Text -- Job 6:5-7 (NET)

Complaints Reflect Suffering

6:5 “Does the wild donkey bray when it is near grass? Or does the ox low near its fodder? 6:6 Can food that is tasteless be eaten without salt? Or is there any taste in the white of an egg? 6:7 I have refused to touch such things; they are like loathsome food to me.

Commentary -- Word/Phrase Notes (per phrase)

Wesley: Job 6:5

_Even the brute beasts, when they have convenient food, are quiet and contented. So it is no wonder that you complain not, who live in ease and prosperity, any more than I did, when I wanted nothing.

Wesley: Job 6:6

_Do men use to eat unsavoury meats with delight, or without complaint? Men commonly complain of their meat when it is but unsavoury, how much more when it is so bitter as mine is?

Wesley: Job 6:7

_The sense may be, those grievous afflictions, which I dreaded the very thought of, are now my daily, though sorrowful bread.

JFB: Job 6:5

Neither wild animals, as the wild ass, nor tame, as the ox, are dissatisfied when well-supplied with food. The braying of the one and the lowing of the other prove distress and want of palatable food. So, Job argues, if he complains, it is not without cause; namely, his pains, which are, as it were, disgusting food, which God feeds him with (end of Job 6:7). But he should have remembered a rational being should evince a better spirit than the brute.

JFB: Job 6:6

Tasteless, insipid. Salt is a chief necessary of life to an Easterner, whose food is mostly vegetable.

JFB: Job 6:6

Literally, "spittle" (1Sa 21:13), which the white of an egg resembles.

JFB: Job 6:7

To "touch" is contrasted with "meat." "My taste refused even to touch it, and yet am I fed with such meat of sickness." The second clause literally, is, "Such is like the sickness of my food." The natural taste abhors even to touch insipid food, and such forms my nourishment. For my sickness is like such nauseous food [UMBREIT]. (Psa 42:3; Psa 80:5; Psa 102:9). No wonder, then, I complain.

Clarke: Job 6:5

Doth the wild ass - פרא pere , translated onager , by the Vulgate, from the ονος αγριος of the Septuagint, which we properly enough, translate wild ass. It is the same with the tame ass; only in a wild state it grows to a larger size, is stronger, and more fleet. The meaning of Job appears to be this: You condemn me for complaining; do I complain without a cause? The wild ass will not bray, and the ox will not low, unless in want. If they have plenty of provender, they are silent. Were I at rest, at ease, and happy, I would not complain.

Clarke: Job 6:6

Can that which is unsavoury - Mr. Good renders this verse as follows: Doth insipid food without a mixture of salt, yea, doth the white of the egg give forth pungency? Which he thus illustrates: "Doth that which hath nothing of seasoning, nothing of a pungent or irritable power within it, produce pungency or irritation? I too should be quiet and complain not, if I had nothing provocative or acrimonious, but, alas! the food I am doomed to partake of is the very calamity which is most acute to my soul - that which I most loathe, and which is most grievous or trying to my palate."Some render the original, Is there any dependence on the drivel of dreams? There have been a great variety of interpretations given of this verse. I could add another; but that of Mr. Good is as likely to be correct as that of any other critic.

TSK: Job 6:5

when he hath grass : Heb. at grass, Psa 104:14

loweth : Psa 42:1; Jer 14:6; Joe 1:18-20

TSK: Job 6:6

that which : Job 6:25, Job 16:2; Lev 2:13; Luk 14:34; Col 4:6

taste : Job 6:30, Job 12:11, Job 34:3; Psa 119:103; Heb 6:4, Heb 6:5

TSK: Job 6:7

as my sorrowful meat : 1Ki 17:12, 1Ki 22:27; Psa 102:9; Eze 4:14, Eze 4:16, Eze 12:18, Eze 12:19; Dan 10:3

Commentary -- Word/Phrase Notes (per Verse)

Barnes: Job 6:5

Doth the wild ass bray when he hath grass? - On the habits of the wild ass, see the notes at Job 11:12. The meaning of Job here is, that he did not complain without reason; and this he illustrates by the fact that the wild animal that had a plentiful supply of food would be gentle and calm, and that when its bray was heard it was proof that it was suffering. So Job says that there was a reason for his complaining. He was suffering; and perhaps he means that his complaint was just as natural, and just as innocent, as the braying of the ass for its food. He should have remembered however, that he was endowed with reason, and that he was bound to evince a different spirit from the brute creation.

Or loweth the ox over his fodder? - That is, the ox is satisfied and uncomplaining when his needs are supplied. The fact that he lows is proof that he is in distress, or there is a reason for it. So Job says that his complaints were proof that he was in distress, and that there was a reason for his language of complaint.

Barnes: Job 6:6

Can that which is unsavoury - Which is insipid, or without taste.

Be eaten without salt - It is necessary to add salt in order to make it either palatable or wholesome. The literal truth of this no one can doubt, Insipid food cannot be relished, nor would it long sustain life. "The Orientals eat their bread often with mere salt, without any other addition except some dry and pounded summer-savory, which last is the common method at Aleppo."Russell’ s Natural History of Aleppo, p. 27. It should be remembered, also, that the bread of the Orientals is commonly mere unleavened cakes; see Rosenmuller, Alte u. neue Morgenland, on Gen 18:6. The idea of Job in this adage or proverb is, that there was a fitness and propriety in things. Certain things went together, and were necessary companions. One cannot be expected without the other; one is incomplete without the other. Insipid food requires salt in order to make it palatable and nutritious, and so it is proper that suffering and lamentation should be united.

