Text -- Job 40:16-24 (NET)

40:16 Look at its strength in its loins, and its power in the muscles of its belly. 40:17 It makes its tail stiff like a cedar, the sinews of its thighs are tightly wound. 40:18 Its bones are tubes of bronze, its limbs like bars of iron. 40:19 It ranks first among the works of God, the One who made it has furnished it with a sword. 40:20 For the hills bring it food, where all the wild animals play. 40:21 Under the lotus trees it lies, in the secrecy of the reeds and the marsh. 40:22 The lotus trees conceal it in their shadow; the poplars by the stream conceal it. 40:23 If the river rages, it is not disturbed, it is secure, though the Jordan should surge up to its mouth. 40:24 Can anyone catch it by its eyes, or pierce its nose with a snare?

Commentary -- Word/Phrase Notes (per phrase)

Wesley: Job 40:16

He hath strength answerable to his bulk, but this strength by God's wise and merciful providence is not an offensive strength, consisting in, or put forth by horns or claws, as it is in ravenous creatures, but only defensive and seated in his loins, as it is in other creatures.

Wesley: Job 40:17

Which though it be but short, yet when it is erected, is exceeding stiff and strong.

Wesley: Job 40:17

The sinews of his thighs. His thighs and feet are so sinewy and strong, that one of them is able to break or over - turn a large boat.

Wesley: Job 40:19

He is one of the chief of God's works, in regard of its great bulk and strength.

Wesley: Job 40:20

Though he lives most in the water, yet he often fetches his food from the land, and from the mountains or hills, which are nigh the river Nile.

Wesley: Job 40:20

They not only feed securely, but sport themselves by him, being taught by experience that he is gentle and harmless.

Wesley: Job 40:22

Or, of the Nile, of which this word is often used in scripture. His constant residence is in or near this river, or the willows that grow by it.

Wesley: Job 40:23

A great quantity of water, hyperbolically called a river.

Wesley: Job 40:23

He drinks not with fear and caution; but such is his courage, that he fears no enemy either by water or by land. He drinks as if he designed, to drink up the whole river. He mentions Jordan, as a river well known, in and nigh unto Job's land.

Wesley: Job 40:24

Can any man take him in his eyes? Openly and by force? Surely not. His strength is too great for man to overcome: and therefore men are forced to use wiles and engines to catch him.

JFB: Job 40:16

Rather, "muscles" of his belly; the weakest point of the elephant, therefore it is not meant.

JFB: Job 40:17

As the tempest bends the cedar, so it can move its smooth thick tail [UMBREIT]. But the cedar implies straightness and length, such as do not apply to the river horse's short tail, but perhaps to an extinct species of animal (see on Job 40:15).

JFB: Job 40:17

Rather, "thighs."

JFB: Job 40:17

Firmly twisted together, like a thick rope.

JFB: Job 40:18

Rather, "tubes" of copper [UMBREIT].

JFB: Job 40:19

Chief of the works of God; so "ways" (Job 26:14; Pro 8:22).

JFB: Job 40:19

Rather, "has furnished him with his sword" (harpe), namely, the sickle-like teeth with which he cuts down grain. English Version, however, is literally right.

JFB: Job 40:20

The mountain is not his usual haunt. BOCHART says it is sometimes found there (?).

JFB: Job 40:20

A graphic trait: though armed with such teeth, he lets the beasts play near him unhurt, for his food is grass.

JFB: Job 40:21

He leads an inactive life.

JFB: Job 40:21

Rather, "lotus bushes"; as Job 40:22 requires.

JFB: Job 40:22

Translate: "lotus bushes."

JFB: Job 40:23

Rather, "(Though) a river be violent (overflow), he trembleth not"; (for though living on land, he can live in the water, too); he is secure, though a Jordan swell up to his mouth. "Jordan" is used for any great river (consonant with the "behemoth"), being a poetical generalization (see on Job 40:15). The author cannot have been a Hebrew as UMBREIT asserts, or he would not adduce the Jordan, where there were no river horses. He alludes to it as a name for any river, but not as one known to him, except by hearsay.

JFB: Job 40:24

Rather, "Will any take him by open force" (literally, "before his eyes"), "or pierce his nose with cords?" No; he can only be taken by guile, and in a pitfall (Job 41:1-2).

Clarke: Job 40:16

His strength is in his loins - This refers to his great agility, notwithstanding his bulk; by the strength of his loins he was able to take vast springs, and make astonishing bounds.

Clarke: Job 40:17

He moveth his tail like a cedar - Therefore it was neither the elephant, who has a tail like that of the hog, nor the hippopotamus, whose tail is only about a foot long

Clarke: Job 40:17

The sinews of his stones - I translate with Mr. Good, and for the same reasons, the sinews of his haunches, which is still more characteristic; as the animal must have excelled in leaping.

Clarke: Job 40:18

His bones are as strong pieces of brass-bars of iron - The tusk I have mentioned above is uncommonly hard, solid, and weighty for its size.

Clarke: Job 40:19

He is the chief of the ways of God - The largest, strongest, and swiftest quadruped that God has formed

Clarke: Job 40:19

He that made him - No power of man or beast can overcome him. God alone can overcome him, and God alone could make his sword (of extinction) approach to him.

Clarke: Job 40:20

The mountains bring him forth food - It cannot therefore be the hippopotamus, as he is seldom found far from the rivers where he has his chief residence

Clarke: Job 40:20

Where all the beasts of the field play - He frequents those places where he can have most prey. He makes a mock of all the beasts of the field. They can neither resist his power, nor escape from his agility. All this answers to what we know of the mammoth, but not at all to the hippopotamus.

Clarke: Job 40:21

He lieth under the shady trees - This and the following verses refer to certain habits of the behemoth, with which we are and must be unacquainted,

Clarke: Job 40:22

The willows of the brook compass him - This would agree well enough with the hippopotamus.

Clarke: Job 40:23

Behold, he drinketh up a river - A similar mode of expression, and of precisely the same meaning, as that in Job 39:24 : "He swalloweth the ground with fierceness."No river can stop his course: he wades through all; stems every tide and torrent; and hurries not as though he were in danger

Clarke: Job 40:23

He trusteth that he can draw up Jordan - Even when the river overflows its banks, it is no stoppage to him: though the whole impetuosity of its stream rush against his mouth, he is not afraid. Mr. Good has seized the true idea in his translation of this verse: -

"If the stream rage, he revileth not

He is unmoved, though Jordan rush against his mouth.

From this mention of Jordan it is probable that the behemoth was once an inhabitant of the mountains, marshes, and woods, of the land of Palestine.

Clarke: Job 40:24

He taketh it with his eyes - He looks at the sweeping tide, and defies it

Clarke: Job 40:24

His nose pierceth through snares - If fences of strong stakes be made in order to restrain him, or prevent him from passing certain boundaries, he tears them in pieces with his teeth; or, by pressing his nose against them, breaks them off. If other parts of the description would answer, this might well apply to the elephant, the nose here meaning the proboscis, with which he can split trees, or even tear them up from the roots! Thus ends the description of the behemoth; what I suppose to be the mastodon or mammoth, or some creature of this kind, that God made as the chief of his works, exhibited in various countries for a time, cut them off from the earth, but by his providence preserved many of their skeletons, that succeeding ages might behold the mighty power which produced this chief of the ways of God, and admire the providence that rendered that race extinct which would otherwise, in all probability, have extinguished every other race of animals! I am not unapprized of the strong arguments produced by learned men to prove, on the one hand, that behemoth is the elephant; and, on the other, that he is the hippopotamus or river-horse, and I have carefully read all that Bochart, that chief of learned men, has said on the subject. But I am convinced that an animal now extinct, probably of the kind already mentioned, is the creature pointed out and described by the inspiration of God in this chapter

On Job 40:1 of this chapter we have seen, from Mr. Heath’ s remarks, that the fourteen first verses were probably transposed. In the following observations Dr. Kennicott appears to prove the point. "It will be here objected, that the poem could not possibly end with this question from Job; and, among other reasons, for this in particular; because we read in the very next verse, That after the Lord had spoken these words unto Job, etc. If, therefore, the last speaker was not Job, but the Lord, Job could not originally have concluded this poem, as he does at present. "This objection I hold to be exceedingly important; and, indeed, to prove decisively that the poem must have ended at first with some speech from God. "And this remark leads directly to a very interesting inquiry: What was at first the conclusion of this poem? This may, I presume, be pointed out and determined, not by the alteration of any one word, but only by allowing a dislocation of the fourteen verses which now begin the fortieth chapter. Chapters 38, 39, 40, and 41, contain a magnificent display of the Divine power and wisdom in the works of the Creator; specifying the lion, raven, wild goat, wild ass, unicorn, peacock, ostrich, horse, hawk, eagle, behemoth, and leviathan. "Now, it must have surprised most readers to find that the description of these creatures is strangely interrupted at Job 40:1, and as strangely resumed afterwards at Job 40:15; and therefore, if these fourteen verses will connect with and regularly follow what now ends the poem, we cannot much doubt that these fourteen verses have again found their true station, and should be restored to it. "The greatness of the supposed transposition is no objection: because so many verses as would fill one piece of vellum in an ancient roll, might be easily sewed in before or after its proper place. In the case before us, the twenty-five lines in the first fourteen verses of chapter xl. seem to have been sewed in improperly after Job 39:30, instead of after Job 42:6. That such large parts have been transposed in rolls to make which the parts are sewed together is absolutely certain; and that this has been the case here, is still more probable for the following reason: - "The lines here supposed to be out of place are twenty-five, and contain ninety-two words; which might be written on one piece or page of vellum. But the MS. in which these twenty-five lines made one page, must be supposed to have the same, or nearly the same, number of lines in each of the pages adjoining. And it would greatly strengthen this presumption if these twenty-five lines would fall in regularly at the end of any other set of lines, nearly of the same number; if they would fall in after the next set of twenty-five, or the second set, or the third, or the fourth, etc. Now, this is actually the case here; for the lines after these twenty-five, being one hundred or one hundred and one, make just four times twenty-five. And, therefore, if we consider these one hundred and twenty-five lines as written on five equal pieces of vellum, it follows that the fifth piece might be carelessly sewed up before the other four. "Let us also observe that present disorder of the speeches, which is this. In chapters 38 and 39, God first speaks to Job. The end of chapter 39 is followed by, ‘ And the Lord answered Job and said,’ whilst yet Job had not replied. At Job 40:3-5, Job answers; but he says, he had then spoken Twice, and he would add no more; whereas, this was his first reply, and he speaks afterwards. From Job 40:15-41:34 are now the descriptions of behemoth and leviathan, which would regularly follow the descriptions of the horse, hawk, and eagle. And from Job 42:1-6 is now Job’ s speech, after which we read in Job 42:7, ‘ After the Lord had spoken these words unto Job!’ "Now, all these confusions are removed at once if we only allow that a piece of vellum containing the twenty-five lines, (Job 40:1-14), originally followed Job 42:6. For then, after God’ s first speech, ending with leviathan, Job replies: then God, to whom Job replies the second time, when he added no more; and then God addresses him the third, when Job is silent, and the poem concludes: upon which the narrative opens regularly, with saying, ‘ After the Lord had spoken these words unto Job,’ etc. Job 42:7."- Kennicott’ s Remarks, p. 161. The reader will find much more satisfaction if he read the places as above directed. Having ended chapter 29, proceed immediately to Job 40:15; go on regularly to the end of Job 42:6, and immediately after that add Job 40:1-14. We shall find then that the poem has a consistent and proper ending, and that the concluding speech was spoken by Jehovah.

Defender: Job 40:17

No elephant or hippo has a tail like a cedar. This description supports the theory mentioned above that a bememoth may be a dinosaur (see notes on Job 40:19)."

Defender: Job 40:19

The behemoth was the "chief" of all created land animals, which could only, therefore, have been one of the great land dinosaurs. These, like all other animals, were created on the fifth and sixth days of creation week. Seemingly, the dinosaurs had representatives preserved on Noah's ark. Some descendants survived to and beyond Job's day, giving rise to all the traditions of dragons in various parts of the world.

Defender: Job 40:19

No mere man could overcome such an animal, but God could. As Job beheld the great reptile, it might well have called to his mind the old Serpent of Eden, who was ultimately responsible for all the world's sin and suffering. He also knew of the ancient promise of the Redeemer who would come some day to slay the Serpent. Furthermore, he had expressed faith in that coming Redeemer (Job 19:25), and had sensed that his sufferings might somehow be a trial to which God was subjecting him (Job 23:10). Perhaps God was helping him to realize what was really going on behind the scenes in connection with his trials."

TSK: Job 40:17

moveth : or, setteth up

the : Job 41:23

TSK: Job 40:18

Job 7:12; Isa 48:4

TSK: Job 40:19

the chief : Job 26:13; Psa 104:24

he that : Psa 7:12; Isa 27:1

TSK: Job 40:20

the mountains : Job 40:15; Psa 147:8, Psa 147:9

where : Psa 104:14, Psa 104:26

TSK: Job 40:21

the reed : Isa 19:6, Isa 19:7, Isa 35:7

TSK: Job 40:22

the willows : Lev 23:40; Isa 15:7; Eze 17:5

TSK: Job 40:23

drinketh : Heb. oppresseth, Isa 37:25

hasteth : Psa 55:8; Isa 28:16

Jordan : Gen 13:10; Jos 3:15

TSK: Job 40:24

Or, Will any take him in his sight, or bore his nose with a gin, Job 41:1, Job 41:2

Commentary -- Word/Phrase Notes (per Verse)

Barnes: Job 40:16

Lo now, his strength is in his loins - The inspection of the figure of the hippopotamus will show the accuracy of this. The strength of the elephant is in the neck; of the lion in the paw; of the horse and ox in the shoulders; but the principal power of the river-horse is in the loins; compare Nah 2:1. This passage is one that proves that the elephant cannot be referred to.

And his force is in the navel of his belly - The word which is here rendered "navel"( שׁריר shârı̂yr ) means properly "firm, hard, tough,"and in the plural form, which occurs here, means the "firm,"or "tough"parts of the belly. It is not used to denote the "navel"in any place in the Bible, and should not have been so rendered here. The reference is to the muscles and tendons of this part of the body, and perhaps particularly to the fact that the hippopotamus, by crawling so much on his belly among the stones of the stream or on land, acquires a special hardness or strength in those parts of the body. This clearly proves that the elephant is not intended. In that animal, this is the most tender part of the body. Pliny and Solinus both remark that the elephant has a thick, hard skin on the back, but that the skin of the belly is soft and tender. Pliny says ("Hist. Nat."Lib. viii. c. 20), that the rhinoceros, when about to attack an elephant, "seeks his belly, as if he knew that that was the most tender part."So Aelian, "Hist."Lib. xvii. c. 44; see Bochart, as above.

Barnes: Job 40:17

He moveth his tail like a cedar - Margin, "setteth up."The Hebrew word ( חפץ châphêts ) means "to bend, to curve;"and hence, it commonly denotes "to be inclined, favorably disposed to desire or please."The obvious meaning here is, that this animal had some remarkable power of "bending"or "curving"its tail, and that there was some resemblance in this to the motion of the cedar-tree when moved by the wind. In "what"this resemblance consisted, or how this was a proof of its power, it is not quite easy to determine. Rosenmuller says that the meaning is, that the tail of the hippopotamus was "smooth, round, thick, and firm,"and in this respect resembled the cedar. The tail is short - being, according to Abdollatiph (see Ros.), about half a cubit in length. In the lower part, says he, it is thick, "equalling the extremities of the fingers;"and the idea here, according to this, is, that this short, thick, and apparently firm tail, was bent over by the will of the animal as the wind bends the branches of the cedar.

The point of comparison is not the "length,"but the fact of its being easily bent over or curved at the pleasure of the animal. Why this, however, should have been mentioned as remarkable, or how the power of the animal in this respect differs from others, is not very apparent. Some, who have supposed the elephant to be here referred to, have understood this of the proboscis. But though "this would be"a remarkable proof of the power of the animal, the language of the original will not admit of it. The Hebrew word ( זנב zânâb ) is used only to denote the tail. It is "possible"that there may be here an allusion to the unwieldy nature of every part of the animal, and especially to the thickness and inflexibility of the skin and what was remarkable was, that notwithstanding this, this member was entirely at its command. Still, the reason of the comparison is not very clear. The description of the movement of the "tail"here given, would agree much better with some of the extinct orders of animals whose remains have been recently discovered and arranged by Cuvier, than with that of the hippopotamus. Particularly, it would agree with the account of the ichthyosaurus (see Buckland’ s "Geology, Bridgewater Treatise,"vol. i. 133ff), though the other parts of the animal here described would not accord well with this.

The sinews of his stones are wrapped together - Good renders this, "haunches;"Noyes, Prof. Lee, Rosenmuller, and Schultens, "thighs;"and the Septuagint simply has: "his sinews."The Hebrew word used here ( פחד pachad ) means properly "fear, terror,"Exo 15:16; Job 13:11; and, according to Gesenius, it then means, since "fear"is transferred to cowardice and shame, anything which "causes"shame, and hence, the secret parts. So it is understood here by our translators; but there does not seem to be any good reason for this translation, but there is every reason why it should not be thus rendered. The "object"of the description is to inspire a sense of the "power"of the animal, or of his capacity to inspire terror or dread; and hence, the allusion here is to those parts which were fitted to convey this dread, or this sense of his power - to wit, his strength. The usual meaning of the word, therefore, should be retained, and the sense then would be, "the sinews of his terror,"that is, of his parts fitted to inspire terror, "are wrapped together;"are firm, compact, solid. The allusion then is to his thighs or haunches, as being formidable in their aspect, and the seat of strength. The sinews or muscles of these parts seemed to be like a hard-twisted rope; compact, firm, solid, and such as to defy all attempts to overcome them.

Barnes: Job 40:18

His bones are as strong pieces of brass - The circumstance here adverted to was remarkable, because the common residence of the animal was the water, and the bones of aquatic animals are generally hollow, and much less firm than those of land animals. It should be observed here, that the word rendered "brass"in the Scriptures most probably denotes "copper."Brass is a compound metal, composed of copper and zinc; and there is no reason to suppose that the art of compounding it was known at as early a period of the world as the time of Job. The word here translated "strong pieces"( אפיק 'âphı̂yq ) is rendered by Schultens " alvei - channels,"or "beds,"as of a rivulet or stream; and by Rosenmuller, Gesenius, Noyes, and Umbreit, "tubes"- supposed to allude to the fact that they seemed to be hollow tubes of brass. But the more common meaning of the word is "strong, mighty,"and there is no impropriety in retaining that sense here; and then the meaning would be, that his bones were so firm that they seemed to be made of solid metal.

Barnes: Job 40:19

He is the chief of the ways of God - In size and strength. The word rendered "chief"is used in a similar sense in Num 24:20, "Amalek was the first of the nations;"that is, one of the most powerful and mighty of the nations.

He that made him can make his sword approach unto him - According to this translation, the sense is, that God had power over him, notwithstanding his great strength and size, and could take his life when he pleased. Yet this, though it would be a correct sentiment, does not seem to be that which the connection demands. That would seem to require some allusion to the strength of the animal; and accordingly, the translation suggested by Bochart, and adopted substantially by Rosenmuller, Umbreit, Noyes, Schultens, Prof. Lee, and others, is to be preferred - "He that made him furnished him with a sword."The allusion then would be to his strong, sharp teeth, hearing a resemblance to a sword, and designed either for defense or for the purpose of cutting the long grass on which it fed when on the land. The propriety of this interpretation may be seen vindicated at length in Bochart, "Hieroz."P. ii. Lib. v. c. xv. pp. 766, 762. The ἅρπη harpē , i. e. the sickle or scythe, was ascribed to the hippopotamus by some of the Greek writers. Thus, Nicander, "Theriacon,"verse 566:

Η ἵππον, τὸν Νεῖλος ύπερ Σάιν αἰθαλοεσσαν

Βόσκει, ἀρούρησιν δὲ κακὴν ἐπιβάλλεται

ἍΡΠΗΝ.

