RHYTHMICAL VERSION

OF THE

BOOK OF JOB.

CHAPTER I.

1

There was a man in the land of Uz whose name was Job. This man was pure 2 and just, one who feared God and shunned evil. There were born to him seven 3 sons and three daughters. His wealth was seven thousand sheep and goats, and three thousand camels, and five hundred yoke of oxen, and five hundred she asses, and a very great household of servants. And this man was great above all the Sons of the East.

4

Now his sons used' to hold a feast, each one of them at his own house, and on his own day; and they sent invitations to their sisters to eat and drink with them. 5 And it was the way of Job when these festival days came round, that he sent and purified them. To this end he rose early in the morning, and offered burnt-offerings according to the number of them all; for it was a saying of Job: it may be that my sons have sinned and cursed God in their hearts. Thus did Job continually.

4 Ver. 5. It was a saying of Job. The general aspect of the passage demands the frequentative sense for

He אָמַר בְּלִבּוֹ) or it may be rendered he thought ; אמר

1 Ver. 4. Used to hold. 1, went and made. has frequently in Hebrew the force of an auxiliary verb, giving to the verb that follows it the sense of constant or habitual action. Comp. Gen. xxvi. 13; Judges iv. 24; 1 Samuel ii. 26; Gen. viii. 3, and many other places. We have a similar iliom in common English: He went and said.

* Ver. 5. And it was the way of Job. “And it came to pass" will not do for the rendering of here, since that would denote only a single event.

Ver. 5. Came round. On account of the Hiphil form some would make sons the subject, giving it a permissive sense, as Conant does: They let the feast days go round. There are examples, however, of Hiphil verbs used intransitively, and it may here have the sense of Kal, Isaiah xxix., although the Kal, in its primary idea, seems to have a very different significance namely, that of cutting, as in Isaiah x. 31; Job xix. The incongruity of the apparently intransitive H phil would probably disappear if we knew the exact connection between the primary and secondary senses of the root. We may still give it something of a Hiphil rendering, and yet keep for the sub. ject: When the days had made their round-their end or section. Or it may borrow its sense from the unused root whence, P. xix. 7, a circuit, or occursus, kaTárraua, a meeting, as the Vulgate and LXX. have it in that place.

קוף

...

said in his heart, Gen. xvii. 17: Pa. xiv 1); or it may be thus taken without the ellipsis, like onui in Homer.

Ver. 5. And cursed God. This is the old rendering of the Syriac (13), favored by the LXX. Kakà èvevőnoav Tрos Tov eòr), although the VULGATE renders it benedixerunt, which Luther follows. JUNIUS and TREMELLIUS, maledixerint, although in the other place, ii. 9, they very inconsistently render it benedicendo. Aside from the strong demands of the context, the argument for the older rendering is found in the analogy of languages. The primary verbal sense of (whatever may be the order of its connection with the noun sense of 7, the knee) is to pray. Hence, in Piel to bless, to pray for good, or, as here, for evil, that is, to curse (the English word itself, according to Webster, having had a good origin in cross-to pray evil in the name, or with the sign, of the cross). In like manner, the corresponding verbs, both in Greek and Latin, ¿páoμat, precor (the latter with the same radical letters as the Hebrew verb, PRK, BRK) have, also, the two senses of prayer and malediction, although the bad sense, from the greater cursing tendency of the Greeks, is so much more frequent than in Hebrew. So also κατεύχομαι, joined with ἀράομαι, ÆsсH. Sept. Theb. 633

οἷας γ' ἀρᾶται καὶ κατεύχεται τύχας. Hence ȧpàs åpâσbai, found frequently (or some similar

6

Now it was the day when the Sons of God came to present themselves before the 7 Lord; and Satan (the Adversary or the Accuser") came also among them. And the Lord said to Satan, Whence comest thou? And Satan answered the Lord and 8 said: From going to and fro in the earth, and walking up and down in it. And the Lord said to Satan: Hast thou observed my servant Job, that there is none like him on the earth, a man pure and just, fearing God and shunning evil?

