Ayub 9:32

9:32 For he ¹  is not a human being like I am,

that ²  I might answer him,

that we might come ³  together in judgment.

Ayub 13:15-23

13:15 Even if he slays me, I will hope in him; ⁴ 

I will surely ⁵  defend ⁶  my ways to his face!

13:16 Moreover, this will become my deliverance,

for no godless person would come before him. ⁷ 

13:17 Listen carefully ⁸  to my words;

let your ears be attentive to my explanation. ⁹ 

13:18 See now, ¹⁰  I have prepared ¹¹  my ¹²  case; ¹³ 

I know that I am right. ¹⁴ 

13:19 Who ¹⁵  will contend with me?

If anyone can, I will be silent and die. ¹⁶ 

13:20 Only in two things spare me, ¹⁷  O God, ¹⁸ 

and then I will not hide from your face:

13:21 Remove ¹⁹  your hand ²⁰  far from me

and stop making me afraid with your terror. ²¹ 

13:22 Then call, ²²  and I will answer,

or I will speak, and you respond to me.

13:23 How many are my ²³  iniquities and sins?

Show me my transgression and my sin. ²⁴ 

Ayub 16:21

16:21 and ²⁵  he contends with God on behalf of man

as a man ²⁶  pleads ²⁷  for his friend.

Ayub 23:3-7

23:3 O that I knew ²⁸  where I might find him, ²⁹ 

that I could come ³⁰  to his place of residence! ³¹ 

23:4 I would lay out my case ³²  before him

and fill my mouth with arguments.

23:5 I would know with what words ³³  he would answer me,

and understand what he would say to me.

23:6 Would he contend ³⁴  with me with great power?

No, he would only pay attention to me. ³⁵ 

23:7 There ³⁶  an upright person

could present his case ³⁷  before him,

and I would be delivered forever from my judge.

Ayub 31:35-36

Job’s Appeal

31:35 “If only I had ³⁸  someone to hear me!

Here is my signature – ³⁹ 

let the Almighty answer me!

If only I had an indictment ⁴⁰ 

that my accuser had written. ⁴¹ 

31:36 Surely ⁴²  I would wear it proudly ⁴³  on my shoulder,

I would bind ⁴⁴  it on me like a crown;

Ayub 34:5

34:5 For Job says, ‘I am innocent, ⁴⁵ 

but God turns away my right.

Ayub 40:8

40:8 Would you indeed annul ⁴⁶  my justice?

Would you declare me guilty so that you might be right?

[9:32]  ¹ tn The personal pronoun that would be expected as the subject of a noun clause is sometimes omitted (see GKC 360 §116.s). Here it has been supplied.

[9:32]  ² tn The consecutive clause is here attached without the use of the ו (vav), but only by simple juxtaposition (see GKC 504-5 §166.a).

[9:32]  ³ tn The sense of the verb “come” with “together in judgment” means “to confront one another in court.” See Ps 143:2.

[13:15]  ⁴ tn There is a textual difficulty here that factors into the interpretation of the verse. The Kethib is לֹא (lo’, “not”), but the Qere is לוֹ (lo, “to him”). The RSV takes the former: “Behold, he will slay me, I have no hope.” The NIV takes it as “though he slay me, yet will I hope in him.” Job is looking ahead to death, which is not an evil thing to him. The point of the verse is that he is willing to challenge God at the risk of his life; and if God slays him, he is still confident that he will be vindicated – as he says later in this chapter. Other suggestions are not compelling. E. Dhorme (Job, 187) makes a slight change of אֲיַחֵל (’ayakhel, “I will hope”) to אַחִיל (’akhil, “I will [not] tremble”). A. B. Davidson (Job, 98) retains the MT, but interprets the verb more in line with its use in the book: “I will not wait” (cf. NLT).

[13:15]  ⁵ tn On אַךְ (’akh, “surely”) see GKC 483 §153 on intensive clauses.

[13:15]  ⁶ tn The verb once again is יָכָה (yakhah, in the Hiphil, “argue a case, plead, defend, contest”). But because the word usually means “accuse” rather than “defend,” I. L. Seeligmann proposed changing “my ways” to “his ways” (“Zur Terminologie für das Gerichtsverfahren im Wortschatz des biblischen Hebräisch,” VTSup 16 [1967]: 251-78). But the word can be interpreted appropriately in the context without emendation.