There was a reason for his complaints, as there was for adding salt to unsavory food. Much perplexity, however, has been felt in regard to this whole passage; Job 6:6-7. Some have supposed that Job means to rebuke Eliphaz severely for his harangue on the necessity of patience, which he characterizes as insipid, impertinent, and disgusting to him; as being in fact as unpleasant to his soul as the white of an egg was to the taste. Dr. Good explains it as meaning, "Doth that which has nothing of seasoning, nothing of a pungent or irritating power within it, produce pungency or irritation? I too should be quiet and complain not, if I had nothing provocative or acrimonious; but alas! the food I am doomed to partake of is the very calamity which is most acute to my soul, that which I most loathe, and which is most grievous or trying to my palate."But the real sense of this first part of the verse is, I think, that which is expressed above - that insipid food requires proper condiment, and that in his sufferings there was a real ground for lamentation and complaint - as there was for making use of salt in that which is unsavory. I see no reason to think that he meant in this to reproach Eliphaz for an insipid and unmeaning address.

Or is there any taste in the white of an egg? - Critics and commentators have been greatly divided about the meaning of this. The Septuagint renders it, εἰ δέ καί ἐστί γεῦμα ἐν ῥήμασι κενοῖς ei de kai esti geuma en rēmasi kenois ; is there any taste in vain words? Jerome (Vulgate), "can anyone taste that which being tasted produces death?"The Targums render it substantially as it is in our version. The Hebrew word rendered "white"( ריר rı̂yr ) means properly spittle; 1Sa 21:13. If applied to an egg, it means the white of it, as resembling spittle. The word rendered "egg"( חלמוּת challâmûth ) occurs nowhere else in the Scriptures. If it be regarded as derived from חלם châlam , to sleep, or dream, it may denote somnolency or dreams, and then fatuity, folly, or a foolish speech, as resembling dreams; and many have supposed that Job meant to characterize the speech of Eliphaz as of this description.

The word may mean, as it does in Syriac, a species of herb, the "purslain"(Gesenius), proverbial for its insipidity among the Arabs, Greeks, and Romans, but which was used as a salad; and the whole phrase here may denote purslain-broth, and hence, an insipid discourse. This is the interpretation of Gesenius. But the more common and more probable explanation is that of our common version, denoting the white of an egg. But what is the point of the remark as Job uses it? That it is a proverbial expression, is apparent; but in what way Job meant to apply it, is not so clear. The Jews say that he meant to apply it to the speech of Eliphaz as being insipid and dull, without anything to penetrate the heart or to enliven the fancy; a speech as disagreeable to the mind as the white of an egg was insipid to the taste. Rosenmuller supposes that he refers to his afflictions as being as unpleasant to bear as the white of an egg was to the taste. It seems to me that the sense of all the proverbs used here is about the same, and that they mean, "there is a reason for everything which occurs. The ass brays and the ox lows only when destitute of food. That which is insipid is unpleasant, and the white of an egg is loathsome. So with my afflictions. They produce loathing and disgust, My very food Job 6:7 is disagreeable, and everything seems tasteless as the most insipid food would. Hence the language which I have used - language spoken not without reason, and expressive of this state of the soul."

Barnes: Job 6:7

The things that my soul refused to touch - That I refused to touch - the word "soul"here being used to denote himself. The idea here is, that those things which formerly were objects of loathing to him, had become his painful and distressing food. The idea may be either that he was reduced to the greatest pain and distress in partaking of his food, since he loathed that which he was obliged to eat (compare notes, Job 3:24), or more probably his calamity is described under the image of loathsome food in accordance with the Oriental usage, by which one is said to eat or taste anything; that is, to experience it. His sorrows were as sickening to him as the articles of food which he had mentioned were to the stomach. The Septuagint renders it strangely, "For my wrath - μοῦ ἡ ὀργή mou hē orgē - cannot cease. For I see my food offensive as the smell of a lion’ - ὥσπερ ὀσμὴν λέοντος hōsper osmēn leontos .

Poole: Job 6:5

Thou wonderest that my disposition and carriage is so greatly altered from what it was, Job 4:3-5 , but thou mayst easily learn the reason of it from the brute beasts, the ass and ox, who when they have convenient and common food, are quiet and contented; but when they want that, they will resent it, and complain in their way by braying or lowing: see Jer 14:6 . And therefore my carriage is agreeable to those common principles of nature which are both in men and beasts, by which their disposition and deportment is generally suitable to their condition. It is no wonder that you complain not, who live in ease and prosperity; nor did I, when it was so with me; but if you felt what I feel, you would be as full of complaints as I am.

Poole: Job 6:6

Can or do men use to eat unsavoury meats with delight, or without complaint? This is either,

1. A reflection upon Eliphaz’ s discourse, as unsavoury, which could not give him any conviction or satisfaction. But his censure of Eliphaz’ s speech begins not till Job 6:14 , and then it proceeds. Or rather,

2. A justification of Job’ s complaints (of which both the foregoing and following verses treat) by another argument. Men do commonly complain of their meat when it is but unsavoury, how much more when it is so bitter as mine is! which is implied here, and expressed in the next verse; where the sense here begun is completed, and this general proposition is accommodated to Job’ s condition.

In the white of an egg Heb. in the white of a yolk , i.e. which encompasseth the yolk of an egg.

Poole: Job 6:7

Heb. As the sicknesses or sorrows of my meat , i.e. as my sorrowful meat, which I am constrained to eat with grief of heart. The particle as , either,

1. Notes not the similitude, but the truth of the thing, as it is oft used, as hath been formerly noted and proved. So the sense is, that such meat as formerly he should have abhorred to touch, either for the quality of it, or for his tears or ulcerous matter which mixed themselves with it, he was now forced by the necessities of nature, and his own poverty, to eat. Or,

2. Implies that the following words are not to be understood properly, but metaphorically. And so the sense may be this, Those grievous afflictions, which according to the principles and common inclinations of human nature I dreaded the very touch and thought of, they are now my daily, though sorrowful, bread; I am forced constantly to feed upon them; as other persons in great afflictions are said to be fed with bread of tears , Psa 80:5 , and to eat ashes like bread , Psa 102:9 . Others make this a censure of Eliphaz’ s words, as ungrateful and loathsome to him. But that sense seems neither to agree with the words of this verse, nor with its scope and coherence with the former, of which See Poole "Job 6:6" .

