A.—The Accusation of Eliphaz: Man must not speak against God like Job
Job 4-5
1. Introductory reproof of Job on account of his unmanly complaint, by which he could only incur God’s wrath:
Job_4:2-11
1 Then Eliphaz the Temanite answered and said:
2 If we assay to commune with thee, wilt thou be grieved?
but who can withhold himself from speaking?
3 Behold, thou hast instructed many,
and thou hast strengthened the weak hands.
4 Thy words have upholden him that was falling,
and thou hast strengthened the feeble knees.
5 But now it is come upon thee, and thou faintest;
it toucheth thee, and thou art troubled.
6 Is not this thy fear, thy confidence,
thy hope, and the uprightness of thy ways?
7 Remember, I pray thee, who ever perished, being innocent?
or where were the righteous cut off?
8 Even as I have seen, they that plough iniquity,
and sow wickedness, reap the same.
9 By the blast of God they perish,
and by the breath of His nostrils are they consumed.
10 The roaring of the lion, and the voice of the fierce lion,
and the teeth of the young lions are broken.
11 The old lion perisheth for lack of prey,
and the stout lion’s whelps are scattered abroad.
2. An account of a heavenly revelation, which declared to him the wrongfulness and foolishness of weak sinful man’s raving against God:
Job_4:12
to Job_5:7
12 Now a thing was secretly brought to me,
and mine ear received a little thereof,
13 in thoughts from the visions of the night,
when deep sleep falleth on men—
14 fear came upon me, and trembling,
which made all my bones to shake.
15 Then a spirit passed before my face;
the hair of my flesh stood up!
16 It stood, but I could not discern the form thereof:
an image was before mine eyes;
there was silence, and I heard a voice, saying,
17 “Shall mortal man be more just than God?
shall a man be more pure than his Maker?
18 Behold, He put no trust in His servants;
and His angels He charged with folly:
19 how much less in them that dwell in houses of clay,
whose foundation is in the dust,
which are crushed before the moth?
20 They are destroyed from morning to evening;
they perish forever without any regarding it.
21 Doth not their excellency which is in them go away?
they die, even without wisdom.”
Job_5:1 Call now, if there be any that will answer thee;
and to which of the saints will thou turn?
2 For wrath killeth the foolish man,
and envy slayeth the silly one.
3 I have seen the foolish taking root;
but suddenly I cursed his habitation.
4 His children are far from safety,
and they are crushed in the gate, neither is there any to deliver them:
5 whose harvest the hungry eateth up,
and taketh it even out of the thorns,
and the robber swalloweth up their substance.
6 Although affliction cometh not forth of the dust,
neither doth trouble spring out of the ground;
7 yet man is born unto trouble,
as the sparks fly upward.
3. Admonition to repentance, as the only means by which Job can recover God’s favor and his former happy estate:
Job_5:8-27
8 I would seek unto God,
and unto God would I commit my cause;
9 which doeth great things and unsearchable,
marvellous things without number;
10 who giveth rain upon the earth,
and sendeth waters upon the fields;—
11 to set up on high those that be low,
that those which mourn may be exalted to safety.
12 He disappointeth the devices of the crafty,
so that their hands cannot perform their enterprise.
13 He taketh the wise in their own craftiness,
and the counsel of the froward is carried headlong.
14 They meet with darkness in the day-time,
and grope in the noonday as in the night.
15 But He saveth the poor from the sword, from their mouth,
and from the hand of the mighty.
16 So the poor hath hope,
and iniquity stoppeth her mouth.
17 Behold, happy is the man whom God correcteth;
therefore despise not thou the chastening of the Almighty.
18 For He maketh sore, and bindeth up;
He woundeth, and His hands make whole.
19 He shall deliver thee in six troubles;
yea, in seven there shall no evil touch thee.
20 In famine He shall redeem thee from death,
and in war from the power of the sword.
21 Thou shalt be hid from the scourge of the tongue,
neither shalt thou be afraid of destruction when it cometh.
22 At destruction and famine thou shalt laugh;
neither shalt thou be afraid of the beasts of the earth.
23 For thou shalt be in league with the stones of the field,
and the beasts of the field shall be at peace with thee.
24 And thou shalt know that thy tabernacle shall be in peace;
and thou shalt visit thy habitation, and shalt not sin.
25 Thou shalt know also that thy seed shall be great,
and thine offspring as the grass of the earth.
26 Thou shalt come to thy grave in a full age,
like as a shock of corn cometh in his season.
27 Lo this, we have searched it, so it is:
hear it, and know thou it for thy good.
