¹ tn Heb “stretched.” Perhaps “his hand” should be supplied by ellipsis (see Ps 144:7). In this poetic narrative context the three prefixed verbal forms in this verse are best understood as preterites indicating past tense, not imperfects.

¹ tc This whole section on the ostrich is not included in the LXX. Many feel it is an interpolation and should therefore be deleted. The pattern of the chapter changes from the questions being asked to observations being made.

³ tn The verb שׁוּב (shuv, “to turn; to return”) is one of the two major words in the OT for “repent”—to return from evil. Here the imperfect should be obligatory—they must do it.

⁴ sn This verse and v. 28 should be compared with Ps 49:7-9, 15 (8-10, 16 HT) where the same basic vocabulary and concepts are employed.

¹ tn The imperfect verb in this question should be given the modal nuance of potential imperfect. The question is rhetorical—it is affirming that no one can teach God.

² tn The word is “iniquities,” but here as elsewhere it should receive the classification of the punishment for iniquity (a category of meaning that developed from a metonymy of effect).

³ sn Cf. Ps 130:3-4, which says, “If you should mark iniquity O Lord, Lord, who could stand? But with you there is forgiveness, in order that you might be feared.”

¹ tn The verb is simply the Piel imperfect אֲדַבֵּר (ʾadabber, “I speak”). It should be classified as a desiderative imperfect, saying, “I desire to speak.” This is reinforced with the verb “to wish, desire” in the second half of the verse.

¹ tn Verse 14 should be taken as a parenthesis and not a continuation of the protasis because it does not fit with v. 13 in that way (D. J. A. Clines, Job [WBC], 256).

¹ tn The verb is מָצָא (matsaʾ, “to find; to discover”). Here it should be given the nuance of potential imperfect. In the rhetorical question it is affirming that Job cannot find out the essence of God.

³ tn The text uses two verbs without a coordinating conjunction: “then you return, you display your power.” This should be explained as a verbal hendiadys, the first verb serving adverbially in the clause (see further GKC 386-87 §120.g).

⁴ tn The word פֹּעַל (poʿal) means “work.” But here the word should be taken as a metonymy, meaning the pay for the work that he has done (compare Jer 22:13).

¹ sn Here the brothers are all his relatives as well as these intimate friends of Job. In contrast to what a friend should do (show kindness/loyalty), these friends have provided no support whatsoever.

³ tn If the word “poor” is to do double duty, i.e., serving as the object of the verb “saves” in the first colon as well as the second, then the conjunction should be explanatory.

³ sn Eliphaz is not being sarcastic to Job. He knows that Job is a God-fearing man who lives out his faith in life. But he also knows that Job should apply to himself the same things he tells others.

¹ tn Heb “the stars of its dawn.” The word נֶשֶׁף (neshef) can mean “twilight” or “dawn.” In this context the morning stars are in mind. Job wishes that the morning stars—that should announce the day—go out.

¹ tc The second occurrence of the Hebrew verb וַיּאמֶר (vayyoʾmer, “and he said”) in the MT should probably be disregarded. The repetition is unnecessary in the context and may be the result of dittography in the MT.

¹ tc Probably one should read with the Lucianic Greek recension, the Syriac Peshitta, and the Vulgate וָאֲצַוֶּה (vaʾatsavveh, “and I commanded”) rather than the rare denominative verb וָאוֹצְרָה (vaʾots^erah, “and I appointed over the storeroom”) of the MT.

² tc The MT reads “to give upon us.” However, the term עָלֵינוּ (ʿalenu, “upon us”) should probably be deleted, following a few medieval Hebrew MSS, the Syriac Peshitta, and the Vulgate.

¹ tc The MT reads “and the Levites.” The conjunction (“and”) should be deleted, following the LXX, Aquila, and the Vulgate. That the vav (ו) of the MT is the vav explicativum (“even the Levites”) is unlikely here.