Haydock: Job 6:6

Salt. I wonder not that you should consider my lamentations as insipid; I now find some consolation in them, ver. 7. (Calmet) ---

Or can. Hebrew, "or is there any taste in the white of an egg?" (Protestants) or in blue milk? (Mercer) or "in the spittle, which a man swallows in a dream?" See Isaias xxviii. 8. If pain did not extort these complaints, should I find any pleasure in them? (Calmet) ---

Septuagint, "is there any taste in vain words?" Can I hear your arguments without indignation? (Haydock) (Menochius) ---

Some manuscripts add, "For to a hungry soul even bitter things appear to be sweet," from Proverbs xxvii. 7. (Calmet)

Gill: Job 6:5

Doth the wild ass bray when he hath grass? or loweth the ox over his fodder? No, they neither of them do, when the one is in a good pasture, and the other has a sufficiency of provender; but when they are in want of food, the one will bray, and the other will low, which are tones peculiar to those creatures, and express their mournful complaints; wherefore Job suggests, that should he make no moan and complaint in his sorrowful circumstances, he should be more stupid and senseless than those brute creatures: and he may have some respect to the different circumstances of himself and his friends; he himself, when he was in prosperity, made no complaints, as the wild ass brays not, and the ox lows not, when they have both food enough; but now, being in distress, he could not but utter his sorrow and trouble, as those creatures when in lack of food; and this may serve as an answer to his different conduct now and formerly, objected to him, Job 4:3; and so his friends; they lived in great tranquillity and prosperity, as Aben Ezra observes, and roared and grieved not, which doubtless they would, were they in the same circumstances he was; though it became them, as things were, to have uttered words of condolence to their friend in distress, instead of sharp reproofs and hard censures.

Gill: Job 6:6

Can that which is unsavoury be eaten without salt?.... As any sort of pulse, peas, beans, lentiles, &c. which have no savoury and agreeable taste unless salted, and so many other things; and are disagreeable to men, and not relished by them, and more especially things bitter and unpleasant; and therefore Job intimates, it need not seem strange that the wormwood and water of gall, or the bread of adversity and water of affliction, he was fed with, should be so distasteful to him, and he should show such a nausea of it, and an aversion to it, and complain thereof as he did: though some apply this to the words and speeches of Eliphaz, and his friends he represented, which with Job were insipid and foolish talk, and very unsuitable and disagreeable to him, yea, loathed and abhorred by him, not being seasoned with the salt of prudence, grace, and goodness, see Col 4:6,

or is there any taste in the white of an egg? none at all. The same things are designed by this as the former. Mr. Broughton renders it, "the white of the yolk"; and Kimchi says ^d it signifies, in the language of the Rabbins, the red part of the yolk, the innermost part; but others, from the use of the word in the Arabic language, interpret it of the froth of milk ^e, which is very tasteless and insipid: but the first of the words we render "white" always signifies "spittle"; and some of the Jewish writers ^f call it the spittle of soundness, or a sound man, which has no taste, in distinction from that of a sick man, which has; and the latter word comes from one which signifies to dream; and Jarchi observes, that some so understand it here; and the whole is by some rendered, "is there any taste" or "savour in the spittle of a dream" or "drowsiness" ^g? such as flows from a person asleep, or in a dream; and so may fitly express the vain and empty words, as the Septuagint translate the phrase, of Job's friends, in his esteem, which to him were no than the words of some idle and dreaming person, or were like the dribble of a fool or madman, as David mimicked, 1Sa 21:13; and it is observed ^h, that the word "spittle" is very emphatically used, since it useless in judging of different tastes, and mixed with food, goes into nourishment, as the white of an egg.

Gill: Job 6:7

The things that my soul refused to touch are as my sorrowful meat. Meaning either the above things, that which is unsavoury, and the white of an egg, of any other food, which in the time of his prosperity he would not touch with his fingers, much less eat, but now was glad of, and were his constant food in his present sorrowful circumstances; the sense given by some Jewish writers ⁱ is, that what he disdained to touch or wipe his hands with formerly, he was glad to make use of as a tablecloth to eat his bread of sorrow upon; but it rather intends the insipid and disagreeable words of his friends, their doctrines, instructions, and exhortations they gave him, but were refused and rejected by him; and which he before compares to unsavoury food, the white of an egg, or the spittle of a dreaming man, or the dribble of a fool; and which were as much loathed and nauseated by him, as his food that was "loathed" by him ^k, either because of his want of appetite, or because of the badness of it, such as were corrupt and "rotten", and even as the "excrements" of food ^l; those he refused to receive with as much indignation as he could such sort of food offered him; and therefore we find, that notwithstanding all that had been said to him, he continued in the same sentiment and disposition of mind, to desire death rather than life, as follows.

Commentary -- Verse Notes / Footnotes

NET Notes: Job 6:5

¹ tn There have been suggestions to identify this animal as something other than a wild donkey, but the traditional interpretation has been confirmed (see P. Humbert, “En marge du dictionnaire hébraïque,” ZAW 62 [1950]: 199-207).

² tn The verb נָהַק (nahaq, “bray”) occurs in Arabic and Aramaic and only in Job 30:7 in Hebrew, where it refers to unfortunate people in the wilderness who utter cries like the hungry wild donkey.

³ sn In this brief section Job indicates that it would be wiser to seek the reason for the crying than to complain of the cry. The wild donkey will bray when it finds no food (see Jer 14:6).

⁴ tn The construction forms a double question (אִם...הֲ, ha…’im) but not to express mutually exclusive questions in this instance. Instead, it is used to repeat the same question in different words (see GKC 475 §150.h).

⁵ tc The LXX captures the meaning of the verse, but renders it in a more expansive way.

tn This word occurs here and in Isa 30:24. In contrast to the grass that grows on the fields for the wild donkey, this is fodder prepared for the domesticated animals.

