« السابقةمتابعة »
I loved (17! relative, as in ch. xv. 17) have impelled towards him by sympathy, they are come, tarned against me.-This verse points parti- and at least stand by him while all other men fles cularly at Eliphaz, Bildad, and Zophar, the once
from him." Del. Pity me, pity me (pathetically trusted friends, who are now become his violent
repeated) Oye my friends!) For the band of
Eloah hath touched me. -An allusion to the opponents. Ver. 20. My bone cleaves to my skin
nature of his frightful disease, being a species of and my flesh (comp. ch. x. 11), i. e., Through
leprosy, i. e., of a y2! (2 Ki. xv. 5), a plaga Dei my skin and my extremely emaciated flesh may
p“wherefore the suffering Messiah also bears the be seen my bones, which seem to cleave, as it significant name '?? ?? ??, the leprous one were, to that poor and loathsome integument. from the school of Rabbi,' in the Talmud, after Comp. Lam. iv. 8; Ps. cii. 6 , and I am es- Isa. liii. 4, 8.”). One who is already treated caped only with the skin of my teeth:- with enough severity through the infiction of i. e., thus far only my gums (the flesh of my such a plague from God, ought not to be smitten teeth, here called the skin of my teeth, because also by men through the exercise of a mercilegg of their skinlike thinness and leanness of muscle) disposition, unfriendly words, etc. bave been spared by this fearful disease,-80 that Ver. 22. Why do ye persecute me as I am able at least to speak, without having my God, " by which he means not merely that they mouth full of internal boils and sores (as is wont add their persecution to God's, but that they take to be the case in the extreme stages of elephan- upon themselves God's work, that they usurp to tiasis). This is the only satisfactory explana-themselves a judicial divine authority; they act tion, to which most moderns give in their adhe- towards him as if they were superhuman, and rence (Rosenm., Umbreit, Ewald, Hirzel, Vaih., therefore inhumanly.” Del. And are not saHeil., Schlottm., Dillm.). This explanation of tiated with my flesh ? i. e., continually de“the skin of the teeth” as the “ gums," is un-vour my flesh, figuratively speaking, by false doubtedly the most obvious, simple, and natural. accusations, slanders, suspicions of my inno[Yet simpler, perhaps, is the view of Umbreit, cence, etc., gnaw me incessantly with the tooth Wordsworth, Noyes, Renan, Elzas, that it is a of slander (comp. Engl. “ backbiting"]. Comp. proverbialexpression, describing a state in which the equivalent figurative expression “slander" one is stripped to the very minimum of posses- | (daşá heuv) in the Aram. of the book of Daniel sion, or emaciated to the last point. Words-(ch. ii. 8; vi. 25) [" to eat the pieces of any worth: “A proverbial paradox. I am reduced one"], in the Syriac, where the devil is called to a mere shadow, I am escaped with nothing, or ochel-karso=diáßonos, and in Arab. where “ to next to nothing, so that my escape is hardly an eat the flesh, or a piece of any one" is equivaescape. I am escaped with the skin of what has lent to “slandering, backbiting.” no skin, the skin of bone; comp. the Latin pro- Ver. 23 seq. As though despairing of the posverbs, Lana caprina (Horat., 1 Ep. xviii. 15), and sibility of influencing the friends to withdraw Totum nil (Juvenal 3, 209)." To which may be from their attacks on his innocence, he now added the humorous English proverb: “ As fat turns with ardent longing for the final vinas a hen in the forehead."-E.]. Other expla- dication of the same to God, first of all uttering nations are in part against the language, in part the wish that his own asseverations of the same too artificial: such as a. That of Jerome, and might be preserved to the latest generations. many Catholio commentators, that by the skin [Ewald imagines & pause after ver. 22. Job of the teeth we are to understand the lips. b. waits to see what response the friends would That of Delitzsch, which explains it to mean par- make to his pitiful appeal. They are silent, ticularly the periosteum (in distinction from the show no signs of relenting. Job sees that he gums—as if such a distinction could have been has nothing to hope for either from men, or the known to the ancient Hebrews! (and “as though God of the present. But in his extremity he obthe poet had written for doctors !” Dillm.]).- tains a glimpse of the far-distant future, after c. That of Stickel and Hahn, who translate: “I his death, which fills him with a new and wonam escaped with the nakedness of my teeth," derful courage). Oh that my words were Si. e., with naked teeth).-d. That of Le Clerc, but written in here followed by 1 consec. who understands it of the gums as alone remain before the voluntative [future), on account of ing, when the teeth have fallen out.