Ee hippon , ton Neilos huper Sain aithaloessan

Boskei , arourēsin de kakēn epiballetai .

Harpēn

On this passage the Scholiast remarks, "The ἅρπη harpē , means a sickle, and the teeth of the hippopotamus are so called - teaching that this animal consumes ( τρώγει trōgei ) the harvest."See Bochart also for other examples. A slight inspection of the "cut"will show with what propriety it is said of the Creator of the hippopotamus, that he had armed him with a sickle, or sword.

Barnes: Job 40:20

Surely the mountains bring him forth food - That is, though he lies commonly among the reeds and fens, and is in the water a considerable portion of his time, yet he also wanders to the mountains, and finds his food there. But the point of the remark here does not seem to be, that the mountains brought forth food for him, but that he gathered it "while all the wild beasts played around him, or sported in his very presence."It was remarkable that an animal so large and mighty, and armed with such a set of teeth, should not be carnivorous, and that the wild beasts on the mountains should continue their sports without danger or alarm in his very presence. This fact could be accounted for partly because the "motions"of the hippopotamus were so very slow and clumsy that the wild beasts had nothing to fear from him, and could easily escape from him if he were disposed to attack them, and partly from the fact that he seems to have "preferred"vegetable food. The hippopotamus is seldom carnivorous, except when driven by extreme hunger, and in no respect is he formed to be a beast of prey. In regard to "the fact"that the hippopotamus is sometimes found in mountainous or elevated places, see Bochart.

Barnes: Job 40:21

He lieth under the shady trees - Referring to his usually inactive and lazy life. He is disposed to lie down in the shade, and especially in the vegetable growth in marshy places on the banks of lakes and rivers, rather than to dwell in the open field or in the upland forest. This account agrees well with the habits of the hippopotamus. The word here and in Job 40:22 rendered "shady trees"( צאלים tse'eliym ), is by Gesenius, Noyes, Prof. Lee, and Schultens, translated "lotus,"and "wild lotus."The Vulgate, Syriac, Rosenmuller, Aben-Ezra, and others, render it "shady trees."It occurs nowhere else in the Scriptures, and it is difficult, therefore, to determine its meaning. According to Schultens and Gesenius, it is derived from the obsolete word צאל tsā'al , "to be thin, slender;"and hence, in Arabic it is applied to the "wild lotus"- a plant that grows abundantly on the banks of the Nile, and that often serves the wild beasts of the desert for a place of retreat. It is not very important whether it be rendered the "lotus,"or "shades,"though the probable derivation of the word seems to favor the former.

In the covert of the reed - It is well known that reeds abounded on the banks of the Nile. These would furnish a convenient and a natural retreat for the hippopotamus.

And fens - בצה bitstsâh - "marsh, marshy places."This passage proves that the elephant is not here referred to. He is never found in such places.

Barnes: Job 40:22

The shady trees - Probably the "lote-trees;"see the note at Job 40:21. The same word is used here.

The willow-trees of the brook - Of the "stream,"or "rivulet."The Hebrew word ( נחל nachal ) means rather "a wady;"a gorge or gulley, which is swollen with torrents in the winter, but which is frequently dry in summer; see the notes at Job 6:15. Willows grew commonly on the banks of rivers. They could not be cultivated in the desert; Isa 15:7.

Barnes: Job 40:23

Behold he drinketh up a river - Margin, "oppresseth."The margin expresses the proper meaning of the Hebrew word, עשׁק ‛âshaq . It usually means to oppress, to treat with violence and injustice; and to defraud, or extort. But a very different sense is given to this verse by Bochart, Gesenius, Noyes, Schultens, Umbreit, Prof. Lee, and Rosenmuller. According to the interpretation given by them the meaning is, "The stream overfloweth, and he feareth not; he is secure, even though Jordan rush forth even to his mouth."The reference then would be, not to the fact that he was greedy in his mode of drinking, but to the fact that this huge and fierce animal, that found its food often on the land, and that reposed under the shade of the lotus and the papyrus, could live in the water as well as on the land, and was unmoved even though the impetuous torrent of a swollen river should overwhelm him.

The "names"by which this translation is recommended are a sufficient guarantee that it is not a departure from the proper meaning of the original. It is also the most natural and obvious interpretation. It is impossible to make good sense of the phrase "he oppresseth a river;"nor does the word used properly admit of the translation "he drinketh up."The word "river"in this place, therefore ( נהר nâhâr ), is to be regarded as in the nominative case to יעשׁק ya‛âshaq , and the meaning is, that when a swollen and impetuous river rushes along and bears all before it, and, as it were, "oppresses"everything in its course, he is not alarmed; he makes no effort to flee; he lies perfectly calm and secure. What was "remarkable"in this appears to have been, that an animal that was so much on land, and that was not properly a fish, should be thus calm and composed when an impetuous torrent rolled over him. The Septuagint appears to have been aware that this was the true interpretation, for they render this part of the verse, Ἐάν γέηται πλνμμύρα, κ.τ.λ. Ean genētai plēmmura , etc . - "Should there come a flood, he would not regard it."Our common translation seems to have been adopted from the Vulgate - "Ecceabsorbebit fluvium."

He trusteth that he can draw up Jordan into his mouth - Or, rather, "He is confident, i. e. unmoved, though Jordan should rush forth to his mouth."The idea is, that though the whole river Jordan should seem to pour down upon him as "if"it were about to rush into his mouth, it would not disturb him. Even such an impetuous torrent would not alarm him. Being amphibious, he would not dread what would fill a land animal with alarm. There is no evidence that the hippopotamus was ever found in the river Jordan, nor is it necessary to suppose this in order to understand this passage. The mention of the Jordan shows indeed that this river was known to the writer of this book, and that it was probably written by someone who resided in the vicinity. In speaking of this huge foreign animal, it was not unnatural to mention a river that was familiarly known, and to say that he would not be alarmed should such a river rush suddenly and impetuously upon him. Even though the hippopotamus is an inhabitant of the Nile, and was never seen in the Jordan, it was much more natural to mention this river in this connection than the Nile. It was better known, and the illustration would be better understood, and to an inhabitant of that country would be much more striking. I see no reason, therefore, for the supposition of Bechart and Rosenmuller, that the Jordan here is put for any large river. The illustration is just such as one would have used who was well acquainted with the Jordan - that the river horse would not be alarmed even though such a river should pour impetuously upon him.

Barnes: Job 40:24

He taketh it with his eyes - Margin, "Or, will any take him in his sight, or, bore his nose with a gin!"From this marginal reading it is evident that our translators were much perplexed with this passage. Expositors have been also much embarrassed in regard to its meaning, and have differed much in their exposition. Rosenmuller supposes that this is to be regarded as a question, and is to be rendered, "Will the hunter take him while he sees him?"- meaning that he could not be taken without some snare or guile. The same view also is adopted by Bochart, who says that the hippopotamus could be taken only by some secret snare or pitfall. The common mode of taking him, he says, was to excavate a place near where the river horse usually lay, and to cover it over with reeds and canes, so that he would fall into it unawares. The meaning then is, that the hunter could not approach him openly and secure him while he saw him, but that some secret plan must be adopted to take him. The meaning then is, "Can he be taken when he sees the hunter?"

His nose pierceth through snares - Or rather, "When taken in snares, can anyone pierce his nose?"That is, Can the hunter even then pierce his nose so as to put in a ring or cord, and lead him wherever he pleases? This was the common method by which a wild animal was secured when taken (see the notes at Isa 37:29), but it is here said that this could not be done to this huge animal. He could not be subdued in this manner. He was a wild, untamed and fierce animal, that defied all the usual methods by which wild beasts were made captive. In regard to the difficulty of taking this animal, see the account of the method by which it is now done, in the notes at Job 40:15. That account shows that there is a striking accuracy in the description.

Poole: Job 40:16

He hath strength answerable to his bulk, but this strength by God’ s wise and merciful providence is not an offensive strength, consisting in or put forth by horns or claws, as it is in ravenous creatures; but only defensive, and seated in his loins, as it is in other creatures, whereby he is rendered more serviceable to men by the carrying of vast burdens.

His force is in the navel of his belly which though in the elephant it be weaker than his loins, whence the rhinoceros fighting with him aims at that part; yet hath a more than ordinary strength in it, as appears by the binding of the heaviest burdens under and about it. This also agrees to the hippopotamus in an eminent degree, whose whole skin is noted by ancient writers to be harder than any other creature’ s, and almost impenetrable.

Poole: Job 40:17

He moveth his tail which though it be but short, both in the elephant and in the hippopotamus, yet when it is erected is exceeding stiff and strong. But this may be understood, either,

1. Of his generative part, which is off called by that or the like name, which the following close of the verse may seem to favour. Or,

2. Of the elephant’ s trunk, which being so eminent and remarkable a part, would not probably be omitted in this description, to which these words very fitly agree, because of its admirable motion and strength. Nor is it strange that this is called his tail, because that word is oft used improperly for any end of a thing, as Isa 7:4 . See also Deu 25:18 28:13,44 .

The sinews of his stones: this may be noted, because the elephant’ s testicles do not hang down below the belly, as they do in other beasts, but are contained within his belly, where they are fastened by ligaments of extraordinary strength. Or, the sinews of the terror thereof , to wit, of the trunk last mentioned, under the name of the

tail i.e. its terrible sinews are strongly and strangely wrapped together, that he can move it as he listeth with wonderful dexterity and strength. Or,

the sinews of his thighs as the latter word oft signifies in the Arabic tongue, which is very near akin to the Hebrew. The thighs and feet of the hippopotamus are noted to be so sinewy and strong, that one of them is able to break or overturn a large boat.

Poole: Job 40:18

His bones under which title are comprehended his ribs (as the LXX here render it) and his teeth.

As strong pieces of brass exceeding hard and strong, as they are in both these creature.

Poole: Job 40:19

Of the ways of God i.e. of God’ s works, to wit, of that sort, or among living and brute creatures. This is eminently and unquestionably true of the elephant, in regard of his vast bulk and strength, joined with great activity, and especially of his admirable sagacity and aptness to learn, and of his singular usefulness to mankind, his lord and master, and God’ s vicegerent in the world, and many other commendable qualities. And the hippopotamus also is in some sort, as others note, the chief, or one of the chief, of God’ s works, in regard of its great bulk, and strength, and sagacity, and the manner of his living, both in the water and upon the land. But it must be granted that the elephant doth exceed the hippopotamus in many things.

Though he be so strong and terrible, yet God can easily subdue and destroy him, either immediately, or by arming other creatures, as the rhinoceros, or dragon, or tiger, against him. Or, he that made him hath applied or given to him his sword , or arms , to wit, his trunk, which may not unfitly be called his sword, because thereby he doth both defend himself and offend his enemies. And this trunk of his being a thing very observable and admirable in him, and therefore not likely to be neglected in his description, if it were not intended by his tail , Job 40:17 , may seem to be designed in these words.

Poole: Job 40:20

Though this creature be vastly great, and require much food, and no man careth for it; yet God provides for it out of his own stores, and makes even desert mountains to afford him sufficient sustenance. The hippopotamus also, though he live most in the water, fetched his food from the land, and from the mountains or hills, which are nigh unto the river Nile.

Where all the beasts of the field play they not only feed securely, but sport themselves by him or with him, being taught by experience that he is gentle and harmless, and never preys upon them.

Poole: Job 40:21

The elephant lies down to rest himself; and it is but fabulous which some writers affirm, that they have no joints in their legs, and so cannot lie down, but sleep or rest themselves standing or leaning against a tree; which is denied and confuted by Aristotle in his History of Living Creatures, 2, 4. and by later writers. For the elephant, being a creature naturally hot, and living generally in hot countries, diligently seeks for and delights in shady and waterish places, as is noted by Aristotle, and after him by Pliny and

Poole: Job 40:22

Of the brook or, of Nilus , of which this word is oft used in Scripture. And this seems to be the chief argument by which the learned Bochart proves this to be meant of the hippopotamus, whose constant residence is in or near the river of Nilus, or the willows that grow by it. But it is well alleged by our learned and judicious Caryl, that this word Naal is never used to express Nilus when it is put by itself, as here it is, but only where the word Egypt is added to it, as it is in all the places which Bochart produceth. And this very phrase,

the willows of the brook is used of other brooks or rivers besides Nilus, as Lev 23:40 : compare Isa 15:7 .

Poole: Job 40:23

He drinketh up or, he snatcheth , or draweth , or drinketh up as it were with force and violence, as the word signifies.

A river i.e. a great quantity of water, hyperbolically called a river, as it is also Psa 78:16 105:41 . This may be fitly applied to the elephant, which because of its great bulk and vehement thirst drinks a great deal of water at one draught, as naturalists and historians have observed.

Hasteth not he drinks not with fear and caution, and sparingly, as the dogs do at Nilus, for fear of the crocodile; but such is his courage and self-confidence, that he fears no enemy, either by water or by land, but drinketh securely and liberally.

He trusteth that he can draw up Jordan into his mouth he drinks as if he designed, or hoped, or desired to drink up the whole river. He mentions Jordan, either as a river well known in and nigh unto Job’ s land; or because possibly there were many elephants which used to drink at it; or as a river in some parts of it but small, which therefore might give more colour to the hyperbole, and to the elephant’ s fancy or expectation, than a vaster river, such as Euphrates, would have done. Bochart expounds this also of the hippopotamus, which though he cannot swim, and may be drowned, as naturalists report, yet will continue securely under water at the bottom of Nilus for some days together; and he renders the verse thus, Behold, if a river oppress or cover him, he fears not; he is confident or secure, though Jordan (which is here put for any river) should break forth or overflow above his mouth , i.e. should overwhelm him. But the judgment of this I leave to the reader.

Poole: Job 40:24

According to this translation the sense is this, He taketh, or snatcheth, or draweth up (as was now said, Job 40:23 )

it (to wit, the river Jordan) with his eyes, i.e. when he sees it, he trusteth that he can drink it all up; as we use to say, The eye is bigger than the belly: his nose or snout pierceth , &c., i.e. he securely thrusteth his snout into the river, even to the bottom of it, to stir up the mud, because he delights to drink muddy water; and if there be any snares laid for other creatures, he breaks them to pieces. But this verse is otherwise translated by others. Will or can any man take him in his eyes , (i.e. openly, and by manifest force? Surely no. His force and strength is too great for man to resist or overcome; and therefore men are forced to use many wiles and engines to catch him; which is true both of the elephant and of the hippopotamus,) or pierce his nose with snares or gins ? No. He may be taken by art and cunning, but not by violence.

Haydock: Job 40:16

Places, insomuch that Ælian (iv. 24.) styles it a "beast of the marshes." It is fabulous that it is forced to sleep against a tree, as if it could not rise without much difficulty. (Calmet) ---

Septuagint, ( 14 ) "This is the beginning or chief ( Greek: arche ) of the creation of the Lord, being made for his angels to play with, or beat. Departing to the craggy rock, it has made sport for the quadrupeds in the field. It sleepeth under all sorts of trees; near the reed and papyrus, and the boutomon, or ox-herb." (Haydock)

Haydock: Job 40:18

Wonder. Hebrew, "make haste," taking time to render it muddy. (Ælian xiv. 44.) ---

It can drink a great deal at once, and then abstain for a week. (Calmet) ---

Run. Hebrew, "he may draw." Septuagint, "may knock at his mouth," (Haydock) in vain, (Calmet) as long as it can breathe by holding by holding its trunk out of the water. (Aristotle ix. 46.) ---

Theo.[Theodotion?] in the Septuagint, "If there should be an inundation, it shall not perceive. It confideth that, or when, the Jordan shall knock at its mouth. He shall take it by its eye; saying snares, he shall bore [ its ] nose." (Haydock)

Haydock: Job 40:19

Stakes. Serpents attack the eyes of the elephant, and sometimes drag it by the trunk into the deep, where it is drowned. (Pliny viii. 12.; Solin xxxviii.) ---

Others read with an interrogation: "Shall one take?" &c. Will any one dare to attack it openly? The elephant is taken by stratagem, either in pits covered with a little earth, or by a tame elephant in an inclosure, and (Calmet) lying on her hack to receive the male. (Aristotle, anim. v. 2.) ---

When he has entered, the gate is shut, and the animal is tamed by hunger; being thus taken by his eyes, Judith x. 17. Chaldean, "They pierce his nostrils with bands." Thus other animals are led about, (ver. 21) and the elephant might be so treated in those days; though of this we have no account. (Calmet) ---

Protestants, "his nose pierceth through snares;" or marginal note, "will any bore his nose with a gin?" Here they conclude this chapter, which commences chap. xxxix. 31., in Hebrew. But the Septuagint agree with us. (Haydock)

Haydock: Job 40:20

Leviathan: the whale, or some sea monster. (Challoner) ---

Protestants' marginal note, "or a whirlpool." (Haydock) ---

But some animal is designated; and Bochart understands the crocodile, which agrees very well with the context. The Thalmudists also say that the calbish is a small fish, which gets into the throat of the leviathan. They mean probably the ichneumon, which kills the crocodile by that means. Leviathan, "the winding serpent," (Calmet) often denotes the dragon or crocodile, (Psalm ciii. 26., and Isaias xxvii. 1.) which frequents the Nile. (Haydock) ---

It can live as well by land as under water, (Watson, p. 293) and hence may be translated, (Haydock) "the coupled dragon." (Parkhurst) ---

Moses mentions the choled, (Leviticus xi. 29.) which the Septuagint and most others translate, "the land crocodile:" but what could induce the Protestants "to render it tortoise, we are at a loss to determine." Crocodiles lay about sixty eggs, like those of geese, in the sand, the warmth of which soon hatches them. Their bodies are covered with scales, which are scarcely penetrable, except under the belly; and they are between twenty and thirty feet in length, running very fast, straight forward, though their feet be short, and they cannot turn easily. The have several rows of sharp teeth, which enter one within another, and their throat is very wide. (Button.) ---

The same word may however denote whales, (Parkhurst) which are the greatest fishes with which man is acquainted. (Haydock) ---

They may also be styled coupled dragons, because many smaller fishes accompany them, and they are well protected by scales, &c. (Menochius) ---

This huge fish, perhaps the whale, representing the devil, is subject to God. (Worthington) ---

Cord. The crocodile may be taken, but with the utmost hazard; though the Tentyrites attacked it without fear, chap. iii. 8. Herodotus (ii. 70.) says it may be caught with a hook, baited with hog's flesh, while the fisher has a pig grunting, at which the crocodile come open-mouthed. Having swallowed the hook, it is drawn to land, and its small eyes being filled with dirt it is easily slain. But the method was not yet invented, or was deemed too rash in Job's days.

