صور الصفحة
PDF
النشر الإلكتروني

"for wrath, i. e. something to be dreaded, are prevails more and more, until at last it remains the punishments of the sword,” for hijiy can supreme and alone.” Ewald.] scarcely be taken in the sense of punishments, chastisements; even in Ps. xxxi. 11; xxxviii.

DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL. 5; Lam. iv. 6, jhysignifies not so much pun

1. The history of the interpretation of verg.

25-27, the ishment, as rather evil-doing, sin together with

passage

of greatest theological imporits mischievous consequences. The above inter- tance in this chapter, exhibits three principal pretation is not, it is true, altogether satisfac- views of the meaning of these the two oldest tory; nevertheless, if we should attempt to rest on the texts of the ancient versions, and amend the passage, it would be better to intro- particularly of the LXX. and Vulg., which are

more or less erroneous, and yield results which duce aș before nijiy, than either to change are one-sided and partially perverted. It is npn to po? (Gesenius: “for such, i. e. such only the latest of these which, resting on the transgressions as yours, are crimes of the sword) original text, avoids these one-sided results, and or to introduce the constr. state non before sets forth the poet's thought with unprejudiced

objectivity. nisly, which is the construction given by the a. A rigidly orthodox, or if the phrase be prePesh, and Vulg., the latter of which reads: ferred, an ultra-orthodox (ultra-eschatological) quoniam ullor iniquitatum gladius est. A difficulty view, which can be traced back into the earliest is also presented in the word 1'? (K'thibh) or periods of the church, assumes that the passage jord (Kori) at the end of the last member, occa- predicts a resuscitation of the body by Christ on the

last day. This assumption rests on the reddersioned by the fact that w=wX does not else-ing of ver. 25 6, and ver. 26 « by the LXX., where occur in the Book of Job, as also by the partly indeed also on the Targum, but more fact that the rendering of the LXX.— Oū totiv especially on the rendering of the passage in the autāv ij van (or according to the Cod. Alex. Örl Vulgate—a rendering which flows out of the ovdauov avtov v loxís éotiv) probably points to older version, and which pushes still further its another text in the original.' The above ren- misinterpretation. The LXX. presents a verdering, however: “that ye may know that there sion of the words which for the most part indeed is a judgment," is in general accord with the is opposed, rather than otherwise, to the eschacontext, and corresponds well to the meaning tological view, which limits Job's expectations of these closing verses. It is not necessary with to the present earthly life, which in fact almost Heiligst., Dillmann, Ewald (2d Ed.), to read wholly precludes the reference to the future. 'TU: "that ye may know the Almighty;” nor But the words beginning with Dip', ver. 25 6, (which is moreover linguistically inadmissible) (instead of which it read O'P), and ending with

as a variation of 'In (Eichhorn, Ni, ver. 26 a, which it combines together so as Hahn, Ewald, 1st Ed.), which would yield the to form one sentence, it renders thus: ávaori DEL same meaning. ["9"? has everywhere else the dé pov oāua ávavrhovv hol tavra (Cod. Alex.: signification judicium, e. g. by Elihu, ch. xxxvi.

αναστήσαι μου το δέρμα μου το αναντλούν ταύτα). 17; and also often in the Book of Proverbs, e.g. tion after death of the sorely afflicted body of Job

According to this rendering a future resuscitach. xx. 8 (comp. in the Arabizing supplement, is as distinctly as possible expressed. The Tarch. xxxi. 8). The final judgment is in Aramaic last day in Heb. and Arabic, I know that my Redeemer lives,” and here

gumist expresses essentially the same meaning: ; 1ta Di', jaum ed-din. To give to puro, " that after my redemption will arise (i. é. be made, (there is) a judgment,” this dogmatically defi-actual, become a reality) over the dust, and nite meaning, is indeed, from its connection after that my skin is again made whole (or with the historical recognition of the plan of -according to another reading—"is swollen redemption, inadmissible; but there is nothing up"') this will happen, and out of my filesh shall against understanding the conclusion of Job's I behold God. On the basis of these interpretsspeech according to the conclusion of the Book tions, which were rooted in the hopes of a resurof Ecclesiastes, which belongs to the same age rection cherished by the Jews after the exile, and of literature.” Delitzsch.]