the intervening 1DX, comp. Deut. v. 26), that 5. Second Division : Vers. 21-27. A lofty flight to a blessed hope in God, his future Re
they were but inscribed (pn, pausal form deemer and Avenger, introduced by a pathetic for pn(see Ewald, & 193, c, and Gesen., & 67 appeal to the friends, that they would be merci-1 (866) Řem. 8], Hoph, of ppn) in a book !fully disposed towards him, as one who had been(10D3, with the Art., as this expression is always so deeply humiliated, and so heavily smitten by the hand of God.
written-comp. Ex. xvii. 14; 1 Sam. X. 25, etc. Ver. 21. f“ Job here takes up a strain we have
-although no particular book is meant, but only not heard previously. His natural strength be
in general a skin of an animal prepared for comes more and more feeble, and his tone weaker
writing , a writing-roll). These words and weaker. It is a feeling of sadness that pre
of his, which he thus desires to see transmitted vails in the preceding description of suffering,
for remembrance by after generations, are, as it and now even stamps the address to the friends
is most natural to suppose, not those contained with a tone of importunate entreaty which shall,
in ver. 25 seq., (Hahn, Schlottm.) [Scott, Good, if possible, affect their hearts. They are indeed |
Bernard, Words., Rodwell, Barnest, but the suf
" | ferer's former protestations of innocence, the his friends, as the emphatic 'Yo ons affirms ; assurances which from ch. vi. on he has conti
nually put forth, that he suffers innocently. [In affirms. [The rendering: "gea, verily,"adopted favor of this view, and against the other, De by Schlotim., Words., Elzas, Mers, etc., is prolitzsch argues: (1) It is improbable that the bably designed to express the ascensive meaning inscription would begin with 1.-(2) It is more referred to above.] Forasmuch as ') is want likely that Job would wish to see inscribed that ing after nyt' (as in ch. IXX. 23; Ps. ix. 21), which was the expression of his habitual con
we should translate simply in the oratio directa : sciousness, then that which was but an occasional and transient flash of light through the
“My Redeemer lives.” 581, which according darkness).
to ch. iii. 5 means literally “reclaimer, redeemVer. 24. That with an iron pen for style] er," acquires a meaning that is entirely too speand with lead-i. e., in letters engraved by
| cial, when it is taken by Umbreit and some means of an iron style, or chisel, and then filled others (Renan, Rodwell, Elzas] to be=D77 983, in with lead, in order to make them more impe
" the blood-avenger” (Num. XXXV, 12, 19), for rishable—they might be graven in the rock
the previous discourse was not of Job in the forever! Instead of w? the LXX. read here, character of one murdered in his innocence,
and ch, xvi. 18 is too remote. After the analogy ag also in Is. XXX. 8: Tys, “ for a witness, as of Prov. xxiii. 11; Lam. iii. 58; Ps. cxix. 154, testimony,” (eis uaptuplov), an emendation how we are to think in general of the restitution of ever which is unnecessary, for the rendering the honor and right of one who has been “ forever” gives here a meaning that is quite Buitable. The monumental inscription is indeed
| oppressed, and are accordingly to take pa in preferred to that on parchment just because of
the sense of a defender, an avenger of honor-4 its greater durability, which is the reason why
meaning indeed which approaches that of a Job wishes for it here. In regard to the use of
"blood-avenger” in so far as the expected deliboth methods of writing already in the Pre-Mo
verance (or vindication is conceived of as saic age, see Introd., & 2, No. 4, p. . For ac
taking place only after the sufferer's death. counts of such inscriptions see Robinson's For the Goel is 'n, is absolutely living ('n, Bibl. Researches in Palestine, I., 169, 188 seq., “he lives,” incomparably stronger than uj", for 552; Wilson's Lands of the Bible, I., 184 seq.; instance would have been) ('n reminding us of Princeton Review, 1870, page 533 seq. “This
“that name of God, dhe in, Dan. xii. 7, after wish was not in truth too high on Job's part; for we now know sufficiently well that of old | which the Jewish oath per Anchialum in Martial in those lands it was sought to perpetuate by
is to be explained,” Del., and indicating here means of inscriptions in stones and rocks not the contrast between Him, the Living One, and only short legal precepts, but also longer docu- Job, the dying one, Dillm.], while the object of ments, memorable historical events, public re- | His redemptive activity is 19y, “dust," and as quests, prayers, etc. Such costly works it is true b shows, at the time when He arises, has long could in general be completed only by kings and been dust.–And as the Last will be arisë princes; Job was however a man of power in upon the dust. -19nx cannot possibly with his age, who might well express such a wish.”
