Ayub 3:19

3:19 Small and great are ¹  there,

and the slave is free ²  from his master. ³ 

Ayub 5:18

5:18 For ⁴  he ⁵  wounds, ⁶  but he also bandages;

he strikes, but his hands also heal.

Ayub 8:16

8:16 He is a well-watered plant ⁷  in ⁸  the sun,

its shoots spread ⁹  over its garden. ¹⁰ 

Ayub 8:19

8:19 Indeed, this is the joy of his way, ¹¹ 

and out of the earth ¹²  others spring up. ¹³ 

Ayub 13:19

13:19 Who ¹⁴  will contend with me?

If anyone can, I will be silent and die. ¹⁵ 

Ayub 15:9

15:9 What do you know that we don’t know?

What do you understand that we don’t understand? ¹⁶ 

Ayub 17:3

17:3 Make then my pledge ¹⁷  with you.

Who else will put up security for me? ¹⁸ 

Ayub 31:4

31:4 Does he not see my ways

and count all my steps?

Ayub 31:11

31:11 For I would have committed ¹⁹  a shameful act, ²⁰ 

an iniquity to be judged. ²¹ 

Ayub 31:28

31:28 then this ²²  also would be iniquity to be judged, ²³ 

for I would have been false ²⁴  to God above.

Ayub 39:30

39:30 And its young ones devour the blood,

and where the dead carcasses ²⁵  are,

there it is.”

Ayub 40:19

40:19 It ranks first among the works of God, ²⁶ 

the One who made it

has furnished it with a sword. ²⁷ 

Ayub 4:7

4:7 Call to mind now: ²⁸ 

Who, ²⁹  being innocent, ever perished? ³⁰ 

And where were upright people ³¹  ever destroyed? ³² 

Ayub 9:22

Accusation of God’s Justice

9:22 “It is all one! ³³  That is why I say, ³⁴ 

‘He destroys the blameless and the guilty.’

Ayub 9:24

9:24 If a land ³⁵  has been given

into the hand of a wicked man, ³⁶ 

he covers ³⁷  the faces of its judges; ³⁸ 

if it is not he, then who is it? ³⁹ 

Ayub 11:11

11:11 For he ⁴⁰  knows deceitful ⁴¹  men;

when he sees evil, will he not ⁴²  consider it? ⁴³ 

Ayub 13:16

13:16 Moreover, this will become my deliverance,

for no godless person would come before him. ⁴⁴ 

Ayub 15:20

15:20 All his days ⁴⁵  the wicked man suffers torment, ⁴⁶ 

throughout the number of the years

that ⁴⁷  are stored up for the tyrant. ⁴⁸ 

Ayub 15:22-23

15:22 He does not expect ⁴⁹  to escape from darkness; ⁵⁰ 

he is marked for the sword; ⁵¹ 

15:23 he wanders about – food for vultures; ⁵² 

he knows that the day of darkness is at hand. ⁵³ 

Ayub 23:6

23:6 Would he contend ⁵⁴  with me with great power?

No, he would only pay attention to me. ⁵⁵ 

Ayub 24:18

24:18 ⁵⁶ “You say, ⁵⁷  ‘He is foam ⁵⁸  on the face of the waters; ⁵⁹ 

their portion of the land is cursed

so that no one goes to their vineyard. ⁶⁰ 

Ayub 28:3

28:3 Man puts an end to the darkness; ⁶¹ 

he searches the farthest recesses

for the ore in the deepest darkness. ⁶² 

Ayub 28:24

28:24 For he looks to the ends of the earth

and observes everything under the heavens.

Ayub 32:1

V. The Speeches of Elihu (32:1-37:24)

Elihu’s First Speech ⁶³ 

32:1 So these three men refused to answer ⁶⁴  Job further, because he was righteous in his ⁶⁵  own eyes.

Ayub 37:6

37:6 For to the snow he says, ‘Fall ⁶⁶  to earth,’

and to the torrential rains, ⁶⁷  ‘Pour down.’ ⁶⁸ 

Ayub 37:21

37:21 But now, the sun ⁶⁹  cannot be looked at ⁷⁰  –

it is bright in the skies –

after a wind passed and swept the clouds away. ⁷¹ 

Ayub 41:10-11

41:10 Is it not fierce ⁷²  when it is awakened?