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL
1. Job_4:1. Then answered Eliphaz,… and said.—It is beyond question the poet’s aim in this first discourse of Eliphaz to put forward as the first arraigner of Job a man venerable through age and experience, calm and dispassionate, godly after his manner, but at the same time entangled in a one-sided eudemonism and theory of work-righteousness. It is a genuine sage who discourses here: not indeed another Job, but still a character of marked superiority over his two associates, Bildad and Zophar, in experimental insight and sterling personal worth, who here “with the self-confident pathos of age and the mien of a prophet” communicates his experiences, annexing thereto warnings, exhortations and admonitions. [“He, the oldest and most illustrious, the leader and spokesman, appears here at once in his greatest brilliancy. What a fullness in the argument, which at first sight seems unanswerable! How well he knows how to produce illustrations and proofs from revelation and from experience, from among the inhabitants of heaven and of earth! And what poetic beauty irradiates it all! How he strikes with equal skill each various chord of mild reproach, of self-assured conviction, of the awful, of the elevated, of calm instruction, of friendly appeal! How clearly and sharply marked are its divisions, alike as to thought and poetic form! Every strophe is a rounded completed whole in itself: and with what freedom, and, at the same time, with what internal necessity does one strophe link itself to another! One might say that as an artistic discourse this part is the completest in the whole book of Job, that it seems as though the poet wished to show at the very beginning the perfection of his art.” Schlottmann. “The speech is wonderfully artistic and exhaustive, unmistakably manifesting the speaker’s high standing and self-conscious superiority, and his conviction of Job’s guilt, yet showing a desire to spare him, even while being faithful with him, and to lead him back to rectitude and humility rather by an exhibition of the goodness of God than of his own sin. The speech is exquisitely climactic, rising, as Ewald says, from the faint whisper and tune of the summer wind to the loud and irresistible thunder of the wintry storm.” Dav.]
The discourse opens with a sharp attack on Job’s comfortless and hopeless lamentation, as something which was adapted to bring down on him God’s wrath, which, as experience shows, is visited on every ungodly man (Job_4:2-11). He strengthens this admonition by describing a heavenly vision which had appeared to him during the night, and which had spoken to him, teaching him how foolish and how wrong it is for man to rebel against God (Job_4:12 to Job_5:7). The close of his discourse consists of a kindly admonition to Job to return accordingly to God in a spirit of prayer and penitent humility, in which case God would certainly deliver him out of his misery, and exalt him out of his present low estate (Job_5:8-27). The first and shortest of these three divisions forms at the same time the first of the five double strophes, into which the entire discourse falls. The two following divisions are subdivided each into two double strophes of almost equal length, as follows: Div. Job 2 : a.Job_4:12-21; b.Job_5:1-7.—Div. Job 3 : a.Job_5:8-16; b.Job_5:17-27.
2. First Division and Double Strophe: Introductory reproof of Job’s faint-hearted lamentation, whereby he could only call down on himself God’s anger: Job_4:2-11.
First Strophe:Job_4:2-6. Retrospective reference to Job’s former godly and righteous life.
Job_4:2. Should one venture a word to thee, wilt thou be grieved?—[The friendly courtesy of these opening words of Eliphaz is worthy of note. They are at once dignified, sympathetic and considerate. At the same time, as Dillmann observes, there is a certain “coldness and measured deliberation” about them, which not improbably grated somewhat on Job’s sensibilities, yearning, as his heart now did, for more tangible and soulfull sympathy. Eliphaz speaks less as a sympathizing friend, than as a fatherly adviser, and a benevolent but critical sage.—E.] The interrogative particle
äֲ
, referring to the principal verb
úִּìְàֶä
, is prefixed to the first word of the sentence. [See Green, Gr. § 283, a.] It is immediately followed by an elliptical conditional clause,
ðִñָּä ãָáָø àֵìֶéêָ
(comp. the same construction in Job_4:21; also in Num_16:22; Jer_8:4), forming an antecedent clause to the principal verb. To be rendered accordingly: “Wilt thou find it irksome, take it hard, will it offend thee, if one attempts a word to thee?”
ðִñָּä
is most simply regarded as third pers. sing. Piel of
ðñä
, tentare, after Ecc_7:23. It is less natural, with Umbreit, etc., to take it as Pret. Niph. in the same sense, or following the old versions, to see in it a variant form of
ðִùָּׂà
(comp. Psa_4:7), as though it were
ðùà ãáø
, “to speak a word:” Job_27:1; Psa_15:3; Psa_81:3. In the latter case the word must be taken either as 3d sing. Niph. in the passive sense (“should a word be spoken”) or, more probably, as 1st plur. Imperf. Kal (“should we speak”), in which latter case again two interpretations are possible, namely either: “wilt thou, should we speak a word against thee, take offence” (Rosenm., etc., comp. the Ancient Versions)? or: “shall we speak a word against thee, with which thou wilt be offended” (Ewald, Bib. Jahrb. ix. 37; Böttcher)? Against the first rendering may be urged the unusual construction of an Imperf. in an elliptical conditional sentence; against the latter the unheard of transitive rendering which it assumes for
ìàä
. [In favor of taking
ðñä
here in the sense of: “to attempt, to venture,” it may be said: (1) This meaning is entirely legitimate. (2) It is more expressive. (3) It is more in harmony with the courtesy which marks these opening words of Eliphaz. Hengstenberg’s rendering is somewhat different from any of those given above: “Shall one venture a word to thee, who art wearied?” But the elliptical construction thus assumed seems less simple and natural than the one adopted above.—E.] And yet to hold back from words [or speaking] who is able? For the use of
òöø
with
áְּ
, “to hold back from [or, in respect to] anything,” comp. Job_12:15; Job_29:9. For the sharpened form
åַòְöֹø
instead of
åַòֲöֹø
, see Ew. § 245, b.—
îִìִּéï
, Aram. plur. ending (comp. Job_12:11; Job_15:13) of
îִìָּä
, which occurs in our book thirty times, whereas
îִìִּéí
occurs but ten times in all.