Böttcher and others [so E. V., Lee, Conant, Ewnld].
Renan, Elzas] be construed in the adverbial Ver. 25. Not because he despairs of the possi.
sense “hereafter, in the latter time (or day.” bility of realizing this last wish (Dillm.), but
It is clearly a substantive, used either in appobecause he knows for a certainty that God will not allow his testimony to his innocence to sition to R2, the subj. of the first member, or pass down to posterity without His absolute as the independent subj. of the second member, confirmations of it, and hence because he re identical in meaning with this 'l. The word gards that wish for the eternal perpetuation signifies neither “Next-man" (Next-of-kin, Ger. of his testimony as by no means a vain one, he Nachmann] in the sense of Avenger (vinder: continues : —And I know my Redeemer Ewald, Hirzel), nor the “Follower" Germ. lives, etc. The 1 in 'nyt! 289 is thus not used Hintermann, "backer"], "second" (Hahn), but in an adversative sense (Luther, Ewald, Vaih., according to Is. xliv. 6; xlviii. 12, simply the Dillm. [Conant, Noyes, Lee], etc., but simply Last, he who survives all, an expression which continuative, or, if one prefers it, ascensive, is used here not with eschatological universality, introducing the end to which the realization of but with particular reference to Job, who is no the preceding wish is to lead. [“The progres- longer living (ch. xvii. 11 seq.). Delit sive rendering seems to be preferable to the however, and in a way which seems more suitaadversative), because the human vindication ble to the sublimity and scope of the passage: after death, which is the object of the wish | " as the Last One, whose word shall avail in the expressed in ver. 23 seq. is still not essentially ages of eternity, when the strife of human voices different from the Divine vindication hoped for shall have long been silent.”Of this Last in ver. 25, which must not be regarded as an One, or this One who is hereafter to come, Job antithesis, but rather as a perfecting of the says: “He will stand up, He will arise” (Dip'), other, designed for posterity. Ver. 25 is, how viz. for his protection and his deliverance (Dap. ever, certainly a higher hope, to which the wish
the customary term for the favorable intervenin ver. 23 seq. forms the stepping stone.” Del.]