Haydock: Job 40:21

Buckle. Literally, "bracelet," ( armilla. ; Haydock) or ring. Horses were thus ornamented, (Virgil vii. 7.) and other beasts led about. But this fierce animal could not be tamed. Hebrew, "Wilt thou put a rush through its gills, or nose, or pierce its jaw with a thorn?" like those little fishes which are thus brought fresh to market. (Calmet)

Haydock: Job 40:22

Will it lay aside its ferocity, (Haydock) and flatter thee? (Menochius)

Haydock: Job 40:24

Handmaids? or little girls. (Calmet) Septuagint, "Wilt thou tie it like a sparrow for thy boy?" (Haydock)

Gill: Job 40:16

Lo now, his strength is in his loins,.... The strength of the elephant is well known, being able to carry a castle on its back, with a number of men therein; but what follows does not seem so well to agree with it;

and his force is in the navel of his belly; since the belly of the elephant is very tender; by means of which the rhinoceros, its enemy, in its fight with it, has the advantage of it, by getting under its belly, and ripping it up with its horn ^s. In like manner Eleazar the Jew killed one of the elephants of Antiochus, by getting between its legs, and thrusting his sword into its navel ^t; which fell and killed him with the weight of it. On the other hand, the "river horse" is covered with a skin all over, the hardest and strongest of all creatures ^u, as not to be pierced with spears or arrows ^w; and of it dried were made helmets, shields, spears, and polished darts ^x. That which Monsieur Thevenot ^y saw had several shot fired at it before it fell, for the bullets hardly pierced through its skin. We made several shot at him, says another traveller ^z, but to no purpose; for they would glance from him as from a wall. And indeed the elephant is said to have such a hard scaly skin as to resist the spear ^a: and Pliny ^b, though he speaks of the hide of the river horse being so thick that spears are made of it; yet of the hide of the elephant, as having targets made of that, which are impenetrable.

Gill: Job 40:17

He moveth his tail like a cedar,.... To which it is compared, not for the length and largeness of it; for the tail both of the elephant and of the river horse is short; though Vartomannus ^c says, the tail of the elephant is like a buffalo's, and is four hands long, and thin of hair: but because of the smoothness, roundness, thickness, and firmness of it; such is the tail of the river horse, being like that of a hog or boar ^d; which is crooked, twisted, and which it is said to turn back and about at pleasure, as the word used is thought to signify. Aben Ezra interprets it, "maketh to stand": that is, stiff and strong, and firm like a cedar. One writer ^e speaks of the horse of the Nile, as having a scaly tail; but he seems to confound it with the sea horse. Junius interprets it of its penis, its genital part; to which the Targum in the King's Bible is inclined: and Cicero ^f says, the ancients used to call that the tail; but that of the elephant, according to Aristotle ^g, is but small, and not in proportion to the size of its body; and not in sight, and therefore can hardly be thought to be described; though the next clause seems to favour this sense:

the sinews of his stones are wrapped together; if by these are meant the testicles, as some think, so the Targums; the sinews of which were wreathed, implicated and ramified, like branches of trees, as Montanus renders it. Bochart interprets this of the sinews or nerves of the river horse, which having such plenty of them, are exceeding strong; so that, as some report, this creature will with one foot sink a boat ^h; I have known him open his mouth, says a traveller ⁱ, and set one tooth on the gunnel of a boat, and another on the second strake from the keel, more than four feet distant, and there bite a hole through the plank, and sink the boat.

Gill: Job 40:18

His bones are as strong pieces of brass: his bones are as bars of iron. Than which nothing is stronger. The repetition is made for greater illustration and confirmation; but what is said is not applicable to the elephant, whose bones are porous and rimous, light and spongy for the most part, as appears from the osteology ^k of it; excepting its teeth, which are the ivory; though the teeth of the river horse are said to exceed them in hardness ^l; and artificers say ^m they are wrought with greater difficulty than ivory. The ancients, according to Pausanias ⁿ, used them instead of it; who relates, that the face of the image of the goddess Cybele was made of them: and Kircher ^o says, in India they make beads, crucifixes, and statues of saints of them; and that they are as hard or harder than a flint, and fire may be struck out of them. So the teeth of the morss, a creature of the like kind in the northern countries, are valued by the inhabitants as ivory ^p, for hardness, whiteness, and weight, beyond it, and are dearer and much traded in; See Gill on Job 40:20; but no doubt not the teeth only, but the other bones of the creature in the text are meant.

Gill: Job 40:19

He is the chief of the ways of God,.... Or the beginning of them, that is, of the works of God in creation; which must be restrained to animals, otherwise there were works wrought before any of them were created. There were none made before the fifth day of the creation, and on that day was the river horse made; in which respect it has the preference to the elephant, not made till the sixth day. But if this phrase is expressive of the superior excellency of behemoth over other works of God, as it seems to be, it must be limited to the kind of which it is; otherwise man is the chief of all God's ways or works, made either on the fifth or sixth day: and so as the elephant may be observed to be the chief of the beasts of the earth, or of land animals, for its largeness and strength, its sagacity, docility, gentleness, and the like; so the river horse may be said to be the chief of its kind, of the aquatic animals, or of the amphibious ones, for the bulk of its body, which is not unlike that of the elephant, as says Diodorus Siculus ^q; and it has been by some called the Egyptian elephant ^r; and also from its great sagacity, of which instances are given by some writers ^s. However, it is one of the chief works of God, or a famous, excellent, and remarkable one, which may be the sense of the expression; see Num 24:20. It might be remarked in favour of the elephant, that it seems to have its name from אלף, the first and chief; as the first letter in the Hebrew alphabet is called "aleph"; unless it should have its name from this root, on account of its docility;

he that made him can make his sword to approach unto him; not the sword of God, as if this creature could not be killed by any but by him that made it; for whether the elephant or river horse be understood, they are both to be taken and slain: but the sword of behemoth is that which he himself is furnished with; which some understand of the trunk of the elephant, with which he defends himself and annoys others; but that has no likeness of a sword. Bochart ^t renders the word by "harpe", which signifies a crooked instrument, sickle or scythe; and interprets it of the teeth of the river horse, which are sharp and long, and bent like a scythe. That which Thevenot ^u saw had four great teeth in the lower jaw, half a foot long, two whereof were crooked; and one on each side of the jaw; the other two were straight, and of the same length as the crooked, but standing out in the length: see the figure of it in Scheuchzer ^w; by which it also appears to have six teeth. Another traveller says ^x, of the teeth of the sea horse, that they are round like a bow, and about sixteen inches long, and in the biggest part more than six inches about: but another relation ^y agrees more nearly with Thevenot and Scheuchzer; that four of its teeth are longer than the rest, two in the upper jaw, one on each side, and two more in the under; these last are four or five inches long, the other two shorter; with which it mows down the corn and grass in great quantities: so that Diodorus Siculus ^z observes, that if this animal was very fruitful, and brought forth many young and frequently, the fields in Egypt would be utterly destroyed. This interpretation agrees with what follows.

Gill: Job 40:20

Surely the mountains bring him forth food,.... Grass, which grows on mountains, and is the food of the river horse as well as of the elephant; and therefore is furnished with teeth like a scythe to mow it down; and it is not a small quantity that will suffice it, mountains only can supply it; and marvellous it is that a creature bred in a river should come out of it to seek its food on mountains. There is a creature in the northern parts, as in Russia, Greenland, &c. which is called morss and sea morss, and by the description of it is much like the river horse, of the size of an ox, and having an head like one, with two large long teeth standing out of its upper jaw, and an hairy skin ^a, said to be an inch thick, and so tough that no lance will enter it ^b; it comes out of the sea, and by its teeth gets up to the tops of mountains, and having fed on grass rolls itself down again into the sea; and this it does by putting its hinder feet to its teeth, and so falls from the mountain with great celerity, as on a sledge ^c;

where all the beasts of the field play; skip and dance, and delight in each other, being in no fear of behemoth; whether understood of the elephant or river horse; since neither of them are carnivorous creatures that feed on other animals, but on grass only; and therefore the beasts of the field may feed with them quietly and securely. Pliny ^d says of the elephant, that meeting with cattle in the fields, it will make signs to them not to be afraid of it, and so they will go in company together.

Gill: Job 40:21

He lieth under the shady trees, in the covert of the reed,

and fens. This may be thought to agree very well with the river horse, the inhabitant of the Nile, where reeds in great plenty grew, and adjoining to which were fenny and marshy places, and shady trees; and, as historians relate ^e, this creature takes its lodging among high reeds, and in shady places; yea, the reeds and sugar canes, and the leaves of the papyrus, are part of the food on which it lives; and hence the hunters of them sometimes cover their bait with a reed to take them; though it must be allowed that the elephant delights to be about rivers, and in clayey and fenny places ^f, and therefore Aelianus ^g says it may be called the fenny animal.

Gill: Job 40:22

The shady trees cover him with their shadow,.... Under which it lies, as in Job 40:21; which is thought not so well to agree with the elephant, since, according to Aelianus ^h and other writers, it lies not down, at least but rarely, but sleeps standing; it being very troublesome to it to lie down and rise up again; and besides it is represented by some authors ⁱ as higher than the trees, and therefore this is supposed to agree better with the river horse; especially since it follows,

the willows of the brook compass him about; or the willows of the Nile, as some choose to render it; which would put it out of all doubt that the river horse is intended, if it could be established, it being an inhabitant of that river; and yet the above writer ^k speaks of elephants, when grown old, seeking large thick and shady woods to take up their abode in.

Gill: Job 40:23

Behold, he drinketh up a river, and hasteth not,.... The elephant is indeed a very thirsty animal, and drinks largely; the philosopher ^l says it drinks nine Macedonian bushels at a feeding, and that it will drink fourteen Macedonian measures of water at once, and eight more at noon; but to drink up a river seems to be too great an hyperbole; wherefore the words may be rendered, "Behold, let a river oppress him", or "bear" ever so hard upon him, and come with the greatest force and pressure on him ^m, "he hasteth not" to get out of it; or he is not frightened or troubled, as the Targum; which agrees with the river horse, who walks into the river, and proceeds on in it, with the greatest ease and unconcernedness imaginable; now and then lifting up his head above water to take breath, which he can hold a long time; whereas the elephant cannot wade in the water any longer than his trunk is above it, as the philosopher observes ⁿ; and Livy ^o speaks of fear and trembling seizing an elephant, when about to be carried over a river in boats;

he trusteth that he can draw up Jordan in his mouth; so bold and confident he is, and not at all disturbed with its rapidity; or "though Jordan", or rather any descending flowing stream, "gushes into his mouth", so Mr. Broughton: for perhaps Jordan might not be known by Job; nor does it seem to have any connection with the Nile, the seat of the river horse; which has such large holes in its nostrils, and out of which, water being swallowed down, he can throw it with great force. Diodorus Siculus ^p represents it as lying all day in the water, and employing itself at the bottom of it, easy, careless, and unconcerned.

Gill: Job 40:24

He taketh it with his eyes,.... Or "can men take him before his eyes?" so Mr. Broughton; and others translate it to the same purpose; no, he is not to be taken openly, but privately, by some insidious crafty methods; whether it be understood of the elephant or river horse; elephants, according to Strabo ^q and Pliny ^r were taken in pits dug for them, into which they were decoyed; in like manner, according to some ^s, the river horse is taken; a pit being dug and covered with reeds and sand, it falls into it unawares;

his nose pierceth through snares; he discerns them oftentimes and escapes them, so that he is not easily taken in them. It is reported of the sea morss ^t, before mentioned; see Gill on Job 40:20, that they ascend mountains in great herds, where, before they give themselves to sleep, to which they are naturally inclined, they appoint one of their number as it were a watchman; who, if he chances to sleep or to be slain by the hunter, the rest may be easily taken; but if the watchman gives warning by roaring as the manner is, the whole herd immediately awake and fall down from the mountains with great swiftness into the sea, as before described; or, as Mr. Broughton, "cannot men take him, to pierce his nose with many snares?" they cannot; the elephant has no nose to be pierced, unless his trunk can be called so, and no hook nor snare can be put into the nose of the river horse. Diodorus Siculus ^u says, it cannot be taken but by many vessels joining together and surrounding it, and striking it with iron hooks, to one of which ropes are fastened, and so the creature is let go till it expires. The usual way of taking it now is, by baiting the hook with the roots of water lilies, at which it will catch, and swallow the hook with it; and by giving it line enough it will roll and tumble about, until, through loss of blood, it faints and dies. The way invented by Asdrubal for killing elephants was by striking a carpenter's chopping axe into his ear ^w; the Jews ^x say a fly is a terror to an elephant, it enters into his nose and torments him grievously.

Commentary -- Verse Notes / Footnotes

NET Notes: Job 40:16

¹ tn In both of these verses הִנֶּה (hinneh, “behold”) has the deictic force (the word is from Greek δείκνυμι, deiknumi, “to show”). It calls attention to something by pointing it out. The expression goes with the sudden look, the raised eye, the pointing hand – “O look!”

NET Notes: Job 40:17

¹ tn The verb חָפַץ (khafats) occurs only here. It may have the meaning “to make stiff; to make taut” (Arabic). The LXX and the Syriac versions support this with “erects.” But there is another Arabic word that could be cognate, meaning “arch, bend.” This would give the idea of the tail swaying. The other reading seems to make better sense here. However, “stiff” presents a serious problem with the view that the animal is the hippopotamus.

NET Notes: Job 40:19

¹ tn Heb “the ways of God.”

sn This may be a reference to Gen 1:24, where the first of the animal creation was the cattle – bÿhemah (בְּהֵמָה).

² tc The literal reading of the MT is “let the one who made him draw near [with] his sword.” The sword is apparently a reference to the teeth or tusks of the animal, which cut vegetation like a sword. But the idea of a weapon is easier to see, and so the people who favor the mythological background see here a reference to God’s slaying the Beast. There are again many suggestions on how to read the line. The RV probably has the safest: “He that made him has furnished him with his sword” (the sword being a reference to the sharp tusks with which he can attack).

NET Notes: Job 40:20

¹ tn The word בּוּל (bul) probably refers to food. Many take it as an abbreviated form of יְבוּל (yÿvul, “produce of the field”). The vegetation that is produced on the low hills is what is meant.

NET Notes: Job 40:22

¹ tn The suffix is singular, but must refer to the trees’ shade.

NET Notes: Job 40:23

¹ tn The word ordinarily means “to oppress.” So many commentators have proposed suitable changes: “overflows” (Beer), “gushes” (Duhm), “swells violently” (Dhorme, from a word that means “be strong”).

² tn Or “he remains calm.”

NET Notes: Job 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).

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

Geneva Bible: Job 40:19

^{( h )} He [is] the chief of the ways of God: ^{( i )} he that made him can make his sword to approach [unto him].

^{( h )} He is one of the chief works of God among the beasts.

^{( i )} Though man dare not come near him, yet God can kill him.

Geneva Bible: Job 40:23

Behold, he drinketh up a river, ^{( k )} [and] hasteth not: he trusteth that he can draw up Jordan into his mouth.

^{( k )} He drinks at leisure, and fears nobody.

Commentary -- Verse Range Notes

TSK Synopsis: Job 40:1-24

1 Job humbles himself to God.

6 God stirs him up to shew his righteousness, power, and wisdom.

16 Of the behemoth.

MHCC: Job 40:15-24

God, for the further proving of his own power, describes two vast animals, far exceeding man in bulk and strength. Behemoth signifies beasts. Most understand it of an animal well known in Egypt, called the river-horse, or hippopotamus. This vast animal is noticed as an argument to humble ourselves before the great God; for he created this vast animal, which is so fearfully and wonderfully made. Whatever strength this or any other creature has, it is derived from God. He that made the soul of man, knows all the ways to it, and can make the sword of justice, his wrath, to approach and touch it. Every godly man has spiritual weapons, the whole armour of God, to resist, yea, to overcome the tempter, that his never-dying soul may be safe, whatever becomes of his frail flesh and mortal body.

Matthew Henry: Job 40:15-24

God, for the further proving of his own power and disproving of Job's pretensions, concludes his discourse with the description of two vast and mighty animals, far exceeding man in bulk and strength, one he calls behemoth, the other leviathan. In these verses we have the former described. " Behold now behemoth, and consider whether thou art able to contend with him who made that beast and gave him all the power he has, and whether it is not thy wisdom rather to submit to him and make thy peace with him." Behemoth signifies beasts in general, but must here be meant of some one particular species. Some understand it of the bull; others of an amphibious animal, well known (they say) in Egypt, called the river-horse ( hippopotamus ), living among the fish in the river Nile, but coming out to feed upon the earth. But I confess I see no reason to depart from the ancient and most generally received opinion, that it is the elephant that is here described, which is a very strong stately creature, of very large stature above any other, of wonderful sagacity, and of so great a reputation in the animal kingdom that among so many four-footed beasts as we have had the natural history of (ch. 38 and 39) we can scarcely suppose this should be omitted. Observe,

I. The description here given of the behemoth.

1. His body is very strong and well built. His strength is in his loins, Job 40:16. His bones, compared with those of other creatures, are like bars of iron, Job 40:18. His back-bone is so strong that, though his tail be not large, yet he moves it like a cedar, with a commanding force, Job 40:17. Some understand it of the trunk of the elephant, for the word signifies any extreme part, and in that there is indeed a wonderful strength. So strong is the elephant in his back and loins, and the sinews of his thighs, that he will carry a large wooden tower, and a great number of fighting men in it. No animal whatsoever comes near the elephant for strength of body, which is the main thing insisted on in this description.

2. He feeds on the productions of the earth and does not prey upon other animals: He eats grass as an ox (Job 40:15), the mountains bring him forth food (Job 40:20), and the beasts of the field do not tremble before him nor flee from him, as from a lion, but they play about him, knowing they are in no danger from him. This may give us occasion, (1.) To acknowledge the goodness of God in ordering it so that a creature of such bulk, which requires so much food, should not feed upon flesh (for then multitudes must die to keep him alive), but should be content with the grass of the field, to prevent such destruction of lives as otherwise must have ensued. (2.) To commend living upon herbs and fruits without flesh, according to the original appointment of man's food, Gen 1:29. Even the strength of an elephant, as of a horse and an ox, may be supported without flesh; and why not that of a man? Though therefore we use the liberty God has allowed us, yet be not among riotous eaters of flesh, Pro 23:20. (3.) To commend a quiet and peaceable life. Who would not rather, like the elephant, have his neighbours easy and pleasant about him, than, like the lion, have them all afraid of him?

3. He lodges under the shady trees (Job 40:21), which cover him with their shadow (Job 40:22), where he has a free and open air to breathe in, while lions, which live by prey, when they would repose themselves, are obliged to retire into a close and dark den, to live therein, and to abide in the covert of that, Job 38:40. Those who are a terror to others cannot but be sometimes a terror to themselves too; but those will be easy who will let others be easy about them; and the reed and fens, and the willows of the brook, though a very weak and slender fortification, yet are sufficient for the defence and security of those who therefore dread no harm, because they design none.

4. That he is a very great and greedy drinker, not of wine or strong drink (to be greedy of that is peculiar to man, who by his drunkenness makes a beast of himself), but of fair water. (1.) His size is prodigious, and therefore he must have supply accordingly, Job 40:23. He drinks so much that one would think he could drink up a river, if you would give him time, and not hasten him. Or, when he drinks, he hasteth not, as those do that drink in fear; he is confident of his own strength and safety, and therefore makes no haste when he drinks, no more haste than good speed. (2.) His eye anticipates more than he can take; for, when he is very thirsty, having been long kept without water, he trusts that he can drink up Jordan in his mouth, and even takes it with his eyes, Job 40:24. As a covetous man causes his eyes to fly upon the wealth of this world, which he is greedy of, so this great beast is said to snatch, or draw up, even a river with his eyes. (3.) His nose has in it strength enough for both; for, when he goes greedily to drink with it, he pierces through snares or nets, which perhaps are laid in the waters to catch fish. He makes nothing of the difficulties that lie in his way, so great is his strength and so eager his appetite.

