Job 5:3-4

5:3 I myself ¹  have seen the fool ²  taking root,

but suddenly I cursed his place of residence. ³ 

5:4 His children are far ⁴  from safety,

and they are crushed ⁵  at the place where judgment is rendered, ⁶ 

nor is there anyone to deliver them. ⁷ 

Job 18:19

18:19 He has neither children nor descendants ⁸  among his people,

no survivor in those places he once stayed. ⁹ 

Job 20:10

20:10 His sons must recompense ¹⁰  the poor;

his own hands ¹¹  must return his wealth.

Job 20:28

20:28 A flood will carry off his house,

rushing waters on the day of God’s wrath.

Proverbs 17:6

17:6 Grandchildren ¹²  are like ¹³  a crown ¹⁴  to the elderly,

and the glory ¹⁵  of children is their parents. ¹⁶ 

[5:3]  ¹ tn The use of the pronoun here adds emphasis to the subject of the sentence (see GKC 437 §135.a).

[5:3]  ² tn This word is אֱוִיל (’evil), the same word for the “senseless man” in the preceding verse. Eliphaz is citing an example of his principle just given – he saw such a fool for a brief while appearing to prosper (i.e., taking root).

[5:3]  ³ tn A. B. Davidson argues that the verse does not mean that Eliphaz cursed his place during his prosperity. This line is metonymical (giving the effect). God judged the fool and his place was ruined; consequently, Eliphaz pronounced it accursed of God (see A. B. Davidson, Job, 36). Many emend the verb slightly to read “and it was suddenly cursed” (וַיֻּכַב [vayyukhav] instead of וָאֶקּוֹב [va’eqqov]; see H. H. Rowley, Job [NCBC], 51).

[5:4]  ⁴ tn The imperfect verbs in this verse describe the condition of the accursed situation. Some commentators follow the LXX and take these as jussives, making this verse the curse that the man pronounced upon the fool. Rashi adds “This is the malediction with which I have cursed him.” That would make the speaker the one calling down the judgment on the fool rather than responding by observation how God destroyed the habitation of the fool.

[5:4]  ⁵ tn The verb יִדַּכְּאוּ (yiddakkÿ’u) could be taken as the passive voice, or in the reciprocal sense (“crush one another”) or reflexive (“crush themselves”). The context favors the idea that the children of the foolish person will be destroyed because there is no one who will deliver them.

[5:4]  ⁶ tn Heb “in the gate.” The city gate was the place of both business and justice. The sense here seems to fit the usage of gates as the place of legal disputes, so the phrase “at the place of judgment” has been used in the translation.

[5:4]  ⁷ tn The text simply says “and there is no deliverer.” The entire clause could be subordinated to the preceding clause, and rendered simply “without a deliverer.”

[18:19]  ⁸ tn The two words נִין (nin, “offspring”) and נֶכֶד (nekhed, “posterity”) are always together and form an alliteration. This is hard to capture in English, but some have tried: Moffatt had “son and scion,” and Tur-Sinai had “breed or brood.” But the words are best simply translated as “lineage and posterity” or as in the NIV “offspring or descendants.”

[18:19]  ⁹ tn Heb “in his sojournings.” The verb גּוּר (gur) means “to reside; to sojourn” temporarily, without land rights. Even this word has been selected to stress the temporary nature of his stay on earth.

[20:10]  ¹⁰ tn The early versions confused the root of this verb, taking it from רָצַץ (ratsats, “mistreat”) and not from רָצָה (ratsah, “be please with”). So it was taken to mean, “Let inferiors destroy his children.” But the verb is רָצָה (ratsah). This has been taken to mean “his sons will seek the favor of the poor.” This would mean that they would be reduced to poverty and need help from even the poor. Some commentators see this as another root רָצָה (ratsah) meaning “to compensate; to restore” wealth their father had gained by impoverishing others. This fits the parallelism well, but not the whole context that well.

[20:10]  ¹¹ tn Some commentators are surprised to see “his hands” here, thinking the passage talks about his death. Budde changed it to “his children,” by altering one letter. R. Gordis argued that “hand” can mean offspring, and so translated it that way without changing anything in the text (“A note on YAD,” JBL 62 [1943]: 343).

[17:6]  ¹² tn Heb “children of children [sons of sons].”

[17:6]  ¹³ tn The comparative “like” does not appear in the Hebrew text, but is implied by the metaphor; it is supplied in the translation for the sake of clarity.

[17:6]  ¹⁴ sn The metaphor signifies that grandchildren are like a crown, that is, they are the “crowning glory” of life. The proverb comes from a culture that places great importance on the family in society and that values its heritage.

[17:6]  ¹⁵ tn The noun תִּפְאָרָת (tif’arat) means “beauty; glory” (BDB 802 s.v.). In this passage “glory” seems to be identified with “glorying; boasting”; so a rendering that children are proud of their parents would be in order. Thus, “glory of children” would be a subjective genitive, the glorying that children do.”

[17:6]  ¹⁶ tc The LXX has inserted: “To the faithful belongs the whole world of wealth, but to the unfaithful not an obulus.” It was apparently some popular sentiment at the time.