TT the phrase " Deut. vii. 13, which DELITZSCH cites means the womb only in a secondary application. Its primary sense is belly, body (Arabic ¡and 17, used in the same way), the interior part; hence used, as in Job xv. 2, 35; Prov. xxii. 18; xviii. 8; xx. 27; xxx. 26; Hab. iii. 16, for the interior spirituality; see Note Job xv. 2. In this primary sense of body it is applicable to the male as well as to the female. And so it is rendered in E. V. children of my בני חלצי ",children of my boncela בני מעי body. It is like "children of my loins." The reference to his children, after the mention of his wife, is most natural; and it should be horne in mind that only four verses above, the brothers of Job, whether uterine, or collateral kinsmen more remote, are mentioned by their own appropriate name () as estranged from him, and far removed. They had abandoned him, and could not have been affected by any such offensiveness. The friends alone seem to have remained in close contact with him, and therein, with all their harshness, they were better than his wife and his brethren. Besides, that there should be no mention of children, would, indeed, be very strange. The difficulty clears up when we abide by the old rendering, whilst the mention of his dead children, and his yearning for them, in connection with his wife's aversion, becomes a most touching instead of such an offensive picture, as the other rendering would make it. • Ver. 18. When I attempt to rise. Dips: paragogic -subjective or optative sense when I would rise, indicating a feeble attempt, as he sits upon the ground, or among the ashes, ii. 8. The boys mock his emaciated form and tottering motions. with fastidium, as used Numb. xi. 20. But they cannot be the same word, as there is radical, and the word is evidently allied to the Arabic, to repel. There is nothing in the Hebrew akin to nausea, and the peculiar offensiveness in Numb. xi. 10, arose from satiety, excessive familiarity, which is an idea the very opposite to that of strangeness. Carrying out the idea which is supposed to be intended in the first clause, many commentators give to n, in the second, a sense derived from another Arabic root channa (in stead of hanna) with the sense of fator. The arguments against it are, 1, that 1, in the usual sense, is a very common Hebrew word. The Hithpahel conjugation is in verse 16, immediately preceding, and the Kal is repeated twice in ver. 21, in almost immediate connection: nn. pity me, oh pity me, ye my friends. The Arabic channa differs in the diacritical point, but to the reader's eye the word nsed is the same root in all these places of the same chapter, to say nothing of its very frequent occurrence in all other parts of the Hebrew Scriptures. This certainly makes it seem very improbable that the writer should have gone so far out of his way to get a very foreign and almost opposite meaning in this passage. What makes it stranger still, is that the Hebrew is well supplied with words to express this idea of foetor. There is the very common with its derivatives, besides . ', which occurs more than twenty times, and another form 3, Joel ii. 20. 2. The primary meaning of channa, as given by the Lexicographers, and especially by LANE, the most exact of them all (and who differs from them in his copious citation of illustrating passages) is "the emission of the breath, with a sound, through the nostrils." This shows that it is an onomatopic, khanna, a nasal sound, or utterance. If used to denote a disease, it would be something like the catarrh, or a cold in the head 3. In getting this sense of factor, they take the remote Xth conjugation of channa (as given by Golins and Freytag, without any references): fotorem emisit puteus-a sense which LANE relegates to the most unusual ones, and which is most probably dialectical, or coming from some incidental association of sound or otherwise. It is certainly very rare, not to be found in the Aucient Arabic, or in the later classical. It is not in the Koran, or in Hariri, or in Ahmed's Life of Timur, or in the copious Koranic commentary of Alzamakhshari. Besides this, it seems most likely to be derived from sachana, meaning to be warm (especially water). The VIIIth conj. of this root (istachana) would differ only by the doubling of the final onsonant from the Xth of the other; and in the Arabic it sometimes happens that the derivative senses thus get mixed together, as istuchana and istachanna. There is the same argument against bringing it from the Syriac rancidus. It is found only in CASTELL without any citations.. Both in the Hebrew and in the Arabic, as well as in It may be a late derivative