especially on the basis of the former (that of the ["Thus does this lofty tragical discourse LXX.), Clemens Romanus (1 Cor. 26), Origen combine in itself the deepest humiliation and Comm. in Matth. xxii. 23 seq.), Cyril of Jerusadepression with the bighest Divine elevation, lem (Catech. XVIII.), Ephraem, Epiphanius the most utter despair with the most animated (Orat. Ancorat), and other fathers before Jeoverflowing hope and the most blissful certainty. rome, found in the passages a proof of the Not only does it occupy the lofty centre of the church doctrine of the åváoTaoiç THS OQPkóc. Still human controversy and of the whole action, but more definitely and completely did the passage it also causes the first real and decisive revolu- acquire the character of a Scriptural proof of tion in Job's favor, because in it Job's two ruling this doctrine from Jerome, as the author of the thoughts and tendencies, the unbelief springing authorized Latin translation, which was adopted from superstition, and the higher genuine faith by the Western Church during the Middle Ages, just forming itself come into such sharp and as well as by the Catholic Church of recent happy contact that the latter rushes forth out times. While the predecessor of his work, the of its insignificance with irresistible might, and Itala, had somewhat indefinitely expressed a although the discord is not as yet harmonized, meaning approximating that of the LXX. (“sufrom this time on it maintains itself, gradually per terram resurget cutis mea," e'c.), the Vulgate

שָׁרִין to regard

set aside the last remnant of a possibility that I and quite recently the Catholic Welte, think that the passage should be understood of a restitution notwithstanding the various amendments which or a restoration of Job in this life. This it did following the original text they make to the verby introducing into the text of vers. 25 and 26 sion of the Vulg., or in a measure to that of Luthree inaccuracies of the most glaring sort. For ther, the passage must still be held to teach, at DAP; (or O'P.;) it substituted without more ado least in general, the Church doctrine of the reDIPX, surreclurus sum; plans it rendered, in no- surrection, in that they favor the inadmissible vissimo die! and rendering 1929 as Niphal of rendering of 7%? as = neque ego alius (" and P= 7ıp, “to surround, to circle,” it gave to truly I not as another, I as unchanged"), or unit no less arbitrarily the meaning of circumdabor, derstand the appearing of the Redeemer on the 80 that the whole passage is made to read thus: dust” as having for its object the quickening of ver. 25:scio enim, quod redemptor meus vivit et in the dead, and hence as referring to the Second novissimo die de terra surrecturus sum; ver. 26: et Advent of Christ, or find denoted in mu?? the rursum circumdabor pelle mea et in carne mea videbo glorified flesh of the resurrection body, or adopt Deum meum; ver. 27: quem visurus sum ego ipse other explanations of a like character (against et oculi mei conspecturi sunt et non alius ; reposita which see above in the Exegetical and Critical est hæc spes mea in sinu meo.”—This interpreta- Remarks). tion, which was emphatically approved and re- 6. A one-sided anti-eschatological view which commended by Augustine (De Civ. Dei XXII., limits the object of Job's hope and longing wholly 29), held its ground through the Middle Ages to this life, which may also be called the skeptical aniong all Christian expositors, and all the more