NET Notes: Job 6:6

¹ tn Heb “a tasteless thing”; the word “food” is supplied from the context.

² tn Some commentators are not satisfied with the translation “white of an egg”; they prefer something connected to “slime of purslane” (H. H. Rowley, Job [NCBC], 59; cf. NRSV “juice of mallows”). This meaning is based on the Syriac and Arabic version of Sa`adia. The meaning “white of the egg” comes from the rabbinic interpretation of “slime of the yolk.” Others carry the idea further and interpret it to mean “saliva of dreams” or after the LXX “in dream words.” H. H. Rowley does not think that the exact edible object can be identified. The idea of the slimy glaring white around the yolk of an egg seems to fit best. This is another illustration of something that is tasteless or insipid.

NET Notes: Job 6:7

¹ tn The traditional rendering of נַפְשִׁי (nafshi) is “my soul.” But since נֶפֶשׁ (nefesh) means the whole person, body and soul, it is best to translate it with its suffix simply as an emphatic pronoun.

² tn For the explanation of the perfect verb with its completed action in the past and its remaining effects, see GKC 311 §106.g.

³ tn The phrase “such things” is not in the Hebrew text but has been supplied.

⁴ tn The second colon of the verse is difficult. The word דְּוֵי (dÿve) means “sickness of” and yields a meaning “like the sickness of my food.” This could take the derived sense of דָּוָה (davah) and mean “impure” or “corrupt” food. The LXX has “for I loathe my food as the smell of a lion” and so some commentators emend “they” (which has no clear antecedent) to mean “I loathe it [like the sickness of my food].” Others have more freely emended the text to “my palate loathes my food” (McNeile) or “my bowels resound with suffering” (I. Eitan, “An unknown meaning of RAHAMIÝM,” JBL 53 [1934]: 271). Pope has “they are putrid as my flesh [= my meat].” D. J. A. Clines (Job [WBC], 159) prefers the suggestion in BHS, “it [my soul] loathes them as my food.” E. Dhorme (Job, 80) repoints the second word of the colon to get כְּבֹדִי (kÿvodi, “my glory”): “my heart [glory] loathes/is sickened by my bread.”

Geneva Bible: Job 6:5

Doth the ^{( d )} wild ass bray when he hath grass? or loweth the ox over his fodder?

^{( d )} Do you think that I cry without cause, seeing the brute beasts do not complain when they have what they want.

Geneva Bible: Job 6:6

Can that which is ^{( e )} unsavoury be eaten without salt? or is there [any] taste in the white of an egg?

^{( e )} Can a man's taste delight in that, which has no savour? meaning that no one takes pleasure in affliction seeing they cannot do away with things that are unsavoury to the mouth.

Commentary -- Verse Range Notes

TSK Synopsis: Job 6:1-30

1 Job shews that his complaints are not causeless.

8 He wishes for death, wherein he is assured of comfort.

14 He reproves his friends of unkindness.

MHCC: Job 6:1-7

Job still justifies himself in his complaints. In addition to outward troubles, the inward sense of God's wrath took away all his courage and resolution. The feeling sense of the wrath of God is harder to bear than any outward afflictions. What then did the Saviour endure in the garden and on the cross, when he bare our sins, and his soul was made a sacrifice to Divine justice for us! Whatever burden of affliction, in body or estate, God is pleased to lay upon us, we may well submit to it as long as he continues to us the use of our reason, and the peace of our conscience; but if either of these is disturbed, our case is very pitiable. Job reflects upon his friends for their censures. He complains he had nothing offered for his relief, but what was in itself tasteless, loathsome, and burdensome.

Matthew Henry: Job 6:1-7

Eliphaz, in the beginning of his discourse, had been very sharp upon Job, and yet it does not appear that Job gave him any interruption, but heard him patiently till he had said all he had to say. Those that would make an impartial judgment of a discourse must hear it out, and take it entire. But, when he had concluded, he makes his reply, in which he speaks very feelingly.

I. He represents his calamity, in general, as much heavier than either he had expressed it or they had apprehended it, Job 6:2, Job 6:3. He could not fully describe it; they would not fully apprehend it, or at least would not own that they did; and therefore he would gladly appeal to a third person, who had just weights and just balances with which to weigh his grief and calamity, and would do it with an impartial hand. He wished that they would set his grief and all the expressions of it in one scale, his calamity and all the particulars of it in the other, and (though he would not altogether justify himself in his grief) they would find (as he says, Job 23:2) that his stroke was heavier than his groaning; for, whatever his grief was, his calamity was heavier than the sand of the sea: it was complicated, it was aggravated, every grievance weighty, and all together numerous as the sand. "Therefore (says he) my words are swallowed up; "that is, "Therefore you must excuse both the brokenness and the bitterness of my expressions. Do not think it strange if my speech be not so fine and polite as that of an eloquent orator, or so grave and regular as that of a morose philosopher: no, in these circumstances I can pretend neither to the one nor to the other; my words are, as I am, quite swallowed up."Now, 1. He hereby complains of it as his unhappiness that his friends undertook to administer spiritual physic to him before they thoroughly understood his case and knew the worst of it. It is seldom that those who are at ease themselves rightly weigh the afflictions of the afflicted. Every one feels most from his own burden; few feel from other people's. 2. He excuses the passionate expressions he had used when he cursed his day. Though he could not himself justify all he had said, yet he thought his friends should not thus violently condemn it, for really the case was extraordinary, and that might be connived at in such a man of sorrows as he now was which in any common grief would by no means be allowed. 3. He bespeaks the charitable and compassionate sympathy of his friends with him, and hopes, by representing the greatness of his calamity, to bring them to a better temper towards him. To those that are pained it is some ease to be pitied.

