Job 9:35

9:35 Then ¹  would I speak and not fear him,

but it is not so with me. ² 

Job 11:5

11:5 But if only God would speak, ³ 

if only he would open his lips against you, ⁴ 

Job 13:13

13:13 “Refrain from talking ⁵  with me so that ⁶  I may speak;

then let come to me ⁷  what may. ⁸ 

Job 18:2

18:2 “How long until you ⁹  make an end of words? ¹⁰ 

You must consider, ¹¹  and then ¹²  we can talk.

Job 19:18

19:18 Even youngsters have scorned me;

when I get up, ¹³  they scoff at me. ¹⁴ 

Job 27:4

27:4 my ¹⁵  lips will not speak wickedness,

and my tongue will whisper ¹⁶  no deceit.

Job 32:7

32:7 I said to myself, ‘Age ¹⁷  should speak, ¹⁸ 

and length of years ¹⁹  should make wisdom known.’

Job 33:2

33:2 See now, I have opened ²⁰  my mouth;

my tongue in my mouth has spoken. ²¹ 

Job 33:14

Elihu Disagrees With Job’s View of God

33:14 “For God speaks, the first time in one way,

the second time in another,

though a person does not perceive ²²  it.

Job 33:31-32

33:31 Pay attention, Job – listen to me;

be silent, and I will speak.

33:32 If you have any words, ²³  reply to me;

speak, for I want to justify you. ²⁴ 

Job 34:35

34:35 that ²⁵  Job speaks without knowledge

and his words are without understanding. ²⁶ 

Job 40:5

40:5 I have spoken once, but I cannot answer;

twice, but I will say no more.” ²⁷ 

Job 41:3

41:3 Will it make numerous supplications to you, ²⁸ 

will it speak to you with tender words? ²⁹ 

[9:35]  ¹ tn There is no conjunction with this cohortative; but the implication from the context is that if God’s rod were withdrawn, if the terror were removed, then Job would speak up without fear.

[9:35]  ² tn The last half of the verse is rather cryptic: “but not so I with me.” NIV renders it “but as it now stands with me, I cannot.” This is very smooth and interpretive. Others transpose the two halves of the verse to read, “Since it is not so, I with myself // will commune and not fear him.” Job would be saying that since he cannot contend with God on equal terms, and since there is no arbiter, he will come on his own terms. English versions have handled this differently: “for I know I am not what I am thought to be” (NEB); “since this is not the case with me” (NAB); “I do not see myself like that at all” (JB).

[11:5]  ³ tn The wish formula מִי־יִתֵּן (mi yitten, “who will give”; see GKC 477 §151.b) is followed here by an infinitive (Exod 16:3; 2 Sam 19:1).

[11:5]  ⁴ sn Job had expressed his eagerness to challenge God; Zophar here wishes that God would take up that challenge.

[13:13]  ⁵ tn The Hebrew has a pregnant construction: “be silent from me,” meaning “stand away from me in silence,” or “refrain from talking with me.” See GKC 384 §119.ff. The LXX omits “from me,” as do several commentators.

[13:13]  ⁶ tn The verb is the Piel cohortative; following the imperative of the first colon this verb would show purpose or result. The inclusion of the independent personal pronoun makes the focus emphatic – “so that I (in my turn) may speak.”

[13:13]  ⁷ tn The verb עָבַר (’avar, “pass over”) is used with the preposition עַל (’al, “upon”) to express the advent of misfortune, namely, something coming against him.

[13:13]  ⁸ tn The interrogative pronoun מָה (mah) is used in indirect questions, here introducing a clause [with the verb understood] as the object – “whatever it be” (see GKC 443-44 §137.c).

[18:2]  ⁷ tn The verb is plural, and so most commentators make it singular. But it seems from the context that Bildad is addressing all of them, and not just Job.