Who is he, then, who can stand before it? ⁷³ 

41:11 (Who has confronted ⁷⁴  me that I should repay? ⁷⁵ 

Everything under heaven belongs to me!) ⁷⁶ 

Ayub 41:34

41:34 It looks on every haughty being;

it is king over all that are proud.” ⁷⁷ 

[3:19]  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.”

[3:19]  ² tn The LXX renders this as “unafraid,” although the negative has disappeared in some mss to give the reading “and the servant that feared his master.” See I. Mendelsohn, “The Canaanite Term for ‘Free Proletarian’,” BASOR 83 (1941): 36-39; idem, “New Light on hupsu,” BASOR 139 (1955): 9-11.

[3:19]  ³ tn The plural “masters” could be taken here as a plural of majesty rather than as referring to numerous masters.

[5:18]  ⁴ sn Verses 18-23 give the reasons why someone should accept the chastening of God – the hand that wounds is the same hand that heals. But, of course, the lines do not apply to Job because his suffering is not due to divine chastening.

[5:18]  ⁵ tn The addition of the independent pronoun here makes the subject emphatic, as if to say, “For it is he who makes….”

[5:18]  ⁶ tn The imperfect verbs in this verse describe the characteristic activities of God; the classification as habitual imperfect fits the idea and is to be rendered with the English present tense.

[8:16]  ⁷ tn The figure now changes to a plant that is flourishing and spreading and then suddenly cut off. The word רָטַב (ratav) means “to be moist; to be watered.” The word occurs in Arabic, Aramaic, and Akkadian, but only twice in the Bible: here as the adjective and in 24:8 as the verb.

[8:16]  ⁸ tn The Hebrew is לִפְנֵי (lifne, “before”). Does this mean “in the presence of the sun,” i.e., under a sweltering sun, or “before” the sun rises? It seems more natural to take לִפְנֵי (lifne) as “in the presence of” or “under.”

[8:16]  ⁹ tn Heb “its shoot goes out.”

[8:16]  ¹⁰ tc Some have emended this phrase to obtain “over the roofs.” The LXX has “out of his corruption.” H. M. Orlinsky has shown that this reading arose from an internal LXX change, saprias having replaced prasias, “garden” (JQR 26 [1935/36]: 134-35).

[8:19]  ¹¹ tn This line is difficult. If the MT stands as it is, the expression must be ironic. It would be saying that the joy (all the security and prosperity) of its way (its life) is short-lived – that is the way its joy goes. Most commentators are not satisfied with this. Dhorme, for one, changes מְשׂוֹשׂ (mÿsos, “joy”) to מְסוֹס (mÿsos, “rotting”), and gets “behold him lie rotting on the path.” The sibilants can interchange this way. But Dhorme thinks the MT was written the way it was because the word was thought to be “joy,” when it should have been the other way. The word “way” then becomes an accusative of place. The suggestion is rather compelling and would certainly fit the context. The difficulty is that a root סוּס (sus, “to rot”) has to be proposed. E. Dhorme does this by drawing on Arabic sas, “to be eaten by moths or worms,” thus “worm-eaten; decaying; rotting.” Cf. NIV “its life withers away”; also NAB “there he lies rotting beside the road.”

[8:19]  ¹² tn Heb “dust.”

[8:19]  ¹³ sn As with the tree, so with the godless man – his place will soon be taken by another.

[13:19]  ¹⁴ tn The interrogative is joined with the emphatic pronoun, stressing “who is he [who] will contend,” or more emphatically, “who in the world will contend.” Job is confident that no one can bring charges against him. He is certain of success.

[13:19]  ¹⁵ sn Job is confident that he will be vindicated. But if someone were to show up and have proof of sin against him, he would be silent and die (literally “keep silent and expire”).

[15:9]  ¹⁶ tn The last clause simply has “and it is not with us.” It means that one possesses something through knowledge. Note the parallelism of “know” and “with me” in Ps 50:11.

[17:3]  ¹⁷ tn The MT has two imperatives: “Lay down, pledge me, with me.” Most commentators think that the second imperative should be a noun, and take it to say, “Lay my pledge with/beside you.” A. B. Davidson (Job, 126) suggests that the first verb means “give a pledge,” and so the two similar verbs would be emphatic: “Give a pledge, be my surety.” Other than such a change (which would involve changing the vowels) one would have to interpret similarly by seeing the imperatives as a kind of hendiadys, with the main emphasis being on the second imperative, “make a pledge.”

