Job

Andrew Perry

and they shall spring up as among the grass,

as willows by the watercourse
Published by:

WILLOW PUBLICATIONS
13 St. Georges terrace
East Boldon
Tyne and Wear
NE36 0LU. U.K.
andrewneileen@yahoo.co.uk

© Andrew Perry, April 2019

ISBN 0 9526192 5 3

www.lulu.com/willowpublications

Publications by WILLOW include:

Fellowship Matters
Beginnings and Endings
Head-Coverings and Creation
Before He Was Born
Demons, Magic and Medicine
Demons and Politics
Joel
Biblical Investigations
Old Earth Creationism
Historical Creationism
Special Creationism
Story and Typology
Isaiah 40-66 (Two Volumes)
Just a Minute
Church Diaries and Letters

Reasons (Ed. T. E. Gaston)

One God, the Father (Ed. T. E. Gaston)
More Reasons (Ed. T. E. Gaston)
Who Through Jesus Sleep (Ed. T. E. Gaston)

2
 Table of Contents

PREFACE ............................................................................................................ 9

CHAPTER ONE .............................................................................................. 11

Joban Scholarship .............................................................................................. 11
1. Intertextual Readings of Job ........................................................................ 11
1.1 Method .................................................................................................... 13
1.1.1 Method 1 ........................................................................................ 13
1.1.2 Method 2 ........................................................................................ 17
2. Dating .............................................................................................................. 17
2.1 Dating Job ............................................................................................... 18
2.2 Dating the Hebrew Bible...................................................................... 21
2.2.1 Dating Isaiah.................................................................................. 24
3. Hebrew Poetry and Philology ...................................................................... 33
3.1 Authorship .............................................................................................. 34
4. Composition of Job ....................................................................................... 35
5. Conclusion ...................................................................................................... 40

CHAPTER TWO .............................................................................................. 49

The Literary Drama of Job ............................................................................... 49
1. Introduction.................................................................................................... 49
2. Parable in Job ................................................................................................. 49
3. The Dramatic Character of Job ................................................................... 51
3. The Setting of Job ......................................................................................... 53
4.1 The Land of Uz...................................................................................... 55
5. Conclusion ...................................................................................................... 56

CHAPTER THREE ......................................................................................... 57

Parable in Job...................................................................................................... 57
1. Introduction.................................................................................................... 57
2. The Literary Framework............................................................................... 57
3. The Identification of Job .............................................................................. 58
3.1 Describing Job ....................................................................................... 59
4. Sons of God ................................................................................................... 63
4.1 Divine Beings ......................................................................................... 64
4.2 Genesis 6 and the Sons of God .......................................................... 68
4.3 Job and the Sons of God...................................................................... 70
5. Satan................................................................................................................. 74
5.1 The Nature of Satan .............................................................................. 75
5.2 Satan and the Sons of God .................................................................. 78
5.4 Satan in Zechariah ................................................................................. 79
6. Job’s Calamities .............................................................................................. 80
3
 6.1 Job’s Family and Household ................................................................ 81
6.2 Job’s First Round of Calamities .......................................................... 83
6.2.1 The Great Wind ............................................................................ 84
6.3 Job’s Second Round of Affliction ....................................................... 86
7. Minor Characters ........................................................................................... 89
8. The Epilogue .................................................................................................. 90
9. Conclusion ...................................................................................................... 92

CHAPTER FOUR ............................................................................................ 93

The First Day...................................................................................................... 93
1. Introduction.................................................................................................... 93
2. Summary of the Speeches ............................................................................ 98
3. Job 3—Job’s First Speech .......................................................................... 100
3.1 The Day of Birth.................................................................................. 100
3.2 Fear and Trouble ................................................................................. 102
3.3 Leviathan ............................................................................................... 105
3.4 Darkness and the Shadow of Death ................................................. 106
3.5 The Wicked........................................................................................... 110
3.5.1 The Wicked Ones in Job 3 ........................................................ 114
4. Job 4—Eliphaz’ First Speech .................................................................... 115
4.1 The Davidic King ................................................................................ 115
4.2 The Invasion......................................................................................... 116
4.3 Lions ...................................................................................................... 118
4.4 The Moth .............................................................................................. 121
5. Job 5—Eliphaz’ First Speech Continued................................................. 123
5.1 The Situation in the City..................................................................... 123
5.2 Beasts of the Earth and Field ............................................................ 125
6. Job 6—Job’s Second Speech ..................................................................... 128
6.1 Response to Eliphaz............................................................................ 128
6.2 Job’s Lament towards God ................................................................ 130
6.3 The Internal Enemies ......................................................................... 133
6.4 Job’s Rejection of the Friends ........................................................... 136
7. Job 7—Job’s Second Speech Continued ................................................. 137
7.1 Job’s Address to God.......................................................................... 137
8. Job 8—Bildad’s First Speech ..................................................................... 140
8.1 Job’s Need for Repentance ................................................................ 141
8.2 The Fate of the Hypocrite .................................................................. 143
9. Job 9—Job’s Third Speech ........................................................................ 145
9.1 Heaven and Earth ................................................................................ 145
9.2 Job’s Cause of Action ......................................................................... 147
10. Job 10—Job’s Third Speech Continued ................................................ 149
10.1 Job’s Complaint ................................................................................. 149
11. Job 11—Zophar’s First Speech ............................................................... 151
4
12. Job 12—Job’s Fourth Speech .................................................................. 155
12.1 God’s Dealings with Judah .............................................................. 155
13. Job 13—Job’s Fourth Speech Continued .............................................. 160
13.1 Job’s Argument against the Friends ............................................... 160
14. Job 14—Job’s Fourth Speech Continued .............................................. 164
14.1 The Condition of Man ...................................................................... 164
15. Job 15—Eliphaz’ Second Speech ........................................................... 166
15.1 The Scandal of Job ............................................................................ 167
15.2 The Wicked One and the Oppressor ............................................. 168
16. Job 16—Job’s Fifth Speech ..................................................................... 176
16.1 The Suffering Servant ....................................................................... 177
16.2 The Wicked Ones .............................................................................. 182
16.3 Job and God ....................................................................................... 184
17. Job 17—Job’s Fifth Speech Continued ................................................. 185
17.1 Job’s Complaint ................................................................................. 185
18. Job 18—Bildad’s Second Speech ............................................................ 187
19. Job 19—Job’s Sixth Speech ..................................................................... 196
19.1 The Military Situation ....................................................................... 196
19.2 The Groups and Individuals against Job ....................................... 197
19.3 Job’s Redeemer .................................................................................. 198
20. Job 20—Zophar’s Second Speech .......................................................... 201
21. Job 21—Job’s Seventh Speech ................................................................ 206
21.1 Overview of Job’s Speech ................................................................ 207
21.2 Politicians ............................................................................................ 208
21.3 The Destruction of the Wicked Ones ............................................ 212
21.4 Idols ..................................................................................................... 216
21.5 The Attack of the Friends ................................................................ 217
22. Job 22—Eliphaz’ Third Speech .............................................................. 219
22.1 Final Condemnation ......................................................................... 219
22.2 Hope .................................................................................................... 223
23. Conclusion .................................................................................................. 228

CHAPTER FIVE ............................................................................................ 231

The Second Day ............................................................................................... 231
1. Introduction.................................................................................................. 231
2. Job 23—Opening the Monologue ............................................................ 231
3. Job 24—Describing the Situation ............................................................. 235
3.1 Faithful lack Knowledge..................................................................... 235
3.2 Thieving Armies................................................................................... 236
3.3 Marauders.............................................................................................. 237
3.4 The City ................................................................................................. 239
3.5 The Morning......................................................................................... 242
3.6 The Mighty............................................................................................ 246
5
4. Job 25—Bildad’s Interruption ................................................................... 248
5. Job 26—Job’s Reply to Bildad................................................................... 250
6. Job 27—Continuing the Parable ............................................................... 257
6.1 Job’s Integrity ....................................................................................... 257
6.2 Job’s Internal Enemies........................................................................ 257
6.3 The Fate of the Oppressor................................................................. 258
7. Job 28—Wisdom Digression ..................................................................... 260
7.1 Places—vv. 1-6 .................................................................................... 263
7.2 Pathways—vv. 7-11 ............................................................................. 271
7.3 Buying Wisdom—vv. 12-19............................................................... 274
7.4 The Source of Wisdom—vv. 20-28 .................................................. 275
8. Job 29—Resuming the Parable ................................................................. 278
9. Job 30—Describing his Condition ........................................................... 282
9.1 Internal Opponents ............................................................................. 282
9.2 Physical Affliction................................................................................ 288
10. Job 31—Declaration of Innocence ........................................................ 290
11. Conclusion .................................................................................................. 297

CHAPTER SIX................................................................................................ 301

Elihu’s Speech .................................................................................................. 301
1. Introduction.................................................................................................. 301
2. Job 32—Elihu’s Opening Words .............................................................. 302
3. Job 33—Elihu’s Offer of Support ............................................................ 303
4. Job 34—Elihu’s Case .................................................................................. 306
4.1 The Kingship of Job ........................................................................... 308
5. Job 35—Discipline and Sin ........................................................................ 313
6. Job 36—Speaking on Behalf of God ....................................................... 315
6.1 The Whirlwind ..................................................................................... 323
7. Job 37—The Approaching Theophany ................................................... 329
7.1 The Voice of God ............................................................................... 329
7.2 God’s Deployment of the Weather .................................................. 331
7.3 Providence and the Weather .............................................................. 334
7.4 The Need for Teaching ...................................................................... 335
8. Conclusion .................................................................................................... 338

CHAPTER SEVEN ........................................................................................ 339

God’s First Speech........................................................................................... 339
1. Introduction.................................................................................................. 339
2. Job 38—The Creation of Israel ................................................................. 339
2.1 Darkened Counsel ............................................................................... 342
2.2 The Foundations of the Earth ........................................................... 344
2.3 Israel and Creation............................................................................... 345
2.4 Israel and the Dry Land ...................................................................... 349
6
 2.5 Deliverance at the Red Sea ................................................................. 352
3. Commanding the Morning......................................................................... 357
3.1 The Deep and the Shadow of Death................................................ 360
3.2 Light and Darkness ............................................................................. 363
4. Times of Trouble and of Peace ................................................................. 365
4.1 Deliverance ........................................................................................... 367
4.2 Restoration............................................................................................ 370
5. Questions, Answers and Astrology........................................................... 373
5.1 Controlling the Rain ............................................................................ 378
6. Job 39—Creatures ....................................................................................... 381
6.1 Lioness and its young .......................................................................... 383
6.2 Raven and its Young ........................................................................... 384
6.3 Untameable Creatures ......................................................................... 385
6.3.1 Wild Goats and Hinds ............................................................... 385
6.3.2 Wild Ass and Swift Ass .............................................................. 387
6.3.3 Wild Ox ........................................................................................ 388
6.4 Ostrich ................................................................................................... 391
6.5 Horses.................................................................................................... 393
6.6 Hawk ...................................................................................................... 395
6.7 Eagle ...................................................................................................... 395
7. Job’s Response ............................................................................................. 396
8. Conclusion .................................................................................................... 397

CHAPTER EIGHT ........................................................................................ 399

God’s Second Speech ...................................................................................... 399
1. Introduction.................................................................................................. 399
2. Job 40—Behemoth ..................................................................................... 401
2.1 Characteristics ...................................................................................... 402
3. Job 41—Leviathan....................................................................................... 410
3.1 Characteristics ...................................................................................... 410
4. Job’s Response ............................................................................................. 419
5. Conclusion .................................................................................................... 423

CONCLUSION ............................................................................................... 425

BIBLIOGRAPHY ........................................................................................... 427

7
8
 PREFACE
The literature on Job is vast. The approach taken here is found in one
other commentary, and it is not the kind of reading offered by standard
commentaries. Our view is that Job has something to do with Judah, and
in particular it needs to be read as a parable of the times of Hezekiah, with
Job being seen as representative of Hezekiah. While I have consulted
commentaries, monographs, and articles, I have not engaged in dialogue
with them. My objective is neither to agree nor disagree with the standard
approach to Job. Our argument in this book is that the standard reading
of Job needs to be reconfigured so as to include a prophetic meaning.

This commentary works with existing English translations of Job rather

than the Hebrew text, but we do comment on the underlying Hebrew
when we offer a new rendering. This study is an intertextual reading of
Job, and the exegesis is grounded in the links that Job has with prophetic
portions of the Hebrew Bible.

Job is a deep and complex book, and this study only scratches one layer.
We have not commented on every verse, preferring to show how the
prophetic reading is generated. This book should be read alongside a
more conventional commentary; in fact, a pre-requisite for reading this
study would be an awareness of how the book works “on the surface”.

Job is difficult to read. The normal key in the commentaries is the

“wisdom tradition” of the Bible and other near-eastern writings. This key
opens the surface of the book, but the key we use opens a prophetic
level of meaning. This takes Job to be a discussion of God’s providential
handling of Judah in the reign of Hezekiah. As such it is a discussion of
prophecy and an explanation of Hezekiah’s suffering. Whether our key
successfully opens such a door is left for the reader to judge.

I would like to thank those who read drafts of the book and corrected
many mistakes including Stephanie Gergle, Julie Evans, Phil Evans, and
Emily Perry. I would also like to acknowledge the debt owed to the Spring
2006 semester Hebrew class of J L Crenshaw on Job at Duke, which
unbeknownst to them, corrected many mistakes; alas, no doubt, I still
retain too many.

9
Second Edition – April 2019

Although the second edition is now being released in 2019, it was written
at the same time as the first edition, which was during my New Testament
PhD research at Durham University between 2003-2006, which was
funded by the AHRC. It was a kind of side project carried out
unbeknownst to my supervisor. In fact, the first edition was just a cut
down version of what is now the second edition. For the first edition, I
took out most of the academic material. That edition has now run its
course in sales. So, in this second edition, there are about 70 extra pages
of more academic material scattered around the book. I was keeping it
back with a view to greatly expanding the academic engagement, since it is
possible to write reams on Job engaging scholars, but I am not sure that
this will happen now. Other writing projects are more pressing. So, it is
better to release what was completed back in 2003-2006 since, while there
is always more to say, what was written back then felt finished enough to
warrant publication.

Abbreviations

Unless otherwise noted below, we utilise The SBL handbook of Style (ed. P.
H. Alexander, et. al.; Peabody: Hendrickson, 1999) for abbreviations and
the general-purpose style of transliteration.

Bib. Int. Biblical Interpretation

10
 CHAPTER ONE
Joban Scholarship
In this review we want to position our study in relation to academic work
on Job. Scholarship on Job is extensive, as is the case with most areas of
study of the Hebrew Bible; though perhaps more so with Job. The
purpose of this position statement is to justify the rather narrow limits of
our approach and identify those major issues in Joban study which we
place to one side.1

1. Intertextual Readings of Job

This study uses existing English translations of Job (KJV, RSV, and
NASB), rather than offer a new translation of the Hebrew text. Much of
the variation between these English versions is down to style and tone,
nuance and emphasis, old English versus modern English, and spellings;
but they also evince substantial disagreement over how the Hebrew
should be handled and how words should be translated. Heavy-weight
commentaries explain the underlying reasons for the choices to be made,
and such commentaries provide their own translations.

Of these versions, the KJV is used as a baseline (default) version, (we cite
statistics2 using the KJV), and we vary it in line with RSV or NASB if the
Hebrew is not adequately represented3 by the KJV. The choice of the

1 For a recent review of Joban scholarship, see B. Waltke and D. Diewert,

“Wisdom Literature” in The Face of Old Testament Studies: A Survey of
Contemporary Approaches, (eds. D. W. Baker and B. T. Arnold; Grand
Rapids: Baker, 2004), 318-327. This review is restricted, and a broader
review can be found in R. J. Williams, “Current Trends in the Study of the
Book of Job” in Studies in the Book of Job, (ed., W. E. Aufrecht; Waterloo,
Ontario: Wilfred University Press, 1985), 1-27.
2 Word counts are for the verse total without counting multiple uses of a

word in a verse unless usage is sufficiently small to require actual word

counts.
3 If we engaged in an extensive discussion of the Hebrew text, we would

produce a different translation than the KJV, RSV and NASB. In effect,
we would be producing a translation in the manner of the standard
commentaries. Instead, we treat these versions as adequate for our
11
KJV is idiosyncratic, but we do so because it amends the Hebrew text less
than the other versions and it is not as influenced by comparative
philology. Ironically, this is the very reason scholars would choose a
modern version and eschew the KJV. However, arguably, the KJV is the
best poetry of these three versions.

In addition, there are some small advantages in favour of the KJV for a
reader without Hebrew: i) it uses italics to signify the absence of
corresponding words in the Hebrew; ii) its syntax is closer to the Hebrew;
iii) it retains a more literal approach to the Hebrew with regard to
pronominal suffixes and prepositions; and iv) it contains marginal
alternatives for the Hebrew which are often better than the chosen
rendering. Nevertheless, the disadvantages of the KJV do need to be
noted: i) it comes with old English spellings; ii) it uses unfamiliar words;
iii) some of its words now have different meanings in modern English;
and iv) many of its translation choices for nouns and verbs would now be
regarded as inaccurate by scholars on philological grounds. We
compensate for these deficiencies by using the RSV and NASB. We only
offer our own rendering of the Hebrew, where all these versions have not
followed the pattern of usage outside the book of Job.1 In general,
however, we work with a principle of economy as far as possible: if we
can work with one of these translations (despite any misgivings), then we
do so, rather than offer a new translation.

When we offer a translation of the Hebrew text, we use the Masoretic

Hebrew Text of the Jewish Scriptures (MT).2 An intertextual reading
requires a fixed text. Philological scholarship deals with the possibilities
surrounding the text and by its nature it makes any text provisional. Many
commentaries offer a reconstructed Hebrew text of Job based upon
detailed philological arguments, although since the discovery of the
biblical manuscripts at Qumran, which has showed the reliability of the
MT, amendments by scholars today are far fewer in number. It is open to
a commentator to offer his own text, explicitly use the text of another

purpose, even though none of them are exactly the translation that we
would produce.
1 For example, the book of Job often shifts from plural to singular

subjects without using corresponding nominative expressions; the

Hebrew text will often just use a singular or plural pronoun or pronominal
suffix; we have endeavoured to respect these changes in number.
2 One commentary that also uses the MT without emendation is E. M.

Good, In Turns of Tempest: A Reading of Job with a Translation, (Stanford,

California: Stanford University Press, 1990).
12
commentator, or work with the MT. We restrict ourselves to the MT in
order to determine how far a parabolic approach can make sense of the
received text of Job.

1.1 Method
This is a reading of Job driven by intertextual connections with the
Prophets. This is a different approach to that found in standard
commentaries, which focus instead on connections between Job and
Wisdom literature.1 My intertextual reading endeavours to show that the
book of Job shares a common subject matter with certain of the Prophets.

Briefly stated, the methods used in preparing this study have been as
follows:

1.1.1 Method 1
1) We started with the assumption that Job had nothing in common with
the writings that have come to form the Hebrew Bible. Our research then
examined the vocabulary that Job shared with the other books of the
Hebrew Bible. We posed the question as to whether this shared
vocabulary required an explanation other than: “the author(s)/editor(s) of
Job used Hebrew like the authors of these other writings, and so he (they)
is (are) bound to have some vocabulary in common”.

2) The point of collecting texts with shared vocabulary was to ascertain

whether there was a shared pattern that explained what was common
between Job and other texts.

Whether a shared word is coincidental or not is a question of purpose

and/or design. An author may intentionally quote or allude to other texts

1 For example, M. H. Pope, Job: A New Translation with Introduction and

Commentary, (AB; Garden City, New York: Doubleday, 1965), lxxiii. The
“wisdom” approach stems from the view that Job is concerned with the
problem of innocent suffering and the justice of God. The question, ‘Why
do the innocent suffer and the wicked prosper?’ is dealt with in Proverbs
and Psalms, and so Job has been coupled with those writings. Our
“historical-prophetic” reading does not place this question to the
foreground. Once terms of reference such as “the wicked one” and “the
wicked ones” are contextualised, the motivation for an abstract reading
dissipates; the book is no longer about the prosperity of the wicked or the
suffering of the innocent in general. For a critique of “wisdom”
classification, see K. J. Dell, The Book of Job as Sceptical Literature, (Leiden:
E. J. Brill, 1991), ch. 2.
13
and this may explain the shared vocabulary. Or an author may write about
the same topics as other texts, and in this way share vocabulary with those
texts; if there is a shared topic there will be a shared design.

3) From a database of shared vocabulary involving the Hebrew Bible and

Job, we identified one possible design and this is what we present in this
study. Our proposal is that the book of Job shares a pattern with the
preferred vocabulary of the eighth century prophets for a political crisis:
this crisis is the invasion of Judah by the Assyrians and the affliction of
the Davidic king in Jerusalem.1 The plausibility of our proposal rests on
whether this shared vocabulary is just such a pattern.2

4) Our argument based on this method is that if a “design” works in two

texts, it is likely that the elements of that design are working in the same
way. The referential values of the shared vocabulary have remained
constant.

Problems with Method 1

The objection to this method is that it is not possible to establish that the
author of Job uses vocabulary in the same way as the eighth century
prophets. It might be further argued that in its original conception Job is a
story about a patriarch and his personal suffering, and it just happens to
be the case that it shares vocabulary with the Prophets. While there are
some well-known connections between Job and the Prophets, these are
few and far between, and the more general shared vocabulary is purely
incidental. In order to establish links between Job and other prophetic
texts, it is necessary to show connections that are comprised of unique,
exclusive, or rare words, and this cannot be done.

This general objection has to borne in mind throughout this study,

because it is not possible to settle this question in advance of considering
the shared vocabulary and expressions. However, it is obviously arbitrary
to insist that any links are just comprised of unique, exclusive, or rare
words. This stipulation assumes that the surviving literature that we have
(the Hebrew Scriptures) is the measure for what is unique, exclusive or
rare. The insistence also rules out a priori the possibility of two texts being

1 Some continental scholars have seen “royal” themes in Job; see

Williams, Current Trends, 26, for a bibliographical list.
2 Job shares its vocabulary with other books and one test for our reading

(which we do not develop) would be whether Job’s common vocabulary

with the eighth century prophets is statistically significant vis-à-vis other
books.
14
linked by common vocabulary. It is one thing to assert that such links
cannot be known because the vocabulary is common; it is a separate claim
to assert that such links are not possible using common vocabulary. Our
counter-argument is that such links can be known, but the case is
cumulative and a question of design.

Nevertheless, it is important to distinguish what we mean by sharing

vocabulary. There are two possibilities to note, diachronic and synchronic:1

1) Some vocabulary may be shared because there is an allusion or

quotation2 by the author of Job to a corresponding prophetic text (or
vice-versa). Such a connection may be part of a contrast with the
prophetic text or it may be in concert with the prophetic text. While we
make some proposals for this kind of connection, our argument is not
based around this kind of claim. We do not rely on this kind of argument
because it requires us to show that the author of Job has intended a
connection with a prophetic text (or vice-versa). Intentional sharing of
vocabulary can be proven if some of the following obtain: i) the
“precursor” text can be shown to be such; ii) the author knew of the
candidate precursor text; iii) the vocabulary is part of a larger shared
design, such as a theme, a motif, or a narrative plot; and iv) the vocabulary
shared by the texts is rare or distinctive in some way.

The claim of sharing a design is as much a claim to an allusion as the

claim of shared lexical material. In terms of method, the claim to a sharing
of design is more impressive, because of its larger scope and the
involvement of multiple elements. If these elements and concomitant
design are found in another text within a shared and known literary
environment, then it is more likely that there is allusion.

However, allusions and quotations are only one reason why vocabulary
might be shared.

1 We use these terms in a literary rather than linguistic sense. A diachronic

method presupposes a diachronic relationship between two texts such
that one text is early and is used by the author of the later text. For a
discussion of the two types of method see J. Barr, “The Synchronic, the
Diachronic and the Historical” in Synchronic or Diachronic? A Debate on
Method in Old Testament Exegesis, (ed. J. C. De Moor; Leiden: E. J. Brill,
1995), 1-14.
2 We take a quotation to be a piece of language that has some sort of

referential marker. We take an allusion to be an intentional link between

two texts, but one that lacks a referential marker such as “it is written”.
15
2) Some vocabulary may be shared without any intended allusiveness (or
without any intended linkage). In order for the book of Job to be talking
about an eighth century crisis, it is not necessary for the author to allude
to any corresponding prophetic text. The vocabulary might be shared
simply because the topic is the same.1 This is our argument in this book:
the vocabulary is shared because the topic of Job is the eighth century
Assyrian crisis.

Instead of matching Job’s vocabulary with Wisdom literature, we match it

with the prophetic texts. The idea of matching one book to another does
not imply there is a relationship of quotation or allusion between two
books. The idea is merely one that says the book of Job can be read in the
same way as the Eighth Century Prophets if you take its shared
vocabulary with those prophets to have the same intended sense and
reference. Whether we should do this is a matter of whether the book of
Job makes more sense in such an interpretative context.2

In order to facilitate this kind of analysis, we use the notion of an “echo”:

a text in Job echoes a prophetic text, or some other text, where there is
some shared vocabulary.3 In restricting our method to this kind of
analysis, we largely remove the idea of an author working in a literary
environment.

The question arises as to how an interpreter can know whether the

vocabulary that Job shares with prophetic texts is to be read in a prophetic

1 Some topics attract specific vocabulary; hence we find the book of Job
uses vocabulary from the prophetic theme of a crisis facing the nation,
e.g. “darkness”, “flood”, “oppressor”, “morning”, “lion”, “teeth”,
“dread”, “fear”, and so on.
2 Similarly, the book of Job might share topics with other non-prophetic

texts and thereby use similar vocabulary as those other texts without the
author of Job intending an allusion or quotation.
3 We take an “echo” to be a link between two texts where there is no

intentional allusion on the part of the author; the link may come about for
a variety of reasons. For example, the use of the same vocabulary may be
due to cultural background knowledge, i.e. the vocabulary may be
common for that topic; or again, the use of the same vocabulary may
derive from knowledge on the part of the author of oral/aural traditions
or other (now lost) writings. We will take “quotation” and “allusion” to
indicate a literary dependence, and “echo” to indicate a deliberately
unspecified type of linkage.
16
way. As an answer to this question, it is worth stating as a preliminary
point that it is of value to present such a reading of Job, because it has
only been done once in scholarship. However, over and above this
consideration, a prophetic reading can be justified using the argument
from design noted above: if the rarer shared nouns and verbs consistently
contribute to a single kind of reading (a single design), then this is a
significant result; it is significant that the shared vocabulary is not pointing
in different directions. Further, if the quantity of nouns and verbs that
contribute to a single reading is large, then this makes the achievement of
a singular reading all the more remarkable. Finally, the mere fact that such
a reading is possible for Job by simply changing the register to “parabolic”
and “prophetic” (and away from “wisdom” and “theodicy”) requires an
explanation; the obvious (ironical) suggestion is that the political-
prophetic reading is intended. We would argue that it is possible to know
whether Job should be read in a prophetic way on this basis.

This is a synchronic method, and it is logically independent of the

diachronic method, but it is historical in the sense that it attempts to
locate the topic of Job’s vocabulary in an historical context. In order to
achieve this, it compares vocabulary in other texts in a historically
sensitive way.

1.1.2 Method 2
In addition to comparing Job with a narrow range of prophetic texts, we
also use other texts in the Hebrew Scriptures with corresponding lexical,
syntactic and/or semantic material to interpret Job.

This method steps outside the narrow range of the eighth century and
assumes that it is valid to compare Hebrew words from later and earlier
periods. The assumption is that there has not been a change in the use of
an expression over time, a change that vitiates the comparison. Standard
dictionary resources summarise the diachronic development of Hebrew
words, but they also offer evidence of the continuity in the range of
meanings that were possible for words.

2. Dating
It is important to separate out the question of date from this study. Our
objective is to show a common subject matter between the book of Job
and the eighth century prophets. It is not essential to this case that we
prove Job to be a later or earlier book than these other writings. It does
not matter who wrote about the common subject matter first. However, it
is valuable to place the book of Job within a scheme of dating for the
Hebrew Bible.
17
2.1 Dating Job
When was Job written? On the question of date, one scholar, D. J. A.
Clines, offers the following comment,

Most scholars today would date the composition of the

book of Job to some point between the seventh and the
second centuries, with the probability that a prose
folktale of a pious sufferer existed long before the largely
poetic book itself was written.1

Such a consensus that the book of Job contains an ancient story is telling,
but we do not have to assume any date for the book of Job, nor do we
have to assume that it contains an ancient folktale. Scholars date the book
anywhere between the 8c.2 and the 2c., but any arguments are
inconclusive, and beyond the scope of this book, and in any event such a
period (8c.-2c.) is so broad as to be unhelpful.

It is not difficult to think of “writing contexts” for the book in the eighth,
seventh or early sixth centuries.3 The Assyrian4 and Babylonian onslaughts
on the land affected the faithful remnant as well as the wicked of Israel
and Judah. The book could be seen in those contexts as a study in the
suffering of the “righteous” or the “suffering of Israel and Judah”. Three
lines of argument support a time frame for the book just prior to the
Exile.

1 D. J. A. Clines, Job 1-20, (WBC; Dallas, Texas: Word Publishers, 1989),

lvii. Second century dating is much too late, because of the development
of the story of Job in the first century document Testament of Job.
2 For an early seventh century dating, see J. E. Hartley, The Book of Job,

(NICOT; Grand Rapids, Michigan: Eerdmans, 1988), 17-20. F. I.

Anderson, Job, (Tyndale; Leicester: Inter-Varsity Press, 1976), 61-64,
favours a formative date around 750. G. H. A. von Ewald favours a mid
to early seventh century date, Book of Job, (London: Williams and Norgate,
1882), 76, 81. However, see also Pope, Job, xxxii-xl., who dates Job to the
early period of the Exile.
3 On the social-scientific context for the writing of the book see Clines,

“Why is there a Book of Job?” in The Book of Job, (ed. W. A. M. Beuken;

Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1994), 1-20.
4 G. N. Knoppers, “The Historical Study of the Monarchy: Developments

and Detours” in Baker and Arnold, eds., The Face of Old Testament Studies,
207-235 (230), makes the point that scholars have neglected the impact of
the Assyrian period on the writings of the Old Testament.
18
1) There are motifs shared only between Jeremiah and Job (e.g. the motif
of “purpose”, Job 42:2, Jer 11:15, 23:20, 30:24, 51:11), which suggests the
thought-world of Jeremiah is the writing context for Job.1 This suggests a
time-frame of Jeremiah’s life for the writing of Job—late seventh/early
sixth century. This would explain links between Jeremiah and Job that
have been noted by scholars such as the inter-dependency of Jer 20:14-18
upon Job 3, and texts such as Jer 12:1, 31:29.2

2) There are also links between Job and Deuteronomy, which suggests
that the late seventh century/early sixth century is the time when Job was
written. A renewed interest in the Law in the reign of Josiah was
engendered by the discovery of the book of the Law (Deuteronomy) in
the temple (2 Chron 34:14-15). Exactly what this discovery meant is
beyond the scope of this study, but the application of Deuteronomic law
at this time supplies a literary context and a catalyst for the author of Job
to work allusions to Deuteronomy into his book. The Deuteronomic
principles of retributive justice are obviously discussed in Job.3

3) The mention of Job by Ezekiel (Ezek 14:14, 20), along with Noah and
Daniel (MT not LXX4), is thought to be a mention of the Job of folklore,1

1 Other motifs shared with Jeremiah are not unique to Job and Jeremiah,
but their use in Jeremiah seems to have an emphasis that is matched by
Job, e.g. the motif of “pleading” (Job 13:19, Jer 2:9, 29, 12:1, 51:34, 36).
2 For example, N. C. Habel, The Book of Job, (OTL; Philadelphia:

Westminster Press, 1985), 41; A. B. Davidson, The Book of Job, (Ed., H.C.
O. Lanchester; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1962), lxxiii.
3 Legal enactments in Deuteronomy are reflected in Job: Pledges—Job

22:6, 24:3, 9, Deut 24:6; Landmarks—Job 24:2, Deut 19:14, 27:17;

prohibition of sun and moon worship—Job 31:26, Job 4:19; adultery—
Job 31:9, Deut 22:22. Davidson, lxiv, offers the following comparisons:
Job 2:7/Deut 28:35, Job 5:14/Deut 28:29, Job 5:18/Deut 32:39, Job
7:4/Deut 28:67, Job 8:8, 20:4/Deut 4:32.
4 The LXX references a “Danel” which scholars think is a reference to a

Ugaritic figure, an honest judge who cared for widows and orphans; for a
review of scholarship on the relationship of Ugaritic texts and Job see, for
example, P. C. Craigie, “Job and Ugaritic Studies” in Aufrecht, Studies in
the Book of Job, 28-35. If the reference is to Daniel as per the MT, the
question arises as to why these three names are chosen. Our proposal
would be that Noah and Job are chosen because they are righteous men
saved in a time of “flood” (the Assyrian Crisis is described as a “flood”,
see below); and Daniel is chosen because he is the candidate for the
“righteous man” at the time of the Babylonian “flood”, i.e. invasion.
19
rather than evidence that the book of Job was extant in Ezekiel’s day, but
this is not conclusive—it could equally be evidence of the existence of the
book of Job.

Ezekiel’s point is that the righteousness of Job would not deliver the land
from destruction. This reading cannot be based solely on the
prologue/epilogue construed as a self-contained folktale, because the
epilogue references what has been said in the body of the book by both
Job and the friends. Moreover, this reading cannot be based on just the
prologue because it is only in the epilogue that Job is invited to intercede on
behalf of his friends; it is such a righteous intervention that Ezekiel’s
point presupposes. Accordingly, we would argue that Ezekiel has some
form of the book of Job (for instance, chs. 1-2, 3-22, 38-39, 42). The date
of this oracle in Ezekiel (ca. 595-587) suggests the “book” of Job is in
circulation and this allows us to date the book to the late seventh/early
sixth century.

This dating leaves unanswered the question of why an author would write
a patriarchal story as a parabolic setting for a political dialogue. This
question is a matter of speculation. Our proposal would be that the author
of Job is representing the political positions inside Hezekiah’s Jerusalem.
With this concern, he chooses “Edomite” characters,2 as those
traditionally antagonistic to Judah. This in turn allows a “Jacob and Esau”
style parable in which Job is presented like the patriarch Jacob. The views
of these characters are political in that they require Job to repent in order
to affect a solution to the crisis facing Judah. In contrast, Job refuses to
take this solution; he upholds his righteousness.

In this way, we make the book an apologetic treatise ostensibly defending

Hezekiah’s attitudes and opposing the opinions and policies of internal
opponents. In addition, we make the book an explanation of why

1 See R. Gordis, The Book of God and Man: A Study of Job, (Chicago:
University of Chicago Press, 1978), ch. 6. While Job is a patriarchal figure
and pre-dates the existence of Israel, Ezekiel’s veneration of Job allows
the suggestion that he understood the parable of the book, i.e. that it was
about an “Israelite” righteous king. Ezekiel’s praise of Daniel (MT)
suggests that he viewed Daniel as a potential “Joseph” among the Exiles.
2 These names of the friends have Edomite associations (see Chapter

Two).
20
Hezekiah suffered—he suffered because God sought to demonstrate his
disinterested righteousness.1

The mention of “the Satan” might suggest a later post-exilic date for the
book.2 However, the inclusion of Satan in a book written in the late
seventh/early sixth century is close enough in time to Zechariah’s
prophecy (ca. 520) to make a theological connection between Job and
Zechariah plausible, without dating Job to the later time. Further, it has
been observed that the heavenly scene bears some comparison to the
vision of Micaiah (1 Kgs 22), which dates from the ninth century; so, Job
may represent an earlier innovation of the concept of “the Satan” vis-à-vis
Zechariah. When we discuss Zechariah in Chapter Three, we shall see that
there is good reason to suppose that Zechariah requires the prior existence
of the parable of Job.

Our only contribution to the dating question is that the language of Isaiah
of Jerusalem links to Job in such a way as to indicate that the book reflects
the eighth century Assyrian crisis. These links can be taken as prima facia
evidence for a date closer in time to Isaiah’s oracles. The intensity of the
book requires a date closer to its historical subject-matter. The conditions
prior to the exile are a better catalyst for Job, when we read Job as a
parable of the times of Hezekiah and an object lesson for Judah and the
monarchy. The reconstructive context after the exile seems inappropriate
for a book offering “comfort” in the face of disaster.

2.2 Dating the Hebrew Bible

Scholarship has a broad consensus on the development of the writings of
the Hebrew Bible.3 The book of Job is often fitted within this consensus
at a later (usually post-exilic) date; we place Job at a pre-exilic date. The
common topical and thematic material that we identify between Job and
the other writings of the Hebrew Bible does not require us to presume the
existence of such writings as finished products. The common material
does however provide evidence for the existence of common traditions

1 For an explanation of this notion see J. L. Crenshaw, Introduction to Old

Testament Wisdom, (Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1981), 101.
2 This is the view of E. H. Dhorme, Job, (trans. Harold Knight; London:

Nelson, 1967), clxix. See also M. Ehrensvärd, “Linguistic Dating of

Biblical Texts” in Biblical Hebrew: Studies in Chronology and Typology (ed., I.
Young; London: T & T Clark, 2003), 164-188 (180).
3 For conservative and critical overviews, see R. K. Harrison, Introduction to

the Old Testament, (Leicester: Inter Varsity Press, 1970) or O. Eissfeldt, The
Old Testament: An Introduction, (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1956).
21
which have been included in the writings that form the Hebrew Bible.
Our reading assumptions about the material common to Job and other
writings are as follows:

• “JEDP” traditions from Genesis to Numbers and Deuteronomy were

of influence in the literate society of the author of Job.1

• Contemporary records concerning the period up to and including

Hezekiah (i.e. those in 1 and 2 Kings) existed and were known. The
written traditions in Chronicles relating to Hezekiah post-date Job,
but encode opinion that was forming during the time of the author of
Job.2

• Certain Psalms carry royal themes of battle and victory, and these can
be related to the events of Hezekiah’s reign (e.g. Ps 89, 107).3

• For the Minor Prophets,4 where there are no dating superscriptions,

(e.g. Joel, Obadiah, Nahum, and Habakkuk), we take a location in the

1 Scholars have traditionally identified hypothetical sources in the

Pentateuch (entitled “J”, “E”, “D” and “P”), but regardless of when they
position their origin as (more or less complete) writings later than our date
for Job, and regardless of any hypothetical development that they propose
for those writings, such theories do not preclude the existence of some of
the constituent traditions of the Pentateuch prior to the 7c.. For an
overview of the history of scholarship, see E. Nicholson, The Pentateuch in
the Twentieth Century, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998), and for a
shorter review G. J. Wenham, “Pondering the Pentateuch: The Search for
a New Paradigm” in Baker and Arnold, eds., The Face of Old Testament
Studies, 116-144.
2 Scholars typically locate traditions in Kings and associated historical

books early and deriving from Northern Israel, and Chronicles as late and
deriving from Judah. However, scholarship is in a state of flux, see
Knoppers’ essay, The Historical Study of the Monarchy: Developments and
Detours in Baker and Arnold, eds., The Face of Old Testament Studies, 207-
235.
3 J. Day, Psalms, (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1992), 47-48, 88-

106.
4 Many scholars, however, prefer to place these books at a later date. The

MT grouping of the “Twelve” is evidenced in Sirach 49:10, Contra Apion I.

8.3, the Murabba’at Minor Prophets scroll, (2)MurXII, as well as 4QXII c;
the Greek Minor Prophets scroll, 8HebXIIgr also reflects the MT order.
22
 Book of the Twelve (MT) to be a chronological indication of a date
for these books. We take Joel,1 Obadiah,2 and Nahum3 to be late
eighth early seventh century prophets and Habakkuk to be a Josianic
prophet. Hosea and Amos are eighth century prophets, and Micah is a
late eighth early seventh century prophet.

• Many of Isaiah’s early oracles (chs. 1-35) relate to the reign of

Hezekiah and the Assyrian Crisis (e.g. chs. 1, 2-4, 5, 28-33).4 Oracles
in the later part of the book of Isaiah, which are normally taken to be
exilic and post-exilic, are here taken to have a pre-exilic application
(apart from the Cyrus oracles of Isa 44:228; 45:1-7). This is a
controversial assumption requiring support, which we sketch below.

Only 4QXIIa evidences a different order in placing Jonah at the end of

the scroll, and dating would appear to be a factor in the arrangement, see
B. Bath 14b. Francis Watson, Paul and the Hermeneutics of Faith, (Edinburgh:
T & T Clark, 2004), 80-88, convincingly argues that the LXX order is a
late Christian revision.
1 While we favour a late eighth/early seventh century date, J. L. Crenshaw

offers a full discussion of the arguments that are used to support the more
common early post-exilic date in Joel, (AB; New York: Doubleday, 1995),
21-29, but concludes, “…to some extent such endeavours to establish a
historical context for a biblical book constitute exercises in futility. Much
of the argument moves in the realm of probability, often resting on one
hypothesis after another about the development of the language and
religion of the Bible…”, 28. For a full discussion see A. Perry, Joel
(Sunderland: Willow Publications, 2009).
2 Scholars typically give Obadiah a setting after the fall of Jerusalem, for

example, see R. Mason, Micah, Nahum, Obadiah, (Sheffield: JSOT Press,

1991), 94. A minority of opinion has positioned the oracle earlier, and in
the seventh/eighth century.
3 Mason, Micah, Nahum, Obadiah, 68 dates Nahum to 612, but notes other

scholars who date it in the mid-seventh century. Dating depends on

historical contextualization and it is not impossible that Nahum
prophesied over a long period of time. The oracle of Nahum 3
presupposes the taking of Thebes in between 670-661, but this does not
date the oracles of Nahum 1-2, some of which have echoes of the
prophetic language of Isaiah, and may describe the crisis of 701
4 A convenient list of oracles often linked to the Assyrian Crisis is given in

B. S. Childs, Isaiah and the Assyrian Crisis, (London: SCM Press, 1967), ch.
2.
23
None of the above assumptions are unchallenged in scholarship. They
have been both defended and questioned. However, the task of such a
defence is not our concern in this book. Our task is not to locate Job in a
developmental framework for the writings of the Hebrew Bible. Our
parabolic interpretation of Job is not materially affected by the hypothesis
of a later date.

2.2.1 Dating Isaiah

Our study shows that the books of Isaiah and Job are sisters. Insofar as
we offer a complete re-configuration of the normal reading of Job in this
study, a similar project for the book of Isaiah is an obvious corollary.1
However, this is beyond the scope of this study. Contextualizing the
oracles in the book of Isaiah is difficult because of the lack of determinate
historical reference points. The critical process has been to identify the
historical reference of “certain” details and then align indeterminate detail
to the context of the “certain” detail. Our reading of Job presumes a new
reading of Isaiah, one in which the Assyrian Crisis (before and after) is
centre stage in much of the book. Contrary to critical and conservative
commentaries, this reading interprets the “Babylonian” details in relation
to Babylon in the days of Isaiah of Jerusalem, even if the future of Babylon
is implied in the detail of the Cyrus oracles (Isa 44:28; 45:1-7). Plausible
historical catalysts for oracles can be suggested for the prophetic rhetoric
relating to Babylon during the times of Isaiah of Jerusalem, provided it is
realized that the king of Babylon was, variously, the king of Assyria,
Merodach-Baladan, a Chaldean tribal lord, and subordinate Assyrian
royals or nobles in Isaiah’s day.2 Here we can only offer an over-simplified
sketch of an eighth century reading of Isaiah.

Isaiah 1-33
The rise of Assyria is a feature of the book of Isaiah’s prophecies. In
respect of Israel and Judah, this begins with the reign of Tiglath-Pileser III
with his crushing of the Northern Israelite revolt in 734-735. This reduced

1 The only full-length commentary on Isaiah to offer a consistent eighth

century reading is H. A. Whittaker, Isaiah, (Cannock: Biblia, 1988).
However, this commentary has problems in that it follows the approach
of C. C. Torrey, The Second Isaiah (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1928) in
rejecting the mention of Cyrus as original to the text. In addition,
Whittaker does not give sufficient attention to the aftermath of the
Assyrian Crisis in his interpretation of Isaiah 40-66.
2 This means that the Book of Isaiah contains historical records of

competing claimants to the throne of Babylon—the Assyrian kings and

Chaldeans like Merodach-Baladan.
24
Northern Israel to vassal status. In 722, after another revolt, Samaria fell,
and substantial numbers of Northern Israel went into captivity. Judah
escaped on these occasions, but Assyria turned its military attention to
Judah in the campaign of 701, after a revolt by Hezekiah.1

Prophecies in Isaiah 1-33 relate variously to Assyria, other nearby nations,

and Israel/Judah in the eighth century, and a chronological framework for
these prophecies is important when positioning intertextual links between
Job and the book of Isaiah.2 Scholars may date materials in these chapters
to various events in the eighth century. The same textual information may
be fitted to different events simply because an invasion in 734 is similar to
an invasion in 722 or 701. Our main interest lies in the oracles of Isaiah
28-33, which apart from Isa 28:1-4 are usually dated to the crisis of 701;
however, this crisis is also the backdrop to other oracles in Isaiah 1-33.

Our examination of the oracles of Isaiah 28-33 identifies intertextual

echoes with the speeches in Job. These echoes, we argue, show a common
topic. Other oracles in Isaiah 1-33 that relate to the Syro-Ephraimite
crisis3 or the Assyrian invasion of Northern Israel are also used in our
study. Here, however, the intertextual echoes show common motifs
because the subject is similar—an invasion by Assyria or northern power;
these oracles do not necessarily share the same topic as Job, although we
would argue that oracles in Isaiah 1, 2-4, 5, 10, 11, also reflect the crisis of
701 and its aftermath.

Isaiah 13-14
Scholars typically treat Isaiah 13-14 (“the burden of Babylon”) as exilic or
post-exilic and about the Babylonian empire. They do this primarily on
the basis of the occurrence of “Babylon” in these oracles. However, the
king of Assyria was at times during the eighth/seventh centuries the “king
of Babylon” (e.g. 2 Kgs 17:24), and he boasted of this status.4

1 Our working chronology is taken from E. R. Thiele, The Mysterious

Numbers of the Hebrew Kings, (Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 1983),
although there are modifications to make as suggested by J. B. Payne,
“The Relationship of the Reign of Ahaz to the Accession of Hezekiah”
Bibliotheca Sacra 126 (1969): 40-52.
2 See J. H. Hayes and S. A. Irvine, Isaiah: The Eighth Century Prophet

(Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1987).

3 See S. A. Irvine, Isaiah, Ahaz and the Syro-Ephraimite Crisis (SBL

Dissertation Series 123; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1990).

4 There is a comparison to be struck between the king of Babylon and

Nimrod (Gen 10:9-10) in echoes such as: the motif of a city (Gen 11:4,
25
Accordingly, Isa 14:4 could be about the king of Assyria, and this identity
is suggested by Isa 14:25, which uses the term “the Assyrian” of this king.1

Tiglath-Pileser III first assumed the title around 728-727 and introduced
the institution of the “dual monarchy” over Assyria and Babylon. He was
succeeded by his son Shalmaneser V who reigned until 722. Around this
time, in the confusion following Shalmaneser’s death and the succession
of Sargon II, Merodach-Baladan, an Aramean tribal lord, assumed control
of Babylon until Sargon II took Babylon back in 709 and once more
assumed the crown. Merodach-Baladan accepted Assyrian rule until the
death of Sargon II in 705

When Sennacherib, Sargon’s successor, installed a puppet king over

Babylon, around 703, Merodach-Baladan overthrew him and was again
king of Babylon for a brief period until 702. Sennacherib retook the
southern half of Mesopotamia in a campaign in 702 and installed a puppet
king who was unable to assume effective control.2 Eventually, one of
Sennacherib’s sons took the title of king in 700, reigning on behalf of his
father. Sennacherib eventually sacked Babylon in 689, after an uprising by
Elamites who had killed his son and taken the city.

Isa 13:9), ascending to heaven (Gen 11:4, Isa 14:13), a name (Gen 11:4,
Isa 14:22), filling the face of the world with cities (Gen 10:9-11, Isa 14:21),
and the mighty man (Gen 10:9, Isa 14:16).
1 Accordingly, some scholars see the mention of Babylon in Isaiah 13-14

as a “Babylonizing” of earlier Assyrian oracles; see C. T. Begg, “Babylon

in the Book of Isaiah” in The Book of Isaiah, (ed., J. Vermeylen; Leuven:
Leuven University Press, 1989), 121-125. This seems preferable to
separating Isa 14:25-28 as a misplaced oracle.
2 It was presumably in 700 that Merodach-Baladan sent envoys to

Hezekiah (Isa 39:1), before Sennacherib’s son assumed the kingship of

Babylon. He was looking for an ally that had recently defeated Assyria, to
bolster his intentions for retaking Babylon. This seems a preferable
sequence of events to the usual suggestion that Merodach-Baladan was
seeking allies to bolster his defence of Babylon against Sennacherib in 702
Hezekiah is able to show the envoys his kingdom (Isa 39:2), which would
not have been possible in 701; he is also able to show them a healthy
treasury, which was depleted during the invasion and siege, but
replenished after the defeat of Assyria; finally, he asserts that there will be
peace in his days, a sentiment unlikely in 702 (Isa 39:8). For the more
usual approach, see J. Motyer, The Prophecy of Isaiah (Downers Grove:
InterVarsity Press, 1993), 291-297.
26
Following the lead of Isa 14:25, the “king of Babylon” of Isa 14:4 could
well be Shalmaneser, who invaded Northern Israel. This identification fits
the dating superscription for the next oracle in Isa 14:28, which dates that
oracle to ca. 715 (Ahaz’ death). Further, this king “boasts” that he will
exalt himself above the “stars of God” (Isa 14:13), which is a figure for
the tribes of Israel, and a suitable piece of propaganda supporting a
programme of conquest for Israel and Judah. On this basis, we suggest
the king is Shalmaneser and that the context of the oracle is the invasion
of Northern Israel in 722/721.

The imperial policy of the Assyrian kings towards Israel and Judah causes
Yahweh to declare that he will “break” (rbv) the king of Babylon (Isa
14:5), and that he will “break” (rbv) the Assyrian (Isa 14:25) upon the
mountains of Israel. The intention is declared and spoken against
Shalmaneser, but it is not “fulfilled” until 701 against Sennacherib. The
oracle is not spoken against the individual Assyrian monarch, but rather
the Assyrian monarchy.

On this reading, it cannot be assumed that Isa 13:17 refers to a Median

conquest of the city of Babylon. Rather, it is just as possible that since the
Israelites were transported to Media (2 Kgs 17:6) by Shalmaneser, this
caused unrest in that region, with the result that their places of settlement
were attacked by the Medes. The Medes are brought against “them”
(~hyl[)—the displaced people, not against “it”—a city.

Similarly, it cannot be assumed that the oracle is predicting a destruction

of the city of Babylon in Isa 13:19. There were several sackings of the city
prior to its rise as the capital of the Babylonian empire, and the Persian
“conquest” of the city did not result in its destruction. The prediction
does not describe an event of destruction, but rather the eventual desolate state
of Babylon. This changes the rhetorical purpose of the oracle. The
eventual desolate state of Babylon is contrasted with the favour to be
bestowed on Israel (Isa 14:1, yk).

The prediction is that the city would become a “possession” for animals
(Isa 13:20-22, 14:22-23), and the rhetoric here is a contrast: it will become
a possession for animals instead of being a “possession” of the king of
Assyria.1 Babylon was “the glory of kingdoms” (KJV), which conveys the

1For a detailed interpretation of Isaiah 13-14 in an Assyrian context, see J.

D. Watts, Isaiah 1-33, (WBC; Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1984), 187-188;
for a review of the history of the period see J. Oates, Babylon, (London:
27
idea of a glorious possession of the kingdoms (2 Sam 1:19, Jer 3:19, Ezek
20:6), but it changed hands several times during Isaiah’s lifetime between
the Chaldean tribes and Assyria.

The point in declaring that Babylon would be a possession for animals is

to discourage Judah from making alliances with the Chaldeans. During the
eighth century overtures were made to Judah by the Chaldean tribes for
strategic purposes (see Isaiah 39). As such, the prediction may have had
the intended function of deterring those in Judah from seeking an alliance
with Babylon against Assyria. There was no basis for security in such an
alliance, because the “glory of the kingdoms” would be a possession for
animals.

For these reasons, we locate Isaiah 13-14 in an Assyrian context, although

it is possible to re-apply the oracles (in a secondary, typical, sense) to
Babylon of Nebuchadnezzar’s day.

Isaiah 24-27
Isaiah 24-27 is usually regarded by scholars as “apocalyptic”, and as later
than the time of Isaiah of Jerusalem. However, we view their content as
entirely applicable to the Assyrian crisis.1 The “Zion triumphant”
perspective of these chapters fits the history of the Assyrian crisis in that
Jerusalem is delivered. The rivalry between Judah and Assyria in the
parochial eyes of Isaiah leads him to proclaim the survival of Jerusalem.

The main critical “evidence” that leads to the non-Isaianic dating for these
oracles is the description of “the city” or “cities”. What is the identity of
the city, and has the city been devastated and the population gone into
captivity? If the city is Jerusalem,2 the details may apply equally to the
Babylonian or Assyrian crisis. The following points suggest an Assyrian
application if the city is Jerusalem:

1) The population are still present in the city and in a state of siege: every
house is “shut up” and “no man” is allowed in (Isa 24:10). The city is in a

Thames Hudson, 1986), 115-120, J. Bright, A History of Israel, (London:

SCM Press, 1977), ch. 7.
1 See E. Kissane, The Book of Isaiah, (Dublin: Browne & Nolion, 1941),

267, 303, and Watts, Isaiah 1-33, 313-351.

2 For a discussion of the identity of the city see A. van der Kooij, “The

Cities of Isaiah 24-27 according to the Vulgate, Targum and Septuagint”

in, Studies in Isaiah 24-27, (eds. H. J. Bosman & H. van Grol; Leiden: E. J.
Brill, 2000), 183-188.
28
state of “confusion” suggesting siege conditions and irrational despair (Isa
24:10). The city is said to be “broken” (rbv, Isa 24:10), but this verb is a
broad term; it could signal the capture and sacking of a city, or it could
indicate a rupture or breach in the city. An example of the latter usage is
Isa 30:13, where a city wall is said to be ruptured. The other details
suggest a city under siege and city walls that have received a breach.

2) The gate is said to be “battered” (ttk, Isa 24:12, RSV). This might
suggest that the gate has been broken down and the siege army has
broken through and ransacked the city. However, this is unlikely; it is
more likely that the gate has been battered and shorn up, and the invader
has not yet broken through. The people are still safe in the city, but in dire
straits. The verb is one of attack rather than one for breaking through:
thus it has been translated as “smite” and “beat” in the KJV. The verb is
used in Isa 30:14 as part of the figure “vessel that is broken in pieces”
(KJV). This text refers to the sudden breaking of the peace treaty between
Assyria and Judah. This led to the siege of Jerusalem and as a
consequence the “joy” that was in the city vanished (Isa 24:11).

3) The city is said to be “desolate” in that desolation is “left in the city”.

The verb for “remaining” is used and this implies some sort of exodus
from the city, with appropriate looting, so that the city only has desolation
left or remaining. This picture is not one describing what is left after the
ransacking of the city, but rather it is one describing what is left once
those who can escape have abandoned the city. The idea of there being a
surviving remnant in the land is prominent in Isaiah (e.g. Isa 28:5, 37:31).
The city is intact but in a dire state “in the midst of the land” (Isa 24:13).

4) Whereas “the city of confusion” is Jerusalem, not every reference to a

city in Isaiah 24-27 is a reference to Jerusalem. Cities were turned into
heaps in the land, and this is the claim of Isa 25:2, “you have made a city a
heap”; the LXX interprets1 with a plural, “you have made cities a heap”.

The sacking of the Judean “fortified cities” (rcb, Isa 25:2) is the hallmark
of the Isaianic account of the Assyrian campaign (rcb, Isa 36:1, 37:26),
rather than any sixth century prophets’ account of the Babylonian
invasion. In a similar vein, the Assyrian invader sacked “citadels of
foreigners” (Isa 25:2). These fortresses were set up by those foreigners

1 Dell, Job as Sceptical Literature, 16, remarks, “…there is strong evidence

therefore that changes were made to the plot and theology of Job in the
Septuagint version which toned down and sometimes eliminated Job’s
most impatient, presumptuous and impious remarks”.
29
taking advantage of the chaos in the land. The claiming of territory by
foreigners in the wake of the Assyrian threat is suggested by such texts as
Isa 1:7.

Another reference to the cities of the land is found in Isa 27:10-11, “the
fortified city is solitary” (RSV). These cities, after they had been sacked by
the Assyrian army, were left abandoned, and since many of them would
have been “fenced” and of wooden construction, their fate was to be used
for firewood (Isa 27:11).

5) Jerusalem is described as “the lofty (bgf) city” with “inhabitants of the

height” (Isa 26:5, RSV). This city is laid low, but it is cast down in order
for the poor and the needy to trample it under foot (Isa 26:6). In this kind
of language, Isaiah is not describing the effects of a hostile enemy, but the
replacement of corrupt rulers who had sought appeasement with Assyria
and who had persecuted the poor and the needy. This interpretation is
suggested by the intertextual links with Isa 2:11, 17 which state that “the
haughtiness (bgf)” of men shall be humbled “in that day”. The description
“lofty city” means a “haughty city”, a city ruled by haughty men. In the
day that the Lord delivers Jerusalem, these men will be humbled in the
dust—their policy of appeasement shown to be a false policy.

In contrast to these men, Isaiah uses the terms “the poor” and “the
needy” as ciphers for those whom the Lord views with favour (Isa 3:14-
15, 10:2, 14:32, 32:7)

6) Oracles about the survival of the city are included in Isaiah 24-27. Thus
Yahweh will reign from Mount Zion (Isa 24:23); and a feast will be
celebrated on the mountain of the Lord (Isa 25:6-8). Oracles are also
included that suggest that the people in the city wait for salvation in that
place (Isa 25:9, 26:1-4). The juxtaposition of these oracles of hope
alongside oracles of doom suggests an imminent expectation of
deliverance of the city.

For these reasons, we take Isaiah 24-27 as descriptive of the Assyrian

Crisis.

Isaiah 34-35
Scholars typically regard Isaiah 34-35 as exilic or post-exilic in origin, and
this is because of shared motifs with Isaiah 40-66. However, its location
here in the book suggests that it is in the first instance an oracle about
Hezekiah’s restoration and the return of the exiles from the Assyrian

30
captivities.1 In Isaiah 34-35, we see nothing that could not be applied to
the 701 crisis and the subsequent restoration of the land. These chapters
express the hope of restoration, but the mixed message of Isaiah 40-48 is
that the restoration faltered and was postponed until the days of Cyrus.

Isaiah 40-66
Scholars have regarded Isaiah 40-55 as the work of a “second” Isaiah who
lived during the exile (although this picture is changing, and multiple
redactors are now being postulated); some assign Isaiah 56-66 to this
unknown prophet, while others regard these later chapters as post-exilic in
origination.2 Our working assumption is that the oracles of Isaiah 40-66
come from Isaiah of Jerusalem, which is an alternative common
conservative commentary position.3

However, contrary to both the critical and conservative consensus, these

oracles are here assumed to apply to the return of Assyrian exiles and a
partial restoration of the state by Hezekiah after 701.4 This position is
unrepresented in scholarship, although scholars may argue for some
oracles in Isaiah 40-66 to have an Assyrian provenance. It is beyond the

1. For an eighth century reading see C. Seitz, Isaiah 1-39, (Louisville,

Kentucky: John Knox Press, 1995), 236-242.
2 M. E. Tate, “The Book of Isaiah in Recent Study” in Forming Prophetic

Literature, (eds. J. W. Watts and P. R. House; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic

Press, 1996), 22-56, summarises the “three-book” approach to Isaiah in
recent commentaries. B. D. Sommers, A Prophet Reads Scripture: Allusion in
Isaiah 40-66, (Stanford, California: Stanford University Press, 1998), 187-
195, who charts some recent objections to the idea of a Third-Isaiah.
3 O. T. Allis, The Unity of Isaiah, (Philadelphia: Presbyterian and Reformed

Publishing, 1950), J. N. Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah, Chapters 1-39, (NICOT;

Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1986), 25, J. A. Motyer, Isaiah, (TBC; Leicester:
Inter-Varsity Press, 1999), 27-33, H. C. Leupold, Isaiah, (3 vols; Grand
Rapids: Baker Book House, 1968), 1:21-27, R. Margalioth, The Indivisible
Isaiah, (New York: Sura Institute for Research, Jerusalem Yeshiva
University, 1964), A. Harman, Isaiah, (Fearn, Ross-shire: Christian Focus
Publications, 2005).
4 On this, see J. Barton Payne, “Eighth Century Israelitish Background of

Isaiah 40-66”, WTJ 29 (1966-67): 179-190; 30 (1967-68): 50-58, 185-203,

and M. F. Rooker, “Dating Isaiah 40-66: What Does the Linguistic
Evidence Say?”, WTJ 58 (1996): 303-312. Rooker’s conclusion is that,
“the evidence from diachronic analysis overwhelmingly supports a pre-
exilic date for Isaiah 40-66”, 305.
31
scope of this study to defend this view, as it would require a full-length
monograph (which is now published).

The oracles of Isaiah 40-66 could be recontextualized to the Assyrian

period, if the mention of Babylon is part of an anti-Babylonian stance on
the part of Isaiah arising from the visit of the Babylonian envoys in 700.1
This propaganda, i) points out that Babylon suffered defeat at the hand
of the Assyrians (Isa 43:14); ii) ridicules Babylon as a potential diplomatic
partner (Isa 46:1, 47:1); iii) ironically2 presents a future “Cyrus” as a
“Davidic” replacement for Hezekiah in rebuilding Jerusalem (Isa 44:28,
45:1-7), a task removed from Hezekiah on account of his “sin” over the
matter of the visit of the Babylonian envoys (Isa 39:1-8); and iv)
commands the leaders of Jerusalem to metaphorically “flee” Babylon (Isa
48:14, 20). This new contextualization of the “Babylonian” materials in
Isaiah 40-48 presumes that Isaiah would have been motivated to make
predictions of the distant future citing the name of a foreign potentate. Such
a motivation is plausible if it is part of the irony in naming the “Davidic”
king (Isa 7:14). If this is the case, the Cyrus oracles evidently presuppose
other predictions (now lost) about his rise to power.

The advantage in reconfiguring the Cyrus oracles and the anti-Babylonian

rhetoric to the reflect the Assyrian Crisis is that the Palestinian
provenance of Isaiah 56-66 can now be brought into the reading of Isaiah
40-55. The mirror reading of these chapters against the Assyrian Crisis
paints a picture in which the temple had been burnt, stripped of its
ornamentation and subject to damage (Isa 64:11). In this context, plans
for a new temple would be a plausible reaction (Isa 28:16, 44:28, 56:7,
60:7, 66:1).

Although Isaiah 40-66 can be recontextualized to the Assyrian era, this is

not essential for our study. Our case is that Job and early oracles in Isaiah
share a common topic in the Assyrian Crisis and the sickness of Hezekiah.
If instead Isaiah 40-66 is exilic and post-exilic, the echoes with Job do not

1 This visit is more commonly dated to 702; however, it is equally possible

that the envoys come from Merodach-Baladan and from a “king in exile”.
The position of the episode in the historical materials suggest a 700 date,
and this makes better sense of Isaiah’s pronouncement; a 702 date would
have favoured an Assyrian punishment from Isaiah rather than a
Babylonian one.
2 This is the critical move in the reconfiguration of Isaiah 40-66. Claus

Westermann claims that the mention of Cyrus is the “pivot on which all
that is in the book turns”, Isaiah 40-66 (London: SCM Press, 1969), 10.
32
show a common topic. Nevertheless, the echoes belong to same kind of
discourse: the consequences of devastation. Our main use of Isaiah 40-66
is in linking Job with the Suffering Servant songs, and as Bernhard Duhm
observed long ago,1 these may be an independent collection of songs in
respect of the composition of Isaiah 40-66. They do not clearly identify
the Suffering Servant, but our proposal is that they have the experience of
Hezekiah as a model and develop the theme of suffering in Job.2

3. Hebrew Poetry and Philology

The Hebrew of Job is the most difficult in the Hebrew Scriptures, with
many unique words, unusual grammatical constructions, problematic
vocalisation, and difficult word combinations. Consequently, scholars
often use comparative philological materials (e.g. Ugaritic, Arabic) in
order to make the Hebrew more regular and remove hypothetical
corruptions or inappropriate editorial changes. In effect, this produces a
new version of the poem.3

Hebrew poetry is characterized by parallelism; in addition, scholars have

developed theories about Hebrew metrics. Thus, they may have views on
the number of syllables that are appropriate to the line (colon), as well as
theories about stress and sound, which may also dictate what is
appropriate in a word and on a line.4 In addition, scholars may have a
view on how many lines are to be associated to form a complete unit (bi-

1 B. Duhm, Das Buch Jesaja (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1892).

2 For a review of scholarship see H. H. Rowley, The Servant of the Lord,
(London: Lutterworth Press, 1954), chs. 1 and 2, and C. R. North, The
Suffering Servant in Deutero-Isaiah, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1948),
ch. 1. The Hezekian application of these songs is argued by J. W. Thirtle,
Old Testament Problems, (London: Henry Frowde, 1907), but both Rowley
and North overlook this contribution, and very few scholars have argued
such an application.
3 This can be seen in how the LXX and the Qumran Targum to Job

handle the Hebrew text. The LXX version is about 100 verses shorter,
suggesting that the translator did not understand many verses and omitted
them; further, the translator frequently paraphrases the Hebrew text for
no apparent reason. The Aramaic Targum offers competing alternative
translations for some of the words in the Hebrew, suggesting difficulty
with the original language.
4 For an introductory discussion of Hebrew metrics see S. E. Gillingham,

The Poems and Psalms of the Hebrew Bible, (Oxford: Oxford University Press,
1994), ch. 3, R. Alter, The Art of Biblical Poetry, (Edinburgh: T & T Clark,
1990), chs. 1-3.
33
colon, tri-colon), and how the thought in that unit is composed
(synonymous parallelism, contrasting parallelism, etc.), and how such units
compose larger units of thought such as strophes.1 On the basis of such
theories, scholars propose amendments to the text, if they feel the existing
line is out of balance.

However, there is no consensus on how to measure and apply a metrical

system to Job, and disagreement exists between each commentator on
how the larger poetic units are distinguished.2 Pope observes that “The
counting of syllables, unstressed and stressed, in lines where the text is
above suspicion shows such irregularity as to cast doubt on emendations
made purely on the grounds of metric theory”.3 Hartley observes that an
“unbalanced” line could well be deliberate, and thereby convey an
emphasis.4

These two factors (poetic form and philological comparison) define the
text-critical layer of scholarship in relation to Job.5 They contribute to
determining the chosen text upon which a scholar then superimposes his
commentary about the cut and thrust of the argument in Job, i.e. his
various higher levels of analysis. Commentaries that are pitched into this
milieu are very different to our study. We do not engage in amending the
Masoretic Text. Instead, we seek to determine how far the received text
can be understood without amendment, when the topic register is shifted
from “wisdom” to “politics”.

3.1 Authorship
The language of Job shows that the author was a literary artist of high-
order with knowledge of Hebrew and Aramaic. The vocabulary has many

1 For a presentation of one strophic pattern to the book, see E. C.

Webster, “Strophic Patterns in Job 3-28” and E. C. Webster, “Strophic
Patterns in Job 29-42” in The Poetical Books, (ed. D. J. A. Clines; Sheffield:
Sheffield Academic Press, 1997), 232-259, 260-273.
2 See the discussions in Hartley, Job, 33-35, and Anderson, Job, 37-41. With

regard to syllable counting, various factors need to be taken into account:

elision of vowels or diphthongs as the language evolved and manuscripts
were brought up-to-date, development of segolate verbs, incorrect vowel
pointing, and introduction of prosaic elements. These factors make the
exercise precarious.
3 Job, liii.
4 Job, 35, see also Dhorme, Job, clxxx-clxxxix.
5 Closely allied to this layer of scholarship is the rhetorical analysis of the

text. This analysis seeks to uncover the structural patterns in the text.
34
Aramaisms and betrays an awareness of Arabic lexical material that has
been absorbed into literary Hebrew. Gordis observes that “the only
tenable conclusion is the most obvious and natural—the Book of Job was
written by a highly learned Hebrew in his native tongue”.1

The frequency of Aramaisms has been thought to suggest a post-exilic

date for Job; however, this is not a secure conclusion. How the author
became skilled in Aramaic, and how far Aramaic had penetrated literary or
common society cannot be determined from the book of Job. It could be
that the author has these language skills, but that they have not yet
become common in all society. Literate Hebrew society could have been
absorbing Aramaic influence as early as the eighth century (2 Kgs 18:26,
Isa 36:11). As the times moved on, Aramaic advanced further until it
became the lingua franca, but the quantity of Aramaisms in Job does not
presuppose socially widespread use of Aramaic. Its presence is consistent
with a date in the late seventh or early sixth century as well as later post-
exilic times.2

4. Composition of Job
The book of Job bristles with problems of textual integrity.3 A discussion
of these issues is beyond the scope of this book. Some of the leading
issues include,

The speeches appear to be in three cycles with a definite pattern (Eliphaz,

Job, Bildad, Job, Zophar, Job, etc.), except that in the “third cycle” the
pattern breaks down; Bildad’s speech is much shorter and Zophar does
not have a speech. This has led scholars to propose that the text is
disturbed, and they offer reconstructions that restore the pattern. Some of
the things that Job says in the third cycle are taken to represent the views
of the friends, and this is where scholars reconstruct Zophar’s and
Bildad’s third speeches.4

1 Gordis, The Book of God, 212.

2 For a discussion see Gordis, The Book of God, ch. 15.
3 For example, see the overview of opinion in Eissfeldt, Introduction, 460-

462. Eissfeldt usefully notes that textual amendment by scholars is

motivated on metrical grounds as well as their perceived constraints upon
what can and cannot be said by the participants in the dialogue. For a
discussion see Pope, Job, xxiii-xxx.
4 However, it is worth noting that the so-called disturbed third cycle is

present in its present form in the Targum fragments discovered at

Qumran, indicating that the current composition is as old as the 2c.
35
For example, Clines argues, following other scholars, that Job 26:5-14
belongs to Bildad’s third speech and that Job 27:13-28:28 is Zophar’s
missing third speech.1 However, we will assume that the text has not been
disturbed and follow the treatment of F. I. Andersen2 in regarding Job as
speaking all of Job 26-27. This means that there is no third speech for
Zophar and Bildad’s “speech” is just an invited interruption by Job, who
says, “If it is not so, who will prove me a liar, and show that there is
nothing in what I say?” (Job 24:25).

If Zophar’s speech is absent, Bildad’s speech is more of an interruption,

and the text is not disturbed, the proposal that there are three cycles of
speeches is severely weakened. We are inclined to take the view that there
are only two cycles of speeches, which are concluded by Eliphaz
summarizing the friends’ position in Job 22:

J / E:J:B:J:Z:J / E:J:B:J:Z:J /E

This would make Eliphaz’ speech the structural counterpart to Job’s

opening speech with both standing outside the two cycles. Eliphaz’ last
speech brings to a close the “first day” of speeches, and the next day
begins with Job, saying, “Today also my complaint is bitter” (Job 23:2).3
D. Wolfers’ conclusion is that “it is impossible to construct from any
extant material a Third Cycle which is thematically consistent in the way
that the first and second cycles are”.4

We see nothing convincing in the reconstructions of scholars and there is

value in providing a final form reading.5

1 Clines, “The Arguments of Job’s Three Friends”, in Art and Meaning:

Rhetoric in Biblical Literature, (eds., D. J. A. Clines, D. M. Gunn, and A.

Hauser; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1982), 199-214 (208). Clines only
canvasses one proposal about the disturbance of the text and notes that
there are other suggestions. A convenient list of 24 different
reconstructions is given in N. H. Snaith, The Book of Job, (London: SCM
Press, 1968), Appendix 1.
2 Andersen, Job, 214-19.
3 This two-cycle approach to Job is supported by D. Wolfers, Deep Things

out of Darkness, (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995), 225-255 and his “The
Speech-Cycles in the Book of Job” VT 43 (1993): 385-402.
4 Deep Things, 254-255.
5 For example, see the introduction to Job in B. S. Childs, Introduction to the

Old Testament as Scripture, (London: SCM Press, 1979), 542.

36
There is a poem about Wisdom in the middle of the book (Job 28), which
is placed into the mouth of Job. Its character has led scholars to observe
that it is out of keeping with the tenor of Job’s remarks; it is often
interpreted as an interpolation by the author or a later hand. We regard it
is a partial digression spoken by Job, whom the author states “continues”
his parable in Job 29:1.

Elihu’s speeches are the subject of dispute. Scholars observe that he is not
mentioned in the prologue or epilogue, and that Job does not reply to
him. Some scholars argue that he is a later addition to the book, e.g.
Dhorme.1 We follow Gordis2 and treat Elihu as integral to the book’s
design.

Another area of dispute is how the narrative envelope and the dialogue
relate to each other. Reading the dialogue without the scene setting of the
prologue engenders the impression that Job’s situation is much worse;
there are social, military and political aspects to his circumstances as well
as his physical affliction. The Hebrew of the prologue is different to that
of the dialogue. The consensus of scholarship is that the prologue reflects
an ancient folklore, which has been adapted to exist with the poem.

Nevertheless, the narrative envelope and the dialogues are linked in such a
way that indicates that the book was intended to be read as a unity. We do
not need to split the two types of material and assign different authors
and a different purpose. They are linked by the way the action flows into
the dialogues. Thus the friends come and comfort Job; when they finish
speaking, Elihu is introduced; God comes and gives Job an answer, and
on the basis of this answer instructs Job to sacrifice for his friends at the
close of the book. In addition, there are multiple intertextual links
between all the speeches which lend cohesion to the book.3

1 Dhorme, Job, cv. One argument is that the presence of Aramaic words is
proportionately greater in Elihu’s speeches suggesting greater influence of
that language. Aramaic was rapidly becoming the lingua franca throughout
the eighth century, and so the different quantity of Aramaisms in Elihu’s
speeches could suggest a later addition by the original author; and it is also
likely the reason for the Aramaisms is to be found in the distinctive nature
of Elihu’s argument.
2 Gordis, The Book of God, 106-109.
3 The clearest advocate of this position is that of Habel, Job, 25-29.

37
Thus, we treat the book as a literary unit. This takes the book “as is” and
places issues of composition to one side.1 We assume that the
prologue/epilogue, the “wisdom poem” of Job 28, the currently assigned
speeches of Job and the friends, God’s speeches, and Elihu’s speeches, are
all an integral part of the book for the purposes of our analysis. Our view
is that the book has an identifiable author of both the narrative sections
and the poetic dialogues, including those of Elihu.

Nothing in scholarship invalidates such a reading, but to defend its unity

would require a different sort of commentary. Thus, while it may be true
to observe that there is a difference in style and language in the Hebrew of
Elihu’s speeches compared to those of the three friends, (there are more
Aramaisms), or in the Wisdom Poem of Job 28, or in God’s speeches,
such differences do not have to imply different authors of these parts; it
could be that an author worked on the book at different times in his life,
in different locales, or chose different styles and a different vocabulary for
the different voices. If we present a successful reading of the whole book,
then this is an argument for the integral unity of the book.

Carol Newsom offers a recent discussion of the question of composition,

unity, and genre in The Book of Job: A Contest of Moral Imaginations.2 She
argues that those who assert the unity of the book have trouble offering a
convincing explanation of the genre of the book, given the disparity
between the prologue/epilogue and the dialogue. Our solution to this
challenge is to say that the unity of the prologue/epilogue with the
dialogue is achieved by there being a parabolic level of meaning in the
prologue, which coheres with the political/military concerns of the
dialogue. The genre of Job is therefore unique;3 but for want of a

1 Scholars disagree on the plausibility of amendments to the text. For a

sceptical review see Gordis, The Book of God, 17-18. Others who defend
the unity of the book and a single “author” include the heavyweight
commentary by Dhorme, Job, lxxxv, and the popular commentary by
Anderson, Job, 41-55.
2 C. A. Newsom, The Book of Job: A Contest of Moral Imaginations, (Oxford:

Oxford University Press, 2003), ch. 1. Newsom says that, “the

multigeneric nature of the book of Job does not lend itself readily to…
[a]focus on unity”, 8. However, our counter-argument is that the elements
in the prologue/epilogue direct the reader to a different level of meaning.
It is not that the book of Job is multigeneric; rather it is multi-levelled in
its meaning.
3 It is beyond the scope of our study to discuss genre from a theoretical

viewpoint; for a discussion see for example, Pope, Job, xxx-xxxi, Habel,
38
definition, we would propose that it is a work of the prophetic imagination. It
is a dramatized lament with associated consolation. It is a disputation
about the causes, the progress, and the resolution of the political and
military situation of “Job”. It is a work of “providential wisdom”—the
wisdom of God’s dealings with his covenant people and their recent
“ideal” righteous Davidic king.1

Scholarship is motivated by five factors when it argues for a complex

history of composition involving, first, an oral folktale, then an original
author of a shortened version of the book and, finally, later editors.2

1) Scholars do not see how the MT makes sense; they do not see how
certain verses are consistent or coherent with surrounding material, and so
they propose amendments to the text, reassign verses to different
speakers, or re-order material. Such “errors” are assigned to editors and
the vagaries of transmission.

2) Scholars perceive that the poetic structures of some verses are not
“right” (according to some poetic theory) and so they suggest that the text
has been corrupted or intentionally changed, and they propose corrective
amendments to the text. Their amendments hypothesize about editorial

Job, 42-46, Hartley, Job, 37-50, G. W. Parsons, “The Structure and

Purpose of the Book of Job” in R. B. Zuck, ed., Sitting with Job, (Grand
Rapids: Baker, 1992), 17-34, C. Westermann, “The Literary Genre of the
Book of Job” in Zuck, Sitting with Job, 51-64. Job illustrates aspects of
lament, the legal lawsuit, and dialogic treatise. Pope asserts that it is “…sui
generis and no single term or combination of terms is adequate to describe
it”, xxxi.
1 This definition of genre pertains to the content of the book rather than

literary form. The themes in Job include a consideration of suffering, the

relevance of innocence and guilt, the doctrine of divine retribution, the
justice of God, as well as the nature of man and the creative power of
God. Scholars discuss these themes and variously favour one or other in
defining the genre of Job. Our proposal sets a military/political context
for these themes. The book of Job is not an abstract discussion of these
themes and therefore a discussion of the “wisdom” of God’s general
dealings with mankind. The military/political echoes with the Prophets
prevent a “Wisdom” classification of Job.
2 This is the current consensus. The more complex the history the less

valuable is the notion of an “original author”; see the discussion of

Dhorme, Job, lxxii-lxxxv.
39
activity, and in effect they put forward new versions of the poem of Job
to that recorded in the MT.

3) Scholars do not understand the poetic figures. It is often the case that
the author of Job puts together words, each of which has a conventional
meaning outside Job, but when put together produce an apparently very
odd figure; commentators often amend the Hebrew or ignore the pattern
of usage outside Job and propose a unique sense for a constituent word in
Job; they often rely on comparative philology for these proposals.

