23 Tzalmaveth', world of shadows, brings He forth to light. Extends their bounds, then lets them pass away. 24 25 He makes them stagger like a drunken man. (079), though not exactly the same with that referred in science—or dynamical energy. See Daniel xi. 38, Dyn to by the would-be philosopher Zophar above, or by Job, the god of forces. DELITZSCH renders ♫ exist- 8 Ver. 16. Power-eternal truth. There is no desire to find too scientific or too philosophical a meaning in Job; but these are the best renderings we can give to those contrasted words 1 and 7. The latter is the reality of things, that which makes them to be what they are, their ideas, laws or principles as distinguished here from power or force, to use the word now such a great one • Ver. 17. i, used collectively. Either literal, or as the phrase is used in Latin, captos mente, despoiled of reason. T אשתוללו אבירי לב : .See Ps. lxxvi 10 Ver. 19. So DELITZSCH supplies the ellipsis. 12 Ver. 22. This word Tzalmaveth, together with Sheol and Hades, should have been naturalized in our English version. 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 And utter specious things3 in His behalf? Is it for God, indeed, that ye contend? Say, is it well, that He should search you out? Shall not His glory fill you with alarm? Pictures in ashes drawn, your maxims grave; Be still; let me alone; that I may speak,— My flesh," why should I bear it in my teeth? Lo! Let Him slay me; still for Him I'll wait;1a Yes, my salvation shall He be; For in His presence the impure shall never come. 2 Ver. 7. For God. The Hebrew order is carefully ob- | everything depends on the reading, whether, or has served since the surprise is that such a thing should be done for God. 8 Ver. 7. Specious things. 77 can hardly be taken here in the sense of intended deceit. 4 Ver. 8. The English phrase, though now becoming obsolete, is still understood from its Bible use, and is very expressive. 5 Ver. 8. Here, too, the Hebrew order is preserved. The contrast denotes surprise. 6 Ver. 10. The intensive double form, in, denotes strong and open conviction. Thus it furnishes the antithesis to (in secret) in the second clause. Something of the kind seems intended. It suggests, too, the idea of something almost prophetical of the conviction of Job's friends, and their open condemnation, xlii. 7. 7 Ver. 11. His dread. n stronger than 8 Ver. 12. 5. The rendering pictures here, may be an accommodation, but it is in harmony with the etymological and general meaning of the root. SCHLOTTMANN: Eure Denksprüche sind Aschensprüche. Ver. 13. Our E. V. is very happy here. Be still from me, which is the literal rendering, is opposed to our idiom. 10 Ver. 13. Literally: come upon me what may. 11 Ver. 14. A climax: flesh and life. The literal rendering of the verse is clear. For the different views of its application see DELITZSCH. 12 Ver. 15. I'll wait. In regard to this disputed verse, it is in the Keri. The Masoretic authority is in favor of the latter. So are the ancient Versions, Syriac and Vulgate. See the evidence most fully and fairly summed up by DELITZSCH, who adopts the rendering that has prevailed in the Church. In regard to the internal evidence, as he well says, nothing could be more Job-like. See xiv. 14, 15; xix. 25. Job's lowest despondency is generally the season when his strangely supported spirit mounts up to the strongest expression of his never to be extinguished hope. suggests 18 Ver. 19. Who then is HE? The one challenged here would seem to be God, although commentators generally do not thus regard it. If so, would properly be exclamatory, rather than interrogatory: What kind of a one? The view has some confirmation in what follows, (ver. 20), unless we suppose an abrupt change of person, a thing which indeed often occurs in Hebrew, but would not be necessary here. It explains, too, the language of the second clause. Some render this, "then shall I be silent and expire." But such a construction as VIINI W something conditional, as it is well rendered in E. V.: "If I hold my peace, I shall give up the ghost." It looks as though Job shrunk from the challenge, but felt that he must utter it or die. The VULG. seems to have had this view in its interpolation, veniat! Let him come-let him appear: Veniat; quare tacens consumor? If the view be correct, then, there would be an emphasis on N, expressed, it may be, in the tone, or dεLKTIKOS, as the critics say, and which is here attempted to be represented by capitals. 