II. The use that is to be made of this description. We have taken a view of this mountain of a beast, this over-grown animal, which is here set before us, not merely as a show (as sometimes it is in our country) to satisfy our curiosity and to amuse us, but as an argument with us to humble ourselves before the great God; for, 1. He made this vast animal, which is so fearfully and wonderfully made; it is the work of his hands, the contrivance of his wisdom, the production of his power; it is behemoth which I made, Job 40:15. Whatever strength this, or any other creature, has, it is derived from God, who therefore must be acknowledged to have all power originally and infinitely in himself, and such an arm as it is not for us to contest with. This beast is here called the chief, in its kind, of the ways of God (Job 40:19), an eminent instance of the Creator's power and wisdom. Those that will peruse the accounts given by historians of the elephant will find that his capacities approach nearer to those of reason than the capacities of any other brute-creature whatsoever, and therefore he is fitly called the chief of the ways of God, in the inferior part of the creation, no creature below man being preferable to him. 2. He made him with man, as he made other four-footed beasts, on the same day with man (Gen 1:25, Gen 1:26), whereas the fish and fowl were made the day before; he made him to live and move on the same earth, in the same element, and therefore man and beast are said to be jointly preserved by divine Providence as fellow-commoners, Psa 36:6. "It is behemoth, which I made with thee; I made that beast as well as thee, and he does not quarrel with me; why then dost thou? Why shouldst thou demand peculiar favours because I made thee (Job 10:9), when I made the behemoth likewise with thee? I made thee as well as that beast, and therefore can as easily manage thee at pleasure as that beast, and will do it whether thou refuse or whether thou choose. I made him with thee, that thou mayest look upon him and receive instruction."We need not go far for proofs and instances of God's almighty power and sovereign dominion; they are near us, they are with us, they are under our eye wherever we are. 3. He that made him can make his sword to approach to him (Job 40:19), that is, the same hand that made him, notwithstanding his great bulk and strength, can unmake him again at pleasure and kill an elephant as easily as a worm or a fly, without any difficulty, and without the imputation either of waste or wrong. God that gave to all the creatures their being may take away the being he gave; for may he not do what he will with his own? And he can do it; he that has power to create with a word no doubt has power to destroy with a word, and can as easily speak the creature into nothing as at first he spoke it out of nothing. The behemoth perhaps is here intended (as well as the leviathan afterwards) to represent those proud tyrants and oppressors whom God had just now challenged Job to abase and bring down. They think themselves as well fortified against the judgments of God as the elephant with his bones of brass and iron; but he that made the soul of man knows all the avenues to it, and can make the sword of justice, his wrath, to approach to it, and touch it in the most tender and sensible part. He that framed the engine, and put the parts of it together, knows how to take it in pieces. Woe to him therefore that strives with his Maker, for he that made him has therefore power to make him miserable, and will not make him happy unless he will be ruled by him.

Keil-Delitzsch: Job 40:15-18

15 Behold now the behêmôth,

Which I have made with thee:

He eateth grass like an ox.

16 Behold now, his strength is in his loins,

And his force in the sinews of his belly.

17 He bendeth his tail like a cedar branch,

The sinews of his legs are firmly interwoven.

18 His bones are like tubes of brass,

His bones like bars of iron.

בּהמות (after the manner of the intensive plur . הוללות , חכמות , which play the part of the abstract termination), which sounds like a plur., but without the numerical plural signification, considered as Hebrew, denotes the beast κατ ̓ ἐξοχήν , or the giant of beasts, is however Hebraized from the Egyptian p -ehe -mau , ( muau ), i.e., the ( p ) ox ( ehe ) of the water ( mau as in the Hebraized proper name משׁה ). It is, as Bochart has first of all shown, the so-called river or Nile horse, Hippopotamus amphibius (in Isa 30:6, בּהמות נגב , as emblem of Egypt, which extends its power, and still is active in the interest of others), found in the rivers of Africa, but no longer found in the Nile, which is not inappropriately called a horse; the Arab. water-hog is better, Italian bomarino, Eng. sea-cow ?, like the Egyptian p -ehe -mau . The change of p and b in the exchange of Egyptian and Semitic words occurs also elsewhere, e.g., pug' and בּוּץ , harpu and חרב ( ἅρπη ), Apriu and עברים (according to Lauth). Nevertheless p -ehe -mau (not mau -t , for what should the post-positive fem. art. do here?) is first of all only the בהמות translated back again into the Egyptian by Jablonsky; an instance in favour of this is still wanting. In Hieroglyph the Nile-horse is called apet ; it was honoured as divine. Brugsch dwelt in Thebes in the temple of the Apet.

(Note: In the astronomical representations the hippopotamus is in the neighbourhood of the North Pole in the place of the dragon of the present day, and bears the name of hes-mut , in which mut = t . mau , "the mother." Hes however is obscure; Birch explains it by: raging.)

In Job 40:15 עמּך signifies nothing but "with thee,"so that thou hast it before thee. This water-ox eats חציר , green grass, like an ox. That it prefers to plunder the produce of the fields - in Arab. chadı̂r signifies, in particular, green barley - is accordingly self-evident. Nevertheless, it has gigantic strength, viz., in its plump loins and in the sinews ( שׁרירי , properly the firm constituent parts,

(Note: Staring from its primary signification (made firm, fast), Arab. srı̂r , שׁרירא can signify e.g., also things put together from wood: a throne, a hand-barrow, bedstead and cradle, metaphor. the foundation. Wetzst. otherwise: "The שׂרירי הבטן are not the sinews and muscles, still less 'the private parts' of others, but the four bearers of the animal body = arkân el -batn , viz., the bones of the מתנים , Job 40:16 , together with the two shoulder-blades. The Arab. sarı̂r is that on which a thing is supported or rests, on which it stands firmly, or moves about. Neshwân (i. 280) says: ‛sarı̂r is the substratum on which a thing rests,' and the sarı̂r er -ra's , says the same, is the place where the head rests upon the nape of the neck. The Kâmûs gives the same signification primo loco , which shows that it is general; then follows in gen. Arab. muḍṭaja‛ , "the support of a thing.")

therefore: ligaments and muscles) of its clumsy belly. The brush of a tail, short in comparison with the monster itself, is compared to a cedar (a branch of it), ratione glabritiei, rotunditatis, spissitudinis et firmitatis (Bochart); since the beast is in general almost without hair, it looks like a stiff, naked bone, and yet it can bend it like an elastic cedar branch; חפץ is Hebraeo-Arab., ḥfḍ

(Note: Wetzst. otherwise: One may compare the Arab. chafaḍa , fut. i, to hold, sit, lie motionless (in any place), from which the signification of desiring, longing, has been developed, since in the Semitic languages the figure of fixing ( ta‛alluq ) the heard and the eye on any desired object is at the basis of this notion (wherefore such verbs are joined with the praep . בּ ). According to this, it is to be explained, "his tail is motionless like (the short and thick stem of) The cedar,"for the stunted tail of an animal is a mark of its strength to a Semite. In 1860, as I was visiting the neighbouring mountain fortress of el-Hosn with the octogenarian Fêjâd , the sheikh of Fîk in Gôlân , we rode past Fêjâd's ploughmen; and as one of them was letting his team go slowly along, the sheikh cried out to him from a distance: Faster! faster! They (the steers, which thou ploughest) are not oxen weak with age, nor are they the dower of a widow (who at her second marriage receives only a pair of weak wretched oxen from her father or brother); but they are heifers (3-4 year-old steers) with stiffly raised tails ( wadhujûluhin muqashmare , מקשׁמר an intensive קשׁוּר or שׁלאנן comp. שׁלאנן , Job 21:23).)

is a word used directly of the bending of wood ( el -‛ûd ).

Since this description, like the whole book of Job, is so strongly Arabized, פחד , Job 40:17 , will also be one word with the Arab. fachidh , the thigh; as the Arabic version also translates: ‛urûku afchâdhihi (the veins or strings of its thigh). The Targ., retaining the word of the text here,

(Note: Another Targ., which translates גבריה ושׁעבוזוהי , penis et testiculi ejus , vid., Aruch s.v. שׁעבז .)

has פּחדין in Lev 21:20 for אשׁך , a testicle, prop. inguina , the groins; we interpret: the sinews of its thighs or legs

(Note: According to Fleischer, fachidh signifies properly the thick-leg (= thigh), from the root fach , with the general signification of being puffed out, swollen, thick.)

are intertwined after the manner of intertwined vine branches, שׂריגים .

(Note: In the choice of the word ישׂרגו , the mushâgarat ed -dawâlı̂ (from שׁגר = שׂרג ), "the interweaving of the vine branches"was undoubtedly before the poet's eye; comp. Deutsch. Morgenl. Zeitschr . xi. 477: "On all sides in this delightful corner of the earth (the Ghûta ) the vine left to itself, in diversified ramifications, often a dozen branches resembling so many huge snakes entangled together, swings to and fro upon the shining stem of the lofty white poplar."And ib . S. 491: "a twisted vine almost the thickness of a man, as though formed of rods of iron (comp. Job 40:18).")

But why is פחדיו pointed thus, and not פחדיו (as e.g., שׁעריו )? It is either an Aramaizing (with אשׁריו it has another relationship) pointing of the plur., or rather, as Köhler has perceived, a regularly-pointed dual (like רגליו ), from פּחדים (like פּעמים ), which is equally suitable in connection with the signification femora as testiculi . מטיל , Job 40:18 , is also Hebraeo-Arab.; for Arab. mṭl signifies to forge, or properly to extend by forging (hammering), and to lengthen, undoubtedly a secondary formation of טוּל , tâla , to be long, as makuna of kâna , madana of dâna , massara (to found a fortified city) of sâra , chiefly (if not always) by the intervention of such nouns as makân , medı̂ne , misr (= מצור ), therefore in the present instance by the intervention of this metı̂l (= memtûl )

(Note: The noun מטיל is also found in the Lexicon of Neshwân , i. 63: " מטיל is equivalent to ממטוּל , viz., that which is hammered out in length, used of iron and other metals; and one says חדידה מטילה of a piece of iron that has been hammered for the purpose of stretching it."The verb Neshwân explains: " מטל said of iron signifies to stretch it that it may become long."The verb מטל can be regarded as a fusion of the root מדד ( מטט , טוּט , comp. מוטה , and Arab. mûṭ Beduin: to take long steps) with the root טוּל , to be long. - Wetzst. The above explanation of the origin of the verb מטל seems to us more probable.)

whence probably μέταλλον (metal), properly iron in bars or rods, therefore metal in a wrought state, although not yet finished.

(Note: Ibn-Koreisch in Pinsker, Likkute , p. קנא , explains it without exactness by sebikat hadı̂d , which signifies a smelted and formed piece of iron.)

Its bones are like tubes of brass, its bones ( גּרמיו , the more Aram. word) like forged rods of iron - what an appropriate description of the comparatively thin but firm as iron skeleton by which the plump mass of flesh of the gigantic boar-like grass-eater is carried!

Keil-Delitzsch: Job 40:19-24

19 He is the firstling of the ways of God;

He, his Maker, reached to him his sword.

20 For the mountains bring forth food for him,

And all the beasts of the field play beside him.

21 Under the lote-trees he lieth down,

In covert of reeds and marsh.

22 Lote-trees cover him as shade,

The willows of the brook encompass him.

23 Behold, if the stream is strong, he doth not quake;

He remaineth cheerful, if a Jordan breaketh forth upon his mouth.

24 Just catch him while he is looking,

With snares let one pierce his nose!

God's ways is the name given to God's operations as the Creator of the world in Job 40:19 (comp. Job 26:14, where His acts as the Ruler of the world are included); and the firstling of these ways is called the Behêmôth, not as one of the first in point of time, but one of the hugest creatures, un chef-d'oeuvre de Dieu (Bochart); ראשׁית not as Pro 8:22; Num 24:20, of the priority of time, but as Amo 6:1, Amo 6:6, of rank. The art . in העשׁו is, without the pronominal suff . being meant as an accusative (Ew. §290, d ), equal to a demonstrative pronoun (comp. Ges. §109, init ): this its Creator (but so that "this"does not refer back so much as forwards). It is not meant that He reached His sword to behêmoth, but (on which account לו is intentionally wanting) that He brought forth, i.e., created, its (behêmoth's) peculiar sword, viz., the gigantic incisors ranged opposite one another, with which it grazes upon the meadow as with a sickle: ἀρούρῃσιν κακὴν ἐπιβάλλεται ἅρπην (Nicander, Theriac . 566), ἅρπη is exactly the sickle-shaped Egyptian sword ( harpu = חרב ). Vegetable food (to which its teeth are adapted) is appointed to the behêmoth: "for the mountains produce food for him;"it is the herbage of the hills (which is scanty in the lower and more abundant in the upper valley of the Nile) that is intended, after which this uncouth animal climbs (vid., Schlottm.). בּוּל is neither a contraction of יבוּל (Ges.), nor a corruption of it (Ew.), but Hebraeo-Arab. = baul , produce, from bâla , to beget, comp. aballa , to bear fruit (prop. seed, bulal ), root בל , to soak, wet, mix.

(Note: Whether בּליל , Job 6:5; Job 24:6, signifies mixed provender ( farrago ), or perhaps ripe fruit, i.e., grain, so that jabo l , Jdg 19:21, in the signification "he gave dry provender consisting of barley-grain,"would be the opposite of the jahushsh ( יחשׁ ) of the present day, "he gives green provender consisting of green grass or green barley, hashı̂sh ,"as Wetzst. supposes, vid., on Isa 30:24.)

Job 40:20 describes how harmless, and if unmolested, inoffensive, the animal is; שׁם there, viz., while it is grazing.

In Job 40:21 Saadia correctly translates: Arab. tḥt 'l -ḍâl ; and Job 40:22 , Abulwalid: Arab. ygṭı̂h 'l -ḍl mdlllâ lh , tegit eum lotus obumbrans eum , by interpreting Arab. 'l -ḍl , more correctly Arab. 'l -ḍâl , with es -sidr el -berrı̂ , i.e., Rhamnus silvestris ( Rhamnus Lotus , Linn.), in connection with which Schultens' observation is to be noticed: Cave intelligas lotum Aegyptiam s. plantam Niloticam quam Arabes Arab. nûfr . The fact that the wild animals of the steppe seek the shade of the lote-tree, Schultens has supported by passages from the poets. The lotus is found not only in Syria, but also in Egypt, and the whole of Africa.

(Note: The Arab. ḍâl or Dûm - tree, which likes hot and damp valleys, and hence is found much on the northern, and in great numbers on the eastern, shores of the Sea of Galilee, is called in the present day sidra , collect. sidr ; and its fruit, a small yellow apple, dûma , collect. dûm , perhaps "the not ending, perennial,"because the fruit of the previous year only falls from the tree when that of the present year is ripe. Around Bagdad, as they told me, the Dûm -tree bears twice a year. In Egypt its fruit is called nebq ( נבק , not nibq as in Freytag), and the tree is there far stronger and taller than in Syria, where it is seldom more than about four and twenty feet high. Only in the Wâdi 's-sidr on the mountains of Judaea have I seen several unusually large trunks. The Kâmûs places the signification "the sweet Dûm -tree"first of all to Arab. ḍâl , and then "the wild D."In hotter regions there may also be a superior kind with fine fruit, in Syria it is only wild - Neshwân (ii. 192) says: " dâla , collect. dâl , is the wild Dûm -tree,"- yet I have always found its fruit sweet and pleasant to the taste. - Wetzst.)

The plur . is formed from the primary form צאל , as שׁקמים from שׁקם , Olsh. §148, b ; the single tree was perhaps called צאלה (= Arab. ḍâlt ), as שׁקמה (Ew. §189, h ). Ammianus Marc. xxii. 15 coincides with Job 40:21 : Inter arundines celsas et squalentes nimia densitate haec bellua cubilia ponit . צללו , Job 40:22 (resolved from צלּו , as גּללו , Job 20:7, from גּלּו ),

(Note: Forms like גּלל , צלל , are unknown to the language, because it was more natural for ease of pronunciation to make the primary form סבבּ into סב than into סבב , גּללו (vid., p. 449), צללו , might more readily be referred to גּלל , צלל (in which the first a is a helping vowel, and the second a root vowel); but although the form קטל and the segolate forms completely pass into one another in inflection, still there does not exist a safe example in favour of the change of vowels of קטל into קטלי ; wherefore we have also derived אגלי , Job 38:28, from אגל , not from אגל , although, moreover, ̇̇ frequently enough alternates with ̇̇ (e.g., ישׁעך ), and a transition into ̇̇ of the ̇̇ weakened from ̇̇ (e.g., ידכם ) also occurs. But there are no forms like נטפי = נטפי from נטף in reality, although they would be possible according to the laws of vowels. In Ges. Handwörterb . (1863) גּללו stands under גּלל (according to the form לבב , which, however, forms לבבו ) and צללו under סלל ( a rare noun-form, which does not occur at all from verbs double Ayin ).)

is in apposition with the subj.: Lote-trees cover it as its shade (shading it). The double play of words in Job 40:22 is not reproduced in the English translation.

הן , Job 40:23 , pointing to something possible, obtains almost the signification of a conditional particle, as Job 12:14; Job 23:8; Isa 54:15. The Arabic version appropriately translates Arab. 'n ṭgâ 'l -nhr , for Arab. ṭgâ denotes exactly like עשׁק , excessive, insolent behaviour, and is then, as also Arab. dlm , ‛tâ , and other verbs given by Schultens, transferred from the sphere of ethics to the overflow of a river beyond its banks, to the rush of raging waters, to the rising and bursting forth of swollen streams. It does not, however, terrify the behêmoth, which can live as well in the water as on the land; לא יחפּוז , properly, it does not spring up before it, is not disturbed by it. Instead of the Jordan, Job 40:23 , especially in connection with יגיח , the 'Gaihûn (the Oxus) or the 'Gaihân (the Pyramus) might have been mentioned, which have their names from the growing force with which they burst forth from their sources ( גּיח , גּוּח , comp. 'gâcha , to wash away). But in order to express the notion of a powerful and at times deep-swelling stream, the poet prefers the ירדּן of his fatherland, which moreover, does not lie so very far from the scene, according to the conception at least, since all the wadis in its neighbourhood flow directly or indirectly (as Wâdi el-Meddân, the boundary river between the district of Suwêt and the Nukra plain) into the Jordan. For ירדּן (perhaps from ירד )

(Note: Certainly one would have expected ירדּן like גּרזן , while ירדּן like יעבּץ , יעזר , appears formed from רדן ; nevertheless ירדּן (with changeable Ssere ) can be understood as a change of vowel from ירדּן (comp. ישׁב for ישׁב ).)

does not here signify a stream (rising in the mountain) in general; the name is not deprived of its geographical definiteness, but is a particularizing expression of the notion given above.

The description closes in Job 40:24 with the ironical challenge: in its sight ( בּעיניו as Pro 1:17) let one (for once) catch it; let one lay a snare which, when it goes into it, shall spring together and pierce it in the nose; i.e., neither the open force nor the stratagem, which one employs with effect with other animals, is sufficient to overpower this monster. מוקשׁים is generally rendered as equal to חחים , Isa 37:29; Eze 19:4, or at least to the cords drawn through them, but contrary to the uniform usage of the language. The description of the hippopotamus

(Note: Vid., Grehm, Aus dem Leben des Nilpferds, Gartenlaube 1859, Nr. 48, etc.)

is not followed by that of the crocodile, which also elsewhere form a pair, e.g., in Achilles Tatius, iv. 2, 19. Behemoth and leviathan, says Herder, are the pillars of Hercules at the end of the book, the non plus ultra of another world distant from the scene. What the same writer says of the poet, that he does not "mean to furnish any contributions to Pennant's Zoologie or to Linnaeus' Animal Kingdom ,"the expositor also must assent to.