4) Fourthly, because of difficulty in comprehending the sense of the MT,

scholars argue that text makes better sense if it is adjusted in respect of
the separation of words, vocalisation, obvious omissions, and scribal
errors.1

5) Finally, scholars propose amendments to the text that are consistent

with their overall reading of the book. Thus, deletions and alterations may
be proposed that make a speech represent preconceived ideas about what
a speaker should be saying if he is to be a consistent character; or such
changes may be proposed in order to fit a theory about the development
of a theme.

In respect of these amendments, Pope notes that “the Masoretic Hebrew

remains our primary source for the Book of Job, even though in many
places the text is corrupt or obscure and has to be emended in order to
yield any acceptable sense”.2 But he warns, “…the text has certainly been
tampered with before and has suffered greatly in transmission. It would,
however, be extremely naïve for anyone to place too much confidence in
any of the ingenious and learned textual restorations and emendations
contained in the commentaries and the extensive periodical literature on
Job”.3

5. Conclusion
Our main result is that Job is a prophetic treatment of the times of
Hezekiah. It is a book that has been developed with a folkloric story
about a patriarchal individual called Job. It is a drama written for
performance4 using this story but carrying an eighth/seventh century

1 For a discussion of this type of correction see Dhorme, Job, cxcii-cxcvi.

Dhorme’s remark is that such errors “are not really frequent”, cxcvi.
2 Job, xlvii.
3 Job, l.
4 J. H. Eaton, Job, (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 2004), 39-40.

40
debate. The prophetic-parable1 can only be uncovered by intertextual
study. Strictly speaking, it only exists in the prologue and the epilogue:
these parts of the book are obviously a story, but our argument is that the
story is parabolic. The dialogue is not parabolic unless it is seen in relation
to the narrative envelope.

If we put the prologue/epilogue to one side and take the dialogue on its
own, the background information we have in the speeches takes on a new
significance, and the character of that information is different. There are
indications of kingship, political power, military conflict, policies of state,
party groupings, diplomatic talks, and a crisis. It is then a question of
identifying the historical context for this kind of dialogue. The
prologue/epilogue disguises this level of meaning with a story about a
patriarch.

The prophetic-parabolic approach is almost non-existent amongst the

commentaries, which instead concentrate on determining the Hebrew
text of Job, relating the text to comparative religious material, offering a
surface paraphrase of the arguments in the book, and considering such
questions as provenance, consistency and intent; to this mix they add
value judgements on the lasting theological worth of the book (as a
theodicy) in the Judeo-Christian tradition. Some commentaries observe
that the book may represent an allegory of the nation of Israel and its
suffering, but this has generally not been accepted.2

1 While this word has a conventional meaning today, and this is how I use
it, there is something to be noted about this word. The narrator refers to
Job’s speeches (Job 27:1, 29:1) as a “parable”, and this word is used in
Deut 28:37, “And thou shalt become an astonishment, a parable, and a
byword, among all nations whither the Lord shall lead thee” (1 Kgs 9:7, 2
Chron 7:20, Ps 44:15, Jer 24:9). This word very often has political import,
and therefore it identifies Job’s speeches and those of the others in the
dialogue as political in nature (Job 13:12).
2 For example, amongst commentaries, Pope says that this allegorical

suggestion is “intriguing”, but “there is…not the slightest suggestion of

interest in the fate of the nation Israel betrayed anywhere in the book”,
Job, xxx; Carol Newsom is certain that the book “contains no references
to historical events or persons”, The Book of Job, (NIB IV; Nashville:
Abingdon Press, 1996), 325; Anderson states that an “historical stage” is
not used, Job, 254; Eaton asserts, Job, 65, that the book does not reflect the
fate of Israel in the exile, and Habel, Job, 40, 41, states that Job “avoids
direct allusions to the later historical and prophetic traditions of Israel”,
and “there is no evidence that he [Job] represents Israel”. Amongst
41
The majority view is that the book is about the problem of Job’s innocent
suffering and therefore a theodicy.1 The friends present alternative
theodicies and Job rejects their proposals. The main problem with this
reading is that it does not appear to encompass God’s speeches; these do
not offer an answer to Job about his suffering.

Our case is that the book is not about the “problem of innocent
suffering”; it is not a theodicy.2 The book is about whether a man can
serve God for nothing (i.e. whether disinterested righteousness is
possible). If Satan’s challenge is being tested in the rest of the book, this
can only mean that Job’s suffering is the way that he is tested for
disinterested righteousness during3 his life. His suffering brings about a

introductory works, J. J. Collins asserts that “the traditional wisdom

teaching found in Proverbs, Job and Qoheleth is notable for its lack of
attention to the history of Israel”, Jewish Wisdom in the Hellenistic Age,
(Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1998), p. 97, and N. Gottwald, The Hebrew Bible:
A Socio-Literary Introduction, (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1985), 579, offers
the view that Job does not reflect the experience of the people in exile.
However, Timothy L. Johnson, in “Job as Proto-Apocalypse: A Fresh
proposal for Job’s Governing Genre”, paper presented to the SBL
Conference 2004, 18, (Online: http://www.sbl-
site.org/PDF/Johnson_Job.pdf), has argued for recognition of
apocalyptic elements in Job; such elements would carry a political
implication in relation to Israel. Further, Davidson, Job, xxix, has argued
for a “national purpose” for the book.
1 For example, see M. V. Fox, “Job the Pious” ZAW 117.3 (2005): 351-

366, M. Tsevat, “The Meaning of the Book of Job”, HUCA 37 (1966):73-

106.
2 For a recent discussion of the theodicy in Job see E. W. Nicholson,

“The Limits of Theodicy as a Theme of the Book of Job” in, Wisdom in

Ancient Israel, (eds., J. Day, R. P. Gordon & H. G. M. Williamson;
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995), 71-82. Nicholson
correctly notes, 72, that Job accepts both good and evil from the Lord
(Job 1:21, 2:9), which obviates the need for a theodicy. Nevertheless, he
believes that the book raises the issue of theodicy for readers.
3 This is an important qualification; Job is not being tested for

disinterested righteousness in respect of any reward after death; Job could

endure his suffering for the prospect of a reward beyond death, although
he makes no such connection; as it is, his test concerns only whether he
will serve God for nothing in this life.
42
state in which he has nothing, and this enables the test to proceed as to
whether he serves God for nothing.1

The embracing framework is set by Satan’s question: the ensuing

discussion of innocent suffering is only the means by which Satan’s test is
executed. Job is tested to see whether he will succumb to the friend’s
theodicies, repent, and seek God’s favour. For Job to accept a
reward/retribution theodicy would be for him to show the impossibility
of disinterested righteousness. He would be conforming his behaviour to
the goal of a reward, i.e. God’s forgiveness. It is essential therefore that
Job uphold his righteousness if God is to be vindicated over against Satan.

God’s speeches answer Job, but they do not do so by justifying his

suffering. The reason for the suffering is given in the prologue—Job is
being tested for disinterested righteousness. (The friends do not offer this
theodicy—that suffering is a test.) God’s speeches are designed instead to
give Job the assurance that his suffering will soon end, and that God is in
control. Such an assurance is not a solution to the “problem of the book”,
the book is not an attempt to explain the problem of suffering. The
assurance is the signal to the reader that Job’s “test” is now ending and his
healing beginning. God’s speeches are designed to bring closure to the
test and restore Job’s faith.

If we ask why an author would write such a narrative, our proposal is that
it was written to explain the suffering of Hezekiah and the nation during
the Assyrian crisis. The “problem” of the book of Job is how to explain a
recent event in Judah’s history. The author has encoded this explanation
in a play about “Job” with Job representing Hezekiah. The value of this
kind of writing in the period prior to the Exile is easy to appreciate, as it
offers an explanation of recent suffering. It also bolsters confidence in
“the land” in times of external threat; hence our suggestion that it is an
apologetic prophetic work written during the times of Jeremiah.

1 The task of enumerating themes in Job is not part of our study. Scholars
emphasize some themes as more critical to the purpose of the book.
These include “piety and the proper response to suffering”, “reasons for
innocent suffering”, “the justice of God in bringing about suffering”,
“protest against God”, “the nature of God”, and “man’s relationship to
God”. All of these themes are in Job and, for example, different reasons
for suffering are given (suffering as an education, suffering as a
punishment, suffering as part of a natural order). However, this does not
make the point of the book one that has to do with the issue of theodicy.
43
Our study uncovers a parabolic meaning in the epilogue/prologue of Job,
and a more literal political and military interpretation of the speeches. An
original audience for Job might not have had the necessary background
knowledge for such a reading. In the absence of such knowledge, the play
works on a surface level as a dialogue about the suffering of a patriarch. If
an audience had some background knowledge of the eighth century
prophets, they could well have unlocked the deeper meaning that we
present.1 Accordingly we conclude that it is entirely plausible to propose
that an author would write a play about Hezekiah in a patriarchal style.

Studies on Job2 tend to be of three kinds: i) detailed text-critical

monographs and articles on the Hebrew, both comparative-philological,
linguistic, and literary, and often tied to considerations of composition,
redactional history, and provenance; ii) heavy-weight commentaries which
aim to summarise and add to the detailed text-critical work, as well as
expound the book line by line; and iii) lighter material, perhaps more
homiletical, perhaps apologetic, perhaps exegetical, which seeks to bring
Job to the concerns of believers of a particular faith-community. This
study is best classified as “lighter” material, aimed at supplying a “reading”
for the entire book for English readers without the complexity inherent in
heavy-weight material.

The only parabolic commentary of Job is Deep Things out of Darkness by D.

Wolfers. This does not offer a line-by-line analysis of Job. It seeks to offer
a holistic reading of the book through a selected analysis of key motifs
and themes. This is the only commentary that we engage as a dialogue
partner.

Wolfers’ view is that “Job is primarily an allegorical figure representing the

people of Judah and their king Hezekiah in the time of Assyrian

1 In order to unlock the meaning of the book it would have been

necessary to interpret the references of key terms such as “the wicked
one”, “the wicked ones”, “the oppressor”, “the hypocrite”, “the light of
the wicked ones”; understand the military and political scope of such
figures as “the flood”, “the river”, “the channel”, “the storm” and “the
whirlwind”; and perceive that Job was a suitable personification of
Hezekiah.
2 For a recent bibliography, see P. Enns, Poetry & Wisdom, (IBR

Bibliographies 3; Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1997).

44
conquests”.1 This is substantially correct, and Wolfers has employed an
intertextual method. However, our view is that the prologue/epilogue of
Job is a parable (not an allegory2) portraying Hezekiah at the time of the
Assyrian siege, and the dialogue is a literal matter-of-fact discussion of the
crisis. Thus, our view places Hezekiah centre-stage rather than Judah.
Wolfers makes “Job” into a composite figure of “Judah and her king”; we
identify Job as Hezekiah.

Wolfers also believes that “…the purpose of the author in writing the
Book of Job was…to re-draw the nature of the relationship between the
people of Israel and their God by demonstrating that the Covenants were
no longer in operation, that they had been unilaterally abrogated by the
Lord, or in the alternative, so transgressed by the people, that they had
become inoperative”.3 This either/or appears to be an example of fence-
sitting; even so, each option is not the purpose of the book.

Wolfers also says, “…the thesis of the book of Job at its deepest level is
that the time had arrived historically for the severance of this tribal bond,
the rupture unilaterally of the covenant, the treaty, between God and
Israel, to free the way for the demonstration of that unrequited love of
God, fear of God, worship of God, which Job at the end of his trials
personifies”.4 Wolfers’ view has a pervasive impact on his reading of the
speeches of Job, to which he gives an overly angry tone.

Wolfers’ thesis is flawed as a big picture, and this affects his reading at
many points. Firstly, Job was restored, and Jerusalem was saved, and this
does not suggest a unilateral rupture of the covenant at this point in
history (587 would be a better proposal). Secondly, the terms of the
Deuteronomic covenant allow for the return of a scattered Israel to the
land (Deut 30:1-10); the “tribal bond” is still affirmed.5 Thirdly, the book

1 Wolfers, Deep Things, 14-15. Wolfers cites, Deep Things, 116, one
precursor: B. D. Napier, Song of the Vineyard, (New York: Harper, 1962),
but this is not a commentary on Job.
2 We exclude this categorization of Job and reserve it for those

interpretations of Job which see in Job a Christian allegory, for example,

Gregory the Great’s Moralia in Iob.
3 Wolfers, Deep Things, 14-15.
4 Wolfers, Deep Things, 207.
5 For a discussion of the “restoration” aspects of the covenant, see J. G.

McConville, “Restoration in Deuteronomy and the Deuteronomic

Literature”, in Restoration: Old Testament, Jewish, and Christian Perspectives, (ed.
J. M. Scott; Leiden: E. J. Brill, 2001), 11-40.
45
of Job places to the foreground a test of disinterested righteousness and
an individual. This is the explanation of the suffering that is offered,
rather than the punishment of Judah and the abrogation of the covenant
by Yahweh or the people. Finally, Wolfers reads Job’s speeches in terms
of an accusation that God has abrogated the covenant, and this gives
them a sense and a tone that does not fit the Chronistic traditions
recorded about Hezekiah.

Hence, there are numerous points of disagreement between Wolfers and

this study as to how the language of the book fits the historical situation
(e.g. on the identities of “Satan”, “the sons of God”, “Behemoth”, “the
hypocrite”, “the wicked ones”, and “the wicked one”). Contextualising
poetry is inherently difficult and such disagreement is inevitable.
Nevertheless, Wolfers should be read along with this study for purposes
of comparison and contrast.1 In their review of recent Joban scholarship,
Waltke and Diewert describe Wolfers’ book as a “striking anomaly” and
comment that “it is unlikely that his views will gain wide acceptance”
although they also say that it is “a helpful counterpoint to the
conventional lines of understanding”.2 Our study is an attempt to correct
Wolfer’s thesis and offer a more systematic defence of the counterpoint
political-parabolic approach to Job.

The parabolic approach is also represented in J. W. Thirtle’s, Old Testament

Problems.3 Thirtle comments that “Hezekiah had a sickness which was of
the nature of leprosy; and before ever the time of crisis arrived, and, in
answer to importunate prayer, recovery was vouchsafed, there was placed
before him this parabolic narrative for his encouragement and comfort”.4
This is unlikely because of the connections that Job has with Jeremiah.
Job betrays a perspective on a crisis that is over and past (but recent), and
the book is not obviously designed for encouragement and comfort.

Thirtle develops connections between the books of Job and Isaiah.5

However, he does not assert that the book of Job is a parable about
Hezekiah and his times; i.e. written to be about Hezekiah. Rather, his view

1 As a matter of method, we have not sought to explicitly rebut Wolfers

(or other scholars); we have cited Wolfers when he is in support of our
reading.
2 Waltke and Diewert, “Wisdom Literature”, 327.
3 Barton-Payne cites this work in his essay, “Eighth Century Israelitish

Background of Isaiah”, 40-66.

4 Thirtle, Old Testament Problems, 192.
5 Thirtle, Old Testament Problems, 189-203.

46
is that the book is “an exhibition of his [Hezekiah’s] case in an illustrative
light”.1 The illustrative light is that of Job, and it is this light that accounts
for the “coincidences of expression” between the two books.2 In other
words, Thirtle does not believe that Job is about Hezekiah, it just
illustrates his plight; it is about Job. The difference between Thirtle’s essay
and this book is one of emphasis, and Thirtle only includes a small
number of illustrative examples to show the relevance of Job to Hezekiah;
we have offered instead a fuller commentary.

This study offers a radically new and reconfigured reading of Job. Newsom
comments that “a new reading should be judged in part by how well it
deals with problems left over by other models, though it will inevitably
introduce new ones. It should be rigorously answerable to the text in a
nonarbitrary fashion. But if a new reading is to be culturally valuable, it
should engage the book by means of emerging reading conventions that
are part of the cultural project of the interpreter’s present”.3 This study
offers new answers to the hermeneutical problems that occupy Joban
scholarship. These problems are not “left over” by existing models; such
models deal with the problems with varying degrees of success. In
Newsom’s terms, if Job is “polyphonic”,4 this study offers a neglected
sounding derived from an intertextual reading of Job with the Prophets.
The advent of computer-aided intertextual tools has made such new
readings accessible. The reading can be evaluated by assessing the
proffered links.

Newsom observes that “if a word belongs both to general discourse and
to specialized discourse, something must trigger the nuances of the
specialized meanings for them to become a part of the communicative
transaction. It may be the clustering of many terms that occur together
only in specialized discourse, or it may be the presence of a word
distinctive to the specialized discourse, or some other device”.5 We
identify such triggers in our study as the more distinctive vocabulary that
Job shares with Isaiah and other eighth century prophets. These triggers
allow a specialized political discourse to be heard in Job.

1 Thirtle, Old Testament Problems, 200.

2 Thirtle, Old Testament Problems, 195.
3 Newsom, Moral Imagination, 16.
4 Newsom, Moral Imagination, ch. 1.
5 Newsom, Moral Imagination, 208.

47
48
 CHAPTER TWO
The Literary Drama of Job
1. Introduction
The book of Job is designed to be performed on a stage;1 it is not a
philosophical treatise on suffering. The issue of suffering is prominent in
the book, but this is subordinate to the real concern of the book, which is
whether Job serves God in this life without regard to reward, i.e. whether
his righteousness is disinterested. This test is portrayed with emotion;
such emotion has been presented in a play. This is how the book “works”
on the surface. In parabolic terms, the book is offering an explanation of
the Assyrian crisis as a test of Hezekiah for disinterested righteousness.

The thesis that the book of Job is a parable about Hezekiah and Judah
during the Assyrian crisis is implausible when it is first presented as an
idea. The reception history of the book going back as early as the first
century Testament of Job does not offer this reading. A parabolic reading
does not overturn this history, but instead offers a complimentary
approach. The historico-critical method is of recent origin and has
uncovered much of value that is unmentioned in the pre-critical history of
interpretation. In a similar way, modern intertextual tools facilitate a kind
of reading that can uncover new levels of meaning. Hence, it is not
unlikely that a prophetic reading of Job should come to light using such
tools, and that such a reading should have remained dormant in the
history of interpretation.

2. Parable in Job
The consensus of scholarship is that although written late in Israel’s
history, the book of Job is based on ancient folklore2 about a figure from
the time of the patriarchs. Whether it incorporates such a folktale or
whether the prologue/epilogue was composed in novo at the same time as
the dialogue, we offer no view. Our project is to explain how the book is
also a parable about Hezekiah.

1 For a description of a staging of the play, see Newsom, Moral Imagination,

259-260.
2 For example, Pope, Job, xxvi.

49
The view that Job is a folkloric figure is ancient (proposed in the Talmud,
Baba Bathra 15a), and this has been tied to the view that Job never existed.
Pope says that “…the term [folklore] is very fitting since Job is in a sense
the type of any and every man who experiences the mystery of seemingly
senseless and underserved suffering”.1 This understanding is dependent
on a reading of the book as a treatise on the problem of suffering. Our
proposal is that, contrawise, the book is about a real individual—
Hezekiah.

If the book of Job is a “script” for dramatic performance, why was it a

parabolic script? A partial answer to this question consists in the fact that
parables are not unknown amongst the prophets, for example,

1) Hosea’s life is an enacted parable; he is commissioned to marry a

prostitute and thereby mirror in his life the relationship of God to the
people. This “parable” has been recorded along with his oracles (Hos 1:3).
Hosea names his children in accordance with this parable (Hos 1:4, 6, 9).

2) Prophets also enacted parables, for example, Ezekiel enacts parables

using scrolls (Ezekiel 3), his body lying down (Ezekiel 4), his beard
(Ezekiel 5), and so on.

3) The policy of Isaiah was to speak in parables. Isaiah’s commission was

to speak in such a way that the general populace should not understand
his message:

“And he said, Go, and tell this people, ‘Hear ye indeed,

but understand not; and see ye indeed, but perceive not.
Make the heart of this people fat, and make their ears
heavy, and shut their eyes; lest they see with their eyes,
and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart,
and convert, and be healed.’ Then said I, Lord, how
long? And he answered, Until the cities be wasted
without inhabitant, and the houses without man, and the
land be utterly desolate, And the Lord have removed
men far away, and there be a great forsaking in the midst
of the land.” Isa 6:9-12 (KJV)

Of course, there would have been some that understood Isaiah’s message
and supported him (his disciples), but the commission from God was
clearly designed to be part of the punishment of the land (Job 17:4).

1 Pope, Job, xxx.

50
Isaiah’s policy may not have covered his whole ministry, and may have
been practised only in the early years prior to 701. The Gospel writers
record this Isaianic policy,

“And he said unto them, Unto you it is given to know

the mystery of the kingdom of God: but unto them that
are without, all these things are done in parables: That
seeing they may see, and not perceive; and hearing they
may hear, and not understand; lest at any time they
should be converted, and their sins should be forgiven
them.” Mark 4:11-12 (KJV)

This early interpretation of Isaiah in Mark offers an explanation of the

intention behind prophetic parables: they were delivered to the people
and their leaders, but only understood by the followers of the prophet.

If the book of Job is prophetic wisdom, then a parabolic prologue and

epilogue are consistent with known prophetic practices.

However, the book of Job is not a collection of prophetic oracles; it is a

dramatic piece. Clines argues in his essay, Why is there a Book of Job?, that
such a book presupposes a literate audience and, we might add, the book
requires a society that watches dramatic performances. It is reasonable to
speculate about the sponsorship of the book and its subsequent
preservation, but nothing more than royal or monied sponsorship can be
suggested.

3. The Dramatic Character of Job

The dramatic character of Job can be appreciated on a first reading, which
gives you the impression that you are meant to “see” the prologue and
epilogue scenes acted out and “listen” to the speeches. The writing opens
with “There was a man…”1 and the feel is not unlike “Once upon a
time”. The story is then structured into acts introduced by markers:

“A man there was…” (Job 1:1)

“Now there was a day…” (Job 1:6)
“And there was a day…” (Job 1:13)
“Again, there was a day…” (Job 2:1)
“So went Satan…” (Job 2:7)
“Now when…” (Job 2:11)

1The Hebrew is even more suggestive, “A man there was…” cf. 2 Sam
12:1.
51
The first act introduces Job and his family and records the pattern of their
life. Its purpose is to give us a picture of regularity, and this is why it
closes with “thus did Job continually”1 (Job 1:5). Subsequent acts depict
the action of the story. The event markers are suitably vague so that we do
not gain the impression that we are reading history per se. Instead, the
telling of the story is highly telescoped and highly stylised, which is
appropriate to a story that is designed to be acted. We are only told the
minimum of detail to get the stage set for the speeches. For example, the
function of Job’s family is to have “feasts”. This is their introductory
characterization (Job 1:4-5a), and when the story comes to “their” act,
feasting is how the act is introduced (Job 1:13), even though their act
recounts three calamities unrelated to them. When a calamity does in fact
befall them, the detail of their feasting is repeated (Job 1:18). Or again, in
the description of the third act, the messengers come onto the stage in
quick succession. They each recount a disaster that has the formula:

some kind of livestock + servants are destroyed and only I have escaped

The action is very fast because each report follows on while the former
servant is speaking — but this speed of action reflects the staging of the
story rather than some single day in which disaster befell the radius of a
few square miles that was Job’s home.

As each act opens in a stylised way, so too the acts close in a regular
manner:

Satan comes (Job 1:6, 2:1)…Satan goes… (Job 1:12, 2:7)

In all this… (Job 1:22)
In all this… (Job 2:10)

The structure of the second act is typical. The main figure, Satan, enters; a
dialogue ensues, and then he leaves. The third and fourth acts have more
in them, but they both close with the same main point, “in all this Job did
not sin”.

1 The Hebrew is a common idiom “all the days” and is picked up here
from the regularity required of Israel in respect of the commandments,
see Deut 4:40, 5:29, 6:24, 11:1, 12:1, 14:23, 18:5, 19:9.
52
The speeches also suggest an enacted drama:

• they are divided across two acts (Job 23:2, 40:5)

• they are spoken in poetry
• they are cyclical: J / E J:B:J:Z:J / E:J:B:J:Z:J /E1

The involvement of God in the dialogue, which is something unique,

suggests a representation of God in a play. The content of God’s speech
is in keeping with the “sharp” tenor of the preceding dialogue and has
sarcastic overtones. This would fit an anthropomorphic representation of
God in a play.

The dramatic character of the story-telling and the long speeches do not
mean that Job was not an historical individual, but we need to be careful
about what we regard as “historical”. The fiction/non-fiction issue is a
false dichotomy on our reading. The historical individual underlying “Job”
is Hezekiah; the character of Job is a representation of Hezekiah in a
patriarchal tale.2

3. The Setting of Job

The surface story setting for Job is the time of the Patriarchs. This setting
is given away by verbal echoes between the prologue/epilogue and
Genesis, but these do not all point in the same direction, and other details
are not patriarchal. These echoes allow us to say that Job probably “lived”
at around the time of Jacob;3 three details suggest a patriarchal setting:

1 For reasons that will become clear, we read two cycles of speeches and
not the usual three. Job 23 begins a second day of speeches, but apart
from an interruption from Bildad (Job 25), only Job and Elihu speak
before Yahweh enters. Scholars disagree on whether to include Job’s first
speech in the first cycle. Thus Dhorme, Job, lxxii, excludes it, whereas
Pope, Job, xxiii-xxx, includes the speech.
2 The patriarchal setting should not be mistaken for an indication of the

time that the book was written (which is only one rabbinical tradition; see
Midrash Aggadath Bereshith 57.4, Baba Bathra 15b). For an overview of
rabbinical treatment see J. R. Baskin, “Rabbinic Interpretations of Job” in
The Voice from the Whirlwind, (eds., L. G. Perdue and W. C. Gilpin;
Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1992), 101-110.
3 The patriarch that appears to be the model is Jacob. See E. F. Davis,

“Job and Jacob: The Integrity of Faith” in The Whirlwind, (eds., S. L. Cook,
C. L. Patton and J. W. Watts: Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2001),
53
 Dramatic Setting of Job The Times of the Patriarchs
Job lives to be over 175. Terah was 205 when he died;
Abraham was 175.
Job exercises a priestly function The Patriarchs exercise a priestly
(Job 1:5), outside the framework function before the Law of
of the Law of Moses. Moses.
Job is concerned with his Many stories are about progeny
progeny. and inheritance.

The points in this table have differing merit. The only deciding detail for
Job’s time-period is his age.1 The ages in Genesis show a patriarchal
setting. The fact that he also exercises a priestly function is consistent with
the times of the patriarchs, but not sufficient on its own to indicate a
patriarchal setting.

Other details flesh out Job’s circumstances, but do not necessarily require
a patriarchal setting. Job is both a herdsman and a landholder with tenant
farmers (Job 1:14, 31:38-40). He has great wealth measured in terms of his
children, his livestock, and his servants (Gen 26:13-14). Nevertheless, he
lives in a tent (Job 5:24, 19:12), close to a city, and while his family live in
houses; he was a leading figure in the local city (Job 29:7-17).2

The names of Job’s friends fit in with patriarchal times. Eliphaz and
Teman (as in Eliphaz the Temanite) are immediate descendants of Esau
(Gen 36:10-11), and “Shuah” (as in Bildad the Shuhite) is a Canaanite
name from the same time (Gen 25:2, 38:2). Since Esau married Canaanite

100-121. This connection was also made by Rabbi Levi and Abha b.
Kahana.
1 Adding 35 years to the 140 years Job lived after his troubles arrives at

the figure of 175. Such an addition assumes that Job’s ten children took
15 years to sire. A popular view is to say that Job lived until he was 210.
This adds 70 years to the 140 years that he lived after his troubles. This
assumes his years were doubled after his troubles as well as his wealth
(Job 42:10). Such a doubling of wealth reflects the Law (Exod 22:3ff) and
is one of many indicators that the writing of Job antedates the Law. It also
implies a recognition that Job’s wealth had been “taken” from him. Job’s
patriarchal setting is also indicated by the number of generations he saw
after his restoration, which marries in with the declining ages at which
people had children of the patriarchal period. Prior to his troubles, Job
must have been sufficiently young for his children to be unmarried.
2 His wealth reflects the Deuteronomic blessings of Deut 28:11; see

Wolfers, Deep Things, 112.

54
women (Gen 26:34), “Eliphaz” and “Teman” are also likely general
Canaanite names. Such names survived in their usage, for we see “Shuah”
being used of a later descendent of Judah (1 Chron 4:11). Zophar the
Naamathite could also be a Canaanite name, seeing that Naam was a
descendent of Eliphaz (1 Chron 4:15).1

4.1 The Land of Uz

One detail that does not come from Genesis is that Job dwelt in the land
of Uz (Job 1:1). The land is often identified with Edom or a region
around Haran,2 but Wolfers argues that Uz was located in what is today
called the Negev part of Israel.

This can be determined from information given in Jeremiah about the

land of Uz in his day. Jeremiah’s mention of Uz comes in a passage that
lists a number of territories:

“Then took I the cup at the Lord’s hand, and made all
the nations to drink, unto whom the Lord had sent
me…Pharaoh king of Egypt, and his servants, and his
princes, and all his people; And all the mingled people,
and all the kings of the land of Uz, and all the kings of
the land of the Philistines, and Ashkelon, and Azzah, and
Ekron, and the remnant of Ashdod; Edom, and Moab,
and the children of Ammon, and all the kings of Tyrus,
and all the kings of Zidon, and the kings of the isles
which are beyond the sea; Dedan, and Tema, and Buz,
and all that are in the utmost corners, and all the kings of
Arabia, and all the kings of the mingled people that dwell
in the desert, And all the kings of Zimri, and all the kings
of Elam, and all the kings of the Medes, And all the kings
of the north, far and near, one with another, and all the
kingdoms of the world, which are upon the face of the
earth: and the king of Sheshach shall drink after them.”
Jer 25:17-26 (KJV)

1 We have noted above that Job is like Jacob; it is an irony therefore that
the friends adopt the position of Esau. Their speeches, while critical of
Job, nevertheless show that they are on the same side as him; they just
have a different solution to his intellectual dilemma.
2 Pope, Job, 4; see also G. Fredrick Owen, “The Land of Uz” in Zuck, ed.,

Sitting with Job, 245-248.

55
There are three lists of territories in this passage; they are listed as if
someone is standing at Jerusalem and looking in different directions to
describe the nations north, south, east, and west: i) Egypt is listed first in
the far south-west and then, as you approach Jerusalem from Egypt, other
nations are listed as you encounter them—firstly, the mingled people of
Sinai, then the land of Uz (what is now the Negev), and then the Philistine
cities; ii) a second sweep of nations is made starting with the south and
west, with nations on the far side of the Dead Sea listed and up as far as
Tyre and Zidon; iii) finally, a sweep is made of nations to the far south of
Arabia and around the far side of the Fertile Crescent.

This places Job to the south of the hills of Judah. In terms of the
patriarchal setting for the book, it raises the question whether the land of
Uz existed in the days of Abraham. It is adjacent to what became the
territory of Edom,1 but this territory did not exist until after Esau’s
dynasty was established. An individual called Uz is mentioned in Esau’s
genealogy (Gen 36:28) and it seems reasonable to suppose that the “land
of Uz” is where this branch of Esau’s descendants settled.

Exactly when the land of Uz came into existence, and developed cities
and kings, is a matter of speculation. The natural conclusion is that the
text identifies the land in which Job lived from the vantage point of when
the text was written (i.e. the days of Jeremiah).

The friends of Job all come from regions to the south of Jerusalem in the
near vicinity to Uz. The parable therefore shows us an inhabitant of the
land of Uz, in the Negev, where Abraham had settled. This might suggest
that Job was not an Israelite. However, given the patriarchal setting, this is
a moot point, since Abraham is the only “Israelite” at this time, and even
to say this is somewhat anachronistic. As we have noted, links with Jacob
suggest that Job and his friends are to be compared to “Jacob and Esau”.

5. Conclusion
Job is a play about a patriarch who endured suffering and losses; it is also
a parable of the suffering a Davidic king in Judah. The catalyst for the
book may very well be the need to provide an explanation of the
deliverance of Judah in the days of Hezekiah, a deliverance that was not
being offered by Jeremiah in the face of the Babylonian threat.

1 The information in Lam 4:21 is often taken to indicate that Uz was in

the territory of Edom, but this text can be read as indicating that Edom
was an occupying force in the Negev, as indicated by the prophecy of
Obadiah; for the standard view see Dhorme, Job, xxii.
56
 CHAPTER THREE
Parable in Job
1. Introduction
In this chapter we will develop the view that the prologue/epilogue of Job
is a parable of Hezekiah. We will show that it is about the suffering of
Judah and their Davidic king. This interpretation implies that the rest of
the book will have a prophetic feel, and it could also explain why the book
was written and preserved. This is not a new approach, as it has been
proposed by one other commentator, but it is very much a minority view.

If a story is a parable, then it has at least two levels of meaning: there is

the ordinary surface meaning, and there is the deeper hidden meaning.
Neither level can be discounted in an interpretation, but it is possible to
try and make “too much” of the deeper hidden meaning, turning the
parable into something that is far-fetched. Not all details in the narrative
need have a parabolic significance, but a sufficient number should invite a
joined-up symbolic reading if a parable is going to be “seen” by readers. If
we imagine ourselves watching the dramatic presentation of Job, then we
can appreciate the play on one level; however, if sitting in the audience,
we start to detect similar language to the Prophets, (not necessarily
quotation or allusion), then we may very well pick up a deeper level of
meaning, and this is what we are detailing in this book. For a play to have
a symbolic level of meaning, all that is necessary is for it to have sufficient
symbolic elements for an audience to garner and construct the symbolic
message.

The objective then of this chapter is to cement the characters of the

prologue/epilogue into Israel’s history.

2. The Literary Framework

The literary structure of Job 1 is uncontroversial, and we drew the outline
in Chapter Two. There is however an important observation to make
about this structure: the story begins in v. 1, continues through to v. 5,
and then after an interruption it resumes in v. 13 to the end of the first
chapter:

“There was a man in the land of Uz, whose name was

Job…And there were born unto him seven sons and
57
 three daughters…And his sons went and feasted in their
houses… And it was so, when the days of their feasting
were gone about,1 that Job sent and sanctified them…
for Job said, It may be that my sons have sinned, and
cursed God in their hearts. Thus did Job continually…
And there was a day when his sons and his daughters were
eating and drinking wine in their eldest brother’s
house…” Job 1:1-13 (KJV)

The above quotation merges the first part of the story (Job 1:1-5) with the
beginning of the second part (Job 1:13-22) to show how naturally the
narrative flows. It shows that the reference of “his sons” in v. 13 requires
the more definite reference of “my sons” in v. 5.2

On this basis, it might be argued that the author has taken an existing
folktale (Job 1:1-5, 13-22), perhaps re-worded it in his own language, and
then added a heavenly scene (Job 1:6-12); on the other hand, the author
may have just inter-cut two scenes.

The literary structure of Job 2 is more complicated than Job 1. In the first
chapter of Job, the divisions between the units of narrative are clear. In
Job 2, the heavenly scene runs on into the next scene. This lack of clear
division supports the view that the prologue/epilogue of Job does not
incorporate the self-contained text of a folktale, but instead was written
from scratch with the dialogues. In Job 2 the author intensifies the stakes
and sets the scene for the dialogues. Our initial questions then concern
the symbolic identities of Job, the sons of God, and Satan; and the
reasons for the conversation between Yahweh and Satan.

3. The Identification of Job

The conventional3 literal reading assumes that the heavenly scene
describes a heavenly council and introduces Satan, one of the heavenly
council. On this approach, the “sons of God” have no other role than to
be “the council”. However, there is an echo with the “sons of God” in

1 The Hebrew verb here indicates “when the days of their feast had come
around”, i.e. in the annual cycle of feasts; this feast had come round once
more. It is not a common verb, but significantly occurs in Isa 29:1, “Let
the feasts run their round” (RSV); the text appears to echo this sentiment
in Isaiah.
2 This point is observed by Pyeon, You Have Not Spoken, 8, who also notes

that the heavenly scene prefers the divine name.

3 For example, Pope, Job, 9.

58
Genesis 6, and these “sons” have a role in that story; it is likely then that
the “sons of God” in Job have a corresponding role, and that this is not
about any conduct in a council.

Furthermore, there is no comparable mention of “the Satan” in Genesis,

and the conversation that Satan has with Yahweh is very different to
anything in Genesis.1 The presence of “Satan” does not suggest that we
simply have a patriarchal tale.

In addition to these two character elements of “Satan” and the “sons of

God”, the prologue has other details that allow a reading that is not
patriarchal, and these allow us to reconfigure conventional readings of the
book of Job to include a parabolic interpretation of the identity of Job. A
parabolic identification of Job with the king of Judah can be made on
three grounds: i) the conversational detail in the heavenly scenes; ii) the
detail of the earthly scenes; and iii) the content of the speeches. In this
chapter, we consider the first two of these three lines of evidence; the
main evidence consists of our interpretation of the speeches in the
subsequent chapters of our study.

3.1 Describing Job

A first indication of Job’s symbolic identity comes in God’s description of
Job as “my servant”, which is used particularly of David (19x), and is a
common royal title for the king in near-eastern monarchies:

“Now therefore so shalt thou say unto my servant David,

Thus saith the Lord of hosts, I took thee from the
sheepcote, from following the sheep, to be ruler over my
people, over Israel...” 2 Sam 7:8 (KJV), cf. 3:18

The use of this description for Job may reflect nothing more than its use
of David, of Abraham (Gen 26:24) or of Moses (Num 12:7-8, Josh 1:2,
7).2 On the other hand it may be used to indicate that the figure of Job is
meant to represent the king in Jerusalem in a symbolic reading of the
book. Since in 2 Chron 32:16 Hezekiah is referred to with this
designation, the king could be Hezekiah:

1 The Serpent of Genesis 3 is associated with the figure of Satan and the
Devil in early Christian writings, but no such association is struck in
Genesis.
2 This use is not insignificant as these figures are the fathers of the nation.

59
 “And his servants spake yet more against the Lord God,
and against his servant Hezekiah.” 2 Chron 32:16 (KJV),
cf. Psalm 116:161

The expression also has echoes with the “Suffering Servant” of Isaiah
(14x), who is a Davidic individual.

God’s other descriptions of Job support this symbology.

“And the Lord said unto Satan, Hast thou considered my

servant Job, that there is none like him (whMark !ya2) in the
earth…” Job 1:8 (KJV)

The expression “none like him” is often used for the king.3 The
institution of the kingship tellingly uses the same Hebrew phrase,4

“And Samuel said to all the people, See ye him whom the
Lord hath chosen, that there is none like him (whMark !ya)
among all the people? And all the people shouted, and
said, God save the king.” 1 Sam 10:24 (KJV)

Here Samuel invites the people to “see” Saul, just as God invites Satan to
“see” Job—that there is none like him. Following this train of enquiry,
perhaps the most significant king of Judah to be referred to in this way is
Hezekiah:

“He trusted in the Lord God of Israel; so that after him

was none like him (whMark hyh al5) among all the kings
of Judah, nor any that were before him. For he clave to
the Lord, and departed not from following him, but kept

1 Isaiah uses this language of Israel (Isa 41:8, 9; 43:10) and the king (Isa
42:2-3), but the prophecy has an initial catalyst in Hezekiah, and reflects
older traditions.
2 A similar phrase occurs in Ps 86:8 in relation to God; here in Job 1:8, “in

the earth” sends the reader to unique individuals on earth rather than
God.
3 See G. N. Knoppers, “There Was None Like Him”, CBQ 54 (1992):

418-425.
4 The exact phrase is unique to Job and 1 Samuel.
5 The Hebrew shares “like him” with our Job passage but expresses “there

was none” differently; see also 2 Chron 30:26, and the description of the
Great Passover, “there was not the like in Jerusalem”.
60
 his commandments, which the Lord commanded
Moses.” 2 Kgs 18:5-6 (KJV)

This description of Hezekiah idealizes him as a righteous man and unique

among the kings of Judah.

Job is further described by God as,

“…a perfect and an upright (rvy) man, one that feareth

God, and escheweth evil…” Job 1:8 (KJV)

This compares with the description of Hezekiah before the invasion of

Sennacherib,

“And thus did Hezekiah throughout all Judah, and

wrought that which was good and right (rvy) and truth
before the Lord his God. And in every work that he
began in the service of the house of God, and in the law,
and in the commandments, to seek his God, he did it
with all his heart, and prospered.” 2 Chron 31:20-21
(KJV)

Hezekiah did that which was “right” (rvy). He eschewed evil (2 Chron
29:6), feared God (Isa 50:10), and had a “perfect” heart (2 Kgs 20:3, Isa
38:3)—and he did this in God’s “sight”.1 Satan’s challenge was whether
Job feared God for nought and he alleged several points:

“Hast not thou made an hedge ($wf) about him, and

about his house,2 and about all that he hath on every side
(bybsm)? Job 1:10 (KJV)

Job has a hedge about him personally, about his house and “on every
side”. The picture is of an ever-enlarging circle—Job, then the household,
and then the wider land. In effect, this makes Job into a “vineyard”. Isaiah
uses the same figure for Israel as a vineyard:

“And now go to; I will tell you what I will do to my

vineyard: I will take away the hedge (hkwfm3) thereof, and

1 Compare Isa 42:1, “Look, my servant whom I uphold”.

2 The Hebrew here for “about him, and about his house” echoes Lev
16:6, 11, 17.
3 This is the corresponding noun to the verb used in Job 1:10.

61
 it shall be eaten up; and break down the wall thereof, and
it shall be trodden down…” Isa 5:5 (KJV), cf. Pss 80:12,
89:40

As with Job, so too with the kings of Israel and Judah, God gave some of
them rest from their enemies “on every side”.

“But now the Lord my God hath given me rest on every

side (bybsm), so that there is neither adversary nor evil
occurrent.” 1 Kgs 5:4 (KJV)

David, Solomon, Asa, and Jehoshaphat were given rest “on every side” (2
Sam 7:1, 1 Chron 22:9, and 2 Chron 14:7, 20:30). In this connection, it is
to be noted that Hezekiah was given guidance “on every side” after the
defeat of Sennacherib (bybsm, 2 Chron 32:22).1

Satan’s next charge is,

“…thou hast blessed the work of his hands, and his

substance is increased (#rp) in the land.” Job 1:10 (KJV)

The king was representative of the people. If Job is typical of the king,
then blessing the work of his hands is the same as blessing the nation.
God had “blessed” the work of Job’s hands. This description resonates
with the potential of Israel in the blessings of Deuteronomy 28:

“The Lord shall open unto thee his good treasure, the
heaven to give the rain unto thy land in his season, and
to bless all the work of thine hand: and thou shalt lend
unto many nations, and thou shalt not borrow.” Deut
28:12 (KJV), cf. 16:15

The text mentions Job’s increase which amplifies the blessing of his
hands. This idea of an “increase” (#rp) in land-produce is also found in
the description of Hezekiah’s reign:

“As soon as the command was spread abroad (#rp),2 the

people of Israel gave in abundance (hbr) the first fruits
of grain, wine, oil, honey, and of all the produce of the

1The Hebrew expression for “on every side” is the same in all these texts.
2 There is a play on ideas here with the “increase” of the command and
the “abundance” of the harvest.
62
 field; and they brought in abundantly the tithe of
everything.” 2 Chron 31:5 (RSV)

The idea of an “increase” is the breaking forth of bounds. Jacob is the

only patriarch of whom it is recorded that his cattle increased in this
manner (#rp, Gen 30:43). The description of Job evokes Jacob in this
detail and in other aspects: i) Job and Jacob share the unique description,
“perfect” (Gen 25:27, “plain”, ~t), ii) the same question of “serving for
nought” arises (Gen 29:15), and iii) Job and Jacob use the concept of a
redeemer (Gen 48:16, Job 19:25).

Our conclusion, based on the above first line of intertextual evidence

between the heavenly scene and prior scriptural traditions is that Job is
symbolic of the Davidic king, Hezekiah. This conclusion will be
strengthened below when we consider the detail of the scenes set on
earth, but before we set out this evidence, we will examine the identity of
the “sons of God” and “Satan”.

4. Sons of God
On the identity of the sons of God, most commentators1 today assume
that they are an angelic council surrounding the throne of heaven. P. S.
Alexander comments, “…one thing is certain: as far back as we can go in
the exegetical tradition on Gen 6:1-4, ~yhla ynb [sons of God] are taken
as angels”.2 He notes that the 2c. Jewish writing, 1 Enoch, may be the
earliest treatment of this myth. On this reading, Satan comes into the
council and rebuts God’s challenge about Job. A minority opinion is that
the sons of God are human beings.3 We will propose, contrary to the
current consensus, that the sons of God are “the people”; they are not an
angelic council around the throne of heaven. In addition, we will propose
that the sons of God, taken as a whole, are unfaithful. Our argument is
based on an analysis of Genesis 6 and the motif of the “sons of God”.

The narrator of the book of Job initially places the reader in a position
where he is standing alongside Job in the midst of his family (Job 1:1-5)
on the earth. When the narrative mentions the “sons of God”, the

1 For example, see Pope, Job, 9, Dhorme, Job, xxviii, Habel, Job, 27.
2 P. S. Alexander, “The Targumim and Early Exegesis of the ‘Sons of
God’ in Genesis 6”, JJS 23 (1972), 61.
3 This interpretation was current in Jesus’ day (e.g. Genesis Rabbah 36:5),

and its origins are dealt with by Alexander, Targumim and Early Exegesis, 60-
71. Older commentaries express this view, but modern commentaries
have returned the angelic view back to its consensus status.
63
narrator shifts the reader’s position to one where he is standing alongside
Yahweh and looking down onto the scene on earth. We are shifted to a
vantage point in heaven, a perspective belonging to Yahweh.

The mention of the “sons of God” seems to do no work in moving the

story forward; they are just there in the scene. In contrast, the sons of Job
are pivotal in the story: they are introduced in a scene of domestic bliss,
and then they are taken away in the disasters that befall Job. The “sons of
God” can be given work in the story if they are equated with the sons of
Job: the sons of Job are the sons of God viewed from the perspective of
Yahweh in heaven.

Job’s sons meet on festival feast days,1 but in their own “houses”,2 and
Job is concerned about their conduct. In the same way, the sons of God
come together “before the Lord”, and this suggests that there is only one
group of “sons”: those attending religious festivals. Our suggestion is that
we have a temple scene on earth, a festival feast day in the capital. On this
occasion Job is present, and Satan comes among the worshippers. It is the
perspective of Yahweh on the “temple” scene which explains why we
have the description “sons of God” used of Job’s sons. When Yahweh
talks to Satan about Job, Job is pictured among these “sons of God” and
the whole group is being reviewed by Yahweh.

4.1 Divine Beings

Popular commentaries3 do not always argue for the majority view, taking
it as a “received opinion” in their trade. However, when a serious case is
argued,4 there are various arguments in favour of the “divine beings”
theory:

1 Pope notes, Job, 9, that the Jerusalem Targum interprets these two days
(Job 1:6, 2:1) as, respectively, New Year’s Day and the Day of Atonement.
2 Newsom, The Book of Job, 345, following Pope, Job, 8, links this mention

of sons and their “houses” with 2 Sam 13:7, 14:31, where the houses of
David’s sons are mentioned. This link supports our parabolic
identification of Job as a Davidic king with “sons”.
3 These will be commentators whose main purpose is not the exposition

of Job, for instance, E. Pagels, The Origin of Satan (London: Penguin,

1995), 41.
4 See Clines, Job 1-20, 18, and his essay “The Significance of the ‘Sons of

God’ Episode” in Clines, On the Way to the Postmodern: Old Testament Essays
(2 vols; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1988), 1:337-350; N. Forsyth,
The Old Enemy: Satan and the Combat Myth, (Princeton, New Jersey:
Princeton University Press, 1987), 111-114.
64
• In Job 38:7, the “sons of God” shout for joy at creation, and these
must be divine beings (angels). This interpretation is as old as the
Jewish Targum found at Qumran, (11Q10 30.6).

• Various visions of the throne of God and the angelic council are
“similar” to the description of Yahweh’s conversation with “the
Satan”, e.g. 1 Kgs 22:19-22.

• The idea of there being “sons of God” around the throne of the deity
is one which is found in other near-eastern religious texts, e.g.
Ugaritic texts.1

• The closest parallel in the Jewish Scriptures is Ps 89:6, “…who among

the sons of the mighty can be likened unto the Lord”. In vv. 5 and 7
(RSV), there is a reference to a “council of the holy ones” in heaven
who praise the Lord, and an “assembly of the holy ones” who fear
him (cf. Job 5:1, 15:5).

• The prophet Daniel records a vision of four men, “…walking in the

midst of the fire, and they are not hurt; and the appearance of the
fourth is like a son of the gods” (Dan 3:25, RSV).

These lines of evidence are not convincing for the following reasons:

• There is very little detail in Job to make a valid comparison with

visions of the throne room and the angelic council. In essence all we
get is the sons of God before the Lord. The visions of the throne
room and the council are richer in detail.2

• The external evidence of the Canaanite deity, El, having a group of

“sons” around him is a rich mythology. The sons of God are physical
descendants of El. The book of Job, in contrast, has very little

1 Pope, Job, 9.
2 Job differs from throne room theophanies in Scripture in several crucial
respects: i) there is no language of vision, ii) there is no description of the
throne, and iii) there is no mention of heaven.
65
 information, and in Jewish traditions, angels or divine beings are not
presented as physical descendants of Yahweh.1

• Daniel uses an Aramaic expression for a single “son of God” as

opposed to the plural Hebrew expression in Job and Genesis.
Further, Daniel’s use of the phrase is from a much later period than
Job.

• The motif of the “sons of God” in Job 38:7 is used to refer to Israel,
rather than divine beings or angels; the opening of Job 38 is a poem
about the creation of Israel.

• The expression, “sons of the mighty” (~yla ynb, Pss 29:1, 89:6, NASB,
RSV) refers to the people at worship. Psalms 29 and 89 have worship
as their topic, and Ps 29:2 uses an expression “the beauty of
holiness”, which is used of the temple (1 Chron 16:29, Ps 96:9).
Further, Job uses ~yla of the rulers of Jerusalem (Job 41:25).

These points do not conclusively rule out the phrase “sons of God” being
used to refer to divine beings (angels), but they open up the question of
the meaning of “sons of God” in Job. A fresh examination of the whole
question is required.

Within Job itself, the bedrock argument for the “divine beings”
interpretation is Job 38:7. This argument is seen to be conclusive because
Job 38 is ostensibly about creation. However, as we shall see in Chapter
Seven, Job 38 is about Israel; it carries a symbology about the creation of
Israel. The expression “sons of God” in Job 38 has a symbolic reference
to Israel, and Job 1 and 2 may well have taken this on board rather than
any reference to beings at the dawn of the Genesis creation. A number of
lines of evidence point to this symbology in Job 38, but these are covered
in Chapter Seven, and so we will not detail them here; there is yet,
however, a tradition-historical point to note.

The expression “sons of God” in Job 1 and 2 is an echo of Gen 6:2. In

Genesis 6, it is said that the sons of God “took wives” from the daughters
of men. The expression “took wives” is a normal expression for marriage
in the Jewish Scriptures and it is doubtful on this basis that the union of

1 For a discussion of El and his council see F. M. Cross, Canaanite Myth

and Hebrew Epic, (Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard Univ. Press, 1977),
ch. 2; for an application to Job, see Perdue, Wisdom in Revolt, 87-90.
66
angel with human (two different beings) would be described this way.
Later non-canonical traditions1 allowed angel-human procreation, but Job
is not a late book. The interpretation of the “sons of God” as divine
beings is then more likely to be an anachronistic reading, and we need to
adopt the alternative view that they are human.

Scholars note Second Temple angel/demon interpretations of Genesis 6,

but the Gospel writers provide evidence of the opposite opinion. On the
subject of angel marriages Jesus is recorded as saying,

“For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given

in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.”
Matt 22:30 (KJV)

“For as in the days that were before the flood they were
eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage,
until the day that Noah entered into the ark…” Matt
24:38 (KJV), cf. Mark 12:25, Luke 20:34

The first of these two utterances denies the possibility of angel-human

marriages;2 the second interprets the flood tradition as referring to
“normal” human marriages (like the normal human “eating and
drinking”).3 This evidence allows us to assert without any danger of being
anachronistic that the “sons of God” in Genesis 6 are human beings.

If the “sons of God” are human in Job, then it seems that they are fallen
in some sense, like the “sons of God” in Genesis, and this is the whole point
in the echo.4 As Clines notes, the “divine beings” reading does not

1 For a discussion of one tradition, “the Watchers”, see M. J. Davidson,

Angels at Qumran, (Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1992), ch. 2.

2 Given the popularity of this idea in Jewish writings, Jesus’ recorded

comments are quite pointed as a contradiction of the popular Jewish view.

3 It might be argued that ordinarily angels do not mate, but the angels of

Genesis 6 are an exception. However, the Gospels record that the “last
days” of the ante-diluvians are like the “last days” of the Jewish
commonwealth (marrying and giving in marriage). It is unlikely therefore
that the Gospel traditions presuppose that the ante-diluvian practices were
exceptional.
4 Standard scholarship attributes Gen 6:1-4 to a “J” source; see C.

Westermann, Genesis 1-11, (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1994), 368-370,

which tends to be dated in the period of the monarchy; see J. Rogerson,
Genesis 1-11, (Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1991), 76-77.
67
explain why humanity should be punished by the Flood, since the
“daughters of men” can hardly be held culpable;1 accordingly, we reject
the majority view.

4.2 Genesis 6 and the Sons of God

The link between Job and early Genesis requires further exploration; why
make this link? What do early Genesis and Job 1 have in common?

“And it came to pass, when men (~dah) began to

multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were
born unto them, That the sons of God saw the daughters
of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of
all which they chose. And the Lord said, ‘My spirit shall
not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet
his days shall be a hundred and twenty years.’ There were
giants in the earth in those days; and also, after that,
when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of
men, and they bare children to them, the same became
mighty men, which were of old, men of renown.” Gen
6:1-4 (KJV)

This passage raises many questions. It is brief and cryptic. In Israelite

scriptural chronology, the Flood comes thousands of years after creation;
so, the mention of “multiplying” is odd. The genealogies of Genesis 4 and
5 show that there has been “multiplying” and marrying since creation, but
the two genealogies indicate two groups, and these are carried forward
into Genesis 6.

The opening of Genesis 6 picks up the story about Cain’s descendants,2

“And it came to pass, when men (~dah) began to

multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were
born unto them…” Gen 6:1 (KJV)

It is not the descendants of Seth who are the “men” that begin to
multiply; it is the descendants of Cain. The descendants of Seth therefore
are the “sons of God”.

1Clines, “Significance of the ‘Sons of God’ Episode”, 338-339.

2This is an intertextual point, but standard critical scholarship also links
Cain’s genealogy with Gen 6:1-4; see Westermann, Genesis 1-11, 326.
68
The two groups were separated when Cain was exiled, and their two
genealogies show separate development; when the text says that the sons
of God saw the daughters of men, this implies that the two groups had
come together. The recognition of two groups explains the emphasis on
the sons of God marrying the daughters of men.

This approach is supported by an alternative translation of what

commentators1 regard as the difficult Hebrew of Gen 6:3,

“And the Lord said, My spirit shall not always strive with
men (~dah), in the which moreover (~gvb) he also is
flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.”
Gen 6:3 (KJV revised)

When Yahweh says that his “spirit” does not strive with men,2 it is “with”
the Cainites, previously identified in the expression “daughters of men”;
God sets their days until the Flood at 120 years.

The tradition in Genesis 6 therefore does not record information about a

class of divine beings called the “sons of God”, (and this tells against this
ancient reading), but one text may explain this title if it is used of the
descendants of Seth:

“And to Seth, to him also there was born a son; and he

called his name Enos: then there was begun (lxwh za)—a
calling upon the name of the Lord.” Gen 4:26 (KJV
revised)

The descendants of Seth called upon the name of Yahweh and became
closely associated with God, and hence became “sons of God”.3 The link
struck between Job and Genesis therefore is that Job is one of the “sons
of God”, but one who was “perfect and upright”. Similarly, Enoch and
Noah had “walked with God”:

“And Enoch walked with God after he begat Methuselah

three hundred years, and begat sons and daughters…And

1 See Westermann, Genesis 1-11, 373-376.

2 This reference to “striving with men” militates against a “divine beings”
reading.
3 The theology of the tradition is also preserved in the subtle contrast that

the Cainites descendants were “men”, whereas the descendants of Seth

were “sons of God”.
69
 Enoch walked with God: and he was not; for God took
him.” Gen 5:22-24 (KJV)

“These are the generations of Noah: Noah was a just

man and perfect in his generations, and Noah walked with
God.” Gen 6:9 (KJV)

A just and perfect man “walks with God” and this is the same thematic
description of Job (Job 1:1).1

4.3 Job and the Sons of God

If we follow this echo with Genesis 6, the story of Job presents the
contrast that just as there was a righteous man among the sons of God
before the Flood, so also there was also a righteous man among this later
group of the sons of God.2 However, this detail is obviously not part of
the patriarchal emphasis of the story.

If the times of Job are like that of Noah, then the implication for the
reader is that the people are “near the end”, there is a “righteous man”,
but the people are “unfaithful”, and the “end” to come is comparable to
an overflowing flood.

We find these characteristics in Isaiah’s descriptions of Hezekiah’s times.

Hezekiah is obviously the “righteous man”, and although he had
introduced religious reform, the spiritual state of the people was not good.
The previous king, Ahaz, had introduced all sorts of idolatrous practises
(2 Chronicles 28). As a result there was an “end” in prospect:

“Behold, the Lord hath a mighty and strong one, which as

a tempest of hail and a destroying storm, as a flood (~rz)
of mighty waters overflowing, shall cast down to the
earth with the hand.” Isa 28:2 (KJV), cf. v. 15

1 Another view of Genesis 6 that we cannot discuss here is that the “sons
of God” are the kings of the nations. This makes the text refer to inter-
marriage with the lower classes. This view is based on comparative
evidence with Sumerian king-lists from the time of the Flood which show
that the kings claimed to be sons of deities. For a discussion of this view,
see Clines “Significance of the ‘Sons of God’ Episode”, 339-341.
2 Job is “perfect and upright” (Job 1:1, 8); Noah was “just” and “perfect”

(Gen 6:9).
70
This language of a “flood” describing an Assyrian invasion is also found
in the records of Tiglath-Pileser III:

“I smash[ed] like a flood-storm the country of Hamath in

its entire [extent]. I br[ought its] ki[ng] Iaubi’di as well as
his family (and) [his] warriors in fett[ers], as the prisoner
(contingent) of his country, to Assyria.”1

M. B. Dick observes, “In the here and now on earth, the Assyrian king
embodies the heroic Ninurta; and, like his divine model, the king
preserves his world from the threats of chaos. Like the warrior god
Ninurta…If the Assyrian king strikes his enemies as the flood (abûbiš), it is
because his hero Ninurta bears the epithet abûb Enlil šadī l immahharu,
‘flood of Enlil which cannot be faced in the mountains’ ”.2
Job also uses the same kind of language:

“They are wet with the storm-flood (~rz3) of the

mountains,4 and embrace the rock for want of a shelter.”
Job 24:8 (KJV revised)

“Because thou shalt forget thy misery, and remember it as

waters that pass away…” Job 11:16 (KJV)

“Behold, he withholdeth the waters, and they dry up: also

he sendeth them out, and they overturn the earth.” Job
12:15 (KJV)

“Your light is darkened, so that you cannot see, and a

flood of water covers you.” Job 22:11 (RSV)

“He hath compassed the waters with bounds, until the

day and night come to an end.” Job 26:10 (KJV)

1 ANET, 284. Many examples of “flood” and “storm” metaphors for

conquest exist in the Assyrian annals.
2 M. B. Dick, “The Neo-Assyrian Royal Lion Hunt and Yahweh’s Answer

to Job” JBL 125 (2006): 243-270 (254).

3 This word occurs 7x in the MT and 5x in Isaiah. Texts indicating a

symbolic Assyrian-led storm-flood include Isa 4:6, 28:2, 32:2.

4 In our discussion of Job 24 below we shall argue that this poetic figure,

“flood of the mountains” means an overflowing flood comprised of a

confederate invasion force (symbolized by mountains).
71
 “Who hath divided a watercourse for the overflowing of
waters, or a way for the lightning of thunder...” Job 38:25
(KJV)

These texts are discussed in later chapters and we situate them in a

prophetic context referring to the “storm-flood” of an invasion.
Accordingly, our argument here is that the mention of the “sons of God”
in the story of Job is part of a “flood” perspective upon Job’s
circumstances.

In this symbolic context, the most natural suggestion for the identity of
the “sons of God” is that they are Judah, and many texts support this
reading:

“And thou shalt say unto Pharaoh, ‘Thus saith the Lord,
Israel is my son, even my firstborn…’” Exod 4:22 (KJV)

“Ye are the sons (!b) of the Lord your God…” Deut 14:1
(KJV revised)

“They have corrupted themselves, their spot is not the

spot of his sons (!b): they are a perverse and crooked
generation.” Deut 32:5 (KJV revised)

“Ye are the sons of the living God.” Hos 1:10 (KJV)

“I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are sons (!b) of
the most High.” Ps 82:61 (KJV revised)

“If I say, I will speak thus; behold, I should offend against

the generation of thy sons (!b).” Ps 73:15 (KJV revised)

“I will say to the north, ‘Give up; and to the south, keep
not back: bring my sons from far and my daughters from

1 This text is significant because it denotes a “council” or “assembly” of

the “sons of God (Most High)”—Ps 82:1. Although scholars typically
treat the Psalm as referring to a divine council, it can just as easily be
comprised of elders or leaders of the nation (cf. John 10:34-35, which
shows 1c. interpretation), and it is presented as a competing council to the
pantheons of the surrounding nations. Several motifs are shared between
Job and this psalm.
72
 the ends of the earth; Even every one that is called by my
name.’” Isa 43:6-7 (KJV), cf. 45:11

These passages (from various strands in Israel’s traditions) establish a

prima facia case for the proposal that, symbolically, the “sons of God” in
Job could stand for Judah. Two theological reasons can be suggested for
this usage:

• Israel are direct descendants of Abraham, who was in the line of

Shem, who was in the line of Seth. This places Israel in the
genealogical line of the “sons of God” of early Genesis.

• The sons of God are those who believe on the name of God; this is
what Israel did when they entered into a covenant with God at Sinai.

One further detail fits this line of thought: the sons of God “come” from
the regions about Jerusalem and “present themselves (bcy) before the
Lord”. These expressions are typically used when the elders of the people,
the priests, or the nation as a whole approach the tabernacle or the
temple:

“And Joshua gathered all the tribes of Israel to Shechem,

and called for the elders of Israel, and for their heads,
and for their judges, and for their officers; and they
presented themselves (bcy) before God.” Josh 24:11
(KJV)

“Then all the children of Israel, and all the people, went
up, and came unto the house of God, and wept, and sat
there before the Lord, and fasted that day until even, and
offered burnt offerings and peace offerings before the
Lord.” Judg 20:26 (KJV)

“And it came to pass in the fifth year of Jehoiakim the

son of Josiah king of Judah, in the ninth month, that they
proclaimed a fast before the Lord to all the people in
Jerusalem, and to all the people that came from the cities
of Judah unto Jerusalem.” Jer 36:9 (KJV)

1The Hebrew verb bcy is common enough and used in contexts where
people stand before the Lord—Exod 19:17, Num 11:16, Deut 31:14, Judg
20:2, 1 Sam 10:19, and compare Zech 6:5.
73
These texts establish a pattern—they give a Jerusalem1 and a temple focus
to the coming together of the sons of God.

5. Satan
The scholarly consensus2 is that Satan is a divine being—and an adversary
either of God or Job. However, any equation with the Devil would be
anachronistic; whether such a concept was possible at our assigned time
for the writing of Job is doubtful. Instead of this developed idea, it is
possible that Satan is a divine being carrying out some adversarial work on
behalf of Yahweh. An alternative proposal would be that Satan is a
leading figure (a rival) contemporary with Job, but it is difficult to see such
a figure having authority over Job. Again, Satan could be a symbolic
character representing any antipathy towards Job in a group of individuals,
but the question remains as to whether such a group would be given
power over Job.3 Could Israelite story-writing conceive such a framework?

The dichotomy “divine or human” is false. Similarly, even if Satan were a

symbolic character, he is still an individual. Our proposal is based on the
later re-use of the title “the Satan” in the book of Zechariah.4 There are
echoes between Job and Zechariah which suggest that “the Satan” of Job
is angelic,5 so titled, not because he is about to be an adversary, but because
he has already been functioning as an adversary. Zechariah’s use of this
title offers an interpretation of Job.

1 The expression “before the Lord” does not occur in connection with the
places of worship in the Northern Kingdom.
2 Pope, Job, 9-10.
3 Since the Hebrew means “the Adversary”, it is possible that the title

illustrates the playwright’s convention of naming roles, e.g. “the

Apothecary”, “the King’s Lieutenant”.
4 Although Satan, as an individual figure, is only mentioned in Job and

Zechariah, the Hebrew word for Satan, !jf, is used in several other places
with the general sense of “adversary”. In Job and Zechariah, the Hebrew
word is used with the definite article so that we have the title, “the Satan”
(!jvh), in the text, although this is not always represented in English
translations. The absence of a “Satan” figure in the Hebrew story
traditions led Jews to place Satan into them in the paraphrases of various
Second Temple writings.
5 Jewish scriptural traditions records the names of some angels—Michael

and Gabriel—but “the Satan” is not a name and, as a title, its etymology is
very different from these angel names which incorporate a word for
“God”—El.
74
The main objection to this proposal arises from views about the history of
Israelite traditions about the deity. The objection is simply that an angel
would not have the sort of conversation with God that is described.
However, such an objection overlooks the role that “spirits” have played
around the throne. The classic example of this is the “lying spirit” of
Micaiah’s vision (1 Kings 22). Accordingly, the conversation that Yahweh
has with Satan does not lie outside the confines of Israelite traditions.1

When the conversation is conceived as a boast and a challenge, it steps

outside Jewish conceptions of the deity and his angelic intermediaries.
However, a boastful tone has to be read into the exchange. In minimal
terms, the conversation only represents a challenge on the part of Satan.
An angel may be “out of character”, but this does not mean that Satan is
not an angel. It means that there is a reason for the uncharacteristic
representation. Following the story-pattern of Micaiah’s vision, the
character of Satan could be commissioned to represent an adversary
among the powers of the day.

5.1 The Nature of Satan

The identity of Satan as a divine intermediary is by power being given
over Job. Further support is found in textual echoes with Zechariah.

“And the Lord said unto Satan, Whence comest thou?

Then Satan answered the Lord, and said, ‘From going to
and fro (jwv) in the earth, and from walking up and down
($lhth) in it.’” Job 1:7 (KJV)

Satan comes into the presence of Yahweh and is asked, “Whence comest
thou?” (Job 1:7). Satan’s reply to Yahweh is that he has been “going to
and fro through the earth and from walking up and down in it”. This
description is also used in Zechariah, and it cannot be co-incidental that
Zechariah also uses “the Satan”.2

Zechariah is a book of symbolic visions. In his first vision, Zechariah sees

a “man” on a red horse situated among myrtle trees, with other riders
behind him on red, speckled and white horses. Zechariah asks an angel

1 Habel, Job, 41, notes a similarity to the “challenge” motif in the trial
speeches of Isa 40-55.
2 These links are noted by Dhorme, Job, clxvii, who uses them to argue for

a date for Job after Zechariah. However, it could equally be the other way
around. Our case in this study is that Zechariah depends on Job.
75
guiding him about them, and the man (the rider) among the myrtle trees
offers an explanation:

“And the man that stood among the myrtle trees

answered and said, ‘These are they whom the Lord hath
sent to walk to and fro ($lhth) through the earth.’ And
they answered the angel of the Lord that stood among
the myrtle trees, and said, ‘We have walked to and fro
($lhth) through the earth, and, behold, all the earth
sitteth still, and is at rest.’” Zech 1:10-11 (KJV)

In this account, the man that stands among the myrtle trees is identified as
an angel of the Lord. In his answer, he says of himself, and the other
riders, that they have “walked to and fro through the earth”.1 This is the
same description that we have of Satan’s activity in Job, and it identifies
Satan as an angel.

In a later vision, Zechariah sees four types of coloured horses (red, black,
white and grisled2), this time with chariots (presumably with riders).
Again, he asks the angel guiding him about them, and the angel answers
that they are the “four spirits” of the heavens (Zech 6:5). Black, white and
grisled horses go respectively to the “north” and “south” countries, but
the “strong grisled” horses walk to and fro in the earth:

“…Get you hence, walk to and fro ($lhth) through the

earth. So they walked to and fro through the earth.”
Zech 6:7 (KJV)

In Zechariah, this activity of horses, chariots and riders relates to “the

earth”, and it may be that the four spirits act in relation to the four points
of the compass. In the first vision, the horses and riders saw that the earth
was at rest and at ease (Zech 1:11, 15), and as a result there is a cry for the
restoration of the people (Zech 1:12). In the later vision, the “strong”
horses go through the earth again (Zech 6:7), but their function is unclear.
The historical context of these visions is the laying of the foundation of
the temple and the restoration of the nation.

1 The form of the Hebrew for “walking to and fro” also occurs in Gen
6:9, 13:17, 17:1 and 1 Sam 30:31.
2 The Hebrew is difficult. As it stands, the KJV has “grisled and bay

horses” (Zech 6:3), but the original text just has the inserted word,
“strong ones” at the end of the sentence as a parenthesis “grisled horses
(strong ones)”.
76
Zechariah’s visions are symbolic pictures and need interpretation; for our
purposes it is sufficient to observe that, just as the horses and chariots
symbolize angelic activity in the earth, so too the activity of “the Satan” is
symbolic of adversarial angelic activity in the earth. Zechariah has
provided an interpretative intertextual reading of Job in virtue of its
application of some shared vocabulary.

If Satan has been walking to and fro in the earth, intervening in the affairs
of the nations, his coming “among the sons of God” would indicate a
turning in his interest. As an adversary among the nations, his coming
among the sons of God would presage adversarial activity among God’s
people.

In terms of an historical application, Satan’s adversarial “walking” might

symbolize a bringing of Assyria upon Northern Israel in 722. In a story
designed for performance, the Satan might not be given his title because
of what he is about to do to Job, but rather because of what he has been doing.
If this is the case, the story of Job may be implying a “back-story” in its
use of “the Satan”, one which taps into ideas of God’s judgments on
Northern Israel:

“Therefore, thus saith the Lord God, ‘An adversary (rc)

there shall be even round about the land; and he shall bring
down thy strength from thee, and thy palaces shall be
spoiled.’ Amos 3:11 (KJV)

These texts may indicate a destroying angel of evil in the Northern

Kingdom (Amos) just prior to Hezekiah’s reign.

Yahweh intervenes with his question to Satan about Job’s righteousness.

His challenge to Satan echoes Abraham’s intervention on behalf of Lot.
Abraham sought to deliver Lot from the destruction of Sodom and
Gomorrah by appealing to the presence of righteous individuals in those
places. The author may be using this tradition as a structure for the
conversation between Satan and Yahweh: Yahweh is pointing to Job as a
reason for the Satan not to destroy Judah.

Satan responds to Yahweh by saying,

“Doth Job fear God for nought? Hast not thou made an
hedge about him, and about his house, and about all that
he hath on every side? thou hast blessed the work of his
77
 hands, and his substance is increased in the land. But put
forth thine hand now, and touch all that he hath, and he
will curse thee to thy face.” Job 1:9-11 (KJV)

This kind of reply may be nothing more than a device to extend his
adversarial purview to Judah in a situation where there is no prior reason
to afflict Judah, as Yahweh asserts, “although you moved me against him,
to destroy him without cause” (Job 2:3, RSV). Satan could be representing
the attitude of the Assyrian superpower, an attitude which ridicules the
religion of Judah and her king, a religion based only on self-interest.

5.2 Satan and the Sons of God

Satan is an angel of evil (Ps 78:49), so-called because of his adversarial
activity among the nations. Angels were mentioned in patriarchal
traditions, and this is in keeping with Job’s archaic colour. However,
individually titled angels are not a feature of these traditions, and this title
is not an archaic detail.1

Satan’s behaviour is to come “in the midst of” (KJV mg.) the sons of God
and this is ominous. The outcome of the challenge between Satan and
Yahweh is that Yahweh places all that Job has into Satan’s hand. The
expression “in your hand” symbolizes Satan’s forthcoming work and, as a
figure of speech, it is often used to describe the taking and destruction of
a people and its cities. For instance, an example relating to Judah in the
days of Ahaz is this prophecy of Oded:

“But a prophet of the Lord was there, whose name was

Oded: and he went out before the host that came to
Samaria, and said unto them, Behold, because the Lord
God of your fathers was wroth with Judah, he hath
delivered them into your hand, and ye have slain them in
a rage that reacheth up unto heaven.” 2 Chron 28:9
(KJV)

Placing “all” that Job (Hezekiah) has into the hand of Satan would then
indicate a degree of destruction of the land of Judah on the horizon.

Yahweh says to Satan,

1 The later record of the Chronicler (1 Chron 21:1) introduced a “satan”

as the agent for the numbering of Israel (2 Sam 24:1). The intention may
be to indicate an angelic motivation of political advisors in Jerusalem.
78
 “And the Lord said unto Satan, Behold, all that he hath is
in thy power; only upon himself put not forth thine hand
($dy xlvt la). So Satan went forth from the presence of
the Lord.” Job 1:12 (KJV)

The expression “put not forth your hand” strikes an echo with the
sacrifice of Isaac. Ironically, the angel commands Abraham to “not put
forth you hand” ($dy xlvt la —Gen 22:12 RSV Revised). This
connection may not be accidental if the author sees a comparison between
the testing of Job and the sacrifice of Isaac, the “sacrifice” of a beloved
son (cf. God’s praise of Job). However, while the Satan does not stretch
his hand against Job in the first round of his affliction, and is therefore
like “Abraham”, in the second round, Satan does stretch his hand against
Job as far as the neck.1

5.4 Satan in Zechariah

We cannot take the appearance of “the Satan” in Job on its own. The
question raised by Zechariah is this: why should “the Satan” appear again
during the times of Zechariah?

The mention of the Satan in Zechariah and Job and only in these two
places in the Jewish Scriptures is a puzzle that has received little attention.
The main comment by scholars is that the mention of “the Satan” in both
books shows that Job is a post-exilic work.

Our proposal is that Zechariah mentions “the Satan” in order to establish

the point, rhetorically, that God has “chosen Jerusalem”. Satan appears in
Job and Zechariah because he is part of a story-pattern. There is a
threefold pattern in the life of Job. This is illustrated in the table below:

Job Early Prosperity Suffering and Restoration and

and leadership Recovery a doubling of
prosperity
Hezekiah Prosperity and Suffering and Later Prosperity
Reform of the Recovery and blessing on
People surrounding
nations

1The shared Hebrew between the prologue of Job and Abraham’s trial is
discussed by V. Hoffer in “Illusion, Allusion and Literary Artifice in the
Frame” in Cook, Patton and Watts, eds., The Whirlwind, 84-99.
79
Job was restored to his former prosperity and his material possessions
doubled. Hezekiah was restored to life after his sickness and a period of
unparalleled prosperity followed the defeat of Assyria.

This pattern explains the presence of “the Satan” in Zechariah, because

this takes place at a time of restoration. Zechariah invokes this conclusion
to the book of Job in support of Joshua who was involved in the work of
restoration. Zechariah makes this connection when “the Satan” is rebuked
by the Lord who has “chosen Jerusalem”.

“And he shewed me Joshua the high priest standing

before the angel of the Lord, and Satan standing at his
right hand to resist him. And the Lord said unto Satan,
The Lord rebuke thee, O Satan; even the Lord that hath
chosen Jerusalem rebuke thee: is not this a brand plucked
out of the fire?” Zech 3:1-2

The deliverance of Jerusalem from Assyria had been a “choice” by God

of Jerusalem. The restoration of Job had been a choice for Jerusalem and
the “city” of which the Joban Hezekiah was ruler. Having made this
choice, God was in effect rebuking1 “the Satan” with a reminder.

Zechariah is therefore a reminder to “the Satan” (within Israel’s story)

that the Lord has chosen Jerusalem—and that he should cease from his
adversarial work in Jerusalem at that time. The adversarial work was being
conducted by those opposed to Joshua the High Priest in Jerusalem, and
Satan was a “lying spirit” in those individuals.

Zechariah’s vision thus directs the reader to connect the circumstances of

Joshua the High Priest with the circumstances of Job and his restoration.
This can be done convincingly when Job is read as a parable of Hezekiah.

6. Job’s Calamities
The first line of evidence for the symbolic identification of Job as
Hezekiah is Satan’s description of Job’s circumstances. The second line of
evidence is the narrator’s description of what happens to Job’s family and
his household.

1 The Hebrew verb translated “rebuke” is not that common (13x). It is

often used of the rebuke of the nations and their war machines, and
therefore it carries political-military overtones (Pss 9:5, 68:30, Isa 17:13,
Nah 1:4, Mal 3:11). Here the rebuke is directed at “the Satan” as the
heavenly agent who is in control of those opposing Joshua on the ground.
80
A sequence of four disasters cannot be matched one-to-one with a
sequence of four recorded disasters that happened to either Northern
Israel or Judah. However, the “fit” between the story and its application
does not have to be in the detail; it can be in the broad sweep. A symbolic
interpretation of the disasters is suggested by the “blessings and curses”
road map of Deuteronomy 28.

6.1 Job’s Family and Household

Several details suggest a symbolic meaning for Job, his family and
household:

1) Job is introduced in a similar way (using the same Hebrew) to the

description of Solomon:

• Job was greater than “any of the children of the east” (~dq ynb lk,
Job 1:3).1

• Solomon’s wisdom was greater than “any of the children of the east”
(~dq ynb lk, 1 Kgs 4:30, cf. Judg 7:12).

This description may reflect nothing more than a conventional cultural

and ethnic comparison. On the other hand, it may be designed to evoke a
comparison between Job and Solomon. This description does not imply
that Job or Solomon were one of the children of the east.

2) Job is wealthy in flocks and herds; almost unique (cf. Josiah) among the
descriptions of the kings of Israel and Judah, Hezekiah has flocks and
herds:

“And Hezekiah had exceeding much riches and honour:

and he made himself treasuries for silver, and for gold,
and for precious stones, and for spices, and for shields,
and for all manner of pleasant jewels; Storehouses also
for the increase of corn, and wine, and oil; and stalls for
all manner of beasts, and cotes for flocks. Moreover, he
provided him cities and possessions of flocks and herds

1 Compare here Isa 2:6, 41:2 for further rhetorical reasons for this
description.
81
 in abundance: for God had given him substance very
much.” 2 Chron 32:27-29 (KJV) 1

3) Job acts in a priestly capacity on behalf of his sons; he cleanses them

and offers burnt offerings in case they have cursed God in their hearts
during “their feasts”. Hezekiah also refers to the nation of Israel as a
whole (the remnant of Northern Israel and Judah) as “sons”:

“And they said unto him, thus saith Hezekiah, ‘This day
is a day of trouble, and of rebuke, and blasphemy: for the
sons (~ynb) are come to the birth, and there is not strength
to bring forth.’” 2 Kgs 19:3 (KJV revised), cf. 2 Chron
29:11, 15

The motif of a “family” would naturally apply to the people of a king. In

his attempt to convert the nation, Hezekiah looked upon the people
(north and south) as his children.

