Job 17-19

New English Translation

Footnotes

1. Job 17:1 tn The verb חָבַל (khaval, “to act badly”) in the Piel means “to ruin.” The Pual translation with “my spirit” as the subject means “broken” in the sense of finished (not in the sense of humbled as in Ps 51).
2. Job 17:1 tn The verb זָעַךְ (zaʿaq, equivalent of Aramaic דָעַק [daʿaq]) means “to be extinguished.” It only occurs here in the Hebrew.
3. Job 17:1 tn The plural “graves” could be simply an intensification, a plural of extension (see GKC 397 §124.c), or a reference to the graveyard. Coverdale had: “I am harde at deathes dore.” The Hebrew expression simply reads “graves for me.” It probably means that graves await him.
4. Job 17:2 tn The noun is the abstract noun, “mockery.” It indicates that he is the object of derision. But many commentators either change the word to “mockers” (Tur-Sinai, NEB), or argue that the form in the text is a form of the participle (Gordis).
5. Job 17:2 tn E. Dhorme (Job, 243) interprets the preposition to mean “aimed at me.”
6. Job 17:2 tn The meaning of הַמְּרוֹתָם (hamm^erotam) is unclear, and the versions offer no help. If the MT is correct, it would probably be connected to מָרָה (marah, “to be rebellious”) and the derived form something like “hostility; provocation.” But some commentators suggest it should be related to מָרֹרוֹת (marorot, “bitter things”). Others have changed both the noun and the verb to obtain something like “My eye is weary of their contentiousness” (Holscher), or “mine eyes are wearied by your stream of peevish complaints” (G. R. Driver, “Problems in the Hebrew text of Job,” VTSup 3 [1955]: 78). There is no alternative suggestion that is compelling.
7. Job 17:3 tc The MT has two imperatives: “Set (down), pledge me, with you.” Most commentators think that the second imperative, עָרְבֵנִי (ʿar^eveni, “pledge security for), should be repointed as a noun, עֵרְבֹנִי (ʿer^evoni, “my pledge of security”) and take it to say, “Set my pledge beside you.” A. B. Davidson (Job, 126) suggests that the first verb means “give a pledge,” and so the two similar verbs would be emphatic: “Give a pledge, be my surety.” However, the verb שִׂים (sim, “set”) does not work with other verbs in this manner in any other contexts.sn Job shows his desperation in lacking anyone to act as a guarantor on his behalf by asking God to accept himself as his own guarantor, a somewhat self-contradictory notion.
8. Job 17:3 sn The idiom is “to strike the hand.” Here the wording is a little different, “Who is he that will strike himself into my hand?”
9. Job 17:4 tn This half-verse gives the reason for the next half-verse.
10. Job 17:4 sn The pronoun their refers to Job’s friends. They have not pledged security for him because God has hidden or sealed off their understanding.
11. Job 17:4 tn The object “them” is supplied. This is the simplest reading of the line, taking the verb as an active Polel. Some suggest that the subject is “their hand” and the verb is to be translated “is not raised.” This would carry through the thought of the last verse, but it is not necessary to the point.
12. Job 17:5 tn Heb “for a portion.” This verse is rather obscure. The words are not that difficult, but the sense of them in this context is. Some take the idea to mean “he denounces his friends for a portion,” and others have a totally different idea of “he invites his friends to share with him.” The former fits the context better, indicating that Job’s friends speak out against him for some personal gain. The second half of the verse then promises that his children will suffer loss for this attempt at gain. The line is surely proverbial. A number of other interpretations can be found in the commentaries.
13. Job 17:6 tn The verb is the third person, and so God is likely the subject. The LXX has “you have made me.” So most commentators clarify the verb in some such way. However, without an expressed subject it can also be taken as a passive.
14. Job 17:6 tn The word “byword” is related to the word translated “proverb” in the Bible (מָשָׁל, mashal). Job’s case is so well known that he is synonymous with afflictions and with abuse by people.
15. Job 17:6 tn The word תֹפֶת (tofet) is a hapax legomenon. The expression is “and a spitting in/to the face I have become,” i.e., “I have become one in whose face people spit.” Various suggestions have been made, including a link to Tophet, but they are weak. The verse as it exists in the MT is fine, and fits the context well.
16. Job 17:7 tn See the usage of this verb in Gen 27:1 and Deut 34:7. Usually it is age that causes the failing eyesight, but here it is the grief.
17. Job 17:7 tn The word יְצֻרִים (y^etsurim), here with a suffix, occurs only here in the Bible. The word is related to יָצַר (yatsar, “to form, fashion”). And so Targum Job has “my forms,” and the Vulgate “my members.” The Syriac uses “thoughts” to reflect יֵצֶר (yetser). Some have followed this to interpret, “all my thoughts have dissolved into shadows.” But the parallel with “eye” would suggest “form.” The plural “my forms, all of them” would refer to the whole body.
18. Job 17:8 tn This verb שָׁמַם (shamam, “appalled”) is the one found in Isa 52:14, translated there “astonished.”
19. Job 17:8 tn The verb means “to rouse oneself to excitement.” It naturally means “to be agitated; to be stirred up.”
20. Job 17:9 tn The last two words are the imperfect verb יֹסִיף (yosif) which means “he adds,” and the abstract noun “energy, strength.” This noun is not found elsewhere; its Piel verb occurs in Job 4:4 and 16:5. “he increases strength.”
