Job 6:25

6:25 How painful ¹  are honest words!

But ²  what does your reproof ³  prove? ⁴ 

Job 13:10

13:10 He would certainly rebuke ⁵  you

if you secretly ⁶  showed partiality!

Job 6:26

6:26 Do you intend to criticize mere words,

and treat ⁷  the words of a despairing man as wind?

Job 22:4

22:4 Is it because of your piety ⁸  that he rebukes you

and goes to judgment with you? ⁹ 

Job 9:33

9:33 Nor is there an arbiter ¹⁰  between us,

who ¹¹  might lay ¹²  his hand on us both, ¹³ 

Job 15:3

15:3 Does he argue ¹⁴  with useless ¹⁵  talk,

with words that have no value in them?

Job 16:21

16:21 and ¹⁶  he contends with God on behalf of man

as a man ¹⁷  pleads ¹⁸  for his friend.

Job 19:5

19:5 If indeed ¹⁹  you would exalt yourselves ²⁰  above me

and plead my disgrace against me, ²¹ 

Job 23:7

23:7 There ²²  an upright person

could present his case ²³  before him,

and I would be delivered forever from my judge.

Job 33:19

33:19 Or a person is chastened ²⁴  by pain on his bed,

and with the continual strife of his bones, ²⁵ 

Job 40:2

40:2 “Will the one who contends ²⁶  with the Almighty correct him? ²⁷ 

Let the person who accuses God give him an answer!”

Job 5:17

5:17 “Therefore, ²⁸  blessed ²⁹  is the man whom God corrects, ³⁰ 

so do not despise the discipline ³¹  of the Almighty. ³² 

Job 13:3

13:3 But I wish to speak ³³  to the Almighty, ³⁴ 

and I desire to argue ³⁵  my case ³⁶  with God.

Job 13:15

13:15 Even if he slays me, I will hope in him; ³⁷ 

I will surely ³⁸  defend ³⁹  my ways to his face!

Job 32:12

32:12 Now I was paying you close attention, ⁴⁰ 

yet ⁴¹  there was no one proving Job wrong, ⁴² 

not one of you was answering his statements!

[6:25]  ¹ tn The word נִּמְרְצוּ (nimrÿtsu, “[they] painful are”) may be connected to מָרַץ (marats, “to be ill”). This would give the idea of “how distressing,” or “painful” in this stem. G. R. Driver (JTS 29 [1927/28]: 390-96) connected it to an Akkadian cognate “to be ill” and rendered it “bitter.” It has also been linked with מָרַס (maras), meaning “to be hard, strong,” giving the idea of “how persuasive” (see N. S. Doniach and W. E. Barnes, “Job 4:25: The Root Maras,” JTS [1929/30]: 291-92). There seems more support for the meaning “to be ill” (cf. Mal 2:10). Others follow Targum Job “how pleasant [to my palate are your words]”; E. Dhorme (Job, 92) follows this without changing the text but noting that the word has an interchange of letter with מָלַץ (malats) for מָרַץ (marats).

[6:25]  ² tn The וּ (vav) here introduces the antithesis (GKC 484-85 §154.a).

[6:25]  ³ tn The infinitive הוֹכֵחַ (hokheakh, “reproof,” from יָכַח [yakhakh, “prove”]) becomes the subject of the verb from the same root, יוֹכִיהַ (yokhiakh), and so serves as a noun (see GKC 340 §113.b). This verb means “to dispute, quarrel, argue, contend” (see BDB 406-7 s.v. יָכַח). Job is saying, “What does reproof from you prove?”

[6:25]  ⁴ tn The LXX again paraphrases this line: “But as it seems, the words of a true man are vain, because I do not ask strength of you.” But the rest of the versions are equally divided on the verse.

[13:10]  ⁵ tn The verbal idea is intensified with the infinitive absolute. This is the same verb used in v. 3; here it would have the sense of “rebuke, convict.”

[13:10]  ⁶ sn The use of the word “in secret” or “secretly” suggests that what they do is a guilty action (31:27a).

[6:26]  ⁹ tn This, in the context, is probably the meaning, although the Hebrew simply has the line after the first half of the verse read: “and as/to wind the words of a despairing man.” The line could be translated “and the words of a despairing man, [which are] as wind.” But this translation follows the same approach as RSV, NIV, and NAB, which take the idiom of the verb (“think, imagine”) with the preposition on “wind” to mean “reckon as wind” – “and treat the words of a despairing man as wind.”