Constable: Job 38:1--42:7

G. The Cycle of Speeches between Job and God chs. 38:1-42:6

Finally God spoke to Job and gave revelation that Job had been demanding for so long (cf. 13:22; 31:35). There was now no need for the middle-man that Job had requested who could mediate between them (cf. 9:33; 16:19). Yahweh spoke directly to Job, and Job had the opportunity to respond directly to God.

What God did not say to Job is as surprising as what He did say. He did not mention Job's suffering, He gave no explanation of the problem of evil, and He did not defend Himself against Job's charge of injustice. God simply revealed Himself to Job and his companions to a greater degree than they had known, and that greater revelation dissolved their difficulties.

"The reader is told why Job was suffering in the Prologue, but that is to show that Job was innocent. Job was never told this; had he been told, the book would immediately lose its message to all other sufferers. So the book is teaching us through the divine theophany that there is something more fundamental than an intellectual solution to the mystery of innocent suffering. Though the message reaches Job through his intellect, it is for his spirit."¹⁵³

"To Elihu the suffering may bring enrichment; to the author of the book of Job it is the presence of God that is enriching, and that presence is given to men of integrity and piety in prosperity and in adversity alike."¹⁵⁴

". . . whereas the advice of Elihu is to learn his lessons that his prosperity may be restored, the effect of the Divine speeches is to make Job realize that he may have the Divine fellowship in his sufferings, and not merely when he has been delivered from them."¹⁵⁵

God's role in His speeches was not that of the defendant on trial whom prosecutor Job was charging with injustice. Rather He was the prosecutor who was asking the questions of Job, the defendant. He asked him more than 70 unanswerable questions and proved him both ignorant and impotent. Since Job could not understand or determine God's ways with nature, he obviously could not comprehend or control God's dealings with people.

Constable: Job 40:6--42:1

3. God's second speech 40:6-41:34

This second divine discourse is similar to, yet different from, the first. It began as the first one did with a challenge to Job (40:6-14; cf. 38:1-3), but it did not end with one (cf. 40:1-2). In the first speech Yahweh spoke of His inanimate creation and of His animate creation, specifically 10 animals. In the second speech He concentrated on only two creatures: Behemoth and Leviathan.

"The second speech is not a mere afterthought about two creatures left out of the first speech. Here God accomplishes more than in the first speech, where He merely humbled Job by showing him how He is Creator and Sustainer of the natural world. Now He will convince Job He is also Lord of the moral order, one whose justice Job cannot discredit. And appropriately Job's response this time is repentance (42:1-6)."¹⁶⁷

"In spite of its aggressive tone, this speech is not really a contradiction of anything that Job has said. In many respects it is very close to his own thought, and endorses his sustained contention that justice must be left to God. But it brings Job to the end of his quest by convincing him that he may and must hand the whole matter over completely to God more trustingly, less fretfully. And do it without insisting that God should first answer all his questions and give him a formal acquittal.

"Here, if we have rightly found the heart of the theology of the whole book, is a very great depth. There is a rebuke in it for any person who, by complaining about particular events in his live, implies that he could propose to God better ways of running the universe than those God currently uses."¹⁶⁸

Constable: Job 40:11-19

God's challenge 40:6-14

God introduced this challenge much the same as He did His first, out of the whirlwind, and with a demand that Job refute Him if he could.

Job had claimed God was unjust. In answering this challenge God did not argue with Job. He simply asked Job questions that made it obvious to Job that he was unable to do what he had blamed God for not doing. In criticizing God Job had placed himself in a position over God. Therefore God now reminded Job that he was not superior or even equal to God (vv. 9, 11-13). If he were superior or equal, Job could deliver himself from his own misery, which he could not do (v. 14). Because Job was inferior to God, he had no right to criticize God for behaving as He did (cf. Rom. 9:20).

It may be that God used the Hebrew word translated "gird up your loins" in a forensic sense in 38:3 and 40:7 to heighten the irony of His interrogation.¹⁶⁹

Constable: Job 40:15--42:1

God's questions 40:15-41:34

Yahweh's purpose in directing Job's attention to such inexplicable animals on land (Behemoth) and in the water (Leviathan) seems to have been the same as His purpose in His first speech. He intended to humble Job by reminding him of his very limited power and wisdom compared with God's so Job would trust and obey Him.

Scholars disagree on the question of whether the Behemoth and Leviathan that the writer described here were real or mythological creatures. Some of the descriptions, if taken literally, could hardly refer to real animals that are alive today (e.g., 41:18-22). Nevertheless this is poetic literature and these descriptions may be figurative, specifically hyperbole (overstatement to emphasize one or more characteristics, similar to a caricature).

"Our poet can hardly write a line without including a simile, a habit which many critics censure as artistic over-kill."¹⁷⁰

Those who prefer the mythological monster interpretation do so mainly because Leviathan almost certainly describes a mythical creature in 3:8, Psalms 74:14, and Isaiah 27:1, and perhaps elsewhere in Scripture. Also the description of Leviathan in 41:18-22 seems to picture an unreal sea monster. Furthermore there are similar descriptions of this sea monster in ancient Near Eastern mythology. Nevertheless it seems to most of the commentators and to me that Leviathan here, but not everywhere in Scripture, describes a real animal for the following reasons. The details of the description point to a real animal. Moreover both Behemoth and Leviathan occur elsewhere in Scripture apart from mythical connotations (e.g., Joel 1:20 where the Hebrew word translated "Behemoth" in Job 40:15 reads "beasts"; cf. Ps. 104:26). Additionally Scripture states that God created Behemoth (Job 40:15) and Leviathan (Ps. 104:26) as well as Job.

Yahweh reminded Job that Behemoth was a creature as he was (40:15). Job was not the Creator; he was on a lower level. The Hebrew word translated "Behemoth" is the plural of the word usually rendered "beast." Consequently some believe verse 15a is an introductory statement for what God says about both animals that follows. However in verses 15b-24 God had one particular animal in view. Since He gave a name to the second animal (41:1), He probably intended that we understand "Behemoth" as a name for the first animal.

Bible students have nominated several animals as Behemoth because of its description in 40:15-24. Some of these are the elephant,¹⁷¹ the extinct rhinoceros that had no horn,¹⁷² the extinct brontosaurus dinosaur,¹⁷³ the water buffalo,¹⁷⁴ and most popularly the hippopotamus.¹⁷⁵ I think both Behemoth and Leviathan may refer to dinosaurs of different types or perhaps other ancient animals that have now become extinct.

Verse 19a probably means Behemoth is the first in size and strength perhaps among animals of its kind or among animals in Job's area.

"The adult hippopotamus weighs up to eight thousand pounds."¹⁷⁶

Verse 19b may mean that only its Maker should dare go near it for hand-to-hand combat; no human being would defeat it.¹⁷⁷ The definite article "the" before "Jordan" in verse 23b is absent in the Hebrew text. This may mean that God had any swift river in mind, any Jordan.¹⁷⁸ "When he is on watch" (v. 24a) is literally "by the eyes," the only parts of a submerged hippopotamus, along with its nose (v. 24b), that are visible above the water.

Various writers have identified Leviathan in 41:1 as a mythical sea monster,¹⁷⁹ a marine dinosaur,¹⁸⁰ a whale, a dolphin, even a "tunny" (tuna?) fish, and most commonly a crocodile.

This section (ch. 41) contains the longest and last description of an animal in the book. As such it is climactic. God first drew Job's attention to the fact that Leviathan was very hard for people to capture and use (vv. 1-11). Since Job could not challenge Leviathan successfully, he should hardly expect to challenge its Creator successfully (v. 10). Job should not think that because he had a little wisdom and strength he could get the best of God in a contest. He could not even overcome Leviathan, one of God's creatures. "Given to" (v. 11a) is literally "anticipated."

"The argument to the superior strength of God is made, not to discourage men from trying to have dealings with God, but to enhance God's capability of managing the affairs of the universe so that men will trust Him."¹⁸¹

Verses 12-25 emphasize Leviathan's anatomy. "His sneezes flash forth light" (v. 18a) may mean that in the proper light the spray from his nostrils looked like jets of light.¹⁸² Its eyes may be like the "eyelids of the morning" (v. 18b) in that they were the first part of the animal to become visible as it rose to the water's surface.¹⁸³ Verses 19-21 may describe its release of "pent-up breath together with water in a hot stream from its mouth [that] looks like a stream of fire in the sunshine."¹⁸⁴

The last section of this description (vv. 26-34) emphasizes man's inability to capture Leviathan. Verse 31b may allude to the foam that formed on the top of a pot when someone was preparing ointment.¹⁸⁵ The deep appeared grey-headed (v. 32b) perhaps when the animal's wake made whitecaps on the water. The section concludes by stressing this beast's fearless confidence. If people cannot shake the confidence of one of God's creatures, how foolish it was for Job to think he could intimidate God.

To some degree Job, his three friends, and Elihu had all based their arguments on the rationality of God's acts. God reminded them of Behemoth and Leviathan partially to teach them all that His actions transcend our ability to explain everything rationally.

"Animals independent of man (38:39-39:30) and animals dangerous and repulsive to man (40:15-41:34) were all a grand zoological exhibition to help Job sense that because he had nothing to do with making, sustaining, or even subduing them, it was unthinkable that he could question their Creator."¹⁸⁶

Another writer advocated a different view with which I do not agree.

". . . the beasts themselves celebrate instead Job's triumph."¹⁸⁷

One might conclude after reading these speeches of Yahweh that God is not very compassionate. He may seem more concerned about establishing His own glory than about Job's suffering. However, we need to remember that God could have said nothing. Furthermore by directing Job's thinking as He did, God did what was best for Job. He did not just give him answers to specific questions but a vision of Himself that would transform Job's life forever after. God's words to Job may sound harsh, but He was simply responding to Job in the same vein as Job had been addressing Him (cf. 2 Sam. 22:26-27; Ps. 18:25-26). He did not do this to mock him but to make a forceful impression on him. The forcefulness of His words harmonizes with the forcefulness of His revelation and the forcefulness of His person.¹⁸⁸ God wants us to understand Him as best we can within our finite human limitations. That is evidently why He spoke to Job, and that is why He preserved this record of His revelation in Scripture.¹⁸⁹

"That no summary challenge was needed at the end of the Lord's second speech is indicative that Job's second response (42:1-6) was a willing one in contrast to his initial reluctant reply (40:3-5)."¹⁹⁰

Introduction / Outline

JFB: Job (Book Introduction)

JOB A REAL PERSON.--It has been supposed by some that the book of Job is an allegory, not a real narrative, on account of the artificial character of many of its statements. Thus the sacred numbers, three and seven, often occur. He had seven thousand sheep, seven sons, both before and after his trials; his three friends sit down with him seven days and seven nights; both before and after his trials he had three daughters. So also the number and form of the speeches of the several speakers seem to be artificial. The name of Job, too, is derived from an Arabic word signifying repentance.

But Eze 14:14 (compare Eze 14:16, Eze 14:20) speaks of "Job" in conjunction with "Noah and Daniel," real persons. St. James (Jam 5:11) also refers to Job as an example of "patience," which he would not have been likely to do had Job been only a fictitious person. Also the names of persons and places are specified with a particularity not to be looked for in an allegory. As to the exact doubling of his possessions after his restoration, no doubt the round number is given for the exact number, as the latter approached near the former; this is often done in undoubtedly historical books. As to the studied number and form of the speeches, it seems likely that the arguments were substantially those which appear in the book, but that the studied and poetic form was given by Job himself, guided by the Holy Spirit. He lived one hundred and forty years after his trials, and nothing would be more natural than that he should, at his leisure, mould into a perfect form the arguments used in the momentous debate, for the instruction of the Church in all ages. Probably, too, the debate itself occupied several sittings; and the number of speeches assigned to each was arranged by preconcerted agreement, and each was allowed the interval of a day or more to prepare carefully his speech and replies; this will account for the speakers bringing forward their arguments in regular series, no one speaking out of his turn. As to the name Job--repentance (supposing the derivation correct)--it was common in old times to give a name from circumstances which occurred at an advanced period of life, and this is no argument against the reality of the person.

WHERE JOB LIVED.--"Uz," according to GESENIUS, means a light, sandy soil, and was in the north of Arabia-Deserta, between Palestine and the Euphrates, called by PTOLEMY (Geography, 19) Ausitai or Aisitai. In Gen 10:23; Gen 22:21; Gen 36:28; and 1Ch 1:17, 1Ch 1:42, it is the name of a man. In Jer 25:20; Lam 4:21; and Job 1:1, it is a country. Uz, in Gen 22:21, is said to be the son of Nahor, brother of Abraham--a different person from the one mentioned (Gen 10:23), a grandson of Shem. The probability is that the country took its name from the latter of the two; for this one was the son of Aram, from whom the Arameans take their name, and these dwelt in Mesopotamia, between the rivers Euphrates and Tigris. Compare as to the dwelling of the sons of Shem in Gen 10:30, "a mount of the East," answering to "men of the East" (Job 1:3). RAWLINSON, in his deciphering of the Assyrian inscriptions, states that "Uz is the prevailing name of the country at the mouth of the Euphrates." It is probable that Eliphaz the Temanite and the Sabeans dwelt in that quarter; and we know that the Chaldeans resided there, and not near Idumea, which some identify with Uz. The tornado from "the wilderness" (Job 1:19) agrees with the view of it being Arabia-Deserta. Job (Job 1:3) is called "the greatest of the men of the East"; but Idumea was not east, but south of Palestine: therefore in Scripture language, the phrase cannot apply to that country, but probably refers to the north of Arabia-Deserta, between Palestine, Idumea, and the Euphrates. So the Arabs still show in the Houran a place called Uz as the residence of Job.

THE AGE WHEN JOB LIVED.--EUSEBIUS fixes it two ages before Moses, that is, about the time of Isaac: eighteen hundred years before Christ, and six hundred after the Deluge. Agreeing with this are the following considerations: 1. Job's length of life is patriarchal, two hundred years. 2. He alludes only to the earliest form of idolatry, namely, the worship of the sun, moon, and heavenly hosts (called Saba, whence arises the title "Lord of Sabaoth," as opposed to Sabeanism) (Job 31:26-28). 3. The number of oxen and rams sacrificed, seven, as in the case of Balaam. God would not have sanctioned this after the giving of the Mosaic law, though He might graciously accommodate Himself to existing customs before the law. 4. The language of Job is Hebrew, interspersed occasionally with Syriac and Arabic expressions, implying a time when all the Shemitic tribes spoke one common tongue and had not branched into different dialects, Hebrew, Syriac, and Arabic. 5. He speaks of the most ancient kind of writing, namely, sculpture. Riches also are reckoned by cattle. The Hebrew word, translated "a piece of money," ought rather be rendered "a lamb." 6. There is no allusion to the exodus from Egypt and to the miracles that accompanied it; nor to the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah (PATRICK, however, thinks there is); though there is to the Flood (Job 22:17); and these events, happening in Job's vicinity, would have been striking illustrations of the argument for God's interposition in destroying the wicked and vindicating the righteous, had Job and his friends known of them. Nor is there any undoubted reference to the Jewish law, ritual, and priesthood. 7. The religion of Job is that which prevailed among the patriarchs previous to the law; sacrifices performed by the head of the family; no officiating priesthood, temple, or consecrated altar.

THE WRITER.--All the foregoing facts accord with Job himself having been the author. The style of thought, imagery, and manners, are such as we should look for in the work of an Arabian emir. There is precisely that degree of knowledge of primitive tradition (see Job 31:33, as to Adam) which was universally spread abroad in the days of Noah and Abraham, and which was subsequently embodied in the early chapters of Genesis. Job, in his speeches, shows that he was much more competent to compose the work than Elihu, to whom LIGHTFOOT attributes it. The style forbids its being attributed to Moses, to whom its composition is by some attributed, "whilst he was among the Midianites, about 1520 B.C." But the fact, that it, though not a Jewish book, appears among the Hebrew sacred writings, makes it likely that it came to the knowledge of Moses during the forty years which he passed in parts of Arabia, chiefly near Horeb; and that he, by divine guidance, introduced it as a sacred writing to the Israelites, to whom, in their affliction, the patience and restoration of Job were calculated to be a lesson of especial utility. That it is inspired appears from the fact that Paul (1Co 3:19) quotes it (Job 5:13) with the formula, "It is written." Our Savior, too Mat 24:28), plainly refers to Job 29:30. Compare also Jam 4:10 and 1Pe 5:6 with Job 22:29; Rom 11:34-35 with Job 15:8. It is probably the oldest book in the world. It stands among the Hagiographa in the threefold division of Scripture into the Law, the Prophets, and the Hagiographa ("Psalms," Luk 24:44).

DESIGN OF THE BOOK.--It is a public debate in poetic form on an important question concerning the divine government; moreover the prologue and epilogue, which are in prose, shed the interest of a living history over the debate, which would otherwise be but a contest of abstract reasonings. To each speaker of the three friends three speeches are assigned. Job having no one to stand by him is allowed to reply to each speech of each of the three. Eliphaz, as the oldest, leads the way. Zophar, at his third turn, failed to speak, thus virtually owning himself overcome (Job 27:1-23). Therefore Job continued his reply, which forms three speeches (Job 26:1-14; Job 27:1-23; Job 28:1-28; Job 29:1-31:40). Elihu (Job 32:1-37:24) is allowed four speeches. Jehovah makes three addresses (Job 38:1-41:34). Thus, throughout there is a tripartite division. The whole is divided into three parts--the prologue, poem proper, and epilogue. The poem, into three--(1) The dispute of Job and his three friends; (2) The address of Elihu; (3) The address of God. There are three series in the controversy, and in the same order. The epilogue (Job 42:1-17) also is threefold; Job's justification, reconciliation with his friends, restoration. The speakers also in their successive speeches regularly advance from less to greater vehemence. With all this artificial composition, everything seems easy and natural.