or hypercritical rationalistic view has for its prenecessarily that a revision of the same after the cursors in the Ancient Church Chrysostom, John Hebrew could not be undertaken by any one of of Damascus, and other fathers of the Oriental them. Neither does Luther's translation—“But Church. By an allegorizing interpretation of I know that my Redeemer liveth, and He will the language of the Lxx. avaothoel pov to hereafter raise (or quicken) me out of the earth, and ovua åvavrhowv pol tavra, these writers refine I shall thereupon be surrounded with this my skin, away the eschatological meaning which undoubtand shall see God in my flesh”-break through edly belongs to the passage as pointing to the the spell of this doctrinally prejudiced interpre- hereafter, and refer it to the removal of his tation; and just as little as Luther do the dis- disease which Job hoped for, and the rehabilitinguished Reformed translators of the Bible, e. tation of his disfigured body; and they saw 9., Leo Juda, Joh. Piscator, the authors of the that the phraseology of the Septuagint in the English Version, etc., exhibit any substantial de- remaining verses of the passage favored this parture from the meaning or phraseology of the interpretation. Most of the Jewish Exegetes Vulgate. Thus the rendering under considera- during the Middle Ages adhered to their view tion succeeded in acquiring the most important so far as the principle was concerned, the prininfluence even in the evangelical theological tra- ciple, to wit, of excluding from the passage any dition. It came to be cited in Church symbols messianic and eschatological application while (e.g., Form. Conc. Epit., p. 875 R.) (Westmin. in respect to many of the details they hit upon ster Conf. of Faith XXXII. 2], catechisms and novel expedients, which were in part of a most doctrinal manuals as a cardinal proof-text for wonderful and arbitrary character. The more the doctrine of the resurrection of the body, and freely inclined theologians of the Reformed occasionally even for the divinity of Christ (on Churches also, such as Mercier, Grotius, Le account of the ning of ver. 26). It became a Clerc, substantially adopted this view. After leading theme of sacred poets (e. g., of Louisa the time of Eichhorn (Allg. Biblioth der Bibl. Henrietta v. Brandenburg, who wrote “Jesus,

Literatur I. 3, 1787) it acquired even a tempomeine Zuversicht” [Jesus, my Trust], of P rary ascendency over the opposite opinions, and Gerhard, the author of "Ich weiss dass mein that not only with commentators of rationalistic Erlöser lebt" [of Charles Wesley: “I know tendencies, such as Justi, v. Cölln, Knobel, Hirthat my Redeemer lives"]], and in general itzel, Stickel, etc., but even with supra-naturalists, has received the most manifold application alike such as Dathe, Döderlein, Baumgarten-Crusius, in the domain of speculative theology, and in Knapp, Augusti, Umbreit, and even with Hahn, that of practical and ascetic piety. Even such strictly orthodox as he is elsewhere (De spe imthorough exegetes as Cocceius, Seb. Schmidt, mortalitatis sub V. T. gradatim exculta, 1845, and Starke, while in subordinate details occasionally his Comm. on the passage), with v. Hofmann departing from the traditional ecclesiastical ver-|(concerning whose peculiar rendering of 1972 sion, advocate strenuously the direct christolo- see above on ver. 26), with the English theological and eschatological reference of the passage gians Wemyss, Stuart, Barnes (Warburton, (comp. also Jablonsky, De Redemptore stante su

Divine Legation, Book VI., Sec. 2; Patrick, per pulverem, Francof. ad V. 1772: Gude and Kennicott, Noyes, Rodwell; to whom may be Rambach: De Jobo Christi incarnationis vate, added Elzas and Bernard], and others. Almost Halæ 1730, etc.). A number even of able Ori- all the advocates of this view agree in holding entalists, and independent Hebrew scholars since who interpret the passage of Christ and the final resurrec. the last century, such as Schultens, J. H. and J. tion, may be ment oned Owen, Vol. XII., Stand. Lib. of Brit. D. Michaelis, Velthusen, Rosenmüller, Rosen- Divines, p. 608 seq.; Bp. Andrews' Sermons, Vol 11., p. 251 garten, the English writers Mason, Good, Hales, seq. in Lib. of Ang.-Cath. Theol.; Bp. Sherlock, Works 1830, J. Pye Smith (Scott, Lee, Carey, Wordsworth),* seq.; Bp. Pearson on the Creed, Art. XI.; Dr. W. H. Mill

, Lent Sermons, Cambridge, 1845; Dr. W. L. Alexander, Cona • (Among other prominent English theological writers noc. and Harm, of 0. and N. Tosts., p. 153 seq.-E.)

