Job 4:18

4:18 If ¹  God ²  puts no trust in ³  his servants ⁴ 

and attributes ⁵  folly ⁶  to his angels,

Job 6:29

6:29 Relent, ⁷  let there be no falsehood; ⁸ 

reconsider, ⁹  for my righteousness is intact! ¹⁰ 

Job 12:6

12:6 But ¹¹  the tents of robbers are peaceful,

and those who provoke God are confident ¹²  –

who carry their god in their hands. ¹³ 

Job 18:14

18:14 He is dragged from the security of his tent, ¹⁴ 

and marched off ¹⁵  to the king ¹⁶  of terrors.

Job 22:29

22:29 When people are brought low ¹⁷  and you say

‘Lift them up!’ ¹⁸ 

then he will save the downcast; ¹⁹ 

[4:18]  ¹ tn The particle הֵן (hen) introduces a conditional clause here, although the older translations used “behold.” The clause forms the foundation for the point made in the next verse, an argument by analogy – if this be true, then how much more/less the other.

[4:18]  ² tn Heb “he”; the referent (God) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[4:18]  ³ tn The verb יַאֲמִין (ya’amin), a Hiphil imperfect from אָמַן (’aman) followed by the preposition בּ (bet), means “trust in.”

[4:18]  ⁴ sn The servants here must be angels in view of the parallelism. The Targum to Job interpreted them to be the prophets. In the book we have already read about the “sons of God” who take their stand as servants before the Lord (1:6; 2:1). And Ps 104:4 identifies the angels as servants (using שָׁרַת, sharat).

[4:18]  ⁵ tn The verb שִׂים (sim, “set”) with the preposition בּ (bet) has the sense of “impute” or “attribute something to someone.”

[4:18]  ⁶ tn The word תָּהֳלָה (toholah) is a hapax legomenon, and so has created some confusion in the various translations. It seems to mean “error; folly.” The word is translated “perverseness” in the LXX; but Symmachus connects it with the word for “madness.” “Some commentators have repointed the word to תְּהִלָּה (tÿhillah, “praise”) making the line read: “he finds no [cause for] praise in his angels.” Others suggest תִּפְלָה (tiflah, “offensiveness, silliness”) a bigger change; this matches the idiom in Job 24:12. But if the etymology of the word is הָלַל (halal, “to be mad”) then that change is not necessary. The feminine noun “madness” still leaves the meaning of the line a little uncertain: “[if] he does not impute madness to his angels.” The point of the verse is that God finds flaws in his angels and does not put his trust in them.

[6:29]  ⁷ tn The Hebrew verb שֻׁבוּ (shuvu) would literally be “return.” It has here the sense of “to begin again; to adopt another course,” that is, proceed on another supposition other than my guilt (A. B. Davidson, Job, 49). The LXX takes the word from יָשַׁב (yashav, “sit, dwell”) reading “sit down now.”

[6:29]  ⁸ tn The word עַוְלָה (’avlah) is sometimes translated “iniquity.” The word can mean “perversion, wickedness, injustice” (cf. 16:11). But here he means in regard to words. Unjust or wicked words would be words that are false and destroy.

[6:29]  ⁹ tn The verb here is also שֻׁבוּ (shuvu), although there is a Kethib-Qere reading. See R. Gordis, “Some Unrecognized Meanings of the Root Shub,” JBL 52 (1933): 153-62.

[6:29]  ¹⁰ tn The text has simply “yet my right is in it.” A. B. Davidson (Job, 49, 50) thinks this means that in his plea against God, Job has right on his side. It may mean this; it simply says “my righteousness is yet in it.” If the “in it” does not refer to Job’s cause, then it would simply mean “is present.” It would have very little difference either way.

[12:6]  ¹³ tn The verse gives the other side of the coin now, the fact that the wicked prosper.

[12:6]  ¹⁴ tn The plural is used to suggest the supreme degree of arrogant confidence (E. Dhorme, Job, 171).

[12:6]  ¹⁵ sn The line is perhaps best understood as describing one who thinks he is invested with the power of God.

[18:14]  ¹⁹ tn Heb “from his tent, his security.” The apposition serves to modify the tent as his security.

[18:14]  ²⁰ tn The verb is the Hiphil of צָעַד (tsa’ad, “to lead away”). The problem is that the form is either a third feminine (Rashi thought it was referring to Job’s wife) or the second person. There is a good deal of debate over the possibility of the prefix t- being a variant for the third masculine form. The evidence in Ugaritic and Akkadian is mixed, stronger for the plural than the singular. Gesenius has some samples where the third feminine form might also be used for the passive if there is no expressed subject (see GKC 459 §144.b), but the evidence is not strong. The simplest choices are to change the prefix to a י (yod), or argue that the ת (tav) can be masculine, or follow Gesenius.

[18:14]  ²¹ sn This is a reference to death, the king of all terrors. Other identifications are made in the commentaries: Mot, the Ugaritic god of death; Nergal of the Babylonians; Molech of the Canaanites, the one to whom people sent emissaries.

[22:29]  ²⁵ tn There is no expressed subject here, and so the verb is taken as a passive voice again.

[22:29]  ²⁶ tn The word גֵּוָה (gevah) means “loftiness; pride.” Here it simply says “up,” or “pride.” The rest is paraphrased. Of the many suggestions, the following provide a sampling: “It is because of pride” (ESV), “he abases pride” (H. H. Rowley); “[he abases] the lofty and the proud” (Beer); “[he abases] the word of pride” [Duhm]; “[he abases] the haughtiness of pride” [Fohrer and others]; “[he abases] the one who speaks proudly” [Weiser]; “[he abases] the one who boasts in pride” [Kissane]; and “God [abases] pride” [Budde, Gray].

[22:29]  ²⁷ tn Or “humble”; Heb “the lowly of eyes.”