[18:2]  ⁸ tn The construction is קִנְצֵי לְמִלִּין (qintse lÿmillin), which is often taken to be “end of words,” as if the word was from קֵץ (qets, “end”). But a plural of “end” is not found in the OT. Some will link the word to Arabic qanasa, “to hunt; to give chase,” to get an interpretation of “snares for words.” But E. Dhorme (Job, 257) objects that this does not fit the speech of Bildad (as well as it might Job’s). He finds a cognate qinsu, “fetters, shackles,” and reads “how long will you put shackles on words.” But G. R. Driver had pointed out that this cognate does not exist (“Problems in the Hebrew text of Job,” VTSup 3 [1955]: 72-93). So it would be preferable to take the reading “ends” and explain the ן (nun) as from a Aramaizing by-form. This is supported by 11QtgJob that uses סוֹף (sof, “end”). On the construction, GKC 421 §130.a explains this as a use of the construct in rapid narrative to connect the words; in such cases a preposition is on the following noun.

[18:2]  ⁹ tn The imperfect verb, again plural, would be here taken in the nuance of instruction, or a modal nuance of obligation. So Bildad is telling his listeners to be intelligent. This would be rather cutting in the discourse.

[18:2]  ¹⁰ tn Heb “afterward.”

[19:18]  ⁹ sn The use of the verb “rise” is probably fairly literal. When Job painfully tries to get up and walk, the little boys make fun of him.

[19:18]  ¹⁰ tn The verb דִּבֵּר (dibber) followed by the preposition בּ (bet) indicates speaking against someone, namely, scoffing or railing against someone (see Ps 50:20; 78:19). Some commentators find another root with the meaning “to turn one’s back on; to turn aside from.” The argument is rendered weak philologically because it requires a definition “from” for the preposition bet. See among others I. Eitan, “Studies in Hebrew Roots,” JQR 14 (1923-24): 31-52 [especially 38-41].

[27:4]  ¹¹ tn The verse begins with אִם (’im), the formula used for the content of the oath (“God lives…if I do/do not…”). Thus, the content of the oath proper is here in v. 4.

[27:4]  ¹² tn The verb means “to utter; to mumble; to meditate.” The implication is that he will not communicate deceitful things, no matter how quiet or subtle.

[32:7]  ¹³ tn Heb “days.”

[32:7]  ¹⁴ tn The imperfect here is to be classified as an obligatory imperfect.

[32:7]  ¹⁵ tn Heb “abundance of years.”

[33:2]  ¹⁵ tn The perfect verbs in this verse should be classified as perfects of resolve: “I have decided to open…speak.”

[33:2]  ¹⁶ sn H. H. Rowley (Job [NCBC], 210) says, “The self-importance of Elihu is boundless, and he is the master of banality.” He adds that whoever wrote these speeches this way clearly intended to expose the character rather than exalt him.

[33:14]  ¹⁷ tn The Syriac and the Vulgate have “and he does not repeat it,” a reading of the text as it is, according to E. Dhorme (Job, 403). But his argument is based on another root with this meaning – a root which does not exist (see L. Dennefeld, RB 48 [1939]: 175). The verse is saying that God does speak to man.

[33:32]  ¹⁹ tn Heb “if there are words.”

[33:32]  ²⁰ tn The infinitive construct serves as the complement or object of “I desire.” It could be rendered “to justify you” or “your justification, “namely, “that you be justified.”

[34:35]  ²¹ tn Adding “that” in the translation clarifies Elihu’s indirect citation of the wise individuals’ words.

[34:35]  ²² tn The Hiphil infinitive construct is here functioning as a substantive. The word means “prudence; understanding.”

[40:5]  ²³ tn Heb “I will not add.”

[41:3]  ²⁵ tn The line asks if the animal, when caught and tied and under control, would keep on begging for mercy. Absolutely not. It is not in the nature of the beast. The construction uses יַרְבֶּה (yarbeh, “[will] he multiply” [= “make numerous”]), with the object, “supplications” i.e., prayers for mercy.

[41:3]  ²⁶ tn The rhetorical question again affirms the opposite. The poem is portraying the creature as powerful and insensitive.