tion of a judge to help one: Ps. xii. 6 ; Is. The causal rendering (LXX., Vulgate, Stickei |
| ii. 19, 21; xxxiii. 10, or also of a witness). He [E. V., Good, Carey, Renan].) is less probable, : although not altogether meaningless, as Dillmann is thus to appear on-ny, “upon the dust :"
i. e., according to ch. xvii. 16; xx. 11; xxi. 26, spannung), is an appositional relative clause, indisputably-on the dust to which I shall soon referring to niy. It is found in the third plur. return (Gen. iii. 19; Eccles. iii. 20), or in which I shall soon be made to lie down, on the dust of
perf. Piel of 7p3, "to break off" (in Piel used my decayed body, or of my grave. This is the particularly of the hewing down of trees. 18. X. only meaning of the expression which suits the 34. Hence the third plur. here being used imcontext (80 Rosenm., Ewald, Vaih., Welte, Del., personally (comp. ch. iv. 19; vii. 3 ; xviii. 18), Dillmann rConant, Elzas, Merx), etc.). Any “after my skin, which is broken off," i. e. cut other explanation does more or less violence to off piecemeal, mutilated, broken in pieces [E. V. the language, whether with Umbreit we trans- unnecessarily supplies “worms” as subject). late in a way altogether too classic, “in the The reference is to the skin together with the arena;” or with Hahn, altogether too freely : tender parts of the flesh [0'72] adhering to it, « above the earth," i. e. in heaven! or with which gradually rot away, so that the meaning Jerome, Luther, and most of the ancients, alto-l is similar to that of ch. xviii. 13. The nxt added gether too dogmatically, and withal against, the at the end of this member of the verse cannot usage of the language, we find expressed an “awakening out of the earth ;" or finally with
with possibly be interpreted as equivalent to nxi Hirzel and others, we understand it in a way ..... "
7N, “this shall be” (Targ., Gesen.) [for in altogether too rationalistic of an “appearing of that case nxi should have stood at the head of God on the earth,” in the sense of ch. Xxxviii., the clause]. We must either, with Arnheim, rejecting any reference to the continuance of Stickel, Hahn, Delitzsch [Lee, Rodwell, and life hereafter [this last rendering, however, preferred by Green], explain it to mean “go, in being adopted by not a few of the commentators this manner,” connecting it in this sense adverwho refer the passage to the final resurrection : bially with 192.1 “thus torn to pieces," Del.), 80 e. g. Scott, Lee). In opposition to all these or else explain it deictically, as pointing to the views, Dillmann says truly : “[Had Job intend-skin, or, since hy is strictly masc., as pointing ed here simply to express the hope of an appear to the body as here represented by that term. ance of God for the purpose of deciding the con- the totality of Job's members and organs. The troversy in favor of Job, 90- would have distinction which the E. V. makes between the been unnecessary (comp. e. g. Ps. xii. 6), and "skin" and the “body," the destruction of the instead of Dip' he would have said 77 rather,
latter being "after" that of the former seems
not sufficiently warranted. Such a distinction for it is not said elsewhere that God arises on the
must have been more clearly indicated. The dust when He appears; besides that God does
construction is indeed a peculiar one, and yet not appear in ch. xxxviii. on the earth, but llel exceedingly pathetic in its broken irregularity. speaks His final decision out of the storm. “ And after my skin-when it is all fallen off by Rather do] the words express the expectation decay-this tattered thing which you now see!" of a 5x2 who lives, even when Job lives no 1-E.] In respect to the various renderings of longer, who comes after him, and who for the the ancients, especially those of the Targ., of open vicdication of his right arises on the dust Jerome, of Luther, etc., see below [Doctrinal in which he is laid, or stands above his grave.” and Ethical] the history of the exposition of the (Analogies from Arabic usage compel us thus to passage.--and free from my flesh, shall I understand the phrase of the grave, or the dust behold Eloah.-If Y ap be explained “out of the grave; see Delitzscb.)". The words thus of my flesh" com as in this conce it is
of my flesh ” [or, as in this sense it is rendered lead us without doubt into the circle of thought by many, “in my flesh," either referring it to indicated in ch. xvi. 18 (although at the same his resurrection-body, E. V., Good, Lee, etc.; time beyond the same). He does not yet say or] with a reference to the restored body of the wbom he intends by this 782, because the main sufferer (Eichh. v. Cölln. Knapp. Hofmann). thought here is the certainty that such an.one [Noyes, Wemyss, Elz., Rod., who render by lives; not until ver. 26, after he has explained himself furtber, does be surprise the friends
"in"], it would form an inappropriate antitheand himself by saying that the object of his hope sis to '? in a, which would be all the more is Eloah Himself."
strange, seeing that only a little before, in ver. Ver. 26. And after my skin, which is 20, they had been used as in substance synonybroken in pieces, even this.--70X is not a mous. Neither can the expression signify exconjunction belonging to 10p, “after that” actly “from behind, or within my flesh" (against (Targ., de Dieu, Gesenius [Schlott., Con., Word., / Volck); this meaning would require wa, or Rod.], etc.), but as its position immediately 72? (after Cant. iv. 1, 3; vi. 7). Hence in before 'mir shows, & preposition [a prepos. is to be rendered privatively, "away from, withwhen used as a conjunc. being always followed out,"free from” (comp. ch. xi. 16; xxi. 9). In immediately by the verb; see ch. xlii. 7; Lev. that case, however, the reference is not to xiv. 43. Rendered as a prepos. the meaning of the last point of time in Job's earthly life, when the phrase “after my skin" will be “after the he would be relieved of all his flesh, i. e., would loss of it.” Comp. ch. xxi. 21, 1901x, “after be completely reduced to a skeleton (Chrysost.. him,” to wit, after his death).