The question to be solved, as exemplified in the case of Job, is, Why are the righteous afflicted consistently with God's justice? The doctrine of retribution after death, no doubt, is the great solution of the difficulty. And to it Job plainly refers in Job 14:14, and Job 19:25. The objection to this, that the explicitness of the language on the resurrection in Job is inconsistent with the obscurity on the subject in the early books of the Old Testament, is answered by the fact that Job enjoyed the divine vision (Job 38:1; Job 42:5), and therefore, by inspiration, foretold these truths. Next, the revelations made outside of Israel being few needed to be the more explicit; thus Balaam's prophecy (Num 24:17) was clear enough to lead the wise men of the East by the star (Mat 2:2); and in the age before the written law, it was the more needful for God not to leave Himself without witness of the truth. Still Job evidently did not fully realize the significance designed by the Spirit in his own words (compare 1Pe 1:11-12). The doctrine, though existing, was not plainly revealed or at least understood. Hence he does not mainly refer to this solution. Yes, and even now, we need something in addition to this solution. David, who firmly believed in a future retribution (Psa 16:10; Psa 17:15), still felt the difficulty not entirely solved thereby (Psa. 83:1-18). The solution is not in Job's or in his three friends' speeches. It must, therefore, be in Elihu's. God will hold a final judgment, no doubt, to clear up all that seems dark in His present dealings; but He also now providentially and morally governs the world and all the events of human life. Even the comparatively righteous are not without sin which needs to be corrected. The justice and love of God administer the altogether deserved and merciful correction. Affliction to the godly is thus mercy and justice in disguise. The afflicted believer on repentance sees this. "Via crucis, via salutis" ["The way of the cross, the way of deliverance"]. Though afflicted, the godly are happier even now than the ungodly, and when affliction has attained its end, it is removed by the Lord. In the Old Testament the consolations are more temporal and outward; in the New Testament, more spiritual; but in neither to the entire exclusion of the other. "Prosperity," says BACON, "is the blessing of the Old Testament; adversity that of the New Testament, which is the mark of God's more especial favor. Yet even in the Old Testament, if you listen to David's harp, you shall hear as many hearse-like airs as carols; and the pencil of the Holy Ghost has labored more in describing the afflictions of Job than the felicities of Solomon. Prosperity is not without many fears and distastes; and adversity is not without comforts and hopes." This solution of Elihu is seconded by the addresses of God, in which it is shown God must be just (because He is God), as Elihu had shown how God can be just, and yet the righteous be afflicted. It is also acquiesced in by Job, who makes no reply. God reprimands the "three" friends, but not Elihu. Job's general course is approved; he is directed to intercede for his friends, and is restored to double his former prosperity.

POETRY.--In all countries poetry is the earliest form of composition as being best retained in the memory. In the East especially it was customary for sentiments to be preserved in a terse, proverbial, and poetic form (called maschal). Hebrew poetry is not constituted by the rhythm or meter, but in a form peculiar to itself: 1. In an alphabetical arrangement somewhat like our acrostic. For instance, Lam. 1:1-22. 2. The same verse repeated at intervals; as in Psa 42:1-11; Psa. 107:1-43. 3. Rhythm of gradation. Psalms of degrees, Psa. 120:1-134:3, in which the expression of the previous verse is resumed and carried forward in the next (Psa 121:1-8). 4. The chief characteristic of Hebrew poetry is parallelism, or the correspondence of the same ideas in the parallel clauses. The earliest instance is Enoch's prophecy (Jud 1:14), and Lamech's parody of it (Gen 4:23). Three kinds occur: (1) The synonymous parallelism, in which the second is a repetition of the first, with or without increase of force (Psa 22:27; Isa 15:1); sometimes with double parallelism (Isa 1:15). (2) The antithetic, in which the idea of the second clause is the converse of that in the first (Pro 10:1). (3) The synthetic, where there is a correspondence between different propositions, noun answering to noun, verb to verb, member to member, the sentiment, moreover, being not merely echoed, or put in contrast, but enforced by accessory ideas (Job 3:3-9). Also alternate (Isa 51:19). "Desolation and destruction, famine and sword," that is, desolation by famine, and destruction by the sword. Introverted; where the fourth answers to the first, and the third to the second (Mat 7:6). Parallelism thus often affords a key to the interpretation. For fuller information, see LOWTH (Introduction to Isaiah, and Lecture on Hebrew Poetry) and HERDER (Spirit of Hebrew Poetry, translated by Marsh). The simpler and less artificial forms of parallelism prevail in Job--a mark of its early age.

JFB: Job (Outline)

• THE HOLINESS OF JOB, HIS WEALTH, &c. (Job 1:1-5)
• SATAN, APPEARING BEFORE GOD, FALSELY ACCUSES JOB. (Job 1:6-12)
• SATAN FURTHER TEMPTS JOB. (Job 2:1-8)
• JOB REPROVES HIS WIFE. (Job 2:9-13)
• JOB CURSES THE DAY OF HIS BIRTH AND WISHES FOR DEATH. (Job 3:1-19)
• HE COMPLAINS OF LIFE BECAUSE OF HIS ANGUISH. (Job 3:20-26)
• FIRST SPEECH OF ELIPHAZ. (Job 4:1-21)
• ELIPHAZ' CONCLUSION FROM THE VISION. (Job 5:1-27)
• REPLY OF JOB TO ELIPHAZ. (Job 6:1-30)
• JOB EXCUSES HIS DESIRE FOR DEATH. (Job 7:1-21)
• THE ADDRESS OF BILDAD. (Job 8:1-22)
• REPLY OF JOB TO BILDAD. (Job 9:1-35)
• JOB'S REPLY TO BILDAD CONTINUED. (Job 10:1-22)
• FIRST SPEECH OF ZOPHAR. (Job 11:1-20) Zophar assails Job for his empty words, and indirectly, the two friends, for their weak reply. Taciturnity is highly prized among Orientals (Pro 10:8, Pro 10:19).
• JOB'S REPLY TO ZOPHAR. (Job 12:1-14:22)
• JOB'S REPLY TO ZOPHAR CONTINUED. (Job 13:1-28)
• JOB PASSES FROM HIS OWN TO THE COMMON MISERY OF MANKIND. (Job 14:1-22)
• SECOND SPEECH OF ELIPHAZ. (Job 15:1-35)
• JOB'S REPLY. (Job 16:1-22) (Job 13:4).
• JOB'S ANSWER CONTINUED. (Job 17:1-16)
• REPLY OF BILDAD. (Job 18:1-21)
• JOB'S REPLY TO BILDAD. (Job 19:1-29)
• REPLY OF ZOPHAR. (Job 20:1-29)
• JOB'S ANSWER. (Job 21:1-34)
• AS BEFORE, ELIPHAZ BEGINS. (Job 22:1-30) Eliphaz shows that man's goodness does not add to, or man's badness take from, the happiness of God; therefore it cannot be that God sends prosperity to some and calamities on others for His own advantage; the cause of the goods and ills sent must lie in the men themselves (Psa 16:2; Luk 17:10; Act 17:25; 1Ch 29:14). So Job's calamities must arise from guilt. Eliphaz, instead of meeting the facts, tries to show that it could not be so.
• JOB'S ANSWER. (Job 23:1-17)
• BILDAD'S REPLY. (Job 25:1-6) Power and terror, that is, terror-inspiring power.
• JOB'S REPLY. (Job 26:1-14)
• JOB'S SPEECH CONTINUED. (Job 28:1-28)
• SPEECH OF ELIHU. (Job 32:1-37:24) Prose (poetry begins with "I am young").
• ADDRESS TO JOB, AS (Job 32:1-22) TO THE FRIENDS. (Job 33:1-33)
• GOD'S SECOND ADDRESS. (Job 40:1-24)
• JOB'S PENITENT REPLY. (Job 42:1-6) In the first clause he owns God to be omnipotent over nature, as contrasted with his own feebleness, which God had proved (Job 40:15; Job 41:34); in the second, that God is supremely just (which, in order to be governor of the world, He must needs be) in all His dealings, as contrasted with his own vileness (Job 42:6), and incompetence to deal with the wicked as a just judge (Job 40:8-14).

TSK: Job (Book Introduction)

A large aquatic animal, perhaps the extinct dinosaur, plesiosaurus, the exact meaning is unknown. Some think this to be a crocodile but from the description in Job 41:1-41:34 this is patently absurd. It appears to be a large fire breathing animal of some sort. Just as the bomardier beetle has an explosion producing mechanism, so the great sea dragon may have an explosive producing mechanism to enable it to be a real fire breathing dragon.

TSK: Job 40 (Chapter Introduction)

Overview

Job 40:1, Job humbles himself to God; Job 40:6, God stirs him up to shew his righteousness, power, and wisdom; Job 40:16, Of the behemoth.

Poole: Job 40 (Chapter Introduction)

CHAPTER 40

God’ s reproof of Job, Job 40:1,2 . He humbleth himself, Job 40:3-5 . God again declareth his righteousness, majesty, and the power of his wrath to abase the proud, Job 40:6-14 . A description of behemoth, Job 40:15-21 .

Having made a little pause to try what Job could answer to his questions, and Job being it seems astonished with God’ s rebukes, or expecting what God would further say, continued silent.

MHCC: Job (Book Introduction)

This book is so called from Job, whose prosperity, afflictions, and restoration, are here recorded. He lived soon after Abraham, or perhaps before that patriarch. Most likely it was written by Job himself, and it is the most ancient book in existence. The instructions to be learned from the patience of Job, and from his trials, are as useful now, and as much needed as ever. We live under the same Providence, we have the same chastening Father, and there is the same need for correction unto righteousness. The fortitude and patience of Job, though not small, gave way in his severe troubles; but his faith was fixed upon the coming of his Redeemer, and this gave him stedfastness and constancy, though every other dependence, particularly the pride and boast of a self-righteous spirit, was tried and consumed. Another great doctrine of the faith, particularly set forth in the book of Job, is that of Providence. It is plain, from this history, that the Lord watched over his servant Job with the affection of a wise and loving father.

MHCC: Job 40 (Chapter Introduction)

(Job 40:1-5) Job humbles himself to God.

(Job 40:6-14) The Lord reasons with Job to show his righteousness, power, and wisdom.

(Job 40:15-24) God's power shown in Behemoth.

Matthew Henry: Job (Book Introduction)

An Exposition, with Practical Observations, of The Book of Job

This book of Job stands by itself, is not connected with any other, and is therefore to be considered alone. Many copies of the Hebrew Bible place it after the book of Psalms, and some after the Proverbs, which perhaps has given occasion to some learned men to imagine it to have been written by Isaiah or some of the later prophets. But, as the subject appears to have been much more ancient, so we have no reason to think but that the composition of the book was, and that therefore it is most fitly placed first in this collection of divine morals: also, being doctrinal, it is proper to precede and introduce the book of Psalms, which is devotional, and the book of Proverbs, which is practical; for how shall we worship or obey a God whom we know not? As to this book,

I. We are sure that it is given by inspiration of God, though we are not certain who was the penman of it. The Jews, though no friends to Job, because he was a stranger to the commonwealth of Israel, yet, as faithful conservators of the oracles of God committed to them, always retained this book in their sacred canon. The history is referred to by one apostle (Jam 5:11) and one passage (Job 5:13) is quoted by another apostle, with the usual form of quoting scripture, It is written, 1Co 3:19. It is the opinion of many of the ancients that this history was written by Moses himself in Midian, and delivered to his suffering brethren in Egypt, for their support and comfort under their burdens, and the encouragement of their hope that God would in due time deliver and enrich them, as he did this patient sufferer. Some conjecture that it was written originally in Arabic, and afterwards translated into Hebrew, for the use of the Jewish church, by Solomon (so Monsieur Jurieu) or some other inspired writer. It seems most probable to me that Elihu was the penman of it, at least of the discourses, because (Job 32:15, Job 32:16) he mingles the words of a historian with those of a disputant: but Moses perhaps wrote the first two chapters and the last, to give light to the discourses; for in them God is frequently called Jehovah, but not once in all the discourses, except Job 12:9. That name was but little known to the patriarchs before Moses, Exo 6:3. If Job wrote it himself, some of the Jewish writers themselves own him a prophet among the Gentiles; if Elihu, we find he had a spirit of prophecy which filled him with matter and constrained him, Job 32:18.

II. We are sure that it is, for the substance of it, a true history, and not a romance, though the dialogues are poetical. No doubt there was such a man as Job; the prophet Ezekiel names him with Noah and Daniel, Eze 14:14. The narrative we have here of his prosperity and piety, his strange afflictions and exemplary patience, the substance of his conferences with his friends, and God's discourse with him out of the whirlwind, with his return at length to a very prosperous condition, no doubt is exactly true, though the inspired penman is allowed the usual liberty of putting the matter of which Job and his friends discoursed into his own words.

III. We are sure that it is very ancient, though we cannot fix the precise time either when Job lived or when the book was written. So many, so evident, are its hoary hairs, the marks of its antiquity, that we have reason to think it of equal date with the book of Genesis itself, and that holy Job was contemporary with Isaac and Jacob; though not coheir with them of the promise of the earthly Canaan, yet a joint-expectant with them of the better country, that is, the heavenly. Probably he was of the posterity of Nahor, Abraham's brother, whose first-born was Uz (Gen 22:21), and in whose family religion was for some ages kept up, as appears, Gen 31:53, where God is called, not only the God of Abraham, but the God of Nahor. He lived before the age of man was shortened to seventy or eighty, as it was in Moses's time, before sacrifices were confined to one altar, before the general apostasy of the nations from the knowledge and worship of the true God, and while yet there was no other idolatry known than the worship of the sun and moon, and that punished by the Judges, Job 31:26-28. He lived while God was known by the name of God Almighty more than by the name of Jehovah; for he is called Shaddai - the Almighty, above thirty times in this book. He lived while divine knowledge was conveyed, not by writing, but by tradition; for to that appeals are here made, Job 8:8; Job 21:29; Job 15:18; Job 5:1. And we have therefore reason to think that he lived before Moses, because here is no mention at all of the deliverance of Israel out of Egypt, or the giving of the law. There is indeed one passage which might be made to allude to the drowning of Pharaoh (Job 26:12): He divideth the sea with his power, and by his understanding he smiteth through Rahab, which name Egypt is frequently called by in scripture, as Psa 87:4; Psa 89:10; Isa 51:9. But that may as well refer to the proud waves of the sea. We conclude therefore that we are here got back to the patriarchal age, and, besides its authority, we receive this book with veneration for its antiquity.

IV. We are sure that it is of great use to the church, and to every good Christian, though there are many passages in it dark and hard to be understood. We cannot perhaps be confident of the true meaning of every Arabic word and phrase we meet with in it. It is a book that finds a great deal of work for the critics; but enough is plain to make the whole profitable, and it was all written for our learning.

1. This noble poem presents to us, in very clear and lively characters, these five things among others: - (1.) A monument of primitive theology. The first and great principles of the light of nature, on which natural religion is founded, are here, in a warm, and long, and learned dispute, not only taken for granted on all sides and not the least doubt made of them, but by common consent plainly laid down as eternal truths, illustrated and urged as affecting commanding truths. Were ever the being of God, his glorious attributes and perfections, his unsearchable wisdom, his irresistible power, his inconceivable glory, his inflexible justice, and his incontestable sovereignty, discoursed of with more clearness, fulness, reverence, and divine eloquence, than in this book? The creation of the world, and the government of it, are here admirably described, not as matters of nice speculation, but as laying most powerful obligations upon us to fear and serve, to submit to and trust in, our Creator, owner, Lord, and ruler. Moral good and evil, virtue and vice, were never drawn more to the life (the beauty of the one and the deformity of the other) than in this book; nor the inviolable rule of God's judgment more plainly laid down, That happy are the righteous, it shall be well with them; and Woe to the wicked, it shall be ill with them. These are not questions of the schools to keep the learned world in action, nor engines of state to keep the unlearned world in awe; no, it appears by this book that they are sacred truths of undoubted certainty, and which all the wise and sober part of mankind have in every age subscribed and submitted to. (2.) It presents us with a specimen of Gentile piety. This great saint descended probably not from Abraham, but Nahor; or, if from Abraham, not from Isaac, but from one of the sons of the concubines that were sent into the east-country (Gen 25:6); or, if from Isaac, yet not from Jacob, but Esau; so that he was out of the pale of the covenant of peculiarity, no Israelite, no proselyte, and yet none like him for religion, nor such a favourite of heaven upon this earth. It was a truth therefore, before St. Peter perceived it, that in every nation he that fears God and works righteousness is accepted of him, Act 10:35. There were children of God scattered abroad (Joh 11:52) besides the incorporated children of the kingdom, Mat 8:11, Mat 8:12. (3.) It presents us with an exposition of the book of Providence, and a clear and satisfactory solution of many of the difficult and obscure passages of it. The prosperity of the wicked and the afflictions of the righteous have always been reckoned two as hard chapters as any in that book; but they are here expounded, and reconciled with the divine wisdom, purity, and goodness, by the end of these things. (4.) It presents us with a great example of patience and close adherence to God in the midst of the sorest calamities. Sir Richard Blackmore's most ingenious pen, in his excellent preface to his paraphrase on this book, makes Job a hero proper for an epic poem; for, says he, " He appears brave in distress and valiant in affliction, maintains his virtue, and with that his character, under the most exasperating provocations that the malice of hell could invent, and thereby gives a most noble example of passive fortitude, a character no way inferior to that of the active hero," etc. (5.) It presents us with an illustrious type of Christ, the particulars of which we shall endeavour to take notice of as we go along. In general, Job was a great sufferer, was emptied and humbled, but in order to his greater glory. So Christ abased himself, that we might be exalted. The learned bishop Patrick quotes St. Jerome ore than once speaking of Job as a type of Christ, who for the job that was set before him endured the cross, who was persecuted, for a time, by men and devils, and seemed forsaken of God too, but was raised to be an intercessor even for his friends and had added affliction to his misery. When the apostle speaks of the patience of Job he immediately takes notice of the end of the Lord, that is, of the Lord Jesus (as some understand it), typified by Job, Jam 5:11.

2. In this book we have, (1.) The history of Job's sufferings, and his patience under them (ch. 1, Job 2:1-13, not without a mixture of human frailty, ch. 3. (2.) A dispute between him and his friends upon them, in which, [1.] The opponents were Eliphaz, Bildad, and Zophar. [2.] The respondent was Job. [3.] The moderators were, First, Elihu, ch. 32-37. Secondly, God himself, ch. 38-41. (3.) The issue of all in Job's honour and prosperity, ch. 42. Upon the whole, we learn that many are the afflictions of the righteous, but that when the Lord delivers them out of them all the trial of their faith will be found to praise, and honour, and glory.

Matthew Henry: Job 40 (Chapter Introduction)

Many humbling confounding questions God had put to Job, in the foregoing chapter; now, in this chapter, I. He demands an answer to them (Job 40:1, Job 40:2). II. Job submits in a humble silence (Job 40:3-5). III. God proceeds to reason with him, for his conviction, concerning the infinite distance and disproportion between him and God, showing that he was by no means an equal match for God. He challenges him (Job 40:6, Job 40:7) to vie with him, if he durst, for justice (Job 40:8), power (Job 40:9), majesty (Job 40:10), and dominion over the proud (Job 40:11-14), and he gives an instance of his power in one particular animal, here called " Behemoth," (Job 40:15-24).

Constable: Job (Book Introduction)

Introduction

Title

This book, like many others in the Old Testament, got its name from the central character in it rather than from its writer. While it is possible that Job may have written it, there is no concrete evidence that he did.

"Job" means "hated" or "the much persecuted." Perhaps "Job" was a nickname his friends gave him during his suffering. Job is the title of the book in the Hebrew, Greek (Septuagint), Latin (Vulgate), and English Bibles.

Date

Concerning the time the events recorded took place there have been many views ranging from the patriarchal age of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob (beginning about 2100 B.C.) to the sixth century B.C.

Internal evidence suggests that Job lived in the patriarchal period. The length of his life (either 140 or about 210 years; 42:16) is similar to that of Terah (205 years), Abraham (175 years), Isaac (180 years), and Jacob (147 years). The writer measured Job's wealth in terms of his livestock. This is how Moses evaluated the wealth of Abraham and Jacob (1:3; 42:12; cf. Gen. 12:16; 13:2; 30:43; 32:5). The Sabeans and Chaldeans (1:15, 17) were nomads during the patriarchal period but not later. Job was the priest of his family (1:5) a condition that became less common when nations in the Near East developed more organization. Names of people and places in the book were also common in the patriarchal age (e.g., Sheba, Tima, Eliphaz, Uz, Job). Genesis, the Mari documents, and the Egyptian Execration texts, all of which refer to life in the Near East at this time, also refer to these names.

