"When will you end these speeches? Be sensible, and then we can talk.
"How long will you hunt for words? Show understanding and then we can talk.
"How long before you stop talking? Speak sense if you want us to answer!
"How monotonous these word games are getting! Get serious! We need to get down to business.
How long will it be before you have done talking? Get wisdom, and then we will say what is in our minds.
"How long will you hunt for words? Consider, and then we shall speak.
"How long till you put an end to words? Gain understanding, and afterward we will speak.
|NET © [draft] ITL|
|NET © Notes||
1 tn The verb is plural, and so most commentators make it singular. But it seems from the context that Bildad is addressing all of them, and not just Job.
2 tn The construction is קִנְצֵי לְמִלִּין (qintse lÿmillin), which is often taken to be “end of words,” as if the word was from קֵץ (qets, “end”). But a plural of “end” is not found in the OT. Some will link the word to Arabic qanasa, “to hunt; to give chase,” to get an interpretation of “snares for words.” But E. Dhorme (Job, 257) objects that this does not fit the speech of Bildad (as well as it might Job’s). He finds a cognate qinsu, “fetters, shackles,” and reads “how long will you put shackles on words.” But G. R. Driver had pointed out that this cognate does not exist (“Problems in the Hebrew text of Job,” VTSup 3 : 72-93). So it would be preferable to take the reading “ends” and explain the ן (nun) as from a Aramaizing by-form. This is supported by 11QtgJob that uses סוֹף (sof, “end”). On the construction, GKC 421 §130.a explains this as a use of the construct in rapid narrative to connect the words; in such cases a preposition is on the following noun.
3 tn The imperfect verb, again plural, would be here taken in the nuance of instruction, or a modal nuance of obligation. So Bildad is telling his listeners to be intelligent. This would be rather cutting in the discourse.
4 tn Heb “afterward.”