Job 31:23
Context31:23 For the calamity from God was a terror to me, 1
and by reason of his majesty 2 I was powerless.
Job 31:29
Context31:29 If 3 I have rejoiced over the misfortune of my enemy 4
or exulted 5 because calamity 6 found him –
Job 33:18
Context33:18 He spares a person’s life from corruption, 7
his very life from crossing over 8 the river.


[31:23] 1 tc The LXX has “For the terror of God restrained me.” Several commentators changed it to “came upon me.” Driver had “The fear of God was burdensome.” I. Eitan suggested “The terror of God was mighty upon me” (“Two unknown verbs: etymological studies,” JBL 42 [1923]: 22-28). But the MT makes clear sense as it stands.
[31:23] 2 tn The form is וּמִשְּׂאֵתוֹ (umissÿ’eto); the preposition is causal. The form, from the verb נָשָׂא (nasa’, “to raise; to lift high”), refers to God’s exalted person, his majesty (see Job 13:11).
[31:29] 3 tn The problem with taking this as “if,” introducing a conditional clause, is finding the apodosis, if there is one. It may be that the apodosis is understood, or summed up at the end. This is the view taken here. But R. Gordis (Job, 352) wishes to take this word as the indication of the interrogative, forming the rhetorical question to affirm he has never done this. However, in that case the parenthetical verses inserted become redundant.
[31:29] 4 sn The law required people to help their enemies if they could (Exod 23:4; also Prov 20:22). But often in the difficulties that ensued, they did exult over their enemies’ misfortune (Pss 54:7; 59:10 [11], etc.). But Job lived on a level of purity that few ever reach. Duhm said, “If chapter 31 is the crown of all ethical developments of the O.T., verse 29 is the jewel in that crown.”
[31:29] 5 tn The Hitpael of עוּר (’ur) has the idea of “exult.”
[31:29] 6 tn The word is רָע (ra’, “evil”) in the sense of anything that harms, interrupts, or destroys life.
[33:18] 5 tn A number of interpreters and translations take this as “the pit” (see Job 17:14; cf. NAB, NASB, NIV, NRSV).
[33:18] 6 tc Here is another difficult line. The verb normally means “to pass through; to pass over,” and so this word would normally mean “from passing through [or over].” The word שֶׁלַח (shelakh) does at times refer to a weapon, but most commentators look for a parallel with “the pit [or corruption].” One suggestion is שְׁאוֹלָה (shÿ’olah, “to Sheol”), proposed by Duhm. Dhorme thought it was שַׁלַח (shalakh) and referred to the passageway to the underworld (see M. Tsevat, VT 4 [1954]: 43; and Svi Rin, BZ 7 [1963]: 25). See discussion of options in HALOT 1517-18 s.v. IV שֶׁלַח. The idea of crossing the river of death fits the idea of the passage well, although the reading “to perish by the sword” makes sense and was followed by the NIV.