4) The “children” were having “feasts”, but they needed cleansing (Job
1:5). This echoes Moses’ cleansing of the people (Exod 19:14), but
Hezekiah also instructed the people to cleanse themselves (2 Chron 29:5),
and he prayed on behalf of the people who had not cleansed themselves for
the feast of the Great Passover:

“For a multitude of the people, even many of Ephraim,

and Manasseh, Issachar, and Zebulun, had not cleansed
themselves, yet did they eat the Passover otherwise than
it was written. But Hezekiah prayed for them, saying,
‘The good Lord pardon everyone that prepareth his heart
to seek God, the Lord God of his fathers, though he be
not cleansed according to the purification of the
sanctuary.’ And the Lord hearkened to Hezekiah and
healed the people.” 2 Chron 30:18-20 (KJV)

Hezekiah is typical of those good kings who emphasized the requirement

for the “cleansing” of the people. It is possible that this detail reflects the

1 This description comes as a series of footnotes to Hezekiah’s reign and

reflects his early as well as later reign, because Hezekiah gave great
numbers of animals for sacrifice at the time of the Great Passover (2
Chron 30:24). It should also be noted the restoration of Job’s wealth fits
this text about Hezekiah.
82
situation in the land where the “houses” and “temples” needed to be
removed and Hezekiah’s reforms in this direction.

These links suggest a symbolic identification of Job’s family

circumstances. There are “feasts”, “sons”, “cleansing”, and a “gathering”
of the sons of God to present themselves before the Lord and parabolic
equivalents in the times of Hezekiah.

6.2 Job’s First Round of Calamities

Job’s wealth and his subsequent calamities are described echoing
Deuteronomy 28. The echoes are given in the table below:1

“And the Lord shall make thee “And there were born unto him
plenteous in goods, in the fruit seven sons and three daughters.
of thy body, and in the fruit of His substance also was seven
thy cattle, and in the fruit of thousand sheep, and three
thy ground….” Deut 28:11 thousand camels, and five
(KJV), cf. Gen 12:16, 30:43 hundred yoke of oxen, and five
hundred she asses, and a very
great household…” Job 1:2-3
(KJV)
“Thine ox (rwv) shall be slain “And there came a messenger
before thine eyes, and thou unto Job, and said, The oxen
shalt not eat thereof: thine ass (rqb) were ploughing, and the
(rwmx) shall be violently taken asses (!wta) feeding beside them:
away (lzg) from before thy face, And the Sabeans fell upon them,
and shall not be restored to and took them away (xql)… .2
thee: thy sheep (!ac) shall be While he was yet speaking, there
given unto thine enemies, and came also another, and said, The
thou shalt have none to rescue fire of God is fallen from heaven,
them. Thy sons and thy and hath burned up the sheep
daughters ($ytnbw $ynb) shall be (!ac) …While he was yet speaking,
given unto another people…” there came also another, and said,
Deut 28:31-32 (KJV) Thy sons and thy daughters
($ytnbw $ynb) …are dead…” Job
1:14-19 (KJV)

1This table is adapted from Wolfers, Deep Things, 112-114.

2 Job’s third calamity concerns camels which are not mentioned in
Deuteronomy 28.
83
Such echoes link the story of Job into the history of Israel and God’s
providential handling of the nation. The echo further implies that the
ensuing dialogue will be about providential wisdom rather than sapiential
wisdom. The echo consists in Job’s state of blessing and then his sequence
of misfortune, which matches the sequence of curses in Deuteronomy
28.1

The echo interprets the parable by matching the story of Job to a literal set
of national curses, and it directs the reader to read the story of Job
symbolically—to see in the dialogue a discussion of Yahweh’s providential
dealings with the nation. The symbology of these calamities therefore is
one where Job’s household and “sons and daughters” are representative
of “the people”.

If we follow this echo, the terms in which the narrator presents these
calamities can then be seen to echo aspects of the Assyrian Crisis:

1) Job’s children are presented as “eating and drinking” in their own

houses, when destruction descends upon them (Job 1:4, 13, 18, 19). This
is a refrain of condemnation in the eighth century prophets (Amos 6:4, Isa
5:22, 22:13, Obad 1:16).

2) The “fire of God” consumes the sheep and their servants. The use of
“fire” is prominent in descriptions of God’s judgment upon the land (Isa
30:27, 33:14).

3) The actions of the Sabeans and Chaldeans are similar, (marauders,

“bands”, 2 Kgs 24:2), and fit a seventh/eighth century context. Pope
observes2 that the tribal nature of the Chaldeans in the seventh/eighth
centuries fits the picture of Job rather than their later settled imperial
status. Sabeans and Chaldeans are mentioned in the political context of
eighth century oracles (Isa 23:13, Joel 3:8), as well as the Assyrian
campaign records.3 Their mention in the story of Job could well evoke
this political reality.

6.2.1 The Great Wind

The last calamity is perhaps the clearest in its parabolic intent. A great
wind “comes across” the wilderness and strikes the “four corners” of the

1 The sequence of the list is also modelled on Jacob, see Gen 32:5.
Further, the same use of Deuteronomy is found in Jer 5:17.
2 Pope, Job, 14.
3 ANET, 284, 285.

84
house, which can be taken as an analogy for the “four corners” of the
land, if there is an echo struck here with a text in Ezekiel:

“And behold, a great wind came across the wilderness,

and struck the four corners (twnp [bra)1 of the house,
and it fell upon the young people, and they are dead; and
I alone have escaped to tell you.” Job 1:19 (RSV)

“Also, thou son of man, thus saith the Lord God unto
the land of Israel; An end, the end is come upon the four
corners (twpnk t[bra) of the land.” Ezek 7:2 (KJV)

The mention of a “great wind” in Job resonates with the use of “wind” as
a figure of the Assyrian invasion of the Northern Kingdom in the fourth
year2 of Hezekiah’s reign (2 Kgs 18:9 ca. 724 B.C.E.):

“Though he may flourish as the reed plant, the east wind,

the wind of the Lord, shall come, rising from the
wilderness; and his fountain shall dry up, his spring shall
be parched; it shall strip his treasury of every precious
thing.” Hos 13:15 (RSV)

Bildad’s perspective is consistent with this symbology:

“And the Lord rejected all the seed of Israel, and

afflicted them, and delivered them into the hand of
spoilers, until he had cast them out of his sight.” 2 Kgs
17:20 (KJV)

“If thy children have sinned against him, and he has cast
them away for their transgression…” Job 8:4 (KJV)

Bildad says that Job’s children have been cast away and this resonates with
the captivity language in 2 Kings. On this reading, the first series of
calamities that befall Job symbolize disasters in the land.

1 These “corners” may be the princes of the tribes (Isa 19:13, RSV,
NASB), and Isa 28:16 may be a rhetorical contrast with this Joban
description.
2 At the time of the Syro-Ephraimite invasion (ca. 735-732), Hezekiah was

already born, and approaching an age where he was about to be made co-
regent with Ahaz (ca. 727, 2 Kgs 18:1—see Harrison, Introduction to the Old
Testament, 190.
85
Wolfers, suggests1 that the first round of disasters symbolically depicts the
destruction and taking into captivity of Northern Israel (Job’s ten children
symbolize the ten tribes). However, it is difficult to see this trauma as
sufficiently an action against Hezekiah to merit this parabolic identification.
It is better to read the disasters in connection with Judah and recognize
that there is no surviving information that will match the sequence of four
disasters.

6.3 Job’s Second Round of Affliction

In the second2 round of Job’s afflictions the stakes are raised. Yahweh
repeats his challenge to Satan to “look at Job” and describes his prior
action as one of “swallowing” (KJV, “destroy”). This is a common verb
and used in prophetic texts for the invasion of the land (e.g. Isa 49:19,
Hos 8:7-8, Lam 2:8, 16).

In the second challenge, Satan is invited to touch Job’s “bone and his
flesh”. This is correctly taken to indicate a physical affliction of Job, but
this expression is also an idiom for “kinsmen” (Gen 29:14, Judg 9:2, 2
Sam 5:1, 19:13, 1 Chron 11:1). If we follow this idiom, Satan is being
invited to strike out at Job’s brethren (Job 6:15, 19:13). This idiomatic
sense fits a parabolic reading of the prologue, but it does not exclude the
expression also functioning as a literal reference to Job’s physical body,
which was afflicted with a “boil”, “from the sole of the foot unto his
crown” (Job 2:8).

Several echoes support a symbolic reading of Job’s physical affliction:

1) Job “sits” on the ground and this is what Jerusalem does when she is
made desolate (Isa 3:26, 52:2).

2) Job sits on ashes and this is what the king of Nineveh does (Jon 3:6) as
a response to the possibility of imminent destruction of his city (the
reversal of Isa 61:3).

3) Job’s “wallowing in ashes” was a response to the imminent destruction

of Jerusalem in Jeremiah’s day (Jer 6:26, Ezek 27:30).

1 Wolfers, Deep Things, 117.

2 In symbolic terms, this “second” round may reflect the patriarchal
tradition of declaring a thing twice in order that its certainty is put beyond
doubt (Gen 41:32).
86
4) Job scrapes himself with a broken potsherd; elsewhere, the broken
potsherd is symbolic of the broken people (Jer 19:11), but more
particularly it is symbolic of the broken treaty with Assyria (Isa 30:14).

5) The Assyrian invasion reaches up to the “neck” of Judah (Isa 8:8,

30:28).

6) Job is afflicted with the same disease as Hezekiah (!yxv,1 Job 2:7, 2 Kgs
20:7, Isa 38:21).

These links support a symbolic reading of Job’s physical affliction.

Satan is invited to touch Job’s “bone and flesh” after remarking that “skin
for skin, yea, all that a man hath, he will give for his life”. The preposition
in “skin for skin” can equally be “skin around skin” and is given this sense
in Job 1:10, “hedge about him”.2 If this is the sense, an echo is struck with
the provision of animal skins for Adam and Eve, which were literally
“skin around skin” (Gen 3:21). Such an echo implies that Satan’s jibe is
about the provision of sacrifice. His accusation is that Job will give all that
he has as a “sacrifice” for his life including his integrity.

This accent on Job’s “life” explains the insistence of Job’s wife to “curse
God and die”. She counsels Job to relinquish his integrity, but this is all
that remains to him after Satan’s affliction. Her advice is ironic, because
were Job to give up his integrity, she suggests, contrary to Satan, that he
would die. Her remark sets the scene for the three friends who will
likewise attempt to persuade Job to give up his integrity. Their argument
will be that Job can gain his “life” by being restored to favour with God
only if he also gives up his integrity.

Although it is Job/Hezekiah that is afflicted in Satan’s second round, this

affliction of the king is symbolic of the nation. This is shown by an echo
with Deuteronomy 28:

“The Lord shall smite thee in the knees, and in the legs,
with a sore boil (!wxv) that cannot be healed, from the

1The word occurs 12x; Exodus (3x), Leviticus (4x), Deuteronomy (2x), 2
Kgs (1x), Job (1x) and Isaiah (1x).
2 Pope notes, Job, 20, that “for” is not the primary sense of the

preposition.
87
 sole of thy foot unto the top of thy head1.” Deut 28:35
(KJV revised)

The prophecy in Deuteronomy is that if Israel were unfaithful, they would

be afflicted with a sore boil from the sole of the foot to the top of their
head. Isaiah picks up this language to describe the invasion of Judah by
Sennacherib:

“Ah sinful nation, a people laden with iniquity, a seed of

evildoers, children that are corrupters: they have forsaken
the Lord, they have provoked the Holy One of Israel
unto anger, they are gone away backward. Why should ye
be stricken anymore? ye will revolt more and more: the
whole head is sick, and the whole heart faint. From the
sole of the foot even unto the head2 there is no soundness
in it; but wounds, and bruises, and putrefying sores: they
have not been closed, neither bound up, neither mollified
with ointment. Your country is desolate, your cities are
burned with fire: your land, strangers devour it in your
presence, and it is desolate, as overthrown by strangers.
And the daughter of Zion is left as a cottage in a
vineyard, as a lodge in a garden of cucumbers, as a
besieged city.” Isa 1:4-8 (KJV)

These two textual echoes with Job (Deuteronomy 28, Isaiah 1) suggest a
symbolic reading of Job’s afflictions as an affliction of the nation
represented in the person of Hezekiah. Job/Hezekiah is personally
afflicted with a sore boil from the sole of the foot to the top of the head,
and this signifies the affliction of the people. Further, Job’s lament that he
came naked “from the womb” (Job 1:21) echoes the refrain in Isaiah that
Judah was created “from the womb” (Isa 44:2, 48:8) and that the Servant
came “from the womb” (Isa 49:1, 5).

Job’s affliction is parabolic of the developing siege: he is now “like” the

nation, afflicted from the sole of the foot to the top of the head. The
invader has now come up to the neck of Jerusalem.3

1 The Hebrew is the same as Job 2:8 except for the change of pronouns.
2 The Hebrew here varies the slogan using a different word for “head”.
3 Another symbolic suggestion is possible: the “boil” was also known as

the “boil of Egypt” (Deut 28:27). For Satan to afflict Hezekiah with such
a “boil” may be a symbolic portrayal of the headlong pursuit of Egyptian
88
7. Minor Characters
The “minor characters” in the prologue can also be interpreted
symbolically:

• The messengers could symbolize the prophets that brought the

warnings to the nation and the king. The refrain of each messenger is,
“and I only am escaped alone to tell thee” (ydbl yna—Job 1:15, 16,
17, 19), and this only occurs elsewhere as the refrain of the archetypal
prophet Elijah, “and I, even I only, am left” (ydbl yna —1 Kgs 19:10).

• The wife could symbolize female opposition to Hezekiah. Women

feature during the Assyrian crisis in the oracles of Isaiah 3 and 32,
which depict foolish government (Isa 32:5-6, RSV) and badly
behaving women (Isa 3:16f, 32:9-12). Job links his wife with the
“foolish women”, and these may be a category of female prophet
(Ezek 13:3).

• The friends come to “comfort” Job (Job 2:11).1 They are “foreigners”
but Job prays on their behalf and God accepts Job instead of dealing
with the friends according to their folly (Job 42:8). They may
represent party political positions amongst those in Jerusalem that are
critical of Hezekiah, or they may represent ethnic minorities in Judah,
such as Edomite derived minorities.2 Initially, they are silent (Isa
36:21-22), but then they argue that the king should repent in order
that Jerusalem can be delivered. They seek to mourn and weep with
Job (2 Kgs 20:3, Isa 38:3), but Job rejects his friends’ “comfort”,
maintaining his own goodness.3

These proposals do not all carry the same weight, but they illustrate how
the parable can be fleshed out.

help against Assyria (Job 9:13), a pursuit that led to Assyria turning on
Jerusalem.
1 Compare Ezek 26:16 which shares with Job’s friends, a “coming”, a

“stripping”, a “sitting” and a “being astonished”; but it is spoken of the

city of Tyre. This seems to echo Job and make sense if Job is read as a
parable about Jerusalem. The theme of “comfort” for Jerusalem in Isa
40:1 should also be noted in this connection.
2 See Wolfers, Deep Things, 195-199.
3 Compare 2 Chron 32:32 and Sirach 48:23-25.

89
8. The Epilogue
The epilogue1 is part of the narrative story and it carries forward the same
symbology. The details can be interpreted in this fashion:

1) First, the Lord turns the captivity of Job when he prays for his friends:

And the Lord turned (bwv) the captivity (tybv) of Job,

when he prayed for his friends: also, the Lord gave Job
twice (hnvm) as much as he had before. Job 42:10 (KJV)

The Hebrew word translated “captivity” is the normal word for the
situation where a people are in captivity and brought back (there is no
other possibility; Amos 9:14; Zeph 3:20; Jer 29:14; 30:3, 18; Ezek 39:25).
The base text here is Deuteronomy,

That then the Lord thy God will turn (bwv) thy captivity
(tybv), and have compassion upon thee, and will return
and gather thee from all the nations, whither the Lord
thy God hath scattered thee. Deut 30:3 (KJV)

This echo implies that Job’s restoration is symbolic of God turning back
the captivity of those deported by Sennacherib:

And for this cause Hezekiah the king, and the prophet
Isaiah the son of Amoz, prayed and cried to heaven.
And the Lord sent an angel, which cut off all the mighty
men of valour, and the leaders and captains in the camp
of the king of Assyria. So, he returned with shame of
face to his own land …Thus the Lord saved Hezekiah
and the inhabitants of Jerusalem from the hand of
Sennacherib the king of Assyria, and from the hand of all
other… 2 Chron 32:20-23 (KJV)

The prayer of Hezekiah and Isaiah saved the nation, and this was the case
with Job; the “captivity” was turned when he prayed for his friends.2

1 The epilogue begins in Job 42:7. As it stands, it presupposes the

dialogue-event because it contains a critique of the friends. Accordingly,
we do not treat the epilogue as part of a separate Joban folktale.
2 J. Blenkinsopp sees this point but makes the application to the Exile

rather than to the earlier precedent of the Assyrian Deportation: Isaiah 40-
55 (AB; New York: Doubleday, 2002), 309; Isaiah 56-66 (AB; New York:
Doubleday, 2003), 227.
90
2) The second detail is the doubling (hnvm) of prosperity. This word
occurs in Isaiah in the context of restoration after suffering,

For your shame ye shall have double (hnvm); and for

confusion they shall rejoice in their portion: therefore, in
their land they shall possess the double: everlasting joy
shall be unto them. Isa 61:7 (KJV); cf. Isa 40:1

The use of hnvm echoes this text in Isaiah and identifies Job’s double
prosperity as symbolic of the double restoration prophesied in Isaiah.1 In
terms of Hezekiah’s reign, the gifts brought to Job by acquaintances (Job
42:112) would be part of this double prosperity and correspond to the
gifts brought by the surrounding peoples to Hezekiah (2 Chron 32:23).

3) The third detail to note is that God “accepts” Job (Job 42:9),

Now therefore, take for yourselves seven bulls and seven

rams, and go to my servant Job, and offer up a burnt
offering for yourselves, and my servant Job will pray for
you.3 For I will accept (afn) him so that I may not do
with you according to your folly, because you have not
spoken of me what is right,4 as my servant Job has. Job
42:8 (NASB)

The common Hebrew word translated “accepted” afn has a broad range
of meaning, so that God could equally be saying that he will magnify Job
in order that he does not have to deal with the friends according to their
folly (Isa 9:16; 32:6). Such a “lifting up” of Job could symbolize a
restoration of power, and with a return of power to Judah, the fate of the
“friends” would have been avoided. The word is also used of Hezekiah
and his restoration after the Assyrian invasion (2 Chron 32:23).

1 The catalyst for this prophecy seems to have been the double blessing of
Hezekiah’s jubilee year (Isa 37:30). See Blenkinsopp, Isaiah 56-66, 227.
2 The Hebrew word for the “money” given to Job is rare (3x) and only

used of Jacob’s currency for purchasing the field upon which he

constructed the altar to the “mighty God of Israel (Gen 33:19-20). The
symbology of this term in Job may be a reassertion of ownership of Judah
by the mighty God of Israel.
3 There is an ironic contrast here with Eliphaz’ remark in Job 22:27.
4 The Hebrew form of the verb here could be “what is established”.

91
4) Job ‘saw’ (har) his children and grandchildren (Job 42:16); furthermore,
his years were prolonged. Similarly, in Isa 53:10 the Servant, Hezekiah,
will ‘see’ his seed ([rz) and have his days prolonged.

9. Conclusion
The invasion of Judah was catastrophic. The subsequent siege of
Jerusalem was doubly devastating. The affliction of Hezekiah, a good and
righteous king, who had introduced religious reform, was a final blow.

The figure of Job and his circumstances are a parable of Hezekiah cast in
the light of God’s covenant blessings and curses as defined in
Deuteronomy 28. The book of Job is an explanation and vindication of
the suffering of Hezekiah. More generally, it explains why a righteous
Davidic king would suffer. The parable fits both the personal
circumstances of Hezekiah and the circumstances of the nation.

These observations place Job, the Satan, and the sons of God into a
plausible Israelite historical context. They set the context for the major
players of the book: there is Job, the stricken king; there is the enemy who
threatens at the gate; there are the friends who advise; and as we shall see,
there are “the wicked ones”, Job’s opponents, who rule in Jerusalem.

92
 CHAPTER FOUR
The First Day
1. Introduction
It is one thing to interpret a story (the prologue/epilogue) in a parabolic
way, it is quite another to incorporate the speeches of Job into the same
parabolic framework. In this chapter we examine the vocabulary of the
dialogue of Job 3-22 in order to determine whether it suggests an
eighth/seventh century topic. We shall propose that the vocabulary does
allow this reading and that this requires explanation. Our explanation is
that the speeches are intended as a consideration of the crisis of 701. This
reading of the dialogue in turn supports the parabolic reading of the
prologue/epilogue.

On any reading, the prologue/epilogue is an interpretive key for the

dialogue. The surface reading of the prologue/epilogue requires us to read
the dialogue as the suffering of a local landowner and city elder, and
perhaps a timeless philosophical consideration of the problem of innocent
suffering. The parabolic reading of the prologue requires us to read the
speeches as a literal discussion of the affliction of Hezekiah and the
invasion of Judah. However, though the prologue/epilogue suggests these
two readings, the dialogue taken in isolation without any reading prejudice
engendered by the prologue supports just a political reading.

We have so far argued (Chapters Two and Three) that the book of Job is
a literary work designed for a stage performance; it is not an historical
work describing the times of Hezekiah. The speeches in the book are not
the “historical” speeches of Hezekiah or three advisors. Rather, the history
of Hezekiah’s times is mediated through the literary tale of Job. The
drama of the work illustrates Hezekiah’s life through the filter of dramatic
licence. The speeches of Job need to be read in the first instance as about
Job in his patriarchal situation. It is only in a secondary sense, (a parabolic
sense), that they echo the circumstances of Hezekiah as recorded in the
Prophets.

A common view of the speeches is that they are timeless considerations

of the justice of God and human suffering. As such it should be possible
to fit their themes to any righteous suffering individual. They are a classic
theodicy in this sense. However, we do not rely on their universal
93
relevance in order to arbitrarily apply them to one particular righteous
king who suffered. Our argument is that the vocabulary in the book of
Job fits an eighth/seventh century timeframe.

From the records in Kings, Chronicles and the Prophets, the times of
Hezekiah have several characteristics, but the arrangement of these
characteristics is subject to scholarly dispute. The records contradict the
Assyrian annals1 and they appear disjointed;2 it is not clear when certain
episodes are to be placed. For example, in the length of Hezekiah’s reign
and whether it was a co-regency, in the timing of Hezekiah’s sickness,
(before or after the siege of Jerusalem), and in the number of Assyrian
incursions into Judah, (one or two campaigns3). It is also not certain what
the tradition of a “miraculous deliverance” means in historical terms,
given Hezekiah’s capitulation.

However, a historical reconstruction offered under the canons of

historical criticism would be anachronistic for our study of Job. We
require a reconstruction appropriate for a late seventh-early sixth century
author using traditions that became incorporated into eventual scriptural
records. Our scheme is outlined below:

Hezekiah assumes a co-regency in 727 B.C.E.4

Hezekiah institutes religious reform (2 Kgs 18:4).
Hezekiah is righteous, unlike the people (2 Kgs 18:5-6).
Hezekiah rejects Assyrian vassal status (2 Kgs 18:7).
Hezekiah has some military success against Assyria (2 Kgs 18:7-8).
Assyria conquers Northern Israel in 722/1 B.C.E. (2 Kgs 18:9-12).

Prior to the invasion of Northern Israel, we propose that,

Hezekiah appealed to Northern Israel to seek safety in Jerusalem, and that

this was supported by a bestowal of the Spirit.

1 J. Maxwell Miller and John H. Hayes, A History of Ancient Israel and Judah,
(London: SCM Press, 1986), 346-363, follow the Assyrian annals in their
reconstruction.
2 Scholars typically identify different and inconsistent sources in 2 Kgs

18:13-16, 18:17-19a, 19:19b-35, and 2 Chron 32, B. S. Childs, The Assyrian

Crisis, 69-103.
3 Bright, History of Israel, 296-308.
4 Harrison, Introduction to the Old Testament, 190.

94
At the start of 701, Sennacherib invaded Phoenicia (Tyre and Sidon and
associated cities). Certain cities and nations sued for peace at this point,
including Edom and Moab. Sennacherib pushed south along the coastal
plain to the cities of Philistia. He subdued these cities and at this time he
defeated an Egyptian and Ethiopian army at Eltekeh which had come out
in support of Ekron. Ekron was a vassal city of Judah at the time of this
campaign, and Sennacherib secured from Hezekiah the return of the
former king of Ekron whom he had imprisoned as an Assyrian
sympathizer.1

The extent of Assyria’s defeat of the Egyptian and Ethiopian forces is

uncertain. Sennacherib’s annals do not paint the picture of an
overwhelming victory.2 They may still have been a threat to Assyrian
plans. However, their intervention on behalf of Ekron implies a treaty
relationship, and a disposition on the part of Egyptians to make treaties
with city states in the region as a buffer for their northern border (2 Kgs
18:21, Isa 30:2, 31:1).

During the spring and summer of 701, after the defeat of the coastal
cities and the “defeat” of Egypt and Ethiopia at Eltekeh, Sennacherib
turns on the cities of the Judean hills.

Assyria besieges the cities of Judah during which time Hezekiah

strengthens Jerusalem (2 Chron 32:1-8).3
Hezekiah initiates a call to Judah to seek safety in Jerusalem.
Hezekiah becomes sick with a leprosy-like disease and is “shut up” in his
house (Lev 13:18-23, 2 Kgs 20:7, Isa 38:21).

We propose that it was as the cities of Judah fell that Hezekiah became sick,4
and that he was not well again until just prior to the deliverance of
Jerusalem. Several arguments support this dating:

1) 2 Kgs 20:1 introduces the episode of Hezekiah’s sickness with an

indefinite time reference “in those days” (~hh ~ymyyb), but in narrative
terms, the “days” that have just been recounted are the days of the
Assyrian Crisis (2 Kgs 19:3).

2) The prophetic word to Hezekiah just prior to his recovery is,

1 ANET, 287-288.
2 ANET, 288; see also Miller and Hayes, History of Ancient Israel, 362.
3 2 Chron 32:10 describes Jerusalem as in effect “under siege”.
4 Thiele, The Mysterious Numbers of the Hebrew Kings, 177.

95
 “And I will add unto thy days fifteen years; and I will
deliver thee and this city out of the hand of the king of
Assyria; and I will defend this city for mine own sake,
and for my servant David's sake.” 2 Kgs 20:6 (KJV)

This assertion conjoins the healing of Hezekiah with the deliverance of

Jerusalem, and presupposes that the city (not Judah) is under threat.

3) Merodach-Baladan sent envoys to Hezekiah after he had recovered

from his sickness. Isaiah castigates Hezekiah for showing them his
treasures. Hezekiah responds by asserting that there will be “peace and
truth in my days” (2 Kgs 20:19). This type of assertion would not have
been made in 702, with the prospect of imminent war on the horizon.

4) The record in Chronicles relates the visit to the “wonder” that was
done in the land (2 Chron 32:31). In the terms of the “miracles” in the
records (Ahaz’ sun-dial and the decimation of the Assyrian army), it was
the defeat of Assyria that was done “in the land”.

Accordingly, we place the visit of the envoys in 700 after the deliverance
of Jerusalem. Even though he was ousted from the kingship of Babylon
by Sennacherib in 702, Merodach-Baladan still claimed kingship of
Babylon and after his defeat would still be considered a “king in exile”.1
His envoys may well have been seeking military aid from Hezekiah after
his “success” against Assyria.

After Hezekiah becomes sick, and in response to the growing crisis, the
following episodes happen:

• There is internal opposition.

• A de-facto “co-regency” emerges (Isa 22:15-25).

1 Thiele, Mysterious Numbers, 176. Sennacherib’s fourth campaign included

action against Merodach-Baladan, proving his was still an active threat
from his base in Elam in 700. Moreover, Sennacherib’s annals refer to
Merodach-Baladan during this campaign as the owner of the throne of
Babylon; see D. D. Luckenbill, ed., The Annals of Sennacherib, (repr. Wipf &
Stock, 2005; Chicago: Chicago University Press, 1924), 35, 85.
96
• During the siege of Lachish, Sennacherib sends servants to Jerusalem
to boast that reliance on Yahweh is futile (2 Chron 32:9-15).1 The
overtures are resisted.
• After the capture of some of the fortified cities of Judah, the co-
regency, sues for peace in the name of Hezekiah, who is now unwell
(2 Kgs 18:13-16), and there is joy in Jerusalem.
• The political elite also pursue an alliance with Egypt.

At some point during the summer of 701,

• The appeasement with Assyria ends.

• Assyria turns on Jerusalem.
• Having taken Lachish, Sennacherib sends an army to Jerusalem under
Tartan, Rabsaris and Rabshakeh (2 Kgs 18:17).
• A siege of Jerusalem lasts some months (2 Chron 32:16-19);
earthworks are constructed. During this time, Sennacherib turns his
attention to Libnah (2 Kgs 19:8).
• The political elite secure an alliance with Egypt and there is joy in
Jerusalem.
• Rabshakeh presents the Assyrian terms of surrender (2 Kgs 18:17-37,
2 Chron 32:18-19).
• Hezekiah prays for recovery and recovers (2 Kgs 20:6). He is no
longer “shut up” in his house and goes to the house of the Lord (2
Kgs 19:1).
• Hezekiah and Isaiah pray for deliverance (2 Chron 32:20); Hezekiah
rejects the terms of surrender (2 Kgs 19:1-7). Rabshakeh returns
leaving the Assyrian army at Jerusalem.
• Sennacherib sends further terms of surrender to Hezekiah while
engaging Tirhakah, king of Ethiopia (2 Kgs 19:9-13) at Libnah.
• Hezekiah prays for deliverance (2 Kgs 19:14-34)
• Assyrian army is decimated (2 Kgs 19:35, 2 Chron 32:21).
• Jerusalem is saved.

After the invasion,

• The faithful praise God and witness to Judah and the nations.
• The land is partly restored, but efforts are hampered by the politically
unstable situation.

1The record does not state that the army was sent at this time, because
Sennacherib was besieging Lachish.
97
• Judean exiles return from Babylon and elsewhere.
• The power vacuum left by the Assyrians is filled by the local nations
and city-states; Judah seeks a diplomatic solution rather than military
conquest as the way forward.
• Hezekiah receives treasures from some nations allying themselves to
Judah (2 Chron 32:23).

If the speeches in Job have a level of meaning depicting the times of

Hezekiah, then they should have similar language to that used in the
Eighth Century Prophets. The traditional surface reading of Job is
powerful, but as a matter of design it hides any political reading. If Job’s
vocabulary is brought into relationship with the Prophets, its passages are
illuminated in a new way.

The sufferings of Job are described in much greater detail in the speeches.
There is socio-political and military language in the speeches. This may
add to a fuller picture of a suffering patriarch, but equally it may indicate
that the surface reading of the book is too restricted. There is a need for
an “historical” political reading. A parabolic reading is one way to allow
the political language to come to the surface. On our reading, the play of
Job is set during the siege of Jerusalem.

2. Summary of the Speeches

The speeches are structured in two cycles and these take place on the first
day: J / E:J:B:J:Z:J / E:J:B:J:Z:J /E. The second day contains one speech
from Job, and an interruption from Bildad. There is also an interlude in
Job’s speech consisting of a wisdom poem. Elihu caps off the human
speeches.

We will approach the speeches sequentially, but this is not a verse by verse
commentary. It is a selective reading of the speeches alongside the Prophets.
Before we examine the speeches, it will be useful to have a summary of
our findings and the cut and thrust of the first day.1

All commentators agree that Job protests his integrity and innocence and
the friends believe that he has sinned and needs to repent. However, the
bulk of the dialogue relates to the political and military situation. As a

1 Our reading of these speeches is uncontroversial except for its historical

setting. For an overview of the tone and mood of the speeches, and how
they develop in their antagonism towards Job, see Clines, “The
Arguments of the Three Friends”.
98
stricken king, Job is unable to rule, and there has been a transfer of power
to a co-regent, someone ruling in his name. This person rules with “the
wicked ones”. The friends hold Job responsible for this state of affairs,
and they condemn this group and their leaders, who are variously called
“the wicked ones”, “the wicked one”, “the hypocrite”, “the wicked man”,
and the “light of the wicked ones”. This group have been responsible for
the policy of appeasement with Assyria and for a treaty with Egypt.
However, the friends imply that Job has been complicit to the extent that
he has failed to act. The friends assert that this group and those exercising
power will come to nothing. They also assert that “the oppressor” will
come to nothing.

In response, Job agrees with their political and military analysis and
distances himself from “the wicked ones” whose policies he has not
supported. He also believes that “the oppressor” will come to nothing but
he struggles to see how God can achieve this deliverance. He begins to see
how this will be done in his later speeches (Job 27-28), but he does not
know whether God will deliver him without further prolonging his
suffering. He bemoans his state and wishes for death. He places the blame
for his state on God, who has turned against him. At times his conflicted
mind gives expression to doubts about his future, and whether God will
redeem him, but these doubts emerge from a failure to see how God can
do this in the face of the Assyrian Power. Even so, when Job’s mind turns
to a more positive outlook, he expresses the hope that God will deliver
him.1

Whereas the friends’ speeches are consistent, the speeches assigned to Job
in the MT show “contradictory” aspects. Rather than amend the MT, we
interpret Job’s speeches as illustrative of a mind in conflict. He protests
against God, and this protest2 is grounded in his expectation that a
righteous king would be supported in his reform of the people. His
complaint is that it is unjust for God to punish innocence and allow “the
wicked ones” and “the wicked one” to have free reign. But Job also
affirms his confidence that God will deliver him from “the wicked one”,
and that “the wicked ones” will receive their just punishment. Job’s

1 There is a “why”, a “how”, a “whether”, and a “that” in Job’s speeches:

he does not understand why he has been afflicted; he does not understand
whether God will deliver him without prolonging his suffering; he partly
sees how God will deliver him; and he expresses confidence that God will
eventually act as a redeemer.
2 The main treatment of this theme of “protest” is that of J. L. Crenshaw,

A Whirlpool of Torment, (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1984).

99
dilemma is that he does not know when God will bring this about and
meanwhile his suffering is overwhelming.

The friends fail to “comfort” Job because they do not support his claim
to innocence and their attack on “the wicked ones”, the “wicked one” and
the “light of the wicked ones” is an implied criticism of his rule, even
though he agrees with their analysis. The friends are increasingly
exasperated by Job’s claim to innocence; were he to repent, they believe
that the current crisis would be resolved by the intervention of God.
Throughout this dialogue, the speeches show that the Davidic king is
innocent, but that the Assyrian calamity came upon the land as a test of
Hezekiah for disinterested righteousness vis-à-vis any rewards pertaining to
this life.

3. Job 3—Job’s First Speech1

The first speech opens up significant themes for the whole dialogue. Job
laments his conception and birth; he recalls an old fear which had now
come upon him (vv. 25-26); he mentions “the wicked ones” (v. 17) and
those who are seeking to rouse Leviathan (v. 8, RSV);2 and he uses the
motifs of light and darkness, night and day, which echoes the language of
creation.3 The speech can be interpreted in a conventional manner, but
certain expressions suggest a political and prophetic reading. These
include the mention of “Leviathan” and the “great fear” and “dread” of
Job. These are details that are difficult (though not impossible) to fit into
a patriarchal reading.

3.1 The Day of Birth

Job’s first speech opens by lamenting the day of his birth (vv. 3-5), and
the night of his conception (vv. 6-7). It is the narrator that describes his
utterances as a curse (v. 1). His words are taken as a natural response to
human suffering, but echoes with other texts suggest they convey a special

1 For a discussion of the intertextuality of Job 3-7, see W. A. M. Beuken,

“Job’s Imprecation as the Cradle of a New Religious Discourse. The
Perplexing Impact of the Semantic Correspondences between Job 3, Job
4-5 and Job 6-7” in W. A. M. Beuken, ed., The Book of Job, (Leuven:
Leuven University Press, 1994), 41-78.
2 The mention of Leviathan here in the first speech forms a thematic

inclusio with the last speech of God

3 For a structural analysis of Job 3 see D. N. Freedman, “The Structure of

Job 3” in his collected essays, Pottery, Poetry and Prophecy, (Winona Lake,
Indiana: Eisenbrauns, 1980).
100
self-understanding—that Job was a “promised seed” in the purpose of
God.

“Let the day perish wherein I was born, and the night in
which it was said, There is a man child (rbg) conceived
(hrh1).” Job 3:3 (KJV)

Job says that the night of his conception was a night in which it was said a
“strong man” (rbg, KJV “man child”) was conceived. This may be
nothing more than the expression of a common parental hope. On the
other hand, a pre-announcement of the birth of a male child is
characteristic of a number of barren birth stories in Israelite scriptural
traditions and a common herald of a coming “promised seed” (e.g. Isaac,
Esau and Jacob, Samuel). Moreover, stories in the Jewish Scriptures that
specifically detail the conception of a child are overwhelmingly about the
forthcoming birth of a “promised seed”—a significant person in Jewish
historical traditions (e.g. Gen 4:1, 17, Gen 21:2, Exod 2:2, Judg 13:3, 1
Sam 1:20).

Isaiah’s pre-announcement about Immanuel is one example:

“Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign;

Behold, a virgin shall conceive (hrh), and bear a son, and
shall call his name Immanuel.” Isa 7:14 (KJV)

In Isaiah’s day there were two applications of this prophecy: (i) one
application was to Maher-shala-hash-baz (Isa 8:3-4, 8, 18), a child of sign
born before the siege and “travail” of Jerusalem by the Syro-Ephraimite
coalition; (ii) a second application was in respect of Hezekiah, who was
the child in the line of David who would deliver the people (Isa 9:6) at the
time of the Assyrian invasion.2 Job speaks of his birth in messianic

1 Contrary to some commentators, this verb is used for conception and for
being pregnant, rather than the actual giving birth, and so Job is not
lamenting the day and night in which he was born—see Gen 16:11, 38:24,
Judg 13:5, 7, 2 Sam 11:5—so Dhorme, Job, 24, Alter, Biblical Poetry, 78,
Pope, Job, lii, Pyeon, You Have Not Spoken, 69, and other commentators.
2 Apart from the intertextual links in Isaiah 8 which establish Immanuel to

be Isaiah’s son, there are chronological arguments which prevent Isa 7:14
being a prophecy of Hezekiah—see Thiele, Mysterious Numbers, 134. The
point behind the sign of Immanuel (qua Isaiah’s son) is that there was
already a “son” who would deliver the people. This was Hezekiah, and he
would deliver the people when the Assyrians invaded during his reign;
101
terms—but laments that birth precisely because he cannot see how its
“promise” can be fulfilled.

The prophecy about Job concerned a “strong man” (rbg). This expression
of hope echoes traditions of the king being a strong man acting on behalf
of God for the people:

“…David the son of Jesse said, and the man (rbg) who
was raised up on high, the anointed of the God of
Jacob…” 2 Sam 23:1 (KJV)

“Let thy hand be upon the man of thy right hand, upon
the son of man whom thou madest strong for thyself. Ps
80:17 (KJV)

In the light of this kind of intertext, Job’s lament takes on significance

other than that of a patriarchal landowner.1

3.2 Fear and Trouble

Job expresses fear in his speeches:

“For the thing which I greatly feared (ytdxp dxp) is

come upon me, and that which I was afraid of is come
unto me. I was not in safety, neither had I rest (jqv),
neither was I quiet (xwn); yet trouble (zgr) came.” Job 3:25-
26 (KJV)

If we consider this remark in the light of the prologue and Job’s happy
circumstances in the beginning, it is difficult to think of a reason why Job
should greatly fear anything; his only concern is whether his sons might
transgress the law. Furthermore, Job did not greatly fear death; the earlier
part of his lament makes this quite clear. Instead, this “fear” seems to be
about “safety” and the absence of “rest”; these ideas occur in the story
traditions of Israel.

hence Isa 9:6, “unto us a child has been born”, is spoken by the people, in
contrast to Isaiah.
1 Compare here Jer 20:14-18. A link has been noted by scholars such as

Dhorme, Job, clix-clixii, Pope, Job, 27-28, and Habel, Job, 103, although
they differ in how they read the direction of dependency. Regardless of
this question, Jeremiah offers a similar sentiment to Job 3 in the political
context in which he found himself, one in which cities have been
destroyed and there is the cry of war.
102
The concept of rest1 is an Edenic motif relating to the nation and the
land. The Garden of Eden was the first place of rest—for God rested on
the seventh day, and it was the culmination of his work. The land is
presented as a “second” place of rest that God had prepared for the
nation after their wilderness journey. The people attempted to enter the
land, but they did “not enter into...rest” (Ps 95:11, Heb 3:16-19).

Once Israel was in the land, their work was to destroy the inhabitants. The
success they had was not the result of their labour; God worked through
them (Josh 24:13). The land was then given as a place of “rest” from war
for the people (Josh 11:23, 14:152).

`The same typology is reflected in Judges, which illustrates a constant

pattern: Israel would be placed in the position of captivity, and so they
would “groan” and this “by reason of…”3 those that oppressed them. A
man would be “sent”, as Moses was “sent” (Exod 3:12, Judg 3:9, 6:14), of
whom the Lord would say, “I will be with thee” (Exod 3:14, Judg 6:16).
This judge would redeem them from this state of chaos (Judg 6:4), and
make a new beginning (Judg 7:19). The nations would be “subdued” and
“dominion” restored to Israel (Gen 1:28, Judg 3:30).4 The land would
have “rest” all the days of the judge (Gen 2:2, Judg 3:11). 5,6

Job’s lack of “rest” and “quiet” causes him to curse his birth and wish for
the ironic “rest” and “quiet” of death:

1 For a discussion of this concept, see the essay, “There Remains still a
Rest for the People of God” in G. von Rad, From Genesis to Chronicles,
(Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2005). The echo is also noted by L. G.
Perdue in “Metaphorical Theology in the Book of Job: Theological
Anthropology in the First Cycle of Job’s Speeches” in Beuken, The Book of
Job, 129-156 (148).
2 These verses use the same word for “rest” as Job 3:26.
3 This expression is often part of a cluster of echoes to the Exodus

redemption. Another example is found in 2 Chron 20 where Jehoshaphat

was dismayed “by reason of ” a great multitude of enemies (2 Chron
20:15). He and the people were delivered, and the land had “rest” for the
rest of his reign (2 Chron 20:30).
4 See also Judg 4:23, 5:13, 8:28, and 11:33.
5 The word here for “rest” is the same word as in Job 3:26; see also Judg

3:30, 5:31, 8:28, 18:7, 27.

6 Job also wishes for “quiet” and this word occurs in the same kind of

passages in Josh 1:13, 21:44, 22:4, and 23:1.

103
 “For now should I have lain still and been quiet (jqv), I
should have slept: then had I been at rest (xwn)…” Job
3:13 (KJV)

Job’s lament can be seen against this background. As a righteous Davidic

king who instituted a great reform and turned back the pagan inroads of
Ahaz—he might have reasonably expected “rest” during his days, but the
“dread (dxp) he dreaded (ytdxp)” had happened.

The identification of Job’s dread can be pursued through intertexts for

dxp. It is used in a number of places in Isaiah to describe this effect on
the people of the Assyrian threat, for instance,

“Fear (dxp), and the pit, and the snare, are upon thee, O
inhabitant of the land (#ra). And it shall come to pass,
that he who fleeth from the noise of the fear (dxp) ...” Isa
24:17-18 (KJV revised), cf. Isa 2:10, 19

Job’s language may also echo the Deuteronomy 28 curses,

“And thy life shall hang in doubt before thee; and thou
shalt fear (dxp) day and night, and shalt have none
assurance of thy life: In the morning thou shalt say,
Would God it were even! And at even thou shalt say,
Would God it were morning! For the fear (dxp) of thine
heart wherewith thou shalt fear (dxp),1 and for the sight
of thine eyes which thou shalt see.” Deut 28:66-67 (KJV
revised)

This word (dxp) occurs in the Prophets mainly in connection with an

expectation of war. Similarly, the word Job uses for the “coming” (20x,
hta) of this fear is also used in the Prophets in relation to the coming of
trouble (e.g. Deut 33:2, 21, Isa 41:5, 23, 25, 44:7, 45:11, 56:9, Jer 12:9,
Prov 1:27).

Job states that “trouble” (zgr, v. 26) came, and this word occurs only twice
outside the book of Job—in Isaiah and Habakkuk:

1 This is the same association, “the dread you dread” (noun + verb).
104
 “And it shall come to pass in the day that the Lord shall
give thee rest from thy sorrow, and from thy trouble (zgr
KJV “fear”1), and from the hard bondage wherein thou
wast made to serve.” Isa 14:3 (KJV revised), cf. Hab 3:2

The context of this verse suggests that the “trouble” was exile and
enslavement.

Accordingly, it is possible to read Job’s lament as stating that the Assyrian

had come into the land. There was an object of trouble and this had
“come” upon Job (v. 8, Isa 27:1).

3.3 Leviathan
It is consistent with this political reading to connect Job’s mention of
Leviathan with Isaiah’s use of this term (v. 8 (RSV), Isa 27:1).2 Job
invokes those who would “raise Leviathan” to curse his day. He states,

“Let those curse it who curse the day, who are prepared
to rouse Leviathan.” Job 3:8 (NASB)

“In that day the Lord with his sore and great and strong
sword shall punish leviathan the fleeing (xrb) serpent,
even Leviathan that crooked serpent; and he shall slay
the dragon that is in the sea.” Isa 27:1 (KJV revised)

The term denotes a mythical sea monster in Canaanite mythologies3 but

the use of mythological language in Job does not establish the reference of
the terms. Alongside the mythological possibility, commentators have
suggested that the language may be used to express “the depths of his
despair”,4 a sea-creature,1 or it may express political realities.2

1 This word occurs 7x—Job (5x), Isaiah (1x), and Habakkuk (1x). We have
brought the translation here into line with Job’s sense of “trouble”. The
word is a motif for the Assyrian crisis.
2 This connection is made in E. B. Smick, “Mythology and the Book of

Job” in Zuck, Sitting with Job, 221-229 (226). Smick concludes that
Leviathan “is not a mere crocodile but is to be understood in light of
Isaiah 27:1”.
3 See Smick, “Mythology”, Habel, Job, 108-109, and Pope, Job, 329-331.
4 G. W. Parsons, “Literary Features of the Book of Job” in Zuck, Sitting

with Job, 35-50 (43). Parsons goes on to suggest (46-47) that the
mythopoeic aspects of the speeches of Job and Yahweh are a subtle
polemic against the gods who were embedded in the mythologies and an
105
If Isaiah 24-27 relates to the Assyrian crisis, “Leviathan” is Assyria. The
“rousing” of Leviathan in Job therefore may be a reference to those of the
political elite whose actions would rouse3 that nation against Jerusalem.
On this reading, Assyria is a monster upon the Mesopotamian sea of
nations creating chaos and reversing the order of creation.

On this reading, Job describes a group of opponents as “cursers of the

day”, i.e. there is a group of professionals who offer curses (and blessings,
cf. Balaam).4 Job invites these people to add his “night” to their curses.
This group is comprised of those who would “rouse” Leviathan, and this
may indicate some sort of political wheeling and dealing on the part of
such a group with Assyria.

3.4 Darkness and the Shadow of Death

Job expresses bitterness in lamenting the day of his birth and the night of
his conception, but his language also has echoes of the Exodus:

“Let darkness ($vx) and the shadow of death (twmlc)

redeem (lag5) it; let a cloud dwell upon it; let the
blackness of the day terrify6 it.” Job 3:5 (KJV revised)

affirmation of Job’s monotheistic stance. This reading supports our use of

Isaianic texts to interpret Job as such a polemic is writ large in the book of
Isaiah.
1 Habel, Job, 108-109.
2 Wolfers, Deep Things, 178-183.
3 The Hebrew verb occurs in Isa 51:9-10 as “awake, awake”—a plea to the

arm of the Lord to defeat the enemy of Israel.

4 It was also commonly held that certain days of the moon-cycle were

dangerous and “cursed” and that it was unwise to do things on those days,
see M. Fishbane, “Jeremiah 4:23-26 and Job 3:3-13: A Recovered Use of
the Creation Pattern”, VT 21 (1971): 151-168; see also ANET, 289. The
book of Isaiah refers to a group of “monthly prognosticators” (Isa 47:13)
whose function was to identify cursed days and months according to signs
discerned in the heavens, see S. H. Hooke, Babylonian and Assyrian Religion,
(Oklahoma: University of Oklahoma Press, 1963), 91.
5 This is the normal word for “redeem”; the NASB and RSV have “claim”

which eliminates any salvific theme.

6 This verb is used for the evil spirit that troubled Saul, which bears

comparison here with the purpose of Satan. The only prophetic usage is
Isa 21:4 and Dan 8:17.
106
There are levels of irony1 in this utterance. Job invites the enemy
(darkness and the shadow of death) to redeem or reclaim the day of his
birth—the day of the birth of the Strong Man. Job echoes the account of
creation in his lament at this point, and he does so because of his
understanding of Israel as the “creation” of God.

Job’s repeated use of “let” resonates with the creation account, and its
sequence of “let there be”. Job asks for the initial darkness of creation
(Gen 1:2) to reclaim the day of his birth. In addition to this echo, the
application of the similes of “darkness” and “shadow of death” to Job’s
circumstances mirrors an application to Israel in the time of Hezekiah.

The application of the similes of “darkness” and “shadow of death” to

Job’s circumstances mirrors an application to Israel in the time of
Hezekiah. In Psalm 107, the initial application of which is in the times of
Hezekiah,2 there are a number of links with the book of Job, two of
which are darkness and shadow of death:

“Such as sit in darkness ($vx) and in the shadow of death

(twmlc), being bound in affliction and iron; Because they
rebelled against the words of God, and contemned the
counsel3 of the most High: Therefore he brought down
their heart with labour; they fell down, and there was none
to help. Then they cried unto the Lord in their trouble,
and he saved them out of their distresses. He brought
them out of darkness ($vx) and the shadow of death
(twmlc), and brake their bands in sunder.” Ps 107:10-14
(KJV), cf. Isa 42:7, 47:5, 49:9

This Psalm opens with thanks for redemption (vv.1-9), and then in v. 10
turns to the circumstances prior to the redemption. These were the
circumstances in which some of the nation had gone into captivity, and
were dwellers in “darkness” and the “shadow of death”. Micah expresses
the same idea:

1 Irony is a device in Job noted by many commentators, but with no

uniform agreement as it is dependent on the overall reading being
supplied for the speeches. For a discussion, see E. M. Good, Irony in the
Old Testament, (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1965).
2 There are many links between Psalm 107 and Job, as we shall see

through our study.

3 This word “counsel” occurs also in Job 38:2.

107
 “Rejoice not against me, O mine enemy: when I fall, I
shall arise; when I sit in darkness, the Lord shall be a light
unto me.” Mic 7:8 (KJV)

From this captivity their bands were broken asunder.1 The echoes with
the Exodus are plain, and they are carried by themes such as “crying unto
the Lord” and bonds being “broken”.

There is a further ironic contrast in Job’s lament. He wanted his day to be

a day of darkness and not light. In this sentiment he is deliberately
invoking the prophetic image of the “day of the Lord”:

“Woe unto you that desire the day of the Lord! to what
end is it for you? the day of the Lord is darkness, and not
light.” Amos 5:18 (KJV), cf. v. 20

Job is recognizing the reality of this day in his own times, because he
invites the darkness of this day to “terrify” his own “day”. This type of
darkness is not the darkness of captivity, the prison house, but the
darkness that covers a land:2

“And in that day they shall roar against them like the
roaring of the sea: and if one look unto the land, behold
darkness and sorrow, and the light is darkened in the
heavens thereof.” Isa 5:30 (KJV)

“A day of darkness and of gloominess, a day of clouds

and of thick darkness, as the morning spread upon the
mountains: a great people and a strong; there hath not
been ever the like, neither shall be any more after it, even
to the years of many generations.” Joel 2:2 (KJV), cf. 3:43

1 See also the application of the figure “shadow of death” in Amos’

warning to the northern tribes in Amos 5:8 (Isa 9:1), a figure picked up in
Job 38, and which we discuss in our chapter on God’s first speech.
2 This kind of darkness is different again from the kind of darkness that

symbolizes a lack of knowledge.

3 Joel records an invasion of the land and this is likely to be the Assyrian

invasion of 701 as another comparable event was not to happen for

“many generations”. The next comparable event happened in 586. The
location of the book in the MT between Hosea and Amos suggests that it
was read as a prophecy about the Assyrian invasion of 701 In this case,
108
In Job’s lament about the day of his birth, he is seeing the darkness over
the land and the shadow of death over those in captivity, and saying that
these should cover the day of his birth.

Although Job laments the day of his birth, he expresses the root of his
lament in the words,

“Why is light given to a strong man (rbg) whose way is hid,

and whom God hath hedged in?” Job 3:23 (KJV revised)

The point here is that Job understands that he (God’s strong man) has
been “hedged in” by God. This was Satan’s observation (Job 1:10), and
we noted in the last chapter that this detail evokes images of Israel as the
vineyard of God. Job understands that he is part of this vineyard. But he
laments that “his way is hidden”—he does not understand the course of
events in the land or in his life. This reverberates with Isaiah,

“Why sayest thou, O Jacob, and speakest, O Israel, My

way is hid from the Lord, and my judgment is passed
over from my God?” Isa 40:27 (KJV)

The context of this passage is one where God extols his power and
knowledge of the heavens (Isa 40:26), and his power over nations in the
whirlwind (Isa 40:24, Job 38:1). These Joban themes tie Isaiah 40 to the
subject-matter of Job.

In addition to lamenting the day of his birth, Job laments the night of his
conception, and he invokes those who “curse” days, to “curse” this night,
and by this he means that they should add his “night” to the list of days
that they regard as cursed. These are the same people who are prepared to
rouse Leviathan, (perhaps a militaristic party grouping in Jerusalem).

Job wishes that the night be desolate and empty of any sound of joy. He
wants its morning stars to remain dark, and for no “light” to be offered to
the night, because it did not “block” his mother’s womb from
impregnation.1 There seems to be an ironical echo here with the Assyrian
who is the “morning star” (Isa 14:12, NASB), and Job’s “night” of

Joel calls the people of Judah to seek safety in Zion, a call supported by
urgent spirit-led preaching (Joel 2:28-32).
1 Job says, let that night be “barren” (v. 7, RSV) using a rare word (4x)

that occurs only once outside Job in Isa 49:21.

109
conception—its morning stars are to remain dark. Job’s night of
conception should have had its morning stars presage an era of salvation
and redemption for the people but, instead, the land was overrun by
another morning star. Had his mother not conceived, Job would not have
seen “trouble” (lm[), the “trouble” of politics in the face of a crisis (Job
4:8, 5:6-7, Isa 10:1, 53:11, 59:4).

3.5 The Wicked

One of the most important terms used in the speeches is “the wicked”.
Traditional commentaries regard the fate of the wicked to be a major theme
of the book. However, commentators often take the phrase “the wicked”
to refer to the archetypal wicked person, any immoral God-forsaking
individual, someone rather abstract.

Conventional readings of Job understand “the wicked” (singular or plural)

to be any individual who leads a life contrary to the will of God; they also
tend to assume that all participants in the dialogue use the expression to
refer to such individuals, and that they only disagree as to whether or not
“the wicked” have a better deal in the scheme of things. This type of
reading does not interpret “the wicked” (plural) differently from “the
wicked” (singular), nor does it interpret the phrase in a specific socio-
political sense,1 nor does it discriminate between the uses of the phrase by
each of the dialogue participants.

The Hebrew word for “wicked” ([vr/~y[vr) is common (249x); its usage
is varied and we have to determine its sense in Job. Below is a brief
summary; fuller discussion of these texts can be found at the appropriate
point in our study.

1) There are examples of the singular “wicked” as an attributive adjective

placed after the qualifying noun phrase:

“This is the portion of a wicked man ([vr ~da qlx)

from God.” Job 20:29 (KJV), cf. 27:13

1For a socio-political reading of “the wicked”, see W. B. Stevenson, The

Poem of Job, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1943), ch. 2, and Wolfers,
Deep Things, ch. 4.
110
 “And you have filled a wicked case ([vr !yd1)…” Job
36:17 (KJV revised)

2) There are examples where the word is used in a substantive way

without qualifying a noun. These examples are the ones where we have to
determine whether or not the word is used to denote any specific group
or individual, or whether the word is used to denote “the immoral
wicked” in general.

i) Some uses of the plural occur in contexts where a specific group is

being described and therefore the correct translation is “the wicked ones”.
We can build up a picture of this group:

• They are paralleled with those who hate Job (Job 8:22).
• They are a group who give “counsel” (Job 10:3, 21:16, 22:18).
• They have Job in their “hands” (Job 16:11).
• They have a short moment of triumph (Job 20:5).
• They are mighty in power (Job 21:7).
• They have vineyards (Job 24:6).
• They make treaties and agreements with foreigners (Job 34:26).

The group would appear to be a socio-political class with wealth and

power in government.

ii) Other uses of the plural are consistent with this identification, but the
term is not used in connection with detail that conclusively identifies the
social and political characteristics of the group:

• Job expresses the view that “the wicked ones” forgo the trouble of
the Assyrian invasion (Job 3:17).
• Zophar expresses the view that the “eyes of the wicked ones” will fail
(Job 11:20).
• Job states that “the wicked ones” have a “candle”, which is a source
of false prophecy (Job 21:17).
• Job asks about the dwelling places of “the wicked ones” (Job 21:28).
• God says that he will shake “the wicked ones” out of the land (Job
38:13), and that their “light” (candle) will be withheld (Job 38:15).

1 The Hebrew is used for a “case”, “cause”, “plea”, or “written

judgement”; see Deut 17:8, Pss 9:5, 140:12; Prov 29:7, 31:5, 8, Isa 10:2, Jer
5:28, 22:16, 30:13 (10x out of a possible 16x).
111
• God asks Job to tread down “the wicked ones” in their place (Job
40:12).

3) There are substantive uses of the singular, and these appear to refer to
an individual among “the wicked ones”—a leader, someone holding the
reins of power.

i) Job complains that God is destroying both “the perfect one” (himself)
and “the wicked one” (Job 9:22).

ii) Job states that the land is given over into the hand of “the wicked one”
and that he has overwhelmed her judges (Job 9:24).

iii) Eliphaz says that “the wicked one” travails with pain all his days (Job
15:20), which we will argue is a metaphor for the trials and tribulations of
government.

iv) Bildad states that “the light” of “the wicked one” will be extinguished
(Job 18:5).

v) Job wishes that his enemy (Assyria) would be like “the wicked one”
(Job 27:7).

vi) Elihu states that God will not preserve “the wicked one” (Job 36:6).

We propose to distinguish singular and plural uses of this word.1 In

English translations of Job it is not always clear when the meaning is “the
wicked one” or “the wicked ones”, as they just have “the wicked”. Our
proposal is that in Job, “the wicked ones” (~y[vr) are principally those in
Jerusalem2 and Judah who oppose God’s will for his people and seek their
own agenda. They are Job’s internal opponents and they are the political

1 In the MT when the word is in the plural, there are usually plural forms
of verbs and plural pronouns (e.g. Num 16:26, Ps 11:2, Jer 25:31).
2 A key use of “the wicked” in the historical traditions is Abraham’s

question—“Will you also destroy the wicked with the righteous?”, spoken
about righteous Lot and “the wicked” in the city of Sodom. Similarly, with
Hezekiah and “the wicked” in the city of Jerusalem, the same question
was posed in Isa 1:8-10—except for the faithful remnant, Jerusalem
would have been as Sodom (contrast Isa 48:22, 57:21, where “the wicked
ones” are Babylonians). The book of Job may address this story-tradition
by showing that there was one righteous man in the city among the sons
of God.
112
class. In this perspective they may be corrupt priests, false prophets,
government officials, or the rich and wealthy. One of these is “the wicked
one” ([vr)—an individual who exercises the reins of power.1

The friends in effect pronounce Job to be “wicked” (Job 32:3, 15:6), and
Job protests that he is not wicked (Job 10:2, 7).2 The friends believe Job
to be wicked in some sense, probably because they see him as complicit in
the decisions being made on his behalf in Jerusalem. However, they do
not use the expression “the wicked one” ([vr) of Job. The friends imply
that Job is “wicked” by association. For example, Job describes his
situation as one of “trouble” (Job 3:10, NASB, RSV, lm[), and Eliphaz
asserts that those who plow iniquity, sow “trouble” (Job 4:8, lm[). This
kind of association and implied critique is common in Job.

Elihu does not particularly develop a view of “the wicked one” (singular)
or “the wicked ones” (plural); he uses these terms in the same way as Job
and the friends. For Elihu, the friends (Job 34:2, 10) are wrong to
condemn Job:

“Would (@ah) he that hateth right bind (vbx,3 KJV mg.)?

And wilt thou condemn him that is most just, saying
(rmah4), in respect of (l) a king “Belial” and “wicked
one” to (la) princes,5 who accepteth not the persons of
princes, nor regardeth the rich more than the poor?” Job
34:17-19 (KJV revised)

1 Wolfers, Deep Things, ch. 4, argues (incorrectly) that “the wicked one” is
Sennacherib.
2 The author uses the corresponding verb to the adjective “wicked” in Job

10:2, 9, 15:20.
3 The idea of binding a wound is the sense here and supported by texts

such as Hos 6:1, Isa 1:6, 3:7, 30:26, 61:1.

4 We follow the KJV here rather than the RSV; the RSV accepts a

common amendment of the MT to give a relative clause, “Shall…thou

condemn him…who says to a king”—we retain the MT; for a discussion,
see Hartley, Job, 455.
5 The KJV, NASB and RSV interpret the Hebrew as an address to two

parties, a king and his princes, but it is ambiguous as to whom the

adjective “wicked” is ascribed. We take it to be a description used of Job
by the friends when talking to the princes. The preposition la is used in 1
Sam 11:12 and Job 34:31to indicate the direction of speech.
113
Elihu criticizes the friends for treating Job as “Belial” and a “wicked
one”.1 Job was one who “bound” people—a healer (Job 29:15), and as
such he could not be someone who hated “right”; he was one who did
not regard the rich more than the poor (Job 29:9-12)—his rule in the land
was the “work of his hands” (Job 1:10).

3.5.1 The Wicked Ones in Job 3

In his opening speech, Job describes the appeal of death as the place
where equally the weary and “the wicked ones” avoid the coming
“trouble”:

“There the wicked ones have forgone (ldx2) trouble (zgr);

and there the weary be at rest. There the prisoners rest
together; they hear not the voice of the oppressor (fgn).”
Job 3:17 (KJV revised)

We have identified this “trouble” (zgr) above as the invasion of the land
by Assyria, and the capture of the people. The wicked ones forgo this fate
in the grave, as do the prisoners. Job says that the prisoners do not hear
the voice of “the oppressor”. The Hebrew word is used of a taskmaster
(Egypt), but it is also used of foreign enemies as well and in particular
Assyria. The specific form of the word used here only occurs elsewhere in
Isa 14:4 and Zech 9:8,

“…you will take up this taunt against the king of

Babylon:3 ‘How the oppressor (fgn)has ceased, the
insolent fury ceased!’ ” Isa 14:4 (RSV)

This echo suggests that Job is saying that the prisoners in the grave “rest”
from the Assyrian.

1 Compare Ps 41:9, which states that the friends of David said that a
“thing of Belial” cleaved to him (KJV—“evil disease”).
2 This word is rare (4x) and has the sense of “leaving” rather than

“cessation” as in the KJV—see Judg 5:6, 7 (roads deserted, villages

emptied), Job 19:14 (kinsfolk leave), and particularly Jer 51:30 (Babylon
forgoes fighting).
3 We argued above (Chapter One) that this prophecy concerns the king of

Assyria who from Tiglath-Pileser III onwards was also king of Babylon,
see Isa 14:25.
114
4. Job 4—Eliphaz’ First Speech
Eliphaz’ first speech is broadly sympathetic to Job and reflects the same
background situation. The motifs in this speech which lend themselves to
a political reading are the various types of lion, which are plausibly taken
as symbols of nations; the reference to being “crushed before the moth”,
and the destruction from “morning to evening”, which is likely to be what
the lions do to God’s servants (v. 18). These details are difficult to fit into
the patriarchal story-setting.

4.1 The Davidic King

Eliphaz appears to have the same Davidic understanding of Job’s rule:

“Thy words (hllm1) have upholden him that was falling,

and thou hast strengthened (#ma) the feeble ([rk) knees
($rb).” Job 4:4 (KJV)

Job had given succour to the faithful who had doubts, to those who were
still bowing2 the knee to God. Eliphaz echoes Isaiah’s prophecy to
Hezekiah:

“Strengthen ye the weak hands, and confirm (#ma) the

feeble (lvk) knees ($rb). Say to them that are of a fearful
heart, Be strong, fear not: behold, your God will come
with vengeance, even God with a recompence; he will come
and save you.” Isa 35:3-4 (KJV)

This is a plural imperative interjection in an oracle of hope. Hezekiah’s

role during the Assyrian onslaught should have been to strengthen the
feeble knees, and this is the point made in Isaiah. Eliphaz is using this
idea, but reminding Job that he had previously strengthened the nation
during Assyria’s earlier decimation of Northern Israel, but now that he
was stricken with disease, he had become forlorn.

1
Another indication that Eliphaz sees Job as a Davidic king is the use of
hllm for “word”, which only occurs outside Job, Proverbs and Psalms in
2 Sam 23:2, “The Spirit of the Lord spake by me, and his word was in my
tongue”. Eliphaz uses this word of his own self and thus competes with
Job (Job 4:2, 12-13).
2 The idea of “bowing the knee” only occurs in Isaiah out of the

Prophets—Isa 45:23, 46:1-2, 65:12.

115
4.2 The Invasion
Eliphaz says that “it” (the siege) has come:

“But now it is come upon1 thee, and thou faintest; it

toucheth thee, and thou art troubled (lhb).” Job 4:5
(KJV)

The Hebrew word for “trouble” (lhb) is used in the following text, and
this echo can inform the point made by Eliphaz:

“Then they cried with a loud voice in the Jews’ speech

unto the people of Jerusalem that were on the wall, to
affright them, and to trouble (lhb) them; that they might
take the city.” 2 Chron 32:18 (KJV), cf. Job 22:10

Eliphaz goes on, this time with a different word for “trouble”,

“He shall deliver thee in six troubles (hrc): yea, in seven

there shall no evil touch thee. In famine he shall redeem
thee from death: and in war from the power of the
sword. Thou shalt be hid from the scourge of the
tongue:2 neither shalt thou be afraid of destruction when
it cometh.” Job 5:19-21 (KJV)

Something had come upon Job and he was troubled. The prologue would
lead us to interpret this trouble as his disease, but Eliphaz’ reassurance
mentions deliverance from death, war, the sword and famine! The context
is military and political: Job was not to be afraid when the “destruction”
came upon him. Job was not to be afraid of “the beasts of the earth” (Job
5:22)—a common figure for the nations (in league with Assyria). A
comparable “trouble” is a theme of Isaiah’s prophecies:

“And they shall look unto the earth [land]; and behold
trouble (hrc) and darkness, dimness of anguish; and they
shall be driven to darkness.” Isa 8:223 (KJV)

1 This is an important linking phrase to the prologue: in Job 2:11 we read

of the “evil that was come upon him”.

2 The figure “scourge of the tongue” would be appropriate as a

description of Sennacherib’s campaign.

3 This text, although part of a prophecy delivered in 735-734 (Isa 8:6), is a

reference to the Assyrian invasion of 722 (Isa 9:1). The contrast in the
116
 “Thus saith Hezekiah, This day is a day of trouble (hrc),
and of rebuke, and blasphemy: for the children are come
to the birth, and there is not strength to bring forth.” 2
Kgs 19:3 (KJV)

Hezekiah’s words are telling: his day was a day of trouble. Isaiah describes
it as “darkness”—a common figure for this period in Judah’s history
stretching from the reign of Uzziah through to Hezekiah (Isa 5:30, Mic
7:8). Job offers the same analysis of his “trouble” as a time of “darkness”:

“Therefore am I troubled at his presence: when I

consider, I am afraid of him. For God maketh my heart
soft [lack courage1], and the Almighty troubleth me:
Because I was not cut off before the darkness, neither
hath he covered the darkness ($vx) from my face.” Job
23:15-17 (KJV)

“When I looked for good, then evil came unto me: and
when I waited for light, there came darkness.” Job 30:26
(KJV)

“What? shall we receive good at the hand of God, and

shall we not receive evil?” Job 2:102 (KJV)

Job was troubled by God and it was making him lack courage. Job
laments that he was not cut off before the darkness had come. The
prologue offers no clue as to what this darkness might be; however, a
parabolic reading links this “darkness” with Isaiah’s description of the
Assyrian invasion ($vx, Isa 5:30). Job’s lament can therefore be read as an
expression of a forlorn hope that God might have been merciful to him
and allowed him to sleep with his fathers before the day of destruction (2
Kgs 22:18-20).3

oracles of Isa 8 and 9:1-7 is between Judah who have a king (Isa 9:6) and
Northern Israel who lose their independence in the war of 735-734 and
their king in 722
1 This natural reaction may echo Isa 13:6-7.
2 Job accepts that good and evil come from God regardless of whether a

person is righteous or unrighteous; contrawise, his friends link “good” to

righteous people and “evil” to unrighteous people.
3 Hezekiah expresses this very sentiment, when he says that it is good that

divine punishment has been deferred from his day (Isa 39:8).
117
The creation of good and evil is central to the understanding of the book
of Job. This is how Job understands his troubles and it is a key assertion
in Isaiah that God both creates light and darkness; he makes peace and
creates evil.

“I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and

create evil: I the Lord do all these things.” Isa 45:7 (KJV)

This is how God explains his dealings with the nation. The juxtaposition
of evil and peace indicates that the evil is the evil of war. If we use Isaiah
45 to interpret Job 2:10 and Job 30:26, then the good that Job looked for
was peace, and the evil was war.

4.3 Lions
Eliphaz seeks to give Job assurance in vv. 7-11 by contrasting his piety, in
which he can have confidence, with those who plough iniquity (v. 8,
echoing Hos 10:13). Picking up on Job’s wish for the day of his birth to
“perish”, Eliphaz says that the innocent do not “perish”. On the other
hand, those who plough iniquity, “the wicked ones”, have no such
assurance.

Eliphaz refers to distinct groups of lions in his speech, and some of the
terms he uses are interchangeable elsewhere in the Prophets as symbols
for Egypt and Assyria; a precise symbolic identification is therefore
problematic.

“The roaring1 of the lion (hyra), and the voice of the

fierce lion (lxv), and the teeth of the young lions (rypk),
are broken. The old lion (vyl) perisheth for lack of prey,
and the whelps of the lioness (aybl) are scattered
abroad.” Job 4:10-11 (KJV revised)

This text refers to several lions. The expression, “old lion”, uses a rare
word2 which only occurs outside Job in Proverbs (1x) and Isaiah (1x):

1 This “roaring” stands in contrast to Job’s “roaring” (hgav, Job 3:24,

4:10) which is like “the waters” (Lam 2:19). Job could be complaining that
he is having to “roar” like the Assyrian “waters”.
2 The word is a place name, “Laish” (5x) and “lion” (3x).

118
 “The burden of the beasts of the south: into the land of
trouble and anguish, from whence come the lioness (aybl)
and the old lion (vyl), the viper and fiery flying serpent,
they will carry their riches upon the shoulders of young
asses, and their treasures upon the bunches of camels, to
a people that shall not profit them.” Isa 30:6 (KJV revised)

This invective identifies Egypt as the “old lion” and the “lioness” (using
the same Hebrew as Job 4:10-11), and as a people that would be of no
profit to Judah if they sought military help against Assyria. Egypt was
perishing for lack of prey, a figure of speech indicating that its empire was
weak, with a lack of conquered peoples under its sway (“prey”).1 With this
connection to Isaiah, the figure in Job of the “whelps” being scattered
might refer to the armies of Egypt.

On the other hand, the “roaring lion” of Eliphaz’ speech (hyra), and the
young lions “with him”, represent Assyria and its confederate allies. This
identification can be made if weight is given to a text in Nahum:

“Where is the dwelling of the lions (twyra), and the

feeding place of the young lions (rypk), where the lion
(hyra), even the lioness (aybl), walked, and the lion’s (hyra)
whelp, and none made them afraid?” Nah 2:11 (KJV
revised)

Here Nineveh (Nah 2:8) is spoken of as having been2 a dwelling for lions
(nations at the Assyrian king’s court), and where the lion, the lioness and
the lion’s cubs walked. It is this lion (hyra) that represents Assyria. These
identifications of a “lion” are to be contrasted with texts that compare
nations to lions:

“For a nation is come up upon my land, strong, and

without number, whose teeth are the teeth of a lion (yra),
and he hath the cheek teeth of a lioness (aybl).” Joel 1:6
(KJV revised)

1 The figure of “prey” for nations or tribal groups (victims of more

powerful enemies) is used as early as Jacob’s Blessings in relation to Judah
and Benjamin and is very common in the Jewish traditions.
2 The oracle describes a rout (v. 8), plunder (v. 9), and then poses the

exulting rhetorical questions about the dwelling of the lions.

119
 “Therefore is the anger of the Lord kindled against his
people…And he will lift up an ensign to the nations
from far…and, behold, they shall come with speed
swiftly…Their roaring shall be like a lioness (aybl), they
shall roar like young lions (rypk): yea, they shall roar, and
lay hold of the prey, and shall carry it away safe, and
none shall deliver it.” Isa 5:25-29 (KJV revised), cf. Amos
3:41

Isa 30:6 and Nah 2:11 suggest that Egypt is an “old lion” or “lioness”
(vyl, aybl), whereas Assyria is a “lion” or “lioness” (aybl, hyra), and has
young lions (rypk). Another text that uses “young lions” for nations is,

“The young lions (rypk) roared upon him, and yelled, and
they made his land waste: his cities are burned without
inhabitant.” Jer 2:152 (KJV)

Following these identifications, Eliphaz is saying that reliance on Egypt is

futile and the Assyrian oppressor is already “broken”. This optimistic
sentiment is part of Eliphaz’ encouragement of Job, reinforcing Job’s
prior thinking: rely only on God, and the invader is as good as broken.3

1 Amos 3:4 has the ideas of “lion”, “young lion, “prey”, “thicket” and
“den” in common with Job and the context of Amos is political.
2 See also Pss 17:12, 35:17, 58:6, Zech 11:3. The figure is also applied to

Israel in texts such as Ezekiel 19.

3 Here, we pass over Eliphaz’ vision of the night. For a discussion, see J.

E. Harding, “A Spirit of Deception in Job 4:15? Interpretive

Indeterminacy and Eliphaz’ Vision”, BibInt. 13 (2004): 137-166. The
visionary experience seems to echo Job’s opening lament and offer an
ironical contrast between Job’s fear and Eliphaz’ fear (Job 3:25, 4:14). One
problem of interpretation is the charging of the angels with folly. Harding
considers a number of ideas, but the one we favour is that the spirit (Job
4:15) is an angel charged with folly, i.e. spreading folly through the visions
of false prophets (“his servants” in Amos 3:7 and compare 1 Kgs 22). It is
worth noting that the conjunction of the expressions, “vision”, “night”
and “deep sleep” (Job 4:13) occur in Isa 29:7-10, albeit with a related but
different Hebrew word for “vision”. This context in Isaiah concerns
visions at the time of the Assyrian invasion. If we trace Job’s word for
“vision” elsewhere (6x) we find it is used in Isa 22:1, 5 and Joel 2:28, all
arguably seventh-eighth century oracles.
120
Other statements about lions in Job are likewise about Assyria and its
confederate nations. For example, in God’s speech, Job is asked a
question about a lioness:

“Wilt thou hunt the prey for the lioness (aybl)? or fill the
appetite of the young lions (rypk)…” Job 38:39 (KJV
revised)

Here, God is asking Job whether he can hunt prey for Assyria. That God
could ask such a question is predicated upon Hezekiah’s earlier military
prowess (2 Kgs 18:4-8, Job 29:17). God’s question is whether Judah could
function like Assyria, (like a lioness hunting prey), and attract allies away
from Assyria by providing “prey” for the young lions in the form of the
spoils of war.

In an eighth century context, the appropriateness of the figure of a lion

for Assyria is illustrated in the symbology of the lion for Assyrian kings.
Dick notes that the Assyrian royal lion hunt was so central to the Assyrian
monarchy that “its motif formed the royal seal”.1 The common
appellation of “shepherd” for the Assyrian king indicates his role as a
protector of his people from predators such as lions. Moreover, this role
was celebrated in ritual hunts, in which the king, dressed in priestly attire,
slew lions, and thereby stated his rule over the chaos of the wilderness.
Eliphaz’ choice of lion symbology echoes Assyrian symbology, but he
presents Yahweh as a king over lions (and not the Assyrian king). Yahweh
will make the same point in relation to the beasts of the earth in his
response to Job.

This leaves the identity of the “fierce lion” (lxv) to be settled. This might
be just another term for Assyria and another way of referring to that
roaring lion, since the clause mentions “…the voice of the fierce lion”.
However, the term is used in Job 28:8 where there is a reference to such a
lion being “decked out” in fine clothes upon the path of wisdom. We shall
argue when we examine Job 28 that such a “fierce lion” equates to Judah
and her princes. If we apply this identity here, Eliphaz is saying that the
rulers of Judah are just as “broken” as Assyria.

4.4 The Moth

Eliphaz closes the first part of his speech with a reference to a moth and a
group of people.

1 Dick, “Neo-Assyrian Royal Lion Hunt”, 246.

121
 Behold, he put no trust in his servants; and his angels he
charged with folly: How much less in them that dwell in
houses of clay, whose foundation is in the dust, which are
crushed before the moth? They are destroyed from
morning to evening: they perish forever without any
regarding it. Is not their tent-cord (rty1) plucked up with
them (~b)? They die, even without wisdom. Job 4:18-21
(KJV revised)

A moth attacks garments, and the figure of being “crushed”, “bruised” or

“broken” by a moth is unusual. It is odd to picture someone dwelling in a
house of clay being crushed by a moth. However, the juxtaposition of
such disparate images is common to Job. The moth eats garments, and in
political terms, “garments” is a figure for the rulers of cities and, as such,
rulers were being crushed before the moth.2 Yahweh offers a comparable
mixed figure in his speech when he says,

It [the land] is turned as clay to the seal; and they stand as

a garment. Job 38:14 (KJV)

This remark refers to the land being impressed by a royal seal as if it were
clay, which is a figure of foreign rule, and the response is just to stand as a
garment (before the moth). God identifies these people in his speech as
“the wicked ones” (Job 38:13).

The word for “moth” is rare (8x) and of the Prophets only Isaiah (2x) and
Hosea (1x) use the figure, which is consistent with the provenance we
have assigned to Job. Isaiah supplies the most significant detail, which
comes in a “Suffering Servant” passage:3

Behold, the Lord God will help me; who is he that shall
condemn me? lo, they all shall wax old as a garment; the
moth shall eat them up. Isa 50:9 (KJV), cf. 51:8

1 The RSV and NASB have “tent-cord”; Pope, Job, 38 notes that the verb
“to pluck” is used in contexts of breaking camp. The figure is used in
Hezekiah’s lament (Isa 38:12), of which Eliphaz’ remark is an echo.
2 A comparable figure is used today of managers in companies when they

are referred to as “the suits”.

3 The link is more poignant if the (individual) “Suffering Servant” is based

on Hezekiah, a topic we deal with in connection with Job 16:10.