"The idea that Job has an Edomite background is as old as the LXX, which equates Job with Jobab, king of Edom (Gn. 36:33)."¹

"Most recent [liberal] writers are agreed that in its original form the book was of post-exilic origin, and the secondary parts of later composition."²

Internal evidence, however, has led many careful students of the book to conclude that it was the work of one person. Perhaps someone else added a few minor touches later under divine inspiration (e.g., 42:16-17). If Job lived in the patriarchal period, as the evidence seems to suggest, what clues are there that someone did not write it then or very soon afterwards? The detailed recounting of the conversations that took place certainly suggests a composition date fairly close to that of the actual events. That has been the position of Jewish and Christian scholars until destructive criticism became popular in the last few centuries. Critics point to the fact that oral tradition was very exact in the ancient world and that people could have transmitted Job's story by mouth for generations and retained its purity. With the Holy Spirit's superintending work it could have been, but there is no evidence that this is what happened. Literacy was widespread in the ancient world at this time.³ Critics further point out that in the process of social evolution composition of a work such as this book was more typical at a date much later than the patriarchal period. Yet again there is no evidence that someone wrote it later. The simpler explanation is that someone wrote it early. Since there is no proof that someone wrote it later, most conservative scholars have continued to prefer the traditional early date of composition theory.

Writer

The book does not identify its writer. Furthermore the ancient Hebrews could not agree on who wrote it. Consequently many different scholars have made guesses as to who the writer was.

From the patriarchal period Job himself is the favored candidate, though some scholars have nominated Elihu. These men seem to be the most likely of the chief characters to have preserved the record of Job's trials. There are many examples of ancient extra-biblical writings in which the author spoke of himself in the third person, so we need not eliminate Job on that ground. The book reads as though an eyewitness of the events recorded wrote it.

Jewish tradition favored Moses as the writer. Moses recorded other events during the patriarchal period in Genesis, he was familiar with desert life, and he had enough ability to write such a book as this one.

Solomon has supporters mainly because he composed other poetic biblical literature (Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and Song of Solomon). Moreover there are some similarities between Job and Proverbs such as the relationship between fearing God and being wise.

Other scholars have suggested later writers including Hezekiah, Isaiah, and Ezra.

Of course, the writer may have been none of these individuals. No one knows for sure who wrote Job. I tend to prefer a contemporary of Job or Job himself because of the antiquity of this view and the fact that no one has proved it unsatisfactory.

Scope

It is also difficult to determine how much time the events narrated in the book cover.

The first chapter tells about Job's life before his trial, and the last chapter reveals what happened after it until Job's death. The chapters in between deal with a relatively short period in Job's long life. How long was this period?

We have a few clues. Job referred to months when he spoke of his sufferings (7:3; 29:2). In view of Job's physical symptoms his ailments seem to have bothered him for several months at least. He may have suffered for years. However, Job said the same people who had respected him previously had come to reject and avoid him. He implied that his rejection was fairly recent.

The main part of the book contains dialogue that took place between a few individuals. There is no indication in the text that extended periods of time interrupted Job's sojourn at the city dump. It seems to have continued for a few days at the most, though the conversations may have stopped and then restarted. The writer may have telescoped the events to keep the narrative flowing smoothly. It appears that the scope of the main action at the city dump lasted no longer than a few days or possibly weeks.

Genre

Job is primarily a combination of at least three literary types: lawsuit,⁴ lament,⁵ and controversy dialogue.⁶ The larger category is wisdom literature. However there are so many different types of literature in this book that many writers despair of assigning one type as the dominant one.

"The book of Job defies all efforts to establish its literary genre. While it has been viewed as an epic,⁷ a tragedy,⁸ and a parable,⁹ upon close analysis it is none of these even though it exhibits properties belonging to each of them. As Robert Gordis observes, the author of Job has created his own literary genre.¹⁰ The book is didactic in the sense that the author seeks to teach religious truth, a task which he executes primarily by means of lyrical poetry expressive of deep emotions."¹¹

"The book of Job is an astonishing mixture of almost every kind of literature to be found in the Old Testament. Many individual pieces can be isolated and identified as proverbs, riddles, hymns, laments, curses, lyrical nature poems."¹²

"One should think of this aspect of interpretation [i.e., genre] as being like the Olympics, a grand occasion made up of a variety of sports. Though it is all sport, each game is played by its own rules and has its own expectations about how to play the game. The variety of literature is the same way. It all has a message, but it conveys that message in a variety of ways and with a variety of expectations. To try to play basketball with soccer's rules will never work, though both use a ball and require foot speed. Or think of musical instruments, they all make music, but in different ways with different sounds. One cannot play the violin like a piano or drums; nor should one expect a violin to sound like either a piano or the kettledrum! In the same way, to read the poetry of the Psalms like a historical book is to miss the emotional and pictorial impact of the message, though both genres convey reality about people's experience with God."¹³

Message

What this book is all about has been the subject of considerable debate. Many people think God gave it to us to provide His answer to the age-old problem of suffering. In particular, many believe it is in the Bible to help us understand why good people suffer. This is undoubtedly one of the purposes of the book and one that I want to develop at some length. However, I think another purpose is more foundational than this one.

Other people have focused on the great questions Job voiced in the book. During his suffering, when God allowed Satan to knock all the props that support human earthly existence out from under him, Job got down to the most basic needs that people face. He made many profound observations about life. He articulated the most fundamental needs that human beings have. He voiced the greatest philosophical questions about life. These questions are an extremely important contribution of the book and one that I plan to give some attention. Nevertheless I think God has inspired and preserved the message of the Book of Job primarily for another reason.

I believe He did so because this book proves that the basic relationship that God has established with people does not rest on retribution but on grace. This is the message statement. Let me explain it.

In our study of the Old Testament historical books I have pointed out that God blesses people for two reasons. These are His sovereign choice to bless and people's response of trust and obedience to Him.

Because we cannot control God's sovereign choice to bless some people more than others we tend to forget that. We tend to focus on what we can control to some extent, namely our securing His blessing by trusting and obeying Him. This is understandable and legitimate, but it leads to a potential problem. The problem is that we may conclude that we can control God. Since God blesses those who trust and obey Him and He curses those who do not, we may conclude that if we trust and obey God, He owes us blessing.

This conclusion assumes that the basis of God's relationship with people is retribution. If I am good, God will reward me with blessing in some form, but if I am bad, He will punish me somehow. While this is normally the way God deals with human beings it is not always His method. Consequently there must be a more fundamental principle that governs God's dealings with people. On what basis does God consistently deal with us?

Throughout the Book of Job this is the major question that God is answering. Every major character in the book--Job, Eliphaz, Bildad, Zopher, and Elihu--assumed that God governed humankind on the basis of retribution. They believed there were no exceptions to the rule that God blesses good people and punishes bad people.

Job concluded that God was unjust since he had been good but God was allowing him to suffer. Job's wife agreed with him. Eliphaz, Bildad, and Zopher believed that Job must be a bad man instead of a good man since he was suffering. Elihu felt the solution to this apparent exception to the rule was not God's injustice but Job's ignorance rather than his sin. Elihu took a more agnostic approach to the solution of Job's problem. He suspected Job was a bad man, but he wasn't as sure about that as Job's other three friends were.

The Book of Job reveals that while God usually blesses the godly and punishes the ungodly, He does not always do so. There is a more fundamental basis from which God operates. That basis is His own free choice to bless or not bless whom He will.

We might conclude then that the basis of God's dealings with mankind is His sovereignty. However, that answer goes too far back. God's sovereignty really has nothing to do with how He rules. The attribute of sovereignty only sets forth God's position as supreme ruler. How does God rule sovereignly? If it is not on the basis of retribution, on what basis is it?

Evidence in the Book of Job points to God's grace as the basis of His dealings with people. Instead of always dealing with us in retribution, God always deals with us in grace. What does this mean?

This means that instead of responding to our good actions with blessing or our bad actions with cursing God initiates favor toward us without our deserving it.

What is the evidence in the Book of Job that God always deals with people on this basis?

This comes through in God's responses to Job (chs. 38-41). In replying to Job, God essentially reminded him of how good He had been to Job. He pointed out how much wiser and stronger He was than Job. In all of this, God wanted to impress Job with His favor toward the patriarch. That Job got the point is clear from the fact that when God finished speaking Job simply rested in God (42:6). He returned to his joy in being the recipient of God's unmerited favor even though God had not answered his questions.

How does the conflict in heaven that we learn about in chapters 1 and 2 fit into this view? Satan too believed that retribution was the basis on which God deals with people (1:9-11). God proceeded to show him that he was wrong. God allowed calamities to overtake a good man. Then when Job's trouble was all over, God blessed him even though he did not trust and obey God as he should have during his trials (42:12-17).

Satan has consistently failed to appreciate God's grace. Instead of being grateful for his own blessings, he has been in rebellion to obtain more than God gave him. Moreover he has led people to do the same things (cf. Gen. 3; Matt. 4).

I would also like to comment on a fourth possible message of the book that some have suggested. Some students of Job have said that the whole purpose of the book is to show God's superiority over Satan. Not many people hold this view, but it has appealed to some. The main problem with this interpretation, from my viewpoint, is that the dialogues and monologues that constitute the bulk of the book (in chapters 3-41) contribute nothing to this theme. While they do contain references to God's greatness, they do not deal with the issue of God's superiority over Satan.

Finally let me make some observations about the great revelation of this book, namely that the basis for God's dealings with man is His grace rather than His retribution.

First, the Book of Job appears to have been one of the first books of the Bible that God gave as special revelation if not the first. If it was one of the first, its subject would have been one of the most foundational for human beings to understand as history unfolded. What more basic revelation could God have given than the message of this book? The knowledge that God initiates favor toward His creatures without their earning or deserving it is at the heart of God's plan of salvation and the doctrine of God. When you think of Job, think of grace (cf. Ps. 103:10).

Second, like Satan, we tend to disbelieve that God wants the best for us, and we doubt that He will give it to us. Consequently we try to secure what we want for ourselves. We also become ungrateful for God's grace. Ingratitude is at the root of much sin as well as much unhappiness in life. Rejoice in God's grace. Cultivate a spirit of thankfulness (1 Thess. 5:18).

Third, we tend to elevate a secondary principle of God's dealings with people (retribution) into the primary position because it enables us to feel we have some control over God. In this way we can get God to serve us rather than serving God. If I can obligate God to bless me by being good, then God owes me something. Many people, of course, believe God owes them salvation because they are good people. However, we cannot dictate to God how He should bless us. We can count on His promises to bless in certain ways when we relate to Him in certain ways. Yet if God does not bless us as we wish He would, when we do not have His promise, we can still count on the fact that He will bless us ultimately. He will do so because it is His will and He has promised to bless the righteous. His basis of dealing with us is grace.

What about the unsaved? If God wants to bless everyone, why does He send some to eternal torment? The fact that some people choose not to accept God's grace does not mean He does not reach out to them with grace. The whole Bible is a testimony to the fact that God always has and always will reach out to humankind offering unmerited favor. The basis of God's dealings with humankind is grace. His common grace extends to all (Rom. 1; Eph. 1). God does not give us what we deserve. He gives us much better than we deserve.

Constable: Job (Outline)

Outline

I. Prologue chs. 1-2

A. Job's character 1:1-5

B. Job's calamities 1:6-2:10

1. The first test 1:6-22

2. The second test 2:1-10

C. Job's comforters 2:11-13

II. The dialogue concerning the basis of the divine-human relationship 3:1-42:6

A. Job's personal lament ch. 3

1. The wish that he had not been born 3:1-10

2. The wish that he had died at birth 3:11-19

3. The wish that he could die then 3:20-26

B. The first cycle of speeches between Job and his three friends chs. 4-14

1. Eliphaz's first speech chs. 4-5

2. Job's first reply to Eliphaz chs. 6-7

3. Bildad's first speech ch. 8

4. Job's first reply to Bildad chs. 9-10

5. Zophar's first speech ch. 11

6. Job's first reply to Zophar chs. 12-14

C. The second cycle of speeches between Job and his three friends chs. 15-21

1. Eliphaz's second speech ch. 15

2. Job's second reply to Eliphaz chs. 16-17

3. Bildad's second speech ch. 18

4. Job's second reply to Bildad ch. 19

5. Zophar's second speech ch. 20

6. Job's second reply to Zophar ch. 21

D. The third cycle of speeches between Job and his three friends chs. 22-27

1. Eliphaz's third speech ch. 22

2. Job's third reply to Eliphaz chs. 23-24

3. Bildad's third speech ch. 25

4. Job's third reply to Bildad chs. 26-27

E. Job's concluding soliloquies chs. 28-31

1. Job's discourse on God's wisdom ch. 28

2. Job's defense of his innocence chs. 29-31

F. Elihu's speeches chs. 32-37

1. The introduction of Elihu 32:1-5

2. Elihu's first speech 32:6-33:33

3. Elihu's second speech ch. 34

4. Elihu's third speech ch. 35

5. Elihu's fourth speech chs. 36-37

G. The cycle of speeches between Job and God 38:1-42:6

1. God's first speech 38:1-40:2

2. Job's first reply to God 40:3-5

3. God's second speech 40:6-41:34

4. Job's second reply to God 42:1-6

III. Epilogue 42:7-17

A. Job's friends 42:7-9

B. Job's fortune 42:10-17

A structural outline of Job14
Prologue	Job's opening lament	Dialogue-dispute(3 cycles)	Interlude on Wisdom	Monologues (3 cycles)	Job's closing contribution	Epilogue
Chs. 1-2	Ch. 3	Chs. 4-14 Chs. 15-- 21 Chs. 22-- 27	Ch. 28	Chs. 29-- 31 (Job) Chs. 32-- 37 (Elihu) Chs. 38-- 41 (God)	Chs. 40:3-5; 42:1-6	Ch. 42:7-17

Constable: Job

Job

Bibliography

Andersen, Francis I. Job. Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries series. Leicester, Eng. and Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1976.

Archer, Gleason L., Jr. A Survey of Old Testament Introduction. Revised ed. Chicago: Moody Press, 1974.

Barnes, Albert. Notes Critical, Illustrative, and Practical on the Book of Job. 2 vols. Glasgow: Blackie & Son, 1847.

Barr, James. "Hebrew Orthography and the Book of Job." Journal of Semitic Studies 30:1 (Spring 1985):1-33.

Baxter, J. Sidlow. Explore the Book. 6 vols. London: Marshall, Morgan, and Scott, 1965.

Beeby, H. D. "Elihu--Job's Mediator." South East Asia Journal of Theology 7:2 (October 1965):33-54.

Blackwood, Andrew W. A Devotional Introduction to Job. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1959.

Bock, Darrell L. "Interpreting the Bible--How Texts Speak to Us." In Progressive Dispensationalism, pp. 76-105. By Craig A. Blaising and Darrell L. Bock. Wheaton: Victor Books, 1993.

Brichto, Herbert Chanan. "Kin, Cult, Land and Afterlife--A Biblical Complex." Hebrew Union College Annual 44 (1973):1-54.

Bullock, C. Hassell. An Introduction to the Poetic Books of the Old Testament. Chicago: Moody Press, 1979.

Burns, John Barclay. "The Identity of Death's First-Born (Job XVIII 13)." Vetus Testamentum 37:3 (July 1987):362-64.

Cansdale, George. Animals of Bible Lands. London: Paternoster Press, 1970.

Carson, D. A. How Long, O Lord? Reflections on Suffering and Evil. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1990.

Carter, Charles W. "The Book of Job." In The Wesleyan Bible Commentary. Edited by Charles W. Carter. 6 vols. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1968.

Constable, Thomas L. "Analysis of Bible Books--Old Testament." Paper submitted for course 685 Analysis of Bible Books--Old Testament. Dallas Theological Seminary, January 1967.

Coureyer, B. "Qui est Behemoth?" Revue Biblique 82 (1975):418-43.

Crenshaw, James L. "The Acquisition of Knowledge in Israelite Wisdom Literature." Word & World 7:3 (Summer 1987):245-52.

_____. Old Testament Wisdom. Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1981.

_____. "Popular Questioning of the Justice of God in Ancient Israel." Zeitschrift für die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 82:3 (1970):380-95.

_____. "Wisdom." In Old Testament Form Criticism, pp. 225-64. Edited by John H. Hayes. San Antonio: Trinity University Press, 1974.

Cummons, Bruce D. The Problem of Suffering. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing Co., 1957.

Darby, John Nelson. Synopsis of the Books of the Bible. 5 vols. Revised ed. New York: Loizeaux Brothers Publishers, 1942.

Delitzsch, Franz. Biblical Commentary on the Book of Job. 2 vols. Translated by Francis Bolton. Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament. Reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1961.

Dhorme, E. A Commentary on the Book of Job. Translated by Harold Knight. 1926; reprint ed., New York: Thomas Nelson, 1967.

Dick, Michael Brennan. "The Legal Metaphor in Job 31." Catholic Biblical Quarterly 41:1 (January 1979):37-50.

Diewert, David A. "Job 7:12: Yam, Tannin and the Surveillance of Job." Journal of Biblical Literature 106:2 (1987):203-215.

"Dinosaurs and the Bible." Five Minutes with the Bible and Science Supplement to Bible-Science Newsletter 6:4 (May 1976):1-7.

Driver, Samuel R. Introduction to the Literature of the Old Testament. Revised ed. New York: Scribner's, 1914.

Driver, Samuel R., and George B. Gray. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Job. International Critical Commentary series. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1921.

Ellison, H. L. A Study of Job. Paternoster Press, 1958; reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1973.

Epp, Theodore H. Why Do Christians Suffer? Lincoln, Nebr.: Back to the Bible Broadcast, 1955.

Estes, Daniel J. "The Hermeneutics of Biblical Lyric Poetry." Bibliotheca Sacra 152:608 (October-December 1995):413-30.

Forrest, Robert W. E. "The Creation Motif in the Book of Job." Ph.D. dissertation, McMaster University, 1975.

Freedman, David Noel. "The Elihu Speeches in the Book of Job." Harvard Theological Review 61:1 (January 1968):51-59.

Gaebelein, Arno C. The Annotated Bible. 4 vols. Reprint ed. Chicago: Moody Press, and New York: Loizeaux Brothers, Inc., 1970.

Gammie, John G. "Behemoth and Leviathan: On the Didactic and Theological Significance of Job 40:15-41:26." In Israelite Wisdom: Theological and Literary Essays in Honor of Samuel Terrien, pp. 217-31. Edited by John G. Gammie, Walter A. Brueggmann, W. Lee Humphreys, and James M. Ward. New York: Union Theological Seminary, 1978.

Gibson, Edgar C. S. The Book of Job. 1919; reprint ed. Minneapolis: Klock & Klock Christian Publishing Co., 1978.

Good, Edwin M. Irony in the Old Testament. Philadelphia: Westminister Press, 1965.

Gordis, Robert. The Book of God and Man. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1965.

_____. The Book of Job. New York: KTAV Publishing House, 1978.

_____. "The Lord out of the Whirlwind." Judaism 13:1 (Winter 1964):48-63.

Gowan, Donald E. "God's Answer to Job: How Is It an Answer?" Horizons in Biblical Theology 8:2 (December 1986):85-102.

Gray, George Buchanan. The Forms of Hebrew Poetry. Library of Biblical Studies series. 1915; reprint ed. New York: KTAV Publishing House, 1972.

Habel, Norman C. The Book of Job. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1975.

Harris, R. Laird. "The Book of Job and Its Doctrine of God." Grace Journal 13:3 (Fall 1972):3-33.

