, susurrus, not “a little, a minimum,” as the Targ., Pesh., the Rabbis [and the Eng. Ver.] render it. The word is to be derived either from ωָׁ ?ξַ ?ς, thus denoting a faint, indistinct impression on the ear (Arnheim, Delitzsch), or from the primitive root, γν ,ων, to which, according to Dillmann, who produces its Ζthiopic cognate, the idea attaches of “lip-closing, dumbness, and low-speaking.” [Here the word “is designed to show the value of such a solemn communication, and to arouse curiosity.” Del. “The whole description of the way in which the communication was made indicates, perhaps, the naturalness and calmness and peace of the intercourse of man’s spirit and God’s—how there is nothing forced or strained in God’s communication to man—it droppeth as the gentle rain from heaven upon the place beneath—and at the same time man’s impaired capacity and receptiveness and dullness of spiritual hearing.” Dav. “The word was too sacred and holy to come loudly and directly to his ear.” Del. Job 4:13-16 present a more specific description of that which is stated generally in Job 4:12. Job 4:13. In the confused thoughts from visions of the night, when deep sleep falls on men.—Whether with most expositors we connect these words with the verse preceding, as a supplementary determination of the time, or as a preliminary statement of time connected with what follows (Umbreit, Dillmann, Conant, etc.), matters not as to the sense.—ωְׂ ?ςִ ?τִּ ?ιν are here, as also in Job 20:2, “thoughts proceeding like branches from the heart as their root, and intertwining themselves” (Delitzsch). [The root, according to Del. and Fόrst, is ωςσ, to bind; according to Ges., Dav., etc., it is for ρςσ, to split; hence here and Job 20:2 “fissures, divisions, divided counsels (1 Kings 18:21), thoughts running away into opposite ramifications, distracting doubts.” Dav.] The following ξִ ?ο indicates that these thoughts proceed from visions of the night, i.e., dream-visions; from which, however, it does not follow that Eliphaz intends to refer what he is about to narrate purely to the sphere of the life of dreams. For the determination of the time in our verse is altogether general, as the second member in particular shows. Hengstenberg’s position that Eliphaz includes himself among the “men” designated here as those on whom deep sleep falls, and that he accordingly represents his vision as literally a dream-vision, has no foundation in the context. (Comp. still further Passavant’s remark on Job 4:13 under the head “Homiletical and Practical”). [“There are three things contained in the genetic process or progress towards this oracle. First, visions of the night, raising deep questions of man’s relation to God, but leaving them unsolved, short flights of the spirit into superhuman realms, catching glimpses of mysteries, too short to be self-revealing—these are the visions. Second, the perturbed, perplexed, and meditative condition of the spirit following these, when it presses into the darkness of the visions for a solution, and is rocked and tossed with fear or longing—the thoughts from the visions. And third, there is the new revelation clearing away the doubts and calming the perturbation of the soul, a revelation attained either by the spirit rising convulsively out of its trouble, and piercing by a new divinely-given energy the heart of things before hidden; or by the truth being communicated to it by some Divine messenger or word.” Dav. The oracle was conveyed by a dream, “because in the patriarchal age such oracles were of most frequent occurrence, as may be seen, e.g. in the book of Genesis.” Ewald]. For ϊַּ ?ψְ ?γֵּ ?ξָ ?δ, “deep sleep,” such as is wont to be experienced about the hour of midnight, in contrast to ordinary sleep, ωֵֹׁ ?πָ ?δ, and to the light, wakeful slumber of morning, ϊְּ ?πεּ ?ξָ ?δ, comp. Genesis 2:21; Genesis 15:12; 1 Samuel 26:12; also below, Job 33:15, where Elihu has a description imitative of the passage before us. [“ϊַּ ?ψְ ?γֵּ ?ξָ ?δ is the deep sleep related to death and ecstasy, in which man sinks back from outward life into the remotest ground of his inner life.” Del. Per contra Davidson says: “ϊψγξδ is used generally of ecstatic, divinely-induced sleep, yet not exclusively (Proverbs 19:15, and verb, Jonah 1:5), and not here. The meaning is that the vision came, not at the hour when prophetic slumber is wont to fall on men (and that El. was under such), but simply at the hour when men were naturally under deep sleep. El. was thus alone with the vision, and the solitary encounter accounts for the indelible impression its words and itself left on him.”] Job 4:14. Shuddering [fear] came upon me (χְ ?ψָ ?ΰַ ?πִ ?ι, from χψδ=χψΰ, to meet, befall, come upon, comp. Genesis 42:38), and trembling, and sent a shudder through the multitude of my bones: the subject of δִ ?τְ ?ηִ ?ιγ being the “shuddering” and the “trembling,” not “the ghostlike something” (as Delitzsch says), of which Eliphaz first proceeds to speak in the following verse. [The perf. vbs. in this verse are pluperf. “A terror had fallen upon me, like a certain vague lull which precedes the storm, as if nature were uneasily listening and holding in her breath for the coming calamity.” So Davidson.—ψֹ ?α in poetry is often used for λֹּ ?μ, all. The terror striking through his bones indicates how deeply and thoroughly he was agitated. Bones, as elsewhere in similar passages, for the substratum of the bodily frame.—E.] Job 4:15. And a spirit passed before me; lit.: passes before me (ιַ ?ηֲ ?μֹ ?σ, “glides, flits”); for the description as it grows more vivid introduces in this and the following verse the imperf. in place of the introductory perf. For ψεּ ?ηַ in the sense of “a spirit,” the apparition of a spirit or an angel, comp. 1 Kings 22:21. So correctly the ancient Versions, Umbreit, Ewald, Heiligstedt, Hahn [Good, Lee, Wem., Ber., Noy., Bar., Carey], etc. On the other hand [Schult.], Rosenm., Hirzel, Bφttcher, Stickel, Delitzsch, Dillmann [Schlott., Ren., Rod,, Merx] render: “and a breath [of wind] passed over me,” a current of air, such as is wont to accompany spirit-communications from the other world (comp. Job 38:1; 1 Kings 19:11; Acts 2:2, etc.). The description in the following verse, however, does not agree with this rendering, especially the ιַ ?ςֲ ?ξֹ ?γ, which is unmistakably predicated of the ψεּ ?ηַ in the sense of “an angel, a personal spirit.” [It needs no argument to prove that the “spirit” here introduced is a good spirit, although it may be mentioned in passing that Codurcus, the Jesuit commentator, followed by some others, regards him as an evil spirit. This notion is advanced in the interest of the theory that Job’s friends are throughout to be condemned.—E.]—The hairs of my body bristled up.—ϊְּ ?ρַ ?ξֵּ ?ψ, Piel intensive, “to rise up mightily, to bristle up.” ωַׂ ?ςֲ ?ψָ ?δ, elsewhere the individual hair (capillus), here a collective word (coma, crines), of the same structure as ςֲ ?πָ ?πָ ?δ, Job 3:5. [The expression ωַׂ ?ςֲ ?ψַ ?ϊαְּ ?ωָׁ ?ψִ ?ι, lit.: “the hair of my flesh,’ shows that the terror, which in Job 4:14 thrilled through all his bones, here creeps over his whole body.—E.] Job 4:16. It stood there, I discerned not its appearance—The subj. of ιַ ?ςֲ ?ξֹ ?γ is not the “unknown something” of the preceding verse (Rosenm., etc.), but the spirit, as it is already known to be, which has hitherto flitted before Eliphaz, but which now stands still to speak (comp. 1 Samuel 3:10).—An image before mine eyes;ϊְּ ?ξεּ ?πָ ?δ, the word which in respect to spiritual phenomena is most nearly expressive of “form.” In Numbers 12:8; Psalms 17:15 it is used of the μορφή or δόξα of God. Here it is very suitably used to describe the spiritual or angelic apparition, fading into indefiniteness; for it refers back to ψεּ ?ηַ, the true subject of ιַ ?ςֲ ?ξֹ ?γ, being placed after it in apposition to it.—A murmur and a voice I heard.—γְּ ?ξָ ?ξָ ?δεָ ?χֹ ?μ, a “lisping murmur and a voice,” a hendiadys, signifying a murmur uttering itself in articulate tones, a “murmuring or whispering voice” (Hahn). [So Ges., Fόrst, Words., Dillm., Del., Dav.]. Umbreit (1st Ed.), Schlottmann [Eng. Ver., Good, Lee, Con., Carey, Ren.] take γְּ ?ξָ ?ξָ ?δ, but unsuitably, in the sense of “silence.” For the true sense comp. 1 Kings 19:12. [Of those who take γξξδ in the sense of silence there are two classes, the one, represented by the English Version and commentators, separates between the “silence” and the “voice:” first the silence, then the voice, as Renan: “in the midst of the silence I heard a voice;” the other, represented by Schlottmann and Hengstenberg, combine the two terms as a hendiadys, “a commingling of both, a faint, muffled voice” (Hengst.) Schlottmann quotes from Gersonides as follows: “And I heard his wonderful words as though they were compounded of the voice and of silence.” Burke in his Treatise on the Sublime and Beautiful has the following remarks on this vision: “There is a passage in the book of Job amazingly sublime, and this sublimity is principally due to the terrible uncertainty of the thing described.… We are first prepared with the utmost solemnity for the vision; we are first terrified before we are let even into the obscure cause of our emotion; but when this grand cause of terror makes its appearance, what is it? is it not wrapt up in the shades of its own incomprehensible darkness, more awful, more striking, more terrible than the liveliest description, than the clearest painting, could possibly represent it?”—E.] Second strophe, Job 4:17-21. The contents of the revelation communicated through the vision. Job 4:17. Is a mortal just before Eloah, or before his Maker is a man pure?—Already in this question is contained the substance of the revelation; Job 4:18-21 only furnish the proof of this proposition” from the universal sinfulness of men. ξִ ?ο here is not comparative, “more just than” (Vulg., Luth. [E. V.], etc.), but “from the side of any one” [Gesenius: “marking the author of a judgment or estimate: here in the judgment or sight of God.”] Hence “is a man just from the side of God?” i.e., from God’s stand-point; or, more briefly: “before God” (LXX.: ἐναντίοντοῦ θεοῦ). In the same sense with this ξִ ?ο = coram (for which comp. Numbers 16:9; Numbers 32:22), we find ςִ ?ν in Job 9:2; Job 25:4; and αְּ ?ςֵ ?ιπֵ ?ι in Job 15:15; Job 25:5. [According to the other (the comparative) rendering, the sentiment is: “Whoever censures the course of Providence, by complaining of his own lot (as Job had done), claims to be more just than God, the equity of whose government he thus arraigns.” See Conant, Davidson, etc.] Job 4:18. Lo, in His servants He trusteth not; and to His angels He imputes error.—“Servants” (ςαγιν) and “angels” (ξμΰλιν) are only different designations of the same superhuman beings, who in Job 1:6 are called “sons of God.” Eliphaz refers to them here in order to introduce a conclusion a majori ad minus. ωִׂ ?ιναְּ, lit.: “to place anything in one,” i.e., to ascribe anything to one, imputare. Comp. 1 Samuel 22:15.—ϊָּ ?δֳ ?μָ ?δ is most correctly explained by Dillmann, after the Ethiopic, as signifying “error, imperfection” (so also Ewald [Fόrst, Delitzsch], and still earlier Schnurrer, after the Arabic). The derivation from δμμ, according to which it would mean “folly, presumption” (Kimchi, Gesenius [Schlottmann, Renan], etc.), is etymologically scarcely to be admitted [on account of the half vowel, and still more the absence of the Daghesh. Del.] The ancient versions seem only to have guessed at the sense (Vulg., pravum quid; LXX., σκολιόντι; Chald., iniquitas; Pesch, stupor). Hupfeld needlessly attempts to amend after Job 24:12, where the parallel word ϊִּ ?τְ ?μָ ?δ is given as the object of ωִׂ ?ιναְּ. [“It is not meant that the good spirits positively sin, as if sin were a natural necesary consequence of their creature-ship and finite existence, but that even the holiness of the good spirits is never equal to the absolute holiness of God, and that this deficiency is still greater in man, who is both spiritual and corporeal, who has earthiness as the basis of his original nature.” Del.] Job 4:18. How much more they who dwell in houses of clay.—ΰַ ?σ here introducing the conclusion of the syllogism a majori ad minus, begun in Job 4:18, and so = ΰַ ?σλִּ ?ι (Job 9:14; Job 15:16; Job 25:6); here, as in 2 Samuel 16:11, to be translated by quanto magis, because a positive premise (Job 4:18 b.) precedes; comp. Ewald, § 354, c. Those “who dwell in houses of clay” are men generally. There is no particular reference to those who are poor and miserable. For the expression αָּ ?ϊֵּ ?ιΞηֹ ?ξֶ ?ψ does not point to men’s habitations, but to the material, earthly, frail bodies with which they are clothed, their φθαρτὰ σώματα (comp. Job 33:6; Wis 9:15; 2 Corinthians 5:1, as well as the Mosaic account of creation which lies at the foundation of all these representations; see Genesis 2:7; Genesis 3:19). It may be said further that the figurative and indefinite character of the language here justifies no particular deductions either in respect to the nature and constitution of angels (to wit, whether in Eliphaz’s conception they are altogether incorporeal, or whether they are endowed with supra-terrestrial corporeality), nor in respect to the doctrine which he may have entertained concerning the causal nexus between man’s sensuous nature (corporeity) and sin.—The foundation of which is in the dust;viz.: of the houses of clay, for it is to these that the suffix points in ΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψιְ ?ρεֹ ?γָ ?ν; comp. Genesis 3:19.—Which are crushed as though they were moths.—The suffix in ιְ ?γַ ?λְּ ?ΰεּ ?ν again refers back to the “houses of clay,” only that here those who dwell in them, men, are included with them in one notion. The subj. of ιγλΰεν is indefinite; it embraces “everything that operates destructively on the life of man.” μִ ?τְ ?πֵ ?ιΞςָ ?ωׁ, not “sooner than the moth is destroyed” (Hahn), nor: “sooner than that which is devoured by the moth” (Kamphsn.), nor: “more rapidly than a moth destroys” (Oehler, Fries), nor: “set before the moth [or ‘worm,’ after Jarchi] to be crushed” (Schlottmann), but: “like moths, as though they were moths” (LXX: σητὸςτρόπον). μִ ?τְ ?πֵ ?ι accordingly means the same here as in Job 3:24, and the tertium comparationis is the moth’s frailty and powerlessness to resist, and not its agency in slowly but surely destroying and corroding, to which allusion is made in Hosea 5:12; Isaiah 1:9; Isaiah 51:8; also below in Job 13:28 of our book. [To the latter idea the verb γִּ ?λֵּ ?ΰ used here is altogether unsuited, the meaning being to crush, not to consume in the manner of the moth.] Job 4:20. From morning to evening are they destroyed;i.e., in so short a space of time as the interval between morning and evening they can be destroyed, one can destroy them (ιֻ ?λָּֽ ?ϊּ ?εּ, potential and impersonal, like ιγλΰεν in Job 4:19). For the use of this phrase, “from morning till evening,” as equivalent to “in the shortest time,” comp. Isaiah 38:12; also our proverbial saying: “well at morning, dead at night,” as well as the name “day-fly” [comp. “day-lily,” “ephemeron.”]—Before any one marks it they perish forever.—ξִ ?αְּ ?μִ ?ιξֵ ?ωִׂ ?ιν, scil. μֵ ?α (comp. Job 1:8; Job 23:6; Job 24:12), “without there being any one who gives heed to it, who regards it,” and hence the same as “unobserved, unawares;” not “in folly,” “without understanding” (Ewald). Job 4:21. Is it not so:—if their cord in them is torn away, they die, and not in wisdom?—The construction is the same as in Job 4:2; the words πρςιϊψναν are an elliptical conditional clause, intercalated in the principal interrogative sentence. ιִ ?ϊְ ?ψָ ?ν (which Olshausen needlessly proposes to amend to ιְ ?ϊֵ ?γָ ?ν, “their tent-pin”), is neither “their residue” (Vulgate, Rabb., Luther, etc.); nor “their best, their chief excellence” (De Wette, Amheim, Schlottmann [Davidson, Barnes, Noyes, E. V.], etc.); nor their bow-string (“the string which is drawn out in them as in a bow,” and which is unloosed to make the bow useless; Umbreit); [nor “their abundance, excess, whether of wealth or tyranny,” and which passes away with them (Lee), which does not suit the universality of the description; nor “their fluttering round is over with them” (Good, Wemyss; taking δμΰ as a verb, “to pass away,” and πρς as a noun, “fluttering;” two forced interpretations)—E.]; but—the only interpretation with which the verb πִ ?ρַּ ?ς, “to be torn away,” agrees (comp. Judges 16:3; Judges 16:14; Isaiah 33:20)—“their tent-cord,” the thread of their life, here conceived as a cord stretched out and holding up the tent of the body; comp. Job 30:11; Isaiah 38:12; also Job 6:9; Job 27:8; and especially Ecclesiastes 12:6, where this inward hidden thread of life is represented as the silver cord, which holds up the lamp suspended from the tent-canvass (see comment on the passage). This, the only correct construction of the passage (according to which ξֵ ?ιϊָ ?ψ=ιֶ ?ϊֶ ?ψ, tent-cord), is adopted by J. D. Michaelis, Hirzel, Hahn, Delitzsch, Kamphsn., Dillmann [Wordsworth, Renan, Rodwell, Gesenius, Fόrst]. [“αָּ ?ν is neither superfluous nor awkward (against Olsh.), since it is intended to say that their duration of life falls in all at once like a tent when that which in them corresponds to the cord of a tent (i.e., the πֶ ?τֶ ?ωׁ) is drawn away from it.” Del.]—And not in wisdom; with, out having found true wisdom during their life, living in short-sightedness and folly to the end of their days; comp. Job 36:12; Proverbs 10:21 (Dillmann). b. Third Double Strophe. Application of the contents of the heavenly revelation to Job’s case, Job 5:1-7. First Strophe. Job 5:1-5. [The folly of murmuring against God asserted and illustrated]. Job 5:1. Call now! is there any one who will answer thee? and to whom of the holy ones wilt thou turn?—That is to say: forasmuch as, according to the interpretation of that Voice from God in the night, neither men nor angels are just and pure before God, all thy complaining against God will be of no avail to thee; not one of the heavenly servants of God in heaven, to whom thou mightest turn thyself, will regard thy cry for help, not one of them will intercede with God for thee, and spare thee the necessity of humbling thyself unconditionally and penitently beneath the chastening hand of God. [The question is somewhat ironical in its tone. If thou art disposed to challenge God’s dealings with thee, make the attempt; enter thy protest; but before whom? the angels, the holy ones of heaven? Behold they are not pure before God, and being holy, they are conscious of their inferiority; will they entertain thy appeal? Where then is thy plea to find a hearing? “Here as elsewhere in this book, call and answer seem to be law terms, the former denoting the action of the complainant, the latter that of the defendant.” Noyes; and so Umbreit.—E.] χְ ?γωִׁ ?ιν, “holy ones” [“saints,” E. V., is misleading, on account of its association with “the holy” among men], here for angels (as in Job 15:15; Psalms 89:6 (5), 8 (7); Daniel 4:14 (17); Zechariah 14:5); thus called with a purpose, because their very holiness, which causes them to subordinate themselves unconditionally to God (comp. Job 4:18), prevents them from entertaining such complaints as those of Job. “How little the Roman Catholic commentators are justified in finding in this verse a locus classicus in favor of the invocation of angels and saints under the Old Dispensation needs no proof.” Schlott.] Job 5:2. For grief slayeth a fool.—λι furnishes a reason for the negative thought contained in the preceding verse [complaints against God’s administration will meet with no favorable response from the holy ones of his court, for they are of a character to destroy the fool who utters them—E.]; hence it may be properly rendered “rather” [so far from calling forth sympathy, they will much rather destroy the complainer—E.]; comp. Job 22:2; Job 31:18. The μ before ΰֱ ?εִ ?ιμ is after the Aramaic usage, introducing the object which is emphatically placed first: quod attinet ad stultum [“as for the fool”], etc.; so also in Job 21:22; Isaiah 11:9 (comp. Ewald, § 292, e; 310, a). [Denied by Hengstenberg, who explains it as a poetic modification of the sense of the verb: stulto mortem affert, but favored by the position and the accounts.—E.] The ΰֱ ?εִ ?ιμ here is naturally one who impatiently murmurs against God because of his destiny, and presumptuously censures Him; such a one as Job must have seemed to Eliphaz to be in view of his lamentations and curses in Job 3. As synonymous with ΰֱ ?εִ ?ιμ we have in the second member τֹּ ?ϊֶ ?δ, “the simple one, without understanding” [“open to evil influences, a moral weakling.” Dav.], while to λַּ ?ςַ ?ωׂ, “grief” [=unmanly repining] in the first member, we find to correspond in the second χִ ?πְ ?ΰָ ?δ, properly “zeal,” here in the bad sense, insolent murmuring, a rancorous feeling toward God. For the form λςωׂ [peculiar to Job], instead of the usual form, λςρ, comp. Job 6:2; Job 10:17. [Some (e.g. Barnes) refer λςωׂ and χπΰδ here to the “wrath” and “jealousy” of God against the sinner. But “it is certainly better to apply the words here to the emotions of the fool; his own passion and jealousy ruin him. (1) We have then the proper autonemesis of sin; its violence brings no help but only destruction to itself, which is the nerve of all Eliphaz is saying (Job 5:6-7). (2) Job refers to these bitter words of Eliphaz with evident pain in the very opening of his reply (Job 6:2): would God that my λַּ ?ςַ ?ωׂ were but weighed! (3) The words fit well Job’s state of mind.” Dav.] Job 5:3-5. An example in proof of the statement just made about the destruction of him who murmurs against God. Job 5:3. I myself have seen a fool taking root, to wit, like a thriving plant, growing in fruitful soil, and hence in a state of prosperity which promised to endure and to increase; compare Psalms 1:3; Isaiah 27:6, etc.—Then I cursed his habitation suddenly, i.e., when I perceived how altogether unstable and superficial was his prosperity, and what a fearful judgment all at once burst over his head by the decree of God. It is to the moment of the descent of this judgment that τִּ ?ϊְ ?ΰֹ ?ν refers, and πַ ?χַ ?α. “to curse,” is not to be understood as a prophetic prediction of the ruin which is hereafter to overtake one in prosperity (Ewald, Schlottmann, etc.), but as a recognition accompanying the event, a subjective human echo, so to speak, of God’s curse, which has already actually overtaken its object. [“The word ‘suddenly’ points as with the finger to the catastrophe by which at one stroke Job’s prosperity was laid in the dust, to the Chaldeans and Sabeans, to the lightning and the storm.” Hengst. “I cursed his habitation suddenly,” means accordingly; when sudden destruction smote his habitation, I felt and declared that it was cursed of God.—E.] πָ ?εֶ ?δ, habitation, abode [“homestead,” Carey], including the pasture-land belonging to it, not simply the pasturage, or grazing-place of the herds. Comp. Job 5:24; Job 18:15; also πָ ?εָ ?δ, Job 8:6. Job 5:4. His sons were far from help, and were crushed in the gate without deliverance.—The Presents (Imperfects) in this and the following verse, describe the consequences of the judgment on the fool as they extend into the present. ιֶ ?ωַׁ ?ς, “help, deliverance,” as in Job 5:11. ιִ ?γַּ ?λְּ ?ΰεּ, Imperf. Hithp., lit.: “they must allow themselves to be crushed,” viz.: by their unjust accusers and persecutors in the court of justice, before the tribunal; for it is to this that reference is made in αַּ ?ωַׁ ?ςַ ?ψ; comp. Job 29:7; Job 31:21; also the same exact form of expression, excepting the Piel instead of the Hithp. in Proverbs 22:22 : “oppress not the poor in the gate.” See Com. in loco. [Davidson and Rodwell take the verb in the reflex sense: “And crushed each other in the gate.” On the uses of the “gate” of an oriental city, see Smith’s Bib. Dict., art. “Gate.”] Job 5:5. He whose harvest the hungry devour.—ΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψ, not a conjunction, “because,” or “while” (Delitzsch), but a relative pronoun, “whose;” comp. Job 20:22; Job 31:8. The description of the judgment, begun in the preceding verse, is here accordingly continued, with special reference to the property of him who is cast down from the height of his prosperity.—And take it away even out of a thorn-hedge, i.e., they are not kept off even by hedges of thorn, hence they carry on their plundering in the most daring and systematic manner. ΰֶ ?μ before ξִּ ?φִּ ?πִּ ?ιν is here the same as ςַ ?γ: adeo e spinis (comp. Job 3:22) [and see Ewald, § 219, c]—And the thirsty swallow up his wealth [lit.: “their wealth;” the plural suffix indicating that the children are here included]. Instead of φַ ?ξִּ ?ιν, it is better, following out the hint which lies in ψָ ?ςֵ ?α in the first member, as well as following the lead of almost all the ancient versions, to read φְ ?ξֵ ?ιִ ?ν, or φְ ?ξֵ ?ΰִ ?ιν, perhaps even the singular φָ ?ξֶ ?ΰ. So Rosenm., Umbreit, Ewald [who in his Gram., § 73, c. suggests that the omission of the ΰ may be due to its location between two vowel sounds], Hirzel, Vaihinger, Stickel, Welte, Ezra [Dillmann, Renan, Wordsworth, Barnes, Elzas, Merx]. etc. To this subject, moreover, the verb ωΰσ is best suited, which signifies to snap, greedily to drain, to lap, or sip up anything [Ges. and Fόrst: to pant; Renan: to look on with longing, couve des yeux ses richesses]. According to the Masoretic text, φַ ?ξִּ ?ιν, the translation should be: “and a snare catches their wealth” [Dav. and Con.: “a snare gapeth for their substance”]. φַ ?ξִּ ?ιν, from φξν, nectere = snare, gin, might indeed be used here tropically for fraud, robbery (not, however, for “robbers,” as the Targ. and some of the Rabbis [also E. V., sing, “robber”] take it, nor for “intriguer,” as Delitzsch [Carey, Wemyss] have it). [The meaning “snare” is adopted by Ges., Fόrst, Noyes, Con., Dav., Schlottm., Hengsten.] This rendering, however, would be rather harsh, especially in connection with the verb ωָׁ ?ΰַ ?σ, which favors rather the interpretation we have given above. Second Strophe. Job 5:6-7. [Human suffering founded on a Divine ordinance]. Job 5:6. For evil goes not forth from the dust, and trouble does not sprout up out of the ground;i.e., the misfortune of men does not grow like weeds out of the earth; it is no mere product of nature, no accidental physical and external ingredient of this earthly life; but it has its sufficient cause, it originates in human sin; God decrees and ordains it for the punishment of sin; whence it follows that the proper remedy against it is the renunciation of sin, and not a gloomy frowardness and mournfulness. ΰָ ?εֶ ?ο and ςָ ?ξָ ?μ precisely as in Job 4:8. Job 5:7. But [λִּ ?ι adversative, and so Schlott., Dillm., Dav., Del., Ren., Hengst., etc.] man is born to trouble;i.e., it lies in human nature, through sin to bring forth misery (Hirzel, Dillmann, etc.); as man he is now not pure, but impure, not righteous, but unrighteous (comp. Job 4:17), and for that very reason he cannot avoid manifold suffering and hardship, the divinely ordained consequence of sin. Observe how gently Eliphaz seeks to bring home to Job the truth that his suffering is also the consequence of his sin. [ιεּ ?μַּ ?γ is by some regarded as Pual Perf., the short shureq written with Vav (Green, Gr., § 43, b); by others as Hoph. Imperf. (Ewald, § 131, c.); while others would point it ιִ ?εָּ ?μֵ ?γ, as Niph. Imperf. (Merx)].—As the sparks of the flame fly upward; lit.: “and the sparks,” etc.εcomparationis, as in Proverbs 25-29 often; comp. Job 22:11; Job 14:12; Job 14:19 [otherwise also called Vav adζquationis; see Green, Gr. § 287, 1]. αְּ ?πֵ ?ιψֶ ?ωֶׁ ?σ, “sons of the fire, children of the flame” (comp. Son 8:6), are naturally neither “birds of prey” (νεοσσοὶ γυπῶν, LXX.; comp. the aves of the Vulg. So also J. D. Michaelis, Gesenius [Fόrst], Vaihinger, Heiligstedt [Umbreit, Good, Wemyss, Conant, Noyes, Renan, Rodwell], etc.; nor “angels” (Schlottmann, who refers to Judges 13:20; Psalms 104:4); nor “angry passions” (Bφttcher, and similarly Stickel); but simply “fire-sparks” (Ewald, Hirzel, Hahn, Ebrard, Delitzsch, Dillmann [Wemyss, Conant, Davidson, Barnes, Carey, Merx]). Only of these can it be properly said that they fly upwards by a law of necessity, which constitutes here the tertium comparationis. ιβαιδεςεσ, lit.: “they make high their flight,” they fly far up on high, fly unceasingly upwards (ςεσ for μςεσ, Ewald, § 285, a.) [It has been objected to the rendering “sparks” that the expression “make high their flight” is too strong to be applied to them, being more suitable to the lofty soaring of “birds,” or “angels,” or “arrows.” But an appeal may confidently be taken on this point to the poetic sensibility of the reader who has ever watched the upward flight of sparks by night, when relative altitudes are but vaguely determined, and when these “sons of the flame” seem literally to soar and vanish among the stars.—E.] [The central thought of the above strophe is that the connection between sin and suffering is a Divine ordinance. In Job 5:1-2 this is presented in the way of warning to Job as a truth against which he can take no appeal to any higher court, and as one of which he is in danger of realizing in his own case the extreme consequences; for the special sin of murmuring against God would infallibly bring about his ruin. In Job 5:3-5 the same truth is vividly enforced by an illustration drawn from actual life. In Job 5:6-7 it is presented in the form of a general law, which, in the statement here given of it is a binary law, consisting of two parts, or propositions, which are complementary of each other; the first (Job 5:6), negative, the second (Job 5:7), positive. The misery which follows sin in general, and in particular the special example of misery following sin mentioned in Job 5:3-5 is a Divine Ordinance: because (λְּ ?ι, Job 5:6) evil is not from without, not from the earth, not from the material constitution of things, for (λִּ ?ι, Job 5:7) Man (ΰγν emphatic by position) is the cause of his own trouble, being born to it, a sufferer by an internal, not an external necessity, by a law of his own existence; a law as necessary, too, as that which compels the sparks to fly upward. According to this view of the connection the λִּ ?ι in Job 5:7 is argumentative as well as that in Job 5:6. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/lange/ B.—Job’s Reply: Instead of Comfort, the Friends bring him only increased SorrowJob_6:1 to Job 7:211. Justification of his complaint by pointing out the greatness and incomprehensibleness of his suffering Job 6:1-101         But Job answered and said: 2    Oh that my grief were thoroughly weighed, and my calamity laid in the balance together! 3    For now it would be heavier than the sand of the sea; therefore my words are swallowed up. 4    For the arrows of the Almighty are within me, the poison whereof drinketh up my spirit; the terrors of God do set themselves in array against me. 5    Doth the wild ass bray when he hath grass? or loweth the ox over his fodder? 6    Can that which is unsavory be eaten without salt? or is there any taste in the white of an egg? 7    The things that my soul refuseth to touch are as my sorrowful meat. 8    Oh that I might have my request, and that God would grant me the thing that I long for! 9    Even that it would please God to destroy me; that He would let loose His hand, and cut me off! 10    Then should I yet have comfort: yea, I would harden myself in sorrow; let Him not spare; for I have not concealed the words of the Holy One. 2. Complaint over the bitter disappointment which he had experienced at the hands of his friends Job 6:11-3011    What is my strength that I should hope? and what is mine end that I should prolong my life? 12    Is my strength the strength of stones? or is my flesh of brass? 13    Is not my help in me? and is wisdom driven quite from me? 14    To him that is afflicted pity should be shewed from his friend; but he forsaketh the fear of the Almighty. 15    My brethren have dealt deceitfully as a brook, and as the stream of brooks they pass away; 16    which are blackish by reason of the ice, and wherein the snow is hid. 17    What time they wax warm, they vanish; when it is hot, they are consumed out of their place. 18    The paths of their way are turned aside; they go to nothing, and perish. 19    The troops of Tema looked, the companies of Sheba waited for them. 20    They were confounded because they had hoped; they came thither and were ashamed. 21    For now ye are nothing; ye see my casting down, and are afraid! 22    Did I say, Bring unto me? or, Give a reward for me of your substance? 23    Or, Deliver me from the enemy’s hand? or, Redeem me from the hand of the mighty? 24    Teach me, and I will hold my tongue; and cause me to understand wherein I have erred. 25    How forcible are right words! but what doth your arguing reprove? 26    Do ye imagine to reprove words, and the speeches of one that is desperate, which are as wind? 27    Yea, ye overwhelm the fatherless, and ye dig a pit for your friend. 28    Now therefore be content, look upon me; for it is evident unto you if I lie. 29    Return, I pray you, let it not be iniquity; yea, return again, my righteousness is in it. 30    Is there iniquity in my tongue? cannot my taste discern perverse things? 3. Recurrence to his former complaint on account of his lot, and accusation of God Job 7:1-211         Is there not an appointed time to man upon earth? are not his days also like the days of an hireling? 2    As a servant earnestly desireth the shadow, and as an hireling looketh for the reward of his work; 3    So am I made to possess months of vanity, and wearisome nights are appointed to me. 4    When I lie down, I say, When shall I arise and the night be gone? and I am full of tossings to and fro unto the dawning of the day. 5    My flesh is clothed with worms, and clods of dust; my skin is broken, and become loathsome. 6    My days are swifter than a weaver’s shuttle, and are spent without hope. 7    O remember that my life is wind! mine eye shall no more see good. 8    The eye of him that hath seen me shall see me no more; Thine eyes are upon me, and I am not. 9    As the cloud is consumed, and vanisheth away, so he that goeth down to the grave shall come up no more. 10    He shall return no more to his house, neither shall his place know him any more. 11    Therefore I will not refrain my mouth; I will speak in the anguish of my spirit; I will complain in the bitterness of my soul. 12    Am I a sea, or a whale, that Thou settest a watch over me? 13    When I say, My bed shall comfort me, my couch shall ease my complaint; 14    then Thou scarest me with dreams, and terrifiest me through visions; 15    So that my soul chooseth strangling, and death rather than my life. 16    I loathe it, I would not live alway; let me alone; for my days are vanity. 17    What is man, that Thou shouldest magnify him? and that Thou shouldest set Thine heart upon him? 18    And that Thou shouldest visit him every morning? and try him every moment? 19    How long wilt Thou not depart from me, nor let me alone till I swallow down my spittle? 20    I have sinned; what shall I do unto Thee, O Thou preserver of men? why hast Thou set me as a mark against Thee, so that I am a burden to myself? 21    And why dost Thou not pardon my transgression, and take away mine iniquity? for now shall I sleep in the dust; and Thou shalt seek me in the morning, but I shall not be. AND 1. This discourse of Job, the first formal reply which proceeded from him, attaches itself immediately to that which was one-sided, erroneous, and unjust in the discourse of Eliphaz (comp. above, page 327. It rebukes these defects, and justifies the complaints which Job had previously uttered in regard to his miserable condition, in part repeating with increased emphasis the reproaches which in his despair he had brought against God. The tone of his discourse however is so far changed that instead of the wild and doubting agony of his former utterance he exhibits rather a spirit which may be characterized as mild, plaintive, and in some measure composed. The discourse falls into three divisions: (1) A justification of the previous lamentation, as entirely corresponding to the fearful greatness of Job’s suffering, Job 6:2-10. (2) A sharp criticism of the friends’ conduct as unreasonably hard, as demonstrating indeed the deceptiveness of their friendship, Job 6:11-30. (3) Renewed lamentation over his inconsolable and helpless condition, together with an arraignment of God, Job 7:1-21. These three principal divisions have the same relative proportions, both as to the length and sub-divisions of each, as the three divisions of the discourse of Eliphaz; the first consisting of one, the two following consisting each of two long strophes. It is only in the last two, however, of these five long strophes (to wit, Job 7:1-21) that we find double-strophes composed of the longer strophes extending over 5–7 verses. The first three double-strophes on the contrary are composed of shorter strophes, including now three, and now four masoretic verses. 2. First Division (and Long Strophe). Justification of his former lamentation by a reference to the greatness and incomprehensibility of his suffering, Job 6:2-10. First Strophe. Job 6:2-4. [His grief was not excessive when compared with his suffering]. Job 6:2. Oh that my grief might be but weighed, and my calamity be laid up over against it in the balances—[The use of the Inf. Absol. ωָׁ ?χεֹ ?μ with the Fut. ιִ ?ωָּׁ ?χֵ ?μ (used optatively after μεּ) shows the emphasis which Job’s mind laid on the complete exact balancing of his vexation against his suffering.—E.] λַּ ?ςַ ?ωׂ, grief, discontent, despondency, is that with which Eliphaz had reproached him [see Job 5:2. “Vexation, impatience, either the inner irritation, or outward exhibition of it, or both.” Dav.] δַ ?ιָּ ?ϊִ ?ι (for which the K’ri has δַ ?εָּ ?ϊִ ?ι, as also in Job 30:13μְ ?δַ ?εָּ ?ϊִ ?ι for δַ ?ιָּ ?ϊִ ?ι) “my calamity, my ruin;” comp. the plur. δַ ?εּ ?εֹ ?ϊ used elsewhere in the same sense, Job 6:30; Psalms 57:2 [1]; Psalms 91:3; Psalms 94:20; Proverbs 19:13. The two expressions are not synonymous (Kamph.), but are related to each other as subjective and objective, or as an effect produced in Job’s emotional experience, and the cause of the same. Accordingly ιִ ?ωְׂ ?ΰεּ ιַ ?ηַ ?γ can not signify: “that it might be laid up (weighed) all at once, altogether,” i.e., my entire woe, in which case indeed we should also expect the plur. δַ ?ιּ ?εֹ ?ϊָ ?ι (δַ ?εּ ?εֹ ?ϊָ ?ι). But πωΰιηγ denotes a simultaneous weighing of the despondency and the calamity, a balancing of either over against the other (comp. Job 17:16; Psalms 141:10; Isaiah 45:8). The whole is a wish or a yearning prayer to God, to show clearly to his friends that his violent grief was most assuredly proportioned to the severity of his sufferings. [Conant objects to the view here given: “that it is not an appropriate answer to Eliphaz, whose admonitions were not based on the disproportion of the sufferer’s grief to its cause.” To which Davidson replies: “Job is not here replying to Eliphaz’s whole charge, but only to the beginning of it (as was fit in the beginning of his reply), the charge of unmanliness, to which the words are an appropriate answer”]. Job 6:3. For now is it heavier than the sand of the seas, i.e., heavy beyond measure. For the use of the expression “sand of the sea,” as a figure to set forth a weight or burden of extreme heaviness (as elsewhere it is used to set forth an innumerable multitude), comp. Proverbs 27:3; Sir 22:15.—ιַ ?ξִּ ?ιν, “seas,” poetic plural, used like the sing. ιָ ?ν in Genesis 49:13.—λִּ ?ιςַ ?ϊָּ ?δ is rendered by Delitzsch, “for then” (as in Job 3:13), and the whole sentence he takes to be an inference from Job 6:2 : “then would it be found heavier than the sand, etc.” But this “it would be found” is simply interpolated into the text. Most modern expositors rightly render it: “For now, as the case now stands, especially in consequence of your unfriendly conduct,” etc.—Therefore do my words rave.—μָ ?‍ ?ֽ ?ςεּ, with the tone on the penult, cannot be derived from μςδ [Ges.], but either from μςς, or μεּ ?ςַ, but not in the sense of sucking down, or swallowing, but in the sense, for which we have the warrant of the Arabic, of stammering, raving, [Fόrst]. Job therefore admits that he has heretofore “spoken foolishly” (comp. 2 Corinthians 11:17; 2 Corinthians 11:21; 2 Corinthians 11:23), but he justifies himself by appealing to his insupportable sorrow. [The translation of the Eng. Ver. “my words are swallowed up,” implying that he had been unable to speak from grief, is less significant, and less suitable to the connection than the confession that he had spoken madly: neither is it consistent with the usage of the verb elsewhere in an active sense; Obadiah 1:16.—E.] Job 6:4. For the arrows of the Almighty are in me, whose poison my spirit drinks up.—More specifically giving the reason for 3a. By “the arrows of the Almighty” are meant the sickness, pains, and plagues which God inflicts on men: [“the emphasis lies on Almighty, the arrows of the Almighty; there was enough in that fact, in the awful nature of his adversary, to account and more than apologize for all his madness.” Dav.] comp. Psalms 38:3 [2]; Deuteronomy 32:23; Ezekiel 5:16; also below in our book, Job 16:12 seq.—ςִ ?ξָּ ?γִ ?ιi.e., lit. “with me,” not “in my body” (ἐυτῷ σώματίμου, LXX. Pesh.). The form of expression is chosen to represent the arrows of God as something which has hurt and wounded not only his body, but also his soul, and which accordingly is ever “with him,” continually present to him (comp. Job 9:35; Job 10:13).—ΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψηֲ ?ξָ ?ϊָ ?ν, not the subj. of the relative clause (LXX., Pesh., Vulg., Rosenm. [E. V., Noy., Lee, Con., Carey], but its object, the subj. of which is rather ψεּ ?ηִ ?ι “my spirit.” ηֵ ?ξָ ?δ’ “heat,” here equivalent to “poison;” comp. Job 21:20; Psalms 7:14 [Psalms 7:13]; Psalms 58:5; Deuteronomy 32:24; Deuteronomy 32:33. [“Some prefer: the poison of which drinketh up my spirit, a meaning that would account for Job’s prostration, the poison of God’s arrows was like a burning heat that dried up and drank in his spirit. It was rather, however, his violence and vehement recrimination against God which he has to excuse; impetuosity, not impotence, has to be accounted for. It is thus better to make spirit nom., the spirit drinks in the Divine virus, which works potently, as Divine poison will, excites, inflames, maddens the spirit.” Dav.].—The terrors of Eloah storm me. ιַ ?ςַ ?ψְ ?λεּ ?πִ ?ι, an elliptical expression for ιςψλεξμηξδςμι, they set themselves in battle array against me, they assail me like an army: comp. Judges 20:30; Judges 20:33; 1 Samuel 4:2. Bφttcher singularly attempts to render it (Neue Exeget. Ζhrenlese, No. 1397): “the terrors of God cause me to arm myself—compel me to put myself in the right.” Against this it may be urged that the “terrors of God” signify not Job’s sufferings and distresses in themselves, and objectively considered, but his subjective experiences of the same, his consciousness of the fact that his suffering proceeds from the attacks and persecutions which God in His wrath directs against his life and his happiness in life (comp. Job 23:16 seq.). [They are “the conscious voluntary terrors which He actively originates, which He gathers from the ends of His dominion and the outlying posts of His power, and marshals like a sable infinite host against Job.” Dav.]. Second Strophe: Job 6:5-7. [The demand that he should submit without a murmur unnatural]. Job 6:5. Does the wild ass bray by the fresh grass, or doth an ox low at his fodder?i.e., I would certainly not lament without sufficient cause; far less would I be disposed to complain than an irrational beast, which is contentedly provided with fodder. The form of the comparison vividly reminds us of Amo 3:4-6.—For πδχ, to moan, to groan, to utter doleful cries, comp. Job 30:7. Concerning the wild ass see the fuller description in Job 39:5-8.—αְּ ?μִ ?ιμ, maslin, farrago, a compound of various kinds of grain. Job 6:6. Is that which is tasteless eaten without salt, or is there flavor in the white of an egg?i.e., can it be expected of me that I should freely and joyously relish the unsavory food of suffering, and especially of that loathsome disease, which has seized upon me? That Job uses tasteless, loathsome food as a figure for the sufferings which afflict him, appears both from Job 6:2-4, and from Job 6:8-10, where the burden of these self-same sufferings prompts him to desire death. The interpretation which refers the figure to the discourses of the friends (LXX. and other ancient expositors, also Rόetschi, Stud, und Krit., 1867) is at variance with the connection. It suits indeed the expression in the first member of the verse (ϊָּ ?τֵ ?μ tasteless; comp. rem. on Job 1:22), but not the expression “slime of the yolk of an egg,” which is altogether too strong for unsuitable and harsh discourses, and which is most naturally referred to the nauseous filth, dust, and ulcerous matter of the leprosy (comp. Job 7:5). [Observe that the point of the illustration lies in the tendency of an agreeable quality, or the opposite, to produce content or discontent. Now as that which occasioned Job’s discontent was his suffering, it is doubtless this suffering which in this verse he describes negatively as tasteless, and therefore to be complained of in the next verse as positively loathsome, and therefore to be refused.—Moreover, it is not until later (Job 6:25 sq.) that Job comes to speak of the nature of his friends’ remarks. He is here justifying his complaint which had been uttered before his friends had spoken at all, and which had been prompted by their silence, of which silence, as indicating a failure of sympathy, he again complains (Job 6:15-21).—E.].—ψִ ?ιψηַ ?μָּ ?ξεּ ?ϊ, “the slime of the yolk,” i.e., the liquid saliva which encloses the solid part, the yellow yolk of an egg, hence the white of an egg, which was esteemed by the Hebrews to be particularly nauseating, or at least as altogether insipid. So, following the Targ. and some of the Rabbis, Rosenm., Umbreit, Ewald, Stickel, Del., Dillmann, [E. V., Hengst., Dav., Fόrst, Schlottmann, Good], etc., and in general most modern writers, while the Pesh., Arab., Gesen., Heiligst., Bφttcher, [Renan, Merx], translate ψִ ?ιψηΧ “portulacca-broth, purslainslime,” a rendering, however, which assigns to ψִ ?ιψ the sense, elsewhere unknown, of slime, broth, or soup. Job 6:7. My soul refuses to touch, such things are to me as putrid food.—Rosenm., Welte, Delitzsch, (as before them the Vulg., Luther) [so also E. V., Noy., Ren., Elz.], take the first member as an antecedent relative clause without ΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψ, “that which my soul refuses to touch, etc.” But such an antecedent position for the relative clause when ΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψ is wanting, is a rare construction, and in order to obtain for the consequent clause a tolerable sense we should be obliged to amend λִ ?γְ ?εִ ?ιִ to λְּ ?γֵ ?ι (as Rosenm. and Welte do in opposition to all the MSS. and Vsns.). Such a construction, moreover, destroys the progression of thought from a to b. The object of μπβες is supplied of itself in that which from Job 6:2 on stands forth as the prominent conception, to wit, the suffering or calamity of Job, to which also the δֵ ?ξָּ ?δ, which stands at the head of the second member, points back, “they,” i.e., things of that sort, such things.—λִ ?γְ ?εֵ ?ιμַ ?ηְ ?ξִ ?ι, lit “as the disease of my bread;” i.e., as though my food were diseased, putrid, loathsome: γְּ ?εֵ ?ι constr. state of γְּ ?εַ ?ι, “sickness, disease,” comp Psalms 41:4 [3] (so rightly Gesenius, [Fόrst], Ewald, Olsh., Hahn, Schlottmann, Dillmann, etc.). Others (Cocceius, Schultens, Heiligstedt, Delitzsch) take γει as constr. st. plur. of γָּ ?εֶ ?δ, “sick, unclean” (comp. Isaiah 30:22), according to which derivation, however, we should expect to read γְּ ?εεֹ ?ϊ. Umbreit and Hirzel (2d Ed.) explain “the disease of my bread” as meaning, “the disease which is my daily bread” [so also Wordsworth and Renan]; Bφttcher would read λִּ ?γְ ?εַ ?ι: “they are according to the disease of my food;” Hitzig, after the Arabic, explains: “the crumbs of my food”—purely arbitrary evasions, and less natural than the construction followed by us. Third Strophe: Job 6:8-10. [He longs for death, and even in death would rejoice in his integrity.] Job 6:8. Oh that my request might be fulfilled [lit. might come], and that Eloah would grant my longing! This prayer and longing are for death, as that which would bring release from his misery, which is all that he desires: see the verse which follows. ξִ ?ιιִ ?ϊֵּ ?ο he well-known optative formula, governing also the verbs of the following verse. [“It occurs quite frequently in the Book of Job, almost altogether, however, in. Job’s discourses, in the friends’ discourses only in Job 11:5, not once in those of Elihu and God. This indicates purpose in the linguistic structure of the argument. Job’s destiny gives him much to wish for.” Hengst.] Hupfeld’s emendation, εְ ?ϊַ ?ΰֲ ?εָ ?ϊִ ?ι for εְ ?ϊִ ?χְ ?εָ ?ϊִ ?ι, is uncalled for. Job 6:9. That it might please Eloah to destroy me, that He would let down His hand to cut me off: lit. “that He would let loose His hand, and cut me off;” for δִ ?ϊִּ ?ιψ, Hiph. of πϊψ, “to spring,” signifies “to cause to spring, to unbind, set loose” (comp. Isaiah 58:6; Psalms 105:20; Psalms 146:7); the hand of God is thus conceived of as having been hitherto bound—bound, that is, by His own will.—εִ ?ιαַ ?φְּ ?ςֵ ?πִ ?ι, “and cut me off,” (not: “and crush me,” Luther, comp. the LXX.: ἀνελέτωμε). Job’s soul, his Ego or his life, is, after the analogy of Job 4:21, regarded as an internal cord, a string, or thread, the cutting off of which is synonymous with death: comp. also Job 27:8; Ps. 76:13, also the well-known Greek representation of the Parcζ. Job 6:10. So would it ever be my comfort.… Delitzsch rightly: “With εּ ?ϊְ ?δִ ?ι begins the conclusion, exactly as in Job 13:5.” Most expositors extend the influence of the ξִ ?ιιϊֵּ ?ο, Job 6:8, over this sentence, and construe the verbs here also as optatives: “and that so my comfort may still be to me,” etc. The comfort, according to this latter construction, would be Job’s speedy death. But how a speedy death could in and of itself bring any comfort is not made to appear in this connection. It is more natural with Hupf., Schlottmann, Delitzsch [Bernard, Conant, Rodwell, Hengst., Renan], especially on comparing this with the analogous passage in Psalms 119:50, to find the statement of that which would bring comfort in the words of the last member: “that I have not denied the words of the Holy One,” thus treating the second member, εַ ?ΰֲ ?ρַ ?μְּ ?γָ ?δεβεΧ, as a parenthesis.—I would leap in unsparing pain. For the use of the cohortative (εַ ?ΰֲ ?ρַ ?μְ ?γָ ?δ) in a subjunctive sense in a parenthesis, comp. e.g.Psalms 40:6; Psalms 51:18.—ρμγ is to be explained after the Arab. zalada (“to stamp the ground, tripudiare”) [to beat hard; hence the E. V.: “I would harden myself in sorrow,” and so Lee, who explains: “Because there still is, or remains consolation,… I will not give way, whatever may be laid on me: or even though He cut me entirely off”], as also after the ἡλλόμην of the LXX. and the μֶ ?ΰֱ ?αεּ ?ςַ (“I will exult”) of the Targum. It is accordingly to be taken in the sense of a jubilant expression of joy, not in the sense of “being tormented” (Rosenm, after some of the Rabbis [who explain the verb to mean “burning;” and so Bernard]), nor: “to spring up through pain” (Schlottmann, who accordingly takes the parenthesis in a concessive sense: “although I leap up for pain”).—μֹ ?ΰιַ ?ηְ ?ξεֹ ?μ (comp. Isaiah 30:14 seq.), a relative clause, with the omission of the adverbial ΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψ: “wherewith he spares me not,” namely, God, who is to be understood as the subject here (Rosenm., Ewald [who makes the omitted relative the direct object of the verb—“pain which he spares not;” a construction, however, which does not harmonize so well with the usage of ηξμ, which generally has a personal object. E.], Hirzel, Heiligstedt, Hahn, Schlottmann, Dillmann) [Renan, Hengst.]. Possibly ηִ ?ιμָ ?δ might be taken as the subject (so Umbreit, Vaih., Stickel) [Gesen., Rodwell, Conant]: “in pain which spares not,” against which, however, it may be urged that, while ηִ ?ιμָ ?δ is most simply treated as fem., the verbal form used, ιηξμ, is masc. In any case, the translation; “in unsparing pain,” corresponds to the sense of the poet.—That I have not denied the words of the Holy One. This fact—that he had been guilty of no denial (comp. Job 1:22; Job 2:10)—constitutes the firm confidence which Job possessed in the midst of all his distress and misery, and which he felt assured would show itself, even in death. The meaning is not essentially different which results from the other and more common construction of our verse, according to which the second member is not treated as a parenthesis, and λִּ ?ι is regarded as introducing a reason for that which precedes: “for I have not denied,” etc. 3. Second Division: A lament over the bitter disappointment which he had experienced from his friends: Job 6:11-30. First Long Strophe: Job 6:11-20 (consisting of three short strophes, of 3, 4, and three verses respectively). [“In view of his broken strength and hopeless condition, he must reject their advice to trust in the future, and openly declare to them that he is completely disappointed in his expectations as to their friendship.” Dillmann.] a. Job 6:11-13. [His helplessness, and consequent hopelessness. Ewald and Hengstenberg put this strophe in the First Division, to which, however, as Schlottmann has shown, there are two objections. First, it mars the completeness which the preceding long strophe possesses, when regarded as closing the triumphant declaration by Job of his integrity and confidence in God contained in Job 6:10.—Secondly, the picture which this short strophe gives of his helplessness and hopelessness is preparatory to the picture which immediately follows of the deceptiveness of his friends, and in that position adds greatly to the pathos and effectiveness of his complaint. E.] Job 6:11. What is my strength that I should persevere [wait], and what mine end that I should be patient? The answer to this question which Job’s meaning would require is of course a pure negative: my strength is completely gone, and death is the only end which I look for, in all its nearness, nay more, with impatience. [“Two things are necessary that one may bear misfortune patiently; first, that the strength of the sufferer is in some proportion to the power of the suffering; and, secondly, that he sees before him an end, which, when reached, will reward the present struggle. Job denies both these things of himself, the first in Job 6:12, the second in Job 6:13.” Schlottmann.] For δֶ ?ΰֶ ?ψִ ?ικְ πֶ ?τֶ ?ωׁ, “to prolong the soul, to lengthen it,” i.e. to be patient, comp. Proverbs 19:11; Isaiah 48:9. [The rendering of E. V., “prolong my life,” would rather require ΰַ ?ΰֲ ?ψִ ?ικְ ιξַ ?ι]. Job 6:12. Or is the strength of stones my strength, or is my flesh of brass?—[The first “or” tends rather to mar the connection. E.] A poetic illustrative expansion of the thought in Job 6:11 a. [According to Hengstenberg, “stones” and “brass” are mentioned here because of their invulnerability. Rather, according to the connection, because of their power of endurance. Schlottmann says: “πηεω is properly always ‘copper,’ which the ancients, however, as is known, had learned to harden, so that in firmness it resembled iron.” E.] Job 6:13. Verily, is not my help in me brought to nought? lit.: “Is not the nothingness of my help with me?” δֲ ?ΰִ ?ν, which occurs elsewhere only in Num. 17:28 [Numbers 17:13], is neither a strengthened interrogative ΰִ ?ν (Schlottmann), nor an inversion for ΰִ ?νδֲ (Delitzsch), nor a collocation of the interrogative particle δֲ with the conditional particle ΰִ ?ν (whether, if my help is destroyed, etc., Kφster), but simply equivalent to δֲ ?μֹ ?ΰ, in the sense of vivid interrogation or asseveration: “verily not” (Ewald, Dillmann). And well-being driven away from me?ϊּ ?εּ ?ωִׁ ?ιּ ?δ essentially the same as in Job 5:12, well-being, enduring prosperity. The sense of the verse as a whole is: My condition is hopeless, and all promises for the future are therefore useless and null. [It is doubtless best to give to ϊεωιδ here the sense which, as Zφckler has elsewhere shown, belongs to it in the Chokma-Literature. Other interpretations are partial, and so far enfeebling: e.g. “wisdom,” E. V., or “insight” (Hengst.), “deliverance” (Noyes), “solace” (Rosenm.), “restoration” (Conant). What Job says is that every element of real and substantial good had been driven away from him. Davidson is more nearly right when he says, that not only was recovery driven away from him, “but that the possibility of it, anything which could spring, and be matured into health again, all inner strength and resource—the very base of recovery—was driven away or out of him.” The word, however, is broader even than this, including all external as well as internal resources, a man’s entire establishment of good.—E.] b. Job 6:14-17 : [He has been disappointed in the friendly sympathy which is accorded to every one in misery, but which, in his case, has proved as deceptive as a summer brook.] Job 6:14. To the despairing gentleness (is due) from his friends (or, is shown by his friends), and [or, even] should he have forsaken the fear of the Almighty.—[“The prep. in μַ ?ξָּ ?ν does not express so much what is due … as what is actually given in affliction. Job’s friends failed, not in giving what was due, the world and even friendship often does, but in giving what was actually and always given.” Dav.] ξָ ?ν from ξρν, liquefieri, denotes literally one “who is inwardly melted, disheartened” (Delitzsch)—a term strikingly descriptive of Job’s condition as one of complete depression, helpless prostration to the very ground.—ηֶ ?ρֶ ?γ, “gentleness, friendliness, kindness” (comp. the πνεῦμαπραύ̈τητος of Galatians 6:1), not “reproach,” as Seb. Schmidt, Hitzig, and others would explain it, after Proverbs 14:34; for in Job 10:12 our poet again uses ηֶ ?ρֶ ?γ in its ordinary sense, and the translation: “If reproach from his friends falls on one who is despairing, he will then give up the fear of God,” gives a thought which is foreign to the context, and withal incorrect in itself. Equally untenable on grammatical grounds is the translation of Luther [and Wemyss; also of Merx, who however alters the text from μַ ?ξָּ ?ν to ξֹ ?πֵ ?ςַ ?]: “He who withholds mercy from his neighbor, he forsakes the fear of the Almighty.”—This rendering, however, although resting on the authority of the Targ., Vulg., and Pesh., is to be rejected on account of the singularly harsh construction of the μְ as a designation of the absol. case, as well as on account of its giving to the Partic. ξν the unheard-of signification: “he who withholds, or refuses.” The second member cannot be regarded as the conclusion of the first,—not even by taking εְ in the sense of alioqui, and so translating with Schnurrer, Delitzsch [Noy., Words., Rod., Hengst.], “otherwise he might forsake the fear of the Almighty” (alioqui hic reverentiam Dei exuit). Rather, if no corruption of the text be assumed, it will be found most simple and natural to regard the first member as an ardently expressed formula of desire, with an omitted jussive from the verb διδ, or to supply “is due to, belongs to,” [or “is given to”], and to find in the second member simply the continuation of the principal notion ξָ ?ν, introduced by a concessive εְ: “and even if he should have forsaken” [Schlott., Dill., Ren., Lee, Dav.] (comp. Ges., § 134 [Con.-Roed., § 131] Rem. 2; Ewald, § 350, b).—Ewald, without necessity, would supply between a and b lines which, he assumes, had fallen out.—The whole verse is evidently an expression of resentment at the fact that Eliphaz had exhibited no trace of gentle forbearance or sympathy for Job; he claims this sympathy for himself, even in case he had in his suffering departed from the fear of God, which case, however, he presents only as possible, not as actual. [Conant translates: “ready to forsake the fear of the Almighty;” Davidson: “to one losing hold of the fear of the Almighty.” “Job,” says the latter, “would not admit that he had forsaken, rather that he was forsaking, in danger of forsaking the fear of the Almighty.” And again: “in his terrible collision in darkness and doubt with the unspeaking nameless (Genesis 32:25) Being he was alone—absolutely—for the Father was against him, and when one is losing hold (ιַ ?ςֲ ?ζεֹ ?α) of God, he sorely enough needs a human hand to grasp, and the sufferer’s pathos is overwhelming, when he sees God and man alike estranged.”—The continuation of the participial construction by the Imperfect, with omitted relative (see Ewald, § 338, b), fully justifies this construction, which is at once most simple and expressive. “To one whose inner man is dissolving, whose faith and life are giving way, and who in that fearful dissolution is in danger of losing hold on God, to him surely sympathy from friends is meet.”—E.] Job 6:15-17. The conduct of Job’s three friends in disappointing his hopes, illustrated by the comparison of a torrent, which in spring rushes along full and strong, but in summer is entirely dried up, an ΰַ ?λְ ?ζָ ?α, or “lying stream,” as the same is described in Jeremiah 15:18 (comp. the paronomasia in Micah 1:14, αָּ ?ϊֵּ ?ιΰַ ?λְ ?ζִ ?ιαμְ ?ΰַ ?λְ ?ζִ ?α, “the houses of Achzih are become a lying stream to the kings of Israel”). Job 6:15. My brethren have been false as a torrent, i.e., my friends, whom I have loved as brothers [ΰַ ?ηַ ?ιּ, placed first with special emphasis],—he mentions them all, because Eliphaz had spoken in the name of all (Job 5:27)—have borne themselves treacherously towards me, have ministered to me an empty semblance of comfort, like the dried-up water of a wadi.—As the bed of torrents which overflow.ιַ ?ςֲ ?αֹ ?ψεּ not, “which vanish away” (Hirzel, Delitzsch [Hengst., E. V., Con., Dav., Noy., Carey, Ren.]), for while “passing away,” or “vanishing,” may indeed be predicated of the water of a brook, it cannot be used of the brook itself. Moreover, the continuation of the description given in the following verse, assumes the torrents to be full, not as yet in course of disappearing [and so Ewald, Dillmann, Schlott. Wemyss]. Job 6:16. Turbid are they from ice:χֹ ?γְ ?ψִ ?ιν black, foul, dark; here in the literal or physical sense, different from Job 5:11.—The snow hides itself in them; or: “down upon which (ςַ ?μֵ ?ιξεֹ) the snow hides itself;” a constr. prζgnans, comp. Gesen., § 141[§ 138]. Job 6:17. At the time when heat comes to them they are cut off [lit., made silent].—αְּ ?ςֵ ?ϊιְ ?ζֹ ?ψְ ?αεֹ at the time when, or so soon as they are warmed. [ςֵ ?ϊ in the constr. state, at the beginning of a temporal clause, with omission of the relative: see Ewald, § 286, i; 332 d]. ζψַֹ ?α, Pual of ζψα, a poetic variant of φψα (Ezekiel 21:3; Proverbs 16:27), “to burn, to parch, to glow;” [and so E. V., Ew., Schlott., Del., Dillm., Dav., Carey, Hengst.—According to Ges., Fόrst. Con., the meaning is: “at the time they are poured off,” or “flow off;” i.e., when the heat begins to melt the snow on the mountains. But as the first result of that is filling up the channels, the sense would be somewhat strained.—E.]. When it is hot, they are dried up [lit., extinguished] from their place:αְּ ?ηֻ ?ξּ ?εֹ, in its becoming hot; i.e., when it is hot. The suffix is to be taken as neuter, not (with Hirzel) to be referred to an ςֵ ?ϊ that is understood; (“when it, the time of the year, becomes hot”); comp. Ewald. § 295, a. c. Job 6:18-20. A further description of the disappointment he had met with from his friends by a continuation of the simile of the treacherous torrents. Job 6:18. The paths of their course wind about, they go up into the waste and vanish.—If, with the Masor. text, we read ΰָ ?ψְ ?ηεֹ ?ϊ, the rendering here given is the only one that is admissible; the “ways” or “paths of their course” are in that case the beds of the torrents, which go winding about, and thus favor the rapid extinction of the torrent; their “going up into the waste” (ςָ ?μָ ?δαַ ?ϊֹּ ?δεּ) is their gradual evaporation into the air, their ascent in vapors and clouds; comp. Isaiah 40:23; so correctly Mercerus: in auras abeunt, in nihilum rediguntur; so also Arnh., Delitzsch [Good, Barnes, Bernard, Words., Elzas]. Most modern expositors, however, correct the text here, and in the following verse to ΰֹ ?ψηεֹ ?ϊ, plur. of ΰֹ ?ψְ ?ηַ ?δ (or also ΰֳ ?ψָ ?ηεֹ ?ϊ, plur. of ΰֹ ?ψַ ?η, way, caravan), and translate either: “the caravans of their way turn aside” [a rendering, however, which is founded on the Masoretic text, regarding ΰָ ?ψְ ?ηεֹ ?ϊ as constr., and the meaning being “the caravans along their way;” so Conant, Davidson, Hengstenberg,—E.], or: “caravans turn aside their course, they go up into the wastes, and perish,” [so Ewald, Schlottmann, Dillmann, Wemyss, Noyes, Carey, Rodwell, Renan, Merx]. The phrase ςָ ?μָ ?δαַ ?ϊֹּ ?δεּ seems indeed to harmonize well with this explanation. But in that case Job 6:18 would anticipate Job 6:19-20 in an unprecedented manner; after the statement of this verse, which by the expression εְ ?ιΰֹ ?αֵ ?γεּ has already carried us forward to the complete destruction of the deceived caravans, what is said in those verses would drag along as a flat tautology. According to our interpretation Job 6:18 completes the description of the treacherous torrents begun in Job 6:15, while the two verses following dwell, with that epic repose and breadth which characterize the whole description, on the impression which such dried up torrents make on the thirsty caravans of the desert. [These reasons are certainly not wanting in force, still they are not conclusive. For (1) It is agreed by all that in the next verse ΰָ ?ψְ ?ηεֹ ?ϊ means caravans, and it is in the highest degree improbable that in two verses, so closely connected, describing the same general idea, and belonging to the same figure, the same word should be used in two different senses. (2). The language used, while most graphically appropriate according to one interpretation, can be adapted to the other only by strained constructions. This is especially true of the secφnd member. “Going up into the waste,” and “perishing,” are surely farfetched expressions for the evaporation and disappearance of water. On the other hand they are, as Zockler admits, in admirable harmony with the other interpretation. Nothing indeed can be more exquisite in its pathos than the picture which they bring before the mind of a caravan, weary with travel and thirst, and still more weary with disappointment, winding along the channel of the torrent, wistfully exploring its dry bed for water, following its course upward, hoping that in the uplands, nearer the river’s sources, some little pool may be found; hoping thus from day to day, but in vain, and so wasting away into a caravan of skeletons, until at last in the far off wastes it perishes. (3). The objection that this interpretation anticipates what follows, and thus produces a tame and dragging tautology, is answered by observing that the chief motive of the description just given is not to excite pity for the fate of such a caravan, but to justify Job’s resentment at the treachery of which the dry wady is the type. Hence in the verses following Job emphasizes the disappointment which the caravan of Tema and Sheba (named by way of vivid individualization) would feel in such a plight. This is the burden of his accusation of his friends, they had disappointed, deceived him. This was to him, at this time, a more bitter fate than his destruction would have been; so that from his point of view, Job 6:19-20, so far from being an anti-climax, contain the very climax of his sorrow.—The suggestions to change ιִ ?μָּֽ ?τְ ?ϊεּ either to Kal, ιִ ?μְ ?τְּ ?ϊεּ (Fόrst), or to Piel, ιְ ?μַ ?τְּ ?ϊεּ (Ewald) are unfortunate. No species could express more happily than the Niphal the helpless, semi-passive condition of an exhausted caravan, such as is here described, winding around, hither and thither, led by the channel in the search for water.—E.] Job 6:19. The caravans of Tema looked: to wit, caravans of the Ishmaelitish Arabian tribe of ϊֵּ ?ξָ ?ΰ (Genesis 25:15), in northern Arabia (Isaiah 21:14; Jeremiah 25:23), which is mentioned here by way of example; so likewise in the next clause ωְׁ ?αָ ?ΰ, as to which see Job 1:15.—[The companies of Sheba hoped for them. μָ ?ξε is by most referred to the torrents; by Schlottmann, however, it is regarded as Dat. commodi, and so suggesting the eagerness of their search. E ] The Perfects in this and the following verse give to the whole description the appearance of a concrete historical occurrence. Job 6:20. They were put to shame by their trust: lit. “because one trusted;” comp. Ewald, § 294, b. The phrase λִּ ?ιαָ ?θַ ?η describes by individualization, wherefore it is unnecessary, with Olsh., to amend to the plur. αָּ ?θָ ?ηεּ, or with Bφttcher to read αָּ ?θָ ?ηֻ (a form which nowhere occurs). They came thither (the fem. suffix in ςָ ?γֶ ?ιδָ in the neuter sense; comp. Job 6:29), and became red with shame; as the result, namely, of their having been disappointed.—Observe the wonderful beauty of this whole illustration, which terminates with this verse. It is no less striking than clear and intelligible. The friendship of the three visitors was once great, like that rushing torrent of melting snow; now, however, in the heat of temptation, it has utterly vanished, so that the sufferer, thirsting for comfort, but meeting instead, first with silence, and afterwards with sharp and heartless censure, finds himself ignominiously deceived, like a company of travellers betrayed by a lying brook. 4. Second Division.—Second Long Strophe (subdivided like the first into shorter strophes of 3, 4, and 3 verses respectively); Job 6:21-30. The complaint concerning the faithlessness of the friends is continued [in simple, non-figurative language], passing over, however, near the close (in strophe c: Job 6:28 seq.) into an appeal for the renewal of their former friendliness. a. Job 6:21-23. [The illustration applied, and the unfaithfulness of the friends shown from the unselfishness of the demands which Job had made on their friendship]. Job 6:21. Verily, so are ye now become nothing.—λִּ ?ιςַ ?ϊָּ ?δ introduces the ground of the preceding comparison of the friends to the treacherous torrents: “for now (for as you now conduct yourselves towards me) you are become a nothing, a nullity,” to wit, for me; I have nothing at all in you, neither comfort nor support. Such is the explanation according to the Masoretic reading: αִּ ?ιςַ ?ϊָּ ?δδֱ ?ιִ ?ιϊֶ ?νμֹ ?ΰ; here μֹ ?ΰ “not” means “nothing,” as in one instance the Chald. μָ ?δ (=μָ ?ΰ): Daniel 4:32. [Comp. μΰϊηθΰ, Job 5:24; also the similar use of ΰַ ?μ, Job 24:25]. According to the regular Hebrew usage, we should certainly expect: δΧμְ ?ΰֵ ?ιο or μְ ?ΰֶ ?τֶ ?ν; still the Targ. justifies our construction (adopted among modern expositors by Umbreit, Vaih., Schlottm., Hahn, Delitzsch [E. V., Fόrst, Davidson, Noyes, Wordsworth, Rodwell, Renan], etc.). According to the K’ri μֹ ?ε, which in many MSS. is the reading even of the text, instead of μֹ ?ΰ, the explanation would be: “ye are become that” [the same]; i.e. ye are become a deceitful πημ, Job 6:15, which, however, hardly gives a tolerable sense. Still more unsatisfactory is the rendering favored by the LXX., Vulg, Pesh., Luth., etc., according to which the reading should be μִ ?ι, instead of μֹ ?ε, “Ye are become to me.” J. D. Michaelis, Ewald, Olshausen, Dillmann, also read μִ ?ι for μεֹ (μֹ ?ΰ), and in addition amend λִּ ?ι to λֵּ ?ο at the beginning of the verse: “so are ye become to me.” This conjecture certainly yields a complete satisfactory sense; but the sentence as it stands with μֹ ?ΰ commends itself by its bolder and more comprehensive form of expression.—You see a terror, and are dismayed.—The words ϊִּ ?ψְ ?ΰεּ and εַ ?ϊִּ ?ιψָ ?ΰεּ form a paronomasia which cannot well be reproduced in a translation: the same paronomasia between ψָ ?ΰָ ?δ and ιָ ?ψֵ ?ΰ occurs also in Job 37:24; Psalms 40:4 [Psalms 40:3]; Psalms 52:8 [Psalms 52:6]; Zechariah 9:5. By ηֲ ?ϊַ ?ϊ [E. V. “casting down,” but rather from ηϊϊ to be broken, crushed, metaphorically with fear: hence that which causes terror.—E.] Job means the fearful calamity which has come upon him, in the presence of which his friends stand astonished and dismayed, thinking they had to do with one who was, in some extraordinary sense, an enemy of God. Job 6:22-23. [“Their cowardice in now renouncing their friendship is all the more striking, forasmuch as he has required of them no sacrifice, or heroic achievement in his behalf, a test before which a false friendship commonly fails, but—for such is his thought—only the comfort of words, and the aid of sympathy.”—Dillmann.] Job 6:22. Did I ever say then, Give to me, and bring presents to me from your wealth?—[δֲ ?λִ ?ι, “is it that?—was your failure because I ever said?” ωִׁ ?ηֲ ?γεּ, Ewald § 226, d. Green. § 119:4]. The question is in a vein of derision: Did I ever require any special sacrifice of you? [and in Job 6:23] did I ever demand of you anything else, any other effort or achievement, than the exhibition of genuine compassion, of true brotherly sympathy? λֹּ ?δַ here means wealth (opes), as in Proverbs 5:10; Leviticus 26:10. Elsewhere we find ηַ ?ιִ ?μ used in this sense. Job 6:23. [And deliver me out of the enemy’s hand, and redeem me from the hand of the oppressor (Renan: brigands)?] We are not specially to think here of a deliverance, or a redemption by means of a ransom—not, therefore, of a pecuniary ransom, although this thought is not to be excluded altogether. b. Job 6:24-27. [A challenge to be convicted of wrong-doing, and a bitter upbraiding of the cruelty which had fastened on words spoken in agony.] Job 6:24. Teach me, then will I be silent (i.e. I will cease my complaint); and wherein I have erred show me. From this urgent request, that he be openly instructed and admonished in regard to that of which he is assumed to be guilty, it is abundantly evident, that the conduct of his friends, when for seven days they sat with him in silence, had been felt by him as a mute accusation on their part, and a sore mortification to himself. Job 6:25. How sweet are words of rectitude [i.e. right words]! ξַ ?δΞπִּ ?ξְ ?ψְ ?φεּ it is best to take as synonymous with ξַ ?δΞπִּ ?ξְ ?μְ ?φεּ (comp. Psalms 119:103), “how sweet, how pleasant are,” etc. According to this rendering, which is favored by the Targ. (also by Raschi, Schultens, Rosenm., Ewald, Schlottmann, Dillmann [Fόrst, Renan, Wordsworth], etc.), the question in the second member of the verse, being introduced with an adversative ε, expresses a contrast with the first member: “but what does reproof from you reprove?” i.e. what does it avail or accomplish? δֹ ?ελֵ ?ηַ, a substantive Inf. Absol. [used as subj., a very rare construction; comp. Proverbs 25:27]. The construction adopted by the LXX., Aq., apparently also by the Pesh. and Vulg., is etymologically admissible. According to this, ξָ ?ψַ ?υ means: “to be sick, weak, in a bad condition,” the sense of the passage being: “Why are the words of rectitude [i.e. my words] poorly esteemed by you? why do they seem to you worthy of blame?” This explanation, however, which is that essentially followed by Luther, Hahn, Ebrard [Umbreit, Hengst., Merx, who, instead of ιωֶׁ ?ψ, reads ιָ ?ωָׁ ?ψ, “the righteous man”], etc., is made less probable in that it renders ξδ by “wherefore.” Others (Kimchi, Delitzsch, v. Gerl.), [so also E. V., Ges., Good, Noyes, Barnes, Conant, Davidson, Carey, Rodwell, Elzas], render: “How forcible, how penetrative, are words of rectitude!” Whereas ξψυ, however, can scarcely be the same with τּ ?ψυ, this rendering lacks the necessary etymological justification. The same is true of Hupfeld’s combination of the verb ξψυ with ξψδ ,ξψ, acerbum acrem esse: “how bitter words of uprightness can be!” Here, moreover, the rendering of ξδ by quantumvis is doubtful. [The word is used elsewhere twice in Niphal, as here: 1 Kings 2:8, of a grievous curse, or “a curse inevitably carried out” (Del.); Micah 2:10, of sore, unsparing destruction; and once in Hiphil: Job 16:3, in the sense of goading, provoking, and so stirring up to speak. The analogy of these passages favors the rendering: “How forcible!” To this add: (1) It agrees better with the subject, “upright, honest, sincere words.” “Words which keep the straight way of truth, go to the heart.”—Del. Comp. what is said of the word of God in Hebrews 4:12. (2) The parallelism favors it, as thus: Words which proceed from sincerity are effective: they have force and pungency; but the words which have proceeded from you (ξִ ?λֶּ ?ν)—what force, what pungency, what reproving power, have they?—E.] Job 6:26. Do you think to reprove (mere) words?i.e. will you, to justify your censorious treatment of me, fasten on my words—on words spoken by me without reflection in the excitement of passion (Job 3), instead of on the fact of my blameless conduct? The whole question attaches itself closely to Job 6:25 b, and defines more closely the sense of that interrogative sentence: Do you think to make your reproof efficacious and profitable [exactly so: a good definition of πִ ?ξְ ?ψְ ?φεּ: see above.—E.] in this way, by directing attention only to those words of mine? [δַ ?μְ ?δֹ ?ελַ ?η, Inf. constr. Hiph. with Pattach: Grn. § 126, 1]. Notwithstanding the words of a despairing man go to the wind, i.e., notwithstanding you should know that the words of one in despair (πεֹ ?ΰָ ?ωׁ) are necessarily inconsiderate and spoken at random, are therefore to be judged leniently, and not pressed to the quick. The same sense is also obtained if (with Delitzsch, etc.) εּ ?μְ ?ψεּ ?ηַ εβεΧ be treated as a circumstantial clause, and translated: “while nevertheless the words,” etc. Our adversative rendering of the ε however makes the expression stronger. [The preposition μ in μְ ?ψεּ ?ηַ is rendered with slight variations. Ewald, Dillmann, Hengstenberg, Merx, like Zφckler, render it, “speaking to the wind.” E. V., Con., Dav., Elz., Rod.: “as the wind.” And so Carey: “for wind.” Schlott., Noyes, Wem.: “but wind.” Delitzsch and Renan: “belong to the wind” (“that they may be carried away by it, not to the judgment, which retains and analyzes them.” Del.).] Job 6:27. Ye would even cast lots for the orphan, and ye would traffic for your friend.—The severest reproach which Job pronounces on his opponents in this discourse. [Renan introduces the verse with the objurgation, “Traitors!”] The two Imperfects express what they would do in a given case, and are thus conditional or subjunctive, as in Job 3:13; Job 3:16. With ϊַּ ?τִּ ?ιμεּ is to be supplied βεֹ ?ψָ ?μ, after 1 Samuel 14:42. [Some suppose the figure in both clauses to be taken from hunting, and supply accordingly ψֶ ?ωֶׁ ?ϊ, net, in the first: “You spread a net, and dig a pitfall for your friend.” Hengstenberg would supply “stones:” “you would stone your friend.” E. V., Good, Elz.: “cause to fall,” i.e., overwhelm, fall upon. But as Zφckler proceeds to say]: A casting of lots for an orphan might take place when unrelenting creditors appropriated the children of their deceased debtors as slaves by way of payment. Comp. 2 Kings 4:1. With λָּ ?ψָ ?δ in the second member, Rosenm., Gesenius, Heiligstedt, supply ωַׁ ?ηַ ?ϊ, “a grave” [so also E. V., Good, Noyes, Wem., Carey, Rod., Elz., Hengst.]. But partly the context, partly the similar expression in Job 40:30, as also passages like Hosea 3:2, Deuteronomy 2:6, assure the signification of λָּ ?ψָ ?δςַ ?μ to be: “to conclude a bargain for any one, to sell, to traffic in any one,” viz., as slaves. Comp. Genesis 37:27 sq. [So Ewald, Dillmann, Delitzsch, Wordsworth, and Schlottmann, who argues that the ellipsis of ψωϊ in the first member is without any analogy: that for the ellipsis of ωׁ ?ηϊ in the second the use of ητψ in Psalms 35:7 cannot be cited, seeing that there ωׁ ?δϊ occurs in the first member, and that the construction with ςμ, “to dig a pit against one,” would be harsh and unprecedented.] Job 6:28-30. [An urgent appeal to consider the righteousness of his cause. Observe the sudden and touching transition from the bitter outbreak of Job 6:27, as though himself alarmed at the violent expression of his feelings, the reaction bringing back with it something of the old trust in his friends.—E.] Job 6:28. And now be pleased to look on me.—Immediately following upon the severest reproof the discourse changes its tone to that of mild entreaty and adjuration. τָּ ?πָ ?δαְ, to turn the face to one, to consider attentively. Comp. Ecclesiastes 2:11. And of a truth I will not lie to your face:i.e., in maintaining unrighteously and untruthfully my innocence. ΰִ ?ν is the particle used in a negative oath, or a solemn asseveration that this or that is not the case (Gesen. § 155 [§ 152], 2 f.). [The rendering of E. V.: “for it is evident unto you, if I lie,” is unfortunate in its use of the present, “is;” for as Conant says: “though it was so clear to Job himself, he could not assert that it was so evident to them.” This objection, however, is obviated, if, with Gesenius, we supply the future: “it will be before your face (i.e., evident.) if I lie;” or if, with Hengstenberg, we supply the optative: “let it lie before your face (i.e., let it be determined by you, be ye judges) whether I lie.” In favor of the one or the other of these constructions, which are substantially the same, it may be said: (1) It establishes a better connection of the first and second members of this verse. Having entreated them to give earnest attention to his case, he assures them that they will be satisfied with his truth. (2) It is in better harmony with the suddenly subdued and almost plaintive tone which characterizes this strophe than the strenuous asseveration that he would not lie to their faces. (3) It brings the structure of the verse into conformity with that of the verse following, where we have the same earnest entreaty, followed by the same assurance of a satisfactory conclusion. (4) Job 6:30 seems to be the expansion of the same thought. (5) The construction is much simpler and less harsh.—E.] Job 6:29. Return, I pray—i.e., not: “come hither in order to hear my complaint” (Schlott., Kamph.), which would be trivial and inexpressive; nor: “begin again” (i.e., try it again, v. Gerl., Del.),—a sense which cannot be referred to the simple objectless ωׁ ?εּ ?αεּ. But the meaning is rather: “Return from the path of hostility and unfriendly suspicion towards me, on which you have entered.” For the absolute use of ωׁ ?εּ ?α, to be converted, to return (to Jehovah), comp. Jeremiah 3:12; Jeremiah 3:14; Jeremiah 3:22; 2 Chronicles 6:24, etc. Let there be no wrong—viz: on your side, through your continuing to torture me, etc. Yea, return, I am still right therein.—With the K’ri we are to read εְ ?ωֻׁ ?αεּ, a reiterated urgent request that they should hear him without prejudice. The K’thibh, εωׁ ?αι, admits of no satisfactory explanation. [One commentator, e.g., supposes that Job is here addressing his wife! Some (e.g., Hengstenberg) that he is addressing his cause (personified), which his friends had dismissed as adjudicated. Others, as Schultens, regard the word as Inf. with suffix; “my return,” i.e., I will return, or again go over my case, and establish its righteousness. But, as Schlottmann remarks, this is undoubtedly one of the few cases where the K’ri is to be preferred. Renan, following, perhaps, a hint already furnished by the LXX.: καθίσατε (probably reading ωְׁ ?αεּ), supposes that, stung by Job’s reproaches, especially in Job 5:27, the friends had made a movement to depart. An ingenious but a needless conjecture, which weakens the importunity of Job’s appeal for an impartial trial of his cause.—E.] “I am still right therein, [or lit.] my righteousness is still in it,” i.e., in the mutter which we are considering [in my cause]; I still stand innocent and unconvicted in this business. Job 6:30. Is there wrong on my tongue?i.e., have I really thus far (in that complaint, Job 3) spoken wrong? He does not therefore admit that in his vehement murmuring and cursing and lamenting he has erred; he will only acknowledge that his words have been “spoken to the wind,” i.e., thoughtlessly (Job 5:26), not that they are blameworthy or godless. Or does not my palate (ηֵ ?κְ here, as in Job 12:11, as the organ of taste) [here of course in the figurative sense of moral discrimination] discern calamities?i.e., do I not possess so much of a right judgment and understanding that I can discern the true import of my misfortune, that I can know whether my suffering is or is not deserved? To assign to ηַ ?εּ ?εֹ ?ϊ another sense than that which belongs to the sing. in Job 5:2, is not suitable. Schlottmann, Dillmann, etc., interpret it rightly in the sense of “calamities, misfortunes,” while most expositors adopt the signification, “wickedness, iniquity” (“the wickedness which completely contaminates feeling and utterance.” Del.), a signification which is scarcely supported by its use in other passages. [Besides its correspondence with the sing. in Job 5:2, the sense here given for ηַ ?εֹ ?εּ ?ϊ is favored by the comparison of suffering with food in Job 6:6-7, and also by the circumstantial and painful description of his sufferings, into which he plunges in the following chapter. This view, moreover, results in less tautology than the other.—E.] For the sense of the passage, as a whole, it matters not whether we translate as above, or: “does not my palate discern iniquity?” In any case, Job by this question gives evidence of his entanglement in Pelagian notions, under the influence of which he will plead guilty neither to error nor to wrong. 5. Third Division: A return to the previous lamentation because of his fate, and an accusation of God: Job 7:1-21. First Long Strophe: Job 7:1-11, (subdivided into two strophes of 6 and 5 verses): A lamentation over the wearisomeness of life on earth in general, and over his own hopeless condition in particular. a. Job 7:1-6. [Job’s weariness of life on account of its misery and brevity. “In antagonism to Eliphaz’s fascinating picture of the Supreme, the Father directing all the currents of creation’s influence for mercy and good, Job’s inflamed eye throws up against the sky in gigantic outline an omnipotent slave driver, and fills the earth with miserable wretches overworked by day, and shaken by feverish weariness and dreams of torture by night.”—Davidson]. Job 7:1. Has not man a warfare on earth, and are not his days like the days of a hireling?—[“The fact that Job in ver 1 brings his suffering into connection with the misery of the whole human race, indicates progress in relation to Job 3, where, predominantly at least, he limited himself to the representation of his individual condition. By this advance the question concerning God’s righteousness and love receives a much more forcible significance. The question is no longer about a solitary exception, which may have a secret personal reason for its existence. Job now stands forth as representative of the whole of suffering, oppressed humanity, arraigning God because of His injustice.” Hengstenberg. ΰֱ ?πεֹ ?ωׁ, used continually in Job, as in the Psalms, of man in his weakness and mortality; comp. Job 5:17; Job 7:17; Job 13:9; Job 14:19; Job 15:14; Job 25:6; or of man in his insignificance and impurity as contrasted with God: comp. Job 4:17; Job 9:2; Job 10:4-5; Job 25:4.—E.]. By many the verse is translated: “Has not man a service [the service, viz., of a vassal] on earth, and are not his days as the days of a hireling?” (so e.g. Hahn, Vaih., etc.). But in the original text the figure first presented is rather the military one (φָ ?αָ ?ΰ, military service, soldiering, as in Job 14:14; Isaiah 40:2; Daniel 10:1) [“in silent antithesis to Eliphaz’s fascinating picture, Job 5,” Dav.], while the figure taken from the peaceful life of a tiller of the soil (ωָׂ ?λִ ?ιψ, hireling, one who works for wages, comp. Job 14:6) follows in the second member. This latter comparison, belonging to the sphere of agricultural life, is continued in the more detailed description of the following verse. Job 7:2. Like a slave, who pants after the shadow [soil. of evening; see Gesenius], and like a hireling who waits for his wages. The λְ used in each member is not the continuation of the λְּ in λִּ ?ιξֵ ?ιΞωׂ ?λְ ?ιψ, Job 7:1, but stands in cor-relation to the λֵּ ?ο which begins Job 7:3, that verse being the apodosis to this. [For the reason just given the translation should not be: “as a slave he pants, etc.” Neither: “as a slave pants,” which would be λַּ ?ΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψ]. τֹּ ?ςַ ?μ that which is earned by working, wages: comp. Proverbs 21:6; Jeremiah 22:13; also the synonymous τְּ ?ςֻ ?μָּ ?δ, Leviticus 19:13; Isaiah 40:10, etc. [The reward of the day’s labor is to be understood as being looked forward to by the laborer here not so much for its own sake, as because it marks the close of the day’s work, because having received his wages he rests.—E.] Job 7:3. So months of wretchedness are allotted to me, and nights of distress are appointed for me.—ιַ ?ψְ ?ηֵ ?ιΞωׁ ?εְ ?ΰ is translated by Delitzsch [Schlott., Hengst., Davidson, E. V.]: “months of disappointment,” which certainly corresponds more nearly to the literal signification of ωָׁ ?εְ ?ΰ (vanity, nothingness, falsehood, the opposite of ϊֻּ ?ωִׁ ?ιָּ ?δ), but furnishes no point of comparison that is altogether suitable in connection with what precedes. Moreover the signification: “wretchedness, misfortune is sufficiently assured for ωָׁ ?εְ ?ΰ by Job 15:31; Isaiah 30:28 [and so Umbr., Ew., Dil., Noy., Con.]. δָ ?πְ ?ηַ ?μְ ?ϊִּ ?ι, lit., “I am made to inherit, are appointed to me as my lot” (πημδ), with accus. of the object. The Passive expresses “the compulsoriness of the lot” (Hirzel). [“A pathetic word, made to inherit, through no cause or fault of mine, it is the mere arbitrary effect … of the will of him whose slave I am. μִ ?ι adds force to the passive, both show the non-participation of Job in causing his troubles, and his helplessness to dispose of them.” Davidson]. From the months of wretchedness to the nights of distress, there is a progression in the thought; the latter are related to the former as the sharp and sudden destruction effected by a bombardment to the preceding and accompanying sufferings which a protracted siege produces among those who are beleaguered. [Dillmann states the progression thus: “in contrast with the days of the hireling are the months and even the nights of the misery.” It seems scarcely necessary, however, to assume a progression here. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/lange/ II. Bildad and Job: Chaps. 8–10A.—Bildad’s rebuke: Man must not charge God with unrighteousness as Job has done, for God never does that which is unjust:Job 81. Censure of Job on account of his unjust accusation against God: Job 8:2-71    Then answered Bildad the Shuhite, and said: 2    How long wilt thou speak these things? and how long shall the words of thy mouth be like a strong wind? 3    Doth God pervert judgment? or doth the Almighty pervert justice? 4    If thy children have sinned against Him, and He have cast them away for their transgression; 5    If thou wouldest seek unto God betimes, and make thy supplication to the Almighty; 6    if thou wert pure and upright, surely now He would awake for thee, and make the habitation of thy righteousness prosperous. 7    Though thy beginning was small, yet thy latter end should greatly increase. 2. Reference to the wise teachings of the ancients in respect to the merited end of those who forget God: Job 8:8-198    For inquire, I pray thee, of the former age, and prepare thyself to the search of their fathers: 9    (For we are but of yesterday, and know nothing, because our days upon earth are a shadow): 10    Shall not they teach thee, and tell thee, and utter words out of their heart? 11    “Can the rush grow up without mire? can the flag grow without water? 12    Whilst it is yet in his greenness, and not cut down, it withereth before any other herb. 13    So are the paths of all that forget God, and the hypocrite’s hope shall perish: 14    Whose hope shall be cut off, and whose trust shall be a spider’s web. 15    He shall lean upon his house, but it shall not stand; he shall hold it fast, but it shall not endure. 16    He is green before the sun, and his branch shooteth forth in his garden. 17    His roots are wrapt about the heap, and seeth the place of stones. 18     If He destroy him from his place, then it shall deny him, saying, I have not seen thee. 19    Behold, this is the joy of his way, and out of the earth shall others grow.” 3. A softened application of these teachings to the case of Job: Job 8:20-2220    Behold, God will not cast away a perfect man, neither will He help the evil doers: 21    Till He fill thy mouth with laughing, and thy lips with rejoicing. 22    They that hate thee shall be clothed with shame; and the dwelling-place of the wicked shall come to nought. AND The aspect which this first discourse of Bildad’s presents to us is far from being particularly controversial or violent, such as would correspond to the conjectural signification of the name αμγγ, = “son of strife” (see on Job 2:11). It attaches itself to the conclusion of the preceding discourse of Job, in that it at once proceeds to show how entirely unjust is Job’s conduct in accusing God of a want of compassion, and of despotic harshness, whereas God in determining the lot of mankind never acts otherwise than justly (Job 8:2-7). He then illustrates and supports the proposition that God causes an evil and sudden end to overtake those who apostatize from him by certain wise proverbial sayings of the ancients (Job 8:8-19). He closes by prominently setting forth the twofold activity of the retributive justice of God (vers, 20–22), a conclusion which is so far conciliatory in its tendency in that it gives stronger expression to the hope that Job, through repenting of his sin, would experience the justice of God rewarding him, than to the fear of the opposite, or a warning of the consequences of his impenitence. [“It is to be specially noted in this connection B. makes no reply to the harsh personal reproaches of Job 6:14-27, but confines himself to the subject-matter.” Dillmann]. Of the three divisions of the discourse, which are somewhat unequal in length, the first comprises 2 strophes, the second 4, the third 1, each of three verses. 2. First Division: Rebuke of Job’s unjust accusation of God, as though He were unmerciful and unjust towards him, Job 8:2-7. First Strophe: Job 8:2-4. [The certainty that retributive justice will punish the sinner]. Job 8:2. How long wilt thou speak such things?ςַ ?γΞΰָ ?ο, as elsewhere ςַ ?γΞΰָ ?πָ ?δ (Job 18:2; Job 19:2): lit. until when, quousque tandem [“An exclamation of impatience.” Dav. “The friends had expected that after so thorough and unanswerable an argument as that which Eliphaz had delivered in their name, Job would at once acknowledge himself convinced, an expectation which Eliphaz himself had confidently announced at the close of his discourse.—The fact proves to be just the reverse: Job speaks more defiantly than at first. And so Bildad introduces his discourse with his exclamatory ςγΞΰο, a veritable Quousque tandem abutere patientia nostra.” Schlottm.] ΰֵ ?μֶּ ?δ, these things, i.e., such things as thou hast spoken. [Said contemptuously, as also ψεּ ?ηַ in the next member]. And the words of thy mouth are a boisterous wind? Properly a continuation of the preceding interrogative construction: “how long shall the words of thy mouth be a boisterous wind?” i.e., like such a wind in respect of their emptiness [and bluster], as well as of their sweepingly destructive tendency (comp. Job 15:2; Job 16:3; 1 Kings 19:11). For λַּ ?αִּ ?ιψ, poetic synonym of βָ ?ψεֹ ?μ (Job 1:19) comp. Job 15:10; Job 31:25; Job 34:17; Job 34:24; Isaiah 17:12. [The word is peculiar to the book of Job and Isaiah]. Job 8:3. Will God pervert the right, or the Almighty pervert justice?i.e., canst thou think for thy part that, etc.? Canst thou in sober earnest accuse God of injustice? “Observe the repetition of the verb ιְ ?ςַ ?εֵּ ?ϊ, on which there rests an emphasis which for Job was particularly stinging.” Umbreit. [Davidson, e.g., more correctly on the whole perhaps: “the repetition of pervert shows that it is not the emphatic word, while the variation of the divine names, as well as their position at the head of the clauses, throws the emphasis on the Divine Being—will God, etc.” The distinction between ξִ ?ωְׁ ?τָּ ?θ and φֶ ?γֶ ?κְ is substantially that already given by Schultens: the former designates the justice of God as embodied in act, actio judicandi; the latter as a principle or rule in the Divine mind.—E.]. Job 8:4. If thy children have sinned against him.—Only to spare Job’s feelings Bildad avoids saying: “because thy children have sinned,” and so leaves it apparently uncertain whether this formed the ground of the Divine decree concerning their fate—but only apparently, since he clearly regarded this decree as a punishment for their sins, as the conclusion proves. [Conant thinks this hypothetical use of ΰִ ?ν to be “not at all in the spirit of Bildad.” He takes it to be concessive—“though thy sons have sinned against Him, and He hath given them, etc., if thou thyself wouldest seek God, etc.” To which it may be objected: (1) This makes the protasis needlessly long. (2) It destroys the evident contrast between verses 4 and Job 5 : between the hypothetical proposition concerning the children’s sin in the former, and the conclusion therefrom, and the similar hypothetical proposition concerning Job’s repentance in the latter, and the conclusion therefrom in Job 8:6-7.—ΰִ ?ν is undoubtedly used in the same way in both propositions, and if conditional in the latter, is conditional also in the former. At the same time it does not seem that Bildad uses ΰִ ?ν in the former case out of any particular consideration for Job’s feelings. He uses it apparently in its purely logical sense, and this, too, with an assumption of the truth of the supposition which makes itself felt throughout the entire verse.—E.]—Then hath he given them over into the hand of their transgression. εַ ?ιְ ?ωַׁ ?μְּ ?ηֵ ?ν, lit., “then hath He let them go into the hand, (i.e., into the power) of their transgression,” subjected them to the influence of their guilt. [“An expression of fearful energy” (Dav.) implying the self-retaliatory power of sin, the certainty that the moral order of the universe, enforced by the Divine will, will punish the transgressor.—E.] Comp. Job 9:24; Judges 4:9; 1 Samuel 23:20.—Concerning the retrospective reference of the verse to Job 1:19, come. Introd., § 8, No. 3. Second Strophe: Job 8:5-7. [The certainty that retributive justice will reward Job, if pure.] Job 8:5. But if thou seekest earnestly unto God.—ωִׁ ?ηַ ?ψΰֶ ?μΞΰֵ ?μ, constr. prζgnans, as above Job 5:8 : γָּ ?ψַ ?ωׁ ΰֶ ?μΞΰֵ ?μ, to sue God for anything, to turn oneself to Him with earnest entreaty. ΰַ ?ϊָּ ?δ, thou, puts Job in emphatic contrast with his children (Job 8:4 a), as one who still has time to repent and to be reconciled, as the condition of the restoration of his prosperity. [And makest supplication to the Almighty.—Davidson calls attention to the “fine force of reflex Hithp., seek to make God gracious to oneself.” Observe also in this verse as in Job 8:3 the use in parallel clauses of El and Shaddai, the names most suggestive of God’s power to uphold the moral order of the universe, thus using the terror of the Lord to persuade Job.—E.] Job 8:6. If thou art pure and upright.—This new conditional clause is not co-ordinate with the preceding, but subordinate to it: “provided, namely, thou art really pure and upright, if it be really the case that thou,” etc.Surely then He will awake for thee.—λִ ?ιςַ ?ϊָּ ?δ, “surely then, verily then,” emphatic introduction of the conclusion, as in Job 13:18.—ιָ ?ςִ ?ιψςָ ?μֶ ?ικָ, He will awake, arouse Himself for thee (comp. Psalms 35:23), namely, for thy protection and deliverance; not: He will watch over thee, take thee under His care (Hirzel, Delitzsch [Dav., Renan, Merx] etc.), which would be altogether at variance, with the usual signification of the verb δςιψ. And restoreιְ ?ωַׁ ?μֵּ ?ν, in integram restituet; the LXX. correctly: καὶ αποκαταστήσει) the habitation of thy righteousness, i.e., the habitation where thou, as a righteous man, dost dwell and enjoy the fruits of thy righteousness (Dillmann).—On πεδ see on Job 5:3. Job 8:7. And if thy beginning was small thy end shall be exceeding great.—In addition to the restoration of his former prosperity he promises him something new and yet more glorious, an unconscious prophecy of that which in the end actually came to pass (Job 42:12), exactly like the promise of prosperity in the latter part of Eliphaz’s discourse: Job 5:8 sq. εְ ?ΰַ ?ηֲ ?ψִ ?ιϊְ ?κָ ιִ ?ωְׂ ?βֶ ?δξְ ?ΰֹ ?γ, lit., “and thy last end (thy latter estate, in contrast with ψֵ ?ΰωִׁ ?ιϊְ ?κָ, thy former estate, thy prosperity in the beginning) will flourish greatly.” ΰַ ?ηֲ ?ψִ ?ιϊ is here exceptionally and ad sensum construed as masculine; hence the form ιִ ?ωְׂ ?βֶּ ?δ (comp. Ewald, § 174 e), instead of which Olshausen unnecessarily proposes to read ιַ ?ωְׂ ?βֶּ ?δ, with ΰֵ ?μ as subject. 3. Second Division: A reference to the wise teachings of the ancients touching the merited end of those who forget God. [“In respect of its artistic, flowery, and yet concise style” (as well as in respect of the searching practical character of its contents), “this passage forms the climax of the whole discourse.” Ewald.] First Strophe: Job 8:8-10. Praise of the wisdom of the ancients, by way of introduction to the express testimonies of that wisdom which follows. Job 8:8. Inquire, I pray, of the former generation.—As to the challenge in general, compare Deuteronomy 32:7. For ωׁ ?ΰμ with μְ, see 2 Kings 8:6; for the orthographical form ψִ ?ιωׁ ?εֹ ?ο instead of ψִ ?ΰωׁ ?εֹ ?ο, see below, Job 39:9 (ψιν instead of ψΰν). Whether the indefinite expression γּ ?εֹ ?ψψִ ?ιωׁ ?εֹ ?ο be rendered by the singular, as above, or by the plural—“former generations”—is a matter of indifference. In any case no particular generation of the past is intended, as appears, also from the following expression—“their fathers,” (i.e., the fathers of those former generations).—And give heed to the research of their fathers:i.e., to that which their fathers had investigated and learned to the experimental wisdom therefore of the fathers reaching back into the remotest antiquity.—ηֵ ?χֶ ?ψ, research (Job 5:9; Job 9:10; Job 34:24), here in the sense of the object, or the results of research, that which is searched out. With εְ ?λεֹ ?πֵ ?ο supply μִ ?αְּ ?κָ, which is elsewhere put in connection with the Hiphil. Olshausen’s emendation αּ ?εֹ ?πֵ ?ο, suggested by Deuteronomy 32:10, is unnecessary. Job 8:9. For we are of yesterday, and know nothing.—This is the reason why we should hold to the tradition of the ancients. Lit., “we are yesterday,” i.e., of, or belonging to yesterday (ΰַ ?πְ ?ωֵׁ ?ιϊְ ?ξεֹ ?μ = ϊְּ ?ξεֹ ?μ, Ewald, § 296, d). The stress here laid on the ephemeral character of the present generation is then in the second member illustrated and strengthened by the figure of a shadow (φֵ ?μ); comp. Job 14:2; Psalms 102:12 (11); Psalms 109:23; Ecclesiastes 6:12; Ecclesiastes 8:13, also the Greek phrase σκιᾶςὄναςἄνθρωπος (Pindar, Pyth. 8, 99; comp. Sophocles, Aj. 126, 1236; Ant. 1155; Euripides, Med. 1224, etc.) This fact, that the life of men is so perishable and short is the reason for the demand here made that we should apply ourselves to the wisdom of the ancients, the term of a single human life being insufficient to fathom the eternal laws which rule the universe; to ascertain these we must consult the collective experience of humanity throughout the past. There is no specific proof that the author here had in mind the remote generations of the primeval world, to wit, the macrobiotic races of the ante-diluvian period. Job 8:10. Will not they teach thee [δֵ ?ν emphatic], say to thee [ΰָ ?ξַ ?ψ, “say,” rather than γαψ “speak,” because their words are cited in the verses following], and bring forth words out of their heart?—The heart is mentioned here as the seat of understanding and reflection, in contrast with Job’s expressions, as the mere empty products of the lips (Job 8:2; Job 11:2; Job 15:3, etc.; comp. ΰִ ?ιωׁ μֵ ?αָ ?α (Job 34:10; Job 34:34), “a man of heart,” i.e., of understanding. In regard to ιεֹ ?φִ ?ιΰεּ, proment, proferent (Vulg.), comp. Matthew 13:52. Second Strophe: Job 8:11-13. First specimen, as reported by Bildad, of the wise teachings of the ancients, not indeed cited verbally, but still reproduced freely, and in exact accordance with the sense. [This introduction of the proverbial wisdom of antiquity in Bildad’s discourse is a masterly stroke of art, worthy of especial note (1) Because of the new and interesting element which it contributes to the rhetorical variety of the book. (2). Because of its significance as a feature in our author’s dramatic portraiture of character, Bildad being here presented to us as the disciple of tradition, the “proverbial philosopher,” in contrast with the more mystically inclined Eliphaz, and the more dogmatic and self-assertive Zophar. (3). Because of the contribution thus furnished to the material of the book, to the discussion of its great problem, Bildad here furnishing to this discussion the voice of tradition, even as Eliphaz had furnished the voice of the supernatural world. See below Doctrinal and Ethical Remarks, No. 1.—E.]. Job 8:11. Does the rush grow up without mire [or, except in the marsh]?—βֹ ?ξֶ ?ΰ, according to the Hebr. etymology from βξΰ, to swallow, absorb, fistula bibere (comp. Job 39:24; Genesis 24:17), but also at the same time an Egyptian word (Copt, kam, cham, reed), denotes here, as in Exodus 2:3; Isaiah 18:2; Isaiah 35:7, the Egyptian papyrus reed, which grows in the marshes of the Nile, but which, according to Theophrast, grows also in Palestine, the papyrus-shrub (Cyperus papyrus L.). The mention of this Egyptian product does not constitute a conclusive argument for the composition of the poem in Egypt, or by a poet of Egyptian origin, and all the less that Bildad is here only quoting the words of another and an older sage. Comp. Introd. § 7, c. [“Bildad likens the deceitful ground on which the prosperity of the godless stands to the dry ground on which, only for a time, the papyrus or reed finds water, and grows up rapidly; shooting up quickly, it withers as quickly; as the papyrus plant, if it has no perpetual water, though the finest of grasses, withers off when most luxuriantly green, before it attains maturity.” Delitzsch; see also Smith’s Bib. Dic., Art. “Reed”]. Does the reed-grass thrive without water?ΰָ ?ηεּ reads in the Egyptian Greek of the LXX. (Isaiah 19:7), and of the Book of Sirach (Job 40:16) ἄχι, and, as Jerome learned from the Egyptians, signifies in their language omne quod in palude virens nascitur, hence the grass of the Nile-marshes, seed-grass, Nile-grass (Copt. ake, oke = calamus, juncus). Instead of αְּ ?μֹ ?ΰ of the first member, we have here αְּ ?μִ ?ι, in the sense of “without;” for the former comp. Job 30:28; for the latter Job 24:10; Job 31:39; Job 33:9, etc. [αμι is properly constr. st. of noun, failure, lack.] Of the two synonymous verbs, ιִ ?βְ ?ΰֶ ?δ in the first member signifies a “shooting up on high,” an expression suitable to the size of the papyrus, which grows to the height of ten feet; εִ ?ωְׂ ?βֶ ?ΰ (another form of ιִ ?ωְׂ ?βֶּ ?δ, Job 8:7; comp. Gesen. § 75, Rem. 21 [§ 74, Rem. 22]), in the second member, a luxuriant out-spreading growth, an expression suitable to the nature of the marsh-grass. Job 8:12. While yet (it is) in its greenness (Son 6:11) is not cut down: lit. “is not to be mowed down, not to be cut down,” a circumstantial clause [“a proper Imperf., in a state of not cut, un-cut.” Dav.] comp. Ewald. § 341, b.—Then, sooner than all grass must it dry up: because, namely, the condition of its existence, water, is all at once withdrawn, so that now it decays and withers sooner than common grass. As parallels in thought, comp. Job 5:3; Matthew 6:30. Job 8:13. So are the ways of all who forget God.—A closing application of the comparison precisely similar to that in Proverbs 1:19, where also the expression “ways” is used of what happens to men, their fate (comp. also Psalms 1:6; Job 23:10; Wis 5:7, and often). For ωֹׁ ?λְ ?ηֵ ?ιΰֵ ?μ as a synonym of ψωςιν, the ungodly, comp. e.g.Psalms 9:18 (17); Psalms 50:22. And the hope of the ungodly perisheth: comp. Proverbs 10:28. ηָ ?πֵ ?σ as in Job 13:16; Job 15:34; Job 20:5, and often. [In all these passages, and whereever the word occurs, the Eng. Ver. renders ηָ ?πֵ ?σ “hypocrite,” which is altogether incorrect, the idea of dissimulation not, belonging to the word at all. This rendering is the more strange, seeing that the cognate verb is always correctly rendered to be polluted, profane, corrupt, etc.—E.] Dillmann correctly calls attention to the fact that the figure of the reeds and grass of the marshes perishing by the sudden drying up of the water is intended to illustrate, not the judgment which will visit those who have always been ungodly, but only those who were at one time righteous, and therefore prosperous, but who afterwards fall away from God. In so far the description conveys a somewhat different thought from that in Job 5:3. Third and Fourth Strophes: Job 8:14-19. A further description of the judgment of God upon the wicked, founded on the proverbial wisdom of the ancients. Job 8:14. He whose confidence is cut asunder.—ΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψ as in Job 5:5, an independent rel. pron., connecting the verse with what goes before; not a causal particle: quippe, quoniam (Del.). ιָ ?χεֹ ?θ is hardly a substantive, either of the signification “gourd” (Reiske, Hahn) or “gossamer” (Saadia, in Ewald-Dukes, Beitrδge zur Gesch. der δlt. Auslegung, I., 89). [Fόrst and Hengstenberg prefer regarding it as a noun, meaning “that which is to be rejected.”] Both as to the form and substance of the word, the only justifiable construction of it is as a Kal Imperf., deriving it either from χευ=χεθ,fastidire (Vulg. and many of the ancients, also Schultens), or with the Pesh., Chald., Kimchi, Rosenm., Gesen., and most of the moderns, from a verb χφυ=) χθθ), “to cut oft” (he, whose hope is cut off, cujus spes succiditur); or, which may be still more correct, from χεθ, not elsewhere to be met with, and meaning “to cut, to be brittle, to break asunder,” and so treating it as an intransitive verb, rather than as Kal Imperf. with a passive signification [comp. Ewald, § 138, b].—And his trust is a spider’s house:i.e. that in which he trusts (ξִ ?αְ ?θָ ?ηεּ, sensu obj., of the object of the trust), proves itself to be as perishable as a spider’s web, which the slightest touch, or a mere puff of wind can destroy. For this figure comp. Isaiah 59:5, also the Koran, Sur. 29. 40, and the Arabic proverb quoted by Schultens, Umbreit, etc.: “Time destroys the wall of the skillfully built castle, even as the house of the spider is destroyed.” Job 8:15. More specific expansion of Job 8:14 b.He leaneth on his house—as the object of his confidence, like the man spoken of in Schiller’s Bell: “Fest wie der Erde Grund,” etc. Comp. on Daniel 4:26. [But it stands not; he holds fast to it, but it endures not. There is a certain gradation of thought in the verse. The ungodly first leans, stays himself on his house, but it gives way beneath him; finding this to be the case, feeling his trust giving way beneath him, he strengthens his hold on it (ιַ ?ηְ ?ζִ ?ιχ), grasps it with all his might, as a sinking man seizes violently on anything within his reach; but in vain! He and his hope all tumble to ruin together.—E.] Job 8:16 sq. After thus dwelling briefly (Job 8:14-15) on the comparison of a falling house, the description now returns to the previous figure derived from the vegetable kingdom. For the marsh-reed, however, there is substituted the climbing plant, with its high and luxuriant growth; and the comparison is so presented that between the figure and the thing figured there is no sharp line of distinction observed, but each blends with the other. Job 8:16. Green is he (the ηָ ?πֵ ?σ of Job 8:13, who is here conceived of as a climbing plant) in the sunshine: in the same heat which causes other plants to wither.—And his sprouts run over his garden (ιεֹ ?πַ ?χְ ?ϊּ ?εֹ [“his suckers”] as in Job 14:7; Job 15:30): i.e. the whole garden in which he, this luxuriantly growing, creeping plant, is placed, is filled and over-run with his root-sprouts which cling to all about them. Job 8:17. His roots entwine themselves (lit. are entwined) over heaps of stone; he looks upon a house of stone: in the sense, that is, that having grown up on it, he eagerly clings to it, as to a firm support. [“On ιηζδ Cocceius remarks: non timet locum lapidosum, sed imperterritus videt. He gazes on it boldly and confidently, with the purpose of making his home in it.” Hengst.] By this is naturally to be understood a real stone house, its walls being of this material (comp. Genesis 49:22, according to the correct explanation of modern commentators), not anything figurative: e.g. the solid structure of his fortune, as Delitzsch explains it. Several modern commentators (Bφttcher, Ewald, Stickel, Fόrst, Dillmann) take αֵּ ?ιο=αֵּ ?ιϊ (as in Proverbs 8:2), hence in the sense of “between, in the midst of,” and ηζδ, according to its primary signification, in the sense of: “to pierce through, to split between;” hence: “to pierce through between the stones,” viz. with its roots. Possible, but perhaps too artificial. [The LXX. translate: ἐνμέσῳ χαλίκωνζήσεται, taking αιϊ in the sense of αιο, and evidently reading or substituting ιηιδ for ιηζδ. Gesenius regards ηζδ here as a bold metaphor, seeing the stones, for feeling them with the roots. Noyes and Renan regard the expression as describing the depth at which the plant takes root. The latter’s rendering is: “His roots are intertwined at the rock; he touches the region of the granite.” Wordsworth’s comment is interesting: “He surveyeth a house of stones; he is like a tree which seems firmly rooted in a heap of stones, and looks down, as it were, with a domineering aspect, and a proud consciousness of strength on a house of stone, in which he appears to be firmly built, as in a marble palace; and yet he will soon be withered and rooted up, and vanish from the face of the earth.—Observe the order of the comparison. The sinner had been first likened to a plant of papyrus or reed-grass, with its tall green stem and flowery tuft flourishing in the watery slime, but suddenly withered, when the soil in which it is set is dried up: he is next compared to a shrub sprouting with fresh leaves, and shooting forth its luxuriant branches, mantling over the wall of the garden; and lastly he is likened to something still more robust, to a tree striking its roots downwards into a cairn of stones, and looking down with proud confidence on its house of rock, and seeming to defy the storm.” We scarcely seem justified, however, in assuming a different plant or tree to be intended in Job 8:17 from that described in Job 8:16.—Conant thinks that “the explanation long ago given by Olympiodorus is the true one; viz. that the wicked is here likened to a plant springing up in a stony soil, and perishing for lack of depth of earth:” to which Davidson justly replies that “the stones assist, not impede the growth of this kind of plants, and Job 8:17 is still occupied with the detail of the luxuriance of the plant.”—We are thus led back to the view of Zφckler, Schlottm., Hengst., etc., as on the whole the simplest and best; that both verses describe the same plant, Job 8:16 as overrunning the garden with its creepers, Job 8:17 as clinging stoutly to its house of stone.—E.] Job 8:18. If He destroys it from its place.—The subj. in ιְ ?αַ ?μְּ ?ςֶ ?πּ ?εּ (comp. the same verb in Job 2:3) is either to be left indefinite: “if one destroys him from his place [as if he is destroyed],” Umbreit, etc.; or, which is better suited to the poet’s whole style and mode of thought, God is to be understood as the subject. On the contrary, in the second member: It shall deny him: I have never seen thee], the subject to be supplied with the verb is unquestionably: “his place” (ξְ ?χεֹ ?ξε). It is a highly poetical conception which is here presented: the native ground, or the place of growth of an uprooted tree, i.e. of a transgressor cast down from the height of his prosperity, being, as it were, ashamed of him, denying him and refusing to know anything more of him. Job 8:19. Behold this is the joy [ironically said] of his way:i.e. so does it end, his pretended joyful way of living (comp. on Job 8:13); so sudden, calamitous is the end of his course. And out of the dust shall others sprout up.—“Others” (ΰַ ?ηֵ ?ψ collect., comp. Ewald, § 319, a), i.e. other men blessed with external prosperity, whose happiness will either prove more enduring, or, in case’ they too fall away from God, will as surely crumble away as his. Third Division and Fifth Strophe: Application of the wisdom of the ancients, as just cited, to the case of Job: Job 8:20-22. [The picture just given suggested a solemn warning to Job to beware of incurring such a fate. Bildad, however, instead of giving to the application this minatory turn, uses a milder and more conciliatory tone, encouraging Job to repentance, by promises of the divine favor.—E.] Job 8:20. Behold, God despiseth not the pious man, and grasps not the hand of evil-doers:i.e. in order to help and support them; comp. Isaiah 41:13; Isaiah 42:6; Psalms 73:23; as also the figurative expansion of this truth just given Job 8:12 sq. Job 8:21. [Expanding, with personal application, the thought of Job 8:20 a].—While He will fill thy mouth with laughter, and thy lips with rejoicing.—Delitzsch (referring to Job 1:18; Psalms 141:10) rightly interprets ςַ ?γ at the beginning of this verse in the sense of “while,” and takes the whole verse as the protasis of which Job 8:22 is the apodosis. Others take ςַ ?γ in the less suitable sense of “yea even” (Umbreit), or amend to ςֹ ?γ, “yet,” comparing the passage with Psalms 42:6 (Cocceius, Honbigant, Bφttcher, Ewald, Stickel, Dillmann). For the expression: “to fill any one’s mouth with laughter,” comp. Psalms 126:2; for the text ιְ ?ξַ ?μֵּ ?δ, instead of ιְ ?ξַ ?μֵּ ?ΰ (the case being accordingly the reverse of that in Job 8:11, b), comp. Gesenius, § 75 [§ 74], 21, b. Job 8:22. [Expansion of 20b, with personal application to Job’s enemies.]—They that hate thee shall be clothed in shame: the same comparison in Psalms 35:26; Psalms 109:29; Psalms 132:18. Observe how persuasive and conciliatory in this conclusion of Bildad’s discourse, in that he wishes for the “haters” of Job the worst fate, the portion of the ungodly; thus unmistakably separating himself and his friends from that class, and placing himself decidedly on the side of Job.—And the tent of the wicked—it is no more.—For the use of the term “tent” as a concrete expression for the totality of well-being, comp. Job 5:24. Altogether too artificial is the explanation of Dillmann and others, denying the identity of the “wicked” with the “haters” in the first member, thus rendering the ε at the beginning of this member adversatively: “but the tent of the wicked is no more,” as though Psalms 1:6 were a parallel passage, and the whole discourse of Bildad, notwithstanding the milder tone assumed in the last strophe, should still close with a warning or a threat. That this is in truth the case, only indirectly (i.e. in so far as the whole of Job 8:22 dwells on the miserable lot of the wicked, without recurring to the description of Job’s prosperity, and closing with that), see in the Doctrinal and Ethical Remarks, No. 3. AND ETHICALThe similarity of this first discourse of Bildad to that of Eliphaz is so marked that it can almost be termed an abbreviated repetition, differing considerably in the application of several particulars, of that with which Eliphaz had already charged Job. The same censorious introduction and the same mitigating and conciliatory close! And in the body of the discourse the same exhortation to betake himself to God in penitence and in prayer for help, with the accompanying promise of salvation (comp. Job 8:5 seq. with Job 5:8 seq.); the same figurative vesture frequently for one and the same truth, as, in particular, the description, twice occurring (Job 8:12 and Job 8:18), of the sudden withering and perishing of a plant of luxuriant growth, an unmistakable copy of the description first given by Eliphaz in Job 5:3 seq. Another noteworthy point of similarity between the two discourses is that Eliphaz, in order more vividly to set forth and more forcibly to emphasize the central thought which he inculcates, presents the same in the form of a divine revelation brought to him mysteriously by night, while Bildad seeks to accomplish the same result by introducing the ancient teachers of wisdom as speaking, in place of himself (comp. Job 8:8 seq. with Job 4:12 seq.). In this citation from the traditional Chokmah he gives a free reproduction of the same, in like manner as Eliphaz in his account of the vision had furnished an ideal, poetic picture. [“It was a hard stroke on Job to see not only his friends of the present, but all good and wise men of the past, marshalled against him; and tremendous must have been his force of conscience to resist and drive from the field such outnumbering odds.” Davidson. “It is a very important point which Bildad here makes. There is no surer way of falling into error than for one individual or one age wilfully and proudly to cut loose from its connection with the whole, and to resolve to be wise independently and alone. That is historical rationalism, of which that which is commonly called rationalism is but one species. The witness of tradition indeed is to be received cum grano salis—and at this point the friends are at fault. Something more is required than a correct understanding; the truth transmitted by historic tradition always has aspects which have not yet been completely developed; it is not enough to bring forward the whole—we must also, when new problems present themselves, be prepared to build up the New on the basis of the Old. That was the point where Elihu had the advantage over the friends.” Hengstenberg.] It seems accordingly as though the poet had purposed to put Bildad forward as simply an imitator of Eliphaz, destitute of independence, and to present his continuation of the discussion of the latter as a weaker reproduction of the same, his object being thus to cast into the shade and to subordinate the spiritual significance of the friends and their position as compared with that of Job. 2. At the same time, however, this discourse is not wanting in new thoughts, which show that it aims to attack Job from another side than that chosen by his former critic. Eliphaz had argued against Job from the doctrine, derived from experience, of the absolute universality of human sinfulness. Bildad strenuously maintains against him the inexorable justice of God, who does not let the sinner go unpunished, nor the righteous unrewarded. His fundamental thought is presented in Job 8:3 : “Will God pervert the right, or the Almighty pervert justice?” or, as it is somewhat differently conceived, and with a particular application to Job’s case in Job 8:20 : “Behold, God does not spurn the godly, nor take fast hold of (lend support to) the hand of evil-doers.” The entire discourse is devoted to the discussion of this proposition, that the immutability of God’s justice (His justitia judicialis, tam remuneratoria quam punitiva) is demonstrated alike in its treatment of the evil and of the godly. Every part of the discourse aims to establish this—the admonitory reference to the punishment inflicted on Job’s children (Job 8:4), the exhortation to him to beseech God for help and reconciliation (Job 8:5 seq.), the striking illustrations given of the perishableness of the prosperity of him who forgets God (Job 8:11 seq.), and the concluding promise of happiness to him, if (as Bildad hopefully assumes he will do) he will repent and return to God (Job 8:21 seq.). Like Eliphaz, or indeed in still higher measure than he, Bildad seems, in all that he says on these points, to establish himself entirely on the truth. There seems to be scarcely any thing in his words unscriptural, partial, or at all censurable. On the objective side, that which relates to the righteousness of God’s treatment, his words seem as Little liable to the charge of a one-sided narrowness, as on the subjective side, or that which sums up the case for Job, they are liable to that of inconsiderateness or unloving harshness. 3. That this, however, is only on the surface is evident from the painful venomous dart which at the very beginning almost of his discourse he aims at the heart of Job in the harsh judgment which he pronounces on his children, in the assertion, hypothetic indeed in form, but direct in its application, that their sudden death was the consequence of their sin, the merited punishment of their crime. At the bottom of this assertion there lies unquestionably a one-sidedly harsh, gross and external representation of the nature and operations of God’s retributive justice. He is evidently entangled in the short-sighted doctrine of retribution which prevailed in antiquity, both within the theocracy, and in general in the monotheistic oriental world. He imagines that he is able, by means of the common-places formally stated in Job 8:2; Job 8:20 to solve all the riddles of life. Hence the self-righteous, Pharisaic condition to which he subjects the saving efficacy of Job’s penitent supplication to God: “if thou (i.e., provided thou) art pure and righteous” (Job 8:6)—back of which we see clearly enough the implied thought: if thou art not righteous, all thy praying and beseeching is of no avail! Hence still further the malicious indirect attack on Job which is conveyed by the wise teachings of the ancients (Job 8:11 seq.) respecting the sudden destruction of the man who forgets God! It would seem as though by these descriptions of the sudden withering and perishing of the Nile-reed, and of the destruction and uprooting of the thriving climbing-plant, Job’s fall from the height of his former prosperity was pictured. We can imagine that it is in Bildad’s thought to exclaim to his friend, like Daniel to king Nebuchadnezzar, “The tree … it is thou, O king!” (Daniel 4:17 [20] seq.). Even the practical application at the close of the discourse, with its prediction of prosperity, has imparted to it by all this a flavor of bitterness to him who is addressed, especially seeing that the last words of the speaker dwell on the certain destruction, and the inevitable punishment, which the wicked incur, as though the stern moralizer must perforce repeatedly relapse out of the tone of promise into that of censure and menace (comp. on Job 8:22). The fundamental error in Bildad’s argument lies in a rigidly legal interpretation of the idea of. justice, unmodified by a single softening ray from an evangelical experience of Salvation and of the merciful love of God as Father—a representation of the nature of divine justice which is directly opposed to the proper sense of φְ ?γָ ?χָ ?δ ,φֶ ?γֶ ?χ (terms which denote the divine activity only as conditioned and ruled by God’s holiness, or holy love). It is by this error that all that is harsh and one-sided in his discourse is to be explained. He knows nothing of a God disciplining and proving men in love, as a father his children. All human suffering he regards as simply and solely an infliction of God’s retributive justice, which begins to punish when man turns away from God, and abates the suffering only when he returns to him again. “If Bildad had represented Job’s suffering as a chastisement of divine love, which was to humble him in order the more to exalt him, Job would then have been constrained to humble himself, although Bildad might not have been altogether in the right. But Bildad, still further than Eliphaz from weakening the erroneous supposition of a hostile God which had taken possession of Job’s mind, represents God’s justice, to which he attributes the death of his children, instead of His love, as the hand under which Job is to humble himself. Thereby the comfort which Job’s friend offers to him becomes a torture, and his trial is made still greater; for his conscience does not accuse him of any sins for which he should now have an angry instead of a gracious God.” (Del.) 4. Notwithstanding these one-sided and erroneous characteristics, the present discourse furnishes to the practical expositors something more than material for criticism from the stand-point of the New Testament faith and religious consciousness. What it says in vindication of the righteous dealings of God, is in itself considered, and especially in contrast with Job’s unseemly and passionate complaints, well grounded and unassailable. We might just as well find a difficulty with descriptions of the righteous administration of the world similar to this, such as are found in the Psalms (Psalms 1; Psalms 7; Psalms 18:21 [20] seq.; Psalms 34:13 [12] seq.), and find in them nothing but expressions of religious perversity, and of an unevangelical way of thinking and acting; and yet such a view of those expressions, occurring as they do in quite another connection, would be entirely without foundation. The poetic beauty, moreover, of the illustrations of the miserable lot of the wicked in Job 8:11 seq. would lose all value if we were to apply this one-sided critical standard to the discourse, and to consider it only as the expression of a disposition of hypocritical work-righteousness. This the homiletic expositor is evidently not bound to do. Besides those one-sided and harsh features of the discourse, he may and should give prominence also to that which is eternally true and beautiful in it, as an inspired eulogy of the righteous intervention of the Godhead in the destinies of mankind. And—a point which in particular is not to be overlooked—he must bear in mind that, as is shown by the wise sayings of the ancients, quoted by Bildad from a gray antiquity, the knowledge which experience brings of God’s retributive justice as visibly exercised in this world was possessed by the pious of our race even in the earliest times; and still further—that for this knowledge of God’s holy and righteous ordering of the world—a knowledge which is deeply impressed on the universal consciousness of mankind, and which is kept fresh and vivid by great historical examples, such as the histories of Noah and his contemporaries, of Abraham and Lot, of Joseph, Moses, Korah, Balaam, etc.—the only foundation which can be assumed as underlying all else is a positive original revelation in the beginning of humanity’s history.—And this is what determines the value and applicability of the following selections from practical exegetes of the past, which are here given as Homiletic and Practical Remarks on Single PassagesJob_8:3; Job 8:8. Brentius: Such as do not understand the glory of God’s Gospel, but are unwisely carried away by zeal for the Law, say: the way of the Lord is not just, because He forgets the wickedness of him who repents, and the goodness of him who relapses into sin—whereas, according to what is decreed in the Law, evil is to be punished and good rewarded. But they hear it said again: I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked, saith the Lord God; return ye, and live, and all your sins shall be forgotten.—Zeltner: Nothing is easier or more common with the world than by a precipitate judgment to sin against one’s neighbor in respect to his misfortunes, especially when believers are concerned.… Although God visits the iniquity of fathers on their children, the calamities which befall pious children are nevertheless no proof that they or their parents have sinned (John 9:3). Job 8:8 seq. Cocceius: There is no doubt but that fathers ought to transmit the revelations which they have received from God to their children and to other men; and that, moreover, through God’s blessing, the truth has been preserved for a time among some through such tradition; although the conjecture is not improbable that our fathers (from the time of Moses on) delivered much to writing.—Brentius: Our life, as its origin was most recent, so is its end most swift; so that some one has well said: Man is a bubble, which having suddenly arisen on the face of the water, soon perishes. Seeing then that our life is most short, prudence in the management of affairs should be learned from those who are older, and from our ancestors; for the authority of the aged is sacred and venerable. Job 8:11-19. Starke (according to the Weim. Bib.): The hope of hypocrites is perishable; for it is founded not on God, but only on that which is temporal and perishable (Psalms 37:35 seq.; Psalms 49:12; 1 Corinthians 7:31; 1 John 2:17).—Wohlfarth: The prosperity of the ungodly is only apparent: so teaches the wisdom of the ancients, so preaches the Holy Scripture, so testifies experience, so proves the nature of things. For the happiness of sin is neither real, nor satisfactory, nor enduring. The peace which makes us truly happy is not dependent on external possessions.—Vict. Andreae: The wise proverbs of antiquity, to which Bildad (with affected humility) refers Job, are intended to teach the latter that as there are no reeds without a marsh, so also Job’s calamity in strict propriety could proceed only out of his great wickedness; wherefore Job must not wonder at it; nay, his confidence in his good conscience would be a treacherous support, as he will soon enough find to his cost. Job 8:20 seq. Brentius: Although the ungodly may seem to flourish and to be blessed in this world, they are nevertheless exposed to the curse, which in its own time is revealed. And as the ungodly now behold the afflictions of the godly in this world with the greatest rejoicing of soul, so again in God’s judgment day they will be the laughing-stock of all creatures, and will be confounded before them: Isaiah 66—Cocceius (on Job 8:20): From hence it is apparent that it happens to the ungodly as to the papyrus and sedge; to the godly as to an herb that is transplanted. The justice of God cannot therefore be accused, as though it would not reward each one according to his way of living. For although the papyrus and the grass are attached to the water, they do nevertheless dry up. And although a good herb may be dug out, it is nevertheless planted anew elsewhere with a great increase of fertility and utility. A measure of happiness for the ungodly does not dishonor God’s justice; trusting in their happiness they are brought to shame and confusion; neither is it dishonored by the affliction of the righteous, which is for their good.—Zeltner: Just as the suffering of the godly is no proof that they have been rejected by God, so also the brilliant prosperity of the ungodly is no proof that they are in God’s favor. But God permits such things to happen in order to test His people’s patience, faith and hope, and, at the right time, to save them and make them happy forever. Therefore, my Christian brother, continue pious, and keep in the right (Psalms 37:37). B.—Job’s reply: Assertion of his innocence and a mournful description of the incomprehensibleness of his suffering as a dark horrible destinyJob 9-101. God is certainly the Almighty and Ever-Righteous One, who is to be feared; but His power is too terrible for mortal man: Job 9:2-121         Then Job answered and said, 2    I know it is so of a truth: but how should man be just with God? 3    If he will contend with Him, he cannot answer Him one of a thousand. 4    He is wise in heart, and mighty in strength; who hath hardened himself against Him, and hath prospered? 5    Which removeth the mountains, and they know not: which overturneth them in His anger; 6    which shaketh the earth out of her place, and the pillars thereof tremble; 7    which commandeth the sun, and it riseth not; and sealeth up the stars; 8    Which, alone spreadeth out the heaven, and treadeth upon the waves of the sea; 9    which maketh Arcturus, Orion, and Pleiades, and the chambers of the South; 10    which doeth great things, past finding out; yea, and wonders without number. 11    Lo, He goeth by me, and I see Him not; He passeth on also, but I perceive Him not. 12    Behold, He taketh away, who can hinder Him? who will say unto Him, What doest Thou? 2. The oppressive effect of this Omnipotence and Arbitrariness of God impels him, as an innocent sufferer, to presumptuous speeches against God: Job 9:13-3513    If God will not withdraw His anger, the proud helpers do stoop under Him. 14    How much less shall I answer Him, and choose out my words to reason with Him? 15    Whom, though I were righteous, yet would I not answer, but I would make supplication to my judge. 16    If I had called, and He had answered me, yet would I not believe that He had hearkened to my voice. 17    For He breaketh me with a tempest, and multiplieth my wounds without cause. 18    He will not suffer me to take my breath, but filleth me with bitterness. 19    If I speak of strength—lo, He is strong! and if of judgment, who shall set me a time to plead? 20    If I justify myself, mine own mouth shall condemn me; If I say, I am perfect, it shall also prove me perverse. 21    Though I were perfect, yet would I not know my soul; I would despise my life. 22    This is one thing, therefore I said it, He destroyeth the perfect and the wicked. 23    If the scourge slay suddenly, He will laugh at the trial of the innocent. 24    The earth is given into the hand of the wicked: He covereth the faces of the judges thereof; if not, where, and who is He? 25    Now my days are swifter than a post; they flee away, they see no good. 26    They are past away as the swift ships; as the eagle that hasteth to the prey. 27    If I say, I will forget my complaint, I will leave off my heaviness, and comfort myself; 28    I am afraid of all my sorrows, I know that Thou wilt not hold me innocent. 29    If I be wicked, Why then labor I in vain? 30    If I wash myself with snow water, and make my hands never so clean, 31    yet shalt Thou plunge me in the ditch, and mine own clothes shall abhor me. 32    For He is not a man, as I am, that I should answer Him, and we should come together in judgment. 33    Neither is there any daysman betwixt us, that might lay his hand upon us both. 34    Let Him take His rod away from me, and let not His fear terrify me; 35    then would I speak, and not fear Him; but it is not so with me. 3. A plaintive description of the merciless severity with which God rages against him, although as an Omniscient Being, He knows that he is innocent: 10:1–221    My soul is weary of my life; I will leave my complaint upon myself; I will speak in the bitterness of my soul. 2    I will say unto God, Do not condemn me; show me wherefore Thou contendest with me. 3    Is it good unto Thee, that Thou shouldest oppress, that thou shouldest despise the work of Thine hands, and shine upon the counsel of the wicked? 4    Hast Thou eyes of flesh? or seest Thou as man seeth? 5    Are Thy days as the days of man? are Thy years as man’s days, 6    that Thou inquirest after mine iniquity, and searchest after my sin? 7    Thou knowest that I am not wicked; and there is none that can deliver out of Thy hand. 8    Thine hands have made me and fashioned me together round about—yet Thou dost destroy me! 9    Remember, I beseech Thee, that Thou hast made me as the clay; and wilt Thou bring me into dust again? 10    Hast Thou not poured me out as milk, and curdled me as cheese? 11    Thou hast clothed me with skin and flesh, and hast fenced me with bones and sinews. 12    Thou hast granted me life and favor, and Thy visitation hath preserved my spirit. 13    And these things hast Thou hid in Thine heart; I know that this is with Thee. 14    If I sin, then Thou markest me, and Thou wilt not acquit me from mine iniquity. 15    If I be wicked, woe unto me! and if I be righteous, yet will I not lift up my head: I am full of confusion; therefore see Thou mine affliction. 16    For it increaseth. Thou hauntest me as a fierce lion: and again Thou shewest Thyself marvellous upon me. 17    Thou renewest Thy witnesses against me, and increasest Thine indignation upon me; changes and war are against me. 18    Wherefore then hast Thou brought me forth out of the womb? Oh that I had given up the ghost, and no eye had seen me! 19    I should have been as though I had not been; I should have been carried from the womb to the grave. 20    Are not my days few? Cease then, and let me alone, that I may take comfort a little, 21    before I go whence I shall not return, even to the land of darkness, and the shadow of death; 22    a land of darkness, as darkness itself; and of the shadow of death, without any order, and where the light is as darkness! AND 1. As we have seen, Eliphaz and Bildad had alike made the attempt, on the basis of their common places, such as the fact of the universal sinfulness of men, and that of the invariable justice of God’s dealings, to extort from Job the confession of His own ill-desert as the cause of his suffering. Neither of them had heeded his request to render a more reasonable and just decision concerning his case (Job 6:28-30). In this new reply accordingly he addresses himself to both at once, and maintains most emphatically, and even with impassioned vehemence that their propositions, true as they were in general, were not applicable to his case. These propositions which they advanced concerning God’s unapproachable purity, and inexorable justice he admits, but only in order “satirically to twist them into a recognition of that which is for mortal man a crushing, overpowering omnipotence in God, disposing of him with an arbitrariness which admits of no reply” (Job 9:2-12). He then, in daring and presumptuous language, arraigns this terrible Being, this arbitrary Divine disposer, who, as he thinks, notwithstanding his innocence, is resolved to hold and treat him as guilty (Job 9:13-35). And finally, under the influence of these gloomy reflections he falls back into his former strain of doubt and lamentation (in Job 3), closing with a sentiment repeated verbally from that lamentation, although in a condensed form, and casting a gloomy look toward that Hereafter, which promises him nothing better, nothing but an endless prolongation of his present misery (Job 10:1-22). [Dillmann calls attention to the fact that while in the former discourse Job had directed one entire section against his friends, here he says nothing formally against them, but soliloquizes, as it were in their hearing, leaving them to infer whither their assaults are driving him]. The first of these three tolerably long divisions embraces four short strophes (the first three consisting of three verses each, the last of two); the second division consists of two equal sub-divisions (Job 9:13-24 and Job 9:25-35) each of three strophes, and each strophe of four verses: the third division comprises, after an exordium of three lines (ch 10:1) two double-strophes (Job 9:2-22) the first formed of one strophe of 6, and one of 5 verses, the second of two strophes, each of five verses. 2. First Division: Job concedes the propositions of his opponents regarding God’s immutable justice and absolute purity, but shows that for that very reason His power is all the more to be dreaded by mortals; Job 9:2-12. First Strophe: Job 9:2-4. [Impossibility of maintaining one’s cause before God]. Job 9:2. Of a truth [ironical as also in 12:2] I know that it is so, viz., that what Bildad has set forth is quite true: that God ever does only that which is right, and that whatever proceeds from him must for that very reason be right. It is only to this leading proposition of Bildad’s discourse (Job 8:3) that Job’s remark here can refer, and not also to the discourse of Eliphaz, to which reference is first made in the following member: [It seems hardly worth while to make this distinction between two members of the same verse. Formally it is more natural indeed to suppose the opening remark to be addressed to Bildad, materially it doubtless refers to both. “In his former reply to Eliphaz,” says Hengstenberg, “he had sought to work rather on the feelings of his friends. Having failed in this, as the discourse of Bildad shows, he now makes all that the friends had spoken the subject of his criticism.”]—And how should a mortal [ΰֱ ?πεֹ ?ωׁ, man in his weakness and mortality] be right before God?i.e., how should it be otherwise than as Eliphaz has declared in his fundamental proposition (Job 4:17), to wit, that “no man is just before God;” which proposition moreover Job here changes into one somewhat differing in sense: “no man is right before God.” Job 9:3. Should he desire to contend with Him, he could not answer Him one of a thousand.—The subject in both members of the verse is man, not God, as Schlottman, Delitzsch, Kamphausen, explain. By “contending” is meant seeking to establish by controversy or discussion the right of man which is denied. The meaning of the second member of the verse is, that God, as infinitely man’s superior, would overwhelm him with such a multitude of questions that he must stand before Him in mute embarrassment and shame, as was actually the case at last with Job, when God began to speak (Job 38:1 sq.). Job 9:4. The wise of heart and mighty in strength—who has braved Him and remained unhurt?—The absolute cases ηλνμα and ΰξιυλη are resumed in ΰֵ ?μָ ?ιε, and refer accordingly to God, and not to ξִ ?ι (as Olshausen thinks). With δִ ?χְ ?ωָׁ ?δ is to be supplied ςψֶֹ ?σ: “who has hardened his neck against Him,” (Deuteronomy 10:16; 2 Kings 17:14), i.e., bid Him defiance? Second Strophe: Vss. 5–7. A lofty poetic description of the irresistibleness of God’s omnipotence, beginning with its destructive manifestations in nature. [“Job having once conceived the power of God becomes fascinated by the very tremendousness of it—the invincible might of his and man’s adversary charms his eye and compels him to gaze and shudder, and run over it feature after feature, unable to withdraw his look from it. This alone, and not any superficial desire (Ewald) to emulate Eliphaz (to whom there is no particular reference in the speech as most comm. think), accounts for this piece of sublime picturing. Ewald has however finely remarked that the features Job fastens on are the dark and terror-inspiring, as was natural from the attitude in which he conceived God to stand to him.” Davidson]. Job 9:5. Who removeth mountains, and they are not aware that (ΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψ as in Exodus 11:7; Ezekiel 20:26) He hath overturned them in His wrath.—[In favor of thus regarding ΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ε as a conjunction rather than a relative, may be urged (1) The Perf. δτο, which would otherwise be Imperf.; comp. ιַ ?ηְ ?ϊֹּ ?ν Job 9:7. (2). The introduction of a relative construction in a coordinate clause, and ε being absent would be a violation of the present participial construction of the strophe. The use of the Imperf. in 6b and 7b is different: those clauses being introduced by ε and subordinate.—E.]. The activity of the Divine wrath bursts upon them so quickly and suddenly that they are quite unconscious of the mighty change which has been effected in them. Job 9:6. Who maketh the earth to tremble out of her place:viz., by earthquakes, comp. Isaiah 13:13; Psalms 46:3 [2], 4 [3]; and touching the climactic advance from the mountains to the earth, see Psalms 90:2.