[17:3]  ¹⁸ sn The idiom is “to strike the hand.” Here the wording is a little different, “Who is he that will strike himself into my hand?”

[31:11]  ¹⁹ tn Heb “for that [would be].” In order to clarify the referent of “that,” which refers to v. 9 rather than v. 10, the words “I have committed” have been supplied in the translation.

[31:11]  ²⁰ tn The word for “shameful act” is used especially for sexual offenses (cf. Lev 18:27).

[31:11]  ²¹ tc Some have deleted this verse as being short and irrelevant, not to mention problematic. But the difficulties are not insurmountable, and there is no reason to delete it. There is a Kethib-Qere reading in each half verse; in the first the Kethib is masculine for the subject but the Qere is feminine going with “shameless deed.” In the second colon the Kethib is the feminine agreeing with the preceding noun, but the Qere is masculine agreeing with “iniquity.”

[31:11]  tn The expression עָוֹן פְּלִילִים (’avon pÿlilim) means “an iniquity of the judges.” The first word is not spelled as a construct noun, and so this has led some to treat the second word as an adjective (with enclitic mem [ם]). The sense is similar in either case, for the adjective occurs in Job 31:28 meaning “calling for judgment” (See GKC 427 §131.s).

[31:28]  ²² tn Heb “it.”

[31:28]  ²³ tn See v. 11 for the construction. In Deut 17:2ff. false worship of heavenly bodies is a capital offense. In this passage, Job is talking about just a momentary glance at the sun or moon and the brief lapse into a pagan thought. But it is still sin.

[31:28]  ²⁴ tn The verb כָּחַשׁ (kakhash) in the Piel means “to deny.” The root meaning is “to deceive; to disappoint; to grow lean.” Here it means that he would have failed or proven unfaithful because his act would have been a denial of God.

[39:30]  ²⁵ tn The word חֲלָלִים (khalalim) designates someone who is fatally wounded, literally the “pierced one,” meaning anyone or thing that dies a violent death.

[40:19]  ²⁶ tn Heb “the ways of God.”

[40:19]  sn This may be a reference to Gen 1:24, where the first of the animal creation was the cattle – bÿhemah (בְּהֵמָה).

[40:19]  ²⁷ tc The literal reading of the MT is “let the one who made him draw near [with] his sword.” The sword is apparently a reference to the teeth or tusks of the animal, which cut vegetation like a sword. But the idea of a weapon is easier to see, and so the people who favor the mythological background see here a reference to God’s slaying the Beast. There are again many suggestions on how to read the line. The RV probably has the safest: “He that made him has furnished him with his sword” (the sword being a reference to the sharp tusks with which he can attack).

[4:7]  ²⁸ sn Eliphaz will put his thesis forward first negatively and then positively (vv. 8ff). He will argue that the suffering of the righteous is disciplinary and not for their destruction. He next will argue that it is the wicked who deserve judgment.

[4:7]  ²⁹ tn The use of the independent personal pronoun is emphatic, almost as an enclitic to emphasize interrogatives: “who indeed….” (GKC 442 §136.c).

[4:7]  ³⁰ tn The perfect verb in this line has the nuance of the past tense to express the unique past – the uniqueness of the action is expressed with “ever” (“who has ever perished”).

[4:7]  ³¹ tn The adjective is used here substantivally. Without the article the word stresses the meaning of “uprightness.” Job will use “innocent” and “upright” together in 17:8.

[4:7]  ³² tn The Niphal means “to be hidden” (see the Piel in 6:10; 15:18; and 27:11); the connotation here is “destroyed” or “annihilated.”

[9:22]  ³³ tc The LXX omits the phrase “It is all one.” Modern scholars either omit it or transpose it for clarity.

[9:22]  sn The expression “it is one” means that God’s dealings with people is undiscriminating. The number “one” could also be taken to mean “the same” – “it is all the same.” The implication is that it does not matter if Job is good or evil, if he lives or dies. This is the conclusion of the preceding section.

[9:22]  ³⁴ tn The relationships of these clauses is in some question. Some think that the poet has inverted the first two, and so they should read, “That is why I have said: ‘It is all one.’” Others would take the third clause to be what was said.