Job_4:3. Behold, thou hast admonished many.—
éִñַּøְúָּ
, lit. thou hast chastised, disciplined, namely, with words of reproof and loving admonition. The Perf. here points back to Job’s normal conduct in former days when revered by all, and thus furnishes the standard by which the time of the following Imperf. verb is to be determined. The general sense of Job_4:3-4 is: “Thou wast wont formerly to conduct thyself in regard to the sufferings of others so correctly and blamelessly, to show such a proper understanding of the cause and aim of heavy judgments inflicted by God, to deal with sufferings in a way so wise and godlike! But now when suffering has overtaken thyself, etc. … And slack hands hast thou strengthened.—“Slack hands:” a sensuous figure representing faint-heartedness and despondency, as also in 2Sa_4:1; Isa_35:3. In the last member of Job_4:4 the expression “stumbling [lit. bowing, i.e. sinking] knees” is used in essentially the same sense (and so in Heb_12:12).
Job_4:5. Because it is now come to thee, to wit, suffering, misfortune. This construction of the impersonal or neutral
úָּáåֹà
is suggested by the context, [and this indefinite statement of the subject is at once more considerate and impressive than if it had been expressed.—E.]
ëּé
is construed by Hirzel, Hahn, Schlottmann, Delitzsch, etc., as a particle of time: “Now when it is come to thee.” But the position,
ëִּé òַúָּä
favors rather the causal rendering of the first particle, “because now,” etc. Comp. Dillmann. [Others explain by supplying an omitted clause: e.g. “I say these things because,” etc. Ewald: “How strange that thou now faintest.” The adversative use of
ëִּé
, (“but now”), except after a negative clause, is too doubtful to be relied on here.—E.] It toucheth thee (
úִּâַּò òָãֶéêָ
, comp. Isa_16:8; Jer_4:10; Mic_1:9), and thou art confounded.
åַúִּáָּäֵì
, lit. “art seized with terror, and thereby put out of countenance;” comp. Job_21:6; Job_23:15. [“It is unfair to Eliphaz to suppose that he utters his wonder with any sinister tone—as if he would hint that Job found it somewhat easier to counsel others than console himself; his astonishment is honest and honestly expressed that a man who could say such deep things on affliction, and things that reached so far into the heart of the afflicted, that could lay bare such views of providence and the uses of adversity, and thus invigorate the weak, should himself be so feeble and desponding when suffering came to his own door.” Dav. Doubtless the words express surprise on the part of Eliphaz, and were spoken with a kind intent; but also with a certain severity, a purpose to probe Job’s conscience, to lead him to self-examination, and to the discovery of the hidden evil within, of the existence of which Eliphaz, with his theodicy, could have no doubt.—E.]
Job_4:6. Is not thy godly fear thy confidence? thy hope—the uprightness of thy ways? The order of the words is chiastic [decussated, inverted]: in the first member the subject,
éִøְàָֽúְêָ
, stands at the beginning; in the second member it is found at the end,
úֹּí ãְּøָëֶéêָ
, evidently synonymous with
éִøְàָä
. A similar case is found in Job_36:26. Altogether too artificial and forced, and too much at variance with the principles which govern the structure of Hebrew verse, is the explanation attempted by Delitzsch: “Is not thy piety thy confidence, thy hope? And the uprightness of thy ways?” (viz. and is not the uprightness of thy ways thy confidence and thy hope?) Eliphaz twice again makes use of the ellipsis
éִøְàָä
for
éִøְàַú àֱìֹäéí
in his discourses (Job_15:4; Job_22:4 : and comp.
äַãַּòַú
, Hos_4:6 for
ãòú àìäí
). [“The word fear is the most comprehensive term for that mixed feeling called piety, the contradictory reverence and confidence, awe and familiarity, which, like the centripetal and centrifugal forces, keep man in his orbit around God.” Dav.]
ëִּñְìָä
, confidence, assurance (the same which elsewhere=
ëֶñֶì
, Job_8:14; Job_31:24), not “folly” (LXX.). [The Vav in the second member is the Vav of the apodosis, or of relation. See Green, Gr. § 287, 3.—The rendering of E. V.: “Is not this thy fear, thy confidence, thy hope, and the uprightness of thy ways?” overlooks the parallelism, and is unintelligible. Some (Hupfeld, Merx) cut the knot by transposing
äִּ÷ְåָúְֽêָ
to the end of the verse. The construction as it stands is certainly peculiar, yet not enough so to justify any change. Moreover it seems to have escaped all the commentators that the very harshness and singularity of the construction is intentional, having for its object to arrest more forcibly the attention of Job, to stir up his consciousness on the subject of his piety and rectitude, and thus to further the process of probing his soul on which Eliphaz is in this part of his discourse engaged.—E.]
Job_4:7-11 Second Strophe: More explicit expansion of Job_4:6, wherein it is shown as the conclusion of experience that the pious never fall into dire affliction, whereas on the contrary the ungodly and the wicked do so often and inevitably.