—And her pillars are shaken [lit., rock themselves. The fundamental meaning of τμυ, which is akin to τμν and τμω, is as Dillmann says, to waver, to rock, not to break, as Ges. and Fόrst explain, connecting it with τψυ]. The pillars of the earth (comp. Psalms 75:4 [3]; 104:5), are, according to the poetic representation prevalent in the O. T. the subterranean roots of her mountains [or according to Schlottmann the foundations on which the earth rests suspended over nothing: Job 26:7; Job 38:6], not their summits, lifted above the earth, which are rather (according to Job 26:11; comp. 38:6) to be thought of as the pillars of the heavenly vault, like Atlas in the Greek mythology. Job 9:7. Who bids the sun (ηֶ ?εֶ ?ν, a rare poetic term for the sun, as in Isaiah 19:18; comp. ηַּ ?ψְ ?ρָ ?δ, Judges 14:18) [“perhaps (says Delitz.), from the same root as ηָ ?ψεּ ?υ, one of the poetical names of gold,” seeing that in Isaiah l. c. ’Ir ha-Heres is a play upon ςִ ?ιψδַ ?ηֶ ?ψֶ ?ν, ‘Ηλιούπολις], and it riseth not, i.e., so that it does not shine forth (comp. Isaiah 58:10), and so appears eclipsed.—And setteth a seal round about the stars, seals them, i.e., veils them behind thick clouds, so that through their obscuration the night is darkened in the same measure as the day by an eclipse of the sun. In regard to obscurations of the heavenly bodies in general as indications of the Divine Power manifesting itself in destruction and punishment, comp. Exodus 10:21; Joe 3:4 (2:31); Ezekiel 32:7 seq.; Revelation 6:12; Revelation 16:10. Third Strophe: Job 9:8-10. The description of the Divine Omnipotence continued, more especially in respect to its creative operations in nature. [To be noted is the absence of the article with the participles in each of these three verses, which alike with its presence in each of the three preceding verses, is clearly a sign of the strophic arrangement.—E.] Job 9:8. Who spreadeth out the heavens alone.πֹ ?θֶ ?δ according to parallel passages, such as Isaiah 40:22; Isaiah 44:24; Psalms 104:2, where the heavenly vault is represented as an immense tent—canvass, is to be explained: “who stretcheth out, spreadeth out,” not with Jerome, Ewald [Noyes, Davidson], etc., “who bows down, lets down.” With the latter interpretation the clause μְ ?αַ ?γּ ?εֹ would not agree; nor again the contents of Job 9:9, where clearly God’s activity as Creator, not as Destroyer, or as one shaking the firmament and the stars, is more fully set forth.—And treads upon the heights of the sea, i.e., upon the high-dashing waves of the sea agitated by a storm, over which God marches as its ruler and controller (Job 38:10 sq.) with sure and majestic tread, as upon the heights of the earth, according to Amos 4:13; Micah 1:3; Comp. Habakkuk 3:15, also the excellent translation of the passage before us in the Sept.: περιπατῶνἔπὶ θαλάσσηςὡςἐπ’ ἐδάφους. Hirzel and Schlottmann [Merx] understand the reference to be to the waters of the firmament, the heavenly cloud-vessels, or thunder-clouds (Genesis 1:6 sq.; Psalms 104:3; Psalms 18:12 (10); Psalms 29:3; Nahum 1:3). But these cloud-waters of the heavens are never elsewhere in the Holy Scripture called “sea” (ιָ ?ν); also not in Job 36:30 (see on the passage), and still less in Revelation 4:6; Revelation 15:8; Revelation 22:1, where the θάλασσα of glass in the heavenly world signifies something quite different from a sea of rain-clouds. [“The objection that this view of sea interferes with the harmony of description, mixing earth and heaven, is obviated by the consideration that the passage is a description of a storm where earth (sea) and heaven are mixed.” Davidson]. Job 9:9. Who createth the Bear and Orion and Pleiades.—ςωֶֹׁ ?δ is taken by Umbreit and Ewald as synonymous with ςֹ ?θֶ ?δ; “who darkens the Bear, etc.”, against which however may be urged the use of ςωδ in Job 9:10, likewise the description flowing out of the present passage in Amos 5:8, and finally the lack of evidence that ςωδ means tegere (which remark holds true also of Job 15:27; and Job 23:9). Moreover the connection decidedly requires a verb of creating or making. [“This as well as all the other participles from Job 9:5 on to be construed in the present, for the act of creation is conceived as continuous, renewing itself day by day.” Dillmann.—“Job next describes God as the Creator of the stars, by introducing a constellation of the northern (the Bear), one of the southern (Orion), and one of the eastern sky (the Pleiades).” Delitzsch]. Of the three names of northern constellations, which occur together in Job 38:31-32, ςָ ?ωׁ, or as it is written in that later passage ςַ ?ιִ ?ωׁ, denotes unmistakably the Great Bear, or Charles’s Wain, the Septentrio of the Romans, and the n’ash (πςω), i.e., “bier” of the Arabians. Whether the word is etymologically related to this Arabic term, which is suggested by the resemblance of the square part of the constellation to a bier, the three trailing stars, the benath na’ash, “daughters of the bier,” being imagined to be the mourners, is doubtful. [The current form ςιω decisively contradicts the derivation from πςω]—λְ ?ρִ ?ιμ in that case, lit. “the fool,” is certainly Orion, who, according to the almost universal representation of the ancient world, was conceived of as a presumptuous and fool-hardy giant, chained to the sky; comp. the mention of the ξεֹ ?ωְׁ ?λεֹ ?ϊ, i.e., the “bands,” or “fetters” of Orion in Job 38:31, as well as the accordant testimony of the ancient versions (LXX.: ’Ωρίων, at least in the parallel passages Job 38:31 and Isaiah 13:10; similarly the Pesh., Targ., etc.). Against the reference to the star Canopus (Saad. Abulwalid, etc.), may be urged, apart from the high antiquity of the tradition which points to Orion, the context of the present passage as well as of Job 38:31, and Amos 5:8, which indicates groups of stars, and not a single star.—The third constellation λִּ ?ιξָ ?δi.e., the heap, is rendered “the Hyades” only in the Vulgate; the remaining ancient versions however (also Saadia), and the Vulg. itself in the parallel passage, 38:31, render by πλειάς, Pleiades, so that beyond doubt it is to be understood of the group of seven stars in the neck of Taurus (known in German as the “clucking hen”); comp. Amos 5:8.—And the chambers of the South;i.e., the secret rooms or spaces (penetralia) of the constellations of the southern heavens, which to the inhabitant of the northern zones are visible only in part, or not at all. In any case ϊֵּ ?ξָ ?ο (defectively written for ϊֵּ ?ιξָ ?ο) points to the southern heavens, and since ηֲ ?γָ ?ψִ ?ιν predominantly signifies “apartments, chambers, halls,” less frequently “store-rooms, reservoirs,” the reference to the “reservoirs of, the south wind” (LXX.: ταμεῖανότου; some modern interpreters also, as Ges., etc.) is less natural, especially as the description continues to treat of the objects of the southern skies. [Dillmann, after recognizing the rendering of the LXX. as admissible, remarks: “On the other side the author certainly knew nothing of the constellations of the southern hemisphere; at the same time as one who had travelled (or at least: as one familiar with the results attained in his day by the observation of physical phenomena,—E.) he might well be acquainted with the fact that the further South men travel, the more stars and constellations are visible in the heavens; these are to the man who lives in the North, secluded as it were in the inmost chambers of the heavenly pavilion, and are for that reason invisible; it is of these ‘hidden spaces’ (Hirzel) of the South, with their stars, that we are here to think”]. Job 9:10. Who doeth great things, past finding out, and marvelous things without number: agreeing almost verbatim with what Eliphaz had said previously, Job 5:9, in describing the wondrous greatness of the Divine Power—an agreement, indeed, which is intentional, Job being determined to concede as fully as possible the affirmations of his friends respecting this point. Fourth Strophe: Job 9:11-12. God puts forth this irresistible omnipotence not only in nature, both in earth and in heaven, but also in that which befalls individual human lives, as Job himself had experienced.—[“There is great skill in making Job touch merely the outstanding points, illuminate only with a single ray the heaven-reaching heights of the Divine power; that in itself is not his immediate theme—it is the crushing effect this power has on feeble man; and to this he hastens on with sudden strides.” Dav. “After the extended description [just given] of the Divine omnipotence (which Ewald wrongly characterizes as “altogether too much of a digression,” whereas it is entirely pertinent to the subject, and all that follows proceeds out of it), the short hasty glance which in this and the following verse is cast on miserable mortal man, makes an impression so much the more pointed.” Schlottman.] Job 9:11. Lo! [δֵ ?ο in this and the following verse, vividly descriptive, and also strongly individualizing himself as the victim of the irresistible omnipotence just described] He passes by me [and I see Him not; He sweeps before me, and I perceive Him not.—The imperfect verb for present, “being an exclamation of felt, though unseen, nearness of God.” Dav.—ιημσ in Job 4:16 of “a spirit;” here of the Infinite Spirit, sweeping past him on His career of destruction.—E.] ημσ, synonymous with ςαε as in Job 4:15, forms an assonance with the parallel ηϊσ of the following verse. Job 9:12. [Lo! He snatches away (scil. His prey)], who will hold Him back; or: “turn Him back” (ιְ ?ωִׁ ?ιαֶ ?πּ ?εּ), viz. from His course: hence equivalent to: “who will put himself as an obstacle in His way?” (comp. Job 11:10; Job 23:13). 3. Second Division: The oppressive thought of God’s overwhelming and arbitrary power incites him, the innocent sufferer, to speak defiantly against God: Job 9:13-35. First Section: Job 9:13-24 : A general complaint of the severity and arbitrariness with which God abuses the exercise of His illimitable omnipotence towards man. First Strophe: Job 9:13-16. [The mightiest cannot withstand Him, how much less I?] Job 9:13. [By some put in strophic connection with the verses preceding; but Job 9:12 appropriately closes the first division, while Job 9:13 is the basis of what follows. Observe especially the contrast between the “helpers of Rahab” in 13b, and “I” in 14a.—E.]—Eloah ceases not from His wrath [Eng. Ver. incorrectly begins with “if”]: lit. “does not cause it to return,” i.e. does not recall it [“it is as a storm wind sweeping all before it, or a mounting tide bearing down all resistance and strewing itself with wrecks.” Dav.].—An affirmation the decided one-sidedness of which sufficiently appears from other passages, e.g., from Psalms 78:38.—The helpers of Rahab stoop under Him.—So far as ψַ ?δַ ?α in and of itself denotes only “a violent, insolent and stormy nature” (comp. Job 26:12), ςֹ ?ζְ ?ψֵ ?ιΞψΧ may be simply rendered, as by Luther, Umbreit, and most of the older expositors: “insolent,” or “proud helpers” [and so E. V., Con., Dav., Hengst.]. But apart from the colorless, tame signification which thus results [to which add the vague generality of the description, weakening the contrast between 13b and 14a; and the incompleteness of the expression, whether we translate, “proud helpers,” which suggests the query—helpers of what? or “helpers of pride.”—E.], the Perf. ωָׁ ?ηֲ ?ηεּ, lit. “have stooped,” leads us to conjecture a definite historical case [“a case of signal vengeance on some daring foe, who drew around him many daring helpers, would be more telling in this connection.” Dav.] Moreover ψδα in fact appears elsewhere in a more concrete sense than that of “violent, presumptuous raging” (so also in Job 26:12, where see Com.). It signifies, to wit, as Isaiah 51:9; Psalms 89:11 [10] show, essentially the same with ϊַּ ?πִּ ?ιο, hence a sea-monster (κῆτος), and by virtue of this signification is used as a mythological and symbolical designation of Egypt (as well in the two passages just mentioned, as also in Isaiah 30:7 and Psalms 87:4), the same country which elsewhere also is symbolically designated as ϊַּ ?πִּ ?ιο or μִ ?εְ ?ιָ ?ϊָ ?ο. We are thus left to one of two significations for ψδα in the present passage. We may, on the one hand, find in the passage a special reference to Egypt, and an allusion to some extraordinary event in the history of that country, whereby its rulers or allies were over-whelmed with defeat. In this case, it would be more natural with Hahn to think of the overthrow of Pharaoh and his mighty ones in the time of Moses [so Jarchi who understands by the “helpers” the guardian angels of the Egyptians, who came to their assistance, but were restrained by God], than with Olshausen to think of some unknown event in the history of Ancient Egypt, or even with Bφttcher of the reign of Psammetich. Or, on the other hand, setting aside any special reference to Egypt, we can (with Ewald, Hirzel, Schlottmann, Delitzsch, Dillmann) regard it as an allusion to some legend, current among the nations of the East, according to which some gigantic sea-monster with its helpers was subdued by the Deity (comp. the Hindu myth of Indra’s victory over the dusky demon Britras). In favor of this interpretation may be urged the parallel passage in Job 26:12, which certainly contains no reference to Egypt, as well as the rendering of the LXX., kήτητὰ ὑπ’ οὐρανόν, which evidently points to an old tradition of the correct interpretation. [“Jerome translates qui portant orbem, probably following a Jewish tradition concerning giants which had been overcome by God and sentenced to bear the pillars of the earth.” Schlott. Dillmann argues forcibly, that the common application of these three terms, ϊπιο ,ψδα, and μειϊο, to Egypt can be explained only by supposing that the first was related in signification to the other two names, being used like them of a sea-monster. He further remarks: “that the legend was widely known and possessed great vitality among the people is indicated by the fact that poets and prophets used it as a symbol of the imperial power of Egypt. It is not strange, accordingly, to find such a popular legend used for his purpose by a poet who elsewhere also derives his material on all sides from popular conceptions.”] Add that it is more natural to seek the basis of this legend of Rahab either in obscure reminiscences which lingered among the ancients touching the gigantic sea-monsters of the primitive world (plesiosauri, ichthyosauri, etc.), or in a symbolical representation of the billowy swelling of the raging ocean, resembling an infuriated monster, than to assign to it an astronomical basis, and to take ψδα to be at the same time the name of a constellation such as Κῆτος or Πρίστις [Balζna Pistrix); for the context by no means points of necessity to such an astronomical application of the term (the mention of the constellations in Job 9:9 being too remote), and moreover in Job 26:12 there is nothing of the kind indicated, as Dillmann correctly observes, against Ewald, Hirzel, Delitzsch. Job 9:14. How should I answer Him?—I, an impotent, weak, sorely suffering mortal. On ΰַ ?σλִּ ?ι comp. Job 4:19; on ςָ ?πָ ?δ, “to answer, respond,” see above on Job 9:3.—Choose out my words against Him?i.e. weigh my words against Him (ςִ ?ν as in Job 10:17; Job 11:5; Job 16:21) with such care and skill [the δ in ΰֶ ?αְ ?ηֲ ?ψָ ?δ indicating the mental effort involved], that I should always hit on the right expression, and thus escape all censure from Him. Job 9:15. Whom I (even) if I were in the right (φָ ?γַ ?χְ ?ϊִּ ?ι, sensu forensi) [“innocent, judicially free from blame”], could not answer, I must make supplication to Him as my judge, viz. for mercy (δϊηπο with μְ as in Esther 4:8). The Partic. Poel ξְ ?ωׁ ?τֵ ?θ is not essentially different in signification from the Partic. Kal ωֹׁ ?τֵ ?θ, although it does differ somewhat from it, in so far as it denotes lit. an “assailant” or “adversary” (judicial opponent: ωֹׁ ?τֵ ?θ, [Poel, expressing aim, endeavor], judicando vel litigando aliquem petere, comp. Ewald, § 125, a). [“So overpowering is God’s might that Job would be brought in litigating with Him to the humiliation of beseeching His very adversary—an idea which sufficiently answers Conant’s charge, that to render ξְ ?ωֹׁ ?τֵ ?θassailant has very little point.” Dav.] Job 9:16. Should I summon Him, and He answered me (if accordingly the case supposed to be necessary in 15b should actually happen, and be followed with results favorable to the suppliant), I would not believe that He would listen to me:i.e. I should not be able to repress the painful and awful though that He, the heavenly and all-powerful Judge of the world, would grant me no hearing at all. [“The answer of God when summoned is represented in Job 9:16 a as an actual result (prζt. followed by fut. consec.), therefore Job 9:16 b cannot be intended to express: I could not believe that he answers me, but: I could not believe that He, the answerer, would hearken to me; His infinite exaltation would not permit such exaltation.” Delitzsch.] The whole verse is thus an advance in thought upon the preceding. Second Strophe: Job 9:17-20. Continuing the description of Job’s utter hopelessness of victory in his controversy with God, clothed in purely hypothetical statements. Job 9:17. He who would overwhelm me in a tempest, and multiply my wounds without cause;i.e., who would pursue me with assaults and calamities, even if I were innocent. [ΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψ may be taken either as relative, or as conj. “for,” (E. V. Con.) the one meaning really blends with the other, as in Job 9:15 = quippe qui]. With the rendering of ιְ ?ωׁ ?εּ ?τֶ ?πִּ ?ι here adopted, “would overwhelm me” (so also Vaih.) we can leave unsolved the question, so difficult of decision, whether, following the Aram. ωְׁ ?τָ ?ΰ, and the testimony of the Ancient Versions (LXX. ἐκτρίψῃ; Vulg. conteret), we render ωεּ ?σ “to crush, to grind;” or, following the Arab, sβfa, and the Hebr. ωָׁ ?ΰַ ?σ; we render it “to snatch up, seize,” (inhiare). Hirzel, Ewald, Umbreit, Dillmann, favor the latter rendering; but on the other side Delitzsch successfully demonstrates that neither Genesis 3:15 nor Psalms 139:11 (the only passages outside of the present in which ωׁ ?εּ ?σ appears) necessarily requires the sense of “snatching,” certainly not that of “sniffing.” Job 9:18. Would not suffer me to draw my breath (comp. Job 7:19), but would surfeit me with bitterness [lit. plur. “bitternesses”]. For λִּ ?ι in the sense of “but, rather,” comp. Job 5:7; for the form. ξַ ?ξְּ ?ψֹ ?ψִ ?ιν, with Dagh. dirimens [“which gives the word a more pathetic expression,” Del.], comp. Ges., § 20, 2, b. Job 9:19. If it be a question of the strength of the strong [others (E. V. Conant, Carey, Schlott.) connect ΰַ ?ξִּ ?ιυ with the following δִ ?πֵּ ?δ; but as the latter is always followed by the predicate, and such an exclamation in the mouth of God (see below) would be less natural than the simple interjection, the connection given in the text is to be preferred. The accents are not decisive,—E.]—lo, here (am I): [δִ ?πֵ ?δ for δֵ ?πִּ ?πִ ?ι, as ΰַ ?ιֵּ ?δ Job 15:23, is for ΰַ ?ιּ ?εֹ ?]—i.e. “would He say”: He would immediately present Himself, whenever challenged to a trial of strength with His human antagonist. Similar is the sense of the second member:—Is it a question of right who will cite me (before the tribunal); viz., “would He say.” [Whichever test of strength should be chosen, whether of physical strength in a trial-at-arms, or of moral strength, in a trial-at-law, what hope for weak and mortal man?—E.] The whole verse, consisting of two elliptical conditional clauses, with two still shorter concluding clauses (also hypothetical), reminds us in a measure by its structure of Rom 8:33-34. Job 9:20. Were I (even) right, my mouth would condemn me:i.e., from simple confusion I should not know how to make the right answer, so that my own mouth (τּ ?ι, with logical accent on suffix, as in Job 15:6) would confess me guilty, though I should still be innocent—(φγχ, as in Job 9:15).—Were I innocent—He would prove me perverse [εַ ?ιַּ ?ςְ ?χְ ?ωֵׁ ?πִ ?ι, with Chiriq of Hiphil shortened to Sheva: comp. Ges. § 53 [§ 52] Rem. 4]. The subject is “God,” not “my mouth” (Schlottmann) [Wordsworth, Davidson, Carey]; God would, even in case of my innocence, put me down as one ςִ ?χֵּ ?ωׁ, one morally corrupt, and to be rejected. “Thus brooding over the thought, true in itself, that the creature when opposed to the heavenly Ruler of the Universe must always be in the wrong, Job forgets the still higher and more important truth that God’s right in opposition to the creature is always the true objective right.” Delitzsch. Third Strophe: Job 9:21-24. Open arraignment of God as an unrighteous Judge, condemning alike the innocent and the guilty. Job 9:21. I am innocent! In thus repeating the expression ϊָּ ?νΰֲ ?πִ ?ι, Job asserts solemnly and peremptorily that which in Job 9:20 b he had in the same words stated only conditionally.—I value not my soul:i.e., I give myself no concern about the security of my life, I will give free utterance to that confession, cost what it may. So rightly most commentators, while Delitzsch, against the connection (see especially the 2d member) explains: “I know not myself, I am a mystery to myself, and therefore have no desire to live longer.” [Hengstenberg: “We might explain: ‘I should not know my soul,’ if I were to confess to transgressions, of which I know myself to be innocent; ‘I should despise my life,’ seeing I have nothing with which to reproach myself. Better however: ‘I know not my soul,’ so low is it sunk, I am become altogether alius a me ipso; ‘I must despise my life,’ I am so unspeakably wretched, that I must wish to die”]. Job 9:22. It is all one: thus beyond question must the expression ΰַ ?ηַ ?ϊΞδִ ?ιΰ be rendered; not: “there is one measure with which God rewards the good and the wicked” (Targ., Rosenm., Hirzel); nor: “it is all the same whether man is guilty or innocent” (Delitzsch).—Therefore I will say it out: [Dav. “I will out with it”]. He destroys the innocent and the wicked:viz., God, whom Job intentionally avoids naming; comp. Job 3:20. Job 9:23-24. Two illustrations confirming the terrible accusation just brought against God (Job 9:22 b) that He destroys alike the innocent and the guilty. Job 9:23. If (His) scourge slays suddenly, viz., men. By ωׁ ?εֹ ?θ “scourge” is meant here not of course the scourge of the tongue (Job 5:21) but a general calamity, such as pestilence, war, famine, etc. (Isaiah 28:15).—Then He mocks at the despair of the innocent:i.e., He does not allow Himself to be disturbed in His blessed repose when those who are afflicted with those calamities faint away from despondency and despair: comp. Psalms 2:4; Psalms 59:9.—ξַ ?ρָּ ?δ, from ξָ ?ρַ ?ν, Job 6:14. [E. V., Conant, Dav., Renan, Hengst., Carey, Rod., etc., give to ξַ ?ρָּ ?δ here its customary sense of “trial,” from πρδ. Jerome remarks that in the whole book Job says nothing more bitter than this.] The interpretation of Hirzel and Delitzsch, founded on Job 22:19 : “His desire and delight are in the suffering of the innocent,” gives a meaning altogether too strong, and not intended by the poet here. Job 9:24. [“In this second illustration there is an advance in the thought, in so far as here a part at least of the wicked are excepted from the general ruin, nay, appear even as threatening the same to the pious.” Schlott.]—A land [or better, because more in harmony with the sweeping and strong expressions here assigned to Job: the earth] is given over to [lit., into the hand of] the wicked, and the face of its judges He veileth:viz., while that continues, while the land is delivered to the wicked, so that they are able to play their wicked game with absolute impunity.—If (it is) not (so) now, who then does it?ΰֵ ?τεֹ (so written also Job 17:15; Job 19:6; Job 19:23; Job 24:25, but outside of the book of Job generally ΰֵ ?τεΰ) belongs according to the accents to the preceding conditional particles ΰִ ?ρΞμֹ ?ΰ (comp. Job 24:25 and Genesis 27:37); lit., therefore, “now then if not, who does it?” [Hirz., Con. and apparently Ew. connect ΰֵ ?τεֹ with the interrogative following—“who then?” quis quζso (Heiligst.) Davidson also takes this view, although admitting that “the accentuation is decidedly the other way,” ΰτεΰֹ being used, as he says, “in impatient questions (Ew., § 105, d) Genesis 27:33; Job 17:15; Job 19:23”]. That the present illustration of a land ill-governed and delivered into the hands of the wicked had, as Dillmann says, “its justification in the historic background of the composition,” cannot be affirmed with certainty in our ignorance of the details of this “historic background:” though indeed it is equally true that we can no more affirm the contrary. 4. Second Division.—Second Section: Job 9:25-35. Special application of that which is affirmed in the preceding section concerning God’s arbitrary severity to his (Job’s) condition. First Strophe: Job 9:25-28. [The swift flight of his days, and the unremitting pressure of his woes, make him despair of a release]. Job 9:25. For my days are swifter than a runner. [“εְ introducing a particular case of the previous general: in this infinite wrong under which earth and the righteous writhe and moan, I also suffer.” Dav.—“Days” here poetically personified. χַ ?μּ ?εּ, Perf., a deduction from past experience continuing in the present.—E.]. ψָ ?υ might, apparently, comparing this with the similar description in Job 7:6, denote a part of the weaver’s loom, possibly the threads of the woof which are wound round the bobbin, (which the Coptic language actually calls “runners”). This signification however is by no means favored by the usage elsewhere in Hebrew of the word ψָ ?υ: this rather yields the signification “swift runner, courier”(ἡμεροδρόμος) compare Jeremiah 51:31; 2 Samuel 15:1; 2 Kings 11:13; Esther 3:13; Esther 3:15.—They are fled away, without having seen good (θεֹ ?αָ ?δ, prosperity, happiness, as in Job 21:25). Job thinks here naturally of the same “good,” which he (according to Job 7:7) would willingly enjoy before his end, but which would not come to him before then. He has thus entirely forgotten his former prosperity in view of his present state of suffering, or rather, he does not regard it as prosperity, seeing that he had to exchange it for such severe suffering. Quite otherwise had he formerly expressed himself to his wife, Job 2:10. Job 9:26. They have swept past like skiffs of reed; lit., “with [ςִ ?ν] skiffs of reed,” i.e., being comparable with them (Job 37:18; Job 40:15). ΰֳ ?πִ ?ιּ ?εֹ ?ϊΰֵ ?αָ ?δ are most probably canoes of rushes or reeds, the same therefore as the λְּ ?μֵ ?ιβֹ ?ξֶ ?ΰ (“vessels of bulrush”) mentioned Isaiah 18:2, whose great lightness and swiftness are in that passage also made prominent. ΰֵ ?αָ ?δ is accordingly a synonym, which does not elsewhere appear, of βξΰ, reed; for which definition analogy may also be produced out of the Arabic. It has however nothing to do with ΰֵ ?α (so the Vulg., Targ.: naves poma portantes) [“fruit ships hurrying on lest the fruit should injure”]; nor with ΰָ ?αָ ?δ, to desire, [“ships eagerly desiring to reach the haven”]. (Symm. νῆεςσπεύδουσαι) comp. Gekatilia in Gesenius, Thes. Suppl., p. 62; nor with ΰֵ ?ιαָ ?δ, “enmity” (Pesh., “ships of hostility,” comp. Luther: “the strong ships,” by which are meant pirate ships); nor with the Abyssin. abβi, the name of the Nile; nor with a supposed Babylonian name of a river, having the same sound, and denoting perhaps the Euphrates (so Abulwalid, Rashi, etc., who make the name denote a great river near the region where the scene of our book is laid). The correct signification was given by Hiller, Hierophyt. II., p. 302, whom most modern critics have followed.—Like the eagle, which darts down on its prey(comp. Job 39:29; Proverbs 30:19; Habakkuk 1:8, etc.). This third comparison adds to that which is swiftest on the earth, and that which is swiftest in the water, that which is swiftest in the air, in order to illustrate the hasty flight of Job’s days. Job 9:27-28. If I think (lit., if my saying be; comp. Job 7:13): I will forget my complaint (see on the same passage), will leave off my countenance (i.e. give up my look of pain, my morose gloomy-looking aspect, comp. 1 Samuel 1:18), and look cheerful (δαμιβ, as in Job 10:20; Ps. 39:14 (Psalms 39:13) [the three cohortative futures here are, as Davidson says, “finely expressive—If I say—rousing myself from my stupor and prostration—I will, etc.”]; then I shudder at all my pains, I know that Thou wilt not declare me innocent.—These words are addressed to God, not to Bildad. Although Job felt himself to be forsaken and rejected by God, he nevertheless turns to Him; he does not speak of Him and about Him, without at the same time prayerfully looking up to Him. Second Strophe: Job 9:29-31. [He must be guilty, and all his strivings to free himself from his guilt are in vain.] Job 9:29. I am to be guilty:i.e. according to God’s arbitrary decree [ΰֲ ?πֹ ?λִ ?ι, emphatic—I, I am accounted guilty, singled out for this treatment. The fut. ΰψως here expressing that which must be, from which there is no escape.—E.] ψָֹ ?ωַׁ ?ς here not “to act as a wicked or a guilty person” (Job 10:15), but “to be esteemed, to appear” such, as in Job 10:7 (comp. the Hiph. δִ ?ψְ ?ωִׁ ?ιַ ?ς, to treat any one as guilty, to condemn, above in Job 9:20).—Wherefore then weary myself in vain, viz. to appear innocent, to be acquitted by God. This wearying of himself is given as an actual fact, consisting in humbly supplicating for mercy, as he had been repeatedly exhorted to do by Eliphaz and Bildad; Job 5:8; Job 5:17; Job 8:5.—δֶ ?αֶ ?μ, adverbially, as in Job 21:34; Job 35:16; lit. like a breath, evanescent, here—“fruitlessly, for naught, in vain.” [That notwithstanding his present mood, he does subsequently renew his exertions, “impelled by an irresistible inward necessity, is psychologically perfectly natural.”—Schlottman.] Job 9:30-31. If I should wash myself in snow-water (read with the K’ri αְּ ?ξֵ ?ιΞ instead of with the K’thibh αְּ ?ξεֹ ?Ξωֶׁ ?μֶ ?β; bathing immediately in undissolved snow is scarcely to be thought of here) [an unnecessary refinement: for washing the hands, which is what the verse speaks of, snow can be used, and is scarcely less efficacious for cleansing than lye. The K’thibh is to be preferred.—E.], and cleanse my hands with lye (αּ ?εֹ ?ψ fully written for αֹ ?ψ, Isaiah 1:25, signifies precisely as in this parallel passage lye, a vegetable alkali, not: purity [as E. V.: “make my hands never so clean’, for “make clean in purity”], which rendering would give a much tamer signification [besides “destroying, the literality of the parallelism”]), then Thou wouldest plunge me into the ditch (ωַׁ ?ηַ ?ϊ, here a sink, sewer), so that my clothes would abhor me.—In these latter words, it is naturally presupposed that the one who has been bathed and thoroughly cleansed as to the entire body while still naked is again plunged into a filthy ditch, and that in consequence of this, he becomes a terror to his own clothes, which are personified, so that they as it were start back and resist, when it is sought to put them on him. So correctly most modern expositors. On the contrary, Ewald and Gesenius—Rφdiger take the Piel ϊִּ ?ςֵ ?α in a causative sense: “so that my clothes would cause me to be abhorred,”—a rendering in favor of which, indeed, Ezekiel 16:25 can be brought forward, but not the usus loguendi of our book (comp. Job 19:19; Job 30:10) which knows no causative sense for ϊִּ ?ςֵ ?α. [The thought expressed by the two verses is that “not even the best-grounded self-justification can avail him, for God would still bring it to pass that his clearly proved innocence should change to the most horrible impurity.” Delitzsch.] Third Strophe: Job 9:32-35. [“The cause of Job’s inability to make out his innocence—not his guilt, but the character and conditions of his accuser,” who has no superior to overrule Him, to mediate between Him and Job. Let Him lay aside His terrors, and Job would plead his cause without fear.] Job 9:32. For [He is] not a man like me, that I should answer Him:viz, before a tribunal, with a view to the settlement of the controversy. Hirzel translates ΰִ ?ιωλָּ ?ξֹ ?βִ ?ι as though it were accusative to ΰֶ ?ςֱ ?πֶ ?πּ ?εּ: “for I cannot answer Him as a man who is my equal;’ but this is altogether too artificial. [“God is not his equal standing on the same level with him. He, the Absolute Being, is accuser and judge in one person; there is between them no arbitrator, etc.” Delitzsch.] Job 9:33. There is no arbiter between us who might lay his hand on us both: so that accordingly we should both have to betake ourselves to him, and accept his decision. ξεֹ ?λִ ?ιηַ is one who gives a decision, an arbitrator who weighs the pleas put in by both the contending parties, and pronounces the award. Not inaptly John Pye Smith, Four Discourses on the Sacrifice and priesthood of Jesus Christ, 5th Ed. p. 98: “There is between us no arguer, who might fully represent the cause, and state, judge and arbitrate fairly for each party.” Observe how emphatically is expressed here, although indeed only indirectly and negatively, the postulate of a true mediator and priestly proprietor between God and sinful humanity! [“It is singular how often Job gives utterance to wants and aspirations which under the Christian economy are supplied and gratified. It was the purpose of the writer to let us hear these voices crying in the wilderness, forerunning the complete manifestation of the Messiah, and therefore the Church is well authorized in using this language of Christ. Job out of his religious entanglement proclaimed the necessity of a mediator to humanize God two thousand years before he came.” Dav.] The optative form [“Would that there might be”] which the LXX. and the Pesh. give to the verse by changing μֹ ?ΰ to μεּ (μֻ ?ΰ), is unnecessary and disturbs the connection with the preceding verse [the thought of which is completed only in this verse. This rendering is, moreover, not suited to the ιֵ ?ωׁ following. The jussive form ιָ ?ωֵׁ ?ϊdoes however reflect the yearning which breathes through his pathetic declaration of the fact that there is no arbiter.—E.]. Job 9:34-35 are related to each other as antecedent and consequent. The two optatives in Job 9:34 are followed by the cohortative ΰֲ ?γַ ?αְּ ?ψָ ?δ without εְ as the apodosis (comp. Ewald, § 347, b, 357, b).—Let Him take away from me His rod (with which He smites me, comp. Job 13:21, equivalent therefore to ωׁ ?εֹ ?θ, scourge, calamity, comp. Job 9:23), and let not His terror overawe [or stupefy] me (ΰֵ ?ξָ ?ϊεֹ in the objective sense, that which is awful in His appearance, the terror which proceeds from His majestic presence): then will I speak without fear before Him; for not thus am I with myself:i.e. for not thus does it stand with me in my inward man, I am not conscious of anything within me of such a character that I must be afraid before Him. ςִ ?ν therefore points to that which is within, the consciousness or conscience, as in Job 10:13; Job 15:9; Job 23:14, etc. That μֹ ?ΰλֵ ?ο here expresses so much as: “not so small, not so contemptible,” is a conjecture of Delitzsch’s, which is supported neither by the connection, nor by Hebrew usage elsewhere. [Delitzsch imagines the expression to be “accompanied by a gesture expressive of the denial of such contempt.” Not dissimilar in this respect is Renan’s explanation: “ ‘For in the depths of my heart I am not such as I seem.’ The conscience of Job is tranquil: the cause of his trouble is without himself. It is God, who by a treacherous maneuvre has arrayed against him His terrors, in order to take away from him the freedom of spirit necessary for his defense.”]  5. Third Division: Job 10.—A plaintive description of the pitiless severity with which God rages against him, although by virtue of His omniscience He knows his innocence. Job 10:1-12 : Exordium (Job 10:1) and First Double Strophe (Job 10:2-12): developing the motive to this new complaint. Job 10:1. [“With brief preface of words which force themselves from the heart in three convulsive sobs (1 a b c), like the sparse large drops before the storm … the patriarch opens his cause in the ear of heaven.” Dav.]—My soul is weary of my life.—πָ ?‍ ?ֽ ?χְ ?θָ ?δ, equivalent to πָ ?χֹ ?θָּ ?δ. Ezekiel 6:9, Perf. Niph. of χθθ, which is synonymous with χεּ ?θ or χεּ ?υ, to feel disgust. [Ges. and Fόrst give a root πχθ, from which Delitzsch also says it may be derived as a secondary verb formed from the Niph. πָ ?χθֹ ?—a form which is also supported by the Aramaic] For the thought comp. Job 7:15-16; Job 9:21.—Therefore will I give free course to my complaint: ςָ ?μַ ?ι, lit. “with me, in me” (comp. Job 30:16; Psalms 42:6 [5], 12 [11]; Jeremiah 8:18), not “over me.” [The cohortative futures are to be noted as expressive of the strength of Job’s feeling and purpose.] In regard to the rest of the verse [I will speak in the bitterness of my soul], comp. Job 7:11; Psalms 55:18 [17]. [“Job continues to believe that the boldness of his speech will be punished with death.” Renan.] First Strophe: Job 10:2-11. An appeal to God not to deal so severely with him, seeing that his innocence is already well known to Him. Job 10:2-3. [“God’s dealing with Job was derogatory to the divine character, and dangerous and confounding to the interests of religion, and the first principles of religious men.”—Dav.] Job 10:2. I will say to Eloah: condemn (comp. Job 9:20)me not. Observe that Job addresses this complaint also to God, like that in Job 9:28. Let me know wherefore Thou contendest with me (as adversary and judge (ψִ ?ια with Accus. as in Isaiah 27:8; Isaiah 49:25. Job 10:3. Doth it please Thee that Thou oppressest, that Thou rejectest the work of Thy hands?—In this question Job touches on a first possibility which might be supposed to determine God to treat him as guilty. He inquires whether it may perchance “please” God, be agreeable to Him, give Him joy, thus to deal with himself. For δθεαμκ in this sense, comp. Job 13:9; Deuteronomy 23:17 [16]. The interpretation adopted by Dillmann and others is also possible: “is it becoming for Thee,” etc., for which comp. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/lange/ III. Zophar and Job: Chaps. 11–14A.—Zophar’s violent arraignment of Job, as one who needs in penitence to submit himself to the all-seeing and righteous God:Job 111. Expression of the desire that the Omniscient One would appear to convince Job of his guilt Job 11:2-61         Then answered Zophar the Naamathite, and said: 2    Should not the multitude of words be answered? and should a man full of talk be justified? 3    Should thy lies make men hold their peace? and when thou mockest, shall no man make thee ashamed? 4    For thou hast said, My doctrine is pure, and I am clean in Thine eyes. 5    But oh that God would speak, and open His lips against thee; 6    and that He would show thee the secrets of wisdom, that they are double to that which is! Know therefore that God exacteth of thee less than thine iniquity deserveth. 2. Admonitory description of the impossibility of contending against God’s omniscience, which charges every man with sin: Job 11:7-127    Canst thou by searching find out God? canst thou find out the Almighty unto perfection? 8    It is as high as heaven, what canst thou do? deeper than hell, what canst thou know? 9    The measure thereof is longer than the earth, and broader than the sea. 10    If He cut off, and shut up, or gather together, then who can hinder Him? 11    For He knoweth vain men; He seeth wickedness also; will He not then consider it? 12    For vain man would be wise, though man be born like a wild ass’s colt. 3. The truly penitent has in prospect the restoration of his prosperity; for the wicked, however, there remains no hope: Job 11:13-2013    If thou prepare thine heart, and stretch out thine hands toward Him; 14    if iniquity be in thine hand, put it far away, and let not wickedness dwell in thy tabernacles. 15    For then shalt thou lift up thy face without spot; yea, thou shalt be steadfast, and shalt not fear. 16    Because thou shalt forget thy misery, and remember it as waters that pass away; 17    and thine age shall be clearer than the noonday; thou shalt shine forth, thou shalt be as the morning. 18    And thou shalt be secure, because there is hope; yea, thou shalt dig about thee, and thou shalt take thy rest in safety. 19    Also thou shalt lie down, and none shall make thee afraid; yea, many shall make suit unto thee. 20    But the eyes of the wicked shall fail, and they shall not escape, and their hope shall be as the giving up of the ghost. AND The comparative violence of this new arraignment of Job is to be explained by the fact that he in his last discourse had positively maintained his innocence, and had accused God quite openly and directly of injustice. Zophar, the youngest and the least considerate of the three friends, opposes him on this head with the declaration that God the All-wise and All-seeing, would observe in him, as in all men, enough of sin to justify the stern infliction of punishment on him (Job 11:6). He indeed gives direct expression to the thought that the suffering which Job endured was well-deserved punishment for sin (Job 11:11), that sincere repentance was required of him (Job 11:14), and that on condition of such repentance could he hope for restoration to his former prosperity, that in any other case the sad doom of the wicked would surely be before him (Job 11:20). [“In his first appearance he is hot, and eager, and peremptory, but widely more gentle and less coarse than hereafter. Eliphaz brings forward his earnest exhortation, overawed by its divine majesty, and trembling when he recollects how he received from heaven the truth which he utters for Job’s advantage. Bildad reposes not on revelation, but on the human consciousness. Zophar, the private dogmatist, and as such—having nothing to fall back on with dignity—the hottest and most intolerant, has only his own ‘of course,’ ‘it cannot but be,’ with which to silence his obstinate adversary.” Davidson.] His discourse falls into three divisions: 1. The expression of a desire for such a declaration from the All-wise God as would convince Job of his guilt (Job 11:2-6); 2. A description intended to warn Job of God’s exalted knowledge, by virtue of which He charges on every man his sins (Job 11:7-12); 3. An inculcation of the necessity of repentance as the only condition of recovering his former prosperity (Job 11:13-20). Parts 1 and 2 are Double Strophes, consisting of small strophes of three or two verses each. Part 3 contains three such shorter strophes or groups of verses. 2. First Division, or Double Strophe. The expression of the desire that the Omniscient One would appear to convince Job of his guilt (Job 11:2-6). First Strophe: Job 11:2-4. A censure of the high-flown and impenitent discourse of Job. Job 11:2. Shall the multitude of words (ψֹ ?αγְּ ?αָ ?ψִ ?ιν, as in Proverbs 10:19; Ecclesiastes 5:2) remain unanswered, or shall a babbler (lit. “man of lips,” ΰִ ?ιωׁ ωְׂ ?λָ ?ϊַ ?ιִ ?ν, to be distinguished from ΰִ ?ιωׁ γְּ ?αָ ?ψִ ?ιν, “a man of words,” i.e., an eloquent speaker, Exodus 4:10) be in the right?—ιִ ?φְ ?γַּ ?χ, literally “to be justified, to be declared in the right,” to wit, by allowing him the last word. The beginning of the discourse resembles that of Bildad, Job 8:2. At the game time there may be detected a slight tone of apology, that the speaker undertakes to say any thing, notwithstanding his youth. [“If Zophar’s name, which signifies chirper or chatterer, was expressive of his character, these words might have been applied to himself.” Wordsworth.] Job 11:3. Shall thy vain talk (αַּ ?γִּ ?ιν from αγγ, βαττολογεῖν) [E. V.: too strong, “lies,” rather chatter, idle babbling] put men (ξְ ?ϊִ ?ιν, archaic expression for ΰγν or ΰπωιν [“like other archaisms, e.g., ϊֵּ ?αֵ ?μ, always without the article.” Del.], comp. Job 11:11; Job 19:19; Job 22:15, etc.) to silence, so that thou mockest [“God (Hirzel); better Rosenmόller: nos et Deum.” Del.], without any one putting thee to shame?viz., by refuting thee.—The fut. consec.εַ ?ϊִּ ?μְ ?ςַ ?β, as also εϊΰξψ at the beginning of the following verse, denotes that into which Job might be betrayed by men’s silence. It bears, therefore, since the principal verb ιַ ?ηֲ ?ψִ ?ιωׁ ?εּ continues the question of the preceding verse, a modal impress: “so that thou darest to mock and to say,” etc. (so correctly Umbreit, Hirzel, Vaihinger, Hahn, Delitzsch, etc., while Ewald, Stickel, Dillmann [Carey], etc. remove altogether the interrogative character of our verse, and make it to consist of two co-ordinate affirmative clauses. Job 11:4. My doctrine is pure.—μֶ ?χַ ?η, in the Book of Job occurring only here, very common, however, in Proverbs (comp. also Deuteronomy 32:2; Isaiah 29:24), signifies not a mere “assumption,” or “opinion” (Hahn), but something appropriated from tradition, a truth taught in accordance with tradition, especially in respect to moral conduct, therefore, in brief, moral teaching, or doctrine in general. With regard, therefore, to this his doctrine, the substance of his moral axioms and rules of living, Zophar reproaches Job with maintaining (or rather he says that he would maintain, if encouraged by the silence of others): “it is pure,” i.e., it is immaculate and infallible (ζַ ?κְ as in Job 8:6; Job 33:9; Proverbs 16:2, etc.). And yet more than this: even against God would he maintain that “he was pure in His eyes” (comp. Job 9:21; Job 10:7). He would therefore, in addition to the purity of his principles, maintain also that of his life, a result which seems to Zophar the height of absurdity, and which seems to him to mock every holy ordinance of God. Second Strophe: Job 11:5-6. Expression of the wish that God Himself might personally interpose to punish Job’s arrogant falsehoods. Job 11:5. But oh that Eloah would speak and open His lips against thee.—After ξιιִ ?ϊֵּ ?ο here follows first the Infinitive (as in Exodus 16:3); then, however, in b, and in the following verse Imperfects: comp. Gesen. § 136, 2. [The subject of the Inf. is emphatically placed before it. “Oh, that Eloah would speak!” See Ewald, § 329, c.] A forcible εְ ?ΰεּ ?μָ ?ν (verum enim vero) introduces the whole optative clause and puts it, in a measure, in opposition to the wish that God might come, previously uttered by Job himself (Job 9:34 seq.), thus: verily, would He but come, there would be an immediate end to thy boasting. Job 11:6. And make known to thee the secrets of His wisdom, that it is twofold in true knowledge.—ϊּ ?εּ ?ωִׁ ?ιָּ ?δ in a somewhat different sense from that found above in Job 5:12; Job 6:13; here in a more theoretic (scientific) sense. λִּ ?τְ ?μַ ?ιִ ?ν, lit. that which is doubled, i.e., in general that which is much greater than something else, which far surpasses it [hence “manifold” would, according to our mode of expression, be more exact than “twofold.” The explanation of some that the word is used here by way of comparison, as though the meaning were that “God’s wisdom is double thine,” or “twice as great as thou canst imagine,” is inadequate. The word is absolute, and although dual in form, is to us plural, or intensive in meaning=God’s wisdom is fold upon fold! how then canst thou presume to judge it, as though able to see through it? For this intensive use of the dual comp. φָ ?ηֳ ?ψַ ?ιִ ?ν, Job 11:17, lit. “double brightness,” i.e., the superlative brightness of noonday.—E.]. Comp. Isaiah 40:2. The subj. of λτμιν, viz., διΰ referring back to ηλξδ, is here omitted, because it is identical with the obj. of the principal clause; comp. Genesis 2:4; Isaiah 3:10 (Ewald, § 336, b). [E. V. here—“that they are double to that which is”—is scarcely intelligible.] So must thou know [εְ ?ψַ ?ς, Imperat. consec., presenting the necessary consequence of the fulfilment of that wish; comp. Ewald, § 347, a) [Delitzsch; “Instead of saying: then thou wouldst perceive, Zophar, realizing in his mind that which he has just wished, says imperiously εְ ?γַ ?ς”] that Eloah remits to thee of thy guilt—i.e., leaves much of it out of the account against thee, lets it go unpunished. The ξִ ?ο in ξֵ ?ςֲ ?εֹ ?πְ ?κָ is accordingly partitive, to be expressed by “somewhat of, much of,” δִ ?ωָּׁ ?δ, lit. to bring into forgetfulness, oblivioni dare, a causative Hiphil, occurring elsewhere in the O. T. only in Job 39:17. 3. Second Division, or Double Strophe: Describing, with an admonitory purpose, the impossibility of contending against God’s omniscience, which charges every man with sin, Job 11:7-12. First Strophe: Job 11:7-9. [God’s wisdom unsearchable.] Job 11:7. Canst thou reach the depths [in the Germ.: den Grund erreichen: lit. to reach the bottom] in Eloah, or penetrate to the uttermost parts [zum Aeussersten hinandringen] in the Almighty?—ηֵ ?χֶ ?ψ, “search” (Job 8:8), is used here sensu objectivo=that which is to be searched, the ground of any thing (so in Job 38:16); here, therefore, the hidden depth [ground, basis] of the divine nature. ϊַּ ?λְ ?μִ ?ιϊ, on the contrary, denotes “the finishing, the terminus,” i.e., the end, the extremity of the same divine nature [Wordsworth: “canst thou arrive at the limit of God? Canst thou attain to the horizon of the Almighty?”] (comp. Job 26:10; Job 28:3; Psalms 139:22; Nehemiah 3:21). The first question accordingly describes God as unfathomable, the second as illimitable or immeasurable; the former conveys the notion of absolute mystery, the latter that of absolute greatness and incomprehensibility. [“The nature of God may be sought after, but cannot be found out; and the end of God is unattainable, for He is both: the Perfect One, absolutus; and the Endless One, infinitus.” Del.] Many moderns, after Eichhorn (e.g., John Pye Smith: The Scripture Testimony of the Messiah, 6 Ed., Vol. I. 11; Vol. II. 240) [also E. V.] take ηχψ in the active sense of searching or discovering, and ϊλμιϊ in the sense of perfection. This, however, yields for both members a less suitable sense, and assigns to ϊλμιϊ a signification which it can nowhere be proved to have. [Conant and others (so also E. V.) regard the clause ςγΞϊλμιϊ as adverbial: “Canst thou find out the Almighty to a perfection?” i.e., to a perfect comprehension of Him. Neither of Conant’s reasons for this rendering is valid. (1) The parallelism does not favor it, but contrariwise. ηֵ ?χֶ ?εΰֱ ?μΧ finds its parallel in ϊַּ ?λְ ?Χωַׁ ?Χ; the former belonging to the category of depth, the latter to that of length, which accounts for the preposition ςַ ?γ. (2) The accentuation does not favor it, but the reverse. Munach puts ωַׁ ?γַּ ?ι in precisely the same connection with the final verb in this member, as ΰֱ ?μεֹ ?δַּ in the former member.—E.] Job 11:8. Heights of heaven: to wit, are the distances which lie between our perception and the “extremity” of the Almighty, the dimensions with which we seek to measure His infinitude. Hence the question, vividly annexed to this exclamation—what canst thou do?—emphasizing the helplessness and powerlessness of man over against that which is immeasurable. To this corresponds the second member:—deeper than the underworld (are the hidden depths, the grounds of the Godhead, or of the Divine Wisdom)—what knowest thou? what can thy knowledge do in view of such depths? In so far as the phrase “heights of heaven” points back to the idea of the ϊּ ?λμιϊ, while the phrase “deeper than the underworld” points to that of the ηχψ, the position of the two members of this verse seems to be inverted as regards those of the ver. preceding. It is to be observed that the ruling idea here, as well as in the following verse, is throughout that of the Divine wisdom (omniscience), or the Divine nature on the side of wisdom and intellectual perfection, as the connection of the passage with Job 11:6 clearly shows. Job 11:9. Longer than the earth is its measure, and broader is it than the sea:viz. the Divine wisdom, the immeasurableness of which is here described according to all the four dimensions, according to the height and depth, and also according to the length and breadth, as in Ephesians 3:18 these same four dimensions are used in describing the absoluteness of the love of God in Christ. Our translation: “longer than the earth is its [lit. her] measure,” rests on the reading ξִ ?γָּ ?ηּ with He mappiq, which is to be regarded as an abbreviated feminine form for ξִ ?γָּ ?ϊָ ?δּ (comp. Job 5:13, ςָ ?ψְ ?ξָ ?ν for ςָ ?ψְ ?ξָ ?ϊָ ?ν: also Zechariah 4:2, etc.). The Masorah, indeed, favors ξִ ?γָּ ?δ, with He raphatum, with which reading the word would be the Accus. of nearer definition (“according to its measure, in measure”). But the separation between the Accus. of relation and its ruling word produced by a word intervening, would give here, where διΰ is omitted, a somewhat harsh construction, to which the simpler rendering given above is to be preferred. Second Strophe: Job 11:10-12. [The judicial intervention of God supposed.] Job 11:10. If He passes by [ιημσ, as in Job 9:11; E. V. incorrectly “cut off”], and arrests, and calls to judgment (lit. summons an assembly, implying that the process of a trial was public, and the verdict rendered and executed by the assembled people: comp. Ezekiel 16:40; Ezekiel 23:46; 1 Kings 21:9). [“One might almost imagine that Zophar looks upon himself and the other two friends as forming such an ‘assembly:’ they cannot justify him in opposition to God, since He accounts him guilty.” Del.]—Who will oppose Him? present a protest in behalf of the accused as though he were not guilty. Comp. in general Job 9:11-12, which description of Job’s Zophar here reproduces in part word for word, but with quite another purpose, viz. to defend, not to condemn or assail God’s justice [“εּ ?ξִ ?ιvav apod. with fine effect—who, as you say (Job 9:12) would?” Dav.]. Job 11:11. For He [emphatic, δεּ ?ΰ; whether others know it, or not] knows evil men (ξְ ?ϊֵ ?ιωָׁ ?εְ ?ΰ, lit. “men of vanity, of falsehood,” [“people who hypocritically disguise their moral nothingness.” Del.], as in Psalms 26:4; comp. also Job 22:15), and sees wickedness without considering it:i.e. without watching it with strenuous and anxious strictness (comp. Job 34:23), the moral qualities of His creatures being at every moment unveiled to His omniscience. [“Finely magnifying the Divine Insight, which is omniscient, and is so without effort.” Dav.] This is the only rendering of εְ ?μֹ ?ΰιִ ?ϊְ ?αּ ?εֹ ?πָ ?ο which accords with the context (comp. already Aben Ezra; non opus habet, ut diu consideret; among moderns Hirzel, Dillm., Del., etc.). Far less natural are the explanations of Ewald: “without his (the wicked) observing it;” of Umbreit, Stickel, Hahn: “without his (the wicked) being observed;” of Schlottman: “and (sees) him who observes not, who is without understanding.” Job 11:12. So must (even) a witless man acquire wisdom, and a wild ass’s foal be born over a man.—This interpretation, which is the one substantially adopted by Piscator, Umbreit, Ewald, Schlottm., Vaih., Heiligst., Dillmann [Renan, Hengst., Wordsworth], and generally by most moderns, is the most suitable among the numerous interpretations of this difficult verse. The connection by the εְ with the verse preceding, shows that this verse should indicate what effect the judicial intervention of the Omniscient God ought to have on man, even though he be a stubborn sinner and devoid of understanding.—ΰִ ?ιωׁ πָ ?αεּ ?α, lit. a man bored through, i.e. a hollow man, hence one void of understanding, a man without intellectual and moral substance; comp. the phrase ξְ ?ϊֵ ?ιωָׁ ?εְ ?ΰ.—Again, ςַ ?ιִ ?ψτֶּ ?ψֶ ?ΰ (of which τֶּ ?ψֶ ?ΰ is in apposition, not in the genitive), signifies lit. “a foal, a wild ass, i.e., a wild-ass-foal (comp. the phrase τֶּ ?ψֶ ?ΰΰָ ?γָ ?ν, used in almost the same sense of untamed wildness in Genesis 16:12).—Both these expressions, as well as those of the preceding verse, are chosen not without reference to the conduct of Job, who seems to Zophar to be an obstinate fool (comp. Job 2:10); although not pointed directly at him, they inflict on him a sensible cut [see Job 12:3, where with evident reference to the ιִ ?μָּ ?αֵ ?α of this passage, Job with indignant scorn says βַּ ?ξΞμִ ?ιμֵ ?αָ ?αλּ ?Χ—E.], and they at the same time facilitate the transition to the following admonitions. Observe also the intentional and witty paronomasia [both of sound and sense] between πָ ?αεּ ?α and ιִ ?μָּ ?αֵ ?α: the empty man is to be made a man of substance [der Hohlkopf soll beherzt gemacht), the void in his head is to be filled up as it were by a new heart. [Observe in addition the assonance of the closing words of each member, ιִ ?μָּ ?αֵ ?α and ιִ ?εּ ?μֵ ?γ.—Davidson adopts essentially the same construction of terms and clauses as that given here, but gives to the verse a different tone. Instead of regarding it as a grave declaration of what should be the result of the judicial intervention of God, he regards it as a sarcastic denial of wisdom to man:—“But a witless man would be wise, and a wild ass colt be a born man! a man who is a fool would arrogate wisdom to himself, and though a wild ass colt, he would claim humanity.” This, however, would be a tone of remark entirely out of harmony with what precedes, and with what follows. Davidson characterizes the interpretation adopted above as “excessively artificial and unhebraistic in construction:” a strange charge surely to come from one who adopts the very same construction, except that he gives it a different coloring. Equally wide of the mark is the objection that Job himself did not exhibit the result which Zophar here says ought or might be expected to follow.—Hengstenberg remarks on the contents of the verse according to our interpretation: “We have here the first passage of Scripture which speaks of a regeneration.”—E.] The following varying explanations are to be rejected as being in part against the connection, in part too harsh, or grammatically inadmissible. 1. “An empty man is without heart,” i.e. without understanding, etc. (Gesenius, Olshausen), [Conant, Noyes, Merx, Rodwell.—Against this it may be argued that such a privative use of Niphal is unexampled in Hebrew, and especially as Dillmann urges, that the sentiment thus expressed is self-evident and trite, and takes away the whole force of the paronomasia].—2. “But man, like a hollow pate, has he understanding,” etc. (Hirzel). [“Violates the accentuation, and produces an affected witticism.” Del.]—3. “Man is—at his birth—as one empty furnished with a heart,” i.e. he receives an empty undiscerning heart (Hupfeld). [Opposed to the future verbs, and to the correlation of παεα and ιμαα].—4. “Ignorant man flares up, or becomes insolent, etc.” (Vulgate, Stickel, Welte [Carey], etc. [Does not bring out the proper antithesis between παεα and ιμαα. Why should the man of whom it is affirmed that he has a bold defiant heart, be described as πָ ?αεּ ?α? This meaning is, moreover, less suitable to the connection. See remarks below at the end of the verse.—The same objections apply to] 5. “An empty man becomes stubborn” (Bφttcher).—6. “Before an empty head gains a heart (understanding), a wild ass’s foal will be born again a man” (Rosenm., Hahn, Del., Kamphausen, etc.) [In determining the meaning of this difficult expression the following considerations should have controlling weight. (1) The evident antithesis of παεα and ιμαα. Now as παεα can be referred only to man in his sinful hollowness, emptiness, ιμαα must describe the opposite, or man as endowed with a heart to understand, appreciate, and profit by God’s dealings. (2) The assonance of ιִ ?μָּ ?αֵ ?α and ιִ ?εָּ ?μֵ ?γ, as well as the striking homogeneousness of thought between the two terms, the one describing the process of endowing man with μֵ ?α, the distinguishing characteristic of manhood, the other the process of becoming a man, being born, here being born again a man, suggests that the verse is most probably a synonymous parallelism, the same essential thought being repeated in both members. (3) The gravity of the connection forbids our regarding the verse as simply a piece of witty irony. The verses preceding are a solemn description of God’s procedure against man in judgment; the verses following a solemn appeal to Job to repent and return to God. This verse in like manner is far more likely to be a grave earnest affirmation of truth than the opposite. (4) The practical drift of the connection makes it probable that the verse is not a description of the sinner in his perversity, but in the possibilities of his restoration. As the result of God’s severe disciplinary processes “empty man may or should be filled with a heart, and a wild ass’s foal may or should be born over a man.” This being the case, if thou direct thine heart, etc., thou shalt lift up thy face without spot, etc. Thus understood, it will be seen that the verse furnishes a suitable sequel to Job 11:10-11, and a suitable preparation to Job 11:13 seq.—(5) It seems exceedingly probable to say the least, that Job’s language in Job 12:3 a is his direct reply to the implied reproach in this verse. There he claims that he hasμαα as well as the friends, a claim which is most satisfactorily explained by supposing that he was stung to make it by understanding Zophar’s language here to imply that he needed to be put in possession of μαα.—E.]. 4. Third Division: An admonition to repentance and conversion as the only means by which Job can recover his former prosperity, and escape the terrible doom of the wicked: Job 11:13-20. First Strophe: Job 11:13-15. A period, consisting of Job 11:13 as hypothetical antecedent, Job 11:15 as consequent, and Job 11:14 as a regularly constructed parenthesis. Job 11:13. (But) if thou direct thy heart (prepare it, bring it into a proper condition, not: “give it the right direction towards God,” Del. and others; nor again: “establish it,” Hirzel [“not pertinent, because Zophar has not in his mind so much perseverance in godliness as a return to it,” Dav.]), and spread forth thy hands unto Him, viz., in prayer and penitent supplication for mercy; comp. Job 8:5, and for the same phrase τψωׂ λτιν, manus supinas (palmas) extendere, comp. Exodus 9:29; Exodus 9:33; 1 Kings 8:22; Isaiah 1:15. Job 11:14. If iniquity is in thy hand, put it far away, and let not evil dwell in thy tents (comp. Job 5:24); this being the antecedent condition of the success of Job’s prayer according to Zophar’s mode of thinking, which indeed is not in itself a theory of legality or work-righteousness (comp. Psalms 34:13(12) seq.; 1 Peter 3:10; Isaiah 1:15 seq.), but which in the present case does nevertheless proceed from a narrow judgment, and is excessively offensive to Job. Job 11:15. Surely, then thou shalt lift up thy face (comp. on Job 10:15) without spot:i.e., “without consciousness of guilt, and without any outward sign of the same cleaving to thee,” (Dillm.) ξִ ?ο lit. “away from,” here equivalent to “without,” comp. Job 19:26; Job 21:9; 2 Samuel 1:22; Proverbs 20:3; and shalt be steadfast without fearing; shalt be firmly fixed in thy new prosperity, without having to fear any further judgments of God.—ξֻ ?φָּ ?χ, Part. Hoph. of ιφχ, lit. fused into solidity, quasi ex ζre fusus (comp. 1 Kings 7:16. [“We must not lose the fine idea of one state arising out of another, a state of fluidity ξָ ?ν Job 6:14) passing over into solidity; playing on Job’s past and future.” Dav.]. Second Strophe: Job 11:16, Job 11:17. Continuation of the promise of well-being to the penitent. Job 11:16. For thou shalt forget trouble, shalt remember it as waters that have passed away: as something therefore that is never to come back, that has disappeared forever. [“When we think of water that has flowed away, we think of it as something which does not return, or rather we think no more about it at all, for with its disappearance even the remembrance of it is gone.” Dillmann]. The pronoun here is emphatic: “for thou thyself wilt forget trouble, thou and none other, no stranger (comp. Job 19:27) [or, as Davidson: “thou, unlike others, who escape calamity, but are haunted by its memory;” or, as Hengst: “thou, who just now canst think no other thought than of thy suffering”]: giving “an emphasis to the personal application of this peroration,” which would be lost if, with the Pesh. and Hirzel, λּ ?ιΰַ ?ϊָּ ?δ were changed to λִּ ?ιςַ ?ϊָּ ?δ. Job 11:17. And brighter than the glory of noon (φδψιν, as in Job 5:14 b) arises (for thee) the future. ηֶ ?μֶ ?γ, lit. that which creeps along slowly, which passes by unobserved (from ημγ, to glide) hence time in general, either in the sense of the world, that which is temporal, αἰών (Psalms 17:14; comp. Hupfeld on the passage, Psalms 49:2); or in the sense of life, lifetime, future, as here and in Psalms 39:6 (5); Psalms 89:48 (47), etc. [“ιָ ?χּ ?εּ ?ν, an exquisite image, lift itself up, disentangle itself from the accumulated, crushing darkness of the present, increasing in brilliancy ever as it disengages itself.” Dav.]. For ξִ ?ο in ξφδψιν, (with “brighter” to be supplied) comp. Micah 7:4.—Should it be dark, it will be as the morning;i.e., if any darkness should come, if dark adversity should befall thee (ϊָּ ?ςֻ ?τָ ?δ, 3d Pers. Fem., with neut. signification: not 2d Pers., “shouldest thou become dark,” as Schlottm. would explain) it will then ever be as bright as on a clear morning: evidently an intentional reversal of the gloomy picture of his future in Job 10:22, which Job had himself drawn. [“His climax there was that his daylight should be as darkness; Zophar’s promise is that his darkness shall he daylight.” Dav.—Gesenius (in Thes.) Ewald, Conant, etc., prefer taking ϊςτδ as a noun, “darkness,” written ϊְּ ?ςֻ ?τָ ?δ, or ϊְּ ?ςεּ ?τָ ?δ, as found in a few MSS., and as read by the Syr. and Chald.—Bernard, Hengstenberg, and others render the verb—“thou shalt fly up,” i.e., soar out of the depths of thy misery to the heights of prosperity; a rendering which destroys the antithesis between this verse and Job 10:22.—E. V.: “thou shalt shine forth” seems to be a paraphrase of this last rendering, suggested perhaps by the frequent comparison of the beams of light to the wings of a bird.—E.] Third Strophe: Job 11:18-20. Conclusion of the promise of prosperity, with an admonitory reference to the joyless end of the wicked. Job 11:18. And thou hast (thou shalt have, Perf. consec.) confidence, because there is [ιֵ ?ωׁ, “with the force of a real and lasting existence,” Del.] hope (for thee, comp. Job 14:7, also the opposite of this hopeful condition, described above in Job 7:6); and thou shalt search about (to ascertain, viz., whether all that pertains to thy household is in a state of order and security; comp. Job 5:24 b), shalt lie down securely, viz., for sleep; comp. Ps. 4:9 (Psalms 4:8). ηָ ?τַ ?ψ here certainly “to spy out,” as in Job 39:21; Job 39:29; not “to blush (ηָ ?τֵ ?ψ), to be ashamed,” as though εְ ?ηָ ?τַ ?ψְ ?ϊָּ were a concessive antecedent clause: “and even shouldest thou be put to shame (in thy confidence), thou canst still lie down in peace,” Rosenm., Hirzel, [Carey], an unsuitable weakening of the sense, which is at variance with the remainder of the bright promises contained in these verses. [“Against this conditional sense is the affirmative use of the corresponding form in the parallel member.” Con. “It is inadmissible, since it introduces a sadness into the promise.” Del.]. The rendering of Hengstenberg is altogether too artificial: “and thou hast dug,” i.e., dug a trench for protection around thy house [and so E. V.—“thou shalt dig about thee”], a sense which the reference to Job 3:21; Job 39:21 is scarcely sufficient to justify. Job 11:19. Thou liest down without any one making thee afraid; as peacefully and securely, that is, as the beast, or the cattle, which no foe terrifies; comp. Genesis 49:9; Isaiah 17:2.—Yea, many shall seek thy favor, lit. stroke, or caress thy face (Del. “thy cheeks”) flatter thee; comp. Proverbs 19:6; Psalms 45:13 (12). Instead of being despised, and covered with ignominy, (Job 10:15) thou shalt be highly honored, and greatly courted. Job 11:20. But the eyes of the wicked waste away, in vainly looking for help, in unsatisfied yearning for good (comp. Job 17:5) and every refuge vanishes from them; lit. “away from them,” ξִ ?πְּ ?δֶ ?ν poet. for ξֵ ?δֵ ?ν; and their hope is the breathing out of the soul;i.e., all that they have still to hope for is the breathing out of their soul (comp. πָ ?τַ ?ηπֶ ?τֶ ?ωׁ, Job 31:39; Jeremiah 15:9), hence the giving up of the ghost, death (not a state where their desires will remain eternally unfulfilled, as Delitzsch explains.) [“Zophar here makes use of the choicest expressions of the style of the prophetic Psalms,” Delitzsch. “If we compare with each other the closing words of the three friends, Job 5:26 sq; Job 8:22 b; Job 11:20, the advance, which each makes beyond his predecessor, is unmistakable.” Dillmann.] AND ETHICAL1. This first discourse of Zophar’s resembles that of Eliphaz, and still more that of Bildad, both in respect of the rebuke with which it begins (“who can hear such words in silence?” etc.) and in respect of the union of promise and warning at the close. It proceeds from the same theological and ethical premises as those of the two previous speakers, in so far as it puts God’s absolute perfection and exaltation (here more particularly on the intellectual side, the illimitability of His knowledge and His wisdom) in solemn and emphatic contrast with the short-sighted limitation of man, and thence derives man’s obligation in all circumstances to draw nigh to God as a penitent, and to confess himself before Him as guilty and deserving of punishment. Not less does it resemble those two preceding arraignments of Job in respect of form, in the strength of its expressions, in the poetic loftiness and figurative richness of its descriptions, qualities which shine forth with especial brilliancy in the passage where the Divine wisdom is described as being high as heaven, deep as hell, long as the earth, and broad as the sea (Job 11:7-9). Moreover the comparatively correct orthodoxy of its positions and arguments, the absence of everything that would decidedly contradict the doctrinal and ethical tradition of pious Old Testament worshippers of Jehovah (worshippers of Eloah), the circumstance that nowhere is there even any excessive work-righteousness and legal harshness visible (particularly not in Job 11:14)—all this exhibits Zophar to us as a kindred soul with Eliphaz and Bildad, and his stand-point as most intimately related to theirs. 2. That, however, which marks the difference between this discourse, as to its contents and tendency, and those of the two former speakers—a difference, too, which is not to the advantage of the speaker—is its tone, which is immeasurably more violent. Its attack on the sorely tried sufferer, who so greatly needed a merciful and tender treatment, is harsher, more pointed and personal. At the very beginning (Job 11:2-3) the bitter charge is hurled at his head that his speech was “a torrent of words” and “empty talk.” To the expression “an empty pate,” which is here applied to him, is added in Job 11:11-12 a description of vain, hollow-pated, stubborn people (who are like the wild ass), which points with unmistakable significance to Job. And in the closing passage (Job 11:20), which points out the hopeless destruction of the wicked, there is no trace of the delicacy and urbanity of his two predecessors, at the close of whose discourses, the tone of promise altogether predominates over that of threats and warnings. The discourse at this very point shows a decidedly perceptible advance beyond the two which precede towards inconsiderate harshness. “Eliphaz barely appended a slight warning; Bildad briefly blends it with his promise by way of contrast; Zophar adds a verse which already looks like the advanced picket of an army of similar harsh menaces in chs. 15, 18, 20” (Ewald). Again, the exceedingly personal and unqualified way in which Zophar in Job 11:6 reproaches Job with his guilt, and suggests that there must be not a little of it that is overlooked by God, as well as the not less personal and humiliating demand that he should repent and renounce all unrighteousness as a conditio sine qua non of his restoration to divine favor (Job 11:13 seq.) exhibit a certain advance on the part of this speaker beyond the stand-point of the two former. Instead of reckoning himself as belonging to those who need repentance and purification, as Eliphaz does very distinctly, and Bildad also, at least to some extent, Zophar, when he reminds Job of the duty of acknowledging his sins and repenting of them, speaks only in the second person. He thus sets himself up before him as a rigid censor and accuser, and assumes the character of an advocate of God, who himself needs no correction. As a consequence all that he says in the way of positive instruction, or produces out of the store of his monotheistic Chokmah-tradition, loses for Job its proper moral value and its determining power. Even the description of the abysmal vastness and unsearchableness of the Divine nature and intelligence in Job 11:7 seq., grand as it is in itself, must seem cold to Job, and pass away without leaving any impression on him; for no softening ray of heartfelt brotherly love, and of a humble realization of grace falls on this magnificent picture of the Divine omniscience and wisdom. That picture can and should in truth produce only terror and trembling; for in whichever of the four directions we turn, whether toward the heights of heaven, or the depths of hell, or the lengths of the earth, or the breadths of the sea, nowhere do we discover any bridge hospitably inviting and facilitating our advance. We find no experience, not even a presentiment of the love-power of Christ’s cross, which fills and pervades the abysmal depths of the divine nature. There is to be found as yet no trace of that knowledge of God, which Paul in Ephesians 3:18 describes as a “comprehending … what is the breadth and the length and the depth and the height:” a comprehension which indeed belongs only to the “saints” of the New Dispensation, which is produced only by the cross of the Redeemer as the solution of all contradictions (comp. also Ephesians 4:8-10), and which can be acquired and appropriated only at the feet of the Crucified One. The deficiency in this knowledge of God, which Zophar here exhibits is indeed on his part essentially not criminal, resting as it does on the fact that neither to him, nor to his associates, nor to Job himself, had the mystery of justification by faith been openly revealed as yet (comp. Brentius: “Zophar and the other friends of Job seem to be entirely ignorant of what the Gospel and faith in God’s promise can effect; they argue against Job as though no one could ever be justified before God by faith”), and that as to his general position he belonged to that immature and imperfect stage of development in the education of the human race, when it was impossible as yet to advance beyond a rigid contra-position of the Godhead and the creature. He must, however, be to the last charged with criminal and guilty conduct in this, that he uses his insight into that heavenly immeasurable superiority of the Divine knowledge over the human (or, which is the same thing: his doctrine that the divine wisdom represents all men as sinful and foolish) with merciless severity against Job, deeply wounding him with it as with a sword, without making even a single attempt to soften the application, or to use this two-edged weapon in a considerate and conciliatory spirit. 3. It is easy to see accordingly what in Zophar’s discourse must be censured as one-sided and unfriendly, and what on the other hand remains as really beautiful and valuable religious and moral truth. The latter is limited essentially to the inspired eulogy of the Divine wisdom and omniscience in Job 11:7 seq.,—a description which in power and beauty is not, indeed, equal to that presented in the introductory part of Psalms 139., but which furnishes nevertheless one of the most note-worthy Old Testament parallels of that passage. It is in the more detailed exhibition of the individual beauties and profound truths of this eulogy of Divine wisdom that we are principally to find the AND Suggestions of this Discourse.—It is neither necessary nor advisable to subdivide it in thus treating it. For as Job 11:2-5 are simply introductory to the main theme, so Job 11:13-20 show how the wisdom of the Most High, incomprehensible in itself, and His omniscience, can alone become comprehensible to man, thus furnishing the basis for the practical and hortatory part, in which every homily on such a theme as the present one must find its issue. The whole is to be left in its organic connection. The following hints however may serve for the treatment of particular passages. Job 11:7. �colampadius: By the four greatest dimensions of the greatest things the idea of supreme perfection is conveyed.… Wisdom is higher than the heaven, deeper than hell, broader than the sea, and longer than the earth, for its greatness is not included within all of these. For the heaven of the heavens cannot contain Thee, says Solomon in his prayer (1 Kings 8:27).—Cocceius: It is no longer necessary that we should wish for one who might either ascend to heaven, or descend to hell or depart beyond the sea. In Christ we have One who came from heaven, who returned from hell, who measures the earth and the sea with a span. In Him all things are open and clear to us.—Starke: If man is not capable of searching out so many things in nature, how much less can he with his narrow understanding comprehend God’s nature, and His wise government (Wis 9:16)!—Hengstenberg : It is here that we first see quite clearly in what respect Zophar asserts the claims of the Divine wisdom against Job, as being that, namely, by virtue of which God penetrates the depths of the human heart and life, which to man himself are utterly inaccessible and hidden. He in rendering His judgment has all facts and data at His control, whereas to man only a small part is accessible. Job 11:13 seq. Cocceius: As there was impudence in the Pharisee’s lifting up of his hands (Luke 18:11 seq.), so there is deception in the hypocrite’s beating of the breast. These gestures easily degenerate. The best prayers are those which make the least noise, and which are poured out in the secret recesses of the heart to Him who seeth in secret, and rewardeth openly, who is the “Hearer of the heart, not of the voice,” as Cyprian says.—Starke: True penitence and believing prayer are the means by which calamity is warded off, and prosperity and blessing procured (Jdt 8:12 seq.) With true repentance, however, there must be associated (as in the case of Zacchζus, Luke 19:8) an earnest purpose to reform the life. Job 11:15 seq. Brentius: What therefore shall be to the man who directs his own heart, who stretches out his hands toward God, and who purges his works of sin? He dares to lift up his face before God, without spot, without crime; for if conscience, sin, or Satan should accuse us it is God who justifies; it is Christ who died and rose again, and the Christian shall rise together with Him.… All these promises are fulfilled in the Church, in which by faith tears are wiped away, and mourning disappears (Revelation 21:4); the body indeed suffers pain, but the inward man is renewed day by day (2 Corinthians 4:16). Job 11:20. Starke: The Divine threatenings are to be applied to the soul that rests in careless security, but not to the soul that is tried with temptation and anguish (2 Thess. 5:14).—Hengstenberg; Job had spoken of death as his only hope. Very true, says Zophar, it is the only hope, if thou remainest as thou art! Zophar is quite right in making all Job’s hope, and all his salvation depend on his knowing himself as a sinner. His error begins only when he comes to determine more particularly the way and mode of recognizing sin, when—that is—he treats sinners and transgressors as convertible terms. In his sense Job could not acknowledge himself a sinner. Footnotes: It is a favorite thought of many of the Church Fathers that the Cross of Christ is a power which mediates and reconciles the discords and oppositions between all parts of the universe (as though accordingly it sent its roots down into the under-world, its head up into heaven, while with both arms it lovingly embraced the broad expanse of earth and air). This thought is elaborated for the most part in connection with Ephesians 3:18 (Job 4:8-10), but occasionally also with reference to Job 11:8-9. So by Basil the Great (comm. on Isaiah 2); by Gregory of Nyssa (Catech. Magna, c. 32); by Rufinus (Expositio Symb. Apostolici); by Coel. Sedulius (Mirabilia Div. V. 297, 54); by John of Damascus (De fide orthod. iv. 12), etc. The same may be said of many modern mystics and theosophists, such as Baader, St. Martin. Gφrres, J. F. v. Meyer. Comp. especially the last named’s “Blόtter f. hohere Wahrheit,” Vol. VIII., page 145 seq.: “The Cross points upward and downward, to the right and to the left; this fourfold direction designates the All, on which and from which its influence acts. Its head uplifts itself to the throne of God, and its root reaches down to hell. Its arms stretch out from the rising of the sun to the going down of the same, from pole to pole. In it heaven and earth are united, in it appeased; in it things which are most strongly opposed are reconciled and made one.” Comp. also the remarks of �colampadius, Cocceius, etc., cited below [Homiletical and Practical]. B.—Job’s Reply: Attack upon his friends, whose wisdom and justice he earnestly questions:Job 12-141. Ridicule of the assumed wisdom of the friends, who can give only a very unsatisfactory de scription of the exalted power and wisdom of the Divine activity: Job 121         And Job answered and said, 2    No doubt but ye are the people, and wisdom shall die with you. 3    But I have understanding as well as you; I am not inferior to you; yea, who knoweth not such things as these? 4    I am as one mocked of his neighbor, who calleth upon God, and He answereth him; the just, upright man is laughed to scorn! 5    He that is ready to slip with his feet is as a lamp despised in the thought of him that is at ease. 6    The tabernacle of robbers prosper, and they that provoke God are secure; into whose hand God bringeth abundantly. 7    But ask now the beasts, and they shall teach thee, and the fowls of the air, and they shall tell thee: 8     or speak to the earth, and it shall teach thee, and the fishes of the sea shall declare unto thee. 9    Who knoweth not in all these that the hand of the Lord hath wrought this? 10    In whose hand is the soul of every living thing, and the breath of all mankind. 11    Doth not the ear try words, and the mouth taste his meat? 12    With the ancient is wisdom; and in length of days understanding. 13    With Him is wisdom and strength, He hath counsel and understanding. 14    Behold He breaketh down, and it cannot be built again; He shutteth up a man, and there can be no opening. 15    Behold, He withholdeth the waters, and they dry up; also He sendeth them out, and they overturn the earth, 16    With Him is strength and wisdom; the deceived and the deceiver are His. 17    He leadeth counsellors away spoiled, and maketh the judges fools. 18    He looseth the bond of kings, and girdeth their loins with a girdle. 19     He leadeth princes away spoiled, and overthroweth the mighty. 20     He removeth away the speech of the trusty, and taketh away the understanding of the aged. 21    He poureth contempt upon princes, and weakeneth the strength of the mighty. 22    He discovereth deep things out of darkness, and bringeth out to light the shadow of death. 23    He increaseth the nations and destroyeth them; He enlargeth the nations, and straighteneth them again. 24    He taketh away the heart of the chief of the people of the earth, and causeth them to wander in a wilderness where there is no way. 25    They grope in the dark without light, and He maketh them to stagger like a drunken man. 2. The resolution to betake himself to God, who, in contrast with the harshness and injustice of the friends will assuredly do him justice: Job 13:1-221    Lo, mine eye hath seen all this, mine ear hath heard and understood it. 2    What ye know, the same do I know also; I am not inferior unto you. 3    Surely I would speak to the Almighty, and I desire to reason with God. 4    But ye are forgers of lies, ye are all physicians of no value. 5    O that ye would altogether hold your peace, and it should be your wisdom. 6    Hear now my reasoning, and hearken to the pleadings of my lips. 7    Will ye speak wickedly for God, and talk deceitfully for Him? 8    Will ye accept His person? will ye contend for God? 9    Is it good that He should search you out? or as one man mocketh another, do ye so mock Him? 10    He will surely reprove you, if ye do secretly accept persons. 11    Shall not His excellency make you afraid? and His dread fall upon you? 12    Your remembrances are like unto ashes, your bodies to bodies of clay. 13    Hold your peace, let me alone that I may speak, and let come on me what will. 14    Wherefore do I take my flesh in my teeth, and put my life in mine hand? 15    Though He slay me, yet will I trust in Him: but I will maintain mine own ways before Him. 16    He also shall be my salvation: for a hypocrite shall not come before Him. 17    Hear diligently my speech, and my declaration with your ears. 18    Behold now, I have ordered my cause; I know that I shall be justified. 19    Who is he that will plead with me? for now, if I hold my tongue, I shall give up the ghost. 20    Only do not two things unto me; then will I not hide myself from Thee. 21    Withdraw Thine hand far from me; and let not Thy dread make me afraid. 22    Then call Thou, and I will answer: or let me speak, and answer Thou me! 3. A vindication of himself, addressed to God, beginning with the haughty asseveration of his own innocence, but relapsing into a despondent cheerless description of the brevity, helplessness, and hopelessness of man’s life: Job 13:23 to Job 14:2223    How many are mine iniquities and sins? make me to know my transgression and my sin. 24    Wherefore hidest Thou Thy face, and holdest me for Thine enemy? 25    Wilt Thou break a leaf driven to and fro? and wilt Thou pursue the dry stubble? 26    For Thou writest bitter things against me, and makest me to possess the iniquities of my youth. 27    Thou puttest my feet also in the stocks, and lookest narrowly unto all my paths; Thou settest a print upon the heels of my feet. 28    And he, as a rotten thing, consumeth, as a garment that is moth-eaten. Job 141    Man that is born of a woman, is of few days, and full of trouble. 2    He cometh forth like a flower, and is cut down; he fleeth also as a shadow, and continueth not. 3    And dost Thou open Thine eyes upon such an one, and bringest me into judgment with Thee? 4    Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean? not one! 5    Seeing his days are determined, the number of his months are with Thee, Thou hast appointed his bounds that he cannot pass; 6    turn from him that he may rest, till he shall accomplish, as an hireling, his day. 7    For there is hope of a tree, if it be cut down, that it will sprout again, and that the tender branch thereof will not cease. 8    Though the root thereof wax old in the earth, and the stock thereof die in the ground; 9    yet through the scent of water it will bud, and bring forth boughs like a plant. 10    But man dieth, and wasteth away! yea, man giveth up the ghost, and where is he? 11    As the waters fail from the sea, and the flood decayeth and drieth up: 12    so man lieth down and riseth not: till the heavens be no more, they shall not awake, nor be raised out of their sleep. 13    O that Thou wouldest hide me in the grave, that thou wouldest keep me secret until Thy wrath be past, that Thou wouldest appoint me a set time, and remember me! 14    If a man die, shall he live again? all the days of my appointed time will I wait, till my change come. 15    Thou shalt call, and I will answer Thee; Thou wilt have a desire to the work of Thine hands. 16    For now Thou numberest my steps; dost Thou not watch over my sin? 17    My transgression is sealed up in a bag, and Thou sewest up mine iniquity. 18    And surely the mountain falling cometh to nought, and the rock is removed out of his place. 19    The waters wear the stones; Thou washest away the things which grow out of the dust of the earth; and Thou destroyest the hope of man. 20    Thou prevailest forever against him, and he passeth; Thou changest his countenance, and sendest him away. 21    His sons come to honor, and he knoweth it not; and they are brought low, but he perceiveth it not of them. 22    But his flesh upon him shall have pain, and his soul within him shall mourn. AND Zophar in Job 11 had specially arrayed against Job the wisdom and omniscience of God, in order to convict him partly of ignorance in Divine things, partly of his sinfulness and need of repentance. Job now meets this attack by strongly doubting the wisdom of his friends, or by representing it as being at least exceedingly ordinary and commonplace, being capable neither of worthily comprehending or describing the Divine wisdom and greatness, nor of demonstrating actual sin and guilt on his part. This demonstration of their incompetency, delivered in an ironical tone, accompanied by a description of the wisdom and strength of God far transcending that of Zophar in energy and inspired elevation of thought, forms the first part of his discourse (Job 12.) This is followed by an emphatic asseveration of his innocence, clothed in the declaration of his purpose to appeal to God, the righteous Judge, and from Him, by means of a formal trial, to which he purposes summoning Him, to obtain testimony in favor of his innocence, which shall effectually dispose of the suspicions of the friends (Job 13:1-22). As though such a trial had already been instituted, he then turns to God with a solemn assertion of his innocence, but failing to meet with a favorable declaration from God in answer to his appeal, he immediately sinks back into his former discouragement and despair, to which he gives characteristic expression in a long description of the shortness of life, the impotence and helplessness of man as opposed to the Divine omnipotence (Job 13:23 to Job 14:22). [Davidson characterizes this discourse as “this last and greatest effort of Job”]. Each of these three parts is subdivided into sections which are distinctly separated, Parts I. and II. into two sections each of about equal length; Part III. into five strophes of 5 to 6 verses each. 2. First Division.—First Section: Sarcasm on the wisdom of Zophar, and the two other speakers, as being quite ordinary and commonplace: Job 12:2-12. First Strophe: Job 12:2-6. [Sarcasm on the friends (Job 12:2) changing into angry invective (Job 12:3), then into bitter complaint of his own lot (Job 12:4), of the way of the world (Job 12:5), and of the security of the wicked (Job 12:6)]. Job 12:2. Of a truth ye are the people.—ΰַ ?ϊֶּ ?νςָ ?ν, with the logical accent on the first word, signifies not: “ye are people, the right sort of people,” but: “ye are the people, the totality of all people, the race of men;” ςָ ?ν, therefore as in Isaiah 40:7; Isaiah 42:5. The Cod. Alex. of the LXX. expresses correctly the sense; μὴ ὑμεῖςἐστέἄνθρωποιμόνοι. As to ΰָ ?ξְ ?πָ ?νλִּ ?ι, comp. the simple ΰָ ?ξְ ?πָ ?ν, Job 9:2. Job 12:3. I also have a heart as well as you, i.e., I lack understanding no more than you.—μֵ ?αָ ?α therefore as above in Job 8:10; Job 9:4; comp. Job 11:12 [“he also has a heart like them, he is therefore not empty, παεα,” Del.], and as below in Job 12:24.—I do not stand behind you: lit., “I do not sink down beneath you,” or: “I do not fall away before you;” the ξִ ?ο in ξִ ?λֶּ ?ν relates to the stand-point of the friends, from which Job might seem to be a πֹ ?τֵ ?μ, one falling below them, meaner than themselves. [Ewald takes ξִ ?ο in the comparative sense, which however would give an unsuitable rendering, “to fall more than another”].—And to whom are such things not known? Lit., “and with whom is not the like of these things?” viz., the like of your knowledge of Divine things. ΰֵ ?ϊ, lit. “with,” is used here in the sense of an inward indwelling, as also in Job 14:5 b, and as elsewhere ςִ ?ν is used: Job 9:35; Job 10:13, etc. Job 12:4. A mockery (ωְׂ ?ηχ, lit., “a laughing,” laughter, Inf. subst., like ξְ ?ωֹׁ ?μ, Job 17:6) to my own friend must I be.—[Lit., “a mockery to his neighbor, etc.]. Instead of μְ ?ψֵ ?ςֵ ?δεּ ?one might expect to find μְ ?ψֵ ?ςִ ?ι; an exchange of persons, however, takes place, that the expression may be made as general as possible: “one who is a mockery to his own friend must I be.” Comp. similar examples of the exchange of persons in Psalms 91:1 seq.; Isaiah 2:8. [“Must I become, ΰֶֽ ?δְ ?ιֶ ?δ best as exclamation, expressing Job’s sense of indignity: (1) At such treatment from friends; (2) such treatment to such as he,” (Dav.) see remainder of verse].—I who called to Eloah and found a hearing: lit., “one calling [still in 3d person] to Eloah, and He heard him,” in apposition to the subject—I—in ΰֶֽ ?δְ ?ιֶ ?δ: which is the case also with φַ ?γִּ ?ιχϊָּ ?ξִ ?ιν, one who is just, godly (pure, blameless), comp. Proverbs 11:5 a, these words being placed with emphasis at the end of the whole exclamation. [Zφckler’s rendering of this clause being: “a mockery (am I);—the just, the godly man!” Noyes and Wemyss render the second member: “I who call upon God that He would answer me” (or “to listen to me”). Noyes objects to the other rendering the use of the present participle. This form, however, is used to denote a continuous fact in Job’s life, and a permanent quality grounded thereon, the Vav. consec. then indicating the Divine result consequent on Job’s conduct and character.—E.]. Job 12:5. For misfortune scorn—according to the opinion of the prosperous: i.e., the prosperous (lit. “the secure,” who lives free from care, comp. Isaiah 33:20) thinks, that contempt is due to the unfortunate. [“It is the ordinary way of the great multitude to over-whelm the unfortunate with contempt, and to give to the tottering still another push.” Dillm.] αּ ?εּ ?ζ thus = contemptus, as in Job 12:21, and Job 31:34; τִּ ?ιγ = destruction, ruin, misfortune, as in Job 30:24; Job 31:29; Proverbs 24:22; and ςַ ?ωְׁ ?ϊּ ?εֹ ?ϊ (plur. fem. st. constr. from ςֶ ?ωֶׁ ?ϊ), or, after a form which is better authorized, ςַ ?ωְׁ ?ϊּ ?εּ ?ϊ, signifies an opinion, fancy, thought (from ςωϊ, to fashion, used of the mind’s fashioning its thoughts). This is the interpretation adopted by most of the moderns, since the time of Aben Ezra. The rendering of the Targ., Vulg., [E. V.], Levi b. Gerson, and other Rabbis, preferred also by Luther, De Wette, Rosenm. [Noyes, Carey, Rod.], etc., which takes μַ ?τִּ ?ιγ in the sense of a torch, yields no tolerable sense, at least no such sense as suits the second member (“a torch of contempt” [Luther: “a despised taper”] in the opinion of the prosperous is he who is ready to totter,” or “to whom it is appointed that his feet slip,” etc.) [Against this rendering, found in E. V., may be urged (1) The expression “a despised torch” is meaningless. As Con. suggests “a consumed or expiring torch would be pertinent, but a torch despised is like anything else that is despised.” (2) πָ ?λεֹ ?ο is superfluous and insipid. Why “ready to waver?” (3) This rendering presupposes a noun ξεֹ ?ςֵ ?γ, with the meaning vacillatio, wavering, lit. ready for waverings, for which however there is no authority, and which would require here rather the vowel pointing: ξָ ?ςֳ ?γֵ ?ι.—(4) It destroys the rhythm of the verse. See Con., Dillm., Dav. and Delitzsch. E.]. The rendering of Hitzig (Geschichte des Volkes Israel I., 112) is peculiar; μַ ?τִּ ?ιγ he takes to mean: “a soothing bandage, a cure” (from the root μτγ, “to wind, or bind around,” here the sing. corresponding to the plur. found in Judges 4:4, which is not a proper name [Lapidoth], but taken in connection with the preceding ΰֵ ?ωֶׁ ?ϊ signifies: “a mistress of healing bandages”), so that the sense would then be: “Healing is a scorn [is scorned] in the opinion of the prosperous” (?).—Ready (is it, the contempt) for those whose foot wavers.—πָ ?λεֹ ?ο, Part. Niph. from λּ ?εּ ?ο, hence ἕτοιμος, ready, as in Exodus 34:2. Comp. below Job 15:23, where may also be found “the wavering of the foot” as a figurative expression of falling into misfortune; Psalms 38:17 (16) Ewald (Bibl. Jahrb. IX. p. 38) would instead of πָ ?λεֹ ?ο read πִ ?λָּ ?ιεֹ ?ο, “a stroke,” and Schultens and Dillmann would assign this same meaning of plaga, percussio to this same form πָ ?λεֹ ?ο (from δִ ?λָּ ?δ ,πָ ?λָ ?δ): “a stroke, is due to those whose foot wavers.” As if a new parallelism of thought must of necessity be found between a and b! Job 12:6. Secure are the tents of the spoilers, lit. to the spoilers; i.e., to powerful tyrants, savage conquerors, and the like. On “tents” comp. Job 5:24; Job 11:14.—ιִ ?ωְׁ ?μָ ?ιεּ is the aramaizing third plur. form of a verb which has for its perf. ωָׁ ?μֵ ?ε (see Job 3:26), but which derives its imperf. forms from ωָׁ ?μָ ?δ. Moreover ιִ ?ωְׁ ?μָ ?ιεּ is not merely a pausal form, but stands here removed from the place of the tone: comp. the similar pathetic verbal forms in Psalms 36:9; Psalms 57:2; Psalms 73:2; also Ewald, § 194, a.—And securityαַּ ?θֻּ ?ηεֹ ?ϊ, plur. et abstr. from αָּ ?θεּ ?ηַ (secure, free from care), have they who defy God [“ωεψγιν denotes the sin of these undeservedly prosperous ones against men, ξψβζιΰμ (lit. those who provoke God, who insolently assail Him) their wickedness against God.” Schlott.] they who carry Eloah in their hand: lit., “he who carries,” (μַ ?ΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψ..... δֵ ?αִ ?ιΰ); from among those who rage against God and defy Him, one is selected as an example, such an one, viz., as “bears God in his hand,” i.e., recognizes no other God than the one he carries in his hand or fist, to whom therefore his fighting weapon is to be his God; comp. Habakkuk 1:11; Habakkuk 1:16; also the “dextra mihi Deus” of Virg. Aen. 16, 773. [Delitzsch renders δֵ ?αִ ?ιΰ a little more precisely perhaps: “he who causes Eloah to enter into his hand; from which translation it is clear that not the deification of the hand, but of that which is taken into the hand is meant. That which is taken into the hand is not, however, an idol (Abenezra), but the sword; therefore he who thinks after the manner of Lamech, as he takes the iron weapon of attack and defense into his hand, that he needs no other God.” The deification of the weapon which a man wields with the power of his own right hand, and the deification of the power which wields the weapon, as in Hab. l. c. and Micah 2:1, are, however, so nearly identical as descriptive of the character here referred to, that either resolves itself into the other. Conant, who adopts the rendering of E. V.: “he into whose hand God bringeth” (E. V. adds “abundantly”) i.e. whom God prospers, objects that by the other rendering “the thought is expressed very coarsely, as to form, when it might be done in the Hebrew with great felicity.” It is difficult to see, however, how the sentence: “he who takes God in his hand” could be expressed more idiomatically or forcibly than in the words of the passage before us. Wordsworth somewhat differently: “who grasps God in his hand. The wicked, in his impious presumption, imagines that he can take God prisoner and lead Him as a captive by his power.” But this is less natural than the above.—E.] Second Strophe: Job 12:7-12. [“Return to the thought of Job 12:3—the shallowness of the friends’ wisdom on the Divine. Such knowledge and deeper every one possessed who had eyes and ears. For (1) every creature in earth and sea and air proclaimed it (7–10); and (2) every man of thought and age uttered it in the general ear (11, 12).” Dav.] Job 12:7. But ask now even the beasts—they can teach thee.—[“εְ ?ΰεּ ?μָ ?ν, recovery from the crushing thought of Job 12:4-6, and strong antithesis to the assumption of the friends.” Dav.] ϊֹּ ?ψֶ ?κָּ, as also ιַ ?βֵּ ?γ in the second member, voluntative [or, jussive], hence not literally future—“they will teach it to thee”—as commonly rendered. Here the form of address is different from that adopted heretofore in this discourse, being now directed to one only of the friends, viz. to Zophar, to whose eulogy of the absolute wisdom of God (Job 11:7-9) reference is here made, with the accompanying purpose of presenting a still more copious and elaborate description of the same. Job 12:8. Or think thoughtfully on the earth: lit. “think on the earth,” i.e. direct thoughtfully thy observation to the earth (which comes under consideration here, as is evident from what follows, as the place where the lower order of animals is found, the ψֶ ?ξֶ ?ωׂ, Genesis 9:2; 1 Kings 5:13), and acquire the instruction which may be derived from her. The rendering of ωִׂ ?ιηַ as a substantive, in the sense of “shrub” (comp. Job 30:4; Genesis 2:5), is on several grounds untenable; for ωִׂ ?ιηַ, “shrub” is, according to those passages, masculine; the use of the preposition μְ instead of the genit., or instead of ςμ or α before δΰψυ, would be singular; and the mention of plants in the midst of the animals (beasts, birds, fishes), would be out of place (against Berleb. Bib., Bφttcher, Umbreit, etc.). Job 12:9. Who would not know in all this, etc.—So is αְּ ?λָ ?μΞΰֵ ?μֶּ ?δ to be rendered, giving to αְּ the instrumental sense, not with Hahn—“who knows not concerning all this,” which would yield too flat a sense, and lead us to over look the retrospective reference which is to be looked for to the various kinds of animals already cited. Neither with Ewald [Hengst., Noyes] is it to be taken in the sense of “among all these,” as if the passage contained a reference to a knowledge possessed by all the creatures of God as their Creator, or possibly to the groaning of the creature after the Godhead, as described in Romans 8:18 sq. This partitive rendering of αְּ (which Renan as well as Ewald adopts: “qui ne saξt parmi tous ces ιtres,” etc.) is at variance with the context, as well as the position of the words (μֹ ?ΰιָ ?γַ ?ς before αְּ ?λָ ?μΞΰֵ ?μֶּ ?δ).—That the hand of Jehovah hath made this.—ζֹ ?ΰϊ refers essentially to the same object with λָּ ?μΞΰֵ ?μֶּ ?δ, only that it embraces a still wider circle of contemplation than the latter expression, which refers only to the classes of animals afore-mentioned. It denotes “the totality of that which surrounds us,” the visible universe, the whole world (τὰ βλεπόμενα, Hebrews 11:3); comp. Isaiah 66:2; Jeremiah 14:22; where λָּ ?μΞΰֵ ?μֶּ ?δ is used in this comprehensive signification; so also above in Job 11:8 seq., to which description of the all-embracing greatness of God there is here a manifest reference. Ewald, Dillmann [Conant, Davidson] translate: “that the hand of Jehovah hath done this.” By ζֹ ?ΰϊ, “this,” Ewald understands “the decreeing of suffering and pain” (of which also the groaning creation would testify); Dillmann refers it to the mighty and wise administration of God among His creatures; both of which explanations are manifestly more remote than the one given above. [“The meaning of the whole strophe is perverted if ζֹ ?ΰϊ is, with Ewald, referred to the ‘destiny of severe suffering and pain.’… Since as a glance at what follows shows, Job further on praises God as the governor of the universe, it may be expected that the reference is here to God as the creator and preserver of the world.… Bildad had appealed to the sayings of the ancients, which have the long experience of the past in their favor, to support the justice of the Divine government; Job here appeals to the absoluteness of the Divine rule over creation.” Delitzsch.]—Apart from the Prologue (Job 1:21), the name ιְ ?δεָ ?δ occurs only here in the mouth of Job, for the reason doubtless that the whole expression here used, which recurs again word for word in Isaiah 41:20 (Isaiah 66:2) was one that was everywhere much used, not unfrequently also among the extra-Israelitish monotheists (and the same is true of the expression ιִ ?ψְ ?ΰַ ?ϊΰֲ ?γֹ ?πַ ?ι, Job 28:28). Job 12:10. In whose hand is the soul of every living thing, and the breath of all the bodies of men.—[“Evidently these words are more naturally referred to the act of preservation than to that of creation.” Schlottm.] Observe the distinction between πֶ ?τֶ ?ωׁ, the lower principle of life, which fills all animals, and ψεּ ?ηַ, the godlike personal spirit of man. Otherwise in Ecclesiastes 3:19; Ecclesiastes 3:21, where ψεּ ?ηַ, in a wider sense, is ascribed even to the beasts. Job 12:11-12. To the knowledge of God which rests on the observation of the external cosmos (notitia Dei naturalis externa s. acquisita), is here added the human wisdom and insight which springs from experience, especially that of the aged, as a second source from which Job might draw (which may be regarded as the equivalent of that which is sometimes called notitia Dei naturalis interna). Job 12:11. Does not the ear prove sayings, even as [εְ ?adζquationis, as in Job 5:7] the palate tastes food for itself (μֹ ?εDat. commodi). Both comparisons illustrate the power of judicious discrimination possessed by the human spirit, by which it discerns the inner worth of things, especially as it exists in aged persons of large experience. So again later in Elihu’s discourse, Job 34:3. The opinion of Umbreit, Delitzsch, etc., that Job in this verse utters an admonition not to receive without proof the sayings of the ancients, to wit, those of which Bildad had previously spoken, Job 8:10 (“should not the ear prove the sayings?”), lacks proper support. A reference to that remote passage in the discourse of Bildad should have been more clearly indicated than by the accidental circumstance that there as here the word ξִ ?μִּ ?ιο, “sayings, utterances,” is used. Moreover the “aged” who are here mentioned (ιְ ?ωִׂ ?ιωִׂ ?ιν, as in Job 15:10; Job 29:8) are by no means identical with the fathers of former generations, whom Bildad had mentioned there. Job 12:12. Among the aged is wisdom, and a long life (works, gives) understanding [or lit. “length of days is understanding”]. The verse is related to the preceding as logical consequent to its antecedent: As the ear determines the value of words, or the palate the taste of food, so aged men have been able to acquire for themselves in the course of a long life a true insight into the nature of things, and a truly rational knowledge of the same,—and I have been to school with such men, I have also ventured to draw from this source! This is the meaning of the passage as clearly appears from the context, and it makes it unnecessary to assume: a. with Starke, etc., that Job reckons himself among the aged, and as such sets himself in the fullness of his self-consciousness against, the three friends as being younger than himself (which is distinctly refuted by what we find in Job 5:26; Job 29:8; Job 29:18; Job 15:10); b. with Ewald, to conjecture the loss of a passage after Job 12:12, which would furnish the transition from that verse to Job 12:23; c. with Dillmann, that originally Job 12:12 stood before Job 12:9-10, thus immediately following Job 12:8; d. with Delitzsch, Hengstenberg. etc., that Job 12:23 is to be connected closely and immediately with Job 12:12, so that thus the following order of thought would be expressed: assuredly wisdom is to be found among the aged, but in reality and in full measure it is to be found only with God, etc. [i.e. with Conant, that the verse is to be rendered interrogatively, on the ground that Job would not appeal to tradition in support of his positions; to which Davidson replies that “Job assails tradition only where he has found it false; and here, where he is exposing the vulgarity of the friends’ much-boasted insight, it is quite in place to refer to the facility any one had for coming in contact with such information; and in Job 13:2, where Job recapitulates Job 12:13-25, these two sources of information, sight and hearsay are directly alluded to.”—Besides Delitzsch and Hengstenberg, Schlottmann and Merx connect the verse with the preceding. On the contrary Con., Dav., Dillm., Ren., Good, Wemyss, etc., connect it with the following, and correctly so on account of the strict connection in thought, and especially the resumption of the thought in varying language in Job 12:16.—In answer to the objection of abruptness in the transition if Job 12:13 be detached from the preceding, Davidson says well that “it is quite in place; the whole chapter and speech is abrupt and passionate.”—E.]. First Division: Second Section: An animated description of the exercise of God’s wisdom and power, by way of actual proof that he is by no means wanting in the knowledge of God, which Zophar had denied to him: Job 12:13-25. [It is possible perhaps to exaggerate this idea that Job in the passage following is consciously emulating his opponents. Something there is of this no doubt, but it must not be forgotten that the description here given of the Divine wisdom and omnipotence is an important part of Job’s argument, as tending to show that these attributes so far from being employed by the ends which they had described, are exercised to produce hopeless confusion and ruin in human affairs.—E.]. First double strophe: Job 12:13-18 (consisting of two strophes of 3 verses each). a. Job 12:13-15. [The theme in its most general statement]. Job 12:13. With Him are wisdom and might, His are counsel and discernment.—The suffixes in ςִ ?ξּ ?εֹ and μֹ ?ε point back to Jehovah, Job 12:9-10, to whom the whole following description to Job 12:25 in general relates. [“With Him, ςִ ?ξּ ?εֹ, him, doubly, emphatic (a) in opposition to the just mentioned wisdom of men, Job 12:12; (b) with awe-ful omission of Divine name, and significant allusion and intonation in the pronoun.” Dav.]. The verse before us forms as it were the theme of this description, which presents Job’s own personal confession of faith in respect to the nature and wisdom of God. It is therefore neither an expression of the doctrinal views of a “hoary antiquity,” or of the aged sages of Job 12:12 (Umbreit) [Ewald, Schlottm.], nor a statement of that which is alone to be esteemed as genuine Divine wisdom, in antithesis to the more imperfect “wisdom of the aged” (Delitzsch, Hengstenberg). There is to be sure a certain progression of thought from Job 12:11 on: the adaptation to their uses of the organs of hearing and of taste, the wisdom of men of age and experience, and the wisdom of God, transcending all else, and united with the highest power, are related to each other as positive, comparative, and superlative. But there is not the slightest intimation of the thought that the absolute wisdom of God casts into the shade those rudiments of itself which are to be found in the sphere of the creature, or would hold them up as utterly worthless. Rather is what is said of the same in our verse in some measure the fruit, or a specimen of the wisdom of the aged, which Job also claims to possess, as a pupil of such aged men. Comp. below Cocceius, in the Homiletical Remarks on Job 12:10-13. Of the four designations of the absolute Divine intelligence here given, which accord with the language of Isa 11:2, and the accumulation of which intensifies the expression to the utmost, ηָ ?λְ ?ξָ ?δ denotes that side of God’s intelligence which “perceives things in the ground of their being, and in the reality of their existence” [“the general word and idea comprehensive of all others,” Dav.]. βְּ ?αεּ ?ψָ ?δ that “which is able to carry out the plans, purposes, and decisions of this universal wisdom against all hindrance and opposition” [“virtus, βֶּ ?αֶ ?ψ, vir.” Dav.]; ςֵ ?φָ ?δ, that “which is never perplexed as to the best way of reaching its purpose;” ϊְּ ?αεּ ?πָ ?δ, that “which can penetrate to the bottom of what is true and false, sound and corrupt, and distinguish between them:” Delitzsch; [ςֹ ?ζ “actively force, passively strength, firmness:” Dav.]. Job 12:14. Lo, He tears down, and it is not built up (again). This is the first example of the irresistible exercise of this absolute might and wisdom of God. Job describes it as directed above all else to the work of tearing down and destroying, because in his recent mournful experiences he had been led to know it on this side of its activity; comp. Job 9:5 seq., where in like manner the mention of the destructive activities of the Divine omnipotence precedes that of its creative and constructive operation. Whether there is a reference to Zophar’s expression (Job 11:10; so Dillmann) is doubtful. He shuts up a man (lit. “He shuts over a man”), and it cannot be opened. The expression ρָ ?βַ ?ψςַ ?μ, “to shut over any one,” is to be explained from the fact that use was frequently made of pits, perhaps of cisterns, as prisons, or dungeons: comp. Genesis 37:24; Jeremiah 38:6; Lamentations 3:53. Where this species of incarceration is not intended, ρָ ?βַ ?ψ is used either with the accus. or with αְּ ?ςַ ?γ (comp. Job 3:10; and 1 Samuel 1:6). Job 12:15. Lo, He restrains the waters, and they dry up (Is. 50:38); He letteth them forth (again), and they overturn the earth. A remarkable parallel in thought to this description of the operation of the Divine omnipotence in the visible creation, now withdrawing and now giving life, but ever mighty in its agency, may be found in Psalms 104:29-30. A reference to Zophar’s comparison of past calamity with vanished waters (Job 11:16) is scarcely to be recognized. b. Job 12:16-18. [Resumption of the theme—specially of the Divine wisdom bringing confusion and humiliation on earth’s mightiest]. Job 12:16. With Him are strength and true knowledge (ϊּ ?εּ ?ωִׁ ?ιָ ?δ, precisely as in Job 11:6). His are the deceived and the deceiver [the erring one, and the one who causes to err]: i.e., His intelligence is so far superior to that of man that alike he who abuses his wisdom in leading others astray, and he who uses it for their good, are in His hand, and constrained to serve His purposes. He thus makes evil, moral and intellectual, subservient to the good: Genesis 50:20; Psalms 18:27. [“ωָׁ ?βַ ?β and ωβδ here are to be understood not so much in the ethical as in the intellectual sense: if a man thinks himself wise because he is superior to another, and can lead him astray, in comparison with God’s wisdom the deceiver is not greater (in understanding) than the deceived; He has them both in his hand, etc.” Dillm.] Job 12:17. He leads counsellors away stripped: or “who leads counsellors, etc.”—for from this point on to the end of the description (Job 12:24) Job speaking of God uses the present participle. The circumstantial accus. ωׁ ?εֹ ?μָ ?μ, which here and in Job 12:19 is used in connection with ξεֹ ?μִ ?ικְ, (and that in the singular, like ςָ ?ψεֹ ?ν, Job 24:7; Job 24:10), is rendered by the ancient versions “captive,” or “chained” (LXX., Targ. on Job 12:19 : αἰχμαλώτους; Targ. on Job 12:17 : catenis vinctos), whereas etymologically the signification “made naked (exutus), violently stripped” is the only one that is authenticated. The word therefore is equivalent to the expression ςָ ?ψεֹ ?νεְ ?ιָ ?ηֵ ?σ “naked and barefoot,” Isaiah 20:4, not to “barefoot” alone, as Oehler, Hitzig, Dillmann, etc., suppose from comparison with the LXX. in Micah 1:8. Naturally we are to understand the description here to be of counsellors led away stripped as captives taken in war: comp. Is. l. c. and 2 Chronicles 28:15, as also what pertains to ιֹ ?ςֲ ?φִ ?ιν, “counsellors” in Job 3:14.—And judges He makes fools. ιְ ?δεֹ ?μֵ ?μ, as in Isaiah 44:25, to infatuate, to show to be fools. Such an infatuation of judges as would cause the military and political ruin of their country to proceed directly from them (as in the breaking out of great catastrophes over certain kingdoms, e.g. over Egypt, Isaiah 19:17 seq.; over Israel and Judah, 2 Kings 19:26; etc.), is not necessarily to be assumed here (comp. Job 5:20), although catastrophes of that character are here especially prominent in the thought of the speaker. Job 12:18. He looses the bond of kings; i.e., He looses the bond, or the fetters, with which kings bind their subjects, He breaks the tyrannical yoke of kings, and brings them rather into bondage and captivity, or as the second member expresses this thought more in the concrete: He “binds a girdle on their loins.” It seems that ΰֵ ?ζεֹ ?ψ lit. “girdle,” in this second member should accord with ξεֹ ?ρַ ?ψ in the first. So much the more should the latter be pointed ξεֹ ?ρַ ?ψ, and be construed as stat. constr. Comp. ξεֹ ?ρֵ ?ψ (= ξֹ ?ΰρֵ ?ψ, from ΰָ ?ρַ ?ψ, to bind). Of less authority, etymologically, is the interpretation required by the Masoretic punctuation regarded as st. constr. of ξεֹ ?ρָ ?ψ, “discipline, castigatio,” although it gives a sense quite nearly related to the preceding, it being presupposed that “discipline” is to be understood in the sense of “rule, authority” (so among the moderns, Rosenm., Arnh., Vaih., Hahn, Delitzsch [Ges., Carey], etc.). But “discipline” is a different conception from “authority,” and “τַּ ?ϊֵּ ?ηַ can very well take for its object ξεֹ ?ρְ ?ψִ ?ιν, fetters, Job 39:5; Psalms 116:16, but not castigationem.” So Dillmann correctly, who also however rightly rejects the interpretation of Ewald, Hirzel, Heiligst., Welte, etc., according to which ξιρψξΧ denotes “the fetters, with which kings are bound,” so that the relation between a and b would be not that of a logical progression, but of direct antithesis, as in Job 12:15. [Hengstenberg calls attention to the paronomasia of ιֶ ?ΰְ ?ρֹ ?ψξεֹ ?ρַ ?ψ, and ΰֵ ?ζεֹ ?ψ]. Second Double Strophe: Job 12:19-25 (divided into one strophe of three, and one of four verses): [The description continued: the agency of the Divine wisdom in confounding the great of earth]. a. Job 12:19-21. [Special classes of leaders brought to shame described]. Job 12:19. He leads priests away spoiled (see on Job 12:17), and those firmly established He overthrows. [λֹּ ?δֲ ?πִ ?ιν “priests,” not “princes” (E. V.) “In many of the States of antiquity the priests were personages no less important, were indeed even more important and honored than the secular authorities.” Dillm. “The juxtaposition of priests and kings here points to the ancient form of priestly rule, as we encounter the same in the person of Jethro and in part also in Melchizedek.” Schlott.].—All objects are called ΰֵ ?ιϊָ ?πִ ?ιν, “firmly-enduring” [perpetual], which survive the changes of time. Hence the term is applied, e.g., to water which does not become dry (aquζ perennes), or firmly founded rocks (Jeremiah 49:19; Jeremiah 50:44), or mighty, invincible nations (Jeremiah 5:15), or, as here, distinguished and influential persons (Vulg., optimates). [ρμσ, “slip, in Piel, overthrow, aptly antithetic [to ΰιϊο.” Dav.]. Job 12:20. He takes away the speech of the most eloquent: lit. of “the trusted,” of those who have been tried as a people’s orators and counsellors; for they are the πֶ ?ΰֱ ?ξָ ?πִ ?ιν (from ΰξο, to make firm, trustworthy, not from πָ ?ΰַ ?ν, to speak, as D. Kimchi thinks, who would explain the word diserti, as though it were punctuated πַ ?ΰֲ ?ξָ ?πִ ?ιν). On b comp. Hosea 4:11; and as regards θςν, “taste, judgment, tact,” see 1 Samuel 25:33. Job 12:21. He pours contempt on nobles (exactly the same expression as in Psalms 107:40), and looses the girdle of the strong, (ΰֲ ?τִ ?ιχִ ?ιν lit. “containing of great capacity” [Delitzsch: “to hold together, especially to concentrate strength on anything”] only here and Job 41:7; i.e., He disables them for the contest (by causing the under-garments to hang down loosely, thus proving a hindrance for conflict; comp. Isaiah 5:27; also below Job 38:3; Job 40:7). The translation of Delitzsch is altogether too forced, and by consequence insipid: “He pours contempt on the rulers of the state, and makes loose the belt of the mighty.” b. Job 12:22-25. [The Divine energy as especially operative among nations]. Job 12:22. [This verse must naturally form the prelude to the deeper exercise of power and insight among nations, and its highest generalization, comp. 16b.” Dav.].—He discovereth deep things out of the darkness, and brings forth to light the shadow of death;i.e., not: “He puts into execution His hidden purposes in the destiny of nations” (Schlottm.), [“for who would call the hidden ground of all appearances in God, φμξεֹ ?ϊ!” Dilllm.], but: “He brings forth into the light all the dark plans and wickedness of men which are hidden in darkness;” comp. 1 Corinthians 4:5 : (φωτίσειτὰ κρυπτὰ τοῠ σκότουςκ. τ. λ., and the proverb: “There is nothing spun so fine but all comes to the light;” see also Job 24:13 seq.; Isaiah 29:15; Romans 13:12; 1 Thessalonians 5:5, etc. [“Deep things out of the darkness, ςֲ ?ξֻ ?χּ ?εֹ ?ϊ, must mean hidden tendencies and principles, e.g., those running under national life, Job 12:23, naturally more subtle and multiplex than those governing individual manifestation on however elevated a scale) and darkness, and shadow of death, figures (Job 11:8) descriptive of the profoundest secresy. These secret tendencies in national life and thought—never suspected by men who are silently carried on by them—He detects and overmasters either to check or to fulfil.” David. A truth “which brings joy to the good, but terror to all the children of darkness (Job 24:13 seq.), and not without threatening significance even to the friends of Job.” Dillmann]. Job 12:23. He makes nations great, and—destroys them; He spreads nations abroad and—causes them to be carried away (or: “carries them away captive,” comp. δִ ?πְ ?ηָ ?δ, synonymous with δִ ?βְ ?μָ ?δ, abducere in servitutem; also 2 Kings 18:11). [Rodwell: “then straitens them: leads them, i.e., back into their former borders”]. Instead of ξַ ?ωְׂ ?βִּ ?ιΰ the LXX. (πλανῶν) as well as some of the Rabbis read ξַ ?ωְׁ ?βִּ ?ιΰ, “who infatuates, makes fools.” But the first member of the verse corresponds strictly in sense to the second, on which account the Masoretic reading is to be retained, and to be interpreted of increase in height, even as the parallel ωֹׁ ?θֵ ?ηַ in b of increase in breadth, or territorial enlargement (not as though it meant a dispersion among other nations, as the Vulg. and Aben Ezra incorrectly interpret this ωׁ ?θη). [The μְ in both members, says Schlottmann, is not used Aramaice with the accus., but as sign of the Dat. commodi.] Job 12:24. He takes away the understanding (μֵ ?α as in Job 12:3) of the chief of the people of the land (ςַ ?ρΞδָ ?ΰָ ?ψֶ ?υ, can certainly signify “the people of the earth, mankind,” [Hirzel], after Isaiah 42:5; for its use in the more limited sense of the people of a land, comp. below Job 15:19). [“We have intentionally translated βειν “nations,” ςν people, for βει is the mass held together by the ties of a common origin, language, and country; ςַ ?ν, the people bound together by unity of government.” Delitzsch].—And makes them wander in a pathless waste: (μֹ ?ΰγֶ ?ψֶ ?κְ, synonymous with αְּ ?μֹ ?ΰΞγΧ, or with ΰֵ ?ιοΞψΧ, comp. μֹ ?ΰΰִֹ ?ιωׁ Job 38:26; and Ewald, § 286, 8). The whole verse, the second member of which recurs verbatim in Psalms 107:40 presents an exact Hebrew equivalent for the Latin proverb: quem Deus perdere vult, prius dementat, a proverb on which the history of many a people and kingdom, from the earliest antiquity down to the present, furnishes an actual commentary that may well make the heart tremble. Concerning the catastrophes of historic nationalities in the most ancient times, which the poet here may not improbably have had before his mind, comp. Introd., § 6, e. Job 12:25. They grope in darkness without light and He makes them to wander like a drunken man. Comp. Isaiah 19:14, and especially above in Job 5:13-14, a similar description by Eliphaz, which Job here seems desirous of surpassing, in order to prove that he is in no wise inferior to Eliphaz in experimental knowledge of the righteous judgments of God, the infinitely Wise and Mighty One. 4. Second Division: First Section: Resolution to appeal to the judicial decision of God, before which the harsh, unloving disposition of the friends will assuredly not be able to maintain itself, but will be put to shame: Job 13:1-12. First Strophe: Job 13:1-6. [Impatience with the friends, and the purpose to appeal to God]. Job 13:1. Behold, mine eye hath seen all (that), mine ear hath heard and perceived for itself.—λֹּ ?μ here equivalent to λָּ ?μΞΰֵ ?μֵּ ?δ, “all that has been here set forth,” all that has been stated (from Job 12:13 on) in respect to the evidences of the Divine power and wisdom in the life of nature and men. [μָ ?δּ, dativus commodi, or perhaps only dat. ethicus: and has made it intelligible to itself (sibi); αִּ ?ιο of the apprehension accompanying perception.” Del.].—On Job 13:2 comp. Job 12:3, the second member of which is here repeated word for word. Job 13:3. But I will speak to the Almighty. ΰεּ ?μָ ?ν, “but nevertheless,” puts that which now follows in emphatic antithesis to the preceding: “notwithstanding that I know all this, I will still,” etc. [“Three feelings lie at the back of this antithesis: (1) The folly of longer speaking to the friends. (2) The irrelevancy of all such knowledge as they paraded, and which Job had in abundance. (3) Antagonism to the prayer of Zophar that God would appear—Job desires nothing more nor better—but I, to the Almighty will I speak.” Dav.]. Observe also the significantly accented ΰֲ ?πִ ?ι, I (ἐγὼ μὲν), which puts the speaker in definite antithesis to those addressed (ΰַ ?ϊֶּ ?ν, Job 13:4, ὑμεῐςδὲ), as one who will not follow their advice to make penitent confession of his guilt towards God; who will rather plead against God.—I desire to plead with God. δεֹ ?λֵ ?ηַ, Inf. absol. as obj. of the verb; comp. Job 9:18; and for the signification of δελη, “to plead, to vindicate one’s cause against an accusation,” comp. Amos 5:10; Isaiah 29:21; also below Job 13:15, Job 19:5. ητυ, to desire, to be inclined, here essentially as in Job 9:3. ιֶ ?ηְ ?τָּ ?υ always for ιַ ?ηְ ?τֹּ ?υ in pause]. That passage (Job 9:3) certainly stands in some measure in contradiction to this, implying as it does the impossibility of contending with God; it is however a contest of another sort from that which is intended there that he proposes here, a contest not of one arrogantly taking the offensive, but of one driven by necessity to the defensive. Job 13:4. But ye are (only) forgers of lies.—εְ ?ΰεּ ?μָ ?νΰַ ?ϊֶּ ?ν puts another antithetic sentence alongside of the first which was introduced by ΰεּ ?μָ ?ν (Job 13:3), without however laying any special stress on ΰַ ?ϊֶּ ?ν; hence: “and however, but again,” etc.; not: “ye however” (Hirzel).—θֹ ?τְ ?μֵ ?ιωֶׁ ?χֶ ?ψ (from θτμ, “to plaster, to smear, to paste together;” comp. θָ ?τֵ ?μ, “plaster” Ezekiel 13:10 seq., and Talmudic θְ ?τֵ ?μָ ?δ grease) are lit. “daubers of lies,” i.e., inventors of lies, concinnatores s. inventores mendacii; not: “imputers, fasteners of falsehood,” assutores mendacii, as Stickel, Hirzel, Schlottmann, Delitzsch, etc., explain both against philology and the context (neither Job 14:17 nor Psalms 119:69 support this definition); nor again: “deceitful patchers,” sarcinatores falsi, i.e., inanes, idutilis, as Hupfeld explains.—Physicians of no value are ye all.—ψֹ ?τְ ?ΰֵ ?ιΰֱ ?μִ ?ιμ are not “patchers” [Con. “botchers”] of vanity,” i.e., such as patch together empty unfounded assertions (Vulg., Ew., Olsh., Dillm.), [Good, Con., Dav.], but in accordance with the universal usage of ψτΰ: “worthless, useless physicians,” medici nihili, miserable quacks, who are incapable of applying to Job’s wounds the right medicine to soothe and heal. [“Job calls their false presuppositions regarding his guilt ωֶׁ ?χֶ ?ψ, their vain attempts at a Theodicy and ‘Theory of Providence’ ΰֱ ?μִ ?ιμ.” Dav.]. Job 13:5. Oh that ye would be altogether silent—that would be reckoned to you for wisdom.—Comp. Proverbs 17:28; the Latin proverb: Si tacuisses, philosophus mansisses; also the honorable title, “bos mutus,” the mute ox, given to Thomas Aquinas during his student life at Paris, by his fellow-students, as well as by his teacher, Albertus Magnus. The jussive, εּ ?ϊְ ?δִ ?ι, is used in a consecutive sense: “then would it be, prove, pass for;” comp. Ewald, § 347, a, Gesen., § 128, 2. Job 13:6. Hear now my reproof, and give heed to the charges of my lips.—So correctly Hirzel, Dillm., Del., etc., while several other moderns explain: “Hear my defense [Con., E. V., “reasoning”], and attend to the arguments of my lips.” As if ϊּ ?εֹ ?λַ ?ηַ ?ϊ could signify anything else than ἔλεγγος, correptio (so correctly LXX,, Vulg.—Comp. δεֹ ?λִ ?ιηַ in Job 6:25; Job 40:2), and as if ψִ ?αεֹ ?ϊ (defectively for ψִ ?ιαεֹ ?ϊ) could even in one instance sink the meaning of the stern word ψִ ?ια, “to strive, to quarrel!” Furthermore it is a long moral reproof and animadversion of the friends which immediately follows, Job 13:7-12. His reply and vindication of himself to God first follows Job 13:13 seq., or indeed properly not before Job 13:17 seq. Second Strophe: Job 13:7-12. [Scathing rebuke of their dishonesty and presumption in assuming to be God’s advocates (Job 13:7-9), and warning of the consequences to themselves when God shall rebuke them for their conduct]. Job 13:7. Will ye for God [μְ ?ΰֵ ?μ emphatic] speak that which is wrong, will ye for Him speak deceitfully?—The preposition μְ signifies here “for, in favor of any one,” as also in Job 13:8, Judges 6:31. On ςַ ?εְ ?μָ ?δ comp. Job 5:16; Job 6:30. Job 13:8. Will ye show partiality for Him (lit. “lift up His countenance,” i.e. show preference for His person), or will ye take the part of God’s advocates? (lit. “contend for God, comp. ψִ ?ιαμַ ?αַּ ?ςַ ?μ, Judges 6:31). These are the two possible ways in which they could “speak in favor of God:” either as clients, dependents, taking His part slavishly, for mercenary ends, or as patrons or advocates, presumptuously and naively taking Him under their protection. [There thus appears a subtle and very effective irony in these questions of Job’s. His charge of partiality is also, as Davidson says, “a master-stroke of argumentation, effectually debarring the friends from any further defense of God in this direction, or almost at all.”—E.]. Job 13:9. Will it be well [for you] when He searches you out (goes to the bottom of you, ηχψ as in Proverbs 28:11; Psalms 139:23) or can you deceive Him as a man is deceived?viz. in regard to your real disposition and the sentiment of your heart, of which a more searching investigation must reveal to Him that it by no means corresponds to His holy nature and life.—δֵ ?ϊֵ ?μ, Hiph. from ϊμμ (in Imperf. ϊְּ ?δָ ?ϊֵ ?μּ ?εּ, with a non-syncopated δ, for ϊָּ ?ϊֵ ?μּ ?εּ, Gesen. § 53 [§ 52] Rem. 7 [Green, § 142, 3]), is lit. “to cause to waver [to hold up anything swaying to and fro], to keep one in suspense, to make sport of any one,” [E. V. “to mock”], hence to deceive; ensnare; comp. Genesis 31:7; Judges 16:10; Jeremiah 9:4.) [Schlott., who renders: “will ye mock him?” explains by quoting from Jarchi: “dicendo: in honorem tuam mendacia nos finximus”]. Job 13:10. Surely He will sorely chastise you (Job 5:17) if ye are secretly partial:i.e. if ye are actuated not by love of the truth and conscientious conviction, but by selfish interest in your relations with Him, as One who is mightier. That with which Job hereby reproaches them is (as Del. rightly observes) a ζῆλοςθεοῦ ἀλλ’ οὐ κατ’ επίγνωσιν, Romans 10:2 (comp. John 16:2), “an advocacy contrary to one’s better knowledge and conscience, in which the end is thought to sanctify the means.” Job 13:11. Will not His majesty (ωְׂ ?ΰֵ ?ϊ, as in Job 31:23, exaltation, dignity; not “a kindling of wrath,” or “a lifting up for contention,” as Bφttch. renders it after the Vulg.) confound you (Job 3:5), and the dread of Him (τַּ ?ηְ ?γּ ?εֹ the dread, the terror which He inspires) fall upon you—then, namely, when He will reveal Himself as your Judge. Job here anticipates what according to Job 42:7 seq. really happened afterwards. [“It is a peculiarity of the author of our book that he drops every now and then hints of how the catastrophe is to turn out, showing unmistakably both the unity of conception and the authorship of the book.” Dav.] Job 13:12. Your maxims (become) proverbs of ashes: to wit, then when God will judge you. ζִ ?λְ ?ψֹ ?πִ ?ιν, “memorable sayings, apothegms, memorabilia [Dav. “old saws”] (comp. Malachi 3:16; Esther 6:1): so does he name here, not without irony, the admonitions and warnings which they had addressed to him, in part as the Chokmah of the ancients, or even as divinely inspired communications. [“The sarcasm in the word is cutting: comp. ζְ ?λָ ?ψΞπָ ?ΰ of Eliph. Job 4:7; and Job 8:8.” Dav.] He characterizes these maxims as ξִ ?ωְׁ ?μֵ ?ιΰֵ ?τֶ ?ψ, i.e. as empty and unsubstantial like ashes or dust, like ashes (the emblem of nothingness and worthlessness, Isaiah 44:20) scattered to every wind. The second member is strictly parallel: Your bulwarks become bulwarks of clay. [“While Job 13:12 a says what their speeches, with the weighty nota bene, are, Job 13:12 b says what their βַ ?αִּ ?ιν become; for μְ always denotes a κίνησις = γένεσις, and is never the exponent of the predicate in a simple clause.” Del.] βα, lit. “back, ridge” (comp. Job 15:26) here equivalent to breastwork, bulwark; so does Job call here the reasonings behind which they sought refuge, the glittering, pathetically urged arguments which they had arrayed against him. Comp. ςֲ ?φֻ ?ξֹ ?εϊ, Isaiah 41:21, and ὀχυρώματα, 2 Corinthians 10:4. [The rendering of E. V. “your bodies (are like) to bodies of clay,” is evidently taken from the signification “back:” and the whole verse is a reminder of their mortality. But this is much less suited to the language used, less pertinent to the context, and less effective for Job’s purpose than the rendering here given.—E.] For ηֹ ?ξֶ ?ψ, mud, potter’s clay, as an emblem of what is frail, easily destroyed, incapable of resistance, comp. Job 38:14; Isaiah 45:9 seq. Second Division: Second Section: Declaration of his consciousness of innocence as against God in the form of a solemn confession, in which he boldly challenges Him: Job 13:13-22. First Strophe: Job 13:13-16. [Turning from the friends, he expresses more emphatically than before his purpose to appeal to God, cost what it may at the first, confident of ultimate acquittal. Dillmann says: “It seems that the poet intentionally cut this strophe short, in order by this very brevity to emphasize more strongly the gravity of these thoughts.”] Job 13:13. In silence leave me alone: lit. “be silent from me” (ξִ ?ξֶּ ?πִּ ?ι), i.e., desist from me, cease from your injurious assaults, and let me be in peace. [According to Schlott. the preposition here is the ξο of source or cause: be silent because of the weight of my words; acc. to the above, a constr. prζgnans is assumed. Conant, etc., translate: “Keep silence before me.” Barnes thinks it “possible that Job may have perceived in them some disposition to interrupt him in a rude manner in reply to the severe remarks which he had made.” Comp. on Job 6:29. More probably, however, the verse is, like Job 13:5, an expression of his weariness with their vain platitudes, and unjust accusations, and a demand that they should stand by in silence while he should plead directly with God.—E.]—Then will I speak, or: in order that I may speak. [Conant: “That I now may speak:εַ ?ΰֲ ?γַ ?αְּ ?ψָ ?δΞΰָֽ ?πִ ?ι.” Strong double emphasis in the use of the cohortative future, and the pronoun; the latter emphasizing the first person, the former his strong determination to speak.—E.]—And let come upon me what will.—ςαψ as in Deuteronomy 24:5. ξָ ?δ here for ξָ ?δωֶׁ ?ιַּ ?ςֲ ?αֹ ?ψ, a condensed form of expression similar to εִ ?ιδִ ?ιξָ ?δ, 2 Samuel 18:22; comp. Ewald, § 104, d. Job 13:14. Wherefore should I take my flesh into my teeth:i.e. be solicitous to save and to preserve my body at any price, like a beast of prey, which drags off its booty with its teeth, and so secures it against other preying animals. This proverbial saying, which does not occur elsewhere, is in itself clear (comp. Jeremiah 38:2). The second member also signifies essentially the same thing: and (wherefore should I) put my soul in my hand:i.e. risk my life, seek to save it by means of a desperate exertion of strength (comp. the same expression in Judges 12:3; 1 Samuel 19:5; 1 Samuel 28:21). [This, says Dillmann, is indeed “scarcely the original meaning of the phrase; nor is it to be understood, as commonly explained, that what one has in the hand easily falls out and is lost. The primary meaning is rather: to commit or entrust the life to the hand in order to bear it through, i.e. to make a desperate effort to save it (see Ewald on the passage): such an attempt is indeed dangerous, because if the hand fails, the life is lost, and so the common explanation attaches itself naturally to the phrase, to expose the life to apparent danger. Here, however, the original meaning is altogether suitable, and indeed necessary, because only so do the first and second members agree: why should I make an extreme effort to save my life?”] Such a desperate effort Job would make, in case he should declare himself guilty of the reproaches brought against him. while at the same time he bore no consciousness of guilt within himself. This, however, would not be of the least avail, for according to Job 13:15 a he has nothing more to hope for, he sees before him nothing but certain death from the hand of God. Hence, therefore, his question: “Wherefore should I seek to save my life at any price—I who have nothing more to hope for?” Compared with this interpretation, which is the only one suited to the context, and which is adopted by Umbreit, Ewald, Vaih., Dillm., etc., the many interpretations which vary from it are to be rejected, especially those according to which the second member is not to be regarded as a continuation of the question, but as an assertion—according to Hirzel in the positive form: “and even my life do I risk”—according to Hahn and Delitzsch in the negative: “nay, I even put my life at stake:” in like manner, that of Bφttcher: “wherefore should I seek to preserve my life at any price, seeing that I willingly expose it, etc.” [Wordsworth agrees in this interpretation of the meaning of each member of the verse, but differs from Zφckler, etc., in the application: “The question (he says) is put hypothetically. You may ask me why I am thus bold to desire to expose myself to a trial before God? The reason is because I am sure that I have a good cause; I know that in the end He will do me right. See what follows.”—The Vulg. renders: “Quare lacero carnes meas dentibus meis, et animam meam porto in manibus meis?” Hengstenberg follows this rendering, explaining the first clause of the wrong, the violence which he would do to his moral personality, if by silence he should plead guilty to the accusations of the friends. Schultens, who is followed in substance by Rosenmόller, Good, Wemyss, Bernard, Barnes, Renan, Davidson, Carey, Rodwell, Elzas, regards both members as proverbially expressing the idea of risking life, and the clause ςַ ?μΞξָ ?δ not in its usual interrogative sense, but as equivalent to: “in spite of every thing.” (Schult., super quid, on any account.) ξָ ?δ is thus a resumption of the ξָ ?δ in 13b. This rendering gives a consistent and forcible sense throughout: Be silent now, and let me alone, and I for my part will assuredly speak, be the consequence what it may: Cost what it may, I will risk it all, I will risk my person and my life: lo, He will slay me, etc., yet in his very presence, etc, (comp. on Job 9:21-22). The objection to this is of course the unusual rendering of ςַ ?μΞξָ ?δ. On the other hand the objection to the interpretation adopted in our comm. is the unusual sense in which we are constrained to take the proverbial expressions of the verse, particularly the latter—“to take the life in the hand”—which according to this interpretation must mean to seek to save the life, whereas in every other instance it means to risk it. It is thus at best a choice between difficulties, or unusual expressions. And it may fairly be queried whether the difficulty in regard to ςμΞξδ is not largely obviated by the close connection in which it stands with the ξδ just preceding.—E.]. Job 13:15. Lo, He will slay me:viz. through my disease, which will certainly bring about my speedy dissolution (comp. Job 6:13; Job 7:6; Job 9:25; Job 10:20). I have no (more) hope; i.e., I do not direct my thoughts to the future, I am not in a state of waiting, expectation (ιִ ?ηֵ ?μ without an obj., prζstolari, exactly as in Job 6:11; Job 14:14), and this indeed is so naturally, because for me there is nothing more to wait for, seeing that my condition is hopeless, and my fate long since decided. So, according to the K’thibh is the phrase μΰֹ ΰֲ ?ιַ ?ηֵ ?μ to be explained, while the K’ri, μεֹ ΰΧ must signify in accordance with the suffix: “until then, viz., until I am slain, I wait” (so substantially Luther), or again: “I wait for Him, that He may slay me” (Delitzsch) [i.e., “I wait what He may do, even to smite with death”]. The context by no means yields the rendering of the Vulg., which also rests on the K’ri; etiam si occiderit me, in ipso (Deo) sperabo [so also E. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/lange/ SECOND SERIES OF THE : Job 15-21I. Eliphaz and Job 15-17A.—Eliphaz: God’s punitive justice is revealed only against evil-doersJob 151. Recital in the way of rebuke of all in Job’s discourses that is perverted, and that bears testimony against his innocence: Job 15:1-191         Then answered Eliphaz the Temanite, and said, 2    Should a wise man utter vain knowledge, and fill his belly with the East wind? 3    Should he reason with unprofitable talk? or with speeches wherewith he can do no good? 4    Yea, thou castest off fear, and restrainest prayer before God. 5    For thy mouth uttereth thine iniquity, and thou choosest the tongue of the crafty. 6    Thine own mouth condemneth thee, and not I: yea, thine own lips testify against thee. 7    Art thou the first man that was born? or wast thou made before the hills? 8    Hast thou heard the secret of God? and dost thou restrain wisdom to thyself? 9    What knowest thou that we know not? what understandest thou, which is not in us? 10    With us are both the gray-headed and very aged men, much elder than thy father. 11    Are the consolations of God small with thee? is there any secret thing with thee? 12    Why doth thine heart carry thee away, and what do thy eyes wink at, 13    that thou turnest thy spirit against God, and lettest such words go out of thy mouth? 14    What is man, that he should be clean? and he which is born of a woman, that he should be righteous? 15    Behold He putteth no trust in His saints; yea, the heavens are not clean in His sight. 16    How much more abominable and filthy is man, which drinketh iniquity like water? 17    I will show thee, hear me; and that which I have seen I will declare; 18    which wise men have told— from their fathers—and have not hid it: 19    unto whom alone the earth was given, and no stranger passed among them. 2. A didactic admonition on the subject of the retributive justice of God in the destiny of the ungodly Job 15:20-3520    The wicked man travaileth with pain all his days, and the number of years is hidden to the oppressor. 21    A dreadful sound is in his ears: in prosperity the destroyer shall come upon him. 22    He believeth not that he shall return out of darkness, and he is waited for of the sword. 23    He wandereth abroad for bread, saying, Where is it? he knoweth that the day of darkness is ready at his hand. 24    Trouble and anguish shall make him afraid; they shall prevail against him as a king ready to the battle. 25    For he stretcheth out his hand against God, and strengtheneth himself against the Almighty: 26    he runneth upon him, even on his neck, upon the thick bosses of his bucklers; 27    because he covereth his face with his fatness, and maketh collops of fat on his flanks: 28    and he dwelleth in desolate cities, and in houses which no man inhabiteth, which are ready to become heaps. 29    He shall not be rich, neither shall his substance continue, neither, shall he prolong the perfection thereof upon the earth. 30    He shall not depart out of darkness; the flame shall dry up his branches, and by the breath of his mouth shall he go away. 31    Let not him that is deceived trust in vanity, for vanity shall be his recompense. 32    It shall be accomplished before his time, and his branch shall not be green. 33    He shall shake off his unripe grape as the vine, and shall cast off his flower as the olive. 34    For the congregation of hypocrites shall be desolate, and fire shall consume the tabernacles of bribery. 35    They conceive mischief, and bring forth vanity, and their belly prepareth deceit. AND This second discourse of Eliphaz is again the longest of the attacks made on Job by his three opponents in this second series or act. Not only by its length, but also by its confident, impassioned tone, it gives evidence of being a deliverance of opinion by the oldest and most distinguished of the three, in short by their leader. Apart from certain indications of increased violence, however, it adds nothing at all that is new to that which had been previously maintained by Eliphaz against Job. Its first principal division (Job 15:2-19) subjects that which was erroneous in Job’s discourses to the same rigid criticism and censure, which culminates in a renewed and more emphatic application to Job of the doctrine advocated in the former discourse, of the impurity of all before God (Job 15:14-19; comp. Job 4:17 seq.). The second division (Job 15:20-35) is occupied with a prolonged dissertation on the destiny of the ungodly, as an example repeating itself in accordance with God’s righteous decree, and full of warning for Job. The first division comprises three strophes of five verses each, together with a shorter group of three verses (Job 15:17-19), which forms the transition to the following division. The latter consists of three strophes, of which the middle one numbers six verses, the first and last each five. 2. First Division: Censuring the perversity of Job in his discourses, and pointing out the evidences which they gave of his guilt; Job 15:2-19. First Strophe: Introduction [Job’s discourses disprove his wisdom, injure religion, and testify against himself] Job 15:2-6. Job 15:2. Doth a wise man utter [or, answer with] windy knowledge?—[Eliphaz begins each one of his three discourses with a question]. Job had clearly enough set himself forth as a Wise Man, Job 12:3; Job 13:2. Hence this ironical contrast between this self-praise and the “windy” nature (comp. Job 8:2; Job 16:3) of that which he really knew.—And fill his breast [sein Inneres, his inward parts] with the stormy East wind?—So Delitzsch, whose translation is to be preferred on the score of taste to the more common and literal version: “and fill his belly with the East wind?” even if we grant that αֶּ ?θֶ ?ο is not, without further qualification, synonymous with μֵ ?α, and consequently not to be taken as a mere designation of the “thinking inner part” of man (although in favor of this application of it, as maintained by Delitzsch, we might cite, if not Job 15:35 of this chapter, at least Job 32:18 seq.). In any case χָ ?γִ ?ιν, “East wind,” is here (as well as in Hosea 12:2 [1] a stronger synonym of ψεּ ?ηַ, “wind,” and so describes the violence, or the ceaseless noisy bluster and roar of Job’s discourses; and the “belly,” or the inward part, which must take into itself such discourses and labor for their refutation, appears as though it were a sail, or tent-canvas inflated by a heavy storm! Job 15:3. An explanatory clause subordinate to the preceding interrogative clause:—Arguing with speech which availeth nought, and with words by which one can do no good.—The Inf. Absol. δεֹ ?λֵ ?ηַ can be taken neither as an interrogative finite verb (Hirzel, Renan: se defend il-par des vaines paroles? [“for though the Inf. Absol. is so used in a historical clause (Job 15:35) it is not in interrogative.” Del.]), nor as the subject (Ewald: “to reprove with words profiteth not,” etc.