[9:24]  ³⁵ tn Some would render this “earth,” meaning the whole earth, and having the verse be a general principle for all mankind. But Job may have in mind the more specific issue of individual land.

[9:24]  ³⁶ sn The details of the verse are not easy to explain, but the meaning of the whole verse seems to be about the miscarriage of justice in the courts and the failure of God to do anything about it.

[9:24]  ³⁷ tn The subject of the verb is God. The reasoning goes this way: it is the duty of judges to make sure that justice prevails, that restitution and restoration are carried through; but when the wicked gain control of the land of other people, and the judges are ineffective to stop it, then God must be veiling their eyes.

[9:24]  ³⁸ sn That these words are strong, if not wild, is undeniable. But Job is only taking the implications of his friends’ speeches to their logical conclusion – if God dispenses justice in the world, and there is no justice, then God is behind it all. The LXX omitted these words, perhaps out of reverence for God.

[9:24]  ³⁹ tn This seems to be a broken-off sentence (anacoluthon), and so is rather striking. The scribes transposed the words אֵפוֹא (’efo’) and הוּא (hu’) to make the smoother reading: “If it is not he, who then is it?”

[11:11]  ⁴⁰ tn The pronoun is emphatic implying that Zophar indicates that God indeed knows Job’s sin even if Job does not.

[11:11]  ⁴¹ tn The expression is literally “men of emptiness” (see Ps 26:4). These are false men, for שָׁוְא (shavÿ’) can mean “vain, empty, or false, deceitful.”

[11:11]  ⁴² tn E. Dhorme (Job, 162) reads the prepositional phrase “to him” rather than the negative; he translates the line as “he sees iniquity and observes it closely.”

[11:11]  ⁴³ tn Some commentators do not take this last clause as a question, but simply as a statement, namely, that when God sees evil he does not need to ponder or consider it – he knows it instantly. In that case it would be a circumstantial clause: “without considering it.” D. J. A. Clines lists quite an array of other interpretations for the line (Job [WBC], 255); for example, “and he is himself unobserved”; taking the word לֹא (lo’) as an emphatic; taking the negative as a noun, “considering them as nothing”; and others that change the verb to “they do not understand it.” But none of these are compelling; they offer no major improvement.

[13:16]  ⁴⁴ sn The fact that Job will dare to come before God and make his case is evidence – to Job at least – that he is innocent.

[15:20]  ⁴⁵ tn Heb “all the days of the wicked, he suffers.” The word “all” is an adverbial accusative of time, stating along with its genitives (“of the days of a wicked man”) how long the individual suffers. When the subject is composed of a noun in construct followed by a genitive, the predicate sometimes agrees with the genitive (see GKC 467 §146.a).

[15:20]  ⁴⁶ tn The Hebrew term מִתְחוֹלֵל (mitkholel) is a Hitpolel participle from חִיל (khil, “to tremble”). It carries the idea of “torment oneself,” or “be tormented.” Some have changed the letter ח (khet) for a letter ה (he), and obtained the meaning “shows himself mad.” Theodotion has “is mad.” Syriac (“behave arrogantly,” apparently confusing Hebrew חול with חלל; Heidi M. Szpek, Translation Technique in the Peshitta to Job [SBLDS], 277), Symmachus, and Vulgate have “boasts himself.” But the reading of the MT is preferable.

[15:20]  ⁴⁷ tn It is necessary, with Rashi, to understand the relative pronoun before the verb “they are stored up/reserved.”

[15:20]  ⁴⁸ tn This has been translated with the idea of “oppressor” in Job 6:23; 27:13.

[15:22]  ⁴⁹ tn This is the meaning of the Hiphil imperfect negated: “he does not believe” or “he has no confidence.” It is followed by the infinitive construct functioning as the direct object – he does not expect to return (to escape) from darkness.

[15:22]  sn The meaning of this line is somewhat in question. H. H. Rowley (Job [NCBC], 111) thinks it could mean that he is afraid he will not wake up from the night, or he dreads misfortune, thinking it will be final for him.

[15:22]  ⁵⁰ sn In the context of these arguments, “darkness” probably refers to calamity, and so the wicked can expect a calamity that is final.