II. He complains of the trouble and terror of mind he was in as the sorest part of his calamity, Job 6:4. Herein he was a type of Christ, who, in his sufferings, complained most of the sufferings of his soul. Now is my soul troubled, Joh 12:27. My soul is exceedingly sorrowful, Mat 26:38. My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? Mat 27:46. Poor Job sadly complains here, 1. Of what he felt The arrows of the Almighty are within me. It was not so much the troubles themselves he was under that put him into this confusion, his poverty, disgrace, and bodily pain; but that which cut him to the heart and put him into this agitation, was to think that the God he loved and served had brought all this upon him and laid him under these marks of his displeasure. Note, Trouble of mind is the sorest trouble. A wounded spirit who can bear! Whatever burden of affliction, in body or estate, God is pleased to lay upon us, we may well afford to submit to it as long as he continues to the use of our reason and the peace of our consciences; but, if in either of these we be disturbed, our case is sad indeed and very pitiable. The way to prevent God's fiery darts of trouble is with the shield of faith to quench Satan's fiery darts of temptation. Observe, He calls them the arrows of the Almighty; for it is an instance of the power of God above that of any man that he can with his arrows reach the soul. He that made the soul can make his sword to approach to it. The poison or heat of these arrows is said to drink up his spirit, because it disturbed his reason, shook his resolution, exhausted his vigour, and threatened his life; and therefore his passionate expressions, though they could not be justified, might be excused. 2. Of what he feared. He saw himself charged by the terrors of God, as by an army set in battle-array, and surrounded by them. God, by his terrors, fought against him. As he had no comfort when he retired inward into his own bosom, so he had none when he looked upward towards Heaven. He that used to be encouraged with the consolations of God not only wanted those, but was amazed with the terrors of God.

III. He reflects upon his friends for their severe censures of his complaints and their unskilful management of his case. 1. Their reproofs were causeless. He complained, it is true, now that he was in this affliction, but he never used to complain, as those do who are of a fretful unquiet spirit, when he was in prosperity: he did not bray when he had grass, nor low over his fodder, Job 6:5. But, now that he was utterly deprived of all his comforts, he must be a stock or a stone, and not have the sense of an ox or a wild ass, if he did not give some vent to his grief. He was forced to eat unsavoury meats, and was so poor that he had not a grain of salt wherewith to season them, nor to give a little taste to the white of an egg, which was now the choicest dish he had at his table, Job 6:6. Even that food which once he would have scorned to touch he was now glad of, and it was his sorrowful meat, Job 6:7. Note, It is wisdom not to use ourselves or our children to be nice and dainty about meat and drink, because we know not how we or they may be reduced, nor how that which we now disdain may be made acceptable by necessity. 2. Their comforts were sapless and insipid; so some understand Job 6:6, Job 6:7. He complains he had nothing now offered to him for his relief that was proper for him, no cordial, nothing to revive and cheer his spirits; what they had afforded was in itself as tasteless as the white of an egg, and, when applied to him, as loathsome and burdensome as the most sorrowful meat. I am sorry he should say thus of what Eliphaz had excellently well said, Job 5:8, etc. But peevish spirits are too apt thus to abuse their comforters.

Keil-Delitzsch: Job 6:5-7

5 Doth the wild ass bray at fresh grass?

Or loweth an ox over good fodder?

6 Is that which is tasteless eaten unsalted?

Or is there flavour in the white of an egg?

7 That which my soul refused to touch,

The same is as my loathsome food.

The meaning of the first two figures is: He would not complain, if there were really no cause for it; of the two others: It is not to be expected that he should smile at his suffering, and enjoy it as delicate food. על־בּלילו I have translated "over good fodder,"for בּליל is mixed fodder of different kinds of grain, farrago . "Without salt"is virtually adjective to תּפל , insipid, tasteless. What is without salt one does not relish, and there is no flavour in the slime of the yolk of an egg, i.e., the white of an egg (Targ.),

(Note: Saadia compares b. Aboda zara , 40, a, where it is given as a mark of the purity of the eggs in the roe of fish: מבפנים וחלמון מב מבחוץ חלבון , when the white is outside and the yellow within.)

or in the slime of purslain (according to Chalmetho in the Peschito, Arab. ḥamqâ ), fatua = purslain), which is less probable on account of ריר (slime, not: broth): there is no flavour so that it can be enjoyed. Thus is it with his sufferings. Those things which he before inwardly detested (dirt and dust of leprosy) are now sicut fastidiosa cibi mei , i.e., as loathsome food which he must eat. The first clause, Job 6:7 , must be taken as an elliptic relative clause forming the subject: vid., Ges. §123, 3, c . Such disagreeable counsel is now like his unclean, disgusting diet. Eliphaz desires him to take them as agreeable. דּוי in כּדרי is taken by Ges. Ew., Hahn, Schlottm., Olsh. (§165, b ), as constr. from דּוי , sickness, filth; but דּוי , as plur . from דּוה , sick, unclean (especially of female menstruation, Isa 30:22), as Heiligst. among modern commentators explains it, is far more suitable. Hitz. (as anonym. reviewer of Ewald's Job in the liter. Centralblatt ) translates: they (my sufferings) are the morsels of my food; but the explanation of המּה is not correct, nor is it necessary to go to the Arabic for an explanation of כּדרי . It is also unnecessary, with Böttcher, to read כּדוי (such is my food in accordance with my disease ); Job does not here speak of his diet as an invalid.

Constable: Job 4:1--14:22

B. The First Cycle of Speeches between Job and His Three Friends chs. 4-14

The two soliloquies of Job (chs. 3 and 29-31) enclose three cycles of dialogue between Job and his three friends. Each cycle consists of speeches by Eliphaz, Bildad, and Zophar in that order interspersed with Job's reply to each address. This pattern continues through the first two cycles of speeches (chs. 4-14 and 15-21) but breaks down in the third when Zophar failed to continue the dialogue.