or presumptuous speaking about God (mala dictio) would be the sin the young men would be most likely to fall into when heated by wine; and this was the very thing that made Job so solicitous about them, even as he was ever solicitous for the honor of God whom "he feared." It shows, too, how justly he was entitled to the character given to him as one who not only feared God, but shunned evileverything that had the appearance of evil, or that might lead to it. See his own description of the highest human wisdom, xxviii. 28. See also the remarks on this touching recital of his God-fearing, paternal solicitude, EXCURSUS iv., p.

phrase) in the dramatic poets, may have the benedictory or Kings xxi. 10), the faithful Syriac renders it cursed ( the maledictory sense. The former is the more ancient (as). Profanity of some kind, some evil speaking, careless we have it HERODOTUS i. 132, ápâσtaι àyabá, and just above in the same section, KaTeúxeтai ev yiveσbai), the latter the more common. It is true, that they generally have an object expressed, or a substantive noun, like apà aph, which seems to determine their application; but then there is the same peculiarity about the noun itself. Thus apa more commonly means a curse; but it has also the older sense of blessing or prayer; as in HIERODOTUS ví. 63; ápyv éπоýσaνтo παῖδα γενέσθαι, “ they made a prayer that he might have & son:" and therefore he was called Demaratus, "the peopleprayed-for" king. If the context helps to determine which sense is to be given to the Greek verbs, there may be said to be the same demand of the context in such passages as these in Job and in 1 Kings xxi. 10. At all events, the facility with which these verbs are used in this double way furnishes an argument for those who hold to a similar tendency in Hebrew. It might, perhaps, be thought that, in some of the verbs referred to, the imprecatory force came from the compounded preposition, as in καταράομαι κατεύχομαι, imprecor. The preposition, however, only gives direction to the action of the verb, and may be consistent with either sense-blessings upon, or curses at.

Besides, in the case of the Greek ápáoμai and the Latin precor, the cursing sense occurs, when the context demands it, without any preposition-bene precari or male precari being equally independent uses. It is worthy of note, too, that, according to LANE, the corresponding Arabic verb in the viii. Conjugation (1) has the sense of vituperation, reviling, detraction. There is, moreover, the analogy of other similar words in Latin. Sacro, for example, may mean to consecrate or to make accursed. So sacer may mean holy, sacred, or impious, accursed, horrible. VIRG. auri sacra fames, "accursed hunger for gold." In this way sacro and exsecror (execrate) come to be used in the same way. The same law of contraries seems to prevail in respect to some other Hebrew words of a similar kind. Thus the verb purus mundus fuit—holy, clean-and, meretrix, one polluted, consecrata in the bad sense of the Latin sacrata. So (as a verb, or as a noun) may carry the idea of Bomething holy, consecrated, or something doomed, accursed, ávábeμa. There is the same equivoque in the Arabic haram. It is not without a natural ground, this diversity and almost contrariety of meaning. It comes from the fact, that the feelings of reverence and of awe, on the one hand, and of fear, detestation, and even of abhorrence, on the other, do sometimes approach each other. The terms are thus used in respect to things or ideas to which we cannot stand indifferent. This is the case with the idea of a personal God. Fearful as is the thought, yet experience, as well as Scripture, teaches that where there is no love for Him, there must be aversion. Not to bless, as Job does, ver. 21,

is to curse.

T:

The argument for the old translation is strengthened by the invalidity of the reasons given for the new. In the first place, there is no evidence that the Hebrew ever means "to bid farewell," like the Greek xaipeiv, or eâv xaipei, unless this place is found to bear testimony to it. And, secondly, there is but slight evidence that the Greek phrase itself is ever used in malam partem. Its etymological signification, to rejoice (like the Latin vale, Greek eppwoo, be well, be strong), is out of harmony with such a use. It is a bidding farewell, and may thus come to mean abandoning, giving up, especially when connected with áo, but ever with sorrow, never with bitterness. It does not mean to renounce or denounce in this harsh way. And if it did, that would be so near to cursing as to take away all its value as an explanation of the seeming difficulty. Such a formula would be most peculiarly inappropriate to the charge against Naboth, 1 Kings xxi. 10, "Thou hast said farewell to the king," as a mode of renouncing. There is not a particle of evidence in the Old Testament that treason or rebellion was

ever expressed in that way. The Vulgate and the LXX. in rendering it literally évλóynkas and benedixisti, thou hast blest the king, either misunderstood it or regarded it as a sneering irony on the part of the witnesses. Here, too (1

Ver. 6. The day. The article, as CONANT says, denotes here a particular time, as set for this purpose. The rendering, therefore, of E. V., there was a day, called for amend

ment.