Umbr., Hirz., Stickel, Heiligst., Hahn, Renan,
192.1, however etc.), but to his condition after departing from (which is not to be taken (with Hofmann, this earth, a condition which if not absolutely Schriftbeweis II., 2, 503] as a Chaldaizing incorporeal, is at least one of freedom from the variation of nADp?=an envelope, Germ. Um- | body. It refers to the time when, freed from his
suffering, miserable, decayed oáps, he shall be-, stranger, not another” (with which comp. Prov. hold God as a glorified spirit (Ewald, Vaihinger, xxvii. 2), containing an allusion to Job's three Schlottm., Arnheim, Delitzsch, Dillmann Con, opponents, who could not sbare in this future Green]). This latter interpretation is favored joyful bebolding of God the Vindicator, at least decidedly by the Imperf. 7Inx, which is not to not in the same blessed experience of it as himbe rendered in the present (as by Mercier, Habn,
self. Moreover the very fact that Job here so H. Schultz [Bibl. Thcol. des A. T., Vol. II.,
obviously glances aside at his opponents, with 1870), etc.): * I behold God even now in the spi
their hostile disposition, precludes the supposi
tion of Hirzel and others, who put the time of rit;" for then the circumstantial particulars,
the beholding here prophesied in this life, and niy ynx and '9033, would appear meuning-regard ch. xxxviii. 1 seq. as the fulfillment of less, and almost unintelligible, but which is cer- the prophecy; for comp. ch. xlii. 7 seq. [Zocktainly to be construed in the future, expressing ler's argument seems to be that the vindication the hope in a joyful beholding of God hereafter, recorded at the close of the book could not be (comp. the similar meaning of Jinx in Ps. xvii. the vindication here anticipated by Job for the 15, also of in' in Ps. xi. 7), that is to say, as reason that in the former case God did really the following verse shows yet more clearly, in appear to the friends, as well as to Job, whereas such a beholding of God in a glorified state after they were to be excluded (80 also Delitzsch) death (Matth. v. 8; 1 John iii, 2, etc ). The ex
from the appearance to which Job looked for pression of such a hope here “ does not, after
ward. But it is unnatural to suppose that the ch. xiv. 13-15; xvi. 18-21, come unexpectedly;
Theophany and the Vindication in which Job and it is entirely in accordance with the inner here exults, would be limited either to him progress of the drama, that the thought of a re- or to his sympathizing adherents. The very demption from Hades, expressed in the former object of it presupposes the presence, as wit- passage, and the demand expressed in the latter nesses, of those who had wronged him. When passage for the rescue of the honor of his blood, Job accordingly says: “I shall see Him-my which is even now guaranteed him by his wit-1 eyes shall bebold Him--and not a stranger"ness in heaven, are here united together into the he is not so much intimating that they would be confident assurance that his blood and his dust excluded, as denying that he himself would be will not be declared by God the Redeemer as in
excluded. The vindication was not to be in his nocent, without his being in some way conscious own absence, and before a stranger, who would of it, though freed from this his decaying body.” feel no interest in the matter, but-in some (Delitzsch).