122
This is spoken of those in Jerusalem who opposed the Suffering Servant,
and who instead surrounded themselves with their own prophetic “lights”
(Isa 50:11; Job 18:5). These men would be “bruised” even as they in turn
bruised the Suffering Servant (Isa 53:5, 10). This connection allows the
suggestion that these were the same type of wicked men whom God was
“shaking out of the land” (Job 38:13), and who therefore were
experiencing the “morning and evening” curse of Deut 28:67, “destroyed1
from morning to evening”; they would die without wisdom. They were
just “suits” that would be consumed by moths. The figure here is one of
vulnerability; exactly how the opponents of the Suffering Servant would
be consumed by moths is not stated.

5. Job 5—Eliphaz’ First Speech Continued

In Job 5, Eliphaz continues with his political analysis. Certain expressions
stand out as indicating a political and prophetic situation: “famine”,
“war”, and the “sword” (v. 20) are part of a “destruction” that is coming
upon Job (v. 21).

5.1 The Situation in the City

Eliphaz’ speech has already echoed Isa 35:3-4 (Job 4:3-4), and there may
be another echo with Isaiah 35 in his reference to “fools”:

“I have seen the foolish (lywa) taking root: but suddenly I

cursed his habitation.” Job 5:3 (KJV), cf. Jer 12:1-2

Isaiah had proclaimed that even “fools” (lywa—Isa 35:8) would not go
astray from the Way of Holiness that would lead them back to Zion after
the invasion. If Isaiah’s “fools” are Eliphaz’ “fools”, Eliphaz’ remark
would apply to an earlier stage of the invasion when they had taken root.2
The figure could refer to their consolidation of power. However,
eventually, Eliphaz says that vexation (v. 2, RSV) will kill the “foolish”,
and this is a reference to those who will be “slain” (grh, Isa 10:4, 14:19,
20, 30, 26:21, 27:1, 7) in a battle that Eliphaz can see looming. This

1 The verb is not common (17x) and significantly occurs in Isa 30:14 in
relation to the Assyrian invasion (Mic 1:7).
2 This reading could be supported by Isa 40:24 if this is an oracle of the

Assyrian Crisis. There could also be a contrasting echo with Isa 27:6,
which specifies the group that will take root instead of those specified in
Isa 40:24.
123
“vexation”1 is from God, and Job refers to this vexation in connection
with war (Job 10:17, RSV).

Eliphaz refers to “jealousy” or “zeal” slaying “the simple” (v. 2, RSV).

This could well be a “zeal” for war (Isa 42:13) on the part of an enemy
slaying “the simple”. The simple could be those who are deceived (htp),
relying on futile alliances (Hos 7:11) forged by the foolish. In the context
of Jerusalem, these men had taken “root” in the “sheepcote”
(“habitation”, v. 3, 2 Sam 7:82), but they would be uprooted (Isa 40:23-
24). Eliphaz says that he had cursed3 them as soon as they had taken root
in their habitation.

Eliphaz says, the children of the foolish will be “crushed”4 in the gate
before the moth (Job 4:19-20); his children will be far from salvation,
there is nothing to deliver them.5 Likewise, the hungry of the city eats up
the spiritual “harvest” of the foolish man, (his political counsel, leadership
and false prophecies), even though it is just thorns (Isa 8:21; 32:6,).
Meanwhile, the “robber” (the Assyrian) swallows the substance of the
fields (v. 5). Instead of this kind of person, Eliphaz advises Job to turn to
the saints (v. 1).

Eliphaz opines that although iniquity (!wa—v. 6, Isa 32:6) does not come
from the dust, nor “trouble” (political troubles) from the ground, but
from men of wickedness (Job 4:8), man is nevertheless born to “trouble”
as the arrows of flame fly upward6 to the city ramparts. In this

1 The word is rare (4x), see also Job 6:2, 17:7.

2 When David was taken from the sheepcote to be a shepherd over the
people, Jerusalem became his new sheepcote.
3 This is a sly dig at Job who had invited the foolish who had roused

Leviathan in the first place to curse his day (Job 3:8).

4 This is the Hebrew for “bruised” as in Isa 53:5, 10, and Eliphaz is saying

to Job that it is the children of the foolish that will be bruised (the tense is
imperfect (future)), even if it appears that the Lord has “bruised” him; see
further our remarks on Job 16.
5 This is the idea of deliverance from a siege, as can be seen in Isa 5:29,

31:5, 36:14-20, 37:11-12, 38:6. This eighth century motif combined with
the reference to “the gate” gives a Jerusalem focus to Eliphaz’ words.
6 The Hebrew expression is a figure meaning, “sons of flame” (@vr ynb,

see KJV mg.), and the city-siege context of Eliphaz’ remarks suggests
“arrows of flame” as in Ps 76:3, RSV. An echo with Deut 32:23-24 is also
suggested by the occurrence of “arrows” (v. 23) and the consequence of
“burning” (@vr, v. 24).
124
circumstance, Eliphaz says that he would seek unto God who does “great
things” as in Egypt (Ps 106:21), one who can do marvellous things (Isa
29:14), and who can give rain upon the fields (Isa 30:23). Those who place
their confidence in God will be exalted (Ps 107:41); those that mourn1 will
be safe (v. 11). Eliphaz is intimating here that Job’s political troubles are
of his own making.

Those in the city, who were attempting to grapple with the crisis, were
just groping in the dark (the text echoes Deut 28:29, Isa 59:10) without
the light of a prophet (Job 12:25). They were meeting secretly with the
envoys of the darkness that overshadowed the land (v. 14). God would
“capture”2 these so-called wise in their own craftiness (i.e. political
intrigue, Ps 83:3). But “the poor” (Isa 32:7) would be saved from “the
sword” of battle and from the “mighty one” (Isa 28:2).The “iniquity”
building up Jerusalem (Mic 3:10) would shut her mouth.

5.2 Beasts of the Earth and Field

Eliphaz concludes his speech with words of encouragement. He expresses
his view that evil comes from the Almighty in order that a man might be
disciplined and corrected (v. 17). He agrees with Job’s words in the
prologue when he says that “he maketh sore, and bindeth up: he
woundeth, and his hands make whole” (v. 183). This is the sentiment,
“…shall we receive good at the hand of God, and shall we not receive
evil?” (Job 2:10). Whether Eliphaz was right to think that God was
correcting Job is doubtful, as both the prologue and the epilogue declare
that Job is righteous.

Eliphaz asserts that God would deliver Job out of various troubles (v. 19),
and his catalogue of troubles expand the reader’s horizon as to what
difficulties are facing Job. Job is not just a local landowner, but someone
who faces war and the famine that comes with war. If Job seeks God, he
will be “hid” (Isa 49:2) from the “scourge of the tongue”, a figure

1 This form of the verb only occurs elsewhere in Job 6:16 where it is
translated “blackish” in the KJV, “turbid” in the NASB and “dark” in the
RSV. Wolfers, Deep Things, 301, suggests that the word should be re-
pointed and transliterated as “Kedarim”. However, the idea of “those
who mourn” fits Job 5:11 and 6:16 (Pss 42:10, 43:2).
2 This is the ordinary word for capturing a city and it shows Eliphaz

making a pun on the situation of imminent capture confronting the wise.

3 The text here echoes “healing and binding” (same Hebrew words) from

Isa 30:26.
125
denoting the propaganda of the Assyrian invader, and he will not be afraid
of the “destruction” when it comes (Joel 1:15,1 Isa 13:6).

Eliphaz mentions that Job would not be afraid of the “beasts of the
earth” (v. 22) and he would be at peace with the “beasts of the field” (v.
23). In Genesis 1 there are both “beasts of the earth” and “beasts of the
field”; the latter are a sub-group of the former and more closely linked to
man. Prophetic usage suggests that both groups are used to denote the
nations, because Israel is viewed as “Adam” with dominion over creation.
The mention of these beasts by Eliphaz reflects a prophetic perspective.

In Genesis 1 these creatures are related to the man—he is given dominion

over the beasts of the earth, the fish and the birds (Gen 1:30); and in
Genesis 2, these creatures are brought to the man for naming, which is a
practical consequence of this dominion (Ps 8:6-8). Noah was to have this
dominion also, but there was an added element:

“And the fear of you and the dread of you shall be upon
every beast of the earth, and upon every fowl of the air,
upon all that moveth upon the earth, and upon all the
fishes of the sea; into your hand are they delivered.” Gen
9:2 (KJV)

In the case of Israel, if they are a “typical man”—a son of God placed
into a land conceived as the “sanctuary of God”, then they too must relate
to “beasts of the earth”, “beasts of the field”, and to the “birds of the air”,
or the “beasts of the nations” (Zeph 2:14):

“And the Lord thy God will put out those nations before
thee by little and little: thou mayest not consume them at
once, lest the beasts of the field increase upon thee.”
Deut 7:22 (KJV), cf. Exod 23:29

And because they are a “new man”, like Noah, the same “fear and dread”
would be part of their rule over the nations:

1 The text here is using the three ideas of a “destruction” (dv) that “comes”
from the “Almighty” (Job 5:17, 21) found in Joel 1. Joel’s prophecy of the
Day of the Lord relates to the Assyrian Crises of Ahaz’ reign, which
culminated in the siege of Samaria, and described by Isaiah who quotes
Joel.
126
 “This day will I begin to put the dread of thee and the
fear of thee upon the nations that are under the whole
heaven.” Deut 2:251 (KJV)

The function of Israel was to be God’s instrument to destroy the beasts of

the field (Deut 7:24) and to subdue the nations. However, the curses of
Deuteronomy 28 prophesy that Israel would be removed into all the
kingdoms of the earth if they disobeyed God,

“And thy carcase shall be meat unto all fowls of the air,
and unto the beasts of the earth, and no man shall fray
them away.” Deut 28:26(KJV), cf. Jer 7:33

The beasts of the field and the fowls of heaven would ravage the man
(Israel) out of their fear of him.

Eliphaz’ argument may be using this general symbology to assure Job that
he should not be afraid of the “beasts of the earth” or the “beasts of the
field”; they would be at peace with Israel (v. 24). Eliphaz uses the figure
of a “peaceable habitation” and the text here may very well echo Isaiah,

“And thou shalt know that thy tabernacle (lha) shall be in

peace (~wlv); and thou shalt visit thy habitation (hwn), and
shalt not sin.” Job 5:24 (KJV)

“And my people shall dwell in a peaceable habitation

(~wlv hwn), and in sure dwellings, and in quiet resting
places…” Isa 32:18 (KJV)

“Look upon Zion, the city of our solemnities: thine eyes

shall see Jerusalem a quiet habitation (hwn), a tabernacle
(lha) that shall not be taken down; not one of the stakes
thereof shall ever be removed, neither shall any of the
cords thereof be broken.” Isa 33:20 (KJV)

The peaceable habitation (Jerusalem) is a sheepcote (hwn—“habitation”, v.

24), and Job is pictured as a shepherd, like David (2 Sam 7:8, Isa 38:122);
and like Abraham, his “seed” would be “many”:

1 This association of “fear and dread” with Noah and Israel further
confirms the typology of “beasts” and nations.
2 Eliphaz assures Job of long life (Job 5:26), which is a further link to Isa

38:12, alongside the vocabulary of the “tent”.

127
 “Thou shalt know also that thy seed shall be great, and
thine offspring as the grass of the earth.” Job 5:25 (KJV)

Here Eliphaz uses a word for “offspring” that is shared only with Isaiah
and refers to those who would be the “new creation” of people that
would be restored in the land after the Assyrian invasion (Isa 44:3, 61:9,
65:23). Eliphaz advocates that Job should therefore “seek” God (v. 8) and
not exclude God from “seeking” his day.

6. Job 6—Job’s Second Speech

Job 6 can be divided into four sections: an opening response to Eliphaz
(vv. 2-7), a lament directed to God (vv. 8-14), a complaint about internal
enemies (vv. 15-20), and a complaint about the friends (vv. 21-30). Job 7
can be treated as a single section of this speech, since it is directed
towards God. Several expressions and motifs indicate a political context:
deliverance from the enemy (v. 23), the “hand of the mighty” (v. 23), and
the “terrors of God” set in an array (v. 4). These ideas bring an
interpretative matrix to bear on the rest of the speech, and this shows
how the speech can be read in a political-military light.

6.1 Response to Eliphaz

Job opens his response to Eliphaz by picking up his echo of the
Abrahamic promise of a multitudinous seed (Job 5:25) with his
expression, “the sand of the sea” (Gen 22:17):

“Oh that my grief were throughly weighed, and my

calamity laid in the balances together! For now it would
be heavier than the sand of the sea: therefore my words
are swallowed up.” Job 6:2-3 (KJV)

“O that my vexation were weighed, and all my calamity

laid in the balances! For then it would be heavier than the
sand of the sea; therefore my words have been rash.” Job
6:2-3 (RSV)

Job offers the thought that his grief and his “calamity”1 are too high a
price to pay for the benefits of these promises. His simile of “weight and

1The MT has a marginal variation which occurs once outside Job, Psalms
and Proverbs in Mic 7:3 to describe the political “calamity” (“evil desire”,
128
balances” is used by Isaiah in a political context (Isa 40:12, 15), and it
allows a political meaning for Job’s figure. The grief and calamity
outweigh the “sand of the sea”, i.e. they outweigh the promises to
Abraham. It is at this point in his thinking that Job is affirming that his
suffering is not proportionate to any sin that he may have committed.

Job explains why his grief and calamity are great. The arrows of the
Almighty are “with him”; they are his companion. His spirit drinks their
poison, and the “terrors” of God are set in array against him. These
figures describe a state of war. Job describes his circumstances as a
“terror”, and this is a rare word (2x):

“For the arrows of the Almighty are within me, my spirit

drinks their poison (hmx1): the terrors (tw[b) of God do
set themselves in array against me.” Job 6:4 (KJV
revised)

“Thy fierce wrath goeth over me; thy terrors (tw[b) have
cut me off.” Ps 88:16 (KJV)

The language of “terrors” being set in “array” against Job is evocative of

an army encircled around a besieged city; the arrows in his case being
those of the Assyrians (Isa 5:28, 2 Kgs 19:32).

The language of “terror” is common to the accounts of the Assyrian

campaigns. Typical reports are,

“The terror and the glamour of Ashur, my lord,

overwhelmed [them]…and they dispersed.”2

“The terror (-inspiring) glamour of Ashur, my lord,

overpowered (however) the king of Meluhha.”3

Eliphaz had asserted that were Job to accept the chastening of the
Almighty, he would have peace with the beasts of the field (Job 5:23). Job
rejects the possibility of this prospect because he sees the “wild ass” and

RSV) of the politician (“great man”, RSV), and this is in the context of
Hezekiah’s reign.
1 The figure of “drinking” suggests that poison is intended (RSV, NASB);

see Pope, Job, 50.

2 ANET, 277.
3 ANET, 285.

129
the “ox” crying out for food, and this figure could be about nations
seeking a prey and a spoil from Judah.1 Consequently, Job says that he
cannot eat untreated food, and the figure seems to refer to the words of
advice available in the city:

“Can that which is untreated (lpt2) be eaten without salt,

or is there any taste in the slime of the purslane?” Job 6:6
(RSV revised)

This advice which he had refused to “touch” (v. 7) was now his meat.

6.2 Job’s Lament towards God

Job wishes that God would “cut him off” (v. 9) and this sentiment can be
compared with Hezekiah’s lament in Isa 38:12. Hezekiah is the only king
(apart from David) to offer a lament, which he does after his recovery
from sickness. Hezekiah’s sickness happened during the Assyrian
invasion, but when it started and how long it lasted is not specified (Isa
38:1). Hezekiah’s lament, however, is not just about a physical affliction.
The language includes detail about the military and political situation that
matches the complaint of Job. It also explains his perception of the reason
for the disease, i.e. Hezekiah was sick “for peace”—the peace of
Jerusalem (Isa 38:17). The lament also shows a different attitude towards
death: Job had longed for death (Job 3); Hezekiah sought to escape death
(Isa 38:2-6).3

There are several links4 between Hezekiah’s lament and Job’s speeches
and these are listed in the table below. The shared vocabulary in this table
may be nothing more than what might be expected of a lament. On the
other hand, this lamenting may share common vocabulary because they
arise from the same military and political context.

1 This figure is discussed in Chapter Seven in connection with God’s

speech and the challenge posed to Job about whether he can hunt prey
for the lioness. We also discuss which group might be symbolized by the
“wild ass” and suggest that this term denotes Ishmaelite tribes.
2 The word is rare (7x) but its semantic field includes the treatment of

walls and it is used in the description of false prophets (Lam 2:14,

“foolish”, Ezek 22:28, “untempered”).
3 This is common in the psychology of illness.
4 Some of these links are suggested by Wolfers, Deep Things, 56-57.

130
 “I am consigned to the gates of “Because he [God] hath loosed my
Sheol for the rest (rty) of my tent-cord (rty1), and afflicted me.”
years.” Isa 38:10 (RSV) Job 30:11 (KJV revised)
“So he who goes down to Sheol
does not come up.” Job 7:9 (RSV)
“Have the gates of death been
opened unto thee?” Job 38:17 (KJV)
“I said, I shall not see (har) the “O remember that my life is wind:
Lord in the land of the living.” mine eye shall no more see (har)
Isa 38:11 (RSV) good.” Job 7:7 (KJV)
“Mine generation is departed” Isa The KJV has “mine age” but
38:12a (KJV revised) Hebrew is overwhelmingly
translated as “generation”. The verb
describing what Hezekiah’s
generation does is commonly used
for pulling up tents and setting out
on a journey; this desertion is
mentioned again in Job 29
“Like a weaver (gra) I have rolled “My days are swifter than a weaver's
up my life; he cuts me off from shuttle (gra), and are spent without
the loom.” Isa 38:12b (RSV) hope.” Job 7:6 (KJV)
“[I said]…he will cut me off “Even that it would please God to
([cb) from the poor (hld2): from destroy me; that he would let loose
day even tonight (hlyl) wilt thou his hand, and cut me off ([cb)...”
make an end of me (~lv).” Isa Job 6:9 (KJV)
38:12c (KJV revised)
“…nights (hlyl) of misery are
apportioned to me.” Job 7:3 (RSV)

“For he will complete (~lv) what he

appoints for me; and many such
things are in his mind.” Job 23:14
(RSV)

1 A “tent-cord” is likely here following up Eliphaz’ remark in Job 4:21. In

Isa 38:10, the word has its conventional sense, and therefore any echo
here with Job 30:11 is a play on words; see Isa 38:12.
2 The word occurs 8x, all of which signify “the poor”. Hezekiah here

seems to be reflecting divine obligations (Job 29:12, 16).

131
 “…as a lion (yra), so will he break
“The night (hlyl) racks my bones
all my bones (~c[): from day even(~c[), and the pain that gnaws me
tonight (hlyl) wilt thou make an takes no rest.” Job 30:17 (RSV)
end of me (~lv).” Isa 38:13cd “For he will complete (~lv) what
(KJV) he appoints for me; and many such
things are in his mind.” Job 23:14
(RSV)
“…thou dost hunt me like a lion
(lxv)” Job 10:16 (RSV), cf. Jer
50:17
“…I did mourn as a dove: mine “Mine eye also is dim by reason of
eyes fail with looking upward…” sorrow…” Job 17:7 (KJV)
Isa 38:14c (KJV)
“O Lord, I am oppressed; be thou “Lay down a pledge (br[) for me
my security (br[)…” Isa 38:14d with thyself…” Job 17:3 (RSV)
(RSV)
“What shall I say? he hath both “But he is in one mind, and who can
spoken unto me, and himself hath turn him? And what his soul
done it…” Isa 38:15ab (KJV) desireth, even that he doeth.” Job
23:13 (KJV)
“…in the bitterness of my soul “I will complain in the bitterness of
(yvpn rm).” Isa 38:15c (KJV) my soul (yvpn rm).” Job 7:11 (KJV),
cf. 10:11

Job’s wish for death is understandable; he sees no prospect for

deliverance by his own strength. Nevertheless, he asserts that he has not
hidden the words of the “Holy One”, and this is a title for God which is
particularly a feature of the book of Isaiah.1 Job says of the Holy One,
“…let him not spare” (v. 10), and here the text echoes Isa 30:14,2

“And he shall break it as the breaking of the potters’

vessel that is broken in pieces; he shall not spare: so that
there shall not be found in the bursting of it a sherd to
take fire from the hearth, or to take water withal out of
the pit.” Isa 30:14 (KJV)

This text refers to the breaking of the treaty that existed between Judah
and Assyria. This was broken suddenly and Assyria turned on Jerusalem.
Similarly, Job could be evoking this event and saying that he does not
expect God to spare Judah or Jerusalem.

1 Of the 31 occurrences of the title, “Holy One of Israel”, 25 are in Isaiah.

2 The Hebrew expression is the same idiom.
132
6.3 The Internal Enemies
This next section (vv. 15-20) concerns Job’s so-called “brethren”.1 The
section ends when Job turns his attention to his friends (v. 21). In a
prophetic reading of Job, these brethren would be the leaders of
Jerusalem who have dealt “treacherously” (v. 15) by seeking a treaty with
Assyria.

“My brethren have dealt treacherously (dgb) as a brook;

as a wadi-channel (qypa) of flood-rivers they pass over
(rb[2)” Job 6:15 (KJV revised)

The motif of “treachery” in Isaiah is linked to Assyria reneging on this

treaty and turning on Jerusalem; this is repeatedly called a “treacherous”
act (Isa 21:2, 24:16, 33:1).

Job’s brethren deal treachery, and treachery is the act of an unreliable

partner. Hence, the treachery is compared to a brook with unreliable
flow—the treaty failed as quickly as a flash-flood. In consequence, the
“channel” for the “flood-rivers” of the invasion (Isa 8:7) was passing over
the land; the “they” of the second simile is the Assyrian confederacy. The
image is of many rivers (nations) converging into one channel and passing
over the land.

Job asserts that his brethren are dark:

“Those who are dark (rdq3) because of (!m) the ice, with
regard to them (wmyl[1) the snow will hide itself (~ll[ty2).

1 There may be an ironic link with 2 Sam 19:13 and the elders who sided
with Absalom.
2 Here we adopt the common meaning for rb[ of “passing over” or

“passing through” against the idiosyncratic preference of the RSV and

NASB— “vanish”. Pope, Job, 53 retains the sense of “overflow”. The
word is very common and used for the passing through the land of the
Assyrian invader (Isa 28:15).
3 Job’s brethren are described with this word. Wolfers argues, Deep Things,

301-302, that this is not the word for “darkening” (KJV, RSV), because
rivers are not “black” by reason of ice. Wolfers amends the MT and turns
the word into the proper noun for the Kedarim (Gen 25:13). However,
rdq is used for ideas of grief and darkness; see Pope, Job, 53. The idea of
“mourning” can be excluded here because in Job, this term is associated
133
 What time they wax warm, they are exterminated (tmc);
when it is hot, they are extinguished ($[d) from their
place.” Job 6:16-17 (KJV revised)

The brethren are “dark” because of the “ice”, but the figure is not one of
these brethren pictured as rushing torrents in a desert wadi with ice
bobbing in the flow. Rather, in the terminology of the author, the “ice” is
given by God (Job 38:29). As such this ice is a symbol of the word from
God,3 and it shows that Job’s brethren are dark. On this reading the
“snow” is a parallel symbol for the prophetic word, and Job is
personifying it when he says that it is hiding from his brethren.

When it is hot these brethren are extinguished (KJV mg.) from their place.
The figure is one of extinguishing a flame ($[d), and the verb is used
elsewhere in Job for the extinguishing of “candles” (Job 18:5, 6, 21:17).
The Hebrew does not clearly indicate what gets hot, but the singular form
is literally “in his heat”. Our suggestion is that it is a figure for the “noon-
day” heat of a siege (1 Sam11:9, Isa 18:4), and as such, it is another figure
for the invader, in addition to the singular figure of an overflowing
“channel of brooks” of the previous verse.

We will later argue (in connection with Job 18) that the “candle” of “the
wicked ones” denotes a false prophet upon which the elite of the city rely,
a candle that will be extinguished. Our proposal is that Job is making the
same point here—when the battle and siege is joined (“when it is hot”)
the prophecies of security from his brethren will be extinguished.

With this context of understanding, Job’s next words have obvious

relevance:

“The paths ($rd) of their way (xra) twist and turn (tpl);
they go to nothing (wht), and perish.” Job 6:18 (KJV
revised)

with those who are faithful (Job 5:11, 29:25). Here, Job describes his
“brethren” as “dark”.
1 The plural form of this preposition suggests that it refers to the

“brethren” of Job.
2 The imperfect hithpael form here suggests that the snow will hide itself;

this makes sense in a symbolic reading.

3 Intertextual echoes between Job 38:29 and Ps 147:16-17 also show this

symbology; we discuss this further in connection with God’s speech.

134
There seems to be an ironical echo here with Isa 30:11:

“Get you out of the way ($rd), turn aside out of the path
(xra), cause the Holy One of Israel to cease from before
us.” Isa 30:11 (KJV)

If we bring Isa 30:11 to bear on Job’s statement, it makes Job throw back
to his adversaries their own words: those who had turned aside “the just”
for “nothing” (Isa 29:21, wht) were themselves going up to “nothing”.1

The text next says,

“They beheld the paths (xra) of Tema; the ways (hkylh)

of Sheba awaited them.2 They were ashamed (vwb)
because he trusted (xjb yk); they went thither and were
confounded.” Job 6:19-20 (RSV revised)

This assertion gives a political colour to Job’s remark and supports our
prophetic reading. The Hebrew for “ways” (5x) is used in expressions to
do with carrying out decisions (Ps 68:24, Prov 31:27, Nah 2:6, Hab 3:6).
The parallelism here suggests that Job’s brethren looked to a course of
action promoted by Tema and Sheba in their handling of the crisis.

The identity of the one who trusts is not certain.3 If we follow the earlier
singular phrase “in his heat”, which we identified as the heat of the siege,

1 Because these men had brought “confusion” to Jerusalem, it was a city

of confusion (Isa 24:10, wht). The Hebrew word for “confusion” (wht)
here occurs 19x, of which 11 occur in Isaiah, 3 occur in Job and 1 in
Psalm 107:40; 4 more occurrences are accounted for by Gen 1:2, Deut
32:10, 1 Sam 12:21 and Jer 4:23. This spread indicates the possibility of a
shared topic for Job and Isaiah.
2 Here, we follow the translation of Wolfers, Deep Things, 304, who notes

that these are the ordinary words for “path” and “way”. Wolfers also
eschews the normal syntax and takes “paths of Tema” to be the object of
the verb, as in Num 23:21. Tema and Sheba are associated in Assyrian
campaign records of Tiglath-Pileser III, ANET, 283, and are likely
districts of Kedar (Isa 21:14-16).
3 Wolfers suggests that it is Hezekiah, Deep Things, 306, but this would

require the clause to be parenthetical and a remark of the narrator; it is

not a first-person utterance. The MT is singular, but Pope, Job, 49,
interprets as a plural.
135
the one “trusting” here would be Sennacherib. In God’s speech there is a
use of the same verb,

“Behold, he drinketh up a river, and hasteth not: he

trusteth (xjb) that he can draw up Jordan into his
mouth.” Job 40:23 (KJV)

The figure of “the Jordan” is an evident figure for Judah. The sense of
Job’s assertion in vv. 19-20 then is that Sennacherib was confident that he
could execute his plan. Seeing this confidence, Job’s brethren had sought
allies with those of Sheba and Tema (“they went thither to Tema and
Sheba”).

The associations of the verbs “to be ashamed” and “to be confounded”

include being ashamed and confounded through following the guidance
of the oracles of false gods (Isa 1:29, 24:23, Mic 3:7 have the two verbs).
Job’s brethren were ashamed and confounded because they sought the
military advice of those of Tema and Sheba. The staple diet of Tema (its
“bread and water”) was war (Isa 21:14).

6.4 Job’s Rejection of the Friends

In the next section (vv. 20-30), Job addresses his friends in the first
person: now, in the present situation, they had “nothing” to offer; they
too were afraid (v. 21). Job’s rejection of the friend’s comfort in his hour
of trial and his “casting down” is telling:

“Did I say, Bring unto me? Or, Give a reward for me of

your substance? Or, Deliver me from the enemy’s hand?
Or, Redeem me from the hand of the mighty [ones]
(#yr[)?” Job 6:22-23 (KJV revised)

Job recognizes an “enemy” and the grip of mighty or terrible ones. The
term for “mighty ones” is repeated in Isaiah:

“And I will punish the world for their evil, and the wicked
for their iniquity; and I will cause the arrogancy of the
proud to cease, and will lay low the haughtiness of the
terrible [ones] (#yr[).” Isa 13:11 (KJV revised)

The “mighty ones” mentioned by Job are the “terrible ones” of Isaiah.
The Hebrew word used in Job (#yr[, “terrible ones”) is a standard term
used throughout Isaiah to describe the Assyrians (Isa 25:3, 4, 5; 29:5, 20).
This echo suggests that Job had not asked his friends to offer military
136
assistance, or offer a tribute (a “reward”, RSV—“bribe”) to the Assyrian
invader. In terms of the parable in the prologue, the friends represent
Edomite tribes that might have offered such help. Job’s appeal to the
friends is that they not return a verdict of “iniquity” upon him, but rather
a verdict of “righteousness” (v. 29).

7. Job 7—Job’s Second Speech Continued

In Job 7, Job turns his remarks towards God. The speech fits a patriarchal
context insofar as its themes centre on Job and his personal mental and
physical suffering. However, there are intertextual connections which
suggest that the catalyst for this suffering is the Assyrian crisis and that
Job is a cipher for Hezekiah.

7.1 Job’s Address to God

Translations of Job 7:1 offer various readings of the Hebrew:

“Is there not an appointed time to man upon earth? Are

not his days also like the days of a hireling?” (KJV)

“Has not man a hard service upon earth, and are not his
days like the days of a hireling?” (RSV)

“Is not a man conscripted on earth?” (Good)

“Truly a mortal is forced to labour on earth.” (Habel)

The KJV mg. suggests, “Is there not warfare for man upon the earth”?
The relevant Hebrew word, abc, is common, and its database of use is
“host” (x393), “war” (x41), “army” (x29), “battle” (x5), “service” (x5), and
a few minor variations. Translations have opted for the idea of service,1
because of the theme of Job 7 and the parallel clause, but a parabolic
reading of Job would suggest the idea of war or a battle-host:

“Is there no host (abc) for man upon earth? Are not his
days also like the days of a hireling?” Job 7:1 (KJV
revised), cf. 10:17

1 Pope, Job, 58, notes that it means literally, “army/warfare”. C.

Westermann, Isaiah 40-66, (London: SCM Press, 1969), 35, notes a link
with Isa 40:2, but opts for the idea of “service” and mis-reads Isa 40:2. A
“reply” to the question in Job 7:1 may however be found in Isa 40:2,
where it is stated that a “host” is ready.
137
The conjunction of these two ideas—a host and a hireling is one that is
found in Isaiah:1

“But now the Lord hath spoken, saying, Within three

years, as the years of a hireling, and the glory of Moab
shall be contemned, with all that great multitude (abc);
and the remnant shall be very small and feeble.” Isa 16:14
(KJV)

“For thus hath the Lord said unto me, Within a year,
according to the years of a hireling, and all the glory of
Kedar shall fail…” Isa 21:16 (KJV)

There is therefore no reason to go against the majority sense of abc and

translate it with some idea of “service”. Instead, it can be argued that the
text has encoded an expectation (mirrored in Isaiah, cf. 40:2 KJV) that
there is a period of war, which Job faces, which will last for the length of
time associated with a hireling. Hence, Job says that he is made to possess
“months” of vanity (v. 3). It is from this comparison that he is led to
reflect on figures associated with hirelings.

The figures of servitude are natural; the desire for shadow from the heat
and the desire for wages (v. 3). There may be an echo here with the desire
for a shadow to be provided by Yahweh (Isa 4:6, 25:4-5), rather than a
shadow provided by Egypt (Isa 30:2-3). Instead, Job expects months of
“vanity” (awv), and here there is a link with Isa 30:28:

“And his breath, as an overflowing stream, shall reach to

the midst of the neck, to sift the nations with the sieve of
vanity (awv): and there shall be a bridle in the jaws of the
people, causing them to err.” Isa 30:28 (KJV), cf. 8:8

Job expects months of vain speculation. Job’s physical and mental

condition (vv. 3-7) appears to reflect the state of the nation and echo the
Deuteronomy curses:

When it is night, he wishes it were morning and vice-versa (v. 4, Deut

28:67).

1 Only in Isaiah and Job is there a comparison with a hireling’s time-

period.
138
His flesh is clothed with “dust” (rp[); likewise, God would make the land
into “dust” (rp[, Deut 28:24).

Job says,

“My flesh is clothed with maggots (hmr) and clods of

dust; my skin is divided ([gr1), and become loathsome.”
Job 7:5 (KJV revised)

Job states that his flesh was clothed with “maggots”, and this rare word
(7x) only occurs outside Job in Exodus 16 (1x) and Isaiah 14 (1x). If we
bring the Isaiah text to bear on Job, it predicts that the king of Babylon
would be “broken” in the land (Isa 14:25), and that maggots would be his
bed (Isa 14:11, RSV). The echo in Job would be a contrast with the fate of
the Assyrian king of Babylon: to be eaten by maggots was fitting for the
king of Babylon, but not for a righteous Davidic king. Job is picturing his
living state as an unjust living death.

Job laments that he has no hope (v. 6, Ps 102:3), and he expects to die
(vv. 8-10), but this despondency turns into a determination to resume his
complaint in the “bitterness of his soul” (v. 11, Isa 38:15). Thus he
exclaims,

“Am I a sea, or a dragon (!ynt), that thou settest a watch

over me?” Job 7:12 (KJV revised)

Job is questioning God about whether he is “the Sea” or “the Dragon”.

Some scholars see here references to mythical creatures, but it is just as
possible to see a reference to the nations (symbolized by “the Sea”) and
the super-power of the day (symbolised by “the dragon”). In an eighth
century context, this would be Assyria (Isa 27:1), and Job would be
expressing the view that Judah was not a “power” in the region to be
watched. The privileged status of Judah ought to have been that of the
“man” of creation, who was given dominion over that creation (Gen
1:26). Hence, Job’s indignation is further expressed with a parody upon
Psalm 8:

What is man, that thou shouldest magnify him? and that

thou shouldest set thine heart upon him? And that thou

1 The sense of “divided” is chosen by the KJV in Job 26:12, Isa 51:15, and
Jer 31:35, which are the only other texts to have the Qal form of the verb.
In an eighth century context, there may be an echo here with Mic 3:2-3.
139
 shouldest visit him every morning, and try1 him every
moment ([gr)? Job 7:17-18 (KJV)

Job concludes his speech with the words,

Have I sinned? What have I done to you, O watcher of

men?2 Why have you set me as your target, so that I am a
burden to myself (yl[)? Job 7:20 (NASB)

There is a double meaning here: Job’s plight is a burden for him, but it is
also a means of forcing him to understand God’s purpose for himself and
the nation; it is a prophetic “burden”3 in the form of real happenings—a
type of what was happening to the nation (an enacted prophetic parable).4

8. Job 8—Bildad’s First Speech

Bildad opens his remarks by wondering,

How long will you say these things, and the words of your
mouth be a great spirit (xwr)? Job 8:2 (RSV revised)

The KJV, RSV and NASB offer “wind” as a translation, but they place to
one side the context of Job 7:11 for setting the sense of xwr.

“Therefore I will not restrain my mouth; I will speak in

the anguish of my spirit (xwr); I will complain in the
bitterness of my soul.” Job 7:11 (RSV)

Eliphaz had claimed the inspiration of a “spirit”, and Bildad is comparing

Job’s anguish to a state of mind where there is the presence of a strong
spirit.5

1 Job’s sense of being “tried” is echoed in Isa 28:16 where the figure is of
a “tried” stone—see also Job 23:10.
2 Modern translations prefer the question form, but the Hebrew has no

question particle, and so the KJV may be correct: “I have sinned”. This is
Job’s first use of the verb “to sin” and his first direct address to God. It
should be linked with the narrator’s comment in Job 1:22, 2:10.
3 The word is common enough with both senses. As a prophetic burden

(27x) from God, see 2 Kgs 9:25, Isa 13:1. This sense is common in Isaiah
(10x).
4 Compare Pyeon, You Have Not Spoken, 128-129.
5 Similarly, Job 6:26 could be an accusation that the friends attributed his

words of desperation to a “spirit”.

140
In the vision of Micaiah, a spirit goes forth from the presence of the Lord
to be a “lying spirit” in the mouth of the king’s prophet (1 Kings 22). In
the same way, Bildad may think that there is a spirit inspiring Job to be
verbose. The Hebrew for “great spirit” (v. 2) is better rendered “strong
spirit”, as the underlying word1 conveys the idea of strength through
numbers (e.g. Job 34:24, Isa 16:14, 17:12, 28:2).

8.1 Job’s Need for Repentance

Bildad’s speech does not focus on a military and political situation. He is
more concerned with Job’s need for repentance, and with identifying the
fate of “the hypocrite” who opposes Job. Bildad’s speech is not overtly
hostile to Job, and like Eliphaz’ first speech it is sympathetic and friendly
to some extent. Job’s first reaction confirms this reading because he says,
“I know it is so of a truth” (Job 9:2).

Bildad states that God does not pervert justice (v. 3, 34:12), but he is
careful to hedge about any accusations of blame. He suggests tentatively
that Job’s “children” have sinned and this is the reason why God had sent
them away (v. 4). On the surface, this detail conflicts with the prologue
which narrates the death of Job’s children. Such a conflict may indicate
that Bildad is using “children” in a symbolic sense. Our suggestion is that
these children are the population in the countryside and cities who have
been “sent away” into “the hand of their transgression” (Amos 3:142). On
this reading, Bildad is seeking to motivate Job to repent and avoid the
example of his “children”.

Bildad picks up on Job’s last words that God would seek Job early in the
morning and not find him; he says that Job ought instead to seek God
early (v. 5, KJV “betimes”). If Job made his supplication to God, he
would “rouse” himself for Job, just as there were those who were
“rousing” Leviathan (Job 3:8, 8:6), and God would bless him (v. 7, 42:12
“his small beginning would be doubled in his latter days”). Bildad invites
Job to listen to the fathers (vv. 8-10), and to purify3 his words (v. 6), and
God will “restore” the habitation of his righteousness. In prophetic terms,
this would be the prospect of the restoration of Jerusalem.

1 The word is unique to Job (6x) and Isaiah (3x).

2 “Transgression” is a particular theme of Amos, and Bildad may be
evoking this tradition.
3 The Hebrew is not common, and given Bildad’s later remarks about

“lamps”, the word may echo Exod 27:20, Lev 24:2, and suggest that, from
Bildad’s point of view, Job’s prophetic lamp is not pure.
141
With these encouragements, inter-textual echoes suggest that Bildad refers
to a political situation in his next words:

“Can the rush grow up without mire? can the flag grow
without water? Whilst it is yet in his greenness, and not
cut down, it will wither (vby) before any other herb.” Job
8:11-12 (KJV revised)

This may be nothing more than a proverb; on the other hand, it may be a
metaphor for Egypt, from which military aid was being sought. The
“rush” is the “bulrush” plant of which Moses’ basket was made (Exod
2:3), and in an echo with the survival of that deliverer in a “vessel of
bulrushes upon the waters”, Isaiah1 refers to diplomatic efforts by
Cushites (Lower Egypt),

“That sendeth ambassadors by the sea, even in vessels of

bulrushes upon the waters, saying, Go, ye swift
messengers, to a nation scattered and peeled, to a people
terrible from their beginning hitherto; a nation meted out
and trodden down, whose land the rivers have spoiled!”
Isa 18:2 (KJV)

In the light of this connection, Bildad’s point seems to be that diplomats

thrive in the water and mire of international politics, but even if the
“plant” of “Egypt and Cush” was green and “strong”, at this time God
would see to it that it would wither before any plant. The thought is
similarly expressed by Isaiah in the same oracle,

“For afore the harvest, when the bud is perfect, and the
sour grape is ripening in the flower, he shall both cut off
the sprigs with pruning hooks, and take away and cut
down the branches.” Isa 18:5 (KJV)

Bildad’s comparison is that,

“So are the paths of all that forget God; and the
hypocrite's hope shall perish.” Job 8:13 (KJV)

1The word for “bulrush” is not common (4x) and apart from Job and
Exodus, only Isaiah uses the word.
142
These were those in the city whose hope was in the possibility of
diplomatic efforts.

8.2 The Fate of the Hypocrite

Bildad refers to “the hypocrite” (v. 13). The Hebrew word (@nEx),
translated “hypocrite”, refers to one of “the wicked ones” (v. 22), which
we have argued are the ruling political elite who favoured compromise
and alliance. It is a fairly rare word and outside Job (8x) it is used only in
Isaiah (3x), Psalms (1x) and Proverbs (1x). The Isaiah texts use the word
of the nation and in particular those in Jerusalem:

“I will send him [Assyria] against an hypocritical nation,

and against the people of my wrath will I give him a
charge, to take the spoil, and to take the prey, and to
tread them down like the mire of the streets.” Isa 10:6
(KJV)

“The sinners in Zion are afraid; fearfulness hath

surprised the hypocrites. Who among us shall dwell with
the devouring fire? who among us shall dwell with
everlasting burnings?” Isa 33:14 (KJV)

Bildad’s argument is that “the hypocrite” does not heed the wisdom of
the former age. He leans upon the “house” of a spider, which could be a
metaphor for a diplomatic package (a web of deceit), but this house would
fall (vv. 14-15). He also compares “the hypocrite” to a green plant “before
the sun”, and this may be a reference to worshiping the Sun-god
Shamash1 in a grove (v. 16, Isa 1:29-30); his shoots appear to spread forth
healthily (v. 16, Hos 14:7), and he clings to his “heap” (altar—Hos
12:11).2

On a prophetic reading, the “hypocrite” is therefore one of the hypocrites

in Jerusalem.3 He is one who trusted in a “spider’s web” (the house of the

1 This god is prominent in the records of the Assyrian campaigns,

initiating war, and as a witness to treaties, ANET, 276, 277, 288, 289, and
290.
2 The related verb to the adjective, “hypocrite”, is used in texts which

speak of the priests and prophets polluting and profaning the land, see Jer
3:2, 9, 23:11.
3 The identification of an individual who is “of Belial” is made in Nah

1:11, 15. This person “comes out of the people” and imagines evil against
the Lord; when he is cut off, the feasts are restored. The context of the
143
spider). The Hebrew for “spider” is unique to Job and Isaiah, who talks of
the hypocrites as weaving spider’s webs:

“They hatch cockatrice’ eggs, and weave the spider’s

web: he that eateth of their eggs dieth, and that which is
crushed breaketh out into a viper.” Isa 59:5 (KJV)1

Bildad could easily be talking about this internal political wrangling (the
spider’s web) along with the religious beliefs of the “hypocrite”. The
hypocrite’s “roots” are weaved like a spider weaves a web upon the basis
of oracles and omens delivered around the altar-heap (v. 17, Hos 12:11).

Bildad goes on to say,

“If he [God] destroy him from his place, then it shall

deny him, saying, I have not seen thee.” Job 8:18 (KJV)

Here Bildad refers to the possibility that God would destroy “the
hypocrite” from his place, and in this eventuality, his place of worship and
the Sun-god would deny any knowledge of him. In this eventuality the
“mirth”2 that the “hypocrite” was promoting (a joy arising from apparent
diplomatic success with Egypt) would cease (v. 19); others would spring
up from the “dust” that was Jerusalem (Isa 29:4, 52:2).

Behold, God will not reject a blameless man, nor take the
hand of evildoers. Job 8:20 (RSV)

Bildad’s fundamental argument to Job is that God will not cast away Job
if he is perfect (v. 20), and that those of Job’s brethren who hate him and
oppose him in Jerusalem will be clothed with shame (v. 22). The term for
“evildoers (14x) occurs in Isa 1:4 and 31:20 for Hezekiah’s opponents in
Jerusalem. The expression “take the hand” indicates a common Near
Eastern ritual of kingship where the god confirmed the king in office by
taking his hand in a procession to the god’s temple. The most prominent
example is that of Marduk and the king of Babylon. Yahweh uses the

first oracle of Nahum has several points of contact with Job and Isaiah in
their description of the Assyrian crisis (e.g. “whirlwind”, “storm”, “the
sea”, “mountains”, “day of trouble”, “flood”, “drunkards”, “passing
through”, and “breaking”).
1 We read this text as a pre-exilic oracle against the political elite in

Jerusalem, who are dealing with the nations to achieve peace and stability.
2 Isaiah castigates “mirth” in Isa 24:8, 11, 32:13.

144
same language of the Servant (Hezekiah, Isa 42:6) and Cyrus (Isa 45:1).
The use of the expression here indicates that Job’s opponents were
making a rival claim to kingship.1

Job may be clothed with worms and clods of dust (Job 7:5), but his
opponents would be clothed with shame. The dwelling place (temple) of
these “wicked ones” would come to nothing. Instead, Job’s lips would be
filled with shouting, and this would be the shouting associated with
victory in war (v. 21, Josh 6:20, 1 Sam 4:5, Ps 47:5).

9. Job 9—Job’s Third Speech

In the first part of this speech, Job agrees with Bildad (v. 2), but he
questions how a man can present his case before God (vv. 3-4). He then
goes on to describe the military and political situation. Several expressions
indicate this topic including “the scourge slay suddenly” (v. 23), “the earth
is given into the hand of the wicked” (v. 24) and “the rod” (v. 34). There
are also echoes of the prophetic language of the “day of the Lord” (vv. 5-
7).

9.1 Heaven and Earth

Job describes God’s power in conventional cosmographic terms, and his
language can be straightforwardly connected to a familiar prophetic
pattern:

Job says that God “shakes the earth out of her place” (v. 6), and this
echoes with Isa 13:13, “Therefore I will shake the heavens, and the earth
shall remove out of her place”. As we argued above (Chapter One), this
oracle of Isaiah describes the invasion of Palestine by the king of Assyria;
it is addressed to Shalmaneser V, but it was Sennacherib that fulfilled its
terms (Isa 14:16, 25).

Job says that God overturns “mountains” (v. 5), and here he reflects the
symbology of prophets like Micah (Mic 6:2), Habakkuk (Hab 3:10) and
Nahum (Nah 1:5) which describe God at war with the nations.

Job says that God “commands2 the sun not to rise” and “seals the stars”
(v. 7, Amos 4:13 “making the morning darkness”). This seems to be

1 H. M. Barstad, “On the So-Called Babylonian Literary Influence in

Second Isaiah” SJOT 2 (1987): 90-110 (99).
2 The form of this verb with article occurs 9x, and 4x in Isaiah (Isa 41:13,

44:26-28).
145
another way of describing the “darkening” of the sun1 and the stars (the
light of the stars is sealed).2 As such, this echoes with Joel 2:10, 3:15, both
of which refer to happenings that take place during an invasion of the
land.

Job says that God “treads down the waves of the sea” (v. 8, Mic 1:3,
Amos 4:13 “treads upon the high places of the earth”). This echoes with
those cosmological texts that show God in control of the sea and the
“light” of the heavens (Isa 5:30, Jer 31:35).

Job says that God “alone” stretches out the heavens (Isa 44:243). Here Job
contrasts the claims of others gods to control the heavens (a
presupposition behind Isa 2:11-18 and Amos 5:8). God alone sets the
constellations in the sky and he alone controls the peoples and their
“deities” which are represented by these constellations. Thus God alone
can withdraw the light of these constellations (Isa 13:10).

Job states that,

“God will not turn back his anger; beneath him bowed
the helpers of Rahab.” Job 9:13 (RSV)

Intertextual echoes suggest that the expression, “helpers of Rahab”, refers

to the help that the leaders of Jerusalem sought from Egypt4 in the time
of the Assyrian crisis:

“For Egypt’s help is worthless and empty, therefore I

have called her “Rahab who sits still.” Isa 30:7 (RSV)

“The Egyptians are men, and not God; and their horses
are flesh, and not spirit. When the Lord stretches out his
hand, the helper will stumble, and he who is helped will

1 Parsons notes that Job does not use the normal Hebrew for “the Sun”
and suggests that this may be a “subtle polemic against sun-worship”,
Literary Features, 44.
2 We will argue in connection with Bildad’s second speech that this

“sealing of the stars” refers to the sealing up of the astrological wisdom

associated with Job’s enemies.
3 This connection is also suggested by Dhorme, Job, 230, Davidson, Job,

lxxiv.
4 This symbolic identification is noted by Pope, Job, 71.

146
 fall, and they will all perish together.” Isa 31:3 (RSV), cf.
51:9, Pss 87:4, 89:11

Job recognises that when God does not withdraw his anger, the help from
Egypt will be worthless. He also says that if Egypt is powerless, what can
Job say to God that might take away the imminent threat (v. 14)? Job is
sceptical that God would answer him because he has evidently made
supplication to him, and yet there has been no answer of deliverance
(vv.15-16).

9.2 Job’s Cause of Action

Job has a cause of action (a lawsuit) against God and he uses the
metaphor of a trial to describe his needs. Legal terminology in Job is well
recognized,1 and here Job uses the verb “to contend” (byr,2 v. 3, Job 10:2,
13:8, 19, 23:6, 33:13, 40:2) to question whether he can contend with God
on a legal basis. He states his case thus:

“For he bruises me with a tempest and multiplies my

wounds without cause.” Job 9:17 (NASB)

God bruises Job in a “storm”, but on a political reading the remark is

ironic. The word is rare (2x) and picked up in Nah 1:3 to describe God’s
vengeance.3 Job could therefore be complaining that it is unfair for him to
be bruised in an act of judgment by God upon the land.4

The text also uses a rare word for the action of bruising (3x), which
occurs in Gen 3:15. The word fits with the echoes we have been tracing
between Job and Isaiah: in this echo, Job is pictured as the seed of the

1 Habel, Job, 29-32.

2 See J. Limburg, “The Root byr and the Prophetic Lawsuit”, JBL 88
(1969): 291-304.
3 Scholars date Nahum’s oracles in the seventh century, but it is possible

that his career began in the eighth century and that the first oracle relates
to the crisis of 701; alternatively, this language may be retrospective.
4 Job has been seen as pious and patient as well as a rebel by

commentators. We do not offer a character assessment of Job in this

study, but we recognise that his mind is conflicted and that he makes both
critical and praiseworthy remarks about God. The “patience of Job” (Jms
5:11) could summarise Job’s “steadfastness” throughout the dialogue in
maintaining his innocence and refusing to follow the counsel of the
friends that he repents and seeks the favour of God. However, part of this
steadfastness is his expression of anger towards God.
147
woman, who is bruised by the Leviathan-Serpent of Assyria (Isa 27:1).
The “wounds” that he has mimic the spiritual state of the nation (Isa
1:6);1 according to Job, God has done this without cause. Thus Job states
that he is certain of one thing: God destroys both “the perfect one” and
“the wicked one” together (v. 22).

Job uses the expression, “the wicked one”, of an individual (one of “the
wicked ones”) who exercises power in the land instead of him. However,
he says that God will equally destroy the “perfect one” (himself, Job 1:1)
and “the wicked one” in the Assyrian invasion:

“This is one thing, therefore I said it, He makes an end

(hlkm) of the perfect one and the wicked one. If the
scourge (jwv) slay suddenly, he will laugh at the trial of
the innocent. The land (#ra) is given into the hand of the
wicked one: he will overwhelm (hsk2) the faces of her
judges (hyjpv) …” Job 9:22-24 (KJV revised)

Job says that God has given the land into the hand of the “wicked one”,
and that the “wicked one” overwhelms the faces of “her” judges. Here the
form of the common Hebrew word for “judge” indicates a “her”, and it
connects up with the feminine word “land”, so Job is saying that the one
who now has power over the land has overwhelmed (corrupted) the
judges of the land.

Job also says that the agent of his own destruction and that of the “wicked
one” is “the scourge”, which is a term used of the Assyrian invader:

“And your covenant with death shall be disannulled, and

your agreement with hell shall not stand; when the
overflowing scourge (jwv)3 shall pass through, then ye
shall be trodden down by it.” Isa 28:18 (KJV)

Job’s righteousness has not prevented the invasion of his land or the siege
of Jerusalem. There is therefore no point in entering into a trial with God
on the grounds of his righteousness. What would a fresh declaration

1 The word for “wounds” is rare (7x) and only occurs in Isa 1:6 in the
prophetic corpus.
2 The sense of this verb here is “overwhelm”; for similar usage see Ps

140:9 and Hab 2:17.

3 The scourge of the tongue for Hezekiah was the blasphemy of

Rabshakeh (Job 5:21).

148
achieve? In any event, God would not hold Job innocent (vv. 27-33).
Accordingly, Job says,

“Let him take his rod away from me, and let not dread of
him terrify me.” Job 9:34 (RSV)

The “rod” here is the Assyrian (Isa 10:5, 30:31); and Job wants the
“dread” of him to be taken away. The word for “dread” here is not
uncommon but only occurs twice in the Prophets (Isa 33:18, Jer 50:38,
NASB). The Isaiah text is part of a description of the aftermath of the
invasion and after the deliverance of Jerusalem. At this time, Isaiah says,
“Your mind will muse on the terror” (RSV), i.e. the inhabitants of
Jerusalem will think back on the “dread” that they had experienced.

10. Job 10—Job’s Third Speech Continued

Job continues his third speech in Job 10 with further elaboration of his
complaint.

10.1 Job’s Complaint

Job asks God whether it is “good” that he should favour the counsel of
“the wicked ones”:

“Is it good unto thee that thou shouldest oppress,1 that

thou shouldest despise the work of thine hands, and
shine upon the counsel of the wicked ones (~y[vr)?” Job
10:3 (KJV revised)

Job’s contrast here is between himself and “the wicked ones”. Job was the
“work of God’s hands”, insofar as he was a type of Adam (Gen 2:7, Job
14:15, Isa 64:8). Continuing our political reading, he had a reasonable
expectation for support from God in his governance of the nation, yet the
wicked ones were in power and he lay stricken.

The word for “counsel” here denotes political counsel,2 and so Job is
referring to those in the nation who have their own agenda. He says that
God is shining upon their counsel, but this is a rhetorical question, with

1 Job accuses God of “oppressing” the people, and the same Hebrew
word occurs in Isaiah 52:4 in connection with Assyria.
2 We discuss this word in Chapter Seven connection with God’s remark to

Job: “Who is this that darkeneth counsel by words without knowledge?”

(Job 38:2).
149
which he is challenging God to justify his apparent favour of the counsel of
the wicked. The historical context for such favour would have been when
Hezekiah was sick unto death and unable to rule. Day-to-day control of
the nation had been handed over to the political elite in Jerusalem, who
favoured policies such as surrender and tribute (2 Kgs 18:14-16), and
alliances with Egypt and southern nations (Isa 30:1-5). These policies
appeared to work until they were suddenly found wanting, and yet they
were still being pursued in the face of the invader outside the gate.

Job accuses God of investigating him for iniquity, and the implication is
that this was being undertaken by his opponents in the city. He says,

“If I be wicked, woe unto me; and if I be righteous, yet

will I not lift up my head. I am full of confusion;
therefore see thou mine affliction.” Job 10:15 (KJV)

The problem is that Job does not understand the reason for his affliction,
let alone that of the nation. Even accepting that he was a sinner does not
explain the calamity that he faced, given the disparity of proportion
between his sin and the disaster. He says,

“For it increaseth.1 Thou huntest me as a fierce lion: and

again thou shewest thyself marvellous (alp) upon me.”
Job 10:16 (KJV)

The rare word (5x) for “increaseth” is used of water rising (Ezek 47:5), as
well as the triumph of God at the Red Sea. In political terms, Job’s
reference could be to the overflowing (rising) flood of the invasion rising
against him at Jerusalem (Isa 28:2, Amos 8:8, 9:5). The figure of the
“fierce lion”2 echoes God’s action towards Northern Israel (Hos 5:14,
13:7), an action now evident towards Judah. The marvellous work (alp)
that God visits upon Job is the siege (alp, Isa 29:14).

“Thou dost renew thy witnesses against me, and increase

thy vexation toward me; changes of garment (hpylx3) and

1 The subject is unexpressed in the Hebrew; Pope, Job, 80, emends the MT
to give “bold as a lion”.
2 A rare word (7x) only appearing twice in the Prophets and used there for

Yahweh. Elsewhere (Job 4:10, 28:8) it refers to Judah or has a proverbial

sense (Ps 91:13, Prov 26:13).
3 The word conveys a change of clothing, e.g. 2 Kgs 5:23.

150
 hosts of war (abc) are with me (ymm[).” Job 10:17 (RSV
revised)

Here Job further describes the desperate plight. God renews witnesses
against him (Mic 1:2); his clothing changes and hosts of war are with him.

Finally, Job closes this speech with the following lament,

“Are not my days few? Cease then, and let me alone, that I
may take comfort a little, Before I go whence I shall not
return, even to the land of darkness and the shadow of
death; A land of darkness, as darkness itself; and of the
shadow of death, without any order, and where the light is
as darkness.” Job 10:20-22 (KJV)

While this lament might traditionally be taken as a wish for death, with the
death-state being described in terms of a land, in terms of the political
parable in Job, it reflects an expectation of captivity by the Assyrian army
and deportation to the “land of darkness”.1

11. Job 11—Zophar’s First Speech

Zophar’s first speech can also be read in political and prophetic terms, if
we align his vocabulary with the Prophets. He says first that Job is a “man
of prating lips” (KJV, “full of talk”),

Should not the multitude of words be answered? and

should a man full of talk be justified? Should thy lies
make men hold their peace? and when thou mockest,
shall no man make thee ashamed? Job 11:2-3 (KJV)

Two echoes give a political flavour to Zophar’s opening assertion:

1) Isaiah uses the word for “full of talk” in apolitical sense (hpf2, Isa 6:5,
36:5), with the last instance being an insult directed to Hezekiah for
trusting in Yahweh (2 Kgs 18:20).

2) Zophar uses another word (vrx) from the Jerusalem wall incident,
“hold their peace”—the people on the wall “held their peace” (2 Kgs
18:36).

1 We noted the use of this description of Assyria above in connection

with those “sitting” in darkness (Ps 107:10-14).
2 Isaiah is the only prophet to use the dual form of the word.

151
If we use these two echoes to contextualise Zophar’s words, his point
seems to be that just as Sennacherib’s lies made the people hold their
peace, so too Job’s “lies” made men hold their peace.1

Zophar is therefore outraged at Job’s defence of his cleanness (Job 11:4).

He cannot be clean if policies of appeasement and diplomatic subterfuge
are being practised. Job had claimed, “…my doctrine is pure” (echoing
Deut 32:2, Job 8:6, 16:17, 33:9), and this is unacceptable to Zophar.2

Zophar wants God to show Job the secrets of his providential wisdom,
that they are double in their effects (hyvwtl ~ylpk). The Hebrew here is a
difficult expression3 and the constituent words are sufficiently rare as to
invite a comment. Outside Job and Proverbs, the word hyvwt only occurs
twice, and these occurrences are in the eighth century prophets, Isaiah and
Micah:

This also cometh forth from the Lord of hosts, which is

wonderful (alp) in counsel, and excellent in working
(hyvwt). Isa 28:29 (KJV), cf. Mic 6:9

The possible meanings of hyvwt according to BDB are sound wisdom or the
effect of sound wisdom; here in Isaiah it means the effect of wisdom, and it is
used in the context of the prospect of the Assyrian invasion.

Similarly, the word for “double” (~ylpk) is found outside Job only in Isa
40:2,

Speak ye comfortably to Jerusalem, and cry unto her, that

her host is full (habc halm), that her iniquity is accepted
(hcrn): for she hath received of the Lord’s hand double
(~ylpk) for all her sins. Isa 40:2 (KJV revised)

This text from Isaiah announces that Jerusalem’s troubles are over,
(echoing the aftermath of invasion and decimation), and that the reward
for Jerusalem has been “double” in spite of her sins. Zophar does not

1Hezekiah comes eventually to “mock” Sennacherib (Isa 37:22).

2Job has not yet said this in so many words.
3 For example, see Habel, Job, 203, who offers “two sides to

understanding” or Pope, Job, 83, “two sides to wisdom” as paraphrases,

but the problem is that commentators are not following the lead of Isa
40:2.
152
believe that Job can find out the “goal” (tylkt, v. 7, RSV “limit”, Job
28:3) of the Almighty. Zophar thinks that the “wisdom” of invasion is
hidden from some people (vv. 7-9), but he wishes that God would make it
plain. Zophar’s point is that Job should not complain about his condition,
seeking to understand its causes and duration; he should simply accept
God’s judgments.

If he passes by or shuts up, or calls an assembly, who can

restrain him? Job 11:10 (NASB)

In the light of these connections, we can see that Zophar is laying the
blame for the Assyrian crisis on Job and that this was less than he
deserved (v. 6). Thus Zophar says that if God “passes through” the land
in this storm (Isa 8:8), or “shuts up” Jerusalem (Isa 26:20), or gathers the
people together to fight against Judah (e.g. 2 Chron 11:1, Ezek 38:13), no
one can hinder him. Here Zophar is answering Job when he says, “he
passeth on also, but I perceive him not” (Job 9:11).

Zophar goes onto say,

“For he knows men of vanity (awv ytm1): he seeth

wickedness also; will he not then consider it?” Job 11:11
(KJV revised)

Here he broadens the reason for the Assyrian crisis to include the factor
that God sees wickedness in the land and men of vanity (“the wicked
ones”—v. 20); the implication is that God will remove these men from
the land.2 This not just a general cleansing of wickedness from the land;
rather, it is the removal of those wicked men who have power in the land
and who oppose Job. When Job talks about “the wicked ones”, it is a
group that directly affects him, and not the wayward populace as a whole.
Zophar’s caustic criticism of these men uses an unusual figure:

“But a stupid man will get understanding, even though (w)

a man is born a wild ass’s colt.” Job 11:12 (RSV revised)

There is an echo here of the story of Ishmael, “a wild ass of a man”, and
the insult seems to echo the use of young asses (Ishmaelite tribes) to carry
tribute to Egypt (Isa 30:6), a stupid policy.

1 This expression can refer to honourable men, men of government (Isa

5:13); the word for “vanity” occurs in Isa 30:28.
2 This is the reason for the invasion supplied in God’s speech (Job 38:13).

153
Zophar invites Job to repent1 and put his iniquity2 far from him, although
he does not specify the nature of Job’s sin (vv. 13-14). He also invites Job
to not let wickedness dwell in his “tents”, which is a figure for the people
of Judah (v. 14, Jer 4:20, 30:18, Zech 12:7), suggesting the need for further
reform. If Job does this, he will be without “spot” (v. 15), which appears
to be an echo with Deut 32:5, and a description of the state of the people
as unworthy of carrying out their function of being priests (Exod 19:5,
Lev 21:18). Job would then “be pouring forth” (v. 15, “steadfast”, Ps 45:2,
Isa 44:3), which seems to be a reference to a new bestowal of a spirit of
prophecy.

“And thine age shall be clearer than the noonday; thou

shalt fly (@w[3, KJV “shine forth”), thou shalt be as the
morning.” Job 11:17 (KJV revised)

Zophar anticipates that if Job repents, he would be “as the morning”

rather than the king of Assyria (v. 17, Isa 14:12-13); he would “fly” (@w[)
upon the enemy as it fled from Jerusalem (Isa 31:5), and his “world”
would stand from the “noonday” (v. 17, Ps 91:6, Jer 15:8, 20:16, Amos
8:9, Zeph 2:4—a common time for battle). Job’s misery would be as water
that passed by, i.e. the overflowing “flood” of the Assyrian invasion (v.
16, Isa 28:2, Amos 8:8, 9:5) would be as if it had just passed by Jerusalem.
Job would once again trust God, because there was “hope” (v. 18, Hos
2:15); God would make Job to lie down in safety (v. 18, Hos 2:18).4 This
assurance offered by the friends is typified by Zophar when he says,

“Also thou shalt lie down, and none shall make thee afraid
(dyrxm !ya); yea, many shall make suit unto thee.” Job
11:19 (KJV)

“And I will give peace in the land, and ye shall lie down,
and none shall make you afraid (dyrxm !ya): and I will rid

1 Using the same two Hebrew words, Zophar echoes 2 Chron 30:19 with
his invitation to Job to “prepare his heart” (Job 11:13).
2 This word is used in Mic 3:10 and Hab 2:12.
3 The RSV and NASB re-point the MT here to give the noun “darkness”,

see Habel, Job, 203. The KJV is idiosyncratic as “flying” is the main sense
of this word.
4 The text here shares three words with Hos 2:15, 18—“hope”, “lie

down” and “safety”, as well as the same preposition. This echo with
Hosea supports a “victory from enemies” reading of Zophar’s assurance.
154
 evil beasts out of the land, neither shall the sword go
through your land.” Lev 26:6 (KJV)

If Job is obedient, the evil beasts will be rid from the land. The use here of
Leviticus1 by Zophar shows that he has a “land” perspective on Job’s
circumstances. If Job repents, many of the surrounding peoples will then
court his favour (v. 19), but the “wicked ones” in Jerusalem shall not
escape their just fate (v. 20), they will have no escape (Jer 25:35, Amos
2:14).

12. Job 12—Job’s Fourth Speech

This fourth speech of Job concludes the first round of speeches, and it
continues prophetic themes.

The first speeches of the friends have the same thrust: Job should
examine his own life and consider whether and where his sin lies; he
should repent and then God will bless him. This “advice” is set against
the same view of “the wicked ones” and the calamitous political situation.

With this common ground, Job’s angst against the friends is fuelled by
their estimation of him as a sinner. His response is to compare himself (as
a righteous person) with the desperate political situation in the land and
show how this is not a fair response to any sin on his part. Job’s fourth
speech closes the first round of speeches and firmly locks in this stalemate
between the parties.

His speech rehearses the common understanding that he has with the
friends over God’s handling of the current political climate (Job 12); he
then attacks his friends for their failure to understand and help him (Job
13); he then concludes with a lament about the condition of man and his
relationship to God (Job 14).

12.1 God’s Dealings with Judah

This chapter concerns God’s dealings with the nations, rather than with a
patriarch. There are “kings” (v. 18), “princes” (vv. 19, 21), the counsel of
politicians and diplomats (v. 20), and “nations” (v. 23). While these

1 The exact phrase from Lev 26:6 occurs in Isa 17:2, which suggests that
the “cities of Aroer” had been taken by Damascus but would be re-taken
for the “flocks” of the Lord who would lie down in safety and be
unafraid.
155
remarks may be general, several expressions tie Job’s words to a specific
context:

In this crisis, Job is “mocked” by the neighbouring nations (v. 4, KJV “his
neighbour”1), an attitude picked up again in Jeremiah (Jer 48:26-27). Job
had been one who called on God and was answered; now he was a
laughingstock.

Job was a “torch of contempt” (zwb dypl,2 KJV “lamp despised”) for a
“thought at ease (!nav twtv[3)” (v. 5, KJV, RSV). Here the text echoes
with Amos 6:1, and Isa 32:9, 11, which describe those “at ease” (!nav) in
Zion—these people were mocking the king, who was “ready to slip”.

Job says that “the tents of the destroyers prosper” (v. 6, NASB), and
something similar is common in other versions (see KJV and RSV). The
word “destroyers” is commonly used of the Assyrian invader as a
“spoiler” (Isa 16:4, 21:2, 33:1, Mic 2:4); on this reading, the tents would be
army encampments and they are “at peace” (RSV).

Job next says that the “tremblers of God” or “provokers of God” (la
yzygrm) are also “secure things” (v. 6, twxjb4). These tremblers are those
who have been caused to tremble by the invader, but who now think they
are secure because of a treaty with Egypt. The word translated “provoke”
is used several times to describe the fearful effect on an indigenous
population of an invasion (Isa 5:25, 14:16, 32:10-11, Joel 2:1, Amos 8:8,
Hab 3:16).

1 The RSV and NASB opt for “friends” but the Hebrew is equally used to
refer to “neighbours”. Wolfers suggests that the friends are friends of
God, Deep Things, 289, but this seems unlikely as it would require Isaiah
and his disciples to be mockers of the king.
2 The Hebrew is difficult, as evidenced by the quite different translations

of the KJV, RSV, and NASB. Pope comments that one possible
translation is: “a contemptible torch to the thought of one at ease”, Job,
90. The issue is whether dypl is the common word for “lamp” or another
unique word dyp with the Hebrew particle l. Wolfers, Deep Things, 290,
opts for splitting the consonants; we follow the MT.
3 The Hebrew translated “thought” is unique and scholars have suggested

it is related to an Aramaism for “to think” found in Jon 1:6.

4 The Hebrew plural noun is turned into the verb, “are secure”, by the

KJV, RSV and NASB, but we retain the plural sense of “secure things”.
156
Job next says that the “tremblers” are “those whom God brings with his
hand (v. 6, b+dy)” This reflects Isa 28:2,

“Behold, the Lord hath a mighty and strong one, which as

a tempest of hail and a destroying storm, as a flood of
mighty waters overflowing, shall cast down to the earth
with the hand (b+dy).” Isa 28:2 (KJV)

The NASB interprets the clause as saying that the tremblers are brought
into the power of the destroyers.

Job agrees with his friends that the hand of the Lord had brought this
calamity upon him (v. 9). All the surrounding nations (vv. 7-8, beasts, fowl
and fish) recognised this fact, including the invader (Isa 36:10).1

Job asserts that “with him” (God) there is “wisdom and strength” and
“counsel and understanding” (v. 13, hrwbgw hmkx hc[). Here the text
echoes Isa 11:2 and its terms for the Davidic king, “wisdom, strength and
counsel” (hrwbgw hmkx hc[). This echo suggests that Job has lost
confidence in himself as an anointed king with these gifts.

Job states, “behold, he breaketh down, and it cannot be built again: he

shutteth up a man, and there can be no opening.” (v. 14, Isa 24:10), which
could very well refer to the devastation of the land, its cities and the siege.
Job sees no prospect of deliverance.

Job says, “Behold, he [God] withholdeth the waters, and they dry up: also
he sendeth them out, and they overturn the earth.” (v. 15), which could be
the political figure of the overflowing flood of the Assyrian invasion (Isa
28:2, 17); Job asserts that God is in control.

God leads away counsellors and priests captive and stripped (vv. 17, 19,
RSV, Isa 20:4);2 he “makes judges fools” (a comment echoed in Isa 44:25,

1 The Hebrew expression underlying the phrase, “the hand of the Lord
hath wrought this” occurs once elsewhere in Isa 41:20.
2 This may be a reference to Isaiah’s enacted parable of walking barefoot

rather than a reference to the taking of priests and counsellors into

captivity from the cities of Judah; several scholars think that Isaiah was a
priest.
157
God “makes diviners fools”). This could refer to the Assyrian practice of
taking captives.1

Referring to the kings arrayed against him, Job says that God “loosens
(xtp) the bonds (ties) of kings”, and “binds their loins with a girdle (rwza)”
for battle (v. 18). The text strikes an echo here with Isaiah 5,

“And he will lift up an ensign to the nations from

far…and, behold, they shall come with speed swiftly:
None shall be weary nor stumble among them; none
shall slumber nor sleep; neither shall the girdle (rwza) of
their loins be loosed (xtp), nor the latchet of their shoes
be broken.” Isa 5:26-27 (KJV)

The figure of “kings and girdles” is also used in Isa 45:1.

Job says that God “deprives the trusted ones of speech” (v. 20, NASB),
and the elders of understanding (Joel 1:14, 2:16).2 This could well be a
comment about the collapse of good government, and may reflect the
situation described in Isaiah 32 in which fools were called “noble” (bydn,
Isa 32:5, Job 12:21, “he pours contempt on nobles (bydn)”, NASB). As a
result of Hezekiah’s sickness there was a transfer of power to Shebna (Isa
22:15-18, 28:1, Job 19:9, 31:36), who seems to have thought of himself as
a co-regent, or substitute king-in-waiting, and this would have brought
changes in those who exercised power. Job qua Hezekiah could well
criticize such a government.3

As well as pouring contempt on the nobles in Jerusalem, Job says that

God “loosens the girdle (xyzm) of the water-channels (qypa)” (v. 21, RSV
revised).4 This unusual figure echoes Isa 8:7 and combines a simile for
Assyria with an image of a soldier’s girdle (Isa 5:27).

1 Pope, IDB, 2:914, states that this deportation of captives is too general
to be about the exile.
2 Job 12:19 conveys the idea of “overthrowing the mighty”, but the verb is

translated elsewhere as “perverting”—Exod 23:8, Deut 16:19.

3 Isaiah had predicted that Hezekiah would die (Isa 38:1), but before this

pronouncement, Hezekiah had been sick for some time, and without an
heir, it is likely that a replacement king was identified and assumed
effective control. Co-regency was not uncommon in the history of Israel
and Judah.
4 The Hebrew expression here is difficult. The word we have translated

“girdle” is unique to Job, but related to the word for “girdle” in Ps 109:19.
158
 “…therefore, behold, the Lord is bringing up against
them the waters of the River, mighty and many, the king
of Assyria and all his glory; and it will rise over all its
channels and go over all its banks…” Isa 8:7 (RSV)

God brings to the light the “shadow of death”, an expression used

elsewhere to denote captivity (Ps 107:10, 14), and also the captivity in
Assyria (Isa 9:1). Job had expressed such a fear in his third speech (Job
10:21-22). God had brought the prospect of such captivity to light, and
the reason for such captivity (the “deep things”) was difficult to discern.
There were deep things to uncover in the darkness that God had brought
upon the king and the land.

Job ends his political discourse by asserting, “He makes nations great, and
he destroys them: he enlarges nations, and leads them away” (v. 23, RSV),
a sentiment to be later echoed in the book of Daniel (Dan 4:25).

The leaders of the land have their courage dissipated and act as if they are
wandering in a wilderness without clear direction (v. 24, echoing Ps
107:40); they “grope” in the dark (v. 25, echoing Deut 28:29).

The leaders “stagger like a drunken man” (v. 25). Here the text echoes Ps
107:27, Isa 28:1, 3,1 7, 29:9 and Joel 1:5, all of which describe the
“staggering” of prophets and priests in the face of the invasion of the land
by Assyria.

To sum up, in this first part of Job’s fourth speech, he has endeavoured to
prove to the friends that he has political understanding as well as them (v.
3, 13:1-2).

The word we have translated “water-channels” is the normal word for

water-channels outside Job. Commentators have offered different
translations because the figure of speech is unusual (see e.g. Pope, Job, 94);
however, we retain the unusual figure because of the link with Isa 8:7. The
use of “water-channels” here can be compared with the occurrence of the
word in Job 40:18, 41:7, upon which we comment in Chapter Seven.
1 We take Isa 28:1-4 to be a description of the leaders of Jerusalem rather

than Samaria; the terms evoke the leadership of Northern Israel as a

caustic device. W. A. M. Beuken in an essay, “Isaiah 28” in de Moor, ed.,
Synchronic or Diachronic, 15-38, notes the ambiguities of reference in vv. 1-4,
but does not offer our suggestion.
159
13. Job 13—Job’s Fourth Speech Continued

13.1 Job’s Argument against the Friends

Job’s argument here is that the friends attributed “injustice” (hlw[, v. 7) to
God, when they attributed the cause of his suffering to some “injustice”
(hlw[, Job 6:29-30) that they presume he has practised. Job suspects that
this is a tactic on their part: the friends claim to be upholding God’s
righteousness in the face of Job’s claims to be righteous, but Job suspects
that their advocacy for God is a deceit (v. 7).

Job repeats the friends’ implicit claim that they are “contending” (v. 8,
byr) for God, and this is something that Micah also describes,

“Hear ye now what the Lord saith; Arise, contend (byr)

thou before the mountains, and let the hills hear thy
voice. Hear ye, O mountains, the Lord’s controversy, and
ye strong foundations of the earth: for the Lord hath a
controversy with his people, and he will plead with
Israel.” Mic 6:1-2 (KJV)

Here Yahweh challenges his people to contend with him before “the
mountains”, a figure for the surrounding nations. Job supposes that the
friends believe that they contend on behalf of God.

Job says,

“He will surely reprove you, if ye in secret (rts) lift up

(afn) persons.” Job 13:10 (KJV revised)

Here the text seems to be echoing Isaiah,

“Judgment also will I lay to the line, and righteousness to

the plummet: and the hail shall sweep away the refuge of
lies, and the waters shall overflow the secrecy (rts).” Isa
28:17 (KJV revised), cf. Isa 32:2

Whatever the secrecy is, and whatever it means to lift people up (perhaps
political subterfuge), Job’s suspicions put the friends in a category that is
decidedly unfriendly and in the speeches to follow, the exchanges become
sharper between them.

160
Job says,

“Should not his majesty (taf) terrify you, and the dread
(dxp) of him fall on you?” Job 13:11 (NASB revised)

Here he uses a word, “majesty” (taf), to refer to the invading army: this
would terrify his friends (when it visited their lands) as it was also Job’s
dread.

The idea of “majesty” is also used in the Assyrian records of their

campaigns in their use of the concepts of “awe” and “glamour”. For
example,

“…the terror-inspiring glamour of Ashur, my lord,

overwhelmed him.”1

“The awe-inspiring splendour of the ‘Weapon’ of Ashur,

my lord, overwhelmed his strong cities.”2

The text uses a fairly common word (12x) which only occurs once in the
Prophets—Hab 1:7,

“For, lo, I raise up the Chaldeans, that bitter and hasty

nation, which shall march through the breadth of the
land, to possess the dwelling places that are not theirs.
They are terrible and dreadful: their judgment and their
majesty (taf) shall proceed of themselves.” Hab 1:6-7
(KJV revised)

This text relates to the prospect of Babylonian invasion, and this type of
language is consistent with its use in Job in relation to the Assyrian
invasion: God was bringing “majesty” upon the land, which would put
fear and dread into everybody (Job 3:25, Isa 24:17-18). Job therefore says
to the friends,

“Your maxims3 are proverbs of ashes; your defences are

defences of clay.” Job 13:12 (RSV)

1 ANET, 286.
2 ANET, 287, 295.
3 Although the RSV and NASB translate the Hebrew here as a linguistic

item, this is not certain; it could be that the reference is to the

“memorials” that the friends rely upon in their temples (Isa 57:8).
161
Here the text echoes Isaiah’s description of the reasoning of the leaders of
the people as “potter’s clay” (Isa 29:16); the friend’s defences were just so
much clay.

Consequently, Job implores the friends to be silent (v. 13) and allow him
to speak to God and present his case.1 The form of the Hebrew verb “to
keep silent” only occurs elsewhere in Isa 41:1. Job asks them to hear
diligently his speech (v. 17), which begins with his asking God to
withdraw his hand (v. 21), i.e. the invader, so that he might defend himself
in a “court”.

Job has confidence that God will be his salvation and that “the hypocrite”
will not come before God, presumably, in the Jerusalem temple (v. 16).
Thus he asks God to withdraw his hand and his “dread” (hmya, Isa 33:18).
But Job asks God as to why he is his enemy and has hidden his face from
him (v. 24, Isa 8:17, Mic 3:4). What is the sin that has apparently brought
about this calamity (v. 23)?

