It would surely outweigh the sand of the seas—no wonder my words have been impetuous.
"For then it would be heavier than the sand of the seas; Therefore my words have been rash.
they would be heavier than all the sands of the sea. That is why I spoke so rashly.
It would be heavier than all the sand of the sea! Is it any wonder that I'm screaming like a caged cat?
For then its weight would be more than the sand of the seas: because of this my words have been uncontrolled.
For then it would be heavier than the sand of the sea; therefore my words have been rash.
For then it would be heavier than the sand of the sea––Therefore my words have been rash.
|NET © [draft] ITL|
|NET © Notes||
1 tn E. Dhorme (Job, 76) notes that כִּי־עַתָּה (ki ’attah) has no more force than “but”; and that the construction is the same as in 17:4; 20:19-21; 23:14-15. The initial clause is causative, and the second half of the verse gives the consequence (“because”…“that is why”). Others take 3a as the apodosis of v. 2, and translate it “for now it would be heavier…” (see A. B. Davidson, Job, 43).
2 sn The point of the comparison with the sand of the sea is that the sand is immeasurable. So the grief of Job cannot be measured.
3 tn The verb לָעוּ (la’u) is traced by E. Dhorme (Job, 76) to a root לָעָה (la’ah), cognate to an Arabic root meaning “to chatter.” He shows how modern Hebrew has a meaning for the word “to stammer out.” But that does not really fit Job’s outbursts. The idea in the context is rather that of speaking wildly, rashly, or charged with grief. This would trace the word to a hollow or geminate word and link it to Arabic “talk wildly” (see D. J. A. Clines, Job [WBC], 158). In the older works the verb was taken from a geminate root meaning “to suck” or “to swallow” (cf. KJV), but that yields a very difficult sense to the line.