that in ver. 25 seq. Job, having just before I are by no means wanting in preparalory intimaexpressed the wish that he might see his pro- tions of a clear and well-defined hope in future testation of innocence perpetuated, utters his retribution and a blessed immortality: see especonviction that such a perpetuation for posterity cially ch. xiv. 18–15, and ch. xvi. 18–21. would not be necessary, that he himself would c. Nor finally can the fact that neither by yet live to see the restoration of his honor and Job's friends, nor in the historical issue of the of his health, and that even though he should colloquy in the Epilogue is there any direct waste away to a most pitiful skeleton, he would reference made to this expression of Job's hope be made to rejoice by the appearance of God to of immortality, be urged against our interprebenefit him and none others.

tation; for “it is a general characteristic of all C. An intermediate view, or one exbibiting a the discourses of the friends, that they-spellmoderate eschatology, which resting on the most bound as they are within the circle of their exact philological and impartial treatment of external, legal views—scarcely enter at all in the original text, avoids the one-sided conclu- detail upon the contents of Job's discourses; sions of the two older interpretations, has been and in ch. xxxviii. seq. God does not undertake advanced and defended by Ewald (Die Dichter the task of a critic, who passes judgment, one des Alten Bundes, 1st Ed., Vol. III., 1836), and by one, on all the propositions of the contending substantially adopted by Vaihinger, Schlottman, parties. That the poet, however, should have v. Gerlach, Hupfeld (Deutsche Zeitschrift, 1850, framed for the drama a different issue from that No. 35 seq.), Oehler (Grundzüge der alt-testa- which it has, is not to be desired, for the theme mentlichen Weisheit, 1854), König (Die Unster- of the poem is not the question touching the blichkeitsidee im B. Job, 1855, Hoelemann (Sächs. immortality of man's spirit, but the question: Kirchen- und Schulbl. 1853, No. 48 seq.), Del. how is the suffering of the righteous to be har(Art. Job in Herzog's Real-Encycl., and in his monized with the Divine justice (Dillmann)? Commentary), Dillmann, Davidson (Introduction Such a change of the issue, moreover, would be II. 224 seq.) [Conant, Canon Cook in Smith's undesirable for the reason that the very contrast Bib. Dict. Art. “Job;" MacClintock & Strong's between the deliverance and exaltation which Job Cyclop. Art. "Job"], and even by the Jewish here hopes for as something which lies afler death, expositors Arnheim and Löwenthal. According and the favor which God visits upon him even in to the unanimous opinion of these investigators, this life, a favor infinitely surpassing all that he Job here expresses the hope, not indeed of a hopes and waits for, prays for or understandsthis bodily resuscitation from death, but neverthe is one of the most striking beauties of the poem, con. less of a future beholding of God in a spiritual stitutes indeed the real focus of its splendor and its glorified state. It is not the hope of a resurrec-crowning close (comp. v. Gerlach in the Homiletion; it is, however, the hope of immortality, to tical Remarks on ver. 25 seq.). Such a sudden which he is here lifted up, and that too with unexpected blazing up of the bright light of the great clearness and the most vivid definiteness, hope of immortality, without frequent references above the ordinary popular conception of the to it afterwards, and without other preparations ancient Israelites, as it has been previously or antecedent steps leading to it than a wish (in declared even by himself.

ch. xiv. 13 seq.), and a demand of similar mean2. We have, in our Exegetical Remarks above, ing (ch. xvi. 18 seq.)—corresponds perfectly to expressed our concurrence in this modified the style of our poet, who, having assigned bis eschatological or futuristic exposition of the hero to the patriarchal age, does not ascribe to passage, because, on the one side, the unmodi- him his own settled certainty of faith, reprefied doctrinal orthodox rendering presents too senting him as possessing such a certainty in many linguistic errors and arbitrary construc- the same clear, complete measure as himself; tions to have any scientific value whatever he aims rather to represent bim as striving after attached to it, and because on the other side the such a possession. To this it may be added that view which excludes every reference to the Hirzel's view, which places the object of the hereafter can be established only by allegori- sufferer's hope altogether in this life is contracally or rationalistically refining away the dicted by the fact that Job in what he has obvious phraseology of the passage. The latter already said has repeatedly described his end interpretation, which Hirzel in particular has as near, his strength as completely broken, his attempted to support with great argumentative disease as wholly incurable, his hope of an acuteness, cannot be successfully maintained. earthly restoration of his prosperity as having

