13:3 But I wish to speak 1 to the Almighty, 2
and I desire to argue 3 my case 4 with God.
13:4 But you, however, are inventors of lies; 5
all of you are worthless physicians! 6
18:2 “How long until you 7 make an end of words? 8
You must consider, 9 and then 10 we can talk.
33:1 “But now, O Job, listen to my words,
and hear 11 everything I have to say! 12
33:31 Pay attention, Job – listen to me;
be silent, and I will speak.
33:32 If you have any words, 13 reply to me;
speak, for I want to justify you. 14
33:33 If not, you listen to me;
be silent, and I will teach you wisdom.”
34:2 “Listen to my words, you wise men;
hear 15 me, you learned men. 16
55:2 Why pay money for something that will not nourish you? 22
Why spend 23 your hard-earned money 24 on something that will not satisfy?
Listen carefully 25 to me and eat what is nourishing! 26
Enjoy fine food! 27
2:1 Therefore we must pay closer attention to what we have heard, so that we do not drift away.
1 tn The verb is simply the Piel imperfect אֲדַבֵּר (’adabber, “I speak”). It should be classified as a desiderative imperfect, saying, “I desire to speak.” This is reinforced with the verb “to wish, desire” in the second half of the verse.
2 tn The Hebrew title for God here is אֶל־שַׁדַּי (’el shadday, “El Shaddai”).
3 tn The infinitive absolute functions here as the direct object of the verb “desire” (see GKC 340 §113.b).
4 tn The infinitive הוֹכֵחַ (hokheakh) is from the verb יָכַח (yakhakh), which means “to argue, plead, debate.” It has the legal sense here of arguing a case (cf. 5:17).
5 tn The טֹפְלֵי־שָׁקֶר (tofÿle shaqer) are “plasterers of lies” (Ps 119:69). The verb means “to coat, smear, plaster.” The idea is that of imputing something that is not true. Job is saying that his friends are inventors of lies. The LXX was influenced by the next line and came up with “false physicians.”
6 tn The literal rendering of the construct would be “healers of worthlessness.” Ewald and Dillmann translated it “patchers” based on a meaning in Arabic and Ethiopic; this would give the idea “botchers.” But it makes equally good sense to take “healers” as the meaning, for Job’s friends came to minister comfort and restoration to him – but they failed. See P. Humbert, “Maladie et medicine dans l’AT,” RHPR 44 (1964): 1-29.
7 tn The verb is plural, and so most commentators make it singular. But it seems from the context that Bildad is addressing all of them, and not just Job.
8 tn The construction is קִנְצֵי לְמִלִּין (qintse lÿmillin), which is often taken to be “end of words,” as if the word was from קֵץ (qets, “end”). But a plural of “end” is not found in the OT. Some will link the word to Arabic qanasa, “to hunt; to give chase,” to get an interpretation of “snares for words.” But E. Dhorme (Job, 257) objects that this does not fit the speech of Bildad (as well as it might Job’s). He finds a cognate qinsu, “fetters, shackles,” and reads “how long will you put shackles on words.” But G. R. Driver had pointed out that this cognate does not exist (“Problems in the Hebrew text of Job,” VTSup 3 [1955]: 72-93). So it would be preferable to take the reading “ends” and explain the ן (nun) as from a Aramaizing by-form. This is supported by 11QtgJob that uses סוֹף (sof, “end”). On the construction, GKC 421 §130.a explains this as a use of the construct in rapid narrative to connect the words; in such cases a preposition is on the following noun.
9 tn The imperfect verb, again plural, would be here taken in the nuance of instruction, or a modal nuance of obligation. So Bildad is telling his listeners to be intelligent. This would be rather cutting in the discourse.
10 tn Heb “afterward.”
11 tn Heb “give ear,” the Hiphil denominative verb from “ear.”
12 tn Heb “hear all my words.”
13 tn Heb “if there are words.”
14 tn The infinitive construct serves as the complement or object of “I desire.” It could be rendered “to justify you” or “your justification, “namely, “that you be justified.”
15 tn Heb “give ear to me.”
16 tn The Hebrew word means “the men who know,” and without a complement it means “to possess knowledge.”
17 tn Grk “as.”
18 tn Grk “the towns [or cities] surrounding them.”
19 tn Grk “strange flesh.” This phrase has been variously interpreted. It could refer to flesh of another species (such as angels lusting after human flesh). This would aptly describe the sin of the angels, but not easily explain the sin of Sodom and Gomorrah. It could refer to the homosexual practices of the Sodomites, but a difficulty arises from the use of ἕτερος ({etero"; “strange,” “other”). When this is to be distinguished from ἄλλος (allos, “another”) it suggests “another of a different kind.” If so, would that properly describe homosexual behavior? In response, the language could easily be compact: “pursued flesh other than what was normally pursued.” However, would this find an analogy in the lust of angels (such would imply that angels normally had sexual relations of some sort, but cf. Matt 22:30)? Another alternative is that the focus of the parallel is on the activity of the surrounding cities and the activity of the angels. This is especially plausible since the participles ἐκπορνεύσασαι (ekporneusasai, “having indulged in sexual immorality”) and ἀπελθοῦσαι (apelqousai, “having pursued”) have concord with “cities” (πόλεις, poleis), a feminine plural noun, rather than with Sodom and Gomorrah (both masculine nouns). If so, then their sin would not necessarily have to be homosexuality. However, most likely the feminine participles are used because of constructio ad sensum (construction according to sense). That is, since both Sodom and Gomorrah are cities, the feminine is used to imply that all the cities are involved. The connection with angels thus seems to be somewhat loose: Both angels and Sodom and Gomorrah indulged in heinous sexual immorality. Thus, whether the false teachers indulge in homosexual activity is not the point; mere sexual immorality is enough to condemn them.
20 tn Or “in the same way as.”
21 tn “Angels” is not in the Greek text; but the masculine demonstrative pronoun most likely refers back to the angels of v. 6.
22 tn Heb “for what is not food.”
23 tn The interrogative particle and the verb “spend” are understood here by ellipsis (note the preceding line).
24 tn Heb “your labor,” which stands by metonymy for that which one earns.
25 tn The infinitive absolute follows the imperative and lends emphasis to the exhortation.
26 tn Heb “good” (so NASB, NIV, NRSV).
27 tn Heb “Let your appetite delight in fine food.”