Ayub 32:17

32:17 I too will answer my part,

I too will explain what I know.

Ayub 37:1

37:1 At this also my heart pounds

and leaps from its place.

Ayub 40:24

40:24 Can anyone catch it by its eyes, ¹ 

or pierce its nose with a snare? ² 

Ayub 6:27

6:27 Yes, you would gamble ³  for the fatherless,

and auction off ⁴  your friend.

Ayub 9:14

The Impossibility of Facing God in Court

9:14 “How much less, ⁵  then, can I answer him ⁶ 

and choose my words ⁷  to argue ⁸  with ⁹  him! ¹⁰ 

Ayub 15:4

15:4 But you even break off ¹¹  piety, ¹² 

and hinder ¹³  meditation ¹⁴  before God.

Ayub 15:16

15:16 how much less man, who is abominable and corrupt, ¹⁵ 

who drinks in evil like water! ¹⁶ 

Ayub 25:6

25:6 how much less a mortal man, who is but a maggot ¹⁷  –

a son of man, who is only a worm!”

Ayub 32:10

32:10 Therefore I say, ‘Listen ¹⁸  to me.

I, even I, will explain what I know.’

Ayub 36:13

36:13 The godless at heart ¹⁹  nourish anger, ²⁰ 

they do not cry out even when he binds them.

Ayub 36:29

36:29 Who can understand the spreading of the clouds,

the thunderings of his pavilion? ²¹ 

Ayub 36:33

36:33 ²² His thunder announces the coming storm,

the cattle also, concerning the storm’s approach.

Ayub 37:11

37:11 He loads the clouds with moisture; ²³ 

he scatters his lightning through the clouds.

Ayub 4:19

4:19 how much more to those who live in houses of clay, ²⁴ 

whose foundation is in the dust,

who are crushed ²⁵  like ²⁶  a moth?

Ayub 14:3

14:3 Do you fix your eye ²⁷  on such a one? ²⁸ 

And do you bring me ²⁹  before you for judgment?

Ayub 34:12

34:12 Indeed, in truth, God does not act wickedly,

and the Almighty does not pervert justice.

Ayub 35:14

35:14 How much less, then,

when you say that you do not perceive him,

that the case is before him

and you are waiting for him! ³⁰ 

Ayub 32:2

32:2 Then Elihu son of Barakel the Buzite, of the family of Ram, became very angry. ³¹  He was angry ³²  with Job for justifying ³³  himself rather than God. ³⁴ 

[40:24]  ¹ tn The idea would be either (1) catch it while it is watching, or (2) in some way disabling its eyes before the attack. But others change the reading; Ball suggested “with hooks” and this has been adopted by some modern English versions (e.g., NRSV).

[40:24]  ² tn Ehrlich altered the MT slightly to get “with thorns,” a view accepted by Driver, Dhorme and Pope.

[6:27]  ³ tn The word “lots” is not in the text; the verb is simply תַּפִּילוּ (tappilu, “you cast”). But the word “lots” is also omitted in 1 Sam 14:42. Some commentators follow the LXX and repoint the word and divide the object of the preposition to read “and fall upon the blameless one.” Fohrer deletes the verse. Peake transfers it to come after v. 23. Even though it does not follow quite as well here, it nonetheless makes sense as a strong invective against their lack of sympathy, and the lack of connection could be the result of emotional speech. He is saying they are the kind of people who would cast lots over the child of a debtor, who, after the death of the father, would be sold to slavery.

[6:27]  ⁴ tn The verb תִכְרוּ (tikhru) is from כָּרָה (karah), which is found in 40:30 with עַל (’al), to mean “to speculate” on an object. The form is usually taken to mean “to barter for,” which would be an expression showing great callousness to a friend (NIV). NEB has “hurl yourselves,” perhaps following the LXX “rush against.” but G. R. Driver thinks that meaning is very precarious. As for the translation, “to speculate about [or “over”] a friend” could be understood to mean “engage in speculation concerning,” so the translation “auction off” has been used instead.

[9:14]  ⁵ tn The construction אַף כִּי־אָנֹכִי (’af ki ’anokhi) is an expression that means either “how much more” or “how much less.” Here it has to mean “how much less,” for if powerful forces like Rahab are crushed beneath God’s feet, how could Job contend with him?

[9:14]  ⁶ tn The imperfect verb here is to be taken with the nuance of a potential imperfect. The idea of “answer him” has a legal context, i.e., answering God in a court of law. If God is relentless in his anger toward greater powers, then Job realizes it is futile for him.

[9:14]  ⁷ sn In a legal controversy with God it would be essential to choose the correct words very carefully (humanly speaking); but the calmness and presence of mind to do that would be shattered by the overwhelming terror of God’s presence.

[9:14]  ⁸ tn The verb is supplied in this line.

[9:14]  ⁹ tn The preposition אִם (’im, “with”) carries the idea of “in contest with” in a number of passages (compare vv. 2, 3; 16:21).

[9:14]  ¹⁰ tn The LXX goes a different way after changing the first person to the third: “Oh then that he would hearken to me, or judge my cause.”

[15:4]  ¹¹ tn The word פָּרַר (parar) in the Hiphil means “to annul; to frustrate; to destroy; to break,” and this fits the line quite well. The NEB reflects G. R. Driver’s suggestion of an Arabic cognate meaning “to expel; to banish” (“Problems in the Hebrew text of Job,” VTSup 3 [1955]: 77).

[15:4]  ¹² tn Heb “fear,” “reverence.”