Job uses a figure of a trembling leaf (v. 25) to describe his situation, and a
figure centred on a “leaf” is used by Isaiah in the context of the Assyrian
invasion:

“And all the host of heaven shall be dissolved, and the

heavens shall be rolled together as a scroll: and all their
host shall fall down, as the leaf falleth off from the vine,
and as a falling fig from the fig tree.” Isa 34:4 (KJV)

In this Isaianic oracle, the host (stars) of the heavens are compared to a
falling leaf from the fig tree; God declares that he will dissolve these
heavens. The meaning of this announcement is uncertain, but it could well
refer to the clearing away of the worship of the heavens that had re-
appeared or remained in Jerusalem after the reforms of Hezekiah. The
figure of a scroll would be appropriate if it signals the sealing up of the
scrolls of instruction on how to interpret the sun, moon and stars and the
significance of their positions in the sky. In the vindication of Hezekiah,
the sun would be darkened, the temples and house-tops associated with

1 Job introduces the framework of a “legal” case at this point (Job 23:4);
again, the use of this device (legal argument) is characteristic of Isaiah 40-
48. Clines observes that from this point Job is committed to
confrontation with God, “A Brief Explanation of Job 12-14” in Zuck,
Sitting with Job, 261-264 (262).
162
the moon would be turned to blood, and the altars to the stars would be
dissolved.1

Job’s assumption of the identity of a trembling leaf presents an ironic

twist to God: was he also to be a leaf that would fall? Would God pursue
the dry “stubble” (Isa 5:24, 41:2, Joel 2:5) until everything was consumed
in the conflagration? Had God written bitter things about Job (v. 26, Isa
30:8), making him responsible for the iniquities of his youth.2

Job finishes3 his plea with an apparent echo of Hosea,

And he, as a rotten thing (bqrk), wears out (hlb), as a

garment (dgbk) that is moth (v[) eaten. Job 13:28 (KJV
revised)

Behold, the Lord God will help me; who is he that shall
condemn me? lo, they all shall wax old (hlb) as a
garment (dgbk); the moth (v[) shall eat them up. Isa 50:9,
cf. 51:8

Therefore will I be unto Ephraim as a moth (v[), and to

the house of Judah as rottenness (bqrk). Hos 5:12 (KJV)

Echoes between Job and Isaiah show that Job is comparing himself to a
garment that God is wearing out as a moth eats a garment. An echo with
Hosea shows that such an action was previously undertaken by Yahweh
upon Ephraim. In each case, the consuming “moth” is a figure for God’s
action of destruction (see comments on Job 4:18-21). If we follow these
echoes, Job is now asserting that God is eating Judah as a moth eats a
rotting garment.

1 The worship of the heavens was endemic to the history of the nation
(Acts 7:42-43) and it reasserted itself in different times (e.g. Ahaz, 2 Chron
33:3, Isa 2:6, Manasseh, 2 Chron 33:5, Josiah, Zeph 1:5). For an example
of the catchphrase “sun, moon and stars” in relation to astrology see the
first century Jewish Book of Jubilees 8.3.
2 Job allows the possibility of sin in his youth while protesting his current

innocence.
3 Pope, Job, 103, transposes this verse to after Job 14:2, because it “fits

better”. But on a political reading of Job’s speech, it fits fairly well in its
present location.
163
In this plea to God, Job shifts between confidence that he will be saved to
the expression of a feeling of injustice.1 His mind is conflicted and in a
state of struggle for understanding.

14. Job 14—Job’s Fourth Speech Continued

14.1 The Condition of Man

Job reflects upon the condition of man, and this would be a natural
meditation for someone in his situation. Job speaks of man in general, but
it is evident that he is thinking of himself. As we noted in our comments
on Job 7:1, Job has an expectation, (expressed in the use of a similar
pattern to that found in Isa 16:14, 21:16), that his day was one of war,
which he expects will last for the years of a hireling. Hence, Job pictures
“man” as a hireling and asks that God turn away from him and let him get
on with this work (v. 6). Job next says,

“For there is hope of a tree, if it be cut down, that it will

sprout again, and that the tender branch thereof will not
cease. Though the root (vrv) thereof wax old in the
earth, and the stem ([zg) thereof die in the ground…” Job
14:7-8 (KJV revised)

He uses a rare word (3x) to describe a “stem” or a “stump” of a tree

which might sprout again after it has been cut down. The word occurs in
Isaiah:

“And there shall come forth a shoot (rjx) out of the

stem ([zg) of Jesse, and a Branch shall grow out of his
roots (vrv) …” Isa 11:1 (KJV revised)

This oracle anticipates the rule of a Davidic king as a “rod” but one which
comes out of the “stump” of Jesse. The figure does not suggest that the
Davidic monarchy has ceased, but that it has been reduced to a stump and
“cut down”. The other use of the word also occurs in Isaiah:

“That bringeth the princes to nothing; he maketh the

judges of the earth as vanity. Yea, they shall not be
planted; yea, they shall not be sown: yea, their stem, ([zg)

1Job’s feeling of injustice shows that he works within the framework that
God punishes the wicked and rewards the righteous.
164
 shall not take root in the earth: and he shall also blow
upon them, and they shall wither, and the whirlwind shall
take them away as stubble.” Isa 40:23-24 (KJV revised)

This prophecy presupposes that princes and judges in the land are in
power and seek to establish their dynasty. The rhetorical contrast between
Job’s assertion and the oracle of Isaiah 11 is that God will re-establish a
“rod” from the stump of Jesse as king. A further connection between Job
and Isaiah here is the idea of a branch or a young branch growing from
the stump. The tree will bring forth boughs like a plant (v. 9). This
language of “planting” resonates with the declaration of Isaiah that
princes and judges would not be planted.

Job gives eloquent expression to the mortality of man in the last part of
his speech, but he couples it with a belief in “resurrection” (v. 13).1 Job
wants God to hide him in the grave until his “anger” is “turned” away (v.
13, Isa 5:25, 12:1). Nevertheless, “all the days of his war (abc, Job 7:1)” he
will wait until his “change of garment” happens (v. 14, Isa 61:3).2 He
expects that God will have a purpose for the “work of his hands” (v. 15)
in the future.3 In effect, Job’s mind is holding faith and doubt in an
uneasy tension and giving expression to both ways of thinking.

As things appear now though, Job believes that God numbers his steps
and does not observe his sin-offering (v. 16).4 He believes that God has

1 Clines, A Brief Explanation of Job 12-14, 263, asserts that Job has no belief
in resurrection, and the concept of “resurrection” may be a later notion.
However, it seems a notion of “living again” is implied and that Job is
affirming that while this is not the general end of man, it is possible for
some individuals.
2 The Hebrew verb for “change” is regularly associated with changing

garments, and translations avoid this figure because it is strange. However,

Isa 61:3 supplies an interpretation of Job’s circumstances because it
mentions a “garment of praise” being given along with “beauty instead of
ashes”—Job sat upon ashes. Furthermore, the language of changing
garments forms a hopeful contrast with Job’s previous lament about
moth-eaten garments (Job 13:28).
3 The Hebrew word translated “desire” in the KJV here is rare (5x) and

Zeph 2:1 uses it in relation to the nation which suggests that the intention
here in Job concerns the nation rather than Job: the nation was in this
sense a “man”.
4 Translations render the common Hebrew word “sin”, but it can also

mean sin-offering, and this goes better with the parallel clause.
165
sealed his transgression so that he is unable to fathom his offence (v. 17).
Job then says,

“But the mountain falls and fades (lbn), and the Rock
will move1 from its place.” Job 14:18 (RSV revised)

Here the text has the strange figure of a mountain “fading” (KJV mg.).
The not uncommon word for “fading” (21x) is particularly used in Isaiah
to describe the demise of the people (Isa 1:30, 24:4, 28:1, 28:4, 34:4). In
prophetic terms, the lament (Job’s fear) seems to be that the beauty of
Zion will fade as a flower, and that therefore the Rock (Yahweh, Isa 26:4,
30:29), who inhabits the temple, will move from his place.

Job believes that God is now prevailing against him and destroying any
hope that he may express:

“The waters wear (qxv) the stones: thou washest away

the things which grow out of the dust of the earth; and
thou destroyest the hope of man.” Job 14:19 (KJV)

Here Job asserts that the “waters” of the invader are “beating” or
“wearing” the stones. The word qxv is rare, occurring only in Exod
30:36, 2 Sam 22:43, and Ps 18:42. These waters, conceived now in the
singular, are “overflowing” or “washing away” what springs up “of itself”
from the ground. The verb for “overflowing” is commonly used of the
Assyrian invader (Isa 28:2, 15, 17, 18, 30:28). The echo in “what springs
up of itself” appears to be to the fact that it was a “Jubilee” harvest year
(Lev 25:5, 11, 2 Kgs 19:29, Isa 37:30).2

15. Job 15—Eliphaz’ Second Speech

Eliphaz’ second speech is divided into two halves. In vv. 2-16, he
considers Job’s claim to integrity and his attack on the three friends;
echoes show that a political backdrop to his remarks is possible. In vv. 7-
35, intertextual echoes also suggest that Eliphaz offers a political analysis
of Job’s situation, which partly agrees with Job’s analysis, but is more
positive in its assertion that the invader will come to nothing.

1 The Hebrew is in the imperfect (future) tense.

2 The Hebrew word only occurs in these texts.
166
15.1 The Scandal of Job
Eliphaz has been listening to Job for a while, and so his speech is now
more forthright. He begins by speaking of a “wise man” (in the third
person) but this is a covert way of referring to Job. He says,

“Should a wise man utter vain knowledge, and fill his

belly with the east wind?” Job 15:2 (KJV)

Eliphaz refers to an “east wind” which reverberates with the description

of Assyria in Isaiah 27:

“In measure, when it shooteth forth, thou wilt contend

(bwr) with it: he stayeth his rough wind in the day of the
east wind.” Isa 27:8 (KJV revised)

Eliphaz’ accusation is that the content of the wise man’s speeches (his belly)
is continually about the Assyrian invasion and about this injustice. He goes
on,

“Should he reason with talk that will be of no use (!ks),

and speeches that will have no profit (l[y) in them?” Job
15:3 (KJV revised)

Here Eliphaz accuses the wise man of speaking to no avail. The verb !ks
is not common (12x), and means “to use”; Isaiah uses the same word to
describe the office of Shebna:

“Thus saith the Lord God of hosts, Go, get thee unto
this steward (!ks),1 even unto Shebna, which is over the
house, and say…” Isa 22:15 (KJV revised)

Shebna was a steward, or one who facilitated the “use” of things. On a

political and prophetic reading of Job, such a word may evoke a pun upon
Shebna’s title, and provide a clue to the identity of the one who was
providing Job with “useless talk”.

There may also be an echo with Isa 30:5-6 and the word for “profit”. The
“wise men” of Jerusalem sought “profit” in an alliance with Egypt (Isa
29:14). Eliphaz is incredulous about this policy, and so offers the
rhetorical point to Job that taLuke of such “profit” was of no use.

1 The word only occurs twice in all prophetic books and only in Isaiah.
167
Having made this point, Eliphaz now accuses Job (switching to the
second person) of breaking a covenant with his “fear”:

“Yea, thou castest off fear, and restrainest prayer before

God.” Job 15:4 (KJV)

The verb for “casting off” is the normal word for “to break” and is
mostly used for the breaking of a covenant (e.g. Isa 24:5, 33:8). The “fear”
here is not the “fear” of the Assyrian invader, for which a different word
is used, but the “fear” that is the “fear of the Lord” (e.g. Exod 20:20, Isa
33:6, 63:17). Eliphaz’ accusation is therefore quite strong, viz. that Job was
breaking the covenant with Yahweh in protesting his own innocence.

Job was choosing the “tongue of the crafty” (Gen 3:1), allowing the
tongue of the diplomats to pursue appeasement and alliances. He was also
acting wickedly with his own mouth (v. 6). Eliphaz’ complaint against Job
is twofold: firstly, he claims superior wisdom and yet rejects their wisdom
(vv. 7-11); secondly, he is carried away by his own heart because he
maintains his own righteousness (vv. 12-16).

15.2 The Wicked One and the Oppressor

Commentators1 have observed that the second part of Eliphaz’ speech
introduces the theme of “the wicked one” using a singular form of the
noun [vr. This is slightly misleading, because Eliphaz describes both “the
wicked one” as well as “the oppressor”, alternating his address between
the two individuals. The switch in his addressee is not indicated by the use
of a different name or description, or a change in the person of the
pronoun; rather it is indicated by what he says and the descriptions he
employs. Some of these can be shown by intertextual exegesis to relate to
“the wicked one”, who is an individual among “the wicked ones”; and
some can be shown to relate to Sennacherib. Schematically, his remarks
divide as follows:

• vv. 17-19—introductory claim to authoritative knowledge.

• vv. 20—“the wicked one” and “the oppressor”.
• vv. 21-24—Job in “fear and dread” of the invader.
• vv. 25-30—Sennacherib, the invasion, and his downfall.
• vv. 31-35—the hypocrite.

1 Pope, Job, 116, Habel, Job, 257.

168
Eliphaz and Job share their analysis of the political situation, and the
eventual downfall of the invader, but Job rejects Eliphaz’ claim that he is
responsible for the situation and thereby guilty of some sin. Eliphaz, for
his part, does not directly accuse Job (using a first-person form of
address) until his last speech (Job 22), in which he makes a final appeal to
Job. The most Eliphaz does in this speech is say that Job’s own mouth
has condemned him (v. 6).

Eliphaz opens the second part of his speech by saying that he will shew to
Job what he has seen (v. 17).

“What wise men have told, and have not concealed more
than their fathers…” Job 15:18 (NASB revised)

His key claim (v. 18) is that the “wise men” of the nation (e.g. Deut 1:13,
15, Isa 5:21, 19:12) have openly repeated and not concealed,1 more than2
any of their fathers, that,

“To whom alone the land was given, and no stranger

passed among them.” Job 15:19 (RSV)3

The bravado of this claim is that any occupation of the land by a foreign
invader will be short-lived. Similar language is used in Ezekiel and Joel:

“So shall ye know that I am the Lord your God dwelling

in Zion, my holy mountain: then shall Jerusalem be holy,

1 The same Hebrew words for repeating and hiding occur in Isaiah 3:9 in
the context of the arrogance of Judah and Jerusalem, “they declare their
sin as Sodom, they hide it not”; and the same Hebrew form for “hide it
not”—the text appears to be echoing Isaiah in Eliphaz’ words.
2 The Hebrew has a comparative form “more than” that only occurs

elsewhere in Judg 2:19 and Jer 7:26. Wolfers, Deep Things, 145, suggests the
translation should be, “what wise men are saying and do not hide from
their elders”, which is similar to the NASB. Our proposal seems to fit v.
19 better insofar as that verse expresses received wisdom: the fathers had
claimed that no stranger had passed among them.
3 The sense is of propaganda and an enthusiastic claim for the inviolability

of the land. The same claim is found in the Assyrian Annals, where the
policy of an anti-Assyrian confederacy is expressed in the words, “Let
there be peace between us and let us come to mutual understanding; we
will divide the country between us, no foreigner shall be ruler among us”,
ANET, 295.
169
 and there shall no strangers pass through her anymore.”
Joel 3:17 (KJV), cf. Ezek 11:15

The Hebrew for “stranger” most often conveys the idea of a foreign
invader (either a principal invader, or a marauding tribe, taking advantage
of the chaos brought about by a main invading force, see Isa 1:7, 29:5,
Hos 8:7, Obad 1:11,1 Jer 30:8). The propaganda of the “wise men” is that
they have the land by inheritance and that no foreign foe has passed
among them.2 Eliphaz quotes this propaganda because he believes that
the invader will not succeed in his programme of conquest.

Eliphaz goes on,

“All the days of the wicked one ([vr), he travaileth with

pain,3 but (w) the number of years is hidden to the
oppressor.” Job 15:20 (KJV revised)

Eliphaz identifies two individuals here: “the wicked one” and “the
oppressor”. His point is that “the wicked one” travails (toils) in pain each
day, but the time allotted to the oppressor is limited. We have argued that
this “wicked one” has the reins of power and acts like the king; he appears
to be a co-regent with Job during his sickness. What Eliphaz now says
supports this political reading.

The Hebrew expression “all the days” (ymy-lk) is sometimes used to

denote the reign of a king; thus a typical expression would be “all the days
of Solomon” (1 Kgs 11:25).4 Eliphaz’ claim is that “the wicked one”
writhes in pain and the Hebrew word (lyx) is used of childbirth.5 This
“pain” is not a physical affliction of “the wicked one”. Rather, the text
echoes the use of this metaphor to describe the political calamity facing
the nation (Mic 4:10, Joel 2:6, Isa 26:17-18). As the one with power, “the
wicked one” is grappling with the day-to-day affairs of state and trying to
resolve the crisis presented by invasion.

1 This text could refer to the tribute monies that were paid to Assyria to
buy off the inevitable siege and sacking of Jerusalem (2 Kgs 18:13-16).
2 The Hebrew for “among them” only occurs elsewhere in Job with

reference to Satan (Job 1:6).

3 For emphasis, we reflect the Hebrew word order here rather than follow

the KJV
4 For example, see Ezra 4:5, 2 Chron 24:2.
5 The form of the Hebrew word only occurs elsewhere in Jer 23:9 of the

whirling of the whirlwind.

170
Eliphaz uses the expression “the oppressor” (#yr[), and intertextual
echoes suggest an identity of the Assyrian invader. The term occurs in
Isaiah in the context of the siege of Jerusalem:

“Moreover the multitude of thy strangers shall be like

small dust, and the multitude of the oppressors (#yr[)
shall be as chaff that passeth away: yea, it shall be at an
instant suddenly.” Isa 29:5 (KJV revised)

“For the oppressor (#yr[) is brought to nought, and the

scorner is consumed, and all that watch for iniquity are
cut off…” Isa 29:20 (KJV revised)

This expression is used quite generally in Isaiah of the Assyrian invader

(Isa 13:11, 25:3-5, cf. 49:25). Eliphaz states that the length of time for the
travail of “the wicked one” is numbered; the LXX has “the years granted
to the oppressor are numbered”. However, while God knows the times
(Job 24:1), the days of his supremacy are hidden to the oppressor.

Because Eliphaz is talking about two individuals,1 it is important to note

when he switches subjects. The next statement is about “the wicked one”:

“A dreadful (dxp) sound is in his ears: in peace (~wlv) the

destroyer (ddwv) shall come upon him.” Job 15:21 (KJV
revised)

Here Eliphaz uses Job’s own word for “dread” (Job 3:25, 13:11); it was
the thing that he feared. The same dread faced “the wicked one”. In his
last speech, Eliphaz will later suggest that this “dread” has come upon the
people, because of crimes by Job, such as sending widows away empty
and failing to feed the hungry (Job 22:7, 9, 10).

1 Wolfers, Deep Things, 146, equates “the wicked one” and “the
Oppressor” at this point, and following the intertextual echoes in Isaiah
identifies “the wicked one” in Job as Sennacherib. However, the
parallelism of v. 20 does not require such an equation; there could equally
be two individuals brought into a parallel relationship because their fates
are intertwined. In v. 21, we have on the one hand, “the destroyer”, and
on the other hand, a victim. Accordingly, we would argue that Wolfers
misinterprets Job on this point, and our reading of the historical context
of this poetry therefore is significantly different to Wolfers.
171
Eliphaz states that “in peace” the “destroyer” comes upon “the wicked
one”. In an eighth century context, this language fits the reconstruction
we have offered: i) a peace treaty that was made on behalf of Hezekiah
immediately prior to the siege of Jerusalem (2 Kgs 18:14-16), and ii) the
treaty was broken “suddenly” when the Assyrian army turned on
Jerusalem. Eliphaz is saying that this treaty has failed, and he reiterates
this point in his last speech (Job 22:10-11).

The word for “the destroyer” is found in Isaiah in relation to the Assyrian
and his treachery, but there it is rendered as “the spoiler” in the KJV:

“Woe to the spoiler (ddwv),1 and thou wast not spoiled;

and dealest treacherously, and they dealt not
treacherously with thee! When thou shalt cease to spoil,
thou shalt be spoiled; and when thou shalt make an end
to deal treacherously, they shall deal treacherously with
thee.” Isa 33:1 (KJV revised), cf. Isa 16:4, 21:2, Jer 51:56

With this context, Eliphaz’ claim against “the wicked one” is that the
peace treaty should not have been made; this in turn suggests that one of
Eliphaz’ complaints against Job was in allowing this treaty to be made
despite his sickness.

Eliphaz describes (vv. 22-23) three expectations of the “wicked one”: i) he

does not expect to return from captivity in Assyria—out of darkness (Job
had said the same thing in Job 10:20-22); ii) he waits for “the sword”; and
iii) he hopes for famine-relief (Isa 3:1) from the envoys that he has sent
abroad. Eliphaz asserts that despite these expectations, the “wicked one”
knows the final reckoning (the day of darkness) is ready to hand.

“Trouble and anguish shall make him afraid; they shall

prevail against him, as a king ready to the battle.” Job
15:24 (KJV)

Eliphaz finishes this diatribe against “the wicked one” by affirming the
obvious: trouble and anguish are roused as a king for battle. Here the text
has a rare Hebrew word for “to rouse” (dyt[, “ready”), which has been
used to describe the rousing of the Assyrian Leviathan (Job 3:8, Isa 27:1).2

1There is a word play here: Assyria was a shōdēd but God was a shaddai.
2The only other uses are Deut 32:35, Esth 3:15 and Isa 10:13—this latter
verse describing the plundering actions of Assyria.
172
With these sentiments from Eliphaz directed towards a specific leader, a
“wicked one” (a co-regent), rather than a hypothetical “wicked man”, or a
class of wicked men, it is easy to see why Job should respond in his next
speech, “miserable comforters” (Job 16:2).

The next block of verses refers to Sennacherib or the Assyrian invader.

They describe, firstly, the conditions of the invasion (vv. 25-28), and then
the confident hope that Sennacherib will not become rich as a result (v.
29), and after returning to his land of darkness, he will see his empire
dwindle and he will die (v. 30).

The Assyrian power is personified in v. 24, when it is said that “trouble”

and “anguish” are roused like Leviathan. Hence, v. 25 describes this
power as “stretching out his hand against God”. This kind of language is
used in relation to military activity against nations (e.g. Isa 14:26, 23:11),
but a nation could only stretch out its hand against God by invading the
Promised Land.

The Hebrew of vv. 26-27 is difficult; the RSV (varied slightly) has,

“…running against him [God] at the neck (rawcb1) with a

thick-bossed shield;2 for he has covered his face with his
fat, and worked layers of fat upon his thighs (lsk yl[
hmyp fyw).” Job 15:26-27 (RSV revised)

The difficulties of this text do not hide the act of war: an enemy in battle
charging with shields and, as has been common practice for infantry, with
a greased torso and limbs to facilitate hand-to-hand combat.3 The army
comes against the “wicked one” as far as the “neck”. This detail echoes
Isaiah’s description of God’s action through the Assyrian invader:

“And his breath, as an overflowing stream, shall reach to

the midst of the neck, to sift the nations with the sieve of

1 The word is “neck” but translators (NASB, RSV) eliminate the word in
favour of a figurative synonym like “Headlong” (NASB), “stubbornly”
(RSV) or “hauberk” (Pope, Job, 118). However, if we retain “neck” a
political figure for the Assyrian siege of Jerusalem emerges.
2 For the use of shields at this time, see 2 Chron 32:5, Isa 21:5, 37:33.

Wolfers suggests the Hebrew expression could refer to a siege engine

covered by shields, Deep Things, 147.
3 Here we follow Wolfers’ reading, Deep Things, 147; see also Isa 21:5.

173
 vanity: and there shall be a bridle in the jaws of the people,
causing them to err.” Isa 30:28 (KJV), cf. 8:8

Following this echo, Eliphaz’ next assertion means: as with any occupying
army, living off the land, and having destroyed cities and villages, the
Assyrian invader, “dwelt in desolate cities, in houses which no man
inhabited, which were ready to become heaps” (v. 28).

Eliphaz finishes his description of the miseries of an invading army with

an expression of confidence that the Assyrian king will not profit from
the invasion. Again using the RSV as a base reading,

“…he will not be rich, and his wealth will not endure,
nor will he stretch out any land acquisition (~lnm #ral
hjy al)” Job 15:29 (RSV revised)

The Hebrew contains a unique word ~lnm. The idea of an “acquisition” is

one of the options suggested in BDB,1 and the verb that is used (hjn) is
the one used in v. 25 for stretching out a hand. Eliphaz’ point is that while
the invader sought to stretch out his hand against God, he would not
succeed in stretching out his land acquisition. Instead, he would depart (v.
30, Isa 14:25) from the land,2 the branches of his empire would be burnt
with fire, and once back in his own land of darkness, he would remain.

Eliphaz closes his speech with remarks about a third group—the

congregation of “the hypocrite” (v. 34). Bildad has used this expression
(Job 8:13), and with the same meaning as Eliphaz—viz., “the hypocrite”
= “the wicked one”; Zophar will also explicitly associate “the hypocrite”
with “the wicked ones”:

“That the triumphing of the wicked ones (~y[vr) is short,

and the joy of the hypocrite but for a moment?” Job 20:5
(KJV revised)

The achievement of this congregation was political mischief and deceit (v.
35).Eliphaz expresses the view that the “congregation”, or a party

1Pope, Job, 118, offers “possessions”.

2 The text has “by the breath of his mouth shall he go away” which may
refer to the Spirit of God bringing about the removal of the invader from
the land; the language evokes Ps 33:6 and Isa 11:4.
174
grouping of “the hypocrite”, will be desolate1 (v. 34). In our reading, this
means that the triumph that this group had in securing treaties with Egypt
or Assyria was short-lived.

Eliphaz says “his branch shall not be green” (v. 32). The text uses a word
for “branch” that only occurs elsewhere in Isaiah (2x):

“The princes of Zoan are become fools, the princes of

Noph are deceived; they have also seduced Egypt, even
they that are the stay of the tribes thereof. The Lord hath
mingled a perverse spirit in the midst thereof: and they
have caused Egypt to err in every work thereof, as a
drunken man staggereth in his vomit. Neither shall there
be any work for Egypt, which the head or tail, branch or
rush, may do.” Isa 19:13-15 (KJV), cf. 9:14

This text describes the futility of the alliance with Egypt that the leaders
of Jerusalem sought. Isaiah states that the Lord has placed a perverse
spirit among the Egyptian leadership, and as a result there will be nothing
for “head or tail” and “branch or rush” in Judah to accomplish on behalf
of Egypt. Here it can be seen that “head or tail” and “branch or rush” are
figures for leaders (Isa 9:13).

Thus, when Eliphaz talks of trusting in vanity (v. 31), it is to this policy of
reliance on Egypt. It seems that when Eliphaz says, “let not him that is
deceived trust in vanity”, he refers to Job, and he considers Job to have
been deceived by the co-regent. Hence, Eliphaz has offered a full analysis
of the political situation and the party of “the wicked ones”.

The figure of speech “his branch shall not be green” means that “the
wicked ones” in Jerusalem will not flourish with this policy towards
Egypt. Instead, the vanity will be evident (“accomplished”) before “his
day” (1 Sam 26:10).

Eliphaz goes onto say,

“He shall shake off his unripe grape as the vine, and shall
cast off his flower as the olive.” Job 15:33 (KJV)

1 This Hebrew word only occurs elsewhere outside Job in Isa 49:21 and
refers to those taken in captivity.
175
Here the Hebrew for “unripe grape” or “sour grape” occurs, (apart from
the proverb in Jer 31:29-30 and Ezek 18:2), only in Isaiah:1

“For afore the harvest, when the bud is perfect, and the
sour grape is ripening in the flower, he shall both cut off
the sprigs with pruning hooks, and take away and cut
down the branches.” Isa 18:5 (KJV)

The context of this utterance by Isaiah is the futile treaty-making with the
Ethiopian dynasty in Egypt (Isa 18:1-2). Isaiah reveals that God will
harvest sour grapes and prune the vineyard of his people (Isaiah 5). The
sour grapes would be those taken into captivity from the land by
Sennacherib; their tents of bribery2 would be burnt.

In summary, intertextual echoes allow a prophetic reading of Eliphaz’

speech, and they suggest that he is particularly concerned with the futility
of treaties as a solution to the crisis facing Job.

16. Job 16—Job’s Fifth Speech

In any reading of Job, Eliphaz has increased the stakes in the dialogue by
his second speech. On a prophetic and political reading, he has claimed
that Job is continually complaining about Assyria, rejected the wisdom of
the aged, and asserted his own integrity; and what is more, he has been
deceived by those exercising power in Jerusalem.

Job opens his next speech complaining that his friends offer no comfort
(vv. 2-6). Their speeches are “against” him and they shake their head at
him (v. 4, 2 Kgs 19:21, Isa 37:22). The speech then shifts its focus to God
as Job says to the friends, “now he hath made me weary” (v. 7). Eliphaz
had identified what was making Job weary in his opening speech, viz.
“…now it is come upon thee, and you are weary; it toucheth thee, and
thou art troubled” (Job 4:5, KJV revised).

1 This is another example of how intertextual exposition changes a

conventional reading of Job. Job reads, “He shall shake off his unripe
grape”, and commentators misread the reference of the pronoun to be
“the wicked one”, Isaiah identifies the referent to be God.
2 That bribery was rife at this time is shown by the occurrence of the

Hebrew word in Isaiah’s descriptions—Isa 1:23, 5:23, 33:15.

176
Job says that God has “appalled all my company” (v. 7, ~mv1), and this
grouping contrasts with the “company of the hypocrite” (Job 15:34) who
oppose Job. The righteous are “appalled” because of what they see in Job
(Job 17:8, 18:20, 21:5).

What Job next says continues to bear a political reading,

“And he has shrivelled me up, which is a witness against

me; and my leanness (vxk) has risen up against me, it
testifies to my face.” Job 16:8 (RSV)

The RSV interprets the Hebrew here to refer to Job’s physical condition
(leanness). However, the Hebrew is rare (6x), and outside Job, it is always
translated as “lies, lying” (Ps 59:12, Hos 7:3, 10:13, 12:1, Nah 3:1). The
text should read,2

“…and my lying (vxk) has risen up against me, it testifies

to my face.” Job 16:8 (RSV revised)

Job is not confessing to lying here; he is using the accusation made against
him that he is a liar to paint the figure that “his lies” have stood up against
him. Job had preached total reliance on Yahweh, but still the Assyrian
invader had overrun the land. This “reliance” was (allegedly) a “lie” that
had now been stood upon its head according to his enemies. The
confidence that Job had in Yahweh literally was thrown back in his face
by (the) Rabshakeh,3 hence, Job goes on to describe his enemy,

“He teareth me in his wrath, who hateth me: he gnasheth

upon me with his teeth; mine enemy sharpeneth his eyes
upon me.” Job 16:9 (KJV)

The figure of “tearing” is normal for military action (Nineveh—Nah 2:12,

Edom—Amos 1:11, Judah—Mic 5:8, etc.). The Assyrian tore at Judah
and Job with his teeth (Joel 1:6).

16.1 The Suffering Servant

The book of Isaiah has four oracles of a Suffering Servant (Isa 42:1-4,
49:1-7, 50:4-9, 52:13-53:12). This servant was commissioned by God to

1 The text here echoes the “astonishment” (~mv) of the tradition in 2

Chron 7:21 in the “astonishment” (~mv) of those who see Job.
2 See Wolfers, Deep Things, 123, but contrast Pope, Job, 121.
3 Isa 36:22; Rabshakeh is a title for the Assyrian envoy.

177
redeem Judah, but endured great suffering. The next assertion by Job is
reminiscent of the Suffering Servant:

“They have gaped upon me with their mouth; they have

smitten me upon the cheek reproachfully; they have
gathered themselves together against me.” Job 16:10
(KJV)

Scholars have noted intertextual links between Job and some of the
Suffering Servant passages in Isaiah, and it is worth collecting some links
together at this point.1 In a parabolic reading, this connection would be a
natural consequence, if the (individual) “Suffering Servant” of Isaiah is
partly modelled on Hezekiah. It is not necessary to assert a one-to-one
identity between the Suffering Servant and Hezekiah; only to affirm that
the Isaiah passages2 have as a catalyst the experience of Hezekiah.
Hezekiah provides the typological platform for the idea that the Davidic
king will suffer and the Suffering Servant passages have this ideal quality.

The following connections3 with the book of Job can be proposed:

• Job is “my Servant” (ydb[, Job 1:8, 2:3, 7:2). God praises “my
servant” as he does Job (Isa 42:1-4). This is a common expression for
leading figures including David and Moses.

• The Servant is the subject of a birth prophecy (Isa 49:1) as is Job.

This is shared motif, again featuring in the stories of Abraham, Isaac
and Jacob.

1 See J. C. Bastiaens, “The Language of Suffering in Job 16-19 and in the

Suffering Servant Passages of Deutero-Isaiah” in, Studies in the Book of
Isaiah, (eds., J. Van Rutien and M. Vervenne; Leuven: Leuven University
Press, 1997), 421-432, Hartley, Job, 14-15, and Dhorme, Job, clv. Thirtle
makes a strong case for identifying Hezekiah as the catalyst for the
Suffering Servant oracles, Old Testament Problems, ch. 12.
2 Scholars disagree on the identity of the Suffering Servant—whether it is

a corporate group like Israel, or an individual. Our interest is only in those

descriptions that focus on an individual.
3 These connections do not all carry the same weight. In descending

order, the stronger type of connection is one involving a shared lexical

item used in the same way; next, there are shared lexical items that are
used in a contrasting way; then there are common motifs which are not
expressed using the same language; finally, there are contrasting motifs
again using different vocabulary.
178
• The Servant is first blessed, then he is afflicted (Isa 49:4-5), and then
he is blessed, which is the pattern for the book of Job. This is a
shared plot-line.

• The people consider the Servant to be “stricken” of God ([gn—Isa

53:4); likewise, Job is “stricken” of God ([gn—Job 19:21). The word
used here is the same although common.

• Job is considered to be chastised (rswm) by the Almighty (Job 5:17);

the same “chastisement” is predicated of the Servant (rswm, Isa 53:5).
This word is common for the chastening of the Lord.

• Job is “despised” (sam, Job 19:18, hzb, Isa 53:3) by brethren. This is a
shared motif using different common words.

• Job’s familiar friends “forget” him and his brethren “stay away” from
him (Job 19:13-14); the Suffering Servant’s brethren “hide their faces”
(Isa 53:3). This is a shared motif using different common words.

• There is an internal group amongst the brethren who are more

vociferous; they buffet the Suffering Servant and Job (Job 16:10, Isa
50:6, 53:4). This is a shared motif using different common words.

• The Servant gives his cheeks (yxl) to smiters (hkn); Job is smitten
(hkn) upon the cheek (yxl) (Isa 50:6, Job 16:10). The word for
“cheeks” is not common, and the combination of “smiting” and
“cheeks” in these texts is rare.

• The Servant does not hide his face from “spitting” (Isa 50:6—qr),
using a rare word (3x) that only occurs in Job (2x) and Isaiah. Job
records his experience as “They abhor me, they flee far from me, and
spare not to spit (qr) in my face” (Job 30:10, 17:6, RSV).

• Job claims that what has befallen him was “not for any violence” in
his hands (Job 16:17). The Hebrew phase translated “not for any
violence” occurs once elsewhere in Isa 53:9, “because he had done no
violence” (smx al l[).

179
• Job asserts that his prayer1 was pure (Job 16:17); this corresponds to
there being no guile found in the Suffering Servant’s mouth (Isa 53:9),
and the refrain that Job did not sin with his lips. This is a shared motif
using different common words. Further, the “righteousness” of the
Servant (Isa 42:6) matches Job’s righteousness.

• Job says that upright men are astonished or appalled (~mv) at what has
happened to him (Job 17:8); this is an aspect of the Suffering Servant,
“many were appalled (~mv) at thee” (Isa 52:14). This is a shared
common word.

• Job says that the mockers will not be “exalted” (~wr———Job 17:4); but
this is what will happen to the Suffering Servant (~wr—Isa 52:13).
This shared word is common and here the link is a contrasting one.

• Job wants someone to “contend” with him (byr—Job 13:19, RSV),

and the same question is posed by the Suffering Servant (byr—Isa
50:8), “Who will contend with me”? This shared word is common,
and frequently used by Jeremiah.

• Job complains that he is being eaten by the moth (v[—Job 13:28);

whereas the adversaries of the Suffering Servant would be eaten by
the moth (v[—Isa 50:9).2 This word is rare, but the link here is one of
contrast.

• Job has “toil” (lm[, Job 7:3) assigned to him as does the Suffering
Servant (“travail (lm[) of the soul”, Isa 53:11); Job is “full” ([bf) of
his tossings to and fro (Job 7:4), and the Suffering Servant is
“satisfied” ([bf) in the travail of his soul (Isa 53:11). These shared
words are common.

1David, Solomon, Hezekiah and Manasseh are the only kings who “pray”.
2Pope transposes Job 13:28 to a position after Job 14:2 asserting that the
verse is “obviously out of place”, Job, 106. However, this is not certain,
and Pope does not consider the intertextuality of this text. The author
positions God as his adversary in Job’s lament (v. 21) and Job describes
himself “as a rotten” thing (bqrk) being eaten by a “moth” (v[). The same
two expressions occur in Hos 5:12, “Therefore will I be unto Ephraim as a
moth (v[), and to the house of Judah as rottenness (bqrk)”. Hosea places
God in the same structural role of an adversary as the author of Job.
There is therefore a reason to retain Job 13:28 in its current position.
180
• Job rests his case with God, as does the Suffering Servant (Job 16:19,
Isa 49:4). This is a shared motif.

These eighteen links are significant. Any one may be dismissed because
the shared vocabulary is common; some may be doubted because the
vocabulary would be shared amongst laments. However, the conjunction
of these links strengthens the argument for those connections that might
be deemed weak.

The question arises as to whether the book of Isaiah is dependent on Job

or Job is dependent on the book of Isaiah at this point. This question
involves taking a view on the date of the material in Isaiah and Job. One
opinion is that Isaiah is here developing the reasons for the necessity of a
“Suffering Servant” beyond that picture presented in Job, and that
therefore these later oracles of Isaiah post-date Job.1 R. H. Pfeiffer argues
this case and concludes that “Job appears to be the source of Isaiah”.2 His
essential point is that Isaiah has “found a solution [to the problem of
Job’s suffering] in the idea of voluntary vicarious suffering”.3 S. Terrien
supports this view, and after setting out some lexical links between what
he considers to be Second-Isaiah (Isaiah 40-55) and Job, concludes that
“the figure of the servant in Second-Isaiah is described in a way that is
strongly reminiscent of Job, and shows that Job is not the borrower”.4

It is not necessary to propose a developmental relationship following

Pfeiffer; it is just as possible that the relationship is complementary. J. L.
Crenshaw observes that “the epic substratum of the didactic narrative
concerns the search for a single instance of disinterested righteousness”
and that “innocent suffering functions as a secondary theme”.5 While
some scholars see no particular fit between the narrative envelope and the
dialogue, it can be argued that the narrative story moves beyond the
declaration that “in all this Job did not sin with his lips” (Job 2:10) to
illustrate disinterested righteousness in the dialogue event.

1 See the contrary discussion in Dhorme, Job, clvi.

2. R. H. Pfeiffer in “The Dual Origin of Hebrew Monotheism” JBL 46
(1927): 202-206 (203).
3 Dual Origin, 206.
4 S. Terrien, The Book of Job, (IB III; Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1954),

889; see also “Quelques remarques sur les affinité de Job avec le Deutéro-
Esaie”, VTSup 15 (1966): 295-310.
5 Crenshaw, Old Testament Wisdom, 100-101. See also his Defending God,

(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005), 69, where he says that ~nnx
“encapsulates the gist of the entire story”.
181
Our view is that these Suffering Servant prophecies are based on the
experience of Hezekiah, and that the story of Job offers a “Suffering
Servant” who is tested for disinterested righteousness. This is a
complementary solution to the problem of Hezekiah’s suffering; neither Job
nor the book of Isaiah supersedes the other in their explanation of
suffering. The necessary characteristics of the Suffering Servant are
threefold: i) innocence (Job and Isaiah), ii) representative suffering
(Isaiah), and iii) disinterested righteousness in this life (Job).

The dialogue illustrates “disinterested righteousness” and “disinterested

service”. Job’s avowal of innocence is expressed in an extreme way in his
railing against God. This shows “disinterest” in any consequence for such
direct and forthright speaking; it also reinforces the claim to
righteousness. Over and above this, Job’s continual avowals engage God
and the friends and illustrate a continuation of service; Job does not cease
to serve God, even in his railing. Furthermore, he resists the offer of the
friends to seek his own interests in a false declaration of sin, which would
have led to a restoration of favour.

16.2 The Wicked Ones

Job mentions “the wicked ones” in this speech, and a prophetic reading of
his remarks is possible.

Job is responding to Eliphaz’ thinly veiled accusation that he had given in

to the policy of “the wicked ones”, and he laments that he has been “shut
up”:

“God hath shut me up (rgs) to the ungodly one, and

turned me over into the hands of the wicked ones.” Job
16:11 (KJV revised)

The Hebrew verb, rgs—“shut up”, is used by Isaiah to describe the

conditions of siege (Isa 24:10, 22, 26:20). This is the same concept used by
Sennacherib, “He himself I shut up like a caged bird within Jerusalem, his
royal city”.1 Transferring this sense to Job’s remark makes his lament a
complaint about being shut up by the invader. Job says he was at the
mercy of the wicked ones, and this fits the situation of Hezekiah, who at
this time was sick unto death and at the mercy of those in government in

1 ANET, 200.
182
Judah and Jerusalem—he was at the mercy of the Judean political class,
“the wicked ones”.1

That “the wicked ones” are Job’s brethren is indicated by an echo with
the story of Cain and Abel. Job says, “O earth, cover not thou my blood,
and let my cry have no place” (v. 18). This resonates with God’s question
to Cain, “What hast thou done? the voice of thy brother's blood crieth
unto me from the ground.” (Gen 4:10). The links are,

• Abel’s blood was shed on the ground; Job does not want his blood on
the earth. Abel’s blood cried from the ground; Job does not want his
cry to have any place on the earth.

• Cain was violent through his hands; Job had no violence on his
hands.

• God witnessed the death of Abel from heaven; Job exclaims that his
witness is in heaven.

Having been at ease, prior to invasion, Job now describes conditions

surrounding the occupation of the land:

“I was at ease, but he hath broken me asunder: he hath

also taken me by my neck, and shaken me to pieces, and
set me up for his mark. His archers compass me round
about, he cleaveth my reins asunder, and doth not spare;
he poureth out my gall upon the ground. He breaketh me
with breach upon breach, he runneth upon me like a
mighty man (rwbg).” Job 16:12-14 (KJV revised)

A number of expressions here give away the situation of invasion, and

describe the actions of the “ungodly one”.2 They are listed in the
following table.

1 There is a further figurative dimension to Job being “shut up”. His

disease was leprosy, and this required isolation (Lev 13:18-23, 2 Kgs 20:7,
Isa 38:21). He figuratively portrays a leprous Jerusalem “shut up” by
Assyria waiting for healing.
2 This is indicated by the comparison “like a mighty man”; the pronouns

pick out the “ungodly one” who is like a mighty man; they do not pick out
God. In general, the book of Job is laconic in its use of pronouns and
shifts of subject occur without the use of a substantive term of reference.
183
 He hath broken me The verb for “breaking” here is mostly used
asunder for the breaking of covenants. Here it refers
to the breaking of the “covenant” (treaty)
with Assyria—Isa 33:8.
He hath also taken me The figure of “taking hold” is used in Isa
by my neck 5:29 and 33:14 (RSV), as well as Job 30:16,
38:13; the “neck” is used as a figure of
capture (Ps 18:40, Isa 8:8, 30:28—
Jerusalem).
Set me up for his This sentiment is echoed in Lam 3:12, a
mark. lamentation of Jeremiah with several points
of comparison with Job.
Archers are round See Jer 50:29 for “archers”; and for a use of
about the city. “round about” in relation to a city, see Isa
23:16. See also Isa 37:33 for a mention of
arrows in the siege.
He cleaveth my reins. This is a figure of sacrifice (reins =
kidneys), see Isa 34:6 for the use of this
figure for warfare.
He does not spare This is an echo of Isa 30:14, “he shall not
(lwmxy al). spare (lmxy al)”.
Pouring gall upon the A figure of casualty in battle, see Joel 3:19,
ground. Ezek 36:18.
Breaking breach upon The verb for breaking is used in Isa 5:5 of
breach the vineyard wall and “breach” is a figure
for the ravaging of Judah. In Isa 30:13,
“breach” is used of the treaty breaking by
Assyria.
He runneth upon me For the use of “running” in the context of
like a mighty man. invasion see Joel 2:4, 7, 9; for the use of
“mighty men” see Isa 13:3, Joel 2:7.

16.3 Job and God

Job’s problem is that God has brought about his current situation. His
mind circles round this fact in an effort to understand the reasons. He
pleads with God and at the same time challenges God to give him an
answer to his questions. Job presents his case by his dress, his crying, and
his words; and each of these ways echo the circumstances of a Davidic
king and in particular Hezekiah:

• He wears sackcloth (v. 15) as did Hezekiah (Isa 37:1).

184
• He weeps (v. 16), as did Hezekiah (Isa 38:3).1

• He appeals to the “witness in heaven” (v. 19), which was the Davidic
throne (Ps 89:37).2

• He sees the need for someone to make judgment for a man with God
(v. 21—xky). The making of such a judgment was part of the request
made by Hezekiah to Isaiah, “It may be that the Lord God…will
reprove (xky) the words…” (Isa 37:4).

• He sees friends who are scorners (#yl, v. 20). Scorners laid snares for
Hezekiah (Isa 28:22, 29:20-21).

• He sees the mockers lodging provocation before his eyes (Job 17:2),
just as Judah and Jerusalem provoked God and the “eyes of his glory”
(Isa 3:8).3

• He asks God to give a pledge for him (ynbr[, Job 17:3), and using the
same form of the Hebrew verb, Hezekiah asks God to give a pledge
for him (ynbr[, Isa 38:14, 36:8). There was no one else to “strike
hands” (make a deal) with Job.

• He recognizes that God has hid understanding from the scorners and
the mockers (Job 17:4).

17. Job 17—Job’s Fifth Speech Continued

17.1 Job’s Complaint

Job continues his complaint in Job 17, echoing Deuteronomy:

“He that speaketh flattery to his friends, even the eyes of

his children shall fail.” Job 17:5 (KJV)

1 See here Jeremiah’s reasons for similar behaviour—Lam 2:11.

2 For an insightful discussion of Ps 89:37, see P. G. Mosca, “Once Again
the Heavenly Witness” JBL 105 (1986): 27-37.
3 These are the only two texts to share the idea of provoking the eyes.

185
 “He who informs against his friends to get a share of
their property, the eyes of his children will fail.” Job 17:5
(RSV)

“To a portion (qlx) he [God] said, ‘Friends’; but the eyes

of his children fail.” Job 17:5 (Wolfers).1

Of these translations, Wolfers is correct. The Hebrew word translated

“portion” is in the KJV “portion” 40 times and “part” 22 times out of 66
occurrences. The echo here is to Deut 32:9, “For the Lord’s portion is his
people”; Job is appealing to God’s promise. The second clause describes
the reality that the eyes of God’s children were failing. This echoes Deut
28:32, “thine eyes shall look, and fail”. Wolfers comments correctly, “this
reading of the line is quite impossible to accept without also accepting the
national allegory of the book of Job”.2

Job’s next point can also be read as an echo of Deuteronomy:

“He has made me a byword of the peoples, and I am one

before whom men spit.” Job 17:6 (RSV)

“And he set me to be a ruler (lvml) of peoples; but I

have become one in whose face they spit.” Job 17:6
(Wolfers)

Wolfers notes that the form of the Hebrew verb lvml is that of an
infinitive and should be read as the verb “to rule” rather than the noun,
“byword” (RSV and MT). He notes an echo to Deut 15:6 (RSV), “you
shall rule over many nations, but they shall not rule over you”. Job’s
complaint is that he was meant to rule over nations, but he was now
someone before whom there was spitting.

Job’s next complaint is,

“Mine eye also is dim by reason of sorrow, and all my

plans (~yrcy3) are as a shadow.” Job 17:7 (KJV revised)

1 Wolfers, Deep Things, 280.

2 Wolfers, Deep Things, 280.
3 This word is unique and Wolfers, Deep Things, 124, suggests “plans”,

Pope, Job, 130, offers “limbs”.

186
Job’s reference to his “eye” being dim echoes Ps 6:7, “Mine eye is
consumed because of grief; it waxeth old because of all mine enemies.”,
and this suggests a metaphorical sense: it is not that Job is literally going
blind, but rather that he cannot see his way forward because of his
adversaries. Hence, he goes on to comment upon his plans.

Nevertheless, in the midst of his dire circumstances, and even as he

laments over his situation, Job interjects an expression of hope:

“Upright men shall be astonied1 at this, but (w) the

innocent shall awake (rw[2)himself against the hypocrite.
And the righteous shall take hold of (zxa3) his way, and
he that hath clean hands shall be stronger and stronger.”
Job 17:8-9 (KJV revised)

This is an expression of hope on the part of Job concerning himself, as

indicated by his use of the expression “the innocent”, which he has used
of himself (Job 9:23). Correspondingly, the expression “the hypocrite”
denotes one of “the wicked ones” (Job 15:34, 20:5), who oppose Job. In
this expression of hope, Job expects some sort of revival (v. 9), even as he
then lapses into contemplating death and the end of his hopes (vv. 11-16).
Job expresses the hope that the righteous will follow his revived way.

18. Job 18—Bildad’s Second Speech

Bildad’s second speech opens with an attack on Job, so much so that it
causes Job to say of all the friends that they were breaking him in pieces
(Job 19:2). Bildad says,

“How long4 will it be ere ye set word snares (!ylml ycenq

!wmyft)? Mark ye, and afterwards we will speak.
Wherefore are we counted as beasts, and reputed vile in
your sight?” Job 18:2-3 (KJV revised)

1 This verb occurs in Deut 28:37, “thou shalt become an astonishment”.

2 This form of the verb occurs in Job 31:29 and Isa 51:17; we favour an
echo with Isa 51:17. Wolfers, Deep Things, 273-275, follows Job 31:29 and
translates the clause, “and the guiltless, that the heathen triumphs”.
Wolfers sees no expression of hope in Job’s assertion.
3 This verb is not “hold onto” but “take hold of” in Job.
4 Job mocks Bildad’s opening words “How long?” (Job 8:2, 18:2) in his

reply (Job 19:2).

187
The problem with this verse is the plural address, apparently, to Job. Pope
avers that Bildad is addressing all the participants, “How long will you all
set word snares? Be sensible and then we may talk”.1 The problem with
this suggestion is that Bildad apparently includes the friends in the
question, “why are we counted as beasts”? A better suggestion, offered by
Wolfers,2 is that Job represents the Judeans. This suggestion is secured by
the rhetorical accusation that Job was “tearing” himself in his anger (v. 4);
a “torn” beast was an unclean beast (Exod 22:31). Bildad throws this
accusation at Job, but its conversational rhetoric implies that Judeans
regarded the friends (of Edomite ethnicity) as unclean torn “beasts”.
Bildad goes on,

“He teareth himself in his anger: shall the land (#ra) be

forsaken for thee? And shall the rock be removed out of
his place?” Job 18:4 (KJV revised)

In a political reading, Bildad is saying here that the land of Israel is not
going to be forsaken because of anything that Job has done, nor will the
rock that is God be removed out of his place, Jerusalem (contradicting
Job’s assertion of Job 14:18). Bildad addresses the other friends when he
says, “…he [Job] tears himself in his anger”, and then turns and addresses
Job with the words, “…shall the land be forsaken for thee”? Bildad’s
confidence echoes Isaiah:

“And he [Yahweh] shall be for a sanctuary; but for a

stone of stumbling and for a rock of offence to both the
houses of Israel, for a gin (xp) and for a snare to the
inhabitants of Jerusalem.” Isa 8:14 (KJV)

This text has another point of contact with Bildad’s speech in that Bildad
also mentions a “gin” (xp, v. 9) taking Job by the heel (Eliphaz makes a
similar point in Job 22:10). In the light of Isaiah’s statement, it would
appear that Bildad believes that while God is the rock of Zion and will
not be removed, he is against the inhabitants of Jerusalem as a “gin and a
snare”.

1 Job, 132-133; see also Habel, Job 282.

2 Wolfers, Deep Things, 195-199.
188
Thus Bildad switches his attention from Job to “the wicked ones” (v. 5),
the rulers of Jerusalem, who have control of the city.1 Of these, Bildad
says, firstly,

“Yea, the light (rwa) of the wicked ones (~y[vr) shall be

put out, and the spark of his fire shall not shine. The
light shall be dark in his tabernacle, and his candle (rn)
shall be put out with him.” Job 18:5-6 (KJV revised)

Here Bildad asserts that “the light” of “the wicked ones”—the ruling elite
in Jerusalem—will be extinguished. There is an underlying proverb here,
i.e. “the candle of the wicked ones will be put out” (Prov 13:9, 24:20).2
However, the proverb is being “writ large” and applied to a group by
Bildad. Whereas the proverb asserts that the candle (rn) of the wicked
ones will be put out, Bildad asserts that the “light” (rwa) of the wicked
ones will be put out. He expands the proverb by distinguishing the
“candle” from “the light” when he says that the candle would be put out
along with him (wyl[).3 Bildad thus identifies an individual as the “light” of
the group, when he says that “the spark of his fire shall not shine” and
“the light shall be dark in its tabernacle”. Bildad implies that the individual
had a “candle”—a source of (false) prophetic inspiration. Bildad then
proceeds to enlarge on the fate of this individual (vv. 7-20) until he closes
his speech with the words,

“Surely such are the dwellings of the unrighteous one

(lw[), and this is the place of him that knoweth not God.”
Job 18:21 (KJV revised)

The word lw[ is rare (5x); outside Job it only occurs in Zeph 3:5, which is
part of a prophecy about Jerusalem and its corrupt leaders, priests and
prophets.

“The just Lord is in the midst thereof; he will not do

iniquity: every morning doth he bring his judgment to
light, he faileth not; but the unrighteous one
(lw[)knoweth no shame.” Zeph 3:5 (KJV revised)

1 Bildad is not talking about Job in vv. 5-21, but he does use terminology
that associates Job with the “wicked ones” and their “light”, Habel, Job, 282.
2 Pope, Job, 134.
3 Wolfers, Deep Things, 150, fails to distinguish a specific individual.

189
Zephaniah asserts that in the midst of the city there resided the
“unrighteous one”, and this echo with Job allows the suggestion that
Bildad is talking about an individual within the Jerusalem hierarchy who
was the “light” of the wicked ones.1

Within Job, the word lw[ is used in the expression “jaws of the
unrighteous one” (Job 29:17), which refers to the Assyrian army as “jaws”.
The relationship of these “jaws” to the leader of the government in
Jerusalem reflects party politics. The argument by the “unrighteous one”
had been that Judah should acquiesce and come under the protection of
the Assyrian jaws. The government had secured appeasement towards
Sennacherib, but ironically the “jaws” had turned on Jerusalem.2

Bildad refers to the “tabernacles” (!kvm, KJV “dwelling places”) of the

unrighteous one, and the “place” of the one who does not know God.
There is a religious dimension to these remarks. The word used is the
ordinary word for Israel’s tabernacle, and it is used in many places for a
place of worship (e.g. Pss 46:4, 74:7, 78:60, 132:7, 2 Chron 29:6). In fact,
where we might expect the singular form to be used, it is often in the
plural suggesting that a temple constitutes the “dwellings” of the deity.
Furthermore, there is likely a rhetorical inclusio here, as Bildad opened his
speech by suggesting that the true God could not be removed from his
“place”, Zion (v. 4), and he then negatively appraises the “place” of the
unrighteous one. Finally, he has referred to the “light” of “the wicked
ones” in their “tent” being extinguished, which further suggests he is
referring to places of worship where cultic oracles were delivered.

One of the backdrops to Job and the diatribes of the eighth century
prophets is the worship of the heavenly bodies. Several details inform the
polemical language:

1) Temples to the gods were regarded as “households” (houses), with an

owner and staff,3 and so the language of “dwellings” is appropriate in Job;

1 Thus, it does not seem plausible to argue that Bildad is referring to Job
in his attack in Job 18:5-21. Nevertheless, he may intend some of his
attack to fall upon Job; he may expect Job to consider that he is like one
of the wicked ones.
2 The other two uses of the word, Job 27:7, 31:3, support this sense.
3 T. Jacobsen, The Treasures of Darkness, (New Haven: Yale University

Press, 1976), 15-17, 121-124, 232; G. Roux, Ancient Iraq, (London:

Penguin, 1992), 209.
190
the temple of the sun-god was often called the “shining (white) house”.1
Some “houses” were “wayside chapels”, attached to blocks of living
quarters, others were detached buildings, and the greater gods had larger
temples.2 As a capital city, with diplomatic comings and goings, Jerusalem
would have sustained quite a number of “houses” to the gods, even in the
face of Hezekiah’s early cleansing of the temple.

2) Sennacherib’s name incorporates the name of the moon-god in

Assyrian mythology—sn (Sin—“the god Sin has compensated the (death
of the) brothers”).3 Although these gods (the sun and the moon) were not
the principal Assyrian deities, they are regularly listed in the Assyrian
campaign records, and they may have been the most influential Assyrian
deities in Judah and Jerusalem (Jer 8:2). Sennacherib’s name suggests the
importance of the moon-god in his family.4

3) The moon was regarded as a “lamp” in the sky, i.e. as a “candle”. 5

Oracles were delivered by priests and prophets associated with temples.
The following is a text from Nabonidus’ reign (ca. 550), who was a
Babylonian king known to be a devotee of the moon-god:

“Marduk, the great lord, and Sin, the lamp of heaven and
earth were in attendance…Marduk said to me,
Nabonidus…build Ekhulkhul [“house of joy”, abode of
the moon-god, Sin], and let Sin, the great lord, take up
his residence within it…Such were the words of the lord
of gods, Marduk, and of Sin, lamp of heaven and earth,
whose command is unalterable.”6

4) The sun and the moon had temples in major cities, for example,
Asshur,7 Ur, Harran, Sippar, and Larsa.1

1 G. Leick, Mesopotamia, (London: Penguin, 2001), 189.

2 The smaller local “houses” would serve the everyday religious needs of
the populace, see S. Pollock, Ancient Mesopotamia, (Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 2004), 192.
3 A. Gibson, Text and Tablet, (Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing, 2000), 236-

237; Roux, Ancient Iraq, 319.

4 See also ANET, 289.
5 Jacobsen, Treasures, 121.
6 D. Winton-Thomas, Documents from Old Testament Times, (New York:

Harper Torchbooks, 1961), 89-90; see also ANET, 390.

7 J. Black and A. Green, eds., Gods, Demons and Symbols of Mesopotamia,

(London: British Museum Press, 1992), 184

191
5) One of the main festivals of the sun-god was the “beer festival” held
on the twentieth day of the month; this may be the context for the
diatribe of Isa 28:1-4.2

6) The sun and the moon were regularly invoked before Assyrian
campaigns. For example, Esarhaddon (680-669) reports, “I reached the
embankment of the Tigris and upon the (oracle-) command of Sin and
Shamash, the (two) lords of the (celestial) embankment, I had all my
troops jump over the Tigris as if it be a small ditch”.3

These details may supply the context for the religious overtones of
Bildad’s speech. The text may well be representing opposition to Assyria
through Bildad’s character. On this reading, Bildad would be opposing
individuals who venerated the moon, one of the gods of Sennacherib. Sun
and moon worship was a general fault laid at the door of the Jerusalemites
(Jer 8:2), and it is something that Job explicitly disavows (Job 31:26).4

In the eighth century Prophets, the deliverance of Jerusalem leads to the

“moon” being “confounded” and the sun “ashamed” (Isa 24:23, Mic 3:7-
9), i.e. the favourable pro-Assyrian oracles would be proved worthless in
the face of the action of Yahweh in bringing Assyria down upon the land.
Oracles promoting treaties with Assyria would prove of no value. In more
figurative terms, the Prophets may describe this effect when they say that
the sun and the moon (temple(s)) will be darkened in Jerusalem as
besieging armies ravaged the land and arrived at the gates of the city (Joel
2:10, 3:15). In the same way, the Prophets may be asserting that the deities
associated with the “stars” and their attendant oracles in their temples
would withdraw their shining in the face of this onslaught.5

The “light” of “the wicked ones” has some sort of “prophetic” authority.
Bildad states that the “spark” of his fire will not shine (KJV), but “spark”
is not certain, as it is a unique word (another possibility is “flame”—RSV,

1 Oates, Babylon, 172-3.

2.Leick, Mesopotamia, 192.
3 ANET, 290. F. Rochberg discusses divination in relation to the sun and

the moon in The Heavenly Writing: Divination, Horoscopy, and Astronomy in

Mesopotamian Culture, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004), 66-
78.
4 Parsons, Literary Features, 44.
5 For an example of the use of stars in guiding Assyrian campaigns, see

ANET, 290.
192
NASB).1 However, the verb “to shine” is more significant as this is rare
(4x) and it connotes divine guidance (2 Sam 22:29, Ps 18:28, Isa 9:2,
13:10).2 It is thus fairly secure that Bildad is attributing (false) prophetic
claims to this individual.3

Bildad goes on,

“The steps of his strength shall be straitened (rrc), and

his own counsel (hc[) shall cast him down.” Job 18:7
(KJV)

The figure “steps of his strength shall be straightened” is a metaphor of

constriction. The Hebrew word for “strength” is not common and its
major use is as a figure of the firstborn (Gen 49:3, Deut 21:17, Pss 78:51,
105:364). In this sense, the “strength” of a man lies in his firstborn.5 The
figure therefore states that the “steps” (choices) of the firstborn of the
“light of the wicked ones” will be constrained, because of political
agreements. An example of the common Hebrew verb for “straightened”
(rrc) in a political context is,

“And Tilgathpilneser king of Assyria came unto him, and

distressed him, but straightened (rrc) him not.” 2 Chron
28:20 (KJV revised)

In political terms, Bildad is expecting that the counsel (hc[) of the

“candle” will “cast him [“the light of the wicked ones”] down”, from
office. The reason Bildad gives is,

“For he is cast into a net (tvr) by his own feet, and he

walketh upon a lattice-work (hkbf).” Job 18:8 (KJV
revised)

1 Pope, Job, 132.

2 Isaiah is the only prophet to carry the rare vocabulary along with Job.
3 Job picks up on this language of “candle” “light” and “tabernacle” when

he describes his inspiration in his early years—Job 29:3-4.

4 Other texts such as Isa 40:26, 29 and Hos 12:3, 8 could also carry this

“firstborn” sense, but they are less clear.

5 That this is the meaning here is shown in Job 18:13 where there is a use

of the Hebrew for “firstborn” in close proximity to a further use of the

same Hebrew word for “strength” (Job 18:12).
193
Bildad’s language of the “net” implies a political web of deceit and the
“light of the wicked ones” falling over into the net by his own feet (Lam
1:13). A similar figure is used of Northern Israel:

“Ephraim also is like a silly dove without heart: they call

to Egypt, they go to Assyria. When they shall go, I will
spread my net (tvr) upon them; I will bring them down
as the fowls of the heaven; I will chastise them, as their
congregation hath heard.” Hos 7:11-121 (KJV)

The intricacy of the web (its confederate structure) is conveyed by the

figure of the “candle” walking upon a lattice-work.

The plans and policies of this person are confounded because the very
beliefs (moon-worship) and the very power (Assyria) which he supported
will turn upon him and make him afraid. His confidence will bring him to
the king of terrors.

“Terrors (hhlb) shall make him afraid on every side, and

shall drive him to his feet.” Job 18:11 (KJV)

“His confidence shall be rooted out of his tabernacle,

and it shall bring him to the king of terrors (hhlb).” Job
18:14 (KJV)

An echo with Isaiah supplies an interpretation of this “terror”:

“And behold at eveningtide terrors (hhlb2); and before

the morning he is not.” Isa 17:14 (KJV revised)

This refers to the Assyrian siege and the miraculous deliverance, but
before this deliverance, the siege was to be a source of “terror” to the
“candle” and the “light” of “the wicked ones”.

Bildad says that the firstborn (strength) of the “light” of “the wicked
ones” will be hungry, and this may refer to his supporters and a failure of
the “light” from the temple to “feed” its devotees.

1 Other texts using the figure of a “net” for the nations coming upon the

people include Ezek 12:13, 19:8, and 32:3.

2 The word is not common (10x); it occurs mainly in Job but elsewhere in

Ps 73:19, Isa 17:14, and Ezek 26:21, 27:36, 28:19.

194
 “His strength shall be hungerbitten, and destruction shall
be ready at his side.” Job 18:12 (KJV)

The “destruction” or calamity is ready at the side of the temple. The text
uses a fairly common word for “calamity”. It is used in Deut 32:35 in
connection with the “sliding foot” of the nation, which allows the
suggestion that the same cause and effect are at play here in Job: a sliding
towards false gods and a consequent calamity (Obad 1:13). Job later
agrees with Bildad on this point when he says, “How often is it that the
lamp of the wicked ones is put out? That their calamity comes upon
them?” (Job 21:17, RSV). The rhetorical answer is that this will always
eventually happen.

Bildad appears to be constructing an ironical play with ideas: the firstborn

of the “light” of “the wicked ones” are spiritually hungry, but they will be
eaten by the “firstborn of death” (v. 13):

“It shall devour (lka) branches (db) of his skin: even the
firstborn of death shall devour (lka) his branches (db).”
Job 18:13 (KJV revised)

The Hebrew figure here is difficult. The “firstborn of death” could easily
be a figure for an oppressor.1 The word db is common (50x) and mainly
used for a “stave” (37x), but these uses are in the context of describing
the tabernacle furniture. Hosea uses the word with the idea of “eating”,
and this echo can be used to interpret Job:2

“He shall not return into the land of Egypt, but the
Assyrian shall be his king, because they refused to return.
And the sword shall abide on his cities, and shall
consume his branches (db), and devour (lka) them,
because of their own counsels.” Hosea 11:5-6 (KJV)

This echo nicely matches a symbolic reading of “firstborn of death” and

the eating of branches. Another problem for translators is the conjunction
of ideas in “branches of skin”—hence, the RSV and NASB offer
“disease” and amend db.3 We will retain the odd figure because, as we

1 Pope, Job, 135, suggests a reference to the Ugaritic god “Death”, but as
he notes, this god had no offspring.
2 Another link between this prophecy and the Job text is the mention of

Egypt in the phrase “firstborn of death”.

3 Pope, Job, 135, amends the MT and offers “hands”.

195
have argued in Chapter Three, there is an implied comparison between
Job’s skin, and its diseased state, and the fate of the nation.

The figure of the “branches” of a tree is developed by Bildad when he

says,

“His roots shall be dried up beneath, and above shall his

branch be cut off.” Job 18:16 (KJV)

Bildad says,

“In his tent dwells that which is none of his; brimstone

shall be scattered upon his habitation.” Job 18:15 (RSV
revised)

This lack of ownership on the part of the “light” of “the wicked ones”
may reflect the “foreign” nature of his deity (the moon-god); the God of
Judah was Yahweh. The text states that “brimstone” will be scattered
upon this habitation,1 thereby echoing the characteristic vengeance of the
Lord upon Assyria and the nations (Isa 30:33, 34:9, cf. Sodom).

The fate of the “light” of “the wicked ones” was to be exile: he would
have no name in the street of the city, no remembrance, and no devotees
in his temples (descendants and relatives). Rather than be astonished at
Job (Job 16:7, 17:8), Bildad says, subsequent generations would be
astonished that this “light” had held such sway.

19. Job 19—Job’s Sixth Speech

We can divide Job’s sixth speech into three sections. In our political and
prophetic reading, he appeals to his friends to support him and, as his
appeal, he describes, firstly, the military situation (vv. 2-12), and then all
those who are against him (vv. 13-19). On this basis he expects his friends
to support him (vv. 20-22). He finishes his speech by recapitulating the
desire for a case to be presented to his redeemer (vv. 23-27), and warning
the friends (vv. 28-29).

19.1 The Military Situation

As far as Job is concerned the friends had vexed his soul (Isa 51:23) and
offered no comfort. Even if he has sinned, he asks, what is that to them?
Instead, Job invites the friends to,

1 The prediction may relate to the destruction of Nineveh.

196
 “Know then that God has put me in the wrong, and
closed his net (dwcm) about me.” Job 19:6 (RSV)

The word that the text uses here for “net” (dwcm) is rare (4x) and occurs in
Ecclesiastes,

“There was a little city, and few men within it; and there
came a great king against it, and besieged it, and built
great bulwarks (dwcm) against it…” Eccl 9:14 (KJV)

If we use this text to supply the sense in Job, then Job is not talking about
a web of deceit, but rather the siege engines of Sennacherib.

Job was “crying out for violence” done to him (Mic 6:12) by his
opponents (v. 7). God had fenced his way (closed off any options) and set
darkness on the paths that he might choose, so that he could not see his
way forward (Hos 2:6). God had taken the “crown” and the “glory” of
kingship from him (v. 9).1 God had destroyed him “on every side”, thus
reversing the situation proclaimed in Job 1:10 that Job had “rest” on every
side, and God now counted Job as an enemy (Amos 3:11). In a siege-like
formation, God’s invading army was now camped around (v. 12) Job’s
tabernacle (Jerusalem, Isa 29:3).

19.2 The Groups and Individuals against Job

This military situation is the backdrop to the fact that every social group
and individual has abandoned Job. The list he enumerates is given in the
table below:2

His brethren are far from him (v. Acquaintances estranged (v. 13, Isa
13, an echo of captivity, Joel 3:6, 1:4 RSV)
Isa 6:12)
Kinsfolk have failed (v. 14, Mic Familiar friends have forgotten him
7:5) (v. 14, Hos 8:14)
His household servants count him His steward ignores him (v. 16)
as a stranger (v. 15)
His wife and children shun him (v. Young children despise him (v. 18)
17)
Men of the Assembly have turned
against him (v. 19, Ps 89:7)

1 Isaiah may record this in Isa 28:1-4 if there was a literal transfer of
kingship in the form of a co-regency during Hezekiah’s sickness.
2 The list presumes that the groups are not synonymous.

197
It is because so many have turned against him, that Job appeals to his
friends to have pity on him (vv. 21-22).

The Assyrian campaign record of the Jerusalem siege mentions the

desertion of Hezekiah’s troops:

“Hezekiah himself, whom the terror-inspiring splendour

of my lordship had overwhelmed and whose irregular
and elite troops which he had brought into Jerusalem, his
royal residence, in order to strengthen (it), had deserted
him…”1

This detail confirms the picture of desertion in vv. 13-19.

In this situation, Job says that he is “being delivered (v. 20, KJV “escape”)
by the skin of his teeth”. The verb suggests that in the face of daily
desertion, he is being delivered daily; the political and military sense of the
verb is found in texts such as Isa 20:6, 31:5, and Joel 2:32. The picture of
his bone and his flesh cleaving to his skin (Ps 102:5) is equivalent to the
metaphor of “holding body and soul together” in the face of dire
circumstances.2

19.3 Job’s Redeemer

Perhaps the most famous verse in the book of Job is the exclamation that
Job’s redeemer lives (v. 25).

“For I know that my redeemer liveth, and that he shall

stand at the latter day upon the dust (rp[)” Job 19:25
(KJV revised)

The Hebrew word, lag, for “redeemer”, is common (92x). It is a title

claimed by Yahweh in Isaiah, and what is distinctive about Isaiah’s usage
that links especially with Job is the use of the possessive suffixes, “your
redeemer” (Isa 41:14, 43:14, 44:24, 48:17, 49:26, 54:5, 54:8, 60:16), “his
redeemer” (Isa 44:6), “our redeemer” (Isa 47:4, 63:16). The word is also
used as a title, “the redeemer” (Isa 49:7, 59:20). This possessive form of
the word is common in Isaiah but rare elsewhere: once in the Prophets—
Jer 50:34; and three times in Psalms and Proverbs—“my redeemer” (Ps
19:14), “their redeemer” (Ps 78:35, Prov 23:11). This database of usage

1 ANET, 288.
2 Following Wolfers, Deep Things, 127.
198
allows the suggestion that Isaiah is the main interpretative context for the
book of Job, and that Job refers to Yahweh as his redeemer.1

The context of these oracles in Isaiah is not a personal and individual

salvation but a collective redemption for the people (Isa 41:14). The
pattern of the Exodus (Isa 43:14) underlies the prospect of such
redemption. This supplies a context for Job that fits the Assyrian crisis:
Job knows that his Exodus redeemer “lives” (in contrast to himself, a man
close to death).

Job is not expressing a “latter day” prophecy with the utterance, “he shall
rise (~wq, “stand”) at the latter day”. The Hebrew word translated in the
KJV as “latter day” (!wrxa) is a common word for “after” and can be used
in a spatial or temporal sense. The word is used in God’s declaration “I am
the last (!wrxa)” (Isa 44:6, 48:12). In Isa 30:8 (RSV revised), the word is
used in the sentence, “And now, go, write it before them on a tablet, and
inscribe it in a book, that it may be for the time after (!wrxa) as a witness
forever.” This “after” could therefore easily indicate a time after the
Assyrian invasion (Pss 48:13, 78:4, 6, 102:18).

In view of these echoes, the text could well be expressing the conviction
that Job’s redeemer (Yahweh) will rise or stand (~wq) upon the dust (rp[)
after an event, and it is natural to suppose that this refers to what has
happened to Job. The Lord will rise up after all that has happened to Job
has run its course and then act as a redeemer to Job, rising upon the
“dust”.

Job expresses the conviction in terms of a “rising” of the Lord and

“dust”. The underlying Hebrew words occur together in Isaiah 2:

“And they shall go into the holes of the rocks, and into
the caves of the dust (rp[), for fear of the Lord, and for
the glory of his majesty, when he ariseth (~wq) to shake
terribly the earth.” Isa 2:19 (KJV revised), cf. v. 10

1 Some commentators do not think that Job can mean Yahweh, because
he regards God as his attacker, not his redeemer. This excludes the
possibility that Job’s mind is conflicted—he moves back and forth
between expressions of hope and despair. Pope, Job, 146, observes that
Job mentions God in the next verse and this suggests that he refers to
God as his redeemer.
199
Here the action of Yahweh “rising” presages a work of judgment upon
the land. Isaiah’s oracle relates to the earthquake in Uzziah’s day, a
response to the pride of the nation. A similar use of the verb “to rise” is
Isa 28:21,

“For the Lord shall rise up (~wq) as in mount Perazim, he

shall be wroth as in the valley of Gibeon, that he may do
his work, his strange work; and bring to pass his act, his
strange act.” Isa 28:21 (KJV)

This prophecy is about the Lord rising to judge the lies, false agreements
and diplomatic efforts of the people to avoid the Assyrian destroying
Judah and Jerusalem.

Job says that the Lord will rise “upon the dust”. The Hebrew word for
“dust” is very common (112x, e.g. 1 Sam 2:8, Ps 113:7, Isa 26:19, 52:2). In
Isaiah it is used in descriptions of the condition of the people of
Jerusalem:

“And thou shalt be brought down, and shalt speak out of

the ground, and thy speech shall be low out of the dust,
and thy voice shall be, as of one that hath a familiar
spirit, out of the ground, and thy speech shall whisper
out of the dust.” Isa 29:4 (KJV)

“Shake thyself from the dust; arise, and sit down, O

Jerusalem: loose thyself from the bands of thy neck, O
captive daughter of Zion.” Isa 52:2 (KJV)

The figure of “being in the dust” seems to connote the status of the
people (Mic 1:10, Lam 2:10).

In prophetic terms, it appears then that Job is saying that while God will
be his redeemer, after what has happened to him has run its course, God
will rise upon the “dust” and the “dust” here is a figure for those who
have been brought down to the dust. Their rising and sitting is a
manifestation of God rising upon the dust in defiance of Judah’s enemies.

Similarly, a prophetic interpretation of Job’s “resurrection” statement is

possible:

“And though after my skin they destroy this, yet in my

flesh shall I see God:” Job 19:26 (KJV revised)
200
If the “skin” of Job is symbolic of the nation or his brethren, Job is here
asserting that even after the invader destroys the cities of Judah and turns
on Jerusalem, Job will survive to see the redemption wrought by God. Job
will see God and not a “stranger” (rz, v. 27, KJV “another”).1

Job concludes his speech by offering a warning to the friends to be afraid

of “the sword” of the Lord (Isa 27:1). God’s anger was bringing this
sword upon the land, because there was a “case” to be heard (v. 29).

20. Job 20—Zophar’s Second Speech

Zophar opens his second speech by asking Job whether or not he knows
that since man was placed upon the earth (in the land) that the triumph of
“the wicked ones” is short and the joy of “the hypocrite” lasts only a
moment (vv. 4-5).2 For Zophar to pose this question, suggests that the
“joy” of the hypocrite has already passed with Assyria’s treaty violation, or
it has been temporarily revived with the securing of a treaty with Egypt.

It is fairly clear that Zophar is not describing just any immoral person or
religious hypocrite. This person is such that he aspires to the heavens (v.
6), oppresses the poor (v. 19), and has to flee from the weapon of war (v.
24); the person has status, political power, and suffers the consequences
of a fall from power; it is a specific individual.

We can therefore take Zophar’s speech as a warning to Job that those in

control of the government, and in particular “the hypocrite”, are destined
to come to nothing.

Zophar describes the fate of “the hypocrite”, a topic that has been visited
by Bildad and Eliphaz (Job 8:13, 15:34). The joy and triumph of “the
hypocrite” is momentary (vv. 4-5). In terms of our reading, such joy and
triumph was shown during the Assyrian invasion when it was thought by
the rulers in Jerusalem that a treaty with Sennacherib had been secured
and Jerusalem had been saved. Zophar’s description of the hypocrite’s joy
is an echo of the joy and triumph of those who ruled the city (Isa 28:14-
15), and who were understandably celebrating (Isa 28:1-4, 22:2, 13). This

1 Job is referring to the “strangers” or “foreigners” who threatened the

city (Isa 1:7, 25:2, 29:5).
2 Zophar therefore distinguishes Job from “the wicked ones” and “the

hypocrite”.
201
joy was momentary, because the treaty with Assyria was suddenly broken
(Isa 30:13).1

Zophar’s description of the aspiration and fate of “the hypocrite” has

several links with the aspiration and fate of the invader, and these support
a prophetic reading: the invader and the hypocrite will have the same fate.

The hypocrite sought to reach the “heavens” (~ymv) and the “clouds”
(b[)—v. 6. This vaulting ambition resounds with the boast of
Shalmaneser V, “For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into
heaven (~ymv)…I will ascend above the heights of the clouds (b[)” (Isa
14:13-14). In this prophecy, Isaiah predicts the fall of the Assyrian king
upon the mountains of Judah (Isa 14:25), and he does this at a time when
the proud “king of Babylon”, was destroying the Northern Kingdom.

Those who were contemporaries of “the hypocrite” and had “seen” (har)
him would ask, “Where is he (wya)?”—v. 7. Here the text appears to strike
an ironical echo with the interrogation of Rabshakeh, “Where is he (wya)—
the king of Hamath, and the king of Arpad, and the king of the city of
Sepharvaim, of Hena, and Ivar?” (2 Kgs 19:13 Mic 7:10). The co-regent—
“the hypocrite”—had sought rapprochement with Sennacherib, who had
bragged, “Where is Yahweh”? In turn, people would say of him, “Where
is he”?2

Zophar says that “the hypocrite” would fly away as a “dream” (~wlx) and
as a “night (hlyl) vision” (v. 8). Here the text seems to echo the night-
time destruction of the Assyrian confederacy, “And the multitude of all
the nations that fight against Ariel, even all that fight against her and her
munition, and that distress her, shall be as a dream (~wlx) of a night (hlyl)
vision” (Isa 29:7). A night-time coup-d’état reasserting Hezekiah’s rule
following the destruction of the Assyrian army seems to be the
implication.

The hypocrite will “fly away” (@w[) and “be chased” (ddn) (v. 8). Here the
text strikes an echo with, “…as birds flying (@w[), so will the Lord of hosts
defend Jerusalem” (Isa 31:5), and “…at the noise of the tumult the people
fled (ddn)” (Isa 33:3). This link implies that “the hypocrite” had fled the
city during the chaos of the flight of the Assyrian army.