from the Arabic, but more likely a merely accidental accommodation from the old sense of ; hence in Syriac, ', a name for a kind of oil (from the idea of smoothness) afterwards used for rancid oil. Any authority that this might seem to possess is invalidated by the fact that the Peschito Syriac translators would have found this word hanino (had it been old Syriac) the very one to be used if fortor were the real meaning intended. Instead of this, they have used the old Hebrew and Syriac 1, and given precisely the rendering of our E. V. (J), "I entreated, supplicated for the children of my bowels." ;חנן A strong argument against this later rendering of fortor, offensiveness, is that, in consequence of demanding for the sense of to, instead of for, or on account of, it makes it impossible that '] (2d clause) should mean the children of Job, for they were all dead. Attempts have been made to refer it to children of slaves, etc., but this is too farfetched to deserve notice. UMBREIT and DELITZSCH regard as referring to his mother's womb, called my womb (as In iii. 10 10 "doors of my womb "). CONANT states the argument very well and concisely for this; but it does not satisfy. Job is not speaking of himself here, and so the argument from iii. 10, does not apply. In Micah vi. 7, certainly means children, and to get away from it by saying that in that case there is meant the womb of his wife is taking away all definiteness from the phrase, aud making it mean anything an exigentia loci might demand. So with 7 Ver. 19. Men of my counsel, 'MD 'n. See Psalm lv. 15, "With whom I took sweet counsel." 8 Ver. 19. Are turned against the sight. The rendering is not too full for the Heb. 15)—are turned right round, or right away. It implies a revolting sight, brought out in all its ghastly features in the next verse. 9 Ver. 20. All shrunk away. This verse has given rise to much and varied comment. The things first to be determined are the meaning of the phrase 1 (skin of my teeth) and the meaning and construction of the verb noon. The idea of DELITZSCH that the first means the periosteum, a fibrous membrane surrounding the bone, is farfetched, and could not have been thought of by Job. No meaning can be given to the phrase unless it be the lips or gums surrendering the teeth, the covering of the teeth. There is no reason he e to go beyond the primary sense of the verb the cognate it is that of smoothness (levis, glaber fuil, GFS.) bareness, slipperiness. Hence elapsus est, evasit, he slipped away, he escaped. There is the same primary idea in the English escape. As an escape from danger, however, or dif ficulty, it is a secondary sense, and found only in the Niphal (the Piel and Hiphil being causative of it). The Hithpahel occurs nowhere else except in this passage, and its reflex form and sense, as will appear, favor the idea above given. The next thing is to examine the Ancient Versions. The Peschito Syriac gives the sense of E. V. The Vulgate, or Hieronymus, renders it derelicta sunt tantummodo labia circa dentes meos, only the lips are left about my teeth-left as something abandoned or deserted. The LXX. bơтâ μov ev odovou exerat, which has little or no sense. In the Hexaplar Syriac Version of the LXX. we find in the margin the rendering of the other early Greek versions. AQUILA gives it as in E. V. and the Peschito. SYMMACHUS: "I am hung," or, I adhere to the skin of my teeth. THEODOTION: I am abandoned of (forsaken by the skin of my teeth. TREMELLIUS has the same rendering as E. V. LUTHER: und kann meine Zähne mit der Haut nicht bedecken. This, with the version of the Vulgate and Theodotion, is the general idea above given, though differently expressed: the teeth exposed and pro truding. STICKEL and HAHN (as cited and contested by DE LITZSCH) arrive at a similar idea, but in a wrong way, by making the infinitive of with the sense of nakedThe difficulty appears to be in the first person of the verb. The sense given would seem to demand the third per ness. 26 27 SHALL SEE HIM MINE; MY SKIN ALL GONE, THIS16 [REMNANT] THEY MAY REND; MINE EYES SHALL SEE" HIM-STRANGER18 NOW NO MORE. son with for the subject: the skin of my teeth has slipped philosophical as well as philological basis. It is the ascribing The other rendering: "I am escaped with the skin of my teeth," seems to have but little meaning, though so strongly defended. From our English it has acquired a sort of proverbial sense-the barest escape from danger; but this is inapplicable to Job. The Arabic formula so commonly cited in its defense: "he escaped with his head," differs in the most important item. Head is, in many languages, used for