Ayub 34:35

34:35 that ¹  Job speaks without knowledge

and his words are without understanding. ² 

Ayub 34:37

34:37 For he adds transgression ³  to his sin;

in our midst he claps his hands, ⁴ 

and multiplies his words against God.”

Ayub 34:1

Elihu’s Second Speech ⁵ 

34:1 Elihu answered:

1 Korintus 4:20

4:20 For the kingdom of God is demonstrated not in idle talk but with power.

Yudas 1:10

1:10 But these men do not understand the things they slander, and they are being destroyed by the very things that, like irrational animals, they instinctively comprehend. ⁶ 

[34:35]  ¹ tn Adding “that” in the translation clarifies Elihu’s indirect citation of the wise individuals’ words.

[34:35]  ² tn The Hiphil infinitive construct is here functioning as a substantive. The word means “prudence; understanding.”

[34:37]  ³ tn Although frequently translated “rebellion,” the basic meaning of this Hebrew term is “transgression.”

[34:37]  ⁴ 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.

[34:1]  ⁵ sn This speech of Elihu focuses on defending God. It can be divided into these sections: Job is irreligious (2-9), God is just (10-15), God is impartial and omniscient (16-30), Job is foolish to rebel (31-37).

[1:10]  ⁶ tn Or “they should naturally comprehend.” The present tense in this context may have a conative force.

[1:10]  sn They instinctively comprehend. Like irrational animals, these false teachers do grasp one thing – the instinctive behavior of animals in heat. R. Bauckham (Jude, 2 Peter [WBC], 63) notes that “Though they claim to be guided by special spiritual insight gained in heavenly revelations, they are in fact following the sexual instincts which they share with the animals.” Jude’s focus is somewhat different from Peter’s: Peter argued that, like irrational animals who are born to be caught and killed, these men will be destroyed when destroying others (2 Pet 2:12). Jude, however, does not mention the destruction of animals, just that these false teachers will be destroyed for mimicking them.