21. Job 17:10 tn The form says “all of them.” Several editors would change it to “all of you,” but the lack of concord is not surprising; the vocative elsewhere uses the third person (see Mic 1:2; see also GKC 441 §135.r).
22. Job 17:10 tn The first verb, the jussive, means “to return”; the second verb, the imperative, means “to come.” The two could be taken as a hendiadys, the first verb becoming adverbial: “to come again.”
23. Job 17:10 tn Instead of the exact correspondence between coordinate verbs, other combinations occur—here we have a jussive and an imperative (see GKC 386 §120.e).
24. Job 17:11 tn This term usually means “plans; devices” in a bad sense, although it can be used of God’s plans (see e.g., Zech 8:15).
25. Job 17:11 tn Although not in the Hebrew text, “even” is supplied in the translation, because this line is in apposition to the preceding.
26. Job 17:11 tn This word has been linked to the root יָרַשׁ (yarash, “to inherit”) yielding a meaning “the possessions of my heart.” But it is actually to be connected to אָרַשׁ (ʾarash, “to desire”) cognate to the Akkadian eresu, “desire.” The LXX has “limbs,” which may come from an Aramaic word for “ropes.” An emendation based on the LXX would be risky.
27. Job 17:12 tn The verse simply has the plural, “they change.” But since this verse seems to be a description of his friends, a clarification of the referent in the translation is helpful.
28. Job 17:12 tn The same verb שִׂים (sim, “set”) is used this way in Isa 5:20: “…who change darkness into light.”
29. Job 17:12 tn The rest of the verse makes better sense if it is interpreted as what his friends say.
30. Job 17:12 tn This expression is open to alternative translations: (1) It could mean that they say in the face of darkness, “Light is near.” (2) It could also mean “The light is near the darkness” or “The light is nearer than the darkness.”
31. Job 17:13 tn The clause begins with אִם (ʾim) which here has more of the sense of “since.” E. Dhorme (Job, 253) takes a rather rare use of the word to get “Can I hope again” (see also GKC 475 §150.f for the caveat).
32. Job 17:14 tn This is understood because the conditional clauses seem to run to the apodosis in v. 15.
33. Job 17:14 tn The word שַׁחַת (shakhat) may be the word “corruption” from a root שָׁחַת (shakhat, “to destroy”) or a word “pit” from שׁוּחַ (shuakh, “to sink down”). The same problem surfaces in Ps 16:10, where it is parallel to “Sheol.” E. F. Sutcliffe, The Old Testament and the Future Life, 76ff., defends the meaning “corruption.” But many commentators here take it to mean “the grave” in harmony with “Sheol.” But in this verse “worms” would suggest “corruption” is better.
34. Job 17:15 tn The adverb אֵפוֹ (ʾefo, “then”) plays an enclitic role here (see Job 4:7).
35. Job 17:15 tn The repetition of “my hope” in the verse has thrown the versions off, and their translations have led commentators also to change the second one to something like “goodness,” on the assumption that a word cannot be repeated in the same verse. The word actually carries two different senses here. The first would be the basic meaning “hope,” but the second a metonymy of cause, namely, what hope produces, what will be seen.
36. Job 17:16 sn It is natural to assume that this verse continues the interrogative clause of the preceding verse.
37. Job 17:16 tn The plural form of the verb probably refers to the two words, or the two senses of the word in the preceding verse. Hope and what it produces will perish with Job.
38. Job 17:16 tn The Hebrew word בַּדִּים (baddim) describes the “bars” or “bolts” of Sheol, referring (by synecdoche) to the “gates of Sheol.” The LXX has “with me to Sheol,” and many adopt that as “by my side.”
39. Job 17:16 tn The conjunction אִם (ʾim) confirms the interrogative interpretation.
40. Job 17:16 tn The translation follows the LXX and the Syriac versions with the change of vocalization in the MT. The MT has the noun “rest,” yielding, “will our rest be together in the dust?” The verb נָחַת (nakhat) in Aramaic means “to go down; to descend.” If that is the preferred reading—and it almost is universally accepted here—then it would be spelled נֵחַת (nekhat). In either case the point of the verse is clearly describing death and going to the grave.
41. Job 18:1 sn Bildad attacks Job with less subtlety than Eliphaz. He describes the miserable existence of the wicked, indicating that it is the proof of sin. His speech falls into two main parts: why is Job so contemptuous toward his friends (Job 18:2-4), and the fate of the wicked (18:5-21). On this chapter see N. M. Sarna, “The Mythological Background of Job 18,” JBL 82 (1963): 315-18; and W. A. Irwin, “Job’s Redeemer,” JBL 81 (1962): 217-29.
42. Job 18:2 tn The verb is plural, and so most commentators make it singular. But it seems from the context that Bildad is addressing all of them, and not just Job.
43. Job 18:2 tn The construction is קִנְצֵי לְמִלִּין (qintse l^emillin), which is often taken to be “end of words,” as if the word was from קֵץ (qets, “end”). But a plural of “end” is not found in the OT. Some will link the word to Arabic qanasa, “to hunt; to give chase,” to get an interpretation of “snares for words.” But E. Dhorme (Job, 257) objects that this does not fit the speech of Bildad (as well as it might Job’s). He finds a cognate qinsu, “fetters, shackles,” and reads “how long will you put shackles on words.” But G. R. Driver had pointed out that this cognate does not exist (“Problems in the Hebrew text of Job,” VTSup 3 [1955]: 72-93). So it would be preferable to take the reading “ends” and explain the ן (nun) as from a Aramaizing by-form. This is supported by 11QtgJob that uses סוֹף (sof, “end”). On the construction, GKC 421 §130.a explains this as a use of the construct in rapid narrative to connect the words; in such cases a preposition is on the following noun.
