Footnotes - continued
15:11. Eliphaz, who was named for God and who seems to be a standin for God, now apparently thinks his own speech beginning at 5:8 came from God himself. There are hints in the text that Job has had trouble meeting Eliphaz' eyes. At some point Job reestablishes his footing vis-a-vis Eliphaz, probably at 13:14, but perhaps not until 16:7.
16:15. Job has sewn a sackcloth garment to wear next to his skin. Verse 30:18 seems to indicate that Job's garment was ingeniously fashioned to some purpose, perhaps as camouflage. At 30:19 Job says he has become like dust and ashes. At 20:7 Zophar says, "he vanishes like dung forever; those who see him ask, 'Where is he?'" And in the prologue at 2:12 Job's three friends at first don't recognize him. As a guess, Job was wearing a sleeveless sackcloth tunic and over that a "dust and ashes" cloak, which if he pulled it round himself would make him look just like another rock by the ash heap. If 23:17 is not mistranslated, perhaps the cloak was easily reversible, ashen gray on one side, velvet black on the other.
16:18. The meaning of verses 18-21 is obscure. Some believe the witness of verse 19 is God, but the context is still goo gloomy to think that Job has found any part of an answer. That a falcon might have been released to represent Job's cry is only a guess, of course, but it would have been grand theater! Job is getting stronger. He has faced up to Eliphaz, but he is still dealing with the shock of finding his friend hostile. The "witness" of 16:19a is the same in the Hebrew as at 16:8, where he accused Eliphaz of being a treacherous witness. Job is saying, if I have no human witness, then let my blood be my witness, my cry, my tears; surely God will answer my cry. And when God does not answer, then Job asks, "Who can see my hope?...Will it go down to Sheol with me? Shall we descend to the dust together?"
16:22. For the
years are numbered that come
And I shall
go the way of no return.
At the bottom, it is his mortality that disturbs Job the most. His other ills point to his coming death. Job dramatizes the ordinary human realization of death. For the first round of Job's afflictions (1:12-19), read the common misfortunes, loss of property, the death of someone loved. For the second round (2:4-7), read the decline of the body in middle age.
17:5. He tells friends
to partake
While the eyes of
his sons fail.
A proverb. The first line is obscure. The Hebrew word translated "partake" appears only here, nowhere else in all the ancient Hebrew literature. It may be related to a word meaning "smooth" or to another word meaning "divide". "Tell" may mean anything from "denounce" to "invite".
Possibilities:
* he denounces friends for a share
* he speaks flattery to friends
* he denounces friends for flattery
* he invites friends to share
The last makes the best proverb, and in context it is very powerful indeed. Job is accusing God of letting those he has known longest die while he turns his attention to those who are younger -- mere acquaintances, relatively.
17:6. Yes he has
set me up to tell a story to the peoples;
And a Tophet/spitting
before the face I am become.
Tophet was an infamous place of child sacrifice. See Jeremiah 7:31. The use of the word tophet to mean "spit" is not known in the Hebrew, but there are cognates with that meaning in Arabic and Chaldee. However, the Chaldee Targum for 6b has: "And I shall be Gehenna to them." Tophet was in the valley of the children of Hinnom, i.e., GeHinnom. See 2 K 23:10.
The authorities conflict, but it appears the Wadi Hinnom ran along the south wall of Jerusalem where it would have been reached through the Dung Gate or through the Potsherd Gate. If so, then it is the modern Wadi er-Rababi, which is a rather deep valley with steep walls, almost a gorge. It is thought that the town dump and possibly a graveyard for paupers was there. Also, the tombs of richer citizens may have been located on the steep south face of the Wadi.
If Job was played in Jerusalem after the Return and before the city wall was rebuilt, the western heights overlooking the Wadi Hinnom to the south would have been the likely spot. The walls of the city had been thrown down when Jerusalem was taken early in the 6th century, so the scene would have been perfectly set. To be sure, this is speculation upon speculation, but many verses of Job would have taken on a special depth of meaning at this location.