strange, unaccountable way-he would be there, Ver. 27 'describes, in triumphant anticipation participating in the awful glory and the blessed of the thing hoped for, how Job will then behold triumph of the scene. This view of the meanGod. Whom I shall behold for myself, to ing also gives the most satisfactory explanation
of 71, not an “enemy,” as shown above, which wit, for my salvation; the , “ for me” (en
en would be inappropriate, nor “another," which phatic Dat, commodi, as in Ps. lvi. 10; cxviii. 6) | would be too general, but a “stranger," who being decidedly emphasized, as also IX, “I,” would have no interest in the result. The jubiby the use of which Job makes prominent the lant tone of Job's mind is strikingly exhibited thought that he, who was so grievously perse in the repetition of the pronoun: "(-for mecuted, and delivered over to certain death, was
my eyes,” the climax being reached in 7-*! destined some day to enjoy a blessed beholding of God. And whom mine eyes shall see.-E.]-Finally, the fact that Job here hopefully and not a stranger.—187 after the Fut. Minx promises this future beholding of God not only is the Perf. of certainty, or of futurity (præt. cular to his eyes, may certainly with perfectly good
l to himself as the personal subject, but in parti. propheticum 8. confidentiæ), and 720x5?, can only right be appealed to in proof that the condition
in which he hopes to enjoy it, viz. disembodied, be nominative, synonymous with 908 859 (et
freed from the earthly 702, is to be understood non alius, Vulg. ; 80 also LXX., Targ. [E. V.),
:: not as one of abstract incorporeality, or absoand most), not accusative, as held by Gesenius in Thes., Vaih., Umbreit, Stickel, Hahn, v. Hofm.
lute spirituality-for this is a representation [Noyes, Wemyss, Carey, Elzas, Green], who take
which is decidedly opposed to the concrete
pneumatico-realistic mode of thought found in the rendering which they assume, et non alium, in the sense of et non adversarium, “and not as
the Old Testament Scriptures, which does not
even represent God as abstractly incorporeal.an enemy”—which is decidedly at variance with the universal use of 71, which never signifies
My reins pine (therefore) in my bosom: " an enemy” [never at least except indirectly, viz. with longing for such a view. 172, lit. and in a national connection, a hostile alien: it they are consumed, waste away, languish; can scarcely be regarded as the word which Job elsewhere used of the soul pining away with would most naturally use in describing God's longing (Ps. lxxxiv. 3 ; cxix. 81), or of the personal relations to himself,-E.], and also at eyes (Ps. lxix. 4 ; cxix. 123; comp. above variance with the clause 1872', which ought ch. xi. 20; xvii. 5), here of that inner organ not to stand without an object, if 71805! were
memwoh, which is regarded as the seat of the tenderest,
er inmost and deepest affections, being used also an appositional accusative. It is undoubtedly in this sense in Ps. xvi. 7 ; vii. 10 591 (Del.. to be taken as a nominative (in cor-relation to Biblical Psychology, p. 268 [Clark. `p. 317]).
X and "J'y, “1-my eyes”] “and not a Comp. also the Arabic phrase culaja tadhabu,
“ my reins melt.” Essentially the same mean- | “the root of the matter" is to be taken in a ing is given to the phrase in the various render- good sense of Job's piety (Barnes), or the "jus. ings which on other accounts are objectionable, tice of his cause" (Renan). The expression e. g. the Syriac: “my reins waste away com- has indeed become in English a proverbial one pletely by reason of ny lot;" that of Hahn: for religious sincerity, and we who have become isif my reins perish in my bosom.” [E. V. and accustomed to it in this sense may find a little Good: “though my reins be consumed within difficulty in releasing our minds from the power me;" Lee and Conant: “when my reins are of that association. It will be found difficult, (or shall have been) consumed within me;" however, to harmonize such a thought with the eitber of which renderings is far less expressive connection. In the E. V., for example, no one as limiting the description to Job's physical suf- can help feeling that the connection between ferings, now, or in death, and failing to bring ver. 28 and the preceding passage has an unsaout the pathetic emotion with which the passage tisfactory abruptness and lameness about it, and expresses Job's ardent longing for the day of his even this connection, such as it is, rests on a vindication-a meaning which is not only far forced rendering of '? which is properly advermore in accordance with the general usage of sative only after an expressed or implied negathe words (see reff. above), but also most touch
tive. And in general it may be said, that wheingly appropriate here. As Dillmann also ther we regard ver. 28 6 as a declaration of remarks: “These words indicate that what Job | Job's sincerity by himself or by his friends, it bas said just before expresses something alto- will be found next to impossible to put it into gether extraordinary.”—E.]