1 Pope notes that the Qumran Targum preserves two words from the end
of Job 20:5, “suddenly it [i.e. the joy] passes away”, Job, 151.
2 See also Isa 63:11.

202
Zophar asserts “this is the portion (qlh hz) of the wicked man” (v. 29).
The Hebrew expression, qlh hz, only appears elsewhere in Isa 17:14,
“And behold at eveningtide trouble; and before the morning he is not.
This is the portion (qlh hz) of them that spoil us, and the lot of them that
rob us.”1 This refers to the sudden decimation of the invader, the
plunderer (Isa 33:1, 3).

In order to avoid sharing his fate (flight, v. 8), the children (followers) of
“the hypocrite” will make amends; they will restore goods to “the poor”
(Isa 14:30, 26:6), because he had oppressed “the poor” (v. 19).

These connections might suggest an identification of the Assyrian king as

“the hypocrite”. However, the use of the Hebrew adjective and the related
verb (@nx) elsewhere identify an internal enemy (Isa 10:6, 33:14). The point
of the connections therefore seems to be one of comparison: “the
hypocrite” among “the wicked ones” will share the same fate as the
enemy with which he had sought a peace treaty.

Job quotes Zophar in a later speech expressing a similar view:

“This is the portion of a wicked man with God, and the

heritage of oppressors, which they shall receive of the
Almighty.” Job 27:13 (KJV)

Here Job agrees with Zophar, and the use of the expression “the
oppressors” (Assyria, Isa 29:5, 20) alongside “wicked man” is another way
in which the two are associated. The subtlety of Zophar’s connections is
reinforced by Job’s more direct linkage: the wicked man’s fate (death,
trouble, Job 27:8-9) is the same as that of the oppressors.

Zophar’s description of the fate of “the hypocrite” parallels Eliphaz’

description of “the wicked one” and it compliments Bildad’s description
of the “light” of “the wicked ones”. Our proposal is that Eliphaz and
Zophar are talking about a person in whom civic authority has been
vested, while Bildad is talking about a corresponding religious authority.

Having described the eventual fate of “the hypocrite” (a flight), Zophar

winds the clock back, and describes his current modus operandi (vv. 11-28).
The following suggestions are one way that Zophar’s details can be
located in the eighth/seventh century context of the Assyrian invasion:

1 The contrasting “portion” is the double restoration (Isa 61:7).

203
1) The hypocrite has “youthful vigour” (v. 11), and one of Job’s
complaints was against those who were “younger” and who had him in
derision (Job 30:1). But such youth would “lie down with him upon the
dust” (v. 11, NASB). Here the text may echo “the oppressor” lying down
equally in the dust with “the hypocrite” (Isa 14:18, 43:17).

2) The hypocrite will seek to hide his wickedness in his mouth (v. 12, Mic
6:12), when he sees that he is under threat; however, he has not forsaken
wickedness (vv. 12-13). This would refer to the political arts of subterfuge
and deception.

3) The policies (food) that “the hypocrite” has followed have “turned”
(gone bad) in his bowels (v. 14). These policies are the “gall of asps”. Here
the text seems to echo Deut 32:33 and the description of a nation void of
understanding and speaking only with venom (Deut 32:28). Zophar
attributes the sudden treachery of Assyria to the “gall” of “the hypocrite”
(v. 25), and by this he means that it was the policy of “the hypocrite” that
brought this sudden reversal.

4) The “viper’s tongue” would slay “the hypocrite” (v. 16). Here the text
uses a rare word (3x) which only occurs outside Job in Isaiah. There may
be an allusion here or, if not, the echo allows the suggestion that “the
viper” is a member of the Egyptian government:

“The burden of the beasts of the south: into the land of

trouble and anguish, from whence come the young and
old lion, the viper and fiery flying serpent, they will carry
their riches upon the shoulders of young asses, and their
treasures upon the bunches of camels, to a people that
shall not profit them.” Isa 30:6 (KJV)

If we use this text as a key, Zophar appears to be saying that the Egyptian
“help” that “the hypocrite” was seeking would fail because of the “viper’s
tongue”, and this would signal his political decline. This reading makes
Zophar (like Eliphaz) against any pro-Egyptian party in Jerusalem.

5) Thus Zophar states that “the hypocrite” would not see the benefits of
any treaty with Egypt. The figure of “butter and honey” (v. 17) is used for
“choosing good and evil” in Isa 7:15,1 and is an appropriate metaphor for

1The Hebrew for “butter” is not common (10x) and Isaiah is the only
prophet to use the word.
204
the benefits of a treaty (supplies and military aid). Treaties promised much
but would deliver nothing.

6) Some sort of tribute is implied in his dealings: Zophar says that “the
hypocrite” has “swallowed riches” (v. 15) and “oppressed the poor” (v.
19), figures that may indicate taxation and sequestration of goods and
property in order to make up any tribute payment (Mic 2:2). Hence,
Zophar envisages that “the hypocrite” would restore what he has taken in
an effort to placate the city over the failure of his policy (before eventually
fleeing); he will not “rejoice” (v. 18)1 in his gain.

7) “The hypocrite” would not know “ease” in his belly—his policy will
not bring the peace he seeks. He will not “deliver” (jlm) what he wants—
his policy will not save the country or the city. He will have nothing left to
devour in order to bolster his policy (v. 21, NASB).

8) Zophar describes internal difficulties for “the hypocrite” when his

policy fails:

“In the fulness of his plenty he will be cramped; The

hand of everyone who suffers will come against him.” Job
20:22 (NASB)

Even with his strategy, “the hypocrite” will be constrained. Bildad made a
similar point when he said, “the steps of his strength shall be
straightened” (Job 18:7). The idea is of being boxed into a corner (Isa
28:20, Ps 107:6, 13, 19, and 28). When his policy collapses, the people in
the city turn on him.

9) In response, Zophar says,

“To fill his belly to the full [God] will send his fierce
anger into him, and rain it upon him as his food.” Job
20:23 (RSV)

The “fierce anger” here is that associated with the “day of the Lord”,
which brings the invader up to the neck of the body, to Jerusalem (Isa 8:8,
13:9, 13, 30:28).

1 This is a rare word (3x); it occurs once in Prov 7:18 (NASB, “delight”)
and in Job 39:13 (NASB, “joyously”). This latter verse describes the
joyous flapping of ostrich wings. We shall see in our discussion of God’s
speeches that the ostrich is a symbol for the elite of Judah.
205
10) At this point (vv. 24-25), with treaties broken, and secret alliances of
no worth, “the hypocrite” will flee from the “iron weapon” (Isa 10:33-34,
22:8) and “bow of steel” (Isa 22:3).1 The “arrow” would pierce his body
(recollecting Ahaziah, 2 Kgs 9:24), as he flees from the “terrors” (Isa
33:18) that are upon him.

Wolfers offers the following translation of v. 25, which we have revised,2

“When he draws, he will depart from pride; and at a flash

of lightning, he will depart his bitterness; terrors assail
him.” Job 20:25 (Wolfers)

This rendering follows the normal sense of the Hebrew. A sword is drawn
by the attacker and the hypocrite departs from his position of pride (hwg,
Job 22:29, 33:17, Jer 13:17); he departs from the “bitterness” (hrrm, Deut
32:32, Job13:26, 20:14) of the situation he has created at the flash of
lightning (fire projectiles).

11) Accordingly, complete darkness is laid up for “the hypocrite” (v. 26,
RSV); he will be consumed by fire (Isa 29:6), but not the fire that will be
“blown” by the Lord upon Assyria (Isa 30:33). Those who are left in his
“house” will be left to suffer the displeasure of the people ([ry). The
heavens will reveal his iniquity, and the land will rise up against him (v.
27). His possessions will be looted in the day of the Lord (v. 28).

The above suggestions are one way in which a prophetic interpretation of

“the hypocrite” can be rendered.

21. Job 21—Job’s Seventh Speech

This is Job’s main speech about “the wicked ones” and his treatment
begins in v. 7. Before speaking about “the wicked ones”, he addresses his
friends in terms that echo the prophetic traditions:

1) He invites them to consider his speech as their “consolation”, picking

up on Eliphaz’ jibe (Job 15:11). The Hebrew word translated
“consolation” is rare3 and occurs in Isa 66:11 about the “consolations” of
Jerusalem.

1 Wolfers, Deep Things, 287, notes that bows are not made of brass, and so

this is a figure for the army that is attacking the hypocrite.

2 Wolfers, Deep Things, 288.
3 Elsewhere only in Ps 94:19 (RSV) and Jer 16:7.

206
2) He expects his friends to “mock” him, and this type of mocking (g[l) is
only mentioned in connection with Hezekiah (2 Kgs 19:21, 2 Chron
30:10).1

3) He commands his friends to turn and look at him and be “appalled”,

which is a characteristic of the Suffering Servant, whose visage was so
marred as to make people appalled (Isa 52:14).

4) Job says that if he remembers, he is terrified (v. 6), and this was the
emotion instilled in the people on the wall of Jerusalem listening to the
words of Sennacherib (2 Chron 32:18). This terror and shuddering is the
same as that experienced by Isaiah (Isa 21:3-4). The point in Job’s remark
is one of assurance for his friends: he too is terrified.

With these echoes suggesting a political context for Job’s language, it is

possible to read the whole of this speech in political and prophetic terms.

21.1 Overview of Job’s Speech

Job offers “consolation” in four parts:

In vv. 7-15 he affirms the view that “the wicked ones” prosper; here they
are the Judean political class who favour Egypt. He concludes his appraisal
by distancing himself from this “counsel of the wicked ones”.

In vv. 16-21 he affirms his conviction that “the wicked ones” and their
“candle” will be destroyed by Assyria. The turning point in his speech
from “the wicked have it good” to “the wicked will be vanquished” is
Job’s assertion that “the good” that the wicked would do is not in their
power to deliver.

In vv. 22-26 he affirms the equality of everyone in death regardless of

their position.

In vv. 28-34 he rejects any accusation that he is of “the wicked ones”.

The above analysis is not uncontroversial. The difficulty in Job’s discourse

lies in the difference of tenor between vv. 7-16 and vv. 17-21. Prima facia,
in vv. 7-16 “the wicked ones” have a good time, but in vv. 17-21 “the
wicked ones” are subject to the wrath of the Almighty. Scholars have
sought to harmonise the two sections by suggesting amendments to the

1 Later traditions use the word to describe Sanballat (Neh 2:19, 4:1).
207
Hebrew, and suggesting that Job quotes views of his opponents in vv. 17-
21. We see no grammatical or lexical evidence for quotation of any views
from his opponents,1 or any reason to amend the Hebrew. It is possible to
supply a plausible and harmonious reading when “the wicked ones” is
primarily given a reference to the political class in Judah and Jerusalem.

21.2 Politicians
The clue to the identity of “the wicked ones” in vv. 7-16 comes at the end
of Job’s remarks. The wicked ones say something which the reader knows
to be Satan’s question,

“What is the Almighty, that we should serve him? And

what profit do we get, if we meet with him (wb [gpn2)?”
Job 21:15 (RSV revised)

The title “Almighty” (ydv) mostly occurs in Job and Genesis. We suggest
its occurrence here in Job is for two reasons:

1) The identity of Yahweh, whether he is God, is critical to the eighth

century Assyrian crises; hence Job reproduces the emphasis on God’s
identity that we find in Exod 6:3—Yahweh is “the Almighty” who
appeared unto Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.

2) While the title is virtually absent3 from the Prophets; it does however
occur, significantly, in Isa 13:6 and Joel 1:15, which are texts about the
“day of the Lord” coming from the Almighty. This connection indicates
that Job is also about a “day of the Lord”—an Assyrian invasion in the
eighth century. Joel and Isaiah cover the Assyrian crises of Ahaz’ reign;
Job’s background is the invasion of 701. (In later centuries, the “day of
the Lord” would be about other superpowers.) In the eighth century, the
prophets were proclaiming that Yahweh was the Almighty God of
Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, and this God was bringing judgment upon the
nation.4

1 Job 21:28 is a nearby example of how Job quotes his friends.

2 The concept of a “meeting” here is that of meeting a god in a place of
worship.
3 The only other place in the Prophets where the title occurs is Ezekiel

(1:24, 10:5).
4 Scholars have noted the similarity between the monotheism of Job and

Isaiah 40-55; see Forsyth, The Old Enemy, 110.

208
The charge of “the wicked ones” is that there is no profit in serving the
Almighty. The word for “profit” (l[y) mainly occurs in connection with
idols (Isa 44:9-10, 47:12, Jer 7:8-9, 16:19-20); there was no profit in the
worship of idols. The position of “the wicked ones” therefore is that there
was no profit in obeying the Almighty, because he was nothing more than
an idol. This is why they say “what” (hm) is the Almighty rather than
“who” is the Almighty.1 This is the question that Satan posed to God:
does Job serve God for nought? Job says that “the wicked ones” will not
serve God for nothing.

The political elite of Judah approached Egypt for military assistance

during the Assyrian crisis, but Egypt asked whether there was any “profit”
in such an alliance for them (Isa 30:1-5). The delegates from Egypt that
met representatives from Judah at Zoan thought that there was no profit
in such an alliance, although events show that some agreement was
secured (2 Kgs 18:21, 19:9). The political elite of Judah are reflecting this
attitude in their profit-seeking mentality. Thus they turn the tables on
Yahweh and those faithful to him: what “profit” is there in the service of
Yahweh, when it is manifestly obvious that we should ally ourselves with
one of the great powers of the day in order to prosper?

The Judean leadership (and the people) says to God, “Depart from us” (v.
14), and in this remark the text is echoing Isa 30:9-11, with its emphasis of
“ceasing from before us”:

“That this is a rebellious people, lying children, children

that will not hear the law of the Lord: Which say to the
seers, See not; and to the prophets, Prophesy not unto us
right things, speak unto us smooth things, prophesy
deceits: Get you out of the way, turn aside out of the
path, cause the Holy One of Israel to cease from before
us.” Isa 30:9-11 (KJV)

This reading fits other things Job says about the prosperity of “the wicked
ones”:

“Their seed is established (!wk) in their sight with them,

and their offspring before their eyes. Their houses are
safe from dread (dxp) neither is the rod of God upon
them.” Job 21:8-9 (KJV revised)

1 Pharaoh had asked “who” was Yahweh, not “what” was Yahweh (Exod
5:2).
209
1) Job refers to the “rod of God” not being upon “the wicked ones” (v. 9).
A prophetic identity for the “rod of God” is supplied by Isaiah:

“O Assyrian, the rod of mine anger, and the staff in their

hand is mine indignation.” Isa 10:5 (KJV)

“Now gather thyself in troops, O daughter of troops: he

hath laid siege against us: they shall smite the judge of
Israel with a rod upon the cheek.” Mic 5:1 (KJV)

The Assyrian rod would smite the “judge” of Israel upon the cheek. This
mention of “the rod” links to Job’s earlier reference, which has an evident
echo with the “fear” and “terror” of invasion:

“Let him take his rod away from me, and let not his fear
terrify me…” Job 9:34 (KJV)

Job sees the invasion in personal terms, and he resents “the wicked ones”
and their prosperity. His complaint is retrospective, commenting upon
their acquired wealth and power; but it may also be contemporary,
suggesting that “the wicked ones” have landed estates which are safe from
the “dread” (dxp) of the Assyrian (vv. 8-9). This would be true if such
estates were to the north and east of Jerusalem and away from the lines of
the Assyrian invasion in 701. If the ruling class were of Northern Israel
origins, (i.e. drunkards of Ephraim, Isa 28:1), the location of their estates
might have been secure.1 Nevertheless, such a confidence is an illusion. In
view of what Job says on the second day, Job can only be describing an
apparent situation, one that is believed by the wicked ones (these things
were true “in their eyes” and “before their eyes”).2

1 Hezekiah’s own estates would have been to the south of Jerusalem in the
Judean hills, the centre of Sennacherib’s occupying forces.
2 Commentators, for example, Habel, Job, 37-39, have proposed that Job’s

complaint here that “the wicked” prosper contradicts what he says in later
speeches (e.g. Job 21:16-26, 24:18-24). Consequently, they re-assign parts
of his later speeches to the friends who have previously claimed that
wicked suffer. However, our counter-argument is that Job is here
describing the “favour” that the wicked ones have in the North and East
of the land; Job goes onto declare that the wicked will not enjoy such
favour.
210
2) Job’s complaint about “the wicked ones” is directed towards God. His
language has a bitter overtone that reflects awareness of the Davidic
promise:

“Their seed is established (!wk) in their sight with them,

and their offspring before their eyes. Their houses are
safe from dread (dxp) neither is the rod of God upon
them.” Job 21:8-9 (KJV revised)

“I will set up thy seed after thee, which shall proceed out
of thy bowels, and I will establish his kingdom…And
thine house and thy kingdom shall be established for
ever before thee: thy throne shall be established (!wk) for
ever.” 2 Sam 7:12-16 (KJV)

In the parabolic reading we have presented, Job is a descendent of David

and without an heir (2 Chron 33:1);1 hence, with a life-threatening disease,
the text echoes the promise to David: “in their sight” picks up on “before
thee”, “thine house” picks up on “their houses” and “seed” and
“established” are the themes of both texts. Job’s complaint is that “the
wicked ones” apparently had all these things “in their own eyes”.

3) Job also asserts that “the wicked ones” are enjoying the benefits of
secure farms.2 This can be seen in his figure of the sending forth of oxen:

“Their bull gendereth, and faileth not;3 their cow calveth,

and casteth not her calf. They send forth their little ones4
like a flock, and their children dance.” Job 21:10-11
(KJV) 5

This was a time of celebration enjoyed after the calving season. These
“wicked ones” had sent forth their young calves to graze, and their own
children to dance to the sound of timbrel and harp. In the context of an

1 The lack of an heir was a patriarchal concern for Abraham and Isaac.
2 The text of Jer 12:1-3 echoes Job 21:7-12.
3 The Hebrew uses the singular, and more literally it is, “…his bull passes

over and does not abhor”.

4 This expression, “little ones”, refers to the calves, as in Job 38:41, 39:3.

Isa 11:7 has a comparable use in a “messianic kingdom” context.

5 The children of the wicked dance (Isa 5:12), and the implied contrast is

that the children of the righteous are not dancing in a “kingdom” age (Ps
150:4).
211
invasion, this remark could indicate that the wicked ones had also
collaborated with the enemy to protect their landed estates in the north.
Job’s complaint is an ironic echo of the earlier promises of Isaiah,

“And on all hills that shall be digged with the mattock,

there shall not come thither the fear of briers and thorns:
but it shall be for the sending forth of oxen, and for the
treading of lesser cattle.” Isa 7:25 (KJV)

“Blessed are ye that sow beside all waters that send forth
thither the feet of the ox and the ass.” Isa 32:20 (KJV)

This theme of the sending forth of oxen is unique to Isaiah and Job, but Job’s
use of the theme is directed in bitterness towards God, because he was
not able to send forth his oxen in a time of peace; yet the “wicked ones”
were doing this in a time of crisis.

21.3 The Destruction of the Wicked Ones

Commentators sense a shift in tone in the second part of Job’s address.
This is because Job appears now to affirm, rhetorically, that “the wicked
ones” receive their just reward, whereas previously he has been affirming
that they enjoy a life of relative ease and prosperity.1

The turning point (signalled by “Lo”) comes at v. 16. Job avers,

“Lo, their good is not in their hand: (the counsel of the

wicked ones is far from me).” Job 21:16 (KJV revised)

The expression, “the counsel of the wicked ones” (Job 10:3), we suggest,
refers to the political advice of the Jerusalem leadership. Job is saying that
“the good” that they would hope for from Egypt is not in their hand to
deliver, and the counsel of the pro-Egypt party inside the Jerusalem elite
was far from him. The common word for “good” is often a prefix to
advice, for instance,

1 Thus Gordis argues that Job quotes the views of his friends and then
rebuts them, The Book of God, 185-187. However, apart from Job 21:28,
there are no textual markers for such quotation, and the text makes sense
on the supposition that Job is now talking about false prophets attached
to the wicked ones.
212
 “It is good that a man should both hope and quietly wait
for the salvation of the Lord. It is good for a man that he
bear the yoke in his youth.” Lam 3:26-27 (KJV)

“And Naomi said unto Ruth her daughter in law, It is

good, my daughter, that thou go out with his maidens,
that they meet thee not in any other field.” Ruth 2:22
(KJV)

“I will praise thee for ever, because thou hast done it:
and I will wait on thy name; for it is good before thy
saints.” Ps 52:9 (KJV)

The advice or the course of action being advocated by “the wicked ones”,
to acquire the aid of Egyptian princes, was thus “far” from Job. Given
Zophar’s implied suggestion that Job is associated with the political
policies of those in power, this denial by Job is crucial. The people were
being rebellious in not seeking “counsel” from the Lord and going down
to Egypt (Isa 30:1).1

Thus their candle would be “put out”,

“How oft is the candle (rn) of the wicked ones put out
($[d)! And how oft cometh their calamity (dya) upon
them?” Job 21:17 (KJV revised)

Here Job picks up Bildad’s theme from Job 18:5. The text is using the
symbol of “the candle”, not as the life-breath of the wicked, but rather to
represent a false prophet lending authority to “the wicked ones”. This
suggestion can be supported by examining the use of the idea of “the
candle” in certain historical traditions:

“Then the men of David sware unto him, saying, Thou

shalt go no more out with us to battle, that thou quench
not the candle (rn) of Israel.” 2 Sam 21:17 (KJV revised)

1 This reading is supported by the remark of Eliphaz in Job 22:18, which

quotes Jobs’ words, “the counsel of the wicked ones is far from me”.
Eliphaz is saying that such counsel is also far from him, but he goes onto
say that “the fire” has consumed the excellency of “the wicked ones” (Job
22:20, cf. 4:21), and this was the “fire” of the Assyrian invasion, which
had consumed much of the wealth of “the wicked ones”.
213
Here David is “the candle” of Israel. This person-focused usage is found
elsewhere:

“For thou art my candle (rn), O Lord: and the Lord will
lighten my darkness.” 2 Sam 22:29 (KJV revised)

From this basis, the symbol of “the candle” is extended to cover teaching:

“Thy word is a candle (rn) unto my feet, and a light unto

my path.” Ps 119:105 (KJV revised)

“For the commandment is a candle (rn); and the law is

light; and reproofs of instruction are the way of life…”
Prov 6:23 (KJV revised)

Both the righteous and “the wicked ones” could have a “candle”, and it
could be an individual or their teaching.

Job could easily therefore be asking the three friends, how often they have
seen “the candle” of “the wicked ones” quenched, and rhetorically
affirming that he has confidence that their “counsel” will come to
nothing, because the advice of “the wicked ones” had often come to
nothing (cf. the LXX interpretation, “Nevertheless, the lamp of the
ungodly also shall be put out”). In other words, this statement is part of
Job’s affirmation that the wicked will be vanquished because they have
always been in the past; in saying this he agrees with Bildad.1

That we need to distinguish “the wicked ones” from their “candle” is also
shown (more clearly) in Bildad’s speech, where we have already noted that
he says of “the wicked one” that “…his candle (rn) shall be put out ($[d)
with him” (Job 18:5-6). i.e. in addition to “the wicked one”, his “candle”
will also be quenched.

Job also says that “the wicked ones” shall experience “calamity” (v. 17,
RSV) and this word “calamity” occurs in several texts about Judah:

“Thou shouldest not have entered into the gate of my

people in the day of their calamity; yea, thou shouldest
not have looked on their affliction in the day of their

1 Pope, Job, 157, asserts that Job contradicts Bildad in vv. 7-16, but Bildad
is concerned with the “candle” of the wicked ones, whereas in vv. 7-16
Job is concerned with the “wicked ones”.
214
 calamity, nor have laid hands on their substance in the day
of their calamity...” Obad 1:13 (KJV)1

This prophetic usage is a further echo suggesting that “the wicked ones”
are the political elite of Judah.

Job’s next point is an assertion that.

God distributeth sorrows in his anger.2 They are as

stubble before the Spirit (xwr), and as chaff that the
whirlwind3 carrieth away. Job 21:17b-18 (KJV revised)

God apportions sorrow or pain (RSV) to the wicked ones. They would be
as “straw” (!bt) before the Spirit (xwr)—they would bend with the
whirlwind (hpws. v. 18).

Intertextual echoes with this verse suggest that the whirlwind here is a
figure for God’s deliverance of the people, and “the Spirit” is the Angel of
the Lord through whom he wrought deliverance (Isa 37:36). At this time
of deliverance, the wicked ones would also suffer the wrath of God. Isaiah
uses the same language to describe this deliverance:

Thou shalt be visited of the Lord of hosts with thunder,

and with earthquake, and great noise, with whirlwind
(hpws) and tempest (hr[s), and the flame of devouring
fire. Isa 29:6 (KJV revised)

The idea of deliverance is seen in the echoes struck by the word “visit”,
since this word is used of Exodus-style deliverance (Exod 3:16; 4:31). It is
also seen in the motif of “the flame of devouring fire” (as in Isa 30:30).
The terms “whirlwind” (hpws) and “tempest” (hr[s) are less obvious. The
term for “whirlwind” is used in a simile of deliverance in Isa 17:13,

The nations shall rush like the rushing of many waters:

but God shall rebuke them, and they shall flee far off, and
shall be chased as the chaff of the mountains before the

1 Ezek 35:5, Jer 18:17, 49:32 have comparable uses of the idea of
“calamity”; other nations also have such days of calamity.
2
The NASB continues the question form, whereas we follow the KJV
and limit the question form to the bi-colon of v17a.
3 Here the text anticipates God answering Job out of a whirlwind.

215
 wind, and like a rolling thing before the whirlwind (hpws)
Isa 17:13 (KJV)

The term for “tempest” (hr[s) is used in a text about the fate of the
princes and judges of the land (Isa 40:24) and in a text about what Judah
will do to the surrounding nations (Isa 41:16); both texts relate to the year
after the siege of Jerusalem in 701.1

The elements of Isa 29:6 (thunder, earthquake, noise, whirlwind, tempest

and fire) are a complex theophanic description of God intervening
directly in the history of the nation. The elements are a natural
phenomenon in which the Angel of the Lord delivers Jerusalem, and this
“tempest” then becomes a metaphor for the action of the Angel of the
Lord through the army of Judah against the princes and judges of the land
and the surrounding nations.

It is important to distinguish “the candle” and what Job says about this
individual. Job goes on to make further points about “the wicked ones”
and “the candle”. Because “the candle” is one of “the wicked ones”, Job
now reverses some of the blessings that “the wicked ones” have enjoyed.
Thus God will “punish” the children (followers) of “the candle” (v. 19);2
he will be destroyed by the wrath of the Almighty (v. 20); and any
“house/dynasty” he might have will be of no value to him when he is “cut
off” (v. 21).

21.4 Idols
Job asks whether any of “the wicked ones” can teach God knowledge (v.
223), a question reflected in Isaiah:

1 See also Ps 107:25, 29; Nah 1:3; Jer 23:19.

2 Wolfers, Deep Things, 275-278, does not see “the candle” as an individual,
and so reads “his children” in Job 21:19 as a reference to God’s children.
However, the plural and singular pronominal suffixes in this part of Job’s
speech can be handled adequately on the supposition that “the candle” of
the wicked ones is an individual.
3 We follow the KJV, RSV and NASB in making God the object of the

verb. Wolfers, Deep Things, 283-286, reverses this and offers the
translation, “Does it pertain to God that he teach wisdom through his
judgment of the eminent”. However, Wolfers discussion is overly
influenced by the LXX and he does not give sufficient weight to the
occurrence of the same Hebrew in Job 13:7, “Will you speak wickedly for
God”.
216
 “Who hath measured (!kt) the Spirit of the Lord, or being
his counsellor hath taught him? With whom took he
counsel, and who instructed him, and taught him in the
path of judgment, and taught him knowledge, and
shewed to him the way of understanding?” Isa 40:13-14
(KJV revised)

“Shall any teach God knowledge? seeing he judgeth those

that are high.” Job 21:22 (KJV), cf. 9:12, 11:10

The reference to “those that are on high” is to anyone who is in a position

of rule, like Job, or “the wicked ones”—the ruling elite in Judah; God
judges all of them.

Job introduces this theme of teaching because “the wicked ones” were
claiming to “teach God” their understanding of the situation. This theme
of teaching follows on from Job’s mention of the “counsel of the wicked
ones” and their “candle”. They had said that the Almighty was an idol
with no profit, and promoted instead the “teaching” of their gods. This
kind of conflict could explain the remark in Isaiah,

“Thus saith the Lord, thy Redeemer, the Holy One of

Israel; I am the Lord thy God which teacheth thee to
profit, which leadeth thee by the way that thou shouldest
go.” Isa 48:17 (KJV)

And the same point appears to be made by Habakkuk in relation to his

day:

“What profiteth the graven image that the maker thereof

hath graven it; the molten image, and a teacher of lies,
that the maker of his work trusteth therein, to make
dumb idols?” Hab 2:18 (KJV)

Job’s riposte was—shall any idol teach God? Those “on high” equally
suffered the same fate (vv. 23-26).

21.5 The Attack of the Friends

Job paraphrases1 his friends’ attack:

1 On this see Gordis, The Book of God, 186.

217
 “Behold, I know your thoughts, and the devices which ye
wrongfully imagine against me.” Job 21:27 (KJV)

“For ye say, Where is the house (tyb) of the noble1

(bydn)? and where is the tent (lha), the tabernacles (!kvm)
of the wicked ones?” Job 21:28 (KJV revised)

The rhetorical answer to these questions is that the house and the
tabernacles are either somewhere significant or nowhere at all. The
interrogative particle in the question indicates that the answer is
“Nowhere” to both questions.2

While the friends have not formally posed these questions in the dialogue,
they do summarise the thrust of their remarks. They have suggested that
Job has sinned on the basis that he has been afflicted; his “house” is the
evidence. His house was, figuratively, an ash-heap. They have also
castigated the “tent” and “tabernacles” (their temple) of “the wicked
ones” (Job 8:22, 15:34, 18:6, 18:14-15, 20:26). Their opinion of them is
that they are of no account. Job’s complaint to the friends therefore is
that they have treated him like “the wicked ones”.

In a partly sarcastic reply, Job answers the “Where” questions of the

friends:

“Have ye not asked them that go by the way? and do ye

not know their signs (twa3)…” Job 21:29 (KJV revised)

This remark has a serious intent. The failing of the friends was that they
had not asked those who were travelling over “the way” and who were
presenting signs. Signs and wonders were a feature of prophetic witness in
the eighth century (e.g. Isa 7:11, 14, 8:18, 19:20, 20:3). And the motif of
“the way” is used in appeals to the people,

“And thine ears shall hear a word behind thee, saying,

This is the way, walk ye in it, when ye turn to the right
hand, and when ye turn to the left.” Isa 30:21 (KJV)

1 This not an uncommon word (25x), but the only prophet to use it is
Isaiah: Isa 13:2, 32:5, 8 (see RSV); in Isa 32:8 it is used of Hezekiah (Isa
32:1).
2 This is the sense of other questions in Job that use the same particle, see

Job 14:10, 15:23, 17:15, and 20:7.

3 Pope, Job, 161.

218
Job’s response to the friends is to reiterate the fate of an “evil one” ([r)
alongside his own expectation. The implication is that while the “evil
one” is reserved for the “day of the Lord”, Job will be saved; the “evil
one” will go to the grave and a watch will be kept over his shock of corn
(v. 32, contradicting Eliphaz’ sentiment in Job 5:26). Job’s conclusion is
therefore that the comfort1 of the friends was vain (v. 34).

22. Job 22—Eliphaz’ Third Speech

This speech concludes Day 1 of the dialogue. Job opens his next speech
with the words “…even today is my complaint bitter” (Job 23:2, 40:5). The
Hebrew expression “even today” regularly indicates a subsequent day
(Exod 5:14, 1 Sam 20:27, 2 Sam 11:12).2 In beginning the second day, Job
repeats a key term (his “groaning”,3 Job 23:2, 3:24, NASB) from the first
day and his opening speech, and this is a literary marker of a new day.

Eliphaz’ speech can therefore be seen as a conclusion to the whole day

and the two rounds of speeches of that day; it need not be seen as the
beginning of a third round of speeches. His speech corresponds to Job’s
opening speech as a closing device. It begins with condemnation and ends
with hope. As the curtain falls on act one, the speech leaves the audience
in a state of anticipation for what Job will say in response.

22.1 Final Condemnation

Eliphaz’ closing speech is more aggressive; he accuses Job of some
remarkable failures. However, the basic thrust of his attack remains
constant: Job has sinned, and the plight of the nation is his fault; this is
shown by what has happened to him.

Eliphaz’ accusation that Job’s wickedness is “great” (v. 5) resonates with a

number of Israelite scriptural stories and the accusation is severe and dire.
Job is being compared to those before the flood (Gen 6:5, “great”) and
Sodom and Gomorrah (Gen 13:13, “great sinners” RSV). But the more
significant comparison is suggested by echoes with Hosea and Joel:

1 Job’s use of this word here forms an inclusio with Job 2:11, and it shows

that Eliphaz’ next speech stands outside this closure in the two cycles, and
is to be paired with Job’s opening speech (Job 3).
2 The only other text is Zech 9:12 which might be an exception if a

previous day is not implied.

3 The term only occurs in Job 3:24, 23:2.

219
 “Let the heathen be wakened, and come up to the valley
of Jehoshaphat: for there will I sit to judge all the
heathen round about…for their wickedness is great.” Joel
3:12-13 (KJV)

“So shall Beth-el do unto you because of your great

wickedness: in a morning shall the king of Israel utterly
be cut off.” Hos 10:15 (KJV)

If we follow these echoes, Job is being compared to the “heathen” whom

God was judging, and to the Northern Kingdom which had already fallen
to the Assyrian.

Isaiah’s prophecy about Hezekiah had prophesied “no end” to his

kingdom (Isa 9:6), but Eliphaz states instead that there is “no end” to
Job’s iniquities (v. 5). Eliphaz describes what Job has done and the
consequences of his actions. The difficulty in the text is to identify what
Job has been doing and what he is capable of doing. It is probably best to
take Eliphaz’ accusation as a fourfold charge in the form, “For you have
done (x) …and now a man of arm has the land” (vv. 6-8).

“For (yk) you have taken (lbxt) a pledge, thy brothers,

for nought, and stripped (jyvpt) the naked of their
clothing; you have not given water (hqvt) to the weary to
drink, even withholding ([nmt) bread from the hungry,
now the man of arm ([wrz, KJV mg.) has the land, and
the man of high estate (~ynp awfn) will dwell in it.” Job
22:6-8 (KJV revised1)

Job’s wickedness had consisted in taking a pledge, but the Hebrew does
not indicate that the pledge is from Job’s brothers. Instead, the verb
suggests that the object of the pledge are Job’s brothers (Exod 22:25,
Deut 24:6, 17). In terms of the Mosaic Law, you take a garment in a
pledge for something, perhaps money.

Job had taken a pledge in return “for something” but the promise of the
transaction had gone bad. The Hebrew term translated “for nought” is
common enough and connected with people in Isa 52:3,

1These actions are incomplete in that they have an ongoing effect; the
Hebrew uses the imperfect (future) tense.
220
 “For thus saith the Lord, Ye have sold yourselves for
nought; and ye shall be redeemed without money.” Isa
52:3 (KJV)

“Now therefore, what have I here, saith the Lord, that

my people is taken away for nought?” Isa 52:5a (KJV)

The rhetoric here implies that the sale of the people was part of a
transaction, but the intended purchase had bought nothing. In the context
of the Assyrian invasion, Eliphaz could well be accusing Job of selling his
brothers, giving his brothers in a pledge “for nothing”—a peace treaty
offered by Sennacherib.1 In the Assyrian annals, Sennacherib records that
Hezekiah gave “his (own) daughters, concubines, male and female
musicians” in tribute.2 Eliphaz may be referring to such tribute, or he may
be evoking the taking into captivity of large numbers of the people by
Sennacherib as something that Job/Hezekiah had in effect allowed for
“nothing” because Sennacherib was not laying siege to the city.

In this context, Job had stripped the naked of their clothing, because
those captured by the Assyrian would have been stripped and deported
(Isa 20:4). And those in the city were now suffering hunger and thirst (Isa
29:8).

Eliphaz therefore goes on and contrasts Job with “the man of arm”. In
our prophetic reading, the “man of arm” refers to Sennacherib, but his
arm was an “arm of flesh”:

“With him is an arm ([wrz) of flesh;3 but with us is the

Lord our God to help us, and to fight our battles. And
the people rested themselves upon the words of
Hezekiah king of Judah.” 2 Chron 32:8 (KJV)

This poetic preference—to employ the “arm” as a metaphor to describe

the king of Assyria—could be the reason why the “arm of the Lord”
features strongly in Isaiah (e.g. Isa 30:30, 33:2, 40:10). Eliphaz states that

1 There is an echo here of the story of Joseph who was stripped and sold
for money by his brothers.
2 ANET, 288.
3 This utterance is made after the invasion but before the siege and

Hezekiah’s illness (2 Kgs 18:14-16).

221
the man of arm has the land and the ruling elite1 in Jerusalem (who favour
capitulation to Assyria) will dwell in the land.

According to Eliphaz, this has come about because Job has sent widows
away empty and crushed the arms of the fatherless:

“Thou hast sent widows away empty, and the arms of the
fatherless have been broken.” Job 22:9 (KJV)

These actions were laid at the door of the ruling elite by Isaiah (Isa 3:15,
10:2), and Eliphaz lumps Job with them.2 Consequently, Eliphaz says that
“snares” were “round about” Job (v. 10). This is a clear echo with the
traps set by the enemy in the countryside around Jerusalem, and the
language of the “snare” is used by Isaiah in the context of the Assyrian
invasion:

“Fear, and the pit, and the snare, are upon thee, O
inhabitant of the earth. And it shall come to pass, that he
who fleeth from the noise of the fear shall fall into the
pit; and he that cometh up out of the midst of the pit
shall be taken in the snare: for the windows from on high
are open, and the foundations of the earth do shake. Isa
24:17-18 (KJV)

Eliphaz states that “sudden fear” troubles Job and this picks up on the
theme of Job’s “fear” of the Assyrian threat which we have already noted
(Job 3:25). Here Eliphaz stresses a sudden quality to the threat, and this
motif of “suddenness” (using the same Hebrew) is also mentioned by
Isaiah in the context of the Assyrian threat:

“Therefore this iniquity shall be to you as a breach ready

to fall, swelling out in a high wall, whose breaking
cometh suddenly at an instant.” Isa 30:13 (KJV)3

1 The affinity of Job with Isaiah is shown here in that the Hebrew
expression for “honourable man” (v. 8, ~ynp awfn) occurs here and only
elsewhere in Isa 3:3, 9:14.
2 These accusations are deeply offensive to Job and he will contradict

them in Job 29:12-13, when he claims the virtues of visiting the fatherless,
the widows, the lame and the poor as qualities of his Davidic kingship.
3 This text refers to the Egyptian “treaty” with the princes of Zoan which,

when it was called upon, “suddenly broke”. It was invoked by Judah when
the treaty made with Assyria (2 Kgs 18:14-16) was broken by Sennacherib,
222
 “Therefore snares are round about thee,1 and sudden fear
troubleth thee; Or darkness, that thou canst not see…”
Job 22:10-11 (KJV)

Eliphaz says that sudden fear troubles2 Job, as he looks upon the situation
in the land, and “darkness” because he cannot “see” the signs of the
times.

22.2 Hope
Eliphaz signals that there is hope if Job repents. It is a matter of dispute in
the commentaries3 where Eliphaz changes his tone in his diatribe. We take
his shift of tone to begin in v. 11b,4 where he says,

“…yet (w) an abundance of waters will cover thee

($skt).” Job 22:11b (KJV revised)

The covering of an abundance of water could be a negative picture,5 and

thus this statement could go with Eliphaz’ negative opening, but here the
point is wholly positive. Assyria is painted as an overflowing river or sea,6
or a flood caused by storm-waters (Isa 5:30, 17:13, 28:1-2), and this is a
destructive figure. But “water” is also the means by which God
rejuvenates and restores desolate land. In Job 38:34 Yahweh uses the
exact same Hebrew figure, “and abundance of waters will cover thee”, to
describe the restoration of Judah (we discuss this in Chapter Seven);
Eliphaz is sounding the same positive note.

and he suddenly turned on Jerusalem; for the surprise factor in the

Assyrian invasion, see Isa 33:14.
1 This “round about” motif was used in Job 19:10-12 to describe Job’s

calamity, which in turn contrasts with the “hedge” that was around him
(Job 1:10).
2 This word is being picked up from Job 4:5. Here Eliphaz claims that “it”

had now come, causing Job to be troubled. On a political reading, the

language is explained by 2 Chron 32:18.
3 Pope, Job, 165, Habel, Job, 334, take the break at v. 12.
4 Making the break here requires us to treat v. 10-11a as a tercet.
5 This is how Pope reads the figure, Job, 165.
6 Here we have a possible historical basis for the figure “as the waters

cover the sea” (Isa 11:9), i.e. the waters of heaven cover the sea of the
Assyrian invasion and the land is subsequently filled with the knowledge
of the Lord.
223
Eliphaz goes onto paraphrase Job, perhaps inaccurately, seeing that Job
has not literally said what Eliphaz now attributes to him. Nevertheless, his
paraphrase is intended to offer support. We can see this if we ask how
Eliphaz “comforts” Job. Some Assyrian propaganda from Isaiah may set
the context:

“For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into

heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I
will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the
sides of the north: I will ascend above the heights of the
clouds; I will be like the most High.” Isa 14:13-14 (KJV)

Here a former king of Assyria (Shalmaneser V) betrays knowledge of

Israel’s theology. The tribes are the “stars” of God, and Jerusalem is a
typical “heaven” where God dwells; the land is the “earth” (we discuss
this symbology further in Chapter Seven). He boasts that he will ascend
above the heights of the clouds and “sit” upon the temple mount. To this
assertion, Eliphaz counters,

“Is not God in the height of heaven? And behold the

height of the stars, how high they are! And thou sayest,
How doth God know? Can he judge through the dark
cloud?” Job 22:12-13 (KJV)

God was in the height of heaven (Zion), not the king of Assyria; the stars
of God (the tribes) were there as well, not the king of Assyria. Job
therefore should not doubt that God can see “through the dark cloud” (v.
14).

“Thick clouds are a covering to him, that he seeth not;

yet (w) he walketh in the circuit of heaven.” Job 22:14
(KJV revised)

Here Eliphaz paraphrases Job’s claim: that God is covered by so much

cloud that he cannot see what is happening to Judah. The “thick clouds”
that Job was referring to is the Assyrian invasion in which God was
present (Joel 2:1-2, Jer 13:6, Ezek 34:12, Zeph 1:14).1 Job’s doubt is
whether God can “see” beyond the dark cloud to “save” Jerusalem and

1 The Hebrew for “dark cloud” also occurs in Job 38:9 as “thick
darkness” which is the normal translation in the KJV; we discuss the word
further in Chapter Seven when we examine God’s speeches.
224
Judah.1 Eliphaz counters this by saying that God walks the “circuit”
(circle) of heaven, and here he uses another rare word (3x) shared with
Isaiah:

“It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the
inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth
out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a
tent to dwell in.” Isa 40:22 (KJV)

Eliphaz’ argument here against Job reflects a similar point in Isaiah:

“Lift up your eyes on high, and behold who hath created

these things, that bringeth out their host by number: he
calleth them all by names by the greatness of his might,
for that he is strong in power; not one faileth. Why sayest
thou, O Jacob, and speakest, O Israel, My way is hid
from the Lord, and my judgment is passed over from my
God?” Isa 40:26-27 (KJV)

Job’s complaint was that his way was “hid” to God, because he could not
see through the dark cloud. Eliphaz’ reply is that God controlled the
heavens.

Next, Eliphaz rhetorically invites Job to consider whether he has “kept”

the old way which the men of Aven have frequently trodden:

“Hast thou kept (rmv) the old way which men of Aven
(!wa ytm) have trodden?” Job 22:15 (KJV revised)

We suggest that these “men of Aven”2 were the priests of Beth Aven
(Bethel)3 in the Northern Kingdom (Hos 10:5, 8). These priests had
ministered before the calves of Egypt that Jeroboam had set up (1 Kgs

1 There is an echo here to God “looking through the cloud” and troubling
the Egyptians in the Red Sea (Exod 14:24); such an echo is consistent
with the echoes of God’s deliverance of Israel at the Red Sea which
feature in Job 38; God’s speech also mentions “thick darkness”.
2 Translations render !wa with words like “iniquity”, “trouble” or

“wickedness” where there is an associated verb—Job 4:8, 5:6, 11:11, 14,

15:35, 36:10, 21. They continue to make the same choice for expressions
denoting a group like “men of wickedness”.
3 Aven was a religious centre in Egypt (Ezek 30:17), although this may be

a polemical city-name.
225
12:28-29) in Bethel and Dan. Eliphaz implies that Job had not kept that
way. These men were cut down and their foundation was overflowed with
the Assyrian flood. The irony here is that these men had said to Israel that
these calves were the gods that had brought Israel up from Egypt, and
they were overflowed with a flood like the Egyptians at the Red Sea.

Eliphaz’ rhetoric and counter to Job here is this:

• The men of Aven had said to God, “Depart from us”, just like you
have claimed for the wicked ones, but they were cut down, and yet
God had filled their houses with good things, and the counsel of “the
wicked ones” is far from me also!

Eliphaz blames Job for the state of the land (vv. 5-11a), but he offers Job
hope: he had not sought an alliance with Egypt; he had not followed the
ancient heresy of Bethel in adopting Egyptian idols. Their destruction by
Assyria was a lesson that Egypt would also soon be destroyed by Assyria.
Eliphaz and Job agree on the futility of such alliances; they disagree on
Job’s personal responsibility for the crisis. Eliphaz does not identify Job’s
personal sin which has brought about the crisis; he only states the
consequences1 of his sin and in effect he makes these consequences Job’s
“wickedness”. Job has the opposite view: he has done no sin that merits
this crisis.

Eliphaz states that the righteous will “see” what he is saying and will be
glad (Ps 107:42); “the innocent” will laugh at the wicked (v. 19), and the
substance of the righteous is not “cut down” unlike the wicked whose
dignity (rty) was consumed by the fire in the Assyrian conquest of
Northern Israel.

Job considers himself to be “the innocent” (Job 9:23), and Eliphaz says
that if Job repents, God2 will deliver the “island1 of the innocent” (v. 30);2
this is a reference to Jerusalem:

1 It is not unreasonable that Eliphaz should do this: civil war had followed
David’s sin with Bathsheba, the division of the kingdom had followed
Solomon’s predilection for foreign wives, and so on.
2 The Hebrew could read, “…the innocent shall deliver the island”,

(reversing subject and object), but this would require Eliphaz to believe
Job was “the innocent”, although Eliphaz may be allowing Job his own
conception.
226
 “And the inhabitant of this isle shall say in that day,
Behold, such is our expectation, whither we flee for help
to be delivered from the king of Assyria: and how shall
we escape?” Isa 20:6 (KJV)

In this oracle, the Jerusalemites are castigated for reliance upon Egypt,
and God describes how he will use Assyria to lead away Egypt and
Ethiopia. Jerusalem and its inhabitants are regarded as an island in the
midst of the Assyrian sea, as yet untouched by the invading flood. In the
face of the Assyrian siege, the “isle” of Jerusalem would be delivered by
the pureness of Job’s hands3 (if Job repented). Certain benefits would
follow Job’s repentance:

Job would accumulate the gold4 of Ophir. The only mention of Ophir in
the Prophets is in Isa 13:12 which states that God would make “a man”
more precious than the gold of Ophir. This is an analogy of salvation:
God would bring about salvation for a remnant through faith either in “a
man” or by a faith that was given through “an ordinary man”.

Job would be “built up” and put away iniquity from his “tent”. Eliphaz
made the same point in his first speech (Job 5:24). This “tent” or
“tabernacle” (singular) is Jerusalem (Isa 16:5, 33:20) or its temple, which
would be “built up” and cleansed of idolatry (2 Chron 33:3). As a
descendent of David, Jerusalem was Job’s tabernacle.

Job would issue decrees from the throne and they would be carried out
(Ps 68:11, Esth 2:1, and 2 Chron 30:5). Eliphaz is likely alluding to Job’s
decree of earlier times inviting the people to celebrate the Great Passover.

1 The Hebrew is sometimes taken to be a negative particle (NASB), but

the reasoning ignores the majority usage of the Hebrew form ya (41x, isle),
see (Pope, Job, 168-169.
2 Eliphaz here is restating the hopeful theme of his first speech (Job 4:7).
3 The condition for the deliverance refers to “pureness” of hands, a motif

which only occurs elsewhere in David’s song of thanksgiving (Ps 18:21,

25, 1 Sam 22:21, 25) and Isa 1:25. An echo with traditions about David is
relevant because it links his deliverance from a strong enemy to his
“cleanness of hand”. An echo with the Isa 1:25 is relevant because it
speaks of God making “clean” the dross of Jerusalem. Eliphaz’ argument
implies that Job would gain deliverance if he repented.
4 The normal word for “gold” does not occur in the text and this is a

guess about a unique word on the basis of the clear mention of Ophir.
227
In any event, Eliphaz’ encouragement concerns the return of effective
kingly rule.

23. Conclusion
By way of conclusion, we have tabulated the major points of Day 1 on the
next page.

228
Job (3) Zophar (11) Job (19)
Claims to be a Job has “lied” to the But God has
Davidic King people with “his” “overthrown” me
because of the policy of and taken away the
“Night of appeasement. crown
Conception
Prophecy”
Expresses fear and Job is to blame for And many groups
dread of the the crisis as well as have deserted me
“Oppressor” the “internal
opponents”
Describes the Job is not righteous Still, I know that my
“internal opponents” and should repent of redeemer lives and
his sin he will rise upon
“the dust”
Eliphaz (4-5) Job (12-14) Zophar (20)
Job has been a good The political The ultimate fate of
Davidic King situation is bad and the “Hypocrite” is to
unjust toward me flee
The “Oppressor” is Friends should not Before his final end,
as good as broken; impugn his integrity the Egyptian policy
do not rely on Egypt of the “Hypocrite”
will fail
The “internal Friends are as much The “Hypocrite” will
opponents” will be victims of the crisis try to patch-up his
eaten by the Moth Egyptian policy
If Job turns to God, The Assyrian siege
he will be restored will seal his fate
Job (6-7) Eliphaz (15) Job (21)
Explains the scale of Scandal of Job’s The “Wicked Ones”
his calamity — it is defence; he has have prospered and
out of proportion to sinned and he has appear to have
anything he has done meddled in God’s blessing in
diplomatic talks their view
The “internal Invader has come I have not supported
opponents” offer despite Assyrian the counsel of the
dead ends treaties; treaties with “Wicked Ones”
Egyptian are futile
Explains why the The “Wicked One”, We agree that the
friends are failing i.e. the “Hypocrite”, “Wicked Ones” and
him; appeals to God will come to nothing their “candle” will be
destroyed by the
Assyrian
229
Bildad (8) Job (16-17) Eliphaz (22)
Job is too pre- I have always Look, the plight of
occupied with advocated sole the nation is your
Assyria reliance on God fault
The “Hypocrite”, I have not supported The plight of the
one of Job’s the “internal nation is the result of
“internal opponents” failures of kingship
opponents”, will
come to nothing
Seek God, confess God has brought If you repent, you
your sin, and he will about this calamity can have hope
not cast you away and it is unjust
Job (9-10) Bildad (18)
Recognises God’s The land will not be
control over affairs; forsaken by God
Agrees Egyptian
help is futile
But God’s action The “internal
against him is unjust opponents”, their
temples, prophets
will be vanquished.
The “internal The “light” of the
opponents” control “Wicked Ones” will
the government; they be quenched
have God’s favour

230
 CHAPTER FIVE
The Second Day
1. Introduction
We have split the play into two days (Job 23:2, 40:5). Job and Elihu are
the principal speakers on the second day. Apart from an interruption from
Bildad, our concern as the audience is to hear Job and Elihu. The friends
fail to take up their chance to respond to Job (Job 32:5). Elihu is a
surprise speaker, of whom as yet we have no knowledge. How he appears
on stage is not revealed. Our listening experience is enhanced by an
“interlude”, separating Job’s monologue into two parts, in which Job
digresses about wisdom in a way that anticipates the speeches that will
conclude the performance—from Yahweh. This then is the second day.

While scholars regard this section of Job to be most damaged, and

consequently assign parts to different speakers and re-order and change
the text, we treat the whole section as presented in the MT. There are two
reasons for this: firstly, we see in Job a conflicted mind, and therefore it is
not surprising that he should give expression to contradictory views;
secondly, a political and military reading of Job handles this section
adequately without any need for chopping and changing the text.

2. Job 23—Opening the Monologue

Job opens the second day as he opened the first—with a “lament-
testimony”.1 The lack of disputation on this second day will result in the
bulk of Job’s monologue having this character. A further indication that
we have a new day in this speech is the fact that Job does not address the
friends in the opening words of his speech, a practice he faithfully
followed on the first day. There is a change in the character of the speech
from previous speeches, although it is not a soliloquy—Job still has the
same audience.

1 The genre of the monologue is disputed, and we offer a fence-sitting

designation, see Newsom, Moral Imagination, 185. The monologue is
different from the dialogue of the first day in that Job does not directly
engage the friends.
231
This chapter can straightforwardly be given a political reading. The key
words for this analysis are Job’s “troubling” (v. 16), the “softness” of his
heart (v. 16), and the “darkness” that has come upon him (v. 17).

The text uses the word “parable” (lsm, Job 27:1, 29:1) to describe Job’s
speech on this second day. The word is common (40x) and Job has used it
to describe the speeches of the friends (Job 13:12). Some examples of
“parables” are,

“In that day shall one take up a parable (lsm) against you,
and lament with a doleful lamentation, and say, We be
utterly spoiled: he hath changed the portion of my
people: how hath he removed it from me! turning away
he hath divided our fields.” Mic 2:4 (KJV)

“That thou shalt take up this parable (lsm) against the

king of Babylon, and say, How hath the oppressor
ceased! the exactress of gold ceased!” Isa 14:4 (KJV
revised)

These uses of the word have a political sense that fits our reading of Job,
although our use of the word “parable” is modern in that it conveys a
sense in which the book of Job is symbolic.

Job opens the second day with an assertion that his “complaint is
rebellion” (v. 2, NASB). The Hebrew word translated “bitter” in the KJV
is yrm and ought to be rendered “rebellion” (NASB); it occurs, for
example, in Isa 30:9,

“That this is a rebellious people, lying children, children

that will not hear the law of the Lord.” Isa 30:9 (KJV)

If we follow this echo, Job’s assertion is not that he is rebelling, but that
the cause of his trouble is a rebellious people. This is his complaint: he is
innocent, and it is the people who are rebellious.

Job goes onto say, “his hand is heavy despite my groaning” (v. 2, NASB),
and here he refers to the hand of God upon him. Job has referred to his
groaning earlier (Job 3:24, NASB), and it is a characteristic of the response
of the people to the invasion of Assyria (Isa 35:10, “sighing”).

Job expresses the desire to approach God, know his “arrangement” of

events (v. 3, “seat”), and present his case (vv. 4-5). Job thinks that if this
232
happened, God would not “contend” (v. 6, RSV) against him using his
great strength. This expresses confidence, but the language also echoes
texts of judgment such as,

“Measure by measure, by exile thou didst contend with

them; he removed them with his fierce blast in the day of
the east wind.” Isa 27:8 (RSV)

Instead, Job says that God would “set by him” (yb ~fy, v. 6, “he would
put strength in me”). Nevertheless, Job says that he goes “east” (~dq, v. 8,
“forward”) and God is not there; he goes backward (i.e. toward the south)
and he cannot perceive God. Here the frustration may refer to Job not
finding God in alliances with eastern and southern nations; God was not
“in” these places.

Such a military context for Job’s thoughts is indicated by the next

assertion:

“When he acts on the left, I cannot behold him; he

overwhelms (@j[) on the right, I cannot see him.” Job
23:9 (NASB revised)

The Hebrew expressions for “left hand” and “right hand” occur together in
Isa 9:20 in connection with the Syro-Ephraimite invasion of Judah,

“And he shall snatch on the right hand, and be hungry;

and he shall eat on the left hand, and they shall not be
satisfied: they shall eat every man the flesh of his own
arm….” Isa 9:20 (KJV)

This text refers to the indiscriminate pillaging of an invading army; but the
figure of speech in Job refers to God acting through such an army in the
land and Job’s failure to comprehend such divine action (Isa 9:19, Zech
12:6). Nevertheless, Job hopes that when God finishes with his trial, he
will come forth as gold (v. 10, cf. Job 7:18, Isa 28:16).

Job next says,

“My foot has held fast to his steps; I have kept his way
and have not turned aside.” Job 23:11 (RSV)

This is clear enough, but the next verse has a difficult clause which we
render as follows:
233
 “I have not departed from the commandment of his lips,
and I have not removed them from my statutes (yqqxm
vyma al); I have treasured the words of his mouth.” Job
23:12 (NASB revised)

Job affirms his innocence at the same time recognizing that God will do
what he wants:

“But he is in one mind, and who can turn him? And what
his soul desireth, even that he doeth. For he performeth
the thing that is appointed for me: and many such things are
with him. Therefore am I troubled at his presence: when
I consider, I am afraid of him.” Job 23:13-15 (KJV)

The KJV is better here in expressing Job’s recognition of God’s

determinate purpose. Job says that God finishes (KJV, “performeth”) the
thing that is “appointed” and the Hebrew here is better rendered “he
performeth my decree”, referring to a decree covering the affliction to be
administered to Job; the language of “decree” is echoed in,

“In the day that thy walls are to be built, in that day shall
the decree be far removed.” Mic 7:11 (KJV)

Job says he is “troubled” at God’s presence (Isa 1:7, 19:1) in the invading
army, and in a state of “dread” (Job 3:25).

“For God maketh my heart soft ($rh), and the Almighty

troubleth me: Because I was not cut off before the
darkness, neither hath he covered the darkness from my
face.” Job 23:16-17 (KJV)

The word translated “making…soft” ($rh) is not common (8x) and only
occurs in Isaiah (2x) and Jeremiah (1x) out of the Prophets. Jeremiah gives
a plausible sense for Job:

“And lest your heart faint ($rh), and ye fear for the
rumour that shall be heard in the land; a rumour shall
both come one year, and after that in another year shall come
a rumour, and violence in the land, ruler against ruler.”
Jer 51:46 (KJV), cf. Isa 7:4

234
This shows the military context for Job’s utterance, and this is consistent
with his wish that he had been cut off before “the darkness” of the
Assyrian invasion (Isa 5:30).

3. Job 24—Describing the Situation

Several aspects of this chapter allow a political and military reading:
“landmarks” (v. 2), the plunder of flocks (v. 2), “prey” (v. 5), dislocation
of the population (v. 7), economic hardship (v. 6), breakdown of law and
order (vv. 14-16), and the language of “terrors” (v. 17). This language
could represent nothing more than common illustrations of what has
been common throughout history; on the other hand, the language may
evoke a specific context in which these things happened.

The structure of this part of Job’s “parable” has six sections, and one
prophetic interpretation would be as follows:

1) Job begins (v. 1) with a lament about the lack of knowledge of God’s
way with the nation on the part of the faithful.

2) He then (vv. 2-4) describes the thieving of the invading army across the
land as they sought to acquire food.

3) His speech then (vv. 5-9) describes opportunist marauders who were
taking advantage of the chaos and weakness in the land.

4) He then (vv. 10-16) describes those “in the city” who have descended
into lawlessness as a result of the chaos caused by the invasion.

5) Next he (vv. 17-20) describes the Assyrian under the figure of “the
morning” and how “he” is terror and death to the lawless; nevertheless,
he asserts that he will be eaten by the worms.

6) Finally, Job (vv. 21-25) turns to the “mighty” in the city and describes
their futile trust in Egypt.

3.1 Faithful lack Knowledge

Job opens this next part of his monologue with a question as to why those
who know God (are faithful to him) do not “see his days”:

“Why, seeing times are not hidden from the Almighty,

do they that know him not see his days?” Job 24:1 (KJV)

235
The verb “see” that is used here (hzx) is used to describe the visions of
prophets. Thus Isaiah “saw” visions (Isa 1:1, 2:1, 13:1, Amos 1:1. Mic 1:1,
Hab 1:1), as did seers (e.g. Isa 30:10, Lam 2:14, Zech 10:2) concerning the
affairs of the nation. So Job here could be referring to a withdrawal of
divine guidance during his affliction, guidance relating to political and
military affairs.

3.2 Thieving Armies

Job’s next thought is that,

“Men remove landmarks (hlwbg); they seize flocks and

pasture them.” Job 24:2 (RSV)

The RSV has “men” but the word is absent in the Hebrew,1 which just
has “they remove”. The echo here appears to be to Isaiah,

“…I have removed the landmarks (hlwbg2) of the people,

and have robbed their treasures, and I have put down the
inhabitants like a valiant man…” Isa 10:13 (KJV revised)

The typical action of an invading army is to remove landmarks (or

borders) and seize flocks for feeding the army.

“They drive away the ass of the fatherless; they take the
widow’s ox for a pledge.” Job 24:3 (KJV), cf. Isa 32:7

Here are more actions consistent with the practice of an invading army:
the use of local animals and the false promise of payment.

“They turn the needy out of the way: the poor of the
land (#ra) hide themselves together.” Job 24:4 (KJV
revised)

This effect of the invading army has to do with morale. The sense is
conveyed by Isaiah, using the same Hebrew expression for “out of the
way”,

“Get out of the way, turn aside from the path, let us hear
no more about the Holy One of Israel.” Isa 30:11
(NASB)

1 Pope, Job, 175, adds “the wicked”, following the LXX.

2 Isaiah is the only prophet to use this word.
236
Here the people ask the true prophet to get out of the way. Similarly, the
invader lowered the morale of the people and caused the “needy” to stray
from the way (Judg 2:17, Mal 2:8). Job uses the same terms of reference as
Amos 8:4,

“Hear this, O ye that swallow up the needy, even to

make the poor of the land to fail.” Amos 8:4 (KJV)

This text shares the same words for “needy” and “poor of the land” with
Job, thereby showing that Job is concerned with the people and the land.
The invader causes them to “hide”—a motif describing the reaction of
the people to an Assyrian invasion (Amos 9:3, Isa 2:10).1

3.3 Marauders
The next verse requires slight revision, as the RSV, NASB and KJV make
it a comparison—the invader is going forth as wild asses. The comparison
is not present in the Hebrew.2

“Behold, wild asses (~yarp) in the desert, they have gone

forth (wacy) to their work; rising betimes for a prey: the
wilderness yieldeth food for them and for their children.”
Job 24:5 (KJV revised)

One intertextual connection for this text lies with “wild asses”. As we
shall see in connection with God’s speech (Job 39:5, Isa 32:14), the wild
ass is a symbol for the wilderness Ishmaelite tribes (Gen 16:12). If we
follow this echo, Job would be observing that such tribes have gone forth
to their work of scavenging after the invading army seeking easy prey.
From talking about the poor and needy of the land, Job shifts his focus to
these “wild asses” with his “Behold!”.

1 Amos 2:4 has “turn aside the way of the meek” using the same verb
“turn” and noun “way”.
2 Pope, Job, 176, notes the absence of the comparative particle but asserts

that ~yarp is adverbial. But this has the consequence that the subject of v.
5 becomes either the poor of the land of v. 4 or the unexpressed subject
of vv. 2-4 who is removing the landmarks, instead of the “wild asses”.
However, this does not account for the “Look” which directs the
characters to look and see a group in the desert; in v. 4., the poor are
hiding. There is no linguistic reason to take ~yarp as adverbial—it is a
plural noun corresponding to the plural verb that follows.
237
This connection is supported by the mixed figure of such wild asses
having “children”. This is the normal Hebrew for a lad rather than a
generic term for the offspring of animals. This alerts a reader into seeing
“wild asses” as a figure for human marauders.

“They reap everyone his corn in the field: and they gather
the vintage of the wicked one ([vr). They cause the
naked to lodge without clothing, that they have no
covering in the cold. They are wet with the showers of
the mountains, and embrace the rock for want of a
shelter. They pluck the fatherless from the breast, and
take a pledge of the poor.” Job 24:6-9 (KJV revised)

These descriptions continue to mix figures: wild asses as such would not
harvest corn, but they might take refuge among the rocks. The picture
continues to show the sort of actions that marauders carry out. However,
certain expressions require comment if they are to be given a political
sense.

1) The “naked” are symbolic of the people; Isaiah had enacted a parable
in which he walked naked for three years (Isa 20:2-4) symbolizing the
nakedness of Egypt. Similarly, God’s punishments upon Northern Israel
are described as a “stripping naked” (Hos 2:3), and Micah enacts a similar
“naked” display in order to demonstrate what was coming upon the
people (Mic 1:8). Here in Job the “wild asses” are part of those who bring
about the punishments upon the people in making them “naked”.

2) The marauders “reap corn”; this is to be expected. The Hebrew word

for “corn” is rare (3x) occurring once outside Job in Isaiah:

“The oxen likewise and the young asses that ear the
ground shall eat clean provender, which hath been
winnowed with the shovel and with the fan.” Isa 30:24
(KJV)

This is a picture of restoration after the Assyrian invasion, and it stands as

a contrast to what had happened during the invasion, when “wild asses”
gleaned the provender/corn. The “vineyard” of the wicked one (v. 6)
might refer to the landed estates of the “wicked one”, the co-regent in
Jerusalem, or it may refer to the land of Judah as a whole considered now
as the “vineyard” of this individual (Isaiah 5).

238
3) The expression, “having no covering1 in the cold”, likewise has a
symbolic significance in that the Assyrian invasion is referred to as “cold”
coming out of the north (Job 37:9).

4) The assertion, “…they are wet with the showers of the mountains” (v.
8), is better rendered as referring to a “tempest” or “storm” rather than
“showers”. The word is found in Isa 28:2 as a description of the Assyrian
invasion, “the Lord has one who is mighty and strong; like a storm of
hail” (RSV) as well as Isa 32:2. It is a storm of “the mountains”, (a figure
for the nations, Hab 3:10), because the “storm” is a confederacy in which
the “wild asses” became “wet”.2 This describes their role, which was one
outside the confederacy, a scavenging phenomenon.

5) The expression, “fatherless” (v. 9), is symbolic of a badly led people as

this term is often found together in the legal traditions of the people (e.g.
Exod 22:22, Deut 10:18). Hosea uses the term symbolically,

“Asshur shall not save us; we will not ride upon horses:
neither will we say any more to the work of our hands,
Ye are our gods: for in thee the fatherless findeth mercy.”
Hos 14:3 (KJV)

Similarly, “the poor” is an expression used of the people under siege (e.g.
Isa 10:2, 14:32, 26:6, 32:7).3 It is these “fatherless” and “poor” that the
wild asses pillage and “snatch”.4

3.4 The City

Job next says,

“The naked walk without clothing (vwbl ylb wkllh

~wr[); but (w) the hungry (b[r) carry the omer (rm[).” Job
24:10 (RSV revised)

1 This word is not common (8x) occurring once in the Prophets in Isa
50:3.
2 The “wild assess” sought refuge (Isa 28:15, 17) from the storm in the

“rock”, and this could signify a region associated with Midian (Isa 10:26,
“rock of Oreb”).
3 For a discussion, see J. Blenkinsopp, Opening the Sealed Book: Interpretations

of the Book of Isaiah in Late Antiquity, (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2006), 209-
211.
4 Pope, Job, 175, relocates v. 9 to a position after v. 3, but a prophetic

reading removes any dissonance in the flow of the argument.

239
The RSV is the better rendering, which we have revised, because there is
no causal sense in the Hebrew; Job is describing the simple fact that the
naked are walking without clothing. The perspective has shifted to the city
(v. 11) and the example of “the hungry” who carry the “omer”. This word
is unusual and evokes the tradition of manna in the wilderness (Exodus
16) and the wave offering (Leviticus 23). These two connections suggest
that while “the naked” in the city walk around without clothing, “the
hungry” carry the manna or have the firstfruits of the wave offering. This
suggests that “the hungry” are symbolic of the faithful who have the
firstfruits of the manna given from heaven, i.e. the word of God (Isa 8:21,
29:8, 32:6, 58:7, 101).

Job next says,

“Within the walls they produce oil; they tread wine

presses but thirst.” Job 24:11 (NASB)2

This NASB translation seems preferable, although the Hebrew for “walls”
here is unique, and its sense is inferred from cognate Aramaic. 3 A
reference to being within “walls” is more likely than the RSV “row”, as
the next verse refers to a “city”, and because of a link with Isaiah:

“And he fenced it, and gathered out the stones thereof,

and planted it with the choicest vine, and built a tower in
the midst of it, and also made a winepress therein: and he
looked that it should bring forth grapes, and it brought
forth wild grapes.” Isa 5:2 (KJV)

The connection here is that within the vineyard (the land of Judah) there
was a tower (Jerusalem) and here the winepresses were pressing sour

1 This sequence of verses shows that “the hungry” is a prophetic motif for
“the people” transitioning from the hunger of the soul vis-à-vis the word
of God to the teaching of God’s word.
2 Wolfers suggests, Deep Things, 114, an echo with Deut 28:39, “You shall

plant and cultivate vineyards, but you shall neither drink of the wine”
(NASB), and Deut 28:48, “…you shall serve your enemies whom the
Lord shall send against you, in hunger, in thirst, in nakedness…” (NASB).
If this is correct, the echo seems to be ironical since the Deuteronomic
curses are imposed from without by an enemy and Job is about the thirst
that comes from the unsatisfying wine of false hope.
3 See Pope, Job, 177.

240
grapes and the people were consequently thirsty. Hezekiah had
deliberately centred the storage of oil, wine and other agricultural goods in
Jerusalem (2 Chron 31:5).

Job next says,

“From the city men groan, and the souls of the wounded
cry out; Yet God will not establish (~yf1) folly.” Job 24:12
(NASB revised)

The “groaning” is the result of wounds received in combat (Ezek 30:24),

skirmishes outside the city-walls. The people were crying out to God, but
God will not “establish” folly.

The word for “folly” is rare (3x) and it is the word used by the narrator
when he asserts that Job did not charge God with “folly” (Job 1:22). The
only other use of the word in Jer 23:13 allows the suggestion that folly is
false prophecy and that the men of the city have followed false prophets
and were now paying the price. Job is affirming that God would not
establish the folly of these individuals by intervening on their behalf and
validating their misrule.

A mention of “folly” as false prophecy forms a transitional link to the

next thought,

“These are they (wyh hmh) who rebel2 against the light:
who are not acquainted with its ways, and do not stay in
its paths.” Job 24:13 (RSV revised)

Here Job could easily be saying that those who had attached themselves to
false prophets were not acquainted with “the light” and its paths. Their
“rebellion” was against God; these were those who were now wounded in
the city.

These rebels are archetypically “murderers”, “thieves” and “adulterers”

(vv. 14-15), oppressing the “poor and needy”, and they loved “the night”.
They thought that “he disguises his face” (v. 15, RSV), i.e. they thought

1This very common verb is here in the imperfect (future) tense.

2Sennacherib uses this word of those in Jerusalem who has allied with
Egypt (Isa 36:5).
241
that God hid his face from their deeds.1 They would suffer their fate at
the hand of the one who was “the morning” or “son of the Dawn” (v. 17,
Isa 14:12, cf. v. 25), the Assyrian king.2 These are the terms used to
describe the city in the opening introduction to the book of Isaiah:

“How is the faithful city become an harlot! It was full of

judgment; righteousness lodged in it; but now
murderers…Thy princes are rebellious, and companions
of thieves: every one loveth gifts, and followeth after
rewards: they judge not the fatherless, neither doth the
cause of the widow come unto them.” Isa 1:21-23 (KJV),
cf. Hos 4:2, 6:9

It is not just that the city has its fair share of criminals, but rather that the
rulers (princes) are also to be counted amongst thieves and murderers,
and the city herself is to be considered an adulterous harlot (Mic 1:7, Jer
2:20). Job concludes by saying that “they know not the light” (v. 16).

3.5 The Morning

The subtlety of the poetry in Job is seen in the juxtaposition of the ideas
of “night” and “morning”. The surface of the poetry says that the lawless
in the city steal under cover of night, and the morning is to them as the
shadow of death.

“For the morning is to them even as the shadow of

death: but (yk) he recognizes (rkn) the terrors of the
shadow of death.” Job 24:17 (KJV revised)

Our suggestion is that “the morning” is also a symbol for Assyria, and
“the lawless” is symbolic of Jerusalem, both the criminal class and the
rulers. This is a radical suggestion, but one echo that allows this
suggestion is found in Joel:

“A day of darkness and of gloominess, a day of clouds

and of thick darkness, as the morning spread upon the
mountains: a great people and a strong; there hath not

1 Wolfers, Deep Things, 231, identifies an echo with Ps 10:11, “he hideth
his face, he will never see it”.
2 We offer a fuller discussion of “the morning” as a figure for Assyria in

connection with God’s speech and his challenge to Job about whether he
can “command” the morning.
242
 been ever the like, neither shall be any more after it, even
to the years of many generations.” Joel 2:2 (KJV)

This text in Joel describes the invading army as a “spreading” morning—

the sunrise coming over a hill and casting its light ever nearer to an
observer. Such a sunrise would cast a long shadow, the shadow of death:

“For the morning is to them even as the shadow of

death: but (yk) he recognizes (rkn) the terrors of the
shadow of death.” Job 24:17 (KJV revised)

The terms in this assertion evoke the Assyrian invader: “shadow of death”
(Job 3:5, Ps 107:10, 14, Isa 9:1), “terrors” (Job 18:11, 14, Isa 17:14, KJV
“trouble”), and “morning” (Isa 14:12). The Assyrian invader was a terror
to those in the city who did not know the light (v. 16), but God1
recognized “the terrors of the shadow of death”.

The next few verses2 of Job’s speech can be read as an enumeration of the
characteristics and fate of both the invader and the rich and powerful, (as
indicated by singular and plural statements):

1) “He is swift (lq) upon (l[) the waters; their portion will be cursed in
the earth: he will not turn from (hnp) the way of the vineyards” (v. 18,
KJV revised). This figure describes a superpower that is swift to demolish
his enemies, the opposing nations, (conceived as “waters”), that stand in
the way of his objectives—the Assyrian invader. It contrasts this power
with a group who will soon have a cursed portion in the land—the native
Judean landowners, shut up in Jerusalem and now castigated as “thieves
and murderers”.

The “swiftness” of the Assyrian armies is noted in Isaiah:

“But ye said, No; for we will flee upon horses; therefore

shall ye flee: and, We will ride upon the swift (lq);
therefore shall they that pursue you be swift (llq).” Isa
30:16 (KJV)

1 Following Wolfers, Deep Things, 233, who correctly notes that this
singular verb trades on the “he” of v. 15—“he hideth his face”.
2 Again, a prophetic reading removes the need to relocate these verses and

assign them to the friends’ speeches as, for example, Pope, Job, 179.
243
The Assyrian did not respect the “way of the vineyards”, and this figure
could plausibly refer to a policy of destruction in a region particularly
noted for vineyards (Amos 5:17, Isa 5:1-7).

2) Job next says,

“Drought and heat snatch away the snow waters; they

stray into Sheol (wajx lwav1).” Job 24:19 (RSV revised),
cf. Job 37:6, 38:22

The figure of “snow” is used in Isa 55:10 for the “word of God”,

“For as the rain and the snow come down from heaven,
and return not thither but water the earth, making it
bring forth and sprout, giving seed to the sower and
bread to the eater, so shall my word be that goes forth
from my mouth; it shall not return to me empty, but it
shall accomplish that which I purpose, and prosper in the
thing for which I sent it.” Isa 55:10-11 (RSV)

Further, “waters” are a figure for spiritual renewal in texts such as Isa 35:6
and Isa 58:11. This echo allows the suggestion for Job that the “drought”
and “heat” are snatching away the “word” from the people and as a result
they are straying into Sheol.

While drought and heat melt snow, and even evaporate snow-water, there
is obviously another mixed figure in the image of drought and heat
“snatching away” snow-water. Since “snatching away” is a normal verb
for the human behaviour of thieving and plundering,2 its use here suggests
that the figure is anthropomorphic: “snow-waters” and “drought and
heat” stand for types of individual.

The prophetic pattern is that God blesses individuals with the Spirit who
then proclaim his “word” to the people. Such individuals could therefore
be the “snow-waters” of God that are “snatched away” by “drought and
heat”. In contrast, typically, those who “snatch away” are those who have
power and wealth (Isa 10:2, Mic 2:2, 3:2, and Ezek 18:7, 12-18, 22:29).
The figure of “drought and heat” snatching away “snow-waters” could

1 Following Wolfers, Deep Things, 236, who lists Job 7:9, 17:16 and 21:13
as comparable texts.
2 This common verb (“snatching”) is one of violence and used for

example in Deut 28:29, 31; it is also used in Job 24:2, 9.

244
therefore be a figure of those with power and wealth robbing “the poor”,
whom God has blessed with his Spirit.

This fits the theme of Job’s remarks in regard to the “thieves and
murderers” of the city oppressing “the poor” (vv. 14-15).

3) Finally Job remarks,

“The womb shall forget him; the worm shall feed sweetly
on him; he shall be no more remembered; and
wickedness shall be broken1 as a tree.” Job 24:20 (KJV)

This assertion is normally taken to be continuing the thought of the

previous verse that Sheol snatches away sinners. The problem with this
reading is that Job has been switching between singular and plural
assertions and the singular assertions have referred to the invader. We can
set these out in the table below.

v. 13 they rebel
v. 16 they know not the light
v. 17 they are in terror
v. 18 he is swift; he does not v. 18 their portion is cursed
respect the way of the vineyards
v. 19 Sheol snatches them away
v. 20 the womb shall forget him
v. 21 he entreats the barren and
the widow
v. 22 he draws the mighty
v. 23 he rests in safety; his eyes v. 23 their ways
are upon
v. 24 he rises v. 24 they are exalted, and they
are brought low

This pattern suggests that the “worm” is the fate of the invader, just like
the wicked ones (Job 21:26). One echo that supports this reading is found
in Isaiah,

1 The use of this common verb here echoes with the Assyrian being
“broken” on the mountains of Judah (Isa 14:5, 25).
245
 “Thy pomp is brought down to the grave, and the noise
of thy viols: the worm is spread under thee, and the
worms cover thee.” Isa 14:11 (KJV)

The word for “worm” is not common (7x) and occurs only once (here) in
the Prophets in a description of the fate of the king of Babylon, i.e. the
Assyrian king (Isa 14:25). This echo supports an identification of the
“him” of “the worm shall feed on him” as the Assyrian invader.

3.6 The Mighty

The final part of Job’s argument in Job 24 relates to the “mighty” in the
city. His first assertion is,

“He shepherds (h[r) the barren that beareth not: and

doeth not good to the widow.” Job 24:21 (KJV revised)

The invader was “shepherding1 the barren that would not bear”. The echo
here is with the prophetic language of Jerusalem as the “barren woman”
that did not bear. The word for “barren” is not common (11x) and the
only occurrence in the Prophets is Isa 54:1 about the restoration of
children to Jerusalem after the desolation of barrenness. If we use this
echo to inform our reading of Job, the invader is “shepherding” or
“feeding” the barren (Jerusalem), and this reflects the prophetic complaint
in Hosea:

“Ephraim feedeth (h[r) on wind, and followeth after the

east wind: he daily increaseth lies and desolation; and
they do make a covenant with the Assyrians, and oil is
carried into Egypt.” Hos 12:1 (KJV), cf. Nah 3:18

In a similar vein, Jerusalem is also called a “widow” in the clause, “and

doeth not good to the widow” (v. 21b, KJV), but this is likely the
perspective of the Assyrian on Jerusalem, a city bereft of “children” and
with no “husband” (Deity) to fight for on her behalf. A contrasting
political theology is expressed in Isa 47:8 (RSV), which records the boast
of the king of Babylon, “I shall not sit as a widow, or know the loss of
children”.