Job_4:7. Remember now! who that was innocent has perished? [“It would be unfair to Eliphaz (as well as quite beside his argument, the purpose of which is to reprove Job’s impatience, and lead him back by repentance to God), to suppose that he argued in this way: Who ever perished being innocent? Thou hast perished; therefore thy piety and the integrity of thy ways have been a delusion. On the contrary his argument is: Where were the pious ever cut off? Thou art pious: why is not thy piety thy hope? Why fall, being a pious man, and as such of necessity to be finally prospered by God, into such irreligious and wild despair? Eliphaz acknowledges Job’s piety, and makes it the very basis of his exhortation; of course, though pious, he had been guilty (as David was) of particular heinous sins, which explained and caused his calamities. The fundamental axiom of the friends produced here both positively and negatively as was meet for the first announcement of it by Eliphaz is, that whatever appearance to the contrary and for a time, yet ultimately and always the pious were saved and the wicked destroyed.” Dav.] The
äåּà
annexed to the
îִé
gives greater vivacity to the question; comp. Job_13:19; Job_17:3; also the similar phrase
îִé æֶä
(Gesen. § 122, 2).
Job_4:8. So far as I have seen, they who plough mischief and sow ruin reap the same.—
ëַּàֲùֶׁø øָàִéúִé
, not “when (or if) I saw” (Vaih., Del.), for this construction of
ëàùø
does not allow the omission of the Vav Consec. before the apodosis. But either the whole sentence is to be taken as a statement of the comparison with that which precedes, to which it is annexed, thus: “As I have seen: they who plough … reap the same” (Hirz., Schlott. [Con.]). Or we are to explain with most of the later commentators;” “So far as I have seen,” i.e. so far as my experience goes (Rosenm., Arnh., Stick., Welte, Heiligst., Ew., Dillm. [Dav., Merx], etc.).
àָåֶï
, lit. “nothingness,” then “sin, wickedness, mischief.”—
òָîָì
as in Job_3:10. The agricultural figure of sowing (or ploughing) and reaping, emphatically representing the organically necessary connection of cause and effect in the domain of the moral life; to be found also in Hos_8:7; Hos_10:13; Pro_22:8; Gal_6:7 seq.; 2Co_9:6, and often.
Job_4:9. By the breath of Eloah they perish: like plants, which a burning hot wind scorches (Gen_41:6). The discourse thus carries forward the preceding figure. On the use of the divine name
àֱìåֹäַּ
in our poem, see Introd. § 5. The
ðִùְׁîַú àֱìåֹäַּ
is in b. still more specifically defined as
øåּçַ àַôå
, lit. “breath of his nostril,” i.e. blast of his anger. Both synonyms are still more closely bound together in Psa_18:16. [“As the previous verse describes retribution as a natural necessity founded in the order of the world, so does this verse trace back this game order of the world to the divine causality.” Schlott. Lee, criticising the A. V.’s rendering of
ðְùָׁîָä
in the first member by “blast,” says: “I know of no instance in which the word will bear this sense. It rather means a slight or gentle breathing.… The sentiment seems to be: they perish from the gentlest breathing of the Almighty .. It is added: and from the blast of his nostril, or wrath, they come to an end. From the construction here, blast or storm is probably meant. See Psa_11:6; Hos_13:15, etc., and if so, we shall have a sort of climax here.”]
Job_4:10-11. From the vegetable kingdom the figurative representation of the discourse passes over to that of animal life, in order to show, by the destruction of a family of lions, how the insolent pride of the wicked is crushed by the judgment of God.—The cry of the lion, and the voice of the roaring lion, and the teeth of the young lions are broken; the strong [lion] perishes for lack of prey, and the whelps of the lioness are scattered.—[Merx rejects these two verses as spurious; but their appropriateness in the connection will appear from what is said below.—E.] Not less than five different names of the lion are used in this description, showing the extent to which the lion abounded in the lands of the Bible, and especially in the Syro-Arabian country, which was the scene of our poem. The usual name
àַøְéֵä
stands first; next follows the purely poetic designation,
ùַׁçַì
, “the roarer” (Vaih.), comp. Job_10:16; Job_28:8; Psa_91:13; Pro_26:13; Hos_5:14; Hos_13:7; then in Job_4:10 b comes the standard expression for young lions,
ëְּôִéøִéí
, comp. Jdg_14:5; Psa_17:12; Psa_104:21; then follows in Job_4:11 a
ìַéִùׁ
, “the strong one,” from
ìִéùׁ
, “to be strong,” found again in Pro_30:30, and being thus limited to the diction of poetry, and finally in Job_4:11 b the no less poetic
ìָáִéà
, which here, as well as in Job_38:29; Gen_49:9; Num_24:9, denotes the lioness, for which, however, we have also the distinctive feminine form
ìְáִéָà
in Eze_19:2. [“The young lions are mentioned along with the old in order to exemplify the destruction of the haughty sinner with all his household.” Schlott.]
ðִúָּòåּ
(from
ðúò
, frangere, conterere, an Aramaizing alternate form of
ðúö
, comp. Psa_58:7) signifies: “are shattered, are dashed out;’ an expression which, strictly taken, suits only the last subject
ùִׁðֵּé ëּ
, but may by zeugma be referred to both the preceding subjects, to which such a verb as “are silenced” would properly correspond. Observe the use of the perf.