—as if this useless striving with words were opposed to a more efficient contention by the use of facts) [which yields indeed, as Dillmann remarks, a good meaning, to wit, that mere words availed nothing for self-justification, when opposed by facts, as e. g. the fact of his suffering, which was presumptive evidence against him. But such a contrast is not expressed. The ΰַ ?σ of Job 15:4 does not at all express it]. Rather is it joined to the preceding finite verbs in the sense of an ablative gerund (redarguendo s. disputando); comp. Ewald, § 280, a. Job 15:4. Yea more, thou [thyself] dost make void the fear of God. ΰַ ?σ, a strong copula, adding a new and more serious charge, like the phrase “over and above;” comp. Job 14:3. [ΰַ ?ϊָּ ?δ, emphatic—“even thou,” who dost fancy thyself to be called on to remind us of the fear of God, Job 13:9 seq.] ιִ ?ψְ ?ΰָ ?δ, absolute, as in Job 4:6; δֵ ?τֵ ?ψ, “to remove, make void,” as in Job 5:12 [lit. to break, destroy; Rodwell: “thou dost break down piety”].—And diminishest (devout) meditation before God—ωִׂ ?ιηָ ?δμִ ?τְ ?πֵ ?ιΞΰֵ ?μ, according to Psalms 102:1; Psalms 119:97; Psalms 119:99, the same with “devotion, pious prayerful reflection” [should not therefore be rendered “prayer,” although prayer is a prominent element in it. It includes the whole meditative side of piety, that over which a sanctified sentiment rules, as ιψΰδ includes the practical side, over which conscience rules. Eliphaz charges therefore that the tendency of Job’s speech and conduct is to undermine piety in its most important strongholds, to injure it in its most vital points.—E.]. In regard to the form ωִׂ ?ιηָ ?δ [with feminine ending] see Job 3:4.—βָּ ?ψַ ?ς, detrahere, to derogate from, to prejudice [Fόrst: to weaken, to lessen]; comp. below Job 15:8, where it conveys more the sense of “drawing to one’s-self” [reserving, attrahere], and Job 36:7, where it means “withdrawing.” Job 15:5. For thy transgression teaches thy mouth: i. e., thou allowest thyself to be wholly influenced in what thou sayest by thy sin, thou showest thyself, even in thy words, to be entirely ruled by it. So correctly the Vulg., Raschi, Luther, Dillm. [Ewald, Schlottm.], for the probability is in favor of ςֲ ?εֹ ?πְ ?κָ, which stands first, being the subject of the sentence. Moreover, the rendering which has latterly become current (since Rosenm., Umbreit, Hirzel, etc.): “thy mouth teaches, i. e., exposes [E. V. ‘uttereth’] thine iniquity,” is at variance with the usual sense of ΰִ ?μֵּ ?σ, which signifies “to teach, to instruct,” not “to show, to declare.” [To which Schlottmann adds that this rendering secures a better connection between the first and second members of the verse. It exhibits to us “in a manner alike original and suitable, the internal motive from which Job’s presumptuous and still crafty discourses proceed”].—And thou choosest the speech [lit. the tongue] of the crafty: (ςֲ ?ψεּ ?ξִ ?ιν essentially as in Job 5:12) i. e., thou doest as crafty offenders do, who, when accused, hypocritically set themselves forth as innocent, and indeed even take the offensive against their accusers, (as Job did in Job 13:4 seq.). [“The perverse heart teaches the guilty man presumptuously to assail God, and at the same time so to arrange his words that in appearance he is filled with the greatest zeal for the piety which he really undermines.” Schlott.] The rendering of Rosenm., Hirzel [Noyes, Conant, Carey], etc.” “while thou (although thou) choosest, etc.” is less satisfactory, and goes with the rendering of the first member, which is controverted above. Job 15:6. Thy mouth condemns thee (see Job 9:20) and not I, and thy lips testify against thee.—The mouth is here personified as a judge pronouncing an unfavorable decision, declaring one guilty, while at the same time the lips figure as witnesses, or accusers (ςָ ?πָ ?δαְּ, a vox forensis; for the masc. ιַ ?ςֲ ?πεּ αָ ?κְ after the fem. ωְׂ ?τָ ?ϊֶ ?ιּ ?κָ comp. Proverbs 5:2; Proverbs 26:23). Comp. still further the New Testament parallel passage, Matthew 12:37. [“These words, according to Eliphaz’s meaning, place Job’s guilt not merely in his words, but rather set forth these as confirming the sinful actions, which he is assumed to have committed on account of the sufferings which have been appointed for him.” Schlott.]. Second Strophe: Job 15:7-11. [Ironical questioning in regard to the extraordinary superiority which Job’s conduct implied that he arrogated to himself]. Job 15:7. Wast thou born as the first man? (ψִ ?ΰωׁ ?εֹ ?ο [ψְ ?ιִ ?ωׁ ?εֹ ?οΧΧ is the original form, which appears again in Joshua 21:10, and is retained by the Samaritans; ψִ ?ΰωׁ ?εֹ ?ο, instead of which we have in Job 8:8ψִ ?ιωׁ ?εֹ ?ο, which has passed into general use, and is hence chosen by the K’ri.” Dillm.] in the constr. st. followed by the collective ΰָ ?γָ ?ν; hence lit. “as first of men.—Delitzsch takes ΰָ ?γָ ?ν as predicate nominative: “wast thou as the first one born as a man?” a rendering which is altogether too artificial. The question presupposes that the first-created man, by virtue of his having proceeded immediately from God’s hand, possessed the deepest insight into the mysteries of the Divine process of creation. Comp. the Adam Kadmon of the Kabbalists, the Kajomorts of the Avesta (πρῶτοςἄνθρωπος of the Manicheans), the Manu (i. e., “the thinking one”) of the Brahmanic legends of creation as well as the ironical proverb of the Hindϋs: “Aye, aye, he is the first man, no wonder he is so wise!” (Roberts, Oriental Illustrations, p. 276). [“Eliphaz evidently gives in these two verses the conception of a First Man, (like the Manu of the Hindϋs), possessed as such of the highest wisdom, a being who before the foundations of the earth were laid, was present, a listener, as it were, to the deliberations concerning creation in the council of God, and thus a partaker at least of creative wisdom (Job 28:23 seq.), without being identified with the Divine ηλξδ.” Dillm. “Many erroneously understand this expression as signifying simply the greatest antiquity, so that the sense would be: dost thou combine in thyself the wisdom of all the centuries, from the creation of the world on? This conception would be unsuitable for the reason that it would have no reality corresponding to it, the first man being conceived of as dead long since.” Schlott.].—And wast thou brought forth before the hills?—ηεֹ ?μַ ?μ, passive of ηεֹ ?μֵ ?μ “to whirl” [hence to writhe, be in pain, travail], Psalms 90:2.—Precisely the same expression occurs in Proverbs 8:25 b, an utterance of God’s Eternal Wisdom, which is doubtless an intentional allusion to this passage. [So also Delitzsch.—Schlottmann, on the contrary, thinks it indisputable that this passage contains an allusion, if not to the passage in Proverbs, then to an original source common to both, so that the sense would be: “art thou the essential Divine Wisdom itself, through which God created the world?” The verse thus furnishes a pregnant and energetic progression of thought and expression. “Being born before the hills,” and “sitting in God’s council,” could not be taken as accidentia sine subjecto, which without having a real substratum, are sarcastically predicated of Job, but they must be regarded as inhering in a definite subject, with which Job is now compared, as immediately before he was compared with the first man; and this makes it necessary that we should think of the ante-mundane Wisdom described in Proverbs 8, which from an early period was brought into special relation to the first man. Ewald accordingly paraphrases Job 15:7-8 : “Thou, who wouldest be wiser than all other men, dost thou stand perchance at the head of humanity, like the Logos, the first alike in age, and in worth and nearness to God?”] Job 15:8. Didst thou listen in the council of Eloah?—ρεֹ ?ψ, as in Jeremiah 23:18; comp. Psalms 89:8 [7]. [“Here God is represented in Oriental language as seated in a divan, or council of state, … and El. asks of Job whether he had been admitted to that council” Barnes.]—And dost thou keep back wisdom to thyself?ηָ ?λְ ?ξָ ?δ without the article, denoting the absolute divine wisdom; comp. Job 11:6; Job 12:2; Proverbs 8:1 seq. In regard to βψς, see above on Job 15:4. [Gesenius: “Dost thou reserve all wisdom to thyself?” like the Arabic, to absorb, drink up. Fόrst: “to snatch away: hast thou purloined wisdom to thyself? i. e. captured it as a booty.”] The representation of the First Man, endowed with the highest wisdom, a witness of God’s activity in creating and ordering the world, still lies at the bottom of these questions. Comp. God’s questions at a later period to Job: Job 38:3 seq. [“Having obtained the secret of that council, art thou now keeping it wholly to thyself—as a prime minister might be supposed to keep the purposes resolved on in the divan?” Barnes.] On Job 15:9 comp. Job 12:3; Job 13:2, to which self-conscious utterances of Job Eliphaz here replies. Job 15:10. Both the gray-headed and the aged [hoary] are among us; or: “also among us are the gray-headed, are the aged;” for the βַּ ?ν is inverted, as in Job 2:10, and as in the parallel passages there cited. αָּ ?πεּ is equivalent to: “in our generation, in our race.” We are to think, on the one side, of Job’s appeal to the aged men, to whom he owed his wisdom, Job 12:12; on the other side, of the proverbial wisdom of the “sons of the East,” to whom the three friends as well as Job belonged (1 Kings 4:30), especially that of the Temanites; see above on Job 2:11. The supposition of Ewald, Hirzel, Dillmann, etc., that Eliphaz, “in modestly concealed language,” referred to himself, as the most aged of the three, has but little probability, for the statement: “there is also among us (three) a gray-headed, an aged man,” would in the mouth of El. himself have in it something exceedingly forced, if he had thereby meant himself; and the collective use of the sing. ωָׂ ?α and ιָ ?ωִׂ ?ιωׂ presents not the slightest grammatical difficulty. Still further, if El. had (according to b) declared himself “more abundant in days than Job’s father,” he would have said of himself that which would have been simply monstrous. The correct explanation is given among the moderns by Rosenm., Arnheim, Umbreit, Delitzsch. [“It will be seen (infra xviii. 3) that in the discussion carried on between Job and his friends, he is not always regarded as a single individual, but rather as the representative of the party whose views he holds, that of the philosophers, namely, who wish to understand and account for everything; while his friends, as the contrary, represent the orthodox party, whose principle it is to declare everything that comes from God good and right, whether it be comprehensible or incomprehensible to the human intellect. Hence the plural αְּ ?ςֵ ?ιπֵ ?ιλֶ ?ν, in your eyes, used by Bildad (though speaking to Job alone), in the chapter alluded to, i. e. in the eyes of you philosophers. In like manner, in the verse before us El. says: Both gray-headed and very aged men are amongst us. Amongst us orthodox people.” Bernard.] Job 15:11. Are the consolations of God (comp. Job 21:2) too little for thee (lit. are they less than thee—comp. Numbers 16:9; Isaiah 7:13)? [The irony of the question is severe: Too little for thee are the consolations of God? The words reveal at the same time the narrow self-complacency of the speaker, the consolations of God being such as he and the friends had sought to administer, for which El., however, claims a Divine value and efficacy.—E.], and a word so gentle with thee?i. e. a word which, like my former discourse, dealt with thee so tenderly and gently. On μָ ?ΰַ ?θ, elsewhere μְ ?ΰַ ?θ, lit. “for softness,” i. e. softly, gently [e. g.Isaiah 8:6 of the soft murmur and gentle flow of Siloah], comp. Ew. § 217, d; § 243, c. Eliphaz here identifies his former address to Job with a consolation and admonition proceeding from God himself; as in fact in delivering the same (see Job 4:12 seq.), he ascribed the principal contents of it to a Divine communication. In regard to the gentleness which he here claims for that former discourse, comp. especially Job 4:2; Job 5:8; Job 5:17 seq. Third Strophe: Job 15:12-16. [Severe rebuke of Job’s presumptuous discontent, founded on man’s extreme sinfulness.] Job 15:12. Why does thy heart carry thee away?μָ ?χַ ?η, auferre, abripere. [μֵ ?α here for deep inward agitation, excitement of feeling (Delitzsch: “wounded pride”). Why dost thou allow the stormy discontent of thy bosom to transport thee beyond thyself?—E.]—And why twinkle thine eyes?ψζν, ἅπ. λεγ. = Aram. and Arab. ψξζ, “to wink, to blink,” said here of the angry, excited snapping, or rolling of the eyes [referring, according to Renan, to such a manifestation of angry impatience with the hypocrisy of El. at this point of his discourse; and similarly Noyes: “why this winking of thine eyes?”]. Comp. Son 6:5 (according to the correct interpretation, see my remarks on the passage). Job 15:13. Depending on the preceding verse: That thou turnest against God thy snorting. ψεּ ?ηַ here meaning angry breathing, θυμός[“thus expressed because it manifests itself in πνέειν (Acts 9:1), and has its rise in the πνεῦμα (Ecclesiastes 7:9).” Delitzsch], as in Judges 8:3; Proverbs 16:32; Isaiah 25:4; comp. above Job 4:9.—And sendest forth words out of thy mouth?ξִ ?μִּ ?ιο (comp. Job 4:2) as parallel with ψεּ ?ηַ can mean here only vehement, intemperate speaking, passionate words, not empty speaking, as Kamphn. explains it. Job 15:14 repeats the principal proposition of Eliphaz in his former discourse (Job 4:17-20), with an accompanying reminder of Job’s confession in Job 14:4, which was in substantial harmony therewith. On ιְ ?μεּ ?ψΰִ ?ωָּׁ ?δ comp Job 14:1. Job 15:15. Behold, in His holy ones He puts no trust. χְ ?ψωִׁ ?ιν, the same as ςαγιν, Job 4:18, and hence used of the angels [see on Job 5:1].—And the heavens are not pure in His eyes. ωָׁ ?ξַ ?ιִ ?ν is neither here, nor in Isaiah 49:13 (comp. Luke 15:18; Luke 15:21; Matthew 21:25), to be taken as a synonym of ξμΰλιν, or of ΰַ ?πְ ?βְ ?μֵ ?ιξְ ?ψεֹ ?ξָ ?ΰ (Targ.), as many commentators explain from the Targumists down to Hirzel, Heiligst., Welte [Schlott., Carey, Ren.], etc. Rather, as the parallel passage in Job 25:5 incontestably shows, it designates the starry heavens, which are here contemplated in respect of their pure brilliancy, and their physical elevation above the impure earthly sphere. So correctly Umbreit, Delitzsch, Dillmann. [“In comparison with the all-transcending holiness and purity of God, the creatures which ethically and physically are the purest, are impure. How in the representations of antiquity ethical and physical purity and impurity are throughout used interchangeably is well enough known.” Dillmann.] The angels are indeed regarded as inhabiting the heavenly spheres, as is indisputably proved by the phrase ςαΰδωξιν (1 Kings 22:19; Isaiah 24:21; Psalms 148:2; comp. Genesis 2:1), and the fact that the Holy Scriptures everywhere speak of angels and the starry heavens together. Comp. Del. on this passage and on Genesis 2:1; Hengstenberg; Ewald, K.—Ztg., 1869; Preface, No. 3, 4; Zφckler: Die Urgeschichte der Erde und des Menschen (1868), p. 12 seq.; also below, on Job 38:7. Job 15:16. Much less then (ΰַ ?σλִּ ?ι, quanto minus, like ΰַ ?σ above in Job 4:19) the abominable and corrupt (πֶ ?ΰֱ ?μָ ?η, lit. soured, one corrupted by the ζύμηκακίας, 1. Cor. Job 5:8, one “thoroughly corrupted,” Del.), the man who drinks iniquity like water, i. e. who is as eager to do iniquity, shows as much avidity for sin, as a thirsty man pants for water; comp. the repetition of this same figure by Elihu, also Psalms 73:10; Proverbs 26:6; Sir 24:21. The whole description relates to the moral corruption of mankind generally, of which Eliphaz intentionally holds up before Job “a more hideous picture” (according to Oetinger) than the latter himself had given in Job 14:4, because he has in view the impurity, ill-desert, and need of repentance of Job himself. Comp. still further what he says Job 5:7 on the spark-like proneness of man to sin and its penalty. Fourth Strophe: Job 15:17-19. Transition to the didactic discourse which follows in the form of a captatio benevolentiζ. Job 15:17. I will inform thee (comp. Job 13:17), listen to me, and that which I have seen will I relate.—ζֶ ?δ is neuter, as in Genesis 6:15, or like δεּ ?ΰ above in Job 13:16, and ζֶ ?δΞδָ ?ζִ ?ιϊִ ?ι is a relative clause; comp. Ges. § 122 [§ 120], 2—ηָ ?ζָ ?δ needs not (with Schlottm.) be understood in the sense of an ecstatic vision, of the prophetic sort, seeing that in Job 8:17; Job 23:9; Job 24:1; Job 27:12, etc., it denotes also the knowledge or experience of sensible things. Moreover, as Job 15:18 shows, Eliphaz makes a very definite distinction between that which is now to be communicated and a Divine revelation of whatever sort. [As Dillmann observes, that which is communicated by a direct revelation from God does not need to be supported by the wisdom of antiquity]. Job 15:18. That which wise men declare without concealment from their fathers.—This verse, which is an expression of the object of εַ ?ΰֲ ?ρַ ?τְּ ?ψָ ?δ, coφrdinate with ζֶ ?δΞδָ ?ζִ ?ιϊִ ?ι, is added without ε, because it is substantially identical with that which Eliphaz “had seen.” ξֵ ?ΰֲ ?αεֹ ?ϊָ ?ν belongs not to εְ ?μֹ ?ΰλִ ?ηֲ ?ψεּ (so the ancient versions, and Luther) but to the logically dominant verb ιַ ?βִּ ?ιγεּ, which the εְ ?μֹ ?ΰλΧ is subjoined as an adverbial qualification. “To declare and not to hide” is equivalent to a single notion, “to declare without deception,” precisely like John 1:20, ὁμολογεῖνκαὶ οὐκἀγνε͂ισθαι. Job 15:19. A more circumstantial description of ΰֲ ?αεֹ ?ϊָ ?ν:—To whom alone the land was given (to inhabit), and through the midst of whom no stranger had forced his way.—[Zφckler takes the verb ςαψ here not in the sense of a chance sojourning in a land, or traveling through it, but in the sense of a forcible intrusion, war gedrungen; a national amalgamation resulting from invasion. The language will include a foreign admixture from whatever source.—E.]. Seeing that δָ ?ΰָ ?ψֶ ?υ denotes here with much more probability “the land” rather than “the earth” (and so again in Job 22:8; Job 30:8), and that what is expressly spoken of is the non-intrusion of strangers (ζָ ?ψִ ?ιν), Sohlottmann’s view that the passage refers to the first patriarchs, “the nobler primitive generations of mankind,” who as yet inhabited the earth alone, is to be rejected. The reason why Eliphaz puts forward the purity of the generation of his forefathers as a guarantee of the soundness and credibility of their teachings is that “among ‘the sons of the East’ purity of race was from the earliest times considered as the sign of highest nobility” (Del.) [“The meaning is, ‘I will give you the result of the observations of the golden age of the world, when our fathers dwelt alone, and it could not be pretended that they had been corrupted by foreign philosophy; and when in morals and in sentiment they were pure.” Barnes. “Eliph.,” says Umbr., “speaks here like a genuine Arab.” The exclusiveness and dogmatic superciliousness which are to this day characteristic of Oriental nationalities are doubtless closely associated with the race-instinct which here finds expression. In proportion as a people, either from lack of courage, or from an effeminate love of luxury, or from a sordid love of gain prostrates itself to foreign influences, and carries the witness of its degradation in the impurity of its blood, it cannot, in the judgment of an oriental sage, produce, or transmit, pure and sound doctrine.—E.]. It is unnecessary herewith to assume that the age of Eliphaz, in contrast with the boasted age of the fathers, was a period of foreign domination, like the Assyrian-Chaldean period in the history of Israel (Ewald, Hirzell, Dillmann). Or granting that such a period is referred to—although we are under no necessity of understanding either ζָ ?ψ or ςָ ?αַ ?ψαְּ ?ϊεֹ ?λָ ?ν of warlike invasions—still nothing could be deduced from the passage in favor of the post-solomonic origin of our book: comp. on Job 12:24. 3. Second Division: An admonitory didactic discourse on the retributive justice of God as exhibited in the fate of the ungodly: Job 15:20-35. [“Now follows the doctrine of the wise men, which springs from a venerable primitive age, an age as yet undisturbed by any strange way of thinking (modern enlightenment and free thinking, as we should say), and is supported by Eliphaz’s own experience.” Delitzsch. “It is not so much the fact that the evil-doer receives his punishment, in favor of which Eliphaz appeals to the teaching handed down from the fathers, as rather the belief in it, consequently in a certain degree the dogma of a moral order in the world.” Wetzstein in Delitzsch]. First Strophe: Job 15:20-24. Description of the inward discontent and the restless pain of an earthly-minded and wicked man who defies God, and cares not for Him. Job 15:20. So long as the wicked liveth, (lit., all the days of the wicked) he suffereth torment (ξִ ?ϊְ ?ηεֹ ?μֵ ?μ, lit. he is writhing and twisting, viz., from pain), and so many years as are reserved for the oppressor [“which according to Job 15:32, are not very many,” Dillm.] (ςָ ?ψִ ?ιυ, tyrant, one who commits outrageous violence, as in Job 27:13; Job 6:23; Psalms 37:35; Isaiah 13:11, etc.). The second member, in which ξִ ?ρְ ?τַּ ?ψωָׁ ?πִ ?ιν is an [adverbial] accusative clause, and πִ ?φְ ?τְּ ?πεּ μֶ ?ςָ ?ψִ ?ιυ a relative clause depending upon it, resumes the temporal clause, “all the days of the wicked,” which for the sake of emphasis stands at the beginning of the entire sentence. The LXX. renders differently: ἕτηδὲ ἀριθμητὰ δεδομέναδυνάστῃ; and similarly Delitzsch: “and a fixed number of years is reserved for the oppressor,” a rendering however which gives a much flatter thought than our exposition. Against the rendering of the Targ., Pesh., and Vulg. [also E. V.] “and the number of years is hidden to the oppressor,” it may be urged that in that case the reading must have been ξִ ?οδֶ ?ςָ ?ψִ ?ιυ. [Not necessarily.—μְ is often used as a sign of the dativus commodi. or incommodi, where we should expect ξִ ?ο.—E. g., Micah 2:4ΰֵ ?ικְ ιָ ?ξִ ?ιωׁ μִ ?ι, where the removal of the nation’s portion from it, is represented by the preposition μְ, because of the injurious consequences to it. So here the hiding of the number of the oppressor’s years from him is represented by μְ, because of the misery this causes to him. On the other hand it may be said in favor of this construction that it is much simpler and stronger, that it introduces an additional thought, such as the change of ςψιυ for ψωׁ ?ς might lead us to expect (Del.), and that it is in entire harmony with the context. The central thought of the passage, the essential element of the oppressor’s misery is apprehension, anxiety, the premonition of his doom. How the darkness of this feature of the picture is deepened by this stroke—“the number of his years is laid up in darkness,” so that he knows not when, or whence, or how the blow will fall.—Furthermore the rendering “hidden” seems more suitable for πִ ?φְ ?τַּ ?ο than “reserved,” in the sense of “determined,” being more vivid, and more closely connected with the subjective character of the description. Even if we render it by “reserved,” the idea of “hidden” should be included.—E.]. Job 15:21 seq., describe more in detail the restless pain of soul, or the continual δִ ?ϊְ ?ηεֹ ?μֵ ?μ of the wicked. [It is doubtful whether the following description is to be limited to the evil-doer’s anxiety of spirit, or whether it includes the realization of his fears in the events of his life. On the whole Delitzsch decides, and apparently with reason, that as the real crisis is not introduced until further on, and is then fully described, the language in Job 15:21-24 is to be understood subjectively.—E.]. Job 15:21. Terrors (the plural τδγιν only here) sound [lit.: the sound of terrors] in his ears; in (the midst of) peace the destroyers fall upon him; or, if we regard ωׁ ?εֹ ?γֵ ?ψ not as a collective, but as singular (comp. Job 12:6): “the destroyer falls upon him.” As to αּ ?εֹ ?ΰ with the accus. in the sense of “coming upon any one,” comp. Job 20:22; Proverbs 28:22. Job 15:22. He despairs (lit., he trusts not, he dares not) of returning out of the darkness (viz., of his misfortune, see Job 15:25; Job 15:30), and he is marked out for the sword. φָ ?τεּ, the same with φָ ?τεּ ?ι (which form is given by the K’ri and many MSS.) Part. pass, of φτδ, signifies literally, “watched, spied out,” which yields a perfectly good sense, and makes both the middle rendering of the Participle, (“anxiously looking out for the sword”—so the Pesh. and Vulg.) and Ewald’s emendation to φָ ?τεּ ?ο, seem superfluous. Job 15:23. He wanders about for bread: “Ah where?” [i. e., shall I find it]? The meaning is obvious: in the midst of super-abundance he, the greedy miser, is tortured by anxieties concerning his food—a thought which the LXX. [also Wemyss and Merx], misunderstanding the short emphatic interrogative ΰַ ?ιֵ ?δ, “where” [for which they read ΰַ ?ιָּ ?δ, “vulture”], have obscured, or rather entirely perverted by their singular translation: κατατέτακταιδὲ εἰςσῖταγυψιν: [“he wanders about for a prey for vultures,” Wem.]. With ΰַ ?ιֵּ ?δ comp. the similarly brief δִ ?πֵּ ?δ in Job 9:19.—He knows that close by him [lit. as in E. V., “ready at his hand”], (αְּ ?ιָ ?γεֹ, like ςַ ?μΞιְ ?γֵ ?ι Job 1:14μְ ?ιַ ?γ, “near, close by,” Psalms 140:6 (5); 1 Samuel 19:3) a dark day (lit. day of darkness; comp. Job 15:22) stands ready—to seize upon him and to punish him (πָ ?λεֹ ?ο, as in Job 18:12). Job 15:24. Trouble and anguish terrify him. φַ ?ψεּ ?ξְ ?φεּ ?χָ ?δ here not of external, but of internal need and distress, hence equivalent to anguish and alarm; comp. Job 7:11.—It overpowereth him (the subj. of ϊִּ ?ϊְ ?χְ ?τֵ ?δεּ is either ξְ ?φεּ ?χָּ ?δ or, with a neuter construction, the unknown something, the mysterious Power [which suggests the comparison that follows]) as a king ready for the onset.—λְּ ?ξֶ ?μֶ ?κְ cannot belong to the object of the verb, as rendered by the LXX. [“like a leader falling in the first line of the battle”] and the Targ. [“to serve the conqueror as a foot-stool”], but only to the subject. The deadly anguish, which suddenly seizes on the wicked, is compared to a king, armed for battle, who falls upon a city; comp. Proverbs 6:11.—The meaning of the Hapaxleg. λִּ ?ιγεֹ ?ψ (= λִּ ?γּ ?εֹ ?ψ, Ew., § 156, b) is correctly given on the whole by the Pesh. and Vulg., although not quite exactly by proelium. The Rabbis, Bφttch., Del., etc., render it better by “the round of conflict, the circling of an army” [“the conflict which moves round about, like tumult of battle,” Del.]; but Dillmann best of all, after the Arabic λγψ by “onset, storming, rush of battle;” for this is the only meaning that is well suited to ςϊιγμְ, paratus ad, as well as to the principal subject ξֶ ?μֶ ?κְ. Second Strophe: Job 15:25-30. The cause of the irretrievable destruction of the wicked is his presumptuous opposition to God, and his immoderate greed after earthly possessions and enjoyments. The whole strophe forms a long period, consisting of a doubled antecedent (marked by the double use of λִּ ?ι, Job 15:25 and Job 15:27), and a consequent, Job 15:29-30. Job 15:25. Because he has stretched out his hand against God (in order to contend with Him), and boasted himself against the Almighty. [As indicated in the introductory remark above, λִּ ?ι at the beginning is not “for” (E. V.), introducing a reason for what precedes, but “because,” the consequent of which is not given until Job 15:29 seq.] ιִ ?ϊְ ?βַּ ?αֵּ ?ψ, lit. “to show oneself a hero, a strongman;” i. e., to be proud, insolent; comp. Job 36:9; Isaiah 42:13. Job 15:26 continues the first of the two antecedents, so that ιָ ?ψεּ ?υ is still under the regimen of λּ ?ι in Job 15:25 … has run against Him with (erect) neck (comp. Job 16:14) with the thick bosses (lit. with the thickness of the bosses, comp. Ewald, § 293, c) of his shields. In a the proud sinner is represented as a single antagonist of God, who αְּ ?φַ ?εָּ ?ΰψ, i. e., erecto colle, (comp. Psalms 75:6 [5]) rushes upon Him; in b he is become a whole army with weapons of offense and defense, by virtue of his being the leader of such an army. Job 15:27. Introducing the second reason [for Job 15:29 seq.]. consisting in the insatiable greed of the wicked—Because he has covered his face with his fatness (comp. Psalms 73:4-7), and gathered (ςָ ?ωָׂ ?δ here in the sense of a natural production or putting forth, as in Job 14:9) fat upon his loins. Job 15:28. And abode in desolated cities, houses which ought not to be inhabited, μֹ ?ΰιֵ ?ωְׁ ?αεּ μָ ?ξεֹ, lit. “which they ought not to inhabit for themselves;” the passive rendering of ιωׁ ?α [Gesen., Del.] is unnecessary, the meaning of the expression in any case being, (domus nonhabitandζ) which are destined for ruins.—We are to think of an insolent, sacrilegious, mocking, avaricious tyrant, who fixes his residence—whether it be his pleasure-house, or his fortified castle—in what is and should remain according to popular superstition, an accursed and solitary place, among the ruins, it may be, of an accursed city; Deuteronomy 13:13-18; comp. Joshua 6:26; 1 Kings 16:34; also what is reported by Wetzstein (in Delitzsch I. 267 n.) concerning such doomed cities among modern orientals. Hirzel altogether too exclusively takes the reference to be to a city cursed in accordance with the law in Deut. (l. c.)—against which Lφwenthal and Delitzsch observe quite correctly that what is spoken of here is not the rebuilding forbidden in that law, but only the inhabiting of such ruins. Possibly the poet may have had in mind certain particular occurrences, views, or customs, of which we have no further knowledge. Perhaps we may even suppose some such widely-spread superstition as that of the Romans in relation to the bidentalia to be intended. [Noyes, Barnes, Renan, Rod well, etc., introduce Job 15:28 with “therefore,” making it the consequence of what goes before.—Because of his pride and self-indulgence, the sinner will be driven out to dwell among ruins and desolations. To this view there are the following objections. (1) It deprives the language of the terrible force which belongs to it according to the interpretation given above. (2) It leaves the description of the sin referred to in Job 15:27 singularly incomplete and weak. This would be especially noticeable after the climactic energy of the description of the sin previously referred to in Job 15:25-26. Having seen the thought in Job 15:25 carried to such a striking climax in Job 15:26, we naturally expect to find the thought suggested rather than expressed in Job 15:27 carried to a similar climax in Job 15:28. (3) After dooming the sinner to dwell an exile among “stone-heaps,” (βַּ ?μּ ?ιν), it seems a little flat to add, “he shall not be rich,” if the former circumstance, like the latter, is a part of the penalty.—E.]. Job 15:29-30. The apodosis: (Therefore) he does not become rich (Hosea 12:9 [8]), and his wealth endures not (has no stability, comp. 1 Samuel 13:14), and their possessions (i. e., the possessions of such people) how not down to the earth.—This rendering is in accordance with the interpretation now prevalent of ξִ ?πְ ?μֶ ?δ = ξִ ?πְ ?μָ ?ν, (with the suffix Ξָ ?ν) from a root (which is not to be met with) πμδ, = Arab, nal, “to attain, to acquire,” and so used in the sense of quζstum, lucrum (comp. the post-biblical ξָ ?ξεֹ ?ο, μαμωνᾶς). A possession “bowing down to the earth” is e. g. a full-eared field of grain, a fruit-laden tree, a load of grain weighing down that in which it is borne, etc. In view of the fact that all the ancient versions present other readings than ξִ ?πְ ?μָ ?ν—e. g., LXX.: φִ ?μָּ ?ν [adopted by Merx]; Vulg. ΰφμν, radicem suam: Pesh. ξִ ?μִּ ?ιν, words; Targ. ξִ ?πְּ ?δεֹ ?ο, etc.—the attempts of several moderns to amend the text may to some extent be justified. Not one of these however, yields a result that is altogether satisfactory, neither Hupfeld’s ξִ ?λְ ?μָ ?δ (non extendet in terra caulam), nor Olshausen’s ξַ ?βָּ ?μָ ?ν (“their sickle does not sink to the earth”), nor Bφttcher’s ξִ ?ξְ ?μָ ?ν (“their fullness”), nor Dillmann’s εְ ?μֹ ?ΰιִ ?θֶּ ?δμָ ?ΰָ ?ψֶ ?υωִׁ ?αֳּ ?μִ ?ιν, “and he does not bow down ears of corn to the earth.” [Carey suggests that there may be a transposition here, and that instead of ξπμν we should read πξμν from root πξμ “to out;” the translation then being: “neither shall the cutting (or offset) of such extend in the earth.” The verbal root πμδ found only in Isaiah 33:1 (λַּ ?πְּ ?μֹ ?ϊְ ?κָ, Hiph. Inf. with Dagh. dirimens for λְּ ?δַ ?πְ ?μֹ ?ϊְ ?κָ) seems to signify perficere, to finish; hence E. V. here renders the noun “perfection.” Bernard likewise “accomplishment, achievements.” For πθδ the meaning “to spread, extend,” is preferred by Good, Lee, Noyes, Umbreit, Renan, Con., Rod-well, etc. (E. V., “prolong”). The preposition μ however suits better the definition “to bow down,” which on the whole is to be preferred.—E.] Job 15:30. He does not escape out of the darkness (of calamity, ver 22); a fiery heat [lit. a flame] withereth his shoots, and be passes away (εֳ ?ιρεּ ?ψ forming a paronomasia with the μֹ ?ΰιָ ?ρεּ ?ψ of the first member) by the blast of His [God’s] mouth; comp. Job 4:9. In the second member the figure of a plant, so frequent throughout our book, previously used also by Eliphaz (comp. Job 5:3; Job 5:25 seq.) [and already suggested here according to the above interpretation of 29b], again makes its appearance, being used in a way very similar to Job 8:16 seq.; comp. also oh. Job 14:7. The parching heat here spoken of may be either that of the sun, or of a hot wind (as in Genesis 41:6; Psalms 11:6). Third Strophe: Job 15:31-35. Describing more in detail the end of the wicked, showing that his prosperity is fleeting, and only in appearance, and that its destruction is inevitable. Job 15:31. Let him not trust in vanity—he is deceived (πִ ?ϊְ ?ςַ ?ϊ, Niph. Perf. with reflexive sense: lit. he has deceived himself) [Renan: Insensι!] for vanity shall be his possession [ϊξεψδ; Ges., Fόrst., Con., etc., like E. V. “recompense:” Delitzsch: “not compensatio,” but permutatio, acquisitio; and so Ewald and Zφckler—Eintausch, exchange]. ωָׁ ?εְ ?ΰ, written the first time ωָׁ ?ε, is used here essentially in the same sense as in Job 7:3, and hence = delusion, vanity, evil. In the first instance the sense of emptiness, deception predominates, in the second that of calamity (the evil consequences of trusting in vanity). For the sentiment comp. Job 4:8; Hosea 8:8; and the New Testament passages which speak of sowing and reaping; Galatians 6:7 seq.; 2 Corinthians 9:6. Job 15:32. While his day is not yet (lit. “in his not-day,” i.e., before his appointed time has yet run its course; comp. Job 10:22; Job 12:24), it is fulfilled, viz., the evil that is to be exchanged, it passes to its fulfillment; or also: the exchange fulfills itself, ϊִּ ?ξָּ ?μֵ ?ΰ referring back immediately to ϊּ ?ξεּ ?ψָ ?ϊεֹ, Job 15:31,—so Hirzel, Dillmann. And his palm-branch (λִּ ?αָּ ?δ as in Isaiah 9:13; Isaiah 19:15) is no longer green, is dry, withered. The whole man is here represented as a palm-tree, but not green and flourishing, as in Psalms 92:13 (12), but as decaying with dried up branches—by which branches we are not to understand particularly his children, especially seeing that only one is mentioned instead of several. Job 15:33. He loses [or shakes off] like a vine his grapes (lit., his unripe grapes; αֶּ ?ρֶ ?ψ or αֹ ?ρֶ ?ψ = ὄμφαξ, late or unripe grape; comp. Isaiah 18:5; Jeremiah 31:29; Ezekiel 18:2) and casts down, like an olive, his blossoms, i.e., without seeing fruit, this, as is well-known, being the case with the olive every other year, for only in each second year does it bear olives in anything like abundance; comp. Wetzstein in Delitzsch [I. 272 n. “In order to appreciate the point of the comparison, it is needful to know that the Syrian olive-tree bears fruit plentifully the first, third, and fifth years, but rests during the second, fourth, and sixth. It blossoms in these years also, but the blossoms fall off almost entirely without any berries being formed.” Add the following from Thomson’s Land and the Book: “The olive is the most prodigal of all fruit-bearing trees in flowers. It literally bends under the load of them. But then not one in a hundred comes to maturity. The tree casts them off by millions, as if they were of no more value than flakes of snow, which they closely resemble. So it will be with those who put their trust in vanity. Cast off they melt away, and no one takes the trouble to ask after such empty, useless things, etc.” I. 72], The verb ιַ ?ηְ ?ξֹ ?ν in a is variously rendered by commentators; e. g., “broken [man bricht, ιηΧ impersonal] as from a vine are his unripe grapes,” Schlott.; or “He (God) tears off as of a vine his young grapes” (Del., Hahn); or: “he (the wicked) wrongs as a vine his unripe grapes” (Hupfeld). The rendering given above (Ewald, Hirzel, Dillmann) [E. V., Con., Noy., Carey, Ren., Rod.], etc.), is favored by the parallelism of the second member, which shows that the “injuring, damaging” (ηָ ?ξַ ?ν as in Lamentations 2:6; Proverbs 8:36, etc.), proceeds from the wicked himself. A reference to the process of cutting off the sour grape for the manufacture of vinegar (Wetzstein, Delitzsch) is altogether too remote here.—In regard to the variety of figures here derived from the vegetable kingdom, comp. further Psalms 92:13 (12) seq.; Hosea 14:6 seq.; Sirach 24; and in general my Theol. Naturalis, p. 218 seq. Job 15:34. For the company of the profligate is barren.—ηָ ?πֵ ?σ as in Job 8:13; Job 13:16βַּ ?μְ ?ξεּ ?γ (Job 3:7) is here and in Job 30:3 used as a substant. in the sense of “stark death” (LXX.: θάνατος), barrenness, hard rock, comp. Matthew 13:5; and ςֵ ?γָ ?δ signifies here not indeed specially the family, as in Job 16:7, but still the family circle, the kinsfolk, tribe, or clan.—And fire devours the tents of bribery:i.e., the fire of the Divine sentence (comp. Job 1:16) consumes the tents built up by bribery, or the tents of those who take bribes (οἴκουςδωροδεκτῶν, LXX.). Job 15:35. They (the profligate, for ηָ ?πֵ ?σ in Job 15:34 was collective) conceive (are pregnant with) misery, and bring forth calamity.—ΰָ ?εֶ ?ο and ςָ ?ξָ ?μ, synonyms, as in Job 4:8; comp. the parallel passages Psalms 7:15 (14); Isaiah 33:11; Isaiah 59:4. The Infinitives absolute in a, which are put first for emphasis, are followed in b by the finite verb: and their body prepares deceit, i.e., their pregnant womb (not their “inward part,” as Del. renders it) matures deceit, ripens falsehood, viz., for themselves; comp. Job 15:31. For δֵ ?λִ ?ιο, to prepare, to adjust, comp. Job 27:17; Job 38:41; for ξִ ?ψְ ?ξָ ?δ, “deception,” Genesis 27:35; Genesis 34:13; Micah 6:11; Proverbs 11:1, etc. AND ETHICAL1. Job’s persistence in holding what the friends assume to be a delusion, and especially in maintaining an attitude of presumptuous defiance towards God, compels them to enter on a new circle of the discussion with him. This is opened by Eliphaz in the new arraignment of Job before us. In respect of doctrinal contents this discourse exhibits little or nothing that is new, as indeed is the case generally with what the friends produce from this point on. It revolves, as well as that which Bildad and Zophar say in the sequel, altogether about the old thesis, that Job’s sufferings have a penal significance. The speakers assume that to have been sufficiently demonstrated by what they have said before, and accordingly do not undertake to prove it further to him, but being themselves unqualifiedly right, they imagine that they have only to warn and threaten and upbraid him in a tone of the harshest reproof. The fact that Job had spoken excitedly, daringly, and inconsiderately against God, is, to their minds, transparent proof, which needs no further confirmation, of the correctness of their coarse syllogism: “All suffering is the penalty of sin; Job suffers severely; therefore, Job is a great sinner.” And so assuming him to be impenitent, and hardened in presumption, they break out all the more violently against him, with the purpose not of instructing him more thoroughly, but of more sharply blaming and chastising him. The consequence is that these later discourses of the friends become more and more meagre in their doctrinal and ethical contents, and abound more and more in controversial sharpness and polemic bitterness. They give evidence of a temper which has been aroused to more aggressive vehemence towards Job, aiming at his conversion as one laboring under a delusion, and, at the same time, of increasing monotonousness and unproductiveness in the development of their peculiar views, their fundamental dogma remaining substantially unchanged throughout. 2. Of these arraignments belonging to the second act (or stage) of the discussion, and having as just stated a polemic far more than a doctrinal significance, the preceding discourse by Eliphaz is the first, and, at the same time, the fullest in matter, and the most original. Its fundamental proposition (Job 15:14-15) is indeed nothing else than a repetition of that which the same speaker had previously propounded to Job as truth received by him through a divine revelation (Job 4:12 seq.). Here, however, by the parallel juxtaposition of “the heavens” with “the angels,” there is introduced into the description an element which is, in part at least, new, and not uninteresting (comp. the exegetical remarks on Job 15:15). The application of the thesis to Job’s case is thereby made much more direct, wounding him much more sharply and relentlessly than before, as Job 15:16 shows, where the harsh, “hideous” (Oetinger) description which El. gives of the corruption of the natural man, is unmistakably aimed at Job himself, as the genuine example of a hardened sinner. It will be seen from the extract from Seb. Schmidt in the homiletical remarks (see on Job 15:2 seq.) how the harshness of the charges preferred against Job in the first division (especially in Job 15:2-13) reaches the extreme point of merciless severity, and how, along with some censures which are certainly merited (as, e.g., that he braves God, speaks proud words, despises mild words of comfort and admonition, etc.) there is much thrown in that is unjust and untrue, especially the charge that he “chose the speech of the crafty,” and hence that he dealt in the deceitful subtleties and falsehoods of an advocate. The discourse, however, presents much that is better, that is objectively more true and valuable, and more creditable to the speaker. Here we must reckon the whole of the second division (Job 15:20-35). Here we have a picture indisputably rich in poetic beauties, and in powerful and impressive passages, harmoniously complete in itself withal, and easily detached from its surroundings,—the picture of a wicked man, inwardly tormented by the pangs of an evil conscience, who after that he has for a long time enjoyed his apparent prosperity, at last succumbs to the combined power of the torments within, and of God’s sentence without, and so comes to a horrible end. This passage—which reminds us of similar striking descriptions elsewhere of the foolish conduct of the ungodly and its merited retribution (as, e.g., Psalms 1; Psalms 35; Psalms 52; Proverbs 1:18 seq.; Job 4:14 seq.; Job 5:1 seq.)—forms an interesting counterpart to the magnificent picture of the prosperity of the penitent and righteous man with which the first discourse of Eliphaz closes (Job 5:17-27). The contrast between the two descriptions, which are related to each other like the serene, bright and laughing day and the gloomy night, is in many respects suggestive and noteworthy; but it is not to the speaker’s advantage. In the former case, in painting that bright picture, he may be viewed as a prophet, unconsciously predicting that which was at last actually to come to pass according to God’s decree. But here, in painting this gloomy night-scene, which is purposely designed as a mirror by the contemplation of which Job might be alarmed, this tendency to prophesy evil shows him to be decidedly entangled in error. Indeed the point where this warning culminates, to wit, the charge of self-deception and of hypocritical lying, which having been first introduced in Job 15:5 seq., is repeated in the criminating word—ξִ ?ψְ ?ξָ ?δ—at the close (Job 15:35), involves in itself gross injustice, and is an abortive attack which recoils on the accuser himself with destructive effect, besides depriving the whole description of its full moral value, and even detracting from its poetic beauty. 3. None the less, however, does the Sage of Teman, even when in error, remain a teacher of real wisdom, who has at his disposal genuine Chokmah material, however he may pervert its application in detail. This same gloomy picture with which the discourse before us closes, although it fails as to its special occasion and tendency, contains much that is worth pondering. It is brilliantly distinguished by rare truth of nature and conformity to experience in its descriptions, whether it treats of the inward torment and distress of conscience of the wicked (Job 15:20 seq.), or of the cheerless and desperate issue of his life (Job 15:29 seq.),—the latter description being particularly remarkable for the profound truth and the beauty of the figures introduced with such effective variety from the vegetable kingdom (see on Job 15:33). But even in the first division there is not a little that is interesting and stimulating to profound reflection. This is especially true of Job 15:7 seq., with its censure of Job’s conceit of superiority on the ground of his wisdom—a passage the significance of which is attested both by the recurrence of one of its characteristic turns of expression (Job 15:2) in the Solomonic Book of Proverbs, and of another in Jehovah’s address to Job (Job 38:3 seq.). AND Job_15:2 seq.: Seb. Schmidt: He brings against Job the grave accusation of swelling up, as it were with the conceit of too great wisdom, and hence of sinning in more ways than one; thus he would convict him: (1) of vanity; (2) of causing scandal, and of encouraging men to neglect the fear of God—nay more, to fall into atheism; (3) of presumption, or of the conceit of too great wisdom; (4) of contempt for the word of God; (5) of proud anger against God.—Wohlfarth: The reproaches which we bring against others are often only witnesses to our own guilt! Job 15:7 seq.: Cocceius: He addresses Job here almost in the same terms as God in Job 38 but with another scope and purpose. Wisdom says in Proverbs 8:25, that it was begotten before the hills, i.e. that it is the eternal Son of God. This Wisdom alone was acquainted with all the mysteries of God the Father, to this Wisdom alone are owing the purification and justification of men, the full declaration of the gracious will of God, and the gift of the spirit of joy. Job 15:14-16 : Brentius: These words are most true: no one in himself is clean, pure and just; but in God, through faith in Christ, we come into possession of all cleanness, purity and justification (John 15:3; Romans 15:1, etc.).—Mercier: Eliphaz finds fault with man’s nature which nevertheless by faith is made pure.—Zeyss: Although the holy angels are pure and holy spirits, neither their holiness nor that of man is to be compared with the infinitely perfect holiness of God, but God only is and remains the Most Holy One; Isaiah 6:3.—Oecolampadius (on Job 15:16): Here is beautifully described the misery of man, who is abominable by reason of innate depravity, a child of wrath, corrupted and degenerated from his first estate, and so inflamed with lust, that as one in the dropsy drinks water, so does he drink sin, and is never satisfied. Job 15:20 seq.: Idem: This is what he would say, that the wicked man, having an evil conscience within himself, at every time of his life when he becomes better known to himself, trembles, carries with him his own torments, and never hopes for good. Moses has finely illustrated this in Cain, Genesis 4—Cramer: The ungodly and hypocrites live in continual restlessness of heart; but blessed are they whose sins are forgiven; they attain rest and peace of conscience.—Comp. Proverbs 27:1 : “The wicked flee when no man pursueth, but the righteous are bold as a lion.” Job 15:29 seq.: Brentius: Eliphaz proceeds with his recital of the catalogue of curses on the wicked. … “His seed will burn up,” i.e. the blessing of the wicked will be turned into a curse; and as the branches of trees are burned by fire, and scattered by the wind, which is called the Spirit [breath] of God, so do all the blessings of the wicked perish by the judgment of God, and the Spirit of His mouth.—Cramer: The dire punishments which befall the ungodly give courage to the pious, and strengthen their faith, when they see how the former are recompensed for their ungodliness (Psalms 91:8). … Although the ungodly have many friends and many dependents, their name must nevertheless rot and perish (Proverbs 10:7; Esther 6:13)—Zeyss (on Job 15:31-33): As the sowing, so the reaping. He who sows vanity will also reap vanity; calamity and destruction will happen to him for a recompense (Hosea 8:7; Galatians 6:8). When the ungodly think that their life is at its very best, they are often enough quite suddenly taken away (Luke 12:17). Footnotes: “As no one Ventures to pronounce the name of Satan because God has cursed him (Genesis 3:14), without adding ’alah el-la’ne. ‘God’s curse upon him!’ so a man may not presume to inhabit places which God has appointed to desolation. Such villages and cities, which, according to tradition have perished and been frequently overthrown by the visitation of Divine judgment, are not uncommon on the borders of the desert. They use places, it is said, where the primary commandments of the religion of Abraham (Dξn Ibrahim) have been impiously transgressed. Thus the city of Babylon will never be colonized by a Semitic tribe, because they hold the belief that it has been destroyed on account of Nimrod’s apostasy from God, and his hostility to His favored one Abraham. The tradition which has even been transferred by the tribes of Arabia Petrζa into Islamism of the disolation of the city of Higr (or Medain Salih) on account of disobedience to God, prevents any one from dwelling in that remarkable city, which consists of thousands of dwellings cut in the rock, some of which are richly ornamented; without looking round, and muttering prayers, the desert ranger hurries through, even as does the great procession of pilgrims to Mekka, from fear of incurring the punishment of God by the slightest delay in the accursed city.” B.—Job: Although oppressed by his disconsolate condition, he nevertheless wishes and hopes that God will demonstrate his innocence, against the unreasonable accusations of his friendsJob 16-17(A brief preliminary repudiation of the discourses of the friends as aimless and unprofitable): Job 16:1-51         Then Job answered and said: 2    I have heard many such things: miserable comforters are ye all. 3    Shall vain words have an end? or what emboldeneth thee that thou answerest? 4    I also could speak as ye do; if your soul were in my soul’s stead, I could heap up words against you, and shake mine head at you. 5    But I would strengthen you with my mouth, and the moving of my lips should assuage your grief. 1. Lamentation on account of the disconsolateness of his condition, as forsaken and hated by God and men: Job 16:6-176    Though I speak, my grief is not assuaged; and though I forbear, what am I eased? 7    But now He hath made me weary: Thou hast made desolate all my company. 8    And Thou hast filled me with wrinkles, which is a witness against me; and my leanness rising up in me beareth witness to my face. 9    He teareth me in His wrath, who hateth me; He gnasheth upon me with His teeth; mine enemy sharpeneth his eyes upon me. 10    They have gaped upon me with their mouth; they have smitten me upon the cheek reproachfully; they have gathered themselves together against me. 11    God hath delivered me to the ungodly, and turned me over into the hands of the wicked. 12    I was at ease, but He hath broken me asunder; He hath also taken me by my neck, and shaken me to pieces, and set me up for His mark. 13    His archers compass me round about, He cleaveth my reins asunder, and doth not spare; He poureth out my gall upon the ground. 14    He breaketh me with breach upon breach; He runneth upon me like a giant. 15    I have sowed sackcloth upon my skin, and defiled my horn in the dust. 16    My face is foul with weeping, and on my eyelids is the shadow of death; 17    not for any injustice in mine hands; also my prayer is pure. 2. Vivid expression of the hope of a future recognition of his innocence: Job 16:18 to Job 17:918    O earth, cover not thou my blood! and let my cry have no place! 19    Also now, behold, my witness is in heaven, and my record is on high. 20    My friends scorn me: but mine eye poureth out tears unto God. 21    O that one might plead for a man with God, as a man pleadeth for his neighbor! 22    When a few years are come, then I shall go the way whence I shall not return. Job 17:1         My breath is corrupt, my days are extinct, the graves are ready for me. 2    Are there not mockers with me? and doth not mine eye continue in their provocation? 3    Lay down now, put me in a surety with Thee; who is he that will strike hands with me? 4    For Thou hast hid their heart from understanding? therefore shalt Thou not exalt them. 5    He that speaketh flattery to his friends, even the eyes of his children shall fail. 6    He hath made me also a byword of the people; and aforetime I was as a tabret. 7    Mine eye also is dim by reason of sorrow, and all my members are as a shadow. 8    Upright men shall be astonished at this, and the innocent shall stir up himself against the hypocrite. 9    The righteous also shall hold on his way, and he that hath clean hands shall be stronger and stronger. 3. Sharp censure of the admonitory speeches of the friends as unreasonable, and destitute of all power to comfort: Job 17:10-1610    But as for you all, do ye return, and come now; for I cannot find one wise man among you. 11    My days are passed, my purposes are broken off, even the thoughts of my heart. 12    They change the night into day: the light is short because of darkness. 13    If I wait, the grave is mine house; I have made my bed in the darkness. 14    I have said to corruption, Thou art my father; to the worm, Thou art my mother and my sister. 15    And where is now my hope? as for my hope, who shall see it? 16    They shall go down to the bars of the pit, when our rest together is in the dust. AND 1. Heartlessly repulsed by his friends, and left without comfort, Job turns, more trustfully than in his previous apologies, to the God who evidenced Himself in his good conscience, of whom he cannot believe that He will leave him forever without testifying to his innocence, however cheerless a night of despair may in the meanwhile surround him. It is in the expression of his confidence, and of his inward yearning and waiting for this Divine testimony to his innocence (Job 16:18 to Job 17:9) that the significance of this discourse culminates, so far as it gives pleasing evidence of progress beyond Job’s former frame of mind. Along with this indeed it gives evidence that the spirit of hopeless and bitter complaint is, if not intensified, at least substantially unchanged and undiminished. The first principal division of the discourse (Job 16:6-17) which precedes that expression of yearning confidence in God’s help contains in particular an expression of cheerless lamentation over his condition, as one forsaken by God and men; while a shorter introduction prefaced to this division (Job 16:2-5), as well as the concluding section, or third division (Job 17:10-16) are particularly occupied with a bitter complaint on account of the misunderstanding and heartless conduct of the friends.—The whole discourse comprises six long strophes, the first of which constitutes the introduction, extending through four verses, or ten stichs (Job 16:2-5), while the first and second divisions contain each two strophes (of 6, 7 verses, or 14 stichs), the third division, however, only one strophe (of 7 verses, or 14 stichs). 2. Exordium of the discourse, or introductory strophe: A short preliminary repudiation of the discourses of the friends as aimless, and destitute of all power to comfort: ch Job 16:2-5. Job 16:2. I have heard (already) many such things (ψַ ?αּ ?εֹ ?ϊ, multa, as in ch, Job 23:14), and miserable comforters are ye all. ξְ ?πַ ?ηֲ ?ξֵ ?ιςָ ?ξָ ?μ, lit. “comforters of distress” [Gen of attribute, Green, § 254, 6] are burdensome comforters (consolatores onerosi, Jer.), who, instead of comfort, minister only trouble and distress; comp. Job 15:11. Job 16:3. Are windy words (now) at an end? Comp. Job 15:2, where Eliphaz reproaches Job with windy speech—a reproach which Job now pays back in the same coin.—Or what vexes thee [addressed more particularly to Eliphaz] that thou answerest?δξψιυ, Hiph. of ξψυ, “to be sick, weak” (see on Job 6:25), signifies “to make sick, to afflict” (Ewald, Schlott., Dillm.), or again “to goad, incite, vex” (Del.) [see the examples in notes on Job 6:25 favoring this definition]: not, “to make sweet, to sweeten,” as the Targ. interprets, as though ξψυ were without further qualification = λִּ ?ι—ּ ?ξμυ moreover is not = quum (Hirz.), but as in Job 6:11 quod: “what vexes thee that thou answerest,” or “to answer.” Job 16:4. I also indeed would speak like you, i.e., would be minded to serve you with such like discourses as your own [Dillmann, Conant, Renan, Rodwell, etc., with good reason prefer to render the subjunctive ΰֲ ?γַ ?αֵּ ?ψָ ?δ “I could,” or “might,” rather than “would”].—If your soul were instead of mine;i.e. in case you had my place, your persons were instead of mine. [Conant, however: “Your soul is not to be taken as a periphrasis of the personal pronoun. Soul, the seat of intelligence, mental activity and emotion, stands as the representative of these faculties in man, and is specially appropriate here, where there is immediate reference to what is thought, felt and suffered. The force of the expression is lost therefore by substituting ye and me.”]—Would [or could] weave words against you.—δֶ ?ηֱ ?αִ ?ιψαְּ ?ξִ ?μִּ ?ινis not “to make a league with words” (Gesen. [Rodwell], etc.), nor again: “to affect wisdom with words” (Ewald), but to “combine words, string them together like pearls.” Instead of the simple accus of the object ξִ ?μִּ ?ιν, the more choice construction with αְּ instrum. is used; comp. the following member, also Job 16:10; Jeremiah 18:16; Lamentations 1:17 (Gesen. § 138 [§ 135] 1, Rem. 3). [“When he says: I would range together, etc., he gives them to understand that their speeches are more artificial than natural, more declamations than the outgushings of the heart.” Del.]—And shake my head at you;viz., as a gesture of scorn and malicious pleasure; comp. Psalms 22:8 [7]; Isaiah 37:22; Jeremiah 18:16; Sir 12:18; Matthew 27:39. It should be borne in mind that what is hateful in such conduct is not to be charged upon Job (who indeed only states what he could do if he had before him the friends, weak and miserable as he is now, and should then follow the promptings of the natural man), but on the friends, before whom Job here holds up as in a mirror the hatefulness of their own conduct. [In regard to the rendering of ςμ by “against,” and the explanation of δֵ ?πִ ?ιַ ?ς as a gesture of scorn, see below on Job 16:5] Job 16:5. Would [could] strengthen you with my mouth:i.e. with mere words, instead of with deeds of a love that wins the heart. [On the form ΰֲ ?ΰַ ?ξִּֽ ?φְ ?λֶ ?ν with Tsere shortened to Hhirik, see Green, § 104, h.]—And the sympathy of my lips (πִ ?ιγ, commisseration, sympathy, only here; comp. the phrase, similar in sound, πִ ?ιαִ ωְׂ ?τָ ?ϊַ ?ιִ ?ν, “fruit of the lips,” Isaiah 57:19) should assuage, soil, your grief. ηָ ?ωַׂ ?κְ, “to soothe, restrain, check,” here without an obj. as in Isaiah 58:1. The following verse easily enables us to supply λְּ ?ΰֵ ?α, as the object. [The E. V., Wem., Bar., Elz., etc., render this as a contrast with Job 16:4, as though Job, after there describing what he might do if they were in his place, describes here what, on the other hand, he really would do. But there is nothing to indicate such a contrast. Job 16:5 is most simply and naturally the continuation of Job 16:4.—The irony of the passage is most keen and cutting. If you were in my place, says Job, if your soul were tried as mine is, I could speak windy words in abundance as you have done, I could string them out one after another, and nod my head to comfort: oh, yes! all such comfort—sympathy of the head, of the mouth, of the lips, I could lavish upon you—that is cheap enough, as your conduct shows—but as for the heart, that is quite another matter! It will be seen from this paraphrase of Job’s language that a somewhat different view is taken of one or two expressions, particularly in Job 16:4, from that given above by Zφckler, It seems unnecessary and unnatural to suppose that Job would in Job 16:4 describe himself as framing words against them, and indulging in gestures of malicious mockery, and then in Job 16:5 as strengthening and soothing them with words—but nothing more. Moreover the expressions of Job 16:4 would thus lose their point, there being no reason to suppose that the friends had shown any such malignity as would be thus suggested. What Job says is, that he could multiply words of cold formal sympathy, that he could string out such words upon them, or towards them; and again that he could make with his head the customary oriental gesture of condolence (πεּ ?ςַ here like πεּ ?γ, see above, Job 2:11 and comp. Gesen. sub. 5.), this being by implication all the sympathy he had received from them.—E.] 3. First Division. A lamentation concerning the cheerlessness of his condition, as one forsaken and persecuted by God and men. Job 16:6-17. First Strophe: Job 16:6-11. From the friends, the “miserable comforters,” who leave him in his helplessness, he turns to himself, who is so greatly in need of sympathy, because God has delivered him over to the scorn and the cruelty of the unrighteous. Job 16:6. [“He bethinks himself whether he will continue, the colloquy further. Already in the lamentation of Job 3. Job had given vent to his grief, and solicited comfort. The colloquy thus far had shown that from them he had no comfort to expect. Should he then speak further, in order to procure at least some alleviation of his grief? but he cannot anticipate even this as the result of his speaking. He must accordingly be silent; yet even then he is no better off.” Dillm.]—If I speak (voluntative after ΰִ ?ν, see Ew. § 355, b) my grief is not assuaged; if I forbear (voluntative without ΰִ ?ν, as in Job 11:17; Psalms 73:16, etc.), what departs from me, viz. of my pain? how much of my pain goes away from me, do I lose? The unexpressed answer would naturally be; Nought! On ιδμκְ, comp. Job 14:20. Job 16:7. Nevertheless—now He hath exhausted me, viz. God, not the pain (λְּ ?ΰֵ ?αִ ?ι, Job 16:6), which the Vulg., Aben-Ezra, etc., regard as the subj. The particle ΰְַ ?κְ, which belongs to the whole sentence, signifies neither: “of a truth, yea verily!” (Ew.) nor “only” [=entirely], as though it belonged only to δμΰπι (Hirz., Hahn, etc.), but it has here an adversative meaning, and states, in opposition to the two previously mentioned possibilities of speaking and being silent, what is actually the case with Job; hence it should be rendered “still, nevertheless,” verum tamen: [Renan: Mais quoi! “He is absolutely incapable of offering any resistance to his pain, and care has also been taken that no solacing word shall come to him from any quarter,” Del. See the next clause].—Thou hast desolated all my circle. ςֵ ?γָ ?δ here not “rabble,” as in Job 15:34, but sensu bono—circle of friends and family dependents (Carey: all my clan). [“This mention of the family is altogether in place, seeing that the loss of the same must be doubly felt by him now that his friends are hostile to him.” Schlott,]. The Pesh. reads “all my testimony” (ςֵ ?γָ ?ϊִ ?ι), i.e., all that witness in my behalf, all my prosperity (so also Hahn among the moderns), to which however δֵ ?ωֵׂ ?ν is not particularly suitable. Note moreover the transition, bearing witness as it does to the vivid excitement of the speaker’s feelings, from the declarations concerning God in the third person (which we find in the first member, and which appear again Job 16:9 seq.), and the mournful plaintive address to Him here and in Job 16:8, in which the description before us is directly continued. Job 16:8. And hast seized me (not “Thou makest me wrinkled,” Vulg., Luther [E. V., Lee, Rodwell] or “shrivelest me together, Del.—for χξθ signifies “to press together, to fasten firmly together;” comp. Job 22:16. [Wordsworth attempts somewhat peculiarly to combine the two definitions: “Thou hast bound me fast with wrinkles, as with a chain”].—It is become a witness, viz., the fact that thou hast seized me; the circumstance that God makes him suffer so severely is—so at least it seems—a witness of his guilt. [This clause, taken in connection especially with the following parallelism, seems certainly to favor the rendering of the Vulg., E. V., etc. “thou hast filled me with wrinkles.” The witness against Job is naturally something which like his “leanness” is visible. The corrugation of the skin was a feature of elephantiasis more marked even than the emaciation of the body, and would hardly be omitted in so vivid a description of his condition as Job here gives. The primary signification of “seizing,” or “compressing” should not however be lost sight of; indeed it adds much to the terrible, force of the representation to retain it, and, with Wordsworth, to combine the two definitions, only in a somewhat different way from his; the true conception being that God—who in Job 16:12 is represented as seizing Job and dashing him in pieces,—is here represented as seizing, compressing him, until his body is shriveled, crumpled up into wrinkles.—E.]. In opposition to Ewald, who changes δָ ?ιָ ?δ into δַ ?ιָ ?δ (= δַ ?εָּ ?δ, see Job 6:2; Job 30:13), and translates accordingly: “and calamity seized me as a witness ”—comp. Del. and Dillm. on the passage: [who object that it would leave μְ ?ςֵ ?γ without much of its force and emphasis, and that the construction would be too condensed and artificial].—And my leanness has appeared against me, accusing me to the face (speaking out against me, comp. Job 15:6 b). On λַּ ?ηַ ?ωׁ = consumption, emaciation, comp. Psalms 109:24. The signification rests on a metaphor similar to that by virtue of which a dried-up brook is called a “liar” (Job 6:15 seq.). Job 16:9. His anger has torn and made war upon me; He has gnashed against me with His teeth; as mine enemy He has whetted His eyes against me. God, who is now again spoken of in the third person, is imagined as a ferocious beast of prey, who is enraged against Job. So above in Job 10:16.—As to the “tearing,” comp. Hosea 6:1; the “making war,” Job 30:21; the “whetting” or “sharpening” of the eyes, Psalms 7:13 [12]: also the acies oculorum of the Romans, and the modern expression, “to shoot a murderous look at any one” Job 16:10. Men also, like God, fall upon Job, as his enemies, resembling beasts of prey.—They have opened wide their mouth against me (a gesture of insolent mockery, as in Psalms 22:8 [Psalms 22:7]; Jer. 57:4); with abuse (i.e., with abusive speech) they strike me on the cheeks (comp. Mic. 4:14 [Micah 5:1]; Lamentations 3:30; John 18:22; John 19:3); together they strengthen themselves against me, or again: they complete; fill themselves up [= fill up their ranks] against me, for δְ ?ϊְ ?ξַ ?μֵּ ?ΰ means “to gather themselves together to a ξְ ?μֹ ?ΰ (Isaiah 31:4), a heap;” not “to equip themselves with a full suit of armor,” as Hirzel would explain, supplying αַּ ?ψְ ?ζֶ ?μ.—The whole of this lamentation, which reminds us of Psalms 22., is general in its form; it contemplates nevertheless the hostile attacks made by the friends on Job, as in particular the word “together” in the third member shows—in hearing which the friends could not help feeling that they were personally aimed at in the strong expressions of the speaker, even as he on his part must have had his sensibilities hurt by such expressions as those of Eliphaz in Job 15:16 (see on the passage). Job 16:11. God delivers me (comp. Deuteronomy 23:16 [15]) to the unrighteous, and casts me headlong into the hand of the wicked. ιִ ?ψְֽ ?θֵ ?πִ ?ι, Imperf. Kal. of ιψθ (contracted from ιִ ?ιψְ ?θֵ ?πι, Ges., § 70 [§ 68], Rem. 3). [“The preformative Jod has Metheg in correct texts, so that we need not suppose, with Ralbag, a ψθδ similar in meaning to ιψθ.” Del.], prζcipitem me dat; comp. LXX. ἔῤῥιψε and Symmachus ἐνέβαλε.—ςֲ ?ειִ ?μ in the first member, “the perverted one, the reprobate, the unrighteous,” or again—“the boy” [der Bube, “or the boyish, childish, knavish one”] as Del. explains it, (referring to Job 19:18; Job 22:11), is used collectively for the plur., as the parallel term ψְ ?ωָׁ ?ςִ ?ιν in b shows. Second Strophe: Job 16:12-17. Continuation of the description of the cruel and hostile treatment he had received from God, notwithstanding his innocence. Job 16:12. I was at ease, and He then shattered me. ωָׁ ?μֵ ?ε, secure, unharmed, suspecting no evil; comp. Job 21:23; Job 3:26.—τַּ ?ψְֽ ?τּ ?ψַ, Pilp. of τψψ with strong intensive signification—“to shatter, to crush in pieces;” so also the following τִּ ?φְ ?τֵּ ?υ, from τφυ, “to beat in pieces, to dash to pieces.” [“He compares himself to a man who is seized by the hair of his head, and thrown down a precipice, where his limbs are broken. He probably alludes to some ancient mode of punishing criminals.” Wemyss]. Observe the onomatopoetic element of these intensive forms, which furthermore are to be understood not literally or physically, but in a figurative sense of the sudden shattering of prosperity, and peace of soul.—And set me for a mark. ξַ ?θָּ ?ψָ ?δ (from πָ ?θַ ?ψ, τηρεῖν, like σκοπός from σκέπτεσθαι), target, mark, as in 1 Samuel 20:20; Lamentations 3:12; comp. ξִ ?τְ ?βַ ?ς above in Job 7:20. Job 16:13 expands the figure in Job 12. c.—His arrows whirred about me. ψַ ?αָּ ?ιε, not “his troops, his archers” (Rabb. [E. V., Noy., Con., Car., Rod., Elz., etc.]), but according to the unanimous witness of the ancient versions: “his arrows, darts” (from ψξδ ,ψαδ – ψαα, jacere, Genesis 49:23; comp. Genesis 21:10).—(He cleaves my reins without sparing, pours out on the earth my gall (comp. Lamentations 2:11). Job here describes more specifically the terrible effect of God’s arrows, i.e., of the ailments inflicted on him by a hostile God (comp. Job 6:4, also the well-known mythological representations of classical antiquity), representing in accordance with the Hebrew conception the noblest and most sensitive of the inner organs of the body as affected, namely the reins, and also the gall-bladder. In view of the highly poetic character of the description, it is not necessary to inquire whether he conceives of the “outpouring” of the gall as taking place inwardly, without being at all perceptible externally, or whether, with a disregard of physiological possibility or probability, he represents it as something that is externally visible. It is moreover worthy of note that according to Arabic notions the “rupture of the gall-bladder” may really be produced by violent painful emotions. Comp. Delitzsch on the passage; also his Biblical Psychology [p. 317, Clark]; also my Theol. Naturalis, p. 618. Job 16:14. He breaks through me breach upon breach. τֶּ ?ψֶ ?υ, comp. Job 30:14, here as accus. of the object, united to its cognate verb; comp. Gesen., § 138 [§ 135] Rem. 1.—He runs upon me like a mighty warrior. In this new turn of the comparison Job, and in particular his body, appears as a wall, or a fortress, which is by degrees breached by missiles and battering-rams, and which God himself assaults by storm. Job 16:15. I have sewed sackcloth upon my skin, i.e. I have girded around myself, and stitched together (about the loins) a closely fitting mourning garment of close hair (comp. ωַׂ ?χ in Isaiah 3:24; Isaiah 20:2; Isaiah 32:11; 1 Kings 21:27; 2 Kings 6:30, etc.). The “sewing upon the skin” is doubtless to be understood only figuratively of the laying on of a closely fitting garment, which it is not intended to lay off immediately. Possibly, indeed, there may be an allusion to the cracked swollen skin of one diseased with elephantiasis, in which the hair of the sackcloth (cilicium) must of necessity stick (see my Kritische Gesch. der Ascese, p. 82 seq.). [See also Art. “Sackcloth” in Smith’sBib. Dict. “Job does not say of it that he put it on, or slung it around him, but that he sewed it upon his naked body; and this is to be attributed to the hideous distortion of the body by elephantiasis, which will not admit of the use of the ordinary form of clothes.” Delitzsch]. In any case in referring to this stiff, almost dead skin, as a part of his fearfully distorted body, he chooses the term βֶּ ?μֶ ?γ, which appears in Hebrew only here (though more common in Aram. and Arab.), and in contrast with ςεֹ ?ψ, the “sound, healthy skin,” may be translated “hide;” comp. the βύρσα of the LXX.—And have lowered (lit. “stuck,” see below) my horn—the symbol of power and of free manly dignity, comp. 1 Samuel 2:1; 1 Samuel 2:10; Psalms 89:18 [Psalms 89:17], Psalms 89:25 [Psalms 89:24]; Psalms 92:11 [sa 92:10]; etc., Luke 1:69—into the dust:—this being a sign of his humiliation, of his consciousness of the defeat, and of the deep sorrow which he has been called to endure. For this lowering of the horn into the dust of the earth is the direct opposite of “lifting up the horn” (Psalms 83:3 [2] as a symbol of the increase of power and dignity. ςεֹ ?μֵ ?μ is with Saad., Rosenm., Ew., Hirz., Dillm., etc., to be derived from ςμμ, introire, of frequent use in the Aram, and Arab., and thus signifies “to stick into, to dig into.” If it were the Pil. of ςμμ, “to act,” meaning accordingly “to abuse,” or “to defile” (Targ., Pesch., Delitzsch [E. V., Schlott.] etc.), the μְ before the object would not be wanting; comp. Lamentations 1:22; Lamentations 2:20; Lamentations 3:51. To be preferred to this is the translation—” I roll my horn in the dust” (Umbr., Vaihing., Hahn), a rendering which is etymologically admissible. Job 16:16. My face is burning red with weeping. ηֳ ?ξַ ?ψְ ?ξְ ?ψָ ?δ (instead of which we ought perhaps with the K’ri to read the plural ηֳ ?ξַ ?ψְ ?ξְ ?ψεּ, unless we explain the fem., like ϊִּ ?ωְׁ ?θֹ ?σ in Job 14:19, in accordance with Gesen., § 146, [§ 143], 3), Pualal of ηξψ, an intensive passive form, expressing the idea of being exceedingly reddened, glowing red (comp. Lamentations 1:20; Lamentations 2:11). [From the same root comes the name Alhambra, applied to the building from its color. See Delitzsch].—And on mine eyelashes is a death-shade, i.e., by reason of continuous weeping, and the weakening thereby of the power of sight, my eyes are encompassed by a gloom of night: [an explanation which Schlottmann characterizes as flat and prosaic. The idea is rather that in Job’s despondent mood he conceived of “the shadow of death” as gathering around. He had well-nigh wept himself out of life]. Job 16:17. Although no violence is in my hands (or clings to them) and my prayer is pure.—Job emphasizes his innocence here in contrast not only with Job 16:16, but with the whole description thus far given of the persecution which he had endured, Job 16:12-16.—ςַ ?μ is used here, as in Isaiah 53:9, as a conjunction. in the sense of “notwithstanding that, although,” (Ewald, § 222, b), not as a preposition, as Hirzel explains it (“in spite of non-violence”). 4. Second Division. A vivid expression of the hope of a future recognition of his innocence: Job 16:18—Job 17:9. First Strophe: Job 16:18—ch. Job 17:2. [His confidence in God as his witness and vindicator—his only hope in view of the speedy approach of death]. Job 16:18. Earth, cover not thou my blood. i.e., drink it not up, let it lie open to view, and cry to heaven as a witness to my innocence, Comp. Genesis 4:10; Ezekiel 24:7 seq.; Isaiah 26:21. [“As according to the tradition it is said to have been impossible to remove the stain of the blood of Zachariah, who was murdered in the court of the temple, until it was removed by the destruction of the temple itself.” Delitzsch. “According to the old belief no rain or dew: would moisten the spot marked by the blood of a person murdered when innocent, or change its blighted appearance into living green.” Ewald]. The second member also expresses essentially the same meaning: and let my cry have no resting-place, i.e., let not the cry for vengeance arising from my shed blood (or the cry of my soul poured out in my blood, Genesis 9:4, etc.), be stilled, let it not reach a place of rest, before it appears as my βεֹ ?ΰֵ ?μ (Job 19:25) to deliver and avenge me. [“Therefore in the very God who appears to him to be a bloodthirsty enemy in pursuit of him, Job nevertheless hopes to find a witness of his innocence: He will acknowledge his blood, like that of Abel, to be the blood of an innocent man. It is an inward irresistible demand made by his faith which here brings together two opposite principles—principles which the understanding cannot unite—with bewildering boldness. Job believes that God will even finally avenge the blood which His wrath has shed, as blood that has been innocently shed.” Delitzsch]. Job 16:19. Even now behold in heaven my witness, and my attestor (ωָׂ ?δֵ ?γ, LXX. συνίστωρ, an Aram, synonym of ςֵ ?γ, witness, comp. Genesis 31:47) in the heights.—In regard to ξְ ?ψεξִ ?ιν as a synonym, of ωָׁ ?ξַ ?ιִ ?ν, comp. Job 25:2; Job 31:2. βַ ?νςַ ?ϊָּ ?δ, “even now,” (not “now however,” Ewald) sets the present condition of Job, apparently quite forsaken, but in reality still supported and upheld by God as a heavenly witness of his innocence, in contrast with a future period, when he will be again publicly acknowledged and brought to honor. This more prosperous and happy future he does not yet indeed realize so vividly as later in Job 19:25 seq. That of which he speaks here is only the contrast between his apparent forsakenness, and the fact that, as he firmly believes, God in heaven is still on his side. [“If his blood is to be one day avenged, and his innocence recognized, he must have a witness of the same. And reflecting upon it he remembers that even now, when appearances are all against him, he has such a witness in God in heaven.” Dillm.]. Job 16:20. [“The conduct of the friends in denying, nay in mocking his innocence, compels him to cling to this God in heaven.” Dillm.].—They who mock me (lit., “my mockers,” with strong accent on “mockers”) are my friends. [“It is worthy of remark that the word here used, melits, signifies also an interpreter, an intercessor, and is employed in that sense; below, Job 33:23; comp. Genesis 42:23; 2 Chronicles 32:31; Isaiah 43:27; and some, as Professors Lee and Carey, have assigned that sense to the word here, ‘My true interpreters are my friends;’ and they suppose in this word, here and in Job 33:23, a prophetic reference to the Mediator. But the Auth. Ver. appears to be correct; and the similarity of the words serves to bring out the contrast between the unkindness of man, and the mercy of God.” Words.].—To Eloah mine eye poureth tears:i.e. although my friends mock me, instead of taking me under their protection, and attesting my innocence, I still direct to God a look of tearful entreaty that He would do justice, etc.—[“An equally strong emphasis lies here on subj. and predicate: ‘My friends’ stands in contrast with God; ‘my mockers’ in contrast with ‘my witness,’ Job 16:19; and finally also ‘my mockers’ in contrast with ‘my friends.’ ” Schlottm.]. Ew., Dillm., etc., take the first member, less suitably, as assigning the reason for the second: “because my friends are become such as mock me, mine eye pours out tears to Eloah,” etc. Job 16:21 states the object of the weeping (i.e., the yearning) look which he lifts up to God. This object is twofold: (1) That He would do justice to a man before God: lit. “that He would decide (εְ ?ιεֹ ?λַ ?η, voluntative expressing the final end, as in Job 9:33) for the man against Eloah, or with Eloah (ςִ ?ν as in Psalms 55:19 [18]; Job 94:16 [15] of an opponent); i.e., that before His own bar He would pronounce me not guilty, that He would cease to misunderstand and to persecute me as an enemy, but would rather assist me to my right, and so appear on my side. (2) (That He would do justice) to the son of man against his friend, that He would justify me against my human friend (ψֵ ?ςֵ ?δεּ distributively for ψֵ ?ςָ ?ιε), and set me forth as innocent—which would result immediately upon his justification before God’s bar. For the interchange of “man” and “son of man” in poetic parallelism, comp. Psalms 8:5. It is not necessary to adopt Ewald’s suggestion (Jahrb. der bibl. Wissenschaft, IX. 38) to read αֵּ ?ιοΰָ ?γָ ?ν, instead of αֶּ ?οΞΰΧ, in order to acquire a more suitable construction for ηελιη. The construction according to the common reading presents nothing that is objectionable, scarcely anything that is particularly harsh. The influence of the μְ of the first member extends forward to αֶּ ?οΞΰָ ?γָ ?ν (as in. Job 15:3), and the μְ before ψֵ ?ςֵ ?δεּ = “in respect to, against,” supplies the place of the ςִ ?ν of the first member. It would be much harsher were we, with Schlottmann, Ewald (in Comm.), and Olsh. to translate the second member: “and judges man against his friend,” a rendering which is condemned by the usage of the language, for δεֹ ?λִ ?ιηַ with accus. of person never signifies “to judge,” but always “to punish, reprove.” [“Job appeals from God to God: he hopes that truth and love will finally decide against wrath. … Schlottmann aptly recalls the saying of the philosophers, which applies here in a different sense from that in which it is meant: Nemo contra Deum, nisi Deus ipse.” Del. “The prayer of Job is fulfilled in Job 42:7; and that too in a sense quite otherwise than that which Job had ventured to hope for, even in this life. This is again one of the passages where the poet permits his hero, in an exalted moment, to enjoy a presage of the issue.” Dillm.] Concerning the theological significance of the wish here expressed by Job, that he might, be justified by God before God as well as before men; comp. the Doctrinal and Ethical Remarks. Job 16:22. Giving the reason why Job longs to be vindicated, arising from the fact that his end is near, and that for him who has once died there is no prospect of a return to this life, [This, however, is not to be understood as a reason given why God should interpose speedily to vindicate him before his death. Rather the argument, is drawn from the hopelessness of his physical condition. Death was sure and near; that recovery which the friends promised on condition of repentance was out of the question: hence if he is to be vindicated, it must be by God, who can do it when he is gone.]—For years that may be numbered are coming on, and by a path without return shall I go hence.—The thought is substantially the same as in Job 7:7-10; and Job 10:20 seq.—ωְׁ ?πεֹ ?ϊξִ ?ρְ ?τַּ ?ψ, lit. “years of number” (Genesis 34:30; Psalms 105:12), are years that may be numbered, i.e. a few years (LXX: ἔτηἀριθμητά), by which we are naturally to understand those which still remain before his death, the remaining years of his life (not all the years of his life, as Hahn and Del. explain). For ιֶ ?ΰֱ ?ϊָ ?ιεּ (in regard to the form, comp. on Job 12:6) can only mean: “they are coming on, they stand before me,” not: “they are passing away” (transeunt, Vulg., etc.), nor: “their end is coming on” (Hahn, Del.). That Job here announces the sad issue in which the rapid and inevitably fatal course of the elephantiasis generally resulted, is shown by the conclusion of the discourse, Job 17:11-16. Job 17:1 [the chapter-division here being manifestly errroneous] continues the statement of the reason given in Job 16:22. It consists of abrupt sob-like ejaculations of which it may be truly said with Oetinger that they form “the requiem, which Job chants for himself even while yet living.”—My spirit is disturbed, so correctly most moderns, taking ψεּ ?ηִ ?ι in the sense of “the spirit or power.” The translation: “my breath is corrupt,” or “destroyed” (De Wette, Del. [B.V., Rod., Elz., Con., Ber.], etc.), is less suitable here to the connection, which requires, as the subject of Job’s expression, not that single symptom of a short and fetid breath [which would be a much less conclusive indication that his days were numbered than others which he might have mentioned], referred to also in Job 7:15; Job 19:17; but requires rather some sign of the incipient dissolution of the whole psychical bodily organism, a failure of the vital principle.—My days are extinct (γςκ = ζςκ, Job 6:17, which some MSS. exhibit here also); graves await me [Rodney: for me the tombs!]. Comp. the Arabic proverb: “to be a grave-companion (Ssβchib el-kubϋr);” also the familiar saying of Luther: “to walk on the grave;” and the modern expression: “to stand with one foot in the grave.” Job 17:2. Verily mockery surrounds me: and on their quarreling mine eye must dwell.—So substantially Welte, Arnh., Del., Dillm. [Schlott,, Con., Words.], whose rendering of this difficult verse is the most satisfactory; for (1) It is best to take ΰִ ?νΞμֹ ?ΰ, as in Job 1:11; Job 22:20; Job 31:36, etc., as a formula of asseveration=“verily, truly.” (2) δֲ ?ϊֻ ?μִ ?ιν (or according to another reading δֲ ?ϊֻ ?μִּ ?ιν is an abstract term, formed from δֵ ?ϊֵ ?μ = mockery, scoffing (not “deception,” as Hirzel renders it); to render it as a concrete term in the sense of “mockers” [E. V., Noyes, etc.], or “beguiled,” is at variance with the laws governing the formation of Hebrew words (see Ew. § 153, a; 179, a, b).—(3) δַ ?ξְ ?ψεֹ ?ϊָ ?ν is Inf. Hiph. with suffix, from ξψδ, which means in Hiph. “to make refractory,” to incite to strife, to contend with one. The word is written with Dagh. dirimens in ξ, comp. Job 9:18; Joe 1:17, etc.—(4) ϊָּ ?μַ ?ο, Jussive or Voluntative form of μιο, to lodge, to tarry (comp. Job 19:4; Job 29:19; Job 31:32), is a pausal form for ϊָּ ?μֵ ?ο, which occurs also in Judges 19:20, the use of which in a non-pausal position seems to be purely arbitrary, or rests possibly on euphonic grounds (the liquids l and n in juxtaposition being treated as though they were gutturals: comp. Ewald, § 141, b, Rem. 2). (5) The sense of the entire verse, according to the construction here given, is decidedly more suitable to the context: Of a truth it is mocking me (δΧςִ ?ξָּ ?γִ ?ι, lit. “mockery is with me, befalls me”) to force me, who am standing on the verge of the grave to confess a guilt from which I know myself to be free; and such hateful quarrelsome conduct it is that I must have continually before my eyes!—Other renderings are e.g.—a. That of the Pesh., Vulg., and recently of Hirzel, which takes δֲ ?ϊֻ ?μִ ?ιν in sense of “deception, illusion.” Thus Hirzel’s rendering is: “If deception is not with me, then let them continually henceforth quarrel.” b. That of Rosenmόller: annon illusiones mecum, et in adversando eorum pernoctat oculus meus.—c. That of Ewald (in part also of Eichhorn, Umbr.): “If only I were not mocked and mine eye were not obliged to dwell,” etc.—d. The rendering in part similar to the latter, of Vaih. and Heiligst.—“Oh, that mockery did not surround me! then could mine eye abide in peace with their contention!”—e. That of Stickel and Hahn: “Or are there not around me those who are deluded? must not mine eye dwell on their contention?”—[f. That of Renan: “May it please God that traitors might be far from me, and that mine eye be never more afflicted with their quarrels!”] Second Strophe: Job 17:3-9. Repetition of the yearning and trustful supplication to God as the only remaining attestor or witness of his innocence now remaining to him in view of the heartless coldness, nay the hostility of his human friends.—Oh, lay down [now], be Thou bondsman for me with Thyself! who else will furnish surety to me? The thought is not substantially different from that in Job 16:21, only that the representation which there predominates of an adjudication in favor of Job’s innocence is here replaced by that of pledging or binding one’s self as security for it. For all the expressions of the verse are borrowed from the system of pledging. With the Imper. ωִׂ ?ιξָ ?δ is to be supplied, as the following lowing ςָ ?ψִ ?αֵ ?πִ ?ι shows, an accus. of the object, “a pledge, security.” It is not necessary with Reiske and Olsh. to change ςָ ?ψְ ?αֵ ?πִ ?ι to ςַ ?ψְ ?αֹ ?πִ ?ι, arrhabonem meam. The following ςִ ?ξָּ ?κְ, indicating the person with whom the pledge is deposited, again represents God, precisely as in Job 16:21, as being, so to speak, divided, or separated into two persons. The word of entreaty ςψα (which appears also in Isaiah 38:14. and Psalms 119:122, and which is here used with the accus. of the person following in the sense of “representing any one mediatorially as ἔγγυος or μεσίτης) is replaced in the second member by the circumstantial phrase πִ ?ϊְ ?χַ ?ςμְ ?ιָ ?γ, to give surety by striking hands. For this is the meaning of the phrase, which elsewhere reads ϊָּ ?χַ ?ςιָ ?γ, or λַּ ?σ (Proverbs 6:1; Proverbs 17:18; Proverbs 22:26), or simply ϊָּ ?χַ ?ς (Proverbs 11:15). Here, however, where, instead of the person, the hand of the person is mentioned (μְ ?ιָ ?γִ ?ι, instead of the simple μִ ?ι, which, according to Proverbs 6:1, we might be led to expect), the reflexive Niphal is used; hence literally: “who will strike himself [scil. his hand] into my hand;” i. e. who will (by a solemn striking of hands, as in a pledge) bind himself to me to vindicate publicly my innocence? What man will do this if Thou, God, doest it not? Job 17:4 assigns a reason for this prayer for God’s intervention as his security in the shortsightedness and narrow-mindedness of the friends: for Thou hast closed [lit. hid] their heart to [lit. from] understanding (to [from] a correct knowledge in respect to my innocence), therefore Thou wilt not let them prevail: lit. wilt not exalt them, i. e. above me, who am unjustly injured by them, but wilt rather at last confound them by demonstrating my innocence (as actually came to pass, Job 42:7). ϊְּ ?ψεֹ ?ξֵ ?ν, Imperf. Pil. of ψεּ ?ν with plur. suffix, is a contraction of ϊְּ ?ψεֹ ?ξְ ?ξֵ ?ν, with omission of Dagh. forte in ξ on account of the preceding long τ. The correction ϊְּ ?ψֻ ?ξֵּ ?ν (suggested by Dillm. with a reference to Job 31:15; Job 41:2 K’ri) is unnecessary, as also the explanation of ϊְּ ?ψεֹ ?ξֵ ?ν as a Hithpael noun, signifying “striving upward, improvement, victory” (Ew.). Job 17:5 continues the consideration of the unfriendly conduct of the friends. Friends are delivered for a spoil, while the eyes of their (lit. “of his”) children languish.—ηֵ ?μֶ ?χ, “a share of booty, spoil” (according to Numbers 31:36) denotes here in particular, as the word δִ ?βִּ ?ιγ makes probable, mortgaged property, an article in pledge, distrained from a debtor by a judicial execution; δִ ?βִּ ?ιγμְ ?ηֵ ?μֶ ?χ (for δΧμִ ?δְ ?ιεֹ ?ϊηֵ ?μֶ ?χ, comp. 1 Kings 14:2; Jeremiah 13:21) signifies to advertise and offer for sale such a pledged article in court; or, more simply and briefly, to distrain, to seize upon by means of a judicial execution. The subject of ιַ ?βִּ ?ιγ is indefinite [“one exposes friends,” i. e., “friends are exposed”] (comp. Job 6:20). In the object ψֵ ?ςִ ?ιν Job certainly points immediately to himself, for certainly he only was the victim of the heartless conduct of the three. He purposely, however, expresses himself by a general proposition; for his whole description is as yet only ideal, imaginative. In the second member, as the sing, suffix in αָּ ?πָ ?ιε shows, he again speaks only of himself as the one who was ill-treated, continuing the description (by means of an enallage of number, similar to that in Job 18:5; Job 24:5; Job 24:16; Job 27:23), as though he had in a written ψֵ ?ςַ or ψֵ ?ςֵ ?δεּ. Hence literally: “and the eyes of his children languish,” or “although the eyes of his children languish” (Ewald, Stickel, Heiligst., Hahn, Dillmann, etc.). Many of the ancients, and also De Wette, Delitzsch [Noyes, Con., Renan, Barnes, Wem., Car., Wordsw., Rod.], etc., translate: “Whoso spoileth friends, the eyes of his children must fail” (or, optatively, “may the eyes of his children fail!” So Rosenmόller, Vaihinger). [The E. V. adopts the same view of the general construction, but less appropriately takes ηֵ ?μֶ ?χ in the sense of “flattery:” “He that speaketh flattery to his friends, even the eyes of his children shall fail.”] In this way, doubtless, the harshness of that change of number is avoided; but so to predict (or even to wish for) the punishment of the evil-doer seems here too little suited to the context, and especially does not agree with the contents of the following verse. [But it certainly agrees very well with the last member of the preceding verse, the thought of which it both confirms and expands. God would not, could not, favor the friends, for they had betrayed friendship, and thus had incurred judgment in which their posterity would share. Job 17:5 may be, as conjectured by some, a proverbial saying quoted by Job to emphasize Job 17:4 b. The “pining of the eyes” is a frequent figure for suffering. This last construction has in its favor, therefore: (1) That it is suitable to the connection. (2) That it avoids the harshness of the other construction, with its sudden change of number, and its strained introduction of the reference to the betrayed one’s children, which is particularly pointless when applied to the childless Job. (3) It takes away from Job 17:4 the isolation which belongs to it, according to the other construction, and provides a much simpler transition from Job 17:4 to Job 17:5.—E.] Job 17:6 seq. Continued description of the unfriendly conduct of the friends, only Unit the same is now directly charged on God. And He (viz., God, who is manifestly to be understood here as the subject of the verb) has set me for a proverb to the world.—ξְ ?ωֹׁ ?μ, a substant. infinitive (comp. Job 12:4), means a proverb, simile, sensu objective, hence an object of ridicule [or, as in E. V., “by-word”]. ַ ?ςξִּ ?ιν, lit. “nations,” denotes here not the races living around Job (e. g., those “gipsy-like troglodytes” who are more fully described in Job 24:30, and who, Delitzsch thinks, may possibly be intended here), but the common people generally (vulgus, plebs), hence equivalent to the great multitude, the world; comp. Proverbs 24:24. And I must be one to be spit upon in the face.—ϊֹּ ?τֶ ?ϊ (only here in the O. T.) denotes spittle, an object spit upon; μְ ?τָ ?πִ ?ιν is in the closest union with it (comp. Numbers 12:14; Deuteronomy 25:9). A ϊֹּ ?τֶ ?ϊμְ ?τָ ?Χ is accordingly one into whose face any body spits, the object of the most unqualified public detestation. Comp. Job 30:9 seq., from which passage it also appears that Job speaks here not only of that which his friends did to him, but that he uses ςַ ?ξּ ?ιν in a more comprehensive sense. Job 17:7. Then mine eye became dim with grief (λςωׂ, as in Job 6:2; and comp. Job 16:16; Psalms 6:8 [7]; Job 31:10 [9]), and all my members (lit. “my frames, bodily frames, or structures”) are as shadows [better on account of the generic δַ, “as a shadow”], i. e., so meagre and emaciated, like intangible shadows, or phantoms; comp. Job 19:20. Job 17:8. The upright are astonished at this—because they cannot understand how things can come to such a pass with one of their sort. And the innocent is roused against the ungodly—lit. “stirred up” by anger—in an opposite sense to that of Job 31:29, describing “the innocent man’s sense of justice as being aroused on account of the prosperity of the ηָ ?πֵ ?σ, comp. Psalms 37:1; Psalms 73.” Hirzel. Job 17:8. Nevertheless the righteous holds fast on his way (the way of piety and rectitude in which he has hitherto walked), and he that is of clean hands (lit. “and the clean-of-hands,” εּ ?θְ ?δָ ?ψΞ, as in Proverbs 22:11) increaseth in strength (ιεֹ ?ρִ ?ισ, of inward increase, or growth of strength, as in Ecclesiastes 1:18).—The whole verse is of great significance as an expression of the cheerful confidence in his innocence and deliverance which Job reaches after the bitter reflections of Job 17:5 seq. So far from realizing the reproach of Eliphaz in Job 15:4, that he would “destroy piety and diminish devotion before God,” he holds fast on his godly way, yea, travels it still more joyously and vigorously than before (comp. Doctrinal and Ethical Remarks). [“These words of Job (if we may be allowed the figure) are like a rocket, which shoots above the tragic darkness of the book, lighting it up suddenly, although only for a short time.” Del.] 5. Third Division: Sixth Strophe. Severe censure of the admonitions of the friends, as devoid of understanding, and without any power to comfort, Job 17:10-16. Job 17:10. But as for ye all (λֻּ ?μָּ ?ν for λֻּ ?μְּ ?λֶ ?ν as in 1 Kings 22:28, and Micah 1:2 [corresponding more to the form of a vocative clause—Del.]; the preceding εְ ?ΰεּ ?μָ ?ν is here written εְֹ ?ΰֻ ?μָּ ?ν, with sharpened tone, for the sake of assonance)—come on again, I pray.—ϊָּ ?ωׁ ?εּ ?αεּ, instead of the Imper. ωׁ ?εּ ?αεּ, which we might have expected, but which cannot stand so well at the beginning of the clause (comp. Ew., § 229) [besides that, as Delitzsch remarks, the first verb is used adverbially, iterum, denuo, according to Gesen., § 142 (§ 139), 3 a—and not either of a physical return, as though, irritated by his words, they had made a movement to depart (Renan), or of a mental return from their hostility (see Job 6:29).—E.]. In this sense it is followed by the supplementary verb αּ ?εֹ ?ΰ in the Imperf., connected with it by ε. I shall nevertheless not find a wise man among you—i. e., your heart remains closed against a right understanding of my condition (see Job 17:4), however often and persistently you may attempt, to justify your attacks upon me. [“He means that they deceive themselves concerning the actual state of the case before them; for in reality he is meeting death without being deceived, or allowing himself to be deceived, about the matter.” Del.] Job 17:11 seq. prove this charge of a defective understanding on the part of the friends by setting forth the nearness of Job’s end, and the almost complete exhaustion of his strength: this fact is fatal to their preconceived opinion as to the possibility of a joyful restoration of his prosperity, such as they had frequently set forth as depending on his sincere repentance. My days are gone (being quite near their end—comp. Job 16:22), my plans are broken off (ζִ ?ξּ ?εֹ ?ϊ, lit. “connections, combinations,” from ζξν, “to bind together,” the same as ξְ ?ζִ ?ξּ ?εϊ elsewhere, Job 21:27; Job 42:2;—but not sensu malo, but in the good sense of the plans of his life which had been destroyed), the nurslings [Pfleglinge] of my heart.—ξεֹ ?ψָ ?ωֵׁ ?ι are things which are coveted and earnestly Bought after, favorite projects, plans affectionately cherished; comp. ΰָ ?ψַ ?ωׁ, to long after, Psalms 21:3 [from which root Dillmann suggests the present noun may be derived (ξεֹ ?ψָ ?ωׁ for ξֹ ?ΰψָ ?ωׁ, like ξεֹ ?ρֵ ?ψ for ξֹ ?ΰρֵ ?ψ from ΰρψ), which would give at once the meaning, “desires, coveted treasures.” So apparently Zφckler. If, according to the prevailing view, it be taken from ιψωׁ, the meaning will be peculia, cherished possessions.—E.] Not so suitable is the definition “possessions” (from ιψωׁ, possidere, after Obad. 17:17 and Isaiah 14:23), while the rendering ἄρθρα (LXX.), cords or bands [or, as Del. suggests, “joints, instead of valves of the heart”] (Gekat., Ewald) is entirely unsupported, and decidedly opposed to the laws of the language. Job 17:12. They change night into day (comp. Isaiah 5:20), inasmuch, to wit, as they picture before me joyous anticipations of life (thus Eliphaz in Job 5:17 seq.; Bildad in Job 8:20 seq.; Zophar in Job 11:13 seq.), while not-withstanding I have before me only the dark night of death. Light is to be near (lit. “is near,” i. e., according to their assertions) in the presence of darkness, i. e., there where the darkness is still present, or in conspectu;ξִ ?τְּ ?πֵ ?ι, here therefore = coram, comp. Job 23:17 (so Umbreit, Vaih., Del.). Others (Ew., Hirz., Stick., Dillm.) take ξִ ?τְּ ?πֵ ?ι in the comparative sense: light is nearer than the face of darkness, i. e., than the visible darkness, which, however, is less suitable in the parallelism. The same is true of the explanation of Welte—“and they bring the light near to the darkness;” of Rosenmόller—“light is near the darkness,” and similarly the LXX.; of Schlottmann—“light, to which the darkness already draws near;” of Renan—“Ah! but your light resembles the darkness!” etc.—Note still further that here in Job 17:11-12, where the tone of lamentation is resumed, those short, sob-like ejaculations appear again, which we have already met with above in Job 17:1-2. [The explanation here given does not seem to harmonize perfectly with the context. With Job 17:10 Job seems to dismiss the friends from his present discourse. He flings that verse at them as a parting contemptuous challenge, and so takes his leave of them. With Job 17:11 he enters on the pathetic elegiac strain with which he closes each one of his discourses thus far (see Job 7:22; 10:20 seq.; Job 14:18 seq.). Job 17:11-12 are characterized, as Zφckler justly remarks, by “brief, sob-like ejaculations” (as in Job 17:1-2), which are more befitting the elegy of a crushed heart than the sarcasm of a bitter spirit. Job makes himself the theme of the whole passage from Job 17:11 to Job 17:16. He is pre-occupied exclusively with his own lamentable condition and prospects, not with the course of his friends, any reference to which after Job 17:10 would interrupt the self-absorption of his sorrow. Supposing Job then to be occupied with himself solely, it follows that ιָ ?ωִׂ ?ιξεּ is to be taken impersonally, and the verse may be explained either—a. With Noyes: “Night, hath become day to me (i. e. I have sleepless nights; I am as much awake by night as by day), the light bordereth on darkness (i. e. the day seems very short; the daylight seems to go as soon as it is come).” Or b. We may translate: “Night will (soon) take the place of day, light (in which I am tarrying for a brief season, awaiting my abode in Sheol, Job 17:13) is not far from darkness (χָ ?ψεֹ ?αξִ ?τְּ ?πֵ ?ι, prope abest ab; LXX. φῶςἐγγὺ ἀπὸ προσώπουσκότους = οὐμακρὰνσκ̓ ?., according to Olympiodorus.—The use of τְּ ?πֵ ?ι with ξִ ?ο, which Delitzsch objects to this rendering, is finely poetic. The darkness faces him, stares upon him, close at hand, just on the other side of this narrow term of light which is left to him). In favor of b may be urged: (1) The use of the fut. ιָ ?ωִׂ ?ιξεּ, following the preterites in Job 17:11.—(2) The analogy of Isa 5:20, where ωִׂ ?ινμְ means to put for, exchange, substitute. (3) It preserves the continuity of Job’s reflections on his own condition, and his immediate prospects. (4) The thought is in admirable harmony with the description which immediately follows, in which he represents himself as lingering on the verge of Sheol, awaiting his speedy departure thither, preparing his couch in that darkness which is so near, etc.—E.] Job 17:13 seq. show how far Job was right in seeing before his eyes nothing but night and darkness, and in giving up the hope of a state of greater prosperity which was held up before him by the friends, Job 17:13-14 form the conditional protasis, introduced by ΰִ ?ν on which all the verbs in both verses depend, Job 17:15 being the apodosis, introduced by εְ consec. [Of which view of the construction, however, Delitzsch remarks) “There is no objection to this explanation so far as the syntax is concerned; but there will then be weighty thoughts which are also expressed in the form of fresh thoughts, for which independent clauses seem more appropriate, under the government of ΰִ ?ν as if they were pre-suppositions.” And see below.] Job 17:13. If I hope for the underworld as my house [or abode], have spread in the darkness my couch.—[Delitzsch agrees with the E. V. in the construction: “If I wait, it is for Sheol as my house.” Gesenius, Fόrst and Conant take δֵ ?ο = ΰִ ?ν, “Lo!” as in Hosea 12:12; Jeremiah 31:20. Job 17:14. If I have cried out to the grave: Thou art my father!—ωַׁ ?ηַ ?ϊ, grave (comp. Job 9:31) in Heb. is strictly speaking feminine, here, however, it is construed ad sensum as a masculine (as is the case elsewhere with such feminines as γַּ ?ςַ ?ϊ ,πְ ?ηωֶׁ ?ϊ ,χֶ ?ωֶׁ ?ϊ, etc., comp. Ges., Thes., p. 1878). It is unnecessary with the LXX., Vulg., Pesh., to take ωׁ ?ηϊ here in the sense of “death,” or with Nachman, Rosenm,, Schlottm., Del. [E. V., Con., Car.], etc., to assign to it the meaning: “corruption, rottenness” as though it were derived from ωָׁ ?ηַ ?ϊ, not from ωׁ ?εּ ?ηַ, fodere: moreover the existence of such a second substant. ωׁ ?ηϊ = corruption is susceptible of certain proof from no other passage. In regard to the bold poetic expression here given to the inward familiarity of Job with the state of death which lay before him, comp. Ps. 88:19 [Psalms 88:18]; Proverbs 7:4; also below Job 30:29. Job 17:15. Apodosis: Where then (as to ΰֵ ?τεֹ, which, notwithstanding the accents, is to be drawn into union with the preceding ΰַ ?ιֵּ ?δ, where? comp. on Job 9:24) is (now) my hope? Yea, my hope, who sees it?i. e., I who exhibits it to me as really well founded? who discloses it to me? In both clauses one and the same hope is intended, that viz. of the restoration of his prosperity in this life, even before death [this hope, Dillmann remarks, being the hope which, according to the friends, he should have, not the hope which, according to Job 17:13, he really has]. Job 17:16. To the bars of the grave it sinks down, when at the same time there is rest in the dust.—The subject here also is ϊִּ ?χְ ?εָ ?ϊִ ?ι, Job 17:15, this hope being regarded as single, although the expression there was doubled. δֵּ ?ψַ ?γְ ?πָ ?δ is a poetic alternate form for ϊֵּ ?ψַ ?γ (Ew., § 191, Gesen., § 47, Rem. 3), not third pers. plur., as the old translators [and E. V.] rendered the form, and as among moderns [Green, § 88, Schlottm.], Bφttcher and Dillmann take it, the latter supposing that the hope which Job really had, mentioned in Job 17:13, and the hope attributed to him by the friends in Job 17:15, are the two subjects of the verb.—αַּ ?γֵּ ?ιωְׁ ?ΰֹ ?μ are “bars of the underworld, of the realm of the dead,” not its “clefts” (Bφttcher), nor its “bounds” (Hahn); for again in Exodus 25:13 seq.; Job 27:6 seq.; Hosea 11:6, αַּ ?γִּ ?ιν signifies “carrying poles,” or “cross-beams” (vectes). And whereas, according to many other passages, Sheol is represented as provided with doors or gates (Job 38:17; Isaiah 38:10; Psalms 9:14 [ Psalms 9:13]; Psalms 107:18), its “cross-beams” or “bars” signify essentially the same with its gates (comp. Lamentations 2:9). In ιַ ?ηַ ?γ, “at the same time” (not “together” [E. V.], as Hahn renders it, understanding it to be affirmed of the descending hope, and of Job at his death). Job expresses a thought similar to that in Job 14:22, the thought, namely, that the rest of his body in the dust coincides in time with the descent of the soul to Hades. πָֽ ?ηַ ?ϊ, pausal form for πηϊ, “rest,” signifies here the rest of the lifeless body in the grave: comp. Isaiah 26:19; Psalms 22:30 [29]. AND ETHICAL1. The central point of this new reply of Job’s—and it is that which principally shows progress on the part of the sorely afflicted sufferer out of his spiritual darkness to a clearer perception and a brighter frame of mind—lies in the expression of a yearning hops in his future justification by God, which is found in the last section but one of the discourse, and which constitutes the real kernel of the argument. Inasmuch as the friends, instead of ministering to him loving sympathy and true comfort were become his “mockers” (Job 16:20), he finds himself all the more urgently driven to God alone as his helper, and the guardian of his innocence. Hence it is that he now suddenly turns to the same God, whom he had just before described in the strongest language as his ferocious, deadly enemy and persecutor, as well as the author of the suffering inflicted on him even by his human enemies, and, full of confidence, calls Him his “witness in heaven,” and his “attestor on high” (Job 16:19), who is already near to him, and who will not permit the earth to drink up his blood, which cries out to heaven, and thus to silence his self-vindication (Job 16:18). Nay, more: he lifts up his tearful eye with courageous supplication to God, praying Him that He would “do justice” to him before Himself, that He would represent him before His own judicial tribunal, interceding in his behalf, acquitting him, and thus vindicating his innocence against his human accusers (Job 16:21). “We see distinctly here how Job’s idea of God becomes brighter in that it becomes dualized (in that he prays to God Himself, the author of his sufferings, as his deliverer and helper). The God who delivers Job to death as guilty, and the God who cannot leave him unvindicated—even though it should be only after death—come forth distinct and separate as darkness from light out of the chaos of temptation.…Thus Job becomes here the prophet of the issue of his own course of suffering; and over his relation to Eloah and to the friends, of whom the former abandons him to the sinner’s death, and the latter declare him to be guilty, hovers the form of the God of the future, which now breaks through the darkness, from whom Job believingly awaits and implores what the God of the present withholds from him” (Del. i. 310–311).—The same duality between the God of the present as a God of terror, and the Redeemer-God of the future, becomes apparent in the earnest entreaty which is further on addressed to God, that He “would become a bondsman with Himself” for Job, seeing that He is the only possible guarantor of his innocence (Job 17:3). This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/lange/ II. Bildad and Job: Ch. 18–19A.—Bildad: Job’s passionate outbreaks are useless, for the Divine ordinance, instituted from of old, is still in force, securing that the hardened sinner’s doom shall suddenly and surely overtake himJob 181. Sharp rebuke of Job, the foolish and blustering boaster: Job 18:1-41         Then answered Bildad the Shuhite, and said: 2    How long will it be ere ye make an end of words? Mark, and afterwards we will speak. 3    Wherefore are we counted as beasts, and reputed vile in your sight? 4    He teareth himself in his anger! shall the earth be forsaken for thee? and shall the rock be removed out of his place? 2. Description of the dreadful doom of the hardened evil-doer: Job 18:5-215    Yea, the light of the wicked shall be put out, and the spark of his fire shall not shine. 6    The light shall be dark in his tabernacle, and his candle shall be put out with him. 7    The steps of his strength shall be straitened, and his own counsel shall cast him down. 8    For he is cast into a net by his own feet, and he walketh upon a snare. 9    The gin shall take him by the heel, and the robber shall prevail against him. 10    The snare is laid for him in the ground, and a trap for him in the way. 11    Terrors shall make him afraid on every side, and shall drive him to his feet. 12    His strength shall be hunger-bitten, and destruction shall be ready at his side. 13    It shall devour the strength of his skin; even the first-born of death shall devour his strength. 14    His confidence shall be rooted out of his tabernacle, and it shall bring him to the king of terrors. 15    It shall dwell in his tabernacle, because it is none of his; brimstone shall be scattered upon his habitation. 16    His roots shall be dried up beneath, and above shall his branch be cut off. 17    His remembrance shall perish from the earth, and he shall have no name in the street. 18    He shall be driven from light into darkness, and chased out of the world. 19    He shall neither have son nor nephew among his people nor any remaining in his dwellings. 20    They that come after him shall be astonished at his day, as they that went before were affrighted. 21    Surely such are the dwellings of the wicked, and this is the place of him that knoweth not God. AND 1. In opposition to Job’s solemn appeal to God as a witness of his innocence, Bildad continues fixed in his former preconceived opinion, that a secret crime must be the cause of his heavy burden of suffering. After a short, sharp, censorious introduction, in which he pays back Job’s bitter and harsh reprimands in the same coin, (Job 18:2-4), he shows that, notwithstanding Job’s passionate bluster, the old divine decree was still in force, by virtue of which a sudden merited punishment from God carries off the hardened sinner, and with him his entire household and race (vers 5–21). He thus presents a companion piece to that description of the doom of the ungodly with which Eliphaz had closed his preceding discourse (Job 15:20-35), this delineation of Bildad’s being new only in form, but being similar to that of Eliphaz throughout as to its substance and tendency. The whole discourse is divided into six strophes of three to four verses each, of which the first forms the introductory section spoken of above, while the remaining five belongs to the long main division, Job 18:5-21. 2. Introduction and First Strophe: A short, sharp rebuke of Job as a foolish boaster, raving with passion; Job 18:2-4. Job 18:2. How long will ye yet hunt for words?—Let it be observed that Bildad’s former discourse began with a like impatient question, Job 8:2 (there ςַ ?γΞΰָ ?ο, here ςַ ?γΞΰָ ?πָ ?δ) and further, that he addresses his opponent in the plural, for the reason that the latter had himself first made his cause identical with the cause of all the righteous, and had thereby himself provoked this representative association of his person with all who were like-minded. [“Some say that he thinks of Job as one of a number; Ewald observes that the controversy becomes more wide and general [representing two great parties or divisions of mankind]; and Schlottmann conjectures that Bildad fixes his eye on individuals of his hearers, on whose countenances he believed he saw a certain inclination to side with Job. This conjecture we will leave to itself; but the remark which Schlottmann also makes that Bildad regards Job as a type of a whole class, is correct, only one must also add, this address in the plural is a reply to Job’s sarcasm (Job 12:2) by a similar one. As Job has told his friends that they act as if they were mankind in general, and all wisdom were concentrated in them, so Bildad has taken it amiss that Job connects himself with the whole of the truly upright, righteous, and pure; and he addresses him in the plural because he, the unit, has puffed himself up as such a collective whole.” Delitzsch], Still further Job had also begun his last discourse (see Job 16:3) with a complaint about the useless interminable discourse of the friends,—a complaint which Bildad here retaliates, although to be sure in an altered form. [“Job’s speeches are long, and certainly are a trial of patience to the three, and the heaviest trial to Bildad, whose turn now comes on, because he is at pains throughout to be brief. Hence the reproach of endless babbling with which he begins here, as at Job 8:2.” Del.]. ωִׂ ?ινχִ ?πְ ?φֵ ?ιμξΧ is not “to put an end to words, to make an end of speaking” (so the ancient versions, Rabbis, Rosenm., Gesen. [E. V. Umbreit. Lee, Carey, Renan]), etc.; for a plural χִּ ?πְ ?φִ ?ιν (with a resolved Daghesh for χִ ?φִּ ?ιν, [see Green, § 54 3]), for χֵ ?υ. cannot be shown elsewhere. Moreover in that case we should rather look for the singular construction ωִׂ ?ινχֵ ?υ (see Job 28:3). [Merx introduces the sing, into the text. Rodwell renders ςַ ?γΞΰָ ?πָ ?δ as an exclamation, and the following Imperf. (like that of b) as an Imperative,—“How long? Make an end of words.” So substantially Bernard, except that he supplies the clause following in Job 8:2. This construction however still leaves the plural χִ ?πְ ?φֵ ?ι unaccounted for. According to the usual construction the clause should have μֹ ?ΰ after ςַ ?γΞΰָ ?πָ ?δ, to render which with E. V., etc. “How long will it be ere,” etc., is forced and gratuitous.—E.]. We are to take χִ ?πְ ?φֵ ?ι (with Castell., Schult., J. D. Michaelis, Ewald, Hirzel, Del. [Dillm., Schlottm., Con., Words.], etc.), as plur. constr. of χָ ?πֵ ?υlaqueus (a hunter’s noose, a snare), so that the phrase under consideration signifies, “making a hunt for, hunting after words” (laqueus verbis tenders, verba venando capere). By this however is intended not contradiction and opposition perpetually renewed, but only uninterrupted, yet useless speaking. [Fόrst, while agreeing with the above derivation of χִ ?πְ ?φֵ ?ι, explains it here as fig. for perversion, contortion: “how long will ye make a perversion of words?” But this explanation of the figure is less natural and appropriate. Bildad’s charge against Job and his party is that they were hunting after words, straining after something to say, when there was really nothing to be said.—E.]—Understand, and afterwards we will speak.—ϊָּ ?αִ ?ιπεּ, “will you understand,” voluntative for the Imperative αִּ ?ιπεּ; comp. on Job 17:10 a. Job 18:3. Why are we accounted as the brute?—a harsh allusion to Job 17:4; Job 17:10; comp. also Psalms 73:22.—Are regarded as stupid in your eyes?—πִ ?θְ ?ξִ ?ιπεּ, from = θξδθξν ,ΰθν, “to stop up,” hence lit. “are (are treated as) stopped up in your eyes,” i. e. are in your opinion stupid, blockheads (comp. the similar phrase in Isaiah 59:1). The LXX. exchange the word, which does not appear elsewhere, for πִ ?γְ ?ξִ ?ιπεּ, σεσιωπήκαμεν; the Targ. gives θξςπΰ, “are sunk.” The Vulg. finally (followed by many moderns, including Dillmann [Ewald, Noyes, Lee, Con., Car., Rod., and so E. V.]) derives the word from θξΰ = θξδ, “to be impure” (Leviticus 11:43), and translates accordingly: et sorduimus coram vobis. But this meaning would be a stronger departure from that of the first member than is allowed by the structure of the verses elsewhere in this discourse, which exhibit throughout a thoroughly rigid parallelism. Moreover it would obscure too much the antithetic reference to Job 17:8-9. Job 18:4. O thou, who tearest thyself in thy rage.—This exclamation, which is prefixed to the address proper to Job, and put in the third person ([so apud Arabes ubique fere, Schult.], comp. Job 17:10 a), is in direct contradiction to the saying of Job in Job 16:9, which represents him as torn by God, whereas he proves that the cause of the tearing is his own furious passion.—For thee [LXX. probably reading δַ ?αְ ?ξεּ ?ϊְ ?κָ, which Merx adopts into the text, render ἐὰνσὺ αποθάνης] should the earth be depopulated [lit. forsaken] (comp. ςζα in Isaiah 7:16; Isaiah 6:12) [on the form ϊֵּ ?ςָ ?ζַ ?α, with Pattach in the ultimate, see Green, § 91, 6], and a rock remove out of its place (comp. Job 14:18; Job 9:5). Both these things would come to pass if the moral order of the world, established by God as an unchangeable law, more especially as it reveals itself in rewarding the good and punishing the wicked, were to depart from its fixed course; or in other words, should God cease to be a righteous rewarder. For that, as Bildad thinks, is what Job really desires in denying his guilt; his passionate incessant assertion of his innocence points to a dissolution of the whole sacred fabric of universal order as established by God (comp. Romans 3:5-6). [A fine and most effective stroke of sarcasm. On the one side, the puny, impotent storming of Job’s wrath; on the other, the calm, unalterable movement of Divine Law. How foolish the former when confronting the latter! And by what right could he expect the Divine Order to be overthrown for his sake? For thee (emphatic) is everything to be plunged into desolation and chaos?—E.] 3. The terrible doom of hardened sinners, described as a salutary warning and instruction, for Job: Job 18:5-21. Second Strophe: Job 18:5-7. [The destruction of the wicked declared.] Job 18:5. Notwithstanding, the light of the wicked shall go out.—βַּ ?ν adding to that which has already been said something new and unexpected, like ὅμως, equivalent to “notwithstanding;” comp. Psalms 129:2; Ezekiel 16:28. The “light going out” is a figure of prosperity destroyed (comp. Job 30:26); so also in the i second member: and the flames of his fire shine not. As to ωָׁ ?αִ ?ια, “flame,” comp. Daniel 3:22; Daniel 7:9. Also as to the transition from the plural in a (“wicked ones”) to the sing, in b (his fire), see on Job 17:5; Ewald, § 319, a. Job 18:6. The light darkens (lit. “has darkened,” ηָ ?ωַׁ ?κְ, Perf. of certainty, as in Job 5:20) in his tent (comp. Job 21:17; Job 29:3; Psalms 18:29 [28]; Proverbs 13:9),and his lamp above him (i. e., the lamp hanging down above him from the covering of his tent, comp. Ecclesiastes 12:6) goes out.—this figure of the extinction of the light of prosperity which is repeated again and again, is alike familiar to the Hebrew and to the Arabian; the latter also says: “Fate has put out my light.” Job 18:7. His mighty steps [lit. the steps of his strength] are straitened: another figure which is “just as Arabic as it is Biblical” (Del.). Comp. in regard to it Proverbs 4:12; Psalms 18:37 [36]. Also as regards the form ιֵ ?φְ ?ψεּ (not from ιָ ?φַ ?ψ, as Gesen. [Fόrst], and Hirzel say, but Imperf. form φψψ, see Ewald, § 138, b. [The meaning is clearly: his movements are hampered, his powers are contracted by the pent-up limits which shut him in],—And his own counsel casts him down: comp. Job 5:12 seq., and as regards ςֵ ?φָ ?δ in the bad sense of the counsel of the wicked, see Job 10:3; Job 21:16. Third Strophe: Job 18:8-11. [Everything conspires to destroy the sinner.] Job 18:8. For his feet drive him into a net: lit. “he is driven, sent forth” (ωֻׁ ?μַּ ?η, precisely as in Judges 5:15) [by or with his own feet. A vivid paradoxical expression, conveying also a profound truth. The sinner is driven, and yet rushes on to his ruin. He is divided against himself. He pursues his course at once with and against his will.—E.]—And he walks over pitfalls.—ωְׂ ?αָ ?λָ ?δ, net-like, cross-barred work, or lattice-work, applied here specially to a snare (as in Arabic schabacah, snare), hence a cross-barred covering laid over a deep pit. [“He thinks he is walking upon solid ground, but he is grievously mistaken; it is but a delicate net-work, spread over an unfathomable abyss, into which, therefore, he every moment risks to be precipitated.” Bernard.] Job 18:9-10 continue still further the same figures derived from hunting, snare, cord and noose. In Job 18:8-10 there are six different implements mentioned as being in readiness to capture the evil-doer; a vivid variety of expression which reminds us of the five names given to the lion by Eliphaz, Job 4:10 seq.; comp. also on Job 19:13 seq. Job 18:9. A trap holds his heel fast, and a snare takes fast hold upon him.—To the simple ΰηζ, to hold, corresponds in b the significantly stronger ηζχ which, however, is used with ςַ ?μ [instead of αְּ ?], thus giving expression to the idea of a mighty, overpowering seizure, [The jussive form ιַ ?ηֲ ?ζֵ ?χ is used simply by poetic license.] On φַ ?ξִּ ?ιν, snare [which is not plur., but sing., after the form φַ ?γִּ ?ιχ, from φξν], comp. on Job 5:5. [The rendering of E. V.: “robbers” is to be rejected here, as well as in Job 5:5. Job 18:10. Hidden in the ground is his cord, and his gin upon the pathway.—[The suffixes here undoubtedly refer to the sinner, and not, according to Conant’s rendering—“its cord—its noose”—to the snare of Job 18:9. “The continuation in Job 18:10 of the figure of the fowler affirms that that issue of his life, Job 18:9, has been preparing long beforehand.; the prosperity of the evil-doer from the beginning tends towards ruin.” Del.] Job 18:11 unites the figures by way of explanation in a more general expression.—On every side terrors affright him.—αַּ ?μָּ ?δεֹ ?ϊ signifies two things at once—terrible thoughts and terrible circumstances, here naturally such as are sent by God upon the wicked to disturb him.—And scare him at his footsteps;i. e. pursuing him: μְ ?ψַ ?βְ ?μָ ?ιε meaning “step for step, close behind;” comp. Genesis 30:30; 1 Samuel 25:42; Isaiah 41:2; Habakkuk 3:5.—[E. V. “shall drive him to his feet” is ambiguous.] δֵ ?τִ ?ιυ, lit. diffundere, dissipare, hence requiring a collective for its object (as e. g. “host” in Habakkuk 3:14), or a word representing a mass (as e. g. “cloud, smoke,” comp. Job 37:11; Job 40:11, etc.); here, however, exceptionally connected with a single individual as its object, and hence synonymous with ψγσ, to chase, scare (comp. Job 30:15). [“It would probably not be used here, but for the idea that the spectres of terror pursue him at every step, and are now here, now there, and his person is multiplied.” Del.] Fourth Strophe: Job 18:11-14. Description of the final overthrow of the wicked in its three stages: outward adversity, mutilation of the body by disease, and death—hence manifestly pointing at Job. Job 18:12. His calamity shows itself hungry.—The voluntat. ιְ ?δִ ?ι used for the finite: comp. Job 18:9, also below Job 24:14.—ΰֹ ?πεֹ, defective for ΰεֹ ?πεֹ, is more correctly derived from ΰָ ?εֶ ?ο in the sense of calamity, misfortune, than from ΰεֹ ?ο, “strength.” The latter rendering, which is adopted by the Vulgate, Rosenm., Ewald, Stickel, Schlottm., Dillm. [E. V., Umbreit, Good, Lee, Wem., Noyes, Con., Car., Rod., Elz.], yields a sense which is in itself entirely appropriate: “then does his strength become hungry.” [“But this rendering is unsatisfactory, for it is in itself no misfortune to be hungry, and ψָ ?ςֵ ?α does not in itself signify ‘exhausted with hunger.’ It is also an odd metaphor that strength becomes hungry.” Delitzsch.] But the rendering favored by the Peshito, Hirzel, Hahn, Del. [Renan, Words.], etc.—“his calamity shows itself hungry (towards him); it seems greedy, eager to devour him” agrees better both with the second member of the parallelism, and with the actual course of Job’s adversity, which began with a series of external calamities suddenly bursting upon him, to which Bildad manifestly refers. The explanation of the Targ. [and Bernard]—“the son of his manhood’s strength (comp. ΰεֹ ?ο in Genesis 49:3) becomes hungry” destroys the connection [and “sounds comical rather than tragic,” Del.]; and Reiske’s translation—“he is hungry in the midst of his strength”—assumes the correctness of the conjectural reading ψָ ?ςֵ ?ααְּ ?ΰֹ ?πεֹ, which is entirely without support.—And destruction (ΰֵ ?ιγ, lit. “a heavy burden, a load of suffering,” hence stronger than ΰָ ?εֶ ?ο, comp. Job 21:17; Obadiah 1:13) is ready for his fall.—μְ ?φַ ?μְ ?ςεֹ might of itself signify “at his side” (lit. “rib”), being thus equivalent to αְּ ?ιָ ?γεֹ, Job 15:23 (Gesen., Ew., Schlottm., Dillm.), [E. V., Good, Lee, Bernard, Wem, Words., Noy., Ren., Con., Car., Rod., Elz.]; but a more forcible meaning is obtained, if in accordance with Psalms 35:15; Psalms 38:18, we take φֶ ?μַ ?ς to mean “limping, fall,” and so find destruction represented as in readiness to cast down the wicked. Job 18:13. There devours the parts of his skin (αַּ ?γִּ ?ιν elsewhere “cross-bars,” or “branches of a tree,” comp. Job 17:16; used here of the members of the body: ςεֹ ?ψ here for the body; comp. on Job 2:4), there devours his parts the first-born of death [or with a smoother English construction, by inverting the order of clauses, as Rodwell: “The first-born of death shall devour—devour the limbs of his body”]. According to this rendering, which is already justified by the ancient versions, and which has of late been quite generally adopted, αְּ ?λεֹ ?ψξָ ?εֶ ?ϊ is the subject of the whole verse, and is placed for emphasis at the end. By this “first-born of death,” we are to understand not the “angel of death” as the Targum explains it, nor again “death” itself, as Hahn thinks, but a peculiarly dangerous and terrible disease, [“in which the whole destroying power of death is contained, as in the first-born the whole strength of his parent.” Del.]. Comp. the Arabic designation of fatal fevers as benβt el-menξjeh, “daughters of fate or death.” The whole verse thus points with indubitable clearness to Job’s disease, the elephantiasis, which devours the limbs and mutilates the body,—an allusion which is altogether lost, if, with Umbreit and Ewald, we make the wicked himself the subject of the verse, understanding him to be designated in b by way of apposition as “the first-born of death, i. e., as surely doomed to death, and to be compared in the rest of the verse to one in hunger devouring his own limbs, as in Isaiah 9:19 [20]. Job 18:14. He is torn out of his tent, wherein he trusted:ξִ ?αְ ?θָ ?ηεֹ as in Job 8:14. ξִ ?αְ ?θָ ?ηεֹ is taken as the subject of the sentence by E. V., Rosenm., Umbr., Ewald. Noyes, Bernard. Good, Lee, Wemyss, Carey, Barnes, Rod., Merx, Delitzsch; the meaning being as explained by the latter: “Everything that makes the ungodly man happy as head of a household, and gives him the brightest hopes of a future, is torn away from his household, so that he, who is dying off, alone survives.” The rendering of our Comm. is adopted by Dillmann, Schlottm., Conant, Renan, Hirzel, Hahn, Heiligst.—It is defended by Dillmann on the ground that according to the order of the description the fate of his tent and household is not mentioned until verse 15; and also that by its position ξαθηε stands in apposition to ΰημε, whereas according to the other construction the order should have been inverted, ξαθηζ as subject coming immediately after the verb: grounds which seem satisfactory.—E.].—And he must march to the king of terrors: lit., “and it makes him march” (ϊφςιγδε fem. used as neuter), viz., his calamity, the dismal something, the secret power which effects his ruin [“After the evil-doer is tormented for a while with temporary αμδεϊ, and made tender and reduced to ripeness for death by the first-born of death, he falls into the possession of the king of αμδεϊ himself; slowly and solemnly, but surely and inevitably (as ϊφςιγ implies, with which is combined the idea of the march of a criminal to the place of execution), he is led to this king by an unseen arm.” Delitzsch]. The “king of terrors” is death himself, who is here, as in Psalms 49:15 [14]; Isaiah 28:15 personified as a ruler of the underworld. He is not however to be identified with the king of the under-world in the heathen mythologies (e. g., with the Yama of the Hindus, or the Pluto of the Romans, with whom Schδrer and Ewald here institute a comparison), nor with Satan. For although the latter is in Hebrews 2:14 designated as ὁ τὸ κράτοςἔχωντοῦ θανάτου, in our book according to Job 1:6 seq., he appears in quite another character than that of a prince of death. Neither can the Angel of the abyss, Abaddon (Revelation 9:11) be brought into the comparison here, since the king of terrors is unmistakably the personification of death itself. We produce an unsuitable enfeebling of the sense if, with the Pesh., Vulg., Bφttcher, Stickel, [Parkhurst, Noyes, Good, Wemyss, Carey] disregarding the accentuation we separate αַּ ?μָּ ?δεֹ ?ϊ from ξֶ ?μֶ ?κְ, and render it as subj. of Σϊφςιγδε “and destruction makes him march onward to itself, as to a king” [or: “Terror pursues him like a king,” Noyes]—a rendering which is made untenable by the disconnected and obscure position which, in the absence of a clause more precisely qualifying it, it assigns to μְ ?ξֶ ?μֶ ?κְ (instead of which we might rather look for λְּ ?ξֶ ?μֶ ?κְ). Fifth Strophe: Job 18:15-17. Description of the influence of the calamity as extending beyond the death of the wicked man, destroying his race, his posterity, and his memory. Job 18:15. There dwells in his tent that which does not belong to him: or again: “of that which is not his.” For ξִ ?αְּ ?μִ ?ιΞμεֹ may be rendered in both ways, either partitively (Hirzel), or, which is to be preferred, as a strengthened negation ΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψξִ ?αְּ ?μιִ ?Ξμεֹ, “that which is not his” (comp. the adverbial ξִ ?αְּ ?μִ ?ι in Exodus 14:11; also the similar, yet more frequent ξֵ ?ΰֵ ?ιο; and in general Ewald, § 294, a). In any case μֹ ?ΰΞμַ ?δּ in Job 39:16 may be compared with it. The fem. ϊωׁ ?λεο (for neuter) is explained on the ground that the forsaken tent is thought of as being inhabited not by human beings, but by wild beasts (Isaiah 13:20 seq.; Job 34:11 seq.), or wild vegetation (Zephaniah 2:9).—Brimstone is scattered on his habitation, viz., from heaven (Genesis 19:24) in order to make it, the entire habitation of the wretched man (πָ ?εֵ ?δεּ as in Job 5:3) a solitude, the monument of an everlasting curse; comp. Job 15:34; Deuteronomy 29:22; Psalms 11:6; also the remark of Wetzstein in Delitzsch, founded on personal observation of present modes of thought and customs among the orientals: “The desolation of his house is the most terrible calamity for the Semite; i. e., when all belonging to his family die, or are reduced to poverty, their habitation is desolated, and their ruins are become the by word of future generations. For the Bedouin especially, although his hair tent leaves no mark, the thought of the desolation of his house, the extinction of his hospitable hearth, is terrible.” Job 18:16. His roots dry up from beneath, and his branch (χָ ?φִ ?ιψ as in Job 14:9) withers above (not, “is lopped off,” Del. [E. V., Conant, etc.] comp. above on Job 14:2): [“the derivation from ξμμ “to cut off,” is here altogether untenable, for the cutting off of the branches of a tree dried up in the roots is meaningless.” Dillm.]. The same vegetable figure, in illustration of the same thing; see above, Job 15:32 seq.; comp. Amos 2:9; Isaiah 5:24, also the inscription on the sarcophagus of Eschmunazar: “Let there not be to him a root below or a branch above!” Job 18:17. His memory perishes out of the land, and he has no (longer a) name on the (wide) plain.—As ΰֶ ?ψֶ ?υ in the first member denotes the “land with a settled population,” so ηεּ ?υ denotes the region outside of this inhabited land, the wide plain, steppe, wilderness. Comp. on Job 5:10, also the parallel phrase ΰֶ ?ψֶ ?υεְ ?ηεּ ?φεֹ ?ϊ in Proverbs 8:26 (see on the passage). Sixth Strophe (together with a closing verse): Job 18:18-21. [After his destruction the wicked lives in the memory of posterity only as a warning example]. Job 18:18. He is driven out of the light into the darkness (i. e., out of the light of life and happiness into the darkness of calamity and death), and chased out of the habitable world. ιְ ?πִ ?γֻּ ?δεּ, from the Hiph. δֵ ?πֵ ?γ of the verb ϊֵּ ?αֵ ?μ ;πγγ used of the inhabited globe, the οἰκουμένη. The third plural of both verbs expresses the subject indefinitely, as in Job 4:19; Job 7:3; Job 19:26. It would be legitimate to take as the object referred to by the suffixes, not the wicked man himself, but his ωֵׁ ?ν and ζֵ ?λֶ ?ψ (Seb. Schmidt, Ewald). The following verse however makes this interpretation less probable. Job 18:19. No sprout, no shoot (remains) to him among his people.—The phrase “sprout and shoot” will most nearly and strikingly reproduce the short and forcible alliteration of πִ ?ιοεְ ?πֶ ?λֶ ?γ, which is found also in Genesis 21:23; Isaiah 14:22.—And there is no escaped one (ωָׂ ?ψִ ?ιγ, as in Deuteronomy 2:34, etc.), in his dwellings. ξָ ?βεּ ?ψ, “lodging, dwelling,” elsewhere only in Psalms 55:16. The whole verse expresses, only still more directly and impressively, what was first of all said figuratively above in Job 18:16. Job 18:20. They of the West are astonished on account of his day (i. e., the day of doom, of destruction; comp. ιεֹ ?ν in Psalms 37:13; Psalms 137:7; Obadiah 1:12, etc.), and they of the East are seized with terror (lit., “they take fright,” seize upon terror, in accordance with a mode of expression employed also in Job 21:6; Isaiah 13:8; Hosea 10:6. The ΰֲ ?ηַ ?ψεֹ ?πִ ?ιν, as well as the χַּ ?γְ ?ξֹ ?πִ ?ιν, might certainly, according to the general usage of the words elsewhere, denote “posterity,” together with the “ancestors” (i. e., the fathers, now living, of the later generations), hence the successors of the wicked, together with his contemporaries. So, besides the ancient versions [and E. V.], many moderns, e. g. Hirzel, Schlottmann, Hahn [Lee, Bernard, Noyes, Conant, Wordsworth, Renan, Rodwell], etc. A more suitable meaning is obtained, however, if (with Schultens, Oetinger, Umbreit, Ewald, Delitzsch, Dillmann), [Wemyss, Barnes, Carey, Elzas, Merx], we take the words in a local sense: the “men of the west,” the “men of the east,” the neighbors on both sides, those who live towards the east, and those who live towards the west [Dillmann inelegantly: “those to the rear, and those to the front”]. Comp. the well-known designation of the Mediterranean as δινδΰηψεο (the western sea), and of the Dead Sea as δχγξεπι (the eastern sea). [Del. objects to the former rendering: “The return from the posterity to those then living is strange, and the usage of the language is opposed to it; for χγξπιν is elsewhere always what belongs to the previous age in relation to the speaker; e. g.1 Samuel 24:14; comp. Ecclesiastes 4:16.” Schlottmann, on the other hand, argues that the temporal sense is much better suited to the entire connection than the local.] Job 18:21. A concluding verse, which properly lies outside of the strophe-structure of the discourse, similar to Job 5:27; Job 8:19.—Only thus does it befall the dwellings of the unrighteous, and thus the place of him who (μֹ ?ΰΞιָ ?γַ ?ς without ΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψ, comp. Job 29:16; Gesen, § 116 [§ 121], 3), knew not God:i. e. did not recognize and honor God, did not concern himself about Him (Job 24:1). Hahn, Dillmann, etc., correctly render ΰַ ?κְ at the beginning of this verse not affirmatively,=“yea, surely,” but restrictively—“only so, not otherwise does it happen to the dwellings of the unrighteous,” etc. For it is only by this rendering that Bildad’s whole description receives the emphatic conclusion which was to be expected after its solemn and pathetic opening, Job 18:5 seq. AND ETHICAL1. Bildad appears here again, as in his former discourse, Job 8., as essentially an imitator of Eliphaz, without being able to present much that is new in comparison with his older associate and predecessor. So far as his picture of the restless condition and irretrievable destruction of the wicked (Job 18:4 seq.) is in all essentials a copy of that of Eliphaz in Job 15:20 seq., while at the same time this, instead of being the subject of a particular section, runs through his entire argument as its all-controlling theme, he appears poorer in original ideas than his model. At the same time he rivals, and indeed surpasses, his associate now again, as before, in wealth of imagery and in the variety of his illustrations derived from the life of nature and humanity, for the vivid and skilful handling of which the speaker is pre-eminently distinguished among the three friends. He uses the peculiar phraseology of the Chokmah with consummate art; and this aptness and elegance of style compensates in a measure for its lack of originality. Especially does his terrible portraiture of the wicked man encountering his doom, like that of Eliphaz in Job 15., or even in a higher degree than that in some particulars, acquire by virtue of these qualities a peculiar significance as regards its ζsthetic beauty, its relation to scriptural theology, and its parenetic value. “The description is terribly brilliant, solemn and pathetic, as becomes the stern preacher of repentance with haughty mien and pharisaic self-confidence; it is none the less beautiful, and, considered in itself, also true—a masterpiece of the poet’s skill in poetic idealizing, and in apportioning out the truth in dramatic form.” (Delitzsch i. 332). Especially are the gradual steps in the destruction of the wicked (Job 18:12 seq.), and the participation of all that he leaves behind him, of his posterity, his property, and his memory, in his own sudden downfall and total ruin (Job 18:15 seq.), described with masterly power. All this is presented with such internal truth, and in such harmony with the experiences of all mankind, that the description, considered in itself, and detached from its connections, is well adapted to exert a salutary influence for all time in the way of warning and exhortation, and edification even for the Christian world. 2. It is true nevertheless that the malignant application to the person of Job of the sharp points and venomous stings of this portraiture, wonderful as it is in itself, destroys the pure enjoyment of the study of it, and warns the thoughtful reader at every step to exercise caution in the acceptance of these maxims of wisdom, which, while sounding beautifully, are applied solely and altogether in the service of an illiberal legal pharisaic and narrow view of life. [“Bildad knows nothing of the worth and power which a man attains by a righteous heart. By faith he is removed from the domain of God’s justice, which recompenses according to the law of works, and before the power of faith even rocks remove from their place” (see Job 18:4). Delitzsch.] The unmistakable directness of the allusions to Job’s former calamities (in Job 18:12-14 which point to the frightful disease which afflicted him; in Job 18:15, where the shower of brimstone is a reminder of Job 1:16 seq., and in Job 18:16, where the “withering of the branch” points to the death of the children) takes away from the description, although true in itself, that which alone could constitute it a universal truth, and lowers it to the doubtful rank of a representation having a partisan purpose. It compels us to regard its author, moreover, as a preacher of morality entangled in a carnal, external, legal dogmatism, destitute of all earnest, deep and pure experience of the nature of human sin, as well as of the divine righteousness, and for that very reason misunderstanding the real significance of Job’s sufferings, and doing gross injustice to his person. We are thus constrained to put Bildad, as a practical representative and teacher of the Divine wisdom of the Old Testament, far below his opponent. The practical commentator, especially when engaged in the continuous exposition of the whole poem, cannot help keeping in view these considerations, which impair the religious and ethical value of this discourse. In its characteristic traits and motives, it yields comparatively little that is directly profitable and edifying. AND Job_18:3 seq. Oecolampadius: Truly the ungodly are vile in the eyes of the godly, and are recognized as being more stupid than brutes; but this is in accordance with a healthy judgment, and free from contempt. For the world was even crucified to Paul, yet what did he not do that he might benefit those who were in the world? The godly therefore seem vile to the ungodly in quite a different sense from that in which the ungodly seem vile to the godly; for to the one class belongs charity, which the other class in every way neglect; the former act without pride, the latter with the utmost pride.—Brentius (on Job 18:4): It is no common trial of faith, that we must think of ourselves as not being of such consequence with God that He for our sakes should change common events, and His own pre-established order. … We seem to think that God rather will change His usual course on our account.—Wohlfarth: God’s plan is indeed unchangeable and without exceptions, alike in the realm of nature, and in that of spirit. But we must beware of erring by arguing from that which is external to that which is internal. In that which pertains to the spiritual, the higher, that which is to decide is, not external indications, but reason, Scripture, and conscience. Job 18:5 seq. Brentius: These curses on the wicked are that his light may be put out, and that the spark of his fire may not shine. For the Lord and His Word are true light and splendor, as David says (Psalms 36:10 [Psalms 36:9]; Psalms 119:105). The wicked have neither, for they say in their heart: There is no God.—V. Gerlach: The light is here in general the symbol of a clear knowledge of man’s destiny, of serene consciousness in the whole life (Matthew 6:22 seq.); the light of the tent carries the symbol further, and points to this clearness, even in a man’s daily household affairs, as something which ceases to be for the ungodly. Job 18:17 seq. Lange: The memory which a man leaves behind him is of little consequence; it is enough if we are known to God in respect of that which is good. Many righteous souls are hidden from the world, because they have wrought their works in the most quiet way in God (John 3:21); while, on the contrary, many an ungodly man makes noise and disturbance enough, so that he is talked about after his death. …… But to the believing child of God it is still granted as his special beatitude that he shall see God, who will make his life an example, bringing it forth into the light, and causing it even after his death to shed a sweet savor to the praise of God (Proverbs 10:7). Job 18:21. Brentius: Truly it is not without purpose that the Holy Spirit so often, even ad fastidium sets forth in this book the judgment which befalls the ungodly; it is to admonish us, lest we should be disturbed by the prosperity of the ungodly, knowing that the judgment hangs over their head, and will be executed most speedily, as you have most impressively set forth in regard to this matter in Psalms 73. For although the application of these judgments to Job by the friends is altogether forced, their opinions nevertheless are most true, and are written for our instruction.—Wohlfarth (on Job 18:5-21): By what tokens can we determine that any one truly reveres God? Not by his scrupulous attention to the external observances of religion, not by the external events which befall him, not by the individual good works which he does, but by the faith which he confesses, by the whole direction of his life toward that which is Godlike, by the composure with which he dies: Psalms 73:17; Psalms 73:19, etc. B.—Job: His misery is well-deserving of sympathy; it will, however, all the more certainly end in his conspicuous vindication by God, although not perchance till the life beyondJob_19:1-29(Introduction: Reproachful censure of the friends for maliciously suspecting his innocence:) Job 19:1-51         Then Job answered, and said: 2    How long will ye vex my soul, and break me in pieces with words? 3    These ten times have ye reproached me; ye are not ashamed that ye make yourselves strange to me. 4    And be it indeed that I have erred, mine error remaineth with myself. 5    If indeed ye will magnify yourselves against me, and plead against me my reproach: 1. Sorrowful complaint because of the suffering inflicted on him by God and men: Job 19:6-206    Know now that God hath overthrown me, and hath compassed me with His net. 7    Behold, I cry out of wrong, but I am not heard; I cry aloud, but there is no judgment. 8    He hath fenced up my way, that I cannot pass, and He hath set darkness in my paths. 9    He hath stripped me of my glory, and taken the crown from my head. 10    He hath destroyed me on every side, and I am gone; and mine hope hath he removed like a tree. 11    He hath also kindled His wrath against me, and He counteth me unto Him as one of His enemies. 12    His troops come together, and raise up their way against me, and encamp round about my tabernacle. 13    He hath put my brethren far from me, and mine acquaintance are verily estranged from me. 14    My kinsfolk have failed, and my familiar friends have forgotten me. 15    They that dwell in mine house, and my maids, count me for a stranger; I am alien in their sight. 16    I called my servant, and he gave me no answer; I entreated him with my mouth. 