1 The image of the king as a shepherd is found in Assyrian records. Adad-

Nirari III (810-783) was a king “whose shepherding they [the gods] made
as agreeable as possible”, ANET, 281; see also ANET, 298 for a use of
the same image in respect of Ashurbanipal (668-633).
246
The NASB gives a better sense to Job’s next assertion,

“And (w) he drags off the valiant by his power; he rises,

and (w) no one has assurance of life.” Job 24:22 (NASB
revised)

The “dragging off” stated here is the action of taking people captive and
scattering them throughout an empire (Isa 18:2, 7).

“For he saith, By the strength of my hand I have done it,

and by my wisdom; for I am prudent: and I have
removed the bounds of the people, and have robbed
their treasures, and I have put down the inhabitants like a
valiant man:” Isa 10:13 (KJV)

The “rising” of this invader was the “rousing” of Leviathan (Job 3:8). The
“valiant” could not withstand him, and no one had any assurance of life.

Job next says that it is given to the invader to be in safety, and this is a
deliberate contrast with his own position (Job 3:26, 11:18):

“It is given to him to be in safety, whereon he trusts (![v);

and (w)his eyes are upon their ways.” Job 24:23 (KJV
revised)

The invader trusted in his own safety, and the contrasting echo here is
with the rulers who instead placed their “trust” on Egypt (Isa 30:12, 31:1).
The invader’s eyes were upon the ways of the rulers in Jerusalem—their
political manoeuvres.

Job next says,

“They are exalted for a little while, then (w) he is gone

(wnnya1) and they will be brought low (wkmh); they will be
taken out of the way (!wcpqy2) as all other, and will be cut
off (wlmy) as the tops of the ears of corn.” Job 24:24 (KJV
revised)

1 The form of the verb is singular, which is hidden in the KJV, RSV and
NASB. Job is juxtaposing comments about the invader (singular) with
remarks about the fate of the rulers of Jerusalem (plural).
2 This imperfect form is rare but it is allows a future tense; the previous

and next verbs are likewise future tenses.

247
Here Job says that the rulers of the city are exalted for a little while, and
the text echoes the prophetic sense of a “little while” as found in texts
such as Isa 10:25, 26:20, 29:17 and Hos 1:4. Once the invader is gone,
they will be brought low and taken out of the way, cut off like the tops of
ears of corn (Isa 17:5).

Job concludes, inviting an interruption:

“If it is not so, who will prove me a liar, and show that
there is nothing in what I say?" Job 24:25 (RSV)

4. Job 25—Bildad’s Interruption

Whereas commentators recognize that Bildad’s speech is short, they do
not recognize it as an interruption. Many scholars regard this part of the
book as corrupt in some form and reconstruct a longer speech for Bildad
out of the speech material currently ascribed to Job in the MT.1

Our contention is that this is unnecessary, once it is realized that Job is a

conflicted man. Job both affirms his innocence, and asserts that the
Assyrian and the wicked rulers in Jerusalem will come to nothing. He
knows that God is in control, but he does not understand why God has
brought the invader into the land, when he himself has been a righteous
king reforming the people. In principle, he knows how God will deliver
him (Job 27-28), but he does not know whether God will enact this
deliverance now, (as he wants), nor does he see how it will be realized.

Job’s speech so far on this second day has covered the following themes:

• The people are rebellious.

• He is innocent.
• God will do whatever he wants.
• He is troubled by God’s troubling of the land.
• The prophets lack knowledge of what is going to happen.
• Thieves and marauders are in the land.
• Lawlessness is in the city.
• Those who control the affairs of the city have futile hopes.

1For example, Habel, Job, 38, and Pope, Job, 180, ascribe Job 26:5-14 to
Bildad.
248
To this litany of themes Job invites an interruption and Bildad supplies an
“answer”. To determine what his reply means we need to relate it to what
Job has just asserted.

In political terms, Bildad’s argument is,

Dominion and fear are with the invader, how then can Job be justified with
God. Job’s guilt is responsible for this situation.

Bildad repeats the mantra that Job cannot be without sin and needs to
repent. If we follow a political approach, one reading of Bildad might be
as follows:

1) Bildad says that dominion and fear are with “him”. The RSV interprets
the “him” to be God,1 but the use of “fear” elsewhere in Job suggests it is
the invader that has the dominion and who is the one causing fear (Job
3:25, 13:11, 15:21, Isa 24:17-18).

2) Bildad says that the invader makes (imposes) peace2 in his high places,
and this refers to the peace treaties that the invader makes “in the field”.
It is an assertion of where the bargaining power lies — it lies with the
conqueror. The “high places” of the invader are his council of nobles; an
example of this idea is,

“And it shall come to pass in that day, that the Lord shall
punish the host of the high ones that are on high, and the
kings of the earth upon the earth.” Isa 24:21 (KJV)

3) Bildad says that there is no number to his “armies”, and here the text
uses a standard word for troops (e.g. 2 Kgs 24:2). The figure of speech
that Bildad uses next, “upon whom doth not his light arise” is another
way of describing the invader as the morning light rising over the Judean
hills (Job 24:17, 38:12).

4) In the light of these evident facts, Bildad asks, who can be justified with
God. The implication is that everyone must be guilty including Job, and
here Bildad repeats Eliphaz’ questions (Job 4:17-19, 15:14-16).3

1 See also the Qumran Targum.

2 The expression only occurs elsewhere in Isa 45:7, where Yahweh asserts
that he “makes peace”.
3 Bildad invites Job to look at the moon and see that it was not shining.

This remark shows that Bildad regarded the moon as indicative of the
249
5. Job 26—Job’s Reply to Bildad
Job 26 contains Job’s reply. Bildad has said nothing new; he only
reinforces the basic argument that the presence of the invader in the land
shows that Job cannot be “right” with God. Consequently, Job’s reply is
caustic in its tone:

“How you have helped him who has no power! How you
have saved the arm that has no strength! How you have
counselled him who has no wisdom, and plentifully
declared sound knowledge! With whose help have you
uttered words, and whose spirit has come forth from
you?” Job 26:1-4 (RSV)

This criticism refers to Bildad’s speeches, but the mention of a “spirit”

echoes Eliphaz’ claim to inspiration (Job 4:12-16).

A conventional reading regards the next part of Job 26 (vv. 5-14) as a

discourse on God’s power over the natural creation and a description of
the cosmos. As noted already, it is often reassigned to a speaker other
than Job (Bildad or Zophar). However, it can be interpreted in political
terms and assigned to Job.

Job goes on to describe aspects of God’s power (vv. 5-13) and concludes
in v. 14,

“Lo, these are but the outskirts of his ways; and how
small a whisper do we hear of him! But the thunder of
his power who can understand?” Job 26:14 (RSV)

This remark anticipates the storm that will come at the close of the drama,
from which God speaks to Job. Here the remark identifies the subject
matter of Job’s reply to Bildad: it is about God’s ways with the nation.

The expression “thunder of his power” uses a rare word (6x) for
“thunder”, and it occurs once in the Prophets at Isa 29:6,

fortunes of the king of Judah, and its eclipse was “proof” that Job was
guilty. Similarly, Bildad’s castigation of the “stars” may be relevant
because they are the “stars” (a constellation) that presage the fortunes of
the king. Bildad concludes by comparing Job to a “worm” and this rare
word occurs in one other place—Isa 14:11.
250
 Thou shalt be visited of the Lord of hosts with thunder,
and with earthquake, and great noise, with storm and
tempest, and the flame of devouring fire. Isa 29:6 (KJV),
cf. 30:30

The context of this use of “thunder” is one of deliverance from an

invading army. This echo suggests that Job is asking Bildad (rhetorically)
about how God can deliver Judah and Jerusalem—who can understand
the thunder of his power.1 The word used for “power” (hrwbg) is also used
in Isaiah’s Assyrian oracles:

For thus saith the Lord God, the Holy One of Israel; In
returning and rest shall ye be saved; in quietness and in
confidence shall be your strength (hrwbg): and ye would
not. Isa 30:15 (KJV)

Hear, ye that are far off, what I have done; and ye that are
near, acknowledge my might (hrwbg). Isa 33:13 (KJV)

I say, sayest thou, (but they are but vain words) I have counsel
and strength (hrwbg) for war: now on whom dost thou
trust, that thou rebellest against me? Isa 36:5 (KJV)

These echoes suggest that Job does not understand how God will use
military might to deliver Judah and Jerusalem. This “understanding” was
not being revealed by the prophets in Jerusalem.

Prior to this conclusion, Job details several aspects of God’s power.

1) Job’s first assertion is regarded as a reference to the “dead”:

“Dead things (~yapr) are formed from under the waters,

and the inhabitants thereof.” Job 26:5 (KJV)

“The departed spirits tremble (lwx) under the waters and

their inhabitants.” Job 26:5 (NASB)

“The shades below tremble, the waters and their

inhabitants.” Job 26:5 (RSV)

1The thunder of God’s power contrasts with the thunder of the Assyrian
battle-horse in Job 39:25.
251
However, this is not certain. The Hebrew word (~yapr) is rendered as
“giants” by the LXX, and with the definite article (as here in Job) it occurs
six times, and it is transliterated as “the Rephaim” in Gen 15:20, Deut
3:11, Josh 12:4, 13:12 (NASB).1

The form of the verb translated here as “tremble” (lwx, NASB, RSV) is
more to do with being born (Ps 51:5, Prov 8:24, 25),2 and this is how the
LXX reads the Hebrew. Accordingly, a better translation of the Hebrew
would be,

“The Rephaim are brought forth from under the waters

and their inhabitants.” Job 26:5 (KJV revised)

If the text refers to a people—the Rephaim, then the association in

Deuteronomy and Joshua is with Bashan.3 Job’s remark could well refer
to an exodus of the inhabitants of Bashan from their territory in the face
of the Assyrian advance (“the waters”), an exodus brought about by God.

2) Job’s next assertion cites a proverb,

“Hell (lwav) is naked before (dgn4) him, and destruction

hath no covering.” Job 26:6 (KJV)

“Hell (lwav) and destruction are before (dgn) the Lord:

how much more then the hearts of the children of men?”
Prov 15:11 (KJV)

The proverb is echoed through the words lwav and dgn as well as the
reference to God. The figure is a personification: the people are
personified as “the grave” and “destruction” because this is their
imminent fate—and they are such “before the Lord”. The personification
of “death and destruction” is continued in Job 28,

“Destruction and death say, We have heard the fame

thereof with our ears.” Job 28:22 (KJV)

1 The only prophet to use the word is Isaiah. Without the definite article it
is rendered as “the dead” (Isa 14:9, 26:14, 19), Pope, Job, 183.
2 See Wolfers, Deep Things, 244.
3 In our discussion of the creatures of God’s first speech, we will have

reason to equate the “wild ox” (Job 39:9) with Bashan.

4 Compare the use of the preposition in Isa 40:17.

252
The assertion “there is no covering” (twsk !ya) also occurs in Job 24:7 and
Job 31:19, and these texts refer to the nakedness of the people.

3) Job then offers a remark about “the North”,1

“He stretcheth out the north (!wpc)2 over the empty place
(wht), and hangeth the earth upon nothing.” Job 26:7

The expression “the North” can be interpreted as a metonym for a

northern invader:

“Howl, O gate; cry, O city; thou, whole Palestina, art

dissolved: for there shall come from the north (!wpc) a
smoke, and none shall be alone in his appointed times.”
Isa 14:31 (KJV)

“I will say to the north (!wpc), Give up; and to the south,
Keep not back: bring my sons from far, and my
daughters from the ends of the earth.” Isa 43:6 (KJV)

“Then the Lord said unto me, Out of the north (!wpc) an
evil shall break forth upon all the inhabitants of the
land.” Jer 1:14 (KJV)

Job says that “the North” is stretched out over “the empty place” (KJV)
or “the void” (RSV). The Hebrew (wht) signifies chaos and here it is a
fitting description of Judah. In the face of the Babylonian invasion,
Jeremiah uses the same description:

“I beheld the earth, and, lo, it was without form (wht), and
void; and the heavens, and they had no light.” Jer 4:23
(KJV)

1 Job 26:6-14 has many points of contact with God’s speech (Job 38) and
as such this identifies the subject of Job’s remarks to be God. Smick
comments, Mythology, 223, that “…no one has satisfactorily explained how
verse 7 fits into any primitive cosmography”.
2 While Mount Zaphon was the sacred mountain of Baal, this is not the

reference here, nor is it a reference to the celestial mountain of the gods.

This suggestion, Pope, Job, 183, does not account for the verb “to
stretch”. This common verb is often used of “stretching out a hand
against” and this sense fits an interpretation of “The North” as a
metonym for a northern invader.
253
The word is also used by Isaiah to describe the “chaos-confusion” of
Jerusalem (Isa 24:10, cf. 29:21).

Job could therefore well be saying that the northern invader is stretched
out over the land and this has been brought about by God.

Job says that God “hangs” the land upon nothing.1 Here the image is of
hanging an enemy or a condemned criminal. The Hebrew word for
“hanging” (hlt) is common enough (27x) and used mainly in this way
(20x). The image is contradictory in that enemies or criminals would
normally be hung on a tree; here it is “nothing”. The text may mean that
the confusion of flawed policy is the “nothing” upon which the land has
been hung.

4) Job next says,

“He bindeth up the waters in his thick clouds; and the

cloud is not rent under them.” Job 26:8 (KJV)

The textual echoes of this statement indicate that Job is referring to the
heavenly waters that bring salvation and these are as yet bound up in the
clouds. This idea of “holding back” is continued in the next two
statements:

“He holdeth back the face of his throne, and spreadeth

his cloud upon it.” Job 26:9 (KJV)

“He hath compassed the waters with bounds, until the

completeness of light with darkness ($vxo ~[ rwa tylkt
d[) .” Job 26:10 (KJV revised)

The link between “waters” and acts of salvation is made in texts such as,2

“I will open rivers in high places, and fountains in the

midst of the valleys: I will make the wilderness a pool of
water, and the dry land springs of water.” Isa 41:18
(KJV)

1 As Pope notes, Job, 184, this is not a reference to the planet seemingly
hanging in space.
2 We discuss this theme in connection with statements on the topic made

by Elihu and God (Job 36:29, 38:34-38).

254
 “For I will pour water upon him that is thirsty, and
floods upon the dry ground: I will pour my spirit upon
thy seed, and my blessing upon thine offspring…” Isa
44:3 (KJV)

“Drop down, ye heavens, from above, and let the skies

pour down righteousness: let the earth open, and let
them bring forth salvation, and let righteousness spring
up together; I the Lord have created it.” Isa 45:8 (KJV)

This kind of water is being held back until “the completeness of light and
darkness” (v. 10). We suggest that this mixed figure brings together two of
the images of Assyria used in the book of Job: the “morning light” (Job
24:17, 38:12) and “darkness” (Job 3:5, 10:21, 28:3). God holds back the
face of his throne, i.e. he is holding back a theophanic display of his
power (Job 37:15) until the completeness of “light with darkness”.1

5) From “holding back” an act of salvation, Job describes how God is

currently acting in the land.

“The pillars of heaven tremble and are astonished at his

reproof.” Job 26:11 (KJV)

Here the intertextual echoes suggest that “pillars of heaven” is a figure for
the rulers and priests in Jerusalem and it is these that are astonished at
God’s reproof. A number of texts contribute to this proposal:

i) The verb “to be astonished” (hmt) is used of princes and priests in

connection with the Babylonian crisis (Jer 4:9, “wonder”); and it is used of
the Assyrian crisis (Hab 1:5, Isa 29:9, “wonder”, Isa 13:8, “amazed”).

ii) The word “reproof” is common enough (hr[g, 14x) but Isaiah is the
only prophet to use the word. Again, it is used in the context of the
Assyrian crisis (Isa 30:17).

iii) The concept of a “dwelling space” is fundamental to the concept of

heaven, and just as God dwells in heaven, he is also presented as dwelling
with man in the tabernacle-sanctuary and the temple (Exod 25:8, Jer

1 In order for there to be “light with darkness”, it would seem that these
terms require a symbolic meaning. Paradoxically, the spreading light of the
Assyrian invasion was darkness over the land.
255
17:12). Several references to the temple use “heaven” terminology (2
Chron 30:27, Pss 11:4, 20:2, 6, Isa 66:1).1 The expression “pillars of
heaven” echoes this typology in its use of the common word for “pillars”.
This building term is used mainly in connection with the temple. The
shaking of these pillars is therefore an appropriate figure for the shaking
of the priestly authorities.

These echoes suggest that Job is saying that the Jerusalem priests are
astonished at the reproof of God.

6) Job then says,

“He quieted the sea with his power, and by his

understanding he shattered Rahab.” Job 26:12 (NASB)

A political sense comes through here in Job’s use of “Rahab”, which is an

Isaianic2 designation for Egypt (Isa 30:7 (RSV), 51:9). The “sea” here
would be a parallel term for Egypt, and God’s taming of the sea (Isa
51:15) reflects the futility of relying on Egypt for help against Assyria.

7) Finally, Job concludes his reply with an assertion about Leviathan:3

“By his Spirit (xwr) the heavens will be made fair; his
hand has pierced the fleeing serpent.” Job 26:13 (RSV
revised)

“In that day the Lord with his hard and great and strong
sword will punish Leviathan the fleeing4 serpent…” Isa
27:1 (RSV)

The echo here is to God’s piercing of Rahab (Isa 51:9) and an expectation
that God will pierce Leviathan, spoken as if it had already happened. At
the same time, the “heavens” (the temple priests) will be made “fair”
through a bestowal of the Spirit.

1 See Margaret Barker, The Gate of Heaven: The History and Symbolism of the
Temple in Jerusalem, (London: SPCK, 1991).
2 Isaiah is the only prophet to use this term.
3 Following Isa 27:1, we have identified Leviathan as Assyria in

connection with Job’s opening lament (Job 3:8).

4 Only Isaiah and Job use this word.

256
6. Job 27—Continuing the Parable
Job’s reply to Bildad does not reaffirm his innocence against Bildad’s
renewed charge, but it does affirm a conviction at the end that God would
save Jerusalem and restore the teaching authority of the temple. In the
next part of his monologue, he continues his “parable”. It is a
continuation of his parable insofar as he resumes his “lament” of Job 23-
24 after the disputatious reply of Job 26. We can divide this chapter into
three sections:

vv. 2-6 — Job vows to uphold his integrity.

vv. 7-12 — Job castigates his internal enemies.
vv. 13-23 — Job affirms the destruction of the Oppressor.

6.1 Job’s Integrity

Job gives strong expression to his determination to maintain his integrity
at this point in his monologue. As such, he still has his eye on Bildad’s
veiled suggestion that it is his sin that has led to the calamity facing the
nation.

6.2 Job’s Internal Enemies1

Job refers to his “enemy” and the “wicked one” in the statement, “let my
enemy be as the wicked one” (v. 7). This reflects his situation of having
both an external enemy and internal opponents. The parallel clause to this
assertion expresses the same thought, “let he that riseth up against me be
as the unrighteous one”. In political terms, the one rising up against him
was Sennacherib (Job 24:22, 25:3), and the “unrighteous one” was the
leader of the faction in Jerusalem opposing Hezekiah (Job 18:21, 29:17,
31:3, Zeph 3:5). Job expresses the thought that just as the gains of the
“wicked one” are worth nothing if he loses his life (v. 8), so too this
should be the fate of his “enemy”.

Job calls the “unrighteous one” a “hypocrite” in keeping with the friends’
title for the ruling leader (Job 8:13, 15:34, 20:5); Job has used the title in
earlier speeches (Job 13:16, 17:8). Elihu will affirm shortly that “…the
hypocrite will not reign” (Job 34:30). Job asserts that “though he has
gained” (v. 8), this would come to nothing when God takes away his life.
Job does not expect God to hear his cry when trouble comes upon him

1 Some commentators (e.g. Eaton, Job, 33) suggest that vv. 7-23 are
difficult to assign to Job in a straightforward way, but a political reading
can accommodate the assertions that Job makes without recourse to
incongruity.
257
(Isa 37:3). Nor does he believe that the hypocrite is sincere when he calls
upon God (v. 10).

Job transitions from talking about his internal enemies to talking about
the invader with the following statement:

“I will teach you concerning the hand of God; what is

with the Almighty I will not conceal. Behold, all of you
have seen it yourselves; why then have you become
altogether vain?” Job 27:11-12 (RSV)

Here Job affirms that he will teach the friends what God is doing in the
land even though they are perfectly aware of the situation. Job is evidently
frustrated by the friends’ inability to see his point of view.

6.3 The Fate of the Oppressor

Job continues by quoting Zophar’s assertion,

“This is the portion of a wicked man from God, and the

heritage appointed unto him by God.” Job 20:29 (KJV)

“This is the portion of a wicked man with God, and the

heritage of oppressors, which they shall receive of the
Almighty.” Job 27:13 (KJV)

Zophar identifies “the wicked man” as “the hypocrite” (Job 20:5), and
describes his fate in terms that echo the prophetic description of the fate
of the Assyrian invader. Job agrees with Zophar: he has stated that he
wants his enemy to be as “the wicked one” (v. 7), or “the hypocrite” (v.
8). Now he asserts with Zophar that the fate of the “wicked man” is also
the heritage of the oppressors.1

Job states that he will describe the “heritage of oppressors” (v. 13), or
“tyrants” (NASB). The terminology is clearly applicable to conquerors,
and the Hebrew for “tyrant” occurs in the Prophets in several texts. Some
typical texts are,

1 Job has expressed confidence in the fate of both the invader and his
internal enemies throughout his speeches; hence, there is no reason on
this count to ascribe these thoughts to one of the friends (usually Zophar)
and hypothesize about a corrupt text.
258
 “For thou hast been a stronghold to the poor, a
stronghold to the needy in his distress, a shelter from the
storm and a shade from the heat; for the blast of the
ruthless is like a storm against a wall…” Isa 25:4 (RSV)

“But the multitude of your foes shall be like small dust,

and the multitude of the ruthless like passing chaff. And
in an instant, suddenly…” Isa 29:5 (RSV)

“For the ruthless shall come to nought and the scoffer

cease, and all who watch to do evil shall be cut off…” Isa
29:20 (RSV)

Job wants to declare what tyrants will receive from the Almighty (v. 13),
and he enumerates several points:

1) If the children of the oppressor multiply, they will die through famine
and the sword (v. 14).

2) The survivors of the oppressor’s defeated army will die from the plague
and his widows will not weep over his failure (v. 15, RSV).

3) The oppressor may accumulate silver, and pile up garments like clay,1
but the “righteous” and the “innocent” (Job himself) would take the silver
and wear the garments (vv. 16-17, RSV).

4) The oppressor is like a “moth” building a house (an empire) and a

watch-keeper making a booth (v. 18, Isa 1:8).2 The RSV and NASB render
the ordinary Hebrew word for “moth” (f[) as “spider”.3 This is an
unnecessary change if the mixed figure is read in political terms. In this
case, an invader could be pictured as a moth working his way through the
rulers of city-states (“the garments”)4 building his own empire en route. At

1 This figure could refer to the stripping of garments from captive nobles
and piling them up on the ground.
2 Isa 1:8 uses two words from v. 18, “booth” and “watch-keeper”. The

KJV, NASB and RSV translate the Hebrew as “besieged city” but “watch-
keeping city” makes the connection with Job clearer.
3 Habel, Job, 383, explains the basic problem to be the observation that

moths do not have houses.

4 Eliphaz is the first speaker to use the term “moth”, and his usage is

consistent with Job’s remarks. The image of a moth attacking garments

presupposes that “the garments” was a term of derision for the ruling elite
259
the same time, his conquests require him to fortify such cities with
watchtowers and fortifications.

5) But the “rich man” (Sennacherib) with all his silver (v. 16) will lie down
on his bed; he will not assemble this wealth; he will open his eyes and it
will be gone (v. 19, RSV).1

6) “Terrors” will take hold of the invader at night (v. 20; Isa 17:14), and a
tempest will take him away (Isa 17:13; 29:6).

7) God will scatter the “east wind”2 (Job 38:24) and this wind will carry
the “rich man” (Sennacherib) away (v. 21).

8) God will hurl at him (v. 22, RSV) and he will “flee” (xrb)—a fleeing
serpent (xrb vxn, Isa 27:1).

9) The storm will “clap” at him (thunder-claps), and the surrounding

nations that he has subjugated will “hiss3 him out of his place” (v. 23).

These details identify the fate of “the oppressors”, but his fate is also the
fate of the “wicked man” insofar as the downfall of the wicked man is tied
to the destruction of the Assyrian invader.

7. Job 28—Wisdom Digression

Job 28 has been treated as an “interlude” by commentators.4 It is most
often characterized as a poem about the inscrutability of moral wisdom,
because of its shared features with other wisdom poems.5 We shall treat

of Jerusalem. The use of garments to indicate power and position among

a ruling aristocracy is illustrated in texts such as 1 Kgs 10:5, 2 Chron 9:4,
Esth 6:9-11, and Isa 3:6-7, 16-23, 22:21. The references in Isaiah are
relevant to a political reading of Job in that they show “clothing” to be
symptomatic of the rule of Jerusalem in the eighth century. Our
suggestion is that it is this malaise that Job’s figure of the “moth”
addresses.
1 This image could reflect the night-time deliverance of Jerusalem (Isa

37:36).
2 This is a term for the Assyrian army in texts such as Isa 27:8, Hos 12:1,

13:15.
3 This action of hissing is possibly echoed in Zeph 2:15.
4 For example, Pope, Job, xxvii. Newsom, Moral Imagination, 169-170, sets

out clearly the options that can be taken in respect of Job 28.
5 Newsom, Moral Imagination, 172-173.

260
the poem as original to the book1 and as a partial digression on the part of
Job, away from his ongoing lament, and focussing on the topic of
providential wisdom. Our main argument for ascribing the speech to Job
is the occurrence of the opening word (yk) of Job 28, which is a logical
connecting word, “for”, connecting Job 28 to Job 27.

The Hebrew of v. 1 is “for there is a place for the silver” (KJV, RSV,
NASB, “surely”), which implies continuity of thought with what has been
spoken in Job 27. This reading is supported by the links between the end
of Job 27 and Job 28. Thus there is a mention in both chapters of “silver”,
“dust”, “bread”, “a place” (vv. 1, 2, 5, 6, Job 27:14, 16, 17, 23,), and the
waters and wind of a storm (vv. 25-26, Job 27:20-21).

The main subject of Job 28 is wisdom, but our proposal is that it is

providential wisdom:2 how can man know what God will do with the nations
on the earth. The reason why this is a digression is that whereas Job and
the friends have been discussing what is happening in the land and who is
responsible, here Job discusses how providential wisdom can be known.

We have seen above in our discussion of Job 27 that the “oppressors” are
the Assyrians. Job says there that while Sennacherib heaps up silver, the
waters and wind of a storm will take him away “in the night” (Job 27:20).
The same sequence of concerns is present in Job 28: the poem opens with
a focus on “silver” and ends with the water and wind of a storm. There is
more detail in Job 28, but the interpretative key is set by Job 27.3

While it is common to regard Job 28 as about “wisdom”, this is partly

misleading. This is the explicit topic in vv.12-23, but it is less than explicit

1 The most recent commentator to take this view is Janzen, Job, 187-201.
See also A. Lo, Job 28 as Rhetoric: An Analysis of Job 28 in the Context of Job
21-31, (SVT; Leiden: E. J. Brill, 2003). Lo’s argument is that if the chapter
is removed and considered a later addition, it creates a major gap in the
structure and design of the book.
2 The term for wisdom (hmkx) is used by the characters in the book of Job

in the sense of providential wisdom, for example, see the conjunction of

wisdom and counsel in Job 12:13, 26:3. As such this wisdom is transcendent
and needs to be imparted by God (Job 38:36-37, 39:17).
3 Newsom, Moral Imagination, 174, recognizes the need to supply a cultural

and historical catalyst for the wisdom poem, because other wisdom
poems have such contexts, but affirms “we simply lack sufficient evidence
to do more than speculate in the most general of terms”. Wolfers’ study is
one such speculation that is noted.
261
elsewhere. In vv. 24-27 we have God’s providential control, which is his
wisdom with the nations, and in v. 28 we have the necessary attitude on
the part of man to God’s control over the nations: fear the Lord and
depart from evil; therefore, vv. 24-28 are about wisdom in an implied
sense. But in the first part of the poem (vv. 1-11) it is not clear that
wisdom is the topic of concern.

The poem of Job 28 has two clearly discernible sections (vv. 12-19, and
vv. 20-28), which are brought out by the KJV and the structural use of the
word for “place”:

(v. 12) But where shall wisdom be found? And where is

the place of understanding? (KJV)

(v. 20) Whence then cometh wisdom? And where is the

place of understanding? (KJV)

What follows v. 12 and v. 20 respectively is tightly knit together. The

opening verses (vv. 1-11) have less coherence on a first reading.

As well as v. 12 and v. 20, the word “place” occurs in,

(v. 1) Surely there is …a place for gold. (KJV)

(v. 6) The stones of it [the earth] are the place of

sapphires: and it hath the dust of gold. (KJV)

(v. 23) God understandeth the way thereof, and he

knoweth the place thereof. (KJV)

“Place” therefore is an important theme, and v. 23 identifies both a “way”

and a “place” in respect of wisdom. If we consider the idea of a “place”,
we can see that various “places” are discussed in the poem. There are
places for various metals and precious stones (vv. 1-6), but where is the
“place” of wisdom (v. 12)? Wisdom is not on land or in the sea (vv.13b-
14), neither can it be bought (v. 15-19). Where then does wisdom come
from (v. 20)? God understands the “way” by which wisdom comes, and
he knows its place (v. 23).

There is then a progression of thought in the poem which is earmarked by

the repetition of the word “place”, and the conclusion is fittingly that God
understands the place of wisdom (v. 23). The specification of “wisdom”
follows the conclusion that God knows its place:
262
 “For he looketh to the ends of the earth, and seeth under
the whole heaven.” Job 28:24 (KJV)

God knows the place of wisdom, because he can look everywhere. What
is this wisdom? The concluding verses of the poem mention winds and
waters, rain, lightning and thunder. What God knows concerns weather—
God looks “to the ends of the earth” and “sees under the whole heaven”,1
so that he can make “weight for the winds”, “weigh the waters”, and so on
(vv. 25-26). He sees and then he declares what should be the case (v. 27).
The response of man should be to fear the Lord and depart from evil (v.
28).

The subject of “wisdom” therefore is various natural weather phenomena.

This concern fits with the conclusion of Elihu’s speech which ends with a
consideration of an approaching storm, and it fits with the setting of
God’s speech which is out of a whirlwind. Elihu describes a complex set
of weather phenomena, and it is likely that there is the same symbology
here as in Elihu’s speech and God’s speech. This symbology concerns
God’s deliverance of his people; we saw the same symbology in our
discussion of Job 27.

A different interpretative result is obtained if we read this poem as directly

connected to Job 27 than if we regard it as a standalone interlude about
wisdom. This is how we will read the poem.

7.1 Places—vv. 1-6

If we read the poem as a continuation of the latter half of Job 27, a number
of rhetorical contrasts become evident:

The Assyrian invader collects silver as part of the booty of war and he
accumulates it as “dust”, but there is a “spring” for silver, i.e. there is a
place for true silver.

The Assyrian invader will be removed out of his place, but there will
remain a place for gold and for sapphires.

1The expression “under the whole heaven” is a geo-political figure for the
nations—God oversees the nations (Deut 2:25, 4:19, Dan 7:27, 9:12).
263
The Assyrian invader accumulates silver as dust, but “the (promised)
land” has the “dust of gold”.1

The children of the Assyrian invader will not be satisfied with bread, yet
the land still brings forth bread.

The poem opens,

“Surely there is a spring (acwm) for the silver, and a place

for gold where they fine it.” Job 28:1 (KJV revised)

Versions (KJV, RSV, NASB) suggest a “mine” or “vein” for the silver,
but the word (acwm) is dynamic suggesting movement forward, hence it is
often translated “spring” as in “spring of water”. The figure of silver is
used for the word of God (Ps 12:6), and a “spring” is used as a figure for
the restoration of the people:

“And the Lord shall guide thee continually, and satisfy

thy soul in drought, and make fat thy bones: and thou
shalt be like a watered garden, and like a spring of water,
whose waters fail not.” Isa 58:11 (KJV)

“I will open rivers in high places, and fountains in the

midst of the valleys: I will make the wilderness a pool of
water, and the dry land springs of water.” Isa 41:18
(KJV)

These echoes allow the suggestion that the text is using a mixed image,
“surely there is a spring for the silver”—surely there is a spring of the
knowledge of the Lord. Such springs could only be created by God
through abundant rain, and this “rain” is a figure of the bestowal of the
Spirit during and after the Assyrian crisis (Joel 2:28-32).

Along with this figure of a “spring of silver” there is a “furnace (place) for
refining gold”. Israel was brought out of the “furnace of iron” (Egypt,
Deut 4:20, 1 Kgs 8:51, Jer 11:4), and the figure of a “furnace” is used of
Jerusalem at the time of the Assyrian siege:

“And he shall pass over to his strong hold for fear, and
his princes shall be afraid of the ensign, saith the Lord,

1 The Assyrian campaign accounts are replete with the itemisation of

plunder from conquests; for a mention of gold dust see ANET, 285.
264
 whose fire is in Zion, and his furnace in Jerusalem.” Isa
31:9 (KJV)

“Behold, I have refined thee, but not with silver; I have

chosen thee in the furnace of affliction.” Isa 48:10 (KJV)

In a similar fashion “gold” was brought out of this furnace. A later

prophet uses the same ideas:

“And I will bring the third part through the fire, and will
refine them as silver is refined, and will try them as gold
is tried: they shall call on my name, and I will hear them:
I will say, It is my people: and they shall say, The Lord is
my God.” Zech 13:9 (KJV)

It seems that Job’s point is that the “gold” being brought forth through
“captivity” is a people redeemed and renewed through the Spirit.

The poem continues,

“Iron is taken from the dust, and bronze (hvwxn) is

smelted from stone (!ba).” Job 28:2 (NASB revised)

The conjunction of “iron” and “bronze” occurs 10x in the Hebrew Bible,
and of the Prophets, only Micah and Isaiah record this combination.
There are military overtones to the combination: iron weapon, bronze
bow (Job 20:24, Ps 18:35), and Micah creates an image of an iron/bronze
horse:

“Arise and thresh, daughter of Zion, for your horn I will

make iron and your hoofs I will make bronze, That you
may pulverize many peoples, That you may devote to the
Lord their unjust gain And their wealth to the Lord of all
the earth.” Mic 4:13 (NASB)

There are also overtones of defensive strength (doors of bronze, iron

bars—Isa 45:2), and stubbornness (Isa 48:4), as well as offensive strength
(Job 40:18). As we shall see when we discuss God’s description of
Leviathan (Assyria), this beast esteems such defences of iron and bronze
as straw and rotten wood (Job 41:27).

A connection with Micah and Job centres on the theme of “making” iron
and “bronze”, and this theme is found in Leviticus:
265
 “I will also break down your pride of power; I will also
make your sky like iron and your earth like bronze.” Lev
26:19 (NASB)

Whereas there seems to be a military overtone to the figure of “bronze

and iron”, the text of Job echoes prophecies that speak of God making his
people “iron and bronze”. The contribution that the book of Job makes
to this theme is that such iron and bronze is taken out of “dust” and
“stone”.

This idea is significant and a statement of the wisdom that this poem is
seeking. The current state of the people is like “dust” and “stone”, but
from this material God will make them strong like bronze and iron. The
figure of “dust” is used of the state of the people:

“And thou shalt be brought down, and shalt speak out of

the ground, and thy speech shall be low out of the dust,
and thy voice shall be, as of one that hath a familiar
spirit, out of the ground, and thy speech shall whisper
out of the dust.” Isa 29:4 (KJV)

“Shake thyself from the dust; arise, and sit down, O

Jerusalem: loose thyself from the bands of thy neck, O
captive daughter of Zion.” Isa 52:2 (KJV), cf. 1 Sam 2:8

Iron is sourced from the earth, and Job is using this process to assert that
God will make the people like iron, and he will do this out of their current
state of “dust”.

Bronze is melted out of stone, and such stone is referred to as “stones of

darkness” in the next verse. In the context of invasion, Micah has a
relevant use of “stones”:

“Therefore I will make Samaria as an heap of the field,

and as plantings of a vineyard: and I will pour down the
stones thereof into the valley, and I will discover the
foundations thereof.” Mic 1:6 (KJV)

Out of “stones”, a figure for a desolated people, God would make iron:

“Instead of bronze I will bring gold, and instead of iron I

will bring silver, and instead of wood, bronze, and
266
 instead of stones, iron. And I will make peace your
administrators and righteousness your overseers.” Isa
60:17 (NASB)

This texts show the restoration focus of this kind of language, “gold”,
“silver”, “iron” and “bronze”, terms shared with the opening of Job 28.

The RSV and the NASB translate v. 3 with a certain amount of

interpretation,

“Men put an end to darkness, and search out to the

farthest bound the ore in gloom and deep darkness.” Job
28:3 (RSV)

“Man puts an end to darkness, and to the farthest limit

he searches out the rock in gloom and deep shadow.”
Job 28:3 (NASB)

However, the word for “men” is not in the text and the KJV is more
accurate in translating the Hebrew. The RSV and NASB interpret the
verse as a continuation of the theme of mining, but the KJV allows a
more political reading:

“He setteth an end to darkness ($vx), and searcheth out

all completeness (tylkt): the stones of darkness (lpa),
and the shadow of death.” Job 28:3 (KJV revised)

The word translated “perfection” (tylkt) in the KJV, which we have

rendered “completeness”, is not common (5x), and significantly it occurs
in Job 26:10:

“He hath compassed the waters with bounds, until the

day and night come to an end (tylkt).” Job 26:10 (KJV)

This assertion is obviously relevant to the point being made in Job 28,
because the next verse (v. 4) goes onto mention a “flood” or a “river”
(lxn). The Hebrew of Job 26:10 indicates that God has circumscribed the
overflowing water (of a river) with a boundary, and this is a statement that
God has set a limit to the overflowing flood of the Assyrian invasion. The
KJV translates the closing Hebrew clause as “until the day and night come
to an end”, but this offers a metaphorical interpretation of the Hebrew
expression, which is more literally “until the completeness of light with

267
darkness”. The ideas of “darkness” and “completeness” are therefore
shared between Job 26:10 and v. 3.

“He hath compassed the waters with bounds, until the

completeness (tylkt) of light with darkness ($vx).” Job
26:10 (KJV revised)

“He setteth an end to darkness ($vx), and searcheth out

all completeness (tylkt): the stones of darkness (lpa),
and the shadow of death.” Job 28:3 (KJV)

God sets an end to darkness ($vx). This first type of darkness is different
to the second type mentioned in the figure “stones of darkness (lpa)”.
The first type of darkness is associated with the “shadow of death”, which
we discussed above in connection with Job’s first speech (Job 3:5). It is
either a darkness of captivity, for those who had been taken away to
Assyria, or it is the darkness of the occupying forces in the land. As we
shall see below the second type of darkness has to do with prophetic
knowledge.

God “searches out” all completeness, i.e. he understands how everything

(all the events) will be completed. The Hebrew is emphatic, he and no one
else searches out these matters. Such “searching” seems to be a figure for
revelation: God searches and reveals what he has found, not mankind (v.
27), who are “stones of darkness”. The word for this second type of
“darkness” is not common (8x) and occurs only once in the Prophets,

“And in that day shall the deaf hear the words of the
book, and the eyes of the blind shall see out of obscurity,
and out of darkness (lpa).” Isa 29:18 (KJV)

According to Job, the people are “stones of darkness”, the blind who will
see out of obscurity; they are lying in the shadow of death (Job 3:5, Ps
107:10-14). Only God searches out how things will be completed and only
he can reveal it to them. More precisely, the “stones of darkness” are a
figure for the priesthood, with an echo being struck with the “stones” of
the breastplate (compare the mention of stones and sapphires in v. 6 and
Ezek 28:13).

The next verse of this poem is rendered differently by versions:

268
 “The flood breaketh out from the inhabitant; even the
waters forgotten of the foot: they are dried up, they are
gone away from men.” Job 28:4 (KJV)

“He sinks a shaft far from habitation, Forgotten by the

foot; they hang and swing to and fro far from men.” Job
28:4 (NASB)

“They open shafts in a valley away from where men live;

they are forgotten by travellers, they hang afar from men,
they swing to and fro.” Job 28:4 (RSV)

Of these, the KJV corresponds more closely to the MT, and the RSV and
NASB both depend on amendments to the text and continue their
“mining” interpretation. A more literal rendering of the Hebrew is,

“The river breaks out from with the sojourner…”

This rendering is preferable because the Hebrew expression “from with”

(~[m) is used in texts where something comes to someone from being
with another person (Isa 7:11, 8:18, 28:29, 29:6); and the Hebrew word for
“inhabitant” has a form that is used for strangers that are sojourning
rather than a native inhabitant (Exod 12:49, Num 15:15).

The idea of a river breaking out from a sojourner may be the scripture
that the Johannine Jesus is recorded as quoting,

“He who believes in me, as the scripture has said, ‘Out of

his heart shall flow rivers of living water’ ” John 7:38
(RSV)

This is interpreted as the bestowal of the Spirit (John 7:39), but such a
bestowal is also a feature of eighth century prophecies (Isa 32:15, Joel
2:28-32). Certain restoration prophecies may refer to this phenomenon:

“Then shall the lame man leap as an hart, and the tongue
of the dumb sing: for in the wilderness shall waters break
out, and streams in the desert.” Isa 35:6 (KJV)

“For I will pour water upon him that is thirsty, and

floods upon the dry ground: I will pour my spirit upon
thy seed, and my blessing upon thine offspring.” Isa 44:3
(KJV)
269
 “And it shall come to pass in that day, that the mountains
shall drop down new wine, and the hills shall flow with
milk, and all the rivers of Judah shall flow with waters,
and a fountain shall come forth of the house of the Lord,
and shall water the valley of Shittim.” Joel 3:18

The sojourner from whom the river breaks out would be those who were
taken into captivity. They are described as “forgotten of the foot” and the
conjunction of “feet” and “sojourning” occurs in a similar context relating
to Tyre:

“Is this your joyous city, whose antiquity is of ancient

days? her own feet shall carry her afar off to sojourn.”
Isa 23:7 (KJV)

The idea of captivity is conveyed by the KJV but not the other versions:

“…even the waters forgotten of the foot: they are dried up,
they are gone away from men (vwnam).” Job 28:4 (KJV)

The Hebrew translated “dried up” is better rendered as “brought low” or

“languish”; the picture is of a people in captivity, and the Hebrew for
“gone away” is better translated as “stagger”. This gives,

“…even the waters forgotten of the foot: they languish,

they are staggered from men (vwnam).” Job 28:4 (KJV
revised)

The text may echo Deuteronomy,

“I would have said, ‘I will cut them to pieces, I will

remove the memory of them from men (vwnam)’ …”
Deut 32:26 (NASB)

This text has the same conjunction of ideas: “from men” and
“forgetting”. Following this possible echo, Job would seem to be about
those who had gone on foot to sojourn in a foreign land and who were
forgotten by those left in Judah.

In the next verse (v. 5), it is said that bread will come from the land:

270
 “As for the land (#ra), out of it will come bread: and
under it, it is turned up like fire (va wmk).” Job 28:5 (KJV
revised)

We have made some changes to the KJV, which interprets the flow of the
argument as a contrast: as for the land, out of it bread will come. Here the
land is pictured as an oven1 from which bread will come, but meanwhile,
under it, there is a fire baking the bread. The thought seems to be that the
people are brought through fire; the dross is refined through fire. This
theme is not uncommon in later prophets (Zech 13:9, Mal 3:2), and it
should be distinguished from a fire of destruction. In Job, rather than
refined metals, the end result is bread.

The stone of the land (v. 6) is the place of the sapphire, and the land also
has the dust of gold. This thought seems to be picked up in Isaiah 54:

“O thou afflicted, tossed with tempest, and not

comforted, behold, I will lay thy stones with fair colours,
and lay thy foundations with sapphires.” Isa 54:11 (KJV)

This text is about restoration, and allows the suggestion that vv. 1-6 is
about Jerusalem and the future role of the priesthood: there is a place for
the silver that is the word of prophecy; the people will be like iron and
bronze to their enemies and the darkness will come to an end; the spirit
will be poured out upon those in captivity and bread will come from the
land; and Jerusalem will be a place for the sapphires of the priesthood.

7.2 Pathways—vv. 7-11

The next section moves away from the theme of “place” to the subject of
the “path”. This duality of theme is reflected in v. 23, “God
understandeth the way thereof, and he knoweth the place thereof” to/of
wisdom. Thus, while “wisdom” becomes explicit as the topic of the poem
from v. 12, it is present in the opening verses as a consideration of the
place for gold and sapphires (vv. 1, 6), and the path which no fowl of the
air knoweth (v. 7).

“That path no bird of prey knows, and the falcon’s eye

has not seen it. The proud beasts have not trodden it; the
lion has not passed over it.” Job 28:7-8 (RSV)

1There may be a rhetorical echo here with Hos 7:8 and Ephraim as a cake
not turned in an oven.
271
This path is unknown and unseen by birds and creatures. In contrast, God
“sees every precious thing” (v. 10). The contrast here is centred on
“seeing” and the knowledge that God has by way of his superior sight.
Hence, the poem will assert that God “looks” to the end of the earth.
This kind of “seeing” concerns God’s oversight of the affairs of the
nations.

The word (in its masculine form) for “path” is not common (5x) and is
used of God making a “way” for his purpose to be worked out:

“He made a way to his anger; he spared not their soul

from death, but gave their life over to the pestilence.” Ps
78:50 (KJV)

This path is not known by the “creatures”. The figure here is that the
creatures (birds of prey, lions) stand for the nations. For example, the
Hebrew word for “bird of prey” is used of a warring king in Isaiah:

“…calling a bird of prey1 from the east, the man of my

counsel from a far country. I have spoken, and I will
bring it to pass; I have purposed, and I will do it.” Isa
46:11 (RSV), cf. Isa 18:6, Jer 12:9, Ezek 39:4,

The RSV refers to “proud beasts” as equally ignorant of the “way”. The
Hebrew is literally “sons of pride”. The RSV, KJV and NASB treat “sons
of pride” as a reference to a kind of beast because of the parallel clause,
which has the word for lion.

The parallel clause refers to a lion “not passing over”. The KJV translates
the Hebrew as “pass by”, but the word is not common (10x) and is
translated elsewhere as “to be decked out” or “adorned” or a similar
cognate, (Job 40:10, Isa 61:10). In each case the text refers to Judah
“decked out” with a boastful pride. If Job echoes this usage, the poem is
here saying that “the lion is not decked out over this path of wisdom”, i.e.
Judah and the ruling princes (the proud beasts) may think they know the
course of events, but they are deluded.

The next verse is rendered differently by versions,

1 The most common suggestion for this “bird of prey” is Cyrus, however,
the terms of the oracle also fit an application to Sennacherib.
272
 “He putteth forth his hand upon the rock; he
overturneth the mountains by the roots.” Job 28:9 (KJV)

“He puts his hand on the flint; he overturns the

mountains at the base.” Job 28:9 (NASB)

“Man puts his hand to the flinty rock, and overturns

mountains by the roots.” Job 28:9 (RSV)

The RSV continues the mining theme and attributes this action to men;
the NASB is less explicit. The KJV is neutral, and reflects the MT insofar
as there is no word for “man” as the subject of the action. We propose
that the one who puts forth his hand is God, as there is a clear echo with
the “rock” in the wilderness. The Hebrew word for “rock” is also
rendered “flint” (KJV mg.) and it is not common (5x):

“Who led thee through that great and terrible wilderness,

wherein were fiery serpents, and scorpions, and drought,
where there was no water; who brought thee forth water
out of the rock of flint.” Deut 8:15 (KJV)

“Which turned the rock into a standing water, the flint

into a fountain of waters.” Ps 114:8 (KJV)

This echo conveys the idea of salvation. Following this echo, the text can
be read as asserting that God can save his people from the nations, just as
he saved them in the wilderness.

This sets up a political sense for the next set of figures (vv. 9-11):

• He overturneth the mountains by the roots.

• He cutteth out rivers among the rocks.

• His eye seeth every precious thing.

• He bindeth rivers (rhn) from weeping (ykb).

• He bringeth forth hidden things to light.

273
1) A “mountain” is a common symbol for a nation (Isa 42:15, 44:23,
54:10). Similarly, the idea of a “root” is used in relation to peoples (Isa
37:31). Accordingly, this figure is suitable to denote the fall of nations.

2) Rivers are symbols of nations (e.g. Isa 8:7) and the cutting of rivers
would therefore denote the rise of a nation.

3) There is a mixed figure in the idea of “binding a river from weeping”,

but the intent could be: those people who suffer (rivers) will be healed,
and they will stop weeping (Isa 15:2-3, 61:1, Hos 6:1).

Finally, Job says that God brings to light those things about his purpose
that are hidden.

7.3 Buying Wisdom—vv. 12-19

The overall concern of the poem is God’s governance of the nations and
the people of Judah. This is hidden both to those who belong to Judah
and those who belong to the nations. God can bring this knowledge to
light, but if he does not do this through the bestowal of the Spirit of
prophecy, man should rest content with the fear of the Lord.

Hence, Job says of wisdom that,

“It cannot be gotten for a chest (rwgs), neither shall silver

be weighed for the price thereof.” Job 28:15 (KJV
revised)

Wisdom cannot be “divined for money” (Mic 3:11), neither can it be

bought with the “gold of Ophir” (v. 16). Here there is an echo (using the
same two words) with Isaiah,

“I will make a man more precious (rqy) than fine gold;

even a man than the gold (~tk) of Ophir.” Isa 13:12
(KJV revised)

The point of Isaiah’s contrast is plausibly construed to be the same as Job:

a man of the Spirit (a precious man) can give the wisdom of prophecy,
and during the Assyrian invasion, this occurred as part of a widespread
bestowal of the Spirit. Job is saying that this wisdom could not be bought
with the gold of Ophir.

Accordingly, Job continues by saying that wisdom cannot be weighed with

the precious onyx or sapphire (v. 16). Here the text offers an ironical echo
274
with the “onyx” of the breastplate (Exod 25:7, Ezek 28:13), and the
recollection that the word of the Lord was “precious” (rqy, 1 Sam 3:1) in
the days of Samuel. The poetic assertion is tantamount to saying that
there was no wisdom emanating from the priesthood in the days of
Hezekiah.

With another echo to Isa 13:12, Job next says,

“Gold and glass cannot equal it, nor can it be exchanged

for jewels of fine gold.” Job 28:17 (RSV)

Here the Hebrew for “fine gold” occurs in Isaiah’s expression, “more
precious than fine gold”. The point is the same: the Spirit of prophecy is
not bought with a price; it is not “drawn out” ($vm1) of a soothsayer with
rubies (v. 18, KJV “price”).

And so Job concludes by saying,

“The topaz of Ethiopia shall not equal it; neither shall it

be valued with pure gold.” Job 28:19 (KJV)

While commentators recognize vv. 12-19 as asserting the unparalleled

value of wisdom, it remains to ask whether there is something more going
on in the text. Our proposal is that we have here a reference to the use of
the treasury of the king to secure political wisdom (advice).

7.4 The Source of Wisdom—vv. 20-28

The final section of this poem opens with a repetition of the thought of v.
12, but now the theme is one of the concealment of the wisdom of God.

“Seeing it is hid from the eyes of all living, and kept close
from the fowls of the air.” Job 28:21 (KJV)

Here the text echoes the tradition in Genesis that Eve was the “mother of
all living” who hid after she had had her eyes opened (Gen 3:20). The
wisdom of God is hid from the “eyes of all living”, and this may be a
figure for the survivors among the people of Judah, while the “fowls of

1 Here we follow the lead of the related verb to get the sense of this rare
noun (1x as a common noun, but as a proper noun it is “Meshech”); for
the common noun, see Ps 126:6.
275
the air” would be a typical symbol for the nations, from whom also this
wisdom was hidden (Jer 7:33, 15:3, 16:4, 19:7).1

In the context of a siege and the calamity of war in the land, it would be
natural for the poet to extend his thought to “destruction and death” as
personified figures who have only heard of the “report” of wisdom (v.
22). In contrast to them, it is only God who sees and understands the
place and the path of wisdom. He is omniscient because he looks at what
is going on in the ends of the earth (vv. 23-24). Here Job uses an Isaianic
expression “ends of the earth”: God is the creator of the ends of the
earth, and he searches the ends of the earth (Isa 40:28, 41:5, 9).

In the next few verses, the poem does not describe the wisdom of God by
identifying nations and detailing what will befall them. This kind of
language is replete in the Prophets; instead, the poem describes God’s
control of the nations in terms of his control over natural phenomena.

God looks to the ends of the earth and under the whole heaven, and
makes appropriate choices about the weather (vv. 24-27), but these
choices are about Judah and the nations. The theology seems to be the
same as that found in Isaiah:

“When he gave to the wind its weight, and meted out the
waters by measure.” Job 28:25 (RSV)

“Who hath measured the waters in the hollow of his

hand, and meted out heaven with the span, and
comprehended the dust of the earth in a measure, and
weighed the mountains in scales, and the hills in a
balance?” Isa 40:12 (KJV)

God “made a decree2 for the rain” (v. 26) of the storm of the Assyrian
invasion, and the intensity of this storm, its purpose, its extent and its
duration is something that lies with the wisdom of God. But at the same
time, God also made a “way for the lightning of the thunder” and this
“way” is a way of “salvation”, a “way” in which the thunder and lightning

1 The use of this symbol in Jeremiah rather than Isaiah is another pointer
to a date for Job late in the seventh century.
2 This word is used in Mic 7:11 for the end of this “decree”.

276
would be diverted and the people would be saved (Job 38:25). We shall
explore this theme later in connection with God’s speech.1

This poem concludes (v. 272) by stating that God anticipated what he was
going to do in the land, and that he declared beforehand that he was going
to do it, and moreover, he also specified the extent of his plan. Such a
statement implies an awareness of the pattern that God does not do
anything, unless he first declares his intentions through the prophets
(Amos 3:7). This in turn implies that while Job recognizes this truth, his
struggle in the previous speeches has been one of understanding these
prophecies, their extent, their purpose, and their duration and, also,
critically, their “justification”.

The question remains as to whether this poem about the wisdom of

providence is part of Job’s speech. This depends on how a commentator
reads Job’s speeches in Job 3-27. It also depends on how complex a
character a commentator sees in Job. As far as our treatment is
concerned, we have argued that Job is a conflicted man, and therefore we
have contrary thoughts presented in his speeches. He recognizes God’s
providential dealings (Job 9:5-10), and this is consistent with an
attribution of Job 28 to his mouth. But he is also convinced of his own
integrity and fails to understand why suffering and affliction has come
upon him; hence, Job seeks an opportunity to plead his case before God
(Job 23:2-7). This indicates that Job’s speeches are a search for
understanding, and in this way, the theme of Job 28—where can wisdom
be found—is Job’s enunciation of his quest.3

1 Apart from the two uses of “lightning” in Job noted here, the only other
use is Zech 10:1 in which it is associated with the restoration of the land.
2 The last verse of Job 28 is a conventional corollary to the “abrupt

conclusion” of v. 27 and it repeats the author’s description in Job 1:8 that

Job was a man that “feared God and eschewed evil”; here wisdom is to
“fear God and depart from evil”. The text uses ynda and this is the only
occurrence in Job. The title is common in Isaiah, Jeremiah and Ezekiel,
and the verse could be a later editorial footnote. However, following
Newsom, Moral Imagination, 171, we take it as an integral conclusion to the
poem of Job 28, and take ynda to be an ossified element of an aphorism.
3 See Newsom, Moral Imagination, 177.

277
8. Job 29—Resuming the Parable
Job 29 begins, “Moreover, Job continued his parable…” suggesting a
possible break in his speaking, but an earlier identical kind of break has
already occurred (Job 27:1). We have argued that this earlier
“continuation” of the parable occurs after Job “answers” Bildad’s
interruption (Job 26:1), an answer which takes up all of Job 26.1 So, it is
unlikely that v. 1 of Job 29 is designed to indicate a change of speaker. It
is more likely that Job 28 is spoken by Job, but it is not part of his
“lament-testimony”, which has taken up Job 23-24 and 27. Job 28 is
therefore something of a partial digression by Job. Job 29-31 resumes
Job’s lament.2

In the next three chapters, Job will finish his monologue. He will recall his
favoured past (Job 29), he will describe his current affliction and calamity
(Job 30), and he will avow his innocence (Job 31). This structure reflects
all his speeches and offers a summary.

Job begins by recounting the basis of his authority. This was prophetic
inspiration; he had a “candle” (v. 3) and a “light” from God, and the
“secret” (dws,3 v. 4, Job 15:8, Amos 3:7) of God was with his tabernacle
(as opposed to any other competing altar and temple in Jerusalem).4 It was
with this light that he navigated through the “darkness” of political
counsel (v. 3). When he was “young” he had his children (the people) and
butter and oil:

“When I washed my steps with butter, and the rock

poured me out rivers of oil…” Job 29:6 (KJV)

The word for “butter” is not common (9x) and only used in the Prophets
by Isaiah (Isa 7:15, 22). The Immanuel of Isaiah’s prophecy would eat
butter and honey:

“Butter and honey shall he eat, that he may know to

refuse the evil, and choose the good.” Isa 7:15 (KJV)

1 This is indicated by Job addressing Bildad, a feature otherwise absent in

his speech of the second day.
2 Westermann, Literary Genre, 51-63.
3 The alternative of “friendship” (RSV, NASB) seems less likely.
4 Hezekiah grew up in a Jerusalem with other temples and altars, and

therefore prophets and gods. In parabolic terms, this may explain Job’s
emphasis here of Yahweh’s tabernacle.
278
If this prophecy concerns Hezekiah, the choice of good and evil may very
well echo Job’s assertion that “good and evil” come from the Lord (Job
2:10).

Job’s description of his early life contains echoes of Davidic traditions of

kingship.

“Because I delivered the poor (yn[) that cried ([wvm), and

the fatherless, and him that had none to help him (rz[ al).
The blessing of him that was ready to perish came upon
me: and I caused the widow's heart to sing for joy.” Job
29:12-13 (KJV)1

“When the ear heard me, then it blessed me; and when
the eye saw me, it gave witness to me…I was eyes to the
blind, and feet was I to the lame. I was a father to the
poor: and the cause which I knew not I searched out.” Job
29:11-16 (KJV)

This rulership stands in the tradition of David and Solomon:

“For he shall deliver the needy when he crieth ([wvm); the

poor (yn[) also, and him that hath no helper (rz[ al). He
shall spare the poor and needy, and shall save the souls
of the needy.” Ps 72:12-13 (KJV)

The links with this psalm of Solomon reinforce the reading that Job is
symbolic of the Davidic king.2

A Davidic role is also indicated by Job when he says,

“I put on righteousness, and it clothed me: my judgment

was as a robe and a diadem.” Job 29:14 (KJV)

This echoes with Isaiah’s description of the ideal Davidic king,

1 Job’s religion was characterized by visiting the fatherless and widows and
in this he followed the Law (Deut 10:18).
2 There is therefore more in Job’s self-description than a village patriarch;

contrast Newsom, Moral Imagination, 187.

279
 “And righteousness shall be the girdle of his loins, and
faithfulness the girdle of his reins.” Isa 11:5 (KJV), cf.
59:17

An initial application of this birth-oracle (Isa 11:1) could well have been
Hezekiah. This is suggested by its collocation with the next two oracles
(Isa 11:10, 11-16), which relate the return of captives from Assyria to the
work of the “root of Jesse” (Isa 11:10).

The position that Job laments having lost is one of rulership:

“The princes refrained talking, and laid their hand on

their mouth. The nobles held their peace, and their
tongue cleaved to the roof of their mouth.” Job 29:9-10
(KJV)

Hezekiah had a particularly close relationship with his princes (of all the
kings of Judah, princes are mentioned the most in records of Hezekiah’s
reign). In his early reign they submitted to his rule (unlike the year of the
siege).

Job continues,

“When I went out to the gate through the city, when I

prepared my dwelling (bvwm) in the street!” Job 29:7 (KJV
revised)

If we are right in seeing Davidic echoes in Job’s language at this point, the
“city” here is (in the parable) Jerusalem, and the “street” and “gate”
belong to that city; of all the kings only Hezekiah is later mentioned in
connection with a street in the city (2 Chron 29:4, 32:6).

Job further claims that,

“I broke the jaw-teeth (h[ltm)1 of the unjust (lw[2), and

plucked the prey (@rj) out of his teeth.” Job 29:17 (KJV
revised)

1 Apart from Prov 30:14, the only other occurrence of this phrase is Joel
1:6, which is a reference to the teeth of the locust army (nation) of the
Northern invader—see Joel 2:20.
2 This term is rare (5x) and occurs once outside Job—Zeph 3:5 where it

refers to those in Jerusalem. In Job the usage is consistent with

280
His language uses the image of a lion’s prey in relation to an invading
nation; it is an image used elsewhere by Isaiah in relation to Judah (Isa
5:29) and Amos in relation to the Northern Kingdom (Amos 3:4). Job
claims to have taken the “prey” away from this lion rather than defeated
the lion in battle, and this could well refer to Hezekiah’s early campaigns
in the land (2 Kgs 18:4-8) at the beginning of any co-regency that he
shared with Ahaz. He may have appealed to the northerners to come
south before the decimation of their land by Assyria (2 Chron 29:10), and
thus escape being taken into captivity—some did escape the coming
wrath.

Continuing the application of Job’s language to this political context,

other political echoes emerge:

He expected to “die in his nest” (v. 18); this echoes with Deut 32:11 and
God’s declaration that he hovered as an eagle over the “nest” that was the
children of Israel. This figure of the “nest” is picked up by God in his
later speech and the description of the ostrich, which leaves her eggs in
her “nest” (Job 39:14). Isaiah also uses this figure of “eggs left in the nest”
to describe Assyria’s view of her prey (Isa 10:14).

He expected that his days would multiply “as the sand” (v. 18); this
echoes the Abrahamic promise, that the seed of Abraham would be
multiplied “as the sand” (Gen 22:17).1

He expected his “root” to open out and “dew” to lodge (!wl—Isa 1:21)
upon his branch (v. 19).2 The figure here is of “the people” considered as
a tree. Hezekiah is the only king to use the same Hebrew word for “root”
in his prayers, when he says, “And the remnant that is escaped of the
house of Judah shall yet again take root downward, and bear fruit
upward.” (2 Kgs 19:30). Here Hezekiah pictures the people as a tree and
describes an expectation that their root would spread out and they would
prosper.

Zephaniah, and here the unjust in Jerusalem have so identified with

Assyria in their policy of appeasement that Job can speak of his having
broken their jaw-teeth in his early reign.
1 The Hebrew comparative form is unique to Job 29:18 and Gen 22:17.
2 Job is here contradicting Bildad’s prediction—Job 18:16 and contrasting

his own despondency—Job 14:8-9.

281
He remembers when his glory was “new” and his bow was “renewed”
(Job 29:20), which could well be references to Hezekiah’s renewal of
Judah’s fortunes at the beginning of his reign, when he threw off the yoke
of Assyria and subjugated the Philistines (2 Kgs 18:7-8).

In the beginning, Job remembers that men (princes, nobles—vv. 9-10)

were subservient; an evident contrast with his experience in his present
trouble. He describes his speech in prophetic terms—“my speech
dropped (@jn) upon them” (v. 22). The figure here is of rain as a simile for
prophecy. The fairly rare Hebrew verb @jn is used of prophesying in
Amos 7:16, Mic 2:6, 11, Ezek 20:46, 21:2. This picture expands his earlier
image of “dew” (v. 19) resting upon his branch, an evident echo of Deut
32:2, “My doctrine shall drop as the rain, my speech shall distil as the
dew”. Hence, Job says that “they” (the rulers) waited for him “as for the
rain” (v. 23).

"I chose a way for them and sat as chief, And dwelt as a
king among the troops, As one who comforted the
mourners.” Job 29:25 (NASB)

Job summarises his position as a king of troops and as a comforter of

mourners. This language of comfort is only found in the Prophets in
Isaiah, and in prophecies of restoration (Isa 57:18, 61:2-3).

“To appoint unto them that mourn in Zion, to give unto

them beauty for ashes, the oil of joy for mourning, the
garment of praise for the spirit of heaviness; that they
might be called trees1 of righteousness, the planting of
the Lord, that he might be glorified.” Isa 61:3 (KJV)

9. Job 30—Describing his Condition

This next part of Job’s speech is divided into three sections marked by the
same Hebrew refrain, “But now (v. 1)…and now (v. 9)…and now (v.
16)”; each section has a distinct theme.

9.1 Internal Opponents

Job makes a strong contrast with his former blessings (Job 29) and his
present condition:

1The conjunction of the figures of “mourning” and “trees” occurs in Job

29:19, 25. Job was a “tree” of righteousness comforting those who
mourned.
282
 “But now they that are younger than I have me in derision
(qxf), whose fathers I would have rejected (sam) for
setting with the dogs of my flock.” Job 30:1 (KJV
revised)

The key word here is “derision” and it occurs in 2 Chron 30:10:1

“So the posts passed from city to city through the

country of Ephraim and Manasseh even unto Zebulun:
but they laughed (qxf) them to scorn, and mocked
them.” 2 Chron 30:10 (KJV)

This was the reaction of some tribes in Northern Israel to Hezekiah’s

appeal to come and celebrate the Great Passover. Those who mocked
were soon to be decimated by the Assyrians while Judah escaped.2 If we
follow this echo, Job’s lament is that now these mockers3 were laughing at
him, because the Assyrian had invaded Judah, and he himself had been
afflicted with a life-threatening disease. But, he says, he would have
disdained to set their “fathers” with the dogs of his flock. Here Job
echoes the pattern in 1 & 2 Kings where the rulers of Northern Israel
were given over to dogs (1 Kgs 14:11, 16:4, 21:19, 23-24, 22:38, 2 Kgs
9:10, 36). Job is clearly contemptuous of these mockers.

“Yea, whereto might the strength of their hands profit me,

in whom old age was perished?” Job 30:2 (KJV)

Job’s reaction to this mocking was to rehearse the consequences of the

Assyrian decimation of Northern Israel: these mockers may laugh at his
plight, but they themselves had had no military strength when they were
invaded. They were cut off in their prime; they had fled into the
wilderness, and they had eaten roots and hidden in holes in the ground.

1 This word only occurs in Chronicles and Kings in relation to Hezekiah

and Michal’s mocking of David (1 Chron 13:8 has a different sense).
2 It is possible that Hezekiah used the Great Passover as a parabolic

teaching device: the people were to see in it the prospect of deliverance

from the Assyrian threat.
3 Job says that these mockers were “younger” than him. This is may not

be a reference to young people (the word “youth” in Job 30:12 (KJV) is

better rendered as “rabble” (RSV)), but rather an identification of the
tribes that were particularly mocking him, i.e. Ephraim, Manasseh and
Zebulun were all “younger” tribes than “Judah”.
283
They mocked him now, but who were they to mock (vv. 2-7)? Job’s
lament here is directed towards God: he was now their (the mockers)
“byword” (v. 9).

“For want and famine they were barren; gnawing in the dry
wilderness (hyyc), yesterday’s (vma) desolation (hawv) and
waste (hawvm).” Job 30:3 (KJV revised)

Job’s language here is evocative of an event characterized as the “day of

the Lord”. He uses a phrase, “desolation and waste”, which occurs
elsewhere in Zeph 1:15,1

“That day is a day of wrath, a day of trouble and distress,

a day of desolation (hav) and waste (hawvm), a day of
darkness and gloominess, a day of clouds and thick
darkness,” Zeph 1:15 (KJV revised)

The word for “desolation” occurs on its own in other “day of the Lord”
verses such as Isa 10:3 and Ezek 38:9 (“storm”). This motif symbolizes
crises in either Judah or Northern Israel (for Northern Israel, see Amos
5:18, 20).

Job states that the mockers had been in a “dry wilderness”, and the word
he uses connects with the fate of the northern tribes,

“Lest I strip her naked, and set her as in the day that she
was born, and make her as a wilderness (hyyc), and set her
like a dry land, and slay her with thirst.” Hos 2:3 (KJV)

Job states that they had been driven out “from the back” and “cried after”
as a thief,

“From the back (wg2) they were driven forth (vrG); they
shouted ([wr) after them as a thief.” Job 30:5 (KJV
revised)

1 Apart from this text, the only other occurrence of the phrase is Job
38:27.
2 Commentators offer alternative meanings for the Hebrew, but the few

occurrences of the word elsewhere indicate “the back”—Isa 38:17, 50:6,

51:23, Prov. 10:13, 19:29, 26:3. The NASB has “from the community”
and the RSV has “from among men”, but these alternatives presume that
284
We suggest that the image here is the driving of captives using rods upon
their backs, and of the conquerors raising a shout of triumph over the
captives (Pss 41:11, 47:1). The content of the shout was that these
Israelites were nothing more than thieves in the land and illicit possessors
of something that was not rightfully theirs (2 Chron 20:11).

“All their wickedness is in Gilgal: for there I hated them:

for the wickedness of their doings I will drive (vrG) them
out of mine house, I will love them no more: all their
princes are revolters.” Hos 9:15 (KJV)

They were driven to dwell in “holes” in the ground (1 Sam 14:11) and on
mountain sides (v. 6, Jer 4:291); they were driven to “bray” with bushes
and congregate with “nettles” (v. 7). Here Job indicates the surrounding
territories into which the northerners fled (if they could). He does this by
using figures of speech associated with specific locales: thus the northern
tribes “bray” with the wild ass, i.e. Ishmael (Job 6:5, 39:5, Gen 16:12)
“among bushes” (Gen 21:15); and they congregated under “nettles”—the
region around Sodom and Gomorrah (Zeph 2:9).

These northerners were now mocking Job, even though all this had
happened to them (v. 9). They were children of “no name” (KJV mg.), i.e.
no longer “of the name Israel”, and children “of fools”, whipped from the
land (v. 8, RSV). The cause of their abuse was God:

“Because he [God] hath opened my residue (rty2) and

afflicted me (hn[3), they have also let loose the bridle
(!sr) before me.” Job 30:11 (KJV revised)

Here Job describes God opening, perhaps laying bare, what is left of his
life, and it is this situation that particularly prompts his adversaries to
action. Their action is described with a rare (4x) word that occurs in Isa
30:28, where it is stated (in an eighth century context) that God will place

“from the back” does not fit the patriarchal story; in offering a Hezekian
reading, we can follow the MT.
1 This is the only other occurrence of the Hebrew for “mountain-side”.
2 This is a common word used to mean something that is left, a

remainder, or the rest of something. Hezekiah uses the word in Isa 38:10
in the expression “I am deprived of the residue of my years”.
3 This is a common Hebrew word used for affliction; examples relevant to

the eighth century would be 2 Kgs 17:20 and Nah 1:12.

285
“a bridle (!sr1) in the jaws of the people, causing them to err” (i.e. causing
the people of Judah to err). In Job the bridle is loosed, and the figure is
the converse — it means a loose mouth. Here Job asserts that this bridle
has been let “loose” as a result of a policy of appeasement on the part of
his adversaries.2

Job laments the speech of these adversaries among the people. Job says that
they “abhorred” him, echoing Amos 5:10 (Mic 3:9), and in some sense
their actions were a “spitting”3 in the face (Job 16:10). They were a
“rabble” (v. 12, RSV), attempting to change his direction (“feet”, e.g. Pss
40:12, 56:13, 119:59). Their way was “destruction” (dya—“calamity”,
echoing Deut 32:35, Obad 1:13); they advocated a policy of seeking
alliances, but there was “no helper” (rz[—Isa 30:7, 31:3). All this, Job
says, happened in the “desolation” (v. 14—hawv) of the Assyrian invasion
(Isa 10:3-54).

Job goes on to say,

“As a breach (#rpk) wide they come; amid the crash they
roll on.” Job 30:14 (RSV revised)

The comparison “as a breach” is rare (4x) and significantly occurs in

Isaiah 30:

“Wherefore thus saith the Holy One of Israel, Because

ye despise this word, and trust in oppression and
perverseness, and stay thereon: Therefore this iniquity
shall be to you as a breach (#rpk) ready to fall, swelling
out in a high wall, whose breaking cometh suddenly at an
instant. And he shall break it [the treaty] as the breaking
of the potters’ vessel that is broken in pieces; he shall not
spare: so that there shall not be found in the bursting of
it a sherd to take fire from the hearth, or to take water
withal out of the pit.” Isa 30:12-14 (KJV)

1 The usage in Ps 32:9 sets the figurative meaning for the word.
2 Job 41:13 states that no one can take a double-bridle to Leviathan.
3 The only other occurrence of this word outside Job is in Isa 50:6.
4 In addition to hawv, the context of Isa 10:3-5 includes the motifs of

speaking lies (v. 1) and a lack of concern for the “widows and fatherless”
(v. 2), which are further points of contact with Job’s speech (Job 29:12-
13). Job is engaging Eliphaz in a ping-pong argument (Job 22:9).
286
The context of this oracle in Isaiah is the reliance the people of Jerusalem
were placing on an Egyptian alliance (Isa 30:2). Yahweh’s verdict on this is
that the treaty will be like a sudden breach in a wall., and it will be broken
once the Assyrian hears of it and turns on Jerusalem (Isa 30:14).

Following this echo, Job’s parallel comment is that the Assyrians come
through this breach, i.e. the Assyrians hear of the treaty with Egypt and
this is the catalyst that leads them to renege on the state of appeasement
and turn on Jerusalem, i.e. the “wall” of the Egyptians proves futile.

Job concludes this section of his speech by saying,

“Terrors (hhlb) are turned upon me: they pursue my

nobility (hbydn1) as the wind: and my salvation (h[wvy) has
passed by (rb[) as a cloud.” Job 30:15 (KJV revised)

There is bitterness here in the ironical echoes of the deliverance from

Egypt: Job’s salvation has “passed over” him as a cloud. The Hebrew
word for “terrors” is not common (10x).2 It occurs in Isa 17:14,

“And behold at eveningtide terror (hhlb); and before the

morning he is not. This is the portion of them that spoil
us, and the lot of them that rob us.” Isa 17:14 (KJV
revised)

This text occurs in an oracle describing Assyrian incursions into Syria and
Ephraim and corresponding “days of the Lord” for Damascus and
Ephraim—hence, Job’s words that “terrors” were now turned on him
means that he was being similarly attacked.3

1 This is a rare word (3x) and it occurs significantly in Isa 32:8 (RSV) in
connection with Hezekiah; this oracle is about a king who would reign in
righteousness instead of nobles, an expression of hope that fits the
circumstance of the political elite ruling in locum for Hezekiah during his
illness.
2 Job 18:11, 14, 24:17, 20.
3 Seitz, Isaiah 1-39, 141-143, notes the possibility of secondary shaping in

the oracle of Isaiah 17. The theme of sudden protection of Jerusalem (v.
14) is found in oracles that deal with the Assyrian crisis (Isa 29:5-8, 31:4-
5), and this may explain the language of Isa 17:12-14.
287
9.2 Physical Affliction
In the last section of Job 30 (vv. 16-31) Job turns to his physical affliction
and directs his remarks to God. The language is both personal and
political, and fits an application to Hezekiah. Conventional patriarchal
readings highlight its personal application; here we will focus on a political
reading.

• Job says (v. 29) that he is a brother to “dragons” and companion to

“owls”; whether the Hebrew words denote these two creatures is not
relevant, and versions differ in their renderings. The conjunction of
these two animals occurs significantly in Mic 1:8, “Therefore I will
wail and howl; I will go stripped and naked: I will make a wailing like
the dragons, and mourning as the owls”. Here the prophet is linked to
wailing dragons and owls because of the judgments of God that will
be meted out on Northern Israel and Judah by the Assyrians.1

• The “days of affliction” (vv. 16, 27) have met (RSV) him and prevent
any recovery. The military and political overtones of such “affliction”
are illustrated in the later words of Jeremiah, “Judah has gone into
exile under affliction…” (Lam 1:3, cf. vv. 7, 9, NASB).

• Job’s bones “pick at”2 him during the night (v. 17); here his “bones”
are his kinsmen3 who “pick” at him, adversaries in Jerusalem.

• Job’s “gnawers”4 take no rest in gnawing him (v. 17). These are those
in the city who were gnawing at the dry and desolate ground, the
chaos and confusion all around them (v. 3).

• By “great force”1 Job’s garment was changed (v. 18), that is, by the
great force of the Assyrian superpower, Job’s position of rule had

1 The only other texts where the two creatures occur together are Isa
34:13, 43:20; see also Ps 102:6.
2 Translations offer “pierce” (KJV, NASB) or “rack” (RSV), but the verb

is not common (6x) and better thought of as a picking or plucking (Num

16:14, Judg 16:21, 1 Sam 11:2, Prov 30:17, Isa 51:1).
3 On this metaphorical interpretation of “flesh and bones”, see our

comments on Job 2:5.

4 Translations suggest “sinews” (KJV) or gnawing pains (NASB, RSV).

The word is rare (2x) occurring elsewhere only in Job 30:3 where it is
rendered as “those who gnaw” (NASB, RSV) the desolate ground.
288
 been changed (Ps 69:11). The garment that has been changed was the
one with which Job clothed himself, viz., his righteous judgments for
the people (Job 29:14).

• The “great force” was like a tunic or coat collar (v. 18, NASB, RSV)
around the neck. This reflects the description of the “stranglehold” of
the Assyrian superpower around the neck of Judah (Isa 8:8, 30:28).

• Job’s skin is “black” and this corresponds to the effects of famine (v.
30, Lam 5:10). His bones are burned from the “heat”, because God
was not being a shadow from the “heat” of the invasion (v. 30, Ps
102:3, Isa 4:6, 25:4-5). His bowels are boiled because of the troubles
in the land (v. 27, Lam 1:20, 2:11).

• Job is trodden down in the mire (v. 19), and this is the language of the
Assyrian invader (Isa 10:6).

• God is “cruel” to him (rzka, v. 21). The word is a variant of yrzka

which occurs in texts such as Isa 13:9, where the day of the Lord is
said to be cruel and one that lays the land to waste. It is a word used
in connection with invading armies (Jer 6:23, 30:14, 50:42).2

• God “dissolves”3 (v. 22) Job’s “wisdom” (KJV mg.4), which

comments upon how events (the invasion and its probable success)
contradict Job’s wisdom that the people should be reliant on Yahweh.

• Job is lifted up to the “wind” of the Assyrian invasion (v 22, Isa 25:4,
27:8, 32:2, Hos 12:1, 13:15). This imagery of the storm is common in
the eighth century prophets.

1 The only other occurrence of this expression is Ps 33:16 (“great

strength”, KJV), which is a military context.
2 These links are noted by Newsom, Moral Imagination, 193.
3 The Hebrew word occurs in texts such as Isa 14:31, Amos 9:5, 13, which

are about the dissolution of the state: God’s dissolution of Judah was at
the same time dissolving Job’s political stance.
4 The KJV mg. offers “wisdom” and Habel, Job, 416, suggests “success”.