a. The connection with vers. 23, 21 cannot altogether disappeared (ch. vi. 8-14; vii. 6; xiii. be urged in its favor, for Job by no means 13-15; xiv. 17-22; xvii. 11-16). With such contradicts the wish here expressed that extreme hopelessness, how would' it be possible

protestation of his innocence might to reconcile the expression in ver. 25 seq. of the be preserved for posterity, when in ver. 25 seq. very opposite, as is assumed to be the case by he declares the assurance of his triumphant the interpretation which refers that passage to justification by God hereafter; rather in pro- this life? And why again hereafter, in ch. xxx. claiming this assurance he but takes a new step 23, does the gloomy outlook of a near and cerupward in the inspired conviction that God will tain death find renewed expression in a way at last interpose as the Avenger of his inno- which cuts off all possibility of cherishing eng

hopes in regard to this life (see on the passage)? b. Job's former hopelessness, as he contem- Wherefore such an unseemly wavering between plates the prournful lot of him who goes down the solemnly emphasized certainty of the hope into Sheol, cannot be used as an argument in in an appearance of Eloah, and the not less favor of that view; for Job's former discourses emphatic expression of the certainty that he

the

oence.

has no hope in such an appearance? What to the future state. Its relation to the perfected would the artistic plan of the poem in general eschatology of those prophets of the exile, as gain by allowing the hero in the middle of it to well as to the post-exilic literature of the Apopredict the final issue, but afterwards to assume, crypha (for example the II. Book of Maccabees) even as he had already done before, that the is like that " of the protevangelium to the perexact opposite of this is the only possible issue? fected soteriology of revelation; it presents only

3. Seeing then that every consideration favors the first lines of the picture, which is worked up most decidedly the view which interprets the in detail later on, but also an outline, sketched passage in accordance with a moderate escha- in such a way that all the knowledge of later iology, the question still remains: whether that times may be added to it” (Delitzsch)—as from beholding of God after this earthly life, which Job of old the Church has been doing, and still is here anticipates as taking place concurrently doing, in her epitaphs, hymns, liturgies, and with the vindication of his honor and his redemp- musical compositions, and this too with some detion, is conceived of by him as soinething that is to be gree of right, although largely in violation of the realized in the sphere of abstract spirituality, or law of exegetical sobriety. whether his conception of it is more concrete, real

[The following additional considerations, sugistic, in analogy with the relations of this earthly gested by the passage, and the context, may be life? In other words, the question is: whether urged in favor of the view here advocated. (1) his idea of immortality is abstractly spiritualistic, Job, as the context shows, is, while uttering this or one which up to a certain point approximates the sublime prediction, painfully conscious of what New Testament doctrine of a resurrection? We he is suffering in the body. Note the whole pashave already declared above (on ver. 27b) in sage, vers. 18-20, where the estrangement of his favor of the latter opinion; because (1) The most intimate friends and kindred is associated mention of the eyes with which he expects to with the loathsome condition into which his dissee God admits only of that pneumatico-realistic ease has brought him. Note again how in the meaning, under the influence of which the old heart of the prophecy itself (ver. 26), he is still Testament speaks even of eyes, ears, and other unable to repress the utterance of this same painbodily organs as belonging to God, and in gene- ful consciousness of his bodily condition. If ral furnishes solid supports to the proposition now he anticipates here a Divine Intervention of Oetinger touching corporeity as the "end of which is to vindicate him, is it not natural that the ways of God.” To this it may be added that he should include in that vindication, albeit (2) the absolute incorporealness of Job's condition