44. Job 18:2 tn The imperfect verb, again plural, would be here taken in the nuance of instruction, or a modal nuance of obligation. So Bildad is telling his listeners to be intelligent. This would be rather cutting in the discourse.
45. Job 18:2 tn Heb “afterward.”
46. Job 18:3 tn The verb נִטְמִינוּ (nitminu) has been explained from different roots. Some take it from תָּמֵא (tameʾ, “to be unclean”), and translate it “Why should we be unclean in your eyes?” Most would connect it to טָמַם (tamam, “to stop up”), meaning “to be stupid” in the Niphal. Another suggestion is to follow the LXX and read from דָּמַם (damam, “to be reduced to silence”). Others take it from דָּמָּה (damah) with a meaning “to be like.” But what is missing is the term of comparison—like what? Various suggestions have been made, but all are simply conjectures.
47. Job 18:4 tn The construction uses the participle and then third person suffixes: “O tearer of himself in his anger.” But it is clearly referring to Job, and so the direct second person pronouns should be used to make that clear. The LXX is an approximation or paraphrase here: “Anger has possessed you, for what if you should die—would under heaven be desolate, or shall the mountains be overthrown from their foundations?”
48. Job 18:4 tn There is a good deal of study on this word in this passage, and in Job in general. M. Dahood suggested a root עָזַב (ʿazav) meaning “to arrange; to rearrange” (“The Root ʿzb II in Job,” JBL 78 [1959]: 303-9). But this is refuted by H. G. M. Williamson, “A Reconsideration of ʿzb II in Biblical Hebrew,” ZAW 97 (1985): 74-85.
49. Job 18:4 sn Bildad is asking if Job thinks the whole moral order of the world should be interrupted for his sake, that he may escape the punishment for wickedness.
50. Job 18:5 tn Hebrew גַּם (gam, “also; moreover”), in view of what has just been said.
51. Job 18:5 sn The lamp or the light can have a number of uses in the Bible. Here it is probably an implied metaphor for prosperity and happiness, for the good life itself.
52. Job 18:5 tn The expression is literally “the flame of his fire,” but the pronominal suffix qualifies the entire bound construction. The two words together intensify the idea of the flame.
53. Job 18:6 tn The LXX interprets a little more precisely: “his lamp shall be put out with him.”sn This thesis of Bildad will be questioned by Job in 21:17—how often is the lamp of the wicked snuffed out?
54. Job 18:7 tn Heb “the steps of his vigor,” the genitive being the attribute.
55. Job 18:7 tn The verb צָרַר (tsarar) means “to be cramped; to be straitened; to be hemmed in.” The trouble has hemmed him in, so that he cannot walk with the full, vigorous steps he had before. The LXX has “Let the meanest of men spoil his goods.”
56. Job 18:7 tn The LXX has “causes him to stumble,” which many commentators accept, but this involves the transposition of the three letters. The verb is שָׁלַךְ (shalakh, “throw”) not כָּשַׁל (kashal, “stumble”).
57. Job 18:8 tn See Ps 25:15.
58. Job 18:8 tn The word שְׂבָכָה (s^evakhah) is used in scripture for the lattice window (2 Kgs 1:2). The Arabic cognate means “to be intertwined.” So the term could describe a net, matting, grating, or lattice. Here it would be the netting stretched over a pit.
59. Job 18:9 tn This word פָּח (pakh) specifically refers to the snare of the fowler—thus a bird trap. But its plural seems to refer to nets in general (see Job 22:10).
60. Job 18:9 tn This word does not occur elsewhere. But another word from the same root means “plait of hair,” and so this term has something to do with a net like a trellis or lattice.
61. Job 18:10 tn Heb “his rope.” The suffix must be a genitive expressing that the trap was for him, to trap him, and so an objective genitive.
62. Job 18:10 tn Heb “his trap.” The pronominal suffix is objective genitive here as well.
63. Job 18:11 sn Bildad is referring here to all the things that afflict a person and cause terror. It would then be a metonymy of effect, the cause being the afflictions.
64. Job 18:11 tn The verb פּוּץ (puts) in the Hiphil has the meaning “to pursue” and “to scatter.” It is followed by the expression “at his feet.” So the idea is easily derived: they chase him at his feet. But some commentators have other proposals. The most far-fetched is that of Ehrlich and Driver (ZAW 24 [1953]: 259-60) which has “and compel him to urinate on his feet,” one of many similar readings the NEB accepted from Driver.
65. Job 18:12 tn The jussive is occasionally used without its normal sense and only as an imperfect (see GKC 323 §109.k).
66. Job 18:12 tn There are a number of suggestions for אֹנוֹ (ʾono). Some take it as “vigor”: thus “his strength is hungry.” Others take it as “iniquity”: thus “his iniquity/trouble is hungry.”