[13:16]  ⁷ sn The fact that Job will dare to come before God and make his case is evidence – to Job at least – that he is innocent.

[13:17]  ⁸ tn The infinitive absolute intensifies the imperative, which serves here with the force of an immediate call to attention. In accordance with GKC 342 §113.n, the construction could be translated, “Keep listening” (so ESV).

[13:17]  ⁹ tn The verb has to be supplied in this line, for the MT has “and my explanation in your ears.” In the verse, both “word” and “explanation” are Aramaisms (the latter appearing in Dan 5:12 for the explanation of riddles).

[13:18]  ¹⁰ tn The particle הִנֵּה (hinneh) functions almost as an imperative here, calling attention to what follows: “look” (archaic: behold).

[13:18]  ¹¹ tn The verb עָרַךְ (’arakh) means “to set in order, set in array [as a battle], prepare” in the sense here of arrange and organize a lawsuit.

[13:18]  ¹² tn The pronoun is added because this is what the verse means.

[13:18]  ¹³ tn The word מִשְׁפָּט (mishpat) usually means “judgment; decision.” Here it means “lawsuit” (and so a metonymy of effect gave rise to this usage; see Num 27:5; 2 Sam 15:4).

[13:18]  ¹⁴ tn The pronoun is emphatic before the verb: “I know that it is I who am right.” The verb means “to be right; to be righteous.” Some have translated it “vindicated,” looking at the outcome of the suit.

[13:19]  ¹⁵ tn The interrogative is joined with the emphatic pronoun, stressing “who is he [who] will contend,” or more emphatically, “who in the world will contend.” Job is confident that no one can bring charges against him. He is certain of success.

[13:19]  ¹⁶ sn Job is confident that he will be vindicated. But if someone were to show up and have proof of sin against him, he would be silent and die (literally “keep silent and expire”).

[13:20]  ¹⁷ tn The line reads “do not do two things.”

[13:20]  ¹⁸ tn “God” is supplied to the verse, for the address is now to him. Job wishes to enter into dispute with God, but he first appeals that God not take advantage of him with his awesome power.

[13:21]  ¹⁹ tn The imperative הַרְחַק (harkhaq, “remove”; GKC 98 §29.q), from רָחַק (rakhaq, “far, be far”) means “take away [far away]; to remove.”

[13:21]  ²⁰ sn This is a common, but bold, anthropomorphism. The fact that the word used is כַּף (kaf, properly “palm”) rather than יָד (yad, “hand,” with the sense of power) may stress Job’s feeling of being trapped or confined (see also Ps 139:5, 7).

[13:21]  ²¹ tn See Job 9:34.

[13:22]  ²² tn The imperatives in the verse function like the future tense in view of their use for instruction or advice. The chiastic arrangement of the verb forms is interesting: imperative + imperfect, imperfect + imperative. The imperative is used for God, but the imperfect is used when Job is the subject. Job is calling for the court to convene – he will be either the defendant or the prosecutor.

[13:23]  ²³ tn The pronoun “my” is not in the Hebrew text, but has been supplied here in the translation.

[13:23]  ²⁴ sn Job uses three words for sin here: “iniquities,” which means going astray, erring; “sins,” which means missing the mark or the way; and “transgressions,” which are open rebellions. They all emphasize different kinds of sins and different degrees of willfulness. Job is demanding that any sins be brought up. Both Job and his friends agree that great afflictions would have to indicate great offenses – he wants to know what they are.

[16:21]  ²⁵ tn E. Dhorme (Job, 240) alters this slightly to read “Would that” or “Ah! if only.”

[16:21]  ²⁶ tn This is the simple translation of the expression “son of man” in Job. But some commentators wish to change the word בֵּן (ben, “son”) to בֵּין (ben, “between”). It would then be “[as] between a man and [for] his friend.” Even though a few mss have this reading, it is to be rejected. But see J. Barr, “Some Notes on ‘ben’ in Classical Hebrew,” JSS 23 (1978): 1-22.

[16:21]  ²⁷ tn The verb is supplied from the parallel clause.

[23:3]  ²⁸ tn The optative here is again expressed with the verbal clause, “who will give [that] I knew….”

[23:3]  ²⁹ tn The form in Hebrew is וְאֶמְצָאֵהוּ (vÿ’emtsa’ehu), simply “and I will find him.” But in the optative clause this verb is subordinated to the preceding verb: “O that I knew where [and] I might find him.” It is not unusual to have the perfect verb followed by the imperfect in such coordinate clauses (see GKC 386 §120.e). This could also be translated making the second verb a complementary infinitive: “knew how to find him.”