life; and thus it becomes an expression of exultation, or at least of self-congratulation. But this would be most inconsistent in the case of Job. He does not speak like one who has escaped (got through his trouble), even with difficulty. And then that piteous cry which immediately follows: koa'ni, hanfni, oh my friends, for it is Eloah's hand that toucheth me, could on y have come from a sense of his forlorn, hopeless condition-his projecting bones, his shrunken skin, his protruding teeth, denuded of their once comely coveringall presenting a woful spectacle of misery and wild despair. There is another view cited by UMBREIT from Michaelis' Supplem., p. 1512, in which a meaning for the Hebrew verb is sought from a secondary sense of the Arabic coming from the common primary idea of smoothness or bareness. It is pilis caruit, or mudavit pilis in Conj. II, smoothing off the beard, like Hebrew. Hence by the skin of the teeth, he would understand the coverin, heard, which has all come out in consequence of the disease. But this is an interpretation on which there is no need of dwelling. 10 Ver. 21. That toucheth me, y). The apparent lightness of the act enhances, by its mighty effect, the greatness of the power: "He looketh at the earth, and it trembles; He toucheth the mountains, and they smoke (the Volcanoes)." Comp. Pe. cxliv. 5. 11 Ver. 23. Satiated. The idea intended is that of remorseless slander compared to a devouring of the flesh. In the SYRIAC it becomes a fixed idiomatic expression for this idea. Hence & Syriac word, p, meaning the Devourer T [PAUSE.] 28 29 21 Yes, ye shall say, why persecute we him? For there is wrath; yea sins (that call) the sword;" pressive in Hebrew, this sudden turn to himself as the ob- 20 Ver. 28. Shall say. The supposing a panse of silence, however brief, before ver. 28 greatly facilitates the interpretation of what follows, and which by being brought abruptly in, has given rise to much unnecessary difficulty. The high feeling of the rapturous anticipation has somewhat gone down; but it has made a change in Job, and gives him, is rendered root of the matter, it seems to have little strength to use a language to the friends different from what he had before employed. There is no recrimination, but he ventures to assume to them something of a warning, and even a prophetic style. It is, however, a general prediction, and there is nothing to show that he had in view the scenes narrated in the close of the book, as some have thought in order to lower the character of his ecstatic vision to a mere guess at returning prosperity. For ye shall say. There is no need of departing from the simple future sense of D The time will come when ye will take a different view of the case. The is slightly illative, being used, as it repeatedly is, in the Book of Job, to denote a kind of reply to something that has been silently passing through the mind. It is like the commencement of Chap. xxviii. This regarded, the two verbs following (77) and 3) may both be treated as in the same conjugation and tense, future in form, but to be rendered as present, or aorist, depending on 1787; in which view there is no need of regarding 1 in the second clause as anything more than simply connective. There is no inferential sense in it to be rendered since or seeing that; all of which arises from a wrong view of the connections of the passage. 21 Seek to find. In kal 3 denotes not simply a finding, casually, but a finding what is sought. Here it may be taken as the 1st Pers. Plu. Fut. Kal, instead of the Niphal participle, which the other view seems to necessitate. The change of person, although it makes strange sounding English, the translator has preserved because it is so ex or no meaning, besides necessitating a different and forced construction of the whole passage. It is in E. V., and maintained by DELITZSCH, CONANT and other very able commentators; but an examination of the use of in such passages as Exod. xviii. 16-22; xxii. 8( hy), xxiv. 14, and other places, can leave little doubt of the meaning as above given-a ground of accusation or blame. It may have been , root of accusation, as denoting charges inferred without evidence, like those in chap. xxii., -dug up-hunted for-having no proof upon the surface. ROSENMUELLER: materiam litis. 23 Ver. 29. Beware-Beware. The repetition in the translation is justified by the great emphasis expressed in Take care of yourselves before the :מפני and לכם sword." The strengthening that Job had received rouses him to give them this warning, though not at all in their style of crimination. 