ðִúָּòåּ
in making vividly present the sudden destruction of the rapacious lions, which is then followed in Job_4:11, first by a present partic. (
àֹáֵø
), then by a present Imperf. (
éִúְôָøָãåּ
), describing them in their present condition, shattered, broken in strength, and restrained in their rage. [Delitzsch remarks that “the partic.
àֹáֵã
is a stereotype expression for wandering about prospectless and helpless,” a definition which here, as well as in the passages to which he refers, would considerably weaken the sense. See Hengsten. in loco.—E.]
îִáְּìִé
, “for the lack of;” the same as “without;” comp. Job_4:20; Job_6:6; Job_24:7-8; Job_31:19. [“From wicked man his imagination suddenly shifts to his analogue among beasts, the lion, and there appears before him one old and helpless, his teeth dashed out, his roar silenced, dying for lack of prey, and being abandoned by all his kind; a marvellous picture of a sinner once powerful and bloody, but now destitute of power, and with only his bloody instincts remaining to torture and mock his impotency.” Dav.]
3. Second Division: describing a heavenly revelation which declared to him the wrongfulness and the folly of frail, sinful man’s anger against God.—a. Second Double Strophe: the heavenly revelation itself, introduced by a description of the awful nocturnal vision through which it was communicated: Job_4:12-21.
First Strophe:Job_4:12-16. The night-vision.
Job_4:12. And to me there stole a word.—Lit. “and to me there was stolen, there was brought in a stealthy, mysterious manner.” The imperf.
éְâֻðָּá
is ruled by the following imperf. consec. [“The speaker is thrown back again by the imagination into the imposing circumstances of the eventful night.… The Pual implies that the oracle was sent.” Dav.] The separation of the
å
which properly belongs to the verb
éְâֻðָּá
, but which is placed here, at the beginning of the verse, before
àֵìַé
[“because he desires, with pathos, to put himself prominent,” Del.] rests on the fact that that which is now about to be related, and especially the
ãָּáָø
which came to Eliphaz, is hereby designated as something new, as something additional to that which has already been observed. [This separation is quite often met with in poetry. Comp. Psa_69:22; Psa_78:15; Psa_78:26; Psa_78:29, etc. See Ew. Gr. § 346 b.] And mine ear caught a whisper therefrom:i.e., proceeding therefrom, occasioned by that communication of a mysterious
ãáø
. The
îå
in
îֶðְäåּ
(poetic form, for
îִîֶּðּåּ
, Ew. § 263 b) is therefore causative, not partitive, as Hahn and Delitzsch regard it.
ùֶׁîֶõ
signifies here, as in Job_26:14, a faint whisper, or lisp [or murmur],
øéèõñéóìüò
, susurrus, not “a little, a minimum,” as the Targ., Pesh., the Rabbis [and the Eng. Ver.] render it. The word is to be derived either from
ùָׁîַò
, thus denoting a faint, indistinct impression on the ear (Arnheim, Delitzsch), or from the primitive root,
ãí
,
ùí
, to which, according to Dillmann, who produces its Æthiopic cognate, the idea attaches of “lip-closing, dumbness, and low-speaking.” [Here the word “is designed to show the value of such a solemn communication, and to arouse curiosity.” Del. “The whole description of the way in which the communication was made indicates, perhaps, the naturalness and calmness and peace of the intercourse of man’s spirit and God’s—how there is nothing forced or strained in God’s communication to man—it droppeth as the gentle rain from heaven upon the place beneath—and at the same time man’s impaired capacity and receptiveness and dullness of spiritual hearing.” Dav. “The word was too sacred and holy to come loudly and directly to his ear.” Del.
Job_4:13-16 present a more specific description of that which is stated generally in Job_4:12.
Job_4:13. In the confused thoughts from visions of the night, when deep sleep falls on men.—Whether with most expositors we connect these words with the verse preceding, as a supplementary determination of the time, or as a preliminary statement of time connected with what follows (Umbreit, Dillmann, Conant, etc.), matters not as to the sense.—
ùְׂòִôִּéí
are here, as also in Job_20:2, “thoughts proceeding like branches from the heart as their root, and intertwining themselves” (Delitzsch). [The root, according to Del. and Fürst, is
ùòó
, to bind; according to Ges., Dav., etc., it is for
ñòó
, to split; hence here and Job_20:2 “fissures, divisions, divided counsels (1Ki_18:21), thoughts running away into opposite ramifications, distracting doubts.” Dav.] The following
îִï
indicates that these thoughts proceed from visions of the night, i.e., dream-visions; from which, however, it does not follow that Eliphaz intends to refer what he is about to narrate purely to the sphere of the life of dreams. For the determination of the time in our verse is altogether general, as the second member in particular shows. Hengstenberg’s position that Eliphaz includes himself among the “men” designated here as those on whom deep sleep falls, and that he accordingly represents his vision as literally a dream-vision, has no foundation in the context. (Comp. still further Passavant’s remark on Job_4:13 under the head “Homiletical and Practical”). [“There are three things contained in the genetic process or progress towards this oracle. First, visions of the night, raising deep questions of man’s relation to God, but leaving them unsolved, short flights of the spirit into superhuman realms, catching glimpses of mysteries, too short to be self-revealing—these are the visions. Second, the perturbed, perplexed, and meditative condition of the spirit following these, when it presses into the darkness of the visions for a solution, and is rocked and tossed with fear or longing—the thoughts from the visions. And third, there is the new revelation clearing away the doubts and calming the perturbation of the soul, a revelation attained either by the spirit rising convulsively out of its trouble, and piercing by a new divinely-given energy the heart of things before hidden; or by the truth being communicated to it by some Divine messenger or word.” Dav. The oracle was conveyed by a dream, “because in the patriarchal age such oracles were of most frequent occurrence, as may be seen, e.g. in the book of Genesis.” Ewald]. For
úַּøְãֵּîָä
, “deep sleep,” such as is wont to be experienced about the hour of midnight, in contrast to ordinary sleep,
ùֵֹׁðָä
, and to the light, wakeful slumber of morning,
úְּðåּîָä
, comp. Gen_2:21; Gen_15:12; 1Sa_26:12; also below, Job_33:15, where Elihu has a description imitative of the passage before us. [“
úַּøְãֵּîָä
is the deep sleep related to death and ecstasy, in which man sinks back from outward life into the remotest ground of his inner life.” Del. Per contra Davidson says: “
úøãîä
is used generally of ecstatic, divinely-induced sleep, yet not exclusively (Pro_19:15, and verb, Jon_1:5), and not here. The meaning is that the vision came, not at the hour when prophetic slumber is wont to fall on men (and that El. was under such), but simply at the hour when men were naturally under deep sleep. El. was thus alone with the vision, and the solitary encounter accounts for the indelible impression its words and itself left on him.”]