[15:4]  ¹³ tn The word גָּרַע (gara’) means “to diminish,” regard as insignificant, occasionally with the sense of “pull down” (Deut 4:2; 13:1). It is here that Eliphaz is portraying Job as a menace to the religion of society because they dissuade people from seeking God.

[15:4]  ¹⁴ tn The word שִׂיחָה (sikhah) is “complaint; cry; meditation.” Job would be influencing people to challenge God and not to meditate before or pray to him.

[15:16]  ¹⁵ tn The two descriptions here used are “abominable,” meaning “disgusting” (a Niphal participle with the value of a Latin participle [see GKC 356-57 §116.e]), and “corrupt” (a Niphal participle which occurs only in Pss 14:3 and 53:4), always in a moral sense. On the significance of the first description, see P. Humbert, “Le substantif toáe„ba„ et le verbe táb dans l’Ancien Testament,” ZAW 72 [1960]: 217ff.). On the second word, G. R. Driver suggests from Arabic, “debauched with luxury, corrupt” (“Some Hebrew Words,” JTS 29 [1927/28]: 390-96).

[15:16]  ¹⁶ sn Man commits evil with the same ease and facility as he drinks in water – freely and in large quantities.

[25:6]  ¹⁷ tn The text just has “maggot” and in the second half “worm.” Something has to be added to make it a bit clearer. The terms “maggot” and “worm” describe man in his lowest and most ignominious shape.

[32:10]  ¹⁸ tc In most Hebrew mss this imperative is singular, and so addressed to Job. But two Hebrew mss and the versions have the plural. Elihu was probably addressing all of them.

[36:13]  ¹⁹ tn The expression “godless [or hypocrite] in heart” is an intensification of the description. It conveys that they are intentionally godless. See Matt 23:28.

[36:13]  ²⁰ tn Heb “they put anger.” This is usually interpreted to mean they lay up anger, or put anger in their hearts.

[36:29]  ²¹ tn Heb “his booth.”

[36:33]  ²² tn Peake knew of over thirty interpretations for this verse. The MT literally says, “He declares his purpose [or his shout] concerning it; cattle also concerning what rises.” Dhorme has it: “The flock which sniffs the coming storm has warned the shepherd.” Kissane: “The thunder declares concerning him, as he excites wrath against iniquity.” Gordis translates it: “His thunderclap proclaims his presence, and the storm his mighty wrath.” Many more could be added to the list.

[37:11]  ²³ tn The word “moisture” is drawn from רִי (ri) as a contraction for רְוִי (rÿvi). Others emended the text to get “hail” (NAB) or “lightning,” or even “the Creator.” For these, see the various commentaries. There is no reason to change the reading of the MT when it makes perfectly good sense.

[4:19]  ²⁴ sn Those who live in houses of clay are human beings, for the human body was made of clay (Job 10:9; 33:6; and Isa 64:7). In 2 Cor 4:7 the body is an “earthen vessel” – a clay pot. The verse continues the analogy: houses have foundations, and the house of clay is founded on dust, and will return to dust (Gen 3:19; Ps 103:14). The reasoning is that if God finds defects in angels, he will surely find them in humans who are inferior to the angels because they are but dust. In fact, they are easily crushed like the moth.

[4:19]  ²⁵ tn The imperfect verb is in the plural, suggesting “they crush.” But since there is no subject expressed, the verb may be given an impersonal subject, or more simply, treated as a passive (see GKC 460 §144.g).

[4:19]  ²⁶ tn The prepositional compound לִפְנֵי (lifne) normally has the sense of “before,” but it has been used already in 3:24 in the sense of “like.” That is the most natural meaning of this line. Otherwise, the interpretation must offer some explanation of a comparison between how quickly a moth and a human can be crushed. There are suggestions for different readings here; see for example G. R. Driver, “Linguistic and Textual Problems: Jeremiah,” JQR 28 (1937/38): 97-129 for a change to “bird’s nest”; and J. A. Rimbach, “‘Crushed before the Moth’ (Job 4:19),” JBL 100 (1981): 244-46, for a change of the verb to “they are pure before their Maker.” However, these are unnecessary emendations.

[14:3]  ²⁷ tn Heb “open the eye on,” an idiom meaning to prepare to judge someone.

[14:3]  ²⁸ tn The verse opens with אַף־עַל־זֶה (’af-’al-zeh), meaning “even on such a one!” It is an exclamation of surprise.

[14:3]  ²⁹ tn The text clearly has “me” as the accusative; but many wish to emend it to say “him” (אֹתוֹ, ’oto). But D. J. A. Clines rightly rejects this in view of the way Job is written, often moving back and forth from his own tragedy and others’ tragedies (Job [WBC], 283).

[35:14]  ³⁰ sn The point is that if God does not listen to those who do not turn to him, how much less likely is he to turn to one who complains against him.

[32:2]  ³¹ tn The verse begins with וַיִּחַר אַף (vayyikhar ’af, “and the anger became hot”), meaning Elihu became very angry.

[32:2]  ³² tn The second comment about Elihu’s anger comes right before the statement of its cause. Now the perfect verb is used: “he was angry.”

[32:2]  ³³ tn The explanation is the causal clause עַל־צַדְּקוֹ נַפְשׁוֹ (’al-tsaddÿqo nafsho, “because he justified himself”). It is the preposition with the Piel infinitive construct with a suffixed subjective genitive.

[32:2]  ³⁴ tc The LXX and Latin versions soften the expression slightly by saying “before God.”