24 Ver. 29. (That call) the sword. Comp. Romans xiii. 4. Literally, sins of the sword, 25 Ver. 29. That judgment is—surely is—really is— or what it really is-said, perhaps, in opposition to their superficial views about the judgments or dealings of the divine providence: That ye may have an idea of the greater and higher judgment. We have here for the only place in Job where it occurs, though so common in Ecclesiastes and the later Hebrew. Job. alone ישיב 2 Ver. 2. Compel me to respond. might mean simply to answer, but the suffix and the context seem to demand the causal sense. It might, however, be rendered furnish my answer-give me an answer. 8 Ver. 2. My haste. There is no need of going away from the pure Hebrew sense of . haste. It is just what the context shows to be wanted, and the word in brackets is simply the expression of what is implied in the emphatic repetition,, of the first person: my haste in me. 1 Ver. 2. To this. ¡. There is no need to follow presented, but very intemperate and unjust as applied to UMBREIT and others in their far-fetched explanations of this particle, . Literally to so—for so—for this-there-for or therefore. So, wherefore. It denotes here an immediate reply. Fired by Job's saying to them to beware of the sword of justice, Zophar answers indignantly and impetuously. He could be very calm when, free from pain, he discourses so loftily and truly about Gods wisdom and "truth's twofold form" (chap. xi. 6). With all theoretical coolness could he exhort Job to repentance. But now when the sufferer, strengthened by his glorious hope (xix. 25-28), turns upon them, as it were, and warns them that they too have need of repentance, Zophar goes off in great haste, as the next clause shows. This heat is continued through the chapter, producing that picture of the wicked man and his doom, most just in itself, and most graphically as well as eloquently 4 Ver. 3. Zeal. is here used for anger, temper, zeal or warmth (ira), as it is Judg. viii. 3; Prov. xvi. 32; Isaiah XXV. 4; xxx. 28; Zech. vi. 8. He justifies this outburst of spirit by the following word,, from my understanding. It is not irrational anger, he would say, but justified by Job's provocation. 9 10 11 12 Yes, though his pride may mount to heaven's height, Who gazed upon him say-where is he gone. Like a night spectre is he scared away. The eye hath glanced" on him-it glanceth not again; His children must appease1 the poor; And his own hands give back again his wealth. Ver. 4. Ha! The Hebrew in is exclamatory 7 Ver. 7. As is his splendor. Ew.: nach seiner Grosse. The weight of authority is in favor of this rendering, as derived from the Arabic, ha, glory, splendor. The Chaldaic it so, that apparitions from this spectral world departed very suddenly as though frightened, either by the crowing of the cock, or the appearance of morning, or something stern and bold in the human attitude towards such seeming intruders. This is remarkably exemplified by the story Plutarch gives us, in his life of Brutus (sect. xxxvi.), of the apparition (the nachtgesicht) that presented itself to him when reading in his tent at midnight before the battle of Philippi. "Whilst in deep study, he seemed to feel the presence of something entering. Turning his eye, he sees a strange and fearful form of something expúdov (belonging to no known species). standing in silence by him. Who art thou, man or god? The phantasm replies, in a hollow tone, I am thy evil genius, Brutus; thou shalt see me at Philippi. I will see thee there, said he." This bold answer of Brutus, as though making an appointment, and the fright of the spectre, is most admi has the same meaning. It avoids the seemingly indecorous comparison of the E. V. rendering, and has, moreover, in its favor the fact that the Arabic word, thus used, isrably paraphrased by Cowley: very common. It may be said, too, that the contrast thus given more strongly expresses the main idea, which is his great downfall. The suffix, too, as CONANT well remarks, is better a lapted to this rendering. 