Job_4:14. Shuddering [fear] came upon me (
÷ְøָàַðִé
, from
÷øä=÷øà
, to meet, befall, come upon, comp. Gen_42:38), and trembling, and sent a shudder through the multitude of my bones: the subject of
äִôְçִéã
being the “shuddering” and the “trembling,” not “the ghostlike something” (as Delitzsch says), of which Eliphaz first proceeds to speak in the following verse. [The perf. vbs. in this verse are pluperf. “A terror had fallen upon me, like a certain vague lull which precedes the storm, as if nature were uneasily listening and holding in her breath for the coming calamity.” So Davidson.—
øֹá
in poetry is often used for
ëֹּì
, all. The terror striking through his bones indicates how deeply and thoroughly he was agitated. Bones, as elsewhere in similar passages, for the substratum of the bodily frame.—E.]
Job_4:15. And a spirit passed before me; lit.: passes before me (
éַçֲìֹó
, “glides, flits”); for the description as it grows more vivid introduces in this and the following verse the imperf. in place of the introductory perf. For
øåּçַ
in the sense of “a spirit,” the apparition of a spirit or an angel, comp. 1Ki_22:21. So correctly the ancient Versions, Umbreit, Ewald, Heiligstedt, Hahn [Good, Lee, Wem., Ber., Noy., Bar., Carey], etc. On the other hand [Schult.], Rosenm., Hirzel, Böttcher, Stickel, Delitzsch, Dillmann [Schlott., Ren., Rod,, Merx] render: “and a breath [of wind] passed over me,” a current of air, such as is wont to accompany spirit-communications from the other world (comp. Job_38:1; 1Ki_19:11; Act_2:2, etc.). The description in the following verse, however, does not agree with this rendering, especially the
éַòֲîֹã
, which is unmistakably predicated of the
øåּçַ
in the sense of “an angel, a personal spirit.” [It needs no argument to prove that the “spirit” here introduced is a good spirit, although it may be mentioned in passing that Codurcus, the Jesuit commentator, followed by some others, regards him as an evil spirit. This notion is advanced in the interest of the theory that Job’s friends are throughout to be condemned.—E.]—The hairs of my body bristled up.—
úְּñַîֵּø
, Piel intensive, “to rise up mightily, to bristle up.”
ùַׂòֲøָä
, elsewhere the individual hair (capillus), here a collective word (coma, crines), of the same structure as
òֲðָðָä
, Job_3:5. [The expression
ùַׂòֲøַú áְּùָׁøִé
, lit.: “the hair of my flesh,’ shows that the terror, which in Job_4:14 thrilled through all his bones, here creeps over his whole body.—E.]
