Ayub 3:13

3:13 For now ¹  I would be lying down

and ²  would be quiet, ³ 

I would be asleep and then at peace ⁴ 

Ayub 3:25

3:25 For the very thing I dreaded ⁵  has happened ⁶  to me,

and what I feared has come upon me. ⁷ 

Ayub 5:6

5:6 For evil does not come up from the dust, ⁸ 

nor does trouble spring up from the ground,

Ayub 5:18

5:18 For ⁹  he ¹⁰  wounds, ¹¹  but he also bandages;

he strikes, but his hands also heal.

Ayub 5:23

5:23 For you will have a pact with the stones ¹²  of the field,

and the wild animals ¹³  will be at peace ¹⁴  with you.

Ayub 9:35

9:35 Then ¹⁵  would I speak and not fear him,

but it is not so with me. ¹⁶ 

Ayub 20:19

20:19 For he has oppressed the poor and abandoned them; ¹⁷ 

he has seized a house which he did not build. ¹⁸ 

Ayub 21:28

21:28 For you say,

‘Where now is the nobleman’s house, ¹⁹ 

and where are the tents in which the wicked lived?’ ²⁰ 

Ayub 22:30

22:30 he will deliver even someone who is not innocent, ²¹ 

who will escape ²²  through the cleanness of your hands.”

Ayub 24:17

24:17 For all of them, ²³  the morning is to them

like deep darkness;

they are friends with the terrors of darkness.

Ayub 27:8

27:8 For what hope does the godless have when he is cut off, ²⁴ 

when God takes away his life? ²⁵ 

Ayub 31:29

31:29 If ²⁶  I have rejoiced over the misfortune of my enemy ²⁷ 

or exulted ²⁸  because calamity ²⁹  found him –

Ayub 33:13

33:13 Why do you contend against him,

that he does not answer all a person’s ³⁰  words?

Ayub 34:37

34:37 For he adds transgression ³¹  to his sin;

in our midst he claps his hands, ³² 

and multiplies his words against God.”

Ayub 36:21

36:21 Take heed, do not turn to evil,

for because of this you have been tested ³³  by affliction.

[3:13]  ¹ tn The word עַתָּה (’attah, “now”) may have a logical nuance here, almost with the idea of “if that had been the case…” (IBHS 667-68 §39.3.4f). However, the temporal “now” is retained in translation since the imperfect verb following two perfects “suggests what Job’s present state would be if he had had the quiet of a still birth” (J. E. Hartley, Job [NICOT], 95, n. 23). Cf. GKC 313 §106.p.

[3:13]  ² tn The copula on the verb indicates a sequence for the imperfect: “and then I would….” In the second half of the verse it is paralleled by “then.”

[3:13]  ³ tn The text uses a combination of the perfect (lie down/sleep) and imperfect (quiet/rest). The particle עַתָּה (’attah, “now”) gives to the perfect verb its conditional nuance. It presents actions in the past that are not actually accomplished but seen as possible (GKC 313 §106.p).

[3:13]  ⁴ tn The last part uses the impersonal verb “it would be at rest for me.”

[3:25]  ⁵ tn The construction uses the cognate accusative with the verb: “the fear I feared,” or “the dread thing I dreaded” (פַחַד פָּחַדְתִּי, pakhad pakhadti). The verb פָּחַד (pakhad) has the sense of “dread” and the noun the meaning “thing dreaded.” The structure of the sentence with the perfect verb followed by the preterite indicates that the first action preceded the second – he feared something but then it happened. Some commentaries suggest reading this as a conditional clause followed by the present tense translation: “If I fear a thing it happens to me” (see A. B. Davidson, Job, 24). The reason for this change is that it is hard for some to think that in his prime Job had such fears. He did have a pure trust and confidence in the Lord (16:19, 29:18ff). But on the other hand, he did make sacrifices for his sons because he thought they might sin. There is evidence to suggest that he was aware that calamity could strike, and this is not necessarily incompatible with trust.

[3:25]  ⁶ tn The verb אָתָה (’atah) is Aramaic and is equivalent to the Hebrew verb בּוֹא (bo’, “come, happen”).

[3:25]  ⁷ tn The final verb is יָבֹא (yavo’, “has come”). It appears to be an imperfect, but since it is parallel to the preterite of the first colon it should be given that nuance here. Of course, if the other view of the verse is taken, then this would simply be translated as “comes,” and the preceding preterite also given an English present tense translation.

[5:6]  ⁸ sn The previous discussion shows how trouble rises, namely, from the rebelliousness of the fool. Here Eliphaz simply summarizes the points made with this general principle – trouble does not come from outside man, nor does it come as a part of the natural order, but rather it comes from the evil nature of man.

[5:18]  ⁹ sn Verses 18-23 give the reasons why someone should accept the chastening of God – the hand that wounds is the same hand that heals. But, of course, the lines do not apply to Job because his suffering is not due to divine chastening.

[5:18]  ¹⁰ tn The addition of the independent pronoun here makes the subject emphatic, as if to say, “For it is he who makes….”

[5:18]  ¹¹ tn The imperfect verbs in this verse describe the characteristic activities of God; the classification as habitual imperfect fits the idea and is to be rendered with the English present tense.

[5:23]  ¹² tn Heb “your covenant is with the stones of the field.” The line has been variously interpreted and translated. It is omitted in the LXX. It seems to mean there is a deep sympathy between man and nature. Some think it means that the boundaries will not be violated by enemies; Rashi thought it represented some species of beings, like genii of the field, and so read אֲדֹנֵי (’adone, “lords”) for אַבְנֵי (’avne, “stones”). Ball takes the word as בְּנֵי (bÿne, “sons”), as in “sons of the field,” to get the idea that the reference is to the beasts. E. Dhorme (Job, 71) rejects these ideas as too contrived; he says to have a pact with the stones of the field simply means the stones will not come and spoil the ground, making it less fertile.