vaguely and remotely, some compensation for after death is in no wise expressed by the phrase the physical wrong he was suffering?. If God oppo, notwithstanding the privative mean-, would appear to recompense the indignity to his ing which in any case belongs to j?, that this good name, would He not appear at the same expression merely indicates the object of Job's time to recompense the indignity from which his hope to be a release from his present miserable body had so grievously suffered? In a word, body of flesh, and that accordingly whrt Job here would not the same experience which here blosanticipates is (gradually accomplished to be sure of a justification of his spiritual integrity, bear

soms so gloriously into the prophetic assurance but) not specifically different from that which at least the bud of a resurrection-bope for the the Apostle calls την απολύτρωσιν του σώματος nuov (Rom. viii. 23; comp. ch. vii. 25), or 'what body, although the latter would be, ez necessitate on another occasion he expresses in more nega. Surely

rei, less perfectly developed than the former ? tive form by the proposition: ott gapę kai, aiua is to come, wiủ bring with it some compensation

Day of Restitution, which he knows βασιλείαν θεού κληρονομήσαι ου δύνανται ουδε ή for this grievous bodily ill, the dark shadow of quopà thu đod apoiav ki povouet (1 Cor. xv. 50). which fits across even this bright vision of faith! --Still further (3) the concluding verse of ch. This presumption is still further heightened xiy. shows that Job conceives even of man's con- when we note that he himself, with his own eyes, dition in Sheol as by no means one of abstract

is to witness that restitution. incorporeality, but rather invests this gloomy and mournful stage of his existence after death (2). The phrase by-by is not without sigwith two factors of being (903 and voj), con- nificance. It certainly means something more ceiving of them as existing in conjunction, and specific than “on the earth.” The Goel is to as standing in some kind of a relation to each stand “on dust” (or “on the dust”-article other (see above on the passage). Finally (4): poetically omitted), the place where lies the dust The perfected realistic hopes of a resurrection, of the body gathered to the dust of the earth. found in the later Old Testament literature from This is the only exegesis of n9y that is either the time of Ezekiel and Daniel on, would be ab- etymologically admissible, or suited to the consolutely inconceivable, they would be found text. The Vindication is thus brought into local drifting in the air without attachment or sup- connection with the grave. And this can mean port, they would be without all historical prece- only one thing. It shows at least that Job could dent, if in the passage before us the hope of im- not conceive of this future restitution as taking mortality beunderstood in the light of an abstract place away and apart from his dust. His body, spirituality. What Job says here is certainly his physical self, was in some way-he has no nothing more than a germ of the more complete conception how-to be interested in it. resurrection creed of a later time, but it must indubitably be regarded as such a germ, as such

(3). The expression niya? is no objection to a seminal anticipation of that which the Israel this view, even with the privative sense which of a later period believed and expected in respect our Commy. (and correctly I think) attaches to

j?. It does not mean,-it is doubtful, as Zöck- First," of which, though the singer understands ler remarks, whether for a Hebrew it could mean, it not, he is yet triumphantly assured, may be

—an abstract unqualified spirituality. At all chanted by the Christian believer with no less events the connection shows that here, as often confidence, and with a truer and more precious elsewhere in Job (comp. ch. vii. 15; xiv. 22; realization of what it means. xxxiiii. 21, etc.), va is used specifically of the cation of Job to this life is sufficiently refuted

(4) The interpretation which refers the vindi. body as the seat of suffering and corruption, the above. The argument, urged by Zöckler as by TÒ Quapròv tovro of Paul. Twice indeed in this others, that such an anticipation of a vindication immediate connection it is used in this sense, to before death is inconsistent with Job's frequent wit, in ver. 19, and ver. 22 (figuratively, how declarations that he had no hope, and that he was ever). Observe particularly that in ver. 19, as in ver. 26 the “flesh” is associated with the swered by Noyes: “As if a person, who is repre