Job_4:16. It stood there, I discerned not its appearance—The subj. of
éַòֲîֹã
is not the “unknown something” of the preceding verse (Rosenm., etc.), but the spirit, as it is already known to be, which has hitherto flitted before Eliphaz, but which now stands still to speak (comp. 1Sa_3:10).—An image before mine eyes;
úְּîåּðָä
, the word which in respect to spiritual phenomena is most nearly expressive of “form.” In Num_12:8; Psa_17:15 it is used of the
ìïñöÞ
or
äüîá
of God. Here it is very suitably used to describe the spiritual or angelic apparition, fading into indefiniteness; for it refers back to
øåּçַ
, the true subject of
éַòֲîֹã
, being placed after it in apposition to it.—A murmur and a voice I heard.—
ãְּîָîָäåָ÷ֹì
, a “lisping murmur and a voice,” a hendiadys, signifying a murmur uttering itself in articulate tones, a “murmuring or whispering voice” (Hahn). [So Ges., Fürst, Words., Dillm., Del., Dav.]. Umbreit (1st Ed.), Schlottmann [Eng. Ver., Good, Lee, Con., Carey, Ren.] take
ãְּîָîָä
, but unsuitably, in the sense of “silence.” For the true sense comp. 1Ki_19:12. [Of those who take
ãîîä
in the sense of silence there are two classes, the one, represented by the English Version and commentators, separates between the “silence” and the “voice:” first the silence, then the voice, as Renan: “in the midst of the silence I heard a voice;” the other, represented by Schlottmann and Hengstenberg, combine the two terms as a hendiadys, “a commingling of both, a faint, muffled voice” (Hengst.) Schlottmann quotes from Gersonides as follows: “And I heard his wonderful words as though they were compounded of the voice and of silence.” Burke in his Treatise on the Sublime and Beautiful has the following remarks on this vision: “There is a passage in the book of Job amazingly sublime, and this sublimity is principally due to the terrible uncertainty of the thing described.… We are first prepared with the utmost solemnity for the vision; we are first terrified before we are let even into the obscure cause of our emotion; but when this grand cause of terror makes its appearance, what is it? is it not wrapt up in the shades of its own incomprehensible darkness, more awful, more striking, more terrible than the liveliest description, than the clearest painting, could possibly represent it?”—E.]
Second strophe, Job_4:17-21. The contents of the revelation communicated through the vision.
Job_4:17. Is a mortal just before Eloah, or before his Maker is a man pure?—Already in this question is contained the substance of the revelation; Job_4:18-21 only furnish the proof of this proposition” from the universal sinfulness of men.
îִï
here is not comparative, “more just than” (Vulg., Luth. [E. V.], etc.), but “from the side of any one” [Gesenius: “marking the author of a judgment or estimate: here in the judgment or sight of God.”] Hence “is a man just from the side of God?” i.e., from God’s stand-point; or, more briefly: “before God” (LXX.:
ἐíáíôßïí ôïῦ èåïῦ
). In the same sense with this
îִï
= coram (for which comp. Num_16:9; Num_32:22), we find
òִí
in Job_9:2; Job_25:4; and
áְּòֵéðֵé
in Job_15:15; Job_25:5. [According to the other (the comparative) rendering, the sentiment is: “Whoever censures the course of Providence, by complaining of his own lot (as Job had done), claims to be more just than God, the equity of whose government he thus arraigns.” See Conant, Davidson, etc.]
Job_4:18. Lo, in His servants He trusteth not; and to His angels He imputes error.—“Servants” (
òáãéí
) and “angels” (
îìàëéí
) are only different designations of the same superhuman beings, who in Job_1:6 are called “sons of God.” Eliphaz refers to them here in order to introduce a conclusion a majori ad minus.
ùִׂéí áְּ
, lit.: “to place anything in one,” i.e., to ascribe anything to one, imputare. Comp. 1Sa_22:15.—
úָּäֳìָä
is most correctly explained by Dillmann, after the Ethiopic, as signifying “error, imperfection” (so also Ewald [Fürst, Delitzsch], and still earlier Schnurrer, after the Arabic). The derivation from
äìì
, according to which it would mean “folly, presumption” (Kimchi, Gesenius [Schlottmann, Renan], etc.), is etymologically scarcely to be admitted [on account of the half vowel, and still more the absence of the Daghesh. Del.] The ancient versions seem only to have guessed at the sense (Vulg., pravum quid; LXX.,
óêïëéüí ôé
; Chald., iniquitas; Pesch, stupor). Hupfeld needlessly attempts to amend after Job_24:12, where the parallel word
úִּôְìָä
is given as the object of
ùִׂéí áְּ
. [“It is not meant that the good spirits positively sin, as if sin were a natural necesary consequence of their creature-ship and finite existence, but that even the holiness of the good spirits is never equal to the absolute holiness of God, and that this deficiency is still greater in man, who is both spiritual and corporeal, who has earthiness as the basis of his original nature.” Del.]
Job_4:18. How much more they who dwell in houses of clay.—
àַó
here introducing the conclusion of the syllogism a majori ad minus, begun in Job_4:18, and so =
àַó ëִּé
(Job_9:14; Job_15:16; Job_25:6); here, as in 2Sa_16:11, to be translated by quanto magis, because a positive premise (Job_4:18 b.) precedes; comp. Ewald, § 354, c. Those “who dwell in houses of clay” are men generally. There is no particular reference to those who are poor and miserable. For the expression
áָּúֵּéÎçֹîֶø
does not point to men’s habitations, but to the material, earthly, frail bodies with which they are clothed, their
öèáñôὰ óþìáôá
(comp. Job_33:6; Wis_9:15; 2Co_5:1, as well as the Mosaic account of creation which lies at the foundation of all these representations; see Gen_2:7; Gen_3:19). It may be said further that the figurative and indefinite character of the language here justifies no particular deductions either in respect to the nature and constitution of angels (to wit, whether in Eliphaz’s conception they are altogether incorporeal, or whether they are endowed with supra-terrestrial corporeality), nor in respect to the doctrine which he may have entertained concerning the causal nexus between man’s sensuous nature (corporeity) and sin.—The foundation of which is in the dust;viz.: of the houses of clay, for it is to these that the suffix points in
àֲùֶׁø éְñåֹãָí
; comp. Gen_3:19.—Which are crushed as though they were moths.—The suffix in
éְãַëְּàåּí
again refers back to the “houses of clay,” only that here those who dwell in them, men, are included with them in one notion. The subj. of
éãëàåí
is indefinite; it embraces “everything that operates destructively on the life of man.”