[22:4]  ¹³ tn The word “your fear” or “your piety” refers to Job’s reverence – it is his fear of God (thus a subjective genitive). When “fear” is used of religion, it includes faith and adoration on the positive side, fear and obedience on the negative.

[22:4]  ¹⁴ sn Of course the point is that God does not charge Job because he is righteous; the point is he must be unrighteous.

[9:33]  ¹⁷ tn The participle מוֹכִיחַ (mokhiakh) is the “arbiter” or “mediator.” The word comes from the verb יָכַח (yakhakh, “decide, judge”), which is concerned with legal and nonlegal disputes. The verbal forms can be used to describe the beginning of a dispute, the disputation in progress, or the settling of it (here, and in Isa 1:18).

[9:33]  ¹⁸ tn The relative pronoun is understood in this clause.

[9:33]  ¹⁹ tn The jussive in conditional sentences retains its voluntative sense: let something be so, and this must happen as a consequence (see GKC 323 §109.i).

[9:33]  ²⁰ sn The idiom of “lay his hand on the two of us” may come from a custom of a judge putting his hands on the two in order to show that he is taking them both under his jurisdiction. The expression can also be used for protection (see Ps 139:5). Job, however, has a problem in that the other party is God, who himself will be arbiter in judgment.

[15:3]  ²¹ tn The infinitive absolute in this place is functioning either as an explanatory adverb or as a finite verb.

[15:3]  ²² tn The verb סָכַן (sakhan) means “to be useful, profitable.” It is found 5 times in the book with this meaning. The Hiphil of יָעַל (ya’al) has the same connotation. E. LipinÃski offers a new meaning on a second root, “incur danger” or “run risks” with words, but this does not fit the parallelism (FO 21 [1980]: 65-82).

[16:21]  ²⁵ tn E. Dhorme (Job, 240) alters this slightly to read “Would that” or “Ah! if only.”

[16:21]  ²⁶ tn This is the simple translation of the expression “son of man” in Job. But some commentators wish to change the word בֵּן (ben, “son”) to בֵּין (ben, “between”). It would then be “[as] between a man and [for] his friend.” Even though a few mss have this reading, it is to be rejected. But see J. Barr, “Some Notes on ‘ben’ in Classical Hebrew,” JSS 23 (1978): 1-22.

[16:21]  ²⁷ tn The verb is supplied from the parallel clause.

[19:5]  ²⁹ tn The introductory particles repeat אָמְנָם (’amnam, “indeed”) but now with אִם (’im, “if”). It could be interpreted to mean “is it not true,” or as here in another conditional clause.

[19:5]  ³⁰ tn The verb is the Hiphil of גָּדַל (gadal); it can mean “to make great” or as an internal causative “to make oneself great” or “to assume a lofty attitude, to be insolent.” There is no reason to assume another root here with the meaning of “quarrel” (as Gordis does).

[19:5]  ³¹ sn Job’s friends have been using his shame, his humiliation in all his sufferings, as proof against him in their case.

[23:7]  ³³ tn The adverb “there” has the sense of “then” – there in the future.

[23:7]  ³⁴ tn The form of the verb is the Niphal נוֹכָח (nokkakh, “argue, present a case”). E. Dhorme (Job, 346) is troubled by this verbal form and so changes it and other things in the line to say, “he would observe the upright man who argues with him.” The Niphal is used for “engaging discussion,” “arguing a case,” and “settling a dispute.”

[33:19]  ³⁷ tc The MT has the passive form, and so a subject has to be added: “[a man] is chastened.” The LXX has the active form, indicating “[God] chastens,” but the object “a man” has to be added. It is understandable why the LXX thought this was active, within this sequence of verbs; and that is why it is the inferior reading.

[33:19]  ³⁸ tc The Kethib “the strife of his bones is continual,” whereas the Qere has “the multitude of his bones are firm.” The former is the better reading in this passage. It indicates that the pain is caused by the ongoing strife.

[40:2]  ⁴¹ tn The form רֹב (rov) is the infinitive absolute from the verb רִיב (riv, “contend”). Dhorme wishes to repoint it to make it the active participle, the “one who argues with the Almighty.”

[40:2]  ⁴² tn The verb יִסּוֹר (yissor) is found only here, but comes from a common root meaning “to correct; to reprove.” Several suggestions have been made to improve on the MT. Dhorme read it יָסוּר (yasur) in the sense of “to turn aside; to yield.” Ehrlich read this emendation as “to come to an end.” But the MT could be read as “to correct; to instruct.”

