Ayub 3:19

3:19 Small and great are ¹  there,

and the slave is free ²  from his master. ³ 

Ayub 10:8

Contradictions in God’s Dealings

10:8 “Your hands have shaped ⁴  me and made me,

but ⁵  now you destroy me completely. ⁶ 

Ayub 9:2-3

9:2 “Truly, ⁷  I know that this is so.

But how ⁸  can a human ⁹  be just before ¹⁰  God? ¹¹ 

9:3 If someone wishes ¹²  to contend ¹³  with him,

he cannot answer ¹⁴  him one time in a thousand.

Yehezkiel 21:3

21:3 and say to them, ¹⁵  ‘This is what the Lord says: Look, ¹⁶  I am against you. ¹⁷  I will draw my sword ¹⁸  from its sheath and cut off from you both the righteous and the wicked. ¹⁹ 

[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.

[10:8]  ⁴ tn The root עָצַב (’atsav) is linked by some to an Arabic word meaning “to cut out, hew.” The derived word עֲצַבִּים (’atsabbim) means “idols.” Whatever the precise meaning, the idea is that God formed or gave shape to mankind in creation.

[10:8]  ⁵ tn The verb in this part is a preterite with the vav (ו) consecutive. However, here it has merely an external connection with the preceding perfects, so that in reality it presents an antithesis (see GKC 327 §111.e).

[10:8]  ⁶ tn Heb “together round about and you destroy me.” The second half of this verse is very difficult. Most commentators follow the LXX and connect the first two words with the second colon as the MT accents indicate (NJPS, “then destroyed every part of me”), rather than with the first colon (“and made me complete,” J. E. Hartley, Job [NICOT], 185). Instead of “together” some read “after.” Others see in סָבִיב (saviv) not so much an adjectival use but a verbal or adverbial use: “you turn and destroy” or “you destroy utterly (all around).” This makes more sense than “turn.” In addition, the verb form in the line is the preterite with vav consecutive; this may be another example of the transposition of the copula (see 4:6). For yet another option (“You have engulfed me about altogether”), see R. Fuller, “Exodus 21:22: The Miscarriage Interpretation and the Personhood of the Fetus,” JETS 37 (1994): 178.

[9:2]  ⁷ tn The adverb אָמְנָם (’omnam, “in truth”) is characteristic of the Book of Job (12:2; 19:4; 34:12; 36:4). The friends make commonplace statements, general truths, and Job responds with “truly I know this is so.” Job knows as much about these themes as his friends do.

[9:2]  ⁸ sn The interrogative is used to express what is an impossibility.

[9:2]  ⁹ tn The attempt to define אֱנוֹשׁ (’enosh) as “weak” or “mortal” man is not compelling. Such interpretations are based on etymological links without the clear support of usage (an issue discussed by J. Barr, Comparative Philology and the Text of the Old Testament). This seems to be a poetic word for “human” (the only nonpoetic use is in 2 Chr 14:10).

[9:2]  ¹⁰ tn The preposition is אִם (’im, “with, before, in the presence of”). This is more specific than מִן (min) in 4:17.

[9:2]  ¹¹ sn The point of Job’s rhetorical question is that man cannot be justified as against God, because God is too powerful and too clever – he controls the universe. He is discussing now the question that Eliphaz raised in 4:17. Peake observes that Job is raising the question of whether something is right because God says it is right, or that God declares it right because it is right.

[9:3]  ¹² tn Some commentators take God to be the subject of this verb, but it is more likely that it refers to the mortal who tries to challenge God in a controversy. The verb is used of Job in 13:3.

[9:3]  ¹³ tn The verb רִיב (riv) is a common one; it has the idea of “contention; dispute; legal dispute or controversy; go to law.” With the preposition אִם (’im) the idea must be “to contend with” or “to dispute with.” The preposition reflects the prepositional phrase “with God” in v. 2, supporting the view that man is the subject.

[9:3]  ¹⁴ tn This use of the imperfect as potential imperfect assumes that the human is the subject, that in a dispute with God he could not answer one of God’s questions (for which see the conclusion of the book when God questions Job). On the other hand, if the interpretation were that God does not answer the demands of mortals, then a simple progressive imperfect would be required. In support of this is the frustration of Job that God does not answer him.

[21:3]  ¹⁵ tn Heb “the land of Israel.”

[21:3]  ¹⁶ tn The word הִנֵּה (hinneh, traditionally “behold”) draws attention to something and has been translated here as a verb.

[21:3]  ¹⁷ tn Or “I challenge you.” The phrase “I am against you” may be a formula for challenging someone to combat or a duel. See D. I. Block, Ezekiel (NICOT), 1:201-2, and P. Humbert, “Die Herausforderungsformel ‘h!nn#n' ?l?K>,’” ZAW 45 (1933): 101-8.

[21:3]  ¹⁸ sn This is the sword of judgment, see Isa 31:8; 34:6; 66:16.

[21:3]  ¹⁹ sn Ezekiel elsewhere pictures the Lord’s judgment as discriminating between the righteous and the wicked (9:4-6; 18:1-20; see as well Pss 1 and 11) and speaks of the preservation of a remnant (3:21; 6:8; 12:16). Perhaps here he exaggerates for rhetorical effect in an effort to subdue any false optimism. See L. C. Allen, Ezekiel (WBC), 2:25-26; D. I. Block, Ezekiel (NICOT), 1:669-70; and W. Zimmerli, Ezekiel (Hermeneia), 1:424-25.