5:27 Look, we have investigated this, so it is true.
Hear it, 1 and apply it for your own 2 good.” 3
8:9 For we were born yesterday 4 and do not have knowledge,
since our days on earth are but a shadow. 5
17:16 Will 6 it 7 go down to the barred gates 8 of death?
Will 9 we descend 10 together into the dust?”
18:2 “How long until you 11 make an end of words? 12
You must consider, 13 and then 14 we can talk.
19:28 If you say, ‘How we will pursue him,
since the root of the trouble is found in him!’ 15
21:14 So they say to God, ‘Turn away from us!
We do not want to 16 know your ways. 17
28:22 Destruction 18 and Death say,
‘With our ears we have heard a rumor about where it can be found.’ 19
38:35 Can you send out lightning bolts, and they go?
Will they say to you, ‘Here we are’?
1 tn To make a better parallelism, some commentators have replaced the imperative with another finite verb, “we have found it.”
2 tn The preposition with the suffix (referred to as the ethical dative) strengthens the imperative. An emphatic personal pronoun also precedes the imperative. The resulting force would be something like “and you had better apply it for your own good!”
3 sn With this the speech by Eliphaz comes to a close. His two mistakes with it are: (1) that the tone was too cold and (2) the argument did not fit Job’s case (see further, A. B. Davidson, Job, 42).
4 tn The Hebrew has “we are of yesterday,” the adverb functioning as a predicate. Bildad’s point is that they have not had time to acquire great knowledge because they are recent.
5 tn E. Dhorme (Job, 116) observes that the shadow is the symbol of ephemeral things (14:2; 17:7; Ps 144:4). The shadow passes away quickly (116).
6 sn It is natural to assume that this verse continues the interrogative clause of the preceding verse.
7 tn The plural form of the verb probably refers to the two words, or the two senses of the word in the preceding verse. Hope and what it produces will perish with Job.
8 tn The Hebrew word בַּדִּים (baddim) describes the “bars” or “bolts” of Sheol, referring (by synecdoche) to the “gates of Sheol.” The LXX has “with me to Sheol,” and many adopt that as “by my side.”
9 tn The conjunction אִם (’im) confirms the interrogative interpretation.
10 tn The translation follows the LXX and the Syriac versions with the change of vocalization in the MT. The MT has the noun “rest,” yielding, “will our rest be together in the dust?” The verb נָחַת (nakhat) in Aramaic means “to go down; to descend.” If that is the preferred reading – and it almost is universally accepted here – then it would be spelled נֵחַת (nekhat). In either case the point of the verse is clearly describing death and going to the grave.
11 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.
12 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 [1955]: 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.
13 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.
14 tn Heb “afterward.”
15 tc The MT reads “in me.” If that is retained, then the question would be in the first colon, and the reasoning of the second colon would be Job’s. But over 100
16 tn The absence of the preposition before the complement adds greater vividness to the statement: “and knowing your ways – we do not desire.”
17 sn Contrast Ps 25:4, which affirms that walking in God’s ways means to obey God’s will – the Torah.
18 tn Heb “Abaddon.”
19 tn Heb “heard a report of it,” which means a report of its location, thus “where it can be found.”