Hengstenberg, E. W. "Interpreting the Book of Job." In Classical Evangelical Essays in Old Testament Interpretation, pp. 91-112. Edited by Walter C. Kaiser Jr. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1972.

Heras, Henry. "The Standard of Job's Immortality." Catholic Biblical Quarterly 11 (1949):263-79.

Hermission, Hans-Jurgen. "Observations on the Creation Theology in Wisdom." In Israelite Wisdom: Theological and Literary Essays in Honor of Samuel Terrien, pp. 43-57. Edited by John G. Gammie, Walter A. Brueggemann, W. Lee Humphreys, and John M. Ward. New York: Union Theological Seminary, 1978.

Hopkins, Hugh Evan. The Mystery of Suffering. Chicago: InterVarsity Press, 1959.

Kallen, Horace M. The Book of Job as a Greek Tragedy. New York: Hill and Wang, 1959.

Kline, Meredith G. "Job." In The Wycliffe Bible Commentary, pp. 459-90. Edited by Charles F. Pfeiffer and Everett F. Harrison. Chicago: Moody Press, 1962.

Lange, John Peter, ed. Commentary on the Holy Scriptures. 12 vols. Reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1960. Vol. 4: Chronicles-Job, by Otto Zockler, Fr. W. Schultz, and Howard Crosby. Translated, enlarged, and edited by James G. Murphy, Charles A. Briggs, James Strong, and L. J. Evans.

Laurin, Robert. "The Theological Structure of Job." Zeitschrift für die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 84 (1972):86-89.

Lewis, C. S. The Problem of Pain. 1940. Reprint ed. London: Collins Press, Fontana Books, 1959.

L'Heureax, Conrad. "The Ugaritic and Biblical Rephaim." Harvard Theological Review 67 (1974):265-74.

Lillie, William. "The Religious Significance of the Theophany in the Book of Job." Expository Times 68:11 (August 1957):355-58.

Maimonides, Moses. The Guide of the Perplexed. Translated by Shlomo Pines. Chicago: University of Chicago, 1963.

MacKenzie, R. A. F. " The Purpose of the Yahweh Speeches in the Book of Job." Biblica 40:2 (1959):435-45.

MacLeod. W. B. The Afflictions of the Righteous. London: Hodder and Stoughton, n.d.

McKeating, Henry. "The Central Issue of the Book of Job." Expository Times 82:8 (May 1971):244-47.

Meek, Theophile J. "Job xix 25-27." Vetus Testamentum 6 (1956):100-103.

Millard, Alan R. "The Question of Israelite Literacy." Bible Review 3:3 (Fall 1987):22-31.

Morgan, G. Campbell. The Answers of Jesus to Job. G. Campbell Morgan Library series. Fleming H. Revell, 1935; reprint ed., Grand Rapids; Baker Book House, 1973.

_____. Living Messages of the Books of the Bible. 2 vols. New York: Fleming H. Revell Co., 1912.

Northrup, Bernard. "Light on the Ice Age." Bible-Science Newsletter 14:1 (June 1976):1-4.

Orr, James. "Immortality in the Old Testament." In Classical Evangelical Essays in Old Testament Interpretation, pp. 253-65. Compiled and edited by Walter C. Kaiser Jr. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1972.

Parsons, Gregory W. "Guidelines for Understanding and Proclaiming the Book of Job." Bibliotheca Sacra 151:604 (October-December 1994):393-413.

_____. "Literary Features of the Book of Job." Bibliotheca Sacra 138:551 (July-September 1981):213-29.

_____. "The Structure and Purpose of the Book of Job." Bibliotheca Sacra 138:550 (April-June 1981):139-57.

Patrick, Dale. "The Translation of Job XLII 6." Vetus Testamentum 26:3 (July 1976):369-71.

Perdue, Leo G. "Job's Assault on Creation." Hebrew Annual Review 10 (1986):295-315.

Pope, Marvin H. Job. Anchor Bible series. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday and Co., 1973.

Reichert, Victor E. Job. London: Soncino Press, 1946.

Rideout, Samuel. The Book of Job. 2nd ed., New York: Loizeaux Brothers, 1943.

Robinson, Theodore H. The Poetry of the Old Testament. London: Duckworth, 1947.

Rowley, H. H. The Book of Job. New Century Bible Commentary series. Thomas Nelson & Sons, 1970; revised ed., Marshall, Morgan & Scott, 1976; reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and London: Marshall, Morgan & Scott, 1983.

Rowold, Henry L. "The Theology of Creation in the Yahweh Speeches as a Solution to the Problem Posed by the Book of Job." Th.D. dissertation, Concordia Seminary in Exile, 1977.

Rude, Terry. "God's Answer to a Complaining Sufferer." Biblical Viewpoint 21:2 (November 1987):37-41.

Sarles, Ken L. "A Theological Evaluation of the Prosperity Gospel." Bibliotheca Sacra 143:572 (October-December 1986):329-52.

Sarna, Nahum M. "Epic Substratum in the Prose of Job." Journal of Biblical Literature 76 (1957):13-25.

Sauer, Alfred von Rohr. "Salvation by Grace: The Heart of Job's Theology." Concordia Theological Monthly 37 (May 1966):259-70.

Sawyer, J. F. A. "The Authorship and Structure of the Book of Job." Studia Biblica 1 (1983):253-57.

Scholnick, Sylvia Huberman. "Lawsuit Drama in the Book of Job." Ph.D. dissertation, Brandeis University, 1975.

_____. "The Meaning of Mispat in the Book of Job." Journal of Biblical Literature 101 (1982):521-29.

Seitz, Christopher R. "Job: Full-Structure, Movement, and Interpretation." Interpretation 43:1 (January 1989):5-17.

Smick, Elmer B. "Another Look at the Mythological Elements in the Book of Job." Westminster Theological Journal 40 (1978):213-28.

_____. "Architectonics, Structured Poems, and Rhetorical Devices in the Book of Job." In A Tribute to Gleason Archer. pp. 87-104. Edited by Walter C. Kaiser Jr. and Ronald F. Youngblood. Chicago: Moody Press, 1986.

_____. "Job." In 1 Kings-Job. Vol. 4 of The Expositor's Bible Commentary. 12 vols. Edited by Frank E. Gaebelein and Richard D. Polcyn. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1988.

_____. "Mythology and the Book of Job." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 13 (Spring 1970):101-8.

Staples, William Ewart. The Speeches of Elihu: A Study of Job XXXII-XXXVII. Toronto: Oxford University Press, 1924.

Tsevat, Matitiahu. "The Meaning of the Book of Job." Hebrew Union College Annual 37 (1966):73-106.

Von Rad, Gerhard. Wisdom in Israel. New York: Abingdon, 1972.

Waters, Larry J. "The Authenticity of the Elihu Speeches in Job 32-37." Bibliotheca Sacra 156:621 (January-March 1999):28-41.

_____. "Elihu's Theology and His View of Suffering." Bibliotheca Sacra 156:622 (April-June 1999):143-59.

_____. "Reflections on Suffering from the Book of Job." Bibliotheca Sacra 154:616 (October-December 1997):436-51.

Webster's New World Dictionary of the American Language. College ed. New York: World Publishing Co., 1953.

Westermann, Claus. The Structure of the Book of Job: A Form-Critical Analysis. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1981.

Wevers, John W. The Way of the Righteous. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1961.

Yancey, Philip. "When the Facts Don't Add Up." Christianity Today, June 13, 1986, pp. 19-22.

Yoder, Sanford Calvin. Poetry of the Old Testament. Scottdale, Pa: Herald Press, 1973.

Zink, James K. "Impatient Job." Journal of Biblical Literature 84:2 (June 1965):147-52.

Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible. S.v. "Uz," by G. Frederick Owen.

Zuck, Roy B. "Job." In The Bible Knowledge Commentary: Old Testament, pp. 715-77. Edited by John F. Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck. Wheaton: Scripture Press Publications, Victor Books, 1985.

_____. Job. Everyman's Bible Commentary series. Chicago: Moody Press, 1978.

_____. "A Theology of the Wisdom Books and the Song of Songs." In A Biblical Theology of the Old Testament, pp. 207-55. Edited by Roy B. Zuck. Chicago: Moody Press, 1991.

Copyright 2003 by Thomas L. Constable

Haydock: Job (Book Introduction)

THE BOOK OF JOB.

INTRODUCTION.

This Book takes its name from the holy man, of whom it treats; who, according to the more probable opinion, was of the race of Esau, and the same as Jobab, king of Edom, mentioned [in] Genesis xxxvi. 33. It is uncertain who was the writer of it. Some attribute it to Job himself; others to Moses, or some one of the prophets. In the Hebrew it is written in verse, from the beginning of the third chapter to the forty-second chapter. (Challoner) --- The beginning and conclusion are historical, and in prose. Some have divided this work into a kind of tragedy, the first act extending to chap. xv., the second to chap. xxii., the third to chap. xxxviii., where God appears, and the plot is unfolded. They suppose that the sentiments of the speakers are expressed, though not their own words. This may be very probable: but the opinion of those who look upon the work as a mere allegory, must be rejected with horror. The sacred writers speak of Job as of a personage who had really existed, (Calmet) and set the most noble pattern of virtue, and particularly of patience, Tobias ii. 12., Ezechiel xiv. 14., and James v. 11. Philo and Josephus pass over this history, as they do those of Tobias, Judith, &c. (Haydock) --- The time when Job lived is not clearly ascertained. Some have supposed (Calmet) that he was a contemporary with Esther; (Du Hamel; Thalmud) on which supposition, the work is here placed in its chronological order. But Job more probably live during the period when the Hebrews groaned under the Egyptian bondage, (Haydock) or sojourned in the wilderness, Numbers xiv. 9. The Syrians place the book at the head of the Scriptures. (Calmet) --- Its situation has often varied, and is of no great importance. The subject which is here treated, is of far more; as it is intended to shew that the wicked sometimes prosper, while the good are afflicted. (Haydock) --- This had seldom been witnessed before the days of Abraham: but as God had now selected his family to be witnesses and guardians of religion, a new order of things was beginning to appear. This greatly perplexed Job himself; who, therefore, confesses that he had not sufficiently understood the ways of God, till he had deigned to explain them in the parable of the two great beasts, chap. xlii. 3. We cannot condemn the sentiments expressed by Job, since God has declared that they were right, chap. xlii. 8) and reprimands Elihu, (chap. xxxviii. 2.) and the other three friends of Job, for maintaining a false opinion, though, from the history of past times, they had judge it to be true. This remark may excupate them from the stain of wilful lying, and vain declamation. (Houbigant) --- However, as they assert what was false, their words of themselves are of no authority; and they are even considered as the forerunners of heretics. (St. Gregory; St. Augustine, &c.) (Tirinus) --- Job refutes them by sound logic. (St. Jerome) --- We may discover in this book the sum of Christian morality, (Worthington) for which purpose it has been chiefly explained by St. Gregory. The style is very poetical, (Haydock) though at the same time simple, like that of Moses. (Du Hamel) --- It is interspersed with many Arabic and Chaldaic idioms; (St. Jerome) whence some have concluded, that it was written originally by Job and his friends (Haydock) in Arabic, and translated into Hebrew by Moses, for the consolation of his brethren. (Worthington) --- The Hebrew text is in many places incorrect; (Houbigant) and the Septuagint seem to have omitted several verses. (Origen) --- St. Jerome says almost eight hundred, (Calmet) each consisting of about six words. (Haydock) --- Shultens, in 1747, expressed his dissatisfaction with the labours of all preceding commentators. To explain this book may not therefore be an easy task: but we must be as short as possible. (Haydock) --- Those who desire farther information, may consult Pineda, (Worthington) whose voluminous work, in two folios, will nearly (Haydock) give all necessary information. (Calmet)

Gill: Job (Book Introduction)

INTRODUCTION TO JOB

This book, in the Hebrew copies, generally goes by this name, from Job, who is however the subject, if not the writer of it. In the Vulgate Latin version it is called "the Book of Job"; in the Syriac version, the Writing of Job; and in the Arabic, the Writing or Book of Job the Just. In some Hebrew Bibles it stands between the Book of Proverbs and the Song of Solomon; but, according to the Talmudists ^a, it should stand between the Psalms of David and the Proverbs of Solomon. Some have made a question of it, whether there ever was such a man as Job, and suppose this book not to be a real history, or to contain matters of fact, but to be written under fictitious names, and to be parabolical, and that it is designed to set forth an example of patience in suffering affliction; and some of the Jewish writers ^b affirm, that Job never was in being, and that this book is a parable, apologue, or fable; and to this Maimonides ^c himself inclines; but this opinion is justly rejected by Aben Ezra, Peritsol, and others; for that there was such a man is as certain as that there were such men as Noah and Daniel, with whom he is mentioned by the Prophet Ezekiel, Eze 14:14 and the testimony of the Apostle James is full to this purpose, who speaks of him as a person well known, and not to be doubted of; of whom, and of whose patience, the Jews he writes to had heard much, Jam 5:11 besides, the names of the countries where he and his friends lived, the account given of his family, and of his substance, both before and after his afflictions, show it to be a real history. Learned men are not agreed about the signification of his name; according to Jerom ^d, it signifies a magician, taking it to be the same with אוב, "ob": and some Jewish writers ^e place him with Balaam and Jethro, as the counsellors of Pharaoh against the Israelites, for which he was afflicted: the same ancient fathers render the word grieving and howling; others, as Spanheim ^f, derive it from יאב, to "love" or "desire", and so it signifies desire or delight, and is the same with Desiderius or Erasmus; hence Job is called by Suidas ^g τριποθητος, exceeding desirable; but Hillerus ^h, deriving it from the same root, makes it to signify just the reverse, "without desire"; or not desirable; and supposes it to be a compound of יאוב, "desire", and איב, "not"; but the generality of writers derive it from איב, "to be at enmity", and so it signifies one that is exposed to the hatred and enmity of men, or one that is a hater and enemy of wicked men; or, as Schmidtt ⁱ interprets it, a man zealous for God, and showing hatred to wickedness and wicked men on his account. Who Job was, it is not easy to say; not the same with Jobab, of the race of Esau, as some, Gen 36:33. Aristeas ^k says he was a son of Esau himself, by his wife Bessare, and was first called Jobam; nor the same with Job a son of Issachar, Gen 46:13, nor was he a descendant of Abraham by Keturah; but rather sprung from Uz, the firstborn of Nahor, brother of Abraham, Gen 22:21, who gave name to the country where Job lived, as Buz his brother did to that of which Elihu was, and as Chesed, another brother of Uz, did to the Chasdim or Chaldeans, who were both near to Job. It is also not agreed in what time Job lived; Maimonides ^l says, of their writers some place him in the times of the patriarchs, some in the times of Moses, others in the times of David, and others say that he was of the wise men of Babylon; and some add, that he was of them that came out of the captivity there, and had a school at Tiberias, as say the Talmudists ^m who give very different accounts of him: some say he was in the times of the judges; others in the times of the queen of Sheba; and others in the times of Ahasuerus; but the more general opinion is, and indeed the more probable, that he was born when the Israelites went down into Egypt, and that he was dead when they came from thence ⁿ: in short, they place him almost in all the ages from Abraham to the Babylonish captivity, and after it; and even Luther ^o was of opinion that he lived in the times of Solomon, for which there is no more reason than for the rest: it seems most probable that he lived before Moses ^p, at least before the giving of the law to him, since no mention is made of it in this book, nor any reference to it; whereas there is to things more ancient, as the general deluge, the burning of Sodom, &c. the law concerning sacrifices only to be offered by priests was not as yet given; for Job offered sacrifices as being the head of his family, and so did his three friends, Job 1:5. The length of his life best agrees with the times before Moses, for in his time the age of man was reduced to seventy years; whereas Job must live two hundred years or more, since he lived one hundred and forty after his restoration: add to this, that this book seems to have been written before any idolatry was in the world but the worship of the sun and moon, Job 31:25 and before there were any writings divinely inspired, since there is no appeal to any in the whole controversy between Job and his friends; but the appeal is made to men of years and wisdom, and to traditions of former times, Job 5:1. According to Dr. Owen ^q Job lived three hundred and fifty years after the dispersion at Babel, about A. M. 2100. It is also greatly controverted who was the writer of this book; some ascribe the writing of it to Isaiah the prophet; others to Solomon, as Luther ^r; others to one of the prophets who was an Idumaean; but most to Moses, so the Jews ^s say, that he wrote his own book, the section of Balaam, and Job. Some think that he wrote it when in Midian, for the comfort and encouragement of the Hebrews afflicted in Egypt at that time, and who might hope to be delivered out of their afflictions, as this good man was delivered out of his; and this, it is supposed, accounts for the use of many Arabic words in it; Midian being in Arabia, where Moses, having lived some years, had mixed their language with his own. Some are of opinion that he met with this book when in those parts, which he found either in the Arabic or Syriac language, and translated it into Hebrew ^t for the use of the Israelites; and others think it was written by Job's friends, and particularly by Elihu, which is concluded from Job 32:15, but it is most probable that it was written by Job himself, or at least compiled from his diary or "adversaria" kept by him, or from those of his friends, or from both, and that it was written in the language it is now in: but be it written by whom it may, there is no doubt to be made of the divine authority of it; as appears from the sublimity of the style, the subject matter of it, its agreement with other parts of the sacred writings, and particularly from a quotation of a passage out of Job 5:13 by the Apostle Paul, 1Co 3:19 see also Job 5:17, compared with Heb 12:5. The design of it is not only in general to assert and explain the doctrine of Providence, as Maimonides observes; but in particular to show, that, though good men are afflicted, yet sooner or later they are delivered out of their afflictions; and that it becomes them to bear them patiently, and not murmur at them; nor complain of God on account of them, whose ways and works are unsearchable, and who gives no account of his matters to men, but is sovereign, wise, and just, in all he does; and whatsoever is done by him issues in the good of his people, as well as in his own glory, as the event shows. This book may be considered either as an history of the life of Job, in which an account is given of him in his prosperity; of his afflictions, and how they came upon him; of a visit paid him by his friends, and of the discourses that pass between him and them, and of his restoration to greater affluence than he enjoyed before: or as a drama or dialogue consisting of divers parts, and in which various speakers are introduced, as God, Satan, Job, his wife, and friends; or as a dispute, in which Job's three friends are the opponents, himself the respondent, Elihu the moderator, and God the umpire, who settled and determined the point in question. It contains many useful things in it concerning the Divine Being, and the perfections of his nature, his wisdom, power, justice, goodness, and sovereignty; concerning the works of creation and providence; concerning original sin, and the corruption of mankind; concerning redemption by Christ, and good works to be done by men; and concerning the resurrection of the dead, and eternal life. Some think Job was a type of Christ in his afflictions and sufferings; in his patience under them, and deliverance out of them; in his exaltation to an high pitch of happiness and prosperity; and in his intercession for his friends. He is in many things worthy of imitation, though in others to be blamed, and not followed; and, on the whole, this book of his may be read with great pleasure and profit.

Gill: Job 40 (Chapter Introduction)

INTRODUCTION TO JOB 40

In this chapter Job is called upon to give in his answer, Job 40:1, which he does in the most humble manner, acknowledging his vileness and folly, Job 40:3; and then the Lord proceeds to give him further conviction of his superior justice and power, Job 40:6; and one thing he proposes to him, to humble the proud, if he could, and then he would own his own right hand could save him, Job 40:10; and observes to him another instance of his power in a creature called behemoth, which he had made, and gives a description of, Job 40:15.