Job 31:20

31:20 whose heart did not bless me ¹ 

as he warmed himself with the fleece of my sheep, ² 

Job 2:9

2:9 Then ³  his wife said to him, “Are you still holding firmly to your integrity? ⁴  Curse ⁵  God, and die!” ⁶ 

Job 1:10-11

1:10 Have you ⁷  not made a hedge ⁸  around him and his household and all that he has on every side? You have blessed ⁹  the work of his hands, and his livestock ¹⁰  have increased ¹¹  in the land. 1:11 But ¹²  extend your hand and strike ¹³  everything he has, and he will no doubt ¹⁴  curse you ¹⁵  to your face!”

Job 1:21

1:21 He said, “Naked ¹⁶  I came from my mother’s womb, and naked I will return there. ¹⁷  The Lord gives, and the Lord takes away. ¹⁸  May the name of the Lord ¹⁹  be blessed!”

Job 2:5

2:5 But extend your hand and strike his bone and his flesh, ²⁰  and he will no doubt ²¹  curse you to your face!”

Job 1:5

1:5 When ²²  the days of their feasting were finished, ²³  Job would send ²⁴  for them and sanctify ²⁵  them; he would get up early ²⁶  in the morning and offer burnt offerings according to ²⁷  the number of them all. For Job thought, “Perhaps ²⁸  my children ²⁹  have sinned and cursed ³⁰  God in their hearts.” This was Job’s customary practice. ³¹ 

Job 42:12

42:12 So the Lord blessed the second part of Job’s life more than the first. He had 14,000 sheep, 6,000 camels, 1,000 yoke of oxen, and 1,000 female donkeys.

[31:20]  ¹ tn The MT has simply “if his loins did not bless me.” In the conditional clause this is another protasis. It means, “if I saw someone dying and if he did not thank me for clothing them.” It is Job’s way of saying that whenever he saw a need he met it, and he received his share of thanks – which prove his kindness. G. R. Driver has it “without his loins having blessed me,” taking “If…not” as an Aramaism, meaning “except” (AJSL 52 [1935/36]: 164f.).

[31:20]  ² tn This clause is interpreted here as a subordinate clause to the first half of the verse. It could also be a separate clause: “was he not warmed…?”

[2:9]  ³ tn The versions have some information here that is interesting, albeit fanciful. The Targum calls her “Dinah.” The LXX has “when a long time had passed.” But the whole rendering of the LXX is paraphrastic: “How long will you hold out, saying, ‘Behold, I wait yet a little while, expecting the hope of my deliverance?’ for behold, your memorial is abolished from the earth, even your sons and daughters, the pangs and pains of my womb which I bore in vain with sorrows, and you yourself sit down to spend the night in the open air among the corruption of worms, and I am a wanderer and a servant from place to place and house to house, waiting for the setting sun, that I may rest from my labors and pains that now beset me, but say some word against the Lord and die.”

[2:9]  ⁴ sn See R. D. Moore, “The Integrity of Job,” CBQ 45 (1983): 17-31. The reference of Job’s wife to his “integrity” could be a precursor of the conclusion reached by Elihu in 32:2 where he charged Job with justifying himself rather than God.

[2:9]  ⁵ tn The verb is literally בָּרַךְ, (barakh, “bless”). As in the earlier uses, the meaning probably has more to do with renouncing God than of speaking a curse. The actual word may be taken as a theological euphemism for the verb קִלֵּל (qillel, “curse”). If Job’s wife had meant that he was trying to justify himself rather than God, “bless God” might be translated “speak well of God,” the resolution accepted by God in 42:7-8 following Job’s double confession of having spoken wrongly of God (40:3-5; 42:1-6).

[2:9]  ⁶ tn The imperative with the conjunction in this expression serves to express the certainty that will follow as the result or consequence of the previous imperative (GKC 324-25 §110.f).

[1:10]  ⁵ tn The use of the independent personal pronoun here emphasizes the subject of the verb: “Have you not put up a hedge.”

[1:10]  ⁶ tn The verb שׂוּךְ (sukh) means “to hedge or fence up, about” something (BDB 962 s.v. I שׂוּךְ). The original idea seems to have been to surround with a wall of thorns for the purpose of protection (E. Dhorme, Job, 7). The verb is an implied comparison between making a hedge and protecting someone.

[1:10]  ⁷ sn Here the verb “bless” is used in one of its very common meanings. The verb means “to enrich,” often with the sense of enabling or empowering things for growth or fruitfulness. See further C. Westermann, Blessing in the Bible and the Life of the Church (OBT).

[1:10]  ⁸ tn Or “substance.” The herds of livestock may be taken by metonymy of part for whole to represent possessions or prosperity in general.

[1:10]  ⁹ tn The verb פָּרַץ (parats) means “to break through.” It has the sense of abundant increase, as in breaking out, overflowing (see also Gen 30:30 and Exod 1:12).