8 Ver. 7. Hopeless ruin. Literally, so he perishes utterly. does not mean forever in the time sense, but oply implies it in its real idea of completeness, finality. The verb suggests strongly that awful word Abaddon (1), the state of the lost. 10 Ver. 8. As a dream—As a night spectre. The rendering is demanded in order to give the true distinction of the words and in. The first is simply an ordinary dreaming, especially in a light sleep, which seems to fly away on opening the eyes (volucrique simillima somno), and we cannot recall it. We only know that we have been dreaming. So the wicked man, after his brief hallucination, cannot be found. Literally: They cannot find him. The other clause of the parallelism is much stronger. denotes a vision as something different from such a mere dreaming. Again, it denotes the object of the vision, as well as the vision itself; like the Greek outs (from onтoμal, corresponding best to le. ), which means the sight (spectaculum), as well as the seeing. This is generally something mysterious and sublime, as in Job iv. 13, or something frightful, as in Job vii. 14: "Then scarest me with visions"-phantasms, spec tres, frightful sights. The vision of Eliphaz (iv. 13-17), whatever degree of objective reality we may ascribe to it, is certainly evidence of a belief in a spectral world, from which came forth things to warn or to terrify men. The rendering spectre is strongly favored by the word following. The ve b 17 is literally driven, chased away, as E. V. and CONANT ender it, but scared away is most fitting to the context: and so the German commentators, such as UMBREIT, EWALD, ZO KLER, etc., mainly render it (verscheucht, fortgescheucht) weggeacheucht. Everything about the passage shows that it was an ancient as well as a modern superstition, if we may call I'll see thee there, saidst thon, With such a voice and such a brow, As put the startled ghost to sudden flight:- Come marching up the eastern hill afar. So flies the wicked man, scared away, driven away, by the divine judgments, or when the light of truth is let into his soul. The rendering, chased away, also reminds us of Prov. xiv. 32: “The wirked man is driven away in his wickedness.' This kind of language has a number of examples in Job, and it may be taken as proof that the phraseology in the Proverbs is derived from it. 11 Ver. 9. Hath glanced. 5. A word rare, but clear. Cant. i. 6: "The sun hath looked upon me"-to change my color. Job xxviii. 7: "The keen falcon's eye hth glanced upon it"-the miner's unexplored path. ZöckLER gives this very strikingly: ein Auge hat auf ihn geblickt, es thut's nicht wieder. Nothing could more distinctly express the idea of transitoriness: one glance, and he is never seen again. 12 Ver. 10. Must appease. This is the rendering of E. V. (seek to please). The argument for it. besides the grammatical one, is the harmony it makes with the second clause. The other rendering, the poor shall oppress his children, demands a new form of the verb 37-737 18 Ver. 11. Sins in secret done. Literally secret things; but a compar son of Ps. xc. 8 hows at once the meaning. Many render it sins of youth. There is authority for it from the use of Dhy, Ps. lxxxix. 46; Job xxxiii. 25, elc., but the general sense here is best, especially as it may Iso include the other, and perhaps point to them. Secret sins, or sins of youth-the effects of them go with a man to his grave. They lie down; ; singular feminine, but anwe 8 for a collective nominative, like a Greek singular verb with a plural neuter to which the Hebrew feminine, in such cases, corresponds. 14 Ver. 17. On the fair rivers. coming to the laborer or to his employer. There being no personal suffix, it must be taken generally as the toil, the wages of the wronged toiler, and therefore the word in brackets is simply the complement of the intended idea. The second clause has occasioned some difficulty. is certainly construct (wealth of exchange), and therefore the rendering of E. V. cannot be sustained, or that of UMBREIT, who would arbitrarily regard it as absolute. The construction, however, may be explained in two ways: 1. By regarding the second) as connecting the clause with D; the first 1 making a subordinate connection reading thus: Restores the fruit of toil, and does not swallow it as the wealth of his exchange, and does not enjoy it.' This makes the two clauses so closely inter-dependent as to form one in fact-a construction which is not according to the usual style of the parallels in Job. 2. The second clause may be taken by itself, and thus rendered: It is as wealth of his exchange, and he does not enjoy. This is, ind ed, very awkward English; but it gives the idea. The 1 may possibly be taken as connecting by way of comparison, which is not unfrequently the case, especially in Prove.bs; but a truer view is to re a verb יעלס and תמורתו gard it as connecting directly and a verbal noun. Taking both as verbs, it would be: As wealth of retribution, not of joy; here, and Judges v. 15, 16, is synonymous with, and means primarily artificial water courses, but the word is used of rivers generally, as in P. Ixv. 10, bs ba, the river of God. It is used to denote a beautiful, fair flowing stream, as represents a fuller and deeper one, or as the Latin amnis in distinction from flumen or fluvius. The