21:15 Who is the Almighty, that 1 we should serve him?
What would we gain
if we were to pray 2 to him?’ 3
23:7 There 4 an upright person
could present his case 5 before him,
and I would be delivered forever from my judge.
23:10 But he knows the pathway that I take; 6
if he tested me, I would come forth like gold. 7
30:3 gaunt 8 with want and hunger,
they would gnaw 9 the parched land,
in former time desolate and waste. 10
31:2 What then would be one’s lot from God above,
one’s heritage from the Almighty 11 on high?
31:12 For it is a fire that devours even to Destruction, 12
and it would uproot 13 all my harvest.
37:20 Should he be informed that I want 14 to speak?
If a man speaks, surely he would be swallowed up!
41:32 It leaves a glistening wake behind it;
one would think the deep had a head of white hair.
1 tn The interrogative clause is followed by ki, similar to Exod 5:2, “Who is Yahweh, that I should obey him?”
2 tn The verb פָּגַע (paga’) means “to encounter; to meet,” but also “to meet with request; to intercede; to interpose.” The latter meaning is a derived meaning by usage.
3 tn The verse is not present in the LXX. It may be that it was considered too blasphemous and therefore omitted.
4 tn The adverb “there” has the sense of “then” – there in the future.
5 tn The form of the verb is the Niphal נוֹכָח (nokkakh, “argue, present a case”). E. Dhorme (Job, 346) is troubled by this verbal form and so changes it and other things in the line to say, “he would observe the upright man who argues with him.” The Niphal is used for “engaging discussion,” “arguing a case,” and “settling a dispute.”
6 tn The expression דֶּרֶךְ עִמָּדִי (derekh ’immadi) means “the way with me,” i.e., “the way that I take.” The Syriac has “my way and my standing.” Several commentators prefer “the way of my standing,” meaning where to look for me. J. Reider offers “the way of my life” (“Some notes to the text of the scriptures,” HUCA 3 [1926]: 115). Whatever the precise wording, Job knows that God can always find him.
7 tn There is a perfect verb followed by an imperfect in this clause with the protasis and apodosis relationship (see GKC 493 §159.b).
8 tn This word, גַּלְמוּד (galmud), describes something as lowly, desolate, bare, gaunt like a rock.
9 tn The form is the plural participle with the definite article – “who gnaw.” The article, joined to the participle, joins on a new statement concerning a preceding noun (see GKC 404 §126.b).
10 tn The MT has “yesterday desolate and waste.” The word “yesterday” (אֶמֶשׁ, ’emesh) is strange here. Among the proposals for אֶמֶשׁ (’emesh), Duhm suggested יְמַשְּׁשׁוּ (yÿmashÿshu, “they grope”), which would require darkness; Pope renders “by night,” instead of “yesterday,” which evades the difficulty; and Fohrer suggested with more reason אֶרֶץ (’erets), “a desolate and waste land.” R. Gordis (Job, 331) suggests יָמִישׁוּ / יָמֻשׁוּ (yamishu/yamushu), “they wander off.”
11 tn Heb “lot of Shaddai,” which must mean “the lot from Shaddai,” a genitive of source.
12 tn Heb “to Abaddon.”
13 tn The verb means “to root out,” but this does not fit the parallelism with fire. Wright changed two letters and the vowels in the verb to get the root צָרַף (tsaraf, “to burn”). The NRSV has “burn to the root.”
14 tn This imperfect works well as a desiderative imperfect.