Job 16:3

16:3 Will ¹  there be an end to your ²  windy words? ³ 

Or what provokes ⁴  you that you answer? ⁵ 

Job 18:2

18:2 “How long until you ⁶  make an end of words? ⁷ 

You must consider, ⁸  and then ⁹  we can talk.

Psalms 140:11

140:11 A slanderer ¹⁰  will not endure on ¹¹  the earth;

calamity will hunt down a violent man and strike him down. ¹² 

Proverbs 10:19

10:19 When words abound, transgression is inevitable, ¹³ 

but the one who restrains ¹⁴  his words ¹⁵  is wise.

Acts 17:18

17:18 Also some of the Epicurean ¹⁶  and Stoic ¹⁷  philosophers were conversing ¹⁸  with him, and some were asking, ¹⁹  “What does this foolish babbler ²⁰  want to say?” Others said, “He seems to be a proclaimer of foreign gods.” ²¹  (They said this because he was proclaiming the good news about Jesus and the resurrection.) ²² 

James 1:19

Living Out the Message

1:19 Understand this, my dear brothers and sisters! ²³  Let every person be quick to listen, slow to speak, slow to anger.

[16:3]  ¹ tn Disjunctive questions are introduced with the sign of the interrogative; the second part is introduced with אוֹ (’o, see GKC 475 §150.g).

[16:3]  ² tn In v. 3 the second person singular is employed rather than the plural as in vv. 2 and 4. The singular might be an indication that the words of v. 3 were directed at Eliphaz specifically.

[16:3]  ³ tn Heb “words of wind.”

[16:3]  ⁴ tn The Hiphil of מָרַץ (marats) does not occur anywhere else. The word means “to compel; to force” (see 6:25).

[16:3]  ⁵ tn The LXX seems to have gone a different way: “What, is there any reason in vain words, or what will hinder you from answering?”

[18:2]  ⁶ 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.

[18:2]  ⁷ 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.

[18:2]  ⁸ 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.

[18:2]  ⁹ tn Heb “afterward.”

[140:11]  ¹⁰ tn Heb “a man of a tongue.”

[140:11]  ¹¹ tn Heb “be established in.”

[140:11]  ¹² tn Heb “for blows.” The Hebrew noun מַדְחֵפֹה (madkhefoh, “blow”) occurs only here in the OT.

[10:19]  ¹³ tn Heb “does not cease.” It is impossible to avoid sinning in an abundance of words – sooner or later one is bound to say something wrong.

[10:19]  ¹⁴ tn Or “holds his lips under control.” The verb חָשַׂךְ (khasakh) means “to withhold; to restrain; to hold in check” (BDB 362 s.v.). The related Arabic term is used in reference to placing a piece of wood in the mouth of a goat to prevent it from sucking (HALOT 359 s.v. חשׂךְ).

[10:19]  ¹⁵ tn Heb “his lips” (so KJV, NAB, NASB); NIV “his tongue.” The term “lips” is a metonymy of cause for speech.

[17:18]  ¹⁶ sn An Epicurean was a follower of the philosophy of Epicurus, who founded a school in Athens about 300 b.c. Although the Epicureans saw the aim of life as pleasure, they were not strictly hedonists, because they defined pleasure as the absence of pain. Along with this, they desired the avoidance of trouble and freedom from annoyances. They saw organized religion as evil, especially the belief that the gods punished evildoers in an afterlife. In keeping with this, they were unable to accept Paul’s teaching about the resurrection.

[17:18]  ¹⁷ sn A Stoic was a follower of the philosophy founded by Zeno (342-270 b.c.), a Phoenician who came to Athens and modified the philosophical system of the Cynics he found there. The Stoics rejected the Epicurean ideal of pleasure, stressing virtue instead. The Stoics emphasized responsibility for voluntary actions and believed risks were worth taking, but thought the actual attainment of virtue was difficult. They also believed in providence.

[17:18]  ¹⁸ tn BDAG 956 s.v. συμβάλλω 1 has “converse, confer” here.

[17:18]  ¹⁹ tn Grk “saying.”

[17:18]  ²⁰ tn Or “ignorant show-off.” The traditional English translation of σπερμολόγος (spermologo") is given in L&N 33.381 as “foolish babbler.” However, an alternate view is presented in L&N 27.19, “(a figurative extension of meaning of a term based on the practice of birds in picking up seeds) one who acquires bits and pieces of relatively extraneous information and proceeds to pass them off with pretense and show – ‘ignorant show-off, charlatan.’” A similar view is given in BDAG 937 s.v. σπερμολόγος: “in pejorative imagery of persons whose communication lacks sophistication and seems to pick up scraps of information here and there scrapmonger, scavenger…Engl. synonyms include ‘gossip’, ‘babbler’, chatterer’; but these terms miss the imagery of unsystematic gathering.”

[17:18]  ²¹ tn The meaning of this phrase is not clear. Literally it reads “strange deities” (see BDAG 210 s.v. δαιμόνιον 1). The note of not being customary is important. In the ancient world what was new was suspicious. The plural δαιμονίων (daimoniwn, “deities”) shows the audience grappling with Paul’s teaching that God was working through Jesus.

[17:18]  ²² sn This is a parenthetical note by the author.

[1:19]  ²³ tn Grk “brothers.” See note on the phrase “brothers and sisters” in 1:2.