[15:22]  ⁵¹ tn Heb “he is watched [or waited for] by the sword.” G. R. Driver reads it, “he is marked down for the sword” (“Problems in the Hebrew text of Job,” VTSup 3 [1955]: 78). Ewald suggested “laid up for the sword.” Ball has “looks for the sword.” The MT has a passive participle from צָפָה (tsafah, “to observe, watch”) which can be retained in the text; the meaning of the form can then be understood as the result of the inspection (E. Dhorme, Job, 217).

[15:23]  ⁵² tn The MT has “he wanders about for food – where is it?” The LXX has “he has been appointed for food for vultures,” reading אַיָּה (’ayyah, “vulture”) for אַיֵּה (’ayyeh, “where is it?”). This would carry on the thought of the passage – he sees himself destined for the sword and food for vultures. Many commentators follow this reading while making a number of smaller changes in נֹדֵד (noded, “wandering”) such as נִתַּן (nittan, “is given”), נוֹעַד (no’ad, “is appointed”), נוֹדַע (noda’, “is known”), or something similar. The latter involves no major change in consonants. While the MT “wandering” may not be as elegant as some of the other suggestions, it is not impossible. But there is no reading of this verse that does not involve some change. The LXX has “and he has been appointed for food for vultures.”

[15:23]  ⁵³ tn This line is fraught with difficulties (perceived or real), which prompt numerous suggestions. The reading of the MT is “he knows that a day of darkness is fixed in his hand,” i.e., is certain. Many commentators move “day of darkness” to the next verse, following the LXX. Then, suggestions have been offered for נָכוֹן (nakhon, “ready”), such as נֵכֶר (nekher, “disaster”); and for בְּיָדוֹ (bÿyado, “in his hand”) a number of ideas – לְאֵיד (lÿ’ed, “calamity”) or פִּידוֹ (pido, “his disaster”). Wright takes this last view and renders it “he knows that misfortune is imminent,” leaving the “day of darkness” to the next verse.

[23:6]  ⁵⁴ tn The verb is now רִיב (riv) and not יָכַח (yakhakh, “contend”); רִיב (riv) means “to quarrel; to dispute; to contend,” often in a legal context. Here it is still part of Job’s questioning about this hypothetical meeting – would God contend with all his power?

[23:6]  ⁵⁵ tn The verbal clause יָשִׂם בִּי (yasim bi) has been translated “he would pay [attention] to me.” Job is saying that God will not need all his power – he will just have pay attention to Job’s complaint. Job does not need the display of power – he just wants a hearing.

[24:18]  ⁵⁶ tc Many commentators find vv. 18-24 difficult on the lips of Job, and so identify this unit as a misplaced part of the speech of Zophar. They describe the enormities of the wicked. But a case can also be made for retaining it in this section. Gordis thinks it could be taken as a quotation by Job of his friends’ ideas.

[24:18]  ⁵⁷ tn The verb “say” is not in the text; it is supplied here to indicate that this is a different section.

[24:18]  ⁵⁸ tn Or “is swift.”

[24:18]  ⁵⁹ sn The wicked person is described here as a spray or foam upon the waters, built up in the agitation of the waters but dying away swiftly.

[24:18]  ⁶⁰ tn The text reads, “he does not turn by the way of the vineyards.” This means that since the land is cursed, he/one does not go there. Bickell emended “the way of the vineyards” to “the treader of the vineyard” (see RSV, NRSV). This would mean that “no wine-presser would turn towards” their vineyards.

[28:3]  ⁶¹ sn The text appears at first to be saying that by opening up a mine shaft, or by taking lights down below, the miner dispels the darkness. But the clause might be more general, meaning that man goes deep into the earth as if it were day.

[28:3]  ⁶² tn The verse ends with “the stone of darkness and deep darkness.” The genitive would be location, describing the place where the stones are found.