For instance the references to the ashpit and the potsherd of chapter two. For instance all mentions of Sheol and Abbadon, which would have been more deeply felt here overlooking the original Gehenna. For instance, all the talk about ruins and breached walls. Job himself would have become a symbol of Jerusalem when he said, "The way is open for their attack...I am already breached." (30:14). And there are references to the wadi itself. "He'll be borne in procession to the grave," says Job of the wealthy sinner, pointing to the graves on the far side of the Wadi Hinnom, "The wadi stones will nestle him." (21:32,33) Eliphaz answers by pointing to the road to Tophet running below and saying: "Will you keep the road the ages have kept, Tread the steps that wicked men trod, who were taken before their time, Their foundations washed away by the river?" (22:15,16) "Adorn...the wadi stone with Ophir gold." (22:24)
The emotions of the Returnee community would have been stirred by Job. They were not doing very well in Jerusalem and it was their fathers and grandfathers who had made God angry, not them. They were innocent, like Job, whose restoration at the end of the play would have cheered them enormously. Could it be that a lasting affection for the play, because it had buoyed them in the dark days before the walls were restored, was the reason why it survived?
17:13-16. These verses make a good example of the beauty and compactness of the Hebrew. Here Job is face to face with the truth he has insisted upon: the light is not near, and there is no escape from death. At the same time, under the goading of his friends, he has realized that he wants to live. After his dramatic appeal to God in chapter 13, he cannot go back to the comforting delusion of chapters 3 and 4, that the grave is his own desire.
13 'im-'eqaveh sheol
bayithi
if - I look to
sheol my house
ba-khoshek
ripadti yitso'yi
in the darkness I spread
my couch
14 lashakhath qara'thi
abyi 'atah
to the pit
I say my father thou art
'amyi
va'khothi la-rimah
my mother and my
sister to the worm
15 v'ayeh - 'epho
tiqvathi
then where - indeed
my hope
vtiqvathi
mi yshurenah
and my hope who doth
see her
16 badye
sheol teradna
the parts of sheol
they go down to
'im-yakhad
al-afar nakhath
when-together upon the dust
ease
In verse 15, if we read 'ayah for 'ayeh without any change in the consonants, we can translate, "then my falcon/hawk is indeed my hope". 'Ayah is probably derived form a root meaning 'cry' or 'howl'. Job's name in the Hebrew is 'Ayob. One wonders if it is not related.
18:2,3. Bildad uses the second person plural in both verses to address the crowd. The versions generally translate as if they were reading a singular because the plural doesn't make much sense -- unless Job was theater!
18:4. One tearing
his soul/self in his anger,
Shall for thy sake
forsaken be the earth,
The rock removed from
its place?
The word for soul, nephesh, is commonly used to mean "self", but more primitively it means life and is connected with the blood by Dt 12:23: "But be sure you do not eat the blood, for the blood is the nephesh..." Most commentators think 18:4 refers to 16:9a: "His anger tears and he hates me." The same commentators then must say Job is being figurative at 16:18: "Earth cover not my blood." The greatness of the poem, though, is in the concreteness of the imagery. When Job calls upon God, God shows up in person. Every generalization must be particularized: "No proud beast has trod that path, The lion has not crossed it." -- 28:8. There are dozens of examples. If Job is theater, then we see that same characteristic particularity in Bildad's lines here at 18:4.
Nor are the earth and rock of this verse just metaphors for the orderliness of creation, as many commentators would have them. Rather, Bildad is speaking to Job's complaint (17:4,5) that God sends all his children to their death, forever. Shall the earth be forsaken? Shall all the graves be emptied out? Shall the rock be moved from its place, the lid of Sheol be shifted so the dead may rise? (See also Mark 16:4 in the New Testament.)
Job had said at 14:18:
18:5-21. The prototype of all hellfire and brimstone sermons.
19:2-5. Job uses the second person plural here, presumably addressing his three friends together. Because he loved his old friend or out of respect for his great age, Job didn't want to single Bildad out for attack.
19:17. There may be an undercurrent of sexuality running through chapter 19. In verses 13 & 14 the famous Biblical "to know" is used, which usually, though not always, implied sexual relations. Some modern commentators wonder about 19:22b, too. If Job is in part the story of a convalescent, then the author may be hinting at a reawakening of sexual desire after a serious illness.
19:23. Who will
give, then, that my words be written?