21 22 22 23 24 25 25 26 27 28 Far off withdraw thy hand from me, Why hold me for thy foe? A driven leaf would'st thou affright? The withered chaff pursue? For bitter things against me thou dost write;15 And to my youthful sins, thou makest me the heir. And guardest all my ways, Making thy mark" upon my very soles; Whilst he18 (thus watched) in rottenness consumes; 14 Ver. 24. DELITZSCH well says: "The bold confidence expressed in the question and challenge of ver. 23 (and he might bave said of ver. 19) is here changed to a sort of mournful astonishment at God's not appearing, and his seeming to hold him as an enemy without an investigation of his case." 15 Ver. 26. Thou dost write. DELITZSCH renders thou decreest. The literal sense is better as preserving the favorite Scriptural image of God's recording book. 16 Ver. 26. Literally, make me inherit. Others render it, possess; but that loses the most impressive figure: the old man heir to the young man's follies. 17 Ver. 27. Making thy mark. Here, as elsewhere sometimes, the most literal rendering gives the best clue to the meaning. The translator must express his surprise at the way in which commentators have gone round and round the idea without exactly hitting it. Most of them take it as meaning "to set a bound about the feet," to prevent his going beyond it. So HEILIGSTEDT, HIRZEL, DILLMANN, SCHLOTTMANN, CONANT, Who cites them, and others. GESENIUS: circa radices pedum meorum effodisti fossam, "dug a trench around them." EWALD, citing Aben Ezra, held this view at first, but afterward changed it for another. He renders р dich versicherst, makest thyself sure of, which is true as an inferential conclusion, but can, in no way, be taken as a sense of р. To get it, he goes a great way, and most unnecessarily, to the Arabic chakka, v. conjugation, tachakkaka ala, certus factus-a secondary Arabic sense, derived from an older secondary Hebrew sense of the Pool, decrevit, legislavit; and then he compares it with tachakkama ala. Besides, tachakkaka is not followed by ala, but by min. Everything in the context goes to show that Прn here, pрn, has its primary sense of marking, Tremellius renders it quite literally: super radices pedem meorum imprimeris, and is followed by our English Version: "thou settest a print upon the heels of my feet." This gives the exact idea, except in its failure to represent the reflex, or Hithpahel, sense of рплл, which DELITZSCH finds a difficulty, although he renders it, like so many others, "thou makest for thyself a circle around the soles of my feet." It is not easy to see how he and others get from the words the sense surrounding, or to set round. The Hithpahel, like the Greek Middle, may be often rendered by the addition of the personal possessive pronoun. Thus, Kal, Thou markest; Hithpahel, thou makest thy mark-thy mark for thyself. This at once suggests the idea which our E. V. and Tremellins come very near expressing. It is, in general, the owner putting his mark somewhere upon his beast, that he may know it, and, in this case, more specially, putting a mark upon the foot-as on the camel's hoof, for example, that he may track it when wandering in the desert. The VULGATE: vestigia pedum meorum considerasit, seems suggested by this, and may itself have suggested Ewald's interpretation. The grievance Job complains of, in this case, would be like putting such a mark upon an old worn-out camel, which, instead of straying, was unable to stand up. Thus Job represents the dealing with himself, so watched, s0 marked, and yet so helpless. It is in perfect harmony with the complaint above, “Thou guardest all my ways," and with what is said about "the driven leaf," and "chasing the withered" chaff: it is all so useless, and therefore cruel. In this interpretation, there may, perhaps, be found a clue to the sudden change of person in the next verse. 18 Ver. 28. Whilst he. Job still has in mind the animal to whom his figure refers, but, at the same time, intending himself, as one thus watched, and having a mark put upon his feet to track him if he strays, although he is a poor emaciated creature, without strength to move or stand. To a Hebrew reader accustomed to it, this change (though the transition from the 1st person to the 3d is rare) would be felt as very touching. We can only supply it by an ellipsis as the translator has endeavored to do. CHAPTER XIV. 1 2 Man of woman born; Few are his days, and full of restlessness. He comes forth like a flow'r, and is mown down; 1 Ver.1. This may be supposed to be said after a brief pause. 