Ayub 9:16

9:16 If I summoned him, and he answered me, ¹ 

I would not believe ² 

that he would be listening to my voice –

Ayub 9:32

9:32 For he ³  is not a human being like I am,

that ⁴  I might answer him,

that we might come ⁵  together in judgment.

Ayub 40:2

40:2 “Will the one who contends ⁶  with the Almighty correct him? ⁷ 

Let the person who accuses God give him an answer!”

[9:16]  ¹ sn The idea of “answer” in this line is that of responding to the summons, i.e., appearing in court. This preterite and the perfect before it have the nuance of hypothetical perfects since they are in conditional clauses (GKC 330 §111.x). D. J. A. Clines (Job [WBC], 219) translates literally, “If I should call and he should answer.”

[9:16]  ² tn The Hiphil imperfect in the apodosis of this conditional sentence expresses what would (not) happen if God answered the summons.

[9:32]  ³ tn The personal pronoun that would be expected as the subject of a noun clause is sometimes omitted (see GKC 360 §116.s). Here it has been supplied.

[9:32]  ⁴ tn The consecutive clause is here attached without the use of the ו (vav), but only by simple juxtaposition (see GKC 504-5 §166.a).

[9:32]  ⁵ tn The sense of the verb “come” with “together in judgment” means “to confront one another in court.” See Ps 143:2.

[40:2]  ⁶ tn The form רֹב (rov) is the infinitive absolute from the verb רִיב (riv, “contend”). Dhorme wishes to repoint it to make it the active participle, the “one who argues with the Almighty.”

[40:2]  ⁷ tn The verb יִסּוֹר (yissor) is found only here, but comes from a common root meaning “to correct; to reprove.” Several suggestions have been made to improve on the MT. Dhorme read it יָסוּר (yasur) in the sense of “to turn aside; to yield.” Ehrlich read this emendation as “to come to an end.” But the MT could be read as “to correct; to instruct.”