67. Job 18:12 tn The expression means that misfortune is right there to destroy him whenever there is the opportunity.
68. Job 18:13 tn The expression “the limbs of his skin” makes no sense, unless a poetic meaning of “parts” (or perhaps “layers”) is taken. The parallelism has “his skin” in the first colon, and “his limbs” in the second. One plausible suggestion is to take בַּדֵּי (badde, “limbs of”) in the first part to be בִּדְוָי (bidvay, “by a disease”; Dhorme, Wright, RSV). The verb has to be made passive, however. The versions have different things: The LXX has “let the branches of his feet be eaten”; the Syriac has “his cities will be swallowed up by force”; the Vulgate reads “let it devour the beauty of his skin”; and Targum Job has “it will devour the linen garments that cover his skin.”
69. Job 18:13 tn The “firstborn of death” is the strongest child of death (Gen 49:3), or the deadliest death (like the “firstborn of the poor, the poorest”). The phrase means the most terrible death (A. B. Davidson, Job, 134).
70. Job 18:14 tn Heb “from his tent, his security.” The apposition serves to modify the tent as his security.
71. Job 18:14 tn The verb is the Hiphil of צָעַד (tsaʿad, “to lead away”). The problem is that the form is either a third feminine (Rashi thought it was referring to Job’s wife) or the second person. There is a good deal of debate over the possibility of the prefix t- being a variant for the third masculine form. The evidence in Ugaritic and Akkadian is mixed, stronger for the plural than the singular. Gesenius has some samples where the third feminine form might also be used for the passive if there is no expressed subject (see GKC 459 §144.b), but the evidence is not strong. The simplest choices are to change the prefix to a י (yod), or argue that the ת (tav) can be masculine, or follow Gesenius.
72. Job 18:14 sn This is a reference to death, the king of all terrors. Other identifications are made in the commentaries: Mot, the Ugaritic god of death; Nergal of the Babylonians; Molech of the Canaanites, the one to whom people sent emissaries.
73. Job 18:15 tn This line is difficult as well. The verb, again a third feminine form, says “it dwells in his tent.” But the next part (מִבְּלִי לוֹ, mibb^eli lo) means something like “things of what are not his.” The best that can be made of the MT is “There shall live in his tent they that are not his” (referring to persons and animals; see J. E. Hartley, Job [NICOT], 279). G. R. Driver and G. B. Gray (Job [ICC], 2:161) refer “that which is naught of his” to weeds and wild animals. M. Dahood suggested a reading מַבֶּל (mabbel) and a connection to Akkadian nablu, “fire” (cf. Ugaritic nbl). The interchange of m and n is not a problem, and the parallelism with the next line makes good sense (“Some Northwest Semitic words in Job,” Bib 38 [1957]: 312ff.). Others suggest an emendation to get “night-hag” or vampire. This suggestion, as well as Driver’s “mixed herbs,” are linked to the idea of exorcism. But if a change is to be made, Dahood’s is the most compelling.
74. Job 18:17 tn Heb “outside.” Cf. ESV, “in the street,” referring to absence from his community’s memory.
75. Job 18:18 tn The verbs in this verse are plural; without the expressed subject they should be taken in the passive sense.
76. Job 18:19 tn The two words נִין (nin, “offspring”) and נֶכֶד (nekhed, “posterity”) are always together and form an alliteration. This is hard to capture in English, but some have tried: Moffatt had “son and scion,” and Tur-Sinai had “breed or brood.” But the words are best simply translated as “lineage and posterity” or as in the NIV “offspring or descendants.”
77. Job 18:19 tn Heb “in his sojournings.” The verb גּוּר (gur) means “to reside; to sojourn” temporarily, without land rights. Even this word has been selected to stress the temporary nature of his stay on earth.
78. Job 18:20 tn The word אַחֲרֹנִים (ʾakharonim) means “those [men] coming after.” And the next word, קַדְמֹנִים (qadmonim), means “those [men] coming before.” Some commentators have tried to see here references to people who lived before and people who lived after, but that does not explain their being appalled at the fate of the wicked. So the normal way this is taken is in connection to the geography, notably the seas—“the hinder sea” refers to the Mediterranean, the West, and “the front sea” refers to the Dead Sea (Zech 14:8), namely, the East. The versions understood this as temporal: “the last groaned for him, and wonder seized the first” (LXX).
79. Job 18:20 tn Heb “his day.”
80. Job 18:20 tn The expression has “they seize horror.” The RSV renders this “horror seizes them.” The same idiom is found in Job 21:6: “laid hold on shuddering.” The idiom would solve the grammatical problem and not change the meaning greatly, but it would change the parallelism.
81. Job 18:20 tn The word “saying” is supplied in the translation to mark and introduce the following as a quotation of these people who are seized with horror. The alternative is to take v. 21 as Bildad’s own summary statement (cf. G. R. Driver and G. B. Gray, Job [ICC], 2:162; J. E. Hartley, Job [NICOT], 280).
82. Job 18:21 tn The term is in the plural, “the tabernacles”; it should be taken as a plural of local extension (see GKC 397 §124.b).
83. Job 18:21 tn The word “place” is in construct; the clause following it replaces the genitive: “this is the place of—he has not known God.”
84. Job 19:1 sn Job is completely stunned by Bildad’s speech, and feels totally deserted by God and his friends. Yet from his despair a new hope emerges with a stronger faith. Even though he knows he will die in his innocence, he knows that God will vindicate him and that he will be conscious of the vindication. There are four parts to this reply: Job’s impatience with the speeches of his friends (2-6), God’s abandonment of Job and his attack (7-12), Job’s forsaken state and appeal to his friends (13-22), and Job’s confidence that he will be vindicated (23-29).