"There are two basic lines of interaction which run through Job--Job's crying out to God and Job's disputations with his three friends. The absence of the third speech of Zophar is consistent with the fact that each of the speeches of the three friends is progressively shorter in each cycle and that Job's responses to each of the friends (which also are progressively shorter) are longer than the corresponding speech of the friends. This seems to signify Job's verbal victory over Zophar and the other two friends. It is also indicative of the bankruptcy and futility of dialogue when both Job and the three friends assume the retribution dogma (which for the friends implies Job's guilt and for Job implies God's injustice). Consequently, this structural design marks a very gradual swing toward a focus on Job's relationship and interaction with God in contrast to the earlier primary interaction between Job and his friends."³⁴

Throughout the three cycles of speeches Job's friends did not change their position. They believed that God rewards the righteous and punishes sinners, the theory of retribution.³⁵ They reasoned that all suffering is punishment for sin, and since Job was suffering, he was a sinner. They believed that what people experience depends on what they have done (cf. John 9:2). While this is true often, it is not the fundamental reason we experience what we do in life, as the Book of Job proceeds to reveal.

As the speeches unfolded, Job's friends became increasingly vitriolic and specific about Job's guilt. This was true of Eliphaz (cf. 5:8; ch. 15; 22:5-9), Bildad (cf. 8:6; ch. 18; 25:5-6), and Zophar (cf. 11:14; ch. 20).

In each of his speeches Job affirmed his innocence of great sin (6:10; 9:21; 16:17; 27:6). In his first five responses he charged God with afflicting him (6:4; 9:17; 13:27; 16:12; 19:11). In each of his first three replies in the first cycle he asked, "Why?" (7:20; 10:2; 13:24). In all six of his speeches he longed to present his case to God (9:3; 13:3; 16:21; 19:23; 23:4; 31:35).

Job's friends each emphasized a different aspect of God's character. Eliphaz pointed out the distance between God and man (4:17-19; 15:14-16) and stressed God's punishment of the wicked (5:12-14). Bildad said God is just (8:3), great (25:2-3), and that He punishes only the wicked (18:5-21). God's inscrutability impressed Zophar (11:7) who also stated that God punishes the wicked quickly (20:23).

Eliphaz spoke to Job with the most respect and restraint, Bildad was more direct and less courteous, and Zophar was the most blunt and harsh. Eliphaz based his arguments on experience (4:8; 5:3; 15:17), Bildad on tradition (8:8-10), and Zophar on mere assumption (20:1-5). Eliphaz viewed life as a mystic, Bildad as an attorney, and Zophar as a dogmatist. Bildad and Zophar picked up themes from Eliphaz's speeches and echoed them with slightly variant emphases (cf. 5:9 and 22:12 with 8:3, 5; 22:2a with 11:7, 11; 15:32-34 with 18:16 and 20:21-22; and 5:14 with 18:5, 6, 18 and 20:26).

Constable: Job 6:1--7:21

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

Job began not with a direct reply to Eliphaz but with another complaint about his condition. Then he responded to Eliphaz's speech but addressed all three of his friends. The "you" and "yours" in 6:24-30 are plural in the Hebrew text.

Constable: Job 6:1-7

Job's reason for complaining 6:1-7

Job said he complained because of his great irritation. His calamities were as heavy as wet sand (vv. 2-3). The Hebrew word translated "iniquity" in verse 2 occurs only here in the Old Testament. We should probably translate it "calamity" or "misfortune." Job implied that his words of complaint were nothing in comparison to his suffering. His situation was harder for him to bear because he believed his misfortune came from God.

"The God he had known and the God he now experiences seemed irreconcilable."⁴⁰

Job refused to accept his trials without something to make them bearable, namely, complaining. Similarly a person refuses tasteless food without salt (vv. 6-7).

Guzik: Job 6:1-30

Job 6 - Job Replies to Eliphaz: "What Does Your Arguing Prove?"

A. Job laments his affliction.

1. (1-7) Job explains his rash words.

Then Job answered and said:

"Oh, that my grief were fully weighed,

And my calamity laid with it on the scales!

For then it would be heavier than the sand of the sea;

Therefore my words have been rash.

For the arrows of the Almighty are within me;

My spirit drinks in their poison;

The terrors of God are arrayed against me.

Does the wild donkey bray when it has grass,

Or does the ox low over its fodder?

Can flavorless food be eaten without salt?

Or is there any taste in the white of an egg?

My soul refuses to touch them;

They are as loathsome food to me."

a. Then Job answered and said: Job's friends were kind enough to sit with him in sympathetic silence for some seven days (Job 2:13). Job broke his the silence with an anguished rant (Job 3), and Eliphaz responded with a poetic call to repentance (Job 4-5). Now Job will answer the words of Eliphaz the Temanite.

b. Oh, that my grief were fully weighed: Job's first response to the words of Eliphaz were to complain about the greatness of his suffering, because Eliphaz only made his suffering worse, with his well-intentioned but wrong analysis of Job's problem.

i. This was not only Job's feeling; it was also the judgment of God as revealed at the end of the Book of Job, where He said of Eliphaz and Job's other counselors: You have not spoken of Me what is right, as My servant Job has (Job 42:7).

c. Therefore my words have been rash: Job's outburst in Job 3 did not curse God, but it did come close. Job here admitted that his words were indeed rash, but explained that it was because of the excessive heaviness of his grief.

i. "Job declared, in effect, that he did not understand the cry because he did not know the pain." (Morgan)

d. The arrows of the Almighty are within me: Job explained why his suffering was so deep and his words were so rash. It was because he felt that God Himself had attacked and cursed him. He felt that God had shot arrows at him; had sent poison against him; and had arrayed His terrors against Job.