flowing streams; literally, flowings of streams; the first noun qualifying the other-the full streams. Is anything special meant here, or is it only a glowing picture representing wealth and prosperity? The latter view seems easy, and is the one generally taken by commentators; but yet it has great difficulties. In the first place, the whole picture is not that of a poor man who never attains to any measure of luxury, but of one who has possessed, and then been deprived of it. In the second place, if Z phar has Job in view, 8 we must suppose from the way he brings in the picture, the language, thus understood, is wholly inapplicable. With his "seven thousand sheep and goats, and three thousand camels, and five hundred yoke of oxen, and five hundred she asses, and very many servants," he must be said to have seen "the brooks of honey and milk," that is, abundance of the luxuries of life, or of the good things of this world, if ever a man did. The conjecture may be hazarded, that the fervid and imaginative Zophar has in mind some early Arabian mythical paradise, something unearthly, or belonging to some remote region of the world, like the Greek "Isles of the Blesse 1." Thus viewed, it may have been the origin of that description we find so often in the Koran, and which must have been much older than the days of Mohammed. See Surat. ii. 23: "For them are the gardens where flow the rivers," etc.. and many other places. In Surat xlvii. 16, 17, the Inguage becomes almost identical, in some respects, with that of the passage in Job: "Like the garden promised to the pious, wherein are rivers of living water (water that never loses its purity), and rivers of milk whose taste never changes, and rivers of honey purified, and fruits of every kind, and forgiveness from their Lord." If Zophar had any such idea derived from any quarter, it may have resembled the Vedaic conception that MERX thinks of so much importance. See INT. THEISM, p 15, 16. Why may not such a myth be regarded as having crosse i the Indus, if it was there at that early period, or as having arisen from the imagination of the dwellers in Zophar's native land of Naama, y (the-because, etc.—therefore) although the connection is less land of delights), wherever that may have been. Such a fancie Paradise of sense would be immeasurably inferior to the sriptural idea of the Cons aiwviov, far inferior, we might say, to Job's vision of a reconciled God, with no other accompaniments. Wholly without God, as they are, it might be maintained, that such mythical representations, with all their "sweetness and light," have really less moral value than the shadows of Sheol which Job so mournfully depicts, and the bare hope of hearing, at some time, God's voice of deliverance from it (xiv. 15). Whatever may be thought of such a conjecture, the resemblance the passage bears to th Koranic language is certainly very striking. The latter may have been derived from it. Such is the opinion of Good, a commentator from whom much may be learned. notwithstanding his work is so marred by extravagant conceits and arbitrary changes of the Hebrew text. See Excursus I. of the Addenda. but it was thought best to keep the word exchange as not only more concise, but more distinctly preserving the figure. 16 Ver. 19. Because. The force of here, and as repeated in ver. 20, seems to extend to the strong apodotic expression, in the second clause of ver. 21. Such a carrying of the protasis through several parallel verses, has other examples in Job. See xv. 25-29, where commentators (EWALD, DILLMANN, 7ÖCKLER, et al.) continue the protasis, through four verses (weil--reil-weil-deshalb). " is used there in the same way, and is rendered because (because clear, and there is no apodotic particle like (see note, on the passage). Here translators generally break it up, or find subordinate apodoses, at the end, or in the middle of intervening clauses, although the demand for continuance is much more clear than in the other passage, and the strong at end seems not to be satisfied with anything less. Thus the in ver. 19 covers its second clause. The repetition of it in the 20th has not only the same effect, bat goes over into the first clause of ver. 21, making the great conclusion with all the more emphatic. The 21st verse, it is true, begins with N, which is an asserting particle, but that does not make it independent, or to be taken alone as the protasis to the following. The leaving out the copu lative particles, and the omission of at the beginning of ver. 21 only makes it more forcible as the language of passion and impetuosity according to the rule of Aristotle, which |