85. Job 19:2 tn Heb “torment my soul,” with “soul” representing the self or individual. The MT has a verb from יָגָה (yagah, “to afflict; to torment”). This is supported by the versions. But the LXX has “to tire” which is apparently from יָגַע (yagaʿ). The form in the MT is unusual because it preserves the final (original) yod in the Hiphil (see GKC 214 §75.gg). So this unusual form has been preserved, and is the correct reading. A modal nuance for the imperfect fits best here: “How long do you intend to do this?”
86. Job 19:2 tn The MT has דָּכָא (dakhaʾ), “to crush” in the Piel. The LXX, however, has a more general word which means “to destroy.”
87. Job 19:2 tn The LXX adds to the verse: “only know that the Lord has dealt with me thus.”
88. Job 19:3 sn The number “ten” is a general expression to convey that this has been done often (see Gen 31:7; Num 14:22).
89. Job 19:3 tn The Hiphil of the verb כָּלַם (kalam) means “outrage; insult; shame.” The verbs in this verse are prefixed conjugations, and may be interpreted as preterites if the reference is to the past time. But since the action is still going on, progressive imperfects work well.
90. Job 19:3 tn The second half of the verse uses two verbs, the one dependent on the other. It could be translated “you are not ashamed to attack me” (see GKC 385-86 §120.c), or “you attack me shamelessly.” The verb חָכַר (hakhar) poses some difficulties for both the ancient versions and the modern commentators. The verb seems to be cognate to Arabic hakara, “to oppress; to ill-treat.” This would mean that there has been a transformation of ח (khet) to ה (he). Three Hebrew mss actually have the ח (khet). This has been widely accepted; other suggestions are irrelevant.
91. Job 19:4 tn Job has held to his innocence, so the only way that he could say “I have erred” (שָׁגִיתִי, shagiti) is in a hypothetical clause like this.
92. Job 19:4 tn There is a long addition in the LXX: “in having spoken words which it is not right to speak, and my words err, and are unreasonable.”
93. Job 19:4 tn The word מְשׁוּגָה (m^eshugah) is a hapax legomenon. It is derived from שׁוּג (shug, “to wander; to err”) with root paralleling שָׁגַג (shagag) and שָׁגָה (shagah). What Job is saying is that even if it were true that he had erred, it did not injure them—it was solely his concern.
94. Job 19:5 tn The introductory particles repeat אָמְנָם (ʾamnam, “indeed”) but now with אִם (ʾim, “if”). It could be interpreted to mean “is it not true,” or as here in another conditional clause.
95. Job 19:5 tn The verb is the Hiphil of גָּדַל (gadal); it can mean “to make great” or as an internal causative “to make oneself great” or “to assume a lofty attitude, to be insolent.” There is no reason to assume another root here with the meaning of “quarrel” (as Gordis does).
96. Job 19:5 sn Job’s friends have been using his shame, his humiliation in all his sufferings, as proof against him in their case.
97. Job 19:6 tn The imperative is used here to introduce a solemn affirmation. This verse proves that Job was in no way acknowledging sin in v. 4. Here Job is declaring that God has wronged him, and in so doing, perverted justice.
98. Job 19:6 tn The Piel of עָוַת (ʿavat) means “to warp justice” (see 8:3), or here, to do wrong to someone (see Ps 119:78). The statement is chosen to refute the question that Bildad asked in his first speech.
99. Job 19:6 tn The verb נָקַף (naqaf) means “to turn; to make a circle; to encircle.” It means that God has encircled or engulfed Job with his net.
100. Job 19:6 tn The word מְצוּדוֹ (m^etsudo) is usually connected with צוּד (tsud, “to hunt”), and so is taken to mean “a net.” Gordis and Habel, however, interpret it to mean “siegeworks” thrown up around a city—but that would require changing the ד (dalet) to a ר (resh) (cf. NLT, “I am like a city under siege”). The LXX, though, has “bulwark.” Besides, the previous speech used several words for “net.”
101. Job 19:7 tn The particle is used here as in 9:11 (see GKC 497 §159.w).
102. Job 19:7 tc The LXX has “I laugh at reproach.”
103. Job 19:7 tn The same idea is expressed in Jer 20:8 and Hab 1:2. The cry is a cry for help, that he has been wronged, that there is no justice.
104. Job 19:7 tn The Niphal is simply “I am not answered.” See Prov 21:13b.
105. Job 19:8 tn The verb גָּדַר (gadar) means “to wall up; to fence up; to block.” God has blocked Job’s way so that he cannot get through. See the note on 3:23. Cf. Lam 3:7.
106. Job 19:8 tn Some commentators take the word to be חָשַׁךְ (hasak), related to an Arabic word for “thorn hedge.”
107. Job 19:9 sn The images here are fairly common in the Bible. God has stripped away Job’s honorable reputation. The crown is the metaphor for the esteem and dignity he once had. See 29:14; Isa 61:3; see Ps 8:5 [6].
108. Job 19:10 tn The metaphors are changed now to a demolished building and an uprooted tree. The verb is נָתַץ (natats, “to demolish”). Since it is Job himself who is the object, the meaning cannot be “demolish” (as of a house so that an inhabitant has to leave), but more of the attack or the battering.