[32:1]  ⁶³ sn There are now four speeches from another friend of Job, Elihu. But Job does not reply to any of these, nor does the Lord. The speeches show a knowledge of the debate that has gone on, but they take a different approach entirely. Elihu’s approach is that suffering is a discipline from God, to teach his people. In other words, Job was suffering to vindicate God’s confidence in him. His speeches are an interesting part of the book, but they too are irrelevant to Job’s actual case. In the first speech, there is a short introduction (32:1-5), and then the speech proper with these sections: Elihu will speak because his youth is wiser (32:6-14), and his friends arguments failed (32:15-22); he calls for Job’s attention (33:1-7), claims Job’s case is wrong (33:8-13), and Job’s argument that God does not answer is false (33:14-28), and then makes an appeal to Job (33:29-33). It becomes evident that Elihu correctly identified Job’s determination to maintain his integrity at God’s expense as the primary problem in at least the latter stages of the dialogues (32:1-3; 34:37; 35:16; cf. 38:2; 40:8; 42:3). Elihu was respectful of his elders (32:4), but remained uninfected by their error (32:14). He sought to maintain impartiality (32:21-22) and to offer true wisdom (33:33), believed like Job that a mediator existed (33:23-24), and desired Job’s vindication (33:32). In addition, Elihu focused on vindicating God’s actions (34:12; 35:10-11; 36:2-3, 22-26) and announced the coming theophany (37:1-5, 22). It appears that he was not included in the divine condemnation of Job’s friends (42:7-9) and was excluded from Job’s prayer of intercession (42:8-10) – both perhaps implying divine approval of his behavior and words.

[32:1]  ⁶⁴ tn The form is the infinitive construct (“answer”) functioning as the object of the preposition; the phrase forms the complement of the verb “they ceased to answer” (= “they refused to answer further”).

[32:1]  ⁶⁵ tc The LXX, Syriac, and Symmachus have “in their eyes.” This is adopted by some commentators, but it does not fit the argument.

[37:6]  ⁶⁶ tn The verb actually means “be” (found here in the Aramaic form). The verb “to be” can mean “to happen, to fall, to come about.”

[37:6]  ⁶⁷ tn Heb “and [to the] shower of rain and shower of rains, be strong.” Many think the repetition grew up by variant readings; several Hebrew mss delete the second pair, and so many editors do. But the repetition may have served to stress the idea that the rains were heavy.

[37:6]  ⁶⁸ tn Heb “Be strong.”

[37:21]  ⁶⁹ tn The light here must refer to the sun in the skies that had been veiled by the storm. Then, when the winds blew the clouds away, it could not be looked at because it was so dazzling. Elihu’s analogy will be that God is the same – in his glory one cannot look at him or challenge him.

[37:21]  ⁷⁰ tn The verb has an indefinite subject, and so should be a passive here.

[37:21]  ⁷¹ tn Heb “and cleaned them.” The referent is the clouds (v. 18), which has been supplied in the translation for clarity. There is another way of reading this verse: the word translated “bright” means “dark; obscured” in Syriac. In this interpretation the first line would mean that they could not see the sun, because it was darkened by the clouds, but then the wind came and blew the clouds away. Dhorme, Gray, and several others take it this way, as does the NAB.

[41:10]  ⁷² sn The description is of the animal, not the hunter (or fisherman). Leviathan is so fierce that no one can take him on alone.

[41:10]  ⁷³ tc MT has “before me” and can best be rendered as “Who then is he that can stand before me?” (ESV, NASB, NIV, NLT, NJPS). The following verse (11) favors the MT since both express the lesson to be learned from Leviathan: If a man cannot stand up to Leviathan, how can he stand up to its creator? The translation above has chosen to read the text as “before him” (cf. NRSV, NJB).

[41:11]  ⁷⁴ tn The verb קָדַם (qadam) means “to come to meet; to come before; to confront” to the face.

[41:11]  ⁷⁵ sn The verse seems an intrusion (and so E. Dhorme, H. H. Rowley, and many others change the pronouns to make it refer to the animal). But what the text is saying is that it is more dangerous to confront God than to confront this animal.

[41:11]  ⁷⁶ tn This line also focuses on the sovereign God rather than Leviathan. H. H. Rowley, however, wants to change לִי־חוּא (li-hu’, “it [belongs] to me”) into לֹא הוּא (lo’ hu’, “there is no one”). So it would say that there is no one under the whole heaven who could challenge Leviathan and live, rather than saying it is more dangerous to challenge God to make him repay.

[41:34]  ⁷⁷ tn Heb “the sons of pride.” Dhorme repoints the last word to get “all the wild beasts,” but this misses the point of the verse. This animal looks over every proud creature – but he is king of them all in that department.