7 Ver. 6. The Lord. The translator has followed E. V. in this rendering, instead of the rendering Jehovah which Conant gives whenever occurs. His is the more faithful translation undoubtedly, and yet it was something entitled to a better name than superstition which led our old translators to avoid the frequent mention of this highest of the divine appellations. We can hardly condemn the Jews for carrying the feeling still farther, even to the avoidance of the writing it, except in copies of the Holy Scriptures. It is the great and ineffable name, and the effect must be bad if its pronunciation is repeated everywhere in the numerous cases of its occurrence throughout fact of its being the proper name of Deity, as it were, in the Scriptures. What would make it sound worse is the distinction from others which are descriptive. If used thus, it would come to sound like ZEUS in Greek, JUPITER in Latin or ORMUZD among the Persians, or THOR of the Scandinavian mythology, and that is the reason, doubtless, why the scoffing infid Is are so fond of giving the name in full in their offensive and irreligious caricatures. The thought is of importance at the present time, when Bible revisions are so much talked of. Dr. CONANT's, or the new Baptist version, is, in many respects, an improvement on the old, and we can only hope, therefore, that, before it goes into common use in that denomination, there may be a change back to the old method. Still more exceptionable are the new modes of writing and pronouncing this sacred name such as Jahveh, Jehveh, etc. Etymologically, they may be more correct than that given by the vowels long attached to it; but it disturbs the sacred feeling that inheres in the name as pronounced on solemn occasions, and as it appears in the few cases of its expression by our old translators. Some of the German Rationalists seem to delight in being especially offensive in this way. It occurs a number of times in this Prologue, and comes again in the Epilogue, or the two closing chapters, but in the dramatic, or spoken part, it occurs but once, xii. 9, and that in a declaration more than usually solemn and emphatic. If we regard them as actual discourses, it is evident that the speakers shunned the utterance of the name. If it is a poetical invention merely, then the writer must have felt that its frequent introduction in the dialogue parts would have been a violation of a sacred dramatic propriety. There is one occasion, as it occurs in the Prologue, in which it was deemed best, by the present translator, to give the name itself. It is in Job's most solemn act of submission, ch. i. 21, where strong emotion causes him to break out into the chanting style.

The

8 Ver. 6. The Accuser-the Adversary. meaning of the name is giɣen here on the ground that it would be suggestive to the reader in those passages of the dialogue where Job speaks of "his enemy," and would give a deeper significance to what he says, xix. 25, of his Goel, Avenger, Redeemer.

9 Ver. 7. Going to and fro-walking up and down. Dr. CONANT's version, roaming over-walking about, is undoubtedly more in accordance with modern speech, and therefore, an improvement; but the present translator must confess his preference of the old English, as more graphic. Compare the language, 1 Pet. v. 8: "The Accuser, like a roaring lion, walks about seeking whom he may devour." It must have come from the Apostle's familiarity with this language in Job.

9 Then Satan answered the Lord and said: Doth Job fear God for nought? 10 Hast thou not made a hedge1o about him, and about his house, and about all that he hath on every side. Thou hast blessed the work of his hands: his wealth has 11 spread abroad in the land. But put forth thy hand now and touch all that he 12 hath, and see if he will not curse thee to thy face. And the Lord said to Satan: Behold, all that he hath is in thy power; only against his person put not forth thy hand. So Satan went forth from the presence of the Lord.