17    My breath is strange to my wife, though I entreated for the children’s sake of mine own body. 18    Yea, young children despised me; I arose, and they spake against me. 19    All my inward friends abhorred me; and they whom I loved are turned against me. 20    My bone cleaveth to my skin and my flesh, and I am escaped with the skin of my teeth. 2. A lofty flight to a blessed hope in God, his future Redeemer and Avenger Job 19:21-2721    Have pity upon me, have pity upon me, O ye my friends! for the hand of God hath touched me. 22     Why do ye persecute me as God, and are not satisfied with my flesh? 23    O that my words were now written! O that they were printed in a book! 24    —that they were graven with an iron pen and lead in the rock for ever! 25    For I know that my Redeemer liveth, and that he shall stand at the latter day upon the earth: 26    and though after my skin worms destroy this body, yet in my flash shall I see God; 27    whom I shall see for myself, and mine eyes shall behold, and not another, though my reins be consumed within me. 3. Earnest warning to the friends against the further continuance of their attacks: Job 19:28-2928    But ye should say, Why persecute we him, seeing the root of the matter is found in me? 29    Be ye afraid of the sword; for wrath bringeth the punishments of the sword, that ye may know there is a judgment. AND 1. Deeply grieved by the warnings and threatenings of Bildad’s discourse, which in these respects was but an echo of that of Eliphaz, Job, on the one side, advances his complaint even to the point of imploring pity from his opponents in view of his inexpressible misery; on the other hand, for the very reason that he, being innocent, finds himself deprived, of all human help and sympathy, he lifts himself up to a more courageous confidence in God’s assistance than he has ever yet exhibited. He expresses the well-defined hope of a vindication awaiting him—if not on this side of the grave, then at least beyond it—through the personal intervention of God, appearing to him in visible form. That anguished complaint concerning his unspeakably severe suffering (Job 19:6-20) is preceded by a sharp word, addressed by way of introduction to the friends, as having maliciously suspected his innocence (Job 19:2-5). That inspired declaration of his hope in the divine vindication which was to take place in the Hereafter (Job 19:21-27) is in like manner followed by a short but forcible and impressive warning to the friends in view of their sinning against him (Job 19:28-29). The whole discourse, accordingly, which is characterized by vivid emotion and decided contrarieties of feeling, contains four principal parts, which embrace five strophes of unequal length. The three longest of these strophes, each being of 7–8 verses, fall into the second and third parts, of which the former contains two strophes, the latter one. The short introductory and concluding strophes are identical with the first and fourth parts. 2. Introduction: Reproachful censure of the friends for their malicious suspicion of his innocence (Job 19:2-5). Job 19:2. The discourse begins—like that of Bildad, with a Quousque tandem (ςַ ?γΞΰָ ?πָ ?δ), which, however, is incomparably more emphatic and significant than that of his accuser, because it has more to justify it How long will ye vex my soul and crush me with words?—ϊֹּ ?βְ ?ιεּ ?ο is fut. energicum of δεֹ ?βָ ?δ, with the third radical retained (Gesen. § 75 [§ 74], Rem. 16). In regard to the form ϊְּ ?γַ ?λְּ ?ΰεּ ?πַ ?πִ ?ι (with suffix appended to the εּ ?ο of the fut. energ. and with the union-vowel a), see Gesen. § 60 [§ 59], Rem. 3 [Green, § 105 c]. Job 19:3 gives the reason for the ςַ ?γΞΰָ ?πָ ?δ. Now already ten times is it that ye reproach me, viz., by assailing my innocence—ζֶ ?δ here in the sense of “already, now already,” comp. Ewald, § 183 a [Gesen. § 122, 2, Rem.; Lex. 3. It may, however, be equally well regarded as a pronoun, in its usual demonstrative sense, in the singular with ςֶ ?ωֶׂ ?ψ, with perhaps an interjectional force—“Lo! these ten times do ye reproach me.” So Renan: Voilΰ, la dixiθme fois que vous m’ insultez. Comp. Genesis 27:36.—E.] “Ten times” stands naturally for a round number, or ideal perfection; Genesis 31:7; Leviticus 26:26; Numbers 14:22, etc. [“Ten, from being the number of the fingers on the human hand, is the number of human possibility, and from its position at the end of the row of numbers (in the decimal system), is the number of that which is perfected; as not only the Sanskrit dacan is traceable to the radical notion ‘to seize, embrace,’ but also the Semitic ςωψ is traceable to the radical notion, ‘to bind, gather together’ (cogn. χωׁ ?ψ). They have already exhausted what is possible in reproaches—they have done their utmost.” Del.]. Comp. my Theologia Naturalis, p. 713 seq.; also Leyrer’s Art. “Zahlen bei den Hebrδern” in Herzog’sReal-Encyclop. XVIII. p. 378 seq.). Are not ashamed to stun me.—The syntax of μֹ ?ΰΞϊֵ ?αωׁ ?εּ ϊַּ ?δְ ?λְ ?ψεּ (“ye stun [me] without shame, shamelessly”), as in Job 6:28; Job 10:16. Comp. Gesen. § 142 [§ 139], 3 b [Green, § 269].—ϊַּ ?δְ ?λְ ?ψεּ is a shortened Imperf. Hiph. for ϊַּ ?δְ ?λִ ?ιψεּ (Gesen. § 53 [§ 52], Rem. 4, 5 [see also Green, § 94 c]), of a verb δλψ, which does not appear elsewhere, which, according to the Arabic, signifies “to stun,” obstupefacere. The rendering “to maltreat, to abuse grossly,” which rests on the authority of the ancient versions (LXX.: ἐπίκεισθέμοι, Vulg. opprimentes), and which is adopted by Ewald, Hirzel, Dillmann, etc., gives essentially the same sense. [The rendering of E. V.: “ye are not ashamed that ye make yourselves strange to me” seems to have been suggested by the use of πλψ in the sense of “not to know.” The Hiph. form of the verb, however, is not found in that sense, which is, moreover, less suitable to the context than the renderings given above.—E.] Job 19:4. And verily even if I have erred (comp. Job 6:24) [ΰַ ?σΞΰָ ?ξְ ?πָ ?ν, double intensive, “yea, verily, comp. Job 34:12], my error remains (then) with me, i. e., it is then known only to me (ΰִ ?ϊִּ ?ι, “with me=in my consciousness,” comp. Job 12:3; Job 14:5), and so does not fall under your jurisdiction, does not call for your carping, unfriendly criticism; for such a wrong, being known to myself alone (and for that reason being of the lighter sort), I have to answer only to God. [“I shall have to expiate it, without your having on this account any right to take upon yourselves the office of God, and to treat me uncharitably; or what still better corresponds with ΰִ ?ϊִּ ?ιϊָּ ?μִ ?ιο: my transgression remains with me, without being communicated to another, i. e., without having any influence over you or others to lead you astray, or involve you in participation of the guilt.” Del.]. So in substance—and correctly—Hirzel, Schlottmann, Hahn, Delitzsch, Dillmann [Renan, Carey, Rod-well], while Ewald and Olshausen, failing to perceive the relation of the first member as a hypothetical antecedent to the second member as its consequent and opposite, translate: “I have erred, I am fully conscious of my error.” [If this be understood as a confession by Job of moral guilt, it is premature and out of place. According to Ewald, it is a confession of intellectual error (to wit, that he had vainly put his confidence in the justice of God), uttered with the view of softening the hostility of the friends, by the indirect admission, on the one hand, that their charges had some justification in the non-appearance of God; by the reminder, on the other hand, that his complaint was against God rather than them. But such a thought would be too obscurely expressed, and would imply too sudden a change from the tone of bitter reproach which pervades this opening strophe.—E.] Job 19:5. Will ye really boast yourselves against me, and prove against me my reproach?—ΰִ ?ν is to be taken, with Schultens, Ewald, Hirzel, Dillmann [Renan: “By what right do you dare to speak insolently to me, and do you pretend to convince me of disgrace?”], as an interrogative particle (=an), and the whole verse as a question, with the chief emphasis resting on the verbs ϊַּ ?βְּ ?γִּ ?ιμεּ (“will you [magnify] boast yourselves,” exhibit yourselves against me as great rhetoricians and advocates, by your elaborate accusations?) and ϊּ ?εֹ ?λִ ?ιηεּ (“will you judicially prove, demonstrate” my disgrace [ςָ ?μַ ?ι against me]? comp. Job 13:3; Job 13:15, and often). This is the only construction which properly completes Job 19:4. There is no such completing of the sense obtained, if we take ΰִ ?ν as a conditional particle—“if,” whether we take the whole of the fifth verse as a hypothetical protasis, and Job 19:6 as apodosis (so Clericus, Olshausen, Delitzsch) [E. V., Lee, Carey, Rodwell, Merx], or regard Job 19:5 a as protasis, and b as apodosis (so Umbreit, Stickel, Schlottmann [Noyes, Wemyss, Conant], etc. [Schlottmann exhibits the connection as follows: “In Job 19:4 Job says—‘Granted that I have erred, you need give yourselves no concern about the matter.’ In Job 19:5 he adds—‘If, nevertheless, you will concern yourselves about it, and in pride look down on me, it is at least incumbent on you not to assume without further proof that I have brought disgrace on myself by such an error, but to prove it against me with good arguments.’ The repetition of ΰָ ?ξְ ?πָ ?ν seems to correlate Job 19:4-5, so that if, as all agree, the first and second members of Job 19:4 are related to each other as protasis and apodosis, the same would seem to be true of Job 19:5.—E.] First Division: First Strophe. Job 19:6-12. Lamentation over his sufferings as proceeding from God. Job 19:6. Know then (ΰֵ ?τεֹ as in Job 9:24) [“elsewhere in questions, here strengthening the exclamation”—Schlott.] that Eloah has wrested me, i. e., has treated me unjustly, done me wrong, ςִ ?εְּ ?ϊָ ?πִ ?ι. for ςִ ?εֵּ ?ϊξִ ?ωְׁ ?τָּ ?θִ ?ι, comp. Job 8:3; Job 34:12; Lamentations 3:36. And compassed me round about with His net—like a hunter who has entirely robbed a wild beast of its liberty by the meshes of the net which envelop him around, so that he can find no way of escape.—The expression describes the unforeseen and inexorable character of the dispensations which had burst on Job as the object of the Divine persecution; comp. Bildad’s description, Job 18:8 seq. [“Bildad had said that the wicked would be taken in his own snares. Job says that God had ensnared him.” Elzas.] Job 19:7. Lo! I cry—“Violence!” (δָ ?ξָ ?ν as an interjectional exclamation, found also Habakkuk 1:2; comp. Jeremiah 20:8) and am not heard (Proverbs 21:13); I call out for help, and there is no justice—i. e., no justice shown in an impartial examination and decision of my cause.—ωִׁ ?εַּ ?ς, lit. “to cry aloud for help, to send forth a cry for deliverance” (comp. Psalms 30:3 [Psalms 30:2]; Psalms 72:12; Psalms 88:14 [Psalms 88:18]), from ωָׁ ?εַ ?ς, or ωׁ ?εּ ?ςַ ιָ ?ωַׁ ?ς =, “to be wide, to be in a prosperous situation.” Job 19:8. He has hedged up my way, that I cannot pass, and He has set darkness on my paths.—Comp. Job 3:23; Job 13:27; also, as regards βָּ ?γַ ?γ, “to fence up, to hedge up,” Lamentations 3:7; Lamentations 3:9; Hosea 2:8 [6]. Job 19:9. He has stripped me of mine honor;i. e., of my righteousness in the eyes of men; comp. Job 29:14. The “crown of my head” in the parallel second member signifies the same thing; comp. Lamentations 5:16. The same collocation of a “raiment of honor,” and a “crown of the head,” occurs also in Isaiah 61:10; Isaiah 62:3; and suggested by these passages we find it often in evangelical church hymns [e. g., in the following from Watts: “Then let my soul march boldly on, Press forward to the heavenly gate, There peace mid joy eternal reign, And glittering robes for conquerors wait. There shall I wear a starry crown, And triumph in Almighty grace, While all the armies of the skies Join in my glorious Leader’s praise”].Job 19:10. He breaks me down on every side: like a building doomed to destruction, for such is the representation here given of Job’s outward man together with his state of prosperity; comp. Job 16:14; [so that I pass away], and uproots, like a tree, my hope: i. e., he takes entirely away from me the prospect of a restoration of my prosperity, leaves it no foundation or bottom, like a plant which is uprooted, and which for that reason inevitably withers (comp. Job 14:19; Job 17:15). As to δִ ?ρִּ ?ιςַ, lit. “to tear out, to pluck up wholly out of the ground,” comp. Job 4:21, where the object spoken of is the tent-stake. Job 19:11. [He makes His anger burn against me, and He regards me as His foes], comp. Job 13:24. The Imperfects alternating with Imperfects consecutive are, as above in Job 19:10, and in what follows, used for the present, because present and continuous sufferings are described; comp. Job 16:13-14. [The plural in αְּ ?φָ ?ψָ ?ιε, either for the class, of which Job is one; or, as Delitzsch suggests, “perhaps the expression is intentionally intensified here, in contrast with Job 13:24; he, the one, is accounted by God as the host of His foes; He treats him as if all hostility to God were concentrated in him”]. Job 19:12. Together all His troops advance.—βְּ ?γεּ ?γִ ?ιν, armies, synonymous with φָ ?αָ ?ΰ, Job 10:17, and denoting here, as there, the band of calamities, sufferings, and pains, which rush upon him.—And cast up their way against me.—ιָ ?ρֹ ?μּ ?εּ, lit. “to heap up” their way, which is at the same time a rampart for carrying on the attack, a mound for offensive operations (ρֹ ?μְ ?μָ ?δ, comp. 2 Samuel 20:15; 2 Kings 19:32; Ezekiel 4:2) against Job, who is here represented as a besieged fortress. In regard to this figure comp. above Job 16:14; also in regard to the technics of siege operations among the ancient orientals, see Keil’s Bibl. Archδol. § 159. First Division: Second Strophe: Job 19:13-20. Lamentation over his sufferings as proceeding from man. Job 19:13. My brethren He drives far away from me: to wit God, to whom here, precisely as in Job 17:6, even the injustice proceeding from men is ascribed. For this reason the reading δִ ?ψְ ?ηִ ?ιχ is perfectly in place, and it is unnecessary after the ἀπέστησαν of the LXX. to change it to δִ ?ψְ ?ηִ ?ιχεּ. To the term “brethren” (which as in Psalms 69:9 [Psalms 69:8], is to be understood literally, not in the wider sense of relatives), who are described as turning away from him, corresponds in Job 19:14 a the term χְ ?ψֹ ?αִ ?ιν, “kinsmen” (Psalms 38:12 [11]). In like manner we find as parallel to the ιֹ ?γְ ?ςִ ?ιν, i. e., “knowers, confidants,” in Job 19:13 b, the ξְ ?ιֻ ?γָּ ?ςִ ?ιν, i. e., those familiarly known, intimate friends, in Job 19:14 b (comp. in regard to it Psalms 31:12 [Psalms 31:11]; Psalms 88:9 [Psalms 88:8]. As synonyms in the wider sense there appear in the sequel βָּ ?ψֵ ?ιΞαֵ ?ιϊ, “house-associates, or so-journers” in Job 19:15 (Vulg., inquilini domus meζ) and finally ξְ ?ϊֵ ?ιΞρεֹ ?γ (Job 19:19), those who belong to the circle of closest intimacy, bosom-friends, (comp. Job 29:4; Psalms 55:15 [14]), so that the notion of friendship is here presented in six different phases and gradations, comp. on Job 18:8-10.—As for the rest ΰַ ?κְ ζָ ?ψεּ Job 19:13 b is lit., “are become only [or, nothing but] strange to me,” i. e., entirely and altogether strange; and ηָֽ ?γְ ?μεּ, Job 19:14 a, means “they cease,” i. e., to be friends, they leave off, fail (comp. Job 14:7), withdraw from me. Job 19:15. My house associates [= “they that dwell in mine house,” E. V.], and my maids (this doubled expression denoting all the domestics, including hired servants and the like; comp. above) are become strange to me[properly, “count me for a stranger,” E. V.]. The verb ϊַּ ?ηְ ?ωְׁ ?αεּ ?πִ ?ι is governed as to gender by the subject next preceding: comp. Gesen. § 60; Ewald, § 339 c [Green, § 276, 1]. Job 19:16. I call to my servant, and he answers not.—Whether this disobedient servant is to be viewed as the overseer, or house-steward, like Eliezer in the house of Abraham, Genesis 24. (Del.), is in view of the simplicity of the language at least doubtful.—With my mouth must I entreat him.—For the Imperf. in the sense of must, comp. Job 15:30; Job 17:2. αְּ ?ξεֹ τִ ?ι (comp. Psalms 89:2 [Psalms 89:1]; Psalms 109:30), expresses here not, as in Job 16:5, a contrast with that which proceeds out of the heart, but with a mere wink, or any dumb intimation of what might be desired of him. Job 19:17. My breath is offensive to my wife.—ζψδ, from ζεּ ?ψ, to be strange, to be estranged, expresses simply by virtue of this signification the idea of “being repugnant, repulsive,” so that we need not derive it from a particular verb ζιψ, “to be loathsome;” and ψεּ ?ηִ ?ι assuredly signifies here the breath (stinking according to b), having the same meaning as πֶ ?τֶ ?ωׁ in the partly parallel passage Job 7:15; hence not “my discontent” (Hirzel) [“my spirit, as agitated, querulous” Gesen.; “depression,” Fόrst]; nor “my sexual impulse” Arnh.; nor “my spirit” (Starke, [Carey] and ancient commentators); nor “my person” (Pesh., Umbreit, Hah) [Renan].—Jerome already correctly: halitum meum exhorruit uxor mea, and in the same sense most of the moderns [so E. V.], and my ill savor to the sons of my body.—εְ ?δַ ?πּ ?εֹ ?ϊִ ?ι, can neither signify: “my prayers, my entreaties” (Gesen., with a reference to his Gram., § 91, 3—against which however compare Ewald, § 259) [Noyes, Lee, Words., Elzas]; nor “my caresses (Arnh.) [Bernard, Rodw., Green, Chrestom., and Gram. § 139, 2—Kal Inf. of ηπο (with fem. termination Ξεֹ ?ϊ) to be gracious]; nor “my lamentations, my groanings” (Hirzel, Vaih.) [Fόrst]; nor yet finally—“and I pray to the sons of my body” (LXX., Vulg., Luth., etc. [E. V., with different construction of the μְ ?—“though I entreated for the children’s sake of my own body”]; for all these constructions are alike opposed to the language and to the context. The word is rather (with Schδr., Rosen. Ew., Hahn, Schlott., Del., Dillm.), to be derived from the root ηεο, “to stink,” which does no appear elsewhere indeed in Heb., but which is quite common in Arab, and Syr., and is to be construed either as first pers. sing. Perf. Kal (“and I smell offensively to the sons of my body”), or, which is better suited to the parallelism, as Infinitive substantive, ζָ ?ψָ ?δ in a being still the predicate. This stench suggests in particular the fetid matter which issues from the festering and partially rotting limbs of the victim of elephantiasis. Comp. on Job 2:7; Job 7:14.—That by “the sons of my body” (αְּ ?πֵ ?ιαִ ?θְ ?πִ ?ι) we are not of necessity to understand the legitimate sons of Job, and hence that there is no contradiction between this passage and the prologue, has already been shown in the Introd., § 8, 3. We need not therefore follow the critics who are there refuted in deciding that the prologue is not genuine; nor assume (with Eichhorn and Olsh.) that the poet has here for once forgotten himself, and lost sight of his scheme as set forth in Job 1:18-19. We are rather to suppose (with Ewald, 1st Ed., Hirz., Heiligst., Hahn, Dillmann, etc.), that the reference is to grandchildren, the offspring left behind by the unfortunate sons—in favor of which may be cited the similar use of αָּ ?πִ ?ιν in a wider sense in Genesis 29:5; Genesis 31:28, etc.: or else (with the LXX., Symmachus, J. D. Michaelis, Schδr., Rosenm., Dathe, Ewald, 2d Ed.) to his children by concubines (υἱουςπαλλακίδωνμου, LXX.) a supposition however with which Job 31:1 seems scarcely to agree, however true it may be that in the patriarchal age, to which our poet assigns Job, rigid monogamistic views did not prevail. The explanation of Stuhlm., Gesen., Umbr., Schlott., Del., [Noyes, Conant, Elzas, Merx] is also linguistically possible, that αִּ ?θְ ?πִ ?ι stands for αֶּ ?θֶ ?οΰִ ?ξִּ ?ι (after Job 3:10), so that απιαθπι would mean accordingly Job’s natural brothers. This theory however is inconsistent with the circumstance that Job has already made mention above, Job 19:13, of his brothers; and that immediately following the mention of his wife, the mention of his descendants would be more suitable than that of his brothers. [To which add this from Bernard, that above, in Job 3:10, no ambiguity whatever could arise from the employment of αθπι in the sense of “mother’s womb,” whereas “here, by using it in this sense, Job would have run such risk of having his meaning misunderstood, as αִּ ?θְ ?πִ ?ι might fairly be considered synonymous with ηֲ ?μָ ?φַ ?ι, my loins, or ξֵ ?ςַ ?ι, my bowels, that we find it quite impossible to believe that if he had really wished to speak here of his brethren, he would have applied to them such a very ambiguous epithet.” It has also been suggested as a relief of the difficulty that children had been born to Job in the interval between the first series of calamities, and the infliction of the disease, but such a conjecture is too precarious. Others regard the expression as general. So Wordsworth: “He is speaking of the greatest wretchedness in general terms”]. Job 19:18. Even youngsters act contemptuously towards me.—ςֲ ?εִ ?ιμִ ?ιν, plur. of ςָ ?εִ ?ιμ, puer (root ςεּ ?μ, comp. Job 21:11) are little children, such namely as are rude and impudent mockers, like those children of Bethel, 2 Kings 2:23 seq, which may be expressed by the word “youngsters” [Germ. “Buben”: Bernard—“wicked-little-children”], here as also above in Job 16:11.—It will also guard in particular against the mistake of supposing that Job’s grandchildren are intended by these ςειμιν, (Hahn).—If I rise up (conditional clause, as in Job 11:17 [not as E. V., “I arose”]), they speak about me, make me the butt of jeering talk (γִּ ?αֶּ ?ψαְּ, as in Psalms 50:20; Numbers 12:1; Numbers 21:5). Job 19:19. My bosom friends abhor me:—(comp. above on Job 19:13 seq.), and those whom I loved(ζֶ ?δ relative, as in Job 15:17) have turned against me.—This verse points particularly at Eliphaz, Bildad, and Zophar, the once trusted friends, who are now become his violent opponents. Job 19:20. My bone cleaves to my skin and my flesh (comp. Job 10:11), i. e., through my skin and my extremely emaciated flesh may be seen my bones, which seem to cleave, as it were, to that poor and loathsome integument. Comp. Lamentations 4:8; Psalms 102:6 [5], and I am escaped only with the skin of my teeth:—i. e., thus far only my gums (the flesh of my teeth, here called the skin of my teeth, because of their skinlike thinness and leanness of muscle) have been spared by this fearful disease,—so that I am able at least to speak, without having my mouth full of internal boils and sores (as is wont to be the case in the extreme stages of elephantiasis). This is the only satisfactory explanation, to which most moderns give in their adherence (Rosenm., Umbreit, Ewald, Hirzel, Vaih., Heil., Schlottm., Dillm.). This explanation of “the skin of the teeth” as the “gums,” is undoubtedly the most obvious, simple, and natural. [Yet simpler, perhaps, is the view of Umbreit, Wordsworth, Noyes, Renan, Elzas, that it is a proverbial expression, describing a state in which one is stripped to the very minimum of possession, or emaciated to the last point. Wordsworth: “A proverbial paradox. I am reduced to a mere shadow, I am escaped with nothing, or next to nothing, so that my escape is hardly an escape. I am escaped with the skin of what has no skin, the skin of bone; comp. the Latin proverbs, Lana caprina (Horat., 1 Ep. xviii. 15), and Totum nil (Juvenal 3, 209).” To which may be added the humorous English proverb: “As fat as a hen in the forehead.”—E.]. Other explanations are in part against the language, in part too artificial: such as a. That of Jerome, and many Catholic commentators, that by the skin of the teeth we are to understand the lips. b. That of Delitzsch, which explains it to mean particularly the periosteum (in distinction from the gums—as if such a distinction could have been known to the ancient Hebrews! [and “as though the poet had written for doctors!” Dillm.]).—c. That of Stickel and Hahn, who translate: “I am escaped with the nakedness of my teeth,” [i. e., with naked teeth].—d. That of Le Clerc, who understands it of the gums as alone remaining, when the teeth have fallen out. 5. Second Division: Job 19:21-27. A lofty flight to a blessed hope in God, his future Redeemer and Avenger, introduced by a pathetic appeal to the friends, that they would be mercifully disposed towards him, as one who had been so deeply humiliated, and so heavily smitten by the hand of God. Job 19:21. [“Job here takes up a strain we have not heard previously. His natural strength becomes more and more feeble, and his tone weaker and weaker. It is a feeling of sadness that prevails in the preceding description of suffering, and now even stamps the address to the friends with a tone of importunate entreaty which shall if possible, affect their hearts. They are indeed his friends, as the emphatic ΰַ ?ϊֶּ ?νψֵ ?ςָ ?ι affirms; impelled towards him by sympathy, they are come, and at least stand by him while all other men flee from him.” Del. Pity me, pity me (pathetically repeated) O ye my friends!] For the hand of Eloah hath touched me.—An allusion to the nature of his frightful disease, being a species of leprosy, i. e., of a πֶ ?βַ ?ς (2 Kings 15:5), a plaga Dei “wherefore the suffering Messiah also bears the significant name ηִ ?εָּ ?ψָ ?ΰγְּ ?αֵ ?ιψַ ?αִּ ?ι, ‘the leprous one from the school of Rabbi,’ in the Talmud, after [Isaiah 53:4; Isaiah 53:8.”]. One who is already treated with enough severity through the infliction of such a plague from God, ought not to be smitten also by men through the exercise of a merciless disposition, unfriendly words, etc.Job 19:22. Why do ye persecute me as God, “by which he means not merely that they add their persecution to God’s, but that they take upon themselves God’s work, that they usurp to themselves a judicial divine authority; they act towards him as if they were superhuman, and therefore inhumanly.” Del. And are not satiated with my flesh?i. e., continually devour my flesh, figuratively speaking, by false accusations, slanders, suspicions of my innocence, etc., gnaw me incessantly with the tooth of slander [comp. Engl. “backbiting”]. Comp. the equivalent figurative expression “slander” (διαβάλλειν) in the Aram. of the book of Daniel (Job 3:8; Job 6:25) [“to eat the pieces of any one”], in the Syriac, where the devil is called ochel-karso = διάβολος, and in Arab. where “to eat the flesh, or a piece of any one” is equivalent to “slandering, backbiting.” Job 19:23 seq. As though despairing of the possibility of influencing the friends to withdraw from their attacks on his innocence, he now turns with ardent longing for the final vindication of the same to God, first of all uttering the wish that his own asseverations of the same might be preserved to the latest generations. [Ewald imagines a pause after Job 19:22. Job waits to see what response the friends would make to his pitiful appeal. They are silent, show no signs of relenting. Job sees that he has nothing to hope for either from men, or the God of the present. But in his extremity he obtains a glimpse of the far-distant future, after his death, which fills him with a new and wonderful courage]. Oh that my words were but written (ξִ ?ιΞιִ ?ϊֶּ ?ο here followed by εconsec. before the voluntative [future], on account of the intervening ΰֵ ?τεֹ, comp. Deuteronomy 5:26), that they were but inscribed (ιֻ ?ηָ ?χεּ, pausal form for ιֻ ?ηֲ ?χεּ [see Ewald, § 193, c, and Gesen., § 67 (§ 66) Rem. 8], Hoph. of ηχχ) in a book!—αַּ ?ρֵּ ?τֶ ?ψ, with the Art., as this expression is always written—comp. Exodus 17:14; 1 Samuel 10:25, etc.—although no particular book is meant, but only in general a skin of an animal prepared for writing [ρτψ], a writing-roll). These words of his, which he thus desires to see transmitted for remembrance by after generations, are, as it is most natural to suppose, not those contained in Job 19:25 seq.. (Hahn, Schlottm.) [Scott, Good, Bernard, Words., Rodwell, Barnes], but the sufferer’s former protestations of innocence, the assurances which from Job 6. on he has continually put forth, that he suffers innocently. [In favor of this view, and against the other, Delitzsch argues: (1) It is improbable that the inscription would begin with ε.—(2) It is more likely that Job would wish to see inscribed that which was the expression of his habitual consciousness, than that which was but an occasional and transient flash of light through the darkness]. Job 19:24. That with an iron pen [or style] and with lead—i. e., in letters engraved by means of an iron style, or chisel, and then filled in with lead, in order to make them more imperishable—they might be graven in the rock forever! Instead of μָ ?ςַ ?γ the LXX. read here, as also in Isaiah 30:8 : μְ ?ςֵ ?γ, “for a witness, as testimony,” (εἰςμαρτύριον), an emendation however which is unnecessary, for the rendering “forever” gives here a meaning that is quite suitable. The monumental inscription is indeed preferred to that on parchment just because of its greater durability, which is the reason why Job wishes for it here. In regard to the use of both methods of writing already in the Pre-Mosaic age, see Introd., § 2, No. 4, p.. [For accounts of such inscriptions see Robinson’sBibl. Researches in Palestine, I., 169, 188 seq., 552; Wilson’sLands of the Bible, I., 184 seq.; Princeton Review, 1870, page 533 seq. “This wish was not in truth too high on Job’s part; for we now know sufficiently well that of old in those lands it was sought to perpetuate by means of inscriptions in stones and rocks not only short legal precepts, but also longer documents, memorable historical events, public requests, prayers, etc. Such costly works it is true could in general be completed only by kings and princes; Job was however a man of power in his age, who might well express such a wish.” Ewald]. Job 19:25. Not because he despairs of the possibility of realizing this last wish (Dillm.), but because he knows for a certainty that God will not allow his testimony to his innocence to pass down to posterity without His absolute confirmations of it, and hence because he regards that wish for the eternal perpetuation of his testimony as by no means a vain one, he continues:—And I know my Redeemer lives, etc. The ε in εΰπιιγςϊι is thus not used in an adversative sense (Luther, Ewald, Vaih., Dillm. [Conant, Noyes, Lee], etc., but simply continuative, or, if one prefers it, ascensive, introducing the end to which the realization of the preceding wish is to lead. [“The progressive rendering seems to be preferable (to the adversative), because the human vindication after death, which is the object of the wish expressed in Job 19:23 seq. is still not essentially different from the Divine vindication hoped for in Job 19:25, which must not be regarded as an antithesis, but rather as a perfecting of the other, designed for posterity. Job 19:25 is, however, certainly a higher hope, to which the wish in Job 19:23 seq. forms the stepping stone.” Del.] The causal rendering (LXX., Vulgate, Stickel [E. V., Good, Carey, Renan],) is less probable, although not altogether meaningless, as Dillmann affirms. [The rendering: “yea, verily,” adopted by Schlottm., Words., Elzas, Merx, etc., is probably designed to express the ascensive meaning referred to above.] Forasmuch as λִ ?ι is wanting after ιγςϊι (as in Job 30:23; Ps. 9:21), we should translate simply in the oratio directa: “My Redeemer lives.” βֹּ ?ΰֵ ?μ, which according to Job 3:5 means literally “reclaimer, redeemer,” acquires a meaning that is entirely too special, when it is taken by Umbreit and some others [Renan, Rodwell, Elzas] to be = βֹ ?ΰֵ ?μδַ ?γָּ ?ν, “the blood-avenger” (Numbers 35:12; Numbers 35:19), for the previous discourse was not of Job in the character of one murdered in his innocence, and Job 16:18 is too remote. After the analogy of Pro 23:11; Lamentations 3:58; Psalms 119:154, we are to think in general of the restitution of the honor and right of one who has been oppressed, and are accordingly to take βֹּ ?ΰֵ ?μ in the sense of a defender, an avenger of honor—a meaning indeed which approaches that of a “blood-avenger” in so far as the expected deliverance [or vindication] is conceived of as taking place only after the sufferer’s death. For the Goel is ηַ ?ι, is absolutely living (ηַ ?ι, “he lives,” incomparably stronger than ιֵ ?ωׁ, for instance would have been) [δַ ?ι reminding us of “that name of God, ηιςεμν, Daniel 12:7, after which the Jewish oath per Anchialum in Martial is to be explained,” Del., and indicating here the contrast between Him, the Living One, and Job, the dying one, Dillm.], while the object of His redemptive activity is ςָ ?τָ ?ψ, “dust,” and as b shows, at the time when He arises, has long been dust.—And as the Last will He arise upon the dust.—ΰַ ?ηֲ ?ψεֹ ?ο cannot possibly with Bφttcher and others [so E. V., Lee, Conant, Renan, Elzas] be construed in the adverbial sense “hereafter, in the latter time [or day].” It is clearly a substantive, used either in apposition to βֹּ ?ΰֲ ?μִ ?ι, the subj. of the first member, or as the independent subj. of the second member, identical in meaning with this βּ ?Χ. The word signifies neither “Next-man” [Next-of-kin, Ger. Nachmann] in the sense of Avenger (vindex: Ewald, Hirzel), nor the “Follower” [Germ. Hintermann, “backer”], “second” (Hahn), but according to Isaiah 44:6; Isaiah 48:12, simply the Last, he who survives all, an expression which is used here not with eschatological universality, but with particular reference to Job, who is no longer living (Job 17:11 seq.). [Delitzsch, however, and in a way which seems more suitable to the sublimity and scope o the passage: “as the Last One, whose word shall avail in the ages of eternity, when the strife of human voices shall have long been silent.”] Of this Last One, or this One who is hereafter to come, Job says: “He will stand up, He will arise” (ιָ ?χεּ ?ν), viz. for his protection and his deliverance (χεּ ?ν, the customary term for the favorable intervention of a judge to help one: Psalms 12:6 [5]; Isaiah 2:19; Isaiah 2:21; Isaiah 33:10, or also of a witness). He is thus to appear ςַ ?μΞςָ ?τָ ?ψ, “upon the dust;” i. e., according to Job 17:16; Job 20:11; Job 21:26, indisputably—on the dust to which I shall soon return (Genesis 3:19; Ecclesiastes 3:20), or in which I shall soon be made to lie down, on the dust of my decayed body, or of my grave. This is the only meaning of the expression which suits the context (so Rosenm., Ewald, Vaih., Welte, Del., Dillmann [Conant, Elzas, Merx], etc.). Any other explanation does more or less violence to the language, whether with Umbreit we translate in a way altogether too classic, “in the arena;” or with Hahn, altogether too freely: “above the earth,” i. e. in heaven! or with Jerome, Luther, and most of the ancients, altogether too dogmatically, and withal against the usage of the language, we find expressed an “awakening out of the earth;” or finally with Hirzel and others, we understand it in a way altogether too rationalistic of an “appearing of God on the earth,” in the sense of Job 38., rejecting any reference to the continuance of life hereafter [this last rendering, however, being adopted by not a few of the commentators who refer the passage to the final resurrection: so e. g. Scott, Lee]. In opposition to all these views, Dillmann says truly: “[Had Job intended here simply to express the hope of an appearance of God for the purpose of deciding the controversy in favor of Job, ςμΞςτψ would have been unnecessary (comp. e. g.Psalms 12:6), and instead of ιχεν he would have said ιֵ ?ψֵ ?γ rather, for it is not said elsewhere that God arises on the dust when He appears; besides that God does not appear in Job 38. on the earth, but He speaks His final decision out of the storm. Rather do] the words express the expectation of a βΰμ who lives, even when Job lives no longer, who comes after him, and who for the open vindication of his right arises on the dust in which he is laid, or stands above his grave.” (Analogies from Arabic usage compel us thus to understand the phrase of the grave, or the dust of the grave; see Delitzsch.) “The words thus lead us without doubt into the circle of thought indicated in Job 16:18 (although at the same time beyond the same). He does not yet say whom he intends by this βΰμ, because the main thought here is the certainty that such an one lives; not until Job 19:26, after he has explained himself further, does he surprise the friends and himself by saying that the object of his hope is Eloah Himself.” Job 19:26. And after my skin, which is broken in pieces, even this.—ΰηψ is not a conjunction belonging to πχτε, “after that” (Targ., de Dieu, Gesenius [Schlott., Con., Word., Rod.], etc.), but as its position immediately before ςεֹ ?ψִ ?ι shows, a preposition [a prepos. when used as a conjunc. being always followed immediately by the verb; see Job 42:7; Leviticus 14:43. Rendered as a prepos. the meaning of the phrase “after my skin” will be “after the loss of it.” Comp. Job 21:21, ΰηψιε, “after him,” to wit, after his death]. πִ ?χְּ ?τεּ, however (which is not to be taken [with Hofmann, Schriftbeweis II., 2, 503] as a Chaldaizing variation of πִ ?χְּ ?τεּ ?ϊ = an envelope, Germ. Umspannung), is an appositional relative clause, referring to ςεֹ ?ψִ ?ι. It is found in the third plur. perf. Piel of πχσ, “to break off” (in Piel used particularly of the hewing down of trees, Isaiah 10:34. Hence the third plur. here being used impersonally (comp. Job 4:19; Job 7:3; Job 18:18), “after my skin, which is broken off,” i. e. cut off piecemeal, mutilated, broken in pieces [E. V. unnecessarily supplies “worms” as subject]. The reference is to the skin together with the tender parts of the flesh [αַּ ?γִּ ?ιν] adhering to it, which gradually rot away, so that the meaning is similar to that of Job 18:13. The ζֹ ?ΰϊ added at the end of this member of the verse cannot possibly be interpreted as equivalent to ζֹ ?ΰϊϊִּ ?δְ ?ιֶ ?δ, “this shall be” (Targ.; Gesen.) [for in that case ζֹ ?ΰϊ should have stood at the head of the clause]. We must either, with Arnheim, Stickel, Hahn, Delitzsch [Lee, Rodwell, and preferred by Green], explain it to mean “so, in this manner,” connecting it in this sense adverbially with πִ ?χְּ ?τεּ “thus torn to pieces,” Del.), or else explain it deictically, as pointing to the skin, or, since ςεֹ ?ψ is strictly masc., as pointing to the body as here represented by that term, the totality of Job’s members and organs. [The distinction which the E. V. makes between the “skin” and the “body,” the destruction of the latter being “after” that of the former seems not sufficiently warranted. Such a distinction must have been more clearly indicated. The construction is indeed a peculiar one, and yet exceedingly pathetic in its broken irregularity. “And after my skin—when it is all fallen off by decay—this tattered thing which you now see!”—E.] In respect to the various renderings of the ancients, especially those of the Targ., of Jerome, of Luther, etc., see below [Doctrinal and Ethical] the history of the exposition of the passage.—And free from my flesh, shall I behold Eloah.—If ξִ ?αְּ ?ωָׂ ?ψִ ?ι be explained “out of my flesh” [or, as in this sense it is rendered by many, “in my flesh,” either referring it to his resurrection-body, E. V., Good, Lee, etc.; or] with a reference to the restored body of the sufferer (Eichh. 5. Cφlln, Knapp, Hofmann) [Noyes, Wemyss, Elz., Rod., who render by “in”], it would form an inappropriate antithesis to ςεֹ ?ψִ ?ι in a, which would be all the more strange, seeing that only a little before, in Job 19:20, they had been used as in substance synonymous. Neither can the expression signify exactly “from behind, or within my flesh” (against Volck); this meaning would require αְּ ?ςַ ?γ, or ξִ ?αַּ ?ςַ ?γ (after Son 4:1; Son 4:3; Son 6:7). Hence ξִ ?ο is to be rendered privatively, “away from, without, free from” (comp. Job 11:15; Job 21:9). In that case, however, the reference is not to the last point of time in Job’s earthly life, when he would be relieved of all his flesh, i. e., would be completely reduced to a skeleton (Chrysost., Umbr., Hirz., Stickel, Heiligst., Hahn, Renan, etc.), but to his condition after departing from this earth, a condition which if not absolutely incorporeal, is at least one of freedom from the body. It refers to the time when, freed from his suffering, miserable, decayed σάρξ, he shall behold God as a glorified spirit (Ewald, Vaihinger, Schlottm., Arnheim, Delitzsch, Dillmann [Con., Green]). This latter interpretation is favored decidedly by the Imperf. ΰֶ ?ηֱ ?ζֶ ?δ, which is not to be rendered in the present (as by Mercier, Hahn, H. Schultz [Bibl. Theol. des A. T., Vol. II., 1870], etc.) : “I behold God even now in the spirit;” for then the circumstantial particulars, ΰַ ?ηַ ?ψςεֹ ?ψִ ?ι and ξִ ?αְּ ?ωָׂ ?ψִ ?ι, would appear meaningless, and almost unintelligible, but which is certainly to be construed in the future, expressing the hope in a joyful beholding of God hereafter, (comp. the similar meaning of ΰηζδ in Psalms 17:15, also of ιֶ ?ηֱ ?ζεּ in Psalms 11:7), that is to say, as the following verse shows yet more clearly, in such a beholding of God in a glorified state after death . The expression of such a hope here “does not, after Job 14:13-15; Job 16:18-21, come unexpectedly; and it is entirely in accordance with the inner progress of the drama, that the thought of a redemption from Hades, expressed in the former passage, and the demand expressed in the latter passage for the rescue of the honor of his blood, which is even now guaranteed him by his witness in heaven, are here united together into the confident assurance that his blood and his dust will not be declared by God the Redeemer as innocent, without his being in some way conscious of it, though freed from this his decaying body.” (Delitzsch). Job 19:27 describes, in triumphant anticipation of the thing hoped for, how Job will then behold God. Whom I shall behold for myself, to wit, for my salvation; the μִ ?ι, “for me” (emphatic Dat. commodi, as in Psalms 56:10; Psalms 118:6) being decidedly emphasized, as also ΰֲ ?πִ ?ι, “I,” by the use of which Job makes prominent the thought that he, who was so grievously persecuted, and delivered over to certain death, was destined some day to enjoy a blessed beholding of God. And whom mine eyes shall see, and not a stranger.—ψָ ?ΰεּ after the Fut. ΰֶ ?ηֱ ?ζֶ ?δ is the Perf. of certainty, or of futurity (prζt. propheticum s. confidentiζ), and εְ ?μֹ ?ΰβζָ ?ψ, can only be nominative, synonymous with εְ ?μֹ ?ΰΰַ ?δֵ ?ψ (et non alius, Vulg.; so also LXX., Targ. [E. V.], and most), not accusative, as held by Gesenius in Thes., Vaih., Umbreit, Stickel, Hahn, v. Hofm. [Noyes, Wemyss, Carey, Elzas, Green], who take the rendering which they assume, et non alium, in the sense of et non adversarium, “and not as an enemy”—which is decidedly at variance with the universal use of ζָ ?ψ, which never signifies “an enemy” [never at least except indirectly, and in a national connection, a hostile alien: it can scarcely be regarded as the word which Job would most naturally use in describing God’s personal relations to himself,—E.], and also at variance with the clause εְ ?ςֵ ?ιπַ ?ιψָ ?ΰεּ, which ought not to stand without an object, if εְ ?μֹ ?ΰψֹ ?ζָ ?ψ were an appositional accusative. It is undoubtedly to be taken as a nominative [in cor-relation to ΰֲ ?πִ ?ι and ςֵ ?ιπַ ?ι, “I—my eyes”] “and not a stranger, not another” (with which comp. Proverbs 27:2), containing an allusion to Job’s three opponents, who could not share in this future joyful beholding of God the Vindicator, at least not in the same blessed experience of it as himself. Moreover the very fact that Job here so obviously glances aside at his opponents, with their hostile disposition, precludes the supposition of Hirzel and others, who put the time of the beholding here prophesied in this life, and regard Job 38:1 seq. as the fulfillment of the prophecy; for comp. Job 42:7 seq. [Zφckler’s argument seems to be that the vindication recorded at the close of the book could not be the vindication here anticipated by Job for the reason that in the former case God did really appear to the friends, as well as to Job, whereas they were to be excluded (so also Delitzsch) from the appearance to which Job looked forward. But it is unnatural to suppose that the Theophany and the Vindication in which Job here exults, would be limited either to himself or to his sympathizing adherents. The very object of it presupposes the presence, as witnesses, of those who had wronged him. When Job accordingly says: “I shall see Him—my eyes shall behold Him—and not a stranger”—he is not so much intimating that they would be excluded, as denying that he himself would be excluded. The vindication was not to be in his own absence, and before a stranger, who would feel no interest in the matter, but—in some strange, unaccountable way—he would be there, participating in the awful glory and the blessed triumph of the scene. This view of the meaning also gives the most satisfactory explanation of ζָ ?ψ, not an “enemy,” as shown above, which would be inappropriate, nor “another,” which would be too general, but a “stranger,” who would have no interest in the result. The jubilant tone of Job’s mind is strikingly exhibited in the repetition of the pronoun: “I—for me—my eyes,” the climax being reached in εְּ ?μֹ ?ΰΞζָ ?ψ.—E.]—Finally, the fact that Job here hopefully promises this future beholding of God not only to himself as the personal subject, but in particular to his eyes, may certainly with perfectly good right be appealed to in proof that the condition in which he hopes to enjoy it, viz. disembodied, freed from the earthly αωψ, is to be understood not as one of abstract incorporeality, or absolute spirituality—for this is a representation which is decidedly opposed to the concrete pneumatico-realistic mode of thought found in the Old Testament Scriptures, which does not even represent God as abstractly incorporeal.—My reins pine (therefore) in my bosom:viz. with longing for such a view. λָּ ?μεּ, lit. “they are consumed, waste away, languish; elsewhere used of the soul pining away with longing (Psalms 84:3 [Psalms 84:2]; Psalms 119:81), or of the eyes (Psalms 69:4 [Psalms 69:3]; Psalms 119:123; comp. above Job 11:20; Job 17:5), here of that inner organ which is regarded as the seat of the tenderest, inmost and deepest affections, being used also in this sense in Psalms 16:7; Psalms 7:10 [Psalms 7:9] (Del., Biblical Psychology, p. 268 [Clark, p. 317]). Comp. also the Arabic phrase culaja tadhϋbu, “my reins melt.” Essentially the same meaning is given to the phrase in the various renderings which on other accounts are objectionable, e. g. the Syriac: “my reins waste away completely by reason of my lot;” that of Hahn: “if my reins perish in my bosom.” [E. V. and Good: “though my reins be consumed within me;” Lee and Conant: “when my reins are (or shall have been) consumed within me;” either of which renderings is far less expressive as limiting the description to Job’s physical sufferings, now, or in death, and failing to bring out the pathetic emotion with which the passage expresses Job’s ardent longing for the day of his vindication—a meaning which is not only far more in accordance with the general usage of the words (see reff. above), but also most touchingly appropriate here. As Dillmann also remarks: “These words indicate that what Job has said just before expresses something altogether extraordinary.”—E.] 6. Third Division: Conclusion: Earnestly warning the friends against the further continuance of their attacks: Job 19:28-29. [It is worthy of note how lofty the tone which Job, inspired by the vision of his future vindication, here assumes towards the friends. No longer a suppliant for pity (Job 19:21), or trembling before their threats of the Divine vengeance, he now threatens them with that vengeance in case they persevere in their unjust treatment of him.—E.] Job 19:28. If ye think [lit. say] How will we pursue him!—λִּ ?ι is neither causal (Stick.) [Rodwell], nor affirmative, “truly” (Umbreit, Hirzel, Vaih.), [nor adversative “but” (E. V.), which requires an untenable rendering of the clauses which follow; nor temporal—“then” (Wemyss, Renan, Elzas, who refer it to Job’s restoration in this life; Good and Lee, who refer it to the resurrection), for this is inconsistent with the future πִ ?ψְ ?γּ ?σ]; but, as the analogy of Job 21:28 teaches, a conditional particle “if” [“when” Ewald; “since,” Noyes], so that Job 19:28 is the protasis of which Job 19:29 is the apodosis. ξַ ?δ in that case is neither an interrogative “how?” (Bφttcher) [Carey], nor “why?” (Umbreit, Hirzel [E. V., Rodmann, Elz.], etc.), but exclamatory: “how! how much!” comp. Job 26:2-3; Son 7:2.—In regard to the construction of ψγσ with μְ, found only here, comp. that with ΰֶ ?μ in Judges 7:25. With this exclamation of the friends there is connected in b the expression of an opinion, or a thought on their part in the oratio obliqua:and (if you think): the root of the matter is found in me, i. e. the cause of my suffering lies only in me, viz. in my sin. As regards this connection of an oratio obliqua with an oratio recta, especially with exclamatory clauses, comp. Job 22:17; Job 35:3; Ewald, § 338. According to the reading of the ancient versions (LXX., Targ., Vulg.), and of some MSS., which have αּ ?εֹ instead of αִּ ?ι, this interchange of the direct and conditional form of expression is removed, assuredly against the original construction. [According to another view, followed by the translators of the E. V., “the root of the matter” is to be taken in a good sense of Job’s piety (Barnes), or the “justice of his cause” (Renan). The expression has indeed become in English a proverbial one for religious sincerity, and we who have become accustomed to it in this sense may find a little difficulty in releasing our minds from the power of that association. It will be found difficult, however, to harmonize such a thought with the connection. In the E. V., for example, no one can help feeling that the connection between Job 19:28 and the preceding passage has an unsatisfactory abruptness and lameness about it, and even this connection, such as it is, rests on a forced rendering of λִּ ?ι which is properly adversative only after an expressed or implied negative. And in general it may be said, that whether we regard Job 19:28 b as a declaration of Job’s sincerity by himself or by his friends, it will be found next to impossible to put it into proper and natural relations to Job 19:28 a on the one hand, and to Job 19:29 on the other. The most intelligible, tenable and forcible construction is that given above by Zφckler (and adopted by Ewald, Dillmann, Schlottmann, Delitzsch, Conant, Green), which regards Job 19:28-29 as a lofty warning to the friends, inspired by the triumphant anticipation of Job 19:25-27, bidding them—if they continued to persecute him, and to charge him with harboring within himself the root of the calamities which had befallen him—to beware of the sword!—E.] Job 19:29. Apodosis: Be ye afraid (μָ ?λֶ ?ν “for yourselves,” as in Hosea 10:5) before the sword, i. e. the avenging sword of God; comp. ηֶ ?ψֶ ?α in Job 15:22; Job 27:14; Deuteronomy 32:41; Zechariah 13:7, etc. [“a sword, without the art. in order to combine the idea of what is boundless, endless and terrific with the indefinite,” Del.]. This sufficiently distinct threat of Divine punishment is confirmed by that which follows: for wrath (befalls) the transgressions of the sword, that ye may know that (there is) a judgment.—ηֵ ?ξָ ?δ, “glow of wrath, rage,” can scarcely be regarded as the subject, with the meaning: “for wrath (against friends) is one of the crimes of the sword” (Schultens, Stickel, Schlottmann), [Conant, Noyes, who with less than his usual accuracy renders by “malice”]. Apart from the difficulty that ςֲ ?εֹ ?πεֹ ?ϊ can by no means, without modification be = the partitive ξֵ ?ςֲ ?εֹ ?πεֹ ?ϊ, the meaning is not at all suited to the true position of Job as regards the friends, who might rather reproach him with anger, than he them. Rather is ηֵ ?ξָ ?δ a noun in the predicate, the meaning being: “wrath are the sword’s crimes,” i.e. they carry wrath as a reward in themselves, they cause wrath; they are infallibly overtaken by it (Rosenm., Hahn, Delitzsch, Dillmann, etc.). [“Crimes of the sword are not such as are committed with the sword—for such are not treated of here, and, with Arnh. and Hahn, to understand ηψα of the sword of ‘hostilely mocking words’ is arbitrary and artificial—but such as have incurred the sword. Job thinks of slanders and blasphemy.” Delitzsch]. This explanation is better than that of Hirzel, Ewald [Rodwell], etc.:“for wrath, i.e. something to be dreaded, are the punishments of the sword,” for ςֲ ?εִֹ ?πεֹ ?ϊ can scarcely be taken in the sense of punishments, chastisements; even in Psalms 31:11; Psalms 38:5; Lamentations 4:6, ςֲ ?εεֹ ?ο signifies not so much punishment, as rather evil-doing, sin together with its mischievous consequences. The above interpretation is not, it is true, altogether satisfactory; nevertheless, if we should attempt to amend the passage, it would be better to introduce a μְ before ςֲ ?εֹ ?πεֹ ?ϊ, than either to change ηֵ ?ξָ ?δ to δֵ ?ξָּ ?δ (Gesenius: “for such, i. e. such transgressions as yours, are crimes of the sword) or to introduce the constr. state ηֲ ?ξַ ?ϊ before ςֲ ?εֹ ?πεֹ ?ϊ, which is the construction given by the Pesh. and Vulg., the latter of which reads: quoniam ultor iniquitatum gladius est. A difficulty is also presented in the word ωַׁ ?γִּ ?ιο (K’thibh) or ωַׁ ?γּ ?εּ ?ο (K’ri) at the end of the last member, occasioned by the fact that ΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψ = ωֶׁ does not elsewhere occur in the Book of Job, as also by the fact that the rendering of the LXX.—ποῦ ἔστιναὐτῶνἡ ὕλη (or according to the Cod. Alex, ὅτιοὐδαμοῦ αὐτῶνἡ ἰσχύςἐστιν) probably points to another text in the original. The above rendering, however: “that ye may know that there is a judgment,” is in general accord with the context, and corresponds well to the meaning of these closing verses. It is not necessary with Heiligst., Dillmann, Ewald (2d Ed.), to read ωַׁ ?γַּ ?ι: “that ye may know the Almighty;” nor (which is moreover linguistically inadmissible) to regard ωַׁ ?γִּ ?ιο as a variation of ωַׁ ?γַּ ?ι (Eichhorn, Hahn, Ewald, 1st Ed.), which would yield the same meaning, [“γִּ ?ιο has everywhere else the signification judicium, e. g. by Elihu, Job 36:17; and also often in the Book of Proverbs, e. g. Job 20:8 (comp. in the Arabizing supplement, Job 31:8). “The final judgment is in Aramaic γִּ ?ιπָ ?ΰψַ ?αָּ ?ΰ; the last day in Heb. and Arabic, ιֹ ?ενδַ ?γִּ ?ιο, jaum ed-din. To give to ωׁ ?γιο, “that (there is) a judgment,” this dogmatically definite meaning, is indeed, from its connection with the historical recognition of the plan of redemption, inadmissible; but there is nothing against understanding the conclusion of Job’s speech according to the conclusion of the Book of Ecclesiastes, which belongs to the same age of literature.” Delitzsch.] [“Thus does this lofty tragical discourse combine in itself the deepest humiliation and depression with the highest Divine elevation, the most utter despair with the most animated overflowing hope and the most blissful certainty. Not only does it occupy the lofty centre of the human controversy and of the whole action, but it also causes the first real and decisive revolution in Job’s favor, because in it Job’s two ruling thoughts and tendencies, the unbelief springing from superstition, and the higher genuine faith just forming itself come into such sharp and happy contact that the latter rushes forth out of its insignificance with irresistible might, and although the discord is not as yet harmonized, from this time on it maintains itself, gradually prevails more and more, until at last it remains supreme and alone.” Ewald.] AND ETHICAL1. The history of the interpretation of Job 19:25-27, the passage of greatest theological importance in this chapter, exhibits three principal views of the meaning. Of these the two oldest rest on the texts of the ancient versions, and particularly of the LXX. and Vulg., which are more or less erroneous, and yield results which are one-sided and partially perverted. It is only the latest of these which, resting on the original text, avoids these one-sided results, and sets forth the poet’s thought with unprejudiced objectivity. a. A rigidly orthodox, or if the phrase be preferred, an ultra-orthodox (ultra-eschatological) view, which can be traced back into the earliest periods of the church, assumes that the passage predicts a resuscitation of the body by Christ on the last day. This assumption rests on the rendering of Job 19:25 b, and Job 19:26 a by the LXX., partly indeed also on the Targum, but more especially on the rendering of the passage in the Vulgate—a rendering which flows out of the older version, and which pushes still further its misinterpretation. The LXX. presents a version of the words which for the most part indeed is opposed, rather than otherwise, to the eschatological view, which limits Job’s expectations to the present earthly life, which in fact almost wholly precludes the reference to the future. But the Words beginning with ιχεν, Job 19:25 b, (instead of which it read ιָ ?χִ ?ιν), and ending with ζΰϊ, Job 19:26 a, which it combines together so as to form one sentence, it renders thus: ἀναστήσειδέμουτὸ σῶματὸ ἀναντλοῡνμοιταῦτα (Cod. Alex.: ἀναστῆσαιμουτὸ δέρμαμουτὸ ἀναντλοῦνταῦτα). According to this rendering a future resuscitation after death of the sorely afflicted body of Job is as distinctly as possible expressed. The Targumist expresses essentially the same meaning: “I know that my Redeemer lives,” and hereafter my redemption will arise (i. e. be made, actual, become a reality) over the dust, and after that my skin is again made whole (or—according to another reading—“is swollen up”) this will happen, and out of my flesh shall I behold God. On the basis of these interpretations, which were rooted in the hopes of a resurrection cherished by the Jews after the exile, and especially on the basis of the former [that of the LXX.], Clemens Romanus (1 Cor. 26), Origen (Comm. in Matthew 22:23 seq.), Cyril of Jerusalem (Catech. XVIII.), Ephraem, Epiphanius (Orat. Ancorat), and other fathers before Jerome, found in the passages a proof of the church doctrine of the ἀνάστασιςτῆςσαρκός. Still more definitely and completely did the passage acquire the character of a Scriptural proof of this doctrine from Jerome, as the author of the authorized Latin translation, which was adopted by the Western Church during the Middle Ages, as well as by the Catholic Church of recent times. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/lange/ III. Zophar and Job: Ch. 20–21A.—Zophar: For a time indeed the evil-doer can be prosperous; but so much the more terrible and irremediable will be his destructionJob 201. Introduction—censuring Job with violence, and Theme of the discourse: Job 20:1-51         Then answered Zophar the Naamathite, and said: 2         Therefore do my thoughts cause me to answer, and for this I make haste. 3    I have heard the check of my reproach, and the spirit of my understanding causeth me to answer. 4    Knowest thou not this of old, since man was placed upon earth, 5    that the triumphing of the wicked is short, and the joy of the hypocrite but for a moment? 2. Expansion of the theme, showing from experience that the prosperity and riches of the ungodly must end in the deepest misery: Job 20:6-296         Though his excellency mount up to the heavens, and his head reach unto the clouds; 7    yet he shall perish forever, like his own dung: they which have seen him shall say, Where is he? 8    He shall fly away as a dream, and shall not be found; yea, he shall be chased away as a vision of the night. 9    The eye also which saw him shall see him no more; neither shall his place any more behold him. 10    His children shall seek to please the poor, and his hands shall restore their goods. 11    His bones are full of the sin of his youth, which shall lie down with him in the dust. 12    Though wickedness be sweet in his mouth, though he hide it under his tongue; 13    though he spare, and forsake it not, but keep it still within his mouth: 14    yet his meat in his bowels is turned, it is the gall of asps within him. 15    He hath swallowed down riches, and he shall vomit them up again: God shall cast them out of his belly. 16    He shall suck the poison of asps; the viper’s tongue shall slay him. 17    He shall not see the rivers, the floods, the brooks of honey and butter. 18    That which he labored for shall he restore, and shall not swallow it down: according to his substance shall the restitution be, and he shall not rejoice therein. 19    Because he hath oppressed, and hath forsaken the poor; because he hath violently taken away a house which he builded not; 20    Surely he shall not feel quietness in his belly, he shall not save of that which he desired. 21    There shall none of his meat be left; therefore shall no man look for his goods. 22    In the fulness of his sufficiency he shall be in straits; every hand of the wicked shall come upon him. 23    When he is about to fill his belly, God shall cast the fury of His wrath upon him, and shall rain it upon him while he is eating. 24    He shall flee from the iron weapon, and the bow of steel shall strike him through. 25    It is drawn, and cometh out of the body; yea, the glittering sword cometh out of his gall; terrors are upon him! 26    All darkness shall be hid in his secret places; a fire not blown shall consume him; it shall go ill with him that is left in his tabernacle. 27    The heaven shall reveal his iniquity; and the earth shall rise up against him. 28    The increase of his house shall depart, and his goods shall flow away in the day of His wrath. 29    This is the portion of a wicked man from God, and the heritage appointed unto him by God. AND 1. A new variation of the favorite theme of the friends—the perishableness of the prosperity of the ungodly.—The formula by which it is this time expressed is (Job 20:5): “The triumphing of the wicked is of short duration, and the joy of the ungodly only for a moment.” In the further development of this thought the wicked, who encounters inevitable destruction, is described as a rich man, who avariciously seizes on the possessions of others, and whose property, unjustly acquired, becomes the prey of an exterminating fire that destroys himself, and all that belongs to him. This on the one side links itself to the former description of Eliphaz, Job 15:25 seq., on the other side, however, it glances aside with malicious suspicion at the former prosperity of Job, the foundation of which the speaker would indicate as presumably impure and unrighteous.—The discourse is divided into a short introduction (Job 20:2-5), and a discussion extending through four strophes of six verses each (in one instance of five), together with a closing verse, which stands as an isolated epiphonema. 2. Introduction, together with the theme of the discourse: Job 20:2-5. Job 20:2. Therefore do my thoughts give answer to me.—[μָ ?λֵ ?ο, by some rendered “still, yet,” (Umbreit, Noyes, Rodwell), or “truly,” (Elzas), but incorrectly]. δωια with Accus. of the person, as in Job 13:22 [E. V., “cause me to answer,” and so Fόrst, and this would correspond with Zophar’s eagerness to speak; but the other signification is the more common]. ωְׂ ?ςִ ?τִּ ?ιν as in Job 4:13.—And hence (comes) the storming within me.—Lit. “my haste in me”: ηεּ ?ωׁ here in the sense of perturbatio; and αִּ ?ι in immediate connection with ηεּ ?ωִׁ ?ι, and more precisely qualifying it, comp. Job 4:21.—Both μָ ?λֵ ?ο in a, and αַּ ?ςֲ ?αεּ ?ψ in b, point forward to the statement given in Job 20:3 of the cause of Job’s discontent and excitement. [“On this account he feels called upon by his thoughts to answer, and hence his inward impulse leaves him no rest, because he hears from Job a contemptuous wounding reproof of himself.” Ewald, Hahn, Wordsworth, etc., point backward to the closing menace of Job’s discourse (Job 19:29) as the cause of Zophar’s feeling]. αַּ ?ςֲ ?αεּ ?ψ, which is evidently separated from ηεּ ?ωִׁ ?ι by the accentuation is used as a preposition = “on account of,” but without its complement. We must supply either λֵּ ?ο (from μλο in a), or ζֹ ?ΰϊ; comp. the similar elliptical use of λְ ?ςַ ?μּ in Isaiah 59:18. To connect αַּ ?ςֲ ?αεּ ?γ immediately with ηεּ ?ωִׁ ?ι: “because of my storming (Del. “because of my feeling”) [“because of my eager haste,” Ges., Con., Carey, Noyes] within me,” produces a less symmetrical structure for the verse, and a flatter sense. Job 20:3. A chiding to my shame must I hear! Comp. Isaiah 53:5 [“chastisement of our peace,” i.e., which tends to our peace; so here, the chastisement or chiding which tends to my shame.—The E. V.’s rendering, “check of my reproach” is scarcely intelligible. Neither is “I have heard” sufficiently exact for the fut. ΰωξς, which means rather “I have to hear.”—E.].—Nevertheless the spirit out of my understanding gives me an answer; i.e., “out of the fulness of its perception it furnishes me with information as to what is to be thought of Job with his insulting attacks” (Delitzsch), viz., that he is to be warned and punished as an ungodly man. [E. V., ιַ ?ςֲ ?πֵ ?πִ ?ι, as Hiph. “causeth me to answer;” better as Kal “answereth,” and thus equivalent to δωׁ ?ια, Job 20:2. This exordium is strikingly suggestive of the prominent traits of Zophar’s character; his mental discursiveness and vivacity, or perhaps volatility, indicated by ωׂ ?ςτιν, his thoughts shot forth in various directions; his eager impetuosity, ηεωׁ ?ι, he could scarcely contain himself until Job had finished, and then broke out hotly; his proud sensitive egotism, especially prominent in Job 20:3 a, “the chiding of my shame must I hear;” his subjective self-sufficient dogmatism—“the spirit out of my understanding gives answer.” It is questionable whether ψεּ ?ηַ here is to be taken as Renan explains, of the universal (not as he terms it “impersonal”) spirit (comp. Job 32:8), speaking in man. The dogmatic character of the speaker, and the prominence which he gives to his own personality, is not altogether in harmony with such a view. Moreover, Elihu is put forward by the poet as the representative of an internal revelation, even as Eliphaz represents the external. Zophar on the other hand represents the individual reason, as Bildad represents the collective traditional wisdom of the race. See Introduction.—E.]. Job 20:4-5 present the substance of these communications of Zophar’s spirit in the form of a question addressed to Job. Job 20:5. Knowest thou this indeed [either “the question implying that the contrary would be inferred from Job’s language” (Con.), or “sarcastically, equivalent to: thou surely knowest; or in astonishment, what! dost thou not know!” (Del.) hence it is unnecessary (with E. V., Ges., etc.), to supply the negative, δֲ ?μֹ ?ΰ = δֲ ?] from eternity (i.e., to be true, ξִ ?πִּ ?ιΞςַ ?γ, as a virtual adjective, or as a virtual predicate-accusative, Ewald § 336, b), since man was placed upon the earth. ωִׂ ?ιν Infinit. with an indefinite subject, “since one placed” [or, since the placing of] as in Job 13:9.—ΰָ ?γָ ?ν, not precisely a proper name, referring to the first man, but collective or generic; comp. Deuteronomy 4:32. Job 20:5. That the triumphing of the wicked is short (lit., from near, i. e., not extending far; comp. Deuteronomy 32:17; Jeremiah 23:23), and the joy of the ungodly only for a moment.—ςֲ ?γֵ ?ι in ςֲ ?γֵ ?ιΞψֶ ?βַ ?ς, like ςַ ?γ in 2 Kings 9:22 expresses the idea of duration, “during, for.” The whole question is intended to convey doubt and wonder that Job, judging by his speeches, was entirely unacquainted with the familiar proposition touching the short duration of the triumphing of the wicked which is made the theme of what follows. [This is Zophar’s short and cutting rejoinder to Job’s triumphant outburst in Job 19:25 seq.—That jubilant exclamation was, as Zophar indirectly suggests, a ψִ ?πְ ?πַ ?ϊψָ ?ωָׁ ?ς, that exulting joy a ωִׂ ?ξְ ?ηַ ?ϊηָ ?πֵ ?σ]. 3. The expansion of the theme: Job 20:6-29. First Strophe: Job 20:6-11. [The wicked, however prosperous, perishes utterly, together with his family and acquisitions; he himself in the prime of life]. Job 20:6. Though his height (ωִׂ ?ιΰ from πωׂ ?ΰ, comp. ωׂ ?εΰPsalms 89:10) [i. e., his exaltation in rank and power] mount up to Heaven, and his head reach unto the clouds; comp, Isaiah 14:13 seq.; Obadiah 1:4. [δִ ?βַּ ?ιςַ, not causative (Del.), but parallel to ςμδ, as ψΰωׂ to ωׁ ?ιΰ]. Job 20:7. Like his dung he perishes forever; they who have seen him say: Where is he?—The subj. here is the ηָ ?πֵ ?σ, Job 20:5 b, and so continues to the end of the de scription. λְּ ?βֶ ?μְ ?μεֹ, “like his dung,” from βֵּ ?μ, globulus stercoris, Zephaniah 1:17; Ezekiel 4:12; Ezekiel 4:15 (comp. βָּ ?μָ ?μ, 1 Kings 14:10). This comparison, which beyond a doubt expresses a meaning which is unfavorable and disgraceful to the ungodly man, refers to his own dung; in the same way that this is at once swept away, on account of its ill odor, so is he speedily removed by the Divine judgment (comp. Ezek. l.c.). In regard to the coarse harshness of the expression, comp. below, Job 20:15, as also Zophar’s former discourse, Job 11:12. [“The word is not low, as Ezekiel 4:12; Zephaniah 1:17 shows, and the figure, though revolting, is still very expressive.” Delitzsch]. The following explanations involve an unsuitable softening [and weakening] of the sense. (1) The attempt of Wetzstein in Delitzsch [I. 377 seq. adopted by Del. and Merx] to identify βֶּ ?μְ ?μεֹ with the cowdung heaped up for fuel in the dwelling of the wicked. (2) The attempt of Schultens, Ewald, Hirz., Heiligst., [Con.], to read λִּ ?βְ ?μָ ?μεֹ, “according to his greatness, in proportion as he was great,” from βְּ ?μָ ?μ, magnificentia, majestas [Good (followed by Wemyss) adopts this with the additional amendment of λ to α, understanding the passage to teach that the wicked perishes in the midst of his greatness]. (3) The unfounded translation of the Syriac: “like the whirlwind” [regarding βμμ, or βμ as = βμβμ, and so Fόrst, who however defines it to mean “chaff.” Either of these renderings, as well as Wetzstein’s, makes the suffix superfluous.—E.]. (4) The equally untenable rendering of some of the Rabbis (as Gekatilia, Nachamanides): “as he turns himself,” or “in turning around, as one turns the hand around.” Job 20:8. As a dream he flies away [and is no more to be found: and he is scared away as a vision of the night].—For the use of “dream” and “night-vision” (ηִ ?ζָּ ?ιεֹ ?ο as in Job 4:13 [“so everywhere in the book of Job instead of ηָ ?ζεֹ ?ο, from which it perhaps differs as visum from visio,” Delitzsch]), as figures for that which is fleeting, quickly perishable, comp. Isaiah 29:7; Psalms 73:20; Psalms 90:5. ιֻ ?γַּ ?γ, Hiph.: “is scared away,” to wit, by God’s judicial intervention; a stronger expression than the Active ιִ ?γַּ ?γ, “he flies.” Job 20:9. An eye has looked upon him (been sharply fixed upon him; ωׁ ?ζσ as in Job 28:7); it does it not again; comp. Job 5:3; Job 7:8; Job 8:18. [The verb ωָׁ ?ζַ ?σ is found in Son 1:6 in the sense of scorching, or making swarthy (cogn. ωָׁ ?γַ ?σadurere). Hence the signification of a fixed scorching look is attached to it by Delitzsch. It may at least be said of it that it means as much as our “scan,” or “gaze upon.” It is suggested perhaps by the lofty position, the heaven-touching, cloud-capped attitude of the wicked in Job 20:6. Such a height, which the sun would (ωׁ ?ζσ) look on, and cause to glow, the eye of man would (ωׁ ?ζσ) gaze on intently. The clause is thus equivalent to: There was a time when he was the observed of all observers, but it is so no more—E.].—And his place beholds him no more.—ξְ ?χεֹ ?ξεֹ, which is doubtless the subject of b, is here construed as a feminine, as in Genesis 18:24; 2 Samuel 17:12. Job 20:10. His children must seek to please the poor.—ιְ ?ψַ ?φּ ?εּ, 3d plur. Piel from ψφδ = to propitiate, appease, synonymous with ηִ ?μָּ ?δτְ ?πֵ ?ιΞτΧ, an expression which is to be understood in a sense altogether general, and not specifically of asking alms [Barnes: “they would be beggars of beggars”] nor of appeasing by the use of money, although the second member approximates the latter meaning quite closely. The ancient versions read ιָ ?ψֹ ?φּ ?εּ, or ιְ ?ψִ ?φְּ ?φεּ (from ψφֹ ?υ), and thus obtained the meaning, which is far less suitable, “His sons (object) the lowly smite down.” [Ewald, adopting this definition for the verb, and amending αָּ ?πָ ?ιε to δָ ?τְ ?πָ ?ιε translates: “his fists smote down the weak”].—And his hands (must) give back his wealth: to wit, by the hands of his children, who will have to appease the creditors of their father. [“The suffix in ιγιε might refer back, in the way of individualization, to the plural in απιν (so Noyes); but against this is the fact that also in the following verse the wicked man is the subject of the discourse.” Schlott.]. The meaning would be much less simple if (with Carey, Dillmann) [Bernard, Renan, Lee], “his hands” were understood literally, and after the preceding mention of his death we were carried back here to the period of his life. Job 20:11. His bones were full of youthful vigor (so correctly the LXX., Targ., Pesh.—while the Vulg., Rosenm., Vaih., etc., understand it of “secret sins,” and comp. Psalms 90:8), [Jerome, however, followed, by E. V., Lee, and Barnes, combining the two ideas of sin and youth, while Renan, Good, Wemyss, Carey, render “secret sins.” Our other authorities, Ew., Dillmann, Schlott., Rodwell, Words., Con., Ber., Elz., with Ges. and Fόrst agree with the LXX., etc.]—and it lies down with him in the dust; or “it is laid down,” viz., his youthful vigor; for the use of ϊִּ ?ωְׁ ?λָ ?α referring back to ςֲ ?μεּ ?ξָ ?ιε, comp. Job 14:19; Psalms 103:5 b. For “dust,” meaning the “grave,” comp. Job 19:25; Job 17:16. Second Strophe: Job 20:12-16. A description of the perishableness of the ungodly man’s prosperity by a comparison with poison, sweet to the taste, but deadly in its results. Job 20:12-13 are the protasis dependent on ΰִ ?ν Job 20:14 seq., the apodosis. Job 20:12. Though evil tastes sweet in his mouth (δִ ?ξְ ?ϊִּ ?ιχ lit., “makes sweet,” Ewald, § 122, c [Green, § 79, 2]); he hides it under his tongue, i.e., he does not swallow it down, in order to enjoy the sweet taste of it so much the longer [“the evildoer likened to an epicure,” Delitzsch.—Renan: Comme un bonbon qu’ on laisse fondre dans la bouche]. Job 20:13. He is sparing of it (ηξμ to indulge, to spare, here with ςַ ?μ, the preposition commonly used with verbs of covering, protecting, guarding) and does not let it go, and retains it in his palate.—The tenacity with which the evil-doer persists in the lustful enjoyment of his wickedness, is set forth by five parallel and essentially synonymous expressions accumulated together. Job 20:14. (Nevertheless) his food is changed in his bowels—into what is explained in the second member. The poison of asps is within him.—ξְ ?ψεֹ ?ψָ ?δ (= ξְ ?ψֵ ?ψָ ?δ, Job 16:13), lit, “gall,” is used here for “poison,”—because the ancients used interchangeably terms representing the bitter and the poisonous; comp. ψΰωׁ = a bitter, poisonous plant and the poison of serpents, in Job 20:16; Deuteronomy 32:33. The word is naturally chosen here as antithetic to δξϊιχ, verse 12. [On τְּ ?ϊָ ?πִ ?ιν see below, Job 20:16. Job 20:15. He hath swallowed down riches.—ηַ ?ιִ ?μ, “possessions, riches, property,” without the accompanying notion of forcible acquisition which rather first makes its appearance in αָּ ?μַ ?ς. God will cast them forth again out of his belly—i.e., his riches, or that which he has swallowed. The greedy devourer of wealth will be made to vomit it forth, as by pains of colic. The LXX., from motives of decorum, substituted ἄγγελος here for θεός; in Zophar’s mouth, however, the latter word need not surprise us. Job 20:16 returns back to the figure of Job 20:14 b in order to describe more minutely the effect of the poison which he had been enjoying. [He sucked in the poison of asps], the tongue of adders slays him—the tongue being regarded as the seat or container of the poison (Psalms 140:4 [3]), the original figure being at the same time changed, and the fatal bite taking the place of the deadly draught; comp. Proverbs 23:32. [τֶּ ?ϊֶ ?ο, LXX. ἀσπίς; according to some, e.g., Kitto, Pictorial Bible, the boeten of the Arabs, about a foot long, spotted black and white, the bite instantly fatal; according to others, the el-Haje of the Arabs, from three to five feet long, dark green, with oblique bands of brown, resembling the cobra di capello in its power of swelling the neck and rising on its tail in striking its prey. The ΰֶ ?τְ ?ςֶ ?δ cannot be determined. See the Dictionaries and Cyclopζdias, “Asp,” “Viper,” “Serpent,” etc.] Third Strophe: Job 20:17-22. [The evil-doer cannot enjoy his prosperity—for he must restore his ill-gotten gains.] Job 20:17. He may not delight in the sight of (ψΰδα as in Job 3:9) brooks, streams, rivers of honey and cream.—[The negative ΰַ ?μ and the apocopated ιֵ ?ψֶ ?ΰ express the concurrence of the speaker’s moral judgment and feeling with the affirmation of the fact. They are a mental Amen to the prediction.—E.] After τְּ ?μַ ?βּ ?εֹ ?ϊ in the absol. state there follow in apposition two nouns in the construct state, πַ ?δֲ ?ψֵ ?ιβַ ?δֲ ?μֵ ?ι, which form an assonance, and are co-ordinate. [Dillmann: “It is a more poetic artistic expression than the simple πδψιγαωׁ επδμιηξΰδ.” Hupfeld conjectures that πδψι may be a gloss. See Gesen. § 255, 3 a.] “Honey and milk” (or here, by way of gradation, “cream,” comp. Isaiah 7:15; Isaiah 7:22) are a familiar figurative expression denoting luxurious prosperity, as in Exodus 3:8; Exodus 3:17, and often; found also in the ancient classical poets, in their descriptions of the golden age; e.g., Theocritus, Idyll. V. 124 seq.; Ovid, Metam. I. 111 seq.: Flumina jam lactis, jam flumina nectaris ibant; comp. Virgil, Ecl. IV. 30; Horace, Epod. 16, 47. Job 20:18. Giving back that which he has labored for (ιָ ?βָ ?ς, subst. synonymous with ιְ ?βִ ?ιςַ) [the participial clause ξֵ ?ωִׁ ?ιαιָ ?βָ ?ς coming first, and assigning the reason for what follows] he enjoys it not—lit. he swallows it not, he will not be happy. According to the property of his exchange (ϊְּ ?ξεּ ?ψָ ?δ as in Job 15:31) he rejoices not—i.e., in accordance with the fact that he employed sinful, unjust means of exchange, in order to gain temporal possessions and enjoyments, he has no pleasure in the latter, he must lack the joy which he had promised himself in them. So correctly Ewald, Delitzsch, Dillmann, etc.; while Hirzel and others [E. V. Lee, Bernard, Renan, Rodwell], following the Targum, translate as though instead of λְּ ?ηֵ ?ιμϊְּ ?ξεּ ?ψָ ?ϊεֹ, the passage read λְּ ?ηֵ ?ιμεֹ ϊְּ ?ξΧ (“as his possessions, so his exchange”, i.e., his restitution). Gesenius, Schlottmann [Conant, Elzas] render: “as his property that is to be exchanged, i.e., to be restored” (similarly Hupfeld: sicut opes permutando comparatas), which, however, yields a strained sense [and is also “contrary to the relative independence of the separate lines of the verse, which our poet almost always preserves, and is also opposed by the interposing of εμΰιαμς.” Del. Carey explains: “to the full amount of its value,” taking ηιμ in the sense of “power,” or “fullness”—a doubtful signification when used in connection with property. To be noted is ςμν in our Book for ςμζ or ςμυ]. Job 20:19. For he crushed, abandoned the poor—i.e., maltreated with persistent injustice the unprotected and defenceless. He has taken houses (lit. “a house,” collective) for his plunder, and builded them not—i.e., has not re-builded them, has not reached the point of reconstructing and fitting them up according to his own taste, because he was not allowed to retain permanent possession of them. Against the rendering of the Targ., Vulg., etc., also of Hupfeld [and E. V.]: “he has plundered a house which he builded not,” it may be urged that in that case it must have read εְ ?μֹ ?ΰαָ ?πָ ?δεּ. The causal relation in which the first member is placed to the second by Delitzsch: “because he cast down, let the destitute lie helpless, he shall not, in case he has seized a house, build it up” [Conant: “the houses he has plundered he shall not build up”] is indicated with too little clearness by the λִּ ?ι at the beginning of the verse, and yields a meaning entirely too artificial. [Other constructions, according to the causal rendering of λִּ ?ι, are (a) That of the E. V.: “Because he hath oppressed and hath forsaken the poor: because he hath violently taken away a house which he builded not; surely he shall not,” etc.; which cannot be justified in rendering λִּ ?ι differently in Job 20:19 and in Job 20:20. (b) That of Noyes and Rodwell, who introduce the apodosis in 20b. (c) That of Good, Lee, Wemyss, Carey,—which assumes the apodosis to be introduced by ςַ ?μΞλֵּ ?ο in Job 20:21 b.—E.]. Job 20:20. For (λִּ ?ι co-ordinate to that at the beginning of the preceding verse) he knew no rest in his belly: the seat of his gluttony or avarice. ωָׁ ?μֵ ?ε here a substantive (differently from Job 16:12, where it is an adjective), synonymous with ωַׁ ?μְ ?εָ ?δ, Proverbs 17:1. For the sentiment comp. Isaiah 59:8. [E. V.: “he shall not feel quietness,” etc., overlooks the distinction of tenses in the verse: ιָ ?γַ ?ς Perfect, ιְ ?ξַ ?μֵּ ?θ Imperf. Whether we translate λִּ ?ι “for” or “because,” there is a relation of antecedent and consequent between a and b. This has been the evil-doer’s character—insatiable voracity; this shall be his doom—to be stripped of every thing.—E.] (Therefore) he shall not escape with his dearest treasure.—ξִ ?μֵּ ?θ without an object = to escape, like τִּ ?μֵּ ?θ, Job 23:7; or also = ξִ ?μֵּ ?θπַ ?τְ ?ωׁ ?εּ, comp. Amos 2:15. The α in αַּ ?ηֲ ?ξεּ ?γεֹ is the α of accompaniment or of possession, as in Job 19:20. [Not, therefore, instrumental (Schlottmann—the object conceived of as the instrument), nor partitive: “of all his delights he shall save nothing” (Conant). The rendering of Carey, Elzas, etc.: “in his appetite he let (or lets) nothing escape,” is inadmissible on account of the passive form of ηξεγ, which signifies not the act, but the object, of desire.—E.] Job 20:21. Nothing escaped his greediness [or gluttony]: lit. “there is nought of a remainder [or of that which has escaped] to his food—comp. Job 18:19. [ΰָ ?λְ ?μεֹ from ΰֱ ?λֹ ?μ, not ΰֹ ?λֶ ?μ (E. V. “meat”); hence, more literally still than above: “there is nothing that has escaped his eating”]. Therefore his wealth shall not endure.—ιηιμ, as in Psalms 10:5, means “to be solid, powerful, enduring.” θεּ ?α, “wealth,” or also “prosperity,” as in Job 21:16. [E. V.: “no man shall look for his goods,” which can only mean (with ιηιμ), no one shall wait for his property as his heir,—a meaning both less simple and less suitable than the above.] Job 20:22. In the fullness of his superfluity it is strait with him—i.e., distress overtakes him, meaning external poverty (not internal anguish, etc.), as b shows. The Inf. constr. ξְ ?μֹ ?ΰεϊ (written like χְ ?ψֹ ?ΰεϊ, Judges 8:1), from ξμΰ, after the analogy of μδΧ, verbs; comp. Gesen. § 75 [§ 74], Rems. 20 and 21 [Green, § 166, 2]. ιֵ ?φֶ ?ψ with retracted tone for ιֵ ?φַ ?ψ [“on account of the following monosyllable.” Del.]; comp. Genesis 32:8; Ewald, § 232 b.—Every hand of a wretched one (comp. Job 3:20) comes upon him (comp. Job 15:21)—viz.: to inflict retribution on him for the violence suffered at his hands, or in order to demand of him plundered property. [The primary reference is doubtless to the victims of his own rapacity, although we may give it, with Delitzsch, a more general application: “the rich uncompassionate man becomes a defenceless prey of the proletaries.”] So according to the reading ςָ ?ξֵ ?μ, comp. Job 3:20. If, following the LXX. and the Vulg. (with Eichhorn, De Wette, etc.), we read ςָ ?ξָ ?μ, we obtain the meaning—in itself indeed admissible, but less in harmony with Job 20:19-21 : “the whole power of misery comes upon him.” [So Rodwell. Bernard, Noyes and Renan take ιγ as in Job 33:2, for “wound” or “blow;’ and translate: “every blow of misfortune” (Ren.), or “every blow of the wretched,” i.e., every blow which cometh upon the wretched (Noyes), or every blow, every plague that can render a man miserable (Bernard).] Fourth Strophe: Job 20:23-28. The end of the wicked according to the divine judgment. Job 20:23. That it may serve to the filling of his belly, He casts the glow of His wrath upon him.—The subject is God, although He is not expressly named; as in Job 16:7. The Jussive ιְ ?δִ ?ι, at the head of the verse, is rendered by most as a simple future: “it shall come to pass,” viz. that which follows. But to express this we should rather expect εְ ?δָ ?ιָ ?δ (as frequently with the prophets), or εַ ?ιְ ?δִ ?ι (as frequently in prose). For this reason the construction of the Jussive as dependent on ιְ ?ωַ ?μַּ ?η is to be preferred to any other (so Stickel, Hahn [Ewald], Dillmann. etc.). [It is certainly simpler, and in the spirit and style of Zophar in this discourse to take ιְ ?δִ ?ι as an independent verb, forming the first of the series of jussives in this verse, each of which expresses the strong sympathy of his feelings with the result which he predicts. See above on ΰַ ?μΞιֵ ?ψֶ ?ΰ, Job 20:17; and Dillmann’s remark below.—E.]—The Jussives ιְ ?ωַׁ ?μַּ ?η and εֲ ?ιַ ?ξְ ?θֵ ?ψ, however, are to be explained on the ground that the passage is intended to set forth the necessity for God’s punitive agency as established in the divine order of the world [“and at the same time to indicate his own agreement therewith.” Dillm.]. In regard to the descent of the divine wrath in the form of a rain of fire, comp. above on Job 18:15.—As to the phrase: “to fill the belly of any one,” comp. above Job 20:20; Luke 15:16.—And causes to rain upon him with his food.—(αְּ serving to introduce the object; comp. Job 16:4; Job 16:10). The subject here again is God. The food which He causes to rain upon the wicked, to wit, his just punishment (comp. Job 9:18; Jeremiah 9:14 [15]) is called “his food” (μַ ?ηְ ?ξεֹ), viz. that of the wicked, that which he is appointed to feed upon. [Ewald: “rain upon him what can satisfy him.”—Schlottm.: “Such a rain of fire, figuratively speaking, is to be the food of the ungodly, instead of the former dainty morsel of wickedness (comp. Job 20:12-13).”—Wordsworth: “He surfeited himself with rapine, and God will make him surfeit with His revenge.”—Carey: “Just as in Psalms 11:6, the wicked are said to drink snares, fire and brimstone, so here the glutton shall have them for food.”] It is possible also to refer the suffix to God. Much too artificial is the rendering of the Targ., Aben-Ezra, Gerson, Delitzsch: “He causeth it to rain upon him into his flesh,”—although to be sure μην might in accordance with Zephaniah 1:17 mean “flesh.” [In Zeph., however, the parallelism: “and their blood is poured forth as dust, and heir flesh (μְ ?ηֻ ?ξָּ ?ν) as dung,” makes the application clear; whereas here he whole context points to the usual literal application.—E.]—ςָ ?μֵ ?ιξεֹ, poetic, full-toned form for ςָ ?μָ ?ιε as in Job 22:2; Job 27:23. [“The morally indignant speech which threatens punishment, intentionally seeks after rare solemn words, and dark-some tones.” Delitzsch. The partial assonance of ςμιξεαμϊεξε may also have had some influence in determining this form, which in this instance at least can scarcely be regarded as plur., on account of the pointed individual application to Job. The rendering of E. V., Good, Lee, Wem., Rod., Elz.: “and shall rain it upon him while he is eating,” is at variance with the form, and misses the striking force of the figure as given above.—E.] Job 20:24 seq. describe how the divine decree of wrath is historically realized by the introduction of several illustrations, the first being that of a warlike pursuit and wounding [“a highly picturesque description.” Ewald].—If he flee from the iron armor (comp. Job 39:21), a bow of brass (Psalms 18:35) pierces him through (comp. Judges 5:26). [If he escapes one danger, it is only to fall into another, and from the same source]. The two members of the verse, which are put together asyndetically, are related to each other as antecedent and consequent, as in Job 19:4. Job 20:25. He draws it out (viz. the arrow, in order to save his life, comp. Judges 3:22). [The Targ. reads ξִ ?βִּ ?εָ ?δּ: he (the enemy, or God) draws, and it (the sword) comes out of its sheath; against which Delitzsch objects that βֵ ?ε cannot signify vagina. Carey also translates ωָׁ ?μַ ?σ, “it is drawn,” i.e. the sword of the pursuing enemy, who plunges it into him, and then draws it out again; but this is much less natural, and mars the terrible vividness of the description given of his unavailing struggle with his doom.—E.]—Then it comes forth out of the body; or also “out of the back,” in case βֵּ ?εָ ?δ, after the analogy of πδψδ, Job 3:4, should be identified with βֵּ ?ε. But the difficulty of accomplishing such a manipulation of the weapon scarcely permits this assumption (adopted among the moderns by Dillmann), [“The evildoer is imagined as hit in the back, the arrow consequently as passing out at the front.” Del.], which, moreover, has against it the following member: and the gleaming steel (comes) out of his gall (comp. Job 16:13; and above on Job 20:14 of this ch.). In regard to αָּ ?ψָ ?χ, lit. “lightning,” here “gleaming steel, metal head” (not a “stream of blood,” as Hahn explains it), comp. Deuteronomy 32:41; Nahum 3:3; Habakkuk 3:11.—Upon him (come) the terrors of death.—The plur. ΰֵ ?ξִ ?ιν (from ΰֵ ?ιξָ ?δ, Job 9:34; Job 13:21) could indeed be connected as subject with ιַ ?δֲ ?μֹ ?κְ construed ad sensum (Hahn, Delitzsch), [Conant]; but the accents connect ιַ ?δֲ ?μιְ rather with the second member of the verse, so that some such verb as “come, break upon,” must be supplied with ςָ ?μָ ?ιεΰֵ ?ξִ ?ιν. Equally opposed to the accents, and altogether too difficult is the rendering of Rosenmόller and Hirzel [Schultens, Carey]: “he goes [departs, “he is going!” Carey] terrors upon him,” i.e., while terrors are upon him. Job 20:26. Further description of the divine decree of punishment, with special reference to the wicked man’s possessions.—All darkness is hoarded up for his treasures, i.e., every kind of calamity, by divine appointment, awaits the treasures which he has gathered and laid up (φְ ?τεּ ?πִ ?ιν as in Psalms 17:14; comp. Deuteronomy 33:19). To the agency of the earthly-minded evildoer storing up treasures for himself corresponds the agency of God in opposition storing up the destruction which is destined to overtake them. Comp. θεσαυρίζεινἑαυτωὅργήν, Romans 2:6. [As Delitzsch suggests, there is somewhat of a play upon words in θָ ?ξεּ ?ομִ ?φְ ?τεּ ?πָ ?ιε].—A fire which is not blown consumes him, lit. “which was not blown” (μֹ ?ΰΞπֻ ?τָּ ?η, a relative clause, Gesenius, § 143, 1 [§ 121, 3], hence a “fire of God” burning down from heaven (comp. Job 1:16; Job 18:15; Isaiah 33:11 seq.). ϊְּ ?ΰָ ?λְ ?μֵ ?δεּ is most simply explained (with Ewald, Hupfeld, Dillmann) [Fόrst, Conant], as an alternate form of the Jussive Kal, instead of the more common ϊֹּ ?ΰλְ ?μֵ ?δεּ, comp. Ewald, § 253, a. [Gesenius takes it as Piel for ϊְּ ?ΰַ ?λְּ ?μֵ ?δεּ, with lengthened vowel in place of Daghesh-forte; Delitzsch as Poel with Hholem shortened to Kamets-Khatuph; Hirzel, Olsh., Green (§ 93, a; § 111, 2, e) as Pual for ϊְּ ?ΰֻ ?λְּ ?μֵ ?δεּ, with the rendering: “a fire not blown shall be made to consume them.” In πֻ ?τָ ?η the gender of ΰֵ ?ωׁ is disregarded, the adoption of the masc. in both the verbs ατη and ιψς making the personification of the supernatural fire more vivid. See on ψεη Job 1:19.—E.]—It must devour that which survives (that which has escaped former judgments; ωָׂ ?ψִ ?ιγ as in Job 20:21) in his tent.—ιֵ ?ψַ ?ς is Jussive Kal [to be explained like the preceding Jussives, Job 20:17; Job 20:23] from ψςδ, “to graze, to feed upon,” the subject here being ΰֵ ?ωׁ used in the masc.; comp. for this rare masc. usage of ΰֵ ?ωׁ ?Psalms 104:4; Jeremiah 48:45. Olshausen’s emendation to ιֵ ?ψָ ?ς (Jussive Niph.=“it shall be devoured”) is unnecessary. [E. V., Bernard, Barnes, Carey, etc., render: “It shall fare ill with him that is left,” etc., or “That which is left, etc., shall perish, or be destroyed” (Lee, Wemyss, Elzas, etc.), some deriving the form from ψες, “to fare ill,” others from ιψς in the same sense (Mercier, Carey), others from ψςς, either Kal (Fόrst) or Niph. (Dathe, Lee). The context favors the root ψςδ.—E.] Job 20:27. The heavens reveal his iniquity (ιֲ ?βμּ ?εּ also properly Jussive like the verbs in Job 20:26; Job 20:28), and the earth riseth up against him (ξִ ?ϊְ ?χεֹ ?ξָ ?ξָ ?δ pausal form for ξִ ?ϊְ ?χεֹ ?ξְ ?ξָ ?δ). Thus the two chief divisions of the creation, which Job had previously (Job 16:18 seq.) summoned as witnesses in behalf of his innocence, must rather testify the opposite, must thrust him out from themselves as one condemned by God, so that there remains for him as his abode only the gloomy Sheol, the third division of the creation besides heaven and earth; comp. Job 11:8-9; Psalms 135:6; Sir 24:7-9. Job 20:28. The increase of his house must depart, flowing forth (lit. “things that flow, or run away,” diffluentia, in apposition to ιְ ?αεּ ?μ) in the day of His wrath, viz. the divine wrath. Ges., Olsh. [Gr., § 140, 2], etc., explain πִ ?βָּ ?ψεֹ ?ϊ as Part. Niph. from βψψ with an Aram. formation, defining it to mean opes corrasζ, things which have been scraped or gathered together; but less satisfactorily, for the clause αְּ ?ιεֹ ?νΰַ ?τּ ?ε, at the end of this member of the verse, hardly permits us to look for a second subject, synonymous with ιְ ?αεּ ?μ. Moreover we must have found that thought expressed rather by πβψεϊιε = opes ab eo corrasae. As it would seem that after Job 20:27 a return to the wicked man’s possessions and treasures could not properly be looked for, some commentators have indulged in attempted emendations of the passage, all of which touch upon ιβμ in the first member (Jussive Kal from βμδ, “to depart, to wander forth, comp. Proverbs 27:25). Thus Dathe, Stickel, etc., read ιָ ?βֹ ?μ—“the flood rolls away his house, etc.:” Ewald, ιִ ?βַּ ?μ—“the revenue of his house must roll itself away (like a torrent;” comp. Amos 5:27): Dillmann finally ιִ ?βָּ ?μ, Jussive Niphal of βμδ—“the produce of his house must become apparent as that which flows away in the day of His wrath.” Job 20:29. Closing verse, lying outside of the strophic arrangement, like Job 5:27, etc.—This is the portion of the wicked man from Elohim; the lot or “portion” (ηֵ ?μֶ ?χ, comp. Job 27:13; Job 31:2) assigned to him by Elohim, [ΰָ ?γָ ?νψָ ?ωָׁ ?ς, “a rare application of ΰָ ?γָ ?ν, comp. Proverbs 6:12 instead of which ΰִ ?ιωׁ is more usual,” Del.].—And the heritage appointed to him by God.—πַ ?ηֲ ?μַ ?ϊΰִ ?ξְ ?ψεֹ, lit. “his heritage of the word,” i.e., his heritage as appointed to him by a word, by a command, a judicial sentence (ΰֹ ?ξֶ ?ψ in this sense only here; but used similarly nevertheless in Psalms 77:9; Hebrews 3:9. It is possible moreover to take the suffix in ΰִ ?ξְ ?ψεֹ as genitive of the object to ΰֹ ?ξֶ ?ψ [or ΰֵ ?ξֶ ?ψ], in which case the sense would be: “the heritage of the command concerning him.” In this case however the construction would be a much harsher one. [“ημχ and πημϊ taken in connection with the ιαεμ of the preceding verse form a striking oxymoron: that his heritage be taken away from him, that is the heritage adjudged to him by God.” Schlottmann]. AND ETHICALThis second discourse of Zophar’s, which is at the same time the last of the utterances directed by him against Job—for in the third act of the colloquy he does not speak—as respects the passionate obstinacy with which it urges the one ever repeated dogma and fundamental axiom of the friends is related to the second discourse of Eliphaz in chapter 15, as superlative to positive, and to the second discourse of Bildad, as superlative to comparative. In it the narrow-minded, legal, as well as unfriendly and unjust opposition of the friends to the misunderstood sufferer appears at its height, as was the case with the former discourse of Zophar in its relation to its two predecessors.—Neither does it present any new thoughts in opposition to Job, any more than the immediately preceding discourses of Eliphaz and Bildad. The terrible picture of the judgment of wrath upon the sinner, with the delineation of which, true to the pattern presented by those two discourses, it is principally, and indeed almost exclusively occupied, exhibits scarcely anything that is materially new or original. Only as regards its formal execution does this picture of horror surpass its two predecessors. It excels in its adroit presentation, and in its skilful, and to some extent original treatment of the familiar figures and phraseology of the Chokmah. This descriptive power, which in the effects produced by it proves itself to be not inconsiderable, seems indeed to be wholly subservient to the speaker’s spirit and purpose, which are characterized by hateful suspicion and vehement accusation. This materially weakens the impression which it is calculated to produce. “It is not possible to illustrate the principle that the covetous, unmerciful rich man is torn away from his prosperity by the punishment God decrees for him, more fearfully and more graphically than Zophar does it; and this terrible description is not overdrawn, but true and appropriate—but in opposition to Job it is the extreme of uncharitable-ness which outdoes itself: applied to him the fearful truth becomes a fearful lie. For in Zophar’s mind Job is the godless man, whose rejoicing does not last long, who indeed raises himself towards heaven, but as his own dung, (comp. on Job 20:7) must he perish, and to whom the sin of his unjust gain is become as the poison of the viper in his belly. The arrow of God’s wrath sticks fast in him; and though he draw it out, it has already inflicted on him a deservedly mortal wound! The fire of God which has already begun to consume his possessions, does not rest until even the last remnant in his tent is consumed. The heavens, when in his self-delusion he seeks the defender of his innocence, reveal his guilt, and the earth which he hopes to have as a witness in his favor, rises up as his accuser. Thus mercilessly does Zophar seek to stifle the new trust which Job conceives towards God, and to extinguish the faith which bursts upward from beneath the ashes of the conflict. His method is soul-destroying; he seeks to slay the life which germinates from the feeling of death, instead of strengthening it.” (Delitzsch). Comp. what Brentius says in his straightforward striking way: “Zophar to the end of the chapter puts forth the most correct opinions; but he is at fault in that he falsely distorts them against Job, just as though Job were afflicted for impiety, and asserted his innocence out of hypocrisy, and not out of the faith of the Gospel.” AND As regards the homiletic treatment of this discourse, the same may be said in general as of the discourses, related as to their contents, in chapters 15 and 18. The description given of the perishableness of the prosperity of the ungodly, and of their just punishment at the last through the judgment of God, has its objective truth and value for the practical life; but the vehement tone of the representation, and the many unmistakable allusions to Job as the object of the speaker’s unfriendly suspicion, destroy the pure enjoyment of the discourse, and compel us to regard the picture, skilful as it is in itself, with critical caution. Particular PassagesJob_20:8. Brentius: The state of the ungodly is compared to the most unsubstantial things, to wit, to a dream, and to visions of the night, which, while they are seen, seem to be something, but when the dreamer awakens, there is nothing remaining, as is set forth in Isaiah 29. Job 20:10. Idem: From this verse we learn whence the poverty, and whence the wealth of children proceeds, viz., from the piety of parents (Psalms 37:25).—Weimar Bible: The reason why many children suffer great misfortune, and especially poverty, lies often in their own sin, but it also proceeds oftentimes from the wickedness of their parents (Exodus 20:5). He therefore who would see his children prosperous, let him beware of sin. Job 20:12 seq. Starke: Sinful pleasure is commonly transformed into pain. When sin is first tasted it is sweet like sugar, but afterwards it bites like an adder (Proverbs 20:17; Proverbs 23:32; Sir 21:2 seq.). Job 20:20 seq. Brentius: As water can never satisfy the dropsical, but the more it is drank, the more it is thirsted for; so riches never satisfy the mind’s lust, for the human mind can be satisfied with no good, save God (Ecclesiastes 1:8). Hence it comes to pass by God’s righteous decree, that as the avaricious man is discontented with what he has, as well as what he has not, so the ungodly man never has enough, however much property he may possess, because he is without God, in whom all good things are stored. You have an example of this in Alexander the Great, who, not content with the sovereignty of one world, groaned on learning that there were more worlds. Job 20:27. Idem: Creatures, when they see the impieties and crimes of the ungodly, are silent until God pronounces judgment; but when His judgment is revealed, then all creatures betray the crimes which the ungodly have committed in their presence. In Christ however the sins of all the godly are covered, nay, are absorbed.—Wohlfarth: Nature is leagued against sin! It is an incontrovertible truth which we find here, written thousands of years ago—he who departs from God’s ways contends against heaven and earth, which from the beginning of the ages have been arrayed against sin, as a revolt against God’s sacred ordinances. B.—JOB: That which experience teaches concerning the prosperity of the ungodly during their life on earth argues not against but for his innocence:Job 211. Introductory appeal to the friends: Job 21:1-61         But Job answered and said: 2    Hear diligently my speech, and let this be your consolations. 3    Suffer me that I may speak; and after that I have spoken, mock on. 4    As for me, is my complaint to man? and if it were so, why should not my spirit be troubled? 5    Mark me, and be astonished, and lay your hand upon your mouth. 6    Even when I remember I am afraid, and trembling taketh hold on my flesh. 2. Along with the fact of the prosperity of the wicked, taught by experience (Job 21:7-16), stands the other fact of earthly calamity befalling the pious and the righteous: Job 21:7-267    Wherefore do the wicked live, become old, yea, are mighty in power? 8    Their seed is established in their sight with them, and their offspring before their eyes. 9    Their houses are safe from fear, neither is the rod of God upon them. 10    Their bull gendereth and faileth not; their cow calveth, and casteth not her calf. 11    They send forth their little ones like a flock, and their children dance. 12    They take the timbrel and harp, and rejoice at the sound of the organ. 13    They spend their days in wealth, and in a moment go down to the grave. 14    Therefore they say unto God, Depart from us, for we desire not the knowledge of Thy ways. 15    What is the Almighty that we should serve Him? and what profit should we have, if we pray unto Him? 16    Lo, their good is not in their hand! the counsel of the wicked is far from me. 17    How oft is the candle of the wicked put out?      and how oft cometh their destruction upon them? God distributeth sorrows in His anger. 18    They are as stubble before the wind, and as chaff that the storm carrieth away. 19    God layeth up His iniquity for His children: He rewardeth him, and he shall know it. 20    His eyes shall see his destruction, and he shall drink of the wrath of the Almighty. 21    For what pleasure hath he in his house after him, when the number of his months is cut off in the midst? 22    Shall any teach God knowledge? seeing He judgeth those that are high. 23    One dieth in his full strength, being wholly at ease, and quiet. 24    His breasts are full of milk, and his bones are moistened with marrow. 25    And another dieth in the bitterness of his soul, and never eateth with pleasure. 26    They shall lie down alike in the dust. and the worms shall cover them. 3. Rebuke of the friends because they set forth only one side of that experience, and use it to his prejudice Job 21:27-3427    Behold, I know your thoughts, and the devices which ye wrongfully imagine against me. 28    For ye say, Where is the house of the prince? and where are the dwelling-places of the wicked? 29    Have ye not asked them that go by the way? and do ye not know their tokens?— 30    that the wicked is reserved to the day of destruction? they shall be brought forth to the day of wrath. 31    Who shall declare his way to his face? and who shall repay him what he hath done? 32    Yet shall he be brought to the grave, and shall remain in the tomb. 33    The clods of the valley shall be sweet unto him, and every man shall draw after him, as there are innumerable before him. 34    How then comfort ye me in vain, seeing in your answers there remaineth falsehood? AND 1. The obstinacy of the friends, who show neither the desire nor the inclination to solve the mystery of Job’s sufferings in a friendly spirit, and in such a way as would not wound his feelings, drives Job to come out in theoretic opposition to the narrow and external interpretation of the doctrine of retribution advocated by them, and to change his reply from the essentially personal character which it had previously borne into a strict criticism of their doctrine. Having first calmly but bitterly challenged their attention to that which he had to communicate to them (Job 21:2-6), he urges against them the mysterious fact that often the ungodly revel in superfluity of prosperity to the end of their life, while on the contrary the pious are often throughout their earthly life pursued by misfortune (Job 21:7-26). In view of a distribution of prosperity and adversity so unequal, and so much at variance with the moral desert of men, it was decidedly unjust, nay malicious and false on the part of the friends to undertake to brand him as a wicked man on account of his misfortune (Job 21:27-34). The whole discussion which brilliantly demonstrates Job’s superiority over the friends in respect to the stand-point of ethical perception and experience, and which serves to introduce the last turn which the colloquy takes, and which is decisive of his complete victory, is divided into five strophes, of five verses each, the first strophe covering the exordium (Job 21:2-6), the remaining four constituting the Second Division [the former two of these strophes again being occupied with the fact, the latter two with the argument showing the fact to be irreconcilable with their theory of retribution; Dillm.]; followed by two strophes of four verses each [rebuking the one-sidedness of the friends] constituting the Third Division (Job 21:27-34.) 2. First Division (and strophe): Exordium: Job 21:2-6. Job announces that he is about to speak of a mysterious and indeed an astounding phenomenon, which demands the entire attention of the friends. Job 21:2. Hear, I pray, hear my speech! and let this be instead of your consolations—or: “in order that this may supply the place of your consolations, may prove to me a comfort instead of them, seeing that they so poorly accomplish their purpose” (comp. Job 15:11; Job 16:2). [A fine touch of irony: attentive silence would be a much more real comfort than all their ineffectual talk!] Job 21:3. Suffer me (ωָׂ ?ΰεּ ?πִ ?ι, with Kamets before the tone, comp. Jonah 1:12; 1 Kings 20:33; Gesenius § 60 [§ 59] Rem. 1)—and then will I speak (I, ΰָֹֽ ?βֹ ?λִ ?ι, in contrast with the “you” of the Imper., although without a particularly strong accent); and after that I have spoken, thou mayest mock (ϊμςιβ, concessive, Ewald § 136, e). The demand for a patient hearing of his rebuke, which reminds us somewhat of the saying of Themistocles—“Strike, but hear me!” (Plutarch, Themist. c. 11), is specifically addressed in the second half to Zophar, whose last discourse must have grieved him particularly, and who in fact after the rejoinder which Job now makes had nothing more to say, and could only leave the mocking assaults on Job to be resumed by his older companions. [So in Job 16:3 Job had singled out Eliphaz in his reply, and again in Job 26:2-4, he singles out Bildad]. Job 21:4. Does my complaint go forth from me in regard to man?i.e. as for me (ΰָ ?πֹ ?λִ ?ι emphatically prefixed, and then resumed again in ωׂ ?ιηι, Gesen. § 145 [§ 142], 2), is my complaint directed against men? is my complaint (ωִׂ ?ιηִ ?ι as in Job 7:13; Job 9:27; Job 10:1), concerning men, or is it not rather concerning something that has a superhuman cause, something that is decreed by God? That in this last thought lies the tacit antithesis to μְ ?ΰָ ?γָ ?ν is evident from the second member: or why should I not be impatient? lit. “why should my spirit not become short,” comp. Job 6:11; Micah 2:7; Zechariah 11:8; Proverbs 14:29. That which follows gives us to understand more distinctly that it was something quite extraordinary, superhuman, under the burden of which Job groans, and concerning which he has to complain. [The rendering of the last clause found in E. V. Lee, Wemyss, etc.: “And if it were so, why should not my spirit be troubled?” is both less natural, in view of the antecedent probability that εְ ?ΰִ ?ν is cor-related to the δ interrogative, less simple, and less satisfactory in the meaning which it yields. E.]. Job 21:5. Turn ye to me and be astonished, and lay the hand on the mouth,viz.: as being dumb with astonishment, comp. Job 29:9; Job 40:4—εְ ?δָ ?ωַׁ ?ξּ ?εּ Imper. cons. Hiph. from ωָׁ ?ξַ ?ν (comp. Job 17:8; Job 18:20) [with Pattach for Tsere in pause], obstupescite. According to the reading δֳ ?ωַׁ ?ξּ ?εּ (Imper. Hoph. of the same verb) [as some regard it even with the punctuation δָ ?ωַׁ ?ξּ ?εּ = hoshammu] the meaning is not essentially different. Job 21:6. Verily if I think on it I am confounded (εְ ?πִ ?αְ ?δָ ?μְ ?ϊִּ ?ι apodosis; comp. Job 7:14) and my flesh seizes on horror. In Heb. αְּ ?ωָׁ ?ψִ ?ι is subject; comp. the similar phraseology in Job 18:20. τָּ ?μַּ ?φεּ ?ϊ, from τָּ ?μַ ?υ Job 9:6, means convulsive quaking, terror, as in the New Testament ἐκθαμβεῖσθαικαὶ ἀδημονεῖν (Mark 14:33). It is to be noted how by these strong expressions the friends are prepared to hear something grave, fearful, astounding, to wit a proposition, founded on experience, which seems to call in question the divine justice, and to the affirmation of which Job accordingly proceeds hesitatingly, and with visible reluctance. 3. Second Division: First Half: The testimony of experience to the fact that the wicked are often, and indeed ordinarily prosperous: Job 21:7-16. Second Strophe: Job 21:7-11. Why do the wicked live on—instead of dying early, as Zophar had maintained, Job 20:5. The same question is propounded by Jeremiah, Job 12:1 seq.; comp. Psalms 73. Malachi 3:13 seq. Become old, yea, strong in power, or: “are become old (lit. advanced in years, comp. ςַ ?ϊִּ ?ιχ) and mighty in possessions.” In regard to βָּ ?αַ ?ψδַ ?ιִ ?μ (with accus. of specification) comp. the equivalent phrase δִ ?ωְׂ ?βָּ ?δδַ ?ιִ ?μ, Psalms 73:12; and in regard to ηַ ?ιִ ?μ see above Job 15:29; Job 20:15; Job 20:18. Job 21:8. Their posterity is establishedπָ ?λεֹ ?ο here not—“standing in readiness,” as in Job 12:5; Job 15:23, but “enduring, firmly established, as in (Psalms 93:2) before them round about them, surrounding them in the closest proximity; this is the meaning of ςִ ?ξָּ ?ν, not: “like themselves” (Rosenm., Umbreit, Sohlottm., Vaih., [Fόrst, Noyes] etc.), in behalf of which latter signification to be sure Job 9:26 might be cited; but the parallel expression—“before their eyes”—in the second member, favors rather the former sense. [And their offspring before their eyes. φֶ ?ΰֱ ?φָ ?ΰִ ?ιν, as in Job 5:25—“is exactly expressed by our issue, though perhaps the reduplication rather implies issue’s issue.” Carey]. Job, having been himself so ruthlessly stripped of his children, makes prominent above all else this aspect of the external prosperity of the wicked, that namely which is exhibited in a flourishing posterity, a fine trait of profound psychological truth! [To be noted moreover is the pathetic repetition of the thought in both members of the verse, and its no less pathetic resumption in Job 21:11. This picture of a complete and peaceful household, with its circle of joyous youth fascinates the bereaved father’s heart exceedingly, and he dwells on it with yearning fondness!] Job 21:9. Their houses [are] peace (ωָׁ ?μֹ ?εν, the same as αְּ ?ωָׁ ?μεֹ ?ν; comp. Job 5:24 [where see rem. in favor of the more literal and forcible rendering obtained by not assuming the preposition at all; E.] Isaiah 41:3) without fear. ξִ ?τַּ ?ηַ ?γ, like ξִ ?αְּ ?ωָ ?γִ ?ε Job 19:26; (comp. Job 11:15; Isaiah 22:3) and the rod of Eloah cometh not upon them, i. e. to punish them; comp. ωֵׁ ?αֶ ?θ in Job 9:34; Job 37:13 [How different from the fate of his own “house!” No such “Terror,” no such “Scourge” as that which had made his a ruin!—E.]. Job 21:10. From the state of the household the description turns to that of the cattle, with the peculiarity that here exceptionally the sing takes the place of the plur., which is used almost throughout to designate the wicked (so again below Job 21:19, and in like manner Job 24:5; Job 24:16 seq.). His bull gendereth and faileth not (Zφckler lit.—“his bull covereth and impregnates”]. ωׁ ?εֹ ?ψ, in itself of common gender, is here indicated as a masc. both by the contrast with τָּ ?ψָ ?δ in b, and by its predic. ςִ ?αַּ ?ψ, “to cover, to gender” (comp. ςָ ?αεּ ?ψ “produce fruit,” Joshua 5:11-12). The additional strengthening clause εְ ?μֹ ?ΰιַ ?βְ ?ςִ ?μ, neque efficit ut ejiciat (semen) indicates that the impregnation is successful. The second member is entirely parallel.—His cow calveth easily (τִּ ?μֵֹ ?θ, synon. withδִ ?ξְ ?μִ ?ιθ ,ξִ ?μֵּ ?θ, Isaiah 34:15; Isaiah 66:7) and miscarries not, neque abortum patitur, comp. Genesis 31:38; Exodus 23:26. Job 21:11. Once more Job recurs to the fairest instance of earthly prosperity, the possession of a flourishing troop of children. On ςֲ ?εִ ?ιμִ ?ιν comp. above on Job 19:18 [where however the word suggests, as it does not necessarily here, a bad quality in the children themselves; Bernard’s rendering “they send forth their wicked little children,” introduces an incongruous element into the picture, which Job contemplates here as a pleasing and attractive one.—E.] As to ωִׁ ?μֵּ ?ηַ, “to send forth, to let loose,” see Isaiah 32:20. Third Strophe: Job 21:12-16. They (the wicked) sing loud with the playing of timbrel and harp; hence with joyous festivity, as in Isaiah 5:12—ιִ ?ωְׂ ?ΰεּ (scil. χεֹ ?μ) lit. “they raise their voice,” i. e., in loud jubilations or songs of joy; comp. Isaiah 42:11—αְּ ?ϊεֹ ?σεְ ?λִ ?πּ ?εֹ ?ψ, used as in Psalms 49:5 [4] of the musical accompaniment; hence, “with, to the timbrel and harp.” On the contrary the reading preferred by the Masora and several Rabbis, λְּ ?ϊֹ ?σεΧ would signify “at, during the playing of the timbrel, etc.” (λְּ of the proximate specification of time, as in λָּ ?ςֵ ?ϊ [“about the time”], λִּ ?ξְ ?ςָ ?θ, etc.). Concerning ςεּ ?βָ ?α, instead of which several MSS. and Ed’s have in Job 30:31ςֻ ?βָ ?α, and in Psalms 150:4ςֻ ?βָּ ?α, comp. Delitzsch on Genesis 4:21; Winer, Realwφrterb. II., 123 seq. [“The three musical instruments here mentioned are certainly the most ancient, and are naturally the most simple, and indeed may be regarded as the originals of every species of musical instrument that has since been invented, all which may be reduced to three kinds—string instruments, wind instruments, and instruments of percussion; and the λִּ ?πּ ?εֹ ?ψharp, the ςεּ ?βָ ?α, pipe, and the ϊֹּ ?σ, tabor, may be considered as the first representatives of each of these species respectively.” Carey, see illustrations in Carey, p. 453 seq., and Smith Bib. Dict. under “Harp, Timbrel, and Organ”]. Job 21:13. They spend in prosperity their days.—So according to the K’ri ιְ ?λַ ?μּ ?εּ (lit. “they complete, finish,” comp. Job 36:11; Psalms 90:9), while the K’thibh ιְ ?αַ ?μּ ?εּ would be, according to Isaiah 65:22 = “they use up, wear out” (usu conterunt) [which is more expressive than the K’ri, signifying not only that they bring their life to an end, but that they use it up, get out of it all the enjoyment that is in it.—E.]. In either case the affirmation is made in direct contradiction to the opposite descriptions of Eliphaz, Bildad, and Zophar, as e. g., Job 15:32; Job 18:14; Job 20:11.—And in a moment (αְּ ?ψֶ ?βַ ?ς like our “in a trice” [Germ.: “im Nu”], hence quickly, easily, without a struggle) they sink down to Sheol,—they thus enjoy a quick death, free from suffering, having fully enjoyed their life even to the end. The connection does not allow us to understand it of an “evil sudden death,” but rather requires the idea of a euthanasy.—ιֵ ?ηַ ?ϊּ ?εּ might in itself be the Imperf. Niph. of ηϊϊ: “they are frightened down” [others, e. g., Bernard; “they are crushed, or hurled down”], to which however the Accus. lociωְׁ ?ΰεֹ ?μ is ill suited. More correctly the form is derived from πηϊ, the Imperf. of which is written either ιִ ?πְ ?ηַ ?ϊ, or ιֵ ?ηַ ?ϊ. It may be read here either ιֵ ?ηָ ?ϊεּ (for ιֵ ?ηֲ ?ϊεּ ?—so Ewald, Hirzel), or with reduplication of the ϊ in pause [Dageshforte emphatic, Green, § 24, c] after the Masora; comp. Gesen. Lehrgeb., p. 45; Ewald, § 93, d. Job 21:14 seq. And yet they say unto God, “Depart from us,”etc., etc., i. e., notwithstanding their prosperity [“the fut. consec.εַ ?ιּ ?ΰֹ ?ξְ ?ψεּ does not here denote temporally that which follows upon and from something else, but generally that which is inwardly connected with something else, and even with that which is contradictory, and still occurring at the same time;” Del.], which should constrain them to gratitude towards God, they will know nothing about Him, yea, they account the service of God and prayer to Him as useless. τָּ ?βַ ?ςαְּ, precibus adire; comp. Rth 1:16; Jeremiah 7:16; Jeremiah 27:18. Job 21:16. After the frivolous words of the ungodly Job here resumes his own description, and concludes the section in which he states his proposition.—Behold, not in their hand stands their prosperity.—This is not an objection assumed by Job to be made by his opponents, as below in Job 21:19 (Schnurrer, Schlottm., Kamph.) [Noyes, Elzas], but an expression of Job’s own conviction, who intends herewith to set forth that not they, but God Himself is in some mysterious way the cause of their prosperity, by which he would indicate the difficulty of the problem, with which he is here occupied in general. The sentence is not an expression of Job’s disapprobation of the view of life prevalent among the wicked (Ewald) [Carey, Wordsworth], for such an expression of disapprobation first appears in b, and the position of the words in a shows clearly that the main emphasis lies on αְּ ?ιָ ?γָ ?ν. The interrogative rendering of the clause, “Behold! is not their prosperity in their hand?” (Rashi, Hirzel, Heiligst., Welte, Hahn [Renan]) is contradicted by the use of δֵ ?ομֹ ?ΰ, not δֲ ?μֹ ?ΰ at the beginning. [Moreover the connection with b according to such a rendering is strained.—E.]—The counsel of the wicked be far from me!—The same formula of detestation recurs in the following discourse of Eliphaz, Job 22:18—ψָֽ ?ηֲ ?χָ ?ηξֶ ?πּ ?ι is used in a precative or optative sense (Ewald, § 223, b); it is thus essentially equivalent to the formula elsewhere in use—ηֲ ?μִ ?ιμָ ?δμִ ?ι. [“It is the perf. of certainty, which expresses that which is wished as a fact, but with an emotional exclamative accent.” Del.]. In respect to ςֵ ?φָ ?η, here in the sense of fundamental maxim, disposition, view of life, comp. Job 5:13; Job 10:3; Job 18:7. Job thus persists decidedly here again in his refusal in any way to renounce God; comp. Job 1:11; Job 2:5. [This strong repudiation by Job of the practical atheism of the wicked is of especial importance to the moral problem of the book.—E.]. 4. Second Division: Second Half. Antithetic demonstration of the preceding proposition derived from experience, with reference to the opposite affirmations of the friends, and their possible reproaches. Fourth Strophe: Job 21:17-21. [The views of the friends in regard to retribution denied both as to the fact and the principle]. Job 21:17 involves a reference to certain expressions which Bildad had used in Job 18 in justification of his doctrine, particularly to his description of the “extinguishing of the light of the wicked” (Job 18:5), and of the sudden destruction (ΰֵ ?ιγ—“prop pressure of suffering” Del.) of the same (Job 18:12), but only to call in question the correct application of these figures.—How oft does the lamp of the wicked go out, and their destruction break upon them?—In Job’s mind this “how oft” (λַּ ?ξָּ ?δ, comp. Psalms 78:40) is naturally equivalent to “how rarely;” for he decidedly doubts the general correctness of those affirmations of Bildad Moreover the influence of this interrogative “how oft” extends to the third member of the verse [which accordingly is not to be rendered affirmatively, as in E. V., “God distributed sorrows in His anger”—a rendering which changes the meaning of the entire context, making it an assertion by Job that God does punish the wicked as the friends had taught—whereas on the contrary Job is asking how often was this the case?—E.]: (how often) does He distribute sorrows in His anger? The subject is God (comp. Job 20:23). The particular affirmation of his opponents, to which Job here alludes, is the close of Zophar’s last speech (Job 20:29), the ηֵ ?μֶ ?χ of which is distinctly enough echoed here in the ιְ ?ηַ ?μֵּ ?χ. The retrospective reference to this passage would be still more definite if we were to derive ηֲ ?αָ ?μִ ?ιν from ηֶ ?αֶ ?μ, measuring-line (so the Targ., Ewald, Hirz., Dillmann [Schlott., Renan, Fόrst]), and explain it to mean “lots, heritages” (comp. Psalms 16:6). It is more natural, nevertheless, (with the LXX. Vulg., Gesenius, Rosenm. [E. V., Good, Lee, Noyes, Ber., Rod., Elz.], etc., to take the word in its ordinary sense = “sorrows, calamities” (plur. of ηֵ ?αֶ ?μ). [“The plur. does not occur in that tropical sense (of “lots”), and if it were so intended here, ηַ ?αְ ?μֵ ?ιδֶ ?ν, or ηֲ ?αָ ?μִ ?ινμָ ?δֶ ?ν might at least be expected.” Del.]. Also the translation “snares, gins,” (Stickel, Hahn, Delitzsch) yields a meaning good in itself, and would have, moreover, the special recommendation of furnishing a retrospective reference to Job 8:10-12, the same passage of Bildad’s discourse to which a and b look. The expression—“to distribute snares”—is however altogether too harsh, and the assumption that such an unusual expression is occasioned by the collateral reference to Job 18:10 seq., and to Job 20:29, is altogether too artificial. Job 21:18 (over which the influence of λַּ ?ξָּ ?δ continues to extend): How often are they as Straw (chopped straw) [a figure occurring only here: the figure of chaff is more frequent. Del.] before the wind, and as chaff (Psalms 1:4; Isaiah 17:13) which the whirlwind snatches away? An allusion to Zophar’s description, Job 20:8-9, if not as regards the expressions, still as regards the sense. Job 21:19. “God lays up his calamity for his (the wicked man’s) children!” (ΰεֹ ?πεֹ from ΰָ ?εֶ ?ο in the signification “calamity;” comp. Job 11:11; Job 15:35.) [There is possibly a play on the word ΰεπε, which may be rendered either “his wealth,” or “his calamity.”—His treasure is the coming wrath! ΰεο also means “iniquity,” and some (E. V., Del., etc.) render it so here. Here, however, the “evil” which is the punishment of “evil” best suits the context.—E.] This is an objection of the opponents, which links itself to similar affirmations by Eliphaz (Job 5:4) and Zophar (Job 20:10), and which Job himself here formulates, in order forthwith to refute it: (Rather) let Him recompense it to him (or, in view of the emphasis belonging to the word bearing the principal tone: “to him let Him repay it”) that he may feel it (ιָ ?γַ ?ς here sentire, to feel, to be sensible of, as in Isaiah 9:8; Hosea 9:7; Ezekiel 25:14). In a manner quite similar the prophets Jeremiah (Job 31:29 seq) and Ezekiel (Job 18) controvert the similar doctrine of the vicarious expiation of the guilt of parents by their posterity. [Job’s view is that retribution can be such only when it falls on the offender himself. It may affect others—although Job does not say that himself—it must reach him. E.] Job 21:20 continues the refutation of that false theory of substitution or satisfaction, and illustrates at the same time how the evil doer is to ιγς or “feel” the divine punishment.—λִּ ?ιγ “destruction,” (lit. “a thrust, blow,” plaga), only here in the Old Testament; synonymous with the Arabic caid. The figure of drinking the divine wrath has immediate reference to Zophar’s description, Job 20:23. [“The emphasis lies on the signs of the person in ςֵ ?ιπָ ?ε and ιִ ?ωְׁ ?ϊֶּ ?δ May his own eyes see his ruin; may he himself have to drink of the divine wrath.” Del.] Job 21:21 gives a reason for that which he has just said against that perverted theory by calling attention to the stolid insensibility of the evil-doer, as a consummate egoist, in respect to the interests of his posterity. For what careth he for his house after him: lit. “for what is his concern, his interest (ηֵ ?τֶ ?υ here, as in Job 22:3; comp. Isaiah 58:3) in his house after him” (i.e., after his death)? ΰַ ?ηֲ ?ψָ ?ιε is in close union with αְּ ?αֵ ?ιϊεֹ (comp. e. g.Genesis 17:19) not with ηֶ ?τְּ ?φεֹ. If the number of his months is apportioned to him; or “while [or when] the number, etc.” The whole of this circumstantial clause, which is a partial echo of Job 15:20 (comp. Job 14:5), expresses the thought, that the selfish pleasure-seeking evil-doer is satisfied if only his appointed term of life remains to him unabridged. This general meaning may be maintained whether, in accordance with Proverbs 30:27, we explain ηָ ?φַ ?υ to mean: “to allot, to appoint,” thus rendering it as a synonym of ηָ ?φָ ?δ (Job 40:30 [Job 41:6]; so Targ., Gesen., Ewald, Dillm.); or, which is less probable, we take it as a denominative from ηֵ ?υ, “arrow,” in the sense of “casting lots, disposing of by lot” [from the custom of shaking up arrows for lots—a doubtful sense for the Hebrew] (so Cocceius, Rosenm., Umbreit, Hirzel, etc.); or whether, finally, we assign to the word the meaning of “cutting off, completing” (Gesenius in Thes., Stickel, Delitzsch [E. V. Good, Ber., Noy., Schlott., Con., Rod., Ren., Fόrst] etc.)—to which latter interpretation, however, the expression—“the number of his months”—is not so well suited, for a number is not properly cut off. [In any case the addition of E. V., “when the number of his months is cut off in the midst,” is erroneous; for even if we assign to the verb the signification—“cut off”—the meaning of the clause is cutting off at the end, not in the midst. What is the evil-doer’s concern in his house, when he himself is no more? The other meaning given above however—“to apportion”—gives a more vivid representation of his brutal selfishness, his unconcern even for his own flesh and blood, provided he himself have his full share of life and its enjoyments. What careth he for his house after him, if the full number of his own months be meted out to him? E.] The number of ηֻ ?φָּ ?φεּ is determined by the subordinate [but nearest] term of the subject, by virtue of an attraction similar to that in Job 15:20 (Gesen. § 148 [§ 145], 1) [Green, § 277]. Fifth Strophe: Job 21:22-26 : [The theory of the friends involves a presumptuous dictation to God of what He should do, seeing that His present dealings with men, and their participation of the common destiny of the grave, furnish no indication of moral character]. Job 21:22. Shall one teach God knowledge. μְ ?ΰֵ ?μ as containing the principal notion is put emphatically first. In respect to the dative construction of verbs of teaching (as in Greek διδάσκειντινίτι) comp. Ewald, § 283, c.: Seeing He judgeth those that are in heaven: lit: “and He nevertheless judges (εְ ?δεּ ?ΰ, circumstantial clause) the high” [Carey: “dignities.” The LXX read γξιν, φόνους]. The “high” are simply the heavenly spirits, the angels as inhabiting the heights of heaven (ξְ ?ψεֹ ?ξִ ?ιν, comp. Job 16:19; Job 25:2; Job 31:2), not the celestial heights themselves, as Gesenius explains, with a reference to Psalms 78:69, a reference, however, which is probably unsuitable. Still less does it mean “the proud” (Hahn, Olshausen), a signification which ψָ ?ν by itself, and without qualification never has. This proposition, that God exercises judicial power over the exalted spirits of heaven, Job advances here all the more readily, that the friends had already appealed twice in similar words to the same fact of the absolute holiness and justice of God (Job 4:18; Job 15:15). They had indeed done this with the intent of supporting their narrow-minded doctrine of retribution, while on the contrary Job, by the same proposition would put their short-sighted theory to the rout, and direct attention to the unfathomable depth and secresy of God’s counsels, and of the principles of His government. Job 21:23-26 demonstrate this unfathomableness and incomprehensibleness of the divine judgments (Romans 11:33) by two examples, which are contrasted each with the other (Job 21:23, Job 21:25 : ζֶ ?δΞζֶ ?δ, “the one—the other”), of one man dying in the fulness of his prosperity, of another who is continually unfortunate, but whom the like death unites with the former, notwithstanding that their moral desert during their life was altogether different, or directly opposite in character. The assumption of many ancient and some modern commentators, as e. g. Hahn, that by the prosperous man described in Job 21:23 seq. a wicked man, and by the unfortunate man described in Job 21:25 a pious man is intended, without qualification, is arbitrary, and hardly corresponds with exactness to the poet’s idea. The tendency of the parallel presented is rather in accordance with Job 21:22, to show, in proof of the mysteriousness of the divine dealings and judgment, that what happens outwardly to men in this life is not necessarily determined by their moral conduct, but that this latter might be, and often enough is directly at variance with the external prosperity. Job 21:23. The one dies in the fulness of his prosperity; lit. “in bodily prosperity,” in ipsa sua integritate. In respect to ςֶ ?φֶ ?ν “self” [essence, the very thing] comp. Gesen. § 124 [§ 122], 2, Rem. 3; and in respect to ϊֹּ ?ν, “integrity in the physical sense, bodily, in general external well being,” comp. the word ξְ ?ϊֹ ?ν generally used elsewhere in this sense, Psalms 38:4 [3], 8 [7], and also ϊְּ ?ξִ ?ιξִ ?ινProverbs 1:12—ωַׁ ?μְ ?ΰֲ ?πָ ?ο in the second member, which is not found elsewhere is an alternate form of ωַׁ ?ΰַ ?πָ ?ο, “unconcerned,” enlarged by the introduction of a liquid [comp. ζμςσ from ζςσ, ζstuare, and αμρν, βάλσαμον, from αωׂ ?ν; Del.]. According to Rφdiger, Olsh., it is possibly just an error in writing for ωַׁ ?ΰֲ ?πָ ?ο, the form given above in Job 12:5. ωָׁ ?μֵ ?ιε stands here for the more frequent defective form ωָׁ ?μֵ ?ε, Job 20:20; comp. Jeremiah 49:31. Job 21:24. His troughs are full of milk. Most moderns, following the lead of the Talmudic ξַ ?ςֲ ?θָ ?ο “olive-trough,” as well as the authority of the Targ. and many Rabbis, take ςֲ ?θִ ?ιπִ ?ιν correctly in the sense of “vessels, troughs” [“milk-pails,” Luther, Wolfsohn, Elzas; “bottles,” Lee; “skins,” Carey (i. e. undressed skins, the abundance of milk making it necessary to use these)], to the rejection of interpretations which are in part singularly at variance, such as “cattle-pastures” (Aben-Ezra, Schult. [Renan, Weymss] etc., “veins” (Fόrst), “jugular veins” (Saad.), “sides” (Pesh.) [Noyes, Con.], “bowels” (LXX., Vulg. [“breasts,” Targ., E. V.; “loins,” Rodwell; “sleek skin,” Good. “The assumption that ςθιπιε must be a part of the body is without satisfactory ground (comp. against it e. g. Job 20:17, and for it Job 20:11); and Schlottm. very correctly observes that in the contrast in connection with the representation of the well-watered marrow one expects a reference to a rich, nutritious drink.” Delitzsch]. The meaning of this member of the verse accordingly reminds us in general of Job 20:17, which description of Zophar’s Job here purposely recalls, in like manner as in “the marrow of the bones,” in b he recalls Job 21:11 of the same discourse. [And the marrow of his bones is well-watered]. In respect to “well-watered,” an agricultural or horticultural metaphor, comp. Isaiah 58:11. Job 21:25. The other dies with a bitter soul (comp. Job 3:20; Job 7:11; Job 10:1), and has not enjoyed good; lit. “and has not eaten of the good” (or “prosperity,” θεֹ ?αָ ?δ as in Job 9:25) with αְּ partitive, as in Psalms 141:4; comp. above Job 7:13 [ΰָ ?λַ ?μαְּ perhaps like ψָ ?ΰָ ?δα conveying the idea of enjoyment, as Schlottmann suggests. Not, however, of full enjoyment, but rather tasting of it.—Not as in E. V. “and never eateth with pleasure;” against which lies (1) The customary usage of αְּ partitive after verbs of eating and drinking; (2) The objective meaning of θεֹ ?αָ ?δ, which cannot be taken of subjective pleasure.—E]. Job 21:26. Together [or: beside one another] they lie down in the dust (of the grave), and worms cover them.—ψִ ?ξָּ ?δ, decay, worms, as above in Job 17:14. Comp. our proverbial expressions in regard to the equality of the grave, the impartiality of death, etc.5. Third Division: A rebuke of the friends on account of their one-sided judgment touching the external prosperity of men, a judgment which was only unfavorable as regards Job: Job 21:27-34. Sixth Strophe: Job 21:27-30.—Behold I know your thoughts [ξδωαεϊ, counsels, plans], and the plots (ξְ ?ζִ ?ξּ ?εֹ ?ϊ, sensu malo, as in Proverbs 12:2; Proverbs 14:17; Proverbs 24:8) [“is the name he gives to the delicately developed reasoning with which they attack him”: Delitzsch; the schemes which they invent to wound him, the painful dilemmas into which they would entrap him: E.] with which ye do violence to me: with the intent namely of presenting me at any cost as a sinner. [“By the construction of ηξν with ςμ the notion of falling upon and over-powering is indicated.” Schlottm.]. Job 21:28, hypothetical antecedent with λִּ ?ι, is related to Job 21:29 as its consequent, precisely like Job 19:28 to Job 21:29. [So Ewald. Del., Dillm. But such a construction seems neither natural nor forcible. The causal rendering: “For ye say, etc.,” is simpler and stronger. It was from just such taunts as the following that Job knew their spirit, and detected their insidious plots against his reputation and his peace. The causal rendering is adopted by E. V. Good, Wem., Noy., Words., Schlott., Con., Rod., Carey, Elzas, etc. E. ]. If, [or, when] ye say: “Where is the house of the tyrant? (πָ ?γִ ?ια, sensu malo, as in Isaiah 13:2, not in the neutral sense, as above in Job 12:21) [a title of honor, similar in use to our nobleman, generosus, for which, in its personal application to Job here, “tyrant” seems too strong a rendering. Neither here, nor in Is. l.c., is such a rendering called for. In this member the prominent idea is station, rank: the moral character of the πγια is indicated in the following member. E.], and where the tent inhabited by the wicked? lit., “the tent of the habitations of the wicked,’ by which possibly a spacious palatial tent is intended, with several large compartments within it (such as the tents of the Bedouin sheikhs are to this day), which can be recognized from afar by their size. [ξωׁ ?λπεϊ “is not an externally, but internally multiplying plur.; perhaps the poet by αιϊ intends a palace in the city, and by ΰδμξωׁ ?λπεδ a tent among the wandering tribes, rendered prominent by its spaciousness, and the splendor of the establishment” Del.]. It is to be noted moreover how distinct an allusion there is in the question to the repeated descriptions of the destruction of the tent of the wicked by Eliphaz and Bildad (Job 15:34; Job 18:15; Job 18:21). Job 21:29. Have ye not inquired then [ωְׁ ?ΰֶ ?μְ ?ϊֶּ ?ν for ωְׁ ?ΰַ ?μϊֶּ ?ν; see Green, § 119, 2] of those who travel: lit. “the wanderers, passers by, of the way;” comp. Lamentations 1:12;. Psalms 80:13, etc. [“People who have travelled much, and therefore are well acquainted with the stories of human destinies.” Del.]. Andtheir tokens ye will at least not fail to know;i. e. that which they nave to tell of examples of prosperous evil-doers and righteous ones in adversity (they, who have travelled much, who know about other lands and nations!) that you surely will not disregard, controvert, or reject? ϊְּ ?πַ ?λֵּ ?ψεּ, Piel of πλψ, expresses here, as in Deuteronomy 32:27 : 1 Samuel 23:7; Jeremiah 19:4, the negative sense of “ignoring, denying,” while occasionally, e. g. in Elihu’s use of it, Job 34:19, it signifies also to “acknowledge” (a meaning elsewhere found in the Hiphil). [So here E. V. Lee, Conant, Ewald, Schlott.—according to which rendering the second member is a continuation of the question begun in the first]. ΰεֹ ?δεֹ ?ϊ, “tokens,” means here “things worthy of note, remarkable incidents, memorabilia, anecdotes of travel.” Job 21:30 gives in brief compass the substance and contents of these lessons of travel: That in the day of destruction (ΰֵ ?ιγ, as in Job 21:17) the wicked is spared (i. e. is held back from ruin; ηωׂ ?κְ as in Job 16:6; Job 33:18), in the day of overflowing wrath they are led away:i. e. beyond the reach of the devastating effect of these outbursts of divine wrath (ςֲ ?αָ ?ψεֹ ?ϊ as in Job 40:11), so that these can do them no harm. The Hoph. δεּ ?αַ ?μ, which is used below in Job 21:32 of being escorted in honor to the grave, expresses here accordingly, in like manner as in Isaiah 55:12, being led away with a protecting escort (as, for example, Lot was conducted out of Sodom). [Noyes gives to the verb here the same application as in Job 21:32, and explains: He is borne to his grave in the day of wrath; i. e. he dies a natural, peaceful death]. The only unusual feature of this construction, which in any case is much to be preferred as a whole to that of Ewald [Rodwell] “on the day when the overflowings of wrath come on” is the μְ ?ιεֹ ?ν, instead of which we might rather look for αְּ ?ιεֹ ?ν, “in the day.” It is nevertheless unadvisable, in view of the context, to translate the second member—as e. g. with Dillman [E. V., Con., Carey]—“they are brought on to the day of wrath;” for such a proposition could not possibly, be attributed to the travellers, but at most to the friends; it would thus of necessity follow a very abruptly [and unnaturally]; neither would any essential relief be obtained from a transposition of Job 21:30 and Job 21:29 as suggested by Delitzsch. [Zφckler overlooks, however, the explanation of those (such as Scott, Carey, Conant, Wordsworth, Barnes, etc.) who regard the whole of this verse as expressing, through the travellers of Job 21:29, Job’s own conviction that the wicked are reserved for future retribution, that they are led forth to a day of wrath hereafter; that accordingly present exemption from the penalty of sin proves nothing as to a man’s real character. Such an explanation, however, is to be rejected for the following reasons: (1) It is at variance with the drift of the book’s argument. (2) It is inconceivable, if Job held so clearly and firmly to the doctrine of future retribution, as this view of the passage before us would imply, that he did not make more use of it in his discussions. (3) It is inconsistent with the connection (a) Why should he produce this view here as a foreign importation? Why should he rest it on experience? Observe that the proposition—the wicked are spared in times of calamity is a deduction from experience, for the truth of which Job might well appeal to the testimony of those who by much observation and experience could testify to the fact. But surely the doctrine of a future retribution must rest on other authority—the witness of conscience, the testimony of a divine revelation, the consensus of the wise and holy (not merely of the ςεֹ ?αְ ?ψֵ ?ιγֶ ?ψֶ ?κְ) in all ages and lands. (b) It is inconceivable that Job having carried his hearers forward to the retribution of the Hereafter as the solution of the mystery of the present should proceed to speak (as he does in the verses immediately following) of the present prosperity and pomp of the wicked, and of the continuance of the same to and upon the grave, in the same strain as before. Especially does the conclusion reached in Job 21:33 seem strange and unsuitable, if we suppose the sublime truth of a full retribution to be declared in Job 21:30—E.] Seventh Strophe: Job 21:31-34. Who to His face will declare His way? and hath He done aught—who will requite it to Him? This inquiry evidently proceeds not from the travellers, whose utterance has already come to an end in Job 21:30, but from Job himself. Moreover it concerns not the sinner, but God, the unsearchably wise and mighty disposer of men’s destinies, whose name is not mentioned from reverential awe. So correctly Aben-Ezra, Ewald, Hirzel, Heiligst., Dillm. Regarded as the continuation of the discourse of the travellers (as it is taken by the majority of commentators) [so Del., Schlott., Renan, Scott, Good, Lee, Bernard, Rod., Words., Elzas, Merx], the verse must naturally be referred to the wicked man, characterizing his unscrupulous arbitrary conduct, which no one ventures to hinder or punish. But for this view the expression ξִ ?ιιְ ?ωַׁ ?μֶּ ?ρΞμεֹ, “who will requite it to him?” would be much too strong. Moreover a sentiment of such a reflective cast would be strange in the mouth of the travellers from whom we should expect directly only a statement of fact (ΰεֹ ?ϊεֹ ?ϊ Job 21:29). [Referred to God the meaning would be: Who will challenge the divine conduct? He renders no account of His actions. His reasons are inscrutable; and however much His dealings with men seem to contradict our notions of justice, our only recourse is silence and submission. But against this interpretation it may be urged: (1) It requires too many abrupt changes of subject. Thus we should have for subject in Job 21:30 the wicked man, in Job 21:31 God, in Job 21:32 the wicked again, and this while in Job 21:31 and Job 21:32 the subject is indicated only by personal pronouns. It is highly improbable that εְ ?δεּ ?ΰ in Job 21:31 b, and εְ ?δεּ ?ΰ in Job 21:32 a are used of different subjects. (2) The expressions are unsuitable to the thought attributed to them, especially the clause ξִ ?ιιְ ?ωַ ?μֶּ ?ρΞμεֹ, which, as Delitzsch argues, used of man in relation to God, has no suitable meaning. On the other hand the application to the wicked gives a smooth connection, at the same time that the expressions are entirely appropriate to describe his career of lawless impunity. The εδεΰ of Job 21:32 moreover acquires by this application its proper emphasis (see on the verse). To the objection made above—that a moral reflection of the sort would be inappropriate in the mouth of travellers, it may be replied that it is not properly a reflection, but a statement of fact, the fact, namely, of the evildoer’s exemption from responsibility and punishment. On the contrary, so far from being called to account, or properly punished, he escapes in the day of calamity (Job 21:30), he defies the world (Job 21:31), and is buried with honor (Job 21:32). Carey thinks that Job here “makes evident allusion to a custom that prevailed among the ancient Egyptians, whose law allowed any one to bring an accusation against a deceased person previously to his interment (and even kings themselves were not exempted from this death judgment); if the accusation was fully proved, and the deceased was convicted of having led a bad life, he was obliged to be placed in his own house, and was debarred the customary rites of interment, even though the tomb had been prepared for him.” Less simple and probable than the explanation given above. E.] Job 21:32 seq. continue the report of those who had travelled much, not however (any more than in Job 21:30) in their ipsissimis verbis strictly quoted, but in such a way that Job fully appropriates to himself that which they say (to wit, their vivid representation of the brilliant career of the wicked), so that accordingly even Job 21:31 need not be regarded as properly an interruption of that report. And he (εְ ?δεּ ?ΰ pointing back to the ψַ ?ς Job 21:30 [emphatic, according to the view which regards the ψַ ?ς as also the subject of Job 21:31. He—the same who lives that lawless, defiant, outwardly successful life, is the favorite of fortune to the very last. Feared in his life, he is again honored in his death. E.] is borne away to burial, in full honor, and with a great procession; comp. on Job 21:30; also Job 10:19; Job 17:1. [“Like ξωׁ ?λπεϊ above, χαψεϊ is also an amplificative plural.” Del. It would thus mean “a splendid tomb”]. And on a monument he (still) keeps watch: as one immortalized by a statue, or a stone monument. This is not to be specially understood in accordance with the Egyptian custom (in that case the reference here being to pyramids; comp. on Job 3:14), but in accordance with a custom, still prevalent in the East, specially among the Bedouin Arabs, of building large grave-mounds, or a domed structure towering above the grave (χֻ ?αָּ ?δ) in memory of the honored dead. In such a lofty monument the dead man keeps watch, as it were, over his own resting-place, without its being necessary to suppose that he was particularly represented by a statue, or a picture on the wall (like those in Egyptian vaults, to which Schlottm. refers here by way of comparison). [“Possibly there is also here some allusion to inscriptions warning off those who would desecrate the tomb, similar to those found on the sarcophagus of Eschmunazar, king of Sidon.” Renan]. This explanation is in striking harmony not only with well-known customs of the east, but also with the etymologically established signification of βַּ ?γִּ ?ιωׁ = heap, tumulus, monumentum (comp. βַּ ?μ, Genesis 31:46 seq.). It agrees not less with that which was previously spoken by Bildad to precisely the opposite effect in respect to the memory of the evil-doer after his death in Job 18:17, where the latter presupposes the complete extinction of the name of the ungodly, whereas Job on the contrary makes the same not only not to sleep the sleep of death, but rather to watch, as though he continued to live. [And Noyes accordingly renders: “Yea, he still survives upon his tomb. He enjoys as it were a second life upon his tomb, in the honors paid to his memory, his splendid monument, and the fame he leaves behind him.”]. The more striking the above points of agreement, the less necessary is it to fatigue ourselves in company with the ancient versions and Bφttcher (Proben, etc., p. 22) in finding how βַּ ?γִּ ?ιωׁ could be taken in the sense of “heaps of sheaves,” and still obtain a sentiment suited to the context. Equally unnecessary is it (with Bφttcher de infer, p. 40, [Conant], Hahn, Rφdiger, etc.) to take ιωχψ impersonally; “watch is held over his grave-mound, etc.” a rendering with which the suffix-less βַּ ?γִּ ?ιωׁ (not βְּ ?γִ ?ιωׁ ?εֹ) would agree but indifferently. [“Moreover,” says Delitzsch, “the placing of guards of honor by graves is an assumed, but not proved, custom of antiquity.” The rendering of E. V. “and shall remain in the tomb,” is feeble as well as incorrect.]