Who will
give in a scroll that they be engraved?
The phrase "who will give" was a common rhetorical flourish meaning "O would that..." But it is not impossible that Job is literally asking for a volunteer to take down his argument. Since his friends won't help him, his only hope is for vindication after his death. See the note at 31:35.
19:25. And
I myself know my goel shall appear/lives,
And aftermost upon the dust he will arise/witness.
19:26. And after my skin they
will destroy--this,
And out-of my flesh I shall see God.
19:27. Whom I myself shall see
for myself/on my side,
And my eyes shall behold, and not another's/estranged.
My kidneys fail within me.
Goel is Hebrew for one's near kinsman whose duty it was to avenge one's murder or buy one back from servitude. When used figuratively, it meant an after the fact rescuer or defender. The preposition translated "out-of" in the second line of verse 26 is ambiguous in Hebrew. It may mean without his body or it may mean from the standpoint of his body.
These unexpected verses stand at a highpoint of the drama. The translation is not easy and the interpretation is even more difficult. Job is confident that his name will be cleared; that much is sure. But who is it that Job means when he mentions his goel? Does he expect exoneration before or after his death? What is the connection with Job's wish to have his words written down?
The ancient version don't help. Jerome's Vulgate has "de terra surrecturus sum" -- from the earth I will rise up, where the Masoretes have "upon the dust he will arise." The Greek LXX and the Syriac differ from the received text even more radically:
LXX: For I know that he is eternal
Who is about
to deliver me,
To raise up
upon the earth my skin that endures these,
For these things
have been accomplished to me of the Lord;
Which I am conscious
of in myself,
Which mine eye
has seen, and not another,
But all have
been fulfilled to me in bosom.
SYR: I know my goel lives,
and in the end he
will be revealed upon the earth,
and after my skin
I shall bless myself in these things,
and after my flesh.
If my eyes shall see
God,
I shall see light.
From Clarke's early 19th century commentary: "Any attempt to establish the true meaning of this passage is almost hopeless. By learned men and eminent critics the words have been understood very differently; some vehemently contending that they refer to the resurrection of the body, and the redemption of the human race by Jesus Christ; while others with equal vehemence and show of argument, have contended that they refer only to Job's restoration [to health]. In defence of these two opinions larger treatises have been written than the whole Book of Job would amount to, if written even in capitals."
Nor has the flow of words diminished, though even among Christian scholars there are few now who would defend the narrow Christian reading. But no one has proposed a convincing alternative. The best the scholars can do is to demolish each other's suggestions. No surprise, then, that the English versions vary considerably:
King James
For I know that my redeemer liveth,
and that he shall stand at the latter day
upon the earth;
And though after my skin worms destroy this
body,
yet in my flesh shall I see God:
Whom I shall see for myself,
and mine eyes shall behold, and not another;
though my reins be consumed within me.
Revised Standard Version
For I know that my Redeemer lives,
and at last he will stand upon the earth;
and after my skin has been thus destroyed,
then without my flesh I shall see God,
whom I shall see on my side,
and my eyes shall behold, and not another.
My heart faints within me!
Anchor Bible
I know my vindicator lives,
A guarantor upon the dust will stand;
Even after my skin is flayed,
Without my flesh I shall see God.
I will see him on my side,
My own eyes will see him unestranged.
My heart faints within me.
New American Bible
But as for me, I know that my Vindicator lives,
and that he will at last stand forth upon
the dust;
Whom I myself shall see:
My own eyes, not another's shall behold him,
And from my flesh I shall see God;
My inmost being is consumed with longing.
New International Version
I know that my Redeemer lives,
and that in the end he will stand upon the
earth.
And after my skin has been destroyed,
Yet in my flesh I will see God;
I myself will see him
with my own eyes--I, and not another.
How my heart yearns within me!
New English Bible
But in my heart I know that my vindicator
lives
and that he will rise last to speak in court;
and I shall discern my witness standing at
my side
and see my defending counsel, even God himself,
whom I shall see with my own eyes,
I myself and no other.
My heart failed me when you said...
Moffatt
Still, I know One to champion me at last,
to stand up for me upon earth.