13 Now it was the day that his sons and his daughters were eating and drinking 14 wine in the house of their brother, the first-born. And there came a messenger to

Job and said: The cattle were ploughing, the she asses were feeding beside them, 15 when the Sabæans fell upon them and took them; The servants also have they smitten with the edge of the sword; and I only am escaped alone to tell thee.

16

17

18

While he was still speaking, there came another and said: The fire of God fell from heaven, and burned the flocks and the young men, and consumed them; and I only am escaped alone to tell thee.

While he was still speaking, there came another, and said: The Chaldæans made three bands, and set upon the camels and took them. The servants also have they slain with the sword; and I only am escaped alone to tell thee.

While he was still speaking, there came another and said: Thy sons and thy daughters were eating and drinking wine in the house of their brother, the first19 born. And behold, there came a great wind from the direction of the wilderness, and struck upon the four corners of the house, so that it fell upon the young people, and they are dead; and I only am escaped alone to tell thee.

Then Job arose and rent his garment, and shaved his head; and he fell to the earth and worshipped. And he said:

All naked from my mother's womb I came,

And naked there shall I again return.
Jehovah gave, Jehovah takes away;
Jehovah's name be blessed.

In all this Job sinned not, nor charged cruelty" upon God.

10 Ver. 10. Made a hedge about him. Among the striking epithets which the Greek poets affix to the name of the supreme god Zeus, no one is more suggestive of certain scriptural ideas than that of Zevs 'Epkeios (derived Latin Jupiter Herceus) literally, "the God of the household," of the enclosure" (from epxos, a fence, hedge, or wall)-the "God of families," of the domestic relations. It is thus the style of Scripture not to shrink from placing side by side, as it were, the two extremes in the divine idea: the "God Eternal, Almighty, Most High" (see the names El Olam, El Shaddai, El Elyon, as they occur in Genesis) in close connection with epithets denoting patrial, local, and even family relations. He is the God of the universe, navтоKрáтwp, and at the same time, a Beds Tarpios, God of Israel, the God of His people, of his elect, in a closer sense than was ever dreamed of in any Grecian mythology. This epithet is a gem from the ancient mine of ideas. The thought it carries is from the patriarchal days. "Thou hast made a hedge about him and about his house, and all that he hath." God does not deny what Satan says, although, for his own transcending reasons, He gives him permission to enter that sacred enclosure, and lay it waste for a season, that it may be restored to a

state of more perfect security. He is called Zevs 'Epkeios, say the Scholiasts, because his statue stood in the pros, and that these frigid souls, and many modern critics with them, think to be enough. They never think of asking the question that lies back of this: why was his statue placed in that spot? There was in it the same idea that is represented in those words of the Latin poet :

"Sacra Dei, sanctique patres "—

so pregnant with a meaning of which he himself perhaps had
a very inadequate conception,-the sacred family idea, now
so fiercely assailed in some quarters-those holy domestic
relations so closely allied to religion, and where Righteous-
ness lingers last when taking its departure from the earth:
"extrema per illos
"Justitia excedens terris vestigia fecit."
11 Ver. 22. Cruelty,
abnormal, anomalous, inexplicable.
word, ch. xxiv. 12.

:

enormity. Any thing See the note on the

CHAPTER II.

1

Again it was the day when the Sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord; and Satan came also among them to present himself before the Lord. 2 Then said the Lord to Satan: Whence comest thou? And Satan answered the Lord and said: From going to and fro in the earth, and from walking up and 3 down in it. Then said the Lord to Satan: Hast thou observed my servant Job, that there is none like him in the earth, a man pure and just, fearing God and shunning evil? And still he holds fast his integrity, though thou didst move me against him to destroy him without cause.

4

And Satan answered the Lord and said: Skin after skin'; yea all that a man hath will he give for his life. But put forth thy hand now, and touch his bone; 6 touch his flesh; and see if he will not curse thee to thy face! And the Lord said

5

7

Lord, and smote Job with a
And he took a potsherd to
Then said his wife to him:

to Satan: Behold, he is in thy hand, only spare his life. Then Satan went forth from the presence of the 8 grievous sore, from the sole of his foot to his crown. 9 scrape himself therewith, as he sat among the ashes. 10 Dost thou still hold fast thine integrity? Curse God and die. But Job said to

11

her: Thou speakest as one of the foolish women speaks. Shall we, then, accept3 good at the hands of God, and shall we not accept evil? In all this Job sinned not with his lips.