. Job 21:33. Soft lie upon him the clods [or sods] of the valley (Job 38:38). Lit., “sweet are to him the clods of the valley,” those, namely, beneath which he rests. Valleys are particularly desired in the East as places of burial; witness the valleys around Jerusalem, abounding as they do in graves. The favorite custom of the Arabs of burying their distinguished dead on eminences, is accordingly not referred to here (comp. Del. on Job 21:32). [“These words also seem to suppose that the person who is buried may partake, in some respects, of the prosperous state of the tomb which contains him. Such an idea seems to have been indulged by Sultan Amurath the Great, who died in 1450, [and who in the suburbs of Prusa] ‘now lieth in a chappell without any roofe, his grave nothing differing from the manner of the common Turks; which, they say, he commanded to be done, in his last will, that the mercie and blessing of God (as he termed it) might come unto him by the shining of the sunne and moone, and falling of the raine and dew of heaven upon his grave.’ Knolles’Hist. of the Turks, p. 332.” Noyes]. And after him draws (ιִ ?ξְ ?ωֹׁ ?κְ intransitive as in Judges 4:6) all the world:viz. by imitating his example, by entering on the same path of a life spent in earthly enjoyment and luxury, which he, and an unnumbered multitude of others before him (as the third member says) had already trod. Thus rendered the sentence undoubtedly expresses an exaggeration; in the λָ ?μΞΰָ ?γָ ?ν there lies an unjust accusation of misanthropic bitterness against the great mass of men. [For a somewhat similar misanthropic, or at least cynical bitterness, comp. what Bildad says in Job 8:19. This same characteristic however corresponds perfectly to the exasperated and embittered temper of Job; whereas on the contrary to interpret “all the world draws after him” of a large funeral procession (Vaih., [Wemyss, Carey] etc.), yields when compared with 32a an inappropriate tautology, and to refer it to those who follow after him through sharing the same fate of death and burial (Delitzsch [Noyes]) seems altogether too vapid in the present connection. Job 21:34. Conclusion: with a reference to Job 21:27. How then (εְ ?ΰֵ ?ικְ, quomodo ergo, stronger than the simple ΰֵ ?ικְ) can you comfort me so vainly (comp Job 9:29)? Of your replies there remains (over nothing but) falsehood! Lit. “and as for your replies (absolute case, Ewald, § 309, b)—there remaineth over falsehood.”—ξָ ?ςַֹ ?μ, scil. αָּ ?ΰֱ ?μֹ ?δִ ?ιν, “a perfidious disposition towards God” (comp. Joshua 22:22), and for that same reason also towards one’s neighbor. By this is intended the same intriguing, malicious, deceitful eagerness to suspect and to slander, with which in Job 21:27 he had reproached his opponents. AND ETHICAL1. The significance of this discourse of Job’s in respect to the progress of the colloquy lies in the fact that it marks the transition from the predominantly personal treatment of the problem, which has thus far obtained on the part both of the friends and of Job to a discussion dealing more immediately with the subject-matter, and for that reason more calm, less passionate in its tone, and more directly preparing the way for the solution. The venomous accusations of the friends, (which in the immediately preceding discourse of Zophar had reached the climax of bluntness and odiousness), do not indeed cease from this point on. Just as little does the tone of bitterness disappear from Job’s replies, which on the contrary at the beginning and close of the present discourse exhibits itself in a manner decidedly marked (in Job 21:2-3; which contain sarcastic allusions to the empty “consolations of the friends”; in Job 21:34, with its reproach of falsehood and unfaithfulness). From this point on however we find, along with these personalities, a tendency, characterized by an ever increasing objectivity, to consider calmly the question of fact involved in the matter in controversy; the result indeed being that Job’s superiority over his opponents as regards their respective points of view becomes more and more obvious. In his former discourse he had discussed only occasionally and incidentally their favorite doctrine concerning the horrible end of the wicked; and in what he had said he had exhibited so little prudence that he had appeared as one who presumptuously challenged the divine righteousness, and had thus only confirmed the friends’ evil opinion of his moral character (see Job 9:22-24; Job 10:3; Job 12:6). Now, however, he proceeds to discuss the question in controversy calmly and thoroughly, opposing to their proposition, that the life of the ungodly must infallibly end in misery, the fact, which experience establishes that it is quite commonly the case that the prosperity of the wicked lasts until their death, while on the contrary the pious are pursued with all sorts of calamities to the grave. In respect to the reflection of an apparent injustice which this experience seems to cast on God, the author of so unequal a distribution of human destinies, Job this time expresses himself with discreet awe and reserve. Instead of assuming the tone of a presumptuous blasphemer, and accusing God of injustice, or tyrannical severity, he treats the contradiction between prosperity and virtue, as it so often exhibits itself in this earthly life, as a dark enigma, not to be solved by human wisdom. And instead of holding up this antagonism before his opponents with frivolous satisfaction or exulting arrogance, he exhibits whenever he approaches the subject deep perplexity and painful agitation (Job 21:5-6), and in the latter part of the description he even points out the mystery which surrounds the phenomenon under consideration as a disciplinary trial for human knowledge, constraining to reverential submission beneath the inscrutable ways of God (Job 21:22; Job 21:31, according to the more correct explanation: see above on the passages). In short, he discourses concerning this mystery as an earnest thinker, resolutely maintaining his religious integrity, and putting the counsel of the ungodly far from him (Job 21:16); and this calm, earnest, dignified treatment accounts for his victory over his opponents, who as may be seen from the following, which is the last stage of the colloquy, are constrained to acknowledge his affirmations in respect to the disproportion between prosperity and moral worthiness in this life as being in great part true, and thus to make a beginning toward a complete surrender. 2. Notwithstanding this undeniable superiority over his opponents, which Job here already exhibits, his argument presents certain vulnerable points, which expose him to further attacks from them. For in so far as, with manifest one-sidedness, it completely ignores the instances, which occur frequently enough, of a righteous apportionment of men’s destinies, and exhibits the instances of the opposite fact, by a process of abstract generalization, as alone of actual occurrence, it does injustice on the one side to the friends, who are thereby indirectly classified with the wicked who are unworthy of their prosperity; while on the other side it becomes an arraignment of God, who is described as though he gave no proof of a really righteous retribution, but rather decreed continually examples of the contrary. Indeed in one instance, (Job 21:19-21) the speaker seems to be guilty even of formally teaching God, in that he here maintains (in opposition to a familiar application of the theory of retribution set forth in the Law, Exodus 20:5; Deuteronomy 24:16, an application controverted also by Jeremiah and Ezekiel), that God punishes with justice only where He exacts expiation of the evil-doer himself, and not of his children after him. The consequence that God does not punish where He ought to punish, is but a short remove from this proposition, which is accordingly easily liable to the reproach of speaking unbecomingly of God. The judgment of Job accordingly in the present discourse concerning God and His dealings with men’s destinies is the less pure and correct in so far as it in no wise distinguishes between the God of the present, and the God of the future, as we find him doing in Job 19:25 seq. For this reason, and because the sufferer begins anew to yield to the pressure of his outward and inward sufferings, the hope of a blessed future in the life beyond, which had previously irradiated his misery, is completely obscured. 3. Notwithstanding this partial obscuration of his spiritual horizon, Job in the discourse before us utters much that is beautiful, profoundly true, and heart-stirring. The first discourse pronounced by Job after the inspired pζan of hope in Job 19:25 seq., there may be discerned in it a certain hallowing influence thence proceeding, which justifies in a measure the remark of Sanctius on that passage: “From this point on to the end of the book Job is not the same is he has been heretofore.” His description of the success and abounding prosperity of the ungodly, by its many points of contact with similar moral pictures, such as Psalms 37; Psalms 73; Jeremiah 12:1 seq.; Habakkuk 1:13 seq.; Ecclesiastes 7, etc., commends itself as being perfectly true, and derived from life. Especially does the circumstance that in his observation of the prosperity of the wicked he shows himself continually inclined to restrain himself within the bounds of modesty, and the limitations prescribed by the contemplation of the unsearchable operations of God, give him an indisputable advantage over the description of his opponents (and especially of his immediate predecessor Zophar), which is one-sided in the opposite direction, and for that very reason less true. “The speeches of Zophar and of Job are both true and false,—both one-sided, and therefore mutually supplementary. If, however, we consider further, that Job is not able to deny the occurrence of such examples of punishment, such revelations of the retributive justice of God, as those which Zophar represents as occurring regularly and without exception; that, however, on the other hand, exceptional instances undeniably do exist, and the friends are obliged to be blind to them, because otherwise the whole structure of their opposition would fall in,—it is manifest that Job is nearer to the truth than Zophar” (Delitzsch i. p. 425). AND Job_21:6. Zeyss: Because reason cannot comprehend the mystery of affliction, and why God often deals so severely with His children, it comes to pass that even in pious hearts mournful thoughts frequently spring up, and they tremble in their great sorrow; Psalms 37:1; Psalms 73:12; Jeremiah 12:1, etc.—v. Gerlach: Doubts touching the rectitude of God’s government of the world, have in them that which makes our inmost feelings quiver; the thought makes all the foundations of human existence quake. Job 21:7 seq. Seb. Schmidt: The happiness of the ungodly is described; and it is shown that they are happy (1) in themselves Job 21:7; (2) in their children Job 21:8; (3) in their houses Job 21:9; (4) in their cattle Job 21:10; (5) in their flocks Job 21:11; (6) in a life which is joyous and merry Job 21:12; (7) in a death which at the last is not sad Job 21:13. Wohlfarth: What must we bear in mind, in order that we may not err as to God and virtue, when we see the ungodly prosperous, the godly afflicted? If Job recoiled from such a sight, who can blame him, a sufferer sorely tried, and with but imperfect knowledge of God? But a Christian can and will guard himself against such doubts; for he knows that according to God’s sovereign decree outward prosperity has often no relation to a man’s moral worth; that the good things of this world will not long make man happy, and that without a peaceful conscience happiness in this earth is impossible; that frequently the earthly prosperity which the wicked enjoy is the means of their punishment; that the place of retribution is not yet in this world; and that God, whose counsels we cannot penetrate, will notwithstanding assuredly compensate pious sufferers for their earthly losses. Job 21:22 seq. Starke: In holy fear we should wonder at God’s judgments; but we should by no means sit in judgment upon them, nor inquire after the reason of His conduct; Isaiah 45:9. v. Gerlach: The righteous and the ungodly have both their various destinies, but these have nothing to do with their position before God; there lies another mystery behind which our short-sighted speeches and thoughts cannot unveil. Job 21:27 seq. Starke (after Osiander and the Tόbingen Bible): The ungodly are often highly exalted in order that afterwards their fall may be so much the greater. Although in this world, occupying high places, they do evil without terror, and are punished by nobody, there will come nevertheless a day of judgment, when their wickedness will be brought to view, and before all the world they will be put to shame. Footnotes: Witness the following curious effort of Bernard: “[Honored] as when he watched over his corn-shocks. Just as in his life-time people were obliged (through their fear of him) to salute him humbly, when they passed before him as he stood watching over his shocks of corn, that no poor man might glean an ear, so must they testify their respect to his body when carried to the grave.” THIRD SERIES OF ITS EXTREME POINT Job 22-28I. Eliphaz and Job: Chapter 22–24A.—Eliphaz: Reiterated accusation of Job, from whose severe sufferings it must of necessity be inferred that he had sinned grievously, and needed to repent:Job 22:1-201. The charge made openly that Job is a great sinner Job 22:1-101         Then Eliphaz the Temanite answered and said: 2    Can a man be profitable unto God, as he that is wise may be profitable unto himself? 3    Is it any pleasure to the Almighty that thou art righteous? or is it gain to Him that thou makest thy ways perfect? 4    Will He reprove thee for fear of thee? will He enter with thee unto judgment? 5    Is not thy wickedness great? and thine iniquities infinite? 6    For thou hast taken a pledge from thy brother for nought, and stripped the naked of their clothing. 7    Thou hast not given water to the weary to drink, and thou hast withholden bread from the hungry. 8    But as for the mighty man, he had the earth: and the honorable man dwelt in it. 9    Thou hast sent widows away empty, and the arms of the fatherless have been broken. 10    Therefore snares are round about thee, and sudden fear troubleth thee. 2. Earnest warning not to incur yet severer punishments: Job 22:11-2011    Or darkness, that thou canst not see; and abundance of waters cover thee. 12    Is not God in the height of heaven? and behold the height of the stars, how high they are! 13    And thou sayest, How doth God know? can He judge through the dark cloud? 14    Thick clouds are a covering to Him, that He seeth not; and He walketh in the circuit of heaven. 15    Hast thou marked the old way, which wicked men have trodden? 16    Which were cut down out of time, whose foundation was overflown with a flood; 17    which said unto God, Depart from us: and what can the Almighty do for them? 18    Yet He filled their houses with good things: but the counsel of the wicked is far from me 19    The righteous see it, and are glad and the innocent laugh them to scorn: 20    “Whereas our substance is not cut down, but the remnant of them the fire consumeth.” 3. Admonition to repent, accompanied by the announcement of the certain restoration of his prosperity to him when penitent: Job 22:21-3021    Acquaint now thyself with Him, and be at peace: thereby good shall come unto thee. 22    Receive, I pray thee, the law from His mouth, and lay up His words in thine heart. 23    If thou return to the Almighty, thou shalt be built up, thou shalt put away iniquity far from thy tabernacles. 24    Then shalt thou lay up gold as dust, and the gold of Ophir as the stones of the brooks. 25    Yea, the Almighty shall be thy defence, and thou shalt have plenty of silver. 26    For then shalt thou have thy delight in the Almighty, and shalt lift up thy face unto God. 27    Thou shalt make thy prayer unto Him, and He shall hear thee, and thou shalt pay thy vows. 28    Thou shalt also decree a thing, and it shall be established unto thee: and the light shall shine upon thy ways. 29    When men are cast down, then thou shalt say, There is lifting up; and He shall save the humble person. 30    He shall deliver the island of the innocent; and it is delivered by the pureness of thine hands. AND 1. Without controverting Job’s position in Job 21, that the present life furnishes numerous examples of the prosperity of the ungodly, and of calamity to the pious, but at the same time without abandoning in the slightest degree his former argument in favor of an external doctrine of retribution, Eliphaz adheres to his assumption that the cause of Job’s calamities and misery could lie only in sins of a grievous character (Job 22:2-10), with which he now reproaches him particularly and in detail (Job 22:6-9),—sins of arrogance, of cruelty, and of injustice towards his neighbor. Then follows an earnest warning against pursuing any further his unholy thoughts and speeches, as otherwise his final doom, like that of all the wicked from the earliest times must be a terrible one (Job 22:11-20)—a position indeed which Job also might urge to prove the alleged injustice of God’s treatment of him. To this sharp warning succeeds a conciliatory invitation to repent and to return to God, and to enter into possession of the blessings promised by God to the penitent, the whole discourse having a conclusion similar to that of the first discourse of Eliphaz (Job 22:21-30). This third and last discourse of Eliphaz falls into three divisions, exactly equal in length, and each of these embraces two strophes substantially equal in length, consisting of five verses each (the first, however, only of four). 2. First Division, or Double Strophe: the accusation: Job 22:2-10. First Strophe: Job 22:2-5 : Four interrogative sentences, which taken together exhibit a well-constructed syllogism, of which the first two questions (Job 22:2-3) constitute the major premise, the third (Job 22:4) the minor, the fourth (Job 22:5) the conclusion. The major premise expresses the thought: The cause of Job’s misery cannot lie in God, the All-sufficient One, to whom the conduct of men, whether good or evil, (wise or unwise) matters nothing. The minor premise affirms that the penalty which Job was enduring could not have been brought upon him by his piety. From this he draws a conclusion unfavorable to Job’s moral character. Is a man [βֶּ ?αֶ ?ψ, “a great man, a hero, etc.; man in short considered in his best estate;” Carey] profitable unto God? Nay, the intelligent man is profitable unto himself. The question, with its negative force, and the negative follow each other immediately, the latter introduced by λִּ ?ι in the sense of “nay, rather” [Conant: “for;” E. V. Wemyss, Elzas, less suitably; “as,” regarding the second clause as a part of the question]. The meaning is: God, the absolutely Blessed One, who has everything and needs nothing, receives no advantage from man’s conduct whether it be thus or so, whether he act unwisely, (i.e. wickedly, Psalms 14:2 [1], or intelligently (i.e. piously, righteously); so that accordingly if the latter is the case, man cares only for his own well-being. In regard to ρλο, lit. “to dwell beside one another, to become one’s neighbor,” and hence “to assist one another, to be serviceable, to be profitable,” comp. above on Job 15:3; also 35:3. The pathetic plural form ςָ ?μֵ ?ιξֹ ?ε, with the signification of the singular, ςμιε, as in Job 20:23. [The use of ςַ ?μ in the second member, instead of μְ as in the first, is one of the Aramaisms, “which poetry gladly adopts” (Del.). Comp. Psalms 16:6]. Job 22:3. Is it an advantage to the Almighty, if thou art righteous?ηֵ ?τֶ ?υ [lit. “pleasure”] means here, as the parallel αֶּ ?φַ ?ςַ in the second member shows, “interest, gain, advantage,” as in Job 21:21. Or a gain, if thou behavest blamelessly? lit. “if thou makest thy ways blameless” [or “perfect”] (ϊַּ ?ϊֵּ ?ν, imperf. Hiph. of ϊξν, with the [Aramizing] doubling of the first radical; comp. Gesen. § 66, Rem. 8), si integras facias vias tuas. The meaning of the whole question is: God gets no profit from men’s righteousness; consequently the motives which determine him to inflict sufferings on men are neither selfish, nor arbitrary. Job 22:4. Will He because of thy godliness [lit. “fear, godly tear”] chastise thee, enter into judgment with thee? That is: if now then the cause of such a calamity as has befallen thee lies in thyself, can it be thy piety for which God punishes thee? Hirzel interprets ξִ ?ιִּ ?ψָֽ ?ΰϊְ ?κָ to mean: “from fear of thee,” the suffix expressing the genit. of the object against the context, which requires a meaning antithetic to ψςϊκ, Job 22:5. [Hirzel’s explanation is the one adopted also by Bernard, Wemyss, Carey, Renan, Rodwell, Elzas]. The meaning: “godly fear, piety” is all the more firmly established for ιψςδ by the fact that Eliphaz has already used this same word twice in this emphatic sense: Job 4:6 and Job 15:4 [“a genuine Eliphazian word, in accordance with the poet’s method of assigning favorite words and habits to his speakers.” Ewald]. Job 22:5. The conclusion, expressed in the interrogative form, like the preceding propositions in the syllogism. Is not thy wickedness great, and no end of thy transgressions?—Thus strongly does Eliphaz accuse Job here; for, entangled in legalism, he thinks that if the impossibility that God should cause the innocent to suffer be once for all firmly held, then, from the severity of the sufferings inflicted on any one, we may argue the greatness of the transgressions which are thus punished,—a piece of bad logic, seeing that it entirely overlooks the intermediate possibility which lies between those two extremes, that God may inflict suffering on such as are friends indeed, but not yet perfected in their piety, with a view to their trial or purification. Second Strophe: Job 22:6-10. Enumeration of a series of sins, which, seeing that they are ordinarily associated with riches and power, must constitute, in the opinion of the speaker, the probable reason why Job, who was once rich and honored, had fallen so low, and been made to suffer the Divine chastisement. Job 22:6. For thou didst distrain thy brethren without cause—i.e., without being in thy superfluity under any necessity of doing so (Hirzel). The brethren are naturally the next of kin, fellow-clansmen, not specially brethren in the more literal sense. If instead of ΰַ ?ηֶ ?ικָ we should with many MSS. and Editions (so also Bδhr and Delitzsch) read ΰָ ?ηִ ?ικָ, this singular form, “thy brother,” would nevertheless require to be understood as a collective, as the second member shows. And the clothes of the naked thou didst strip off.—By ςֲ ?ψεּ ?ξִּ ?ιν we are to understand, of course, not those who are absolutely naked, but those who are scantily clothed, the half-naked poor, as in Isaiah 20:2; John 21:7; James 2:15 (comp. also Seneca, De Benefeciis, v. 13: si quis male vestitutum et pannosum videt, nudum se vidisse dicit). To strip such “naked” ones by distraint of their last piece of apparel is forbidden not only by the law of Moses (Exodus 22:25 seq.; Deuteronomy 24:6; Deuteronomy 24:10 seq.), but also by the sentiment of universal humanity. The same may be said of the proofs of cruelty enumerated in the following verse [Job 22:7 : Thou gavest no water to the fainting to drink, and thou didst refuse bread to the hungry]; comp. Isaiah 58:10, and for the opposite course Matthew 10:42. Job 22:8. And the man of the fist (absolute case)—his was the land, and the honored one was to dwell therein!—That is to say, according to the insolent, selfish, grasping views and principles which Eliphaz imputes to Job. The “man of the arm,” or “of the fist” (ΰִ ?ιωׁ ζְ ?ψεֹ ?ςַ), i.e., the powerful and violent man, as well as “the honored man” (πְ ?ωׂ ?εּ ?ΰτָ ?πִ ?ιν, as in Isaiah 3:3; Isaiah 9:14), is none other than Job himself, the proud, rich Emir, who, as Eliphaz maliciously conjectures, had driven away many of the poor and helpless from house and home, in order to seize upon the land far and wide for himself. According to the assumption that both expressions referred to another than Job, whom the latter had favored in his course of self-aggrandizement (Rosenmόller, Umbreit, Hahn [Noyes, Wemyss, Renan, Elzas—who translates: “As if the land belonged to the man of power alone; as if only the man of rank may dwell therein”]), the strong sense of the passage is needlessly weakened. That Job is not immediately addressed here, as in the verse just preceding, and again in the verse following, is to be explained by the vivid objectivizing tendency of the description. Job 22:9. Widows thou didst send away empty—when they came to thee as suppliants; and the arms of the orphans were broken—in consequence, namely, of the treatment which such needy and helpless ones were wont to receive from thee and those like thee. The discourse here assumes the objective generalizing tone, for the reason that Eliphaz is sensible that the concrete proofs of the charge which he would be able to produce out of Job’s former history would be all too few! The “arms of the orphans” is a figurative expression describing not their appeal for help, but all their powers and rights, all upon which they could depend for support. The same phrase—γλΰζψςεϊ—occurs also in Psalms 37:17; Ezekiel 30:22. For the “arms” as the symbol of strength, power, comp. Job 40:9; Psalms 77:16 [15]; 83:9 [8]. Job 22:10. Therefore snares are round about thee (a figure descriptive of destruction as besetting him around; comp. Job 18:8-10), and terror suddenly comes upon [or affrights] thee (comp. Proverbs 3:25)—i.e., sudden deadly anguish, terror in view of thy approaching complete destruction, overpowers thee time after time. Comp. the similar description above in Bildad’s discourse, Job 18:11. [“To be noted is the frequent paronomasia of τη and τηψ.” Schlott.]. 3. Second Division, or Double Strophe: the warning. If Job should presumptuously cast doubt on the Divine righteousness, and thereby make himself partaker of the sins of those in the primeval world who insolently denied God, he would draw down on himself the Divine judgment which had been ordained for those guilty of such wickedness, and which would without fail overtake them, however long and securely they might seem to enjoy their prosperity: Job 22:11-20. Third Strophe: Job 22:11-15. Or seest thou not the darkness, and the flood of waters, which covereth thee?—That is, dost thou not then perceive in what destruction thou art already involved, and that in punishment for thy sins? “Darkness” and the “flood of waters” (the multitudinous heaving of waters, ωִׁ ?τְ ?ςָ ?δ as in Isaiah 60:6) are here, as also in Job 27:20, a figure not of the sins of Job (Hahn), but of the night of suffering and of the deep misery, which, as Eliphaz thinks, had come upon him in consequence of his sins. ϊְּ ?λַ ?ρֶּ ?κָּ is a relative clause, and logically belongs also to ηωֶׁ ?κְ; comp. Isaiah 60:2. In mentioning darkness and a flood as bursting on Job, he has reference to the catastrophe of the deluge, which in the following verses he proceeds to hold up as a warning picture of terror (Job 22:16). The whole verse forms a suitable transition from the accusation in the preceding section to the warning which now follows. [By the majority of versions and commentators Job 22:11 is joined immediately to the verse preceding, as its continuation. There is certainly a close connection between the two. But that Zφckler (after Dillmann) is correct in regarding Job 22:11 as transitional to what follows, and so introducing the next strophe, is favored both by the use of the disjunctive ΰεֹ rather than εְ, and by the evident anticipation of Job 22:16 in the ωִׁ ?τְ ?ςַ ?ϊΞξַ ?ιִ ?ν. This view requires the construction of ηωֶׁ ?κְ as the object of μֹ ?ΰϊִ ?ψְ ?ΰֶ ?δ: “seest thou not the darkness?” (Ewald, Schlottm., Dillm., Delitzsch), rather than as an independent subject, followed by a relative clause: “darkness, that, thou canst not see” (E. V., Umbreit, Noyes, Con., Lee, Renan, Rodwell, etc.).—E.] Job 22:12. Is not Eloah the height of heaven?i.e. the heaven-high, infinitely exalted One (comp. Job 11:8; [in view of which passage, says Schlottmann, the construction of βαδωξιν as Accus. loci: “in the height of heaven,” is less probable than the construction, as predicate]).—And see now the head of the stars [i.e. the highest of the stars, λּ ?εֹ ?λָ ?αִ ?ινgen. partitivus) how high they are!—λִּ ?ι “how,” or also “that,” as in Genesis 49:15; 1 Samuel 14:29. The plural ψָ ?ξεּ [by attraction] as in Job 21:21; comp. Ewald, § 317, c. The whole verse, in this reference to the Divine greatness and exaltation, beginning as a question, and passing over into a challenge, has for its object the vindication of Him who is above the world, and above man, against every thought which would limit His knowledge, or cast any suspicion on the perfect justice of His ways. Job 22:13 seq. The doubt expressed by Job touching the justice of God in administering the affairs of the world is here interpreted by Eliphaz as a denial that God has any knowledge of earthly things, or feels any special concern in what happens to men. He therefore reproaches him with holding that erroneous, and almost atheistical conception of the Deity, which has since been advanced by the Epicureans (see e.g. Lucretius III. 640 seq.), and more recently by the English Deists. [“Eliphaz here attributes to Job, who in Job 21:22 had appealed to the exaltation of God in opposition to the friends, a complete misconception of the truth, and thus skilfully turns against Job himself the weapon which the latter had just sought to wrest from him.” Schlottmann]. And so thou thinkest (literally “sayest”) what knows God? (or: what should God know?) will He judge through (αְּ ?ςַ ?γ as in Genesis 26:8; Joe 2:9) the darkness of the clouds?—i.e. judge us men on this lower earth, from which He, covered by the clouds, is wholly separated and shut off. Job 22:14 continues this symbolical description of this total separation of God from the world: Clouds are a covering to Him, so that He sees not (comp. Lamentations 3:44), and He walks upon the vault (or “circle,” Proverbs 8:27; Isaiah 40:22) of the heaven—not therefore on this earthly world, which is too small and insignificant for Him. Similar expressions of unbelief touching God’s special concern for the affairs of earth may be found e.g. in Psalms 73:11; Psalms 94:7; Isaiah 29:15; Ezekiel 8:12. Job 22:15. Wilt thou keep in the path of the old world? (ωָׁ ?ξַ ?ψ, to observe, follow, as in Psalms 18:22 [not “hast thou marked”? E. V. against which is the fut. ϊִּ ?ωְׁ ?ξεψ, and the connection] and ΰֹ ?ψַ ?ηςֹ ?εμָ ?ν, as in Jeremiah 6:16; Jeremiah 18:15), which the men of wickedness trod?i.e. insolent, ungodly and wicked men, as they are described in the following verses, both as to their arrogant deeds, and their righteous punishment. The reference to the race of men immediately preceding the Noachian deluge (the ἀρχαῖοςκὀσμος of 2 Peter 2:5) is evident enough. Fourth Strophe: Job 22:16-20. Description of the destruction of those ungodly men as a divine judgment overtaking them after a season of prosperity, together with an application to the controversy suggested by Job’s case in respect to the doctrine of retribution. Job 22:16. [The asterisk in the Hebrew Bible marks the verse as the middle of the book, there being 537 verses before, and the same number after this mark] Who were swept off (χֻּ ?ξְּ ?θεּ, lit. “were seized” comp. above on Job 16:8) [Bernard, Rodwell, etc., “who became shrivelled (corpses) before, etc.” Carey: “who got tied up … so that escape was impossible,” but better as above,—“to be snatched away”] before the time—i.e. before there was any probability, according to human experience, that their hour had come; comp. the ἄωροι of the LXX. also above in Job 15:32αְּ ?μֹ ?ΰιεֹ ?ξεֹ ?—as even in the present passage some Mss. read αְּ ?μֹ ?ΰ instead of εְ ?μֹ ?ΰ (com. Psalms 139:16). As a stream their foundation was poured away—i. e. it became fluid, so that they could no longer stand on it, but sank down. Again a palpable allusion to the deluge (scarcely to the fate of Sodom and Gomorrah, in mentioning which the rain of fire and brimstone (Genesis 19:24; comp. Job 18:15) would scarcely have been forgotten:—against Ewald [and Davidson, Introd. ii. 229]). The construction of the words which we have followed, according to which ιְ ?ρεֹ ?γָ ?ν is the subject, πָ ?δָ ?ψ nominat. of the predicate or product, and ιεּ ?φַ ?χ descriptive Imperf. Hoph. (not an unusual alternate form of the Perf. Pual εֻ ?φַּ ?χ, as Ewald supposes) appears as that which alone is favored by the position of the words and the accents. The following renderings are not so good: “their place became a poured out stream” (Hirzel: “whose foundation was a poured out stream” (Umbr., Olsh.) [Rodwell]; “a stream was poured out upon their foundation”(Rosenm., Hahn) [Lee, Carey: with which may be connected the rendering of E. V. Renan, Noyes, Elzas: “whose foundation was overflown with a flood,” and of Conant: “their foundation was poured away in a flood”]. Job 22:17. Who said unto God: Depart from us! and what could the Almighty do for them?—The sentiment of the ungodly is expressed first in the direct and then in the indirect form of speech, precisely as in Job 19:28. As to the matter the passage reminds us of Job’s last discourse, Job 21:14-15. The same arrogant God-renouncing utterances, which Job there attributes to the prosperous wicked described by him, is here imputed by Eliphaz to the objects of his description, in order to show to him that up to a certain point he agrees entirely with his representation of the relation of external prosperity to human sinfulness. [“El. no doubt intends this as a direct contradiction to Job’s statement. The Patriarch had asserted that men of these atheistical principles were happy all their lives. El. says: No! these are the very sort of men who were visited by the judgment of the deluge, and you are just as bad as they, for you are treading in their steps.” Carey]. Job 22:18. And yet he had filled their houses with blessings—(θεֹ ?α, prosperity, good, as below Job 22:21 and Job 21:25θεֹ ?αָ ?δ); a circumstantial clause, which stands connected with the principal verb in Job 22:16, having a restrictive force, in order to express the contrast between the sudden judgment which overtakes the wicked, and the long season of prosperity preceding it, which gives to them the appearance of exemption from punishment. The formula of detestation which follows in b Eliphaz intentionally takes as it were out of the mouth of Job (comp. Job 21:16), in order to impress upon him that only he has the right thus to speak who does not doubt that God inflicts righteous retribution. Job 22:19. The righteous will see it:—to wit, the destruction which will one day befall the wicked (not the punishment inflicted on the sinners of the primeval world, which was long since past)—and rejoice, and the innocent will mock at them—at those who were once prosperous, but have now encountered the righteous penalty of their transgressions, in regard to whom accordingly the proverb will be verified—“he laughs best who laughs last.” The triumphant joy of the righteous over the final punishment of the ungodly, which they shall live to see, and which Eliphaz here describes in such a way as to contrast with Job’s previous utterances, Job 17:8; Job 21:5-6, is frequently described in the Old Testament; comp. Psalms 58:11 [10] seq.; 64:10 [9] seq. Job 22:20 contains the words in which this future triumph of the pious will be expressed. Verily (ΰִ ?ρΞμֹ ?ΰֹ as in Job 1:11; Job 17:2) our adversaries are destroyed. χִ ?ιξָ ?πεּ (instead of which Olsh. needlessly proposes χָ ?ξֵ ?ιπεּ after Psalms 44:6; Exodus 15:7) is a pausal form for χִ ?ιξֵ ?πεּ, from a root χִ ?ιν, which occurs only here, meaning “he who is set up” (partic. pass.), i.e. the adversary. The righteous designate the ungodly as their adversaries not in a personal, but an ethical sense, because God’s enemies are also their enemies; comp. Psalms 139:21; Romans 11:28. And what is left to them a fire has devouredιϊְ ?ψָ ?ν, “their remnant, their residue,” to wit, in property and wealth; the remainder of their means; hardly “their super-abundance” (Del.) [“for why should the fire devour only that which they had as a superfluity?” Dillm.] ιִ ?ϊְ ?ψָ ?ν is used here accordingly in another sense than in Job 4:21, a passage otherwise similar to the present. For the use of fire as a symbol of the divine decree of punishment effecting a radical extermination, comp. Job 15:34; Job 20:26; Ezekiel 20:28, etc. 4. Third Division, or Double Strophe: Job 22:21-30 : An admonition to repentance, and a promise of salvation to the penitent. Fifth Strophe: Job 22:21-25 : The admonition. Job 22:21. Make friends now with Him, and be at peace. ηִ ?ρְ ?αִּ ?ιο here with ςִ ?ν, which gives a signification different from that found above in Job 22:2, viz. “to make friends with any one, to draw nigh to any one,” comp. James 4:8. The following εּ ?ωְׁ ?μָ ?ν is to be rendered as an Imperat. consec. (comp. Proverbs 3:4; and Gesen. § 130 [§ 127], 2; “and be at peace, i.e. “and so shalt thou be at peace.” [“We distinguish best between δρλο and ωμν by regarding the former as expressing the conclusion, the latter the preservation of peace.” Schlottmann]. There by shall blessing come to thee—come upon thee, comp. Job 20:22. ϊְּ ?αֹ ?ΰָֽ ?ϊְ ?κָ (instead of which many Mss. read ϊְּ ?αֹ ?ΰַ ?ϊְ ?κָ) Isaiah 3 sing. fem. imperf. with a doubled indication of its feminine form (first by ϊ and afterwards by Ξָ ?δ), hence = ϊָּ ?αֹ ?ΰָ ?δ, with suffix of the 2d person. Comp. in regard to such double feminines Delitzsch on the passage [who refers to Proverbs 1:20; Ezekiel 23:20; Joshua 6:17; 2 Samuel 1:26; Amos 4:3], also Ewald § 191, c; 249, c [Green § 88, 3 f.]—Olsh. and Rφdig. following certain Mss. would read ϊְּ ?αεּ ?ΰָֽ ?ϊְ ?κָ: “thereby will thine income be a good one,” but this would impart to the discourse an artificial character, seeing that an earthly reward is not mentioned before Job 22:25 seq. As to αָּ ?δֶ ?ν, “thereby” (lit. “by these things”) with neuter suffix, comp. Ezekiel 33:18; Isaiah 64:4; Isaiah 38:16. Job 22:22. Receive, I pray, instruction out of His mouth.—God’s mouth represented as the source of instruction in the higher truth, as in Proverbs 2:6 [El. as Dillm. says claiming to be himself the interpreter of God’s teaching to Job]. Job 22:23. If thou returnest to the Almighty.—(ωׁ ?εּ ?αςַ ?ψ as in Joe 2:12; Amos 4:6 seq.; Isaiah 19:22) [“We are told by Rosenmόller that ςַ ?γ stands here for ΰֶ ?μto, but we are rather inclined to think with Maimonides that it is purposely made use of in its real signification, viz., as far as, even to, right up to, close up to, in order to encourage Job, who was looked upon by the speaker as a very great sinner, by showing him that notwithstanding the enormities of his sins, he need not despair of coming through penitence again close up to his offended Creator.” Bernard. Or, as Carey says, that his return must be no partial movement, “not one that would stop half way, but a return quite to God”]. If thou removest iniquity far (puttest it far away) from thy tents.—This second conditional clause, being parallel to the antecedent clause in a, needs no apodosis. It adds to the former a more specific qualification, which in itself indeed is not necessary, but which is appropriately illustrative of the former; comp. Job 11:14. The LXX., who in the first member read ϊֵּ ?ςָ ?πֶ ?η (καὶ ταπεινώσῃς) instead of ϊִּ ?αָּ ?πֵ ?η construed the whole verse as the antecedent, Job 22:24-25 as parenthetic, and Job 22:26 as consequent—a dragging construction, which indeed has a parallel in Job 11:13-15, but has less to justify it here in the sense and connection. [The E. V. in making the last clause a part of the apodosis—“thou shalt be built up, thou shalt put away, etc.,” does not quite correctly set forth the logical relation of the clauses. E.] Job 22:25. And lay down in (or cast down to) the dust the precious ore.—The word αֶּ ?φֶ ?ψ, which occurs only here and in the following verse, signifies according to the etymology as well as the connection precious metal, gold or silver, and that in its crude, unprepared state, as it is brought forth out of the shafts of the mountain mines, hence “gold and silver ore,” “virgin-gold” (Delitzsch). The “laying down of such metal in the dust” signifies that one relieves himself of it as of worthless trash. The second member expresses the same thought still more strongly. And among the pebbles of the brooks (αְּ ?φεּ ?ψ assonant with αֶּ ?φֶ ?ψ) the gold of Ophir,—ΰεֹ ?τִ ?ιψ for the more complete and common λֶּ ?ϊֶ ?νΰεֹ ?τִ ?ιψ, comp. Job 28:16; Psalms 45:10 [9], etc., also such modern mercantile abbreviations as Mocha, Damask, Champagne, etc. In regard to the much disputed location of the land of Ophir (LXX., Ὠφείρ,—Cod. Al. however Σωφείρ, which reminds us of Sufβra, on the peninsula of Guzerat, in India, as well as of the Coptic Sofir, used as a name for India) comp. the Realwφrterbόcher [Cyclopζdias and Dictionaries]; also Bδhr on 1 Kings 10:22 [Vol. VI. of this series, p. 122]. To the earlier theories which located Ophir in India, or in Arabia has been added latterly that of Sir Rod. Murchison, who in a Report to the London Geographical Society is inclined to the opinion that the south-African coast around the mouth of the Limpopo river is the true Ophir of the Bible, supporting his view in part by the conjectures of the well-known archζologist, John Crawford (in his Descriptive Dictionary of the Indian Islands), which point to this locality, and in part by the discoveries of districts abounding in gold, which the German traveller, K. Mauch, claims to have made since 1866 in this very region (north of the colony of Natal). Comp. the Ausland, 1868, No. 39: Die Goldfόnde in der Kolonie Natal und das Ophir der Bibel—which essay indeed rightly prefers the combinations of K. Ritter, Chr. Lassen, etc. pointing to the East Indies, while an article in the “Globus,” Vol. 18, No. 24, p. 369 seeks to mediate between the two hypotheses by supposing Ophir to be “a wild region on the Indian Ocean, which embraced a part of the eastern coast of Africa and of the western coast of India.” Job 22:25. Apodosis. Then will the Almighty be thy treasure (αְּ ?φָ ?ψִ ?ιν, pl. of αֶּ ?φֶ ?ψ, hence lit “pieces of gold-ore, pieces of metal”) and silver in heaps to thee—scil, “will He be.”—ϊּ ?εֹ ?ςָ ?τεֹ ?ϊ which occurs elsewhere only in Numbers 23:22; Numbers 24:8; and Psalms 95:4, has received very different explanations. According to these passages, however, it must signify “things standing out high and prominent.” Here, therefore it must mean either “high heaps of silver,” or “long, prominent bars of silver.” The former definition is favored by the fact that the Arabic certifies for ιςσ the signification, “to tower, to grow, to mount upward,” a meaning which the Vulgate expresses here also (argentum coacervabitur tibi), while on the contrary the derivation of the word from the root ιτς, “to shine” (comp. the LXX: καθαρὀνὤσπερἀργὐριονπεπυρωμἐνον), or even from ιָ ?ςֵ ?σ, “to be weary” (Gesen. in Thes., Bφttcher [Con. “silver sought with toil”] etc), has but slight etymological foundation. In regard to the sentiment in Job 22:24-25 comp. New Testament parallels: like Matthew 6:20; Matthew 6:33; Matthew 19:21; Luke 12:33; 1 Timothy 6:16-19, etc. [The rendering of these two verses (24, 25) by the E. V. is to be rejected as inconsistent with the language (thus ωִׁ ?ιϊΞςַ ?μΞςָ ?τָ ?ψ cannot be “to lay up as dust”), and as yielding a much feebler sense.—E.] Sixth Strophe: Job 22:26-30 : Further expansion of the promise annexed to the admonition.—Yea, then shalt thou delight thyself in the Almighty.—λִּ ?ιΞΰָ ?ζ confirmatory, as in Job 11:15 : or argumentative—“for then,” etc., which is the common rendering. For the representation of God as the object of joy or delight on the part of the righteous comp. Psalms 37:4; Isaiah 58:14. In regard to “lifting up the face” as an expression of freedom from the consciousness of sin (the opposite of πָֽ ?τְ ?μεּ τָ ?πִ ?ιν, Genesis 4:6), comp. above Job 11:15. Job 22:27. If thou prayest to Him,etc.—ϊֲּ ?ςְ ?ϊִּ ?ιψ hypothetical antecedent without ΰִ ?ν, as also ϊִּ ?βְ ?ζַ ?ψ in the following verse. As to δֱ ?ςֶ ?ϊִ ?ιψ to pray (lit. “to present incense”), comp. Exodus 8:4 [8], 25 [29]; 10:17. In respect to “discharging,” i.e. “fulfilling” vows (here most naturally such as have been offered in connection with prayer), see Psalms 22:26 [25]; 50:14; 61:6 [5], 9 [8]; 65:2 [1]. Comp. v. Gerlach on this passage (below in the Homiletical Remarks). Job 22:28. If thou purposest anything, so shall it come to pass to thee.—βζψ lit. “to cut off,” here as an Aramaism in the sense of “to purpose, determine.” ΰֹ ?ξֶ ?ψ, either = γָּ ?αָ ?ψ “a matter, anything,” or “design, plan” (Del.). As to χεּ ?ν, “to come to pass, to be realized,” comp. Isaiah 7:7; Proverbs 15:22; in respect to “light upon thy ways,” see Job 19:8. Job 22:29. When they lead downwards—viz. thy ways (as to δִ ?ωְׁ ?τִּ ?ιμ, “to make low, to lead downwards,” comp. Jeremiah 13:18), then thou sayest—Upward!—βִּ ?εָ ?δ, syncopated form of βְּ ?ΰֵ ?ζָ ?δ (Ewald § 62, b; 73, b), lit. “uplifting;” here as an interjection, meaning—“upward! arise!” not, however, as a petition in a prayer (Dillm., etc.), but as a triumphant exclamation in thanksgiving. [This rendering is certainly not free from objection, especially on account of the artificial cast which it seems to give to the expression The rendering of E. V., however: “when men are cast down, then thou shalt say, etc.,” is still less satisfactory, destroying as it does the connection between the first and second members, leaving two verbs, δִ ?ωְׁ ?τִּ ?ιμεּ and ιεֹ ?ωִׁ ?ςַ, with subjects unexpressed, and introducing in a a thought which is scarcely suited to this connection, and which is subsequently introduced with climactic force in 30b.—E.] And to the humbled one (i.e., to thee, if thou art humbled; lit. “to him who has downcast eyes,” LXX.: κύφονταὀφθαλμοῖς) He works out deliverance;i.e., God, who is also the subject of the first member in the following verse. It is not necessary therefore with the Pesh. and Vulg. to read the passive ιִ ?εָּ ?ωֵׁ ?ςַ. Job 22:30. He will rescue him that is not guiltless, and (yet more!) he is rescued by the pureness of thine hands (αֹּ ?ψλַּ ?τַ ?ιִ ?ν as in Job 17:9; Psalms 18:21 [20]; 24:4); i.e., on account of thine innocence, which thou shalt then have recovered, God will be gracious even to others who need an atonement for their sins. So great and transcendent an efficacy does Eliphaz assume that Job’s future conversion will possess, without once anticipating that he (together with Bildad and Zophar) will turn out to be the not-guiltless one” (ΰִ ?ιΞπָ ?χִ ?ι for ΰֵ ?ιοΞπָ ?χִ ?ι, Ewald, § 215, b) [Gesen., § 149, 1], whom God will forgive only on Job’s account; comp. Job 42:8. [Another striking example of that dramatic irony in which our author from time to time indulges, when he allows for a moment the light of the future to fall on his characters in such a way as to present the contrast between their thoughts and God’s thoughts.—E.] Seb. Schmidt and J. D. Michaelis have already given the correct explanation, as follows: Liberabit Deus et propter puritatem manuum tuarum alios, quos propria innocentia ipsos deficiens ipsos deficiens non esset liberatura. So also substantially most moderns, while Hirzel arbitrarily understands by the not-guiltless one Job, with another subject for the second member. Umbreit, however, gives a still harsher construction, taking Job as the object of the first member (= ΰִ ?ιΞπָ ?χִ ?ι), and at the same time as subject of the second member, which he treats as addressed to God: “yea, he (Job) is delivered by the pureness of Thy hands;” i.e., by Thy Divine righteousness. [E. V., in taking ΰִ ?ι in its usual meaning of “island,” gives a rendering which is seen at once to be altogether unsuitable.—E.] AND ETHICAL1. Eliphaz in the second part of this new discourse is prompted to discuss somewhat more thoroughly than before the proposition advanced by Job (Job 21) touching the frequent contradiction between the moral desert and the outward lot of men, which he does indeed only by representing the prosperity of the wicked, the existence of which he cannot deny, as only apparent, and quickly passing away (Job 22:15-20). Following upon this discussion, which has in it little that is personal, and which concerns itself rather with the subject-matter, he resumes the tone of fatherly admonition and persuasion by promises of good found in his first discourse, instead of continuing the purely threatening tone of the second (Job 15), closing even with a prophetic picture so full of light, that it quite rivals in the freshness and glow of its colors that found at the close of the first discourse (Job 5:17 seq.), and breathes a spirit which certainly proves him to be in his way Job’s sincere well-wisher. In all these particulars, and to this extent, Eliphaz, the oldest of Job’s friends and their leader, here at the beginning of the third act of the colloquy exhibits progress for the better in his way of thinking—a progress, moreover, to which Job himself contributes by the skill with which he vindicates himself, and the moral superiority of his spirit. On the other hand, however, it must be said that he is guilty of misunderstanding and of misrepresenting in a one-sided manner Job’s doubts resulting from the disproportion between human desert and happiness (Job 22:13-14), and so perverts them, as though Job had advanced frivolous epicurean conceptions of the Deity, and thus denied a special Providence, leaving the destinies of men on earth to be ruled over by accident. In close connection with this gross misconception of Job’s opinions, and serving to explain it, is the re-affirmation which he makes in the First Division through the medium of a downright syllogism (Job 22:2-5) of grievous crime on the part of Job as the ground of his sufferings, proceeding so far even as to name particular sins of which he arbitrarily assumes him to be guilty, and pushing his charges to the most outrageous excess (Job 22:6-9). In both these respects we see an advance on the part of the speaker in an evil direction, an increasing bitterness, a constant stubborn refusal to entertain the truth. We accordingly find in this discourse in one direction certainly an apparent preparation for a peaceful solution and harmonious reconciliation of the conflict; but in another direction, and that the very one which is important and decisive, it simply contributes to the heightening of the conflict, and by inciting Job to bitterness, makes it more and more impossible for the sorely tried sufferer to enter upon a truly calm and convincing exhibition of the goodness of his cause, and thus points with a necessity which ever becomes more and more imperative, to the final intervention of a higher Arbiter as the only way of unraveling the entangled coil of the controversy. 2. In consequence of this advance both in a good and an evil direction, this new discourse of Eliphaz bears in a much higher degree than his two former ones the character of a peculiar double-sidedness, and self-contradiction in its expressions. Considered in itself it is “the purest truth, expressed in the most striking and beautiful form; but as an answer to the speech of Job the dogma of the friends itself is destroyed in it, by the false conclusion by which it is obliged to justify itself to itself” (Delitzsch). In one respect its expressions breathe the spirit of a genuine prophet, of a divinely enlightened teacher of wisdom of the patriarchal age. But in another respect, in that, namely, which concerns the sharply malicious tendency which they reveal against Job. they seem like the sayings of a false prophet, and even of a passionate accuser and spiteful suspecter of suffering innocence. They have a double sound to them, like the expressions of one who is at once a Moses and a Balaam. “According to their general substance these speeches are genuine diamonds; according to their special application they are false ones” (Delitzsch).—Eliphaz gives utterance to the purest and most elevated conceptions of God, and His infinitely wise and righteous dealings. At the very beginning of the first division he describes His blessed all-sufficiency; at the beginning of the second His heaven-high exaltation, His majesty comparable to the unchangeable brilliancy of the stars; and in the third division he sets forth with incomparable and truly impressive power His fatherly gentleness and compassion, which willingly hears the prayer of the penitent sinner. And what he affirms in respect to the inexorable rigor with which the justice of the same God inflicts punishment, as it was manifested in judgment upon the sinners of the primeval world, upon the ungodly antediluvians (Job 22:15-18), even that produces an impression all the more deep and forcible in that it has for its setting those splendid descriptions radiating forth their mild brilliancy. Yet after all that inviting description of the divine all-sufficiency is used in the service of a low, external and vulgar theory of retribution, which is deduced from it by an audacious sophism, and an unexampled logical leap (see on Job 22:5). After all that admonitory reference to the majestic movement of God as the All-seeing Ruler of the universe, and the inexorable Avenger of the wicked, shoots wide of the mark in so far as it is aimed at Job, for it was neither true that Job had denied the special Providence and Omniscience of God (as Eliphaz in Job 22:13-14, by a crafty process of deduction, reproached him with doing), nor that his sins were of such a character that they could even approximately be compared with those of the insolent blasphemers and deniers of God in Noah’s time. Finally, the beautiful words of promise in the closing division, with their reference to God’s goodness as Father, and with their counsel to seek the love of this God as the most precious of all treasures (Job 22:24-25), are wanting in all true power of consolation for Job, and lose entirely their apparent value in consequence of that which precedes them. For if Job is to seek God as his heavenly treasure, it is presupposed that hitherto he has loved earthly treasures more than was right, nay, that he has been guilty of the sins and transgressions of grasping tyrants, as was intimated in the first division (Job 22:6-9). And if Job had really sinned so wantonly, and subscribed to the atheistic sentiments of the generation that was destroyed by the deluge, then all advice to repent and return to the Heavenly Father would be for him practically useless; at least from the stand-point of Eliphaz, characterized as it was by the pride of legal virtue, such an exhortation, together with the promise of good which accompanied it, could scarcely have been uttered sincerely. [Should we not, however, make allowance for the perplexing dilemma in which the friends found themselves placed? Was there not a constant strife between the deductions of their logic and the instincts of their affection? Is it strange that the rigor of the former should be continually qualified by the tenderness of the latter? And does not our poet skillfully avail himself of this inconsistency to relieve what would otherwise be the intolerable harshness of their position?—E.] 3. This two-fold character appertaining to the utterances of Eliphaz, it is evident, increases largely the difficulty of the homiletic expounder of this chapter, especially if he would not simply seize upon and bring forth single pearls or gems, but consider the beautiful glittering jewel as a whole. For in order to a correct appreciation, and a truly fruitful application of the contents of the discourse, which is not wanting in richness, it is indispensable to avoid as much as possible any mutilation of so well-connected a whole, and to note everywhere not only what is true, but also what is false and one-sided in the utterances of the speaker. The Moses and the Balaam sides of the prophet must be exhibited together. Any other treatment, any one-sided favorable representation of the speaker’s character would contradict the evident purpose of the poet, which is from the beginning to the end of this discourse to present truth and error blended and amalgamated together. This is especially indicated by the circumstance that Eliphaz at the close of the discourse appears wholly in the character of a pseudo-prophet, of the order of Balaam, and is compelled unwillingly to prophesy the issue of the controversy, and that too as one that is decidedly unfavorable to him and his associates. “He who now, considering himself as πָ ?χִ ?ι, preaches penitence to Job, shall at last stand forth ΰִ ?ιπָ ?χִ ?ι, and will be one of the first who need Job’s intercession as the servant of God, and whom he is able mediatorially to rescue by the purity of his hands” (Delitzsch—comp. above on Job 22:29-30). AND Job_22:2 seq. Brentius: This is indeed a most beautiful exhortation to repentance which Eliphaz here delivers; but what is it to Job? Eliphaz therefore sins in this direction, because that by these words he falsely charges Job with iniquity and impiety, and this with no other reason for so doing than that he sees him to be afflicted. … Everything is well said, but carnally understood. For carnal wisdom thinks that in this life blessing attends the godly in temporal affairs, but a curse the ungodly; whereas truth teaches that in this life, to the godly, the blessing accompanies the curse, life death, salvation damnation; while, on the contrary, to the ungodly, the curse accompanies the blessing, death life, damnation salvation. Job 22:6 seq. Starke (after the Tόbingen Bible and Zeyss): To withhold a pledge which has been received, and to oppress the poor, are heinous sins, which cry out to heaven (Exodus 22:26 seq.). To sin against the widows, the orphans, the poor, the needy, etc., infallibly brings down severe punishment from God, as One who has His eye specially on those, Sir 35:18 seq. Job 22:12 seq. Cocceius: It is an old error that God dwells in the highest summit of heaven, and touches those things which are lower only by a certain force impressed on those things which are nearest to Himself, and gradually transmitted from them;—an error which Scripture refutes when it says that God is a God at hand, and not a God afar off (Jeremiah 23:23 seq.), for no part of creation is nearer to God than any other.—Wohlfarth: “God is too exalted to trouble himself about the affairs of men:” thus do many still think, and walk accordingly in the path of unbelief, sin and destruction. Only the Tempter can persuade them to this. Just because God is the most exalted Being, nothing is hidden from Him; and He knows even our most secret actions, our most hidden wishes, our most silent sufferings (Jeremiah 23:23 seq.; Psalms 139:1 seq.; Matthew 6:8; 1 John 3:20, etc.). Job 22:17 seq. Starke: As it is the wish and longing of the godly, that God would draw nigh to them, so, on the contrary, the burden of the song of the ungodly is: “Depart from us!” They would gladly leave to God His heaven, if He would only leave to them their earthly pleasure.—God oftentimes seeks to allure the wicked to repentance by multiplying their earthly possessions; if, however, He does not succeed in this, it results only in their heavier condemnation. When they think that they are most firmly established, God suddenly casts them down, and brings them to nought (Psalms 73:19). Job 22:19. Wohlfarth: May the Christian also rejoice in the destruction of sinners? Eliphaz, in accordance with the way of thinking in his time, speaks of the pleasure of the righteous when sinners are seized by the hand of the Lord. Christ wept in sight of Jerusalem over its hardened inhabitants, and said: “How often,” etc. (Matthew 23:37; Luke 19:42 seq.) … When, therefore, the Lord blesses the righteous, rejoice, O Christian! but do not mock at the sinner, but save him when thou canst do it (James 5:19-20),—when not, mourn for him as thy brother, whose fate demands pity. Job 22:23-25. Starke: What sin tears down, God’s grace builds up again. Having this, you are rich enough! The world’s treasure and comfort are silver and gold, empty and perishable things; but the children of God’s only, highest, and best portion is God Himself (Psalms 73:25 seq.).—V. Gerlach: If thou dost cling with the heart to God, thou canst throw away thy gold, or lose it without concern; the Almighty still remains thy perennial treasure; whereas, on the contrary, without Him the most laborious cares and watchings avail nothing. Job 22:27. V. Gerlach: The paying of the vows, which is elsewhere presented more as a duty, appears here as a promise: God will ever grant thee so much, that thou shalt be able to fulfill all thy vows! Job 22:30. Jo. Lange: The intercession of a righteous man is so potent with God, that on account of it He spares even evil-doers, and visits them not with punishment (Genesis 18:23 seq.; Ezekiel 14:14 seq.). B.—Job: Seeing that God withdraws Himself from him, and that moreover His allotment of men’s destinies on earth is in many ways most unequal, the incomprehensibleness of His ways may hence be inferred, as well as the short-sightedness and one-sidedness of the external theory of retribution held by the friendsJob 23-241. The wish for a judicial decision of God in his favor is repeated, but is repressed by the thought that God intentionally withdraws from him, in order that He may not be obliged to vindicate him in this life Job 231         Then Job answered, and said: 2         Even to-day is my complaint bitter: my stroke is heavier than my groaning. 3    O that I knew where I might find Him! that I might come even to His seat! 4    I would order my cause before Him, and fill my mouth with arguments. 5    I would know the words which He would answer me, and understand what He would say unto me. 6    Will He plead against me with His great power? No; but He would put strength in me. 7    There the righteous might dispute with Him; so should I be delivered forever from my judge. 8    Behold I go forward, but He is not there; and backward, but I cannot perceive Him; 9    on the left hand where He doth work, but I cannot behold Him; He hideth Himself on the right hand that I cannot see Him. 10    But He knoweth the way that I take: when He hath tried me, I shall come forth as gold. 11    My foot hath held His steps, His way have I kept, and not declined. 12    Neither have I gone back from the commandment of His lips; I have esteemed the words of His mouth more than my necessary food. 13    But He is in one mind, and who can turn Him? and what His soul desireth, even that He doeth. 14    For He performeth the thing that is appointed for me: and many such things are with Him. 15    Therefore am I troubled at His presence: when I consider, I am afraid of Him. 16    For God maketh my heart soft, and the Almighty troubleth me. 17    Because I was not cut off before the darkness, neither hath He covered the darkness from my face. 2. The darkness and unsearchableness of God’s ways to be recognized in many other instances of an unequal distribution of earthly prosperity, as well as in Job’s case Job 241         Why, seeing times are not hidden from the Almighty, do they that know Him not see His days? 2    Some remove the landmarks; they violently take away flocks, and feed thereof. 3    They drive away the ass of the fatherless, they take the widow’s ox for a pledge. 4    They turn the needy out of the way; the poor of the earth hide themselves together. 5    Behold, as wild asses in the desert, go they forth to their work, rising betimes for a prey: the wilderness yieldeth food for them and for their children. 6    They reap every one his corn in the field: and they gather the vintage of the wicked. 7    They cause the naked to lodge without clothing, that they have no covering in the cold. 8    They are wet with the showers of the mountains, and embrace the rock for want of a shelter. 9    They pluck the fatherless from the breast, and take a pledge of the poor. 10    They cause him to go naked without clothing, and they take away the sheaf from the hungry; 11    which make oil within their walls, and tread their wine-presses, and suffer thirst. 12    Men groan from out of the city, and the soul of the wounded crieth out: yet God layeth not folly to them. 13    They are of those that rebel against the light; they know not the ways thereof, nor abide in the paths thereof. 14    The murderer rising with the light killeth the poor and needy, and in the night is as a thief. 15    The eye also of the adulterer waiteth for the twilight, saying, No eye shall see me: and disguiseth his face. 16    In the dark they dig through houses, which they had marked for themselves in the daytime: they know not the light. 17    For the morning is to them even as the shadow of death: If one know them, they are in the terrors of the shadow of death 18    He is swift as the waters; their portion is cursed in the earth: he beholdeth not the way of the vineyards. 19    Drought and heat consume the snow waters: so doth the grave those which have sinned. 20    The womb shall forget him; the worm shall feed sweetly on him; he shall be no more remembered; and wickedness shall be broken as a tree. 21    He evil entreateth the barren that beareth not: and doeth not good to the widow. 22    He draweth also the mighty with his power: he riseth up, and no man is sure of life. 23    Though it be given him to be in safety, whereon he resteth; yet his eyes are upon their ways. 24    They are exalted for a little while, but are gone and brought low; they are taken out of the way as all others, and cut off as the tops of the ears of corn. 25    And if it be not so now, who will make me a liar, and make my speech nothing worth? AND 1. Instead of replying directly to the injurious accusations of Eliphaz in Job 22:6 sq.; Job here recurs first of all to the wish which he has already uttered several times (especially in chs. 9 and 13), that God Himself might manifest Himself as Umpire and as Witness of his innocence, and so end authoritatively the controversy which in each successive stage was becoming more and more involved. This wish is, however, immediately repressed by the thought that God purposely keeps Himself removed from him, in order to make him drink the cup of his sufferings to the dregs (Job 23). And in connection with the mournful fact that his state is so cheerless and so full of suffering, and furnishes living proof that God withholds the exercise of His retributive justice, he arrays forthwith (in the second and longer division of his discourse, Job 24), numerous facts of a similar character, which may be observed in the sphere of human life in general. In particular he sets forth many examples of the prosperity of the wicked, continuing to extreme old age, or even to the end of life. He dwells with evident satisfaction on his description of these examples, in order in this way to establish and illustrate most fully, the incomprehensibleness of the divine ways.—The whole discourse, apart from the two principal divisions, which coincide with the customary division by chapters, is divided into smaller strophes of four verses each (in one case of five) in accordance with the strophe-divisions of Ewald, as well as of Stickel and Delitzsch, which in the present case are entirely in harmony. 2. First Division. Repetition of the wish, heretofore uttered, that God might appear to rescue and to vindicate him, together with a self-suggested objection, and an expression of doubt whether the wish would be realized: Job 23. First Strophe: Job 23:2-5. Even to-day my complaint is still bitter.—Both the authority of the Ancient Versions, such as the Targ., Pesh., Vulg. [E. V.], and also the comparison with former passages, such as Job 7:11; Job 10:1, favor the view that ξְ ?ψִ ?ι signifies “bitterness,” and is thus synonymous with ξַ ?ψ, the possibility of which is shown by the cognate radical relation of the verbs ξψδ and ξψψ, which occasionally interchange forms; comp. Delitzsch on the passage. If we take the word however in its ordinary signification of “frowardness, perverseness,” we get a suitable meaning: “my complaint is still ever froward” (ever bids defiance, maintains its opposition), i.e., against such exhortations to penitence as those of Eliphaz (or in opposition to God, as Hahn, Olshausen, etc., explain). On the other hand we can make no use of the reading of the LXX.: ἔκτῆςχειρὀςμου (ξִ ?ιָּ ?γִ ?ι), nor yet of Ewald’s conjecture derived from it—ξִ ?ιָּ ?γεֹ, “by reason of His hand is my complaint” [so Copt. and Merx].—My hand lies heavy on my groaning:i. e., I am driven to the continuous outbreak of my groaning, I must all the time force forth groans (not: my hand thrusts down my groaning, forces it back; Hirzel). Since this rendering yields a meaning that is entirely suitable, and suffers from no particular difficulty as to the language, it is unnecessary either with the Targ. [E. V.], to understand ιָ ?γִ ?ι of “the hand of God which strikes me” (the suffix Ξִ ?ιsensu obj.) or (with the LXX. and Pesh.) [Merx] to read ιָ ?γεֹ. (According to E. V., Ges., Ber., Noyes, Schlottm., Ren., Rod., ςַ ?μ is comparative: “the hand upon me is heavier than my groaning,” which gives a suitable meaning, at least if we take ξְ ?ψִ ?ι in the sense of bitterness. The objection to it is, however, as stated by Delitzsch, that “λαψδιγςμ is an established phrase, and commonly used of the burden of the hand upon any one, Psalms 32:4 (comp. Job 33:7; and the connection with ΰֶ ?μ, 1 Samuel 5:6, and ωָׁ ?ν, 1 Samuel 5:11”).—E.]. It remains to be said that the clause defining the time, βַּ ?νδַ ?ιּ ?εֹ ?ν, “even today,” belongs to both halves of the verse, and for the same reason it expresses the more general sense, “even now, even always,” (comp. Job 3:24). The supposition that the colloquy had lasted several days, and that in particular the present third course of the same had begun one day later than the one preceding is scarcely admissible on the strength of their expression, which is certainly not to be pressed too far, (against Ewald, 2d Ed., and Dillmann). Job 23:3. Oh that I but knew how to find Him.—The Perf. ιָ ?γַ ?ςְ ?ϊִּ ?ι with the following Imperf. consec. (εְ ?ΰֶ ?ξְ ?φָ ?ΰֵ ?δεּ) expresses the principal notion contained in Job’s wish: utinam scirem (locum ejus), et invenirem eum = utinam possim invenire eum! Comp. the similar construction in Job 32:22; also Gesen., § 142, (§ 139), 3, c. The rendering of Dillmann: “Oh that I, having known (where He is to be found), might find Him,” (in accordance with Ewald, § 357 b) gives essentially the same sense.—ϊְּ ?λεּ ?πָ ?δ in the second member means by itself, a frame, stand, setting up;” here specifically, “seat, throne,” i.e., the judgment seat of God, as the sequel shows. Job 23:4. In regard to ςָ ?ψַ ?κְ ξִ ?ωְׁ ?τָּ ?θ, causam instruere, comp. Job 13:18; in regard to ϊּ ?εֹ ?λָ ?ηεֹ ?ϊ (lit. “objections, reproofs”) in the specific sense of “legal arguments, grounds of justification,” see Psalms 38:15 [14]; also above Job 13:3. Second Strophe: Job 23:6-9. The doubt as to the possibility of such a protective interposition of God, begins again to appear. This (Job 23:6) takes first of all the form of a shrinking reflection on the crushing effect which God’s majesty and infinite fulness of power might easily exert upon him; a thought which has already emerged twice before (Job 9:34; Job 13:21), and which in this place Job, supported by the consciousness of his innocence, repudiates and tramples under foot. Would He in omnipotence then contend with me? Nay! He would only regard me: i. e., only give heed to me (ιָ ?ωִׂ ?ιν, scil.μֵ ?α; comp. Job 4:20; here in union with αְּ to express the cleaving of the Divine regard to him, comp. τָּ ?πָ ?δαְּ, Job 6:28): only grant me a hearing, and as the result thereof acquit me. [ΰַ ?κְ “nothing but;” intensive; the very thing that He would do, hence the thing that He would assuredly do]. To render the Imperfect verbs ιָ ?ψִ ?ιּ ?α and ιָ ?ωִׂ ?ιν as expressive of a wish: “shall He contend with me?” i. e., shall I wish, that He would contend with me? (Hirzel, Ew., Dillm., etc.), is altogether too artificial, and not at all required by the connection. [The E. V., Bar., Carey, supply “strength” (λֹּ ?ηַ) after ιωׂ ?ν: God, so far from using His power to crush Job, would strengthen him to plead his cause. But the ellipsis of μֵ ?α is already justified by Job 4:20, and the antithesis thus obtained between a and b is more direct and natural.—E.]. Job 23:7. Then (ωָׁ ?ν as in Job 35:12; Psalms 14:5; Psalms 66:6, and often in a temporal sense; then, when such a judicial interposition of God should take place) would a righteous man plead (lit., “be pleading,” πεֹ ?λָ ?η, partic.) with Him:—i. e., it would be shown that it is a righteous man who pleads with him; and I should forever escape my Judge; i. e., by virtue of this my uprightness. τַּ ?μֵּ ?θ is, like ξַ ?μֵּ ?θ Job 20:20, intensive of Kal. Job 23:8-9. The joyful prospect is suddenly swept away by the thought that God is nowhere, in no quarter of the world to be found.—Yet (δֵ ?ο, “yet behold,” in an adversative sense, as in Job 21:16) if I go eastward, He is not there, etc.χֶ ?γֶ ?ν (“toward the front, = toward the east”) and ΰָ ?ηεֹ ?ψ (toward the rear, = toward the west,” comp. Job 18:20), refer to the eastern and western quarters of the heavens, even as the following “left” and “right” refer to the northern and southern.—If He works northward, I behold (Him) not; if He turns southward I see it not. ωְׂ ?ξֹ ?ΰεμ, “toward the left” is an adverbial local clause, qualifying αַּ ?ςֲ ?ωׂ ?ϊεֹ, as also ιָ ?ξִ ?ιο qualifying ιַ ?ςֲ ?θֹ ?σ. The former verb expresses its customary meaning: “to work, to be active, efficient,” which suits here very well (comp. Job 28:26), so that every different rendering, as e. g., taking = ςָ ?ωָׂ ?δςָ ?ωָׂ ?δγֶּ ?ψֶ ?κְ, “to take His way” (Blumenfeld), or = “to hide Himself” (Umbreit), or = ςָ ?θָ ?δ “to incline Himself, to turn Himself” (Ewald), seems uncalled for. On the other hand the common signification of ςθσ—“to veil Himself,” is less suitable in b [so E. V., Lee, Con., Ber., Rod. Elz,, etc.], than the signification “bending, turning aside” adopted by Saadia, Schultens, Ewald Delitzsch, etc., after the Arabic. If this latter definition deserves here the preference, there is he less probability that the passage contains any reference to the ηַ ?γְ ?ψֵ ?ιϊֵ ?ξָ ?ο, (“the chambers of the South,” Job 9:9), or, generally speaking, to any celestial abode of God as set forth in heathen theologies or cosmogonies. Rather does he poet conceive of God as omnipresent, as much so as the poet of the 139th Psalm, in his similar description (Job 23:8-10). [Gesenius and Carey translate b: “He veileth the South, etc.,” but less appropriately, the construction of ιָ ?ξִ ?ιο being evidently the same with ωְׂ ?ξֹ ?ΰεμ, which is unquestionably adverbial.—E.] Third Strophe: Job 23:10-13. The reason why God withdraws Himself: although He knows Job’s innocence, He nevertheless will not abandon His purpose, once formed, not to allow Himself to be found by Him. [“He conceals Himself from him, lest He should be compelled to acknowledge the right of the sufferer, and to withdraw His chastening hand from him.” Delitz.] Job 23:10. For He knows well my accustomed, way.—γֶּ ?ψֶ ?κְ ςִ ?ξָּ ?γִ ?ι, lit. “the way with me,” i. e., the way which adheres to me, which is steadfastly pursued by me (comp. Psalms 139:24; Ew., § 287 c), or: “the way of which I am conscious” [“which his conscience (συνείδησις) approves (συμμαρτυρεῖ)”], as Delitzsch explains, referring to Job 9:35; Job 15:9.—If He should prove me (αְּ ?ηָ ?πַ ?πִ ?ι, an elliptical conditional clause; comp. Ewald, § 357, b), I should come forth as gold, i. e., out of His crucible; a very strong and bold declaration of his consciousness of innocence, for which Job must hereafter (Job 42:6) implore pardon. Job 23:11. My foot hath held firm to His step (ΰηζ, as elsewhere ϊָּ ?ξַ ?κְ, Psalms 17:5; Proverbs 5:5) [“The Oriental foot has a power of grasp and tenacity, because not shackled with shoes from early childhood, of which we can form but little idea.” Carey]: His way I have kept, and turned not aside. ΰָֽ ?θ, Jussive Hiph. from πθδ, in the intransitive sense of deflectere, as in Psalms 125:5; Isaiah 30:11. Job 23:12. The commandment of His lips—I have not departed from it.—δֵ ?ξִ ?ιωׁ, intransitive, like δִ ?θָּ ?δ in the verse preceding. In regard to the construction (antecedent placing of a nominative absolute) comp. Job 4:6. More than my (own) law I have observed the saying of His mouth; have accordingly set them for above all that I have, of my own will, desired or prescribed for myself. [Bernard explains the preposition ξ here to mean: “by reason of my rule,” i. e., by reason of my having made it a rule. This however obscures the striking contrast between ηֻ ?χִּ ?ι and ΰִ ?ξְ ?ψֵ ?ιΞτִ ?ιε—E.]. With ηֻ ?χּ ?ι we may compare the “law in the members” warring against the Divine law, Romans 7:23. [E. V. takes ηֻ ?χִּ ?ι, as in Genesis 47:22; Proverbs 30:8, in the sense of one’s “allowance of food;” Ewald also translates by “Gebόhr” (“that which as a distinguished rich man I have the right to require in my relations to other men, and my claims upon them”). The consideration of Job’s greatness and power should be borne in mind with the rendering “law.” The “law” which Job had ever held subordinate to the Divine precepts was the will of a prince.—E.]. φָ ?τַ ?ο “to lay up, preserve,” is here substantially equivalent with ωָׁ ?ξַ ?ψ, comp. Psalms 119:11; in view of which parallel passage it is not necessary with the LXX. instead of ξֵ ?δֻ ?χִּ ?ι to read αְּ ?ηֵ ?ιχִ ?ι, ἐντῷ κόλπῳ μονἔκρυψαῥήματααὐτοῦ. Job 23:13. Nevertheless He remaineth (ever) the same, and who will turn HimΣ viz., from His purpose; comp. Job 9:12; Job 11:10. εְ ?δεּ ?ΰαְּ ?ΰֶ ?ηָ ?γ, not: “He remaineth by one thing” (Hirzel, Del.) [Lee, Noyes, Carey], for this would have been expressed by the neuter form αְּ ?ΰַ ?ηַ ?ϊ (comp. Job 9:22); but the αְּ is αessentiζ (Gesen. § 154 [§ 151] 3, a), and the thought expressed is that of the unchangeableness, the constancy of God (not the oneness, or the absolute superiority of God, as the Vulg., Targ., Starke, who refers to Galatians 3:20, Schultens, Ewald, Schlottmann, [Ges., Ber., Rod., Elz.] explain, but against the context. With b compare the well-known expression: “He spake, and it was done, etc.,” Psalms 33:9. [The unchangeable purpose of God of which Job here speaks is evidently the purpose to inflict suffering on him, a purpose to which He inflexibly adheres, notwithstanding He knows Job’s integrity, and finds through His crucible that the sufferer is pure gold.—E.]. Fourth Strophe: Job 23:14-17. Truly (λִּ ?ι as in Job 22:26), He will accomplish my destiny. ηֻ ?χִּ ?ι with suffix of the object, means here that which has been decreed, ordained concerning me. And much of a like kind is with Him—i. e., “has been determined by Him, lies in His purpose,” (comp. Job 9:35; Job 10:13; Job 15:9). The “much of that kind” spoken of refers not specifically to Job’s sufferings (Umbreit, Delitzsch, etc.), as rather to all that is analogous thereto, to all decrees of a like character regarding men in general. Job 23:15. Therefore do I tremble (lit. “I am terrified, troubled”) before His face; if I consider it, I am afraid before Him. ΰֶ ?ϊְ ?αּ ?εֹ ?πֵ ?ο is an elliptical hypothetical antecedent, as is the case in Job 23:10 b. We are to supply as the object to be considered the unfathomable decree of God, by virtue of which he must suffer. Job 23:16. And God hath made my heart faint [lit. “soft”] (δֵ ?ψַ ?κְ Hiph. from ψַ ?κְ, Deuteronomy 20:3, etc.), and the Almighty has confounded me. The emphasis rests in the subjects ΰֵ ?μ and ωַׁ ?γַּ ?ι which are purposely placed first in both members. It is God Himself, who by His incomprehensibly harsh and stern treatment has plunged him in anguish and terror; his suffering considered in itself by no means exerts such a crushing influence upon him (see the vers. following). Job 23:17. For I am not dumb before the darkness, nor yet before myself whom thick darkness has covered—i. e., the darkness of my calamity (comp. Job 22:11), and my own face and form darkened and disfigured by my sufferings (comp. Job 19:13 seq.) are not able to strike me dumb (with horror); only the thought of God can do this, who with His incomprehensible decree stands behind this my suffering! Observe the significant contrast between the ξִ ?τְּ ?πֵ ?ιΞηωֶׁ ?κְ of this ver. and the ξִ ?τָּ ?πָ ?ιε of Job 23:15 a; as well as moreover the antithetic relation, which obtains between this passage and the statement of Eliphaz in Job 22:11 that Job seemed not to mark at all the terrible darkness of his misery. Either of these retrospective references of the passage is lost sight of if, with most of the ancients (LXX., Vulg., Luth.] [E. V. Ges., Scott, Noyes, Ber., Ren., Rod., Elz.] we render: “because I was not cut off (πִ ?φְ ?ξַ ?ϊdeleri, perire, as in Job 6:17) before the darkness came, and He has not covered the darkness from my face” [i. e., has not covered me in the grave, so that I might never have faced this suffering]. The signification: “to become dumb, to be brought to silence,” is the only one that is suitable here; we should then have to think (with Delitzsch, etc.) of an inward destruction by terror and confusion. 3. Second Division: Job 24. An extended description of the many incomprehensible things in what God does as ruler of the universe, beginning with the many instances in which He permits the innocent and defenceless to be oppressed and persecuted by their powerful enemies: Job 24:1-12. Fifth Strophe: Job 24:1-4. Why are times not reserved by the Almighty?—i. e. times of reckoning with good and evil; judicial terms, at which He displays His retributive justice. In. regard to the use of φτο, “reserving” [storing up] in the sense of “appointing, fixing, comp. Job 15:20; Job 21:19. The question is of course so intended as to require no answer, or a negative one. So also in the second member: and do His friends (lit. “His knowers” [acquaintances], they who are His, who know Him, and He them, comp. Job 18:21; Psalms 36:11 [10]) not see His days?—The “days” of God here are His judgment days, the days in which He reveals Himself in judicial rigor against his enemies, and in beneficent mercy toward His holy ones (comp. Ezekiel 30:3, also the expression, the “days of the Son of Man” in Luke 17:22). This verse also seems to contain a retrospective reference to the last discourse of Eliphaz, especially to Job 22:19; by the ancients, moreover, who were troubled more; particularly about the ςִ ?ϊִּ ?ιν, “terms, judicial periods,” it was variously misunderstood, and erroneously translated. [The construction adopted by E. V., Con., etc.: “Why, seeing times are not hidden from the Almighty, do they that know Him not. see His days?” is a less natural and simple rendering of the original than, that given above. Conant objects that “this, question is not pertinent here. The point of inquiry is not, why are such times of retribution not appointed by God; but why, if they are appointed by Him, as alleged, do not good men witness them?” Job however does deny, by implication, that there is any retribution, or time reserved for it, with the Almighty. The phenomena of human life, he argues, indicate that God cares not how men sin, or suffer. The second member of the verse puts the thought of the first in a still more striking light. The indications of retributive justice in the administration of the world, are such that not even God’s familiars, who are in His secret, can discern the days whereon they occur.—E.]. Job 24:2. Landmarks they remove [or, are removed; vb. impersonal] flocks, they plunder, and feed. From this point on begins the specific description of the many deeds of violence, oppression and persecution permitted by God. The vers. immediately following (3, 4) describe the wicked agents who commit such deeds, Job 24:5-8 the wretched ones who suffer from them, and thence on interchangeably, now the persecutors and now the persecuted, the verbs used being put in the 3d person plural Perfect. In respect to the wickedness of removing landmarks, (ιַ ?ρִּ ?ιβεּ = ιַ ?ωִּׂ ?βεּ, from ρεּ ?β) comp. Deuteronomy 19:14; Deuteronomy 27:17; Proverbs 22:28; Proverbs 23:10. In regard to the plundering and carrying off of herds, comp. Job 20:19. [“They steal flocks, εַ ?ιִּ ?ψְ ?ςεּ ?i. e., they are so bare-faced, that after they have stolen them, they pasture them openly.” Delitzsch]. Job 24:3. πָ ?δַ ?β, “to drive away,” as in Isaiah 20:4; ηָ ?αַ ?μ, “to distrain, to take as a pledge” as in Exodus 22:25; Deuteronomy 24:6; comp. below Job 24:9 (whereas on the other hand in Job 22:6 the word is used in a somewhat different sense). [The ass of the orphan, and the yoke-ox of the widow are here referred to as the most valuable possession, and principal dependence of those unfortunate ones.—E.]. Job 24:4. The poor they thrust oat of the way—i. e., out of the way, in which they have the right to walk, into roadless regions (comp. δִ ?θָּ ?δ in a similar sense in Amos 5:12). All together (ιַ ?ηַ ?γ as in Job 3:18) the wretched of the land must hide themselves.—So according to the K’ri: ςֲ ?πִ ?ιֶּ ?ιΞΰֶ ?ψֶ ?υ;, while the K’thibh ςַ ?πְ ?ειֵ ?ΞΰΧ would, according to Psalms 76:10; Zephaniah 2:3 designate the “afflicted,” the “sufferers” of the land, which seems less suitable here. The Pass. ηֻ ?αְּ ?ΰεּ denotes what these unfortunate ones are compelled to do; comp. Job 30:7. Sixth Strophe; Job 24:5-8. Description of the miserable condition into which the oppressed and persecuted are brought by those wicked ones (not of another class of evil-doers apart from those previously spoken of, as ancient exegesis for the most part assumed, and as latterly Rosenm., Umbr., Vaih. [Lee, Barnes, Carey, Scott, etc.] explain). As is evident from the more extended description in Job 30:1-8 of the unsettled, vagabond life of such unfortunates, the poet has here before his eyes the aborigines of the lands east of the Jordan, who were driven from their homes into the desert, possibly the remnant of the ancient Horites [cave-dwellers]; comp. what is said more in detail below on Job 30. Behold, wild asses in the wilderness (i. e. as wild asses; comp. Job 6:5; Job 11:12; Job 39:5 seq.), they go forth in their daily work (lit. “work;” comp. Psalms 104:23), seeking after prey (θֶ ?ψֶ ?σ, booty, prey, a living, as in Proverbs 31:15) [“from θָ ?ψַ ?σ in the primary signification decerpere describes that which in general forms their daily occupation as they roam about. …The idea of waylaying is not to be connected with the expression.” Del.]; the steppe [ςֲ ?ψָ ?πָ ?δ, the wide, open, desert plain] is to them (lit. “to him,” viz., to each one of them), [or “to him as father of the company,” Del., or possibly the sing. μεֹ is used to avoid the concurrence of μָ ?δֶ ?ν with μֶ ?ηֶ ?ν immediately following: Hirzel] bread for their children—(πְ ?ςָ ?ψִ ?ιν as in Job 1:19; Job 29:5) [“the steppe, with its scant supply of roots and herbs, is to him food for the children; ho snatches it from it, it must furnish it to him” (Del.) thus accounting for the use of θֶ ?ψֶ ?σ]. A striking description of the beggar, vagabond life of these troglodytes, the precursors of the gipsies, or South-African Bushmen of to-day. [Of the τְּ ?ψָ ?ΰִ ?ιν, onagri (Kulans), with which these are compared, Delitzsch says: “Those beautiful animals, which, while young, are difficult to be caught; which in their love of freedom are an image of the Beduin, Genesis 16:12; in their untractableness an image of that which cannot be bound, Job 11:12; and from their roaming about in herds in waste regions, are here an image of a gregarious vagrant, and freebooter kind of life.” Del.] Job 24:6. In the field they reap (so according to the K’ri ιִ ?χְ ?φεֹ ?ψεּ the K’thibh ιַ ?χְ ?φִ ?ιψεּ would be rendered by some such expression as “they make for a harvest”) the cattle-fodder [αְּ ?μִ ?ιμֹ ?ε, as in Job 6:5, mixed fodder for the cattle, farrago]; lit. “his cattle-fodder, i. e. that of the ψָ ?ωָׁ ?ς mentioned in b. [Most explain this to mean that these miserable hirelings seek to satisfy their hunger with the fodder grown the cattle. Delitzsch on the ground that “χָ ?φַ ?ψ does not signify to sweep together, but to reap in an orderly manner; and if they meant to steal why did they not seize the better portion of the produce?” supposes that the “rich evildoer hires them to cut the fodder for his cattle, but does not like to entrust the reaping of the better kinds of corn to them.” This view, however, seems less natural than the former, and less in harmony with the parallelism. See below on b.—E.]. And they glean the vineyard of the wicked. μχωׁ ?serotinos fructus colligere (Rosenm.), to glean the late-ripe fruit, i. e. stealing it. The meaning can scarcely be that this was done in the service of the rich evil-doer, in which case the verb ςεֹ ?μֵ ?μracemari would rather have been used (against Delitzsch). Job 24:7. Naked (ςψεν, adverbial accusative, as in Job 24:10; comp. ωׂ ?εֹ ?μָ ?μ, Job 12:17; Job 12:19) they pass the night without clothing, ξִ ?αְּ ?μִ ?ι lit. “from the lack of,” comp. Job 24:8 b. and Job 24:10. Job 24:8. …And shelterless (from lack of shelter) they clasp the rock.—ηִ ?αְּ ?χεּ, they “embrace” the rock, in that shivering they crouch beneath it as their shelter. Comp. the phrase, “embracing the dunghill” (mezabil), Lamentations 4:5. Seventh Strophe: Job 24:9-12. Resuming the description of the tyrannical conduct of those men of power described in Job 24:2-4. They tear the orphan from the breast.—ωֹׁ ?γ here the same as ωַׂ ?γ, as also in Isaiah 60:16; Isaiah 66:11. Correctly therefore the LXX.: ἀπὸ μαστοῦ ?—whereas to render ωֹׁ ?γ in its customary signification of “destruction, ruin” (as e. g. by Ramban, etc.) [=“from the shattered patrimony”], yields no satisfactory meaning. The act of tearing away from the breast is conceived of as the violent deed of harsh creditors, who would satisfy their claims by bringing up the orphan children as slaves. And what the miserable one has on they take away as a pledge.—A tenable meaning, and one that will agree well with Job 24:10 is obtained only by regarding εְ ?ςַ ?μ as an elliptical expression for εַ ?ΰֲ ?ωֶׂ ?ψςַ ?μ “and what is on the miserable one,” i. e. What he wears, his clothing (Ralbag, Gesen., Arnh., Vaih., Dillmann) [Rod., Bernard, Noyes]. With the thought may then be compared Micah 2:9; in respect to ηαμ see above on Job 24:3. The other explanations which have been given are less suited to the connection, if not absolutely impossible, such as: “they take a pledge above [beyond the ability of] the sufferer” (Hirzel); “they take for a pledge the suckling (εְ ?ςֻ ?μ of the poor”) (Kamphausen) [Elzas]; “with the poor they deal basely,” or “knavishly” (Umbr., Del.), which latter rendering however would make it seem strange that the verb ηαμ has only a short while before been used twice (Job 24:3, and Job 22:6) in the sense of distraining. [To which add Dillmann’s objection that this interpretation seems “colorless,” out of place in the series of graphic, concrete touches of which the description is composed. It may also be said of the explanation of E. V. Ewald, Schlott., Renan, Conant, etc., “they impose a pledge on the sufferers,” that it is less vivid than that adopted above. It must be admitted on the other hand that the assumption that =ςμΰωׁ ?ψςμ is somewhat doubtful.—E.]. Job 24:10-12 again bring into the foreground as subject those who are maltreated by the proud oppressors. These are however no longer represented as the wretched inhabitants of steppes or caves, but as poor serfs on the estates of the rich, and are thus represented as being in inhabited cities and their vicinity. Naked they (the poor) slink about, without clothing.—Comp. Job 24:7, and in respect to δִ ?μֵּ ?κְ, “to slink,” see Job 30:28. And hungry they bear the sheaves—i. e. for the rich, whose hired service they perform, who however allow them to go hungry in their service, and thus become guilty of the crying sin of the merces retenta laborum (Deuteronomy 25:4; 1 Timothy 5:18, etc.). [The English translators, misled probably by the Piel, δִ ?μֵּ ?λεּ, which they took to be transitive, have made the “oppressors” of the vers. preceding the subject of Job 24:10. δִ ?μֵּ ?κְ however is always “to walk about, to go to and fro” (so also in Proverbs 8:20). Taking it in this sense here, the subject is naturally “the poor;” and πωׂ ?ΰ in the second member is simply “to bear, not “to take away from.”—E.] Job 24:11. Between their walls (hence under their strict supervision) they must press out the oil (ιַ ?φְ ?δִ ?ιψεּ, Hiph. denom., only here); they tread the wine-vats, and suffer thirst (while so engaged—Imperf. consec. comp. Ewald, § 342, a). A further violation of the law that the mouth of the ox must not be muzzled. Job 24:12. Out of the cities the dying groan.—So according to the reading ξֵ ?ϊִ ?ιν (Pesh., 1 Ms. of de Rossi’s, and some of the older editions), which word indeed elsewhere means “the dead,” but which here, as the parallel of the following ηֲ ?μָ ?μִ ?ιν (“wounded, pierced to death,” comp. Ezekiel 26:15; Jeremiah 51:22) may very well be taken to mean the dying, those who utter the groaning and rattling of the death struggle [see Green, § 266, 2, a]. So correctly Umbreit, Ew., Hirz., Vaih., Stick., Heiligst., Dillmann [Schlott., Renan, Noyes. Others (Carey, Elzas, etc.) in the weaker sense: “mortals.”] The usual reading ξְ ?ϊִ ?ιν, “men,” yields a suitable rendering only by disregarding the masoretic accentuation, and connecting this ξְ ?ϊִ ?ιν as subj. with ιִ ?πְ ?ΰָ ?χεּ (so Jer., Symmachus, Theod.). In that case, however, it should be translated not by the colorless and indefinite term “people” [Leute] (Hahn, etc.) but by “men [Mδnnen, viri], warriors,” and understood (with Del.) of the male population of a city, “whom a conqueror would put to the sword.” This however would remove the discourse too far out of the circle of thought in which it has hitherto removed. [According to the Masor. punctuations ξֵ ?ςִ֣ ?ιψξְ ?ϊִ ?ιν would be “out of an inhabited, thickly populated city,” a thought which has no place in the connection. Gesenius, followed by Conant, takes ςιψ (II Lex.) in the sense of “anguish:” “for anguish do the dying groan.” But the second member: “and the soul of the wounded cries out,” brings up before us a scene of blood, involving the slaying of a multitude, for which we should have been unprepared without the mention of the “city” in the first member.—E.]. Yet God regards not the folly!—ϊִּ ?τְ ?μָ ?δ, lit. [“insipidity], absurdity, insulsitas (Job 1:22), a contemptuous expression which seems very suitable here, serving as it does to describe tersely the violence of the wicked, mocking at the moral order of the universe, and still remaining unpunished. The punctuation ϊְּ ?τִ ?μָּ ?δ, “prayer, supplication” (Pesh., some MSS.) [Con., Noyes, Good, Elzas], may also be properly passed by without consideration. In regard to the absolute use of μֹ ?ΰΞιָ ?ωִׂ ?ιν (supply αְּ ?μִ ?λּ ?εֹ, comp. Job 22:22), “he regards not,” see Job 4:20; Isaiah 41:20; and especially Psalms 50:23, where, precisely as here, the expression is construed with the accus. of the object. [The rendering of E. V.: “yet God layeth (=imputeth) not folly to them,” is not essentially different, but is less expressive. Oppression ravages the earth; in the wilderness, among rocks and caves, in fields and vineyards, in villages and cities, men suffer, groan, die—and all this chaotic folly, this dark anomaly, this mockery of the Divine order—God heeds it not!—E.] 4. Second Division: Second Half: Job 24:13-25. Continuation of the preceding description, in which special prominence is given to those evildoers who commit their crimes in secret, and escape for a long time the divine punishment, which surely awaits them. Eighth Strophe: Job 24:13-17. Those (δֵ ?ξָּ ?δ, emphatically contrasting the present objects of the description, as a new class of evil-doers, with those previously mentioned) are rebels against the light, or: “are become rebels,” etc.; for so may the clause δָ ?ιεּ αְּ with αessential, comp. Job 23:13) be taken, unless we prefer to explain: “are become among apostates from the light,” i. e. have acquired the nature of such (Del., Dillm.) [in either case διδ is not the mere copula, but expresses a process of becoming]. ξψְֹ ?γֵ ?ιΞΰεֹ ?ψ, “apostates, revolters from the light, enemies of the light,” are essentially the same, as “children of the night” (Romans 13:12; 1 Thessalonians 5:5; Ephesians 5:8, etc.—Will not know its ways; i. e. the ways of the light, for it is more natural to refer the suffix in γְ ?ψָ ?λָ ?ιε, as well as in πְ ?ϊִ ?ιαεֹ ?ϊָ ?ιε to ΰεֹ ?ψ than to “God.” Job 24:14. At the dawn (μָ ?ΰεֹ ?ψ, sub lucem, cum diluculo, toward the break of day, before it is yet broad daylight) the murderer riseth up. ψεֹ ?φֵ ?ηַ, one who makes a trade of murder, who kills to steal, like the English garotter; for the wealthy oppressor is no longer (down to Job 24:18) the subject of the discourse.—[He slays the poor and needy: because of their defenceless condition; not of course for plunder, but to gratify his bloodthirsty disposition.]—And in the night he acts like a thief, or: “he becomes as the thief,” i. e. in the depths of night, when there is no one to cross his path, he plies the trade of a petty, common thief, committing burglary, etc. for the Jussive ιְ ?δִ ?ι instead of ιִ ?δְ ?ιֶ ?δ, comp. above Job 18:12; Job 20:23, etc. [poetic form]; and for ΰָ ?ηַ ?ζ, instead of ΰֶ ?ηֱ ?ζֶ ?δ, Job 23:9. Job 24:15. And the adulterer’s eye watches (ωָׁ ?ξַ ?ψ, observare, to be on the watch for, to lurk for) the twilight, i. e. the evening twilight, before the approach of which he does not ply his craft; comp. Proverbs 7:9. πֶ ?ωֶׁ ?σ here crepusculum; see above on Job 3:9—And puts a veil over the face: lit. “and lays on a covering of the face,” i. e., some kind of a veil;—hardly a mask, of which oriental antiquity had no knowledge; comp. Delitzsch on the passage. Job 24:16. They break in the dark into houses; lit. “he,” or “one breaks in;” the indefinite subj. of ηϊψ, is, as the plurals in the following members show, an entire band of thieves.—They, who by day keep themselves shut up, know not the light, i. e. they have no fellowship with it, as children of night and of darkness. The rendering of the Targ. and of some of the Rabbis (approximately also of the Vulg.) [also of E. V.]: “which houses) they had marked for themselves in the daytime,” is opposed by the fact that ηϊν signifies always obsignare, never designare; comp. Job 14:17; Job 37:7. Job 24:17. For to them all deep darkness is morning; i. e. when the deepest darkness of the night (φμξεϊ, comp. Job 3:5) begins, then they enter upon their day’s work [the drawing on of the night is to them what day-break is to others]—a striking characteristic of the ἔργατοῦ σκότους, in which these evil-doers engage. Umbreit and Hirzel [and so E. V. Ber., Con.] unsuitably take not φμξεϊ, but αχψ as subject: “the morning is to them at once deep darkness.” Against this explanation it may be urged that ιַ ?ηְ ?γָּ ?ε means not “at once,” but as in Job 2:11; Job 9:32, etc., “all together, all in a body.”—Because they know the terrors of deep darkness; i. e. are familiar with them, as other men are with the open day; comp. Job 24:16 e; Job 38:16. The sing, again makes its appearance here [λִּ ?ιιַ ?λִּ ?ιψ, lit. “for he (or one) knows,” etc.], because stress is laid on the fact that every member of this wicked band has this familiarity with the darkness of night. [According to the rendering of E. V., Hirzel, etc., here rejected, the meaning would be that morning or daylight would bring terror to these evil-doers, the fear i. e. of being detected and condemned. In the second member λִּ ?ιιַ ?λִּ ?ιψ would then be antecedent, either general: “when one can discern” (Con.), or particular: “if one know them” (E. V.) and αַּ ?μְ ?ηεֹ ?ϊφַ ?μְ ?ξָ ?εֶ ?ϊ, the consequent—“terrors of death-shade!” The other rendering, however, has on the whole the advantage of greater simplicity, and agreement with usage and the context.—E.] Ninth Strophe: Job 24:18-21. The judgment which will overtake the wicked who have been thus far described. This judgment Job describes here proleptically, for in Job 24:22-24 a he returns once again to their haughty, insolent conduct before the judgment comes, in order to bring out the thought that a long time usually elapses before it overtakes them. This strophe sets forth, in the first place, and this intentionally in strong language, which in the mouth of Job is quite surprising, that a grievous punishment and certain destruction infallibly awaits them; but that such destruction, for the most part, is long delayed, is maintained in the following strophe, which, however, in Job 24:24 again resumes the description of the destruction. The language does not permit us with the LXX., Vulg., Pesh., Eichh., Dathe, Umbr., Vaih, etc., to take these verses in an optative sense, as a description of the punishment, which ought to befal evil-doers: thus at the outset in Job 24:18 we have χַ ?μδεּ ?ΰ, not ιְ ?δִ ?ιχַ ?μδεּ ?ΰ; and so throughout every sign of the optative form of speech is wanting. It is possible, but the same is not indicated with sufficient clearness by the author, and for that reason is altogether too artificial, to take vers 18–21 (with Ewald, Hirzel, Schlottm., v. Gerlach, Heiligstedt, Dillmann) as a description of the well-merited judgment inflicted on the wicked, ironically attributed by Job to his opponents, Job’s own opinion on the opposite side being in that case annexed to it in Job 24:22 seq. See against this opinion, as well as against the related opinion of Stickel, Bφttcher, Hahn, etc., the remarks of Delitzsch [Job 2:33: “(1) There is not the slightest trace observable in Job 24:18-21 that Job does not express his own view. (2) There is no such decided contrast between Job 24:18-21 and Job 24:22-25, for Job 24:19 and Job 24:24 both affirm substantially the same thing concerning the end of the evil-doer. In like manner it is not to be supposed with Stickel, Lφw., Bφttch., Welte and Hahn, that Job, outstripping the friends, as far as Job 24:21, describes how the evil-doer certainly often comes to a terrible end, and in Job 24:22 seq., how the very opposite of this, however, is often witnessed; so that this consequently furnishes no evidence in support of the exclusive assertion of the friends. Moreover, Job 24:24 compared with Job 24:19, where there is nothing to indicate a direct contrast, is opposed to it; and Job 24:22, which has no appearance of referring to a direct contrast with what has been previously said, is opposed to such an antithetical rendering of the two final strophes.”] Job 24:18. His course is swift on the face of the waters: i. e. lightly and swiftly is he born hence, as one who is swept away irresistibly by the flood; comp. Job 9:26; Hosea 10:7. [Carey curiously conjectures that this ver. speaks of pirates!]—Accursed is their portion in the land; or: “a curse befals,” etc. (Dillm.). [In German: Im Fluge ist er dahin auf Wassers Flδche; verflucht wird ihr Grundstόck im Lande; or according to Dillmann: Flucht trifft, etc., whereby, continues Zφckler, the paronomasia between ϊְּ ?χֻ ?μַּ ?μ and χַ ?μ is still more clearly expressed. This paronomasia it is impossible to reproduce in English without slightly paraphrasing the one term or the other. The above attempts to combine the verbal play with fidelity to the German original: “his course is swift” for “im Fluge dahin,” and “accursed” for “verflucht.”] Whether a divine curse, or a curse on the part of men, is intended, seems doubtful: still parallel passages, such as Job 5:3; Job 18:20, favor the latter view. The interchange of plur. and sing. occurs here as in Job 24:16.—He enters no more on the way of the Vineyard; lit. “he turns no more into the way to the vineyard” (comp. 1 Samuel 13:18); i. e. there is an end of his frequent resorting to his favorite possession, and in general of his enjoyment of the same. Observe that from here on wealthy evil-doers again form the prominent subject of the description; in this differing from Job 24:13-17. Job 24:19. Drought and heat carry off [ιִ ?βְ ?ζְ ?μεּ lit. “bear away as plunder”] the snow-water (comp. Job 6:16 seq.): so the underworld those who have sinned.—ηָ ?θָ ?ΰִ ?εּ, a relative clause, which is at the same time the object of the verb in the first member, which extends its influence also to the second member. As to the sentiment, comp. Psalms 49:13 [12] 21 [20]; also Job 24:18 a; not however Job 21:23, where rather the euthanasia [of the subject] is described, not his sudden end without deliverance. Job 24:20. The womb forgets him, (whereas) the worms feed sweetly on him.—The two short sentences which constitute this member stand in blunt contrast to each other. ξϊχ here sensu activo: to taste anything with pleasure, delectari aliquare (lit. “to suck”—hence the meaning “sweet”). So then is iniquity broken like the tree—(i. e. like a shattered, or felled tree; comp. Ecclesiastes 11:3; Daniel 4:7 seq.; also above Job 19:10). Instead of the wicked man his injurious conduct (ςַ ?εְ ?μָ ?δ, comp. on Job 5:16) is here mentioned as having come to an end, while Job 24:21 again speaks in the concrete concerning the evil-doer himself, in order to point to his heinous bloodguiltiness as the cause of his punishment. [“The fundamental thought of the strophe is this, that neither in life nor in death had he suffered the punishment of his evil-doing. The figure of the broken tree (broken in its full vigor) also corresponds to this thought; comp. on the other hand what Bildad says, Job 18:16 : “his roots dry up beneath, and above his branch is lopped off” (or: withered). The severity of his oppression is not manifest till after his death.” Delitzsch]. Job 24:21. He who hath plundered (lit. “fed upon, devoured,” comp. Job 20:26) the barren, that beareth not (who has therefore no children to protect her), and hath done no good to the widow—but on the contrary has shown himself hard of heart towards her. On the form ιְ ?ιֵ ?θִ ?ια comp. Gesen. § 70 [§ 69], 2, Rem. [Green, § 150, 2] [The Participial form ψֹ ?ςֶ ?δ introducing the characteristics of the class, and followed by finite verb according to Gesen. § 131, Rem. 2]. Tenth Strophe: Job 24:22-25. And yet He preserveth long the men of might by His strength—i. e., but truly (εְ before ξωκ is at once adversative and restrictive). He (God, comp. Job 24:23) often greatly prolongs the life of such mighty evil-doers (ΰַ ?αִּ ?ιψִ ?ιν, comp. Isaiah 46:12) [“the strong, who bid defiance not only to every danger, (Psalms 76:6) but also to all divine influences and noble impulses.” Delitzsch]. On ξωκְ as applied to the agency of God in prolonging life comp. Isaiah 13:22; Psalms 36:11; Psalms 85:6 [5]. Such an one rises up again, although despairing of life—when he had already despaired of continuing in life. [So far from using his power to crush the mighty villains of earth, God uses it to bring them triumphantly through those crises in which they themselves had given up all hope—E.] εְ ?μΰΞιַ ?ΰֲ ?ξִ ?ιο subordinate circumstantial clause, comp. Ewald, § 341, a.—ηַ ?ιִּ ?ιο, Aramaizing plur. like ξִ ?μִּ ?ιο, Job 4:2. [According to E. V. and most commentators the subject of Job 24:22 is still the wicked man, ξωׁ ?κְ being taken to mean: “to draw, drag” as a captive; or “to hold, bind;” or “to destroy. ‘He subjugates the mighty, and puts all in terror for their very life.’ The interpretation given above however is more in accord with the proper meaning of ξωׁ ?κְ, with Job 24:23 understood as having God for its subject; and is specially favored by the consideration that it gives more distinct expression to the thought, so important to Job’s argument here of the lengthening out of the life and prosperity of the evil-doer, and of the long delay of his punishment. The omission of the Divine Name is so characteristic of our book as to present no difficulty.—E.]. Job 24:23. He grants him safety (lit. “He (God) grants to him to be in safety; permits him to be at his ease [μαθη, adverbial, of the state or condition He grants him to be in]; so that he is sustained (εַ ?ιִּ ?ωָּׁ ?ςֵ ?ο, expressing the consequence of that divine grant of security), and His (God’s) eyes are upon their ways—in order, namely, to keep them therein, and to bless and protect them; comp. δֹ ?ετִ ?ιςַ ςַ ?μ, Job 10:3. [God’s eyes, says Job, follow the prosperous evil-doer with watchful interest, to see that he does not step out of the path of security and success! According to the other interpretation, which continues the evil-doer as the subject, the meaning is that the oppressor allows to those who are in his power only a transient respite, watching for every pretence or opportunity to injure them. See Scott. The full-toned suffix Ξֵ ?ιδεּ ?—seems chosen for emphasis.—E.]. Job 24:24. They rise high—a little while only, and they are gone. ψֹ ?ξּ ?εּ, 3 Plur. Perf. from ψεּ ?ν=ψξν, to raise oneself, to mount upward” (Ew. § 114 a; comp. Gesen. § 67 [§ 66] Rem. 1 [Green, § 139, 1], ξְ ?ςַ ?θ with following εְ for the consequent, forms a short sentence by itself, as in Psalms 37:10. As to εְֵ ?ΰιֶ ?ππּ ?εּ “then he is no more,” comp. Genesis 5:24. The interchange of numbers as in Job 24:16 and Job 24:18. And they are bowed down (concerning δֻ ?ξְּ ?λεּ [Aramaizing] Hoph. from ξλκְ, comp. Gesen. § 67 [§ 66], Rem. 1); like all they perish (i. e. like all others), and as the top of the ears [of grain: i. e. the grain-bearing head of the wheat-stalk] they wither.—ιָ ?χּֽ ?τְ ?φεּ ?ο, lit. “they shrivel together” (Niph. Reflex. from Kal; comp. Job 5:16) i. e., they perish. There is no reference to the componere artus of the dead [Ges. “to gather oneself up, composing the body and limbs as in death,” which here would mean to die in the course of nature, not by violence, or suddenly], nor to the “housing,” i. e. the burial of the dead (comp. Ezekiel 29:5). The expression is rather a figure taken from vegetable life, like the following ιִ ?ξָּ ?μεּ, “they wither like the heads of grain;” see on Job 42:2. [It may be claimed with reason that the connection here favors the definition, “to be cut off,” the oriental custom of reaping being to cut off the tops, leaving long stalks standing in the field.] It is not altogether in the sense of euthanasia, therefore, of an easy, painless death, as described in Job 21:23, that the present passage is to be understood (against Ewald, Dillmann, etc., also Del.). It rather resumes the description in Job 24:18 seq., although in less forcible language, and in such a way as to set forth a natural death, such as all die, rather than that caused by a divine judgment, such as often falls upon the wicked. Job 24:25. And should it not be so (εְ ?ΰִ ?ρΞμֹ ?ΰΰֵ ?τεֹ as in Job 9:24) who will convict me of falsehood, and make my speech of no effect?—The phrase ωִׂ ?ινμְ ?ΰַ ?μ (instead of which Symm., Vulg., Pesh. read ωׂ ?Χμְ ?ΰֵ ?μ) is precisely the same with εἰςμηδεντιθέναι, or our: “bring to nought,” comp. Ewald, § 286, g; 321, b. The whole question is a triumphant expression of the superiority which Job vividly felt himself to possess over his opponents, especially in the views derived from experience which he had just urged respecting the incomprehensible dealings of God with the destinies of men. AND ETHICAL1. The significance of the present discourse of Job lies essentially in its descriptive treatment of ethical and anthropological themes, some passages even describing matters of interest in the history of civilization (Job 24:5 seq.), whereas the speculative and theological element becomes subordinate. The latter is restricted almost exclusively to the first and shorter Division, which is occupied with the mystery of Job’s own destiny of suffering, just as the second Division is occupied with the obverse side of this mystery, the prosperity and impunity of the wicked. That which the first Division says touching the inexplicableness of his sufferings is substantially only a repetition of the wish, already several times uttered, that God by His personal intervention might decide the controversy, and confirm his innocence, combined with a statement of the reasons why this wish could not be realized. On the first of these reasons, to wit: that on account of the overwhelming majesty pertaining to the appearance of God, the Unapproachable and Almighty One, it would be impossible for him to put in his answer before Him (Job 23:6) he does not dwell this time as on two former occasions (Job 9:34; Job 13:21); he merely touches it with suggestive brevity. His consciousness of innocence is too strong to allow him to give way long to this thought; thanks to the incessant assaults and accusations of the friends, it has become consolidated and strengthened to such a degree that in Job 19. (as indeed had been the case before here and there, especially in Job 16:17; Job 17:9) it even found utterance in decided exaggeration, and drove him to extreme assertions touching his absolute blamelessness and immaculateness, for which he must hereafter implore pardon. Among these assertions we find the following: that he would come forth out of God’s trial of him like gold, that he would never swerve from His ways, that he had always observed the words of His mouth more than his own law (Job 23:10-12). All the more emphatic however is the stress which he lays on the other reasons why that wish seems to him incapable of realization. God, he thinks, purposely withdraws Himself from him. It is deliberately and with good reason that He keeps Himself at a distance and hidden from him, it being now His settled purpose to make him drain his cup of suffering to the dregs (Job 23:13 seq.). [“Job’s suspicion against God is as dreadful as it is childish. This is a profoundly tragic stroke. It is not to be understood as the sarcasm of defiance; on the contrary, as one of the childish thoughts into which melancholy bordering on madness falls. From the bright height of faith to which Job soars in Job 19:25 seq., he is here again drawn down into the most terrible depth of conflict, in which, like a blind man, he gropes after God, and because he cannot find Him thinks that He flees before him lest He should be overcome by him. The God of the present Job accounts his enemy; and the God of the future to whom his faith clings, who will and must vindicate him so soon as He only allows Himself to be found and seen—this God is not to be found.” Delitzsch.]. It is not the invisible essence of God in general, not that He cannot be discovered by those who seek Him on earth east or west, north or south (Job 19:8-9)—it is not the pure spirituality and the divine omnipresence, which extinguishes his hope in God’s interposition to vindicate and to redeem him. The thought of that divine unsearchableness, which he beautifully describes in a way that reminds us of Psa 139:7-9, as well as of Zophar’s first discourse (Job 11:8-9), could have had nothing terrible or cheerless for him. Just as little (as he expressly declares in the closing verse of the First Part, Job 23:17) would the contemplation of his woful physical condition, and the tragical calamities of his outward life have sufficed to plunge him into the fear of death and dumb despair. That which fills him with dismay and terror, that which makes his heart faint, and removes the prospect of his deliverance to the indefinite future, is that same predestinatianism, that same dread of a mysterious, inexorable, and as regards himself malign decree of God, which had already extorted repeatedly from him a cry of lamentation, and which had formed the dark back-ground which so often emerges behind his meditations thus far (comp. Job 6:9 seq.; Job 7:12 seq.; Job 9:22 sqq.; Job 10:13 seq.; Job 13:15 seq.; Job 16:12 sq.; Job 19:6 seq.). No comforting, brightening, alleviating thought, no joyous soaring of hope in God’s compassion, bringing help however late, is to be seen anywhere in this discourse, as was the case e. g. in Job 17. and 19. On the contrary the Second Division of the discourse lays out before us a much wider circle of phenomena and sentiments at variance with a righteous and merciful activity on the part of God. The experience which he had, or believed that he had, of God’s treatment of him as unsympathetic and harsh, as being a mere exhibition of divine power, without the slightest trace of justice or fatherly kindness—this experience he utters in the general proposition: “that God had appointed no times of judgment, would let His friends see no days on this earth in which He would exercise righteous retribution” (Job 24:1). This proposition he expands into an eloquent description of the manifold injustice, which men of the most diverse classes inflict on one another, while the wrongs of the outraged and oppressed weaker party are never redressed or avenged (Job 24:2 seq). Toward the end of this picture, which is true in a sense, although one-sided in its tendency, he changes his tone somewhat to be sure, and by strongly emphasizing the certainty that a rigid judgment of God will at the last terminate the course of the wicked (Job 24:18-21; Job 24:24), qualifies the preceding accusation against the divine justice. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/lange/ II. Bildad and Job: Chap. 25–26A.—Bildad: Again setting forth the contrast between God’s exaltation and human impotenceJob 251. Man cannot argue with God Job 25:2-41         Then answered Bildad the Shuhite, and said: 2    Dominion and fear are with Him, He maketh peace in His high places. 3    Is there any number of His armies? and upon whom doth not His light arise? 4    How then can man be justified with God? or how can he be clean that is born of a woman? 2. Man is not pure before God: Job 25:5-65    Behold even to the moon, and it shineth not; yea, the stars are not pure in His sight. 6    How much less man, that is a worm; and the son of man, which is a worm? B.—Job: Rebuke of his opponent, accompanied by a description, far surpassing his, of the exaltation and greatness of GodJob 261. Sharp rebuff of Bildad: Job 26:1-41         But Job answered, and said: 2    How hast thou helped him that is without power? how savest thou the arm that hath no strength? 3    How hast thou counselled him that hath no wisdom? and how hast thou plentifully declared the thing as it is? 4    To whom hast thou uttered words? and whose spirit came from thee? 2. Description of the incomparable sovereignty and exaltation of God, given to surpass the far less spirited effort of Bildad in this direction: Job 26:6-145    Dead things are formed from under the waters, and the inhabitants thereof. 6    Hell is naked before Him, and destruction hath no covering. 7    He stretcheth out the north over the empty place, and hangeth the earth upon nothing. 8    He bindeth up the waters in His thick clouds; and the cloud is not rent under them. 9    He holdeth back the face of His throne, and spreadeth His cloud upon it. 10    He hath compassed the waters with bounds, until the day and night come to an end. 11    The pillars of heaven tremble, and are astonished at His reproof. 12    He divideth the sea with His power, and by His understanding He smiteth through the proud. 13    By His spirit He hath garnished the heavens; His hand hath formed the crooked serpent. 14    Lo, these are parts of His ways: but how little a portion is heard of Him? but the thunder of His power who can understand? AND 1. Job’s reply to the last assaults of Eliphaz had certainly avoided all personality, but had at the same time asserted his complete innocence in very strong, almost objectionable language (Job 23:10-12). It is more particularly to this vulnerable point that Bildad turns his attention in this, his last discourse, which limits itself to showing how unbecoming it is for man—this miserable worm of the earth—to arrogate to himself any right whatever before God, or to impute to himself any justice. In substance, accordingly, he lays down only two propositions, and that without enlarging on them, to wit: (1) Man cannot argue with God, the Almighty; (2) Before God, the Holy One, man cannot be pure. In this discourse, which closes the series of attacks on Job, he describes the divine greatness and exaltation, a description which is decidedly meagre, made up only of repetitions of what Eliphaz had said in his former discourses (comp. Job 4:17 seq.; Job 15:14 seq.). No wonder that Job discovers the opportunity thus presented to him, and in his reply, first of all, addresses to the speaker a sharp, bitterly satirical rebuff, and then meets his propositions in regard to God’s greatness and holiness, not by denying them, but by surpassing them with a far more magnificent and eloquent description of the same divine attributes. [And note particularly that as Bildad’s illustrations of his theme are drawn from the heavenly hosts and luminaries, Job in his reply dwells principally, though not exclusively on God’s greatness as manifested in the heavens above.—E.]—The Strophe-scheme of both discourses is very simple, Bildad’s discourse containing only two strophes, the first of three, the second of two verses; Job’s discourse containing four strophes, each of three verses. 2. The last discourse of Bildad: Job 25. Man can neither argue with God, nor is he pure before Him. First Strophe: Job 25:2-4.—Dominion and fear are with Him, who maketh peace in His high places.—δַ ?ξְ ?ωֵׁ ?μ, lit. “to wield dominion, to exercise sovereignty,” a substantive Inf. absol. Hiph.; comp. Ewald, § 156, e.—[τηγ is added in order to set forth the terrible majesty of this sovereignty.—Schlott.]—αִּ ?ξְ ?ψεֹ ?ξָ ?ιε cannot be understood as a more precise qualification of the subject: “He in His high places, He who is enthroned in the heights of heaven” (Reimarus, Umbreit, Hahn). It is rather a local qualification of the action affirmed of the subject. It accordingly describes the peace founded by God as established in the heights of heaven, and so having reference to the inhabitants of heaven, and pre-supposing their former strife. Bear in mind what was said above by Job of God’s “judging those in heaven” (Job 21:22), and comp. Isaiah 24:21; also below Job 26:13.—It is a weakening of the sense which is scarcely justified by the language to understand the passage as teaching God’s agency in harmonizing either the elements of the heavenly Kosmos (the perpetually recurring cycle, the wonderfully ordered paths of the stars, comp. Clemens Rom. 1 Cor. 19), or the discord of the heavenly spirits, conceived of only in the most abstract possible manner, but in truth continually averted by God, and thus as teaching the maintenance, not the making or institution, of peace (so Seb. Schmidt, J. Lange, Starke, etc.). [“Ewald explains the words of the heavenly powers and spirits represented by the innumerable host of the stars, which might indeed some time be at war among themselves, but which are ever brought again by the Higher Power into order and peace. But nothing whatever is said elsewhere of such a discord as now coming to pass in the upper world. All analogies point rather to a definite fact which is assigned to the beginning of creation.” Schlott.]. Job 25:3. Is there any number to His armies?—βְ ?γεּ ?γָ ?ιε, synonymous with φְ ?αָ ?ΰָ ?ιε, which is used elsewhere in this sense, are God’s hosts or armies, the stars, first of all, indeed, the heavenly armies, together with the angels which rule and inhabit them (comp. above on Job 15:15). Whether also the lower forces of nature, such as lightnings, winds, etc. (comp. Job 38:19 seq.; Psalms 104:4, etc.) are intended, as Dillmann thinks is doubtful in view of the indefiniteness of the figurative form of expression. And upon whom does not His light arise?—The emphatic suffix ehu in ΰεֹ ?ψֵ ?δεּ (comp. ςֵ ?ιπֵ ?ιδεּ, Job 24:23) puts His light, to wit God’s own light, in contrast with the derived lower light of His hosts. The expression is scarcely to be understood of the sunlight, which indeed itself belongs to the number of these πְ ?γεּ ?γִ ?ιν: neither can ιָ ?χεּ ?ν be taken ιִ ?ζְ ?ψַ ?η= (neither here, nor Job 11:17). It is inadmissible accordingly to refer the words to the rising sun, as a sign of the fatherly beneficent solicitude of God for His earthly creatures (comp. Matthew 5:45. So against Mercier, Hirz. Hahn, Schlott., etc.). We are to understand them rather of that absolutely supra-terrestrial light in which God dwells, which He wears as His garment, by which indeed He manifests His being, His heavenly doxa (Psalms 104:2; Ezekiel 1:27 seq.; 1 Timothy 6:16, etc.). In respect to this light Bildad asks: “upon whom does it not arise?” The question is not: “whom does it not surpass?” [“over whom (i.e. which of these beings of light) does it not rise, leaving it behind, and exceeding it in brightness?” Delitzsch], for χεּ ?ν would scarcely be appropriate for this thought, since the degree of light is not measured by its height (against Ewald, Heiligst., Del.)—but: “upon whom does it not dispense blessings and happiness?” (Dillm.) Job 25:4. How could a mortal be just with God—(comp. Job 9:2): i. e. how could he appear before Him, to whose absolute power all heavenly beings are subject, arguing with Him, and making pretensions to righteousness? The second member, with which Job 4:17; Job 15:14 may be compared, stands connected with the principal thought of the discourse, which immediately follows, to the effect that no man possesses purity or moral spotlessness before God. Second strophe: Job 25:5-6. Job 25:5. Behold, even the moon, it shineth not brightly, and the stars are not pure in His eyes.—ςַ ?γΞιָ ?ψֵ ?ηַ, lit. “even to the moon,’ i.e. even as regards the moon. In the following εְ ?μֹ ?ΰ the εְ is the Vav of the apodosis; comp. Gesen. § 145 [§ 142], 2; and see above Job 23:12. ιָ ?δִ ?μ=ιַ ?ΰֲ ?δִ ?ιμ from ΰδμ, an alternate form, found only here, of δμμ, to be bright, to shine; comp. Job 31:26. Gekatilia’s attempt to render the verb—“to pitch a tent,” is inadmissible, for that must have read ιְ ?ΰָ ?δֵ ?μωָׁ ?ν, in order to yield the meaning—“He pitcheth not his tent.”—The clause—“in His eyes”—in the second member, belongs also to the first. Comp. the parallel passages already cited in Job 4:15.—Furthermore it is only the physical light, the silver-white streaming brilliancy of the stars, which is here put beside the absolute glory of God’s light (which is at once physical and ethical). Scarcely is there reference to the angels as inhabiting the stars, and to their moral purity (against Hirzel); from which however nothing can be inferred unfavorable to the theory that the stars, i.e., the heavenly globes of the starry world, are inhabited by angels. Job 25:6. Much less then (ΰַ ?σαִּ ?ι, as in Job 15:16) mortal man, the worm, etc. In regard to these figures of the maggot and the worm, as setting forth the insignificance, weakness, and contemptibleness of man, comp. Psalms 22:7 [6]; also Isaiah 53:2, and similar descriptions. 3. Job’s rejoinder: Job 26. First Division (and Strophe): Job 26:2-4 : Sharp ironical rebuke of Bildad. Job 26:2. How hast thou helped the powerless!ξֶ ?δΞ here, like ξַ ?δ, is equivalent to an ironical—“How well! How excellent!” (comp. Job 19:28). μֹ ?ΰΞλֹ ?ηַ, lit. “no-power” is abstr. pro conc. = the powerless; so also in bμֹ ?ΰΞςֹ ?ε = the strengthless, the feeble; and in Job 26:3 aμֹ ?ΰηָ ?λְ ?ξָ ?δ=the unwise, ignorant. By these three parallel descriptive clauses Job means of course himself, as the object of the well-intended, but perverted attempts of the friends to teach him (not God, as Mercier, Schlottm., etc. explain) [as though Bildad had regarded God as too feeble to maintain His own cause. But against this explanation the choice of verbs, if nothing else, would be, as Delitzsch argues, decisive]. Job 26:3..…and hast declared wisdom in abundance (μָ ?ψֹ ?α, lit. “for multitude”) [“an ironical hit at the poverty-stricken brevity of B.’s speech.” Dillm.]. ϊּ ?εּ ?ωִׁ ?ιָּ ?δ, here as in Job 5:12 may be rendered by “that which is to be accomplished,” provided it be referred to the intellectual world, and so understood as vera et realis sapientia (J. H. Mich.). Here indeed the word is used ironically of its opposite. Job 26:4. To whom hast thou uttered words?—i. e. whom hast thou been desirous of reaching by thy words? for whom were thy elaborate speeches coined? was it, possibly, for me, who have not been touched by them in the least? So correctly the LXX.: τίνιἀνήγγειλαςῤήματα, and the Vulg.: quem docere voluisti? The translation: “with whose assistance (ΰֶ ?ϊΞξִ ?ι) hast thou utttered these words?” (Arnh. Hahn) [Con.] seems indeed to be favored by b, but is condemned by the construction of the verb δִ ?βִּ ?ιγ elsewhere in our book with a double accusative (so also Job 31:37; comp. Ezekiel 43:10), and does not agree so well with what precedes.—And whose breath went forth from thee?—i.e. from what kind of inspiration (inbreathing) hast thou spoken? is it the divine? Num Deo inspirante locutus es? The question involves a biting irony; for the speech of Bildad, so poor and meagre in thought, merely repeating a little of what Eliphaz had said already, might look accordingly as though it had been inspired by the latter. 4. Second Division: Job 26:5-14 : Eclipsing and surpassing the description given by Bildad of the exaltation and majesty of God by one far more glorious. Second Strophe: Job 26:5-7. While Bildad’s description took its start from heaven, and it stars, Job begins by appealing to the realm of shades, together with its subterranean inhabitants as witnesses of the divine omnipotence and majesty, in order from this depth, the lowest foundation of all that is, to mount upward to the heavenly world—The shades are made to tremble.—ψְ ?τָ ?ΰִ ?ιν are not “giants,” as the Ancient Versions render the word, but in accordance with the root γτδ (“to be slack, relaxed, exhausted,” comp. Ewald, § 55, e), “weak, powerless,” namely, the marrowless and bloodless shades or forms of the underworld, the wretched inhabitants of the realm of the dead; so also in Psalms 88:11 [10]; Proverbs 2:18; Proverbs 9:18, and often: Isaiah 26:14; Isaiah 26:19; comp. Job 14:9 seq. [It seems every way reasonable to associate with the idea of weakness, nervelessness, etc., here given to the word that of gigantic stature, when we remember that this same word did denote a race of earthly giants, and that the tendency of the imagination to magnify the spectral forms of the dead is so common, if not universal. So Good: “The spectres of deified heroes were conceived, in the first ages of the world, to be of vast and more than mortal stature, as we learn from the following of Lucretius: Quippe et enim jam tum divϋm mortalia seclaEgregias animo fades vigilante videbant;Et magis in somnis mirando corporis actu.”This idea will certainly add to the gloomy sublimity of the description here. Let one imagine the gigantic “marrowless, bloodless phantoms or shades below writhe like a woman in travail as often as the majesty of the heavenly Ruler is felt by them, as perhaps by the raging of the sea, or the quaking of the earth.” Delitzsch. “That even these beings, although otherwise without feeling or motion, and situated at an immeasurable distance from God’s dwelling-place are sensible of the effects of God’s activity,—this is a much stronger witness to God’s greatness than aught that B. had alleged.” Hirzel]. Of these shades, living far from God in the depths under the earth and under the seas (comp. b: “beneath the waters and their inhabitants”), it is here said: “they are put in terror, they are made to tremble and quake” (ιְ ?ηεֹ ?μָ ?μεּ, Pul. from ηεּ ?μ, comp. Ewald, § 141 b), an expression which, like Psalms 139:8; Proverbs 15:11, is intended to describe the energy of the divine omnipotence as illimitable and filling all things, extending even down to Sheol. Comp. also James 2:19, a passage otherwise related to the one before us, and perhaps suggested by it, but having a different purpose. [The rendering of E. V. needs but to be compared with the above to show how erroneous and unsatisfactory it is.—E.]. Job 26:6. Naked is the underworld before Him (comp. Hebrews 4:13 : πάνταδὲ γυμνὰ καὶ τετραχηλισμένατοῖζὀφθαλμοῖζαὐτοῦ), and the abyss of hell has no covering (for Him). Comp. on Proverbs 15:11, a passage parallel to this in matter, where ΰֲ ?αַ ?γּ ?εֹ ?ο (lit. “destruction, annihilation”) stands precisely as here as a synonym of ωְׁ ?ΰֹ ?μ; also Psalms 139:8, and below Job 38:17. [The definition, “destruction, annihilation” here given for ΰαγεο is of course not to be understood in the metaphysical sense of the extinction of being. It is the destruction of life, as enjoyed on the face of the earth; the extinction of light, the derangement of order, the wasting away of all vital energy and beauty. Hence as ωְׁ ?ΰεֹ ?μ describes the underworld as the insatiable receptacle of the departed, demanding and drawing men into itself, orcus rapax, ΰֲ ?αַ ?γּ ?εֹ ?ο gives us a glimpse yet deeper into its abysmal horrors, its destructive, wasting potencies. Hence the fearful significance with which in Rev. (Job 9:11) it is applied, as the Hebrew equivalent to the Greek Apollyon, to the angel of the bottomless pit.—E.]. Job 26:7. Who stretcheth out the northern heavens over empty space.—The Participles in this and the two following verses attach themselves to God, the logical subject of the ver. preceding [and are used to describe the divine activity herein specified as continuous]. Our rendering of φָ ?τεֹ ?ο in the sense of the northern heavens, the northern half of the heavenly vault, has decisively in its favor the verb πθδ, which is never used of the stretching out or expansion of the earth, or a part of it, but always of the out-stretching of the heavenly vault, which is conceived of as a tent; comp. Job 9:8; Isaiah 40:22; Isaiah 44:24; Zechariah 12:1; Psalms 104:2, etc. It would be singular, moreover, if Job had first mentioned only a part of the earth, the northern, and not until afterwards had mentioned it as a whole, however true it might be that the popular notion of oriental antiquity, which represented the north of the earth as a part of it which abounded most in mountains, and was highest and heaviest, would seem to favor this view (against Hirzel, Ewald, Heiligst., Schlottmann, Dillmann). [Ewald calls attention to the corresponding Hindu notion concerning the north. Schlottmann thinks such a reference to the north as the heaviest part of the earth best suited to the connection. Dillmann argues that it could not properly be affirmed of the heavens, that they are stretched out over the ϊֹּ ?δεּ ?]. The reference of φָ ?τεֹ ?ο to the northern hemisphere of the heavens (Umbreit, Vaih., Hahn., Olsh., Del., etc.) is favored also by this considetion in addition to those already mentioned, that all the more important constellations which our book mentions (the Bear, Pleiades, etc.) belong to this northern hemisphere, and that moreover among other people of the ancient world, the “pole” (i. e. the north pole), and “heaven,” are used as synonyms; so especially among the Romans (Varro, de L. L. vii. 2, § 14; Ovid, Fast. 6, 278; Horace, and other poets). The correct view was substantially given by Brentius: Synecdoche, a part for the whole; for Aquino, which is Septentrio [North] is used for the whole heaven or firmament. Hangeth the earth upon nothing: αְּ ?μִ ?ιξָ ?δ, not anything [lit. “not-what”] = nothing, here substantially synonymous with “the empty space,” ϊֹּ ?δεּ (comp. Genesis 1:2), hence denoting the endless empty space in which the earth (which according to Job 26:10 is conceived of as a flat disk, rather than as a ball). together with the overarching northern heavens, hangs freely. The cosmological conception of the suspension of the earth in the empty space of the universe (with which may be compared parallel representations from the classics, such as Lucretius II., 600 seq.. Ovid, Fast. II., 269 seq.) does not conflict with the mention of the “pillars of the earth” in Job 9:6, for the reason that the “pillars” are conceived of as the inner roots or bones, the skeleton as it were of the body of the earth. It is only quite indirectly that the passage before us can be used to prove the creation of the world out of nothing. We may suggest as worthy of note the descriptions, which remind us of the one before us, in the more recent oriental poets, as e. g. the Persian Ferideddin Attar (in 5. Hammer, Geschichte der schφnen Redekόnste Persiens, p. 141, 143): “Pillarless he spreads out the heavens A canopy above the earth. … What bears the atmosphere? ’Tis nothing, Nothing on nothing, and only nothing;” also the Arabian Audeddin Alnasaph (de religione Sonnitar., princ. Job 5:2): “Out of a breath He made the heavens;” and already in the Koran, in its Sur. Job 13:2, it is said: “It is Allah, who has built the heavens on high, without founding it on visible pillars.” Comp. Umbreit on the ver. Third Strophe: Job 26:8-10. Who bindeth up (or “shuts in,” comp. Proverbs 30:4, c) the waters in His clouds: which accordingly are regarded as vessels [bags, bottles, etc.] or transparent enclosures for the waters of the heavens above: without the clouds bursting under them (the waters); i. e. so that the weight of these masses of water does not cause them to pour themselves forth in torrents of rain out of their cloud-vessels, implying that this is as God expressly wills and orders it; comp. Genesis 7:11; Genesis 8:2. [“By which nothing more or less is meant than that the physical and meteorological laws of rain are of God’s appointment.” Del.]. Job 26:9 [“describes the dark and thickly clouded sky that showers down the rain in the appointed rainy season.” Del.] Who enshroudeth the outside of His throne—lit. “of the throne,” for λִּ ?ρֵּ ?δ, as in 1 Kings 10:19 is for λִ ?ρֵּ ?ΰ, scarcely, as Hirzel thinks, by an error of transcription for λִ ?ρְּ ?ΰֹ ?δ. But unquestionably “the throne” is simply = “His throne,” God’s throne in heaven (comp. Isaiah 66:1; Matthew 5:34). It is said of the face or outside (τְּ ?πֵ ?ι) of this throne, i. e., that side of it which is turned towards this earth, that God “encloses” or “enshrouds” it by causing the clouds to come between it and the earth. ξְ ?ΰַ ?ηֵ ?ζ, Piel from ΰηζ, used here of the artificial veiling, or unclosing, draping it as it were) [“ΰηζ signifies to take hold of, in architecture to hold together by means of beams, or to fasten together. … then also as usually in Chald. and Syr. to shut (by means of cross-bars, Nehemiah 7:3), here to shut off by surrounding with clouds.” Del. Hence not exactly “to hold back,” E. V. but to “fasten up.” Merx understands the verb of bearing, holding up, and the verse to set forth the miracle that God bears up the throne on which He sits. But in that case τπι would be superfluous. E.]. Spreading over it His clouds—this member of the verse explaining the former. ςָ ?μָ ?ιε refers to τְּ ?πֵ ?ιλִ ?ρְ ?ΰεֹ, and the quadril. verb τַּ ?ψְ ?ωֵׁ ?ζ is Inf. Absol. and may thus be rendered in Latin by expendendo, in our language by the Pres. Active Participle (comp. Ew. § 141, c; and Del. on the ver.) [According to others, e. g., Dillmann, Green, § 189 a, the vb. is preterite. Gesenius (Lex) regards the quadriliteral as a mixed form, from τψω and τψζ. Delitzsch argues forcibly against this, and regards it as an intensive form of τψωׂ, formed by prosthesis, and an Arabic change of Sin into Shin.] Job 26:10 [passes from the waters above to the waters below]. He hath rounded off (encircled, ηָ ?β, comp. the ἐγύρωσεν of the LXX.) a bound (ηֹ ?χ as in Job 14:5) for the face of the water, to the ending of the light beside the darkness: or “to the extremity” (the confines, the boundary line) of the light with the darkness, ad lucis usque tenebrarumque confinia (Pareau). So correctly Del. and Dill. [E. V. Con., Words., Carey, Renan., Rod. Merx], while most moderns (Rosenm., Ewald, Hirz., Schlottm., Hahn, etc.) take ςַ ?γΞϊַּ ?λְ ?μִ ?ιִ ?ϊ by itself in an adverbial sense, “most perfectly, most accurately,” (comp. Job 28:3), take ΰεֹ ?ψ either as a remoter accus. of ηπ (so Hirz.), or as Genit. to ηֹ ?χ, standing at the head of the clause in the construct state (so Ewald). In either case, however, we get a construction which is much too harsh. As proving that ςַ ?γΞϊַּ ?λְ ?μִ ?ιϊ is by no means necessarily used adverbially, comp. above Job 11:7. The meaning of the verse will be rightly apprehended only by referring it not to the limit in time between light and darkness, i. e. to the regular succession of day and night (Schlottm.), but to the limit in space, the line separating between the light and dark regions of the heavenly circle, which runs along the surface of the waters of the ocean, encircling the earth. “That is to say this description, like that in Proverbs 8:27, has for its basis the conception, prevalent also among the classic nations, and down into the middle ages, that the earth is encompassed all around by water, or a sea,—that upon this earth-encircling ocean is marked out the circle of the celestial hemisphere, along which the sun and stars run their course (so that a part of the water lies within this circle)—that the region of the stars, of the light, lies inside of this circle, and that the region of darkness begins outside of it; comp. Voss on Virg. Georg. I., 240 seq.” Dillm. Fourth Strophe: Job 26:11-13.—The pillars of heaven are made to tremble, and are astonished at His rebuke.—“Pillars of heaven” is the name which the poet gives to the mountains towering upon high, which seem as it were to bear up the arch of heaven; comp. the ancient classic legend of Atlas, and see above on Job 9:6. In speaking of these pillars as “moved to trembling” (ιְ ?ψεֹ ?τָ ?τεּ, Piel. from ψεּ ?σ, τινάσσειν) [“the signification of violent and quick motion backwards and forwards is secured to the verb” by forms in the Targ., Talm. and Arabic.—Del.], and as fleeing in astonishment before God’s rebuking thunder (comp. Psalms 104:7; Isaiah 50:2; Nahum 1:4), the poet describes here he phenomenon of an earthquake, or that of a tremendous thunderstorm (comp. Psalms 29.; also Revelation 6:12 seq.; Job 20:11). Job 26:12. By His power He frightens up the sea.—ψβς here not intransitive as in Job 7:5; but transitive in the sense of “frightening up, arousing,” τ̔αράσσειν (comp. Isaiah 51:15; Jeremiah 31:35); hardly in the sense of intimidating, or putting at rest, as some expositors [Umbreit, Dillm. [Conant, Carey, Rod.], etc.) render the verb after the LXX. (κατέπαυσεν). [E. V. “divideth” (and so Bernard) here, and in all the passages cited: but unsupported and less suitably.]—And by His understanding He smites Rahab in pieces.—Comp. on Job 9:13, where already it was shown to be necessary to understand ψַ ?ηַ ?α (LXX.: τὸ κῆτος) of a colossal demon-monster of legendary antiquity (not of Egypt, nor of the raging fury of the sea, to which ξηυ, “to shatter, to dash in pieces” would not be suitable). Job 26:13. By His breath the heavens become bright: lit. “are brightness,” ωִׁ ?τְ ?ψָ ?δ, a substantive found only here, which, however, does not denote a permanent quality of the heavens (Rosenm.), but one that is transiently [occasionally] produced by God [by His breath He scatters the clouds, and brightens the face of heaven]; His hand hath pierced the fleeing serpent.—ηֹ ?μְ ?μָ ?δ, Po. from ημμ, Isaiah 51:9, hence perforavit, trucidavit; not Pil. from ηεμ or ηιμֹ, so that it would express the idea of forming, creating as the Targ., Jer., Rosenm., Arnh., Vaih., Welte, Renan [E. V., Con., Noy., Ber., Rod.], explain. For here again the discourse treats not of a creative energy of God, but of one that is exercised as a part of the established order of nature, and in all probability it discusses the same theme as that to which Job 3:8 refers, to wit, the production of eclipses of the sun and moon. For the popular superstition prevalent at the time of the composition of our book conceived of this phenomenon as consisting in the attempt of a dragon-like dark monster to swallow up these luminaries, accompanied by an intervention of God, who slays or strangles this monster [“so that it was customary to say, when the sun or moon was eclipsed: ‘The Dragon, or the Flying Serpent, has wound around it;’ and on the other hand when it was released from the obscuration: ‘God has killed the Dragon.’ ” Dillm.] It is to this exercise of God’s power, bringing deliverance, that the clause ηֹ ?μְ ?μָ ?διָ ?γεֹ refers, while πָ ?ηָ ?ωׁ αָּ ?ψִ ?ιηַ (the same expression also in Isaiah 27:1) denotes the monster referred to, which is represented as seized upon in the act of fleeing (before God), hence as “a fugitive, fleeing serpent.” In that parallel passage in Isaiah, the LXX. rightly translate by ὄφινφεύγοντα, while their rendering in the passage before us, δράκονταἀποστάτην, whether we regard the language or the thought, is equally inadmissible with the coluber tortuosus of the Vulg. [followed by E. V. “crooked serpent”], or the serpenlem vectem of the same version in Isaiah 27:1 (comp. the ὄφινσυγκλείοντα, “the barring serpent,” of Symmachus). Job 26:14. A recapitulating closing verse, standing outside of the schema of strophes.—Lo, these (ΰֵ ?μֶּ ?δ pointing backwards, as in Job 18:21) are the ends of His ways; or, “of His way,” according to the K’thibh; the same wavering between γַּ ?ψְ ?λּ ?εֹ and γְּ ?ψָ ?λָ ?ιε to be seen also in Proverbs 8:22. The “ends” or “borders” (Delitzsch) [Conant, Words., etc.,] of God’s ways are the extreme outlines of what He is doing in governing the world, those intimations of His heavenly activity which are lowest, and nearest, and most immediately accessible to our power of apprehension.—And what a faintly whispering word (it is) that we hear!—γָּ ?αָ ?ψεּ ?ξָ ?δΞωֶׁ ?ξֶ ?υ, lit. “and what a whisper of a word.” For this combination of ξָ ?δ with a substantive in apposition, comp. Psalms 30:10; Isaiah 40:18; and for ωָׁ ?ξַ ?ς with αְּ of the attentive hearing of anything, see above Job 21:2; also Job 37:2; Genesis 27:5; Psalms 92:12. Against the partitive rendering of αּ ?εֹ, advocated by Schlott. and Delitzsch, may be urged the plur form γְּ ?ψָ ?λָ ?ιε, preferred by the Masoretes, as well as the probability that to express this meaning the preposition ξִ ?ο would rather have been used. [Here again, as in Job 4:12, the incorrect rendering of E. V.: “How little a portion is heard of Him,” mars the poetic beauty and graphic contrast of the passage. On ωξυ Wordsworth remarks: “We feel as it were a zephyr of God’s Presence walking in the garden of this world in the cool of the day.”]—But the thunder of His omnipotence (according to the K’ri βְּ ?αεּ ?ψεֹ ?ϊָ ?ιε, “his energies”) who can understand?i. e. the full, unmodified manifestation of His energies, the unsmothered “thunder-course” of His heavenly spheres (comp. what Raphael says in the Prologue to Faust) would be unbearable by us, frail, sinful children of earth. [“Job could not have uttered in nobler language his deep feeling of the degree in which the divine glory surpasses all human knowledge. There resounds in it in truth an echo of the far-off divine thunder itself, and before this the poet has the friends now become entirely dumb.” Schlottm.] , ETHICAL AND 1. That which Bildad brings forward against Job in Job 25. is so meagre, and possesses so little novelty, that it may be said, that in his discourse the opposition of the friends dies the death of exhaustion, and that the bitter irony of Job’s rejoinder to it seems fully justified. For the real problem which underlies the whole controversy—the great mystery touching the frequency with which the innocent suffer, which Job had again set forth so eloquently just before—that problem Bildad certainly does not consider. He avoids indeed those bitter personalities and odious accusations against Job with which Eliphaz had made his exit just before in a manner that was altogether unworthy, and takes his leave of the sufferer, whom he himself also had heretofore violently assailed, in a way that is relatively friendly—in a way in which the final peaceful termination of the conflict (Job 42:7-9) is remotely intimated. That which Bildad actually brings forward is a truth which does not at all touch the real point at issue, which Job himself has on former occasions expressly conceded (see Job 9:2; Job 14:4), the same truth which Eliphaz had in his first two discourses prominently emphasized, and in the renewed statement of which, at this time, Bildad closely copies even the expressions of his older associate. He “only reminds Job of the universal sinfulness of the human race once again, without direct accusation, in order that Job may himself derive from it the admonition to humble himself; and this admonition Job really needs, for his speeches are in many ways contrary to that humility which is still the duty of sinful man, even in connection with the best justified consciousness of right thoughts and actions towards the holy God” (Del.). 