2 Ver. 2. Flees. Heb, and flees. The frequent Hebrew conjunction is often a mere breathing, a transition particle, merely indicating a going on of the thought. In such cases, we come nearer to the spirit of the original by leaving the passage unbound (ȧovvdeтov), than by clogging it with our heavy connective and. See the rendering of xiii. 23 as compared with the original. 13 Its stump all dead and (buried) in the dust; And send forth shoots like a new planted stem. Man draws his parting breath, and where is he? As wastes the flood and drieth up, So man lies down to rise no more; Until the Heavens be gone, they ne'er awake, [A BRIEF PAUSE.] O that in Sheol thou would'st lay me up; That thou would'st hide me till thy wrath shall turn,3— Set me a time, and then remember me. [A MUSING SILENCE.] 14 Ah, is it so? When man dies, does he live again! 3 Ver. 3.y: on this; deɩKTUKŵs; either by tone or gesture indicating that he means himself; as is shown by the sudden change of person. MERX wholly destroys the pathos of this by arbitrarily changing into 4 Ver. 4. O could. The optative rendering here is not only according to the usual use of ", but gives more distinctly the idea of inherited human depravity, and consequent disease, which here forces itself upon the mind of Job, On this account, it may be thought singular that it should be generally a lopted by the more rationalizing commentators. There is here, says UMBREIT, the Oriental (!) idea of the Erbsünde; but then he immediately qualifies it as usual by saying: "Not. however, in the sense of the subtile dogmatic definitions." 6 Ver. 8. The supply of the ellipsis only gives the full meaning. 6 Ver. 10. 7 unites both these senses: fallen-wastes. It puts him in contrast with the fallen tree. 7 Ver. 11. D' may mean any large collection of water. 8 Ver. 13. 1 denotes a turning. DELITZSCH, very hap pily: Till thine anger change." Ver. 14. Ah, shall he live?". This language is neither that of denial. nor of dogmatic affirmation. Between these lie two states of soul: one of sinking doubt, the other of rising hope. It depends upon the tone and manner of utterance, whilst these, again, can only be recalled to us by something in the structure of the sentence, or by the context. The particle is the hinge on which *Ω πόποι ἢ ῥά τίς ἐστι καὶ εἶν Αίδαο δόμοισιν O wonder! Is there truly in that unseen world And so even the Christian believer might speak when the momentous thought comes suddenly before him with some 15 16 17 18 19 Then all the days appointed me I'll wait, Then thou wilt call, and I will answer thee; For thou wilt yearn" towards thy handy work. Thou wilt not set a guard" upon my sin; (For) sealed, as in a bag, is my transgression bound, And mine iniquity thou sewest13 up. [A LONGER INTERVAL OF SILENCE.] Yes1-even the mountain falling wastes away; Its overflowings sweep away the soil; This new impressiveness. There is still another shade of the idea, near akin to this feeling of wonder: When a man dies, does he live! That is: Is death really the way to life? Do we live by dying? See the quotation from Euripides, and the remarks in the INTRODUCTION ON THE THEISM, page 8. In regard to the force of the context, there can be but little doubt. There is certainly a rising of hope which has somehow come in after the mournful language of ver. 12. prompts the prayer preceding, in ver. 13; then there is the exclamation; and then, as though from some inspiration it had given him, the strong declaration that he would wait for this change, as involving something most desirable, though wholly unknown. Immediately follow words that Beem to rise to full assurance (ver. 15): "Thou wilt call, and I will answer thee; thou will have regard to the work of thy hands." This force of the context is very clearly presented by DELITZSCH. The mode of expression implies some thing of a traditional knowledge, to say the least: Ah, is it se. as we have heard, rò @pvàλovμevor-that saying rumored everywhere? For surely Job must have heard it, or heard of it. The Egyptians had it; see DIOD. SIC. i. 51. According to the Rationalists themselves, the Persians and other transEuphratean nations must have had it long before the time they ascribe to the book of Job. If the Vedas which MERX quotes (see INT. THEISM, page 16) are as old as pretended, some rumor of this idea must have crossed the Indus, and reached the land of Uz. The Greeks, we know, had it in the ante-Homeric times. There is good evidence, too, of its having been entertained by the early Arabian tribes; as is shown by passages in the Koran where the Infidels reply to Mohammed, saying: "When we are dead and have become dust and dry bones, how can we be revived? Why, this is just what we were threatened with, we and our fathers of old; away with it; surely this is nothing more than fables of the ancient men." See Koran Surat. xxiii. 