i. Job both opened (Job 6:4) and closed (Job 7:20) this speech with the picture of God shooting arrows in him. "There is an evident reference here to wounds inflicted by poisoned arrows, and to the burning fever occasioned by such wounds, producing such an intense parching thirst as to dry up all the moisture in the system, stop all the salivary ducts, thicken and inflame the blood, induce putrescency, and terminate in raging mania, producing the most terrifying images, from which the patient is relieved only by death." (Clarke)

ii. "Arrows; so fitly calls his afflictions, because, like arrows, they came upon him swiftly and suddenly, one after another, and that from on high, and they wounded him deeply and deadlily." (Poole)

e. Can flavorless food be eaten without salt? Or is there any taste in the white of an egg? Job described how the words of Eliphaz "tasted" to him. They were weak and flavorless, and certainly did not give Job any health or strength.

i. "The speech, also, to which Job had listened from Eliphaz the Temanite did not put much sweetness into his mouth; for it was devoid of sympathy and consolation. If you read it at home you will see that it was worthy to be the first of a singular selection of galling utterances. . . . He had spoken as harshly and severely as if he were a judge addressing a criminal who was suffering no more than he deserved." (Spurgeon)

f. Does the wild donkey bray when it has grass? Job insisted that he had reason for his grief. The donkey doesn't bray and the ox doesn't low when they have enough food; in the same analogy, Job's isn't complaining without reason.

i. "The wail is always evident of a want. The wild ass does not bray when he has grass, nor the ox over his fodder." (Morgan)

2. (8-10) Job longs for God to grant the escape of death.

"Oh, that I might have my request,

That God would grant me the thing that I long for!

That it would please God to crush me,

That He would loose His hand and cut me off!

Then I would still have comfort;

Though in anguish, I would exult,

He will not spare;

For I have not concealed the words of the Holy One."

a. That it would please God to crush me: Job returns to the theme of his complaint from Job 3, where he mourned the day of his birth and believed he would be better off day. Though Job never seems to have contemplated suicide, he wished God Himself would end his life.

i. "When the answer does not come, when instead of the release of cutting off, we have the continuity of pain, and a great silence, then let us remember this story: and remain confident that there is some explanation, and that when it comes, we shall thank God that He did not give us our request." (Morgan)

b. That He would loose His hand and cut me off: The idea may again have God as an archer shooting arrows at Job. He pleads that God might simply launch more arrows and end his life (cut me off).

c. I have not concealed the words of the Holy One: Here Job again insists on his basic innocence before God. The calamity in his life was not due to some sin such as concealing the words of the Holy One (perhaps better translated as that I had not denied the words of the Holy One, as in the NIV).

i. "With the sense that I have not denied or disobeyed the words of the Holy One. I should die calmly, for I should die innocent." (Bradley)

ii. "He would have one consolation left before he died - that he had not denied the words of the Holy One, though he emphatically rejected the words of Eliphaz." (Smick)

iii. If Job sensed a responsibility to not deny or conceal the words of the Holy One, we have an even greater responsibility. "Did you listen to that splendid sermon? What rhetoric! What oratory! But those poor people in the aisles did not understand a word, or if they did they only comprehended disconnected sentences, and lost the soul of the discourse. Is this right? Is this according to the Scriptural idea of preaching? . . . If the next generation should become more wicked than the present, and still more ignorant of the gospel, the fact will be chargeable upon those who conceal the words of God today." (Spurgeon)

3. (11-13) Job laments his weakness.

"What strength do I have, that I should hope?

And what is my end, that I should prolong my life?

Is my strength the strength of stones?

Or is my flesh bronze?

Is my help not within me?

And is success driven from me?"

a. What strength do I have, that I should hope? Job reflected the sense of hopelessness of the severe and chronic sufferer. Sensing no inner strength to meet the present and future challenges, he felt no hope at all.

i. We can sense the depth of Job's anguish: Is my strength the strength of stones? Is my flesh bronze?

b. Is my help not within me? We should not think that Job is like a motivational self-help speaker encouraging himself to looking within for a hidden resource of help. Instead these words from the pain-wracked man sitting on a burned-out place in a garbage dump indicate Job's absolute sense of helplessness. If Job's only help is within him, then he has no help. Indeed, all success is driven from him.

i. The NIV translation of Job 6:13 is helpful: Do I have any power to help myself, now that success has been driven from me?

ii. "The words of Job can bring immense comfort for the simple reason that many sufferers have felt rage but have been too ashamed to express it." (Smick)

B. Job challenges Eliphaz.

1. (14-23) Job criticizes Eliphaz and defends himself.

"To him who is afflicted, kindness should be shown by his friend,

Even though he forsakes the fear of the Almighty.

My brothers have dealt deceitfully like a brook,

Like the streams of the brooks that pass away,

Which are dark because of the ice,

And into which the snow vanishes.

When it is warm, they cease to flow;

When it is hot, they vanish from their place.

The paths of their way turn aside,

They go nowhere and perish.

The caravans of Tema look,

The travelers of Sheba hope for them.

They are disappointed because they were confident;

They come there and are confused.

For now you are nothing,

You see terror and are afraid.

Did I ever say, 'Bring something to me'?

Or, 'Offer a bribe for me from your wealth'?

Or, 'Deliver me from the enemy's hand'?

Or, 'Redeem me from the hand of oppressors'?"

a. Kindness should be shown by his friend: Job here made his most basic accusation against Eliphaz. "You should show me kindness, even if were true that I had forsaken the fear of the Almighty."

b. My brothers have dealt deceitfully like a brook: Even though only Eliphaz had previously spoken, Job addressed his brothers collectively. Either this was out of politeness (not wanting to single out Eliphaz), or because Job believed that the attitude and silence of his other companions meant they agreed with Eliphaz. Job accused them of being as unreliable as a snow-fed stream that vanishes when it is hot.

i. "Incidentally this touch supports our suspicion that Job's homeland was to the east of the Lebanon complex, rather than near Edom, where snow waters would not be seen." (Anderson)

ii. "How great a contrast to the love and friendship of Jesus! Not like a brook that dries in the time of drought, but like a well of water springing up within the heart for ever." (Meyer)

iii. For now you are nothing, you see terror and are afraid: "Verse 21 is the climax of Job's reaction to his friends' counsel. They offered no help. The verse is like a sermon about the special strength needed to be willing to make oneself available when we see others in a truly dreadful condition. The risk involved makes us afraid." (Smick)

c. Did I ever say: Job wasn't asking his friends to pay him money or to ransom him from kidnappers. All he wanted was some words of comfort, and he heard none.