2. Of the fact that Job is still wanting in proper humility, and in a profound perception of sin, he at once proceeds to give evidence in his rejoinder in Job 26. In this he appears as decisively victorious over his opponents, who have shown themselves totally unequal to the problem to be solved, while he, by his emphatic reference to the incomprehensibleness and unsearchableness of God’s ways, had made at least an important advance towards its solution, and had shown his appreciation of the mystery as such in its entire significance. But he makes his vanquished opponents duly sensible of this superiority which he had over them, when in replying to Bildad, the last speaker of the number, he wields the weapon of sarcasm in a way that is altogether merciless, and seeks to humiliate him by a eulogy of the divine omnipotence and exaltation which is visibly intended to surpass and eclipse that which had been said by him. It is true indeed that this very description in its incomparable grandeur gives us to understand clearly enough how entirely filled and carried away Job is by its infinitely elevated theme, and how by virtue of his flight to this height of an inspired contemplation of God. every thought respecting the unrelenting, or even vindictive persecution of his opponents disappears, so that the closing reference to the unattainable height and glory of the divine nature and activity (Job 26:14) is unaccompanied by any expression whatever of triumphant pride, or bitter enjoyment of their discomfiture (comp. V. Gerlach below, Homiletic Remarks on Job 26:2 seq.). The pure and undivided enthusiasm with which he surrenders himself to the contemplation of the Divine has manifestly an ennobling, purifying, and elevating influence on his spirit. It shows that he is not far removed at length from the goal of a perfectly correct and true solution of the dark mystery which occupies him. It makes it apparent that essentially one thing is lacking to him that he may press upward through the dark scenes of his conflict to the light of pure truth and peace with God, and that is—a humble submission beneath the dealings of the only wise and true God, dealings which are righteous even towards him, sincere repentance and confession of the errors and failures of which he had been guilty even during the hot conflict of suffering through which he had passed, that “repenting in dust and ashes” to which God’s treatment brought him at last, as one who had been afflicted by his Heavenly Father, not indeed in accordance with the ordinary standard of retribution, but nevertheless not unjustly, not without a remedial and loving purpose. 3. That which is of greatest interest in the two short sections preceding not only to the scientific, but also to the practical and homiletic expositor, are those elements of a poetic cosmology and physical theology, which in Bildad’s discourse are presented more briefly and more in the way of suggestion, but which in that of Job are exhibited in a more developed and comprehensive form. It is that material which at an earlier day was treated by Baur in his Systema Mundi Jobζum (Hal. 1707), Scheuchzer in his Jobi Physica Sacra, etc., and which to this day is a theme of no small interest in its theological aspects as well as in those related to cosmology and the history of civilization. The fact that certain mythological representations, and in particular a few traces of astronomical myths, are scattered over this magnificent picture of creation, and that the teachings of modern science concerning the mechanism of the heavens cannot be derived from it, cannot injure the peculiarly high value of the description, nor destroy its utility for practical purposes. It is in any case a view of the universe of incontrovertible grandeur, which in all that is described in Job 26:5-13 beholds only the “fringes” of God’s glory as they hang over on earth (comp. Isaiah 6:1), only a few meagre lineaments of the entire divine manifestation, only a muffled murmur echoing from afar off as a poor substitute for the thunder of His omnipotence. And in respect to the purity and correctness of its representations in detail, this physical theology of Job ranks sufficiently high, as is shown by that which is said of “hanging the earth upon nothing” (Job 26:7), a description of the fact no less surprising than the following descriptions of meteorological and geological processes are poetically bold and elevated. Particular PassagesJob_25:4 seq. Cocceius: Although in our eyes the stars may seem καθαρόντιστίλβειν (to shine with some degree of purity], nevertheless even they are outside of God’s habitation, being esteemed unworthy to adorn His dwelling-place. … How therefore can miserable man, who is mortal and diseased and liable to death, who is a son of Adam, who is no worthier than a worm, or a grub, who is made of earth, who crawls on the earth, who lives by the earth, who is at once foul and defiled, … who in a word is as far below the stars, as the worm is below himself—how shall he dare or be able to face God in His court, and on equal terms to argue with Him? Let him, along with the moon and the stars, keep himself in his own station, and he will enjoy God’s favors; but let him attempt to exalt himself, and he will be crushed by the weight of the divine majesty.—V. Gerlach: As the hosts of heaven are types of the pure spirits of heaven, so is their brightness a type of the holiness of the inhabitants of heaven, just as immediately after (in Job 26:6) the mortality and wretchedness of man is a type of his sinfulness. In this contra-position there lies a profound truth: Holiness and shining brightness, and sin and death’s corruption correspond to each other. In his frailty and mortality man has an incessant reminder of his sin and corruption; in seeing his outward lot he should humble himself inwardly before God. Job 26:2-4. Wohlfarth: After that Job has ironically shown to his friend the irrelevancy of his reply; he takes a nobler revenge upon him, by delivering a much worthier eulogy on God’s exalted greatness, of which notwithstanding and during his suffering he has a most vivid and penetrating conviction.—V. Gerlach: Job’s frame of mind bordering on pride, which causes him altogether to misunderstand that which is glorious and exalted in Bildad’s last discourse, belongs to the earthly folly which clings to him, which is to be stripped away from him by the sufferings and conflicts of his inner man, and which does at last really fall away from him. The splendid description which follows, and especially its humble conclusion (Job 26:14), proves in the meanwhile that the fundamental disposition of Job’s heart was different from that which the particular expressions uttered by him in his more despondent moods would seem to indicate. Job 26:7 seq. Brentius: The fact that God stretches out the heavens, and supports the earth, without the aid of pillars, is a great argument in proof of His power (Psalms 102:26). The poets relate that Atlas supports heaven on his shoulders; but we acknowledge the true Atlas, the Lord our God, who by His word supports both heaven and earth.—Wohlfarth: The look to heaven which Job here requires us to take, does not indeed reach upwards to the throne of the Eternal (Job 26:7 seq.). But although we cannot now behold Him, who dwells in His inaccessible light, we can nevertheless feel His nearness, recognize His existence, experience His influence, see His greatness and majesty, when we pray to Him as the Being who stretches out the heavens above the earth like a tent, at whose beckoning the clouds open and water the thirsty earth, who has given to the water its bounds, etc. As the work bears witness to its master, so does the universe to its Creator, Preserver, and Ruler (Psalms 19:5); and no despairing one has ever beheld the eternal order which stands before him, and its mysterious, but ever beneficent movements, no sinner desiring salvation has ever tarried in the courts of this great temple of God, without being richly dowered with heavenly blessings Job 26:14. Oecolampadius: These tokens of divine power however great will nevertheless rightly be esteemed small, as being hardly a slight whisper in comparison with the mighty thunder. There is nothing therefore so frightful, but faith will be able to endure it, when it thus exercises itself in the works of God’s power, especially with the word of promise added.—Wohlfarth: We can survey only the smallest portion of God’s immeasurable realm! What is the knowledge of the greatest sages but the short-sighted vision of a worm! Our earth is a grain of sand in the All, the “drop of a bucket,” as the prophet says; and how little do we know of Him; how great is the sum of that which is hidden from us! (1 Corinthians 13:9 seq.). III. Job alone: His closing address to the vanquished friends. Chap. 27—28a. Renewed asseveration of his innocence, accompanied by a reference to his joy inGod, which had not forsaken him even in the midst of his deepest misery Job 27:1-101    Moreover Job continued his parable, and said: 2         As God liveth, who hath taken away my judgment; and the Almighty, who hath vexed my soul; 3    all the while my breath is in me, and the spirit of God is in my nostrils;— 4     my lips shall not speak wickedness nor my tongue utter deceit. 5     God forbid that I should justify you: till I die I will not remove mine integrity from me. 6     My righteousness I hold fast, I will not let it go: my heart shall not reproach me so long as I live. 7     Let mine enemy be as the wicked, and he that riseth up against me as the unrighteous. 8     For what is the hope of the hypocrite, though he hath gained, when God taketh away his soul? 9    Will God hear his cry when trouble cometh upon him? 10     Will he delight himself in the Almighty? will he always call upon God? b. Statement of his belief that the prosperity of the ungodly cannot endure, but that they must infallibly come to a terrible end. Job 27:11-2311     I will teach you by the hand of God; that which is with the Almighty will I not conceal. 12     Behold, all ye yourselves have seen it; why then are ye thus altogether vain? 13     This is the portion of a wicked man with God, and the heritage of oppressors, which they shall receive of the Almighty. 14     If his children be multiplied, it is for the sword; and his offspring shall not be satisfied with bread. 15     Those that remain of him shall be buried in death; and his widows shall not weep. 16     Though he heap up silver as the dust, and prepare raiment as the clay; 17     he may prepare it, but the just shall put it on, and the innocent shall divide the silver. 18     He buildeth his house as a moth, and as a booth that the keeper maketh. 19     The rich man shall lie down, but he shall not be gathered; he openeth his eyes, and he is not! 20     Terrors take hold on him as waters, a tempest stealeth him away in the night. 21     The east wind carrieth him away, and he departeth: and as a storm hurleth him out of his place. 22     For God shall cast upon him, and not spare: He would fain flee out of his hand. 23     Men shall clap their hands at him, and hiss him out of his place. c. Declaration that true Wisdom, which alone can secure real well-being, and a correct solution of the dark enigmas of man’s destiny, is to be found nowhere on earth, but only with God, and by means of a pious submission to God. Chap. 28 1     Surely there is a vein for the silver, and a place for gold where they fine it. 2     Iron is taken out of the earth. and brass is molten out of the stone. 3     He setteth an end to darkness, and searcheth out all perfection: the stones of darkness, and the shadow of death. 4     The flood breaketh out from the inhabitants; even the waters forgotten of the foot: they are dried up, they are gone away from men. 5     As for the earth, out of it cometh bread: and under it is turned up as it were fire. 6     The stones of it are the place of sapphires: and it hath dust of gold. 7     There is a path which no fowl knoweth, and which the vulture’s eye hath not seen. 8     The lion’s whelps have not trodden it nor the fierce lion passed by it. 9    He putteth forth his hand upon the rock; 10     He cutteth out rivers among the rocks; and his eye seeth every precious thing. he overturneth the mountains by the roots. 11     He bindeth the floods from overflowing; and the thing that is hid bringeth he forth to light. 12     But where shall wisdom be found? and where is the place of understanding? 13     Man knoweth not the price thereof: neither is it found in the land of the living. 14     The depth saith, It is not in me; and the sea saith, It is not with me. 15     It cannot be gotten for gold, neither shall silver be weighed for the price thereof. 16     It cannot be valued with the gold of Ophir, with the precious onyx, or the sapphire. 17     The gold and the crystal cannot equal it: and the exchange of it shall not be for jewels of fine gold. 18     No mention shall be made of coral, or of pearls; for the price of wisdom is above rubies. 19     The topaz of Ethiopia shall not equal it, neither shall it be valued with pure gold. 20     Whence then cometh wisdom? and where if the place of understanding? 21     Seeing it is hid from the eyes of all living, and kept close from the fowls of the air. 22    Destruction and death say, we have heard the fame thereof with our ears. 23     God understandeth the way thereof, and He knoweth the place thereof. 24    For He looketh to the ends of the earth, and seeth under the whole heaven; 25    to make the weight for the winds; and He weigheth the waters by measure. 26    When He made a decree for the rain, and a way for the lightning of the thunder; 27    Then did He see it, and declare it; He prepared it, yea, and searched it out. 28    And unto man He said: Behold, the fear of the Lord, that is wisdom; and to depart from evil is understanding. AND 1. Inasmuch as the opposition of the friends is silenced, before the last of the number attempts a third reply, the victor, after a short pause, takes up his discourse, “in order that, by collecting himself after the passion of the strife, he might express with greater calmness and clearness the convictions which have been formed within him as results of the colloquy thus far, and so to give to the colloquy the internal solution which was wanting” (Dillm.). It is not so much a triumphant self-contemplation, or a pathetic monologue, that he delivers, but a genuine didactic discourse, addressed to the vanquished friends, which, like the discourses of the previous discussion, is cast in the form, characteristic of the Chokmah, of a series of proverbs. It is hence expressly termed in the introductory verse (Job 27:1) a continuation of the “Mashal, i. e. of the proverbial discourse” (in regard to ωְׂ ?ΰֵ ?ϊξָ ?ωָׁ ?μ, “to utter, lit. to raise a proverb;” comp. Numbers 23:7, where the same expression is applied to a prophetic vaticinium of Balaam’s). [“ξָ ?ωָׁ ?μ is speech of a more elevated tone and more figurative character; here, as frequently, the unaffected outgrowth of an elevated solemn mood. The introduction of the ultimatum as ξָ ?ωָׁ ?μ reminds one of “the proverb (el-methel) seals it in the mouth of the Arab, since in common life it is customary to use a pithy saying as the final proof at the conclusion of a speech.” Delitzsch.]—The following are the contents of this proverbial discourse, which is somewhat extended, and which, especially in its last principal division, is exceedingly lofty and poetic: (1) An emphatic asseveration of his own innocence, which he has made repeatedly during the previous colloquy, and which he now puts forth as attested by his continued experience of God’s friendship, and his joy in God (Job 27:2-10); (2) A description—imitating and surpassing the similar descriptions of the friends in chs. 15; 18; 20, etc.—of the fearful divine judgment, which must of necessity overtake the ungodly, and in view of which he indeed has every reason to adhere earnestly and zealously to God’s ways (Job 27:11-23); (3) An exhibition of the nature of true wisdom, which alone can furnish correct solutions of the dark enigmas of this earthly life, and which is here set forth as a blessing absolutely supra-sensual, to be obtained only through God, and the closest union with Him (Job 28.).—These three sections are differently divided, the two former consisting of three short strophes (of three to five verses), the third of three long strophes (two of eleven, and one of six verses). 2. First Section: The asseveration of his innocence: Job 27:2-10. First Strophe: Job 27:2-4.—As God liveth (lit. “living is God!” a well-known Hebrew, and also Arabic formula of adjuration) [the only place where Job resorts to the oath], who hath taken away from me my right, and the Almighty who hath vexed my soul; lit. “who hath made bitter my soul” (LXX.: ὁ πικρώσας, comp. Colossians 3:19 : πικραίνεσθαι). Job 27:3. For still all my breath is in me, and God’s breath is in my nostrils, i. e. I am still possessed of enough freshness and vigor of spirit to know what I say, to be a responsible witness in behalf of my innocence. The older expositors, and among the moderns Schlottmann [Good, Noyes, Conant, Bernard, Carey, Rodwell, Elzas, Renan, Merx, and so E. V.] take the verse not as a parenthetic reason for the adjuration in Job 27:2, but as the antecedent of Job 27:4 : “so long as my breath is yet in me,” etc. But in that case the contents of the oath would have a double introduction, first by λִּ ?ι, then by ΰִ ?ν. Moreover the words λָּ ?μΞςεֹ ?γπִ ?ωְׁ ?ξָ ?ϊִ ?ιαִ ?ι, as the parallel passages, 2 Samuel 1:9; Hosea 14:3, show, have not in the least the appearance of an adverbial antecedent determination of time.—[The older rendering is certainly to be preferred. (1) It expresses a thought much more suitable for incorporation into an oath. “As God lives—while I live—I will speak only the truth”—is natural. “As God lives—and I take this oath because I am fully competent to stand up to what I am swearing—my lips shall not,” etc.—is decidedly unnatural. (2) The language at once suggests the simple idea of living—“breath (πωׁ ?ξϊι) yet in me—the breath of Eloah in my nostril.” This is scarcely the language one would use in describing a particular inward condition. (3) λִּ ?ι is simply transitional, introducing after the oath a thought preparatory to the principal thought introduced by ΰִ ?ν, a construction which Delitzsch admits to be possible, though what there is perplexing in it, it is difficult to see. (4) λָּ ?μΞ is used adverbially as in Psalms 39:6; Psalms 45:14; Ecclesiastes 5:15; here—“wholly as long as” (see Gesenius and Fόrst). It thus strengthens the expression in a way that is altogether appropriate to the strong feeling which prompts the oath.—E.] Job 27:4 gives the contents of the oath, which the following verses unfold still more specifically and comprehensively. In regard to ςַ ?εְ ?μָ ?δ, lit. “perverseness,” hence “falsehood, untruthfulness,” and its synonym ψְ ?ξִ ?ιָּ ?δ, comp. Job 13:7. Second Strophe: Job 27:5-7.—Far be it from me (lit. “for a profanation be it to me,” comp. Ew. § 329, a) to grant that you are in the right:—wherein is seen in the second member—until I die I will not let my innocence be taken away from me (lit. “I will not let it depart from me”), i. e. I will not cease from asserting it continually. Job 27:6. In regard to δִ ?ψְ ?τָּ ?δ in a, meaning “to let something go, to let it fall,” comp. Job 7:19.—My heart reproacheth not one of my days.—ηψσ, lit. “to pluck, to pick off,” carpere, vellicare. μֵ ?αָ ?α here is unquestionably synonymous substantially with “conscience.” So Luther translated it both here and in Joshua 14:7; comp. also 1 Samuel 24:6 [5]; 2 Samuel 24:10, where it may also be translated “conscience” (see in general Vilmar, Theolog. Moral. I., p. 66). Most modern commentators rightly take ξִ ?ο in ξִ ?ιָּ ?ξָ ?ι, as partitive—“one of my days;” the temporal rendering of the expression adopted by the ancients, as also by Ewald (= while I live, in omni vita mea, Vulg.) [E. V.], necessitates the harsh and scarcely admissible rendering of ιֶ ?ηֱ ?ψַ ?σ as intransitive, or as reflexive (“does not blame itself,” Ewald) [E. V. supplies “me”]. It remains to be said, that this asseveration of innocence (like that in Job 23:10 seq.) is, in some measure, exaggerated, when compared with the mention which Job makes earlier of “the sins of his youth,” Job 13:26. Job 27:7. Mine enemy must appear as the wicked, and mine adversary as the unrighteous:viz. as the penalty of their falsely suspecting and disputing my innocence. Only this optative rendering of the Jussive ιְ ?δִ ?ι is suited to the context, not the concessive: “though mine enemy be an evil-doer, I am none” (Hirz.). As to ξִ ?ϊְ ?χֹ ?ξֵ ?ν, comp. Job 20:27; Psalms 59:2. [“The idea conveyed in ΰֹ ?ιֵ ?α is hostility of feeling; in ξִ ?ϊְ ?χֹ ?ξֵ ?ν, hostility of action, and that initiative. It is, to some extent, expressive of unprovoked assault.” Carey.] Third Strophe: Job 27:8-10.—For what is the hope of an ungodly man when He cutteth off, when Eloah draweth out his soul?—This question is to be understood from the two former discourses of Job, in which, when confronting death he placed his hope with animated emphasis on God, as his final deliverer and avenger (chs. 17. and 19.). In contrast with such a joyful hope reaching out beyond death, the evil-doer has nothing more to hope for, when once God has cut off his thread of life, and drawn out his soul out of the mortal body enclosing it (ιֵ ?ωֶׁ ?μ Imperf. apoc. Kal. from ωָׁ ?μָ ?δ, extrahere, cognate with ωμμ and πωμ). The figurative expression: “cutting off the soul,” has always for its basis the same conception of the body as a tent, and of the internal thread of life as the tent-cord, which we came across in Job 4:21. Possibly the expression: “drawing out” has the same explanation, although this seems to have rather for its basis the comparison of the body to a sheath for the soul (Daniel 7:15), so that accordingly we have a transition from one figure to another. [E. V. (after the Vulgate, Syr., Targ.), Gesenius in Thes., Fόrst, Con., Ber., Merx, Rod., Elz., translate λִּ ?ιιִ ?αְ ?φָ ?ς “though he hath gained” soil, riches, or “though he despoil.” The meaning “to plunder” or “gain” is certainly more in harmony with the usage of the verb in Kal, and avoids the mixture of metaphor according to the other construction.—E.] Job 27:9-10. Will God hear his cry? … Can he delight himself in the Almighty?etc. The meaning of these questions is that to him there shall be neither the hearing of his prayers, nor a joyful, trustful and loving fellowship with God (δִ ?ϊְ ?ςַ ?πָּ ?β as in Job 22:26). Job accordingly claims for himself both these things (comp. Job 13:16), and thereby leaves out of the account transient obscurations of his spirit, like that in consequence of which he mourns (Job 19:7) that his prayer is not heard. 3. Second Section: Description of the inevitable overthrow of the wicked: Job 27:11-23. The striking correspondence which this description by Job seems at first sight to exhibit with the well-known descriptions of the friends, especially in the second series of the colloquy, and this notwithstanding the fact that Job himself only just before, in chs. 21 and 24, has maintained the happiness of the wicked to the end of their life, have led some to assume a transposition, or confusion of the text (Kennicott, Stuhlmann, Bernstein, [Bernard, Wemyss, Elzas]; comp. Introd. § 9, 1); others, to suppose that Job is here simply repeating the opinion of his opponents, without purposing to make it his own (Eichhorn, Das Buch Hiob όbers., etc., 1824; Bφckel, 2d Ed. 1830). But the contradiction to Job’s former utterances is only apparent, for: (1) The opinion that the prosperity of the wicked cannot endure has been repeatedly put forth even by himself, at least in principle (comp. Job 21:16; Job 23:15; Job 24:12; comp. also below Job 31:3 seq.). (2) The erroneous and objectionably one-sided utterances regarding God as a hard-hearted persecutor of innocence, and author of the prosperity of many evil-doers, which he has heretofore frequently put forth, needed to be counteracted by the truths which supplement and rectify these one-sided errors. (3) It was of importance to Job, not so much to instruct the friends in regard to the fact that the impending destruction of the ungodly was certain—for that they had long known this fact is expressly set forth in Job 27:12—as rather to place this phenomenon in the right light, in opposition to the perverted application which they had made of it, and to exhibit its profound connection with the order of the universe as established by the only wise God. This end he accomplishes by subsequently introducing a description of true wisdom and understanding, a treasure deeply hidden, and to be possessed only through the fear of God, and humble submission to Him.—This is the end which Job has in view in the present discourse. It is not necessary (with Brentius and others of the older expositors, also Schlottmann) to find in it a warning purpose, i. e., the purpose to set before the friends the end of those who judge unjustly, and who render unfriendly decisions, with a view of terrifying them—a purpose of which there is nowhere any indication, and for which there would seem to be no particular motive, seeing that the discussion has come to an end, and that any attempt to move the vanquished opponents by warnings would be cruelly and most injuriously at variance with the conciliatory mildness which this last discourse of Job’s elsewhere breathes. [a. The attempts to relieve the difficulty connected with the passage before us by changing and transposing the text are arbitrary and unsatisfactory, producing abrupt connections, or rather breaks, and a confusion of thought and impression more serious than that which it is sought to remove. b. Especially does it betray a total want of appreciation of the author’s skill in managing the plot and development of the drama to force in Zophar for a third speech. The logical and rhetorical exhaustion of the friends could not well be more effectively indicated than by the way in which the colloquy on their part tapers and dwindles—first in the short, and so far as ideas are concerned, poverty-stricken speech of Bildad, and finally in the complete dumbness of Zophar, perhaps of all three the most consummate master of words. c. The theory that Job is here going over the ground of the friends, and repeating their position, is disproved negatively by the absence of anything to indicate such a course, and positively by the straightforward earnestness and deep feeling which pervade the passage, as well as by what he says in the introductory verses 11, 12. d. Regarded as Job’s own earnest affirmations the following considerations should be borne in mind. (1) As shown above by Zφckler, isolated statements have already proceeded in harmony with the representation given here. At the same time it cannot be denied that this is much the most extended and emphatic expression by Job of the view here set forth, and that it is in form much more nearly allied to the representations of the friends. But: (2) It is no part of the poet’s plan to preserve Job’s unalterable consistency. Job’s experiences are most various, and his utterances change with them. They strike each various chord of sorrow, joy, doubt, confidence, despair, hope, fear, yearning, victory. Through all it is true there is an underlying unity and identity of character; but the variations exist, and are full of dramatic interest and importance, and yet more of sacred practical suggestiveness. (3) These inconsistencies still further prepare the way for a termination and solution of the controversy. As Umbreit has shown, “without the apparent contradiction in Job’s speeches, the interchange of words would have been endless;” or as Delitzsch has stated it: “Had Job’s stand-point been absolutely immovable, the controversy could not possibly have come to a well-adjusted decision, which the poet must have planned, and which he also really brings about, by causing his hero still to retain an imperturbable consciousness of his innocence, but also allowing his irritation to subside, and his extreme harshness to become moderated.” (4) In the particular passage before us, Job’s utterance is to be explained largely in the light of the victory which he has just achieved. In the hour of triumph a great soul is moderate, calm, just. So here Job shows the greatness of his strength by conceding to the friends the truth in their position, and by stating that truth with a power equal to their own. It is a masterly touch of the poet’s art that shows itself here in this picture of a great soul in the hour of victory. (5) There is, however, as suggested above by Zφckler, a still more conscious and controlling purpose in the following description. Job describes the certain destruction of the wicked, not mainly in the way of concession to the friends, but rather for his own vindication. The friends had portrayed such descriptions to show how much there are in the evil-doer’s fate to remind of Job’s calamities. Job takes up the theme to show how unlike his fate, with all its tragic lineaments, and the abandoned sinner’s. He still holds fast to his righteousness, is heard by God, delights in God, is on terms of intimacy with God, is competent to instruct in behalf of God;—the wicked man has a very different portion with God! As ever therefore Job is not merely eloquent, but cogent; and when he accepts their conclusions, it is to overwhelm them yet more completely with their own arguments.—E.] First Strophes: Job 27:11-13. Introduction to the following description. Job 27:11. I will teach you concerning God’s hand:i. e. concerning His doings, His mode of working. In regard to αְ with verbs of teaching or instructing, comp. Psalms 25:8; Psalms 25:12; Psalms 32:8; Proverbs 4:11 (Ew. § 217, f).—The mind of the Almighty will I not conceal from you: lit. “what is with the Almighty, that which forms the contents of His thoughts and counsels;” comp. Job 10:13; Job 23:10, etc. Job 27:12. See now, all ye yourselves [ΰַ ?ϊֶּ ?ν emphatic] have seen it, have become familiar with it by observation (ηָ ?ζָ ?δ, as in Job 15:17), so that ye do not need to learn the thing itself, but only to acquire a more correct, unprejudiced understanding of it. The second member points to the latter: “and why are ye then vain with vanity?” i. e. so altogether vain, so completely entangled in perverse delusion? (Ew. § 281, a). Job 27:13 announces the theme treated of in the passage following, in words which purposely convey a reminder of the language used by one of the opponents, Zophar, at the close of his discourse (Job 20:29). Second Strophe: Job 27:14-18. The judgment, upon the family, possessions, and homestead of the evil-doer. Job 27:14. If his children multiply (it is) for the sword. μְ ?ξεֹ ?Ξηֶ ?ψֶ ?α sc. ιִ ?ψְ ?αּ ?εּ. In respect to μְ ?ξεֹ, found only in Job, comp. Job 29:21; Job 38:40; Job 40:4 (Ew. § 221, b). Job 27:15. The remnant of those who are his shall be buried by the pestilence.—ωְׂ ?ψִ ?ιγָ ?ιε “his escaped ones” (comp. Job 20:21; Job 20:26), are the descendants still remaining to him, after that the sword and famine have already thinned their ranks. This remainder the Pestilence will carry off, that third destroying angel, in addition to the sword and famine, mentioned also in Jeremiah 14:12; Jeremiah 15:2; Jeremiah 18:21; 2 Samuel 24:13; Leviticus 26:25 seq. Here, as also in Jeremiah 15:2, this is simply designated “death” (ξָ ?εֶ ?ϊ); and by the phrase, “in death (or by death) they are buried,” allusion is made to the quick succession of death and burial, which is customary in such epidemics (comp. Amos 6:9 seq.). This bold and truly poetic thought is destroyed if, with Bφttcher, we take αξεϊ to mean in momento mortis, or if, with Olshausen [Merx], we arbitrarily insert a μֹ ?ΰ before ιִ ?χָ ?αֵ ?ψεּ. [Carey explains: “They shall be sepulchred by Death. This is literal, and a bold figure, by which is signified that they should have no other burial than such as Death should give them on the open field, where they had fallen, either by sword or by famine.” This, however, is somewhat too artificial and modern]. And his widows weep not—to wit, in following the coffin, because by reason of the frightful raging of the disease, funeral solemnities are not observed. “His widows” may mean both the principal wives and concubines of the head of the family, and those of his deceased sons and grandsons; these latter even, in a certain sense, belonging to him, the patriarch. Comp. the literal repetition of this member in Psalms 78:64, where the twofold possibility mentioned here is not recognized, because the ΰַ ?μְ ?ξְ ?πֹ ?ϊָ ?ιε there refers to the “people,” ςַ ?ν. Job 27:16. If he heapeth up for himself silver as the dust, etc.—The same figures used to designate material regarded as worthless on account of its great quantity in Zechariah 9:3. Job 27:17. Apodosis to the preceding verse, expressing the same thought as, e. g., Psalms 37:29; Psalms 37:34; Ecclesiastes 2:16. Job 27:18. He hath built, like a moth, his house, and like a booth, which a watchman puts up (in a vineyard, or an orchard, Isaiah 1:8). The point of comparison for both members is the laxity, frailty, destructibility of such structures, which are intended to be broken up soon. Third Strophe: Job 27:19-23. He lieth down rich, and doeth it not again.—So according to the reading εְ ?μֹ ?ΰιֹ ?ΰρִ ?σ (=ιεֹ ?ρִ ?ι‍ ?σ), which already the LXX. (καὶ οὐ προσθήσει), Itala, and Pesh. followed, which is favored by parallel passages, such as Job 20:9; Job 40:5, and is accordingly preferred by the leading modern commentators, such as Ewald, Hirzel, Delitzsch, Dillmann [Renan, Rodwell, Merx]. The renderings based on the reading εְ ?μֹ ?ΰιֵ ?ΰָ ?ρֵ ?σ are not so good; as, e. g., “and yet nothing is taken away” (Schnurr., Umbreit, Stick. [Elzas, Wemyss: “but he shall take nothing away”];—“and he is not buried” (Ralbag, Rosenmόller, Schlottmann) [Noyes, E. V.: “he shall not be gathered,” and so Con., Lee, Scott, etc. Carey explains the familiar phrase, “to be gathered (to one’s fathers, etc.),” not of being buried in the grave, but of being removed to the place of spirits. The objections to referring the clause to the rich man’s burial, as stated by Delitzsch, are, that the preceding strophe has already referred to his not being buried, and that the relation of the two parts of the verse in this interpretation is unsatisfactory]. The same may be said of the reading εְ ?μֹ ?ΰιֶ ?ΰֱ ?ρֹ ?σ, “and takes not with him” (Jerome, and some MSS.). Openeth his eyes—and is gone! (comp. Job 24:24).—This further description of the sudden end of the wicked relates to the morning, the time of awakening, as the preceding clause refers to the evening hour of going to bed. Job 27:20. The multitude of terrors (i. e., the sudden terrors of death; comp. Job 18:14; Job 20:25) like the waters (like the torrents of a sudden overflow—comp. Job 20:28; Jeremiah 47:2; Psalms 18:5 [4]) overtakes him (ϊַּ ?ωִּׂ ?ιβ, 3d Perf. sing. fem, referring to the plur. αַּ ?μָּ ?δεֹ ?ϊ; comp. Job 14:19). On b comp. Job 21:18. Job 27:21. Further descriptive expansion of the figure of a tempest: The east wind lifteth him up.—This wind being elsewhere frequently described as particularly violent and descriptive; comp. Job 1:19; Job 15:2; Job 38:24; Isaiah 27:8; Ezekiel 27:26. Concerning εְ ?ιֵ ?μַ ?κְ, ut pereat, comp. Job 14:20; Job 19:10. Job 27:22. The subj. of εְ ?ιַ ?ωְׁ ?μֵ ?κְ can be only God, the secret Author of the whole judgment of wrath here described. Of Him it is said: He hurleth upon him without sparing—to wit, arrows; comp. Job 16:13; and in regard to the objectless =δִ ?ωְׁ ?μִ ?ικְ ?“to shoot,” see Numbers 35:20. Before His hand must he flee—lit. “must he fleeing flee.”—The Inf. Absol. expresses the strenuousness and yet the futility of his various attempts to flee (Del.: “before His hand he fleeth hither and thither”). Job 27:23. They clap their hands at him—rejoicing at his calamity and mocking him; comp. Job 34:37; Lamentations 2:15; Nahum 3:19. The plural suffixes in ςָ ?μֵ ?ιξεֹ and λַּ ?τֵּ ?ιξεֹ are used poetically for the sing., as in Job 20:23; Job 22:2. “The accumulation of the terminations κmo and τmo gives a tone of thunder and a gloomy impress to this conclusion of the description of judgment, as these terminations frequently occur in the book of Psalms, where moral depravity is mourned and divine judgment threatened (e. g., in Psalms 73).” DelThey hiss him out of his place—so that he must leave his dwelling-place (comp. Job 8:18) in the midst of scorn and hissing (comp. Zephaniah 2:15; Jeremiah 49:17). Or “out of his home” (Hirz.), which rendering gives essentially the same meaning. 4. Third Section: first Strophe. Job 28:1-11. The difficulty, indeed the absolute impossibility, of attaining true wisdom by human skill and endeavor, described by means of an illustration taken from mining, which gives man access to all valuable treasures of a material sort, but which can by no means put him in possession of that spiritual good which comes from God. The question—whence the author had acquired so accurate a knowledge of mining as he here displays, seeing that the land of the Israelites was comparatively poor in mineral treasures (comp. Keil, Bibl. Archδol., p. 35 seq., 38)? may be answered, on the basis of Biblical and extra-Biblical sources of information, as follows: (1) The Jews in Palestine could not have been absolutely, strangers to the business of mining, seeing that in Deuteronomy 8:9 there is expressly promised to them “a land whose stones are iron, and out of whose hills thou mayest dig brass.” (2) Both Lebanon in the north, and the Idumean mountains in the south-east of Palestine proper, had copper mines, the particular location of these being at Phunon, or Phaino, Numbers 33:42 seq., in the working of which it is certain that the Jews were occasionally interested; comp. Volney’s Travels; Ritter, Erdkunde XVII. 1063; Gesenius, Thes. p. 1095; v. Rougemont, Bronzezeit, p. 87. (3) The Israelites possessed iron pits, possibly in South Lebanon, where in modern times such may still be found, together with smelting furnaces (Russegger, Reise I. 779, 778 seq.), but certainly in the country east of the Jordan, where, according to the testimony of Josephus, de B. Jud. IV. 8, 2, there was an “iron mountain” ( σιδηροῦνὸ ?̓ρος) north of Moabitis, the “Cross Mountain,” El Mi’rβd of to-day, between the gorges of the Wadi Zerka and Wadi Arabun, west of Gerash; a mountain district in which in our own century iron mines have been worked here and there (v. Rougemont, l. c.; Wetzstein in Delitzsch, II. 90–91). (4) Jerome testifies to the existence of ancient gold mines in Idumea (Opp. ed. Vail. III. 183). (5) The Israelites might also come occasionally into connection with the copper and iron mines of the Sinai-peninsula, in the development of which the Egyptian Pharaohs were conspicuously energetic (comp. Aristeas v. Haverkamp, p. 114; Lepsius, Briefe, p. 335 seq.; Ritter, Erdkunde XIV. 784 seq; v. Rougemont, l. c. (6) What has been said above by no means excludes the possibility that in this description the poet in many particulars took for his basis traditional reports concerning the mines of distant lands, e. g. concerning the gold mines of Upper Egypt and Nubia (Diodorus Job 3:11 seq.), concerning the gold and silver mines of the Phenicians in Spain (1Ma 8:3; Plin. Job 3:4; Diod. 5:35 seq.), concerning the emerald quarries of the Egyptians at Berenice, and other deposits of precious stones, more or less remote. Comp. above Introd. § 7, b; and see a fuller discussion of the subject in Delitzsch 2:86–89; to some extent also the mining experts who have commented on the following verses, such as v. Weltheim (in J. D. Mich., Orient. Bibl. 23,. 7 seq.), and Rud. Nasse (Stud. u. Krit., 1863, p. 105 seq.) Job 28:1. For there is for the silver a vein [Germ. Fundort, place where it is found], and a place for the gold, which they refine.—The connection between this section and the preceding, which is indicated by the causal λִּ ?ι “for,” is this: The phenomenon described in Job 27:11-23, that the wicked—with whom, according to Job 28:2-10 Job is not to be classed—meet with a terrible end without deliverance, is to be explained by the fact that they do not possess true wisdom, which can be acquired only through the fear of God, which cannot, like the treasures of this earth (the only object for which the wicked plan and toil), be dug out, exchanged or bought. The proposition introduced by λִּ ?ι accordingly assigns a reason first of all for that which forms the contents of Job 27:11-23 (“the prosperity of the ungodly cannot endure”), but secondarily and indirectly also that which is announced in Job 27:2-10 (Job is an upright man, and one who fears God, whose joy in God does not forsake him even in the midst of the deepest misery). [“The miserable end of the ungodly is confirmed by this, that the wisdom of man, which he has despised, consists in the fear of God; and Job thereby attains at the same time the special aim of his teaching, which is announced at Job 27:11 by ΰεψδΰϊλναιγΞΰμ; viz. he has at the same time proved that he who retains the fear of God in the midst of his sufferings, though those sufferings are an insoluble mystery, cannot be a ψωׁ ?ς. … And if we ponder the fact that Job has depicted the ungodly as a covetous rich man who is snatched away by sudden death from his immense possession of silver and other costly treasures, we see that Job 28. confirms the preceding picture of punitive judgment in the following manner: silver and other precious metals come out of the earth, but wisdom, whose value exceeds all these earthly treasures, is to be found nowhere within the province of the creature; God alone possesses it, and from God alone it comes; and so far as man can and is to attain to it, it consists in the fear of the Lord and the forsaking of evil.” Delitzsch.] The first verses of the chapter indeed down to the 11th, present nothing whatever as yet of that which serves directly to establish those antecedent propositions, they simply prepare the way for the demonstration proper, by describing the achievements of art and labor in the accumulation by men of their treasures, by means of which nevertheless wisdom can not be found. Hence λִּ ?ι may appropriately be rendered “for truly” (the “but” in Job 28:12 corresponding to the “truly”). This connection between Job 28, 27 is erroneously exhibited, when any subordinate proposition of Job 27 is regarded as that which is to be established (as e. g., according to Hirzel, the question in Job 28:12 : “why are ye so altogether vain? why do ye adhere to so perverse a delusion?” or according to Schlottmann the purpose to warn against the sin of making unfriendly charges, which he thinks is to be read between the lines in the description Job 28:11-23). These false conceptions of the connection, alike with the total abandonment of all connection, which has led many critics to resort to arbitrary attempts to assign to Job 28. another position (e. g. according to Pareau after Job 26.; according to Stuhlmann after Job 25) or to question altogether its genuineness (Knobel, Bernstein——comp. Introd. § 9, 1)—all these one-sided conceptions rest, for the most part, on the assumption that it is the divine wisdom, which rules the universe, whose unsearchableness is described in our chapter, and not rather wisdom regarded as a human possession, as a moral and intellectual blessing bestowed by God on men, connected with genuine fear of God. Comp. Doctrinal and Ethical Remarks, No. 1. [E. V.’s rendering of λִּ ?ι by “surely” overlooks the connection, and was probably prompted by the difficulty attending it].—ξεֹ ?φָ ?ΰ, lit. “outlet” (comp. 1 Kings 10:28), the place where anything may be found, synonymous with the following ξָ ?χεֹ ?ν.—The word ιָ ?εֹ ?χּ ?εּ is a relative clause: gold, which they refine, or wash out. In regard to ζχχ, lit. “to filter, to strain,” as a technical term for purifying the precious metals from the stone-alloy which is mixed with them, comp. Malachi 3:3; Psalms 12:7 [6]; 1 Chronicles 28:18. Comp. the passage relative to the gold mines of Upper Egypt, describing this process of crushing fine the gold-quartz, and of washing it out, this process accordingly of “gold-washing,” as practised by the ancients, in Diodor. Job 3:11 seq., as well as the explanations in Klemm’s Allgem. Kulturgesch. V. 503 seq., and in M. Uhlemann, Egypt.Alterthumskunde, II. 148 seq. Job 28:2. Iron is brought up out of the ground.—ςָ ?τָ ?ψ here of the interior or deep ground, not of the surface as in Job 39:14; Job 41:25 [33], and stone is smelted into copper.—ιָ ?φεּ ?χ here not as in Job 41:15 Partic. Pual of ιφχ, but as in Job 29:6 Imperf. of ιφχ= φεּ ?χ (the 3d pers. sing. masc. expressing the indefinite subj.). [Gesenius not so well makes the verb transitive: “and stone pours out brass.”] Job 28:3. He has put an end [ωָׂ ?ν still the indefinite subj., but as the description becomes more individual and concrete, it is better with E. V. to use from this point on the personal pron. “he”] to the darkness, viz. by the miner’s lamp; and in every direction (lit. “to each remotest point, to every extremity, in all directions”) [not as E. V. “all perfection,” which is too general, missing the idiomatic use of the phrase; nor adverbially: “to the utmost,” or “most closely:”—“μϊλμιϊ might be used thus adverbially, but μλμΞϊλμιϊ is to be explained according to μλμΞψεη, Ezekiel 5:10, ‘to all the winds.’ ” Delitzsch]—he searcheth the stones of darkness and of death-shade,i. e. the stones under the earth, hidden in deep darkness. δεּ ?ΰ before ηֹ ?εχֵ ?ψ refers back to the indefinite subj. of ωָׂ ?ν, who is continued through Job 28:4, and again in Job 28:9-11. Job 28:4. He breaketh [openeth, cutteth through] a shaft away from those who sojourn (above). πημ, elsewhere river, valley [river-bed] (Wadi), is here—as is already made probable by the verb τָ ?ψַ ?υ, pointing to a violent breaking through (comp. Job 16:14), and as is made still more apparent by the third member of the verse—a mining passage in the earth, and that moreover a perpendicular shaft rather than a sloping gallery. ξֵ ?ςִ ?ρΞβָּ ?ψ, lit. “away from one tarrying, a dweller,” i. e. removed from the human habitations found above, removing from them ever further and deeper into the bowels of the earth. [Schlottmann understands by βψ the miner himself dwelling as a stranger in his loneliness; i. e. his shaft sinks ever further from the hut in which he dwells above. The use of βψ is doubtless a little singular, and Schlottmann’s explanation may be accepted so far as it may serve to account for it by the suggestion that those who do live in the vicinity of mines are naturally βָּ ?ψִ ?ιν, sojourners, living there to ply their trade and shifting about as new mines or veins are discovered.—E.]—Who are forgotten of every step, lit. “of a foot” (ξִ ?πִּ ?ιΞψֶ ?βֶ ?μ), i. e. of the foot or step of one travelling above on the surface of the earth [=“totally vanished from the remembrance of those who pass by above”], not the foot of the man himself that is spoken of, as though his descent by a rope in the depths of the shaft were here described (V. Leonhardt in Umbr. and Hirzel). [On this use of ξִ ?ο after πωׁ ?λη, comp. Deuteronomy 31:21; Psalms 31:13; “forgotten out of the mind, out of the heart”]. Moreover δַ ?πִּ ?ωְׁ ?λָּ ?ηִ ?ιν are identical, according to the accents, with the indef. subj. of τָּ ?ψַ ?υ (the interchange between sing, and plur. acc. to Ew. § 319, a); hence the meaning is: those who work deep down in the shafts of the mines. They are again referred to in the finite verbs in c, which continue the participial construction: they hang far away from men, and swing.γַּ ?μּ ?εּ from γּ ?μμ (related to ζμμ) deorsum pendere, according to the accents, accompanies ξֵ ?ΰֱ ?πεֹ ?ωׁ (meaning the same with ξֵ ?ςִ ?ρΞβָּ ?ψ), not πָ ?ςεּ, as Hahn and Schlottm. think. The adventurous swinging of those engaged in digging the ore out of the steep sides of the shafts, hanging down by a rope, is in these few, simple words beautifully and clearly portrayed. It is the situation described by Pliny (H. N. Job 33:4, Job 21 : is qui cζdit, funibus pendet, ut procul intuenti species ne ferarum quidem, sed alitum fiat. Pendentes majori ex parte librant et lineas itineri prζducunt, etc. [The above rendering, adopted by all modern exegetes, gives a meaning so appropriate to the language and connection, and withal so beautiful, vivid and graphic that it seems Strange that all the ancient and most of the modern versions of Scripture, including E. V., should have so completely darkened the meaning. The source of the difficulty lay doubtless in πημ which being taken in its customary meaning of “river, flood,” threw everything into confusion. Add to this a probable want of familiarity with mining operations on the part of the early translators, and the result will not seem so surprising.—E.] Job 28:5 states what the miners are doing in the depths.—The earth—out of it cometh forth the bread-corn (μֶ ?ηֶ ?ν as in Psalms 104:14), but under it it is overturned like fire:i. e. as fire incessantly destroys, and turns what is uppermost lowermost. [“Man’s restless search, which rummages everything through, is compared to the unrestrainable ravaging fire.” Del.] Instead of λְּ ?ξεֹ Jerome reads αְּ ?ξεֹ: “is overturned with fire,” which some moderns prefer (Hirz., Schlott.), who find a reference here to the blasting of the miners. But this is too remote. [“The principal thought is the process of breaking through; the means are not so much regarded; and fire was not the only means.” Dillmann. Some commentators have fancied in this verse a trace of what modern criticism calls “sentimentalism,” as though Job were protesting against ruthlessly ravaging as with fire the interior of that generous earth which on its surface yields bread for the support of man. Job is, however, fixing his attention solely on the agent—man, who not satisfied with what grows out of the earth, digs for treasure into its deepest recesses.—E.] Job 28:6. The place of the sapphire (ξָ ?χεֹ ?ν as in Job 28:1 a, the place where it may be found) are its stones, viz. the earth’s, Job 28:5; in the midst of its stones is found the sapphire, which is mentioned here as a specimen of precious stones of the highest value.—And nuggets of gold (or “gold ore,” hardly “gold-dust” as Hirzel thinks) become his, viz. the miner’s (so Schult., Rosenm., Ewald, Dillmann). Or: “nuggets of gold belong to it,” the place (ξχεν) where the sapphire is found (Hahn, Schlottm., Delitzsch). The reader may take his choice between these two relations of αּ ?εֹ; the brevity of the expression makes it impossible to decide with certainty. Job 28:7. The path (thither) no bird of prey hath known [and the vulture’s eye hath not gazed upon it]. πָ ?ϊִ ?ιαִ is a prefixed nom. absol. like ΰֶ ?ψֶ ?υ in Job 28:5. It may indeed also be taken as in opposition to ξָ ?χεֹ ?ν in Job 28:6 (hardly to ςַ ?τְ ?ψεִ ?ϊζָ ?δָ ?α, as Ewald thinks), in which case the rendering would be: “the path, which no bird of prey hath known,” etc. (Del.). But that “the place of the sapphire” should be immediately afterwards spoken of as a “path,” looks somewhat doubtful. Concerning ωְׁ ?ζָ ?τַ ?ϊּ ?εּ comp. on Job 20:9.—[The rendering of E. V.: “There is a path which no fowl knoweth,” etc., is vague and incorrect in so far as it leads the mind away from the deposits of treasure, which are the principal theme of the passage.—E.] Job 28:8 carries out yet further the description begun in Job 28:7 of the inaccessibleness of the subterranean passage-ways. The proud beasts of prey (lit. “sons of pride;” so also in Job 41:26 [34]) have not trodden it.—That this finely illustrative phrase [“sons of pride”] refers to the haughty, majestically stepping beasts of prey [“seeking the most secret retreat, and shunning no danger,” Del.], appears clearly enough from the parallel use of ωַׁ ?ηַ ?μ in b (comp. Job 4:10). Job 28:9. On the flint (the hardest of all stones) he lays his hand (the subject being man, as the overturner of mountains; see b, and respecting the use there of ξִ ?ωֹּׁ ?ψֶ ?ωׁ, radicitus, “from the root,” comp. above Job 13:27; Job 19:28. [“ωָׁ ?μַ ?ηιγָ αְּ something like our “to take in hand,” of an undertaking requiring strong determination and courage, which here consists in blasting, etc. Del.] How the hand is laid on flint and similar hard stones is described by Pliny l. c.: Occursant silices; hos igne et aceto rumpunt, sζpius vero, quoniam id cuniculos fumo et vapore strangulat, cζdunt fractariis CL. libras habentibus, etc. Job 28:10. Through the rocks he cutteth passages.—ιְ ?ΰֹ ?ψִ ?ιν, an Egyptian word, which signifies literally water-canals, must here, like πημ in Job 28:4, signify subterranean passages or pits for mining. And further, according to b, what is intended are galleries, horizontal excavations, in which the ore is dug out, and precious stones discovered. The word can scarcely be used of wet conduits, or canals to carry off the water accumulating in the pits, of which Job does not begin to speak until the following verse (against v. Weltheim, etc.). [The rendering “rivers” (E. V., Con., Car., Rod., etc.) would be still more misleading, because more vague, than “canals,” which is not without plausible arguments in its favor. Add however to Zφckler’s arguments in favor of the rendering “passages, galleries,” the sequence in the second member: And his eye sees every precious thing; which, as Delitzsch says, “is consistently connected with what precedes, since by cutting these cuniculi the courses of the ore (veins), and any precious stones that may also be embedded there, are laid bare.”—E.] Job 28:11. That they may not drip he stops up passage-ways.—ξִ ?αְּ ?λִ ?ι, lit. “away from dripping” [weeping], or: “against the dripping,” i. e. against the oozing through of the water in the excavations, to which the shafts and galleries, especially when old, were so easily liable. ηִ ?αֵּ ?ωׁ, as elsewhere ηָ ?αַ ?ωׁ, to stop or dam up, to bind up surgically (comp. ηֹ ?αֵ ?ωׁ, the surgeon, or wound-healer in Isaiah 3:7; Isaiah 1:6). πֵ ?ηָ ?ψεֹ ?ϊ seems in general to mean the same as πημιν above, and ιְ ?ΰֹ ?ψִ ?ιν Job 28:10, to wit, excavations, shafts, pits, galleries. Nevertheless it may also denote “the seams of water” breaking through the walls of these excavations, thus directly denoting that which must be stopped up (Del.).—And so (through all these efforts and skilful contrivances) he brings to the light that which was hidden—a remark in the way of recapitulation, connecting back with the beginning of the description in Job 28:1, and at, the same time forming the transition to what follows. Respecting ϊַּ ?ςֲ ?μֻ ?ξָ ?δ, comp. Job 11:6; ΰεֹ ?ψ, Acc. loci for μָ ?ΰεֹ ?ψ. 5. Continuation: Second Strophe: Job 28:12-22. Application of the preceding description to wisdom as a higher good, unattainable by the outward seeking and searching of men. [“Most expositors since Schultens, as e. g. Hirz., Schlott., etc., assume out of hand that the Wisdom treated of here is the divine wisdom, as the principle which maintains the moral and natural order of the universe. But that the divine wisdom is to be found only with God, not with a creature, is something so very self-evident, and the exaltation of the divine wisdom above all human comprehension as a proposition so universally recognized, being also long since maintained and conceded by both the contending parties of our book (chs. 11 and 12), that it is not apparent why Job should here lay such stress upon it.” Dillm.] Job 28:12. But wisdom—where is it found? And where (lit. “from where?” ξֵ ?ΰֵ ?ιο as in Job 1:7, and ξִ ?ο accompanying ξָ ?φָ ?ΰ as in Hosea 14:9 [8]) is the place of understanding?δַ ?ηָ ?λְ ?ξָ ?δ, with the article, because wisdom is to be set forth as the well-known highest good of man. With the principal term ηָ ?λְ ?ξָ ?δ is connected αִּ ?ιπָ ?δ as an alternate notion, as is often the case in Proverbs, especially chs. 1.–9. The first term denotes wisdom rather on its practical side, as the principle and art of right thinking and doing, or as the religious and moral rectitude taught by God; the second (with which ϊְּ ?αεּ ?πָ ?δ, Proverbs 8:1, and γַּ ?ςַ ?ϊ, Proverbs 1:2, alternate) pre-eminently on the theoretic side as the correct perception and way of thinking which lies at the basis of that right doing. Comp. the Introd. to the Solomonic Literature of Wisdom, § 2, Note 3 (Vol. X., p. 7 of this series). Job 28:13. No mortal knows its price.—ςֵ ?ψֶ ?κְ (from ςψκ Job 28:17; Job 28:19) means lit. equivalent, price, value for purchase or exchange, the same with ξְ ?ηִ ?ιψ elsewhere. The LXX. probably read γַּ ?ψְ ?λָּ ?δּ, which reading is preferred by some moderns, e. g., by Dillmann, as agreeing better with Job 28:12. Job 28:14. With “the land of the living” [Job 28:13] i. e., the earth inhabited by men (comp. Psalms 27:13; Isaiah 38:11, etc.) are connected the two other regions beneath heaven, in which wisdom might possibly be sought: (1) The “Deep” (ϊְּ ?δεֹ ?ν) i. e., the subterranean abyss with its waters, out of which the visible waters on the surface of the earth are supplied (Genesis 7:11; Genesis 49:25):—(2) The “Sea” (ιָ ?ν = Ὠκεανός) as the chief reservoir of these visible waters. Job 28:15. Pure gold is not given for it.—ρְ ?βεֹ ?ψ is the same with ζָ ?δָ ?αρְ ?βεֹ ?ψ, 1 Kings 6:20; 1 Kings 10:21, not “shut up” [= carefully preserved], but according to the Targ. “purified” gold (aurum colatum, purgatum), hence gold acquired by heating, or smelting; comp. Diodor. l. c.Job 28:16. In regard to the gold of Ophir (here λֶּ ?ϊֶ ?νΰεֹ ?τִ ?ιψ, fine gold of Ophir) comp. Job 22:24; respecting the onyx stone (ωֹׁ ?ηַ ?ν, lit. “pale, lean”) comp. the commentators on Genesis 2:12. Job 28:17-19. Further description of the incomparable and unattainable value of wisdom, standing in a similar connection with Job 28:15-16, as Proverbs 3:15 with Proverbs 3:14.—Gold and glass are not equal to it.—ςψκ intrans. with Accus.—ζquare aliquid, as in Job 28:19; Psalms 89:7. In respect to the high valuation of glass by the ancients (ζְ ?λεּ ?λִ ?ιϊ, or as some MSS., Ed’s., and D. Kimchi read—ζְ ?λεֹ ?λִ ?ιϊ) comp. Winer, Realw., Vol. I., 432 [and Eng. Bib. Dictionaries, Art “Glass”]. In respect to ϊְּ ?ξεּ ?ψָ ?δ in b, “exchange, equivalent,” comp. Job 15:31; Job 20:18. Job 28:18. Corals and crystal are not to be named, not to be mentioned, i. e., in comparison with it, with wisdom (in regard to the construction of the passive ιִ ?ζָּ ?λֵ ?ψ with the accus., comp. Gesen., § 143 [§ 140] 1, a). βָּ ?αִ ?ιωׁ, (lit. “ice,” like the Arab, gibs) denotes the quartz-crystal, which was regarded by the ancients as a precious stone, and supposed to be a product of the cold; Pliny, H. N. XXXVII. 2, 9.—The ψָ ?ΰξεֹ ?ϊ, the mention of which precedes, seem to be “corals,” an explanation favored by what is conjectured to be the radical signification of this word, “horns of bulls, or of wild oxen” (from ψְ ?ΰֵ ?ν—comp. Pliny XIII. 51), as well as by its being placed along with the less costly crystal; comp. also Ezekiel 27:16, where indeed corals from the Red Sea and the Indian Ocean are mentioned as Tyrian articles of commerce. On the contrary τְ ?πִ ?ιπִ ?ιν in b must be, according to Proverbs 3:15; Proverbs 8:11; Proverbs 20:15; Proverbs 31:10, an exchangeable commodity of extraordinary value, which decides in favor of the signification “pearls” assigned (although not unanimously) to this word by tradition, however true it may be that in Lamentations 4:7 corals seem rather to be intended (or perhaps red pearls artificially prepared, like the Turkish rose-pearls of to-day). Comp. Carey [who agrees in rendering ψָ ?ΰξεֹ ?ϊ by “corals,” and doubtfully suggests “mother-of-pearl” for βָּ ?αִ ?ιωׁ ?]. Delitzsch renders the former of the two words by “pearls,” the second by “corals” [so J. D. Michaelis, Rφdiger, Gesenius, Fόrst; the two latter regarding ψΰξεϊ and τπιπιν as equivalent. See also in Smith’s Bib. Dic.,—Art’s., “Rubies,” “Pearls,” “Coral”]. The word ξֶ ?ωֶׁ ?κְ, “acquisition, possession,” (from ξωׁ ?κ, “to draw to oneself”) only here in the O. T.; related are ξֶ ?ωֶׁ ?χ, Genesis 15:2, and ξִ ?ξְ ?ωָׁ ?χ, Zephaniah 2:9. Job 28:19. The topaz from Ethiopia (Cush) is not equal to it.—The rendering topaz (τοπάζιον) for τִּ ?θְ ?γָ ?δ is established by the testimony of most of the ancient versions in this passage, as well as in Exodus 28:17; Ezekiel 28:13. It is also favored by the statement of Pliny (Job 37:8) that the topaz comes principally from the islands of the Red Sea, as also by the probable identity of the name τθγδ with the Sanscrit pita, yellow (comp. Gesen.) [and see the Lexicons, Delitzsch, Carey, etc., on the probable transposition of letters in the Hebrew and Greek forms]. In regard to b, comp. the very similar passage in ver 10a). Job 28:20 again takes up the principal question propounded in Job 28:12. The εְ in εְ ?δַ ?ηָ ?λְ ?ξָ ?δ is consecutive, and may be rendered by “then” (Ew., § 348, a). Job 28:21. It is hidden (εְ ?πֶ ?ςֶ ?μְ ?ξָ ?δ, lit., “and moreover, and further it is hidden”) from the eyes of all living, i. e., especially of all living beings on the earth: λָּ ?μΞηַ ?ι as in Job 12:10; 30:33. Of these “living” b then particularly specifies the sharp-sighted, winged inhabitants of the upper regions of the air; comp. above Job 28:7. Job 28:22 follows up the mention of that which is highest with that of the lowest: Hell and the abyss [lit. “destruction and death”] say, ξָ ?εֶ ?ϊ in connection with ΰֲ ?αַ ?γּ ?εֹ ?ο (see on Job 26:6) means the realm of death, the abyss; comp. Job 38:17; Psalms 9:14 [13]; Revelation 1:18. For the rest comp. above, Job 28:14; for to say that they [destruction and death] have learned of wisdom only by hearsay is substantially the same with saying, as is said there of the sea and the deep, that they do not possess it. [“The πςμξδξςιπιλμηι, Job 28:21, evidently points back to the λμιχψψΰϊδςιπε Job 28:10. In Job 28:11 it is said that man brings the most secret thing to light. In Job 28:22 that Divine wisdom is hidden even from the underworld.” Schlott.]. 6. Conclusion: Third Strophe: Job 28:22-28. The final answer to the question, where and how wisdom is to be found: to wit, only with God, I and through the fear of God. [“The last of these three divisions (of the chap.) into which the highest truths are compressed is for emphasis the shortest, in its calmness and abrupt ending the moat solemn, because the thought finds no expression that is altogether adequate, floating in a height that is immeasurable, but opening a boundless field for further reflection.” Ewald.] Job 28:23. God knows the way to it, and He knows its place.—ΰֱ ?μֹ ?δִ ?ιν and δεּ ?ΰ, in emphatic contrast with the creatures mentioned in Job 28:13 seq., and Job 28:21 seq. The suffix in γַּ ?ψְ ?λָּ ?δּ is objective (comp. Genesis 3:24) “the way to it.” Job 28:24-25 constitute one proposition which illustrates and explains the Divine possession of wisdom by a reference to God’s agency in creating and governing the world (so correctly Ewald, Arnh., Dillm.) [E. V., Conant, Rodman]. Against connecting Job 28:25 with what follows, more immediately with Job 28:26, and then regarding Job 28:25-26 together as constituting the protasis of Job 28:27 lies the objection that μַ ?ςֲ ?ωׂ ?εֹ ?ϊ cannot properly be translated either “when He made,” or “in that He made,” as well as the fact that the gerundive Infinitive with μְ cannot be put before its principal verb, together with the absence of a suffix after μַ ?ςֲ ?ωׂ ?εֹ ?ϊ referring to the subject God [should be μַ ?ςֲ ?ωׂ ?εֹ ?ϊεֹ if the verse were antecedent]. Furthermore the Divine “looking to the ends of the earth,” etc., Job 28:24, would need a telic qualification, referring the divine omniscience [God’s looking every where and seeing every thing] to the creation and preservation of the order of nature, in order that it might not be understood as declaring the omniscience of God in abstracto. That He may appoint to the wind its weight, and weigh the water by measure.—The careful “measurement” of wind and water, i. e., their relative apportionment, government, and management (comp. Isaiah 60:12), is a peculiarly characteristic example of God’s wise administrative economy in creation: “Who sends the wind upon its course,” etc. Instead of the Infinitive the finite verb appears in b, and that in the Perf. form, ϊִּ ?λֵּ ?ο, because the expression of purpose passes over into the expression of sequence, precisely as in Job 5:21 (see on the 5). Job 28:26 seq. As the wisdom of God furnishes the means and basis of His government of the world, so in the exercise of His creative power was it the absolute norm, and is in consequence thereof the highest law for man’s moral action, positively and negatively considered. When He appointed for the rain a law (when and how often it should fall, where it should cease; comp. Genesis 2:5) and for the thunder flash a path (i. e., through the clouds; comp. Job 38:25), then saw He it and declared it—i. e., in thus exercising at the beginning His creative power, He beheld it, contemplated it (we are to read ψָ ?ΰָ ?δּ with Mappiq in δ), as His eternal pattern, according to which He made, ordered, and ruled His creatures, and declared it (εַ ?ιְ ?ρַ ?τְּ ?ψָ ?δּ, lit. “and enumerated it”), i. e., unfolded its contents before men and His other rational creatures throughout the whole creation, which in truth is nothing else than such a “development and historical realization” of the contents of eternal wisdom. The attempt of Schult., Ew., Dillm. to explain ρτψ as meaning “to number through, to review all over” (after Job 38:37; Psalms 139:18) is less natural.—He established it, and also searched it out, i. e., He laid its foundations in the creation (comp. Proverbs 8:22-23, where both verbs, χπδ and πρκ, convey the came idea of founding, establishing wisdom as δֵ ?λִ ?ιο here), brought it to its complete actualization in creation, and then reviewed all its individual parts to see whether they all bore the test of His examination. Comp. what is said in Genesis 1:31 : “And God saw everything that He had made, and behold, it was very good.”—Or again: “He set it up before Himself,” for more attentive contemplation (δֵ ?λִ ?ιο according as in Job 29:7), and searched it out thoroughly, exploring its thoughts (so Wolff and Dillmann) [the latter of whom says: “He set it up for contemplation, as an artist or an architect puts up before himself the ϊַּ ?αְ ?πִ ?ιϊ”]. It is not necessary, with some MSS. and Eds. to read δֱ ?αִ ?ιπָ ?δּ, instead of δֱ ?αִ ?ιπָ ?δּ, as Dφderl. and Ew. do. Job 28:28. And said to man: Behold, the fear of the Lord is wisdom, etc.—He would accordingly not reserve to Himself the wisdom which had served Him as a pattern of creation, but would communicate it to the human race which He had made and put into His world, which He could do only by setting it before them in the form of an original command to fear God and to depart from evil (ρεּ ?ψξֵ ?ψָ ?ς, comp. Job 1:2; Proverbs 3:7; Proverbs 16:6. Instead of ΰֲ ?γֹ ?πָ ?ιιִ ?ψְ ?ΰַ ?ϊ, very many MSS. and old editions read ιΧιְ ?δεָֹ ?δ, which reading seems to have in its favor: (1) That ιְ ?δεָֹ ?δ, occurring only twice elsewhere in our book, might easily be set aside as being too singular; (2) that ΰֲ ?ψֹ ?πָ ?ι in Jehovah’s own mouth does not occur elsewhere in the Old Testament, not even in Amos 6:8; (3) that the parallels of the primitive saying before us in the Proverbs and in the Psalms constantly exhibit ιִ ?ψְ ?ΰַ ?ϊιְ ?δεָֹ ?δ (comp. Proverbs 1:7; Proverbs 3:7; Proverbs 9:10; Proverbs 16:6; Psalms 111:10).—On the other side it is true the Masoretic tradition expressly reckons this passage among the one hundred and thirty-four passages of the Old Testament, where ΰγπι is not only to be read, but is actually written instead of ιδεδ (Buxtorf, Tiberias, p. 245). As regards the thought, it makes no difference whether we read “fear of the Lord” (“the Lord of all,” Del.), or “fear of Jehovah (Jahveh).” [It may, however, be said, that there is an especial appropriateness in the use of ΰγπι here, in view of the fact that God is spoken of in connection with the creation, as the product of wisdom; and not only so, but God in His Lordship, His supremacy, His claim to be feared, i. e. revered and obeyed, whence ΰγπι is used rather than ΰμεδ or ΰμδιν. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/lange/ SECOND CHIEF OF THE OF THE MYSTERY THROUGH THE OF JOB, ELIHU AND JEHOVAH Job 29:1 to Job 42:6 First Stage of the DisentanglementJob 29-31Job’s Soliloquy, setting forth the truth that his suffering was not due to his moral conduct, that it must have therefore a deeper cause. [The negative side of the solution of the problem.]1. Yearning retrospect at the fair prosperity of his former life Job 29a. Describing the outward appearance of this former prosperityJob_29:1-101         Moreover, Job continued his parable, and said: 2    O that I were as in months past, as in the days when God preserved me; 3    when His candle shined upon my head, and when by His light I walked through darkness; 4    as I was in the days of my youth. when the secret of God was upon my tabernacle; 5    when the Almighty was yet with me, when my children were about me; 6    when I washed my steps with butter, and the rock poured me out rivers of oil; 7    when I went out to the gate through the city, when I prepared my seat in the street! 8    The young men saw me, and hid themselves; and the aged arose, and stood up. 9    The princes refrained talking, and laid their hand on their mouth. 10    The nobles held their peace, and their tongue cleaved to the roof of their mouth. b. Pointing out the inward cause of this prosperity—his benevolence and integrityJob_29:11-1711    When the ear heard me, then it blessed me; and when the eye saw me, it gave witness to me: 12    because I delivered the poor that cried; and the fatherless, and him that had none to help him. 13    The blessing of him that was ready to perish came upon me: and I caused the widow’s heart to sing for joy. 14    I put on righteousness, and it clothed me: my judgment was as a robe and a diadem. 15    I was eyes to the blind, and feet was I to the lame. 16    I was a father to the poor; and the cause which I knew not I searched out. 17    And I brake the jaws of the wicked, and plucked the spoil out of his teeth. c. Describing that feature of his former prosperity which he now most painfully misses, viz., the universal honor shown to him, and his far-reaching influence: Job 29:18-2518    Then I said, I shall die in my nest, and I shall multiply my days as the sand. 19    My root was spread out by the waters, and the dew lay all night upon my branch. 20    My glory was fresh in me, and my bow was renewed in my hand. 21    Unto me men gave ear, and waited, and kept silence at my counsel. 22    After my words they spake not again; and my speech dropped upon them. 23    And they waited for me as for the rain; and they opened their mouth wide as for the latter rain. 24    If I laughed on them, they believed it not; and the light of my countenance they cast not down. 25    I chose out their way, and sat chief, and dwelt as a king in the army, as one that comforteth the mourners. 2. Sorrowful description of his present sad estate Job 30a. The ignominy and contempt he receives from men: Job 30:1-151    But now they that are younger than I have me in derision, whose fathers I would have disdained to have set with the dogs of my flock. 2    Yea, whereto might the strength of their hands profit me, in whom old age was perished? 3    For want and famine they were solitary; fleeing into the wilderness in former time desolate and waste. 4    Who cut up mallows by the bushes, and juniper roots for their meat. 5    They were driven forth from among men, (they cried after them as after a thief); 6    To dwell in the cliffs of the valleys, in caves of the earth, and in the rocks. 7    Among the bushes they brayed; under the nettles they were gathered together. 8    They were children of fools, yea, children of base men; they were viler than the earth. 9    And now am I their song, yea, I am their byword. 10    They abhor me, they flee far from me, and spare not to spit in my face. 11    Because He hath loosed my cord, and afflicted me, they have also let loose the bridle before me. 12    Upon my right hand rise the youth; they push away my feet, and they raise up against me the ways of their destruction. 13    They mar my path, they set forward my calamity, they have no helper. 14    They came upon me as a wide breaking in of waters; in the desolation they rolled themselves upon me. 15    Terrors are turned upon me: they pursue my soul as the wind: and my welfare passeth away as a cloud. b. The unspeakable misery which everywhere oppresses him: Job 30:16-2316    And now my soul is poured out upon me; the days of affliction have taken hold upon me. 17    My bones are pierced in me in the night season; and my sinews take no rest. 18    By the great force of my disease is my garment changed: it bindeth me about as the collar of my coat. 19    He hath cast me into the mire, and I am become like dust and ashes. 20    I cry unto Thee, and Thou dost not hear me: I stand up, and Thou regardest me not. 21    Thou art become cruel to me; with Thy strong hand Thou opposest Thyself against me. 22    Thou liftest me up to the wind; Thou causest me to ride upon it, and dissolvest my substance. 23    For I know that Thou wilt bring me to death, and to the house appointed for all living. c. The disappointment of all his hopes: Job 30:24-3124    Howbeit he will not stretch out his hand to the grave, though they cry in his destruction. 25    Did not I weep for him that was in trouble? was not my soul grieved for the poor? 26    When I looked for good, then evil came unto me; and when I waited for light, there came darkness. 27    My bowels boiled, and rested not: the days of affliction prevented me. 28    I went mourning without the sun: I stood up, and I cried in the congregation. 29    I am a brother to dragons, and a companion to owls. 30    My skin is black upon me, and my bones are burned with heat. 31    My harp also is turned to mourning, and my organ into the voice of them that weep. 3. Solemn asseveration of his innocence in respect to all open and secret sins Job 31a. He has abandoned himself to no wicked lust: Job 31:1-81         I made a covenant with mine eyes; why then should I think upon a maid? 2    For what portion of God is there from above? and what inheritance of the Almighty from on high? 3    Is not destruction to the wicked? and a strange punishment to the workers of iniquity? 4    Doth not He see my ways, and count all my steps? 5    If I have walked with vanity, or if my foot hath hasted to deceit; 6    let me be weighed in an even balance, that God may know mine integrity. 7    If my step hath turned out of the way, and mine heart walked after mine eyes, and if any blot hath cleaved to mine hands; 8    then let me sow, and let another eat; yea, let my offspring be rooted out. b. He has acted uprightly in all his domestic life: Job 31:9-139    If mine heart have been deceived by a woman, or if I have laid wait at my neighbor’s door; 10    then let my wife grind unto another, and let others bow down upon her. 11    For this is a heinous crime; yea, it is an iniquity to be punished by the judges. 12    For it is a fire that consumeth to destruction, and would root out all mine increase. 13    If I did despise the cause of my man-servant, or of my maid-servant, when they contended with me; 14    what then shall I do when God riseth up? and when He visiteth, what shall I answer Him? 15    Did not He that made me in the womb make him? and did not One fashion us in the womb? c. He has constantly practised neighborly kindness and Justice in civil life: Job 31:16-2316    If I have withheld the poor from their desire, or have caused the eyes of the widow to fail; 17    or have eaten my morsel myself alone, and the fatherless hath not eaten thereof: 18    (for from my youth he was brought up with me, as with a father, and I have guided her from my mother’s womb;) 19    if I have seen any perish for want of clothing, or any poor without covering; 20    if his loins have not blessed me, and if he were not warmed with the fleece of my sheep; 21    if I have lifted up my hand against the fatherless, when I saw my help in the gate; 22    then let mine arm fall from my shoulder blade, and mine arm be broken from the bone! 23    For destruction from God was a terror to me, and by reason of His highness I could not endure. d. He has not violated his more secret obligations to God and his neighbor: Job 31:24-3224    If I have made gold my hope, or have said to the fine gold, Thou art my confidence; 25    if I rejoiced because my wealth was great, and because mine hand had gotten much; 26    if I beheld the sun when it shined, or the moon walking in brightness; 27    and my heart hath been secretly enticed, or my mouth hath kissed my hand: 28    this also were an iniquity to be punished by the judge; for I should have denied the God that is above. 29    If I rejoiced at the destruction of him that hated me, or lifted up myself when evil found him: 30    (—neither have I suffered my mouth to sin by wishing a curse to his soul:) 31    if the men of my tabernacle said not, O that we had of his flesh! we cannot be satisfied. 32    The stranger did not lodge in the street: but I opened my doors to the traveller. e. He has been guilty furthermore of no hypocrisy, or mere semblance of holiness, of no secret violence, or avaricious oppression of his neighbor: Job 31:33-4033    If I covered my transgressions as Adam, by hiding mine iniquity in my bosom: 34    did I fear a great multitude, or did the contempt of families terrify me, that I kept silence, and went not out of the door? 35    O that one would hear me! behold, my desire is that the Almighty would answer me, and that mine adversary had written a book. 36    Surely I would take it upon my shoulder, and bind it as a crown to me. 37    I would declare unto Him the number of my steps; as a prince would I go near unto Him. 38    If my land cry against me, or that the furrows likewise thereof complain; 39    If I have eaten the fruits thereof without money, or have caused the owners thereof to lose their life; 40    Let thistles grow instead of wheat, and cockle instead of barley. The words of Job are ended. AND 1. Although introduced by the same formula as the discourse immediately preceding (comp. Job 29:1 with Job 27:1), this last long series of Job’s utterances exhibits decidedly a μετάβασιςεἰςἄλλογένος, a form and method esssentially new in comparison with the former controversial and argumentative discourses of the colloquy. They are not once addressed to the friends, who since Job 25. have been entirely silenced, and have not been provoked to further reply even by the elaborate instructions, which he imparts to them in Job 27-28. Instead of this they frequently appeal to God, and present, especially in the last section, a long series of solemn asseverations or adjurations uttered before God. They thus appear, in contrast with the interlocutory character of the discourses hitherto, as a genuine soliloquy by Job, which both by its contents and by its conspicuous length, forms a suitable transition to the following discourses, or groups of discourses by Elihu and Jehovah, which are in like manner of considerable length. The three principal sections are a yearning retrospect to the happy past (Job 29), a description of the sorrowful present (Job 30), and solemn asseverations of innocence in presence of the divine judge, or God of the Future (Job 31). These divisions are very obvious, and justify the divisions into chapters founded on them as corresponding strictly to that intended by the poet himself. Neither can there be much doubt in regard to the more special sub-division of these chief divisions. The first and the second contain respectively three long sub-divisions or strophes, of 8–9 verses each (once only, Job 30:1 seq. of 15 verses, which long strophe indeed may also be divided into two shorter ones of 8 and 7 verses. In the third part there appear quite distinctly five groups of thought of 7–8 (once of 9) verses each. 2. First Division: The prosperity of the past: Job 29. [“It is very thoughtfully planned by the poet that Job, by this description of his former prosperity, unintentionally refutes the accusations of his friends, inasmuch as it furnishes a picture of his former life very different from that which they had ventured to assume. We have here the picture of a rich and highly distinguished chief of a tribe [or patriarch], who was happy only in spreading abroad happiness and blessing.” Schlottmann]. First Strophe: Job 29:2-10 : The outward appearance of this former prosperity. Job 29:2. Oh that it were to me [Oh that I were] as in months of yore! lit. “who gives (makes) me like the months of the past,” who puts me back in the happy condition of that time (so Rosenm., Welte, Vaih, etc.). Or, with the dative rendering of the suffix in ιִ ?ϊְּ ?πֵ ?πִ ?ι (as in Isaiah 27:4; Jeremiah 9:1), “who gives to me like the months of the past,” i. e. who makes me to live over such! (so usually). On the construction in b (the constr. state λιξι before the relative clause), comp. Gesenius, § 116, [§ 114], 3. [Green, §255, 2]. Job 29:3. When it (viz.) His lamp shone above my head.—αְּ ?δִ ?μּ ?εֹ, Inf. Kal of δμμ with the vowel a weakened to i (Ewald, § 255, a) [Green, § 139, 2], not Inf. Hiph. as Bφttcher would render it, when after the Targ. he translates: “when He caused His lamp to shine.” This Hiphil rendering could only be justified if (with Ewald in his comm.) we should read αָּ ?δִ ?μּ ?εֹ (αַּ ?δֲ ?δִ ?μּ ?εֹ). [“Probably alluding to the custom of suspending lamps in rooms or tents over the head. The language of this ver. is of course figurative, and implies prosperity and the divine favor.” Carey]. On the anticipation of the subject πֵ ?ψεֹ by the suffix, comp. Ew., § 309, c. Delitzsch quite too artificially refers the suffix in αδμι to God, and takes πֵ ?ψεֹ as a self-corrective, explanatory permutative: “when He, His lamp shone, etc.” Job 29:4. As I was in the days of my harvest.—λַּ ?ΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψ, “as, according as,” resumes the simple λְּ in λιψηι and λιξι, Job 29:2. “The days of the harvest” are, as Job 29:5 b shows, a figurative expression for ripe manhood [“the days of my prime” Carey], the ζtas virilis suis fructibus f�ta et exuberans (Schultens): comp. Ovid Metam. XV. 200. [The rendering of E. V. “in the days of my youth” (after Symmach. and the Vulg.) is less correct, as is shown by the reference above to Job 29:5 b, the time referred to being that when he had his children about him, as well as by the word ηψσ itself, which means the time when the ripe fruit is gathered]. When Eloah’s friendship was over my tent;i. e. dispensed protection and blessing above my habitation. ρεֹ ?γ here meaning “familiarity, confidential intercourse,” (as in Job 19:19; Psalms 25:14; Psalms 55:15 [14]; Proverbs 3:22), not the celestial council of God, as in Job 15:8 (against Hirzel). [“αְּ ?ρεֹ ?γ either by ellipsis for αִּ ?δְ ?ιεֹ ?ϊρεֹ ?γ or ρεֹ ?γ having the force of an active [verbal] noun, “His being familiar.” Dillm.—Carey’s explanation, though pushing the literal rendering a little too far, is striking: “lit. in the seat or cushion of God being at my tent; i. e., when God was on such terms of familiar intercourse with me that he had, as it were, his accustomed seat at my tent”]. Job 29:5. On children as a most highly valued blessing, placed here next to God Himself, comp. Psalms 127:3 seq.; Psalms 128:3. Concerning πςψιν): in this sense (not in that of “servants,”) see above Job 1:19; Job 24:5. Job 29:6. When my steps were bathed in cream (comp. Job 20:17, where however we have the full form δֶ ?ξְ ?ΰָ ?δ), and the rock beside me poured out streams of oil; that which elsewhere was barren poured out costly blessings, and that close by his side, so that he was not compelled to go far; comp. Deuteronomy 32:13. Job 29:7-10. The honor and dignity which he then enjoyed. When I went forth to the gate up to the city. ωׁ ?ςψ is equivalent to ωַׁ ?ςֲ ?ψָ ?δ, towards the gate (comp. Job 28:11; Genesis 27:3), not: “out at the gate” (as below, Job 31:34τֶּ ?ϊַ ?η), for Job’s residence was in the country, not in the city with ωׁ ?ςψιν. For this same reason he speaks here of his going up ςֲ ?μֵ ?ιχֶ ?ψֶ ?ϊ, “up to the city;” for the city adjoining to him, was on an eminence, as was usually the case with ancient cities. [Comp. Abraham’s relations to Hebron, as indicated in Genesis 23.. In respect to the use of the space directly inside the gates of these cities as a place for assemblies of the people, comp. above, Job 5:4; also Job 31:4; Proverbs 1:21; Proverbs 8:3, and often. When I prepared my seat in the market. ψְ ?ηεֹ ?α the open space at the gate, as in Nehemiah 8:1; Nehemiah 8:3; Nehemiah 8:16, etc. On the construction (the change from the Infin. to the finite verb), comp. Job 29:3; Job 28:25. Job 29:8. Then the young men saw me, and hid themselves;i. e. as soon as they came in sight of me, from reverential awe. And the gray-headed rose up, remained standing—until I myself had sat. [“A most elegant description, and exhibits most correctly the great reverence and respect which was paid, even by the old and decrepit, to the holy man in passing along the streets, or when he sat in public. They not only rose, which in men so old and infirm was a great mark of distinction, but they stood, they continued to do it, though the attempt was so difficult.” Lowth]. On the construction, comp. Ewald, §285, b. Job 29:9. Princes restrained themselves from speaking (ςָ ?φַ ?ψαְּ ?ξִ ?μִּ ?ιν, as in Job 4:2; Job 12:15), and laid the hand on their mouth, imposed on themselves reverential silence; comp. Job 21:5. [“What is meant is not that those who were in the act of speaking stopped at Job’s entrance, but that when he wished to speak, even princes, i. e. rulers of great bodies of men, or those occupying the highest offices, refrained from speech.” Dillmann]. Job 29:10. The voice of nobles hid itself, lit. “hid themselves,” for the verb πֶ ?ηְ ?αָּ ?ΰεּ is put in agreement with the plur. dependent on χεֹ ?μ as the principal term, as in the similar cases in Job 15:20; Job 21:21; Job 22:12. [Comp. Green, § 277].—πְ ?βִ ?ιγִ ?ιν lit. “those who are visible” (from πβγ) i. e. conspicuous, noble [nobiles]. On b comp. passages like Psalms 137:6; Ezekiel 3:26. Continuation. Second Strophe: Job 29:11-17. Job’s active benevolence and strict integrity as the inward cause of his former prosperity. Job 29:11. For if an ear heard—it called me happy—lit. “for an ear heard, and then called me happy;” and similarly in the second member. The object of the hearing, as afterwards of the seeing, is neither Job’s speeches in the assembly of the people [“if this ver. were a continuation of the description of the proceedings in the assembly, it would not be introduced by λִּ ?ι” Dillm.], nor his prosperity (Hahn, Delitzsch), but as Job 29:12 seq. shows, his whole public and private activity. [For the reason mentioned by Dillmann λִּ ?ι is better translated “for” than “when” (E. V.)]. In regard to ΰִ ?ωֵּׁ ?ψ “to pronounce happy,” comp. Proverbs 31:28; Son 6:9. In regard to δֵ ?ςִ ?ιγ, to bear favorable testimony to any one, comp. μαρτυρεῖντινιLuke 4:22; Acts 15:8. Job 29:12. For I delivered the poor, that cried, and the orphan, who had no helper (εְ ?μֹ ?ΰΞςֹ ?ζִ ?ψִ μֹ ?ε a circumstantial clause, comp. Ew., § 331). [The clause “is either a third new object (so E. V.)], or a close definition of what precedes: the orphan and (in this state of orphanhood) helpless one. The latter is more probable both here and in the Salomonic primary passage Psalms 72:12; in the other case εΰωׁ ?ψΰιοΞςζψμε might be expected.” Delitz.]. The Imperfects describing that which is wont to be, as also in Job 29:13; Job 29:16. As to the sentiment, comp. Psalms 72:12. Job 29:13. The blessing of the lost (lit. “of one lost, perishing;” ΰεֹ ?αֵ ?γ as in Job 31:19; Proverbs 31:6) came upon me;i. e., as b shows, the grateful wish that he might be blessed from such miserable ones as had been rescued by him, hardly the actual blessing which God bestowed on him in answer to the prayer of such (comp. Hernias, Past. Simil. 2). Job 29:14. I had clothed myself with righteousness, and it with me;i. e., in proportion as I exerted myself to exercise righteousness (φֶ ?γֶ ?χ) toward my neighbor, the same [righteousness] took form, filled me inwardly in truth [“it put me on as a garment, i. e., it made me so its own, that my whole appearance was the representation of itself, as in Judges 6:34, and twice in the Chron., of the Spirit of Jehovah it is said that He puts on any one, induit, when He makes any one the organ of His own manifestation,” Delitzsch. “Righteousness was as a robe to me, and I was as a robe to it. I put it on, and it put me on; it identified itself with me.” Words.] Not: “and it clothed me,” as Rosenmόller, Arnh., Umbr. [E. V., Schlottm., Carey, Renan, Rod., Elz., etc.], arbitrarily render the second μαωׁ, thereby producing only a flat tautology. [Ewald also: “it adorned me.”—The other rendering is adopted, or approved by Gesen., Fόrst, Delitzsch, Dillmann, Wordsworth, Noyes in his Notes]. The figure of being clothed with a moral quality or way of living to represent one as equipped, or adorned therewith, (comp. Isaiah 11:5; Isaiah 51:9; Isaiah 59:17; Psalms 132:9), is continued in the second member, where Job’s strict righteousness and spotless integrity (this is what ξִ ?ωְׁ ?τָּ ?θ means; comp. Micah 3:8) are represented as “a mantle and a tiara (turban);” comp. Isaiah 61:10. Job 29:15. Comp. Numbers 10:31. To be anybody’s eye, ear, foot (here “feet”), etc., is of course to supply these organs by the loving ministration of help, and to make it possible as it were to dispense with them. Job 29:16. On a comp. Isaiah 9:5; Isaiah 22:21.—ΰָ ?α and ΰֶ ?αְ ?ιεֹ ?πִ ?ιν seem to form a paronomasia here.—And the cause of the unknown [the strangers, the friendless] I searched out, i. e., in order to help them as their advocate, provided they were in the right.—μֹ ?ΰιָ ?γַ ?ςְ ?ϊִּ ?ι, attributive clause, as in Job 18:21; Isaiah 41:3; Isaiah 55:5, and often. [E. V., “the cause which I knew not” is admissible, and gives essentially the same sense; but the other rendering is to be preferred, as furnishing a better parallel to the “blind, lame, poor,” preceding.—The man whom nobody knew, or cared for, Job would willingly take for his client.—E.]. Job 29:17. I broke the teeth of the wicked (the cohortative, εַֽ ?ΰֲ ?ωַׁ ?αְּ ?ψָ ?δ, as in Job 1:15; Job 19:20), and out of his teeth I plucked the prey.—For the description of hardhearted oppressors and tyrants (or unrighteous judges, of whom we are to think particularly here), under the figure of ravaging wild beasts, from which the prey is rescued, comp. Psalms 3:8 [Psalms 3:7]; Psalms 58:7 [Psalms 58:6], etc. 4. Conclusion: Third Strophe: Job 29:18-25. The honor and the influence which Job once enjoyed, and the loss of which he mourns with especial sorrow. Job 29:18. And so then I thought [said]: With my neat [“together with my nest,” as implying a wish that he and his nest might perish together, would be “unnatural, and diametrically opposed to the character of an Arab, who in the presence of death cherishes the twofold wish that he may continue to live in his children, and that he may die in the midst of his family,” Delitzsch] (or also: “in my nest”) shall I die;i. e., without having left or lost my home, together with my family, and property (comp. Psalms 84:4 [3]), hence in an advanced, happy old age.—And like the phenix have many days: lit., “make many, multiply my days.” The language also would admit of our rendering ηεֹ ?μ “sand,” understanding the expression to refer to the multiplication of days like grains of sand; comp. “as the sand of the sea” in 1 Kings 5:9 [1 Kings 4:29 applying to Solomon’s wisdom] and often; also Ovid, Metam. XIV. 136 seq.: quot haberet corpora pulvis, tot mihi natales contingere vana rogavi. But against this interpretation, which is adopted by the Targ., Pesh., Saad., Luther, Umbreit, Gesenius, Stickel, Vaih., Hahn, [E. V., Con., Noy., Ber., Carey, Words., Renan, Rodwell, Merx], and in favor of understanding ηεֹ ?μ of the phenix, that long-lived bird of the well-known oriental legend (so most moderns since Rosenmόller) may be urged: (1) The oldest exegetical tradition in the Talmud, in the Midrashim, among the Masoretes and Rabbis (especially Kimchi); (2) the versions—manifestly proceeding out of a misconception of this phenix tradition—of the LXX.: ωσπερστέλεχοςφοίνικος; of the Itala: sicut arbor palmζ, and of the Vulg.: sicut palma; (3) and finally even the etymology of the word ηεֹ ?μ (or ηεּ ?μ, as the Rabbis of Nahardearead, according to Kimchi) which it would seem must be derived (with Bochart) from ηεμtorquere, volvere, and be explained “circulation, periodic return,” and even in its Egyptian form Koli (Copt.; alloe) is to be traced back to this Shemitic radical signification (among the ancient Egyptians indeed the chief name of the phenix was bιni, hierogl. bano, benno, which at the same time signifies “palm”). The phrase—“to live as long as the phenix” is found also among other people of antiquity besides the Egyptians, e. g., among the Greeks (φοίνικοςἔτηβιοῦν, Lucian, Hermot., p. 53); and the whole legend concerning the phenix living for five hundred years, then burning itself together with its nest, and again living glorified, is in general as ancient as it is widely spread, especially in the East. Therefore it can neither seem strange, nor in any way objectionable, if a poetical book of the Holy Scripture should make reference to this myth (comp. the allusions to astronomical and other myths in Job 3:9; 26:28). Touching the proposition that the Egyptian nationality of the poet, or the Egyptian origin of his ideas does not follow from this passage, see above, Introd., § 7, b (where may also be found the most important literary sources of information respecting the legend of the phenix). Job 29:19-20 continue the expression, begun in Job 29:18, of that which Job thought and hoped for. [According to E. V., Job 29:19 resumes the description of Job’s former condition: “My root was spread out, etc.” But these two verses are so different from the passage preceding, (Job 29:11-25), in which Job speaks of his deeds of beneficence, and from the passage following (Job 29:21-25) in which he describes his influence in the public assembly, and so much in harmony with Job 29:18, in which he speaks of his prospects, as they seemed to his hopes, that the connection adopted by Zφckler, and most recent expositors, is decidedly to be preferred.—E.]. Job 29:19. My root will be open towards the water:i. e., my life will flourish, like a tree plentifully watered (comp. Job 14:7 seq.; Job 18:16), and the dew will lie all night in my branches (comp. the same passages; also Genesis 27:39; Proverbs 19:12; Psalms 133:3, etc.) Job 29:20. Mine honor will remain (ever) fresh with me (λָּ ?αεֹ ?γ = δόξα, consideration, dignity, honor with God and men—not “soul” as Hahn explains [“to which ηָ ?γָ ?ωׁ is not appropriate as predicate,” Del.], and my bow is renewed in my hand—the bow as a symbol of robust manliness, and strength for action, comp. 1 Samuel 2:4; Psalms 46:10 [Psalms 46:9]; Psalms 76:4 [Psalms 76:3]; Jeremiah 49:35; Jeremiah 51:56, etc.—δֶ ?ηֱ ?μִ ?ισ, to make progress, to sprout forth (Job 14:7); here to renew oneself, to grow young again. It is not necessary to supply, e.g., λֹּ ?ηַ, as Hirzel and Schlottmann do, on the basis of Isa 40:31. Job 29:21. seq., exhibit in connection with the joyful hopes of Job, just described, which flowed forth directly out of the fulness of his prosperity, and in particular of the honor which he enjoyed, a full description of this honor, the narrative style of the discourse by εָ ?ΰֹ ?ξַ ?ψ, Job 29:18, being resumed. Job 29:21-23 have for their subject others than Job himself, the members of his tribe, not specially those who took part in the assemblies described in Job 29:7-10; for which reason it is unnecessary to assume a transposition, of the passage after Job 29:10. Job 29:21. They hearkened to me, and waited (ιִ ?ηֵ ?μּ ?εּ, pausal form, with Dagh. euphonic for ιִ ?ηֲ ?μεּ, comp. Gesen. § 20, 2 c), and listened silently to my counsel (lit. “and were silent for or at my counsel”). Job 29:22. After my words they spoke not again—lit. “they did not repeat” (εִ ?ωְׁ ?πεּ, non iterabant). On b comp. Deuteronomy 32:2; Son 4:11; Proverbs 5:3. Job 29:23. Further expansion of the figure last used of the refreshing [rain-like] dropping of his discourse. They opened their mouth wide as for the latter rain.—The ξַ ?μְ ?χεֹ ?ωׁ, or latter rain in March or April, is, on account of the approaching harvest, which it helps to ripen, longed for with particular urgency in Palestine and the adjacent countries; comp. Deuteronomy 11:14; Jeremiah 3:3; Jeremiah 5:24; Joe 2:23; Hosea 6:3, etc. On ωָׁ ?ΰַ ?σ = τָּ ?ςַ ?ψτֶּ ?δ, to gape, pant, comp. Psalms 119:131. Job 29:24. I laughed upon them when they despaired—lit. “when they did not have confidence” (δֶ ?ΰֱ ?ξִ ?εο, absol. as in Isaiah 7:9; comp. Psalms 116:10; and ιַ ?ΰֲ ?ξִ ?ιπεּ a circumstantial clause without εְ ?—this lacking εְ, however, being supplied in many MSS. and Eds.). The meaning can be only: “even when they were despondent, I knew how to cheer them up by my friendly smiles.” This is the only meaning with which the second member agrees which cannot harmonize with the usual explanation: “I smiled at them, they believed it not” (LXX., Vulg., Saad., Luther [E. V., Noy., Rod., Ren., Merx], and most moderns). [“The reverence in which I was held was so great, that if I laid aside my gravity, and was familiar with them, they could scarcely believe that they were so highly honored; my very smiles were received with awe” Noyes]. And the light of my countenance (i. e., my cheerful visage, comp. Proverbs 16:15) they could not darken; lit. “they could not cause to fall, cast down,” comp. Genesis 4:5-6 Jeremiah 3:12.—[“However despondent their position appeared, the cheerfulness of my countenance they could not cause to pass away.” Del.] Job 29:25. I would gladly take the way to them (comp. Job 28:23); i. e., I took pleasure in sitting in the midst of them, and in taking part in affairs. This is the only meaning that is favored by what follows;—the rendering of Hahn and Delitzsch: “I chose out for them the way they should go” [“I made the way plain which they should take in order to get out of their hopeless and miserable state.” Del This is the meaning also suggested by E. V.] is opposed by the consideration that αηψ, “to choose,” never means “to prescribe, determine, enjoin.” In the passage which follows, “sitting as chief” (ψֹ ?ΰωׁ) is immediately defined more in the concrete by the clause, λְּ ?ξֶ ?μֶ ?κְ αַּ ?βְּ ?γεּ ?γ, “like a king in the midst of the army;” but then the I altogether too military aspect of this figure (comp. Job 15:24; Job 19:12) is again softened by making the business of the king surrounded by his armies to be not leading them to battle, but “comforting the mourners.” Whether in this expression there is intended a thrust at the friends on account of their unskilful way of comforting (as Ewald and Dillmann think), may very much be doubted. Second Division: The wretchedness of the present. Chap. 30. First Strophe (or Double Strophe). Job 30:1-15. The ignominy and contempt which he receives from men, put in glaring contrast with the high honor just described. The contrast is heightened all the more by the fact that the men now introduced as insulting and mocking him are of the very lowest and most contemptible sort; being the same class of men whose restless, vagabond life has already been described in Job 24:4-8, only more briefly than here. Job 30:1. And now they laugh at me who are younger than I in days—the good-for-nothing rabble of children belonging to that abandoned class. What a humiliation for him before whom the aged stood up! [“The first line of the verse which is marked off by Mercha-Mahpach is intentionally so disproportionately long to form a deep and long-breathed beginning to the lamentation which is now begun.” Del.] They whose fathers I would have disdained to set with the dogs of my flock (ωִׂ ?ιϊςִ ?ν, “to make like, to put on a level with,” not to set over, ωִׂ ?ιϊςַ ?μ, prζficere, as Schultens, Rosemn., Schlottm. explain). From this strong expression of contempt it does not follow that Job was now indulging in haughty or tyrannical inhuman thoughts [the considerate sympathy expressed by Job in Job 24:4-8 regarding this same class of men should be borne in mind in judging of Job’s spirit here also; yet it cannot be denied that the pride of the grand dignified old Emir does flash through the words.—E.], but only that that rabble was immeasureably destitute, and moreover morally abandoned, thievish, false, improvident, and generally useless. Job 30:2. Even the strength of their hands—what should it be to me?—i. e. “and even (LXX. καίγε) as regards themselves, those youngsters, of what use could the strength of their hands be to me?” Why this was of no use to him is explained in b:for them full ripeness is lost, i. e., enervated, miserable creatures that they are, they do not once reach ripe manly vigor (αֶּ ?ψַ ?δ as in Job 5:26). [Hence not “old age,” as in E. V., which is both less correct and less expressive.] Why they do not, the verses immediately following show. Job 30:3. Through want and hunger (they are) starved; lit. they are “a hard stiff rock” βַּ ?μְ ?ξεּ ?γ, as in Job 15:34); they, who gnaw the dry steppe;i. e., gnaw away (ςχψ as in Job 30:17) what grows there; comp. Job 24:5; which have long been a wild and a wilderness.—According to the parallel passages Job 38:27; and Zephaniah 1:15ωׁ ?εֹ ?ΰָ ?δεּ ?ξְ ?ωׁ ?εֹ ?ΰָ ?δ unquestionably signifies “waste and devastation,” or “wild and wilderness” (comp. ϊδεεαδε, Genesis 1:2; αεχδεξαεχδ, Nahum 2:11; and similar examples of assonance). The ΰֶ ?ξֶ ?ωׁ preceding however is difficult. Elsewhere it is an adverb of time: “the past night, last evening [and so, yesterday],” but here evidently a substantive, and in the constr. state. It is explained to mean either: “the yesterday of wasteness and desolation,” i. e., “that which has long been wasteness,” etc. (Hirzel, Ewald) [Schlott., Renan, to whom may be added Good, Lee, Carey, Elzas, who connect ΰֶ ?ξֶ ?ωׁ with the participle, translating—” who yesterday were gnawers,” etc.], or: “the night, the darkness of the wilderness” (Targ., Rabbis, Gesen., Del.) [Noyes, Words., Barnes, Bernard, Rodwell, the last two taking ωׁ ?Χ ,ΰξωׁ ?and ξωΧ as three independent nouns,—“gloom, waste, desolation”]. Of these constructions the former is to be preferred, since darkness appears nowhere else (not even in Jeremiah 2:6; Jeremiah 2:31) as a characteristic predicate of the wilderness,” and since especially the “gnawing of the darkness of the wilderness” produces a thought singularly harsh. Dillmann’s explanation: “already yesterday a pure wilderness” (where therefore there is nothing to be found to-day), is linguistically harsh; and Olshausen’s emendation—ΰֶ ?ψֶ ?υωׁ ?ΧεξΧ—arbitrary. [E. V. following the LXX. Targ., and most of the old expositors, translates δָ ?ςֹ ?ψְ ?χִ ?ιν “fleeing,” a rendering which besides being far less vivid and forcible, is less suitable, the desert being evipently their proper habitation. ςψχ in the sense of “gnawing” reminds of θψσ, Job 24:5. It will be seen also that E. V. follows the adverbial construction of ΰξωׁ but “the wilderness in former time desolate and waste” suggests no very definite or consistent meaning. If a verbial, the force of ΰξωׁ must be to enhance the misery and hopelessness of their condition. They lived in what was not only now, but what had long been a desert—a fact which made the prospect of getting their support from it all the more cheerless.—E.]. Job 30:4. They who pluck the salt-wort by the bushes—in the place therefore where such small plants could first live, despite the scorching heat of the desert sun; in the shadow, that is, of larger bushes, especially of that perennial, branchy bush which is found in the Syrian desert under the name sξh, of which Wetzstein treats in Delitzsch.—ξַ ?μּ ?εּ ?ηַ is the orach, salt-wort (also sea-purslain, atriplex halimus L. comp. LXX.: ἅλιμα), a plant which in its younger and more tender leaves furnishes some nourishment, although of a miserable sort; comp. Athenζus, Deipnos. IV., 161, where it is said of poor Pythagoreans: ἅλιματρώγοντεςκαὶ κακὰ τοιαῦτασυλλέγοντες.—And broom-roots are their bread.—That the root of the broom (genista monosperma) is edible, is indeed asserted only here; still we need not doubt it, nor read e. g., μַ ?ηֲ ?ξַ ?ν, “in order to warm themselves” (Gesenius), as though here as in Psalms 120:4, or the use of the broom as fuel was spoken of, Comp. Michaelis. Neue orient. Bibl. V, 45, and Wetzstein in Del. [II., 143.—And see Smith’s Bib. Dic., “Juniper,” “Mallows”]. Job 30:5. Out of the midst (of men) they are hunted, e medio pelluntur. πֵּ ?ε, lit. that which is within, i. e., here the circle of human social life, human society.—They cry after them as (after) a thief. λַּ ?βַּ ?πָּ ?α, as though they were a thief; comp. λַּ ?ξָּ ?θָ ?ψ, Job 29:23. Job 30:6. In the most horrid gorges they must dwell—lit. “in the horror of the gorges (in horridissima vallium regione; comp. Job 41:22; Ewald, § 313, c) it is for them to dwell;” comp. Gesen., § 132 (§ 129], Rem. 1.—In holes of the earth and of the rocks. Hence they were genuine troglodytes; see below after Job 30:8. Concerning ςָ ?τָ ?ψ, “earth, ground,” see on Job 28:2. Job 30:7. Among the bushes they cry out. πδχ above in Job 6:5 of the cry of the wild ass, here of the wild tones of the savage inhabitants of the steppes seeking food,—not their sermo barbarus; Pineda, Schlottmann [who refers to Herodotus’ comparison of the language of the Ethiopian troglodytes to the screech of the night-owl. According to Delitzsch the word refers to their cries of lamentation and discontent over their desperate condition. There can be but little doubt that the word is intended to remind us of the comparison of these people to wild asses in Job 24:5, and so far the rendering of E. V. “bray,” is not amiss]. Under nettles (brambles) they herd together; lit. “they must mix together, gather themselves.” Most of the modern expositors render the Pual as a strict Passive, with the meaning, “they are poured [or stretched] out,” which would be equivalent to—“they lie down” [or are prostrate]; comp. Amos 6:4; Amos 6:7. But both the use of ρτη in such passages as 1 Samuel 26:19; Isaiah 14:1, and the testimony of the most ancient Versions (Vulg., Targ., and indeed the LXX. also: διῃτῶντο) favor rather the meaning of herding, or associating together. [“But neither the fut. nor the Pual (instead of which one would expect the Niph., or Hithpa.) is favorable to the latter interpretation: wherefore we decide in favor of the former, and find sufficient support for a Heb.-Arabic ρτη in the signification effundere from a comparison of Job 14:19 and the present passage.” Del.]. Job 30:8. Sons of fools, yea, sons of base men,—both expressions in opposition to the subject of the preceding verse. παμ is used as a collective, and means the ungodly, as in Psalms 14:1.—αְּ ?μִ ?ιΞωֵׁ ?ν, equivalent to ignobiles, infames, a construction similar to that in Job 26:2 [lit. “sons of no-name”]; comp. § 286, g.—They are -whipped out of the land; lit. indeed an attributive clause—“who are whipped,” etc.; hence exiles, those who are driven forth out of their own home. [The rendering of E. V., “they were viler than the earth” was doubtless suggested by the use of the adjective πָ ?λֵ ?ΰ in the sense of “afflicted, dejected”]. In view of the palpable identity of those pictured in these verses with those described in Job 24:4-8, it is natural to assume the existence of a particular class of men in the country inhabited by Job as having furnished the historical occasion and theme of both descriptions. Since now in both passages a troglodyte way of living (dwelling in clefts of the rock and in obscure places, comp. above Job 24:4; Job 24:8) and the condition of having been driven out of their former habitations (comp. Job 24:4) are mentioned as prominent characteristics of these wretched ones, it be comes particularly probable that the people intended are the Choreans, or Chorites (Luther: Horites) [E. V.: “Horims”] who dwelt in holes, the aborigines of the mountain region of Seir, who were in part subjugated by the Edomites, in part exterminated, in part expelled (comp. Genesis 36:5; Deuteronomy 2:12; Deuteronomy 2:22). Even if Job’s home is to be looked for at some distance from Edomitis, e. g. in Hauran (comp. on. Job 1:1) a considerable number of such Chorites (ηεֹ ?ψִ ?ιν, i. e. dweller in holes, or caves) might have been living in his neighborhood; for driven out by the Edomites they would have fled more particularly into the neighboring regions of Seir-Edom, and here indeed again they would have betaken themselves to the mountains with their caves, gorges, where they would have lived the same wretched life as their ancestors, who had been left behind in Edom. It is less likely that a cave-dwelling people in Hauran, different from these remnant of the Horites, are intended, e. g. the Itureans, who were notorious for their poverty, and waylaying mode of life (Del. and Wetzst.). Job 30:9. In the second half of the Long Strophe, which also begins with εְ ?ςַ ?ϊָּ ?δ Job turns his attention away from the wretches whom he has been elaborately describing back to himself. And now I am become their song of derision, I am become to them for a byword.—πְ ?βִ ?ιπָ ?δ, elsewhere a stringed instrument, means here a song of derision, σίλλος (comp. Lamentations 3:14; Psalms 69:13 [12], ξִ ?μָּ ?δ, malicious, defamatory speech, referring to the subject of the same (LXX.: θρύλλημα). Job 30:10. Abhorring me, they remove far from me (to wit, from very abhorrence), yea, they have not spared my face with spitting;i. e. when at any time they come near me, it is never without testifying their deepest contempt by spitting in my face (Matthew 26:67; Matthew 27:30). An unsuitable softening of the meaning is attempted by those expositors, who find expressed here merely “a spitting in his presence” (Hirzel, Umbreit, Schlottmann); this meaning would require μְ ?τָ ?πַ ?ι rather than ξִ ?τָּ ?πַ ?ι. Comp. also above Job 17:6, where Job calls himself a ϊֹּ ?τֶ ?ϊμְ ?τָ ?πִ ?ιν for the people. Job 30:11 seq. show why Job had been in such a way given over to be mocked at by the most wretched, because namely God and the divine powers which cause calamity had delivered him, over to the same. For these are the principal subject in Job 30:11-14, not those miserable outcasts of human society just spoken of (as Rosenm., Umbreit, Hirzel, Stickel, Schlottm., Del. [Noy Car., Rod. and appy. E. V.] explain). The correct view is given by LXX. and Vulg., and among the moderns by Ewald, Arnh., Hahn, Dillm., etc.For He hath loosed my cord. So according to the K’ri ιִ ?ϊְ ?ψִ ?ι, on the basis of which we may also explain: “For He hath loosed, slackened my string,” which would be an antithetic reference to Job 29:20 b, even as by the translation “cord” there would be a retrospective reference to Job 4:21; Job 27:8. If following the K’thibh we read ιִ ?ϊְ ?ψεֹ, the explanation would be: “He has loosed His cord, or rein, with which he held the powers of adversity chained,” with which however the following clause: “and bowed me” would not agree remarkably well [not a conclusive objection, for ςִ ?πָּ ?δ might very appropriately and forcibly describe the way in which his nameless persecutor, God doubtless, would overpower, trample him down, by letting loose His horde of calamities upon Job. Comp. Psalms 78:8 [7]. Conant not very differently: “because he has let loose his rein and humbled me;” i. e. with unchecked violence has humbled me. Ewald, less naturally: “He hath opened (i. e. taken off the covering of) His string (his bow). Elizabeth Smith better: “He hath let go His bow-string, and afflicted me.” τִּ ?ϊֵּ ?ηַ in the sense of letting loose a bow, or bow-string however, is not used elsewhere, and εַ ?ιְ ?ςַ ?πֵּ ?πִ ?ι would hardly be a suitable description of the effect of shooting with the bow.—E.]. And the rein have they let loose before me;i.e., have let go before me (persecuting me). The subject of this, as of the following verses, is indisputably God’s hosts let loose against Job, the same which in the similar former description in Job 19:12 were designated his βְּ ?γεּ ?γִ ?ιν (comp. also Job 16:9; Job 16:12-14). The fearful, violent, and even irresistible character of their attacks on Job, especially as described in Job 30:13-14, is not suited to the miserable class described in Job 30:1-8. They are either angels of calamity, or at least diseases and other evils, or, generally speaking, the personified agencies of the Divine wrath, that Job has nere in mind. Job 30:12. On the right there rises up a brood, or troop. τִּ ?ψְ ?ηָ ?η, or according to another reading τִּ ?ψְ ?ηָ ?δ, lit. “a sprouting, a luxuriant flourishing plant.” [E. V., after the Targ. Rabbis, “the youth,” which is both etymologically and exegetically to be rejected.—E.] This calamitous brood (of diseases, etc.) rises on the right, in the sense that they appear against Job as his accusers (comp. Job 16:8); for the accusers before a tribunal took their place at the right of the accused; comp. Zechariah 3:1; Psalms 109:6.—They push away my feet, i. e., they drive me ever further and further into straits, they would leave me no place to stand on. (Ewald’s emendation ψַ ?βְ ?μָ ?ν—“they let loose then-feet, set them quickly in motion”—is unnecessary)—And cast up against me their destructive ways, in that they heap up their siege-walls against me, the object of their blockade and hostile assaults. ρμμ, as in Job 19:12, a passage which agrees almost verbally with the one before us, and so confirms our interpretation of the latter as referring to the Divine persecutions as an army beleaguering him. [Not only is this view favored by such a use of the same language as has been used elsewhere (Job 19) of the Divine persecutions, but also by the language itself. It is scarcely conceivable that Job should dignify the spiteful gibes and jeers of that rabble of young outcasts by comparing them to the solemn accusations of a judicial prosecution, or the regular siege of an army.—E.] Job 30:13. They tear down my path;i. e., by heaping up their ways of destruction they destroy my own heretofore undisturbed way of life.—They help to my destruction (comp. Zechariah 1:15)—they to whom there is no helper:i. e., who need no other help for their work of destruction, who can accomplish it alone. So correctly Stickel, Hahn, while most modern expositors find in c the idea of helplessness, or that of being despised or forsaken by all the world, to be expressed. Ewald however [so Con.] explains: “there is no helper against them” (appealing to Psalms 68:21); and Dillmann doubts whether there can be a satisfactory explanation of the text, which he holds to be corrupt. Job 30:14. As through a wide breach (λְּ ?τֶ ?ψֶ ?υ an elliptical comparison, like λַּ ?βַ ?πָּ ?α Job 30:5) they draw nigh [come on]; under the crash they roll onwards, i, e., of course to storm completely the fortress; comp. Job 16:14. The “crash,” ωׁ ?εֹ ?ΰָָ ?δ, is that of the falling ruins of the walls [breached by the assault] not that, e. g., of a roaring torrent, as Hitzig explains (Zeitschr. der D.—M. G., IX. 741), who at the same time attempts to give to τֶּ ?ψֶ ?υ the unheard of signification, “forest stream.” [Targ. also; “like the force of the far-extending waves of the sea,” after which probably E. V., “as a wide breaking-in of waters.” But the fig. is evidently that of an inrushing army.—E.] Job 30:15. Terrors are turned against me;i. e., sudden death-terrors; comp. Job 18:11; Job 18:14; Job 27:20; they pursue like the storm, (like an all-devastating hurricane) my dignity (πְ ?γִ ?αָ ?ϊִ ?ι) [not “soul,” E. V., probably after the analogy of λָּ ?αֹ ?εγ frequently in Psalms] that, viz., which was described in Job 29:20 seq. The 3d sing. fem. ϊִּ ?ψְ ?γּ ?σ referring to the plur. αַּ ?μָּ ?δεֹ ?ϊ as in Job 14:19; Job 27:20, and often.—And (in consequence of all that) like a cloud my prosperity is gone;i. e., it has vanished as quickly and completely—leaving no trace—as a cloud vanishes on the face of heaven. Comp. Job 7:9; Isaiah 44:22. [Paronomasia between ςָ ?α and ςָֽ ?αְ ?ψָ ?δ: “my prosperity like a vapor has vanished”]. 6. Continuation. Second Strophe: The unspeakable misery of the sufferer: Job 30:10-23.—And now (the third εְ ?ςַ ?ϊָּ ?δ, comp. Job 30:1; Job 30:8) my soul is poured out within me, dissolving in anguish and complaint, flowing forth in tears [“since the outward man is, as it were, dissolved in the gently flowing tears (Isaiah 15:3) his soul flows away as it were in itself, for the outward incident is but the manifestations and results of an inward action.” Del.] On ςָ ?μַ ?ι, “with me, in me,” comp. Job 10:1; Psalms 42:5 [E. V., too literally—“upon me”].—Days of suffering hold me fast, i. e., in their power, they will not depart from me with their evil effects [“ςֳ ?πִ ?ι with its verb, and the rest of its derivatives is the proper word for suffering, and especially the passion of the Servant of Jehovah.” Del.] Job 30:17. The night pierces my bones.—[“The night has been personified already, Job 3:2; and in general, as Herder once said, Job is the brother of Ossian for personifications: Night, (the restless night, Job 7:3 seq., in which every malady, or at least the painful feeling of it increases) pierces his bones from him.” Del.] Or a translation which is equally possible, “by night my bones are pierced” [E. V., etc.], inasmuch as πִ ?χַּ ?ψ can be Niph. as well as Piel. ξֵ ?ςָ ?μַ ?ι, lit. “away from me,” i. e., “so that they are detached from me.”—And my gnawers sleep not;i. e., either “my gnawing pains,” or “my worms, the maggots in my ulcers;” comp. ψξָּ ?δ. Job 7:5 [“and which in the extra biblical tradition of Job’s disease are such a standing feature, that the pilgrims to Job’s monastery even now-a-days take away with them thence these supposed petrified worms of Job.” Del.] In any case ςֹ ?χְ ?ψַ ?ι is to be explained after ςχψ Job 30:3. The signification “veins” (Blumenth), or “nerves, sinews” (LXX., νεῦρα, Parchon, Kimchi) [E. V.] is without support. Job 30:18. By omnipotence my garment is distorted;i. e., by God’s fearful power I am so emaciated that my garment hangs about me loose and flapping, no longer looking like an article of clothing (comp. Job 19:20). This is the only interpretation (Ewald, Delitzsch, Dillm., Kamphausen, [E. V., Con., Words., Ren.] etc.), that agrees with the contents of the second member, not that of the LXX., who read ιִ ?ϊְ ?τּ ?ωֹׁ instead of ιϊητωׂ, and understood God to be the subject: πολλῃ ἰσχύιἐπελάβετομουτῆςστολῆς; nor that of Hirzel: “by omnipotence my garment is exchanged,” i. e., for a sack; nor that of Schult. and Schlott.: “it (i. e., the suffering, the pain) is changed into [become] my garment,” etc. [with the idea of disguise, disfigurement].—It girds me round like the collar of my [closely-fitting] coat;i. e., my garment, which nowhere fits me at all, clings to my body as closely and tightly as a shirt-collar fastens around the neck. [“ιַ ?ΰַֽ ?ζְ ?ψֵ ?πִ ?ι, cingit me, is not merely the falling together of the outer garment, which was formerly filled out by the members of the body, but its appearance when the sick man wraps himself in it; then it girds him, fits close to him like his shirt-collar.” Del.] The LXX. already translate λְּ ?τִ ?ιλֻ ?ϊָּ ?πְ ?ϊִּ ?ι correctly: ὥσπερτὸ περιστόμιοντοῠ χιτῶνόςμου (Vulg. quasi capitium tunicζ) [E. V.].—To render λְּ ?τִ ?ι “as,” or “in proportion to” yields no rational sense (comp. also Exodus 28:32). Job 30:19. He (God) hath cast me into the mire (a sign of the deepest humiliation, comp. Job 16:15) so that I am become like dust and ashes (in consequence of the earth-like, dirty appearance of my skin, comp. Job 7:5, a theme to which he recurs again at the close of the chapter, Job 30:30) Job 30:20-23. A plaintive appeal to God, entreating help, but entreating it without a hope of being heard by God.—I stand there (praying) and Thou lookest fixedly at me, viz., without hearing me. This is the only interpretation of the second member which agrees well with the first, not that of Ewald: “if I remain standing, then Thou turnest Thy attention to me,” in order to oppose. [Ewald preferring the reading εϊϊλπο]. It is absolutely impossible with the Vulg., Saad., Gesen., Umbreit, Welte, [E. V., Ber.] to carry over the μֹ ?ΰ of the first member to εϊϊαπο—“I stand up, and Thou regardest me not.” [“The effect of μֹ ?ΰ cannot be repeated in the second member, after a change of subject, and in a clause which is dependent on the action of that subject.” Con.”] Job 30:21. Thou changest Thyself to a cruel being towards me.—ΰַ ?λְ ?ζָ ?αsζvus, comp. Job 41:2 [10], also the softened ΰֹ ?ιֵ ?α in the derivative passage, Isaiah 63:10.—On ωׂ ?θν in b, [with the strength of Thy hand Thou makest war upon me], comp. Job 16:9. Job 30:22, Raising me upon a stormy wind (as on a chariot, comp. 2 Kings 2:11) [not exactly “to the wind” (E. V., Con., Words., etc.), as though Job were made the sport of the wind, ludibrium ventis, but flung upon it, and whirled by it down from the heights of his prosperity.—E.]. Thou causest me to be borne away (comp. Job 27:21), and makest me to dissolve in the crash of the storm.—The last word is to be read after the K’thibh, with Ewald, Olsh., Del., etc., ϊְּ ?ωֻׁ ?εָּ ?δ, and to be regarded as an alternate form of ϊְּ ?ωׁ ?εּ ?ΰָ ?δ, or ϊְּ ?ωֻׁ ?ΰָ ?δ (comp. Job 36:29), and hence as being essentially synonymous with ωׁ ?εֹ ?ΰָ ?δ, Proverbs 1:27, “tempest,” and as to its construction an accus. of motion, like ξָ ?εֶ ?ϊ in the following verse. [Ges., Umbr., Noyes, Carey, read ϊְּ ?ωַׁ ?εֶּ ?δ, “Thou terrifiest me,” a verb unknown in Heb., and even in Chaldee used only in Ithpeal. See Delitzsch.] The K’ri ϊֻּ ?ωִׁ ?ιָּ ?δ (of which the LXX. have made ϊְּ ?ωׁ ?εּ ?ςָ ?δ) would give a meaning less in harmony with a: “Thou causest well-being to dissolve for me” [E. V.: “Thou dissolvest my substance.” But the other rendering is a far more suitable close to the whole description, which is fearfully magnificent, besides being entitled to the ordinary preference for the K’thibh]. Job 30:23. I know that Thou wilt bring me to death (or “bring me back”—δωια in the sense of ωׁ ?εּ ?α, Job 1:21) [“death being represented as essentially one with the dust of death, or even with non-existence,” Delitzsch, who, however, denies that ωׁ ?εּ ?α always and inexorably includes an “again”], into the house of assembly for all living.—The latter expression, which is to be understood in the sense of Job 3:17 seq., is in apposition to ξָ ?εֶ ?ϊ, and this is used here as a synonym of ωְׁ ?ΰεֹ ?μ, as in Job 28:22. Conclusion: Third Strophe: Job 30:24-31 : The diappointment of all his hopes. Job 30:24. But still doth not one stretch out the hand in falling?—ΰַ ?κְ here an adversative particle, as in Job 16:7; μֹ ?ΰ, however, interrogative for δֲ ?μֹ ?ΰ, comp. Job 2:10 b. The view that αְּ ?ςִ ?ι is compounded of αְּ and ςִ ?ι, “ruin, fall, destruction” (comp. Micah 1:6, also the more frequent plur., ςִ ?ιִּ ?ιν, ruins), is favored by the parallel expression αְּ ?τִ ?ιγεֹ in the second member. ωָׁ ?μַ ?ηιָ ?γ finally, in the sense of stretching out the hands in supplication, prayer, is at least indirectly supported by Exodus 17:11 seq., and similar passages (such as Exodus 9:29; 1 Kings 8:38; Isaiah 1:15; Isaiah 65:2, etc.).—Or in his overthrow (will one not lift up) a cry on that account?—The interrogative δֲ ?μΰֹ ?=μֹ ?ΰ extends its influence still over the second member. The suffix in αְּ ?τִ ?ιγεֹ refers back to the indefinite subject in ιִ ?ωְׁ ?μַ ?η, and belongs therefore to the same one overtaken by the fall, and threatened with destruction (τִּ ?ιγ as in Job 12:5). Respecting μָ ?δֶ ?ο “on that account, therefore,” see Ewald, § 217, d; and on ωַׁ ?εְ ?ςָ ?δ = ωׁ ?εַּ ?ς, “a cry,” comp. Job 36:19 a.—It is possible that instead of the harsh expression μָ ?δֶ ?οωׁ ?εַּ ?ς we should read something like μֹ ?ΰιְ ?ωַׁ ?εֵּ ?ςַ (according to Dillmann’s conjecture). On the whole the explanation here propounded of this verse, which was variously misunderstood by the ancient versions and expositors, gives the only meaning suited to the context, for which reason the leading modern commentators (Ewald, Hirzel, Delitzsch, Dillmann, and on the whole Hahn, etc.) adhere to it. [Delitzsch thus explains the connection: “He knows that he is being hurried forth to meet death; he knows it, and has also already made himself so familiar with this thought, that the sooner he sees an end put to this his sorrowful life, the better—nevertheless does one not stretch out one’s hand when one is falling? … or in his downfall raise a cry for help?” As Dillmann remarks, this meaning is striking in itself (besides being simple and natural), and is in admirable harmony with the context. The E. V., after some of the Rabbis, takes ςִ ?ι in the sense of “grave,” although the meaning of its rendering is obscure. It would seem to be that God will not stretch out His hand, in the way of deliverance, to the grave, although when He begins to destroy, men cry out for mercy. Wordsworth translates: “But only will He (God) not stretch out His hand (to help, see Proverbs 31:20; Habakkuk 3:10) upon me, who am like a desolation or a ruin? And will not crying therefore (reach Him) in His destruction of me?”—Others (Ges., Con., Noyes, Carey, take αְּ ?ςִ ?ι (from αָּ ?ςָ ?δ) to mean “prayer:” “Yea, there is no prayer, when He stretches out the hand; nor when He destroys can they cry for help,” which is not so well suited to the connection, and is against the parallelism which makes it probable that αְּ before ςִ ?ι is a preposition as before τּ ?ιγ.—E.] Job 30:25. Or did I not weep for him that was in trouble? lit. for “the hard of day,” for “him that is afflicted by a day” (a day of calamity). On b comp. Job 19:12; Job 19:15 seq. The ἄπ. λεγ. ςָ ?βַ ?ν, “to be troubled, grieved,” is not different in sense from ΰָ ?βַ ?ν, Isaiah 19:10. Job 30:26. For I hoped for good, and there came evil, etc.—For the thought comp. Isaiah 59:9; Jeremiah 14:19. Respecting εַ ?ΰֲ ?ιַ ?ηֲ ?μָ ?δ (Imperf. cons. Piel), comp. Ewald, § 232, h; the strengthening Ξָ ?δ in the final vowel as in Job 1:15. Job 30:27. In regard to the “boiling” (ψϊη as in Job 41:23 [31]) of the bowels, comp. Lamentations 1:20; Lamentations 2:11; Isaiah 16:11; Jeremiah 31:20, etc. [“My bowels boiled,” E. V., does not quite express the Pual ψֻ ?ϊְּ ?ηεּ, “are made to boil,” the result of an external cause.] On χִ ?γֵּ ?ν, “to encounter any one, to fall upon him” [E. V. “prevent” obsolete], comp. Psalms 18:6 [6]. Job 30:28. I go along blackened, without the heat of the sun, i. e. not by the heat of the sun, not as one that is burnt by the heat of the sun. Since ηַ ?ξָּ ?δ (comp. Son 6:10; Isaiah 30:26) denotes the sun as regards its heat, αְּ ?μֹ ?ΰηΧ (instead of which the Pesh. and Vulg. read αְּ ?μֹ ?ΰηֵ ?ξָ ?δ) is not to be explained “without the sun-light=in inconsolable darkness” (so Hahn, Delitzsch, Kamp.) [and probably E. V.: “I went mourning without the sun”]; which is all the less probable in that χֹ ?γֵ ?ψ can scarcely denote anything else than the dirty appearance of a mourner, covered with dust and ashes (comp. Job 7:5), such a blackening of the skin accordingly as would present an obvious contrast with that produced by the heat of the sun. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/lange/ The Second Stage of the DisentanglementJob 33-37Elihu’s Discourses, devoted to proving that there can be really no undeserved suffering, that on the contrary the sufferings decreed for those who are apparently righteous are dispensations of divine love, designed to purify and to sanctify them through chastisement: The first half of the positive solution of the problemI: ELIHU’S , AND THE OF HIS , GIVING THE REASONS FOR HIS Job 32:1 to Job 33:71. Elihu’s appearance (related in prose) Job 32:1-6 a1So these three men ceased to answer Job, because he was righteous in his own eyes. 2Then was kindled the wrath of Elihu the son of Barachel the Buzite, of the kindred of Earn; against Job was his wrath kindled, because he justified himself rather than God. 3Also against his three friends was his wrath kindled, because they had found no answer, and yet had condemned Job 4 Now Elihu had waitedtill Job had spoken, because they were elder than he. 5When Elihu saw that therewas no answer in the mouth of these three men, then his wrath was kindled. 6And Elihu the son of Barachel the Buzite answered and said: 2. An explanation addressed to the previous speakers, showing why he had taken part in their controversy: Job 32:6-10 6    b I am young, and ye are very old; wherefore I was afraid, and durst not show you mine opinion. 7    I said, Days should speak, and multitude of years should teach wisdom. 8    But there is a spirit in man; and the inspiration of the Almighty giveth them understanding. 9    Great men are not always wise; neither do the aged understand judgment. 10    Therefore I said, Hearken to me; I also will show mine opinion. 3. Setting forth that he was justified in taking part, because the friends had showed, and still showed themselves unable to refute Job: Job 32:11-22 11    Behold, I waited for your words; I gave ear to your reasons, whilst ye searched out what to say. 12    Yea, I attended unto you, and behold, there was none of you that convinced Job, or that answered his words. 13    Lest ye should say: “We have found out wisdom: God thrusteth him down, not man.” 14    Now he hath not directed his words against me; neither will I answer him with your speeches. 15    They were amazed, they answered no more: they left off speaking. 16    When I had waited (for they spake not, but stood still, and answered no more); 17    I said, I will answer also my part, I also will show mine opinion. 18    For I am full of matter, the spirit within me constraineth me. 19    Behold, ray belly is as wine which hath no vent, it is ready to burst like new bottles. 20    I will speak, that I may be refreshed: I will open my lips and answer. 21    Let me not, I pray you, accept any man’s person, neither let me give flattering titles unto man. 22    For I know not to give flattering titles: in so doing my Maker would soon take me away. 4. A special appeal to Job to listen calmly to him [Elihu], as a mild judge of his guilt and weakness: Job 33:1-71    Wherefore, Job, I pray thee, hear my speeches, and hearken to all my words. 2    Behold, now I have opened my mouth, my tongue hath spoken in my mouth. 3    My words shall be of the uprightness of my heart; and my lips shall utter knowledge clearly. 4    The Spirit of God hath made me, and the breath of the Almighty hath given me life. 5    If thou canst answer me, set thy words in order before me, stand up. 6    Behold, I am according to thy wish in God’s stead: I also am formed out of the clay. 7    Behold, my terror shall not make thee afraid, neither shall my hand be heavy upon thee. FIRST ; OF MAN’S GUILT BEFORE GOD Job 33:8-33a. Preparatory: Reproof of Job’s confidence in his entire innocence: Job 33:8-118    Surely thou hast spoken in mine hearing, and I have heard the voice of thy words, saying: 9    I am clean without transgression, I am innocent, neither is there iniquity in me. 10    Behold, He findeth occasions against me, He counteth me for His enemy: 11    He putteth my feet in the stocks, He marketh all my paths. b. Didactic discussion of the true relation of sinful men to God, who seeks to warn and to save them by manifold dispensations and communications from above; Job 33:12-3012    Behold, in this thou art not just: I will answer thee, that God is greater than man. 13    Why dost thou strive against Him? for He giveth not account of any of His matters. 14    For God speaketh once, yea twice, yet man perceiveth it not. 15    In a dream, in a vision of the night, when deep sleep falleth upon men, in slumberings upon the bed; 16    then He openeth the ears of men, and sealeth their instruction, 17    that He may withdraw man from his purpose, and hide pride from man. 18    He keepeth back his soul from the pit, and his life from perishing by the sword. 19    He is chastened also with pain upon his bed, and the multitude of his bones with strong pain: 20    so that his life abhorreth bread, and his soul dainty meat. 21    His flesh is consumed away, that it cannot be seen; and his bones that were not seen stick out. 22    Yea, his soul draweth near unto the grave, and his life to the destroyers. 23    If there be a messenger with him, an interpreter, one among a thousand, to show unto man his uprightness; 24    then He is gracious unto him, and saith, Deliver him from going down to the pit: I have found a ransom. 25    His flesh shall be fresher than a child’s; he shall return to the days of his youth: 26    he shall pray unto God, and He will be favorable unto him; and he shall see His face with joy; for He will render unto man His righteousness. 27    He looketh upon men, and if any say, I have sinned, and perverted that which was right, and it profited me not; 28    He will deliver his soul from going into the pit, and his life shall see the light. 29    Lo, all these things worketh God oftentimes with man, 30    to bring back his soul from the pit, to be enlightened with the light of the living. c. Conclusion; Calling upon Job to give an attentive hearing to the discourses by which he would further instruct him: Job 33:31-3331    Mark well, O Job, hearken unto me; hold thy peace, and I will speak. 32    If thou hast anything to say, answer me: speak, for I desire to justify thee. 33    If not, hearken unto me: hold thy peace, and I shall teach thee wisdom. AND 1. On the general subject of the genuineness of Elihu’s discourses, comp. Introd., § 10, as well as below, Doctrinal and Ethical Remarks.—The circumstantiality of the twofold introduction to these discourses—first that of the author in prose, then the self-introduction of Elihu (Job 32:6 b—Job 33:7) which latter again consists of three subdivisions—is to be explained by the fact that in Elihu there was to be introduced the representative of a new stand-point, which had not yet received its statement, differing as it did from that of all the former speakers. For neither Job’s one-sided denial of his guilt nor the blunt and rough way in which he had been attacked, satisfies this new speaker. He appears to speak for and against Job, whose “better self” he in some measure represents (comp. Victor Andreδ, p. 139); hence the three stages of his self-introduction: (1) the captatio benevolentiζ with which he begins; or the apology for his youth addressed to all the former speakers (Job 32:6 b–10); (2) the reprimand administered to the three friends, as having shown themselves incompetent to refute Job (Job 32:11-22);—and (3) the appeal to Job to give a hearing to his instructions (Job 33:1-7) an appeal full of earnest admonition and loving encouragement. The last of these divisions provides a direct transition to the first of Elihu’s discourses proper (Job 33:8-33), in which he sets forth the foundation of Job’s suffering—the universal sinfulness and guilt of men before God, this discourse again occupying three divisions, of which the middle, being the longest (Job 32:12-22), contains the proper didactic exposition of the subject, while the first, by citing the propositions of Job which are to be refuted, prepares the way for the discussion; and the third furnishes, together with a practical conclusion, the transition to the didactic discourse which follows. The most of these divisions are at the same time coincident each with a single strophe, except that the long middle sections (Job 32:11-22 and Job 33:12-30) are subdivided into several strophes, the former into two, the latter into four, together with a short epiphonema of two verses (Job 32:29–30). 2. Introduction in prose (although with poetic accents—comp. above, § 3, p. 264) [the poetic mode of accentuation retained, because a change in the middle of the book, and especially in a piece of such small compass appeared awkward,: Del.] Job 32:1-6 a.—Then the three men ceased to answer Job. This notification occurs first here, not after Job 26. or Job 28., because it was only through the last monologues of Job that the defeat of the three opponents became complete.—Because he was righteous in his own eyes;i. e., because he would not admit that his suffering was in any degree whatever the consequence of his guilt; a statement which refers back in particular to the contents of Job 31. Job 32:2. Then was kindled the wrath of Elihu, the son of Barachel, etc.ΰֱ ?μִ ?ιδεּ ?ΰ, which is written below without the final ΰ (Job 32:4; Job 35:1) signifies—“my God is he,” and appears also as an Israelitish name (1 Samuel 1:1; 1 Chronicles 12:20). The Elihu of our passage is a Nahorite, of the tribe of Buz (αּ ?εּ ?ζ), who in Genesis 22:21 is mentioned as the brother of Uz, and the second son of Nahor, and whose tribe, according to Jeremiah 25:23, like Dedan and Tema, belonged to the inhabitants of the Arabian desert. The “family of Ram” is mentioned only here. The identification of the name ψָ ?ν with ΰֲ ?ψָ ?ν is inadmissible, for ψָ ?ν is simply the name of a family, not of a people. The Aramaic origin of the Buzites, according to the above description, admits indeed of no doubt, and the same may be said respecting the poet’s purpose in that connection to impart an Aramaic coloring to Elihu’s discourses. Lightfoot and Rosenmόller curiously imagine that under the character of Elihu the poet has concealed himself, and that this explains the particularity with which, in opposition to what is characteristic of the book elsewhere, he describes the origin of the new speaker. This detailed account of Elihu’s genealogy is undoubtedly a little singular, but it may be satisfactorily explained by the poet’s desire to represent him as a kinsman of the same race with Job, or it may be his desire to distinguish between him and some other well-known person of the name. In respect to the question whether Elihu’s position is that of “one not simply near to the Abrahamitic revelation, but of one standing within the pale of it” (as Vilmar thinks, l. c.), nothing definite can be established from the genealogical statement before us.—Respecting the name αָּ ?ψַֽ ?λְ ?ΰֵ ?μ (instead of which some MSS. write αַּ ?ψַ ?λְ ?ΰֵ ?μ, with a latent Daghesh). It signifies—“may God-bless!” and is thus distinguished as an imperative formation from the indicative of the specifically Israelitish name αֶּ ?ψֶ ?λְ ?ιָ ?α (“Jehovah blesseth”).—Because he declared himself righteous before God. φִ ?ψֵּ ?χ instead of the Hiph. which, is elsewhere more common in this signification, occurs again Job 33:32, and often in Jerem. and Ezek.—ξֵ ?ΰֱ ?μֹ ?δִ ?ιν, not “more than God, at the expense of God” (Ew., Delitz.) [E. V., Con., Nov., Carey, Words., etc.], but “before,” ξִ ?ο accordingly as in Job 4:17. The comparison of the passage in Job 40:8 is scarcely sufficient to confirm the former rendering. Job 32:3 states how far the conduct of the three friends had caused Elihu’s discontent:—because they found no answer, and still condemned Job. So—taking εְ in εַ ?ιַּ ?ψְ ?ωִׁ ?ιςεּ adversatively—may the words be rendered with the greatest probability (so Hirzel, Ewald) [E. V., Noy., Con., Carey, Rodwell, Elz., Schlottm., Renan]. For the fact that the friends had condemned Job notwithstanding their inability to answer him aggravates the guilt of the three in Eliun’s eyes; and that he really attributed to them double guilt, as compared with Job, is evident from the passage which follows, and which involves more rigid censure of the friends (Job 32:11 seq. ; 15 seq.) than of Job (comp. also Job 32:5). With this interpretation agrees essentially that of Delitzsch and Kamphausen: “because they, from their inability to answer him, condemned him.” [“The fut. consec. describes the condemnation as the result of their inability to hit upon the right answer; it was a miserable expedient to which they had recourse.” Del.]. The language admits still further of the explanation of Hahn and Dillmann (with the influence of the negation extended to the second member): “because they did not find an answer, and (consequently) did not, condemn him [i.e., secure his condemnation, by “stripping him of his self-righteousness”]. The opinion of the Masoretes, that in this passage we have one of the 18Tiqquney Sopherim (comp. on Job 7:20), according to which we should read ΰֶ ?ϊΞδָ ?ΰֱ ?μֹ ?δִ ?ιν instead of ΰֶ ?ϊΞΰִ ?ιּ ?εֹ ?α, is refuted by Job 40:8, where it is not the friends, but Job, who is said to have shown himself to be one who had condemned God. Job 32:4. But Elihu had waited for Job with words.—ηִ ?λָּ ?δ pluperf., comp. Ewald, § 135, a; i. e., he had waited until Job’s speeches were ended, until he had spoken his last word in the controversy, the reason being:—because they were older than he in days (μְ ?ιָ ?ξִ ?ιν, as in Job 30:1, and below Job 32:6), i. e., because he was the youngest of all,—younger than all the former speakers. 3. First section of Elihu’s introduction: captatio benevolentiζ, addressed to all the former speakers: Job 32:6 b–10.—Young am I in days, and ye are hoary (ιְ ?ωִׁ ?ιωִׁ ?ιν as in Job 12:12; Job 15:10; Job 29:8); therefore I was afraid and feared. ζημ in Heb. elsewhere “to crawl,” here in the sense of “fearing,” customary in Aramaic, but not met with elsewhere in the O. T. [Carey: “I did slink”]. Also γֵּ ?ςַ for γֵּ ?ςַ ?ϊ is an expression peculiar to the Aramaizing constructions of Elihu’s language (comp. again Job 32:10; Job 32:17; Job 36:3; Job 37:16), while on the contrary ηִ ?εָּ ?δ “to declare, to communicate,” occurs else-where in our book. [“It becomes manifest even here that the Elihu section has in part a peculiar use of the language.” Del.]. Job 32:7. Respecting the plur. ιεֹ ?γִ ?ιςεּ with ψֹ ?αωָׁ ?πִ ?ιν, comp. Job 21:21. Job 32:8. Still the spirit it is in mortal man … which gives them understanding. ΰָ ?λֵ ?οverum, only here by Elihu, instead of ΰεּ ?μָ ?ν, which is elsewhere customary in this sense. The subjects ψεּ ?ηַ εβεΧ and πִ ?ωְׁ ?ξַ ?ϊεβεΧ have for their common predicate δִ ?ιΰ with ϊְּ ?αִ ?ιπֵ ?ν at the close of the second member as a relative clause of closer specification. The “spirit in man” is the principle of his life and thought wrought into him by the Spirit of God; here, as also in Job 27:3; Job 33:4; Job 34:14, identical with the “breath of the Almighty,” the Divine creative breath (Genesis 2:7); comp. also Ecclesiastes 12:7. [Noyes happily quotes the following from Milton, in the preface to his Reason of Church Government, urged against Prelaty: “And if any man think I undertake a task too difficult for my years, I trust, through the supreme enlightening assistance, far otherwise; for my years, be they few or many, what imports it? So they bring reason, let that be looked on”].—ΰֱ ?πεֹ ?ωׁ is used collectively, as is evident from the plur. suffix in b referring to it. Job 32:9. Not the aged are wise; lit. “not the great” (ψַ ?αִּ ?ιν) [grandζvi], i. e., great in years, comp. the πολυχρόνιοι of the LXX., also Genesis 25:23; and φָ ?ςִ ?ιψ, small = young, above (Job 32:6 b). Job 32:10. Therefore I say: Hearken to me!—The Imperfect singular, ωִׁ ?ξְ ?ςָ ?δΞμּ ?ι, is used distributively, applying to each individual of those who are summoned to hear, (not referring specially to Job, to whom Elihu does not address himself until below in Job 33:1 seq.). The ancient versions, except the Targ., as well as some MSS. read ωִׁ ?ξְ ?ςεּ ?—an emendation to relieve the difficulty [arising from El.’s addressing the friends in the plur. in the next verse]. I also will declare my knowledge (comp. Job 32:6, b). [Rather, more modestly—“I will declare my knowledge, even I.” Words.]. Respecting the appearance of vain self-praise, of which Elihu is guilty in consequence of these and the preceding expressions, comp. below Doctrinal and Ethical Remarks, No. 2. 4. Second section of Elihu’s introduction: Showing his claims to speak, in contrast with the friends, as the feeble and incompetent opponents of Job: Job 32:11-22.—a. Address to the friends touching their lack of skill in refuting Job. Behold, I waited for your words; or for words from you.” γִּ ?αְ ?ψֵ ?ιλֶ ?ν are not the words actually uttered by them (Stick., Hahn, Schlott.), but those for which Elihu had waited in vain, expecting that they would produce them, more particularly explained in b as being their words of intelligence, speeches full of wisdom (ϊְּ ?αεּ ?πεֹ ?ϊ). The construction of ΰָ ?ζִ ?ιο, contracted form for ΰַ ?ΰֲ ?ζִ ?ιο) with ςַ ?γ shows clearly enough that the object of the hearkening or listening was wholly in expectation. Until ye might find out replies. ξִ ?μִּ ?ιο, a second parallel term to γαψιν, can denote here only words from the friends, suited to refute Job, such words as they had shown themselves unable to “search out,” or “to think out.” (ηχψ). Job 32:12. And unto you I gave heed.—ςָֽ ?γֵ ?ιλֵ ?νmeans here ΰֵ ?μֶ ?ιλֶ ?ν; or it may mean giving heed until they should produce a real confutation of Job. [Carey translates ςַ ?γ the three times it occurs in Job 32:10-11 “to the utmost of”—perhaps a little too artificially. It does however express more emphatically than the simple μְ the act of close attention.—E.]. Job 32:13. That ye may not say; or “since ye do not say, etc.”—Respecting the dissuasive particle τֶּ ?ο “that not,” comp. Ew., § 337, b. We found wisdom (i. e., with Job): God can smite him, not man.—That is, we have come upon such superior wisdom in Job that only God can drive him out of the field (πγσdiscutere, dispellere, used elsewhere of the chasing of chaff, straw, smoke—comp. Psalms 1:4; Psalms 68:3 [2]) [“chosen here with great propriety, because after every answer from the three Job showed himself again in the arena.” Dillm.]. Only this explanation, adopted by most moderns, gives a meaning that is intelligent, and suited to the context, not that of the ancient commentators (also more recently of Rosenmόller, Arnheim, Welte, etc.): “Only do not say we have brought up against him true wisdom, to wit: that God Himself contends against, and routs him out of the-field (by the severe sufferings which He has decreed for him” [and so substantially Lee, Bernard. According to another explanation the second member is spoken by Elihu, not the friends, the general meaning being: Ye have been silenced, lest ye should become proud and boast of your wisdom, and that his defeat may come visibly from God and not from men. So Good, Wordsworth, Carey, Wemyss, Rodwell, Barnes, most of whom make the first member dependent on the second; e. g. Rodwell: “Lest ye should say—‘We hare found out wisdom,’—El, not man, shall vanquish him.”—Schlottmann explains: “Say not: We have found wisdom, i. e. we for our part have not erred, we have hit the exact truth, but God must smite him, not man, i. e. Job is so obstinate that the most exhaustive proofs of our doctrine fail to affect him, wherefore God only can convict him of his error.”] Job 32:14. For he bath not arrayed words against me;i. e. he has produced no argument which actually convinces me of his innocence, ςָ ?ψַ ?