109. Job 19:10 tn The text has הָלַךְ (halakh, “to leave”). But in view of Job 14:20, “perish” or “depart” would be a better meaning here.
110. Job 19:10 tn The verb נָסַע (nasaʿ) means “to travel” generally, but specifically it means “to pull up the tent pegs and move.” The Hiphil here means “uproot.” It is used of a vine in Ps 80:9. The idea here does not contradict Job 14:7, for there the tree still had roots and so could grow.
111. Job 19:10 tn The NEB has “my tent rope,” but that seems too contrived here. It is absurd to pull up a tent-rope like a tree.
112. Job 19:10 tn Heb “like a tree.” The words “one uproots” are supplied in the translation for clarity.
113. Job 19:11 tn The verb is a nonpreterite vayyiqtol perhaps employed to indicate that the contents of v. 11 are a logical sequence to the actions described in v. 10.
114. Job 19:11 tn This second half of the verse is a little difficult. The Hebrew has “and he reckons me for him like his adversaries.” Most would change the last word to a singular in harmony with the versions, “as his adversary.” But some retain the MT pointing and try to explain it variously: Weiser suggests that the plural might have come from a cultic recitation of Yahweh’s deeds against his enemies; Fohrer thinks it refers to the primeval enemies; Gordis takes it as distributive, “as one of his foes.” If the plural is retained, this last view makes the most sense.
115. Job 19:12 sn Now the metaphor changes again. Since God thinks of Job as an enemy, he attacks with his troops, builds the siege ramp, and camps around him to besiege him. All the power and all the forces are at God’s disposal in his attack of Job.
116. Job 19:12 tn Heb “they throw up their way against me.” The verb סָלַל (salal) means “to build a siege ramp” or “to throw up a ramp”; here the object is “their way.” The latter could be taken as an adverbial accusative, “as their way.” But as the object it fits just as well. Some delete the middle clause; the LXX has “Together his troops fell upon me, they beset my ways with an ambush.”
117. Job 19:13 tn Heb “brothers.”
118. Job 19:13 tn The LXX apparently took אַךְ־זָרוּ (ʾakh, “even, only,” and zaru, “they turn away”) together as if it was the verb אַכְזָרוּ (ʾakhzaru, “they have become cruel,” as in 20:21). But the grammar in the line would be difficult with this. Moreover, the word is most likely from זוּר (zur, “to turn away”). See L. A. Snijders, “The Meaning of zar in the Old Testament,” OTS 10 (1964): 1-154 (especially p. 9).
119. Job 19:14 tn The Pual participle is used for those “known” to him, or with whom he is “familiar,” whereas קָרוֹב (qarov, “near”) is used for a relative.
120. Job 19:14 tn Many commentators add the first part of v. 15 to this verse, because it is too loaded and this is too short. That gives the reading “My kinsmen and my familiar friends have disappeared, they have forgotten me (15) the guests I entertained.” There is not much support for this, nor is there much reason for it.
121. Job 19:15 tn The Hebrew גָּרֵי בֵיתִי (gare veti, “the guests of my house”) refers to those who sojourned in Job’s house—not residents, but guests.
122. Job 19:15 tn The form of the verb is a feminine plural, which would seem to lend support to the proposed change of the lines (see last note to v. 14). But the form may be feminine primarily because of the immediate reference. On the other side, the suffix of “their eyes” is a masculine plural. So the evidence lies on both sides.
123. Job 19:15 tn This word נָכְרִי (nokhri) is the person from another race, from a strange land, the foreigner. The previous word, גֵּר (ger), is a more general word for someone who is staying in the land but is not a citizen, that is, a sojourner.
124. Job 19:16 tn The verb קָרָא (qaraʾ) followed by the ל (lamed) preposition means “to summon.” Contrast Ps 123:2.
125. Job 19:16 tn Heb “plead for grace” or “plead for mercy” (ESV).
126. Job 19:17 tn The Hebrew appears to have “my breath is strange to my wife.” This would be the meaning if the verb was from זוּר (zur, “to turn aside; to be a stranger”). But it should be connected to זִיר (zir), cognate to Assyrian zaru, “to feel repugnance toward.” Here it is used in the intransitive sense, “to be repulsive.” L. A. Snijders, following Driver, doubts the existence of this second root, and retains “strange” (“The Meaning of zar in the Old Testament,” OTS 10 [1964]: 1-154).
127. Job 19:17 tn The normal meaning here would be based on the root חָנַן (khanan, “to be gracious”). And so we have versions reading “although I entreated” or “my supplication.” But it seems more likely it is to be connected to another root meaning “to be offensive; to be loathsome.” For the discussion of the connection to the Arabic, see E. Dhorme, Job, 278.
128. Job 19:17 tn The text has “the sons of my belly [= body].” This would normally mean “my sons.” But they are all dead. And there is no suggestion that Job had other sons. The word “my belly” will have to be understood as “my womb,” i.e., the womb I came from. Instead of “brothers,” the sense could be “siblings” (both brothers and sisters; G. R. Driver and G. B. Gray, Job [ICC], 2:168).
129. Job 19:18 sn The use of the verb “rise” is probably fairly literal. When Job painfully tries to get up and walk, the little boys make fun of him.