Now three friends of Job heard of all this evil that was come upon him. And they came, each one from his place, Eliphaz the Temanite, and Bildad the Shuhite, and Zophar the Naamathite, for they made an appointment together to go 12 and mourn with him, and to comfort him. And they lifted up their eyes afar off, and knew him not; and they wept aloud, and rent, each one, his mantle, and

to the bone, and to the quick or tender flesh. It represents the outside goods, ra ifw, such as property and even children. These may be stripped off, like one cuticle after another, but the interior life, the bone and the quick-flesh, is not reached. Touch that and see if he will not cry out in a different strain. Satan wanted to try the effect of severe bodily pain. He knew how intolerable it was, and that other afflictions, though deemed greater, perhaps, when estimated as matter of loss, could more easily be borne. The history shows that it was not the fear of death that was so terrible to Job, since he sometimes expresses a desire to die. then, here rendered the life (end of ver. 4) is not life, as existence, but life as feeling, feeling of severe pain. At the end of ver. 6, the context demands the other sense. He will give any thing, says Satan, to get relief from that when it becomes excruciating. See Remarks on this idea of unendurable pain in the Introduction on the Theism of the Book, p. 28.

1 Ver. 4. Skin after Skin. Heb. yy, or skin for skin, if we wish to take in the same way as at the end of the verse, y, for his life. But it comes to the same thing. From the sense of after, which certainly belongs to T, and, in Arabic, is the prominent sense, comes that of exchange, one thing after another, or taking the place of another; the preposition coming before either the price or the thing exchanged. But what is the meaning of it? It would require a large space to give the different views that have been entertained. The reader will find a very full list of them, as given by Dr. CONANT: Skin for skin-skin of another for skin of one's self-skin for the body-skin for skin, a proverbial saying, like for like-skin after skin, as Schultens explains it; that is, a willingness to be flayed over and over again, that is, figuratively, to be stripped of all his possessions, etc. It seems strange that none of them seek the explanation of the language in any thing beyond itself. After so much discussion, it is with diffidence the 2 Ver. 9. The reasons for this rendering are still stronger translator makes the suggestion that the whole difficulty is here than in the other passage, i. 5. The wife's vehemence, cleared up by simply adverting to the words and and apparent bitterness, demand the strongest expression. 3 Ver. 10. Accept. This is a more suitable word, and denotes more than receive. The latter word does not determine the manner, being, like the Hebrew ph. hap occurs in Daniel and Ezra, and may be called an Aramaism; but such examples, as has been fully shown, prove little or nothing in respect to the date of the Book. There are still more decided Aramaisms in Genesis and Judges. There are reasons, in some cases, for regarding them as marks of antiquity rather than of the contrary.

T:

("his bone and his flesh ") in the next verse. Y bone is used for the very substance of a thing, in distinction from its outside, or incidental properties. See Exodus xxiv. 12. So, sometimes. But take it here for bone, as something more interior than the skin, or as containing the medulla, or as connected with the flesh which has in it more of the life, the feeling, than the skin, and we have just the comparison desired. It is the interior flesh, the quick flesh, as contrasted with the less sensible skin. So in xix. 25, it is the contrast between the raw flesh to which he points (N), as yet remaining, and the skin which the crawling worms, bred by his disease, had already nearly devoured. The comparison seems obvious. The skin is outside

4 Ver. 10. With his lips. The Jewish commentators infer from this that while Job preserved correctness of speech, he was already sinning, or beginning to feel a want of submission, in his heart. But there hardly seems any good warrant for this. See Int. Theism, p. 28.

13 sprinkled dust upon their heads toward heaven. And they sat down with him upon the earth, seven days and seven nights; and none spake a word to him; for they saw that his pain' was very great.

1 Ver. 3. 13 x. When I was to be born.-We | to Hirek in the construct. state.