Ayub 34:5-9

34:5 For Job says, ‘I am innocent, ¹ 

but God turns away my right.

34:6 Concerning my right, should I lie? ² 

My wound ³  is incurable,

although I am without transgression.’ ⁴ 

34:7 What man is like Job,

who ⁵  drinks derision ⁶  like water!

34:8 He goes about ⁷  in company ⁸  with evildoers,

he goes along ⁹  with wicked men. ¹⁰ 

34:9 For he says, ‘It does not profit a man

when he makes his delight with God.’ ¹¹ 

Ayub 34:17

34:17 Do you really think ¹² 

that one who hates justice can govern? ¹³ 

And will you declare guilty

the supremely righteous ¹⁴  One,

Ayub 34:36

34:36 But ¹⁵  Job will be tested to the end,

because his answers are like those of wicked men.

Ayub 36:17

36:17 But now you are preoccupied with the judgment due the wicked,

judgment and justice take hold of you.

[34:5]  ¹ tn Heb “righteous,” but in this context it means to be innocent or in the right.

[34:6]  ² tn The verb is the Piel imperfect of כָּזַב (kazav), meaning “to lie.” It could be a question: “Should I lie [against my right?] – when I am innocent. If it is repointed to the Pual, then it can be “I am made to lie,” or “I am deceived.” Taking it as a question makes good sense here, and so emendations are unnecessary.

[34:6]  ³ tn The Hebrew text has only “my arrow.” Some commentators emend that word slightly to get “my wound.” But the idea could be derived from “arrows” as well, the wounds caused by the arrows. The arrows are symbolic of God’s affliction.

[34:6]  ⁴ tn Heb “without transgression”; but this is parallel to the first part where the claim is innocence.

[34:7]  ⁵ tn Heb “he drinks,” but coming after the question this clause may be subordinated.

[34:7]  ⁶ tn The scorn or derision mentioned here is not against Job, but against God. Job scorns God so much, he must love it. So to reflect this idea, Gordis has translated it “blasphemy” (cf. NAB).

[34:8]  ⁷ tn The perfect verb with the vav (ו) consecutive carries the sequence forward from the last description.

[34:8]  ⁸ tn The word חֶבְרַה (khevrah, “company”) is a hapax legomenon. But its meaning is clear enough from the connections to related words and this context as well.

[34:8]  ⁹ tn The infinitive construct with the ל (lamed) preposition may continue the clause with the finite verb (see GKC 351 §114.p).

[34:8]  ¹⁰ tn Heb “men of wickedness”; the genitive is attributive (= “wicked men”).

[34:9]  ¹¹ tn Gordis, however, takes this expression in the sense of “being in favor with God.”

[34:17]  ¹² tn The force of הַאַף (ha’af) is “Is it truly the case?” The point is being made that if Job were right God could not be judging the world.

[34:17]  ¹³ tn The verb חָבַשׁ (khavash) has the basic idea of “to bind,” as in binding on the yoke, and then in the sense of subduing people under authority (cf. Assyrian absanu). The imperfect verb here is best expressed with the potential nuance.

[34:17]  ¹⁴ tn The two words could be taken separately, but they seem to form a fine nominal hendiadys, because the issue is God’s justice. So the word for power becomes the modifier.

[34:36]  ¹⁵ tc The MT reads אָבִי (’avi, “my father”), which makes no sense. Some follow the KJV and emend the word to make a verb “I desire” or use the noun “my desire of it.” Others follow an Arabic word meaning “entreat, I pray” (cf. ESV, “Would that Job were tried”). The LXX and the Syriac versions have “but” and “surely” respectively. Since this is the only ms support, albeit weak, it may be the best choice. In this sense Elihu would be saying that because of Job’s attitude God will continue to test him.