Job 6:24

No Sin Discovered

6:24 “Teach ¹  me and I, for my part, ²  will be silent;

explain to me ³  how I have been mistaken. ⁴ 

Job 10:16

10:16 If I lift myself up, ⁵ 

you hunt me as a fierce lion, ⁶ 

and again ⁷  you display your power ⁸  against me.

Job 17:3

17:3 Make then my pledge ⁹  with you.

Who else will put up security for me? ¹⁰ 

Job 31:29

31:29 If ¹¹  I have rejoiced over the misfortune of my enemy ¹² 

or exulted ¹³  because calamity ¹⁴  found him –

[6:24]  ¹ tn The verb “teach” or “instruct” is the Hiphil הוֹרוּנִי (horuni), from the verb יָרָה (yarah); the basic idea of “point, direct” lies behind this meaning. The verb is cognate to the noun תּוֹרָה (torah, “instruction, teaching, law”).

[6:24]  ² tn The independent personal pronoun makes the subject of the verb emphatic: “and I will be silent.”

[6:24]  ³ tn The verb is הָבִינוּ (havinu, “to cause someone to understand”); with the ל (lamed) following, it has the sense of “explain to me.”

[6:24]  ⁴ tn The verb שָׁגָה (shagah) has the sense of “wandering, getting lost, being mistaken.”

[10:16]  ⁵ tn The MT has the 3rd person of the verb, “and he lifts himself up.” One might assume that the subject is “my head” – but that is rather far removed from the verb. It appears that Job is talking about himself in some way. Some commentators simply emend the text to make it first person. This has the support of Targum Job, which would be expected since it would be interpreting the passage in its context (see D. M. Stec, “The Targum Rendering of WYG’H in Job X 16,” VT 34 [1984]: 367-8). Pope and Gordis make the word adjectival, modifying the subject: “proudly you hunt me,” but support is lacking. E. Dhorme thinks the line should be parallel to the two preceding it, and so suggests יָגֵּעַ (yagea’, “exhausted”) for יִגְאֶה (yig’eh, “lift up”). The contextual argument is that Job has said that he cannot raise his head, but if he were to do so, God would hunt him down. God could be taken as the subject of the verb if the text is using enallage (shifting of grammatical persons within a discourse) for dramatic effect. Perhaps the initial 3rd person was intended with respect within a legal context of witnesses and a complaint, but was switched to 2nd person for direct accusation.

[10:16]  ⁶ sn There is some ambiguity here: Job could be the lion being hunted by God, or God could be hunting Job like a lion hunts its prey. The point of the line is clear in either case.

[10:16]  ⁷ tn The text uses two verbs without a coordinating conjunction: “then you return, you display your power.” This should be explained as a verbal hendiadys, the first verb serving adverbially in the clause (see further GKC 386-87 §120.g).

[10:16]  ⁸ tn The form is the Hitpael of פָּלָא (pala’, “to be wonderful; to be surpassing; to be extraordinary”). Here in this stem it has the sense of “make oneself admirable, surpassing” or “render oneself powerful, glorious.” The text is ironic; the word that described God’s marvelous creation of Job is here used to describe God’s awesome destruction of Job.

[17:3]  ⁹ tn The MT has two imperatives: “Lay down, pledge me, with me.” Most commentators think that the second imperative should be a noun, and take it to say, “Lay my pledge with/beside you.” A. B. Davidson (Job, 126) suggests that the first verb means “give a pledge,” and so the two similar verbs would be emphatic: “Give a pledge, be my surety.” Other than such a change (which would involve changing the vowels) one would have to interpret similarly by seeing the imperatives as a kind of hendiadys, with the main emphasis being on the second imperative, “make a pledge.”

[17:3]  ¹⁰ sn The idiom is “to strike the hand.” Here the wording is a little different, “Who is he that will strike himself into my hand?”

[31:29]  ¹³ 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]  ¹⁴ 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]  ¹⁵ tn The Hitpael of עוּר (’ur) has the idea of “exult.”

[31:29]  ¹⁶ tn The word is רָע (ra’, “evil”) in the sense of anything that harms, interrupts, or destroys life.