[23:3]  sn H. H. Rowley (Job [NCBC], 159) quotes Strahan without reference: “It is the chief distinction between Job and his friends that he desires to meet God and they do not.”

[23:3]  ³⁰ tn This verb also depends on מִי־יִתֵּן (mi-yitten, “who will give”) of the first part, forming an additional clause in the wish formula.

[23:3]  ³¹ tn Or “his place of judgment.” The word is from כּוּן (kun, “to prepare; to arrange”) in the Polel and the Hiphil conjugations. The noun refers to a prepared place, a throne, a seat, or a sanctuary. A. B. Davidson (Job, 169) and others take the word to mean “judgment seat” or “tribunal” in this context.

[23:4]  ³² tn The word מִשְׁפָּט (mishpat) is normally “judgment; decision.” But in these contexts it refers to the legal case that Job will bring before God. With the verb עָרַךְ (’arakh, “to set in order; to lay out”) the whole image of drawing up a lawsuit is complete.

[23:5]  ³³ tn Heb “the words he would answer me.”

[23:6]  ³⁴ tn The verb is now רִיב (riv) and not יָכַח (yakhakh, “contend”); רִיב (riv) means “to quarrel; to dispute; to contend,” often in a legal context. Here it is still part of Job’s questioning about this hypothetical meeting – would God contend with all his power?

[23:6]  ³⁵ tn The verbal clause יָשִׂם בִּי (yasim bi) has been translated “he would pay [attention] to me.” Job is saying that God will not need all his power – he will just have pay attention to Job’s complaint. Job does not need the display of power – he just wants a hearing.

[23:7]  ³⁶ tn The adverb “there” has the sense of “then” – there in the future.

[23:7]  ³⁷ tn The form of the verb is the Niphal נוֹכָח (nokkakh, “argue, present a case”). E. Dhorme (Job, 346) is troubled by this verbal form and so changes it and other things in the line to say, “he would observe the upright man who argues with him.” The Niphal is used for “engaging discussion,” “arguing a case,” and “settling a dispute.”

[31:35]  ³⁸ tn The optative is again introduced with “who will give to me hearing me? – O that someone would listen to me!”

[31:35]  ³⁹ tn Heb “here is my ‘tav’” (הֵן תָּוִי, hen tavi). The letter ת (tav) is the last letter of the alphabet in Hebrew. In paleo-Hebrew the letter was in the form of a cross or an “X,” and so used for one making a mark or a signature. In this case Job has signed his statement and delivered it to the court – but he has yet to be charged. Kissane thought that this being the last letter of the alphabet, Job was saying, “This is my last word.” Others take the word to mean “desire” – “this is my desire, that God would answer me” (see E. F. Sutcliffe, “Notes on Job, textual and exegetical,” Bib 30 [1949]: 71-72; G. R. Driver, AJSL 3 [1935/36]: 166; P. P. Saydon, “Philological and Textual Notes to the Maltese Translation of the Old Testament,” CBQ 23 [1961]: 252). R. Gordis (Job, 355) also argues strongly for this view.

[31:35]  ⁴⁰ tn Heb “a scroll,” in the context referring to a scroll containing the accusations of Job’s legal adversary (see the next line).

[31:35]  ⁴¹ tn The last line is very difficult; it simply says, “a scroll [that] my [legal] adversary had written.” The simplest way to handle this is to see it as a continuation of the optative (RSV).

[31:36]  ⁴² tn The clause begins with the positive oath formula, אִם־לֹא (’im-lo’).

[31:36]  ⁴³ tn The word “proudly” is not in the Hebrew text, but is implied (note the following line).

[31:36]  ⁴⁴ tn This verb is only found in Prov 6:21. But E. Dhorme (Job, 470) suggests that (with metathesis) we have a derivative מַעֲדַנּוֹת (ma’adannot, “bonds; ties”) in 38:31.

[34:5]  ⁴⁵ tn Heb “righteous,” but in this context it means to be innocent or in the right.

[40:8]  ⁴⁶ tn The verb פָּרַר (parar) means “to annul; to break; to frustrate.” It was one thing for Job to claim his own integrity, but it was another matter altogether to nullify God’s righteousness in the process.