κְ ?sensu forensi as in Job 13:18; Job 23:4, The whole verse introduced by εְ ?μΰ with a fin. verb following, forms a clause subordinate to that which precedes, like Job 13:3 (comp. Ewald, § 341, a). b. A declaration respecting the unavoidable necessity of his taking part in the colloquy, the friends although still referred to being spoken of in the third person. Job 32:15. They are confounded, they answer no more, or “without answering again” (comp. Ewald, § 849, a), words are fled away from them, i.e. have deserted them; δςϊιχ here accordingly intransitive; “to depart, to wander away,” like Genesis 12:8; Genesis 26:22, not transitive, as in Job 9:5 (against Hirzel). Job 32:16. And should I (still) await, because they speak not?—This interrogative rendering of the Perf. consec. εְ ?δεֹ ?ηַ ?μְ ?ϊִּ ?ι is the only one that yields a suitable meaning, not the affirmative, which used to be the prevalent one, “and I waited, because,” etc., by which the verse would express a quite unendurable tautology with Job 32:11-12. Job 32:17. So then I also will answer my part, i.e. what comes to my part (comp. Job 15:2; Proverbs 18:23); I will in like manner throw the weight of my opinion into the scales. [“Elihu speaks more in the scholastic tone of controversy than the three.” Delitzsch. The ΰַ ?σΞΰֲ ?πִ ?ι twice repeated is far from implying conceit or arrogance on the part of the speaker. It is possible indeed to explain it, with Barnes, “even I,” notwithstanding my youth and inexperience, in the tone of modest self-depreciation. More probably however it indicates rather the independent, individual position of the speaker, differing as it did from the rest, as we should say—“on my part.” In any case, as Schultens remarks: jucunda et decora formula; scire meum—quantum mihi quidem sciere, et percipere datum. Frustra sunt, qui hζc ad arrogantiam detorquent.” E.] The Fut. Hiph., ΰַ ?ςֲ ?πֶ ?δ, expresses as e. g.Eccles. v. 19 (see on the passage); Hosea 2:23, etc., the strengthened sense of Kal: “to make answer, to put in a reply.” Ewald renders quite too artificially: “so then I also plough my field” (ΰςπδ Hiph. from the other root ςπδ, “to be sunk”), which would be proverbial for—“I also begin my speech.” Job 32:18 seq. describe the powerful inward impulse to speak, which Elihu discovers is himself, and which makes it impossible for him to be silent. The spirit (Job 32:8) constraineth me in my inward part; lit. “the spirit of my inward part, of my belly” (αִ ?θְ ?πִ ?ι), comp. Job 15:2; Job 15:35. Respecting the scriptio defectivaξָ ?μֵ ?ϊִ ?ι, in a, comp. on Job 1:21. Job 32:19. Behold, my interior is like wine which is not opened, i. e. to which there is no vent, so that it threatens to burst its vessel. It is of course new, fresh wine that is intended, as in the parallel New Testament passages, which refer to this place, Matthew 9:17; Luke 5:39, which show moreover that the “new bottles” in b can be none other than such as are “filled with new wine,” so that the attribute “new” denotes not the firmness of the material of the bottles, but rather the age and the quality of their contents. Furthermore, ιִ ?αָּ ?χֵ ?ςַ is neither a relative clause to ΰֹ ?αεֹ ?ϊ (Hirzel) [Ges., Con.], nor an adverbial subordinate clause—“when it will burst,”—but the direct predicate of αִּ ?θְ ?πִ ?ι, which indeed is feminine, but here with the passive, is treated as the grammatical object; comp. Job 22:9. The LXX. read ηֲ ?ψָ ?ωִׁ ?ιν, and rendered the preceding ΰֹ ?αεֹ ?ϊ in the sense of “bellows:” ὤσπερφυσητὴρχαλκέως. The figure thus arising is not unsuitable; still, according to the preceding explanation, there is no sufficient ground for departing from the Masoretic reading. On Job 32:21 comp. Job 13:8. [The distinction between ΰַ ?μ and μֹ ?ΰ is not to be overlooked; the former expressing the subjective wish, or purpose; the latter the objective fact. E.]. Job 32:22 gives the reason for that which is declared in Job 32:21, b:For I know not how to flatter. ΰֲ ?λַ ?πֶּ ?δ is logically subordinate to the preceding μֹ ?ΰιָ ?γַ ?ςְ ?ϊִּ ?ι, and is used accordingly for the Inf. λַ ?πּ ?εֹ ?ϊ, or for μְ ?λַ ?πּ ?εֹ ?ϊ; comp. Ewald, § 285, c—Otherwise my Maker would speedily snatch me away; lit. “lift me up;” ιִ ?ωָּׂ ?ΰֵ ?πִ ?ι [which “seems designedly to harmonize with ςωֵֹׁ ?πִ ?ι” Delitzsch, and perhaps involves a play on ΰֶ ?ωָּ ?ΰ, Job 32:21; Dillmann], an expression derived from a stormy wind; comp, Job 27:21; 2 Kings 2:16. The Imperf. here with a modal force [= would, or might]; comp. Ewald, § 136, f. 5. Third section of Elihu’s Introduction: Calling on Job to listen calmly to the discourses of instruction and admonition which follow: Job 33:1-7. Job 33:1. Nevertheless hear now, O Job, my discourses. εְ ?ΰεּ ?μָ ?ν interruptive, and introducing to something new, like verumtamen; com. Job 1:11; Job 11:5; Job 12:7; Job 14:18 and often. The particular address to Job by name, which it is true occurs only in the mouth of Elihu (besides here again in Job 33:31 and Job 37:14), has nothing in it that is especially surprising, seeing that in every case it serves as a special summons to Job, in distinction from the three friends. Job 33:2. The circumstantiality with which Elihu announces here the beginning of his discourse is by no means without significance. It is designed to call attention to the importance of that which he has to say to him, and it may be compared in this respect with introductory formulas of the New Testament, such as Matthew 5:2; Acts 10:34; and especially 2 Corinthians 6:11. [“My tongue hath begun to speak,” lit. my tongue hath spoken in my palate (the latter word a synecdoche). The Pret. γαψδ denotes here the present, but as an act reaching over into the present out of the past. This, we have judged, called for the free translation which we have given.” Schlottm.] Job 33:3. My words are the uprightness of my heart; they are the honest open expression of the thought of my heart, precisely that therefore which Job had so painfully missed in the three friends (see Job 6:25).—And the knowledge of my lips—they declare it purely.—The “knowledge of my lips” is either prefixed as casus absolutus, “and as touching the knowledge of my lips—they speak it purely;” or as the object: “and what my lips know, that,” etc.—αָּ ?ψεּ ?ψ can be a predicate accusative [“and knowledge that is pure my lips declare”], referring to γַּ ?ςַ ?ϊ, which is elsewhere also used in the masculine (e. g.Proverbs 2:10; Proverbs 14:6); but it can just as well be taken adverbially (comp. Ewald, § 279, a). Job 33:4. The Spirit of God hath made me, etc.—The object of this appeal to the derivation of Elihu’s spirit from God’s Spirit must be essentially the same with that of the similar utterance in Job 32:8. It is not a special, nor an altogether wonderful, prophetic inspiration that Elihu here asserts for himself; he simply claims that it is a universal human wisdom residing in his spirit by virtue of his innate dignity as a man, on the basis of which he here applies himself to instruct Job. It is, so to speak, the humanistic, the genuine original and unperverted human character of his knowledge and experimental wisdom, to which Elihu appeals, when, as a young man, he presents himself to the more aged Job as his instructor. It is to this genuinely human character of his wisdom that he calls attention, both in this passage, where he emphasizes the divine origin of his spiritual life (Job 33:4-5), and in the following, where he sets forth his participation in the material part of man’s nature, in his earthly human corporeity (Job 33:6 seq.). The older Church exegesis readily availed itself of this verse as an argument for the divine trinity, on the ground that it mentions (1) Deus omnipotens: (2) Spiritus Dei (= Sapientia s. Filius); and (3) Spiraculum Dei (= Sp. Sanctus). So e. g. Cocceius on the passage; approximately also Starke. Job 33:5. If thou canst, then answer me (δωׁ ?ια as in Job 32:14), draw up against me (ςֶ ?ψְ ?λָ ?δ scil. ξִ ?μִּ ?ιο, see Job 32:14; μְ ?τָ ?πַ ?ι, lit. “before me,” here “against me”), take thy stand, viz. for the controversy, take thy post; the same expression used 1 Samuel 17:16 of Goliath’s putting himself in a military attitude, and challenging the Israelites to combat.—[“The very ring of the words in Heb. has in them the tone of haughty defiance.” Schlottmann.] Job 33:6. Behold, I am God’s, as thou art;i. e., I stand no nearer to him; I am, like thee, His creature. [The μְ here may be either the μְ of possession, dependence, according to the explanation just given (comp. μεֹ, Job 12:16); or the μְ of relation: “I am like thee in relation to God.” In our relation to Him we are both equal. The rendering of E. V., Bernard, Barnes: “Behold, I am according to thy wish in God’s stead,” is much less suitable to the connection, and less in harmony with Elihu’s claims.—E.]—Out of clay was I also formed: lit. “out of clay was I also cut off, nipped off” (Del.). The verb χψυ (lit. to nip, to pinch), which forcibly and onomatopoetically describes the action of the potter in forming his vessels, is found in Pual only here. Comp. Job 10:9, and the parallel passages there cited. Job 33:7. Behold, my terror will not affright thee:i. e. in view of this my genuinely human and earthly character, thou needest not fear an unequal contest with me, as would be the case against God, whom thou didst pray, that “His majesty might not terrify thee.” The passage contains an unmistakable allusion to Job 9:34; Job 13:21,—to the latter passage also by means of the hapax legom. ΰֶ ?αֶ ?σ, “pressure, weight,” which appears here in place of the like-sounding λַ ?σ, which is there used. The LXX. (ἡ χείρμου) [E. V. “my hand”] read λַּ ?τִ ?ι also in the present passage, but disregard in so doing the Hebrew usage, which is wont everywhere else to connect the verb λָּ ?αֵ ?γ with ιָ ?γ, not λַּ ?σ. 6. The first speech of Elihu.—a. Reference to Job’s objectionable language, in which he maintains his entire innocence in opposition to God, his hostile persecutor: Job 33:8-11.—Surely, thou hast said in mine hearing, etc.—The restrictive rendering of ΰַ ?κְ = “only” [not otherwise than] (Ewald, Hahn, Dillmann, etc.) is less suitable here than the affirmative: “verily, surely” (Rosenm., Hirzel, Umbreit, Delitzsch—in general most of the moderns) [and so E. V.: “To say anything αְּ ?ΰָ ?ζְ ?πֵ ?ι of another is in Hebrew equivalent to saying it not secretly, and so as to be liable to misconstruction, but aloud and distinctly.” Del.]. Job 33:9-11. A collection of several objectionable utterances by Job, which are cited in part literally, in part according to the sense, and with the refutation of which ail that follows to the close of these discourses is occupied, so that these three verses contain to some extent the common theme of all the four discourses of Elihu (comp. below on Job 35:1).—Pure am I, without (αְּ ?μִ ?ι as in Job 31:39) wickedness. Comp. Job 9:21; Job 10:7; Job 16:17; Job 23:10; Job 27:5 seq. The word ηַ ?σ (lit. tersus, lotus, rubbed down smooth, grown fine) used here in b as a synonym of ζַ ?κְ, was not used by Job, and occurs only here. The same may be said of ϊְּ ?πεּ ?ΰεϊ, “oppositions, hostilities, alienations” (comp. Numbers 14:34) in Job 33:10 a, with which are to be compared utterances of Job like those in Job 10:13 seq.; Job 19:11; Job 30:21. In regard to Job 33:10 b comp. Job 13:24; and with Job 33:11 comp. Job 13:27, which passage Elihu quotes with literal accuracy, doubtless because he had taken particular offense at this accusation of God as Job’s jailer and most crafty watcher. 7. Continuation.—b. Didactic exhibition of the true relation of sinful men to God, who seeks to turn them to Himself by manifold dispensations and communications, to wit: a. By the voice of conscience in dreams; Job 33:12-18.—Behold, in this thou art not right, I answer thee (not: “I will answer thee,” Hirzel [E. V.], etc.). ζֹ ?ΰϊ, accus. of nearer definition to μΰΞφγχϊ refers to the citations from Job’s speeches in Job 33:9-11. Respecting φγχ in the signification “to be right,” comp. Job 11:2. The second member gives the reason for this assertion that Job, with his suspicions of God’s greatness and love, was in the wrong: for Eloah is greater than mortal man, will not therefore after the manner of man, play the part of a hateful or vindictive persecutor of feeble creatures. [Del. explains: “God is too exalted to enter into a defence of Himself against such vain-glorying interwoven with accusations against Him. And for this reason Elihu will enter the lists for God.” But a deeper and more satisfactory meaning is obtained by the explanation in the Commentary. God is too great to be actuated by the petty malignities which Job had imputed to Him. Job was wrong; God is just, because He is great.” E. V. and several commentators connect ΰֶ ?ςֱ ?πֶ ?κָּ with what follows, either rendering λִּ ?ι “that,” or “for” with Delitzsch’s explanation. But the Masoretic accentuation connects it with what precedes, and this harmonizes better with the poetic rhythm of the verse, and with the weight of thought in b.—E.] Job 33:13. Why hast thou contended (ψִ ?ιαεֹ ?ϊָ instead of ψַ ?αְ ?ϊָּ, Gesenius, § 73 [§ 72], 1) against Him?—Such striving or murmuring against God on the part of Job had found expression, e. g., in Job 7:20; Job 10:18; Job 13:24 seq.—The second member declares the ground or contents of this contention against God to be: that [for] He gives account of none of His doings; lit. “that He answers not (ςπδ as in Job 32:12; Job 40:2; Job 9:3) all His words (or matters, γְּ ?αָ ?ψָ ?ιε). So correctly Gesenius, Umbreit, Vaih., Delitzsch [E. V., Con., Words., Rod., Elz., Bar., Renan], etc., while the explanations of other moderns vary widely, e. g. “to all his (man’s) words giveth He no answer” (Hirzel, Heiligst., Hahn) [Carey on the contrary: “since to none of His words doth man answer,” i. e. man is deaf when God speaks]; or “that all his words to Him (suffix in γαψιε referring to the object) He easily answers” (Stickel, and similarly Welte): or “with not a single word does He answer” (Schlottmann, Kamph.); or “that He makes no answer to all thy words” (Dillmann, changing γαψιε to γֶּ ?αָ ?ψֻ ?ικָ), etc. Job 33:14. For (on the other hand) God speaketh once and twice;i. e. many times, often, repeatedly; comp. Job 40:5; also Job 5:19. Those commentators who explain: “in many ways” (Arnh., Hirz., Stick., Del., etc.) make too much of the simple form of enumeration used; it is only the πολυμερῶς of the divine revelation, and not of also its πολυτρόπως, which is here spoken of. Respecting the αְּ before ΰηϊ and ωϊιν, comp. besides Job 40:5, also Psalms 62:12 [11]. The subj. of the follg. μΰֹ ιְ ?ωׁ ?εּ ?ψֶ ?πָּ ?δ, which the Masoretic accentuation also separates from what goes before, cannot be “God” again, but only man, used indefinitely; hence “one perceiveth it not” (ωׁ ?εּ ?ψ with a neut. suffix, in the general meaning of observing, perceiving, precisely as in Job 35:13). This short clause stands accordingly in a limitative, or an adversative relation to the preceding thought: “only man observes it not,” or “yet man,” etc. [E. V.]. It is possible also to render it as a circumstantial clause: “without any one observing it” (Schlottm.). [“God’s speech is unnoticed, not recognized by the senses, understood only by the susceptible feelings.” Schlottmann.] The explanation of this verse by Schultens, Ewald and Vaihinger is peculiar (comp. the Vulg. and Pesh.): “for God speaks once—He does not glance at it a second time” [i. e. to reconsider or change what He has once said]. Against this is (1) the Masoretic accentuation; (2) the connection with Job 33:15 seq., which would there stand quite torn apart; (3) the fact that ωׁ ?εּ ?ψ cannot signify revidere (it would in that case have to be changed into ωׁ ?εּ ?α). Job 33:15 seq. now mention—if not several kinds (Hirzel, Schlottm., Del.)—at least several examples of impressive communications from God to men, or, according to the language used in Job 33:14, of “speeches” by God. The first instance mentioned is that of revelation by dreams, Job 33:15-18, which Elihu describes in language which is a close, and in part a literal copy of that of Eliphaz (Job 4:12-16). The statement prefixed of time and circumstance (Job 33:15) is almost literally the same as Job 4:13 (see on the passage). Job 33:16. Then opens He the ear of men;i. e. He opens their understanding for His confidential communications; the same phrase in Job 36:10; Job 36:15; 1 Samuel 9:15, and often—And presses a seal upon their instruction (ξֹ ?ρָ ?ψ, an alternate form of ξεּ ?ρָ ?ψ, found only here); i. e. He impresses upon them all the more deeply the earnest admonitions and warnings which He administers to them by all the various experiences of life (not particularly by painful diseases as Ewald, Hahn, and Dillmann explain, on the strength of Job 33:19 seq.); He assures them by such dreams and visions that they are to recognize such serious dispensations of life as coming from Him, as rules of His divine agency in educating men; comp. Job 36:10. Note how according to this Elihu regards every man as being continually subject to the operations of a divine discipline. As to ηϊν with αְּ (different from ηϊν with αְּ ?ςַ ?γ, Job 9:7), comp. Job 37:7. Several of the ancient versions (LXX., Aqu., Pesh.) and Luther translate as though they had read ιְ ?ηִ ?ϊֵּ ?ν, “He terrifies them.” Job 33:17-18. The aim of this nocturnal opening of the ear, and sealing of the divine instruction.—In order to withdraw man from transgression.—So according to the improved reading ξִ ?ξַּ ?ςֲ ?ωֶׂ ?δ (Hirz., Del., Dillm., etc.), which is sufficiently attested by the ἀποστρέψαιἅνθρωπονἀπὸ ἀδικίαςαὐτοῦ [of the LXX.]. According to the common reading ξַ ?ςֲ ?ωֶׂ ?δ, man must be regarded as subj. of μְ ?ηָ ?ρִ ?ιψ: “that he may put away evil-doing.” In respect to ξςωׂ ?δ, facinus, comp. e. g.1 Samuel 20:19.—And to hide pride from man; so that he does not see it, and so remains preserved from it (Hirzel, etc.), or: “so that he becomes unaccustomed to it” (Del.). Concerning the syncopated form πֵּ ?εָ ?δ, see on Job 22:29. It is unnecessary to amend the verb ιְ ?λַ ?ρֶּ ?δ to ιְ ?λַ ?μֶּ ?δ “to cause to disappear” (Dillmann), or to ιְ ?πַ ?ωֶּׂ ?δ, “to set aside, to remove” (Bφttcher). Job 33:18. To keep back his soul from the grave, i.e. to preserve him from death; comp. Psalms 16:10; Psalms 30:4 [3], 10 [9].—And his life (ηַ ?ιָּ ?δ always with Elihu, equivalent to ηַ ?ιִּ ?ιν elsewhere; comp. Job 33:20; Job 33:22; Job 33:28) from perishing by the dart.—So (with Dillmann) [E. V. “by the sword,” but ωׁ ?μη rather means “missile”] are we to understand the phrase ςָ ?λַ ?ψαַּ ?ωֶּׁ ?μַ ?η, which occurs only here and Job 36:12 (comp. ςαψ in Job 34:20). The common explanation: “to precipitate one’s self into [or upon] the dart” (iruere in telum) is not so natural, and is not confirmed by the expression ςָ ?αַ ?ψαַּ ?ωַּׂ ?ηַ ?ϊ in Job 33:28, which, although of similar sound, is essentially different in signification (against Hirzel, Delitzsch, etc.). [“Here everything in thought and expression is peculiar.” Del.] 8. Continuation. The second instance of the divine visitation; β. By grievous painful disease: Job 33:19-22. Ewald, Hahn, Dillmann, groundlessly endeavor to treat this new instance as only a special expansion of that which precedes, because that already in Job 33:16 reference is made to severe suffering on the part of him to whom God addresses His dream-revelation—an inadmissible forcing of the meaning of ξֹ ?ρָ ?ψ in that passage, and at the same time disproved by the εְ at the beginning of the present verse, which is a connective, introducing a new thought, not an explicative particle, referring back to ξֹ ?ρָ ?ψ, from which it is much too far removed.—He is chastised also with pains on his bed, while the strife in his bones goes on continually.—So according to the K’thibh ψִ ?ια = “strife, contest” [admirably describing disease as a disturbance of the equilibrium of the powers: Del.], and in accordance with the correct rendering of ΰֵ ?ϊָ ?ο (=ΰֵ ?ιϊο, comp. Job 32:18) as predicate, not as the attribute of ψִ ?ια (“and by the continual conflict,” etc.), for the latter rendering (Hirzel, Vaih., Del.) is forbidden by the absence of the article before ΰֵ ?ϊָ ?ο, Following the K’ri, ψεֹ ?α, which is supported by the ancient versions, and several MSS., we should have to explain (with Ewald, Dillmann, etc.): “while the multitude of his limbs is still vigorous throughout” (comp. Job 12:19; Job 20:11). [E. V.: “and the multitude of his bones with strong (or unceasing) pain.” So Aben-Ezra, Junius, Tremellius, Arn. (Vulg.: et omnia ossa ejus marcescere facit), but the construction of ΰϊο is unnatural.] Job 33:20. And his life makes bread a loathing.—ζִ ?δֵ ?ν causative Piel of the verb ζָ ?δַ ?ν, not found elsewhere in the Hebrew, which, according to the Arabic, signifies “to stink;” hence to cause to stink, to excite loathing (not as intensive of Kal, “to be disgusted,” as Rosenm., Umbr., Vaih., Hahn, etc., explain it). ηַ ?ιָ ?δ again is here not = craving, hunger, any more than the parallel πֶ ?τֶ ?ωׁ in b, but as always with Elihu: “life, vital energy.” Schlottmann truly remarks: “It expresses very vividly the thought that the proper vital power, the proper ψυχή, when it is consumed by disease, gives one a loathing for that which it otherwise likes as being a necessary condition of its own existence.” Job 33:21. So that his flesh consumes away (ιִ ?λֶ ?μ abbreviated for εַ ?ιִּ ?λֶ ?μ, comp. Ew. § 233, a) that it cannot be seen, lit. “away from seeing,” or “away from sightliness.” Comp. in respect to ψֹ ?ΰִ ?ι (pausal form for ψֳ ?ΰִ ?ι) 1 Samuel 16:12; Isaiah 52:14; Isaiah 53:2.—And his wasted limbs are scarcely to be seen any more (or “are become invisible”). So following the K’thibh εּ ?ωְׁ ?τִ ?ι, which according to the Hebrew root, ωτδ, “to be bare,” expresses the notion of bareness, meagreness (scarcely as Gesen., Hirz., Del., etc. think, that of rottenness, putrefaction, after the Aram.), and in connection with the genitive ςַ ?φְ ?ξεֹ ?ϊָ ?ιε produces the collective notion: “the wasting of his members = his wasted members,” with which the plur. predicate, μֹ ?ΰψֻ ?ΰεּ, agree perfectly well (comp. the similar constructions with ψֹ ?α or ξִ ?ρְ ?τָּ ?ψ above, Job 32:7; Job 15:20; Job 21:21, and often). The K’ri εְ ?ωֻׁ ?τּ ?εּ, “and are made bare,” owes its origin to the attention being fixed on this incorrectly understood plural ψֻ ?ΰεּ. [“After ιִ ?λֶ ?μ and before εַ ?ϊִּ ?χְ ?ψַ ?α the Perf. with εְ is out of place.” Dillm.] In respect to the pointing ψֻ ?ΰֹ ?εּ, with Dagh. in ΰ, comp. Delitzsch on the passage, and Ewald, § 21, e. [Green, § 121, 1, who, however, inclines to regard it as Mappik. In either case its function is to indicate the guttural quality of ΰ, here to be carefully observed, to give strength to the description.—E.] Job 33:22. On a comp. Job 33:18.—And his life to the angels of death, lit. “the slayers, or destroyers” (ξְ ?ξִ ?ιϊִ ?ιν), by which are intended not only mortal pains (Rosenm., Schlottmann) [Barnes, Carey], but, according to Psalms 78:49; 2 Samuel 24:16; 1 Chronicles 21:15, angelic powers sent from God, and commissioned to destroy men. [The former explanation “does not commend itself, because the Elihu section has a strong angelological coloring in common with the book of Job.” Del.] 9. Continuation. The third instance of the divine visitation: γ. By sending a mediating angel as a deliverer out of distress, and so by a wonderful removal of the painful disease and danger of death just described: Job 33:23-28.—If then there is for him [ςμιε, “for,” better than “with him”] an angel, a mediator (ξֵ ?μִ ?ιυ here otherwise than in Job 16:20, where it was used in malem partem), one of thousands, to declare to man his duty (lit. “his uprightness, his right way,” comp. Proverbs 14:2).—Oecolampad., Schult,, Schnurr., Bouil., Eichh., Rosenm., Welte, v. Hofmann [Noyes, Barnes, Carey] understand by the ξַ ?μְ ?ΰָ ?κְ ξֵ ?μִ ?ιυ a human interpreter of the will of God, a prophet, or teacher of true wisdom, such as Job had before himself in Elihu. But the ancient reference to an angel (comp. Job 4:18) to which the majority of moderns also adhere, is supported by the following considerations. (1) The mention, just before, of the angel of death, to which manifestly there is now about to be introduced a contrast. (2) The contrast with μְ ?ΰָ ?γָ ?ν in c, as well as the office of delivering from death, with which, according to Job 33:23, the ξμΰκְ is invested. (3) His being called “one of a thousand,” which would scarcely characterize him as a man of an extraordinary sort, such as can scarcely be met with as one among a thousand, but rather as belonging to the innumerable hosts of heaven—a description, accordingly, which is to be understood not according to Ecclesiastes 7:28, but according to Daniel 7:10; Psalms 68:18 [17]. The latter designation, moreover, makes it impossible to regard this mediating or interpreting angel (comp. Genesis 42:23; Isaiah 43:27; 2 Chronicles 32:31) as an angel of peculiarly high rank, as e. g. the Mal’ak-Jehovah of the Pentateuch, or as the “Angel of the Presence,” or the Metathron of the later Jewish literature, as Schlottmann and Del. [Lee, Wordsw., Canon Cook in Smith’s Bib. Dic.] think; for the force of the clause ΰηγξβιΞΰμσ is simply to put this one messenger of God on an equality with many others, whom God might in like manner entrust with such a commission, not to exalt him above them. The Messianic meaning, which many expositors attribute to the verse (even among those who understand the ξַ ?Χξֵ ?Χ of a human messenger of God, e. g. Schultens, Velthusen, J. D. Michaelis, also J. Pye Smith, Script. Testimony to the Messiah, I. 307, the last indeed only tentatively, and without definitely deciding the question), is accordingly in any case very indirect and general. Moreover a special Christological vaticinium of the kind which the majority of the older exegetes maintained (comp. especially J. D. Michaelis: De angelo interprete, Hal. 1707), would scarcely seem appropriate in the mouth of an extra-Israelitish sage of the patriarchal era, any more than that celebrated verse of the �dipus Coloneus of Sophocles: “One soul, in my opinion, for ten thousand will suffice To make atonement, if with kindly feelings it draws nigh,” could be understood as Messianic otherwise than very remotely (comp. Luthardt, Apolog. Vortrδge ii. 224). [“In the extra-Israelitish world a far more developed doctrine of angels and demons is everywhere found than in Israel, which is to be understood not only subjectively, but also objectively; and within the patriarchal history after Genesis 16. that (ΰμδιν) ξμΰκιδεη appears, who is instrumental in effecting the progress of the history of redemption, and has so much the appearance of the God of revelation, that He even calls Himself God, and is called God. He it is whom Jacob means, when (Genesis 48:15 seq.), blessing Joseph, he distinguishes God the Invisible, God the Shepherd, i.e. Leader and Ruler, and “the Angel who delivered (δַ ?βֹּ ?ΰֵ ?μ) me from all evil;” it is the Angel who, according to Psalms 34:8, encampeth round about them that fear God, and delivereth them; “the Angel of the Presence,” whom Isaiah in the Thephilla, 63:7 seq., places beside Jehovah and His Holy Spirit as a third hypostasis. Taking up this perception, Elihu demands for the deliverance of man from the death which he has incurred by his sins, a superhuman angelic mediator. The “Angel of Jehovah” of primeval history is the oldest prefigurement in the history of redemption of the future incarnation, without which the Old Testament history would be a confused quodlibet of premises and radii, without a conclusion and a centre; and the angelic form is accordingly the oldest form which the hope of a deliverer assumes, and to which it recurs, in conformity to the law of the circular connection between the beginning and the end, in Malachi 3:1.” Delitzsch.—See further Remarks on Job 33:24. Job 33:24 is not the apodosis to the preceding verse (Hirzel, Hahn, Delitzsch, Kamphausen) [E. V., Con., Noyes, Renan, Rodwell], for God’s commission to the angel: “Deliver him,” etc.—belongs as yet to the preliminary conditions of the deliverance, which is first described in Job 33:25. The conditional particle of the preceding verse accordingly extends its influence over the present verse: and (if) He hath mercy on him, and saith, etc.,—This divine commission presupposes that the sorely afflicted one has truly repented, and laid to heart the salutary teachings of the angel. It is unnecessary with Schlottmann to take the angel as the subject of this brief clause, for the reason that the exercise of mercy cannot be the function of an angel.—Deliver him from going down into the pit (comp. Job 33:18 a), I have found a ransom, viz. for him. [“One is here reminded of Heb 9:12, αἰωνἰανλύτρωσινεὑράμενος.” Del.] By this is meant the intercession of the mediating angel, who had preached repentance, not in vain, to the sick one, and had therefore appeared before God, interceding in his behalf. Instead of τְּ ?γָ ?ςֵ ?δεּ (from a root τָּ ?ψַ ?ς, liberare, which is not elsewhere found, and which is hardly intelligible), it would seem natural to read either τְּ ?γֵ ?δεּ or τְּ ?γָ ?ΰֵ ?δεּ (from τγδ = τּ ?εΰ); some MSS. show τְּ ?εָ ?ςֵ ?δεּ, solve eum, which, however, would be suitable only in case the angel addressed were the angel of death. [“λֹּ ?τֶ ?ψ according to its primary notion is not a covering = making good, more readily a covering = cancelling (from λָּ ?τַ ?ψ, Talmud, to wipe out, away), but, as the usual combination with ςַ ?μ shows, a covering of sin and guilt before wrath, punishment, or execution on account of guilt, and in this sense λύτρον, a means of getting free, ransom-money. The connection is satisfied if the repentance of the chastened one (thus e. g. also von Hofm.) is understood by this ransom, or better, his affliction, inasmuch as it has brought him to repentance. But wherefore should the mediatorship of the angel be excluded from the notion of the λֹּ ?τֶ ?ψ? Just this mediatorship is meant, inasmuch as it puts to right him who by his sins had worked death, i.e. places him in a condition in which no further hindrance stands in the way of the divine pardon. If we connect the mediating angel, like the angel of Jehovah of the primeval history with God Himself, as then the logos of this mediating angel to man can be God’s own logos communicated by him, and he therefore as ξμιυ, God’s speaker (if we consider Elihu’s discourse in the light of the New Testament), can be the divine Logos himself, we shall here readily recognize a passage of the mystery which is unveiled in the New Testament: “God was in Christ, and reconciled the world unto Himself.” A presage of this mystery, flashing through the darkness, we have already read in Job 17:3 (comp. Job 16:21; and, on the other hand, in order to see how this anticipation is kindled by the thought of the opposite, Job 9:33). The presage which meets us here is like another in Psalms 107.—a Psalm which has many points of coincidence with the book of Job—where in Job 33:20 we find: ‘He sent His word, and healed them.’ At any rate Elihu expresses it as a postulate, that the deliverance of man can be effected only by a superhuman being, as it is in reality accomplished by the man who is at the same time, and from all eternity the Lord of the angels of light.” Delitzsch. In addition to the suggestions which may be found in the two extracts from Delitzsch, given above in favor of explaining the ξμΰκְ ξμιυ of this passage in the higher sense of the O. T. ξμιιδεδ, the following considerations may be urged: 1. To understand the words of an ordinary angel furnishes no adequate explanation of the description here given of him. Especially is it difficult to understand on this theory why he should be spoken of as “one out of a thousand.” Is it (a) simply as a rhetorical amplification of the word “angel”—“one of the innumerable hosts of heaven?” (Renan). But this would be here a meaningless rhetorical flourish. What has his being one of a countless angelic company to do with the function here assigned to him? Is it (b) as a more precise definition of the Malakah, to indicate that he is an angelic, or celestial messenger? (Dillmann). But that would have been expressed in more definite language. Is it (c) restrictive—“but one among a thousand?” (Rodwell). Apart from the obscurity of the language to express such a thought, it is difficult to see the force of such a restriction. Not to indicate any unwillingness on the part of the angels in general, for that would be nothing to the purpose. It could only serve to magnify God’s willingness to be gracious—let but one mediator appear, and God will have mercy. But to this there are several decisive objections. (1) It is against the proper view of the connection, according to which Job 33:24 is not the consequent, but a part of the conditional antecedent. (2) It seems to be founded on the opinion that means an “intercessor” (so Rodwell—“interceding angel”), whereas he is God’s representative, not man’s. (3) It lies outside the scope of the passage. The sufferer has in the verses immediately preceding been brought to the verge of the grave. But all at once a glorious possibility presents itself—a Messenger from God, to show the sufferer the way of right, mercifully commissioned to deliver him, and lo! he is rescued, his youth renewed, and he beholds the face of God in joy] To interject the thought that such a messenger would be only one of a thousand like himself, would be confusing and weakening. The same objection would apply still more forcibly if we should take it to mean (d) any one of a thousand. But Job 2 : understood of a ξμΰκְ of high rank, the words are significant. They indicate dignity, superiority. He is One out of, or above (ξο combining its local and comparative force) a thousand, or thousands, or the thousand. Good explains: “one of the supreme chyliad, the preeminent thousand that shine at the top of the empyreal hierarchy, possessed of transcendent and exclusive powers, and confined to functions of the highest importance.” Granting that this explanation of ΰμσ is problematical, it may still be said that whether we take it indefinitely for “a thousand” or collectively for “thousands,” i.e. all the angels, the phrase—“oneout of a thousand”—most naturally suggests rareness, pre-eminence. And this view of it accords with the rest of the description. (1) The term ξֵ ?μִ ?ιυ, in such a connection, would naturally convey the idea of dignity. He is an ambassador, internuncius (see 2 Chronicles 32:31), an angelic envoy endowed with an extraordinary commission—certainly not here, as the context shows, the mere mouthpiece of another (as in Genesis 42:23). (2) His function—“to show to man the right way” (his rightness, his true life)—suggests at once the Prophet foretold by Moses (Deuteronomy 18:15 seq.), one who should interpret—declare—more clearly than mere man could the will of God by which man is to be saved. (3) His remedial commission, it will be seen, is extraordinary: (a) In its origin, in the special, solemn, formal manner in which he is invested with it. (b) In its nature—involving as it does deliverance from the pit, and the completion of man’s ransom—λֹּ ?τֶ ?ε—a word used again by Elihu (Job 36:18) in the most solemn connection with reference to deliverance from the most terrible of destinies (comp. also Psalms 49:8, and the use of the cognates λִּ ?τֵּ ?ψλִּ ?τֻּ ?ψִ ?ιν, and λַּ ?τֹּ ?ψֶ ?ϊ, as significant of the expiation of sin): (c) In its results—especially as embracing reconciliation with God (Job 33:26). 3. Add that the idea of Divine Grace, as developed so remarkably in Job 33:26-27, comes into more fitting connection with such an interpretation of the passage as involves an evangelic anticipation of the revelation of grace in Christ, the great μεσίτης. 4. The passage is not indeed to be constrained into a complete exposition of Christ’s mediatorial office. Here, as elsewhere in our book, the truth is fragmentary, obscure, a prophetic hint, little more than the yearning after a possibility. This consideration however would all the more seem to put it in the category of such passages as Job 14:14 seq.; Job 17:3; Job 19:25 seq. It is a hypothesis, hanging on an If—ΰִ ?ρΞιֵ ?ωׁ ?—but it is an If, the answer to which is the Amen of the Gospel. If, as shown above, the language itself points in the highest direction here indicated, we are still further justified in taking that direction by the position which must be accorded to Elihu’s discourses in the book. Assuming here their genuineness, they must be regarded as a part of the solution of the problem. So regarded, it would seem strange if they did not once show us those heights of aspiration and faith, of which Job’s words have already given us such wonderful glimpses. On the other hand, it should not seem to us strange that the young sage, the precursor of Jehovah, in the disentanglement of the book’s mystery, whose especial mission in the book it is to throw the light of inspired thought on the mystery, should reflect upon it some rays from the mediatorial cross. E.]. Job 33:25. Apodosis to Job 33:23 seq.: (then) his flesh swells with the vigor of youth. In respect to the Perf. quadril. ψֻ ?θֲ ?τַ ?ωׁ “to be over-juicy, to swell,” comp. Ewald, § 131, g [Green, § 180, a]. πֹ ?ςַ ?ψ [peculiar to the Elihu section] here and in Job 36:14, instead of the customary πְ ?ςεּ ?ψִ ?ιν. The ξִ ?ο before this word is used not comparatively, but causally, as the parallel thought in b shows. Job 33:26. If he prayeth to Eloah, He accepteth him graciously (comp. Job 22:27), and causeth him to behold His face with rejoicing, or: “so that he sees His face with rejoicing:” both renderings are equally possible, according as we render ειψΰ as imper. Kal, or Hiph. The rendering of Umbreit and Ewald, however, is inappropriate: “and He cause his face to look upon joy,” because ψΰδαְ already signifies of itself, “to see joy” (see Job 33:28 b).—And He gives back again to man his righteousness, which he had lost; not “requites to man his uprightness,” as Delitzsch (after Luther) translates, for Job 33:27 b does not agree with this. Moreover to express this idea of the recompense of upright actions, we should rather expect to find λְּ ?φִ ?γְ ?χָ ?ϊεֹ. The idea of a righteousness in the rescued sinner, restored to him by God as a free gift, is peculiar to Elihu. It at least retires quite into the background in the descriptions, otherwise quite similar, of the three friends, such as Job 5:19 seq.; Job 8:21; Job 11:15 seq.; Job 22:23 seq., and thus characterizes Elihu’s religious and ethical views as more free from legal narrowness and externality. Job 33:27. He singeth to man, and saith.ιָ ?ωֹׁ ?ψ, abbreviated Imperf. from ωִׁ ?ιψ = ωׁ ?εּ ?ψι (comp. Job 36:24). ςַ ?μΞΰֲ ?πָ ?ωִׁ ?ιν, lit. “to men, addressed to them;” comp. Proverbs 25:20. As to the thought, however, comp. Psalms 22:23 [Psalms 22:22] seq.; Psalms 51:14, and often. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/lange/ SECOND Proof that man is not right in doubting God’s righteousness:Job 34a. Opening: Censure of the doubt of God’s righteousness expressed by Job:Job 34:1-91         Furthermore Elihu answered and said: 2    Hear my words, O ye wise men; and give ear unto me, ye that have knowledge. 3    For the ear trieth words, as the mouth tasteth meat. 4    Let us choose to us judgment: let us know among ourselves what is good. 5    For Job hath said: “I am righteous; and God hath taken away my judgment. 6    Should I lie against my right? my wound is incurable without transgression.” 7    What man is like Job, who drinketh up scorning like water? 8    Which goeth in company with the workers of iniquity, and walketh with wicked men? 9    For he hath said: “It profiteth a man nothing that he should delight himself with God.” b. Proof that the Divine righteousness is necessary, and that it really existsα. From God’s disinterested love of His creatures:Job 34:10-1510    Therefore hearken unto me, ye men of understanding! Far be it from God that He should do wickedness; and from the Almighty, that He should commit iniquity! 11    For the work of a man shall He render unto him, and cause every man to find according to his ways. 12    Yea, surely God will not do wickedly, Neither will the Almighty pervert judgment. 13    Who hath given Him a charge over the earth? or who hath disposed the whole world? 14    If He set His heart upon man, if He gather unto Himself his spirit and his breath; 15    All flesh shall perish together, and man shall turn again unto dust. β. From the idea of God as Ruler of the world:Job 34:16-30.16    If now thou hast understanding, hear this: hearken to the voice of my words. 17    Shall even he that hateth right govern? and wilt thou condemn Him that is Most Just? 18    Is it fit to say to a king, “Thou art wicked?” and to princes, “Ye are ungodly?” 19    How much less to Him that accepteth not the persons of princes, nor regardeth the rich more than the poor? for they all are the work of His hands. 20    In a moment shall they die, and the people shall be troubled at midnight, and pass away: and the mighty shall be taken away without hand. 21    For His eyes are upon the ways of man, and He seeth all his goings. 22    There is no darkness, nor shadow of death, where the workers of iniquity may hide themselves. 23    For He will not lay upon man more than right; that he should enter into judgment with God. 24    He shall break in pieces mighty men without number, and set others in their stead. 25    Therefore He knoweth their works, and He overturneth them in the night, so that they are destroyed. 26    He striketh them as wicked men in the open sight of others; 27    Because they turned back from Him, and would not consider any of His ways: 28    So that they cause the cry of the poor to come unto Him, and He heareth the cry of the afflicted. 29    When He giveth quietness, who then can make trouble? and when He hideth His face, who then can behold Him? whether it be done against a nation, or against a man only: 30    That the hypocrite reign not, lest the people be ensnared. c. Exhibition of Job’s inconsistency and folly in reproaching God with injustice, and at the same time appealing to His decision:Job 34:31-3731    Surely it is meet to be said unto God— “I have borne chastisement, and will not offend any more: 32    That which I see not teach Thou me: If I have done iniquity, I will do no more.” 33    Should it be according to thy mind? He will recompense it, whether thou refuse, or whether thou choose; and not I: therefore speak what thou knowest. 34    Let men of understanding tell me, and let a wise man hearken unto me. 35    Job hath spoken without knowledge, and his words were without wisdom. 36    My desire is that Job may be tried unto the end, because of his answers for wicked men. 37    For he addeth rebellion unto his sin, he clappeth his hands among us, and multiplieth his words against God. THIRD .Refutation of the false position that piety is not productive of happiness to men: 35a. The folly of the erroneous notion that piety and godliness are alike of little advantage to men:Job 35:1-81         Elihu spake, moreover, and said: 2    Thinkest thou this to be right, that thou saidst “My righteousness is more than God’s?” 3    For thou saidst, “What advantage will it be unto thee?” and, “What profit shall I have if I be cleansed from my sin?” 4    I will answer thee, and thy companions with thee. 5    Look unto the heavens, and see; and behold the clouds which are higher than thou. 6    If thou sinnest, what doest thou against Him? or if thy transgressions be multiplied, what doest thou unto Him? 7    If thou be righteous, what givest thou Him? or what receiveth He of thine hand? 8    Thy wickedness may hurt a man as thou art, and thy righteousness may profit the son of man. b. The true reason why the deliverance of the sufferer is often delayed, viz.:α. The lack of true godly fear:Job 35:9-149    By reason of the multitude of oppressions they make the oppressed to cry: they cry out by reason of the arm of the mighty. 10    But none saith, “Where is God, my Maker, who giveth songs in the night; 11    Who teacheth us more than the beasts of the earth, and maketh us wiser than the fowls of heaven?” 12    There they cry, but none giveth answer, because of the pride of evil men. 13    Surely God will not hear vanity, neither will the Almighty regard it. 14    Although thou sayest, thou shalt not see Him, yet judgment is before Him; therefore trust thou in Him. β. Dogmatic and presumptuous speeches against God:Job 35:15-1615    But now, because it is not so, He hath visited in His anger; yet He knoweth it not in great extremity: 16    Therefore doth Job open his mouth in vain; he multiplieth words without knowledge. AND 1. Of the two charges which Elihu had brought forward against Job at the beginning of his first discourse (Job 33:9-11—the one, that he regarded himself as perfectly pure and innocent,—the other, that he accused God of treating him with cruel severity—the former was subjected to particular examination in the first discourse. The three remaining discourses of Elihu are devoted to the examination of the second charge in which Job represents God as a cruel, unjust, and unfriendly persecutor of his innocence, and consequently doubts the justice of God’s actions as Ruler of the Universe. Of the two discourses which are here combined together, the second (Job 34.) controverts Job’s denial of the justice of God’s conduct, proving that it is just on the positive side—a: from God’s absolutely unselfish disinterested love towards His creatures, and b: from the conception of God as Ruler of the universe (Job 34:10-30), while at the same time on the negative side it assails the folly and self-contradiction of Job in doubting the justice of the God to whom he himself appeals as Supreme Judge (Job 34:31-37). The third discourse (Job 35.) controverts more particularly Job’s doubt as to the utility of piety, his tendency, as repeatedly manifested by him, to call it a matter of indifference whether a man’s actions were good or bad, seeing that no righteous retribution from God is to be looked for. In opposition to this dangerous error, which Job 34:9 had already put forward in all its pernicious force, this discourse maintains a: that such an opinion is irrational, and absolutely irreconcilable with God’s wonderful greatness (Job 34:1-8), and then defines b: the true reason why God’s righteous and saving activity is so often long delayed, the reason being α: that he who is tried by such doubts is often wanting in true godly fear (Job 34:9-14); or β: that he is guilty of speaking arrogantly and dogmatically against God, as had been the case in particular with Job (Job 34:15-16).—These subdivisions coincide for the most part with the single strophes, except that some of the longer divisions contain two and three strophes each.—Against the attempt of Kφster and Schlottmann to throw suspicion on the genuineness of Job 35:1, see below on the passage. 2. The second discourse: Job 34 a. Opening: Job 34:1-9. And Elihu began and said, being incited by Job’s silence [hence εַ ?ιַּ ?ςַ ?ο as elsewhere—“and answered”], who had nothing to reply to that which El. had hitherto brought forward. So again in Job 35:1 (but somewhat differently on the contrary in the introduction of the fourth discourse, Job 36:1). Job 34:2. Hear, ye wise men, my words. The “wise and knowing ones” here appealed to (comp. Job 34:10, “men of understanding”) are neither all in the world capable of forming a judgment (Hirzel), nor the circle of listeners who had gathered around the disputants, i.e. to say, all those present with the exception of Job and the three, all “impartial experts, whose presence is assumed” (Schlott., Del., Dillm.). There is no reason apparent why Job and the three should be regarded as excluded from the number of the wise men addressed; except that they are included only in so far as they are prepared to lift themselves above their own partisan stand-point to those higher points of view established by Elihu. In other words that which is really wise and intelligent in them is set over against that which is erroneous and in need of correction. Job 34:3. For the ear trieth words. Here Elihu’s own ear is intended as well as that of the wise men addressed; for it is a trial of the truth in common to which he would summon them by this appeal to the natural capacity of judgment, which man possesses. In regard to b, comp. Job 12:11. Instead of the form ΰλμιθςνμε found there, we have here ιθςνμΰλμ: “proves, tastes in order to eat,” i.e. when it would eat [or gerundive, vescendo.] Job 34:4. The right would we choose for ourselves; i.e. in the controversy between God and Job we would test, find out, and choose for ourselves that which is right; comp. 1 Thessalonians 5:21. It is to this testing and choosing in common that the “knowing among ourselves what is good” in b refers. Job 34:5-9. The special theme of the investigation which now follows, accompanied by the expression of Elihu’s moral indignation over the fact that Job had been able to put forth such expressions. For Job has said: I am innocent; yet God has taken away from me my right. The clause—“I am innocent”—is simply auxiliary or preparatory to what follows. The main emphasis rests on the second proposition, which is taken verbally from Job 27:2; in like manner as φָ ?γַ ?χְ ?ϊִּ ?ι is taken from Job 13:18 (comp. Job 23:10; Job 27:7). Job 34:6. In spite of my right I shall lie;i.e. notwithstanding ςַ ?μ as in Job 10:17; Job 16:17) that the right is on my side, I shall still be [accounted] a liar, if I maintain it. Job had not so expressed himself literally; nevertheless comp. the utterances, related in meaning, in Job 9:20; Job 16:8. [E. V. “Should I lie against my right?” i.e. confess my guilt when I am innocent?—a suitable meaning, but less forcible than the above; and here it is natural to suppose that Elihu would refer to the strongest expressions which Job had used. Instead of the Masoretic ΰֲ ?λַ ?ζֵּ ?α Carey suggests ΰַ ?λְ ?ζָ ?α: “Concerning my right He [God] is a false one.” The conjecture however is unnecessary.—E.]. My arrow is incurable, i.e. the arrow of God’s wrath sticking in me, or rather the wound occasioned by the same (comp. Job 6:4); this being the case “without transgression,” without αְּ ?μִ ?ι as in Job 8:11) my having deserved it; comp. Job 33:9. Job 34:7 seq. Sharp rebuke of Job’s conduct in thus suspecting the divine justice: Where is there a man like Job, who drinketh scornful speeches like water?—Elihu evidently borrows this harsh figurative expression from one of the earlier discourses of Eliphaz (Job 15:16), with a considerate limitation however of the charge there brought forward to Job’s scornful and blasphemous speeches against God (μςβ), which really deserved to be rebuked thus harshly, whereas the charge of Eliphaz, that he drank “iniquity” (ςεμδ) as water, besides being urged indirectly and covertly, and so much the more irritatingly, was in its indefinite and general form much less accurate and must for that very reason have inflicted a much more cutting wound. The expression being thus palpably borrowed from that former attack on Job, the charge which from Antiquity has been founded on this passage of immoderate violence and bluntness on the part of Elihu, is certainly unmerited (against the Pseudo-Jerome, Gregory the Great, Beda, etc., also Delitzsch). Job 34:8. And goes in company (lit. “to the company”) with evil-doers, and is wont to go about with men of wickedness. εμμλϊ, continuation of the finite verb εΰψη; comp. Ewald, § 351, 100. What is meant is, of course, only that by blasphemous speeches, such as might be quoted in the way of example, he lowers himself to the companionship of wicked men (comp. Psalms 1:1 seq.), that accordingly by his frivolous and wanton sins of the tongue he puts himself on a level with the evil world. Elihu does intend an actual participation by Job in the society of evil-doers, as the following verse clearly shows. Job 34:9. For he saith: A man hath no profit (comp. Job 22:2), if he lives in friendship with God (lit. “from his having pleasure with God,” i.e., in fellowship with God; comp. Psalms 50:18). Job had never expressed himself in this way literally, but he had often uttered this sentiment; e.g., Job 9:22 seq.; Job 21:7 seq.; Job 24:1 seq. But how blameworthy such frivolous utterances were, he himself repeatedly acknowledged (Job 17:9; Job 21:15; Job 28:28), without however ceasing from them. Continuation: Proof that God really is righteous in His dispensations: (a) from His love to His creatures: Job 34:10-15. Job 34:10. Therefore men of understanding, hearken to me. Lit. “men of heart” (LXX. συνετοὶ καρδίας); comp. Delitzsch, Biblical Psychology, p. 293; Beck, Umriss der bibl. Seelenlehre, 3d Ed., p. 99. Far from God be wickedness, etc.ηָ ?μִ ?ιμָ ?δ here with ξִ ?ο of the thing abjured, as in Genesis 18:25. In the third member εְ ?ωַׁ ?γַּ ?ι is used by abbreviation for εּ ?μִ ?ωַׁ ?γַּ ?ι; comp. Job 15:3. Job 34:11. Rather (λִּ ?ι, comp. Job 33:14) man’s work He recompenseth to him, and according to a man’s conduct (lit. “way”) He causeth it to be with him, lit. “He causeth it to find him, to overtake him” δִ ?ξְ ?φִ ?ιΰ, only here and Job 37:13). Job 34:12. Yea verily (ΰַ ?σΰָ ?ξְ ?πָ ?ν, as in Job 19:4) God doth not act wickedly, doth not act as a ψωׁ ?ς (μΰιψωׁ ?ις). In respect to b comp. Job 8:3. Job 34:13. Who hath delivered over to Him the earth?—ΰψυ = ΰψφδ only here, and Job 37:12 [with He paragogic therefore, not directive; see Green, § 61, 6, a]. τּ ?χγ with ςַ ?μ, of the person and accus. of the thing, denotes: To trust any one with anything, to commit anything to any one, to deliver over to one’s charge (πιστεύειντινάτι); comp. Numbers 4:27; 2 Chronicles 36:23. Without sufficient support from the language Hahn explains: “Who besides (or except Him cares for the earth? “and similarly Ewald: “who investigates the earth against him” [i.e., against man, in order to punish him when necessary]? And who hath established (founded, ωָׂ ?ν as in Job 38:5; Isaiah 44:7) the whole globe?—The answer to both these questions is self-evident: “None other than Himself.” This reference however to God’s independent glory, and to the relation of absolute causality between Him and all that has been created, is made in order to exclude as strongly as possible the thought of any selfish, or unloving conduct whatever on the part of God. Job 34:14. If He should set His heart only upon Himself, gather unto Himself (again) His spirit and His breath.—The case here supposed is an impossible one, as Job 34:15 shows. The twice-used ΰֵ ?μָ ?ιε refers both times to God as subject, not merely the second time (as Jerome, Targ., Pesh., Grotius, Rosenm., Delitzsch [E. V. Scott, Con., Lee, Noyes] explain). In respect to the withdrawal of His spirit and breath, comp. Psalms 104:29 seq.; Ecclesiastes 12:7, in which passages indeed the withdrawal of the divine vital spirit spoken of is not, as here sudden and total, but that successive and gradual process, which takes place continually in the death of individual creatures. The fact therefore that God does not, as He well might, put an end at once to the independent life of His creatures, but gives to each one of them a respite to enjoy life, this is here brought forward as proof of the disinterested fatherly love, and at the same time of the righteousness of His conduct. [“Elihu says this, to assert God’s sovereignty, and the bearing of this on the main argument is, if God be sovereign, and amenable to no superior, then he can have no motive for doing what is otherwise than right. The argument is not unlike that of Abraham, “Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right?” and that of St. Paul, “Is God unrighteous who taketh vengeance? God forbid, for then how shall God judge the world?” Carey]. 4. Continuation. The divine justice proved: (β) from the conception of God as Ruler of the universe: Job 34:16-30. Job 34:16. And if there is understanding (with thee), then hear this.—So according to the punctuation of αִּ ?ιπָ ?δ as Milra, preferred by the Targ., Pesh., Jer., and in general most of the ancients, as well as the moderns [so E. V.]. If the word be rendered as Imperative, the preceding εְ ?ΰִ ?ν should be taken as an optative particle—“and oh that thou wouldst observe, oh understand now.” (Del.). This rendering however is equally destitute of support from the language as the εἰ δὲ μὴ νουθετῆ of the LXX., and various similar renderings. The punctuation of the Masoretes [as Milel] is to be explained by their desire to remove the apparent discourtesy and insult implied in the expression—“and if there is understanding with thee.” But this by no means implies a real doubt of Job’s intelligence. In regard to b comp. Job 33:8. Will even an enemy of the right be able to govern?—ΰַ ?σ here meaning “even,” as in Job 40:8 seq., not the object of εηαω: num. iram osor judicii refrenabit (Schult., Umbr., Welte, etc.), against which the position of the words is decisive. Rather is ηαω here objectless, meaning to bind, to hold the reins of authority, to govern, (as elsewhere ςφψ, 1 Samuel 9:17). [“Right and government are indeed mutually conditioned, without right everything would fall into anarchy and confusion.” Delitzsch]. Or wilt thou condemn (i.e., declare unjust; δψωις here in its usual sense, differing in this from Job 34:12) the All-just; lit. “the mighty just One;” comp. Ewald, § 270, d.Job 34:18 seq. He who exercises justice in union with omnipotence is now more particularly described in this aspect of His activity. Him, who says to a king: Thou worthless one! So according to the reading δָֹ ?ΰξֵ ?ψ, which is attested, not indeed by the Masoretes, but by the LXX. and Vulg., and in favor of which most of the moderns declare (Hirz., Ew., Hahn., Stick., Vaih., Dillm., [Renan, Elz.], etc.). The Mas., Targ., Luth., Del. [E. V., Con., Car., Noy., Rod., Ber., Bar., Lee, Schlott.], etc., read δַ ?ΰֲ ?ξֹ ?ψ, Inf. constr. with δֲ interrogatives “is it (fit) to say to a king—Thou worthless one,” etc.? But it would be very difficult to connect the clause ΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψεβεΧ in Job 34:18 with such a question, which would express a conclusio a min. ad majus (even to a human king one would not dare to speak thus, etc.). Job 34:19. Him, who accepteth not the person of rulers (comp. Job 32:21), and knoweth not (i.e., considers, regards not; concerning πִ ?λַּ ?ψ see Job 21:29) the rich before the poor, i.e., in preference to the poor (comp., Job 8:12). God exercises this strict impartiality, because, as the parenthetical clause in c explains, His creatures are all of equal worth to Him. Job 34:20. In a moment they perish, even at midnight, i.e., suddenly and unexpectedly, at night, (comp. Psalms 119:62; and for the thought Job 27:19; also below Job 34:25). Their people are shaken and pass away.—The subject of the verse is those who are expressly mentioned first in the third member as “the strong” or “mighty ones,” the same who are specially distinguished in the two preceding verses as kings, princes, rulers and rich men, and who then in Job 34:23 seq. become again the principal object of consideration. The clause in b, ιְ ?βֹ ?ςֲ ?ωׁ ?εּ ςָ ?ν, is neither (with Ewald) to be explained “they stagger in crowds,” nor (with Hirzel and others) “nations are shaken.” The word ςָ ?ν admits of neither rendering; in connection with the princes it can signify only their people, their subjects. And the mighty are removed (lit. “the mighty one is, etc.”)—not by the hand of man, i.e., without needing to be touched by hand, referring to a higher invisible power as cause; comp. Job 20:27; Zechariah 4:6; also the expression of Daniel, αְּ ?ΰֶ ?ρֶ ?σιָ ?γ, Daniel 8:25; comp. Daniel 2:34. Job 34:21-24 give the reason why such a mighty administration of justice on the part of God is possible, or rather why it actually exists, by calling attention to His omniscience. In respect to Job 34:21 comp. Job 31:4; on Job 34:22 see Job 24:13 seq.; Psalms 139:11 seq.; and parallel passages. Job 34:23. For He doth not long regard man;i.e., He needs not to wait a long time for him, until he submits himself to His judicial examination, because He has him, like all His creatures, continually present before Him. [“A single thought of God, without the uttering of a word, is enough to summon the whole world to judgment. Job had earnestly craved for leave to enter into judgment with God (see Job 13:8; Job 16:21; Job 23:3; Job 31:35). Elihu replies that God of His own accord, finds out men in a moment, without any effort, and summons them to judgment. Job ought therefore to change his tone, and say, “Enter not into judgment with thy servant, O Lord, for in Thy sight shall no man living be justified” (Psalms 143:2). Wordsworth], ςεγ here not “again and again, a long time (Hirzel, Del. [Ber., Bar., Noy., Rod.] etc.) [nor “more than right,” E. V., Rashi, Wolfsohn, Elzas], but simply, “more, yet, again,” as e.g., Isaiah 5:4, and often. Job 34:24. Respecting μֹ ?ΰηֵ ?χֶ ?ψ, instead of ηׇ αְּ ?μֹ ?ΰ, comp. Job 12:24; Job 38:26. [Pesh. Vulg. E. V. Rod. render “without number;” but the meaning “without inquiry,” without undertaking a long process of investigation, is better suited to the context. E.]. In respect to ΰַ ?ηֵ ?ψ in b, see Job 8:19; Isaiah 45:15. Job 34:25-30 recur to the previous description of God’s fearful judgments upon the mighty of earth (Job 34:18 seq.). Therefore He knoweth their works.—μָ ?λֵ ?ο, lit. “therefore, on that account,” means here “accordingly, and so, hence,” as a formula denoting a logical inference from that which precedes; comp. Job 42:3. Rosenmόller, Umbreit erroneously: “Because that He knoweth their works;” for which meaning we should have rather μλοΰωׁ ?ψ. [Alike incorrect is the rendering “for”—Noyes, Barnes, Rodwell]. ξַ ?ςְ ?αָּ ?γ, only here in Elihu, an Aramaizing word, used interchangeably with ξַ ?ςֲ ?ωֶׂ ?δ. And overthrows them in the night (i.e., suddenly; comp. Job 34:20) so that they are crushed; comp. Job 5:4. From this verb εַ ?ιִ ?γַּ ?λָּ ?ΰεּ the object of the preceding verb ητκְ is to be supplied (Proverbs 12:7). The object cannot be μιμδ, (which is evidently an adverbial specification of time), as Umbreit renders it: “He changes the night,” i.e., into day. Job 34:26. Instead of the wicked He scorns them, i.e., the mighty; lit. “Ho claps, slaps them,” ρτχ as in Job 34:37, used metaphorically in the sense of scorning, mocking; comp. the full phrase ρָ ?τַ ?χ ,λַּ ?τַּ ?ιִ ?ν Job 27:23. [Vulg., E. V., Rosenm., Del., Con., Car., Noy., etc. render the verb “to strike, smite,” but less in accordance with the usage].—ϊַּ ?δַ ?ϊΞψְ ?ωָׁ ?ςִ ?ιν does not mean exactly “in the place of execution of the wicked” (Hirzel), but more “in the stead, after the manner of the wicked” comp. Vulg,: quasi impios) [and E. V. “as wicked men”]. In the place where all see it; lit. “in the place of those seeing,” i.e., publicly, in propatulo. [Grotius: ἐθεάτρισεναὐτοὺς; Cocceius: (1) cum pudore el ignominia; (2) in exemplum]. Job 34:27-28. They, who for that reason turn away from Him, etc.ςַ ?μΞλֵּ ?ο points forward to that which follows (comp. Job 20:2), and is explained in μδαιΰ, and so forth (Job 34:28). In order vividly to characterize the insolent, and persistently wicked conduct of evildoers, it is represented as their purpose to continue torturing the oppressed until their cry pierces through the clouds, and as it were compels God to hear it. [If ΰωׁ ?ψΰμΞλο be rendered “because” (LXX. E. V. Rosenm., Umbr., Hahn, Con., etc.). μηαιΰ will be Inf. epexeget. In that case λִּ ?ι=ΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψ, This however seems a less probable construction than that given above]. Job 34:29 seq. And if He giveth rest who will condemn (Him) δωχιθ, Hiph. of ωׁ ?χθ in the sense of Isa 14:7; Judges 5:31, hence “to give rest,” viz. by resisting and overcoming the violence of mighty tyrants, which drives the poor to cry out for help (comp. Psalms 94:13). εְ ?δεּ ?ΰ, referring to God is prefixed for emphasis, as is the case also with εּ ?ξִ ?ι at the head of the following interrogative sentence, which signifies that it would be impossible to object to that which has been ordained by God, or to condemn it (as e.g., Job had undertaken to do Job 9:22 seq.). [This is the meaning of δψωις favored by all the ancient versions, by usage, and by the parallelism, which suggests God as the object of the verb here, as in b. The meaning “to make trouble” (E. V.) is not inappropriate however: and either rendering leads to the same result, to wit, a rest for the oppressed against which oppressors will be impotent]. The structure of the second parallel member is essentially the same: if He hides His face (in wrath above those wicked ones)—who will behold Him, again find Him graciously disposed? To the clause εְ ?ιַ ?ρְ ?ϊֵּ ?ψτָּ ?πִ ?ιν, from which it is separated only on account of the rhythm, belongs the close specification in the third member, together with the doubled negative statement of the end aimed at in Job 34:30 : alike above a people and above man (ιַ ?ηַ ?γ serving to strengthen the correlation and correspondence expressed by εְ ?–εְ), in order that ungodly men might not rule (=ξִ ?ο that not; comp.2 Kings 23:33, K’ri), not (ξִ ?ο by ellipsis, instead of the repetition of ξִ ?ξְּ ?μֹ ?κְ) snares of the people;i.e., ungodly misleaders, who would plunge the people into ruin; comp. Exodus 10:7; Hosea 5:1. 5. Conclusion: Exhibition of the inconsistency and folly of Job’s accusations of the divine righteousness: Job 34:31-37. Job 34:31-32. For does one say indeed to God—“I expiate without doing evil; what I see not, that show Thou me; if I have done iniquity I will do it no more.”—So (in essential agreement with Schult., Ew., Vaih., Heil. Dillm.) are these two obscure verses to be rendered, which have been variously misunderstood by the ancient versions of expositors. For (1) δֶֽ ?ΰָ ?ξֵ ?ψ, Job 34:31 a, can only be 3 Perf. sing. with δֲ interrogative (comp. Job 21:4; Ezekiel 28:9), not Imperat. Niph. (= δֵ ?ΰָ ?ξֵ ?ψ, dicendum est), as Rosenm., Schlottm. [E. V. Noy., Con., Rod.], etc., take it. The subject of this interrogative num. dicit however cannot be the ΰָ ?γָ ?νηָ ?πֵ ?σ of the preceding verses, but is indefinite, any one (comp. Job 21:22; Job 30:24.). [“It is observed by Scott that the petition and confession, which Elihu recommends to Job, would be highly improper for one who knows himself to be guilty of heinous crimes, but highly fit for a person, who though good in the main, has reason to suspect somewhat amiss in his temper and conduct, for which God is displeased with him. It appears plainly that Elihu did not suppose Job to be a wicked man, suffering for his oppressions, bribery, inhumanity, and impiety, with which his three friends had charged him.” Noyes]. (2) The difficult expression πָ ?ωָׂ ?ΰϊִ ?ι is most simply understood of the bearing of sins in respect of their punishment, an object which is easily supplied out of the asyndetically added circumstantial clause μֹ ?ΰΰֶ ?ηְ ?αֹּ ?μ; hence—“I bear (or expiate), without doing evil.” (ηαμ as e.g., Nehemiah 1:7; comp. Daniel 6:23). This rendering of the second member of Job 34:31 is, on account of its simplicity, and the established character of the linguistic construction in all its parts, greatly to be preferred to any other, as e.g., to that of Rashi, Merc, Schlottmann [E. V. Noyes, Con., Rod., Bar.], etc. “I expiate, I will do evil no more;” of Hirzel—” I bear the yoke of punishment, and will not cast it off;” of Hahn and Delitzsch—“I have been proud, I will do evil no more;” of Kamphausen (who following the LXX. reads πָ ?ωָׂ ?ΰϊִ ?ι)—“I have practiced oppression, I will take a pledge no more”—LXX.: “I have received (scil. blessings), I will not take a pledge”], etc. (3) The elliptical objective clause αμςγιΰηζδ the beginning of Job 34:32 is according to Ew., § 333 b to be explained: “that which lies beyond what I see, teach Thou me;” i.e., that which lies beyond the circle of my vision, that which I do not see, teach Thou me respecting it. By this is meant the errors unknown to the speaker, which in Psalms 19:13 are called πִ ?ρְ ?ϊָּ ?ψεֹ ?ϊ—only that here the person introduced as speaking is not a truly pious and penitent self-observer, like the poet of that Psalm, but one who confesses reluctantly, who regards himself as being, properly speaking, wholly innocent, and who (according to Job 34:32) announces himself as ready to repent only in case (ΰִ ?ν) iniquity should be proved upon him. And on the whole Job had indeed heretofore always expressed himself essentially in this impenitent, rather than in a truly contrite way; comp. Job 7:20; Job 19:4, etc.Job 34:33. Should He recompense it to thee according to thy will (ςִ ?ν as in ξֵּ ?ςִ ?ξְּ ?κָ Job 23:10; Job 27:11, and often), that thou hast despised, scil. His usual way of recompensing. The question may also be expressed thus: “Should He allow thy discontented fault finding, and blaming of His method of retribution to go unpunished, and take up instead with a method corresponding to thy way of thinking?” which is equivalent to saying: Should He change the laws of His righteous administration (his justitia retribuens) to please thee?—so that thou must choose, and not I?i.e., so that thou wouldst have to determine the mode of retribution, and not I (God). Instead of ΰֲ ?πִ ?ι we should properly expect δεּ ?ΰ, but Elihu here, after the manner of the prophets, introduces God Himself as speaking, and thus makes himself the organ of God (so correctly Rashi, Rosenm., Ewald, etc.). [“The abrupt and bold personation of the Deity in the first person (“and not I”) is not unnatural in one who is speaking on behalf of God, and representing his just prerogatives and claims.” Con.]. And what knowest thou then? speak; i.e., in respect to the only true method of retribution. What more correct knowledge than all others canst thou claim for thyself respecting this obscure province of the divine way of retribution? On Job 34:34 comp. Job 34:2; Job 34:10. Job 34:35-37 contain the speech of the men of understanding, to whose judgment Elihu appeals as agreeing with his own. Job 34:35. Job speaks without knowledge, and his words are without wisdom.—δַ ?ωְׂ ?λֵ ?ιμ, substant. Inf. absol. Hiph., instead of the usual form δַ ?ωְׂ ?λֵּ ?μ; so also in Jeremiah 3:15. Job 34:36. O would that Job were proved continually.—ΰָ ?αִ ?ι cannot signify “my Father,” as though it were an address to God (Vulg., Saad., Luther [Bernard], etc.), for in Elihu’s mouth, judging by numerous parallels, we should rather look for “my Maker,” or “my God;” and the address “my Father” does not once elsewhere throughout the Old Testament proceed from a single person to God, and just here would have but little propriety. [Words, suggests that it may have been addressed by Elihu, as a young man, to Job; which in view of the mention of Job immediately after in the third person, would be singularly harsh]. Hence the word should either (with Targ., Kimchi, Umbr., Schlottm. [E. V.], etc.) be derived from a subst. ΰָ ?αֶ ?δ, “wish,” to be assumed, and to be rendered either “my desire is,” or “I desire;” or—which is in any case to be preferred—with Dφd., Ew., Del., Dillm., be rendered as an interjectional optative particle, synonymous with μεּ, and resting on a root αιΰ or αει.—Etymologically related are the well known αּ ?ι in the formula αִּ ?ιΰֲ ?γֹ ?πִ ?ι, (quζso domine), on the other side the optative interjection, still very common with the Syrian Arabs of Damascus, abi (which is formally inflicted abξ, tebξ, jebξ; nebξ, tebϋ, Jebϋ); comp. the elaborate and learned discussion of Wetzstein in Delitzsch, p. 431 seq.—In respect to ςַ ?γπֶ ?φַ ?η, “continually,” or “to the extreme end,” comp. the similar μַ ?πֶּ ?φַ ?η in Job 23:7. What Elihu here desires for Job is not that the chastisements inflicted on him should increase in severity, that his sufferings should continually grow more intense (such cruelty would in connection with his mild and friendly treatment, of Job elsewhere be simply inconceivable). It is rather that the divine operation of proving his heart and working on his conscience now going on (comp. Psalms 139:23; also αηο in Job 7:18) should be carried on until he had been brought at last to confess his guilt, and to humble himself beneath the hand of God (comp. Brentius, and von Gerlach below, Homiletical Remarks). The reason why Elihu desires that he may thus continue under the influence of the divine process of proving and punishing him,—or more accurately, why he introduces the men of understanding as uttering this wish in what they say, is given in Job 34:36 b taken together with Job 34:37 : on account of his answers after the manner of wicked men (ϊְּ ?ωֻׁ ?αεֹ ?ϊ) “replies,” viz. to the speeches of the friends rebuking him; comp. Job 21:34; αְּ here signifying “in the manner, after the fashion of”). Job 34:37. Because he addeth to his sin transgression (i.e. by his presumptuous speeches against God) [hence τֶּ ?ωַׁ ?ς here may be rendered “blasphemy”], in the midst of us he mocks (“claps” [his hands in scorn]; see on Job 34:26), and multiplieth his speeches against God.—ιֶ ?ψֶ ?α, imperf. apoc. Hiph. (as in Job 10:17) is used instead of the unabbreviated Imperf., like εְ ?ϊָ ?ωֶׂ ?ν Job 13:27, instead of εַ ?ϊָּ ?ωֶׂ ?ν, or like ιָ ?ωֹׁ ?ψ, Job 33:27, etc.—μָ ?ΰֵ ?μ, “towards God, against God,” refers back both to this ιֶ ?ψֶ ?α and to ιρτεχ; for the mocking is also described as being against God. 6. The third discourse: Job 35. First Half: The folly of the erroneous notion that piety and ungodliness are alike of little profit: Job 35:1-8. In respect to Job 35:1, comp. Job 34:1. The conjecture of Kφster and Schlottmann, that the verse is a later interpolation, because Job 35. gives evidence of being a simple appendage to Job 34., has no foundation. For with just as good right might Job 34. also be regarded as a simple appendage to Job 33., because the theme of this second discourse has also received expression at the beginning of the discourse preceding (Job 30:9 sq.). All four discourses are closely bound together, and Job 33:9-11 contains the common point of procedure for all alike (see on the passage). Job 35:2-3 formulate, in an interrogative form, the special theme of the discourse, as a repetition of that which has already been said (Job 34:9).—Hast thou considered this (ζֹ ?ΰϊ pointing forwards to Job 35:3) to be right (Job 33:10), and spoken of it as “my righteousness before God” (ξִ ?οcoram, as in Job 4:7; Job 32:2), that thou sayest, what advantage is it to thee (ρλο as in oh. Job 34:9), “what doth it profit me more than my sin?”—As frequently with Elihu, the direct interrogation interchanges here with the indirect (comp. e.g.Job 34:33). The force of the whole question, moreover, is that of a strong negation: a righteous man speaks not thus. [The construction here given of these two verses seems awkward and artificial. Extremely so in particular is it to render ΰξψϊφγχιξΰμ “(hast thou) defined it as ‘my righteousness before God’ that thou hast said,” etc. And besides how can it be said that he had made his saying that there is no profit in holiness a part of his righteousness before God? Here, moreover, it cannot well be denied that the comparative sense of ξִ ?ο, “my righteousness is more than God’s,” makes the proposition introduced by ΰָ ?ξַ ?ψְ ?ϊָּ more complete and forcible. Had he designed to say: “I am righteous before God,” he would have used the verb φָ ?γַ ?χְ ?ϊִּ ?ι (which Olshausen indeed proposes to read), rather than φִ ?γְ ?χִ ?ι. The meaning of the claim which Job had made, according to Elihu, is not that his character was more righteous than that of God, but that his cause, as against God, was more just than that of his Almighty antagonist. In Job 35:3 Elihu gives the proof, or rather the specification in support of his charge. Job had denied that there was any profit in holiness:—in other words he had charged God with indifference to moral character in his treatment of men. The rendering of E. V. is to be preferred except in the last clause, where ξִ ?ο is again comparative, and which should be rendered, not—“what profit shall I have if I be cleansed from my sin?” but—“what profit shall I have more than by my sin?”—E.] Job 35:4. I will answer thee words (comp. Job 33:32), and thy companions with thee, i.e. Eliphaz, Bildad and Zophar, who have shown themselves incompetent to contend with thee effectively, and who deserve to be reprimanded together with thee (ςִ ?ξָּ ?κְ). We are scarcely to render ςִ ?ξָּ ?κְ (with Dillmann, etc.), “who are with thee.” Still more impossible is it to understand by ψֵ ?ςִ ?ιν not the three friends, but all others associated with Job in sentiment and character, the ΰπωׁ ?ιςεο of Job 34:8; Job 34:36 (Umbr., Heil., Vaih., Del.), for ψֵ ?ςִ ?ιν constantly denotes throughout the book the three friends of Job (Job 2:11; Job 19:21; Job 32:3; Job 42:7). Job 35:5-8. Refutation of the ensnaring proposition that it is useless to be pious by calling attention to God’s blessed self-sufficiency in His heavenly exaltation, the contemplation of which shows that of necessity man only can derive profit from his righteousness (a thought which had been already expressed by Job himself, Job 7:20; and by Eliphaz, Job 22:2 seq.). Job 35:5. Look up to heaven, and see, etc.—In the same way that Zophar (Job 11:7 seq.) points Job to the height of the heavenly vault, and its loftiest luminous fleece-like clouds (which is what ωְׁ ?ηָ ?χִ ?ιν means here, not precisely a synonym of “heaven,” or of the “ether,” as Vaihinger, Delitzsch, etc., say), in order to illustrate God’s absolute exaltation above the world. On Job 35:6 seq. comp. ch Job 7:20; Job 22:2 seq. Job 35:8. To man like thee thy wickedness availeth (i.e. it produces its effects on him), and for a son of man thy righteousness.—By the “son of man” Job himself, or one of his kind, is again intended. The expression serves to set forth their need of help, and frailty in contrast with the exaltation and blessedness of God. 7. Continuation and close.—Second Half: The true reason why sufferers remain for a long time unheard, to wit: a. Their lack of genuine reverence for God; b. The presumptuousness of their speeches against God. a. Job 35:9-14. On account of the multitude of oppressions they cry out, they wail because of the violence (lit. “because of the arm,” ζְ ?ψεֹ ?ςַ as in Job 22:8) of the mighty (ψַ ?αִּ ?ιν here in another sense than in Job 32:9). The Hiph. ιַ ?εְ ?ςִ ?ιχεּ in the sense of Kal, or as intensive of Kal (comp. Job 19:7; Job 31:18) [not Hiphil proper, “they make the oppressed to cry,” (E. V.) which is unsuitable in connection with ξֵ ?ψεֹ ?αςωׁׅ ?]. ςֲ ?ωׁ ?εּ ?χִ ?ιν, “oppressions,” as in Amos 3:9; Ecclesiastes 4:1. Job 35:10 seq. introduce the refutation of this objection [contained in Job 35:9, to wit, that oppression goes unpunished, hence that the wicked fare no worse than the righteous], by calling attention to the guilt of the suffering. But they do not say (as they could say)—Where is Eloah my creator? This is the question asked by those who seek God (comp. Jeremiah 2:6; Jeremiah 2:8). ςωָֹׁ ?ι intensive plur., as in Isaiah 22:11; Isaiah 54:5; Psalms 149:2. Who giveth songs in the night; i.e., by granting sudden and wonderful deliverance (comp. Job 34:25). Job 35:11. Who teaches us more than the beasts of the earth—not “by them, as our mute instructors” (Hahn, Delitzsch), but with a comparative rendering of ξִ ?ο, “in preference to the beasts, esteeming us worthy of higher honor and blessing than they.” The form ξַ ?μְ ?τֵ ?πεּ is either an error of transcription, or syncopated from ξְ ?ΰַ ?μְּ ?τֵ ?πεּ; comp. ΰִ ?μֵּ ?σ in Job 15:5. On b comp. Job 12:7, where in like manner the mention of the birds of heaven is parallel to that of the beasts of the field. [A pregnant passage. The instinctive cry of distress for relief is not the prayer which God requires. The former goes up from the brute creature (comp. Psalms 104:21; Joe 1:20; Psalms 149:9); man’s prayer should be worthy of a rational being, should proceed from the recognition of God the creator, and from gratitude for His interposition in our behalf in the night of calamity. If (as he proceeds to show) man’s prayers are not heard, it is because they are too much the cry of animal instinct, not the outpouring of the heart, conscious of its wants, of God, and of His goodness.—E.]. Job 35:12. There cry they—but He answers not (or: “without indeed God’s answering them”)—on account of the pride of the evil.—Respecting the construction of the verb φςχ with ξְ ?τְּ ?πֵ ?ι, “before,” or “on account of,” comp. Isaiah 19:20. [It seems most natural to put ξτπι here in close connection with ιςπδ, “He will not answer” (so as to save them) from the force of wicked men. To make the pride of the oppressors the reason why God refuses to hear the oppressed, although the affirmation in itself might be made, would be out of harmony here. The reason as Elihu more explicitly declares in Job 35:13 is in the oppressed themselves.—E.]. Job 35:13. The reason why God does not hear those oppressed when they cry: Only vanity (i.e., nothingness, empty, fruitless complaining [with ΰַ ?κְ restrictive—“that which is only emptiness, that crying which has no heart in it”]) God heareth not—.but on the other hand (for this is the unspoken antithesis) He doth hear the righteous, pious prayer. And the Almighty regardeth it not—viz., that crying and complaining. The neut. suffix in ιְ ?ωεּ ?ψֶ ?πָּ ?δ does not refer to the masc. ωָׁ ?εְ ?ΰ, but to the crying spoken of in the preceding verse. Respecting ωׁ ?εּ ?ψ “to behold, observe,” comp. Job 33:14. Job 35:14. Much less then (would He hear thee) when thou sayest: thou beholdest Him not;i.e., He intentionally withdraws himself from thee; comp. Job 23:8 seq. In respect to ΰַ ?σλִּ ?ιquanto minus (here more precisely quanto minus si, comp. Job 4:19; Job 9:14; Ezekiel 15:5. Neither the language nor the context justifies the rendering of Schlottmann and Delitzsch [also E. V.], who take ΰַ ?σλִּ ?ι to mean “although,” etiαmsi, which moreover receives no support from Nehemiah 9:18. The cause lies before Him, and thou waitest (in vain) on Him;—this being the continuation of the indirect address begun in a.—γִּ ?ιο (instead of which elsewhere we have ψια), “the cause in controversy, the case on trial,” as also ηεֹ ?μֵ ?μ “to wait” (instead of which elsewhere ιִ ?ηֵ ?μ), are both expressions peculiar to Elihu. Hirzel, Schlottmann, Delitzsch [E, V. Scott, Noyes, Barnes, Words., Ren., Rod.], etc., render this second member as an admonition to Job—“the controversy lies certainly before God, but thou shouldst calmly await His decision.” But this is rendered impossible by the tone of stern censure in Job 35:15 seq. Still more out of the question (on account of μְ ?τָ ?πָ ?ιε) is the rendering of Ewald who takes ϊְּ ?ωׁ ?εּ ?ψֶ ?πּ ?εּ and ϊְּ ?ηεֹ ?μֵ ?μ as addressed to God. β. Job 35:15-16. The complaint of Job, above cited, in respect to God’s assumed withdrawal and concealment of Himself, gives Elihu occasion to refer to Job’s presumptuous and dogmatic speeches as another reason for his being unheard. And now, because His anger has not yet punished (lit. “because there is not [or nothing], which His anger has punished [visited]; i.e., because His anger has not yet interposed to punish—comp. Ew., § 321, b), should He not nevertheless be well acquainted with presumption?—In respect to ξְ ?ΰֹ ?γ with ιγς comp. Psalms 139:14, and respecting αְּ in the sense of “about” (to know about anything), comp. above, Job 12:9.—τַּ ?ωׁ, instead of which the LXX. and Vulg. read τְּ ?ωַׁ ?ς, seems to signify, according to the Arabic, “arrogance, presumption,” possibly also “foolishness” (the same with ϊִּ ?τְ ?μָ ?δ used elsewhere); scarcely however “multitude, mass,” as the Rabbis explain [nor “extremity,” as E. V. renders it]. The word is intended to designate Job’s presumptuous, intemperate speeches against God. The passage is in substance correctly rendered by Ewald, Delitzsch and Dillmann,—only that the last named conjectures b to be a free citation from Job’s former discourses (say from Job 24:12), and thus needlessly obscures the explanation of the verse (to the extent that he conjectures either a corruption of the word τַּ ?ωׁ, or the loss of two half verses from between a and b. The commentators follow different constructions of the passage, which in some particulars vary greatly among themselves, but which are largely agreed in taking Job 35:15 as protasis, and Job 35:16 as apodosis: on the basis of which construction Hahn e.g. translates: “Especially now, because He (God) does not have regard for his (Job’s) anger, and does not trouble himself about wicked arrogance, Job opens, etc.,” (and so Kamph.; while Rosenm., Stick., Hirz., Schlottm., [Carey, with others who take τωׁ in the sense of “transgression,” as, e.g., Conant, Noyes, Barnes, Rodwell, Renan] take ΰַ ?τּ ?εֹ in Job 35:15 a as subj. and understand by it God’s anger. But Job 35:16 cannot be the apodosis of Job 35:15, partly because of the way the subject εְ ?ΰִ ?ιּ ?εֹ ?α is prefixed, and partly because the thought is rather the delivery of a final judgment in respect to the whole manner of Job’s appearance: But Job opens his mouth in vain (i.e., uselessly, to no purpose; δֵ ?αֶ ?μ as in Job 9:29; Job 21:34), and unintelligently multiplieth words.—The “opening of the mouth” is not mentioned here as a gesture of scorn (as e.g., in Lamentations 2:16; Lamentations 3:46), but, as explained by the second member, as a symbol or means of unintelligent babbling and loquacity. δִ ?λְ ?αִּ ?ιγ here and Job 36:31=δִ ?ψְ ?αָּ ?δ, (Job 34:37). AND ETHICALThe many points of contact between the two discourses here considered and those of the three friends, especially in the words of blame and reproof addressed to Job have furnished those expositors in ancient and modern times, whose judgment respecting Elihu has been in general unfavorable, with abundant material for their disparaging judgments, and their attacks. That Elihu is a servile imitator, a mere reproducer and compiler of what has been said by previous speakers; that in repeating he weakens in many ways the statements of his predecessors; that he cites Job’s expressions, when he would controvert them, inaccurately, or in such a way as altogether to distort them; that he endeavors to surpass the three friends in the intemperate severity of his attacks on Job, etc., these and the like are the unfavorable judgments of the critics from the pseudo-Jerome, Gregory, and Bede, down to; Dillmann, and indeed even more considerate and favorably disposed critics fall in, at least in part, with this tone of remark. Thus Delitzsch asserts, at least in respect to Job 37, that the absence, in this third discourse of Elihu, of the “bold original figures” of the previous discourses, indicates on the part of this discourse as compared with the remainder of the poem “a deficiency of skill, as now and then between Koheleth and Solomon;” that not one of its thoughts is, strictly speaking, new, that, on the contrary, in one chief thought we have simply the repetition of what was said in a previous discourse of Eliphaz, to wit, that the piety of the pious profits himself; in the other—to wit, that the pious, in his necessity, does not put forth useless cries, but lifts himself in prayer to God—a repetition of what Job had said in his last discourse, Job 27:9 seq. But nevertheless Delitzsch is obliged to admit that “Elihu deprives these thoughts of their hitherto erroneous application.” He is constrained to acknowledge that the quickened consciousness of sin and guilt, which Elihu in this discourse occasions for Job, is perfectly in place, and must touch Job’s heart, especially in so far as it teaches him to seek the cause of his long-continued sufferings, and of the failure of his prayers hitherto to be heard ξn himself, in the inadequacy of his own purity and piety, in his lack of true submissiveness to God’s righteous decree—and not in any severity on the part of God. And still more favorable is his judgment respecting the value of the argument in his second discourse, directed principally against Job’s presumptuous doubt of the divine justice; respecting which he acknowledges that “Elihu does not here coincide with what has been already said (especially Job 12:15 seq.), without applying it to another purpose; and that his theodicy differs essentially from that proclaimed by the friends. It is not derived from mere appearance, but lays hold of the very principles. It does not attempt the explanation of the many apparent contradictions to retributive justice which outward events manifest, as agreeing with it; it does not solve the question by mere empiricism, but from the idea of the Godhead and its relation to the world, and by such inner necessity guarantees to the mysteries still remaining to human short-sightedness their future solution” (II., p. 266, comp. p. 276). When we see one of the weightiest opponents of the genuineness of the whole Elihu-section stripping of all its force and value that charge against these two chapters which is most frequently brought forward, and most persistently urged, the complaint that it is deficient in originality, and that its character is simply that of a compilation and reproduction, we shall not find it difficult to reply to the remaining objections made to the inward value and authenticity of the two discourses. As regards (a) the absence of ornament, the lack of original figures and similes which Del. urges as an objection, at least so far as Job 35. is concerned, it may be very much questioned whether the poet himself did not intend this as a characteristic of the utterances of Elihu here, whether, that is, this unadorned simplicity does not on the one side render effective support to that which Elihu has to say against Job’s intemperate speeches, greatly increasing its impressiveness, its power to speak to the heart, and to quicken the conscience, while, on the other side, it is intended to form a contrast to the final discourse which follows (Job 36-37), in which the wealth of picturesque illustration, bold imagery, and artistic rhetorical turns, which are characteristic of the book elsewhere, reappears in higher measures, and in a way which quite eclipses the splendor of the art of figurative representation as exercised by the preceding speakers. In other words, it may be questioned, whether it is not the poet’s purpose to introduce Elihu, the preacher of repentance, as speaking as plainly, simply, and with as little art as possible, but on the contrary to introduce Elihu, the inspired eulogist and glorifier of God, as surpassing the former speakers in the power, loftiness and adornment of his discourse, nay, even as rivalling in this respect the representation of Jehovah himself. (b) As regards the assertion that Elihu quotes those utterances of Job, which he opposes, incorrectly, and so as to distort them, this is by no means the case, as a close comparison of the quotations in question not only with similar utterances of Job’s or with such as are verbally identical, but also with the meaning of his language, teaches, and as the exegesis of the particular passages has already shown. And finally (c): that Elihu here exhibits himself as still more inconsiderate and intemperate, in his censure of Job than the three friends, rests on the misinterpretation of particular passages which, when rightly judged according to their connection, reveal Elihu as being mildly disposed toward the person of his opponent. So in particular that passage, harsh, in some respects, which he has borrowed from the second discourse of Eliphaz, and subjected to a peculiar modification, where he speaks of “drinking scorn like water” (Job 34:8 seq., see on the passage). So again the wish, uttered at the close of the second discourse (or rather put in the mouth of certain men, who are there introduced as speaking), that Job “might be continually proved to the end,” in respect to which the necessary remarks have already been made in explaining the passage. So again the strong language at the close of Job 35. the severity of which is due simply to the circumstance that Elihu here gives expression to his indignation against that which was really most objectionable and criminal in Job, his presumptuous and intemperate speeches against God, as a cruel, unsympathizing Being. There is scarcely one of the objections which in these respects have been made to the discourses of Elihu, particularly the two discourses before us, which may not, with apparently equal justice, be urged against the concluding discourses of God, in which we also find a repetition of much of the thought in the previous chief divisions (the same being cited in part literally, in part freely), and in which Job’s fundamental moral fault, the arrogance and insolent presumption of his heart against God, is just as energetically arraigned, without for that reason occasioning any reasonable doubts touching the genuineness and originality of that section. AND The practical and homiletic material, which these two intermediate discourses furnish, is small, compared with that which may be found in many other sections. Nevertheless the treatment of the two fundamental thoughts—that God deals righteously, notwithstanding all appearances to the contrary—and that true piety is always and infallibly blessed—gives rise to many thoughts of peculiar theological and moral value, showing that these two chapters are mines of genuine revealed wisdom, and that they furnish much wholesome stimulus. Particular PassagesJob_34:1 (Job 35:1): Vict. Andreδ: From this point on Job learns before all else to be silent. Without saying a word, he simply takes believingly to heart whatever is now made clear to him. In this way he really becomes another man than he has been heretofore, so that at last, because his frame of mind is become truly acceptable to God, he is ready to be completely delivered from his suffering, and to be doubly blessed by God. Job 34:2 seq. Brentius (on Job 35:3): No man, however spiritual, has the right to judge the Word of God, but only the word of man, i.e., to determine whether what men teach, declare, and decree, is the word of God. E.g., Christ shed His blood for our sins—it is permitted to no men to sit in judgment on this saying, but it is the duty of all men to yield themselves captive to this saying, and to believe it. In the meanwhile however many persons put forth many and various opinions in respect to this saying, etc.—Zeyss: We are to use our ears and mouth not only for the necessities of the body, but also for those of the soul, first of all however that we may hear and speak God’s word. … We are to prove and to judge whether that which is spoken be right or wrong, in accordance with God’s Word, or not in accordance with it. Job 34:12 seq. v. Gerlach: In what belongs to another it is possible for one to do injustice; but if God should do injustice to any one, He would injure Himself, destroy His own property, for all is His. A profound, a lofty thought! No one can conscientiously belie himself, do justice to himself. All that we call injustice becomes possible only because man has his equal as a free being beside himself, and has to do with the property of others on earth. This (injustice) is impossible with God, just for the reason that all belongs to Him.—Andreδe: In opposition to Job’s assertion, that it is of no profit to a man with God to live a pious life, Elihu maintains calmly and firmly the irrefragable truth—that both the holiness of God, which excludes every thought of tyranny, and His justice, which always renders to each one his own, yea even and His love, by which He maintains the whole world in existence, belong inseparably to the divine nature itself, so that Job’s speeches condemn themselves. Job 34:20 seq. Starke (according to the Weim. Bib., and Cramer): God has power enough to bring the proud and the mighty to the punishment which is meet for them. The raging of all His foes is vain: God can destroy them quickly. He knows our need, however, and gives close attention to it.—Andreδe: God does not need to institute long inquiries respecting the sins of men; He has immediate knowledge of all that they do, and executes His mighty judgments, without needing the help of men. … He punishes or spares, as He may think best in His unsearchable Power and Wisdom. Job 34:36 seq. Brentius: Elihu does not imprecate any evil on Job, but asks that he may be led to the acknowledgment of his own blasphemy, a result which can be brought about only by the cross and afflictions. Hence when he prays that he may be afflicted (crucified) unto the end, he at the same time prays that he may repent, for affliction (the cross) is the school of repentance.—v. Gerlach: God is asked to prove and to search out Job “even to the end,” i.e., most deeply and thoroughly. Not that Elihu supposes him to be guilty of such sins as the friends had conjectured in his case; but he nevertheless misses in him the profound perception of secret sins, and wishes for him accordingly what the Psalmist wishes for himself (Psalms 139:23). Job 35:9 seq. Brentius: May we not infer that God is present with us and that He favors us, in that “prona cum spectent animalia cetera terram, Os homini sublime dedit, c�lumque videre, Jussit et erecto ad cidera tollere vultus.” For when He made the beasts and birds ἄλογα, He created us men so that we might be wise, endowed with reason, and lords of creation. Who then, pondering these things deeply in his mind, would not in affliction call upon the Lord, or hope for His aid?—Wohlfarth: We must above all things show ourselves thankful for the spiritual endowments with which God has distinguished man (above all the beasts), by cultivating them with the utmost diligence, and by using them for God’s glory, and for the salvation of the world.—Andreδe: God can cause a joyous song of jubilee to spring forth out of the deepest night of suffering provided we only understand His gracious purposes. All of these tend to the same end, to lift us men to something better and higher than the brute, which knows not God. But presumptuous cries and empty prayers will never find a hearing with God. FOURTH vivid exhibition of the activity of God, which is seen to be benevolent, as well as mighty and just, both in the destinies of men, and in the natural world outside of manJob 36-37Introduction: announcing that further important contributions are about to be made to the vindication of GodJob_34:1-41    Elihu also proceeded and said: 2    Suffer me a little, and I will show thee that I have yet to speak on God’s behalf. 3     I will fetch my knowledge from afar, and will ascribe righteousness to my Maker. 4     For truly my words shall not be false; he that is perfect in knowledge is with thee. a. Vindication of the divine justice, manifesting itself in the destinies of men as a power benevolently chastening and purifying them: Job 34:5-21α. In general: Job 34:5-155     Behold God is mighty, and despiseth not any; He is mighty in strength and wisdom. 6     He preserveth not the life of the wicked; but giveth right to the poor. 7     He withdraweth not his eyes from the righteous; but with kings are they on the throne; yea, He doth establish them forever, and they are exalted. 8     And if they be bound in fetters, and be holden in cords of affliction; 9     then He sheweth them their work, and their transgressions that they have exceeded. 10     He openeth also their ear to discipline, and commandeth that they return from iniquity. 11     If they obey and serve Him, they shall spend their days in prosperity, and their years in pleasures. 12     But if they obey not, they shall perish by the sword, and they shall die without knowledge. 13     But the hypocrites in heart heap up wrath; they cry not when He bindeth them. 14     They die in youth, and their life is among the unclean. 15     He delivereth the poor in his affliction and openeth their ears in oppression. β. In Job’s change of fortune in particular: Job 34:16-2116     Even so he would have removed thee out of the strait into a broad place, where there is no straitness; and that which should be set on thy table should be full of fatness. 17     But thou hast fulfilled the judgment of the wicked; judgment and justice take hold on thee. 18     Because there is wrath, beware lest He take thee away with His stroke; then a great ransom cannot deliver thee. 19     Will He esteem thy riches? no, not gold, nor all the forces of strength. 20     Desire not the night, when people are cut off in their place. 21     Take heed, regard not iniquity: for this hast thou chosen rather than affliction. b. Vindication of the divine justice, revealing itself in nature as supreme power and wisdom;Job 36:22 to Job 37:24α. The wonders of nature, as revelations of divine wisdom and power:Job 36:22– Job 37:1322     Behold, God exalteth by His power; who teacheth like Him? 23     who hath enjoined Him His way? or who can say, Thou hast wrought iniquity? 24     Remember that thou magnify His work, which men behold. 25     Every man may see it; man may behold it afar off. (1) Rain, clouds, and thunder: Job 36:26— Job 37:526     Behold, God is great, and we know Him not, neither can the number of His years be searched out. 27     For He maketh small the drops of water; they pour down rain according to the vapour thereof; 28     which the clouds do drop, and distil upon man abundantly. 29     Also can any understand the spreading of the clouds, or the noise of His tabernacle? 30     Behold, He spreadeth His light upon it, and covereth the bottom of the sea. 31     For by them judgeth He the people; He giveth meat in abundance. 32     With clouds He covereth the light; and commandeth it not to shine by the clouds that cometh betwixt. 33     The noise thereof showeth concerning it, the cattle also concerning the vapour. Job 37 1     At this also my heart trembleth, and is moved out of his place. 2     Hear attentively the noise of His voice, and the sound that goeth out of His mouth, 3     He directeth it under the whole heaven, and His lightning unto the ends of the earth. 4     After it a voice roareth: He thundereth with the voice of His excellency; and He will not stay them when His voice is heard. 5     God thundereth marvellously with His voice; great things doeth He, which we cannot comprehend. (2) The forces of winter, such as snow, rain, the north-wind, frost, etc.: Job 37:6-13. 6     For He saith to the snow: Be thou on the earth; likewise to the small rain, and to the great rain of His strength. 7     He sealeth up the hand of every man; that all men may know His work. 8     Then the beasts go into dens, and remain in their places. 9     Out of the south cometh the whirlwind; and cold out of the north. 10     By the breath of God frost is given; and the breadth of the waters is straitened. 11     Also by watering He wearieth the thick cloud; He scattereth His bright cloud; 12     and it is turned round about by His counsels; that they may do whatsoever He commandeth them upon the face of the world in the earth. 13     He causeth it to come, whether for correction, or for His land, or for mercy. β. Final admonitory inferences from what precedes for Job 38:14-2414     Hearken unto this, O Job; stand still, and consider the wondrous works of God. 15     Dost thou know when God disposed them, and caused the light of His cloud to shine? 16     Dost thou know the balancings of the clouds, the wondrous works of Him which is perfect in knowledge? 17     How thy garments are warm, when He quieteth the earth by the south wind? 18     Hast thou with Him spread out the sky, which is strong, and as a molten looking-glass? 19     Teach us what we shall say unto Him; for we cannot order our speech by reason of darkness. 20     Shall it be told Him that I speak? if a man speak, surely he shall be swallowed up. 21     And now men see not the bright light which is in the clouds: but the wind passeth, and cleanseth them. 22     Fair weather cometh out of the north: with God is terrible majesty. 23     Touching the Almighty, we cannot find Him out. He is excellent in power and in judgment, And in plenty of justice; He will not afflict. 24     Men do therefore fear Him: He respecteth not any that are wise of heart. AND 1. Instead of the predominantly anthropological and ethical doctrine of the three preceding discourses, Elihu puts forth, in this his closing discourse, reflections which are pre-eminently theological. God, the infinitely mighty and wise Being, who is at the same time just, and possessed of fatherly love, stands in the foreground of his descriptions, alike in the first and shorter division (Job 36:5-21), which describes His righteous interposition in determining the lots of mankind, and gives further expression to the favorite thought of the speaker touching the hand of God chastising men with severity indeed, and yet ever with a merciful purpose, and in the and yet ever with a merciful purpose, and in the Job 36:22 to Job 37:24), which treats of the majestic manifestation of God’s activity in the wonders of His creation, first in the way of description (Job 36:22 to Job 37:13) then in the way of application, closing with admonitory inferences from the themes of his description for the benefit of Job. It is in this last half especially that this fourth discourse of Elihu exhibits itself as the immediate preparation for the concluding act of the whole poem, providing the transition to the interposition of God. This magnificent physico-theological section is vividly introduced by the threefold δֵ ?ο at the head of each of the three strophes—ch. Job 36:22 seq.; 26 seq.; 30 seq.; and this threefold successive δֵ ?ο compels us to find the beginning of this section in Job 36:22, and not (with Ewald, Vaihinger, Dillm., etc.) in Job 36:26 (see below on Job 36:22). Add to this the predominance throughout the description of the references to the majestic phenomena of lightning, thunder, storm and rain, and the conjecture formerly adopted by Cocceius, J. H. Michaelis, Reimarus, Starke, Lange, and latterly by Rosenmόller, Umbreit, v. Gerlach, V. Andreδ, Schlottmann, Bφttcher [Scott, Noyes, Barnes, Bernard, Carey] becomes probable, that the poet conceived that thunder-storm out of which he represents God as speaking to Job, Job 38:1 sq. as already beginning during this last discourse of Elihu, and furnishing him in many particulars with the occasion and material for his descriptions. This is a hypothesis, which, as we shall see, serves to give essential help in understanding not a few of the details of the splendid description—granting that the absence of definite historical data in the text of our book, or in the most ancient exegetical tradition makes it impossible that it should be regarded as more than a probability. 2. The Introduction: Job 36:1-4 : An announcement that further, and yet more important instruction is about to be communicated respecting the nature and operations of God (comp. 1 Corinthians 12:31).—And Elihu continued and spoke.—This new introductory formula, compared with Job 34:1 and Job 35:1, is intended to intimate that a long silence on the part of Job did not this time precede. [ειρσ not ειςο, as hitherto, because in Job 35. Job was not summoned to speak. Dillmann. “Elihu had spoken three times, i. e., as many times as any of the other friends, but Job does not reply, and he proceeds. The silence of Job, who had replied to every speech of the three friends, is a proof that Job was conscious that Elihu had reason on his side, and is an answer to those who disparage Elihu.” Wordsworth]. Job 36:2. Wait for me a little, and I will teach thee;i. e., hear my instructions only a little while longer (not: “let me first collect my thoughts a little;” Hirzel). ξְ ?ςַ ?θ = ζְ ?ςֶ ?ιψ, used also in Isaiah 28:10; Isaiah 28:13. λִּ ?ϊֵּ ?ψ, Aramaic, equivalent to the Hebr. δεֹ ?ηִ ?ιμ, expectare.—For there are yet words (to be said) for Eloah:i. e., for I know of something still further, and yet better to say in justification of Eloah (μΰμεδ, Dat. commodi) than what has been said hitherto. Job 36:3. I will fetch my knowledge (comp. Job 37:16) from afar.—μְ ?ξֵ ?ψָ ?ηεֹ ?χ, as in Job 39:29, and Isaiah 37:26, “from afar,” altius repetendo (Merc.) [“out of the wide realm of history and nature.” Del.]. Elihu has already in mind the wonders of the Divine government in nature and in history, in view of which he will praise God’s righteousness (lit. “give [= ascribe] right to his Maker”) [τֹּ ?ςֵ ?μ so used only here]. Hence these expressions, which involve no empty self-praise, but have their basis in the inspiring greatness of the object to be described. Job 36:4. For one faultless in knowledge, [lit. knowledges] stands before thee;i. e., one who has studied and learned to know God’s greatness in His works, one who is penetrated with the sense of the Divine exaltation, and who for that reason is raised above the danger of going astray, or speaking falsehood. ϊְּ ?ξִ ?ινγֵּ ?ςεֹ ?ϊ here cannot signify “an honest thinker” (Hirzel, and many of the older commentators) for in Job 37:16 it [ϊְּ ?ξִ ?ινγֵּ ?ςִ ?ιν] is used of the perfect knowledge of God. [“As Elihu there attributes absolute perfection of knowledge in every direction to God, so here, in reference to the theodicy which he opposes to Job, he claims faultlessness and clearness of perception.” Del.] The Vulg. renders correctly as to the meaning: et perfecta scientia probabitur tibi. 3. First Division: Proof of God’s righteous dealings in allotting the destinies of men: a. In general: Job 36:5-15 (three short strophes: Job 36:5-7; Job 8-12; Job 13-15). Job 36:5. Behold God is mighty, yet He disdaineth nothing.—εְ ?μֹ ?ΰιִ ?ξְ ?ΰָ ?ν, objectless, as in Job 42:6; comp. Job 8:20. The meaning is, although He is exalted in power (λַּ ?αִּ ?ιψ as in Job 34:17), He nevertheless does not disdain to interest Himself even in the smallest of His creatures, and to maintain its right inviolate (comp. Job 36:6-7).—Mighty is He in strength of understanding (lit. “of heart,” μֵ ?α as in Job 34:34), i. e., in the possession of an all-embracing intellectual energy, by virtue of which He sees through right and wrong everywhere, and orders everything in the highest wisdom; comp. Job 12:13. Job 36:6. He preserveth not the ungodly in life.—Comp. Job 34:19 seq., as also Job’s presumptuous assertion of the contrary in Job 24:22 seq., against which Elihu here declares himself. [But He will grant the right of the afflicted]. Job 36:7 continues the affirmation of Job 36:6 b.—And (even) with kings on the throne (comp. Psalms 9:5 [4] He makes them (i. e., the righteous, or “the afflicted” of Job 36:6 b, for both conceptions here flow together into one) to sit down forever, so that they are exalted.—Comp. the parallel passages as to thought—ch. Job 5:11; 1 Samuel 2:8; Psalms 113:7, etc. Inasmuch as the particular point respecting which we should look for something to be said here is how widely God’s care for His people extends, how high He can exalt them, the rendering of the Vulg. and of Luther—“who makes kings to sit on the throne”—is unsuitable, as also that of Ewald, which suffers besides from too great artificiality: “Kings for the throne, i. e., who merit the throne, He makes to sit down, etc.” Job 36:8-12 constitute a single period, which develops the thought, that if God subjects to suffering His righteous ones (who continue to be the logical subject here, not “the ungodly,” as Hahn thinks), He does this with a view to their chastisement and purification—But if they i are bound with chains (ζִ ?χִּ ?ιν to be understood figuratively; comp. Job 36:13), holden in cords of distress; comp. Job 13:27; Isaiah 28:22; Psalms 107:10 seq. Job 36:9-10 are with Tremellius, Cocceius, Schultens, Ewald, Dillmann, etc., to be construed as still belonging to the protasis; the apodosis begins with ιְ ?λַ ?μּ ?εּ, in Job 36:11 b, the first verb in the whole long series which stands without εְ ?consecut., and is by that very fact marked as introducing the apodosis. [Most commentators, (and so E. V.), introduce the apodosis with the beginning of Job 36:9. But in addition to the argument from the use of the Vav. consec., it would seem to be more in harmony with Elihu’s conception, which unites the discipline with the suffering, to take the entire process described in Job 36:8-10 as one hypothesis, finding its consequent in Job 36:11 b.—E.]—And He declareth to them their doing.—τֹּ ?ςַ ?μ, maleficium, evil-doing, like ξַ ?ςֲ ?ωֶׂ ?δ, Job 33:17.—And their transgressions, that (λִּ ?ι, quod objective) they act proudly (ιִ ?ϊְ ?βַּ ?αָּֽ ?ψεּ, lit. to show themselves strong, i. e. in opposing God): “exceeded,” E. V. is ambiguous, the intransitive use of it being rare.—E.]. In respect to “the opening of the ear for instruction” (Job 36:10 a), comp. Job 33:16, where the rarer form ξֹ ?ρָ ?ψ is used instead of the usual form ξεּ ?ρָ ?ψ found here. [Lit. “to the instruction,” that which forms the design of the chastisement.]—And commandeth them to turn (lit. “saith to them, that they turn”) from vanity.—ΰָ ?εֶ ?ο, emptiness, nothingness, referring to the manifold sins of infirmity into which man easily falls, even when the essential spirit of his heart is holy, the taints proceeding from daily contact with the vain world (comp. John 13:10 seq.; 1 John 1:9 seq.; 1 John 2:16), by reason of which the purifying discipline of God becomes necessary. Job 36:11-12, double apodosis to the antecedent propositions contained in Job 36:8-10, expressed by means of two subordinate antecedent conditional clauses, introduced by ΰִ ?ν, together with the consequents corresponding to each. This construction, which partially reminds us of Job 8:5 seq., was necessary, because, where disciplinary suffering is divinely appointed, the result in every case involves a two-fold possibility—either that the one who is chastised should humble himself, and be made better, or that he should continue presumptuously to resist.—In respect to ςαγ, “to humble himself, to submit, to betake himself to obedience,” comp. 1 Kings 12:7; Malachi 3:18; Psalms 2:11.—In respect to πְ ?ςִ ?ιξִ ?ιν, am�na, pleasantness, comfort, see Psalms 16:6. Respecting ςָ ?αַ ?ψαְּ ?ωֶׁ ?μַ ?η, “to perish by the dart” (or “in the dart”), gee Job 33:18.—On αִּ ?αְ ?μִ ?ιγָֽ ?ςַ ?ϊ, “in ignorance,” or “through ignorance,” see Job 35:16; also Job 4:21. Job 36:13-15 continue yet further in a peculiar way the thought of the last two verses, the precedence being given here to the lot of the wicked, which in the previous verses was spoken of in the second place; so that an inverted order of thought ensues Job 36:13-14 corresponding to the contents of Job 36:12, Job 36:15 to that of Job 36:11.—And the impure in heart cherish wrath.—ιָ ?ωִׂ ?ιξεּ ΰַ ?σ, scil. αְּ ?μִ ?αָּ ?ν (comp. Job 22:22; Psalms 13:3 [2]; Proverbs 26:24), or possibly—“they set up wrath,” in a warlike manner, against God as their enemy. The meaning, however, can scarcely be: “they lay up with God a store of wrath,” as though ΰַ ?σ here signified not men’s own discontent, but the divine wrath, and the θησαυρίζεινὀργήν of Romans 2:6 were a parallel expression (Aben-Ezra, Rosenm. [E. V. app’y, Con., Words., Carey], etc. [Considered by itself, the expression ωִׂ ?ινΰַ ?σ would seem to be most simply rendered by “lay up wrath.” But the second member of the verse, which speaks of the conduct of the wicked when God afflicts them, favors rather the explanation of the commentary.—Instead of showing submission to God, they treasure up rebellious wrath within. This rendering of ωִׂ ?ιν is justified by the reff. given above; and of ΰσ by Job 18:4 (comp. also ηξδ, Job 36:18); and the analogy of λַּ ?ςַ ?ωׂ and χִ ?πְ ?ΰָ ?δ in Job 5:4—E.]—They pray not (lit. “cry not,” ωִׁ ?εֵּ ?ςַ, according to Job 30:20; Job 38:41) when He hath chained them (comp. Job 36:8), so that they must perish, etc.ϊָּ ?ξֹ ?ϊ jussive, expressing the necessary consequence of the presumption of the dissolute. Respecting αַּ ?πֹּ ?ςַ ?ψ, “in youth, in he fresh vigor of youth,” comp. Job 33:25.—And their life is among the polluted, i. e. like that of the polluted (comp. Job 34:36). The Vulg. correctly: inter effeminates. For the word χְ ?γֵ ?ωִׁ ?ιν refers to the Syrian Canaanitish temple-prostitutes of the male sex, and the verse describes the effect of their incontinence in enervating, debilitating their manhood, and causing them to decay in the flower of their age [comp. Deuteronomy 23:18; 1 Kings 14:24; 1 Kings 15:12; 1 Kings 22:47 [46]). The reference is not to the violation of women or maidens, in a military invasion (as described in Genesis 34; Judges 19, etc.). The point of comparison lies not in the violence, but in the prematureness (and shamefulness) of the death. Job 36:15. But He delivereth the sufferer by his affliction; i. e. He rescues at last out of his misery the man who quietly and willingly endures, just by virtue of his constant endurance; He makes his suffering serve as a means of deliverance and a ransom to him (comp. Job 36:18 b). There seems to be a play upon words intended between ιְ ?ηַ ?μֵּ ?υ and αַּ ?μַ ?ηַ ?υ in b, which may be approximately rendered [in German] by translating with Delitzsch: Doch den Duldenden entrόckt Er durch sein Dulden, und φffnet durch Bedrόckung ihr Ohr. 4. Proof of the divine righteousness, β. specially from Job’s experiences: Job 36:16-21.—And even thee he lures out of the jaws of distress.—So correctly most of the moderns since Ṡ ?chultens. δֵ ?ριϊ with ξִ ?ο signifies, as in 2 Chronicles 18:31, “to lure away from anything, out of anything” (not “to draw out,” as the Pesh., Targ., Rabbis explain, nor “to rescue,” as the Vulg. renders it). [Wordsworth: “He is instigating and impelling thee by means of thy affliction into a state of greater glory and happiness.”] εְ ?ΰַ ?σδֲ ?ρִ ?ιϊְ ?κָ is used, inasmuch as ΰσ must occupy its usual place at the beginning of the sentence, for εְ ?δֵ ?ρִ ?ιϊΰַ ?σΰֹ ?ϊְ ?κָ [ΰַ ?σ serving to connect emphatically the particular case of Job with the general proposition expressed in the preceding verse. Schlottm.], and expresses not a future, but a present sense [the pret. being used either because Elihu has in mind God’s purpose in decreeing the present suffering of Job (Del.), or because that friendly process of alluring is conceived of as having begun in the past, and being continued in the present (Schl.). The expression ξִ ?τִּ ?ιΞφָ ?ψ figuratively describes the distress as a monster, with open jaws, threatening or attempting to swallow him.—E.].—Into a wide place under which there is no narrowness; i. e. into a wide place (ψַ ?ηַ ?α femin. accus. of the place aimed at), the foundation of which exhibits no narrowness, hence signifying “without narrowness in its foundation; or, which is better, a wide space, in place of which (ϊηϊ as in Job 34:26) is no narrowness, a wide place broken by no straits.” As to the figure comp. Psalms 4:2 [1]; Job 18:20 [19], etc. [The same figure is implied in all three terms, ψַ ?ηַ ?α ,φָ ?ψ, and ξεφχ, the last from φεχ, to be strait.]—And the setting of [=that which is set on] thy table (He makes, or becomes) fulness of fatness; the same fig. to describe a state of flourishing prosperity as in Psalms 23:5 (comp. Proverbs 9:2; Psalms 22:27 [Psalms 22:26]; Psalms 107:9, etc.) πַ ?ηַ ?ϊ from πεּ ?ηַ, “to settle down,” referring to that which is set down on a table, or served for it, the food set on it. Fat food is used as a sign of feasts which are particularly expensive and abundant in Isaiah 25:6; Isaiah 55:2; Genesis 27:28; Genesis 27:39. Ewald, Vaih. and Dillm. take ψַ ?ηַ ?α in the second member, as also πַ ?ηַ ?ϊ in the third (the latter in the sense of “peace”) as subj. of the whole proposition, and thus obtain the meaning: “Verily, the wide place without straits, the peace of thy table full of fat, has misled thee more than sharp distress” (Dillmann: “away from the mouth of distress” [i. e. away from obeying the teachings of adversity]). But this thought, involving as it does a serious charge against Job, is poorly connected with what goes before, and is rendered impossible by the clause ξִ ?τִּ ?ιΞφָ ?ψ, which in connection with δριϊ cannot well signify anything else than “out of the mouth (jaws) of adversity.” Job 36:17. But if thou art filled with the judgment of the wicked, then (truly) will judgment and punishment take firm hold, viz., on thee, will not depart from thee (not—“will take hold upon each other, follow each other by turns [as Carey, e. g., explains, “the act of judgment and the delivery of the sentence are very closely connected;” or according to others (e. g., Barnes) such opinions (those of the wicked) would be rapidly followed by judgment]—which reciprocal meaning of ϊξκְ would have been expressed rather by the Niph. ιִ ?ϊָּֽ ?ξְ ?λεּ. The first member is in any case, as respects the thought, a hypothetical antecedent; in order to be a strict grammatical antecedent the Pret. ξָ ?μֵ ?ΰϊָ must of course have stood at the beginning. γִּ ?ιο stands in a in the sense of guilt (Rosenmόller, Stickel, Hahn), or of a “murmuring judgment, presumptuous decision” respecting God (Umbreit, Hirzel, Schlottmann, Delitzsch, etc.); only in b does it denote the divine sentence of punishment. In no case does it express in both instances precisely the same meaning, as Ewald, Arnh., Dillmann, etc., suppose. [“He, whom thou dost presume to judge with words, will judge thee in deed.” Schlottm. The rendering of E. V., Good, Lee, Carey, Renan, etc.—“Thou hast fulfilled the judgment of the wicked,” implying that Job had realized in his own experience the full measure of crime or of punishment belonging to the wicked, is certainly too harsh for the connection. The tone of the passage is strongly admonitory no doubt, but such a sentiment as that just referred to would carry Elihu too far into the camp of the opposition, represented by the friends.—E.]. Job 36:18 suitably introduces a warning to follow the threat just uttered. Here again Elihu has in mind the chief fault of Job,—his presumptuous complaining against God, and his doubt of God’s justice.—For the heat (of thy afflictions) should not mislead thee by its greatness;i. e., should not cause thee to err in respect to God’s goodness and justice, or to judge God after the manner of the wicked (comp. Job 36:17 a). [There seems to be a contrast intended between δριϊκ in Job 36:16, and ιριϊο, here. God would by His discipline lure, or urge him out of a narrow into a broad place: the ηξδ of this ver. would urge him against God.—E.] Hahn correctly thinks the heat (ηֵ ?ξָ ?δ) spoken of to be the heat of his sufferings. The passage, as appears clearly enough from b, is a parallel to 1 Peter 4:12 (James 1:2 seq.). It is less natural to understand ηֵ ?ξָ ?δ of the heat of his passion (Delitzsch) or of his anger [against God] (Stickel, Welte, Schlottm. [Conant, Wordsworth], etc.), or of the Divine anger (Rosenm., Umbreit, Dillmann) [E. V., Good, Ber., Barnes, Noyes, Rodwell, etc.],—although these renderings cannot be called unsuitable. On the contrary the attempt of Ewald, Hirzel, Vaih., Heiligst., to identify ηֵ ?ξָ ?δ with ηֶ ?ξְ ?ΰָ ?δ, “cream” (Job 29:6), and that in the sense of riches (“may thy riches not betray thee”), is alike insipid and destructive of the sense. It may remain doubtful whether αְּ ?ωָׂ ?τֶ ?χ (Pausal form for αְּ ?ωֶׂ ?τֶ ?χ), signifies “into scorn, to mock and deride” (Stickel, Umbreit, Hahn, Schlottmann, Delitzsch, etc.) or “through superfluity, through abundance” (Ewald, Heil., Dillmann) [Fόrst]. The latter rendering, which regards ωֶׂ ?τֶ ?χ as a dialectic alternate form of ρֶ ?τֶ ?χ (Job 20:22) seems to be favored both by the preposition αְּ (not μְ), and the parallel ψָ ?αΞλֹּ ?τֶ ?ψ in the second member. [To the above should be added the signification “stroke,” which may fairly be vindicated for ωׂ ?τχ from the use of the alternate form ρτχ just referred to in Commy. (comp. Job 27:23 with Job 34:26; Job 34:37). Thus defined it may be taken here (with Kimchi, Schult., etc.), in the sense of the clapping of hands, with the idea of expulsion, or in the sense of “stroke, chastisement,” (E. V., Merc, Rosenm., Gesenius, Carey, Ber., Good, Noyes, Barnes, Rod., Elzas, etc.). The latter would be the simpler. In that case ηֵ ?ξָ ?δ may refer to the divine wrath, which is the view taken by most of those who thus explain ,ωτχαְּ being explained as instrumental (E. V. “with His stroke”). It is better however to explain it of the anger or passionate discontent of man against God (comp. ΰַ ?σ above in Job 36:13) for the reason that elsewhere δֵ ?ρִ ?ιϊαְּ means uniformly to excite against. Thus Conant: “For beware, lest anger stir thee up against chastisement.” The thought thus obtained would be moreover altogether suitable to the connection. Elihu’s great anxiety is that Job should through submission profit by his chastisement, and that on the other hand he should not by a rebellious spirit resist, and so frustrate the object of the Divine discipline.—E.].—And let the abundance of the ransom not ensnare thee; i. e., let not the fact that thou must reckon up so large a ransom for the expiation of thy guilt, that thou must make such a severe expiation of the same, lead thee into error touching the goodness of God. λֹּ ?τֶּ ?ψ here accordingly in a somewhat different sense from Job 33:24. The supposition that the reference is to Job’s “vast wealth” in earthly possessions, with which he might erroneously imagine that he could purchase his release from God (Ewald, Hirz., Vaih. [Renan], etc.), is decidedly untenable, and would impute to Job a reliance on earthly treasures, the like of which the three friends even had not once ventured to charge upon him, much less the far more considerate and just Elihu. [Schl., with better reason, assumes that the reliance, or ransom intended here is Job’s piety. “He might think in some measure that he did not need to be very exact in what he should say concerning God’s dealings, because he could put all his piety, the beneficent use which he had made of all his treasures, in the other scale of the balance.” The idea of Zφckler on the contrary seems to be that God requires a great ransom in the sense of expiation, before the sinner can be delivered. Let not the greatness of that ransom, says Elihu, lead thee into error, i. e., the error of doubting the goodness of God. The rendering of E. V., “then a great ransom cannot deliver thee,’ is not an unsuitable thought in the connection. The principal objection to it lies in the verb πθδ, which cannot well be rendered “deliver.” Gesenius, in order to obtain this meaning explains thus: “a great ransom cannot turn thee away, scil. from the Divine punishment, so as to avoid it.” But this is not altogether natural, and such a form of expression occurs nowhere else. This rendering, still further, seems to hang on the view that ΰַ ?σ means the Divine anger, and that δֵ ?ρִ ?ιϊαְּ means “to take away with,” against which see above. The negative ΰַ ?μ moreover does not favor it; for although it might have been used indeed in dependence on τֶּ ?ο, still such a construction would have been less natural and forcible than that with μֹ ?ΰ. It must be confessed that no interpretation of the verse which has been suggested is free from difficulties, and Dillmann’s conjecture of a corruption of the text is not altogether without reason.—E.]. Job 36:19 seq. continue the warning against impatient and discontented conduct in distress.—Shall thy crying put thee out of distress?—ωׁ ?εּ ?ςַ, “crying,” as in Job 30:24 (comp. Job 35:9, and above Job 36:13 b); ςָ ?ψַ ?κְ, a more choice word to express the idea of ωִׂ ?ιν or ωִׂ ?ιϊ, “to place,” (comp. Job 37:19): the object of δֲ ?ιַ ?ςֲ ?ψֹ ?κְ is easily supplied by “thee,” or “any one.” The meaning of the question accordingly can be only: “will thy crying, thy lamentation, thy discontented raging, put thee in non-distress (μֹ ?ΰαְּ ?φָ ?ψ, equivalent to αְּ ?μֹ ?ΰφָ ?ψ), take thee out of distress?” So correctly Stickel, Hahn, Del. All other renderings depart more or less from the meaning required by the context: as e. g. that of Hirz.: “Will thy riches suffice? O, not gold (αֶּ ?φֶ ?ψ=αְּ ?φָ ?ψ, Job 22:24 seq.), nor all treasures,” etc. [Good: “Will then thy magnificence avail? Not gold, nor,” etc.]; of Schlottmann: “Will thy treasures suffice? O not in distress,” etc.; of Ewald: “Will thy riches equip thee—without distress—with all the means of power?” of Rosenmόller, Umbreit, Ebrard [E. V.: Gesenius, Fόrst, under αφψ, though differently under ςψκְ, Renan, Noyes, Rodwell, Conant: “Will He value thy riches without stint, and all the might of wealth?”]: “Will He value thy riches?” etc.; of Dillmann: “Will He set in order thy cry (of supplication)?” And all the efforts of strength (i. e., of thy strength)?—To ωׁ ?εּ ?ςֲ ?κָ, which is made sufficiently determinate by the subject, the notion of “efforts of strength” is here suitably appended as an additional subject. ξַ ?ΰֲ ?ξָ ?υ from ΰָ ?ξֵ ?υ, “to be strong, firm,” in connection with λֹּ ?ηַ, can signify only a physical application of strength, not “wealth in treasures;” comp. ΰַ ?ξִּ ?ιυλֹּ ?ηַ, Job 9:4; Job 9:19. Job 36:20. Pant not after the night, when (entire) peoples go up (i. e., fly up like chaff before the tempest, Isaiah 5:24; Psalms 1:4) in their place—i. e., do not long, as thou hast foolishly done (comp. Job 13:18 sq.; Job 23:3 sq.; Job 24:1; Job 24:12), for the night of the divine judgment, with its terrors, sweeping away entire populations. In respect to ωָׂ ?ΰַ ?σ, anhelare, to long urgently for any thing, comp. Job 7:2; for the representation of the divine judgment by a night of terror, see Job 34:20; Job 34:25; Job 35:10. In respect to ϊַּ ?ηְ ?ϊָּ ?ν, “in their place,” here as regards the meaning=“from their place,” see above, Job 5:16. It is impossible, with De Wette, to take ϊַּ ?ηְ ?ϊָּ ?ν as standing for ϊַּ ?ηַ ?ϊςַ ?ξִּ ?ιν, “to raise up people in the place of people.” The rendering of Stickel and Hahn is harsh, and much too artificial: “when people come uppermost, with that which is under them.” The rendering of Delitzsch, however, is unnecessary, which takes μַ ?ςֲ ?μεֹ ?ϊ as Inf. Hiph.=μְ ?δַ ?ςֲ ?μεֹ ?ϊ: “which will remove peoples from their place.” [The rendering “in their place” does not do entire justice to the expression ϊַּ ?ηְ ?ϊָּ ?ν, which is exactly rendered by our phrase, “on the spot.” So again in Job 40:12; comp. Habakkuk 3:16; 2 Samuel 2:23 (“and he died on the spot”); Job 7:10. The rendering of Conant and Carey: “when [Con.: “where”] people are carried off below” (to the world below), involves a very harsh incongruity between the verb (“go up”) and the preposition (“below”). Conant argues that Elihu “is not speaking of any sudden calamity that sweeps whole races of men to the grave. This would be out of place here, for Job had desired no such thing. It was the repose of the grave for which he longed; for that night of death where successive generations sink down to the world beneath them.” Such, it is true, was Job’s conception of the night of death. But Elihu here reminds him that the night of death would be at the same time the night of divine judgment, and that so terrible is that judgment that it can sweep off whole peoples on the spot; how much less then could he, single-handed and alone, hope to face it without perishing. Let him rather repent, etc., Job 36:21.—E.] Job 36:21 concludes these warnings against foolish murmuring and presumptuous complaining (which is here called ΰָ ?εֶ ?ο, “vanity, wickedness,” comp. Job 5:10) in an emphatic way, by expressing the thought found in Genesis 8:21, and founded on the universal experience of the race, that the heart is naturally inclined to disobedience and to rebellion against God: for to this thou hast desire more than to affliction.—ξִ ?ο, comparative, as in Job 7:15, not causal, as though ξֵ ?ςֹ ?πִ ?ι meant “on account of suffering, in view of affliction” (Vulg., Luther, Stickel, etc.), nor again instrumental (Ewald: “therefore thou wast proved by suffering.” αָּ ?ηַ ?ψςַ ?μ here (other wise than in 2 Samuel 19:39 [38]) essentially the same with αָּ ?ηַ ?ψαְּ, to extend one’s choice to any thing, i. e., to be inclined towards any thing, to have a desire for it. 5. Second Division. Proof of the divine righteousness from the wonders of nature, from the power and wisdom revealed in the physical world. a. Descriptive part: chs. Job 36:22 to Job 37:13. Introduction or transition: Job 36:22-25 (the first of three eight-lined strophes, Job 36:22 sq., 26 sq., 30 sq., each of which begins with δֵ ?ο, and which by the exact equality and similarity of their structure give evidence of being one coherent whole—a structure which has been correctly recognized by Stickel and Delitzsch [also by Schlottmann, Noyes, Wordsworth, Carey, Rodwell], but ignored by Kφst., Ewald, Dillmann, etc.). Behold, God worketh loftily in His strength [E. V.: Behold, God exalteth by His power; but less suitably to the connection, this strophe being, as has just been shown, introductory to the description of God’s power in the physical world, rather than in the world of humanity.—E.].—As the meditation on truths lying in the realm of historical or ethical theology, which constitutes the preceding section, began with a δֵ ?ο, “behold” (Job 36:5), vividly pointing out the theme of discourse, so also the meditation which is here introduced on truths in the realm of physical theology. The conjecture is in itself sufficiently probable, that some phenomenon of external nature, perhaps a thunder-storm, which already in Job 36:5 was approaching, but which had now burst forth, with lightning, thunder, and heavy rain, furnished the occasion to this sudden and vivid transition to the description of the natural world. This conjecture receives a strong support from the emphatic double recurrence of the δֵ ?ο, first in Job 36:26, at the beginning of the description of the rain, and then in Job 36:30, in the transition to the description of lightning and thunder. The probability is still further increased by passages like Job 36:33, and especially by Job 37:2 sq. And finally it receives the strongest support from the article before ρְ ?ςָ ?ψָ ?δ in Job 38:1, which can scarcely be explained without the supposition here referred to (comp. on the passage). Who is a ruler like to him?—The usage of the language would justify, and indeed would even favor rather the rendering adopted by the Targ., Peshito, Luther, Schlottmann, Delitzsch [E. V., Lee, Noyes, Conant, Bernard, Renan, Rodwell, Barnes], etc.: “Who is a teacher like Him?” But the context, and especially the δִ ?ωְׂ ?βִּ ?ια in a, seems rather to favor the rendering supported by the LXX., which takes =ξεִ ?ψֶ ?δ Chald. ξָ ?ψֵ ?ΰ (Daniel 2:47), hence to mean “lord, ruler.” The Vulg. attempts to give an explanation intermediate between the δυνάστης of the LXX. and the “teacher” of the other ancient versions by its use of legislator: quis ei similis in legislatoribus? [So Wordsworth combines “Master and Teacher;” Carey: “Master,” as expressing the ambiguity of the original. Some (e. g.. Good): “And who, like Him, can cast down?” which would be a suitable antithesis to the E. V.’-s rendering of a: “God exalteth by His power,” but is open to the same objection; see above. In favor of the sense “teacher,” Delitzsch argues: “(1) ξεֹ ?ψֶ ?δ from δεֹ ?ψָ ?δ, Psalms 25:8; Psalms 25:12; Psalms 32:8) has no etymological connection with ξψ; (2) it is, moreover, peculiar to Elihu to represent God as a teacher both by dreams and dispensations of affliction, Job 33:14 seq.; Job 34:32; and by His creatures, Job 35:11; and (3) the designation of God as an incomparable teacher is also not inappropriate here, after His rule is described in Job 36:22 a as transcendently exalted, which on that very account commands to human research a reverence which esteems itself lightly.” These considerations at least show that the educational disciplinary functions of the Divine Ruler are prominently intended here; and this is in harmony with the general tone of this strophe.—E.] Job 36:23. Who hath appointed to Him His way?—τχγςμ, “to charge one with any thing, to prescribe anything to any one,” as in Job 34:13. It would be possible also to render it: “Who hath inspected for Him His way?” (LXX., Vulg., Seb. Schmidt, Ewald, [Good], etc.). The second member permits both renderings. Job 36:24. Remember that thou exalt (δִ ?ωְׂ ?βִּ ?ιΰ, in a different sense from Job 12:23) His doing, which men have greatly sung. ωֹׁ ?ψֵ ?ψ an intensive form of ωׁ ?εּ ?ψ, denoting singing often repeated, or various in its character. The exhortation to the praise and glorification of the exalted activity of God stands in significant antithesis to the previous warnings against sitting in judgment on the same. [Here again, as in Job 33:27 E. V. takes the verb ωׁ ?εּ ?ψ in the sense of “behold,” which would be a useless and feeble tautology before the ηζδ and δαιθ of Job 36:25.—E.]. Job 36:25. All people gaze thereon with delight (αּ ?εֹ referring back to τָּ ?ςָ ?μֹ ?ε, Job 36:24 a;ηζδα as elsewhere ψαδα); mortals behold It from afar;—i. e., not—“they can behold it only from a great distance” (so Dillmann, who would compare Job 26:14), but—they dare not contemplate it anear, from reverential fear before the unapproachableness of His operations. 6. Continuation. Description of the storm, together with the mighty phenomena accompanying it, such as rain, clouds, lightning, thunder, etc.: Job 36:26—Job 37:5 (three strophes, the first two consisting of 4 verses each, the third of 5). Job 36:25-29. Behold, God is exalted (ωַׂ ?βִּ ?ιΰ as in Job 37:23, elsewhere only in the Aramaic portions of the O. T.), we know not (i. e., how very exalted He is); the number of His years is unsearchable (lit. “as for the number of his years—so [εְ ?] there is no searching;” respecting the εְ introducing the apodosis, comp. Job 4:6; Job 15:17). The eternity of God is here introduced as the explanatory ground (not as a mere co-ordinate “moment,” as Dillmann supposes) of the divine greatness and wisdom. As the Eternal One, God has the power to effect all the glorious wonders in the realm of His creation which are enumerated in the passage following; comp. Job 12:12 seq. [“The Omnipotence and wisdom of God, which are everywhere apparent in the universe, furnish a testimony to God’s righteousness. All attributes of the Divine Nature are rays proceeding from one centre; where one is, (here also of necessity must the others be. How can the Being who everywhere shows Himself in creation to be most perfect, be defective in this one point? Every witness therefore in Nature to God’s greatness as a Creator, rises against an arraignment of God’s righteousness. Whoso will bring a charge against God’s justice, must measure himself with the Divine Omnipotence.—At first sight it may seem surprising that the mind of the righteous sufferer is directed by Elihu and by Jehovah himself, to the wondrous formation of the clouds, to Thunder, Lightning and Snow, and to the War-horse, the Hawk, and the Eagle. But when we examine the matter more carefully, we see that such a course of reasoning is excellently fitted its purpose. An Almighty and All-wise God, who is not at the same time righteous, is in truth an inconceivable impossibility. For this reason, they who impeach God’s righteousness, are always on the high road to doubt His existence. Pelagianism leads not merely to the destruction of the true idea of God, but to blank Atheism (Hengstenberg). It must also be borne in mind that God rises from an appeal to the signs of His power and goodness in the visible world, and refers Job to His working in the invisible world, in the domain of spirits, and challenges Job to a comparison of human power with that of God in the defense and deliverance of mankind, even of Job himself, from his spiritual enemies. See below, Job 40:6-15.” Wordsworth.]. Job 36:27. For He draweth up the water drops, to wit, from the earth. This is the only rendering of ιְ ?βָ ?ψַ ?ς, which corresponds to the second member; not that of the LXX., Pesh., etc.; “He numbers off;” and just as little that of Stickel and Delitzsch: “He draws off [=lets fall] the drops,” i. e., out of the upper mass of waters [to which add the rendering of E. V., Mercier, etc. “He maketh small the drops of water.” The reference seems clear to the first step in the process of forming the rain, by which the drops are attracted (upward of necessity, although that does not lie essentially in the verb, for which reason the objection of Delitzsch that it means attrahere or detrahere, but not attrahere in sublime falls to the ground), attracted, that is, towards Him who is the Divine cause.—E.]. So that they ooze (ζχχ, lit. “to filter, refine,” comp. Job 28:1) the rain with His mist, i. e., the mist which He spreads out [i. e., since a mist produced by it (Genesis 2:6) fills the expanse (ψָ ?χִ ?ιςַ), the downfall of which is just this rain.” Delitzsch]. In respect to ΰֵ ?γ, comp. Genesis 2:6; in respect to μְ, “with,” (or also “on account of, by means of”) comp. Job 37:1 a. [E. V. “they pour down rain according to the vapor thereof.” “Pour down” for ζχχ is neither sufficiently accurate nor expressive, destroying as it docs the image of “filtering” which lies in the verb. “According to” may be accepted for μְ, which is obscure. According to Gesenius, it indicates the vapor as the origin of the rain—quζ orta est ex vapore ejus: and so Conant. According to others it denotes the state into which rain-drops pass in falling. According to Ewald it is a sign of the accusative, ΰֵ ?γ being in opposition with ξָ ?θָ ?ψ. Is it not natural to find in Job 36:27-28 a description of the successive steps in the formation of the rain—first (27a) the ascent of the water-drops in evaporation—then (27b) the filtering of the mist whereby rain is produced, then (Job 36:28) the fall of the rain (a) in general, (b) in copious abundance? If this view be correct, the best explanation of μְ would seem to be that it denotes possession, or origin. The suffix in ΰֵ ?γεֹ moreover is better referred to God than to the rain, especially according to the explanation here suggested.—E.] Job 36:28. Which the high clouds drop down.—ωְׁ ?ηָ ?χִ ?ιν here somewhat differently from Job 35:5) denoting such clouds indeed as are high, but not dry, or rainless; comp. Proverbs 3:20. Respecting the construction (ΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψ, accus. of material to ιִ ?ζְּ ?μεּ) comp. Ewald, § 281, b. In respect to b [And distil upon the multitude of men], comp. Job 37:12 seq.—[ψָֽ ?α may (with E. V.) be taken adverbially=“abundantly;” although it seems better with most moderns to take it as an adjective describing ΰָ ?γָ ?ν “many men.” In this case as well as the other the predominant thought seems to be the copiousness of the rain.—E.]. Job 36:29. Yea (ΰσ intensive, as elsewhere αִּ ?ιΰַ ?σ, comp. Job 35:14) can one understand the spreadings of the clouds? their expansion, outspreading over the vault of heaven (comp. Ezekiel 27:7; Psalms 105:39; not “their burstings,” which ξִ ?τְ ?ψְ ?ωֵׂ ?ι could signify only if we were at liberty to derive it (with Hirzel and Stickel [Conant, Renan] from a verb = τψωׂ τָּ ?ψַ ?ν, frangere.—The loud crashing of His pavilion?—The thick, deep black thunderclouds are here conceived of as the “tabernacle” behind which God veils Himself, precisely as in Psalms 18:12. It should be noted that the “tents” ρֻ ?λּ ?εϊ) of the orientals have the appearance of being predominantly black (comp. on Son 1:5; Son 4:1). ϊְּ ?ωֻ ?ΰεֹ ?ϊ; used of the loud crashing of the thunder (referred to the thunder-clouds, pictured as a tabernacle), hence somewhat differently from below, Job 39:7. [The magnificent terseness and power of the line ϊְּ ?ωֻׁ ?ΰεֹ ?ϊξֻ ?αָּ ?ϊεֹ should be noted.—E.]. Job 36:30 seq. Special description of the phenomena of thunder and lightning in the storm, as already announced in Job 36:29 b.—Behold, He spreadeth His light around Himself;i. e. that eternal, heavenly veil of light, in which God dwells continually (Psalms 104:2, etc.), and out of which the lightning-flashes issue, like rays, gleaming through the clouds, and dividing them; comp. Job 36:32; Job 37:3. [ςָ ?μָ ?ιε, as here explained—around or over Himself—the suffix referring to God, not the “tabernacle,”—“upon it.” E. V.]—And with the roots of the sea He covereth Himself (λִּ ?ρָּ ?δ with accus.—“to take anything as a covering,” as in Jonah 3:6). The “roots of the sea” are the masses of water drawn upwards out of the sea, into the heavens in the form of black clouds, and here serving God as a veil (so correctly Umbreit, Ewald, Vaihinger, Dillmann) [Conant, Noyes, who renders: “And He clotheth Himself with the depths of the sea”]. The expression is poetically bold, but still unmistakable (comp. ωֹׁ ?ψֶ ?ωׁ in Job 13:27; Job 28:9. By δַ ?ιָּ ?ν we are to understand neither the waters of the heavens above (Hirzel, Schlottm.), nor the sea of clouds (Hahn) [Renan]. The expression denotes, as always, the ocean, regarded as the source of the atmospheric moistures which mount up from it. The language does not refer to a “covering of the foundations of the sea with the light of the lightning” (Stuhlm., Delitzsch) [Good, Wordsworth]; in order to express this thought, another ΰεֹ ?ψ or αָּ ?ΰεֹ ?ψ would scarcely have been omitted with λִּ ?ρָּ ?δ. [Delitzsch explains his view as follows: “The lightning in a thunder-storm, especially when occurring at night, descends into the depths of the sea, like snares that are cast down (τַּ ?ηִ ?ιν, Psalms 11:6), and the water is momentarily changed, as it were, into a sea of flame.” But this explanation does not adequately account for the use of ωׁ ?ψωׁ. According to another explanation, God is represented as covering the depths of the sea, either with waters (Barnes), or with darkness, contrasting with the lightning which covers the sky (Lee, Rodwell). But neither of these explanations falls in naturally with the description of the storm. Renan: “Now He covers Himself with His lightnings as with a curtain; now He seems to hide Himself in the depths of the sea;” his explanation being: “He treats here of the alternations of light and darkness which take place in storms. The clouds are compared to a dark and deep sea.” There is nothing, however, to indicate such a contrast between light and darkness. The “light” here is more especially that of the storm-lightning, in which God wraps Himself as a robe; the “ocean-roots” are the storm-clouds, conceived of as the waters lying in the depths of the sea, which God has lifted up, and gathered around Himself.—E.] Job 36:31. For therewith—with lightnings and clouds (Job 36:30)—He judgeth the people, giveth food in abundance.—μְ ?ξַ ?λְ ?αִּ ?ιψ only here,=the expression μָ ?ψֹ ?α, usually found elsewhere. The whole verse—which has somewhat of a parenthetic character, as an ethical and theological reflection in the midst of a passage which otherwise is purely descriptive—which, however, is not (with Olshausen) to be placed between Job 36:28-29—reminds us of Schiller: Aus der Wolke quillt der Segen, Strφmt der Regen; Aus der Wolke, ohne Wahl, Zuckt der Strahl. Job 36:32. Both hands He covereth over with light and sendeth it forth against the adversary.—This is a more specific description of what God does in judging the people (Job 36:31 a), and the use He makes therein of the lightning. [“God is represented under a military figure as a slinger of lightnings: He covers light over both hands, i. e. arms both completely with light, and directs it.” Delitzsch.] Who the adversary is (ξַ ?τְ ?βְּ ?ιςָ, LXX., Theod.: ἀπαντῶν) against whom He sends forth the light (lit. “commands it, enacts concerning it,” φִ ?εָּ ?δ with ςַ ?μ, as often) remains undetermined, and needs not to be inquired into. It signifies at any rate any hostile powers, against which God sends forth His lightnings; comp. Psalms 18:14 seq.; Job 11:6; Wis 19:12, etc. The signification of ξַ ?τְ ?βִּ ?ιςַ elsewhere (= intercessor, Isaiah 59:16) does not suit here. The change of the word into ξִ ?τְ ?βַּ ?ς, “point of attack” (Job 7:20), proposed by Olshausen, is however untenable. The same may be said of Hahn’s explanation of the word in this sense. Delitzsch renders it peculiarly: “and commissioneth it as one who hitteth the mark” (αִּ as αְּ ?essentiζ, and δτβις after Isaiah 53:6). [Delitzsch connects it with God, as “a sure aimer.”