³ tn The text has תִקְוָתִי (tiqvati, “hope”). There is no reason to change the text to “my desire” (as Driver and others do) if the word is interpreted metonymically—it means “what I hope for.” What Job hopes for and asks for is death.

⁵ tn Most translations have “low” (ASV, ESV, Holman, KJV, NASB); a few have “bellow” (CEB, NIV, NLV). The verb is rare but cognate languages suggest a loud sound (e.g. Syriac “to scream” Ugaritic “to roar,” see HALOT 199). The rhetorical question expects a “no” answer and context suggests that the (unexpected) sound would convey discontent or complaint.

¹ tc The repetition of “destruction” and “famine” here has prompted some scholars to delete the whole verse. Others try to emend the text. The LXX renders them as “the unrighteous and the lawless.” But there is no difficulty in having the repetition of the words as found in the MT.

² tn The verb יִדַּכְּאוּ (yiddakk^eʾu) could be taken as the passive voice, or in the reciprocal sense (“crush one another”) or reflexive (“crush themselves”). The context favors the idea that the children of the foolish person will be destroyed because there is no one who will deliver them.

⁴ sn The point being made is that the angels do not represent the cries of people to God as if mediating for them. But if Job appealed to any of them to take his case against God, there would be no response whatsoever for that.

⁴ sn The expression without attaining wisdom is parallel to the previous without anyone regarding it. Both verses describe how easily humans perish: there is no concern for it, nor any sense to it. Humans die without attaining wisdom which can solve the mystery of human life.

¹ sn The imperative is here a challenge for Job. If he makes his appeal against God, who is there who will listen? The rhetorical questions are intended to indicate that no one will respond, not even the angels. Job would do better to realize that he is guilty and his only hope is in God.

¹ tn The versions have taken the pronoun in the sense of the verb “to be.” Others give it the sense of “the same thing,” rendering the verse as “small and great, there is no difference there.” GKC 437 §135.a, n. 1, follows this idea with a meaning of “the same.”

² tn Heb “filled their houses.” There is no reason here to take “houses” to mean tombs; the “houses” refer to the places the princes lived (i.e., palaces). The reference is not to the practice of burying treasures with the dead. It is simply saying that if Job had died he would have been with the rich and famous in death.

¹ tc The text has וַיַּעַן (vayyaʿan), literally, “and he answered.” The LXX simply has “saying” for the entire verse. The Syriac, Targum, and Greek A agree with the MT. “[Someone] answered and said” is phraseology characteristic of all the speeches in Job beginning with Satan in 1:9. No other portion of the OT employs this phraseology as often or as consistently.

² tc Due to the large numbers of people implied, some scholars suggest that the original text may have read “leaders of the army” (cf. NAB “Persian and Median aristocracy”; NASB “the army officers”; NIV “the military leaders”). However, there is no textual evidence for this emendation, and the large numbers are not necessarily improbable.

¹ tc The Hebrew term אַחַר (ʾakhar) is difficult here. It normally means “after,” but that makes no sense here. Some scholars emend it to אַחַד (ʾakhad) and supply the word “day,” which yields the sense “daily.” Cf. TEV “40 silver coins a day for food and wine.”

¹ tn The Hebrew verbal forms could be imperatives (“Disguise yourself and enter”), but this would make no sense in light of the immediately following context. The forms are better interpreted as infinitives absolute functioning as cohortatives (see IBHS 594 §35.5.2a). Some prefer to emend the forms to imperfects.

¹ tn Heb “Solomon declared to her all her words; there was not a word hidden from the king which he did not declare to her.” If riddles are specifically in view (see v. 1), then one might translate, “Solomon explained to her all her riddles; there was no riddle too complex for the king.”

¹ tn Heb “the sons of Jaaziah, Beno.” Apparently בְנוֹ (v^eno), which could be translated “his son,” is a proper name here. The text, however, may be defective at this point; a list of Jaaziah’s sons may have been accidentally omitted. See v. 27.

¹ tc Heb “and the sons of Mareshah,” but this does not fit contextually. Perhaps the text originally had וּבְנוֹ מִשְׁנֶה מָרֵשָׁה (uv^eno mishneh mareshah, “and his second son, Mareshah”), with מִשְׁנֶה (“second”) later accidentally falling out by homoioteleuton (cf. the note in BHS here).

² sn No such Mesopotamian god is presently known. Perhaps the name Nisroch is a textual variation of Nusku, the Mesopotamian god of light and fire. Other proposals have tried to relate the name to Ashur, the chief god of the Assyria, or to Ninurta, the Assyrian god of war.

² tn Heb “[there was] none but the restrained, and [there was] none but the abandoned, and there was no deliverer for Israel.” On the meaning of the terms עָצוּר (ʿatsur) and עָזוּב (ʿazur), see the note at 1 Kgs 14:10.

² tn Heb “and not to repair the damages to the temple.” This does not mean that the priests were no longer interested in repairing the temple. As the following context makes clear, the priests decided to hire skilled workers to repair the damage to the temple, rather than trying to make the repairs themselves.

¹ tn Heb “the gate of Sur” (followed by many English versions) but no such gate is mentioned elsewhere in the OT. The parallel account in 2 Chr 23:5 has “Foundation Gate.” סוּר (sur), “Sur,” may need to be emended to יְסוֹד (y^esod) “foundation,” involving in part dalet-resh confusion.