130. Job 19:18 tn The verb דִּבֵּר (dibber) followed by the preposition ב (bet) indicates speaking against someone, namely, scoffing or railing against someone (see Pss 50:20; 78:19). Some commentators find another root with the meaning “to turn one’s back on; to turn aside from.” The argument is weak philologically because it requires a definition “from” for the preposition ב. See among others I. Eitan, “Studies in Hebrew Roots,” JQR 14 (1923-24): 31-52, especially 38-41.
131. Job 19:19 tn Heb “men of my confidence,” or “men of my council,” i.e., intimate friends, confidants.
132. Job 19:19 tn The pronoun זֶה (zeh) functions here in the place of a nominative (see GKC 447 §138.h).
133. Job 19:19 tn T. Penar translates this “turn away from me” (“Job 19, 19 in the Light of Ben Sira 6, 11, ” Bib 48 [1967]: 293-95).
134. Job 19:20 tn The meaning would be “I am nothing but skin and bones” in current English idiom. Both lines of this verse need attention. The first half seems to say, “My skin and my flesh sticks to my bones.” Some think that this is too long, and that the bones can stick to the skin, or the flesh, but not both. Dhorme proposes “in my skin my flesh has rotted away” (רָקַב, raqav). This involves several changes in the line, however. He then changes the second line to read “and I have gnawed my bone with my teeth” (transferring “bone” from the first half and omitting “skin”). There are numerous other renderings of this; some of the more notable are: “I escape, my bones in my teeth” (Merx); “my teeth fall out” (Duhm); “my teeth fall from my gums” (Pope); “my bones protrude in sharp points” (Kissane). A. B. Davidson retains “the skin of my teeth,” meaning “gums.” This is about the last thing that Job has, or he would not be able to speak. For a detailed study of this verse, D. J. A. Clines devotes two full pages of textual notes (Job [WBC], 430-31). He concludes with “My bones hang from my skin and my flesh, I am left with only the skin of my teeth.”
135. Job 19:20 tn Or “I am left.”
136. Job 19:20 tn The word “alive” is not in the Hebrew text, but is supplied in the translation for clarity.
137. Job 19:22 sn Strahan comments, “The whole tragedy of the book is packed into these extraordinary words.”
138. Job 19:22 sn The idiom of eating the pieces of someone means “slander” in Aramaic (see Dan 3:8), Arabic and Akkadian.
139. Job 19:23 tn The optative is again expressed with the interrogative clause “Who will give that they be written?” Job wishes that his words be preserved long after his death.
140. Job 19:23 tn While the sense of this line is clear, there is a small problem and a plausible solution. The last word is indeed סֶפֶר (sefer, “book”), usually understood here to mean “scroll.” But the verb that follows it in the verse is יֻחָקוּ (yukhaqu), from חָקַק (khaqaq, “to engrave; to carve”). While the meaning is clearly that Job wants his words to be retained, the idea of engraving in a book, although not impossible, is unusual. And so many have suggested that the Akkadian word siparru, “copper; brass,” is what is meant here (see Isa 30:8; Judg 5:14). The consonants are the same, and the vowel pattern is close to the original vowel pattern of this segholate noun. Writing on copper or bronze sheets has been attested from the 12th to the 2nd centuries, notably in the Copper Scroll from Qumran (3Q15), which would allow the translation “scroll” in our text (for more bibliography see D. J. A. Clines, Job [WBC], 432). But H. S. Gehman notes that in Phoenician our word can mean “inscription” (“סֵפֶר, An Inscription, in the Book of Job,” JBL 63 [1944]: 303-7), making the proposed substitution unnecessary.
141. Job 19:24 sn There is some question concerning the use of the lead. It surely cannot be a second description of the tool, for a lead tool would be of no use in chiseling words into a rock. It was Rashi’s idea, followed by Dillmann and Duhm, that lead was run into the cut-out letters. The suggestion that they wrote on lead tablets does not seem to fit the verse (cf. NIV). See further A. Baker, “The Strange Case of Job’s Chisel,” CBQ 31 (1969): 370-79.
142. Job 19:25 tn Or “my Vindicator.” The word is the active participle from גָּאַל (gaʾal, “to redeem, protect, vindicate”). The word is well-known in the OT because of its identification as the kinsman-redeemer (see the book of Ruth). This is the near kinsman who will pay off one’s debts, defend the family, avenge a killing, marry the widow of the deceased. The word “redeemer” evokes the wrong connotation for people familiar with the NT alone; a translation of “Vindicator” would capture the idea more. The concept might include the description of the mediator already introduced in Job 16:19, but surely here Job is thinking of God as his vindicator. The interesting point to be stressed here is that Job has said clearly that he sees no vindication in this life, that he is going to die. But he knows he will be vindicated, and even though he will die, his vindicator lives. The dilemma remains though: his distress lay in God’s hiding his face from him, and his vindication lay only in beholding God in peace.
143. Job 19:25 tn The word אַחֲרוּן (ʾakharon, “last”) has triggered a number of interpretations. Here it is an adjectival form and not adverbial; it is an epithet of the vindicator. Some commentators, followed by the RSV, change the form to make it adverbial, and translate it “at last.” T. H. Gaster translates it “even if he were the last person to exist” (“Short notes,” VT 4 [1954]: 78).
