Job 8:3

8:3 Does God pervert ¹  justice? ² 

Or does the Almighty pervert ³  what is right?

Job 9:19

9:19 If it is a matter of strength, ⁴ 

most certainly ⁵  he is the strong one!

And if it is a matter of justice,

he will say, ‘Who will summon me?’ ⁶ 

Job 11:2

11:2 “Should not this ⁷  abundance of words be answered, ⁸ 

or should this ⁹  talkative man ¹⁰ 

be vindicated? ¹¹ 

Job 21:4

21:4 Is my ¹²  complaint against a man? ¹³ 

If so, ¹⁴  why should I not be impatient? ¹⁵ 

Job 24:25

24:25 “If this is not so, who can prove me a liar

and reduce my words to nothing?” ¹⁶ 

Job 34:16-17

God Is Impartial and Omniscient

34:16 “If you have ¹⁷  understanding, listen to this,

hear what I have to say. ¹⁸ 

34:17 Do you really think ¹⁹ 

that one who hates justice can govern? ²⁰ 

And will you declare guilty

the supremely righteous ²¹  One,

Job 36:12

36:12 But if they refuse to listen,

they pass over the river of death, ²² 

and expire without knowledge.

Job 40:9

40:9 Do you have an arm as powerful as God’s, ²³ 

and can you thunder with a voice like his?

[8:3]  ¹ tn The Piel verb יְעַוֵּת (yÿ’avvet) means “to bend; to cause to swerve from the norm; to deviate; to pervert.” The LXX renders the first colon as “will the Lord be unjust when he judges?”

[8:3]  ² tn The first word is מִשְׁפָּת (mishpat, “justice”). It can mean an act of judgment, place of judgment, or what is just, that is, the outcome of the decision. It basically describes an umpire’s decision. The parallel word is צֶדֶק (tsedeq, “righteousness,” or “what is right”). The basic idea here is that which conforms to the standard, what is right. See S. H. Scholnick, “The Meaning of Mishpat in the Book of Job,” JBL 101 (1982): 521-29.

[8:3]  ³ tn Some commentators think that the second verb should be changed in order to avoid the repetition of the same word and to reflect the different words in the versions. The suggestion is to read יְעַוֵּה (yÿ’avveh) instead; this would mean “to cause someone to deviate,” for the root means “to bend.” The change is completely unwarranted; the LXX probably chose different words for stylistic reasons (see D. J. A. Clines, Job [WBC], 198). The repetition in the Hebrew text is a common type; it strengthens the enormity of the charge Job seems to be making.

[9:19]  ⁴ tn The MT has only “if of strength.”

[9:19]  ⁵ tn “Most certainly” translates the particle הִנֵּה (hinneh).

[9:19]  ⁶ tn The question could be taken as “who will summon me?” (see Jer 49:19 and 50:44). This does not make immediate sense. Some have simply changed the suffix to “who will summon him.” If the MT is retained, then supplying something like “he will say” could make the last clause fit the whole passage. Another option is to take it as “Who will reveal it to me?” – i.e., Job could be questioning his friends’ qualifications for being God’s emissaries to bring God’s charges against him (cf. KJV, NKJV; and see 10:2 where Job uses the same verb in the Hiphil to request that God reveal what his sin has been that has led to his suffering).

[11:2]  ⁷ tc The LXX, Targum Job, Symmachus, and Vulgate all assume that the vocalization of רֹב (rov, “abundance”) should be רַב (rav, “great”): “great of words.” This would then mean “one who is abundant of words,” meaning, “a man of many words,” and make a closer parallel to the second half. But the MT makes good sense as it stands.

[11:2]  ⁸ tn The Niphal verb יֵעָנֶה (ye’aneh, “he answered”) would normally require a personal subject, but “abundance” functions as the subject in this sentence. The nuance of the imperfect is obligatory.

[11:2]  ⁹ tn The word is supplied here also for clarification.

[11:2]  ¹⁰ tn The bound construction “man of lips” means “a boaster” or “proud talker” (attributive genitive; and see GKC 417 §128.t). Zophar is saying that Job pours out this stream of words, but he is still not right.

[11:2]  ¹¹ tn The word is literally “be right, righteous.” The idea of being right has appeared before for this word (cf. 9:15). The point here is that just because Job talks a lot does not mean he is right or will be shown to be right through it all.

[21:4]  ¹⁰ tn The addition of the independent pronoun at the beginning of the sentence (“Is it I / against a man / my complaint”) strengthens the pronominal suffix on “complaint” (see GKC 438 §135.f).

[21:4]  ¹¹ sn The point seems to be that if his complaint were merely against men he might expect sympathy from other men; but no one dares offer him sympathy when his complaint is against God. So he will give free expression to his spirit (H. H. Rowley, Job [NCBC], 147).

[21:4]  ¹² tn On disjunctive interrogatives, see GKC 475 §150.g.

[21:4]  ¹³ tn Heb “why should my spirit/breath not be short” (see Num 21:4; Judg 16:16).

[24:25]  ¹³ tn The word אַל (’al, “not”) is used here substantivally (“nothing”).

[34:16]  ¹⁶ tn The phrase “you have” is not in the Hebrew text, but is implied.

[34:16]  ¹⁷ tn Heb “the sound of my words.”

[34:17]  ¹⁹ tn The force of הַאַף (ha’af) is “Is it truly the case?” The point is being made that if Job were right God could not be judging the world.

[34:17]  ²⁰ tn The verb חָבַשׁ (khavash) has the basic idea of “to bind,” as in binding on the yoke, and then in the sense of subduing people under authority (cf. Assyrian absanu). The imperfect verb here is best expressed with the potential nuance.

[34:17]  ²¹ tn The two words could be taken separately, but they seem to form a fine nominal hendiadys, because the issue is God’s justice. So the word for power becomes the modifier.

[36:12]  ²² tn This is a similar expression to the one in Job 33:18, where the suggestion was made by many that it means crossing over the canal or river of death. Some retain the earlier interpretation of “perish by the sword” (cf. NIV).

[40:9]  ²⁵ tn Heb “do you have an arm like God?” The words “as powerful as” have been supplied in the translation to clarify the metaphor.