—Wordsworth a little differently with the lightning: “He giveth it a command as an assailant, or an avenger.”—Lee: “He layeth His commands upon it to destroy.”—Rosenmόller, Stickel, Elzas: “He commandeth it where to strike.” Barnes, Carey: “He commandeth it in striking.” The rendering of E. V.: “With clouds (λַּ ?τַ ?ιִ ?ν for clouds from their fancied resemblance to hands) He covereth the light, and commandeth it not to shine by the cloud that cometh betwixt,” pre-supposes too much. The rendering of the Commentary: “against the enemy,” is that which is best supported by the etymology, grammatical form, and connection.—E.] Job 36:33. His thunder-cry announces Him; lit. “His alarm-cry makes announcement (1 Samuel 27:11) concerning Him.” ψֵ ?ςεֹ in accordance with Exodus 32:17; Micah 4:9; not=ψֵ ?ςֵ ?δεּ [His friend, companion], as indeed almost all the ancient versions take it [LXX.: “The Lord will declare concerning this to His friend”]; also among the moderns Umbreit and Schlottmann. [“He makes known to it (scil. the light, or lightning) His friend.” So Barnes.] Just as little does it mean: “His thought, decree” (Cocceius, Bφttcher, Welte) [Elzas: “By it He announceth His will.”—E. V., Rosenm., etc.: “The noise thereof showeth concerning it,” taking the suffix to refer to the storm, not to God; which is altogether too insipid].—The cattle even (announce) that He is on the march; or: “concerning Him who is coming upward.” This is beyond a doubt the most satisfactory explanation of the difficult closing member ξִ ?χְ ?πֶ ?δΰַ ?σςַ ?μΞςεֹ ?μֶ ?δ—an explanation which becomes still more obvious if—instead of assuming, as is commonly done (so Rosenm., Stick., Ew., Vaih., Heil., Delitsch, etc.), merely a general reference to the uneasy movements of animals at the first approach of a thunder-storm, and comparing with it passages like Virgil, Georg. I., 373 seq.; Pliny, H. N. XVIII., 35, etc.,—we suppose that the storm thus far described had occasioned under the eyes of the assembly, before which Elihu speaks, a certain bewilderment or destruction in- a particular herd of cattle;—if, accordingly, we assume an actual occasion to have been given for this description—an occasion which is not to be more particularly defined, and so derive again out of the passage before us a confirmation of the supposition advanced above on Job 36:22. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/lange/ The Third Stage of the DisentanglementJob_38:1 to Job 42:6JEHOVAH’S .—The aim of which is to prove that the Almighty and Only Wise God, with whom no mortal man should dispute, might also ordain suffering simply to prove and test the righteous: (Second Half of the positive solution of the problem.)Job 38:1 to Job 40:5 First Discourse of Jehovah (together with Job’s answer): With God, the Almighty and Only Wise, no man may dispute. Job 38:1 to Job 40:51. Introduction: The appearance of God; His demand that Job should answer Him Job 38:1-31         Then the Lord answered Job out of the whirlwind, and said: 2    2 Who is this that darkeneth counsel by words without knowledge? 3    Gird up now thy loins like a man; for I will demand of thee, and answer thou Me! 2. God’s questions touching His power revealed in the wonders of creation Job 38:4 -Job 39:30a. Questions respecting the process of creation:Job 38:4-15.4    Where wast thou, when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding. 5    Who hath laid the measure thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it? 6    Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner-stone thereof: 7    when the morning-stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy? 8    Or who shut up the sea with doors, when it brake forth, as if it had issued out of the womb? 9    When I made the cloud the garment thereof, and thick darkness a swaddling-band for it; 10    and brake up for it my decreed place, and set bars and doors, 11    and said, Hitherto shalt thou come, but no further; and here shall thy proud waves be stayed? 12    Hast thou commanded the morning since thy days; and caused the day spring to know his place; 13    that it might take hold of the ends of the earth, that the wicked might be shaken out of it? 14    It is turned as clay to the seal; and they stand as a garment. 15    And from the wicked their light is withholden, and the high arm shall be broken. b. Respecting the inaccessible depths and heights below and above the earth, and the forces proceeding from themJob_38:16-2716    Hast thou entered into the springs of the sea? or hast thou walked in the search of the depth? 17    Have the gates of death been opened unto thee? or hast thou seen the doors of the shadow of death? 18    Hast thou perceived the breadth of the earth? declare if thou knowest it all. 19    Where is the way where light dwelleth? and as for darkness, where is the place thereof, 20    that thou shouldest take it to the bound thereof, and that thou shouldest know the paths to the house thereof? 21    Knowest thou it because thou wast then born? or because the number of thy days is great? 22    Hast thou entered into the treasures of the snow? or hast thou seen the treasures of the hail, 23    which I have reserved against the time of trouble, against the day of battle and war? 24    By what way is the light parted, which scattereth the east wind upon the earth? 25    Who hath divided a watercourse for the overflowing of waters, or a way for the lightning of thunder; 26    to cause it to rain on the earth, where no man is; on the wilderness, wherein there is no man; 27    to satisfy the desolate and waste ground; and to cause the bud of the tender herb to spring forth? c. Respecting the phenomena of the atmosphere, and the wonders of the starry heavensJob_38:28-3828    Hath the rain a father? or who hath begotten the drops of dew? 29    Out of whose womb came the ice? and the hoary frost of heaven, who hath gendered it? 30    The waters are hid as with a stone, and the face of the deep is frozen. 31    Canst thou bind the sweet influences of Pleiades, or loose the bands of Orion? 32    Canst thou bring forth Mazzaroth in his season? or canst thou guide Arcturus with his sons? 33    Knowest thou the ordinances of heaven? canst thou set the dominion thereof in the earth. 34    Canst thou lift up thy voice to the clouds, that abundance of waters may cover thee? 35    Canst thou send lightnings, that they may go, and say unto thee, Here we are? 36    Who hath put wisdom in the inward parts? or who hath given understanding to the heart? 37    Who can number the clouds in wisdom? or who can stay the bottles of heaven, 38    when the dust groweth into hardness, and the clods cleave fast together? d. Respecting the preservation and propagation of wild animals, especially of the lion, raven, wild goat, oryx, ostrich, war-horse, hawk, and eagleJob_38:39 to Job 39:3039    Wilt thou hunt the prey for the lion? or fill the appetite of the young lions, 40    when they couch in their dens, and abide in the covert to lie in wait? 41    who provideth for the raven his food? when his young ones cry unto God, they wander for lack of meat. Chap. 391         Knowest thou the time when the wild goats of the rock bring forth? or canst thou mark when the hinds do calve? 2    Canst thou number the months that they fulfil? or knowest thou the time when they bring forth? 3    They bow themselves, they bring forth their young ones, they cast out their sorrows. 4    Their young ones are in good liking, they grow up with corn; they go forth, and return not unto them. 5    Who hath sent out the wild ass free? or who hath loosed the bands of the wild ass? 6    Whose house I have made the wilderness, and the barren land his dwellings. 7    He scorneth the multitude of the city, neither regardeth he the crying of the driver. 8    The range of the mountains is his pasture, and he searcheth after every green thing. 9    Will the unicorn be willing to serve thee, or abide by thy crib? 10    Canst thou bind the unicorn with his band in the furrow? or will he harrow the valleys after thee? 11    Wilt thou trust him because his strength is great? or wilt thou leave thy labor to him? 12    Wilt thou believe him, that he will bring home thy seed, and gather it into thy barn? 13    Gavest thou the goodly wings unto the peacocks? or wings and feathers unto the ostrich? 14    Which leaveth her eggs in the earth, and warmeth them in the dust, 15    and forgetteth that the foot may crush them, or that the wild beast may break them. 16    She is hardened against her young ones, as though they were not hers: her labor is in vain without fear; 17    because God hath deprived her of wisdom, neither hath He imparted unto her understanding. 18    What time she lifteth up herself on high, she scorneth the horse and his rider. 19    Hast thou given the horse strength? hast thou clothed his neck with thunder? 20    Canst thou make him afraid as a grasshopper? the glory of his nostrils is terrible. 21    He paweth in the valley, and rejoiceth in his strength: he goeth on to meet the armed men. 22    He mocketh at fear, and is not affrighted; neither turneth he back from the sword. 23    The quiver rattleth against him, the glittering spear and the shield. 24    He swalloweth the ground with fierceness and rage; neither believeth he that it is the sound of the trumpet. 25    He saith among the trumpets, Ha, ha! and he smelleth the battle afar off, the thunder of the captains, and the shouting. 26    Doth the hawk fly by thy wisdom, and stretch her wings toward the south? 27    Doth the eagle mount up at thy command, and make her nest on high? 28    She dwelleth and abideth on the rock, upon the crag of the rock and the strong place. 29    From thence she seeketh the prey, and her eyes behold afar off. 30    Her young ones also suck up blood; and where the slain are, there is she. 3. Conclusion of the discourse, together with Job’s answer, announcing his humble submissionJob_40:1-5 Chap. 40.1         And Jehovah answered Job, and said, 2    Shall he that contendeth with the Almighty instruct Him? he that reproveth God, let him answer it. 3    Then Job answered the Lord, and said, 4    Behold, I am vile; what shall I answer thee? I will lay mine hand upon my mouth. 5    Once have I spoken, but I will not answer: yea, twice; but I will proceed no further. AND 1. The appearance of God, which Job had again and again expressly wished for, a wish which recurs in Job 23:3 seq., and especially towards the end of his last discourse (Job 31:35), and for which Elihu’s preaching of doctrine and of repentance had prepared the way—this appearance now takes place during that storm, of fearful beauty, which had supplied the last of Elihu’s discourses with the material for its impressive descriptions of the greatness of God in His works. This Divine manifestation, which is not to be understood as taking place corporeally in a human form; see on Job 38:1—corresponds moreover to the preparatory representations proceeding from Elihu in this respect, that like those representations it bears testimony at the same time in behalf of Job and against him. It testifies for Job in that it brings about the actual realization of the ardent longing which he had so often uttered, and in that it is not accompanied by that terrifying and crushing effect on the bold challenger which he himself had several times dreaded as possible (Job 9:34; Job 13:21; Job 23:6), and had on that account deprecated. It testifies against him by means of the deep humiliation which the majesty of the Almighty occasions to him, by means of the consciousness wrought within him of his own insignificance and limitation in contrast with this fulness of power and wisdom, and by means of the principle which in this very way is brought forth into full expression, and which is expressly acknowledged by him at the close of this first address of Jehovah—the principle, namely, that from henceforth he must lay aside entirely all condemnation of God’s ways, and be willing to submit himself in absolute humility to His decree.—Again the rich illustration, elaborated in the most elevated style of poetic discourse, which in this first address God gives of His all-transcending majesty in contrast with man’s insignificance (chs. Job 38:4 to Job 39:30) is also such as testifies at once for and against Job, and thus continues with increased emphasis the strain already begun by Elihu (especially in his fourth discourse). On the one side it serves to confirm the previous descriptions given by Job himself of God’s greatness, wonderful power, and plenitude of wisdom; on the other side it transcends the same in the incomparably more elevated and impressive power of its representation, under the influence of which the last remainder of insolent pride still adhering to Job must of necessity dissolve and disappear. The discourse forms one well-conceived, harmoniously constructed whole, consisting of two principal divisions of almost equal length, of which the first (Job 38:4-38) refers to the creation and to inanimate nature, the second (chs. Job 38:39; Job 39:30) to the animal kingdom, as sources of evidence proving the divine majesty. It is not necessary to resolve these two divisions into two separate discourses, as is done by Kφster and Schlottmann, the former of whom even deems it necessary to resort to the violent operation of transposing the conclusion in Job 40:1-5, and putting it after Job 38:36.—Each of these divisions may be subdivided into three strophegroups, or long strophes, consisting of 11–12 verses each, which may again be subdivided, according to the subjects described, into subordinate strophes or paragraphs, now longer and now shorter. Of these simple, short strophes the three long strophes of the first principal division (a, b and c) contain respectively three to four, whereas the last two long strophes, at least of the second chief division, which dwell on themes derived from the animal world, consist of but two short strophes respectively. 2. The Introduction: Job 38:1-3.—Then Jehovah answered Job out of the storm.—The “answering” or “replying” refers back to Job’s repeated challenges, and especially to the last, found in Job 31:35 : “Let the Almighty answer me!”—ξִ ?πְ ?δַ ?ρְּ ?ςָ ?ψָ ?δ (here, as also in Job 40:6 with medial π; comp. Ewald, § 9, 11, c [Green, § 4, a]; which the K’ri in both cases sets aside) “out of the storm (thunderstorm);” not (as Luther translates) “out of a storm.” It is beyond question an unsatisfactory explanation of the definite article to say that as applied to ρςψδ it means that storm, which “always, or as a rule, is wont to announce and to accompany the appearance of God, whenever He draws nigh to the earth in majesty and in the character of a judge” (Dillmann). In view of the way in which the most ancient Old Testament sources describe the theophanies of the patriarchal age in general, this generic rendering of the article is not at all suitable (comp. also 1 Kings 19:11 : “the Lord was not in the wind”). The only explanation of the δρςψδ here, as well as in Job 40:6, which is linguistically and historically satisfactory, is that which finds in it a reference to Elihu’s description of a violent thunder-storm in his last discourse (Job 36:37)—a reference which at the same time confirms not only our interpretation of this discourse given above, but also its genuineness, and the authenticity of Elihu’s discourses in general. Placing ourselves (along with the commentators cited above on Job 36.) on this, the only correct point of view, we see at once the impossibility of viewing “God’s speaking out of the storm” as taking place through a corporeal appearance of Jehovah in human form. On the contrary, precisely in the same way that Elihu’s description pre-supposed only an invisible approach and manifestation of God in the storm-clouds, in their thunder and lightning, so also here a similar presence and self-manifestation of the Highest is intended, taking place under the veil of those mighty phenomena of nature; hence only a symbolical, not a corporeal appearance of God. For this reason we may with some propriety describe the solution of the whole problem of our poem which is introduced by this divine appearance as “a solution in the consciousness” (Delitzsch). In any case the theophany which effects it is to be conceived of as one in which God “drew near to the earth veiled, perceptible indeed to the ear, and in His shining veil visible to the eye, but nevertheless veiled, and not presenting a bodily appearance” (Ewald). [In accordance with the explanation given above of Job 37:21-22, the ρςψδ out of which Jehovah speaks is not to be limited to the storm while raging, but refers rather to “the dark materials of the storm now pacified,” the mountainous cloud-masses in the north, which having spent their thunder, were now looming up in “terrible majesty,” while their open rifts disclosed the golden irradiation of the sunlight, a scene we may suppose not unlike that described by Wordsworth near the close of the Second Book of the Excursion. Such a scene, just preceded as it had been by the awe-inspiring phenomena of the storm at its height would fitly usher in the Divine Presence, from which the words which are to end the controversy are about to proceed.—E.] Job 38:2. Who is this that darkens counsel: lit. “who is this, who is here (ξִ ?ιζֶ ?δ, comp. Gesenius, § 122 [§ 120], 2) darkening counsel?” ςֵ ?φָ ?δ without the article (instead of δָ ?ςֵ ?φָ ?δ, or instead of ςֲ ?φָ ?ϊִ ?ι) is used intentionally in order to describe that which is darkened by Job qualitatively, as something “which is a counsel (or a plan),” as opposed to a whim, or a cruel caprice, such as Job had represented God’s dealings with him as being. [“Two things are implied in what is here said to Job: that his suffering is founded on a plan of God’s, and that he by his perverse speeches is guilty of distorting and mistaking this plan (in representing it as caprice without a plan).” Dillm. Job’s ignorant words had “darkened” God’s plan by obscuring or keeping out of sight its intelligent benevolent features]. The participle ξַ ?ηֲ ?ωִׁ ?ικְ is used rather than the Perf., because down to the very end of his speaking Job had misunderstood God’s counsel, and even during Elihu’s discourses he had recalled nothing of what he had said in this particular. For to the instruction and reproofs of this last speaker he had made no other response than persistent profound silence. He actually appeared accordingly at the moment when Jehovah himself began to speak as still a “darkener of counsel,” however true it might be that his conversion to a better frame of mind had already begun inwardly to take place under the influence of the addresses of his predecessor. This participle ξַ ?ηֲ ?ωִׁ ?ικְ accordingly furnishes no argument against the genuineness of chap. 32-37. (against Ewald, Delitzsch, Dillmann, etc.): and all the less seeing that a direct interruption of Job at the moment when he had last spoken contentiously and censoriously in respect to God’s plan (Job 31:35 seq.) by the appearance of God cannot be intended even if these chapters were in fact not genuine (comp. remarks on that passage). And especially would the assumption that the interpolator of the Elihu discourses had been prompted by this expression, ξַ ?ηֲ ?ωִׁ ?ικְ, purposely to avoid introducing Job within the limits of that section as making any confession whatever of his penitence, presuppose on the part of the interpolator a degree of artistic deliberation, nay more, of crafty cunning absolutely without a parallel in the entire Bible literature. Job 38:3. Gird up now thy loins like a man—i.e., in preparation for the contest with me (comp. Job 12:21). According to b this contest is to consist in a series of questions to be addressed by God to Job and to be answered by the latter; hence formally or apparently in the very thing which Job himself had in Job 13:22 wished for; in reality however God so overwhelms him by the humiliating contents of these questions that the absolute inequality of the contending parties and Job’s guilt become apparent at once. 3. The argument: a. God’s questions respecting the process of creation: Job 38:4-15. [This division consists of three minor strophes of four verses each, the fourth verse in each forming, as Schlottmann observes, a climax in the thought]. a. Questions touching the foundation of the earth: Job 38:4-7. Job 38:4. Where wast thou when I founded the earth? (A question similar to that of Eliphaz above: Job 15:7 seq.). Declare it if thou hast understanding—to wit, of the way in which this process was carried on. This same How of the process of founding the earth is also the unexpressed object of δַ ?βֵּ ?γ “declare!” In respect ιָ ?γַ ?ςαִּ ?ιπָ ?δ, “to have an understanding of anything,” comp. Isaiah 29:24; Proverbs 4:1; 2 Chronicles 2:12. Job 38:5. Who hath fixed its measure that thou shouldest know it?—λִּ ?ιϊֵ ?γַ ?ς, not: “for thou surely knowest it” (Schlottmann) [Good, Lee, Barnes, Carey, Renan, Elzas], but “so that thou shouldest know it” (λִ ?ι as in Job 3:12). [Dillmann objects to the rendering, “for thou knowest,” that the verb should be in that case ιָ ?γַ ?ςְ ?ϊָּ; an objection which may also be urged against the rendering of E. V., Sept., Vulg., Umbreit, Rosenmόller, Bernard, “if thou knowest.” Compare ΰִ ?νιָ ?γַ ?ςְ ?ϊָּ in Job 38:4 b.]. “The ξִ ?ι inquires not after the person of the Architect, the same being sufficiently known, but rather after His character, and that of His activity:—what kind of a being must He be who could fix the earth’s measure like that of a building?” (Dillmann). Job 38:6. Whereon were its pillars sunken—i.e., on what kind of a foundation? ΰֲ ?γָ ?πִ ?ιν lit. “pedestals,” comp. Exodus 26:19 seq.; Son 5:15. The meaning of the question is of course that already indicated in Job 9:6; Job 26:7, according to which passages the earth hangs free in space. The question in b refers to the same thing: “or who laid down her corner-stone?” where the “laying down” (ιָ ?ψָ ?δ, jacere) of the corner-stone points to the wonderful ease with which the entire work was accomplished. Job 38:7. When the morning-stars sang out together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy.—The Infinitive ψֹ ?ο is continued in b by the finite verb, as in Job 38:13, and often. The whole description determines the time of the fact of the founding of the earth (καταβολὴ κόσμου) spoken of in Job 38:6. The founding is here set forth as a festal celebration (comp. Ezra 3:10; Zechariah 4:7) attended by all the heavenly hosts, which are here mentioned by the double designation “sons of God” (comp. Job 1:6; Job 2:1) and “morning stars, i.e., creatures of such glory, that they surpass all other creatures of God in the same way that the brightness of the morning-star (=λּ ?εֹ ?λַ ?ααֹּ ?χֶ ?ψδֵ ?ιμֵ ?μ, Isaiah 14:12, Lucifer) eclipses all the other stars. As another example of this generic generalized form of expression here found in the word “morning-stars,” compare the λִּ ?ρִ ?ιμִ ?ιν of Isaiah 13:10, i.e., the Orion-like constellations. The expression “morning-stars” moreover is scarcely to be understood as a tropical designation of that which is literally designated by the expression “sons of God,” that is to say, the angels (Hirzel, Dillmann [Carey, Wemyss, Barnes] etc.). Rather are the angels and stars mentioned together here in precisely the same way that in Job 15:15 “heaven” and “the holy ones” of God are mentioned together, this being in accordance with the mysterious connection which the Holy Scriptures generally set forth as existing between the starry and angelic worlds (comp. also on Job 25:6). Such a representation of the brightly shining and joyously “jubilating” stars (comp. Psalms 19:2; Psalms 148:3) as present when the earth was founded by God by no means contradicts the Mosaic account of creation in Genesis 1. where verse 14 (according to which the sun, moon and stars were not made until the fourth day) is assuredly to be interpreted phenomenally, not as descriptive of the literal fact. β. Questions respecting the shutting up of the sea within bounds: Job 38:8-11. Job 38:8. And (who) shut up the sea with doors?—εַ ?ιָּ ?ρֵ ?κְ, which is attached to ξִ ?ιιָ ?ψָ ?δ in Job 38:6, is used with reference to the waters of the sea in the newly-created earth, which at first wildly swelling and raging had in consequence to be enclosed, penned up, as it were, behind the doors (comp. Job 3:23) of a prison (comp. Genesis 1:2; Genesis 1:9 seq.). The second member introduces a clause determining the time of the first which continues to the end of Job 38:11.—When it burst forth, came out from the womb—i.e., out of the interior of the earth (comp. Job 38:16). The verb βִּ ?ιηַ, which is used in Psalms 22:10 [9] of the bursting forth of the f�tus out of the womb, is explained by the less bold word ιֵ ?φֵ ?ΰ (which follows the Infinitive in the same way as the finite verb above in Job 38:7). The representation of the earth as the womb, out of which the waters of the sea burst forth, seems to contradict the modern geological theory, which on the contrary makes the earth to emerge out of the primitive sea, which enveloped and covered everything. But the science of geology recognizes not only elevations, but depressions by sinking of land or mountain masses (comp. Friedr. Pfaff, Das Wasser, Munich, 1870, p. 250 seq.). Especially do the recent “Deep Sea Explorations,” as they are called, seem to be altogether favorable to the essential correctness of the biblical view presented here and also in Genesis 7:11; Genesis 8:2, which regards the interior of the earth as originally occupied by water (comp. Pfaff, p. 90 seq.; Hermann Gropp, Untersuchungen und Erfahrungen όber das Verhalten des Grundwassers und der Quellen, Lippstadt, 1868). Job 38:9. When I made the cloud its garment, etc. A striking poetic description of that which in Genesis 2:6 seq. is narrated in historic prose. In respect to ηֲ ?ϊֻ ?μָּ ?δ, “wrapping, swaddling-cloth,” comp. the corresponding verb in Ezekiel 16:4. [By this expression the ocean is obviously compared to a babe. “God thus in grand language expresses how manageable was the ocean to Him.” Carey]. Job 38:10. And brake for it (lit. “over it”) my bound, etc. The verb ωָׁ ?αַ ?ψ which is not here equivalent to βּ ?ζψ, “to appoint,” as Arnheim, Wette, Hahn [Lee, Bernard, Noyes, Conant, Wemyss, Barnes, Renan] think, [or according to Rosenmόller, Umbreit, Carey, “to span,” after the Arabic] vividly portrays the abrupt fissures of the sea-coast, which is often so high and steep. Comp. the Homeric ἐπὶ ῥηγμῖνιθαλασσης. On ηֹ ?χ, “bound,” comp. Job 26:10; Proverbs 8:29; Jeremiah 5:22. On b comp. Job 38:8 a. Job 38:11. Hitherto shalt thou come, and no further (εְ ?μֹ ?ΰϊֹ ?ρִ ?ισ scil. μָ ?αεֹ ?ΰ); here let one set against the pride of thy waves, scil. “a dam, a bound.” The verb ιָ ?ωִׁ ?ιϊ, “let one place” is used passively [and impersonally] for “let there be placed” (comp. Gesen. § 137 [§ 134]). It is not necessary, with the Vulg. and Pesh. to read ϊָּ ?ωִׁ ?ιϊ, “here shalt thou stay the pride of thy waves,” or, with Codurcus, Ewald, and others to make τΰ the subj. (in the sense of “this place”). On the pride of the waves”=“proud waves,” comp. Psalms 89:10 [9]. γ. Questions respecting the regular advance of the light of morning upon the earth: Job 38:12-15. [“The transition from the sea to the morning is not so abrupt as it appears. For the ancients supposed that the sun sets in the ocean, and at his rising comes out of it again.” Noyes. “Here with genuine poetry the dawn sending forth its rays upon the earth immediately after creation is represented in its regular recurrence and in its moral significance. This member accordingly forms the transition to the following strophe; it is however first of all the logical conclusion of the first.” Schlottmann]. Job 38:12. Hast thou since thy birth (lit. “from thy days”) commanded the morning (i.e., to arise at its time), made known to the dawn its place, (lit. “made the dawn to know its place”). Instead of the K’thibh, ιִ ?γַּ ?ςְ ?ϊָּ ?δωַׁ ?ηַ ?ψ it is certainly admissible to read with the K’ri ιִ ?γַּ ?ςְ ?ϊָּ δַ ?ωַּׁ ?ηַ ?ψ; the anarthrous αֹּ ?χֶ ?ψ of the first member by no means requires us to remove the definite article from the dawn, which is always only one. [“The mention of its ‘place’ here seems to be an allusion to the fact that it does not always occupy the same position. At one season of the year it appears on the equator, at another north, at another south of it, and is constantly varying its position. Yet it always knows its place. It never fails to appear where by the long-observed laws it ought to appear.” Barnes]. Job 38:13. That it may take hold on the borders (or “fringes”) of the earth. The surface of the earth is conceived of as an outspread carpet, of the ends of which the dawn as it were takes hold all together as it rises suddenly and spreads itself rapidly (comp. Job 37:3; Psalms 139:9), and this with the view of shaking out of it “the wicked, the evil-doers who, dreading the light, ply their business upon it by night;” i.e., of removing them from it at once. The passage contains an unmistakable allusion to Job’s own previous description in Job 24:13 seq. God, anticipating herein in a certain measure the contents of His second discourse, would give Job to understand “how through the original order of creation as established by Himself human wrong is ever annulled again”) Ewald. Comp. also Job 5:15). Job 38:14. That it may change like signet-clay—i.e., the earth (γῆ σημανρίς, Herod. II. 38), which during the night is, as it were, a shapeless mass, like unsealed wax, but which, in the bright light of the morning, reveals the entire beauty of its changing forms, of its heights and depths, etc. The subj. of ιִ ?ϊְ ?ιַ ?φְּ ?αεֹ is to be sought neither in the “morning” and “day-spring” of Job 38:12 (Schultens, Rosenmόller), which is altogether too far removed from this clause, nor in the “borders” of Job 38:13 (Ewald), but in the particular things found on the earth’s surface. The effect of the morning on them is that “they set themselves forth (or, all sets itself forth) like a garment,” i.e., in all the manifold variegated forms and colors of gay apparel. Job 38:15. From the wicked their light is withheld—i.e., the darkness of the night with which they are so familiar [and which is to them what light is to others], comp. Job 24:16 seq. (Delitz.: “the light to which they are partial” [ihr Lieblingslicht]). And the uplifted arm (is) broken—i.e., figuratively, in the sense that the light of the day compels it to desist from the violence, to fulfil which it had raised itself (comp. Job 22:8). 4. Continuation: b. Questions respecting the heights and depths above and below the earth, and the natural forces proceeding from them: Job 38:16-27. a. The depths under the earth: Job 38:16-18. Job 38:16. Hast thou come to the well-springs of the sea?—i.e., to those “fountains of the deep” of which the Mosaic account of the Flood makes mention; Genesis 7:11; Genesis 8:2 (comp. above on Job 38:8). The phrase πִ ?αְ ?λֵ ?ιΞιָ ?ν, found only here, is not, with Olshausen and Hitzig, to be changed into πִ ?αְ ?μֵ ?ιΞιָ ?ν, for the root πακְ is evidently only a harsher variation of πας, and so beyond a doubt expresses the notion of “welling, springing.” Thus correctly the LXX: πηγὴ θαλάσσης. [Jarchi, followed by Bernard, Lee, (and see Ewald and Schlottmann) defines παλιν to mean “entanglements, mazes” (comp. αεκְ); but this meaning is less probable than the one more commonly received after the Sept.].—In respect to ηֵ ?χֶ ?ψ in b, comp. above, Job 8:8; Job 11:7. Job 38:17. Have the gates of death opened themselves to thee, etc.—Comp. Job 26:6, where the mention of the realm of the dead follows that of the sea precisely as here. On “death,” as meaning the realm of the dead, comp. Job 28:22; and on φμξεϊ in the same sense, see Job 10:21 seq. Job 38:18. Hast thou made an examination unto the breadths of the earth.—δϊαεποςγ signifies, as also in Job 32:12, “to attend to anything strictly, to take a close observation of anything,” the ςγ indicating that this observation is complete, that it penetrates through to the extreme limit. The interrogative δֲ ?is omitted before δִ ?ϊְ ?αֹּ ?πַ ?πְ ?ϊָּ, in order to avoid the concurrence of the two aspirates (Ewald, § 324, b). On b comp. Job 38:4, λֻּ ?μָ ?δּ refers not to the earth, but in the neuter sense, to the things spoken of in the questions just asked. [“To see the force of this (question), we must remember that the early conception of the earth was that it was a vast plain, and that in the time of Job its limits were unknown.” Barnes. “Too much stress is commonly laid on the fact that when the poet wrote this, only a small part of the earth was known. Unquestionably the consciousness of the limitation of man’s vision was in some respects strengthened by that, fact; but that which is properly the main point here, to wit, the inability of man, at one glance to compass the whole earth and all its hidden depths retains all its ancient stress in connection with the widest geographical acquaintance with the surface of the earth.” Schlottmann]. β. The heights of light above the earth: Job 38:19-21. Job 38:19. What is the way (thither, where) the light dwells.—On the relative clause ιִ ?ωְּׁ ?λּ ?εֹ ?οΰεֹ ?ψ comp. Ges. § 123 [§ 121], 3, c. On b, comp. Job 28:1-12. The meaning of the whole verse is as follows: Both light and darkness have a first starting point or a final outlet, which is unapproachable to man, and unattainable to his researches. [“As in Genesis 1., the light is here regarded as a self-subsistent, natural force, independent of the heavenly luminaries by which it is transmitted: and herein modern investigation agrees with the direct observations of antiquity.” Schlottm.] Job 38:20. That Thou mightest bring them (light and darkness) to their bound [lit. “it to its bound,” the subjects just named considered separately]. λִּ ?ι as above in Job 38:5. μχη lit. “to bring, to fetch;” comp. Genesis 27:13; Genesis 42:16; Genesis 48:9.—And that thou shouldest know the paths of their house, i.e. “to their home, their abiding place” (comp. Job 28:23). It is possible that by this “knowing about the paths of their house” is meant taking back [escorting home] the light and darkness, just as in the first member mention is made of fetching, bringing them away; for the repetition of λִּ ?ι seems to indicate that the meaning of the two halves of the verse is not identical (Dillmann). Job 38:21 is evidently intended ironically: Thou knowest, for then wast thou born, i.e. at the time when light and darkness were created, and their respective boundaries were determined. The meaning is essentially the same as in Job 15:7. On the Imperf. with ΰָ ?ζ comp. Gesenius, § 127 [§ 125], 4, a; Ewald, § 136, b.—And the number of thy days is many.—The attraction in connection with ξִ ?ρְ ?τַּ ?ψ as in Job 15:20; Job 21:21. [The interrogative rendering of this verse, as in E. V.: “Knowest thou it, because thou-wast then born?” etc., is excessively flat. It may be undesirable, as Barnes says, “to represent God as speaking in the language of irony and sarcasm, unless the rules of interpretation imperatively demand it.” But humiliating irony surely accords better with the dignity and character of the speaker, as well as with the connection, than pointless insipidity.—E.] γ. Snow and hail, light and wind: Job 38:22-24. Job 38:22. Hast thou come to the treasuries of the snow? Comp. on Job 37:9. The figure of the “treasuries” (ΰֹ ?φָ ?ψεֹ ?ϊ, magazines, storehouses) vividly represents the immense quantities in which snow and hail are wont to fall on the earth; comp. Psalms 135:7. Job 38:23 gives the purpose and rule of the Divine Government of the world, which snow and hail are constrained to subserve.—Which I have reserved for the time of distress.—Such an ςֵ ?ϊφָ ?ψ (comp. Job 15:24; Job 36:16) may be caused in the east not only by a hailstorm (Exodus 9:22; Haggai 2:17; Sir 39:29), but even by a fall of snow. In February, 1860, innumerable herds of sheep, goats and camels, and also many men, were destroyed in Hauran by a snow-storm, in which snow fell in enormous quantities, as described by Muhammed el-Chatib el-Bosrawi in a writing still in the possession of Consul Wetzstein (Delitzsch).—The second member refers to such cases as Joshua 10:11 (comp. Isaiah 28:17; Isaiah 30:30; Ezekiel 13:13; Psalms 68:15 [14]; 1 Samuel 7:10; 2 Samuel 23:20), where violent hail or thunder-storms contributed to decide the issues of war in accordance with the divine decrees. Job 38:24. What is the way to where the light is parted [where] the east wind spreadeth over the earth.—The construction as in Job 38:19 a. The light and the east wind (i.e. a violent wind, a storm in general, comp. Job 27:21) are here immediately joined together, because the course of both these agents defies calculation, and because they are incredibly swift in their movements [possibly also because they both proceed from the same point of the compass]. ΰεֹ ?ψ scarcely denotes the lightning, as in Job 37:3 seq. (Schlottmann), which is first spoken of in Job 38:25, and then again in Job 38:35, and to which the verb ιημχ, “divides, scatters itself,” is less suitable than to the bright day-light (comp. Job 38:13 seq.) In respect to δֵ ?τִ ?ιυ, se diffundere, comp. Exodus 5:12; 1 Samuel 13:8. [According to the E. V. the light is the subject of both members: “By what way is the light parted, which scattereth the east wind upon the earth.” But this construction is less probable and suitable than that given above, which recognizes the “light” as the subject of the first member, and the “east-wind” of the second.—E.] d. The rain-storm and the lightning considered as divinely appointed phenomena which, while they inspire terror, are productive of beneficent results: Job 38:25-27. Job 38:25. Who hath divided a watercourse for the rain-torrent, i.e., conducted the rain through the thick masses of clouds to specific portions of the thirsty earth. ωֶׁ ?θֶ ?σ, which of itself means “flood, torrent of waters” in general, is used here of a down-pouring beneficent torrent of rain [“the earthward direction assigned to the water-spouts is likened to an aqueduct coming downwards from the sky;” Delitzsch], and hence in a different sense from e.g., Psalms 32:6. The second member is taken verbally from Job 28:26. Job 38:26. That it may rain on the land where no man is; lit. “to cause it to rain,” etc. The subject of μְ ?δַ ?ξְ ?θִ ?ιψ is of course God who has been already indicated by ξִ ?ι in Job 38:25. That it should rain on a land of “no-man” (the construction as in Job 10:22), i.e., on a land destitute of men, not artificially irrigated and tilled by men, is here set forth as a wise and loving providential arrangement of God’s. [“God lays stress on this circumstance in order to humiliate man, and to show him that the earth was made neither by him, nor for him.” Renan. “Man who is so prone to put his own interests above everything else, and to judge everything from his own human point of view, is here most strikingly reminded, how much wider is the range of the Divine vision, and how God in the exercise of His loving solicitude remembers even those regions, which receive no care from man, so that even there the possibility of life and growth is secured to His creatures.” Dillmann]. Job 38:27 then states more definitely this beneficent purpose of God: to satisfy the wild and wilderness, (ωֹׁ ?ΰָ ?δεּ ?ξְ ?ωׁ ?εֹ ?ΰָ ?δ as in Job 30:3) [“the desert is thus like a thirsty pilgrim; it is parched, and thirsty, and sad, and it appeals to God, and He meets its wants and satisfies it,” Barnes], and to make the green herb to sprout; lit. “to make the place (the place of going forth, ξֹ ?φָ ?ΰ, comp. Job 28:1) of the green herb to sprout.” 5. Continuation. c. Questions respecting the phenomena of the atmosphere and the wonders of the starry heavens: Job 38:28-38. α. Respecting rain, dew, ice, and hoar-frost: Job 38:28-30. Job 38:28-29. Is there a father to the rain? As this member, together with the following inquires (through the formula ξִ ?ιδεֹ ?μִ ?ιγ) after a male progenitor for the atmospheric precipitations of moisture, so does Job 38:29 inquire after the mother of ice and hoar-frost, for the formula ξִ ?ιιμֳ ?γεֹ in b also refers to the agency of a mother, as well as the question in a. This variation of gender in the representation is to be explained by the fact that rain and dew come from heaven, the abode of God, while ice and hoarfrost come out of the earth, out of the secret womb of the waters (verse 8).—ΰֶ ?βְ ?μֵ ?ιθָ ?μ in Job 38:28 b are not “reservoirs of dew” (Gesenius), for which the verb δεֹ ?μִ ?ιγ would not be suitable, but drops (lit. balls, globules; LXX.: βῶλοι) of dew, whether the root ΰβμ be associated with βμμִ, volvere (which is the view commonly held), or with the Arab, agal, retinere, colligere (so Delitzsch). Job 38:30 describes more specifically the wonderful process which takes place when water is frozen into ice. The water hardens like stone. ιִ ?ϊְ ?ηַ ?αָּ ?ΰεּ, lit. “they hide themselves, draw themselves together, thicken” (a related form is ηָ ?ξָ ?ΰ, whence δֶ ?ξְ ?ΰָ ?δ, curdled milk). The same representation of the process of freezing as producing contraction or compression (a representation which in the strict physical sense is not quite correct, seeing that water on the contrary always expands in freezing—comp. Pfaff, in the work cited above, pp. 103, 189 seq.), was given above by Elihu, chapter Job 37:10, not however without indicating in what sense he intended this compression, a sense which is by no means incorrect; see on the passage. A similar intimation is conveyed here by the second member: and the face of the deep cleaves together, and thus constitutes a firm solid mass (continuum), instead of fluctuating to and fro, as in the fluid state. δִ ?ϊְ ?μַ ?λֵּ ?γ as in Job 41:8 [17]; comp. the Greek ἔχεσθαι. β. Respecting the control of the stars, and of their influence upon earth: Job 38:31-33. Job 38:31. Canst thou bind the bands of the Pleiades?—ξַ ?ςֲ ?γַ ?πּ ?εֹ ?ϊ here not = am�nitates, as in 1 Samuel 15:32, [E. V., “sweet influences,” referring to the softening and gladdening influences of spring-time, when that constellation makes its appearance] but vincula (LXX.: δεσμόν; Targ. ωֵׁ ?ιψֵ ?ι=σειράς) as appears from χωψ “to bind,” and the parallel ξεֹ ?ωְׁ ?λεֹ ?ϊ in b, and not less from the testimony of all the ancient versions, of Talmudic usage, and of the Masora. It is to be derived accordingly by transposition from ςπγ, “to bind” (comp. Job 31:36) not from ςγο. The arranging of the stars of the Pleiades (λִּ ?ιξָ ?δ as in Job 9:9) in a dense group is with poetic boldness described here as the binding of a fillet, or of a cluster of diamonds. (See a similar conception copied out of Persian poets in Ideler, Sternennamen, p. 147).—Or loose the bands of Orion, so that this brilliant constellation would fall apart, or fall down from heaven, to which the presumptuous giant is chained (comp. on Job 9:9). The explanation preferred by Dillmann is admissible, and even perhaps, in view of the etymon of ξεֹ ?ωְׁ ?λεֹ ?ϊ, to be preferred to the one more commonly adopted: “Or canst thou loose the lines [German—Zugseile, draw-lines, traces, the cords by which he is drawn up to his place, suggested by ρωׁ ?κְ ?] of Orion (the giant suspended in heaven), and thus canst thou now raise, and now lower him in the firmament?” The reference of the passage to the Star Suhκl = Canopus (Saad., Gekat., Abulwalid, comp. also Delitzsch) is uncertain, and conflicts with the well-known signification of λְּ ?ρִ ?ιμ, which is also firmly established by Job 9:9. Job 38:32. Canst thou bring forth the bright stars in their time (αְּ ?ςִ ?ϊּ ?εֹ as in Job 5:26; Psalms 104:27; Psalms 145:15). The word ξַ ?ζָּ ?ψεֹ ?ϊ, to which such a variety of interpretations have been given, which already the LXX. did not understand, and accordingly rendered by μασουρώθ [followed herein by E. V., “Mazzaroth”], seems to be most simply explained (with Dillmann) as a contracted form of ξַ ?ζְ ?δָ ?ψεֹ ?ϊ, from ζδψ, splendere, and to mean accordingly “the brightly shining, brilliant stars,” in which case we may assume the planets to be intended, particularly such as are pre-eminently brilliant, as Venus, Jupiter, Mars, (comp. Vulg., “Luciferum”) [Fόrst: Jupiter, the supreme god of good fortune]. The “being brought forth in their time” seems to suit better these wandering stars than e.g., “the two crowns,” the Northern and Southern (Cocceius, Eichhorn, Michaelis, Ewald, by comparison with πζψ) [these constellations being, as Dillmann objects, too obscure and too little known], or the twelve signs of the Zodiac (so the majority of moderns, on the basis of the very precarious identification of ξַ ?ζָּ ?ψεֹ ?ϊ with ξַ ?ζָּ ?μεֹ ?ϊ, 2 Kings 23:5), or the twenty-eight stations (Arab. menβzil) of the moon (so A. Weber, in his Abhandlung όber die vedischen Nachrichten von den naxatra, oder Mondstationen, 1860), or, finally, any prophetic stars whatever, astra, prζsaga, prζmonentia (Gesenius, who refers the word to πζψ in the Arabic signification).—And guide the Bear (lit., “the she-bear,” ςַ ?ιִ ?ωׁ, comp. Job 9:9) together with his [lit., her] young?i.e., the constellation of the Bear with the three stars forming its tail, which are regarded as its children (αָּ ?πִ ?ιν, in Arab. αָּ ?πεֹ ?ϊ); see on Job 9:9. The evening star (vesperus, Vulg.) is far from being intended, and equally so the comparatively unimportant constellation Capella (Eichhorn, Bibliothek, Vol. VII., p. 429). Job 38:33. Knowest thou the laws of heaven?i.e., the laws which rule the course of the stars, the succession of seasons and periods, annual and diurnal, etc., (comp. Genesis 1:14 seq.; Job 8:22).—Or dost thou establish its dominion over the earth?i.e., dost thou ordain and confirm its influence (that of heaven, here personified as a king; comp. Ewald, § 318 a) on earthly destinies. ξִ ?ωְׁ ?θָ ?ψ, “dominion,” is construed [with αְּ ?] after the analogy of the verbs ξωׁ ?μαְּ ,ψγδαְ. γ. Respecting the Divine control of clouds and lightnings: Job 38:34; Job 38:36. On Job 38:34 b, comp. Job 22:11 b (which is here verbally repeated). On Job 38:35 comp. Psalms 104:3; Psalms 33:9. δ. Additional questions relating to the clouds, and their agencies: Job 38:36-38. Job 38:36. Who put wisdom in the dark clouds, who gave understanding to that which appears in the sky [Germ. “Luftgebilde” atmospheric phenomena]; i.e., who has given to them an intelligent arrangement and significance, θֻ ?ηεֹ ?ϊ, from θεּ ?ηַ, signifies here as in Psalms 51:8, dark, hidden places,” meaning here, as the connection shows, “dark clouds, black cloud-layers” (Eichhorn, Umbr., Hirz., Stickel, Hahn, Dillmann, etc., by comparison with the Arabic θηΰ, and its derivative nouns. In that caseωֶׂ ?λְ ?εִ ?ι, from the Hebr. and Aram, ωׂ ?λδ, “to see,” (comp. ωְׂ ?λִ ?ιּ ?εּ ?ϊ and ξַ ?ωְׂ ?λִּ ?ιϊ), signifies “appearance, phenomenon, form,” here according to the parallelism of the first member, “a form, phenomenon of the atmosphere, or the clouds.” It can scarcely mean (the rainbow being certainly called χֶ ?ωֶׁ ?θ, Genesis 9:13) “an appearance of light, fiery meteor” (Ewald, Hahn), or “the full moon,” (so Dillmann, at least tentatively, assuming at the same time that θֻ ?ηεֹ ?ϊ refers to the dark phases of the moon). At all events the explanation which refers both parallel expressions to phenomena of the cloud-heavens is the only one suited to the context (as was the case with the meteorological sense of “gold” in Job 37:22; whereas on the contrary the interpretation long ago adopted by the Vulg., the 2d Targ., and many Rabbis [and E. V.] and recently by Delitzsch [Gesenius, Noyes, Conant, Barnes, Wordsworth, Schlottmann, Renan], according to which θֻ ?ηεֹ ?ϊ means “the reins,” or “entrails,” (comp. Psalms 51:8 [6]), and ωֶׂ ?λְ ?εִ ?ι the “cock” [as “the weather-prophet κατ̓ ἐξοχήν among animals,” Delitzsch: while Gesenius, Schlottmann, Noyes, Conant, Wordsworth, Renan, as also E. V., render by “heart, intelligence”] yields a meaning that is singular enough, and which is made no better when the cock is regarded as speculator et prζco aurorζ, as ales diei nuntius (Prudentius), or as a weather-prophet (after Cicero, de divin. II., 26), and the reins are supposed to be mentioned because of their power of foretelling the weather and presaging the future. Still more singular and opposed to the context is the rendering of the LXX.: Τίςἔδωκενγυναικὶ ὐφάσματοςσοφίανκαὶ ποικιλτικὴνἐπιστήμην [And who has given to woman skill in weaving, or knowledge of embroidery]? They seem to have read in the first member θֹ ?εεֹ ?ϊ, in the second ωָׂ ?λεֹ ?ϊ, “embroidering women,” or ωַׂ ?λּ ?εֹ ?ϊ “to embroider.” Job 38:37. Who numbers the clouds in Wisdom.—ρִ ?τֵּ ?ψ as elsewhere the Kal: “to number” (Job 28:27). And the bottles of the heavens—who inclines them—i.e., who causes them to be emptied, to pour out their fluid contents. The comparison of the clouds, laden with rain, to bottles, or pitchers occurs frequently also in Arabic poets (see Schultens on the passage). [E. V. “Who can stay the bottles of heaven?” which is less suitable to δωׁ ?λια, and to the context. Jerome, taking, παμι to mean “harps,” renders uniquely: et concentrum c�lorum quis dormire faciet?] Job 38:38. When the dust flows together into a molten mass. ξεּ ?φָ ?χ, “fused, solid metal,” a word which is to be explained in accordance with Job 37:18 (not in accordance with Job 22:16). φֶ ?χֶ ?ϊ here, as in 1 Kings 22:35, to be rendered intransitively: “When the dust pours itself,” i.e., when it flows, runs, as it were, together. In respect to ψְ ?βָ ?αιν, “clods,” comp. Job 21:33. 6. Continuation and conclusion, d. Questions respecting the propagation and preservation of wild beasts as objects of the creative power and wise providence of God. chap. 38–39:30. a. The lion, the raven, the wild goat, the stag, and the wild ass: Job 38:39 to Job 39:8. Job 38:39. Dost thou hunt the prey for the lioness, and dost thou appease the craving of the young lions?—Respecting the lion’s names, μָ ?αִ ?ιΰ and λְּ ?τִ ?ιψ, comp. on Job 4:11. “To appease (lit. to fill) the craving” (ξִ ?μֵּ ?ΰηַ ?ιָּ ?δ), means the same as “to fill the soul” (ξΧπֶ ?τֶ ?ωׁ), Proverbs 6:30. Job 38:40. When they crouch in the dens. On ιָ ?ωֹׁ ?ηεּ comp. Psalms 10:10. On ξְ ?ςεֹ ?πεֹ ?ϊlustra, comp. Psalms 104:22. In respect to ρֻ ?λָּ ?δ in b, comp. ρֹ ?κְ, used elsewhere in the sense of “thicket,” Psalms 10:9; Jeremiah 25:38. On μְ ?ξεֹ ?Ξΰָֽ ?ψֶ ?α, which gives the object of the “crouching” and “sitting” [or “dwelling”], comp. Job 31:9 b. Job 38:41. Who provides for the raven its prey, when its young ones cry unto God, [wander without food?—The interrogation properly extends over the whole verse, not, as in E. V., over the first member only, which makes the remainder of the verse meaningless.—E.]. δֵ ?λִ ?ιο, “to prepare, to provide,” as in Job 27:16 seq. λִּ ?ι “when,” as in Job 38:40 a. The ravens are introduced here, as in the parallel passages, Psalms 147:9; Luke 12:24, as objects of God’s fatherly care, rather than any other description of birds, because they are specially noticeable among birds in search of food, by reason of their hoarse cries. Observe moreover the contrast, which is surely intentional between the mighty monarch of the beasts, which in Job 38:39 seq. is put at the head of beasts in search of food, and the contemptibly small, insignificant, and uncomely raven. [“Jewish and Arabian writers tell strange stories of this bird, and its cruelty to its young; hence, say some, the Lord’s express care for the young ravens, after they had been driven out of the nests by the parent birds; but this belief in the ravens’ want of affection to its young is entirely without foundation. To the fact of the raven being a common bird in Palestine, and to its habit of flying restlessly about in constant search for food to satisfy its voracious appetite, may perhaps be traced the reason for its being selected by our Lord and the inspired writers as the especial object of God’s providing care.” Smith’s Bib. Dict. Art. “Raven.”]  Job 39:1-4 : Propagation and increase of the wild goats (rock-goats, ibices) and stags. Job 39:1. Knowest thou the time when the wild goats bear? observest thou the travail of the hinds?—ηεֹ ?μֵ ?μ Inf. Pilel of ηεμ, “to be in labor,” ὠδίνειν (comp. the Pulal in Job 15:7), here the object of ϊִּ ?ωְׁ ?ξֹ ?ψ, to which verb the influence of the δֲ before ιָ ?γַ ?ςְ ?ϊָּ in the first member extends. Job 39:2. Dost thou number the months which they (must) fulfil;i.e., until they bring forth, hence their period of gestation. [The point of the question can scarcely be that Job could have no knowledge whatever of the matters here referred to, but that he could have no such knowledge as would qualify him to stand toward these creatures at such a time in the place of God; or, as Carey expresses it: “Can you keep an exact register of all this, and exercise such providential care over these creatures, the mountain goats and hinds, as to preserve them from dangers during the time of gestation, and then deliver them at the proper period?”—E.]. In the second member μִ ?γְ ?ϊָּ ?πָ ?δ, with full-toned suffix, is used for μִ ?γְ ?ϊָּ ?ο; comp. Rth 1:19, and Gesenius, § 91 [§ 89], 1, Rem. 2. [Green, § 104, g]. Job 39:3. They bow themselves (comp. 1 Samuel 4:19), they let their young ones break through (lit. “cleave;” comp. Job 16:13), they cast away their pains;i.e., the fruit of their pains, their f�tus, for this is what ηֶ ?αֶ ?μ here signifies, not the after-pains, as Hirzel and Schlottmann think. Comp. ῥίψαιὠδῖνα = edere f�tum, in Euripides, Ion 45; also examples of the same phraseology from the Arabic in Schultens on the passage. It will be seen further that ϊτμηπδ (instead of which Olshausen needlessly conjectures ϊτμθπδ after Job 21:10) forms a paronomasia with ϊωμηπδ. Job 39:4. Their young ones become strong (ημν, lit. “to grow fat,” pinguescere), grow up in the desert.—αַּ ?ηεּ ?υ=αַּ ?αָּ ?ψ, or αַּ ?ωָּ ?γֶ ?δ, as often in the Targ. [a meaning more suitable to the context than that of E. V. “with corn “]. They go away, and return not to them;i.e., to the parents, μָ ?ξεֹ however might also be explained after Job 6:19; Job 24:16 as Dat. commodi: sibi=sui juris esse volentes (Schultens, Delitzsch). Vers 5–8. The wild ass, introduced as an example of many beasts, the life of which is characterized by unrestricted liberty, defying and mocking all human control and nurture. Job 39:5. Who hath sent out the wild ass free, and who hath loosed the bands of the fugitive?—The words τֶּ ?ψֶ ?ΰ (Arab, ferβ; comp. above Job 6:5; Job 11:12; Job 24:5) and ςָ ?ψּ ?εֹ ?γ denote one and the same animal, the wild ass or onager (the ὄνοςἄγριος of the LXX., the “Kulan” of the eastern Asiatics of to-day), which is characterized by the first name as the “swift runner,” by the latter (which in Aramaic, and particularly in the Targum is the common name), as the “shy, fleeing one.” As to the predicate accusative ηָ ?τְּ ?ωִׁ ?ι, “free, set loose,” comp. Deuteronomy 15:12; Jeremiah 34:14. As to the second member, comp. Job 38:31. Job 39:6. Whose home [lit. “house”] I have made the desert, and his abode the salt-steppe.—The word “salt-steppe” (ξְ ?μֵ ?ηָ ?δ) which is here used as parallel to “waste, desert” (ςψαδ, Job 24:5 b), stands in Psalms 107:34 as the opposite of ΰֶ ?ψֶ ?υτְּ ?ψִ ?ι (comp. Judges 9:45, where mention is made of sowing a destroyed city with salt). On the preference of the wild ass for saline plants, and on his disposition to take up his abode in salt marshes, comp. Oken, Allg. Naturgesch. Vol. VII., p. 1230. Job 39:7. [He laughs at the tumult (E. V. “multitude,” but the parallelism favors “tumult”) of the city], the driver’s shouts he hears not;i.e., he flees from the control of the drivers, to which the tamed ass is subjected. On ϊְּ ?ωֻׁ ?ΰεֹ ?ϊ, comp. Job 36:29. Job 39:8. He ranges through the mountains as his pasture.—So according to the reading ιָ ?ϊεּ ?ψ (Imperf. of ϊּ ?εּ ?ψ, investigare), which is attested by almost all the ancient versions, by the LXX, Vulg., Targum. The Masoretic reading ιְ ?ϊεּ ?ψ is either (with the Pesh. Le Clerc, etc.) to be taken as a variant of ϊּ ?εּ ?ψ, abundantia, or as a derivative of ϊּ ?εּ ?ψ with the meaning, “that which is searched out” (investigatum, investigabile). But the statement that “the abundance of the mountains is the pasture of the wild ass” would be at variance with the fact in respect to the life of these animals, which inhabit the bare mountain-steppes (comp. Oken in the work cited above). On the other hand we should expect the normal form ιְ ?ϊεּ ?ψ, following the analogy of such words as ιָ ?χεּ ?ν to have an active rather than a passive signification. ιְ ?ϊεּ ?ψ however can scarcely mean “circle, compass,” [E. V. “range”] here (Hahn). β. The oryx and ostrich: Job 39:9-18. Job 39:9. Will the oryx be pleased to serve thee?—ψֵ ?ιν, contracted from ψְ ?ΰֵ ?ν (comp. the full written form ψִ ?ΰֵ ?ιν, Psalms 92:11), assuredly denotes not the rhinoceros (Aq., Vulgate) [Good, Barnes], because the animal intended must be one that was common in Western Asia, and especially in the regions of Syria and Palestine. Comp. the reference to it in Psalms 22:22 [21]; Job 29:6; Deuteronomy 33:17; Isaiah 34:7. It would be more natural, with Schultens, Gesenius, De Wette, Umbreit, Hirzel [Robinson, Noyes, Carey, Wordsworth, Renan, Rodwell, Conant, Fόrst, Smith’sBib. Dict. Art. “Unicorn”], etc., to understand the buffalo or wild ox [bos bubalus) to be intended, seeing that this animal is still quite common in Palestine, and that here a contrast seems to be intended between this wild ox and the tame species (see Job 39:10). But this particular buffalo of Palestine is an animal which is not particularly strong, or characterized by untamable wildness, as is shown by the fact that it is frequently used in tilling the land (Russell, Naturgesch. von Aleppo, II. 7) [Thomson’sLand and the Book, I. 386, 387]. The μονοκέρως of the LXX. [E. V.: “unicorn”] (of which the Talmudic χψω is a mutilated form, and the ῥινοκἑρως of Aquila and Jerome is a misunderstanding) points to an animal which is, if not always, yet often, represented as having one horn, i.e., as being armed with one horn on the forehead, consisting of two which have grown together. Such an animal seems in ancient times to have been somewhat common in Egypt and South-western Asia, the same being a species nearly related to the oryx—antelope (Antil. loucoryx) of to-day. It is represented on Egyptian monuments, now with two horns, and now with one. It is described by Aristotle and Pliny as a one-horned, cloven hoof (Aristotle, Hist. Anim. II. 1; De Partib. Anim. III. 2; Pliny, Hist. Nat. XI. 106); and in all probability it has been again discovered recently in the Tschiru, or the Antil. Hodgsonii of Southern Thibet (Hue and Gabet, Journeyings through Mongolia and Thibet, Germ. Edit., p. 323; see the passage quoted in Delitzsch, II., p. 334, n. 2). The name ψιν in the passage before us is all the more suitably applied to such an animal of the oryx species, in view of the fact that the corresponding Arabic word still signifies a species of antelope among the Syro-Arabians of to-day, and that this same oryx-family embraces sub-species which are particularly wild, largely and powerfully built, and almost bovine in their characteristics. Accordingly, Luther’s translation of the word by “unicorn,” in this passage, and probably in every other where ψΰν occurs in the Old Testament, supported as it is by the LXX., might be justified without our being compelled to understand by this “unicorn” a fabulous animal like that of the Perso-Assyrian monuments, or of the English royal coat-of-arms. Comp. on the subject S. Bochart, Hierozoicon, II. 335 seq.; Rosenmόller, Bibl. Alterth. IV. 2, 288 seq.; Lichtenstein, Die Antilopen, 1824; Lewysohn, Zoologie des Talmud, 1858, § 146, 174; Sundewall, Die Thierarten des Aristoteles, Stockholm, 1863, p. 64 seq.; also Koner’s Zeitschr. fόr allgem. Erdkunde, 1862, II., H. 3, p. 227, where interesting information is given respecting the researches of the Englishman, W. B. Bailie, touching the existence of a one horned animal still to be found in the regions of Central Africa, south of the Sea of Tsad, differing both from the rhinoceros and from the unicorn of the British coat-of-arms, which is probably, therefore, an African variety of the oryx—antelope, and possibly the very same variety as that represented on the old Egyptian monuments. [See Robinson’s Researches in Palestine, III, 306, 563; Wilson, Lands of the Bible, II., p. 167 seq.; and the remarks of Dr. Mason, of the Assam Mission, in the Christian Review, January, 1856, quoted by Conant in this verse.] Will he lodge [lit. “pass the night,” ιָ ?μִ ?ιοat thy crib?—lit. “over thy crib” [hence ΰֵ ?αεּ ?ν cannot be, as defined by Gesenius, “stall, stable”], for the crib being very low, the cattle of the ancients in the East reached over it with the head while lying beside it. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/lange/ Second Discourse of Jehovah (together with Job’s answer):To doubt God’s justice, which is most closely allied to His wonderful omnipotence, is a grievous wrong, which must be atoned for by sincere penitence:Job 40:6 to Job 42:61. Sharp rebuke of Job’s presumption, which has been carried to the point of doubting God’s justice: Job 40:6-14 Job 40:6.         Then answered the Lord unto Job out of the whirlwind, and said: 7    Gird up thy loins now like a man: I will demand of thee, and declare thou unto me. 8    Wilt thou also disannul my judgment? wilt thou condemn me that thou mayest be righteous? 9    Hast thou an arm like God? or canst thou thunder with a voice like Him? 10    Deck thyself now with majesty and excellency, and array thyself with glory and beauty. 11    Cast abroad the rage of thy wrath; and behold every one that is proud, and abase him. 12    Look on every one that is proud, and bring him low; and tread down the wicked in their place. 13    Hide them in the dust together: and bind their faces in secret. 14    Then will I also confess unto thee that thine own right hand can save thee. 2. Humiliating exhibition of the weakness of Job in contrast with certain creatures of earth, not to say with God; shown a. by a description of the behemoth (hippopotamus):Job 40:15-2415    Behold now behemoth, which I made with thee; he eateth grass as an ox. 16    Lo now, his strength is in his loins, and his force is in the navel of his belly. 17    He moveth his tail like a cedar: the sinews of his stones are wrapped together. 18    His bones are as strong pieces of brass; his bones are like bars of iron. 19    He is the chief of the ways of God: He that made him can make his sword to approach unto him. 20    Surely the mountains bring him forth food, where all the beasts of the field play. 21    He lieth under the shady trees, in the covert of the reed, and fens. 22    The shady trees cover him with their shadow; the willows of the brook compass him about. 23    Behold, he drinketh up a river, and hasteth not: he trusteth that he can draw up Jordan in his mouth. 24    He taketh it with his eyes: his nose pierceth through snares. b. by a description of the leviathan (crocodile): Job 40:25–41:26 [E. V. Job 41:1-34]E.V. [Heb.] 41. [40. 1    [25] Canst thou draw out leviathan with a hook? or his tongue with a cord which thou lettest down? 2    [26] Canst thou put a hook into his nose? or bore his jaw through with a thorn? 3    [27] Will he make many supplications unto thee? will he speak soft words unto thee? 4    [28] Will he make a covenant with thee? wilt thou take him for a servant for ever? 5    [29] Wilt thou play with him as with a bird? or wilt thou bind him for thy maidens? 6    [30] Shall the companions make a banquet of him? shall they part him among the merchants? 7    [31] Canst thou fill his skin with barbed irons? or his head with fish spears? 8    [32] Lay thine hand upon him, remember the battle, do no more. [41] 9    [1] Behold the hope of him is in vain: shall not one be cast down even at the sight of him? 10    [2] None is so fierce that dare stir him up; who then is able to stand before Me? 11    [3] Who hath prevented me that I should repay him? whatsoever is under the whole heaven is mine. 12    [4] I will not conceal his parts, nor his power, nor his comely proportion. 13    [5] Who can discover the face of his garment? or who can come to him with his double bridle? 14    [6] Who can open the doors of his face? his teeth are terrible round about. 15    [7] His scales are his pride, shut up together as with a close seal. 16    [8] One is so near to another, that no air can come between them. 17    [9] They are joined one to another, they stick together that they cannot be sundered. 18    [10] By his neesings a light doth shine, and his eyes are like the eyelids of the morning. 19    [11] Out of his mouth go burning lamps, and sparks of fire leap out. 20    [12] Out of his nostrils goeth smoke, as out of a seething pot, or cauldron. 21    [13] His breath kindleth coals, and a flame goeth out of his mouth. 22    [14] In his neck remaineth strength, and sorrow is turned into joy before him. 23    [15] The flakes of his flesh are joined together: they are firm in themselves; they cannot be moved. 24    [16] His heart is as firm as a stone; yea, as hard as a piece of the nether millstone. 25    [17] When he raiseth up himself the mighty are afraid: by reason of breakings they purify themselves. 26    [18] The sword of him that layeth at him cannot hold: the spear, the dart, nor the habergeon. 27    [19] He esteemeth iron as straw, and brass as rotten wood. 28    [20] The arrow cannot make him flee; slingstones are turned with him into stubble. 29    [21] Darts are counted as stubble; he laugheth at the shaking of a spear. 30    [22] Sharp stones are under him: he spreadeth sharp-pointed things upon the mire. 31    [23] He maketh the deep to boil like a pot; he maketh the sea like a pot of ointment. 32    [24] He maketh a path to shine after him; one would think the deep to be hoary. 33    [25] Upon earth there is not his like, who is made without fear. 34    [26 He beholdeth all high things: he is a king over all the children of pride. 3. Job’s answer: Humble confession of the infinitude of the divine power, and penitent acknowledgment of his guilt and folly: Job 42:1-61    Then Job answered the Lord and said: 2    I know that Thou canst do everything, and that no thought can be withholden from Thee. 3    “Who is he that hideth counsel without knowledge?” therefore have I uttered that I understood not; things too wonderful for me which I knew not; 4    Hear, I beseech Thee, and I will speak: I will demand of Thee, and declare Thou unto me. 5    I have heard of Thee by the hearing of the ear; but now mine eye seeth Thee: 6    Wherefore I abhor myself, and repent in dust and ashes. AND 1. That the omnipotent and infinitely wise activity of the Creator in nature is at the same time just, was in the first discourse of God affirmed for the most part only indirectly, or implicite. Only once, in Job 38:13-15, was this aspect of His character expressly presented, and then only incidentally. The second discourse of Jehovah is intended to supply what is still lacking as to this point, to constrain Job fully to recognize the justice of God in all that He does, and in this way to vanquish the last remainder of pride and presumption in his heart. It accomplishes this end by a twofold method of treatment. First by the direct method of severely censuring the doubt which Job had uttered as to the divine justice, and by vindicating God’s sole and exclusive claim to the power requisite for exercising sovereignty over the universe (first, and shorter part: Job 40:6-14). Next by the indirect method of attacking his pride through a lengthened description of two proud monster-beasts, mighty creations of God’s hand, which after all the amazing wonder which their gigantic power calls forth, are nevertheless only instruments in the hand of the Almighty, and must submit, if not to the will of man, at least to the will of God, who crushes all tyrannous pride (second, and longer part: Job 40:15 to Job 41:26 [ Job 41:34]). This second part, which is again divided into two unequal halves-the shorter describing the behemoth- Job 40:15-24, the longer the leviathan, Job 40:25-41:26. [E. V., Job 41:1-34], falls back on the descriptive and interrogative tone of the first discourse of God; in contrast with which however it is characterized by an allegorizing tendency. It directly prepares the way for Job’s second and last answer, in which he renews the humble submission which he had previously made, and strengthens it by a penitent confession of his own sinfulness.-The strophic arrangement of this second discourse of Jehovah is comprehensively simple and grand, corresponding to the contents, which are thoroughly descriptive, with a massive execution. It embraces in all five Long Strophes, of 8–12 verses each, not less than three of which are devoted to the description of the leviathan in Job 40:25–41:26, [E. V., Job 41. These five Long Strophes include indeed shorter subordinate divisions, but not, strictly speaking, regularly constructed strophes.-Against the modern objections to the authenticity of the episode referring to the behemoth and leviathan, see above in the Introd. § 9, II. (also the notice taken of the peculiar theory of Merx in the Preface). 2. First Division (Long Strophe): Severe censure of Job’s presumptuous doubt respecting the justice of the divine course of action: Job 40:6-14. Job 40:6. Then answered Jehovah Job out of the storm, etc.-This intentional repetition of Job 38:1 is to show that God continues to present Himself to Job as one who, if not exactly burning with wrath towards him, would have him feel His mighty superiority. That here also, instead of ξπρςεδ, the original text was ξִ ?πְ ?δַ ?ρְּ ?ςָ ?εָ ?δ, is evident from the Masorah itself. The absence of the art. δ, if it originally belonged here, is by no means to be explained, with Ramban, as designed to indicate that the storm was no longer as violent as before. Job 40:7 precisely as in Job 38:3. Job 40:8. Wilt thou altogether annul my right?-δֲ ?ΰַ ?σ stands in a climactic relation to Job’s “contending” (ψֹ ?α) reproved in Job 40:2. “To break” (δτψ) God’s right would be the same as “to abolish, annul” the same (comp. Job 15:4). Job was on the point of becoming guilty of this wickedness, in that he sought to substitute what he assumed to be right, his idea of righteousness, for that of God, so that he might be accounted righteous, and God unjust, (see the second member). Job 40:9. Or hast thou an arm like God?-εְ ?ΰִ ?ν interrogative, as in Job 8:3; Job 21:4; Job 34:17. The “arm” of God as a symbol of His power, comp. Job 22:8; so also the “thunder-voice” spoken of in the second member; comp. Job 37:2 seq.-ϊַּ ?ψְ ?ςֵ ?ν, lit., “wilt, canst thou thunder? dost thou pledge thyself to thunder?” Job 40:10. Then put on majesty and grandeur, as an ornament; clothe, deck thyself with these attributes of divine greatness and sovereignty (comp. Psalms 104:1 seq.; Job 21:6 [5]. The challenge is intended ironically, since it demands of Job that which is in itself impossible; in like manner all that follows down to Job 40:13 (comp. Job 38:21). Job 40:11. Let the outbreakings of thy wrath pour themselves forth.-δֵ ?τִֹ ?υ, effundere, to pour forth, to cause to gush forth, as in Job 37:11; Proverbs 5:16. ςַ ?αְ ?ψεֹ ?ϊ, lit., “over-steppings,” are here the overflowings, or outbreakings of wrath; comp. Job 21:30; and for the thought, particularly in the second member, comp. Isaiah 2:12 seq. The fact that Jehovah ironically summons Job to display such manifestations of holy wrath and of stern retributive justice against sinners, conveys an indirect, but sufficiently clear and emphatic assurance of the truth that He Himself, Jehovah, governs the world thus rigidly and justly; comp. above, Job 38:13 seq. Job 40:12. Look on all that is proud, and bring it low.-This almost verbal repetition of Job 40:11 b is intended to emphasize the fact that at the moment when God casts His angry glance upon the wicked, the latter is cast down; comp. Psalms 34:17 [16].-And overturn the wicked in their place, δָ ?γַ ?κְ, ἅπ. λεγ., “to throw down,” or perhaps “to tread down” (related to γּ ?εּ ?κְ). In the latter case the passage might be compared with Romans 16:20.-On ϊַּ ?ηְ ?ϊָּ ?ν “in their place” [= “on the spot”], comp. Job 36:20. Job 40:13. Hide them in the dust altogether;i.e., in the dust of the grave (hardly in holes of the earth, or of rooks, as though Isaiah 2:10 were a parallel passage).-Shut up fast (lit., “bind, fetter”) their faces in secret, i.e., in the interior of the earth, in the darkness of the realm of the dead; θָ ?ξεּ ?ο here substantially = ωְׂ ?ΰֹ ?μ Comp. the passage out of the Book of Enoch Job 10:5, cited by Dillmann: καὶ τὴνὄψιναὐτοῦ πώμασον, καὶ φῶςμὴ θεωρείτω. Job 40:14. Then will I too praise thee, not only wilt thou praise thyself (comp. Job 40:8)-That thy right hand brings thee succor;i.e., that thou dost actually possess the power (the “arm,” Job 40:9) to put thy ideas of justice into execution with vigor; comp. the similar expressions in Psalms 44:4 [3]; Isaiah 59:18; Isaiah 63:5. This conclusion of the rebuke which Jehovah administers directly to Job’s insolent presumption, as though he only knew what is just, prepares at once the transition to the description which follows of the colossal animals which are introduced as eloquent examples of God’s infinite creative power, which for the very reason of its being such is of necessity united to the highest justice. 3. Second Division: The descriptions of animals, given for the purpose of humiliating Job by showing his weakness, and the absolute groundlessness of his presumptuous pride. a. The description of the behemoth: Verses 15–24. Job 40:15. Behold now the behemoth.-Even Dillm., one of the most zealous opponents of the genuineness of the whole section, is obliged to admit that the connection with what precedes by means of δִ ?πֵּ ?δּ is an “easy” one. Moreover it is by no means one that is “purely external,” for the behemoth is brought to Job’s attention for the very purpose of illustrating the proposition that no creature of God’s, however mighty, can succeed against Him, can “with his right hand obtain for himself help against Him” (see Job 40:14 b). This is clearly enough indicated by the second member: which I have made with thee;i.e. as well as thee (ςִ ?ν as though it were comparative, as in Job 9:26; comp. Job 37:18). Job is bid to contemplate his fellow-creature, the behemoth, far huger and stronger than himself, that he may learn how insignificant and weak are all created beings in contrast with God, and in particular how little presumptuous and proud confidence in external things can avail against Him (comp. the passage of Horace; Vis consilξ expert mole ruit sua, etc.). The name αְּ ?δֵ ?ξεֹ ?ϊ (which the ancient versions either misinterpreted as a plural [so the LXX.: θηρία], or left untranslated, as a proper name [Vulg., etc.]), in itself denotes, in accordance with the analogy of other plural formations with an intensive signification: “the great beast, the colossus of cattle, the monster animal.” The word is, however, a Hebraized form of the Egyptian p-ehe-mau, “the water-ox” (p=the, ehe=ox, mau or mou=water), and like this Egypt, word (besides which indeed the hieroglyphic apet is more frequently to be met with), and the Ital. bomarino, it signifies the Nile-horse, or hippopotamus. For it is to this animal that the whole description which follows refers, as is most distinctly and unmistakably shown by the association with another monster of the Nile, the crocodile: not to the elephant, of which it is understood by Thom. Aquinas, Oecolampadius, the Zόrich Bib., Drusius, Pfeifer, Le Clerc, Cocceius, Schultens, J. D. Michaelis [Scott, Henry. Good refers the description to some extinct pachyderm of the mammoth or mastodon species. Lee, following the LXX., understands it of the cattle, first collectively, and then distributively]. The correct view was taken by Bochart (Hieroz. iii. 705 seq.), and after him has been adopted by the great majority of moderns. With the following vivid description of this animal’s way of living and form, beginning with the mention of his “eating grass” (supporting himself on tender plants, the reeds of the Nile, roots, etc.), may be compared Herod, ii. 69–71; Pliny viii. 25; Aben Batuta, ed. Defrem 4., p. 426; among the moderns, Rόppell: Reisen in Nubien, 1829, p. 52 seq.; and in particular Sir Sam. Baker in his travels, as in The Nile and its Tributaries, The Albert Nyanza, etc. (See extracts from these works, with striking illustrations of the hippopotamus in the Globus, Vol. XVII., 1870, Nos. 22–24) [Livingstone, Travels and Researches, p. 536]. Job 40:16. Lo now, his strength is in his loins, etc.-ΰεֹ ?ο as in Job 18:7; Job 18:12. ωְׁ ?ψִ ?ιψִ ?ιν in b, a word found only here (derived from the root ωׁ ?ψ, “to wind, to twist,” which is contained also in ωֹׁ ?ψ, “navel,” as also in ωֹׁ ?ψֶ ?ωׁ “root”), cannot signify, the “bones,” of which mention is first made in Job 40:18 (against Wetzstein in Delitzsch), but the cords, the sinews and muscles, which in the case of the hippopotamus (not, however, of the elephant) are particularly firm and strong just in the region of the belly. Job 40:17. He bends his tail like a cedar;i.e. like a cedar-bough; the tert. comp. lies in the straightness, firmness and elasticity of the tail of the hippopotamus (which is furthermore short, hairless, very thick at the root, of only a finger’s thickness, however, at the end, looking therefore somewhat like the tail of the hog, but not at all like that of the elephant). ιַ ?ηְ ?τֹּ ?υ, instead of being translated “he bends” (Targ.), may possibly be explained to mean “he stiffens, stretches out” (LXX., Vulg., Pesh.).-The sinews of his thighs are firmly knit together; or also “the veins of his legs” (by no means nervi testiculorum ejus, as the Vulg. and Targ. [also E. V.] render it). With ιְ ?ωׂ ?ψָ ?βεּ, “they are wrapped together, they present a thick, twig-like texture,” comp. ωָׂ ?ψִ ?βִ ?ιν, “vine-tendrils” [the interweaving of the vine-branches being before the poet’s eye in his choice of the word. Del.]. Job 40:18. His bones are pipes of brass.-ΰֲ ?τִ ?ιχִ ?ιν here “pipes, tubes, channels,” as in Job 41:7; comp. πַ ?ηַ ?μ, Job 28:4. πְ ?ηεּ ?ωָׁ ?δ, a word peculiar to our book, instead of the form which obtains elsewhere, πְ ?ηωֶׁ ?ϊ (comp. further Job 20:24; Job 28:2; Job 41:19). Concerning ξְ ?θִ ?ιμ, “staff, pole, bar,” probably the Semitic etymological basis of μέταλλον, comp. Delitzsch on the passage. In respect to the similes in both members of the verse, comp. Son 5:15 a. Job 40:19. He is a firstling of God’s ways;i.e. a master-piece of His creative power (comp. Genesis 49:3). ψֵ ?ΰωִׁ ?ιϊ can all the more easily dispense with the article here, seeing that it denotes only priority of rank (as in Amos 6:1; Amos 6:6; comp. also αְּ ?λεֹ ?ψ in Job 18:13, and often), not of time (as e.g. in Proverbs 8:22; Numbers 24:20). In respect to “God’s ways” in the sense of the displays of His creative activity in creating and governing the universe, comp. Job 26:14. The whole clause refers to the immense size and strength of the hippopotamus, which, at least in length and thickness, if not in height, surpasses even the elephant, and overturns with ease the ships of the Nile, vessel, crew and cargo. In reality therefore there is no exaggeration in the statement; and only an exegetical misapprehension of it, and an idle attempt at allegorizing it (stimulated in the present instance by the resemblance to Proverbs 8:22) could have influenced the Jewish Commentators, and those of the ancient Church, to find in this designation of the behemoth as a “firstling of God’s ways” a symbolic representation of Satan (comp. Book of Enoch, 60, 6 seq.; many Rabbis of the Middle Ages; the Pseudo-Melitonian Clavis Scriptur� Sacrζ [in Pitra, Spicileg. Salesm. Vol. II.], Eucherius of Lyons in his Formulζ maj. et minores [Idem, Vol. III., p. 400 seq.], Gregory the Great, and most of the Church Fathers on the passage; Luther also in his marginal gloss on the passage, Brentius [see below, Doctrinal and Ethical Remarks.-The same view is taken moreover by Wordsworth, who explains: “It seems probable that Behemoth represents the Evil One acting in the animal and carnal elements of man’s own constitution, and that Leviathan symbolizes the Evil One energizing as his external enemy. Behemoth is the enemy within us; Leviathan is the enemy without us”].-It only remains to say, that there is nothing surprising in the fact that here, in a discourse by God, He should speak of Himself in the third person; comp. above Job 39:17; Job 38:41.-He who made him furnished to him his sword, viz. his teeth, his two immense incisors (which according to Rόppell in l. c. grow to be twenty-six French inches long), with which as with a sickle (a ἅρπη, Nicander, Theriac. 566; Nonnus, Dionysiac. 26) he mows down the grass and green corn-blades. δָ ?ςωֹׁ ?εֹ stands for δָ ?ςωֵֹׁ ?δεּ, “He who hath made him, his Creator” (the article being used as demonstrative; comp. Gesenius § 109 [§ 108, 2, a]), and ιַ ?βֵ ?ωׁ elliptically for ιַ ?βֵ ?ωׁ μεֹ, “brought near to him, furnished to him.” The emendation suggested by Bφttcher and Dillmann-ηֵ ?ςָ ?ωׁ ?εּ instead of δָ ?ςωֹׁ ?εֹ: “which was created [lit. plur. ‘which were created’] so as to attach thereon a sword” (ιַ ?βֵ ?ωׁ as Jussive)-is unnecessary, as is also Ewald’s rendering of δִ ?βִּ ?ιωׁ in the sense of “to blunt, to make harmless.” Job 40:20 gives a reason for Job 40:19 b:For the mountains bring him forth food.-ιְ ?αεּ ?μ=αּ ?εּ ?μ, produce, fruit, vegetation. The clause is not intended to describe the hippopotamus as an animal that commonly or frequently grazes on the mountains (in point of fact it is only in exceptional instances that he ascends the mountains or high “grounds, when the river-banks and the grounds immediately around them have been eaten up). It only intends to say that entire mountains, vast upland tracts, where large herds of other animals abide, must provide for him his food (see b). Job 40:21 states where the hippopotamus is in the habit of staying: He lies down under the lotus-trees, in the covert of reeds and fens (comp. Job 8:11)-φֶ ?ΰֱ ?μִ ?ιν, plur. of φִ ?ΰְ ?μ, or of φֶ ?ΰֱ ?μָ ?δ (a word which occurs also in the Arabic), are not the lotus-flowers, i.e., the water-lilies (Nymphζa Lotus) [so Conant], but the lotus-bushes, or trees (Lotus silvestris s. Cyrenaica), a vegetable growth frequently found in the hot and moist lowlands of Egypt, Cyrenaica, and Syria, with thorny branches, and a fruit like the plum. On b comp. the description of the hippopotamus given by Ammianus Marcellinus (XXII. 15): Inter arundines celsas et squalentes nimia densitate hζc bellua cubilia ponit. Job 40:22. Lotus-trees cover him as a shade.-φִ ?μְ ?μεֹ (resolved from φִ ?μּ ?εֹ, like βֶּ ?μְ ?μεֹ, Job 20:7, from βִּ ?μּ ?εֹ) is in apposition to the subject, with which it forms at the same time a paronomasia. Another paronomasia occurs between ιְ ?ρֻ ?λֻּ ?δεּ and ιְ ?ρֻ ?αֻּ ?δεּ in b. Job 40:23. Behold, the river shows violence; he trembles not; lit., “he does not spring up, is not startled. δֵ ?ο at the beginning of this clause has, as in Job 12:11; Job 23:8, substantially the force of a conditional particle. ςָ ?ωַׁ ?χ here without an object: “to exercise violence, to act violently,” (differing from Job 10:3) a word which strikingly describes a river wildly swelling and raging [sweeping its borders with tyrannous devastation. E. V., following the Vulg. absorbebit fluvium (Targ. “he doth violence to the river”) gives to ςωχ a meaning not warranted]. He remains unconcerned (lit. “he is confident”) when a Jordan rushes (lit. “bursts through, pours itself forth,” βִּ ?ιηַ as in Job 38:8) into his mouth. The Jordan, (ιַ ?ψְ ?γֵּ ?ο without the Art.) is used here in an appellative sense of a river remarkable for its swiftly rushing course, not as a proper name, for hippopotami scarcely lived in the Jordan. There is nothing strange in this mention of the Jordan in order vividly to illustrate the description, the same being a river well known to Job, and also to his friends. It certainly cannot be urged as an argument for the hypothesis that the author of this section is not the same with the author of the remainder of the book (against Ewald and Dillmann). [“The reason why the Jordan is the river particularly here used as an illustration is, I suppose, because not unlikely, rising as it does at the foot of the snow-clad Lebanon, it was liable to more sudden and violent swellings than either the Euphrates or the Nile. It is, in fact, more of a mountain torrent than either, and probably in its irruptions it drove away in consternation the lions and other wild beasts, located in the thickets on its banks.” Carey. Comp. Jeremiah 12:5 and Jeremiah 41:19]. Job 40:24. Before his eyes do they take him, pierce through his nose with snares.-The position and tone of the words forbid one taking this verse as an ironical challenge: “Let one just take him!” or as a question: “Shall, or does any one take him,” etc.? Instead of αְּ ?ςֵֹ ?πָ ?ιε (i.e., “while he himself is looking on, under his very eyes;” comp. Proverbs 1:17), we must at least have read δַ ?αְּ ?ςֵ ?ιπָ ?ιε. Moreover instead of the 3d Pers. we should rather have looked for the 2d, if either of the above constructions had been the true one (comp. the questions in Job 40:25 seq.) [Job 41:1 seq.]. The clause accordingly is to be taken, with the ancient versions, and with Stickel, Umbreit, Ewald, Dillmann [Conant] as descriptive of something which actually takes place, and hence as referring to the capture of the river-horse. By the ancients in like manner as by the Nubians of to-day this was accomplished by means of harpoons fastened to a long rope. It is either to this harpoon-rope, or to a switch drawn through the nose after the capture has been effected that the word ξεֹ ?χֵ ?ωׁ in b refers. It can hardly mean a common trap (Delitzsch [“let one lay a snare which, when it goes into it, shall spring together and pierce it in the nose”]).-Why does God close the description of the hippopotamus with a reference to its capture? Evidently because He wishes thereby to emphasize the thought that this animal is wholly and completely in His power, that all its size and strength are of no avail to it, and that when God determines to deliver it into the hands of men, its pride is humbled without fail. Whereas on the other hand the description of the leviathan which follows contains no such reference to its capture, but sets forth throughout only the difficulty, or indeed the impossibility of becoming its master by the use of ordinary strength and cunning; this indicates an advance over what goes before. 4. Continuation, b. First part of the description of the leviathan: Job 41:1-11 [Heb. Job 40:25-41:3]: the untamableness and invincibility of the leviathan.-Dost thou draw out the leviathan with a net? [or as E. V., Gesen., Fόrst, etc., “with a hook”]. The name μִ ?εְ ?ιָ ?ϊָ ?ο denotes here neither the mythical dragon of heaven, as in Job 3:8 (see on the passage), nor the whale, as in Psalms 104:26, but the crocodile, whose structure and mode of life are in the following description depicted with fidelity to the minutest particular (comp. the evidence in detail in Bochart, Hieroz. III., 737 seq.). In and of itself μειϊο is the generic name of any monster capable of wreathing itself in folds, in like manner as ϊַּ ?πִּ ?ιο (comp. τείνω) may denote any monster that is long stretched out. But as the latter name is become the prevalent designation of the whale, (see on Job 7:12), so the name leviathan seems to have attached itself from an early period to the crocodile, that particularly huge and terrible amphibious monster of Bible lands, for which animal there was no special name appropriated in the primitive Hebrew, as it was not indigenous to Palestine, or at all events was but rarely found in its waters (traces indeed are not absolutely wanting of its having existed in them at one time: see the remarks of Robinson in respect to the “coast-river Nahr ez Zerka, or Maat-Temsβh [“crocodile-waters”], and also in respect to the city Crocodilon, not far from Cesarea, in his “Physical Geography,” etc., p. 191). The name leviathan does not involve the Hebraizing of an Egyptian name of the crocodile, (analogous to that of pe-ehe-mou in behemoth). By so much the more probable is it that in the interrogative ϊִּ ?ξְ ?ωֹׁ ?κְ “drawest thou” (without δֲ, see Ew., § 324, a), the poet intends an allusion to the well-known Egyptian name of the animal, which in Copt, is temsah, in modern Arab, timsah (Ew., Del., Dillm., etc).-Dost thou with a cord press down his tongue? i.e., when, liks a fish, be has bitten the fishing-hook, dost thou, in pulling the line, cause it to press down the tongue? The question is not (with Schult., Hirzel, Delitzsch, etc.) to be rendered: “Canst thou sink a line into his tongue [or “his tongue into a line”]? a rendering which is indeed verbally admissible, but which yields an idea that is not very intelligible. This member expresses, only with a little more art, the same thought as the first. It is not at all necessary to assume (with Ewald, Dillmann and other opponents of the genuineness of the present section), that the poet represents the capture of the crocodile as absolutely impossible, thus contradicting the fact attested by Herodotus, II., 7, that the ancient Egyptians caught this animal with fishing-hooks. That which the ironical question of God denies is simply the possibility of overcoming this animal, like a harmless fish, with ordinary craft or artifice, not the possibility of ever capturing it.-There is nothing to forbid the assumption that instead of the Egyptian crocodile (or at least along with it) the author had in view a Palestinian species or variety of the same animal, which is no longer extant, and that this Palestinian crocodile, just because it was rarer than the saurian of the Nile, was in fact held to be impossible of capture, (comp. Delitzsch II, p. 366, n. 2). It is, generally speaking, a very precarious position to question the accuracy of our poet’s statements even in a single point: compare e.g., the perfectly correct mention in this passage of the tongue of the crocodile, with the ridiculous assertion of Herodot. (II. 68), Aristotle, and other ancients, that the crocodile has no tongue. Job 41:2 [Job 40:26]. Canst thou put a rush-ring into his nose, and bore through his jaw (or, “his cheek”) with a hook?-i.e.. canst thou deal with him as fishermen deal with the fish captured by them, piercing their mouths with iron hooks in order afterwards to thrust through them rush-cords (σχοίνους), or iron rings (the fishermen of the Nile use the latter to this day, see Bruce, Travels, etc.), and to lay the fish thus tied together in the water? Job 41:3 [Job 40:27. Will he make many supplications to thee, etc., i. e., will he speak thee fair, in order to retain his freedom? The question which follows in Job 41:28 enlarges upon this thought, with a somewhat different application. “For a servant for ever” is here equivalent to “for a tamed domestic animal” (comp. Job 39:9). Job 41:5 [Job 40:29]. Wilt thou play with him as with a bird?-ωִׂ ?ηַ ?χαְּ differently from Psalms 104:26, where it signifies to play in something. By the “bird” here spoken of is meant neither the “golden beetle” (which in the language of the Talmud is called “bird of the vineyard”), nor the grasshopper (comp. Lewysohn, Zool. des Talmud. § 364). We are rather to compare with it the sparrow of Catullus: Passer, deliciζ meζ puellζ, and, as in that poem, we are to understand by the πςψεϊ “female slaves;” scarcely the “little daughters” of the one who is addressed (as Dillmann thinks, who takes pains to exhibit here a new reason for suspecting the genuineness of this section). Job 41:6 [Job 40:30]. Do fishermen-partners trade in him? [do they divide him among the Canaanites?]ηַ ?αָּ ?ψִ ?ιν (different from ηֲ ?αֵ ?ψִ ?ινIsaiah 44:11) are fishermen as members of a guild, or as partners in a company associated together for the capture of fish; comp. Luke 5:7; Luke 5:10, ιִ ?λְ ?ψεּ with ςַ ?μ as in Job 6:27, “to make bargains for anything, to traffic with it;” not “to feast upon anything, to make a banquet,” as the phrase is rendered by the LXX. (ἐνσιτοῦνται), Targum [E. V.], Schult., Rosenmόller, etc.; for λָּ ?ψָ ?δ “to banquet” (2 Kings 6:23) agrees neither with the construction with ςַ ?μ, nor the mention of the “Canaanites,” i.e., the Phenician merchants (Isaiah 23:8; Zechariah 14:21; Proverbs 31:24) in the second member. [Gesenius, Conant, etc., less simply take λָּ ?ψָ ?δ in its more usual sense, “to dig,” i.e., dig pits, lay snares for. Merx. reads ιִ ?λְּ ?ψεּ from λψψ, and translates: The animal, against which hunters go in troops]. Job 41:7 [Job 40:31]. Not only is the crocodile unsuited to be an article of commerce, but. coated as he is with scales, he is equally unsuited to be the object of an exciting harpoon-hunt. With ωֻׂ ?λּ ?εֹ ?ϊ, “pointed darts,” comp. the Arab, sauke, which signifies both “thorn” and “spear.” Job 41:8 [Job 40:32]. Remember the battle, thou wilt not do it again-i. e., shouldst thou presume to fight with him (ζְ ?λֹ ?ψ, not Infinit. dependent on ϊּ ?εֹ ?ρַ ?σ, but Imperat. consecut., comp. Ew., § 347, b), thou wilt not repeat the experiment (ϊּ ?εֹ ?ρַ ?σ pausal form for ϊּ ?εֹ ?ρֶ ?σ, see Ew., § 224, b). Needless violence is done to this verse also, if (as by Dillmann) the attempt be made to deduce from it the idea of the absolute impossibility of capturing and conquering the crocodile. Let it be borne in mind that the words are addressed to a single individual. Job 41:9 [Job 41:1], Behold, every hope is disappointed; lit. “behold, his hope is disappointed,” that viz. of the man who should enter into a contest with the monster (the use of the suffix accordingly being similar to that of Job 37:12). Even at the sight of him one is cast down; lit. as a question: “is one cast down?” etc.; i.e., is it. not the fact that the mere sight of him is enough to cast one down with terror? On ξַ ?ψְ ?ΰָ ?ιε, which is not plur.. but sing, comp. Gesenius, § 93 [§ 91], 9, Rem. Job 41:10 [Job 41:2], None so fool-hardy that he would stir him up.-ψֹ ?ΰ is not, without further qualification, ΰֵ ?ιο (Hirz.), but the lacking subj. is to be supplied out of the next member, and the whole clause is exclamatory: “not fierce (fool-hardy, rash) enough, that he should rouse him up!” Respecting ΰַ ?λְ ?ζָ ?ψ, (comp. Job 30:21. And who will take his stand before Me?-i.e., appear against Me as Mine adversary; δϊιφα here in another sense than in Job 1:6; Job 2:1. According to some MSS. and the Targ. the text should be μְ ?τָ ?πָ ?ιε, referring to the crocodile: and who will stand before him?” But this would destroy the characteristic fundamental thought of the verse, which consists in a conclusio a min. ad majus: “If no one ventures to stir up that creature which I have made, how much less will any one dare to contend with Me, the Almighty Creator?” Job 41:11 [3]. Who gave to me first of all that I must requite it?-i. e., who would dare to appear against me as my accuser or my enemy, on the ground that he has perchance given me something, and is thus become my creditor? (Romans 11:35). As to the second half of the verse which gives the reason for the question, in which God claims all created beings as His property, comp. Psalms 50:10 seq.; on ϊַּ ?ηַ ?ϊλָּ ?μΞδַ ?ωָּׁ ?ξַ ?ιִ ?ν see Job 28:24; on the neuter δεּ ?ΰ see Job 13:16; Job 15:9.-The general thoughts advanced in Job 41:2 b, and Job 41:3 are a suitable close to what is said of the invincibility of the crocodile, as a mighty illustration of God’s creative power, so that we are required neither to transpose the passage (as e.g., by placing it after Job 40:14), nor to deem it out of place here, between the description of the leviathan’s untamableness, and that of his bodily structure (against Dillmann). 5. Conclusion: c. Second part of the description of the leviathan: The bodily structure and mode of life characteristic of the leviathan, the king of all proud beasts: Job 41:12-34 [4–20]. Job 41:12 [4]. I will not keep silent as to his members (αַּ ?γִּ ?ιν, see Job 18:13). So according to the K’thibh μֹ ?ΰΰַ ?ηֲ ?ψִ ?ιωׁ; the K’ri μεֹ ΰηΧ would give the idea in the form of a question: “as to him should I pass his limbs in silence?” which as being a little more difficult is to be preferred. In no case does the clause deserve to be called “a prosaic and precise announcement of the subject to be treated of,” such as would seem to be “not very suitable” in a discourse delivered by God (Dillmann): the idea of the ancients touching what might be suitable and in taste, and what might not be so, were quite different from our modern notions. Nor as to the fame of his powers (so Vaihinger strikingly); lit. “nor of the word of his powers” i.e., of their kind and arrangement (Ewald), how the case stands with respect to them; comp. γָּ ?αָ ?ψ in Deuteronomy 15:2; Deuteronomy 19:4. In the final clause εְ ?ηִ ?ιοςֶ ?ψְ ?λּ ?εֹ the word ςֶ ?ψֶ ?κְ is in any case equivalent to “disposition, structure” (Aq.: τάξις), and δִ ?ιο seems to be a secondary form of ηֵ ?ο= come-liness, gracefulness, with which the tenor of this description which follows well agrees, setting forth as it does not only that which is fearful, but also that which is beautiful and elegant in the structure of the leviathan. For this reason it is unnecessary either with Ewald to identify the word with δִ ?ιο, “measure” (dry measure), or with Dillmann to amend the text (to ςֵ ?ιο? or ηֹ ?ρֶ ?ο?) Job 41:13-17 [5–9]: The upper and foreside [face] of the crocodile.-Who has uncovered the face of his garment?i.e., no one can uncover, lift up the upper side (τָּ ?πִ ?ιν as in Isaiah 25:7) of his scaly coat of mail; this lies on his back with such tenacity that it cannot be removed, nor broken. [Others, Ewald, Schlott., etc., explain τָּ ?πִ ?ιν of the anterior part of his garment, or armor, that which pertains to the head or face; but this would be less natural, and would involve tautology-the. “opening of the jaws” being referred to again in the next ver.].-Into his doable jaws who enters in?-Lit., “into the double of his jaws;” ψֶ ?ρֶ ?ο here accordingly in a different sense from Job 30:11 [where it means “bridle,” the meaning which E. V. gives to it here]. The fact mentioned by Herod. II., 68, and confirmed by modern observations, to wit, that a little bird, the plover, (Charadrius Ζgyptius, in Herod, τροχίλος) enters the open jaw of the crocodile, in order to look for insects there, need not be deemed unknown to our author; only we are not to insist on his having such an incident in mind in the passage before us. Job 41:14 [6]. The doors of his face-who has opened them?i.e., his jaws, his mouth, the aperture of which reaches back of the eyes and ears (comp. the well-known picture, taken from the Description de l’Egypte, and introduced into several pictorial works on zoology, e.g., into Klotz and Glaser’s Leben und Eigenthόmlichkeiten der mittleren und niederen Thierwelt, Leipzig, 1869, p. 15, representing the mouth of a crocodile wide open, with a Charadrius in it).-Round about his teeth is terror; comp. Job 39:20. The crocodile has thirty-six long, pointed teeth in the upper jaw, and thirty in the lower, the appearance of which is all the more terrible that they are not covered by the lips. Job 41:15 [7]. A pride are the furrows of the shields (comp. Job 40:18), referring to the arched bony shields, of which the animal has seventeen rows, all equally large and square in form. [According to this interpretation ΰֲ ?τִ ?ιχֵ ?ι means first channels, and then the shields bounded by those channels. Others (Gesenius, Conant, etc.) take it as an adj. = robusta (robora) scutorum].-Fastened together like a closely, fitting seal; or, construing ηεϊνφψ not as appositional, but as instrumental accusative (according to Ewald, § 297, b): “fastened together as with a closely-fitting seal” [so E. V.]. How this is to be understood is shown by the two verses which follow; in which comp., as to the phrase, ΰιωׁ αΰηιδε, Gesen., § 124, [§ 122], Rem. 4; as to the verbs γαχִ and ιϊμλγJob 38:30; Job 38:38. Job 41:18-21 [10–13]. The sneezing and breathing of the crocodile.-His sneezing flashes forth light (ϊָּ ?δֶ ?μ, abbreviated from ϊָּ ?δֵ ?μ, Hiph. of δμμ, comp. Job 31:26); i.e., when the crocodile turned toward the sun with open jaws is excited to sneezing (which in such a posture happens very easily, see Bochart III., 753 seq.), the water and slime gushing from his mouth glisten brilliantly in the sunbeams. As Delitz. says truly: “This delicate observation of nature is here compressed into three words; in this concentration of whole, grand thoughts and pictures, we recognize the older poet.”-And his eyes are as eyelids of the dawn (Job 3:9); i.e., when with their red glow they glimmer in the water, before the animal’s head becomes visible above the surface of the water. This cat-like sparkle of the crocodile’s eyes was observed from an early period, and is the reason why in the ancient Egyptian hieroglyphics two crocodiles’ eyes became the hieroglyph for the dawn, according to the express statement of Horus, Hierogl. I., Job 68: ἐπειδὴ πρὸ παντὸςσώματοςζώουοἱ ὀφθαλμοὶ ἐκτοῦ βύ̓θουἀναφαίνονται. Job 41:19 [11]. Out of his mouth proceed torches;i.e., not literal torches, but streams of water shining like torches, when the animal emerging out of the water breathes violently.-Out of his nostrils goes forth smoke, like a seething pot with reeds [lit., “like a kettle blown and reeds”]; i.e., like a heated kettle standing over a crackling and strongly smoking fire of reeds (Ewald, Bφttcher, Delitzsch, Dillm.) [Conant]. The common rendering is: “as a seething pot and caldron;” but ΰַ ?βְ ?ξεֹ ?ο is scarcely to be taken to signify something else here than above in Job 40:26 [Job 41:2]; “caldron” would be ΰַ ?βָּ ?ο, Arab, iggane. With the description before us, as well as with the still more strongly hyperbolical description in the verse which follows, comp. the description of Bochart, l. c.: Turn spiritus diu pressus sic effervescit et erumpit tam violenter, ut flammas ore et naribus videatur evomere. Also what the traveler Bartram (in Rosenmόller’s Alterth., p. 250) relates of an alligator in Carolina, that a thick smoke streamed out of its distended nostrils, with a noise which made the earth shake. [Schlottmann calls attention to the close parallelism between Job 41:18-19 and Job 41:20-21]. Job 41:22 [14]. On his neck dwells (lit., “passes the night, lodges,” ιָ ?μִ ?ιο as in Job 17:2) strength, and despair danceth hence before him. ϊָּ ?γεּ ?υ, leaps, springs up suddenly. Both members of the verse refer to the crocodile suddenly emerging out of the water, and terrifying men or beasts, and particularly to the violent movements of its neck or head, which are sufficient to overturn ships, etc. [“The trepidation, the confused running to and fro of one who is in extreme anguish (comp. ιϊηθΰε Job 41:17) is compared to the dancing of one who is crazed, and this is attributed to the γΰαδ as the personification of the anguish.” Schlott.-E. V., less suitably: “and sorrow is turned into joy before him”]. Job 41:23 [15] seq., describe the lower and hinder parts of the animal.-The flanks [ξτμι, the flabby pendulous parts of the body, especially the belly] of his flesh are closely joined together, are fixed fast upon him, are not moved; i.e., they do not shake with the motions of the body, being thickly lined with strong scales, smaller however than those on the back. ιָ ?φּ ?εּ ?χ, pass. partic. of ιφχ, differing accordingly from Job 28:2; Job 29:6. Job 41:24 [16]. His heart is firmly cast as a stone, firmly cast as a nether millstone, [not as E. V., “as a piece of the nether millstone,” for τμη, as that which is split off, or produced by cleavage, refers to the whole stone; hence elsewhere (Judges 9:53; 2 Samuel 24:6), τֶ ?μַ ?ηψֶֹ ?λֶ ?α for the upper millstone]. It was necessary that the nether millstone should be particularly hard, because it has to bear the weight and friction of the upper stone; comp. the Biblical Archζologies and Dictionaries, under the word “Mill.” Besides the physical hardness of the crocodile’s heart (in respect to which comp. Arist. De partib. animal. 3, 4), the poet here has in view the firmness of his heart in the tropical or ethical sense, i.e., the courage and fierceness of the beast, as the following verses show clearly enough. Job 41:25 [17]. At his rising up heroes tremble.-ΰֵ ?ιμִ ?ιν, or, as many MSS. read ΰֵ ?μִ ?ιν “mighty ones,” from ΰεּ ?μ “to be thick, strong:” comp. Exodus 15:15 with Ezekiel 31:11; Ezekiel 32:21. ξִ ?ωֵּׂ ?ϊεֹ, contracted from ξִ ?ωְּׂ ?ΰֵ ?ϊεֹ, cannot mean here “before his majesty” (Job 13:11; Job 31:23), but simply: “at his rising, when he raises himself up.”-From terror they miss their aim. ξִ ?ωְּׁ ?αָ ?ψִ ?ιν, lit., “from brokenness [breakings];” not however “from wounds.” Jerome correctly: tẹ ?rriti (comp. Isaiah 65:14). δִ ?ϊְ ?ηַ ?θֵּ ?ΰ, lit., “they miss,” i.e., “their mark” (to wit, here, the slaying of the monster). [Gesenius, Conant, etc., “they lose themselves for terror,” spoken of a person in astonishment and terror missing his way in precipitate flight.-Fόrst: “they disappear, i.e., they cannot hold out.”-E. V., under the influence of the Vulg. and Targ. “by reason of breakings they purify themselves,” which hardly yields an intelligible meaning]. Job 41:26 [18]. If one reaches him with the sword, lit., he who reaches him with the sword, it doth not hold, i.e., the sword, (lit., “it does not get up”), it glances off without effect from the scaly armor of the beast. As to the construction comp. Ewald, § 357, c; on the use of αְּ ?μִ ?ι with the finite verb, which occurs only here, Ew., § 322, a. In the second member, which introduces three additional subjects to the verb ϊָּ ?χεּ ?ν, this αְּ ?μִ ?ι is to be again supplied: “nor spear, dart, and armor.”-According to the testimony of the ancient versions it would seem that ωִׁ ?ψְ ?ιָ ?δ must be rendered as a synonym of ωִׁ ?ψְ ?ιεֹ ?ο, “coat of mail,” although the context, and a comparison with the Arab, sirwe, or surwe, “arrow,” would favor rather the meaning “missile,” either the harpoon, or some peculiar kind of arrow. For ξַ ?ρָּ ?ς the definition “sling-stone” has the support of the Targ., while the LXX and the Vulg. associate the word with the preceding ηֲ ?πִ ?ιϊ in the sense of hasta missilis. Verses 27–29 [19–21] describe more at length the ineffective rebound of ordinary human weapons from the armor of the leviathan, together with the animal’s fearlessness in encountering all assaults by means of such weapons. Respecting πְ ?ηεּ ?ωָׁ ?δ in Job 41:19, b, comp. on Job 40:18. ψִ ?χָּ ?αεֹ ?ο in the same member is a poetic form for ψָ ?χָ ?α (Job 13:28). The “son of the bow,” Job 41:20 a is the arrow, as the “ son of the flame “ in Job 5:7 meant the spark of fire. The “turning to stubble,” Job 41:20 b is of course to be taken only in the subjective sense of becoming as it were stubble. Job 41:29 [21]. Clubs are accounted (by him) as chaff; lit. “a club;” ϊּ ?εֹ ?ϊַ ?η, as a generic term, is construed with the plur. On b (ψַ ?ςַ ?ωׁ and λִּ ?ιγεֹ ?ο), comp. Job 39:23-24. Job 41:30 [22] continues the description of the under side of the body begun in Job 41:23 [16]. His under parts are pointed shards; lit. “the sharpest of shards,” ηַ ?γּ ?εּ ?γֵ ?ιδָ ?ψֶ ?ωׁ; on this mode of expressing the superlative, which occurs also in Job 30:6, comp. Gesen., § 112 [§ 110], Rem. 1. The comparison of the scales on the under side of the crocodile, and especially on his tail, with pointed sherds, is found also in Aelian, H. N. 10, 24. He spreadeth a threshing sledge upon the mire; i.e., by means of those same pointed scales, which leave a mark on the soft mire, like that made by the iron spikes of a threshing-sledge (comp. Isaiah 28:27). Job 41:31 [23]. He maketh the deep to boil like a pot.-On δִ ?ψְ ?ϊִּ ?ιηַ, “to cause to seethe, to boil and foam violently,” comp. Job 30:27. The “deep” [ξְ ?φεּ ?μָ ?δ), i.e., literally, the deep of the sea. (=ιָ ?ν) is a word which can also be applied to a great river, like the Nile; comp. Isaiah 19:5; Nahum 3:8. The Bedouins to this day call the Nile bahr. “sea,” it being quite like a sea when it overflows its banks. He maketh the sea (comp. Job 14:11) like a pot of ointment, i.e., as respects its bubbling and foaming. An Egyptian sea may here be assumed, standing in connection with the Nile, or perhaps one of the seas of the Jordan, if the author took a Palestinian crocodile as the object of his description. The figure of the pot of ointment can hardly allude to the strong odor of musk which the crocodile emits when playing in the water (Bochart, Del.) seeing that the poet is describing here only the visible effects of his tumbling and rushing in the water. Job 41:32 [24]. After him he maketh the path to shine, by means of the bright white trail which he leaves behind him on the surface of the water, and which in b is compared to the silver bright whiteness of hoary hair (ωֵׂ ?ιαָ ?δ), in the same way that the classic poets speak of a πολιὴ ἅλς (Il. I. 350; Od. IV. 405), or of a canescere (incanescere) of the waves (Catull. Epithal. Pelei; Manilius, Astron.: Ut freta canescunt, sulcum ducente carina, etc.). Job 41:33 [25] seq.: Conclusion of the whole description, repeating the affirmation of the invincibility of the leviathan as a proud tyrant in the animal kingdom. There is not upon the earth one who commands him; lit. “there is not upon the dust (comp. Job 19:25) dominion over him,” comp. Zechariah 9:10. So correctly the Targ., Pesh., and most of the moderns, while the LXX, Vulg., [E. V.], Umbreit, Delitzsch, [Lee, Noyes, Merx] translate: “on earth there is not his like.” By itself ξָ ?ωְ ?μεֹ could certainly be thus rendered; but the second member-“he who is made (δֶ ?ςָ ?ωׂ ?εּ comp. Job 15:22) [Green, § 172, 5] for no-fear” (or “for, into a fearless creature,” μִ ?αְ ?μִ ?ιΞηָ ?ϊ)-favor rather the meaning given above. Job 41:34 [26]. He looks on all that is high; i.e., looks it boldly in the face, without fearing or turning back before it (comp. Job 40:11). He is king overall the sons of pride, i.e., over all the huge, proudly stalking beasts of prey (comp. Job 28:8), he is therefore a tyrant in the midst of the animal kingdom, to whom the larger quadrupeds must submit, especially in consequence of the violent blows which he inflicts with his tail (Bochart, p. 767; Oken, Allgem. Naturgesch., VI, 654 seq.). 6. Job’s answer and penitent confession: Job 42:1-6. Job 42:2. Now I know that Thou canst do all things-now that in these two animal colossi Thou hast set before me the most convincing proofs of Thine omnipotence, and at the same time of the constant justice of Thy ways. And that no undertaking (no thought, or purpose, which Thou dost undertake to carry out; ξְּ ?ζִ ?ξָּ ?δsensu bono, comp. ζִ ?ξָּ ?δ Job 17:11) is forbidden to Thee (lit. “cut off”) [rendered inaccessible, impracticable]. To these thoughts, which God has the power to execute without condition or any limitation whatever, belongs, in the very first rank, the appointment of severe sufferings for men who, apparently, are innocent. This Job here recognizes as the normal result of the operations of the All-wise, All-merciful, and Righteous God in His government of the world, being just as truly the result of His operations as the terrible forms and activities of the behemoth and leviathan. Job 42:3. “Who is this that obscureth counsel without knowledge?” thus, namely hast thou rightly spoken to me. The words of God at the beginning of the first discourse (Job 38:2), are cited here verbally; and from this divine verdict, as one that cannot be assailed nor abrogated, the inference which follows is immediately drawn: thus have I judged, without understanding, what was too wonderful for me, without knowing;i.e., the judgments which I have heretofore pronounced respecting my sufferings as unmerited and unreasonably cruel, were uttered without understanding or knowledge. To the idea, complete in itself, conveyed by δִ ?βַּ ?γְ ?ϊִּ ?ι, “I have judged (uttered),” an object is emphatically added in the following member, so that the notion of judging passes over into that of deciding or passing judgment upon something. Job 42:4 contains another expression, cited both from the first discourse of Jehovah (Job 38:3), and from the introduction to the second (Job 40:7), here however preceded and strengthened by the short introductory clause: “Hear, I pray thee, and I will speak,” and for this reason to be regarded as only a free citation, to which Job then appends the observation contained in Job 42:5. This verse (4) is not therefore to be regarded as an independent entreaty on the part of Job to Jehovah, framed however in imitation of the words of Jehovah in the passages referred to (as Rosenm., Stick., Hirz., Hahn., Del. [Scott, Noyes, Barnes] think). The meaning is: “Thou hast demanded of me to make my answer to Thee, as in a judicial trial; my answer can be none other than that which now follows (Job 42:5-6). [To the view that this is the language of humility on the part of Job, seeking for further instruction from God, Carey objects: “(1) That Job does not ask God any particular question on which he requires information. (2) That on the supposed view the first clause, “Hear now, and I will speak,” would be the formula of an opening address, leading one to expect that that address was to be of some length, at least, whereas no such address does actually follow. (3.) That the words themselves would be too arrogant for Job to use in his present humbled state of mind. (4.) That as Job 42:3 is manifestly a citation from Job 38:2, and as the words in this present verse occur in Job 38:3, they may reasonably be supposed to be a citation also. (5.) On the supposition of their being a citation, a more natural, and, at the same time, a more pregnant sense is obtained”]. Job 42:5. I have heard of thee by the hearing of the ear.-“According to (μְ, as, e.g., in Job 28:22; Psalms 18:45) the hearing of the ear,” i.e., on the basis of a knowledge which was mediate only, and therefore incomplete, the opposite information resting on the firm basis of immediate perception, observation, or experience; comp. Psalms 48:9. But now mine eye hath seen thee-i.e., not externally, or corporeally, but intuitively, by means of that intellectual faith-perception which, in the visible manifestations of creation, beholds the Creator Himself; comp. the νοούμενακαθορᾶται of Romans 1:19; also above on Job 38:1. Job 42:6. Therefore do I recant-lit. “I reject [repudiate],” that, viz., which I have heretofore said”; the object omitted, as in Job 7:16; Job 36:5. The LXX., Symm., and Vulg. read ΰֶ ?ξָּ ?ΰֵ ?ν: “I reject, blame, accuse myself” (Luth.) [E. V.: “abhor myself”], which gives substantially the same sense with the Masoretic reading (for Bφttcher’s rendering of this Niphal-“I despair”-finds no conclusive support in Job 7:5), but is by no means of necessity to be substituted for the same. And I repent (am sorry, πִ ?ηַ ?ξְ ?ϊִּ ?ι, Niph.) in dust and ashes-i.e., like one in deep mourning, one who feels himself completely broken and humbled; comp. Job 2:8; Job 2:12. And so Job returns, as it were, to his heap of ashes, the symbol of his voluntary submission under the mighty hand of God. He perfectly resumes that patient resignation to the will of God, out of which he had allowed himself to be provoked by the accusation of the friends, in that he recognizes the divine decree of suffering as one that has been inflicted on him not unjustly, and holds his peace, until the sentence of the Most High, pronouncing His blessing upon him, again exalts the upright penitent. AND ETHICAL1. The progress which this second discourse of God, taken in connection with Job’s confession of penitence, marks in the inward development of the poem, is in general clear. The destruction and punishment of the proud self-exaltation of the presumptuous censurer of God’s ways, which had constituted the aim and issue of the first discourse (see on Job 40:5), must be followed by the entire overthrow of the presumption in Job’s heart, in consequence of which he had not deeply and earnestly enough perceived his sinfulness, had doubted whether the severe visitation which had come upon him was deserved, and had thus assailed God’s justice. In addition to the complete humiliation of Job it was necessary still further to produce in him entire contrition, the voluntary confession of his guilt; and this is exactly what this second discourse aims at and accomplishes. It accomplishes this, as may be seen from the first part, which is in the form of a direct rebuke (Job 40:7-14), by the ironical challenge addressed to Job, to take the government of the world into his own hand, and to judge the proud transgressors on the earth (see Job 40:10 seq.). This is a challenge which shows an advance beyond the series of ironical questions in the first discourse, in that it imputes to him who is addressed not merely the exercise of a high, wonderful, and all-embracing divine knowledge, but rather of an omnipotent activity resembling that of God, the ruler of the universe. God now no longer says, “knowest thou?” or “canst thou?” but “do it! seat thyself on my judicial throne!” and the stronger irony which flashes forth from such appeals must in the nature of things be accompanied by a stronger power to cause shame to him who is addressed, so that the last remnant of presumption in his heart is swept away. “By thus thinking of himself as the ruler and judge of the world, Job is obliged to think of the cutting contrast between his feebleness and the divine rule, with which he has ventured to find fault; at the same time, however, he is taught that-what he would never be able to do-God really punishes the ungodly, and must have wise purposes when He does not, as indeed He might, let loose at once the floods of His wrath” (Del.). In other words: Job, brought to the lowest depths of shame, must, by that challenge, be made sensible of two things in one, the omnipotence and the inflexible justice of the divine government of the world. He is compelled to see that there cannot be, and least of all in the administration of the Most High, a “bare omnipotence,” disjoined from justice and love. 2. So far the purpose of this discourse is clear. But is the second part of it, which is characterized by disproportionate length, and in which nature, or rather, more particularly, the animal world, is described, in accordance with this purpose? Are we, with a number of critics (see Introd. § 9) to reject this part of the book as not genuine? Or, instead of resorting to this violent operation, favored as it is by nothing in the historic transmission of the text, are we, by more profoundly fathoming the meaning and aim of this wonderful description of animals, to exhibit its original organic connection with its surroundings? Obviously there is little to be gained from such ingenious, and yet at bottom, superficial remarks as that of Herder: “Behemoth and Leviathan are the pillars of Hercules at the end of the book, the Non plus ultra of another world;” and just as little from the flat and shallow physical theology of the vulgar rationalism, which represents the poet as finding in these “prodigies of the amphibious world” (Job 40:9) the hippopotamus and the crocodile, “the power, wisdom, and goodness of God” (see, e.g., Wohl-farth on the passage), or from the downright allegorizing of the Church Fathers, who in the leviathan and also in behemoth found the devil, with whom also Luther is in accord, when he says; “By behemoth is meant all the large monster beasts, and by leviathan all the large monster fishes. But under these names he describes the power and might of the devil, and of his servants, the ungodly multitude in the world.” On the other side, the opinion favored by most moderns, that the hippopotamus and crocodile, like the animal pictures grouped together in the first discourse of Jehovah (Second Part, Job 38:39 seq.), are designed to illustrate the greatness and wonderful glory of God’s creative energy, and so to present impressive pictures of created existence mirroring the omnipotence of God-this opinion is far from furnishing a perfectly satisfactory explanation of the poet’s purpose in describing so earnestly and elaborately these two animals, and in this way dissipating completely the doubt which has been raised touching the genuineness of this section of the book. That which alone can help us to a correct appreciation of the poet’s purpose is the truth, flowing from the view of nature presented throughout the revealed Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments, that the entire animal world is a living text-book, a mirror of morals, now warning, now encouraging and shaming us, a gallery of pictures, ethical and parenetic, collected for men by God Himself; and that in particular the animals distinguished for ferocity and size are awe-inspiring examples for us, symbols, as it were, or pictorial embodiments of the Divine Wrath. Novatian, in his work on the Jewish legislation touching food (De cibis Judaicis), says: In animalibus mores depinguntur humani et actus et voluntates; and most of the Church Fathers express themselves in substantial agreement with this view in respect to the more profound ethical and symbolical significance of the animal world. So, e.g., Clement of Alexandria, among whose utterances on this subject (Pζdag. III. 11; Strom. II., p. 389 C; 405 D, etc.), that which he has said respecting the sphinx (Strom. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/lange/ Job_42:7-171. Glorious vindication of Job before his friends: Job 42:7-107 And it was so, that, after the Lord had spoken these words unto Job, the Lord saidto Eliphaz the Temanite, “My wrath is kindled against thee, and against thy two friends: for ye have not spoken of me the thing that is right, as my servant Job hath. 8Therefore take unto you now seven bullocks and seven rams, and go to my servant Job, and offer up for yourselves a burnt offering; and my servant Job shall pray for you: for him will I accept: lest I deal with you after your folly in that ye have not spoken of me the thing which is right, like my servant Job 9 So Eliphaz the Temanite and Bildad the Shuhite and Zophar the Naamathite went, and did according as the Lord commanded them: the Lord also accepted Job 10 And the Lord turned the captivity of Job, when he prayed for his friends: also the Lord gave Job twice as much as he had before. 2. The restoration of his former dignity and honor: Job 42:11-12. 11Then came there unto him all his brethren and all his sisters, and all they that had been of his acquaintance before, and did eat bread with him in his house; and they bemoaned him and comforted him over all the evil that the Lord had brought upon him: every man also gave him a piece of money, and every one an ear-ring of gold. 12So the Lord blessed the latter end of Job more than his beginning. 3. The doubling of his former prosperity in respect to his earthly possessions and his offspring: Job 42:12 b—1712b For he had fourteen thousand sheep, and six thousand camels, and a thousand yoke of oxen, and a thousand she asses. 13He had also seven sons and three daughters. 14And he called the name of the first, Jemima; and the name of the second, Kezia; and the name of the third, Keren-happuch. 15And in all the land were nowomen found so fair as the daughters of Job: and their father gave them an inheritance 16among their brethren. After this Job lived an hundred and forty years, and saw his sons, and his sons’ sons, even four generations. 17So Job died being old and full of days. AND 1. The inward restoration of Job, his deliverance from the errors which had beclouded his heart and his knowledge, and his penitent submission under God’s righteous and gracious will, is immediately followed by his outward restoration and redemption, This comes to pass in immediate connection with the sharp rebuke which God visits upon them because of their unreasonably harsh condemnation of Job, and also in connection with the brotherly intercession which Job offers in their behalf, thus heaping coals of fire on their head. The brilliant vindication, which the sorely understood man thus enjoys, is accompanied by the not less brilliant restoration of his external prosperity, as the result of which he is permitted even in this life, sooner therefore and more gloriously than he had dared to hope, to behold God as his Redeemer, and to taste in all its fulness His rewarding grace and taste in all its fulness His rewarding grace and mercy. As this conclusion of the whole matter carries us back, in respect to the facts, to the Introduction (Job 1:1 seq.), so also does the external form of the introductory narrative here reappear; the lofty poetic style gives place again to simple prose, as the only medium suitable to the simple but weighty facts, in which the hero’s destiny is accomplished. 2. The vindication of Job, together with the divine rebuke of the three friends: Job 42:7-10. And it came to pass, after that Jehovah, etc.ΰַ ?ηַ ?ψΰֲ ?ωֶׁ ?ψ=ΰַ ?δַ ?ψ, and so conjunctional, as in Leviticus 14:43. God addresses Eliphaz in particular, as the spokesman, and leader of the three, who shaped their opinions. For ye have not spoken of me that which is right, as my servant Job. πְ ?λεֹ ?πָ ?δ signifies not that which is subjectively true, i.e., honest, upright (Ewald, Hirzel, Schlottmann), but that which is objectively true, right (directum), comp. the ἀληθές of the LXX.). In respect to this objective truth, pertaining to facts, the friends in their speeches had either erred or kept silence, inasmuch as they had persistently refused to recognize Job’s essential innocence, his freedom from sins of the graver sort, and had assiduously endeavored to brand him as a heinous sinner. Job, on the contrary, had maintained that which was objectively true, comparatively at least, and in substance, inasmuch as he had retained the consciousness of his innocence, and the sense of God’s nearness in the heat of his trials. God accordingly solemnly recognizes him as “His servant” (comp. Job 1:8; Job 2:3), and fulfils literally the wish uttered by Job (Job 16:21) that he would “do justice to a man before God and his friends.” Job 42:8. And now take unto you seven bullocks and seven rams.—The same kind and number of animals for sacrifice as in Numbers 23:1; comp. also the use of the number seven above in Job 1:2; and see Introd., § 2, near the end. On ΰֵ ?μִ ?ιν, defectively written for ΰֵ ?ιμִ ?ιν, comp. Ewald, § 15, b.—ςεֹ ?μָ ?δαַּ ?ςַ ?γְ ?λֶ ?ν, “a burnt-offering for you,” i, e., to atone for you; comp. Job 1:5.—Only to him will I have regard—lit. “only (λִּ ?ιΰִ ?ν, comp. Ewald, § 356) his person will I lift up, will I regard favorably,” comp. Genesis 19:21. Job’s essential innocence, purity, and irreproachableness could not be more strongly declared and confirmed, in opposition to the petty suspicions of the friends than by thus commissioning him to be a priestly mediator and interceder in behalf of the three who had incurred the divine disfavor, and by thus directly verifying what Eliphaz had promised him in Job 22:30 (comp. also Abraham’s intercession for Abimelech: Genesis 20:7; Genesis 20:17).—That I visit not upon you the folly: lit. “that I may not do (fulfil) for you folly,” i.e. the punishment of your folly; πְ ?αָ ?μָ ?δ here means “reward, punishment of the folly,” in like manner as ηַ ?θָּ ?ΰϊ or ςַ ?εֹ ?ο signifies the penalty of sin.—For ye have not spoken in respect to me that which is right, like my servant Job.—Some MSS. exhibit both here and in the 7th verse, where the same words occur, the reading: “against my servant Job” (αְּ ?ςַ ?αְ ?γִּ ?ι instead of λְּֽ ?ςַ ?αְ ?γִּ ?ι); and so the Sept. also here: κατὰ τοῦ θεράποντόςμουἸώβ. This change of the text is manifestly, however, an intentional correction in both cases. Job 42:9. Then went Eliphaz, etc. The ε, which is wanting before φֹ ?τַ ?ψ, is supplied by some MSS., but without any necessity; see Ewald, § 349 a, 2. [Schultens on the contents of the ver.—stupenda conversio rerum!] Job 42:10. And Jehovah turned the captivity of Job.—Thus are Job’s past sufferings described, in accordance with the representation which he himself has often given of them as a state of captivity or imprisonment; comp. Job 7:12; Job 13:27, etc.; also the familiar Pauline expression: “I, a prisoner in the Lord” (Ephesians 3:1; Ephesians 4:1, etc.) Taken by itself, this phrase ωׁ ?εּ ?αωְׁ ?αεּ ?ϊ signifies neither here nor elsewhere, where it occurs (as in particular in the Messianic promises of many prophets) “to turn the imprisonment of any one,” but only “to turn the turning, to cause an unfortunate turn of affairs to be succeeded by a fortunate one, which puts an end to the former.” So Symmachus on this passage: ἐπέστρεψετὴνἀποστροφὴντοῦ ’Ιώβ; and so also the remaining versions outside the Targum. It might therefore be translated: “and Jehovah turned the misery of Job.” When he prayed for his friends.—So correctly Delitzsch, Dillmann, etc.—not “because he prayed” (as commonly explained), or “in return for his praying” (Hirzel). For αְּ before δִ ?ϊְ ?τַּ ?μְ ?μεֹ can express only the idea of simultaneousness (“while, during”); and there is deep significance in the fact that the moment when his disease departs from him is the very moment when, as regards his friends, he completely forgives and forgets, notwithstanding they had so grievously injured him. The original text properly reads in the sing.: “for his friend” (αְּ ?ςַ ?γψֵ ?ςֵ ?δεּ), which sing., however, is to be understood generally, as in Job 16:21; comp. Job 12:4.—And Jehovah increased all that Job had twofold;μִ ?ξִ ?ωְׁ ?πֶ ?δ, comp. Isaiah 61:7, and the still stronger word πολλαπλασίονα (referring indeed to the eternal recompense hereafter) in Luke 18:30. The description which follows sets forth how this doubling of his former possessions (which of course is not to be pressed throughout with literal exactness) was carried out in detail. 3. The restoration and (partial) doubling of Job’s former prosperity (Job 42:11-17). Job 42:11 and Job 42:12 a narrate first of all the restoration of his former honor, authority and dignity.—Then came there unto him all his brethren, etc.; all those persons accordingly, of whose cold, heartless withdrawal from him he had reason to complain so bitterly in his misery; comp. Job 19:13 seq. (from which passage also the term ιֹ ?γְ ?ςָ ?ιε, used here, is derived).—And they gave him each a kesita, and each a ring of gold.—to wit, a ring for the ear or the nose (πֶ ?ζֶ ?ν), which according to Exodus 32:3 was a favorite ornament of both men and women; comp. Genesis 24:22. The χְ ?ωִׂ ?ιθָ ?δ is a piece of gold of the patriarchal age, which, besides this passage, is mentioned only in Genesis 33:19 and Joshua 24:32, signifying according to the ancient Versions a “lamb,” but according to the later, and perhaps the better founded etymology a “piece weighed out.” Its value, it would seem, was four times that of the shekel (comp. Genesis 33:19 with Job 23:10). At any rate it is a gold coin representing a higher value than the shekel of a later period, and hence not very accurately translated by Luther a “beautiful groschen” [nor with sufficient precision by E. V. “a piece of money”]. F. Mόnter’s Prog. όber d. Kesitah (Copenhagen, 1824), in which a Cyprian coin, with a lamb engraved on it, is erroneously identified with the old Hebrew Kesitah, presents a view that is antiquated, and to be used only with caution. [Carey also favors the view that it was a weight in the form of a lamb, like the bull’s heads of Egypt, and the lions and ducks of Nineveh. So also the Art. “Money” in Smith’s Bib. Dic.], In respect to the custom of bestowing presents when making a visit (either of congratulation or condolence), comp. Winer’s Realwφrterb. Art. “Geschenke” [Smith’s Bib. Dic. “Gifts”].—And Jehovah blessed the latter end of Job more than his beginning.—ΰַ ?ηֲ ?ψִ ?ιϊ—ψֵ ?ΰωִׁ ?ιϊ, the earlier, the later period; comp. Job 8:7. Job 42:12 b–17 describe the doubling of Job’s former earthly possessions, to wit, in cattle (comp. Job 42:12 b with Job 1:3), and also the restitution made to him in children. Job 42:13. And there were to him seven sons and three daughters.—In this respect accordingly there was no doubling; nevertheless according to the Old Testament view deceased children were not regarded as absolutely lost (see 2 Samuel 12:23), so that this new blessing of children which Job now enjoys is still to be regarded as signifying more than the simple restoration of the earlier good. The pausal form ωִׁ ?αְ ?ςָ ?πָ ?δ is not to be treated as an error of transcription for ωִׁ ?αְ ?ςָ ?δ (Hirz., Olsh.), but with Ewald, § 269, c, as an obsolete substantive ωִׁ ?αְ ?ςָ ?ο, with an unaccented feminine ending. Job 42:14. And the one they called [or, was called] Jemima, etc.—The subject of εַ ?ιִּ ?χְ ?ψָ ?ΰ is indefinite, “one, they.” The names here mentioned accordingly are not such as were given to the daughters by the father himself, but appellations which the people of their acquaintance bestowed upon them on account of their beauty. Of these three names ιְ ?ξִ ?ιξָ ?δ seems to signify the “dove,” or “pure as the dove” (possibly the “dove-eyed;” comp. Son 1:15; Son 2:14; Son 4:1), unless we follow the ancient versions, and bring the word into connection with ιָ ?ξִ ?ιν, “days,” Arab. ιְ ?ξָ ?ξָ ?ΰ, explaining it to mean “pure, bright as the day” (comp. Diana from dies). χְ ?φִ ?ιςָ ?δ = cassia, is in any case “fine as the essence of cassia,” she who was “as if woven out of the fragrance of cinnamon” (Del., with a reference to Son 1:8). The third was called χֶ ?ψֶ ?οδַ ?τּ ?εּ ?κְ “paint-horn, box of ointment,” on account of her graceful nature and action, which served to heighten her natural beauty; hence the charming one, who spread her charm all about her. In respect to χֶ ?ψֶ ?ο “box, jar,” comp. 1 Samuel 16:1; 1 Samuel 16:13. On the painting of oriental women, see 2 Kings 9:30; Jeremiah 4:30; Ezekiel 23:40; also Rosenmόller, Morgenland, IV. 269 seq.; Hartmann, Das Ideal weiblicher Schφheit, p. 35 seq., 307 seq [Smith’s Bib. Dic. Art. “Paint”]. Job 42:15. And their father gave to them their inheritance in the midst of their brethren.—This act of Job’s, which was strictly at variance with the regulations of the Mosaic law (see Numbers 27:8 seq.), but which has its parallel in certain family customs of the Arabs, rather than in practices specifically Hebrew, was intended to make it possible for the daughters to continue to live among their brothers even after their marriage; it is mentioned accordingly as a sign of the brotherly and sisterly concord which prevailed among these later children of Job as among the earlier (comp. Job 1:4).—The masc. endings are used in μָ ?δֶ ?ν and ΰֲ ?ηֶ ?ιδֶ ?ν (referring in each case to the daughters), as in Job 39:3. Job 42:16. And Job lived after this a hundred and forty years.—How long he had lived before this does not appear from what precedes. The LXX. arbitrarily represent him as being seventy years old at the time when his sore trial befals him, as is evident from their rendering of this passage: ὲ ?̓ζησενδὲ Ιὼβμερὰ τὴνπληγὴυὲ ?̓τηἑκατόνἑβδομήκοντα· τὰ δὲ πάνταζῆ ἐτηδιακόσιατεσσαράκοντα (so at least the Vatican text, while the Cod. Alex. and various other MSS. and Ed.’s add an ὀκτώ to the latter number, thus placing the πληγή in Job’s seventy-eighth year, and representing his entire age as being two hundred and forty-eight years). [“As we do not know how old he was when his affliction came upon him, we cannot precisely determine the age at which he died; but as he had previously to his affliction a family of ten children all grown up, he could not have been less than sixty or seventy years. And as in other respects God gave him twice as much as he had before, so perhaps also in this. The half, then, of one hundred and forty gives us seventy, and the two periods united make two hundred and ten, an age which unquestionably places Job in patriarchal times.” Carey].—And saw his children, and children’s children, through four generations.—Instead of εַ ?ιַּ ?ψְ ?ΰ the K’ri exhibits the unusual form εַ ?ιִּ ?ψְ ?ΰֶ ?δ, preferred probably on account of its fuller musical tone (comp. 1 Samuel 17:42; Ezekiel 18:14). As parallels in thought, comp. Genesis 1:23; Proverbs 17:6; Psalms 128:6; Tob. 9:11. Job 42:17. And Job died old and sated with life.—The same formula is found in Genesis in recording the end of Abraham’s life, and of Isaac’s (Genesis 25:8; Genesis 35:29). Delitzsch strikingly: “The style of primeval history, which we here everywhere recognize, is retained to the last words.” 4. The Alexandrian Version presents after Job 42:17 the following long addition (see the same in the original, together with the more important variations in Stier and Theile’s Polyglotten-Bibel, III. 1, 604 seq.): “It is written however that he will rise again with those whom the Lord raises up. This man [Job] is described in [lit., interpreted out of”] the Syriac Book [Bible] (i.e., is described according to the account of the Hebrew Holy Scripture) as living in the land of Ausis [Uz], on the borders of Idumea and Arabia; but his name before was Jobab. And he took an Arabian wife, and begat a son whose name was Ennon. But he himself was the son of his father Zare, one of the sons of Esau, and of his mother Bosorrha (Bozra), so that he was the fifth from Abraham. And these were the kings who reigned in Edom, over which land he also ruled; first, Balac, the son of Beor, and the name of his city was Dennaba (Dinhaba); but after Balac Jobab, who is called Job; and after him Asom (Chusham), who was governor out of the country of Thζman; and after him Adad (Hadad), the son of Barad, who destroyed Midian in the plain of Moab; and the name of his city was Gethaim. And the friends who came to him were Eliphaz, a son of Sophan, of the sons of Esau, king of the Themanites; Bildad, son of Ammon, the son of Chobar, sovereign of the Sauchζans (Shuhites), Sophar, king of the Minζans (Naamites). Theman, son of Eliphaz, ruler of Idumea. This one is described by [interpreted out of] the Syrian [i.e., Hebrew] Bible, as living in the land of Ausis [Uz], on the borders of the Euphrates; but his name aforetime was Jobab; but his father was Zareth, from the rising of the sun (the East).” Here evidently we have to do with an interpolation, compiled with a good deal of confusion and recklessness out of the statements of our book and those of Genesis 36. (especially Genesis 42:10; Genesis 42:15; Genesis 42:32-36), either by Hellenistic Jews, or possibly even by Christian hands (as Hirzel infers from the allusion to the resurrection in the introductory words). No sort of value attaches to it, and it was rejected accordingly even by Origen (Ep. ad. African.) and Jerome. Neither was it introduced into the Greek versions of Aquila and Symmachus, nor into that of Theodotion except in part, and so it has always been excluded from the authorized Latin version of the Bible. AND ETHICALIt has been justly remarked (Del. II. 392) that a New Testament writer would have closed our book in some other way than with the recital of an abundant temporal recompense, such as finally befel the great sufferer, of an earthly restoration and an indemnification in material possessions, and the prolongation of his life on earth; for it is certainly true that the New Testament regards the recompense of affliction and sore tribulations as belonging to the hereafter, and always points those who suffer for Christ and the Gospel to a future reward in heaven (comp. Matthew 5:3; Matthew 5:10-12; Matthew 19:29; Mark 10:29-30; Revelation 7:14, etc. It would, however, be a one-sided inference from the conclusion of the book as it stands to regard it as ministering to an external, abstract, temporal theory of retribution. Just as decidedly to be rejected as one-sided is the theory adopted by several modern expositors (comp. Introd. § 4 a), that the purpose of the book is just the opposite, to controvert—namely, the Mosaic theory of retribution, and that the contents of the epilogue, for that reason, contradict the poem proper, and that the genuineness and authenticity of the former are accordingly to be questioned (Introd. § 8). That Job, after enduring to the end a trial of suffering of inexpressible severity should be rewarded with prosperity in this life, that he should not only receive a most brilliant vindication, and be again honored, but also be most abundantly indemnified, this is, first of all, a feature of the book which is characteristic of the Israelitish nationality, which is in harmony with the spirit of the Old Testament people of God (a feature which may be compared with that truly German depth of feeling and freshness of life which is impressed on the well-known bright conclusion of the Gudrun). It is in the next place a feature which harmonizes with the spirit of the Old Testament revelation itself, which is most deeply grounded in that revelation, in which the faith of believers before the coming of Christ in the unchangeable wisdom and righteousness of God’s dealings, found one of its most glorious witnesses. This close of the narrative, indeed, has nothing to say of that which took place in heaven after Job’s victorious struggle of faith; neither does it undertake to furnish any prophetic descriptions of Job’s own entrance into the communion of the holy and the blessed in the life beyond. All the more fresh and true to nature, however, are the colors with which it pictures the restored earthly prosperity of the sufferer, and it visibly refrains from causing the wishes and hopes which Job had frequently uttered (especially in chaps. 17 and 19) for a vindication from God in the future life to be transcendently surpassed and eclipsed by the splendor of that which in part he enjoyed here on earth. Without this conclusion, the heart’s need of Old Testament believers would have found no true satisfaction; the issue of the conflict of doubt, excited by the peculiarly severe and hard to be understood visitation of Job, would have remained more or less undecided; those children of God who were limited to the anticipatory and typical fides Veteris Testamenti would not have been able to derive from the book perfect and true consolation. Nevertheless it remains no less true that the consolation ministered by the book, according to its inmost essence, is not different from the consolation of the children of God under the New Testament. The Book of Job is a genuine “Cross and Comfort Book” for us who are Christians, as well as for Old Testament believers, as surely as that it teaches unconditional submission to God’s holy will, and childlike resignation to His merciful Fatherly love as the only true source of religious blessedness and real peace of soul, and presents in Job the example of a sufferer, whose suffering has a twofold aim, on the one side to prove his innocence, on the other to tempt, i.e., to reveal his inmost secret sinfulness, who accordingly has a twofold typical significance as sufferer, being typical of Christ, who through suffering was perfected as Mediator and High-Priest of the New Covenant, and typical also of Christians, whose sufferings, like those of Job, ever present the double aspect of probational and castigational visitations of God. AND In the homiletic treatment of the epilogue, special attention should be devoted to the thought last emphasized, to wit, the character of Job’s suffering, as intended both for probation, and also for chastisement or purification. The most suitable opportunity for presenting this thought will be in connection with the rebuke of the friends, which Jehovah proceeds to administer immediately after that true and complete repentance has been wrought in Job (Job 42:7-10). For it is at this point that Job’s comparative innocence is definitely declared on the one hand, at the same time that it is only where Job has been humbled in sincere heartfelt penitence, that he is solemnly pronounced righteous by God,—nay more—that it is only when in fervent brotherly love he intercedes for his opponents that his bodily suffering is removed (see on Job 42:10), wherein it is most clearly intimated that sin is to be included as one cause of his suffering. It is t this description of Job’s justification, which furnishes occasion for a concise recapitulation of the fundamental ideas of the whole dialogue, (especially of the discourses of Elihu and of God), that the practical expositor should most of all give his attention, while what is said concerning the restitution and doubling of Job’s external possessions need occupy only a secondary place. Particular PassagesJob_42:7 seq. Brentius: The three friends spoke ill, Job well; while at the same time Job argued ill, the friends well. For the friends thought wickedly, when from the affliction they decided that God was angry, and Job wicked, although they discourse excellently concerning the omnipotence and wisdom of God. Job on the other hand speaks well when he continually affirms that afflictions had befallen him not because he had deserved them, and that they were not evidences of his wickedness, and of an angry God. But he speaks ill when he impugns God’s decree, and blasphemes God. Now since Job has a good cause as against the friends, although he sins in the management of his cause, while the friends are at fault touching the merits of his cause, the Lord pronounces sentence for Job against the friends; for He had previously rebuked his blasphemies.—V. Gerlach: Inasmuch as Job, although guilty of speaking foolishly, nevertheless gave utterance to his sense of the contradiction which tortured him, in that he retained the consciousness of his fellowship with God in the midst of his feeling of God’s wrath, he was nearer the solution of the enigma than the friends. Job 42:10 seq. Brentius: You now see by the fact itself what is the issue of trial; for God inflicts nothing on any one in order that He may destroy him, but that He may restore much more; “Ye have heard of the patience of Job, and have seen the end of the Lord,” etc. (James 5:11).—Starke: God causes the temptation of His saints to work a good end (1 Corinthians 10:13); He lays a burden on us, but He helps us again, (Psalms 66:10 seq.; Psalms 68:20). After the trial comes the revival; after the cry of distress the gracious hearing; after the sowing in tears the reaping in joy (Psalms 126.; Tob. 3:22) … (on Job 42:11); As the swallows depart before the winter, but return again with the summer, so is it with the friendship of men. When tribulation has been endured to the end, and when days of prosperity and abundance of riches return, friends immediately make their appearance (Sir 6:8; Sir 12:8 seq.).—V. Gerlach: It was necessary that Job should be purified inwardly from a mercenary spirit, from self-righteousness, and selfishness in its more refined forms. This having been accomplished, he now appears in possession of honor and riches, a conspicuous memorial of God’s recompensing love, recognizing all that he receives and enjoys as from God, and honoring Him far above His gifts. His life accordingly ends, having received its full completion; there remains in it nothing more that is obscure or inexplicable; it is full of promise for all God’s struggling ones under the Old Dispensation; it is a type of the Perfectly Holy One, who humbled Himself to the death of the Cross, who, although a Son, yet learned obedience by the things which He suffered, and who has therefore received a name which is above every name—that Jesus Christ may be Lord to the glory of God the Father. AMENFootnotes: We find a help to the right explanation of the singular words οὗτος (sc. Ἰὼβ) ἑρμηνεύεταιἐκτῆςΣυριακῆςβίβλου in a remark of Olympiodorus in the Catena Patr. Grζc. in l. Job, coll. Niceta, Lond., Job 1637: Συριακὴννῦντὴντῶν ‘Εβραίωνδιάλεκτονκαλεῖ. From this it appears that οὗτος refers not so much to the book of Job (Ddlm.), but also to the person of the hero, and that ἑρμηνεύεσθαιἐκ is used in the sense of “being related, or described by.”