near his grave, is perhaps fairly enough an. "skin" in describing his emaciated condition. sented as agitated by the most violent and oppoWhen therefore he describes bis physical condi-site emotions, could be expected to be consistent tion at the time of his ultimate restitution first in his sentiments and language. What can be by the clause “after my skin, which shall have more natural than that Job, in a state of extreme been destroyed—even this!” and then by the depression, arising from the thought of his clause, “and without my flesh,” what he means wrongs, the severity of his afflictions, and the evidently is, when skin and filesh are both no natural tendency of bis disease, should express more, when the destruction, the decay, begun himself in the language of despair, and yet that by disease, and to be continued in the grave, bas he should be animated soon after by conscious finished its course ; then would be behold God, innocence and the thought of God's justice, good—“After my skin”-and “without my flesh ” are thus parallelistio equivalents, of which still of hope and confidence ?". Job's utterances are

ness and power, to break forth into the language another equivalent is found in “dust,” the last in fact marked by striking inconsistencies, as result of bodily decay.—These elements of the he is swayed by this feeling or by that. The passage thus fix the place and the time of the following considerations are, however, decisive coming restitution; the place—the grave, the

against this view. time-the remote future, when his body should

a. It furnishes a far less adequate explanation be dust.

of the remarkable elevation and ardor of feeling It seems clear therefore that the passage can- which Job here exhibits than the other view, not be regarded on the one hand as a distinct which refers it to the hereafter. formal enunciation of a literal resurrection, for the last view which he gives us of his body is as of the expressions used, there are others with

6. However well it may harmonize with some that which is no more, as dust.. Just as little on which it is altogether irreconcilable. This is the other hand is it a mere vindication of his memory, a declaration of the integrity of his especially true of Dip; nohy and the prepocause, an abstract spiritual beholding of God, sition in quan. It may also be said that IDX for he is conscious of physical suffering-he an- —which is best explained as a preposition beticipates a complete restitution-one therefore which will bring some reparation of the wrong fore 'lly—implies a state wherein the skin has which he has suffered in the body, the grave ceased to be, in like manner as j? before 'ri. where his dust lies is to be the scene of his vin- Both these prepositions carry us forward to an dication, and he, the 's now speaking, the per- indefinitely remote period after death, and are sonal I contrasted with “& stranger,” as com- thus inconsistent with the idea of a physical replete realistic a personality, therefore, as any storation before death. It is especially incon. then living,—he is to be there, seeing with his ceivable that the poet should have used nøy-hy own eyes, and exulting in the sight. This neces- to describe the place where the God should apsarily implies a rehabilitation of the man, as well pear, if the appearance was to be before death, as of his cause, a rehabilitation after death, as the when it is remembered how invariably elseterms and internal scope of the passage prove, as where, when mentioned in connection with Job, well as the external plan and scope of the book; it is associated with the grave. Comp. chap. and if not a resurrection, it at least carries us a vii. 21; viii. 19; x. 9; xrii. 16; xx. 11; ssi. long way forward in the direction of that truth. 26; xxxiv. 15.* It is, as Delitzsch says above, an outline of that

c. It would be, as Zöckler well argues, & sedoctrine which needs but a few touches to com; Irious artistic fault, were Job at this point to be plete the representation. Indeed it may be said that if the passage had contained one additional introduced predicting the actual historical sothought, more definitely linking the dust of Job's lution of the drama in language so definite, and body with that future '2x, that vaguely foresha- this while the evolution of the drama is still godowed organism with the eyes of which he was

ing on, and the logical entanglement is at its to see God, the enunciation of a resurrection

height. According to the eschatological theory, would be almost complete. But that thought is the passage before us is a momentary gleam of wanting. It is not in the Book of Job. That brightness from the Life Beyond, which lights which is given, however, points to the resurrec- up with preternatural beauty the lurid centre tion; and the pæan of the Old Testament saint, of the dark drama before us, which, however this old “song of the night," breathing forth

may modify the development which fol. faith's yearning towards the “glorious appear- * Even in chap. xli. 25 (33] it suggests, as Umbreit correctly ing” of Him who is “The Last" as He is "The observes, earth as a transitory state of activity for leviathan.

it

« السابقةمتابعة »