ìִôְðֵéÎòָùׁ
, not “sooner than the moth is destroyed” (Hahn), nor: “sooner than that which is devoured by the moth” (Kamphsn.), nor: “more rapidly than a moth destroys” (Oehler, Fries), nor: “set before the moth [or ‘worm,’ after Jarchi] to be crushed” (Schlottmann), but: “like moths, as though they were moths” (LXX:
óçôὸò ôñüðïí
).
ìִôְðֵé
accordingly means the same here as in Job_3:24, and the tertium comparationis is the moth’s frailty and powerlessness to resist, and not its agency in slowly but surely destroying and corroding, to which allusion is made in Hos_5:12; Isa_1:9; Isa_51:8; also below in Job_13:28 of our book. [To the latter idea the verb
ãִּëֵּà
used here is altogether unsuited, the meaning being to crush, not to consume in the manner of the moth.]
Job_4:20. From morning to evening are they destroyed;i.e., in so short a space of time as the interval between morning and evening they can be destroyed, one can destroy them (
éֻëָּֽúּåּ
, potential and impersonal, like
éãëàåí
in Job_4:19). For the use of this phrase, “from morning till evening,” as equivalent to “in the shortest time,” comp. Isa_38:12; also our proverbial saying: “well at morning, dead at night,” as well as the name “day-fly” [comp. “day-lily,” “ephemeron.”]—Before any one marks it they perish forever.—
îִáְּìִé îֵùִׂéí
, scil.
ìֵá
(comp. Job_1:8; Job_23:6; Job_24:12), “without there being any one who gives heed to it, who regards it,” and hence the same as “unobserved, unawares;” not “in folly,” “without understanding” (Ewald).
Job_4:21. Is it not so:—if their cord in them is torn away, they die, and not in wisdom?—The construction is the same as in Job_4:2; the words
ðñò éúøí áí
are an elliptical conditional clause, intercalated in the principal interrogative sentence.
éִúְøָí
(which Olshausen needlessly proposes to amend to
éְúֵãָí
, “their tent-pin”), is neither “their residue” (Vulgate, Rabb., Luther, etc.); nor “their best, their chief excellence” (De Wette, Amheim, Schlottmann [Davidson, Barnes, Noyes, E. V.], etc.); nor their bow-string (“the string which is drawn out in them as in a bow,” and which is unloosed to make the bow useless; Umbreit); [nor “their abundance, excess, whether of wealth or tyranny,” and which passes away with them (Lee), which does not suit the universality of the description; nor “their fluttering round is over with them” (Good, Wemyss; taking
äìà
as a verb, “to pass away,” and
ðñò
as a noun, “fluttering;” two forced interpretations)—E.]; but—the only interpretation with which the verb
ðִñַּò
, “to be torn away,” agrees (comp. Jdg_16:3; Jdg_16:14; Isa_33:20)—“their tent-cord,” the thread of their life, here conceived as a cord stretched out and holding up the tent of the body; comp. Job_30:11; Isa_38:12; also Job_6:9; Job_27:8; and especially Ecc_12:6, where this inward hidden thread of life is represented as the silver cord, which holds up the lamp suspended from the tent-canvass (see comment on the passage). This, the only correct construction of the passage (according to which
îֵéúָø=éֶúֶø
, tent-cord), is adopted by J. D. Michaelis, Hirzel, Hahn, Delitzsch, Kamphsn., Dillmann [Wordsworth, Renan, Rodwell, Gesenius, Fürst]. [“
áָּí
is neither superfluous nor awkward (against Olsh.), since it is intended to say that their duration of life falls in all at once like a tent when that which in them corresponds to the cord of a tent (i.e., the
ðֶôֶùׁ
) is drawn away from it.” Del.]—And not in wisdom; with, out having found true wisdom during their life, living in short-sightedness and folly to the end of their days; comp. Job_36:12; Pro_10:21 (Dillmann).
b. Third Double Strophe. Application of the contents of the heavenly revelation to Job’s case, Job_5:1-7.
First Strophe.Job_5:1-5. [The folly of murmuring against God asserted and illustrated].
Job_5:1. Call now! is there any one who will answer thee? and to whom of the holy ones wilt thou turn?—That is to say: forasmuch as, according to the interpretation of that Voice from God in the night, neither men nor angels are just and pure before God, all thy complaining against God will be of no avail to thee; not one of the heavenly servants of God in heaven, to whom thou mightest turn thyself, will regard thy cry for help, not one of them will intercede with God for thee, and spare thee the necessity of humbling thyself unconditionally and penitently beneath the chastening hand of God. [The question is somewhat ironical in its tone. If thou art disposed to challenge God’s dealings with thee, make the attempt; enter thy protest; but before whom? the angels, the holy ones of heaven? Behold they are not pure before God, and being holy, they are conscious of their inferiority; will they entertain thy appeal? Where then is thy plea to find a hearing? “Here as elsewhere in this book, call and answer seem to be law terms, the former denoting the action of the complainant, the latt