[5:17]  ⁴⁵ tn The particle “therefore” links this section to the preceding; it points this out as the logical consequence of the previous discussion, and more generally, as the essence of Job’s suffering.

[5:17]  ⁴⁶ tn The word אַשְׁרֵי (’ashre, “blessed”) is often rendered “happy.” But “happy” relates to what happens. “Blessed” is a reference to the heavenly bliss of the one who is right with God.

[5:17]  ⁴⁷ tn The construction is an implied relative clause. The literal rendering would simply be “the man God corrects him.” The suffix on the verb is a resumptive pronoun, completing the use of the relative clause. The verb יָכַח (yakhakh) is a legal term; it always has some sense of a charge, dispute, or conflict. Its usages show that it may describe a strife breaking out, a charge or quarrel in progress, or the settling of a dispute (Isa 1:18). The derived noun can mean “reproach; recrimination; charge” (13:6; 23:4). Here the emphasis is on the consequence of the charge brought, namely, the correction.

[5:17]  ⁴⁸ tn The noun מוּסַר (musar) is parallel to the idea of the first colon. It means “discipline, correction” (from יָסַר, yasar). Prov 3:11 says almost the same thing as this line.

[5:17]  ⁴⁹ sn The name Shaddai occurs 31 times in the book. This is its first occurrence. It is often rendered “Almighty” because of the LXX and some of the early fathers. The etymology and meaning of the word otherwise remains uncertain, in spite of attempts to connect it to “mountains” or “breasts.”

[13:3]  ⁴⁹ tn The verb is simply the Piel imperfect אֲדַבֵּר (’adabber, “I speak”). It should be classified as a desiderative imperfect, saying, “I desire to speak.” This is reinforced with the verb “to wish, desire” in the second half of the verse.

[13:3]  ⁵⁰ tn The Hebrew title for God here is אֶל־שַׁדַּי (’el shadday, “El Shaddai”).

[13:3]  ⁵¹ tn The infinitive absolute functions here as the direct object of the verb “desire” (see GKC 340 §113.b).

[13:3]  ⁵² tn The infinitive הוֹכֵחַ (hokheakh) is from the verb יָכַח (yakhakh), which means “to argue, plead, debate.” It has the legal sense here of arguing a case (cf. 5:17).

[13:15]  ⁵³ tn There is a textual difficulty here that factors into the interpretation of the verse. The Kethib is לֹא (lo’, “not”), but the Qere is לוֹ (lo, “to him”). The RSV takes the former: “Behold, he will slay me, I have no hope.” The NIV takes it as “though he slay me, yet will I hope in him.” Job is looking ahead to death, which is not an evil thing to him. The point of the verse is that he is willing to challenge God at the risk of his life; and if God slays him, he is still confident that he will be vindicated – as he says later in this chapter. Other suggestions are not compelling. E. Dhorme (Job, 187) makes a slight change of אֲיַחֵל (’ayakhel, “I will hope”) to אַחִיל (’akhil, “I will [not] tremble”). A. B. Davidson (Job, 98) retains the MT, but interprets the verb more in line with its use in the book: “I will not wait” (cf. NLT).

[13:15]  ⁵⁴ tn On אַךְ (’akh, “surely”) see GKC 483 §153 on intensive clauses.

[13:15]  ⁵⁵ tn The verb once again is יָכָה (yakhah, in the Hiphil, “argue a case, plead, defend, contest”). But because the word usually means “accuse” rather than “defend,” I. L. Seeligmann proposed changing “my ways” to “his ways” (“Zur Terminologie für das Gerichtsverfahren im Wortschatz des biblischen Hebräisch,” VTSup 16 [1967]: 251-78). But the word can be interpreted appropriately in the context without emendation.

[32:12]  ⁵⁷ tn The verb again is from בִּין (bin, “to perceive; to understand”); in this stem it means to “to pay close attention.”

[32:12]  ⁵⁸ tn The particle הִנֵּה (hinneh, “behold”) has a deictic force here, calling attention to the thought that is now presented.

[32:12]  ⁵⁹ tn The participle מוֹכִיחַ (mokhiakh) is from the verb יָכַח (yakhakh) that has been used frequently in the book of Job. It means “to argue; to contend; to debate; to prove; to dispute.” The usage of the verb shows that it can focus on the beginning of an argument, the debating itself, or the resolution of the conflict. Here the latter is obviously meant, for they did argue and contend and criticize – but could not prove Job wrong.