[5:23]  ¹³ tn Heb “the beasts of the field.”

[5:23]  ¹⁴ tn This is the only occurrence of the Hophal of the verb שָׁלֵם (shalem, “to make or have peace” with someone). Compare Isa 11:6-9 and Ps 91:13. The verb form is the perfect; here it is the perfect consecutive following a noun clause (see GKC 494 §159.g).

[9:35]  ¹⁵ tn There is no conjunction with this cohortative; but the implication from the context is that if God’s rod were withdrawn, if the terror were removed, then Job would speak up without fear.

[9:35]  ¹⁶ tn The last half of the verse is rather cryptic: “but not so I with me.” NIV renders it “but as it now stands with me, I cannot.” This is very smooth and interpretive. Others transpose the two halves of the verse to read, “Since it is not so, I with myself // will commune and not fear him.” Job would be saying that since he cannot contend with God on equal terms, and since there is no arbiter, he will come on his own terms. English versions have handled this differently: “for I know I am not what I am thought to be” (NEB); “since this is not the case with me” (NAB); “I do not see myself like that at all” (JB).

[20:19]  ¹⁷ tc The verb indicates that after he oppressed the poor he abandoned them to their fate. But there have been several attempts to improve on the text. Several have repointed the text to get a word parallel to “house.” Ehrlich came up with עֹזֵב (’ozev, “mud hut”), Kissane had “hovel” (similar to Neh 3:8). M. Dahood did the same (“The Root ’zb II in Job,” JBL 78 [1959]: 306-7). J. Reider came up with עֶזֶב (’ezev, the “leavings”), what the rich were to leave for the poor (“Contributions to the Scriptural text,” HUCA 24 [1952/53]: 103-6). But an additional root עָזַב (’azav) is questionable. And while the text as it stands is general and not very striking, there is absolutely nothing wrong with it. Dhorme reverses the letters to gain בְּעֹז (bÿ’oz, “with force [or violence]”).

[20:19]  ¹⁸ tn The last clause says, “and he did not build it.” This can be understood in an adverbial sense, supplying the relative pronoun to the translation.

[21:28]  ¹⁹ sn The question implies the answer will be “vanished” or “gone.”

[21:28]  ²⁰ tn Heb “And where is the tent, the dwellings of the wicked.” The word “dwellings of the wicked” is in apposition to “tent.” A relative pronoun must be supplied in the translation.

[22:30]  ²¹ tc The Hebrew has אִי־נָקִי (’i naqi), which could be taken as “island of the innocent” (so Ibn-Ezra), or “him that is not innocent” (so Rashi). But some have changed אִי (’i) to אִישׁ (’ish, “the innocent man”). Others differ: A. Guillaume links אִי (’i) to Arabic ‘ayya “whosoever,” and so leaves the text alone. M. Dahood secures the same idea from Ugaritic, but reads it אֵי (’e).

[22:30]  ²² tc The MT has “he will escape [or be delivered].” Theodotion has the second person, “you will be delivered.”

[24:17]  ²³ tn Heb “together.”

[27:8]  ²⁴ tn The verb יִבְצָע (yivtsa’) means “to cut off.” It could be translated transitively or intransitively – the latter is better here (“when he is cut off”). Since the next line speaks of prayer, some have thought this verse should be about prayer. Mandelkern, in his concordance (p. 228b), suggested the verb should be “when he prays” (reading יִפְגַּע [yifga’] in place of יִבְצָע [yivtsa’]).

[27:8]  ²⁵ tn The verb יֵשֶׁל (yeshel) is found only here. It has been related spoils [or sheaves]”); שָׁאַל (sha’al, “to ask”); נָשָׂא (nasa’, “to lift up” [i.e., pray]); and a host of others.

[31:29]  ²⁶ tn The problem with taking this as “if,” introducing a conditional clause, is finding the apodosis, if there is one. It may be that the apodosis is understood, or summed up at the end. This is the view taken here. But R. Gordis (Job, 352) wishes to take this word as the indication of the interrogative, forming the rhetorical question to affirm he has never done this. However, in that case the parenthetical verses inserted become redundant.

[31:29]  ²⁷ sn The law required people to help their enemies if they could (Exod 23:4; also Prov 20:22). But often in the difficulties that ensued, they did exult over their enemies’ misfortune (Pss 54:7; 59:10 [11], etc.). But Job lived on a level of purity that few ever reach. Duhm said, “If chapter 31 is the crown of all ethical developments of the O.T., verse 29 is the jewel in that crown.”

[31:29]  ²⁸ tn The Hitpael of עוּר (’ur) has the idea of “exult.”

[31:29]  ²⁹ tn The word is רָע (ra’, “evil”) in the sense of anything that harms, interrupts, or destroys life.

[33:13]  ³⁰ tc The MT has “all his words.” This must refer to “man” in the previous verse. But many wish to change it to “my words,” since it would be summarizing Job’s complaint to God.

[34:37]  ³¹ tn Although frequently translated “rebellion,” the basic meaning of this Hebrew term is “transgression.”

[34:37]  ³² tc If this reading stands, it would mean that Job shows contempt, meaning that he mocks them and accuses God. It is a bold touch, but workable. Of the many suggested emendations, Dhorme alters some of the vowels and obtains a reading “and casts doubt among us,” and then takes “transgression” from the first colon for the complement. Some commentators simply delete the line.

[36:21]  ³³ tn Normally “tested” would be the translation for the Niphal of בָּחַר (bakhar). Although the Qal is employed here, the context favors “tested” rather than “chose.”