This body may break up, but even then
my life shall have a sight of God;
my heart is pining as I yearn
to see him on my side,
see him estranged no longer.
Against all the versions, here is an interpretation based upon the idea that Job was played by actors before holiday crowds:
19:25a Then I myself know my defender shall appear
The use of the first person pronoun for emphasis is curious. What is the point of the stress? Who else could it be but Job who knows about his goel? Thus a delicate suspense, barely perceptible to the listener, is established. Then when the emphatic pronoun in repeated at the beginning of verse 27, the suspense is lifted, an answer has been suggested. The listener then knows that the emphatic "I" in verse 25 meant that Job the character was speaking and that its paired emphasis at verse 27 means now it is the actor playing Job who speaks, out of character. For the use of "goel" as defender in court, see Pr 23:11, Jer 50:34.
19:25b And aftermost upon the dust he will arise.
Aftermost. I.e., in the distant future, the contemporary time for the audience. Job stands up at this point, thus telling the audience that he, the actor playing Job, is Job's goel. The verb "to arise" also meant to stand as witness; thus verse 25 continues the metaphor of the court case. Job wanted his words written down so his defender could carry on his case as a true witness. The moral that the author relies upon is that the prophecies of an honest man come true. By this device he pulls the audience into his circular logic transforming it into the assembly or court before which the cosmic trial of Job will proceed. When Job is played, the audience is actually in attendance at that trial.
19:26a And after my skin they will destroy--this,
Hebrew sometimes used the third person plural as we use the passive, to obscure the subject of the action. Thus general conditions, or perhaps more especially, the worms, will destroy Job's skin. If the verse is not corrupt, then "this" must have been accompanied by a demonstrative gesture. Here Job copies the sweeping gesture Zophar made at 18:21 -- this scene of actors and audience, he implies, is where the vindication he is predicting will take place.
19:26b And out-of my flesh I shall see God
It is still the character Job who is speaking, but he is in part identified with the actor playing the character. To "see God" was to feel the strength of righteousness within. See 33:26, Ps 11:7. As the ancient Job who suffered, he feels his future vindication ringing back through the ages, working to restore his sense of presentableness before God. Verbs in Hebrew take their tense in part from the circumstances, so the timeless quality of the story was perhaps more accessible to the ancient audience than it is to us.
The magic of identification works both ways. The vindication wrought by the actor is transported back to the original Job, and the original Job is transported forward to be present in the body of the actor. Thus he will see God literally, as explained in the next verse, but "out-of" or apart from his body.
19:27
As to which I myself shall see for myself,
And my eyes shall behold, and not another's.
My kidneys fail within me.
The emphasis on the first person singular corresponds to the similar emphasis at the beginning of verse 25. Now it is Job the actor who will speak, as distinct from Job the character. By stepping out of character, the actor confirms to the audience the extraordinary implication of the two previous verses. He is both Job and Job's goel. He is the character he is acting.
"As to which". As to God, or with respect to seeing God. The actor is creating suspense by advertising the coming appearance of God on stage at chapter 38. The appearance of God would have been rather high on the bill for the play(!), and the whole audience would be expecting it. That interview with God is timeless, but it is the actor and not the original Job who will see God in the flesh -- with his own eyes and not another's.
"My heart fails within me." Here the actor resumes his part. Job has seen his vindication and the excitement is too much for his frail state. His illness reasserts itself and he collapses to his knees but regains control to seat himself. He is temporarily lost in thought.
19:28,29. Eliphaz had mentioned a sword at 15:22, and Bildad's fire and brimstone sermon of chapter 18 was unconscionable. Even so, Job would not have launched into this attack upon his friends directly upon being overcome by a vision of his future vindication. When Job speaks again in chapter 21, he is not defensive.
The assignment of the verses to Elihu is imaginative, perhaps, but not out of the question. By speaking up from the audience against Job's friends Elihu would gain standing as spokesman for the crowd and so a better reception for his big speech at chapter 32. Also, the references to Job in the third person, in verse 28 make better sense if it is Elihu speaking; and the word for "judgment" in verse 29 occurs elsewhere in Job only in the speeches of Elihu, where it occurs twice (34:23, 36:17).
last changed April 5, 1998