144. Job 19:25 tn The Hebrew has “and he will rise/stand upon [the] dust.” The verb קוּם (qum) is properly “to rise; to arise,” and certainly also can mean “to stand.” Both English ideas are found in the verb. The concept here is that of God rising up to mete out justice. And so to avoid confusion with the idea of resurrection (which although implicit in these words which are pregnant with theological ideas yet to be revealed, is not explicitly stated or intended in this context) the translation “stand” has been used. The Vulgate had “I will rise,” which introduced the idea of Job’s resurrection. The word “dust” is used as in 41:33. The word “dust” is associated with death and the grave, the very earthly particles. Job assumes that God will descend from heaven to bring justice to the world. The use of the word also hints that this will take place after Job has died and returned to dust. Again, the words of Job come to mean far more than he probably understood.
145. Job 19:26 tn This verse on the whole has some serious interpretation problems that have allowed commentators to go in several directions. The verbal clause is “they strike off this,” which is then to be taken as a passive in view of the fact that there is no expressed subject. Some have thought that Job was referring to this life, and that after his disease had done its worst he would see his vindication (see T. J. Meek, “Job 19:25-27, ” VT 6 [1956]: 100-103; E. F. Sutcliffe, “Further notes on Job, textual and exegetical,” Bib 31 [1950]: 377; and others). But Job has been clear—he does not expect to live and see his vindication in this life. There are a host of other interpretations that differ greatly from the sense expressed in the MT. Duhm, for example, has “and another shall arise as my witness.” E. Dhorme (Job, 284-85) argues that the vindication comes after death; he emends the verb to get a translation: “and that, behind my skin, I shall stand up.” He explains this to mean that it will be Job in person who will be present at the ultimate drama. But the interpretation is forced, and really unnecessary.
146. Job 19:26 tn The Hebrew phrase is “and from my flesh.” This could mean “without my flesh,” i.e., separated from my flesh, or “from my flesh,” i.e., in or with my flesh. The former view is taken by those who think Job’s vindication will come in this life, and who find the idea of a resurrection unlikely to be in Job’s mind. The latter view is taken by those who interpret the preceding line as meaning death and the next verse underscoring that it will be his eye that will see. This would indicate that Job’s faith rises to an unparalleled level at this point.
147. Job 19:26 tn H. H. Rowley (Job [NCBC], 140) says, “The text of this verse is so difficult, and any convincing reconstruction is so unlikely, that it seems best not to attempt it.” His words have gone unheeded, even by himself, and rightly so. There seem to be two general interpretations, the details of some words notwithstanding. An honest assessment of the evidence would have to provide both interpretations, albeit still arguing for one. Here Job says he will see God. This at the least means that he will witness his vindication, which it seems clear from the other complaints of Job will occur after his death (it is his blood that must be vindicated). But in what way, exactly, Job will see God is not clarified. In this verse the verb that is used is often used of prophetic visions, but in the next verse the plain word for seeing—with his eye—is used. The fulfillment will be more precise than Job may have understood. Rowley does conclude: “Though there is no full grasping of a belief in a worthwhile Afterlife with God, this passage is a notable landmark in the program toward such a belief.” The difficulty is that Job expects to die—he would like to be vindicated in this life, but is resolved that he will die. (1) Some commentators think that vv. 25 and 26 follow the wish for vindication now; (2) others (traditionally) see it as in the next life. Some of the other interpretations that take a different line are less impressive, such as Kissane’s, “did I but see God…were I to behold God”; or L. Waterman’s translation in the English present, making it a mystic vision in which Job already sees that God is his vindicator (“Note on Job 19:23-27: Job’s Triumph of Faith,” JBL 69 [1950]: 379-80).
148. Job 19:27 tn The emphasis is on “I” and “for myself.” No other will be seeing this vindication, but Job himself will see it. Of that he is confident. Some take לִי (li, “for myself”) to mean favorable to me, or on my side (see A. B. Davidson, Job, 143). But Job is expecting (not just wishing for) a face-to-face encounter in the vindication.
149. Job 19:27 tn Hitzig offered another interpretation that is somewhat forced. The “other” (זָר, zar) or “stranger” would refer to Job. He would see God, not as an enemy, but in peace.
150. Job 19:27 tn Heb “kidneys,” a poetic expression for the seat of emotions.
151. Job 19:27 tn Heb “fail/grow faint in my breast.” Job is saying that he has expended all his energy with his longing for vindication.
152. Job 19:28 tc The MT reads “in me.” If that is retained, then the question would be in the first colon, and the reasoning of the second colon would be Job’s. But over 100 mss have “in him,” and so this reading is accepted by most editors. The verse is a little difficult, but it seems to form a warning by Job that God’s appearance which will vindicate Job will bring judgment on those who persecute him and charge him falsely.
153. Job 19:29 tn The word “wrath” probably refers to divine wrath for the wicked. Many commentators change this word to read “they,” or more precisely, “these things.”
154. Job 19:29 tn The word is “iniquities,” but here as elsewhere it should receive the classification of the punishment for iniquity (a category of meaning that developed from a metonymy of effect).
155. Job 19:29 tc The last word is problematic because of the textual variants in the Hebrew. In place of שַׁדִּין (shaddin, “judgment”) some have proposed שַׁדַּי (shadday, “Almighty”) and read it “that you may know the Almighty” (Ewald, Wright). Some have read it יֵשׁ דַּיָּן (yesh dayyan, “there is a judge,” Gray, Fohrer). Others defend the traditional view, arguing that the שׁ (shin) is the abbreviated relative particle on the word דִּין (din, “judgment”).