proper and natural relations to ver. 28 a on the 6. Third Division : Conclusion: Earnestly lone hand, and to ver. 29 on the other. The warning the friends against the further continu-l most intelligible, tenable and forcible construcance of their attacks: vers. 28, 29. [It is wor- tion is that given above by Zöckler (and adopted thy of note how lofty the tone which Job, by Ewald. Dillmann. Schlottmann, Delitzsch. inspired by the vision of his future vindication, Conant, Green), which regards vers. 28, 29 as a bere assumes towards the friends. No longer lofty warning to the friends, inspired by the & suppliant for pity (ver. 21), or trembling triumphant anticipation of verg. 25-27, bidding before their threats of the Divine vengeance, he them if they continued to persecute him, and now threatens them with that vengeance in case to charge him with harboring within himself they persevere in their unjust treatment of him. (the root of the calamities which had befallen -E.)
him—to beware of the sword !-E.] Ver. 28. If ye think [lit. say] How will Ver. 29. Apodosis: Be ye afraid (D3) “for we pursue him!-'? is neither causal (Stick.) /
ck.) yourselves," as in Hos. X. 5) before the [Rodwell], nor affirmative, “truly” (Umbreit, I sword, i.e. the avenging sword of God; comp. Hirzel, Vaih.), [nor adversative “but” (E. V.), 2on in ch. xv. 22; xxvii, 14; Deut. xxxii. 41; which requires an untenable rendering of the
19 Zech. xiii. 7, etc. pora sword, withont the art. in clauses which follow; nor temporal-"then”
order to combine ihe idea of what is boundless, (Wemyss, Renan, Elzas, who refer it to Job's
endless and terrific with the indefinite,” Del.). restoration in this life; Good and Lee, who refer it to the resurrection), for this is inconsis
This sufficiently distinct threat of Divine pun
ishment is confirmed by that which follows: tent with the future 977!]; but, as the analogy
for wrath (befalls) the transgressions of of ch. xxi. 28 teaches, a conditional particle the sword, that ye may know that (there “if" [" when” Ewald; "since," Noyes), so
is) a judgment.-77pm, “glow of wrath, rage," that ver. 28 is the protasis of which ver. 29 is the apodosis. 72 in that case is neither an
can scarcely be regarded as the subject, with
the meaning: “for wrath (against friends) is interrogative “how?" (Böttcher) [Carey], nor one of the crimes of the sword” (Schultens, “why?" (Umbreit, Hirzel (E. V., Rodmann, Stickel, Schlottmann). [Conant, Noyes, who Elz. ], etc.), but exclamatory: "how! how much!" with less than his usual accuracy renders by comp. ch. xxvi. 2, 3; Cant. vii. 2.-In regard · malice"). Apart from the difficulty that to the construction of 777 with ?, found nisin. can by no means, without modification be only here, comp. that with 58 in Judg. vii. =the partitive nijipy, the meaning is not at 25. With this exclamation of the friends all suited to the true position of Job as regards there is connected in b the expression of an the friends, who might rather reproach him with opinion, or a thought on their part in the oratio anger, than he them. Rather is 721 a noun in obliqua: and (if yon think): the root of the the predicate, the meaning being: “wrath are matter is found in me, i. e. the cause of my l the sword's crimes," i. e. they carry wrath as a suffering lies only in me, viz. in my sin. As reward in themselves, they cause wrath, they regards this connection of an oratio obliqua with are infallibly overtaken by it (Rosenm., Hahn, an oratio recta, especially with exclamatory Delitzsch. Dillmann. etc.). « Crimes of the clauses, comp. chap. xxii. 17; xxxv. 3; Ewald, sword are not such as are committed with the 2 338. According to the reading of the ancient sword for such are not treated of here, and, versions (LXX., Targ., Vulg.), and of some with Arnh. and Hahn, to understand 20 of MSS., which have 12 instead of '?, this inter- the sword of hostilely mocking words' is arbichange of the direct and conditional form of trary and artificial-but such as have incurred expression is removed, assuredly against the the sword. Job thinks of slanders and blasoriginal construction. [According to another phemy." Delitzsch). This explanation is better view, followed by the translators of the E. V., ihan that of Hirzel, Ewald [Rodwell], etc.;