2. (24-30) Job challenges his friends to point out his error and lack of discernment.

"Teach me, and I will hold my tongue;

Cause me to understand wherein I have erred.

How forceful are right words!

But what does your arguing prove?

Do you intend to rebuke my words,

And the speeches of a desperate one, which are as wind?

Yes, you overwhelm the fatherless,

And you undermine your friend.

Now therefore, be pleased to look at me;

For I would never lie to your face.

Yield now, let there be no injustice!

Yes, concede, my righteousness still stands!

Is there injustice on my tongue?

Cannot my taste discern the unsavory?"

a. Do you intend to rebuke my words, and the speeches of a desperate one: Job believed that Eliphaz was unduly harsh in his reply and failed to see that his Job's rant recorded in chapter 3 was made up only of words from a desperate one.

i. Eliphaz, in his insensitivity, acted as if Job's words were as wind. "Do you take me for a desperate and distracted man, who knows not or cares not what he saith, but only speaks what comes first into his mind and mouth? The wind is oft used to express vain words, as Job 15:2; Jeremiah 5:13; and vain things, Job 7:7; Proverbs 11:29." (Poole)

ii. Instead of comforting Job, Eliphaz was as bad as someone who would overwhelm the fatherless and undermine his friend. "Now he seems to retaliate with charges of his own: You would even gamble over an orphan and bargain over your friend. This is pretty rough stuff. There is no more indication that the friends gambled for orphans than there is that Job asked for bribes. Perhaps this is what Job is getting at. But their relationship has certainly deteriorated if they are already swopping insults like this." (Anderson)

b. Yes, concede, my righteousness still stands! Job very much wanted Eliphaz and his other friends to see that his present calamity was not judgment for some grievous (though hidden) sin.

i. The words "teach me," "cause me," "what does your arguing prove," and "concede" are all demands for evidence and proof. "He turns to Eliphaz and says, 'You say that I'm suffering because of sin, but you've never pointed anything out specifically. Teach me and tell me what my sin is. But until you do, there's no proof of your argument." (Lawson)

ii. Because we know the story-behind-the-story from Job 1 and 2, we understand this to be true. Yet Job's friends have a very hard time believing this, and will continue the contention with Job over this point.

c. Is there injustice on my tongue? Cannot my taste discern the unsavory? Previously in this chapter Job has represented the words of Eliphaz as bits of food; bits that were very unsatisfying to Job in his present suffering.

· According to the analogy of animals, if the words of Eliphaz had comforted and satisfied Job, he would not have cried out as he did in Job 3 (Job 6:5)

· The words of Eliphaz were like flavorless food (Job 6:6)

· The words of Eliphaz were like rotten, loathsome food (Job 6:7)

· Job can discern the unsavory character of the words of Eliphaz (6:30)

© 2006 David Guzik - No distribution beyond personal use without permission

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 6 (Chapter Introduction)

Overview

Job 6:1, Job shews that his complaints are not causeless; Job 6:8, He wishes for death, wherein he is assured of comfort; Job 6:14, He reproves his friends of unkindness.

Poole: Job 6 (Chapter Introduction)

CHAPTER 6

Job’ s answer: he wisheth his troubles were duly weighed, for then would his complaints appear just, Job 6:1-7 : prayeth for death; his hope in it, Job 6:8-10 . He is unable to bear up under his burden, Job 6:11,12 . He vindicateth himself against his friends, and reproveth them, Job 6:13-30 .

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 6 (Chapter Introduction)

(Job 6:1-7) Job justifies his complaints.

(Job 6:8-13) He wishes for death.

(v. 14-30) Job reproves his friends as unkind.

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 6 (Chapter Introduction)

Eliphaz concluded his discourse with an air of assurance; very confident he was that what he had said was so plain and so pertinent that nothing could be objected in answer to it. But, though he that is first in his own cause seems just, yet his neighbour comes and searches him. Job is not convinced by all he had said, but still justifies himself in his complaints and condemns him for the weakness of his arguing. I. He shows that he had just cause to complain as he did of his troubles, and so it would appear to any impartial judge (Job 6:2-7). II. He continues his passionate wish that he might speedily be cut off by the stroke of death, and so be eased of all his miseries (Job 6:8-13). III. He reproves his friends for their uncharitable censures of him and their unkind treatment (v. 14-30). It must be owned that Job, in all this, spoke much that was reasonable, but with a mixture of passion and human infirmity. And in this contest, as indeed in most contests, there was fault on both sides.

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 6 (Chapter Introduction)

INTRODUCTION TO JOB 6

This and the following chapter contain Job's answer to the speech of Eliphaz in the two foregoing; he first excuses his impatience by the greatness of his afflictions, which, if weighed by good and impartial hands, would be found to be heavier than the sand of the sea, and which words were wanting to express, Job 6:1; and the reason why they were so heavy is given, they being the arrows and terrors of the Almighty, Job 6:4; and by various similes he shows that his moans and complaints under them need not seem strange and unreasonable, Job 6:5; and what had been said not being convincing to him, he continues in the same sentiment and disposition of mind, and wishes to be removed by death out of his miserable condition, and gives his reasons for it, Job 6:8; and though his case was such as required pity from his friends, yet this he had not from them, but represents them as deceitful, and as having sadly disappointed him, and therefore he neither hoped nor asked for anything of them, Job 6:14; and observes that their words and arguments were of no force and weight with him, but harmful and pernicious, Job 6:24; and in his turn gives them some exhortations and instructions, and signifies that he was as capable of discerning between right and wrong as they, with which this chapter is concluded, Job 6:28.