[1:11]  ⁷ tn The particle אוּלָם (’ulam, “but”) serves to restrict the clause in relation to the preceding clause (IBHS 671-73 §39.3.5e, n. 107).

[1:11]  ⁸ tn The force of the imperatives in this sentence are almost conditional – if God were to do this, then surely Job would respond differently.

[1:11]  ⁹ sn The formula used in the expression is the oath formula: “if not to your face he will curse you” meaning “he will surely curse you to your face.” Satan is so sure that the piety is insincere that he can use an oath formula.

[1:11]  ¹⁰ tn See the comments on Job 1:5. Here too the idea of “renounce” may fit well enough; but the idea of actually cursing God may not be out of the picture if everything Job has is removed. Satan thinks he will denounce God.

[1:21]  ⁹ tn The adjective “naked” is functioning here as an adverbial accusative of state, explicative of the state of the subject. While it does include the literal sense of nakedness at birth, Job is also using it symbolically to mean “without possessions.”

[1:21]  ¹⁰ sn While the first half of the couplet is to be taken literally as referring to his coming into this life, this second part must be interpreted only generally to refer to his departure from this life. It is parallel to 1 Tim 6:7, “For we have brought nothing into this world and so we cannot take a single thing out either.”

[1:21]  ¹¹ tn The two verbs are simple perfects. (1) They can be given the nuance of gnomic imperfect, expressing what the sovereign God always does. This is the approach taken in the present translation. Alternatively (2) they could be referring specifically to Job’s own experience: “Yahweh gave [definite past, referring to his coming into this good life] and Yahweh has taken away” [present perfect, referring to his great losses]. Many English versions follow the second alternative.

[1:21]  ¹² sn Some commentators are troubled by the appearance of the word “Yahweh” on the lips of Job, assuming that the narrator inserted his own name for God into the story-telling. Such thinking is based on the assumption that Yahweh was only a national god of Israel, unknown to anyone else in the ancient world. But here is a clear indication that a non-Israelite, Job, knew and believed in Yahweh.

[2:5]  ¹¹ sn The “bones and flesh” are idiomatic for the whole person, his physical and his psychical/spiritual being (see further H. W. Wolff, Anthropology of the Old Testament, 26-28).

[2:5]  ¹² sn This is the same oath formula found in 1:11; see the note there.

[1:5]  ¹³ tn The verse begins with the temporal indicator “and it happened” or “and it came to pass,” which need not be translated. The particle כִּי (ki, “when”) with the initial verbal form indicates it is a temporal clause.

[1:5]  ¹⁴ tn The verb is the Hiphil perfect of נָקַף (naqaf, “go around”), here it means “to make the round” or “complete the circuit” (BDB 668-69 s.v. II נָקַף Hiph). It indicates that when the feasting had made its circuit of the seven sons, then Job would sanctify them.

[1:5]  ¹⁵ tn The form is a preterite with vav (ו) consecutive. The same emphasis on repeated or frequent action continues here in this verse. The idea here is that Job would send for them, because the sanctification of them would have consisted of washings and changes of garments as well as the sacrifices (see Gen 35:2; 1 Sam 16:5).

[1:5]  ¹⁶ tn Or “purify.”

[1:5]  ¹⁷ tn The first verb could also be joined with the next to form a verbal hendiadys: “he would rise early and he would sacrifice” would then simply be “he would sacrifice early in the morning” (see M. Delcor, “Quelques cas de survivances du vocabulaire nomade en hébreu biblique,” VT 25 [1975]: 307-22). This section serves to explain in more detail how Job sanctified his children.

[1:5]  ¹⁸ tn The text does not have “according to”; the noun “number” is an accusative that defines the extent of his actions (GKC 373-74 §118.e, h).

[1:5]  ¹⁹ tn The clause stands as an accusative to the verb, here as the direct object introduced with “perhaps” (IBHS 645-46 §38.8d).

[1:5]  ²⁰ tn Heb “sons,” but since the three daughters are specifically mentioned in v. 4, “children” has been used in the translation. In this patriarchal culture, however, it is possible that only the sons are in view.

[1:5]  ²¹ tn The Hebrew verb is בָּרַךְ (barakh), which means “to bless.” Here is a case where the writer or a scribe has substituted the word “curse” with the word “bless” to avoid having the expression “curse God.” For similar euphemisms in the ancient world, see K. A. Kitchen, Ancient Orient and Old Testament, 166. It is therefore difficult to know exactly what Job feared they might have done. The opposite of “bless” would be “curse,” which normally would convey disowning or removing from blessing. Some commentators try to offer a definition of “curse” from the root in the text, and noting that “curse” is too strong, come to something like “renounce.” The idea of blaspheming is probably not meant; rather, in their festivities they may have said things that renounced God or their interest in him. Job feared this momentary turning away from God in their festivities, perhaps as they thought their good life was more important than their religion.

[1:5]  ²² tn The imperfect expresses continual action in past time, i.e., a customary imperfect (GKC 315 §107.e).