84, 85; xxvii, 69, 70 and other places. io Ver. 14. Reviving. : General sense change, vicissitude, from that mysterious root . It is used in connection with NY, warfare, time of military or other serrice, x. 17. Here the change, naturally suggested by the context, is release from Sheol, as from a warfare, when that set time comes. There can hardly be a doubt, however, that the use of the word here is suggested to Job by the verb , which he had taken, ver. 7, to denote the regermination of the tree. This, of itself, would seem to settle it that the change in view is one of reviviscence, and the idea derives still farther aid from the use of the word. Ps. xc. 5, where the Kal is applied to the flower growing up in the morning, and Ps. cii. 27, where the Hiphil denotes the revi viscence of nature in the new Heavens and the new Earth. As change, it is never change from life to death; and if that were the meaning intended here, a more unfit word could not be found. 11 Ver. 15. Wilt yearn. : a word of great strength and pathos, well rendered yearn by CONANT. In Ps. lxxxiv. 3, the Niphal is used to express the longing of the soul for God and the services of his house. There it is pines, yea faints my soul for the courts of the Lord." In Gen. xxxi. 30, it is used to describe Jacob's intense longing for home. And this is the word which, by a blessed anthropopathism, is used here to express God's longing for the handy work which he had once so curiously and marvellously made. 12 Ver. 16. gives here an intensive sense. The connection only occurs elsewhere in Prov. v. 22, where it is taken in bonam partem. In both cases, it has the sense of guarding for the sake of preserving. The idea is that there is no need any more of guarding or watching over Job's sin, lest it should be lost, for it is sealed up-tied fast in God's fasciculus, or bundle (compare the same word, 13, ver. 17, as used 1 Sam. xxv. 29, for the "bundle of life"). Such seems to be the train of thought, and it makes clear a passage which has been supposed to present no little difficulty in consequence of an apparent disagreement between its two clauses. The interrogatory rendering, as given in E. V., and elsewhere, is a forced help. The Vulgate regards a secon 18 Ver. 17. Sewest up. Gesenius gives bau dary sense suggested by the Greek phrase dólov pánтELV"to sew falsehood against my iniquity." This suits Ps. cxix. 69; but there it is y, against me, against the person, not against the sin, which would be an absurdity. It would be here, moreover, an unnecessary departure from the other figures. 14 Ver. 18. Yes, even the mountain. The expressive particle, DN, as it occurs in Job, often denotes a kind of soliloquizing pause. It makes an emotional rather than a logical transition, suggestive rather than adversative. It may be supposed to refer to something thought, rather than expressed. What is the point of the comparisons that here start up in the mind of the musing, partly controverting, partly soliloquizing Job? It is a question which commentators have had difficulty in answering. The connective link would seem to be something suggested by the thought of deliverance from Sheol, ver. 15. But "how long! O Lord, how long!" as the Psalmist so expressively says. The mind of Job, beginning to fall back into its despondency, is led 'o a mental consideration of the slow changes of nature, and his breaking out with is a sort of answer to the thought that had silently intervened: Ah, yes; God's times are long; the earth, too, and the heavens (see vers. 11 and 12) are passing away. "Yes, even the mountain falling crumbles to decay." The effect of this is to throw a shade over his hope, until at the end of the chapter he seems to have got almost wholly to his old despairing state. 15 Ver. 18. In the version given there is an attempt to combine the two senses of phy so closely suggestive of each other, namely age and removal. See Note ix 5. 16 Ver. 19. Wears the stones: the pebbles on the beach made round and smooth by the ablution of the waters. It is a phenomenon suggestive, even to the most common mind, of long duration. One might almost fancy it a description of geological changes. |