These two options follow the marginal variation in the MT, but the idea
of “sound wisdom” is better, as this reflects usage in texts such as Isa
28:29 and Mic 6:9, which are the only two prophetic texts to carry the
word.
289
• Job is in a “heap of ruins” (v. 24, RSV), which is a rare description
(4x) specifically associated with Jerusalem (Mic 3:12, Jer 26:18, Ps 79:1
and Mic 1:6). Jeremiah explicitly cites Micah by name with regard to
this description of Jerusalem.

• Job “mourns”, but he does not invoke “the sun”1 in worship (Job
31:26) or for guidance.

The most astonishing charge that Job makes is that God has turned to
cruelty with regard to him and hated him (v. 21, Job 16:9). When he
“waited” for good, i.e. salvation (v. 26, Gen 49:18, Ps 25:5), the “evil” of
the Assyrian invasion came (Mic 1:12); when he waited for the “light” of
prophecy, there came only the darkness of false counsel (Isa 29:18).

There is here in Job’s accusation toward God an echo2 with Isa 63:10,
“therefore he was turned to be their enemy”. The Hebrew verb for
“turned” is the same as that used in v. 21, “thou art turned to be cruel to
me”. Job is echoing the response of Yahweh to the rebellion of the
children of Israel in the wilderness and making an implicit comparison to
his day. He is asking whether he was like them, rebellious, and whether
this was why God had “turned to cruelty” towards him.

10. Job 31—Declaration of Innocence

This last section of Job’s final speech lists a number of possible sins which
are then disavowed. This disavowal constitutes Job’s final declaration of
innocence. Our interest in this list is whether there is a parabolic layer of
meaning. Job opens by saying,

“I have made a covenant with my eyes; how (hm) should

I diligently consider a virgin?” Job 31:1 (RSV revised)

While this is traditionally taken to be a statement of virtue, the reference

to a virgin could just as easily carry a figurative meaning and refer to
Jerusalem (Isa 37:22). In this case, Job’s opening lament is a despondent
remark about how he should view the welfare of Zion.3 This reading is
likely in view of Job’s next remarks about inheritance,

1 This is a rare word for the sun (6x) and it occurs significantly in Isa
24:23, 30:26. Isaiah 24 suggests a political interpretation for Job.
2 This echo is suggested by Dhorme, Job, clvii.
3 This may mirror the emphasis upon Hezekiah’s weeping (Isa 38:3, 14).

Pope notes the suggestion, Job, 229, that the “virgin” might be the virgin
290
 “For what portion of God is there from above, and what
inheritance of the Almighty from on high?” Job 31:2
(KJV)

Job understands that Judah has an allotted portion from God, and he
wonders about their prospects; this echoes with Micah:

“In that day shall one take up a parable against you, and
lament with a doleful lamentation, and say, We be utterly
spoiled: he hath changed the portion of my people: how
hath he removed it from me! turning away he hath
divided our fields.” Mic 2:4 (KJV)

The “portion” has changed and what can Judah expect from God. The
notion of “inheritance” here ties up with the use of the word in relation to
the promise of land which was given as an “inheritance” (e.g. Num 16:14,
18:20, 26:53, 32:18, 33:54, Deut 4:21, Josh 11:23, Ps 105:11). So, Job’s
lament is about what the Almighty could be giving to Judah as their “land
of inheritance” when it is overrun by an enemy.

“Is it not calamity (dya) to the unrighteous one (lw[), and

disaster (rkn) for (l) those who work iniquity?” Job 31:3
(NASB revised)

Here Job acknowledges that the calamity of the invasion was a calamity
equally for the “unrighteous one”—the leader of the government (Job
18:21, 29:17). The parallel clause uses the word “disaster” for “calamity”.
This is a rare word occurring elsewhere only in the eighth century prophet
Obadiah,

“Do not gloat over your brother’s day, the day of his
disaster (rkn). And do not rejoice over the sons of Judah
In the day of their destruction; yes, do not boast in the
day of their distress.” Obad 1:12 (NASB revised)

Obadiah also uses the same Hebrew word for “calamity” three times in
the next verse,

queen of heaven, the goddess Ishtar, and that here Job forswears such
worship.
291
 “Thou shouldest not have entered into the gate of my
people in the day of their calamity (dya); yea, thou
shouldest not have looked on their affliction in the day
of their calamity (dya), nor have laid hands on their
substance in the day of their calamity (dya)” Obad 1:13
(KJV)

Disaster was for the “workers of iniquity”, and these are the political elite
in Jerusalem who oppose Hezekiah. The phrase (!wa yl[p, 18x) is mainly
used in the Psalms and twice in the Prophets and Job. Isaiah uses the
phrase of those in Jerusalem who sought help from Egypt at the height of
the Assyrian crisis:

“Yet he also is wise and will bring disaster and does not
retract his words, but will arise against the house of
evildoers and against the help of the workers of iniquity
(!wa yl[p).” Isa 31:2 (NASB)

The Jerusalem focus of this expression is also seen in the Psalms, and a
clear example is Psalm 101:

“I will early destroy all the wicked of the land; that I may
cut off all the workers of iniquity (!wa yl[p) from the city
of the Lord.” Ps 101:8 (KJV revised)

From this initial statement of “the obvious”, Job moves on to reflect on

his innocence:

“Doth not he see my ways, and count all my steps?” Job

31:4 (KJV)

This may be a tone of exasperation, as if to say, God does not see that his
steps are true. Job then recounts his “virtue” in a long series of “if”
statements declaring his innocence. While on one level they attest
personal virtues, on another level intertextual echoes allow a reader to
contextualize them in relation to Hezekiah’s life. This makes Job’s
declaration of innocence an appeal: in effect he says that he is not like
those around him and should not suffer their fate.

We can set out the contrasts in the following table:

292
 Job’s Assertion Contextualization
v. 5a If Job has walked with Like the people who were
“vanity,” offering “vain” oblations—
Isa1:13
v. 5b or used deceitful weights, Like the people who were using
deceitful weights—Mic 6:11
v. 6 then God should weigh him Just as he weighs the nations—
in the balances. Isa 40:15
v. 7 If Job has soiled hands, Like the rulers who did evil with
both hands—Mic 7:3
v. 8a then let his enemies eat As it says in Lev 26:16, a fitting
what he sows, punishment for the nation
v. 8b and let his “seed”1 be A reference to succession and
rooted out. inheritance of government—Isa
40:24
v. 9 If Job’s heart has been Like Ephraim whose heart was
enticed by a woman, “silly” with Assyria and Egypt—
Hos 7:11
v. 10 then let others have Let “the people” be taken away
relations with his “wife”.2 from him and given to others
v. 11 Such enticement would be It would be lewdness like that of
lewdness and iniquity for the Benjamin (Judg 20:6), and an
judges,3 iniquity to be punished by the
nations (Deut 32:31)
v. 12a and such lewdness would As it states in the “lewdness law”
be a destructive fire; of Lev 20:14—fire is the fitting
punishment
v. 12b it would also root out his Of which Hezekiah had much (2
“increase”. Chron 32:28
v. 13a If Job has despised “his As it appears God has despised
male servant”, or “his “his servant”—Jer 33:264
maidservant”,

1 This word is unique to Job and Isaiah.

2 The Hebrew is euphemistic, and the verbs for “grind” and “bow down”
are only used in the Prophets by Isaiah.
3 This is a rare word (3x) occurring as well in Exod 21:22 and Deut 32:31.
4 The form of the Hebrew for “my servant” and “despise” is shared

between Job 31:13 and Jer 33:26.

293
 Job’s Assertion Contextualization
v. 13b when they brought As it appears God has done to
controversies against him, Hezekiah, when he had a
controversy with Judah—Hos
12:2, Isa 34:8
v. 14a what shall he do when That is, when God rises to act to
God rises, punish
v. 14b and when God visits, how That is, when God “visits” in
shall he turn him away?1 punishment, Job would have
nothing to turn such punishment
away
v. 15 Did not God make Job and That is, Job viewed “the servant”
“him” the womb? as his equal
v. 16 If Job has withheld “the As those in Jerusalem had done
poor” from pleasure, or caused to “the poor”, “widows” and
the eyes of “the widow” to fail, “orphans” (Isa 10:2)2
v. 17 or refused food to “the
orphan”,
v. 18 for from his youth he has
been a father to the fatherless
and looked after widows;
v. 19 If Job has not clothed “the As was the case in Northern
needy”; Israel before the Fall of
Samaria—Amos 2:6, 4:1, 8:4, 6,
cf. Isa 32:7
v. 20 If Job has not provided As required by the Law—Deut
fleeces of sheep for “the needy”; 18:43

1 The form of the Hebrew here occurs 8x in Amos out of a total of 12x
and is typically “I will (not) turn away”. It is possible therefore that the
text is echoing Amos. In Amos, God states that he would not turn away
from punishment; similarly, Job is saying that if he had committed
lewdness, he could not turn God away from his punishment.
2 Neglect of “widows and orphans” is a concern of the Law and a concern

of Isa 1:17, 23. The neglect of “the poor” was a complaint of Amos prior
to the Fall of Northern Israel—Amos 4:1, 5:11; hence, Job’s declaration
of innocence.
3 The echo with Deut 18:4 and Job 31:20 lies in rare word for “fleece”

(4x) occurring in the Deuteronomy text and the figure of “priestly

blessing” in Job 31:20.
294
 Job’s Assertion Contextualization
v. 21 If Job lifted up his hand The “help” was sought from
against the orphans because he Egypt (Isa 20:6, 31:1-2); even at
saw “help” in the gate, this time of false confidence, Job
did not lift up has hand against
the orphans
v. 22a then let my shoulder- A figure for rule—Isa 9:6
blade fall from the shoulder,
v. 22b and let my arm be broken The “reed” of Egyptian help—
from its “reed”.1 Isa 36:6
v. 23a For the “calamity” is from This “calamity” is the Assyrian
God and is a “terror”, (NASB) invasion (Isa 24:17-18, “fear”—
Job 3:25) and a “terror” (Obad
1:13, “calamity”)
v. 23b it is the “majesty” of This is the Assyrian invasion—
God. (NASB) see Hab 1:6-7 for a use of the
Hebrew for “majesty” as a
description of the later invasion
of the Chaldeans
v. 24 If Job has put his Gold and fine gold is the tribute
confidence in gold or his trust in necessary to effect alliances (Isa
fine gold; 13:12)
v. 25a If Job has rejoiced As he might have done in the
because he thought he had a days of his revolt against Assyria
great army,2
v. 25b or because his hand had Allies that had joined him in the
acquired “much”;3 revolt of 705-704

1 This is the normal Hebrew for “reed” or “branch” and its use here fits
the political dimension of a mixed figure of an “arm” relying on a “reed”
for support.
2 The Hebrew is the normal word for an army or a host; the KJV, NASB

and RSV opt for “wealth” and exclude a military/political dimension to

Job, but this choice is not common in the KJV (10x out of 243x).
3 This word is unique to Job (6x) and Isaiah (3x); in Isaiah it is used for

God’s army (Isa 28:2 has “hand” and “much” (KJV, “mighty”) in
common with Job).
295
 Job’s Assertion Contextualization
v. 26a If Job beheld “the Light”1 A reference to an accusation that
when it “shined”,2 or the moon he worshipped the sun and
walking in splendour, moon, using a common figure
for the moon walking across the
sky
v. 27 and had his heart As Ephraim had been a “silly”3
“enticed”, or blown a kiss, dove—Hos 7:11, cf. Job 31:9
v. 28 then this is “iniquity” for Echoing Josh 24:27
the judges, for he would have
denied God.
v. 29a If Job rejoiced at the Rejoicing over those enemies
destruction of them that hated4 who have been destroyed by the
him Assyrian army
v. 29b or “roused” himself when And rousing himself (Job 3:8,
evil befell him; 17:8) to take military advantage
of such circumstances
v. 30 (No, I have not allowed my Whereas God had devoured the
mouth to sin By asking for his land with a “curse”—Isa 24:6
life in a curse.) (NASB)
v. 31 Have the men of my tent5 Job’s avowal of earlier
not said, ‘Who can find one who hospitality, but here they are
has not been satisfied with his figures for the safety offered in
meat ‘? (NASB) Jerusalem
v. 32 The alien has not lodged
outside, For I have opened my
doors to the traveller.

1 The KJV, RSV and NASB translate the Hebrew as “sun” but it is the
ordinary word for “light” rather than “sun”. Whilst a reference to the sun
is certain, the use of “the light” alludes to the use of this term in the
creation account of Gen 1 and the use of the sun for “signs and seasons”.
This was the use made of the sun by the astrologers of the day, and here
Job disavows such worship.
2 This word is a homonym with the ordinary Hebrew for “to praise”. The

pun here seems to be that Job disavowed the praise of the sun, even when
it shined favourably upon its subjects.
3 This is the same verb as “enticed” in Job.
4 Typical uses of the form of this Hebrew word are Num 10:35, Deut

32:41, 2 Sam 22:41, Ps 68:1.

5 This motif is found in Jer 10:20; see also Isa 33:20.

296
 Job’s Assertion Contextualization
v. 33 Have I covered my The great multitude is the
transgressions like Adam, by confederate army with Assyria—
hiding my iniquity in my bosom, Joel 3:14, Isa 13:4, 29:7-8, 31:4,
(NASB) 33:3
v. 34 because I feared1 the great
multitude, and the contempt of
families dismayed2 me (NASB)

Job ends his avowal of innocence with an expression of desire for a

“hearing”:

“Oh that I had one to hear me! Behold, here is my

signature; Let the Almighty answer me! And the
indictment which my adversary has written.” Job 31:35
(NASB)

Job (ironically) requests that the Almighty present him with a book of
charges against him, so that he might stand before God and “list his
steps” (v. 37). Job then concludes with a final note about the land:

“If my land cry against me, or that the furrows likewise

thereof complain; If I have eaten the fruits thereof
without money, or have caused the owners thereof to
lose their life: Let thistles grow instead of wheat, and
cockle instead of barley.” Job 31:38-40 (KJV)

The focus on “my land” evokes the symbology of the king and his land.
Job’s final words about “the land” are appropriate because all his speeches
have concerned the invasion of the land.

11. Conclusion
The question arises as to the role and function of this continued avowal
of innocence. Obviously, it is important for the author of Job to present
Job as innocent; this is an important idea that he shares with Isaiah’s
picture of the Suffering Servant. But the prologue proposes that the issue
of the book is whether Job serves God for nothing, that is, whether there
is such a thing as disinterested righteousness in this life. The book is not about

1Isaiah is the only prophet to use this verb—e.g. Isa 2:19, 21.
2 The Hebrew is more likely to be “dismay” than “terrify” (NASB)
because these are the political families of Jerusalem that oppose Job and
might have caused him to hide his “sins”.
297
whether or not Job is innocent, but whether he will remain innocent under
trial. His continued avowal of innocence is therefore a puzzle given the
explicitly stated purpose of the book.

Expressing this problem differently, disinterested righteousness is not a

topic of discussion between the dialogue participants. Instead, the
discussion has concerned whether Job is innocent and suffering
undeservedly. The presupposition of this discussion is that suffering as
such is not undeserved and that there must be a reason for Job’s suffering,
i.e. his sin. The whole dialogue revolves around this crux, and Job and the
friends share its implied doctrine of retribution.

This problem can be solved in the following way: the author is presenting
the whole dialogue as an example of disinterested service. The content of
the dialogue shows that Job continues to serve God with nothing as a
reward. He continues to serve God because he passionately discusses
God; he wants to know the reason for his suffering; he wants to meet
God and hear his answer. Job does not curse God, nor does he renounce
his beliefs concerning God. Job and the friends believe the doctrine of
retribution (the good receive rewards, the wicked are punished), but the
book tests this doctrine in the person of Job: does he behave only in
accordance with this doctrine. The friends try to get him to behave in
accordance with this doctrine by getting him to repent of some sin and
receiving God’s favour in return. In response, Job maintains his
innocence.

Accordingly, the dialogue illustrates disinterested service, because Job sits

on an ash-heap—he has nothing—and yet he continues to defend God.1
Job defends God by insisting that he will save Judah and Jerusalem, even
though he does not understand precisely how this can be done as things
stand, or why he and the nation have been afflicted. By contrast, the
friends do not defend God; they contradict God by insisting Job has
sinned and as a consequence he and the nation are being punished.

In parabolic terms, Job is a righteous Davidic king in Jerusalem, suffering

as such, and with nothing in return for that suffering, facing a hopeless
situation. The “nothing” offered by Satan is the absence of any hope in
respect of the promises that God has made to the fathers of the nation.
This demonstration of “nothing” is complete, because Hezekiah faces the
dissolution of the kingdom and captivity. While he might have accepted

1The dialogue does show that Job has things, for instance, a household,
but the point is that he has been reduced to nothing.
298
the captivity of the Northern Kingdom, the end of Judah represents a
more devastating event. It means that the promises to Abraham, to
Moses, and to David are empty. In order to demonstrate this emptiness,
Satan devastates the land with overwhelming force and eliminates all hope
of deliverance.

In the face of this catastrophe, Hezekiah could have allied with Assyria or
Egypt and chosen vassal status (following Ahaz’ policies), but this would
have rejected God (these are the policies of the “wicked ones”). It would
have shown that in the absence of hope, there is no point in serving the
God of Israel. The fact that Job struggles to understand his affliction and
the wisdom of God shows a continuing disinterested service on his part.

The implication of Satan’s challenge is that innocence is a function of self-

interest. The compliment to this supposition is illustrated by the friends
who link repentance to a restoration of favour; atoning for guilt therefore
is as much an act of self-interest as seeking to avoid guilt. The challenge
of the narrative is therefore carried forward into the dialogue: Job can
ameliorate his circumstances with confession, but only at the price of
displaying self-interest; no other possibility is presented. The deity can be
vindicated only if Job maintains his innocence in the face of destitution,
i.e. with no rewards in this life and no hope for the future.

The prologue offers closure to the dynamic set up by the challenge of

Satan, insofar as Job affirms that “good and evil” alike come from God
(Job 2:10). However, the dialogue is not inconsistent with this closure
because it illustrates the challenge worked out in a mental conflict
experienced by Job. The dialogue extends the test placed upon Job
beyond that of his “boil”, and his wife’s advice, to a persistent offer of
self-interest by the friends. The expectation engendered in the reader by
the prologue and the dialogue is that either Job will admit some infraction
and be restored to favour and thus vindicate Satan, or he will maintain his
innocence in a state of continuing destitution, and thus vindicate the deity.

The book of Job therefore is not about the problem of innocent suffering,
and no answer is needed from God to explain Job’s suffering; no
justification is needed. The prologue has set up the question of
disinterested service, and the book needs to demonstrate this, and it does
so insofar as it records no fall from service on the part of Job.

What is required to complete the book is an explanation of why God has

brought the Assyrian into the land, which is to shake the wicked out of

299
the land (Job 38:13), and how God will miraculously deliver Job from the
calamity that has come upon him.

300
 CHAPTER SIX
Elihu’s Speech
1. Introduction
Elihu’s speech poses a problem for commentators, who often regard it as
secondary to the book; a speech added to the book by a different hand.1
Some scholars have proposed that the speech was added by the same
author but at a later date in a second edition. This would account for
differences of language and style, Elihu’s summarization and citation of
the earlier speeches,2 and the supplementary character of the arguments
that exist in the speech.3 Many books in the Hebrew Bible were built up
over a period of time by their authors (and others). In terms of vocabulary
unique to Elihu, there are a greater number of Aramaisms, but this is too
uncertain to date Elihu’s speeches to a later hand rather than the original
author.

Determining whether Elihu’s speech is in some sense “secondary” is

beyond the scope of our study. Regardless of any answer to this question,
the speech is evidently designed to dovetail with what precedes and what
follows it in the book. So, for example, Elihu quotes Job’s earlier
speeches; his introduction onto the scene is tied to the previous dialogue;
and his speech both anticipates themes in God’s speeches, and his speech
transitions towards God’s speech in its mention of a whirlwind (Job 37:9).
Accordingly, we will treat the speech as integral to the design of the book
of Job and bracket the question of whether it is a secondary addition.

1 For example, see Pope, Job, xxvii, Newsom, Moral Imagination, 200-202.
Habel, Job, 32-33, 36-37, argues that Elihu is integral to the design of the
book.
2 Examples of citation include Job 33:9-11/13:24, 27, 34:5/27:2.
3 Some other arguments that are proposed include: i) Job 38:1 addresses

Job as if he were the last person to speak, ii) Elihu is absent in the
prologue and epilogue, iii) Job does not respond to Elihu, iv) Elihu’s
name suggests Israelite tribal associations, unlike the names of the three
friends, v) the prose introduction of Elihu is different to the introduction
of the three friends, and vi) the style of Elihu’s refutation of Job is
different to that of the friends.
301
The role of Elihu in the book is a puzzle. He claims to be the arbiter that
Job has requested in his protestations towards God (Job 9:33, 33:6). This
is indicated by Elihu’s echo of Job’s fear (t[b, Job 9:34, 33:7, cf. 16:21),
which Job mentions in his request for an arbiter.1 However, as such, he
finds for God rather than Job (Job 33:12, 36:2). He accuses Job of
speaking words without knowledge (Job 34:35) and answering for wicked
men (Job 34:36, 35:16). He holds that Job is not right to insist upon his
innocence (Job 35:2). The puzzle in this stance is why it is made at this
point in the structure of the book and whether it expresses a point of view
appropriate to the Assyrian Crisis.

Elihu’s position in the book is that of an observer of the dialogue, a

commentator upon what has been said by Job and the friends. His role is
not to debate the cause of Job’s suffering and whether he has sinned in
such a way as to merit the punishment of God. His role is to appraise the
speeches of Job and the friends. This kind of character in the book does
not necessarily indicate that Elihu is a secondary addition to the book
either by the author or a later hand. It is a perfectly logical option for the
original author of the book to have included such an appraisal of the
speeches in the mouth of a character, and particularly Job’s speeches at
this point in the book.

2. Job 32—Elihu’s Opening Words

The whole of this chapter is given over to Elihu’s lengthy introduction of
himself, and therefore there is little that is relevant to our purpose of
setting Elihu’s speech in an eighth century context. This opening speech
can equally be read in a conventional context and as a prophetic preamble.

Elihu is angry with the friends and Job; angry with the friends because
they have given no answer to Job, and angry with Job because he has
justified himself. He is not prepared to accept the apparent response of
the friends that they have the wisdom, and if Job cannot see this, God will
teach Job the necessary painful truth (v. 13) He has waited for them to
answer Job, but he has something to say which he regards as from God
(vv. 8, 18), if they do not answer Job.

1 Habel, Job, 452.

302
3. Job 33—Elihu’s Offer of Support
Elihu begins his argument in this chapter. In this speech, several
expressions suggest an eighth century reading, and these expressions
convert the whole speech into a discourse about Hezekiah. Firstly, Elihu
talks about “his terror” (v. 7) not terrifying Job and this suggests that Job
has a contrasting “terror”. This is a strong word which does not fit easily
into a conventional reading. Secondly, Elihu mentions “the destroyers” (v.
22), which is plausibly read as a political and military term to do with
conquest. Thirdly, there is the prospect of perishing by “the sword” (v.
18), which on a conventional reading would be a general remark, but can
equally be a specific allusion to a military context. Finally, there is a
reference to an “interpreter” (v. 23), which suggests a diplomatic context.

The first important claim made by Elihu is in v. 6 and versions make

different choices:

“Behold, I am according to thy wish in God’s stead (lal

$ypk): I also am formed out of the clay.” Job 33:6 (KJV)

“Behold, I belong to God like you; I too have been

formed out of the clay.” Job 33:6 (NASB)

“Behold, I am toward God as you are; I too was formed

from a piece of clay.” Job 33:6 (RSV)

The Hebrew expression, lal $ypk, literally means, “…as your mouth to
God”, which suggests that Elihu is claiming to be on Job’s side
representing his case to God; the RSV comes closest to this sense. Job
now has a second “witness” with whom his case can be presented to God
(Deut 19:15), hence Elihu claims he will “justify” Job (v. 32). However,
Elihu does not justify Job.

Elihu seeks to reassure Job, saying that “his terror” (hmya) will not make
him afraid, unlike the “terror” of the Assyrian invasion (hmya, Isa 33:18).
But Elihu says Job is “not just” to proclaim his innocence (vv. 8-12).
Elihu seems to believe that the proclamation of innocence is unjust and
this is Job’s basic fault.

Elihu paraphrases Job’s position in vv. 9-11 as a protestation of innocence

and unfairness in his treatment by God. Alluding to Job’s words (Job 9:2)
and echoing Isa 45:9, Elihu reproves Job for “striving” against God (v.
13). In terms of the design of the book, this reproof is not the author’s

303
point of view. Job is innocent and God has counted him as an enemy for
the purposes of testing. Elihu’s point of view is not that of the prologue.
Rather, Elihu’s criticism of Job seems to be that the self-justification in his
speeches is wrong. Job dresses this justification with the legal metaphor of
presenting his case1 before God and Elihu sees this as a presumption on
the part of Job.

Elihu asserts his confidence in a revelation from God and claims that it is
directed towards Job (vv. 14-16). He intimates to Job something of his
fault when he says,

“That he may turn man aside from his conduct, and keep a
strong man (rbg2) from pride…” Job 33:17 (NASB
revised)

And he proceeds to describe Job’s condition in vv. 17-29: God was

keeping him from “the weapon” (xlv, v. 18, “the sword”, Joel 2:83),
chastening him upon his bed (Job 33:19-21), and bringing him “to those
who bring death” (v. 22, KJV “the destroyers”, i.e. the Assyrians). It is
likely that Elihu thinks of this “chastening” as a discipline from God. This
view of Job’s suffering is distinct from that of Job’s friends in that Elihu
does not include in his speech the view that Job is suffering on account of
any sin on his part, a view that the friends clearly enunciate.

Elihu may be personifying Job’s enemy as “the weapon” and, if so, there
may be an echo of enemy propaganda in this remark. Sennacherib reports
his campaign against Sidon as follows:

“In my third campaign I marched against Hatti. Luli,

king of Sidon, whom the terror inspiring clamour of my
lordship had overwhelmed, fled far overseas and
perished. The awe-inspiring splendour of the Weapon of
Ashur, my lord, overwhelmed his strong cities…”4

1 Job’s legal metaphor is found in texts such as Job 9:3, 14-16, 32, 13:18-
22, 23:4-7.
2 Elihu here is picking up Job’s description of himself in Job 3:3 as a

“strong man”.
3 The KJV and RSV offer “sword” but it is not the usual word for

“sword”. The idea of “weapon” is a better choice. Joel is the only prophet
to use this word.
4 ANET, 287.

304
Elihu next says,

“If there be a messenger against him (wyl[), a scorner

(#wl), one among a thousand, to declare to man what is
right for him (wrvy ~dal dyghl), and (w1) he is gracious
unto him, and saith, Deliver him from going down to the
pit: I have found a ransom. His flesh shall be fresher
than a child's: he shall return to the days of his youth…”
Job 33:23-25 (KJV revised)

Elihu connects a ransom to the presence of a messenger ($alm, v. 23).

The RSV and NASB render the Hebrew as “angel”, but it is not clear that
Elihu is referring to an angel.2 The “messenger” is described as an
“interpreter” (#wl) in the KJV, “one in a thousand”,3 but the Hebrew for
“interpreter” is associated with “scorn” and “mocking” in the Prophets
(4x).4 The word is used in Isaiah:

“For the terrible one is brought to nought, and the

scorner (#wl) is consumed, and all that watch for iniquity
are cut off.” Isa 29:20 (KJV), cf. Isa 28:22, 43:27, Hos 7:5

If we follow this echo, it supplies a context for Elihu’s remark. Rabshakeh

was a messenger of scorn and mocking; he purported “to declare to man
what is right for him” (RSV).5

1 The RSV translates the conjunction as “and” rather than “then” shifting
the “then” forward to v. 26; this makes more sense in a political reading.
2 Wolfers sets out the reasons against this reading, Deep Things, 295-299,

however, he proposes that the messenger is Elihu. He does not give

sufficient weight to the echoes supplied in the ideas of “scorning” and
“ransom”.
3 This is an idiom of rarity and picks up Job’s usage in Job 9:3 (Ecc 7:28).

Elihu is identifying someone as “one among a thousand” because this

person is offering an “answer” to one of the thousand questions that Job
would pose to Yahweh. Elihu has already alluded to Job 9:2 and Job’s
“striving” with God in v. 13.
4 Of the 27 uses in the Hebrew Bible, perhaps 24 uses are in the semantic

field of “scorn” with 17 uses in Proverbs particularly emphasizing this

idea. The form of the related verb is used for foreign emissaries in 2
Chron 32:31.
5 The Hebrew is literally “his uprightness”, and the word (14x) is

connected with the way that a man walks, e.g. 1 Kgs 9:4. Elihu uses the
305
The scorner caustically echoes the deliverance of Israel from Egypt in his
mention of a “ransom” (Isa 43:3) and “grace” (!nx, Exod 33:19, Isa 30:18-
19, 33:2). The ransom that the scorner claims to have found could be any
tribute paid, or promised, by the rulers of Jerusalem. It is this ransom that
will deliver Hezekiah if he submits to the will of the scorner.

In this historical setting, Elihu’s point is that,

“…then man prays to God, and he accepts him, he

comes into his presence with joy. He recounts to men his
salvation…” Job 33:26 (RSV)

God (not the scorner) will graciously save Job by providing a ransom if he
prays for salvation.

Elihu does not necessarily believe that Job has sinned before his troubles
(the position of the friends). Rather, he believes that Job should not have
protested this innocence. Elihu says of Job that,

“He should look (rwv1) upon men, and say, I have sinned,
and perverted that which was right, and he [God] did not
reckon me (yl hwv2 al)” Job 33:27 (KJV revised)

On our reading, this means that Job should confess that he was wrong to
protest his innocence, and that God had not counted up any sins; God
would then deliver him from the “pit” (v. 28, Isa 38:17) and not the
scorner (v. 24).

4. Job 34—Elihu’s Case

In this chapter, Elihu is more strident in his remarks. A political and
prophetic reading arises from the interpretation of the “workers of
iniquity” (v. 8), the governing of Job (v. 17), the reason for calling Job a
king (v. 18), the identity of the princes (v. 18), the reference of the
expression “the mighty men” (v. 24), the meaning of the “reign” of the
hypocrite (v. 30), and Job’s rebellion (v. 37). While it is possible to

word of himself in Job 33:3; Job uses the expression, “words of

uprightness” in Job 6:25.
1 The RSV and NASB translate as “sing” preferring to re-point the

Hebrew; we follow the MT and treat it as jussive in sense.

2 The text here echoes Hezekiah’s assertion, “I reckoned (rwv) till

morning…” (Isa 38:13).

306
configure these terms and ideas in a patriarchal setting, they are more
plausibly accommodated in a political setting.

Elihu begins by paraphrasing some of Job’s claims:

“Should I lie concerning my judgment (yjpvm)? My

wound (vna) is incurable, though I am without
transgression.” Job 34:6 (NASB revised)

Here Elihu quotes Job, “my judgment (yjpvm) was as a robe and a
diadem” (Job 29:14), which implies that Job’s complaint was that the
kingship has been removed from him. Job claims that God has removed
his judgment, and this is echoed in Isaiah,1

“Why sayest thou, O Jacob, and speakest, O Israel, My

way is hid from the Lord, and my judgment (yjpvm) is
passed over from my God?” Isa 40:27 (KJV), cf. Isa 49:4

According to Elihu, Job is asking, “Should I lie against my judgment?”,

and claiming “God has removed my judgment”. His wound (vna) was
incurable, and here there is an echo with Micah, which shows how Job’s
affliction symbolised the state of the people:

“For her wound (vna) is incurable, for it has come to

Judah; it has reached the gate of my people, even to
Jerusalem.” Mic 1:9 (NASB)

Nevertheless, in addition to making these claims, Elihu describes Job’s

circumstances and praises him:

“What man is like Job, who drinks up derision (g[l) like

water, who goes in company with the workers of iniquity,
and walks with wicked men?” Job 34:7-8 (NASB)

Job was being derided by the Assyrian scourge (g[l, Job 9:23, Isa 33:19,2
Hos 7:16), and he was being forced to walk with the wicked ones who
now held power in Jerusalem. Elihu indicates that Job was not willingly
walking with such men in the remark,

1 God picks up this claim in Job 40:9, “Should I disannul my judgment?”,

and a different attitude again is displayed in Mic 7:9.

2 This echo may be part of a theme as the derision of Assyria is turned

around when God in turn derides them (Isa 37:22).

307
 “For he hath said, It profiteth a man nothing that he
should delight himself with God.” Job 34:9 (KJV)

The key word here is “delight” (hcr), Elihu literally says, “with his taking
delight with God”. The word is used of God taking (or not) delight in
sacrifices (e.g. Hos 8:13, Amos 5:22, Mic 6:7). Following this connection,
Elihu is ascribing to Job the view that there is no profit in sinning and
sacrificing: God takes no delight in a multitude of sacrifices. It is an
affirmation of righteousness on the part of Job, but one that he does not
make in the text of the book. Job is a sorry figure because he walks with
wicked men believing as he does that there is no profit in a lifestyle of sin
and sacrifice. Elihu will make a similar point in favour of Job in Job 35:3.

4.1 The Kingship of Job

Elihu addresses the three friends (v. 10) as “men of understanding”, a
phrase which he repeats at the end of his address to them (v. 34). Elihu’s
disagreement with the friends is over their view that Job has sinned prior
to his troubles and that this is their cause. Accordingly, God cannot be
acting against Job for this reason, and to do so would be “wicked” (vv.
10-12). Elihu’s first argument is expressed in this way:

“Would (@ah) he that hateth right bind (vbx, KJV mg.)?

and wilt thou condemn him that is most just, saying
(rmah), in respect of (l) a king “Belial” and “wicked one”
to (la) princes, who accepteth not the persons of
princes, nor regardeth the rich more than the poor?” Job
34:17-19 (KJV revised)

Elihu criticizes the friends for treating Job as “Belial”, and a “wicked
one”. While Elihu criticizes Job, he does so for Job’s complicit behaviour
during his sickness and for his protestations of innocence; Elihu disagrees
with the friends’ attempt to get Job to confess to sin during the good
years of his kingship.

Nevertheless, Elihu has every confidence that God will deliver the people:

“In a moment shall they die, and the people shall be

troubled at midnight, but (w) they will pass over (rb[):
and the mighty man shall be taken away without hand.”
Job 34:20 (KJV revised)

308
Here, intertextual echoes allow the suggestion that Elihu refers to the
temporary suffering of the people and the certain destruction of the
Assyrian army in the assertion, “they shall die”:

• The people suffer for a “moment” (Isa 10:25, 26:20, 47:9, 54:7-8, Jer
4:20).

• At midnight there is trouble for the people (Isa 17:14, 37:36), but they
will pass over the ordeal.

• The mighty man is taken away but not by a human hand (Isa 10:13
(NASB), 34:7, 59:16).

The purpose of this invasion is to cleanse the “workers of iniquity” (or

“workers of Aven”, v. 22) from Jerusalem and the land (Job 38:13). These
men were both seeking alliances and attempting to cement a peace treaty
with Assyria. Elihu asserts that there would be no “darkness” or “shadow
of death” where they could hide, and here he refers to the land of Assyria,
where the Northern tribes and some of Judah were already in captivity
(Isa 9:1, Ps 107:10, 14). According to Elihu, God’s eyes were upon such
men (v. 21). Elihu’s complaint against Job is not only that he protests his
innocence, but also that he answers “among men of Aven” (!wa yvnab, v.
36, “wicked men”).1

This desire of Elihu suggests that he was partly disingenuous when he

stated earlier that he sought to “justify” Job. In Elihu’s estimation, Job
may have been innocent as a king, but since his sickness, he had become
identified with the policies of “wicked men”. Elihu wanted Job to be
“tried” for this, and for the act of “protesting” his innocence to God (vv.
36-37).

Elihu asserts,

“For he adds rebellion to his sin; he claps hands (qps)

among us, and multiplies his words against God.” Job
34:37 (NASB)

1 See Job 22:15 and our remarks on that verse; the expression, “men of
Aven”, in the Hebrew may not be “wicked men” but men identified with
the place “Aven” (Hos 10:8), and as such this would be a piece of
invective.
309
And this compares to the following idiom,

“I (called up the gods by) clapping my hands, with regard

to my (intention of) assuming the kingship, my paternal
legacy.”1

If we follow this echo, Elihu’s complaint against Job is that he was

invoking God in their presence. Elihu has made no allowances for Job’s
state of mind and how his disease has sapped his fortitude.

Elihu’s anger is also directed towards the “workers of iniquity” (men of

Aven) and the source of this anger is his confidence that God will act.
This confidence is expressed in the words,

“He breaks in pieces mighty men without inquiry, and

sets others in their place. Therefore he knows their
works, and he overthrows them in the night, and they are
crushed.” Job 34:24-25 (NASB)

God breaks “mighty men” (~yrybk, “mighty waters”—Isa 17:12, 28:2) and
sets up other nations (Dan 4:17) without anyone having to first inquire
into his understanding (Isa 40:28). Because of this, Elihu is confident that
God knows the “works” of the “workers of iniquity” and that they will be
“crushed” (Job 4:19).

Elihu next states,

“He striketh them as wicked men in the open sight of

others…” Job 34:26 (KJV)

“He strikes them like the wicked in a public place…” Job

34:26 (NASB)

“He strikes them for their wickedness in the sight of

men…” Job 34:26 (RSV)

This is a difficult text. The Hebrew uses the plural, “the wicked ones”
(~y[vr), and there is no word for “men”. The KJV and NASB suggest a
comparison is being made, “like the wicked/as wicked men”. The
problem with this is that the common preposition translated “as/like/for”

1 This is a remark of Esarhaddon (680-669), ANET, 289.

310
(txt) in these versions, is usually “underneath, beneath, instead of” and a
comparison is usually indicated by another common preposition (k).

The verb for “striking” is not common (Num 24:10, Isa 2:6 (RSV), Jer
31:19, Lam 2:15, Ezek 21:12).), and it is used for “clapping” hands or
striking the thigh. We noted above that clapping can be used as a gesture
for invoking the gods. It can also be a gesture accompanying treaty-
making:

“For thou hast rejected thy people, the house of Jacob,

because they are full of diviners from the east and of
soothsayers like the Philistines, and they strike hands
(qps) with foreigners.” Isa 2:6 (RSV)

“For Thou hast abandoned Thy people, the house of

Jacob, Because they are filled with influences from the east,
And they are soothsayers like the Philistines, And they
strike bargains with the children of foreigners.” Isa 2:6
(NASB)

The RSV gives a literal rendering and the NASB have interpreted the
Hebrew in a metaphorical sense. Another example is Job 17:3,

“Lay down now, put me in a surety with thee; who is he

that will strike hands with me?” Job 17:3 (KJV)

The verb is different but the idiom is the same image. If we follow this
echo, Elihu’s statement is that God will “strike hands” instead of the
wicked ones, who had been engaged in treaty-making and alliances. God
will do this “in the place of the ones seeing” (~yar, v. 26, see NASB
footnote). Our rendering of v. 26 is therefore,

“He will clap hands (qps) instead (txt) of wicked men in

the place of the ones seeing (~yar ~wqmb)…” Job 34:26
(KJV revised)

Here an echo with Hezekiah’s description of the Priests and Levites as the
“seeing ones” (~yar, 2 Chron 29:8, 30:7, Isa 32:3) may identify Elihu’s

311
audience.1 In this case, Elihu is saying that through the Davidic king God
will make deals.2

Elihu indicates that these “wicked ones” (the bad shepherds of the
people) had once followed God, but had now turned aside from following
his ways (like the Israelites who sought to turn back from the land). This
error on their part seems to be a failure to believe God’s wonders in
Egypt and to have followed the Law (wlykfh al, v. 27, Ps 106:7, Jer
10:21). As a result the “poor” had cried unto God for deliverance (Isa
32:7).

As far as Elihu is concerned, no one would act wickedly if God gave the
“rest” associated with the kingdom; likewise, no one can look at God if he
hides his face, which is what had happened. No one can look at God,
whether a nation (Judah) or a man (v. 29, RSV, Isa 8:17, Mic 3:4), neither
“the hypocritical man” who was ruling as co-regent, nor the ensnared
people (v. 30, NASB).

On this basis, Elihu appeals to the friends that it is surely proper that Job
confess,

• I have borne (v. 31, a burden, the yoke of the Assyrian, Isa 10:27,
14:25).

• I will not pledge (v. 31, transactions involved in raising tribute

monies, Job 22:6).

• I see (v. 32).

• Teach me [God] (v. 32, Job 6:24, Isa 28:9).

• If I have done iniquity, I will add no more (v. 32).

1 This Hebrew form of the common verb “to see” only occurs 11x in the
MT and 3x in texts related to Hezekiah’s day. Wolfers, Deep Things, 154,
suggests “seers”.
2 Wolfers, ibid. p. 154, interprets the sense as “he chastised them under

the wicked”, but he does not distinguish “the wicked one” from “the
wicked ones” in his treatment. Moreover, Elihu refers to “workers of
iniquity” (v 22) and it is this group inside Jerusalem that “the wicked
ones” denotes.
312
Elihu offers these pointers because he believes that it is not right for God
to recompense Job on his terms:

“Shall he [God] recompense on your terms, because you

have rejected it [his terms]? For you must choose,1 and
not I; Therefore declare what you know.” Job 34:33
(NASB)

Elihu’s view is that Job has multiplied his words against God in protesting
his innocence. He has not accepted the terms of God’s dealings with him,
and he has allowed “wicked men” to hold the balance of power. From an
initial position of wanting to “justify” Job, Elihu has moved to a stance of
antagonism.

5. Job 35—Discipline and Sin

In this chapter, Elihu tackles the character of Job’s case, which he
conceives as an assertion to greater righteousness than God (v. 2). This is
an interpretation of Job’s claim to innocence and his assertion that God
has treated him unfairly. Elihu’s counter-argument is that this is not “right
thinking” (v. 2).

Elihu has accused Job of saying that there is no profit in serving God (Job
34:9). Here he further states that Job has asked, “What advantage will he
be to me? How am I better off than if I had sinned?” (v. 3, RSV revised).
However, this is not an attitude that Job has expressed. Elihu is therefore
giving his interpretation of Job’s arguments, and it follows Eliphaz’ terms
in the debate. Eliphaz is the only other person to use the word for
“advantage” or “profit” (!ks, Job 15:3, 22:2, 21).2

Elihu is saying that Job has argued that those who were younger than him
and in positions of rule were “facilitating his calamity” (wly[y ytwhl, Job
30:13, Isa 30:5 “they were of no profit”, l[y) because they “had no
helper”—Egypt would be of no help to them (rz[, Job 30:13, Isa 30:7).
They were facilitating his calamity because Egyptian alliances were futile.

If we follow these echoes with Isaiah, Elihu is accusing Job of having

been complicit in the pro-Egyptian policy, but at the same time

1 The text may echo Isa 7:14-15.

2 Isaiah is the only prophetic book to contain the word (Isa 22:15, 40:20);
its meaning is about facilitation and benefits.
313
His understanding of Job’s argument is that his righteousness is such that
he needs nothing from God. His point is that whether Job is a sinner or
righteous, this gives nothing to God; only men are affected (vv. 3-8). This
argument fits a patriarchal and political reading.

A political reading of this chapter emerges from a consideration of the

theme of oppression (v. 9). Who is oppressing and who are the ones
oppressed? In addition, the expression, “the arm of the mighty” (v. 9) is
suggestive of a military context. If this is admitted, the motifs of “beasts
of the earth”, “fowls of the air” (v. 11), “vanity” (v. 13), and a “visitation”
by God (v. 15) all suggest a political-military situation.

Elihu says,

“By reason of the multitude of oppressions they make the

oppressed to cry: they cry out by reason of the arm of the
mighty.” Job 35:9 (KJV)

This statement appears to evoke a military situation. A contrasting echo

may be struck between the expression “arm of the mighty” and Assyrian
propaganda:

“With him is an arm of flesh; but with us is the Lord our

God to help us, and to fight our battles. And the people
rested themselves upon the words of Hezekiah king of
Judah.” 2 Chron 32:8 (KJV)

If we follow this echo, Elihu is saying that the Assyrians were making the
faithful (Mic 3:4) in the city cry through much oppression (Amos 3:91).

“But none saith, Where is God my maker, who giveth

songs in the night…” Job 35:10 (KJV)

Here, none of these faithful were questioning whether God would deliver
them,2 and God was one who could give “songs in the night”. The text
echoes Isa 30:29,

“You shall have a song as in the night when a holy feast

is kept; and gladness of heart, as when one sets out to the

1This is the only other occurrence of this word in the Hebrew Bible.
2The question that they do not ask, “Where is God?”, was the jibe of the
Assyrian king (Isa 36:19).
314
 sound of the flute to go to the mountain of the Lord, to
the Rock of Israel.” Isa 30:29 (RSV)

This prophecy is about the deliverance of Jerusalem and the “songs in the
night” that would follow that act of salvation.

Elihu goes on to say that God teaches Israel more than the surrounding
nations (beasts of the earth and fowl of the air), and the people were
crying out for such teaching from Job, but there was no guidance from
him, because the answers were coming from evil men (v. 12). Elihu here
blames Job for not giving an answer to the cry of the faithful.

Elihu concludes this part of his speech with two notes of encouragement,
which can be interpreted politically:

i) God would not hear vanity (v. 13). The Assyrians were speaking
blasphemous vanity through their envoy, Rabshakeh (the “sieve of
vanity”, Isa 30:28). Although Job had claimed that he would not see “it”1
(v. 14, “his hope”, Job 17:15), because of the Assyrian, Elihu counsels him
to trust in God. His “case” was before the judge and he would have to
wait for God.2

ii) God has not visited Job in his anger (v. 15, NASB).3 God is not
punishing Job to “the extremity”, but as a result Job has been emboldened
to protest his innocence (v. 16).

6. Job 36—Speaking on Behalf of God

In the first part of this chapter (vv. 3-254) Elihu continues to make the
same points as in Job 35; he then describes an approaching storm in
which God will speak to Job out of the “whirlwind”. The description of
this storm continues into Job 37, and so the chapter division is awkward.

1 The KJV, RSV and NASB interpret this pronominal suffix as “him”, but
this Hebrew verb for “seeing” only occurs on Job’s lips in Job 7:8, 17:15,
24:15. The context supports a reference to something abstract.
2 This is the sense of the KJV, RSV and NASB; however, the text may be

echoing the anxious waiting and travail associated with childbirth (Job
15:7, 20).
3 Job had asserted that God would punish the wicked ones and their

“candle” in his anger (Job 21:17), and here Elihu picks up on Job’s
language and asserts that Job was not being visited by God in his anger.
4 The reason for making the division here is the repetition of “far off”

from Job 36:3.

315
A patriarchal reading of the chapter is generalized and non-specific. Thus
“the wicked”, “the hypocrites” and “the poor” are general groups in
society (vv. 6, 13); Elihu’s advice about kings (vv. 7-12) is about kings in
general and does not presume that Job is a king. However, a political
reading contextualizes these groups and presumes that Job is a king for
whom Elihu is choosing kingship arguments.

Expressions in Job 36 easily fit a prophetic and political context. For

example, there is distress (v. 16, RSV) and an individual who does not
value Job’s riches as a means of escape from such distress (v. 19); there is
“wrath” (v. 18) and the possibility of being taken away. This kind of
language is easily given a political sense, if a specific identity is given to the
oppressor who is exacting the distress and does not give heed to tribute
monies.

1) Elihu’s first points address Job as a king:

• God is “mighty” unlike Moab (rybk, v. 5, Isa 16:141); Job should place
his confidence in God.

• God will not preserve the life of the “wicked one” (v. 6, Job 38:13).

• God will give judgment for the “poor” (v. 6, Job 34:28, Isa 3:15).

• God establishes Davidic kings forever (v. 7, 2 Sam 7:13).

• If these kings are bound in fetters (2 Kgs 17:4, 2 Chron 33:11, 36:6),
God does this for reasons of discipline (vv. 8-10).

• If these kings do not obey God, they will die by the “weapon” (Joel
2:8) and “without knowledge”2 (v. 12).

2) Elihu’s next point concerns “the hypocrites” (v. 13, Isa 10:6, 33:14).
They are hypocritical “of heart” and they do not cry out when they are
captured (Isa 22:3). They will die in their youth and live among the
sodomites (v. 14, KJV mg.). Elihu’s invective here describes the captors as
sodomites, and as such it is a piece of plausible war propaganda. In

1This rare adjective (6x) only occurs outside Job in Isa 16:14.
2Here Elihu gives away his veiled attack because he has accused Job of
multiplying words without knowledge (Job 35:16).
316
describing the hypocrites as hypocritical of heart, the text may also be
striking an echo with Isa 6:10 and the condition of the people as having
“fat” hearts (Isa 29:13).

Elihu is confident that God will deliver the “poor” (v. 15, Isa 14:32) and
open their ears in “oppression” (Isa 30:20, NASB). On our reading this
“oppression” refers to the oppressive conditions of the siege. The
opening of their ears (Isa 32:3, 35:5) is God’s counter action to the closing
of the ears (Isa 6:10), and this refers to a bestowal of the Spirit prior to
their deliverance, a bestowal intended for preaching to the people (Isa
32:15).

3) Elihu’s next point is strange. Scholars regard Job 36:16-17 as

corrupted.1 Commentaries and versions differ, but the NASB appears to
allow intertextual factors more room for interpretation:

“But anger (@a2), enticed (tws) you from the mouth of

distress (rc), instead of it [distress], a broad place with no
constraint; and that which was set on your table was full
of fatness.” Job 36:16 (NASB revised)

If we take intertextual echoes into account, the “distress” would be the

dire straits (rc, Isa 5:30) in which Job finds himself, and the “mouth”
belonging to this distress would be the mouth of Rabshakeh (LXX,
“…and he has also enticed thee out of the mouth of the enemy”).

The Hebrew verb translated “entice” significantly occurs in the mouth of

Rabshakeh (and only twice elsewhere in the Prophets). The offer made by
Rabshakeh was to alleviate the “straits of the distress” for a broader
pasture, and the offer on the table was “full of fatness”:

1 For example, see Habel, Job, 498.

2 This is normally a conjunction of addition, and the NASB has “…then
indeed”. Wolfers make the suggestion that it should be read as “anger”,
Deep Things, 364, but in the MT only 2 out of the 28 uses of the word with
a conjunction are “anger”—Num 11:33, Ps 78:31, and these are with a
noun—“anger of the Lord”, “anger of God”. Nevertheless, Wolfers’
suggestion appears correct: firstly, it cannot be God who is enticing Job,
as this would not fit with the tone of vv. 3-15, which have dealt with what
God is doing; secondly, Elihu’s focus shifts to Job and away from what
God is doing for the “poor” and against the “hypocrites”, consequently,
the conjunction needs to be stronger than “and”—there is an implied
contrast: “God is doing this, but this is happening to you Job…”.
317
 “Hearken (tws) not to Hezekiah: for thus saith the king
of Assyria, Make an agreement with me by a present, and
come out to me: and eat ye every one of his vine, and
every one of his fig tree, and drink ye every one the
waters of his own cistern; Until I come and take you
away to a land like your own land, a land of corn and
wine, a land of bread and vineyards.” Isa 36:16-17 (KJV)

Elihu next says,

“But thou hast fulfilled the judgment of the wicked:

judgment and justice take hold on thee.” Job 36:17 (KJV)

“But the case of the wicked you did not judge, the
orphan’s justice you belied.” (Pope)

“But you are full with the suit of a guilty man, lawsuit
and litigation obsess you.” (Habel)

There is a certain amount of paraphrase here, but this is not because the
component Hebrew words are difficult; rather, it is because the point
being made is difficult to grasp. The difficulty arises because this point is a
parenthesis. We can see this parenthesis if we translate vv. 16-18 in this
way:

“But anger (@a) enticed you from the mouth of distress,1

instead of it [distress], a broad place with no constraint;
and that which was set on your table was full of fatness.
(And you have filled a wicked case; judgment and a case
are taking hold.) Beware lest wrath entice you with
abundance; and let not the greatness of the ransom turn
you aside.” Job 36:16-18 (KJV revised)

Elihu is giving a warning to Job.

The Hebrew word (!yd) translated “judgment” (KJV) is a legal case, suit,
cause, or plea (Deut 17:8, Pss 9:4, 140:12, Isa 10:1-2, Jer 5:28). This case is
“wicked” ([vr !yd) and Job has “filled” (alm) this case—Job is the
contents of this dossier. As a result judgment (jpvm) and a case (!yd) are

1Wolfers’ suggestion is “voice of distress”, Deep Things, 364, but this

misses the propaganda overtone and the Hebrew is “mouth”.
318
taking hold. In the middle of his warning to Job, Elihu is ready to affirm
that Job is guilty of reacting wrongly to his afflictions.

Elihu appears to be quoting Job’s earlier words,

“Be ye afraid of the sword: for wrath (hmx) bringeth the

punishments of the sword, that ye may know there is a
case (!yd).” Job 19:29 (KJV revised)

Job had told his friends to be afraid of the Assyrian “sword” because
there was a “case” requiring punishment. Job says that “wrath” (hmx) was
bringing this punishment (the “wrath” that was “the Assyrian”, Job 6:4,
19:29, 21:20, Isa 34:2, “fury”).

The warning does not come out clearly in the KJV which reads,

“Because there is wrath (hmx), beware lest he take thee away

(tws) with his stroke: then a great ransom cannot deliver
thee.” Job 36:18 (KJV)

This verse contains a difficult Hebrew word which the KJV has translated
“stroke”; the KJV has also chosen to interpret the Hebrew verb for “to
entice” (tws) as “to take away”, but Elihu has just used this word as
“entice” in v. 16 (NASB). The NASB offers a better rendering of the first
clause,

“Beware lest wrath entice you to scoffing…” Job 36:18

(NASB)

Habel notes that the Hebrew translated “to scoffing” could equally be
“with abundance”,1 which fits better the situation of the Assyrian taunt
and lure strategy, which would give,

“Beware lest wrath entice you with abundance…” Job

36:18 (KJV revised)

However, the RSV seems to capture the sense of the second clause,

“…let not the greatness of the ransom turn you aside.”

Job 36:18 (RSV)

1 Job, 498. Habel notes the link with Job 20:22 to support this choice.
319
If we combine the above remarks, Elihu’s warning becomes clear,

“But anger enticed you from the mouth of distress,

instead of it [distress], a broad place with no constraint;
and that which was set on your table was full of fatness.
(And you have filled a wicked case; judgment and a case
are taking hold.) Beware lest wrath entice you with
abundance; and let not the greatness of the ransom turn
you aside.” Job 36:16-18 (KJV revised)

Elihu’s final point in this argument seems to be that Job’s cry is not
sufficient to remove the distress:

“Will he esteem thy riches? No, not gold, nor all the
forces of strength.” Job 36:19 (KJV)

“Will your riches keep you from distress, or all the forces
of your strength?” Job 36:19 (NASB)

“Will your cry avail to keep you from distress, or all the
force of your strength?” Job 36:19 (RSV)

There are problems with each of these renderings, but the RSV seems to
be the best alternative for the following reasons:

i) The MT does not have the usual word for “gold” (KJV), and it is not
clear that Sennacherib would be concerned with any riches left in the city.

ii) The word translated “riches” ([wv) in the KJV/NASB is rare (2x as a
common noun, Job 30:24), and probably means “cry” as in the RSV. Job
therefore has a “cry”, and a cry in the mouth of Israel is always directed
towards God and not any oppressor.

iii) The common verb ($r[) translated “esteem” (KJV), “keep” (NASB,
RSV), is usually one of ordering, preparing, setting up, arranging and
comparing (e.g. Job 13:18, 23:4, 32:14, 33:5).

iv) The word translated “distress” (rc, NASB/RSV) is used for Job’s
situation as it has been caused by his enemy, and as boasted of by the “the
mouth of distress” (Job 36:16).

v) The Hebrew word translated “forces” is unique to this text and this is
just one possible translation.
320
A literal rendering of the Hebrew would be,

“Will he [God] order your cry? Not with distress and all
the forces of strength!” Job 36:19 (KJV revised)

Job was ordering his cause before God (Job 13:18, 23:4), and he was
“crying out” for a judgment (Job 19:7, 30:20, 28). Elihu’s point seems to
be that Job was not crying appropriately unto God: Job was ordering his
cause before God, but God was obviously not ordering his cry—not with
the distress and all the forces of strength arraigned against him. An
appropriate cry in the face of such affliction would be a cry for
forgiveness and deliverance, but Job was not giving this cry. Elihu is
warning Job that his situation is perilous if he does not accept the
discipline of God.

4) And so Elihu counsels Job (picking up on Job’s desire for darkness

from Job 3,

“Desire not the night, when people are cut off in their
place.” Job 36:20 (KJV)

“Be careful; do not turn to evil; for you have preferred

this to affliction.” Job 36:21 (NASB)

This is consistent with Elihu’s argument that Job had not responded
appropriately to the affliction: he had turned to affirm his own innocence
rather than accept the affliction and cry out for deliverance.

5) Elihu says next that God exalts (bgf) by his power (xk)—v. 22. Here,
Elihu repeats Eliphaz’ hope, “that those which mourn may be exalted
(bgf) to safety” (Job 5:11). This deliverance to safety is described with the
figure of childbirth in Isaiah:

“And they said unto him, Thus saith Hezekiah, This day
is a day of trouble, and of rebuke, and of blasphemy: for
the children are come to the birth, and there is not
strength (xk) to bring forth.” Isa 37:3 (KJV)

Hezekiah doubted that there was strength to deliver (he was still sick) but,
taking this text in Isaiah as a suitable echo of Job, Elihu has no doubt of
such strength.

321
6) Elihu asks, who is a “teacher” (RSV, NASB—hrwm) like God? The
Hebrew is not common (9x) and occurs in the Prophets only in Isa 30:20
and Joel 2:23,

“And though the Lord give you the bread of adversity, and
the water of affliction, yet shall not thy teachers (hrwm) be
removed into a corner any more, but thine eyes shall see
thy teachers (hrwm)” Isa 30:20 (KJV)

This refers to the resurgence of true and faithful teaching in Jerusalem in

connection with the bestowal of the Spirit. Joel uses a homonym of this
word, and it is translated “rain”,

“So rejoice, O sons of Zion, and be glad in the Lord your

God; for he has given you the early rain (hrwm) for your
righteousness (hqdc).1 And he has poured down for you
the rain, the early rain (hrwm) and latter rain as before.”
Joel 2:23 (NASB revised), cf. Hos 6:3

Here the former rain is given “for righteousness”, and the echo is with
Isaiah,

“For the vineyard of the Lord of hosts is the house of

Israel, and the men of Judah his pleasant plant: and he
looked for judgment, but behold oppression; for
righteousness, but behold a cry.” Isa 5:7 (KJV)

Isaiah describes the absence of righteousness that brought the Assyrian

invasions upon the land, and Joel describes how the righteousness is
brought back, through a bestowal of the Spirit, prefigured as rain. Joel
goes on to describe the “pouring out” of the Spirit of God (Joel 2:28). It
would seem that hrwm was a homonym for rain and a teacher.

Elihu’s point is that God exalts a person to the position of a prophet by

his power.

7) Elihu next asks, “who has visited (dqp) upon him his way”? The KJV,
NASB and RSV choose minority options in their translation. Thus, for

1The NASB has “vindication” but this is unlikely as the Hebrew word is
overwhelmingly rendered as “righteousness” (KJV). The difficulty is to
understand how an early rain could be “for” righteousness, but this
difficulty is solved if the “rain” is a figure for the Spirit of prophecy.
322
example, the RSV has, “who has prescribed for him his way”? However,
the idea is of “visiting” upon someone the consequences of their way of life.
The two ideas occur in Hosea:

“The Lord hath also a controversy with Judah, and will

punish (dqp) Jacob according to his ways; according to
his doings will he recompense him.” Hos 12:2 (KJV)

Elihu’s point is exactly this: God’s ways cannot be “visited” because they
are always true; no one can accuse God of iniquity.

6.1 The Whirlwind

Elihu sees1 an approaching storm, and this is the arrival of God to speak
to Job out of the whirlwind. This causes him to make various points
about God’s providence in terms of the weather. He describes the storm
and offers remarks about what it signifies, and he mentions other facets of
the weather and what they signify.

At one level Elihu describes God’s mastery over the elements of the
weather. We can tell that he is not just describing one storm because he
mentions various facets of weather—clouds (thick clouds, bright clouds),
the general level of light, rain (showers and downpours), mist, thunder,
lightning, snow, frost, and violent winds. The storm that Elihu sees is the
basis for extending his thoughts on God and the weather.

On another level the storm is a theophany, and the choice of this mode of
God-manifestation reflects the work of God with the land. This reflects a
pattern in the Jewish Scriptures whereby theophanies and visions of
heaven reflect circumstances on earth. For example, in a time of war,
Joshua sees the captain of the Lord’s host (Josh 5:14-15); in a time of
punishment upon the nation, David sees the angel of the Lord stand
between the earth and the heaven with a drawn sword (1 Chron 21:16);
Micaiah’s vision describes a heavenly court of advisors to the Lord, and
this mirrors the court of the king of Israel with his advisors (1 Kgs 22:12,
23); and the character of Uzziah’s apostasy accounts for the details of
Isaiah’s vision (2 Chron 26:16, 19, Isa 6).

Overall, the RSV gives the better rendering of the first part of Elihu’s
description (vv. 26-33), but we have made several changes:

1 This is indicated by the use of “look!” (Job 36:30).

323
 “Behold, God is great, and we know him not; the number
of his years is unsearchable. For he diminishes ([rg1) the
drops of water, he distils rain for his mist (wdal), which
the skies pour down, and drop upon man abundantly.
Again (@a), can anyone understand the spreading of a
cloud (b[), the thunderings of his pavilion? Behold, he
scatters his light (rwa) upon him (wyl[), and covers the
roots of the sea. For by these he judges peoples; he gives
food in abundance. Upon the palms of his hands, he
hides lightning (rwa hsk ~ypk l[), and commands it with
an intercessor ([ygpmb hyl[ wcy). Its crashing declares
concerning him; the cattle also, concerning what is
coming up (hlw[ l[ @a hnqm).” Job 36:26-33 (RSV
revised)

On the surface, this passage is about storm weather, but even on this
reading it is puzzling. Why would a storm be related to the “number of his
years”? Why would covering the “roots of the sea” be relevant in a
description of a storm? A storm may well be seen as a manifestation of
the presence of God and symbolic of his judgment, but these other
aspects are puzzling.

Our proposal for the closing part of Elihu’s speech is that it is political.
Elihu’s point is that there is a failure to understand God’s ways with the
nation just as there is failure to understand this physical phenomenon. He
is not just asserting that such phenomena manifest the power of God.
The lack of understanding is not about how the weather works, or that
God controls the weather; rather, it is a failure to see the weather as a
natural sign that God is at work in the nation, and how it was a portend of
what was going to happen. There is therefore a double meaning in the
text.

The symbolic significance of this weather concerns the knowledge of the

Lord, and what he is about to do in the land. The gathering of the clouds,
the darkening of the sky, the absence of light, and thunder, presage a
storm and signify the absence of understanding (prophetic knowledge).
The dropping of the rain is the giving of the prophetic word, warning the
people about what is to come upon the nation. The lightning strikes are

1 The RSV has “draws up” drops of water suggesting the hydrological
cycle, but the verb carries the sense of diminish, abate, restrain, take, and
so on. In symbolic and prophetic terms, Elihu’s point is about the
withdrawal of prophecy.
324
the first part of the storm itself and their crashing upon the land is
symbolic of Assyrian armies, directed by God upon all those “under
heaven” (Job 37:3); they make Elihu afraid (Job 37:1).

After this, Elihu says that a “voice will roar” and this is the voice of
deliverance.1 This voice instructs more weather and different kinds of
weather to deliver the people—snow, wind, ice, as well as rain (Job 37:4-
12). Elihu concludes that weather comes from God “whether for
correction…or for mercy” (Job 37:13).

The following points enlarge upon this summary, and identify intertextual
echoes that prompt our reading.

1) The expression “number of his years” (wynv rpsm) might suggest God’s
eternity (Ps 102:24-27), but a similar expression occurs elsewhere in
relation to God’s providential dealings:

“In the first year of his reign I Daniel understood by

books the number of the years, whereof the word of the
Lord came to Jeremiah the prophet, that he would
accomplish seventy years in the desolations of
Jerusalem.” Dan 9:2 (KJV)

“For I have laid upon thee the years of their iniquity,

according to the number of the days, three hundred and
ninety days: so shalt thou bear the iniquity of the house
of Israel.” Ezek 4:5 (KJV)

“The wicked man travaileth with pain all his days, and the
number of years is hidden to the oppressor.” Job 15:20
(KJV)

These texts all illustrate a numbering of years by God in relation to his

dealings with the people; the Daniel text shows him seeking to understand
this number. Similarly, Elihu expresses the unsearchable nature of God’s
dealings with his people, a point made slightly differently by Eliphaz: the
number of years assigned to the “oppressor” (Assyria) was hidden.2

1 On a prophetic reading, the voice of the Lord may be taken as a contrast

with the voice of Rabshakeh (Isa 36:13-14).
2 The Hebrew verb for “searching” is not common (12x) and only occurs

once in the prophets—Isa 40:28, “there is no searching of his

understanding”.
325
2) The emphasis on understanding continues in the point about
diminishing “drops” (@jn) of water. This is a figure closely associated (via
the related verb, @jn) with prophecy:

“Son of man, set thy face toward the south, and drop
(@jn) thy word toward the south, and prophesy against the
forest of the south field…” Ezek 20:46 (KJV)

“Son of man, set thy face toward Jerusalem, and drop

(@jn) thy word toward the holy places, and prophesy
against the land of Israel…” Ezek 21:2 (KJV)

“Now therefore hear thou the word of the Lord: Thou

sayest, Prophesy not against Israel, and drop (@jn) not
thy word against the house of Isaac.” Amos 7:16 (KJV)

“Prophesy (@jn) ye not, say they to them that prophesy (@jn):

they shall not prophesy (@jn) to them, that they shall not
take shame.” Mic 2:6 (KJV)

“If a man walking in the spirit and falsehood do lie,

saying, I will prophesy (@jn) unto thee of wine and of
strong drink; he shall even be the prophet (@jn) of this
people.” Mic 2:11 (KJV)

The figure of “diminishing” denotes the withdrawal of the prophetic word

and the withdrawal of understanding. This indicates Job’s perception of
the situation: he was terminally ill and the Assyrian was about to destroy
the nation and take the capital city, very much as in the case of Northern
Israel; he did not understand the rationale of this action.

3) Elihu says that God “distills” rain “for his mist” (NASB, “from the
mist”, RSV “distils rain in his mist”) and the rare (7x) word for distilling
or refining is used of God’s word:

“The words of the Lord are pure words: as silver tried in

a furnace of earth, purified seven times.” Ps 12:6 (KJV)

326
Elihu’s point seems to be that God withdraws his word only to refine it
before then pouring (lzn, v. 28, KJV “drop”) it forth as rain for (l) his
mist1 of creation. This pouring forth of rain is picked up in Isaiah:

“For I will pour (lzn) water upon him that is thirsty, and
floods upon the dry ground: I will pour my spirit upon
thy seed, and my blessing upon thine offspring.” Isa 44:3
(KJV)

“Drop down, ye heavens, from above, and let the skies

pour down (lzn) righteousness: let the earth open, and let
them bring forth salvation, and let righteousness spring
up together; I the Lord have created it.” Isa 45:8 (KJV)

The catalyst for these prophecies is the bestowal of the Spirit in

Hezekiah’s day just prior to the deliverance of the people (Joel 2:28-32).
Without such a bestowal, there is a lack of understanding.

4) Elihu’s next point is a reiteration and restatement,

“Again (@a), can anyone understand the spreading of a

cloud (b[), the thunderings of his pavilion? Behold, he
scatters his light (rwa) upon him (wyl[), and covers the
roots of the sea.” Job 36:29-30 (KJV revised)

Elihu has just asserted that the skies drop down rain “upon” man (v. 28),
and he now varies the figure by saying that God scatters his light “upon”
him (v. 30). This action is paralleled with the “covering of the sea” and
echoed in Isaiah:

“They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain:

for the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the Lord,
as the waters cover the sea.” Isa 11:9 (KJV)

1 The Hebrew word for “mist” only occurs elsewhere in Gen 2:6, a mist
that watered the ground from which the new man was created. If we
follow this echo, Elihu’s point would appear to be that the word of
prophecy is similarly a “mist” that can create a new man. While we retain
the translation “mist”, Pope, Job, 273, argues that this rare word should
be “subterranean cosmic reservoir”, so that Gen 2:6 becomes,
“subterranean water rose up from the ground and watered the face of the
whole earth”.
327
These are the waters of heaven that pour down the knowledge of the
Lord and cover the sea. The text of Job has expanded the figure to include
the “roots” of the sea, but Isaiah has a similar emphasis on “roots”.
Instead of these “roots”, a “root” of Jesse shall stand up for the people
(Isa 11:10).1 The sea here would be symbolic of “the wicked” (Isa 57:20),
whose roots would be covered by the knowledge of the Lord. That is, the
waters of heaven will pour down and the knowledge of the Lord will be
dispersed throughout the nations.

In this context, the spreading of the cloud would be a symbol for the
spreading of the Spirit, a kind of “baptism” in a cloud in which the
knowledge of the Lord is poured out upon man. Elihu’s point is picked by
God in his speech,

“Canst thou lift up thy voice to the clouds, that

abundance of waters may cover thee?” Job 38:34 (KJV)

This question, which God poses to Job, is set in the context of a lack of
knowledge about what was happening in the land.

5) Elihu gives away the dual application of his figure of “clouds” when he
says that “by these he judges (!yd) peoples; he gives food in abundance”
(v. 31). The same Hebrew word occurs once in Isaiah:

“The Lord standeth up to plead, and standeth to judge

(!yd) the people.” Isa 3:13 (KJV)

This judgment is the judgment associated with determining a legal case.

The figure of “clouds” as the means of judgment can be compared to the
word of the Lord judging the people. But at the same time, clouds water
the earth and give food in abundance.

6) In the RSV, Elihu next says “…he covers his hands with the lightning”,
but the Hebrew is more literally, “…upon the palms of his hands, he
hides lightning”. The same Hebrew expression is used in Isaiah:

“Behold, I have graven thee upon the palms of my hands;

thy walls are continually before me.” Isa 49:16 (KJV)

1The figure of “roots” is used with a person, nation or a city-state (Amos

2:19, Isa 5:24, 14:30).
328
The RSV opts for “lightning” because the context is about a storm.
According to the RSV, Elihu commands the lightning to strike the mark,
but this is implausible. The Hebrew verb translated “to strike the mark” is
the ordinary word for meeting someone, or encountering someone, or
making intercession (e.g. Job 21:15). The form of the verb is used here
and once elsewhere:

“And he saw that there was no man, and wondered that

there was no intercessor: therefore his arm brought
salvation unto him; and his righteousness, it sustained
him.” Isa 59:16 (KJV)

Elihu’s point seems to be that God commands the lightning with (b) an
intercessor. This is consistent with the legal overtone in the previous
point that God judges people by the clouds. Elihu is saying that the Lord
will command the lightning through an intercessor, and the echo with
Isaiah indicates that this could be the “arm of the Lord” (Isa 40:10, the
Angel of the Lord, Isa 63:10, the holy Spirit).

7) Elihu concludes by saying that the “crashing” makes a declaration

concerning him (v. 33, RSV), which is a reference to thunder and
lightning showing that God is at work in the land. The NASB is better
with the final clause, “…the cattle also, concerning what is coming up”,
i.e. the cattle also declare that something is about to happen.

7. Job 37—The Approaching Theophany

In this last chapter of Elihu’s speech, a patriarchal reading interprets
Elihu’s point as a general extolling of God’s greatness and a prelude to
God’s own self-declaration in the next speech. However, certain
expressions suggest a political and historical context for Elihu’s words.
Thus, God causes a storm to come for “his land” (v. 13), which suggests
the Promised Land; the “voice of God” is a common prophetic motif in
descriptions of his dealings with Israel and the nations; and the motif of a
storm is prominent in the Prophets in connection with crises for the
people.

7.1 The Voice of God

Elihu describes the “voice” of God in terms of lightning, but there are
two voices to note,

“Hear attentively the noise of his voice, and the sound

that goeth out of his mouth. He directeth it under the

329
 whole heaven, and his light (rwa) unto the ends of the
earth. After it a voice roareth: he thundereth with the
voice of his Excellency; and he will not stay them when
his voice is heard. God thundereth marvellously with his
voice; great things doeth he, which we cannot
comprehend.” Job 37:2-5 (KJV revised)

Elihu instructs Job to listen attentively to the first voice (of lightning), and
an intertextual echo allows the suggestion that this corresponds to the
voice of invasion:

“And the Lord shall utter his voice before his army: for
his camp is very great: for he is strong that executeth his
word: for the day of the Lord is great and very terrible;
and who can abide it?” Joel 2:11 (KJV)

Elihu’s advice to listen attentively to this voice is part of his argument that
Job had not reacted in the right way to the Assyrian onslaught. The
“noise” of this voice uses a rare (7x) Hebrew word for “agitation” which
is mostly found in Job (Job 3:17, 26, 14:1, 39:24). It is used to refer to the
“trouble” (KJV) that Job is experiencing. It is also used in God’s
description of the battle-horse (Job 39:24, KJV “rage”), which we will
show below to be a symbol for the Assyrian army. Outside Job, the word
is used in the context of the Assyrian invasion (Isa 14:3, “fear”, 14:25) and
for the “wrath” of the Lord prior to the Babylonian invasion (Hab 3:2).1
The fear that Job was experiencing was also Elihu’s, for he says “…at this
also my heart trembleth” (v. 1).

This voice is different to the voice (of thunder) that comes afterwards (v.
4). This voice “roars” and the conjunction of the words for “voice” and
“roaring” occur in contexts of salvation and deliverance:

“The Lord also shall roar out of Zion, and utter his voice
from Jerusalem; and the heavens and the earth shall
shake: but the Lord will be the hope of his people, and
the strength of the children of Israel.” Joel 3:162 (KJV)

1 The related verb is found in the same kind of context: e.g. Isa 32:10-11
“trouble”, 37:28-29 “rage”; the text echoes the imperative to the women
of Jerusalem to “listen” in Elihu’s exhortation to Job to “listen”.
2 See also Isa 29:6, 30:30-31, 66:6.

330
This voice has a different purpose, hence Elihu calls it “the voice of his
excellency” (v. 4) using a word that features in deliverance contexts—
Exod 15:7.1 Now, lightning is symbolic of deliverance on the part of God.

7.2 God’s Deployment of the Weather

The voice of deliverance is symbolized in different weather. Again, using
the RSV as a base translation, Elihu says,

“After it his voice roars; he thunders with his majestic

voice and he does not restrain the lightnings when his
voice is heard. God thunders wondrously with his voice;
he does great things which we cannot comprehend. For
to the snow he says, ‘Fall on the earth’; and to the
shower and the rain, ‘Be strong’. He seals up the hand of
every man, that all men may know his work. Then the
beasts go into their lairs, and remain in their dens. From
its chamber comes the whirlwind, and cold from the
scattering winds. By the breath of God ice is given, and
the broad waters are frozen fast. Again (@a),2 he loads the
thick cloud with moisture; the cloud of his light is
scattered (wrwa !n[ #ypy). It (awh) turns round and round
by his guidance, to accomplish all that he commands
them on the face of the habitable world.” Job 37:4-12
(RSV revised)

1) Elihu’s point that God thunders (Ps 29:3) wondrously anticipates Job
40:9. The Hebrew for “wondrously” occurs in Exod 3:20 signifying acts
of deliverance, and in Exod 34:10 signifying God’s use of his people to
subdue the nations.3 The same word occurs in Isaiah and Joel:

“Therefore, behold, I will proceed to do a marvellous

work among this people, even a marvellous work and a
wonder: for the wisdom of their wise men shall perish,
and the understanding of their prudent men shall be hid.”
Isa 29:14 (KJV), cf. Mic 7:15

1 See also Isa 2:10-22, 24:14, Mic 5:4; the word is also used for the
competing majesty of earthly kings and nations.
2 The RSV deletes this particle of addition and misses the repetition in

Elihu’s speech.
3 See also Josh 3:5, Judg 6:13

331
 “And ye shall eat in plenty, and be satisfied, and praise
the name of the Lord your God that hath dealt
wondrously with you: and my people shall never be
ashamed.” Joel 2:26 (KJV)

Elihu is describing the same event of deliverance, but in terms of the

weather. God would do “great things” as he had done in Egypt (Ps
106:21).

2) Elihu says that “we cannot comprehend” God’s great things. He

explains the reason for this (yk, v. 6) in terms of God making it snow and
rain upon the earth. The symbology here uses “snow” to represent the
word of God that is given through the spirit of prophecy (Isa 55:10); this
is a word that explains how God will bring about his “great things”.

3) Elihu next says, literally, that “…a shower, rain, and a shower, rains of
his strength” are commanded by God to be upon the earth. These rains of
prophecy declare God’s strength in delivering his people.

4) Elihu explains that God “seals” up the hand of every man to bring
about a resolution of the political crisis, either by war, alliances or
diplomacy, in order that man might know God’s work of deliverance (v.
7).1 His point is that men do not know how to move forward because
they lack the word of prophecy. Thus, the beasts (nations) that might have
offered military assistance retreat to their homelands (v. 8).

5) Elihu next asserts that,

“From its chamber comes the whirlwind (hpws), and cold

from the scattering winds (~yrzm2). By the breath of God
ice is given, and the broad waters are frozen fast.” Job
37:9 (RSV)

Elihu’s mention of “snow” (v. 6) “ice” (v. 10, RSV) and “cold” (v. 9) are
details echoed in Psalm 147:

“Praise the Lord, O Jerusalem! Praise your God, O Zion!

For he strengthens the bars of your gates; he blesses your
sons within you. He makes peace in your borders; he fills

1 This purpose in “sealing” up the hands of every man may be reflected in

Isaiah’s motif of the “sealing” of knowledge (Isa 8:16, 29:11).
2 The word is unique to Job and uncertain; here we follow Pope, Job, 281.

332
 you with the finest of the wheat. He sends forth his
command to the earth; his word runs swiftly. He gives
snow like wool; he scatters hoarfrost like ashes. He casts
forth his ice like morsels, who can stand before his cold?
He sends forth his word, and melts them; he makes his
wind blow, and the waters flow. He declares his word to
Jacob, his statutes and ordinances to Israel. He has not
dealt thus with any other nation; they do not know his
ordinances. Praise the Lord!” Ps 147:12-20 (RSV)

The associations in this Psalm connect “snow”, “ice” and “frost” to the
giving of the word of God. The Psalmist asserts that no one can “stand”
in the face of this word (the “cold” of this frost and ice); no one can
oppose the sure word of prophecy. If they do, God dissipates their
resolve (“melts them”, Josh 14:8).

As well as giving a word of prophecy God also acts to straighten the

broad waters. The “weather theology” here is that God is fighting water
with water (not fire with fire); it is the waters of heaven versus the waters
of the earth. The “broad waters” of the Assyrian empire are
“straightened” (KJV), or as the RSV interprets, “frozen fast”. They are
straightened by a storm of deliverance (hpws, Isa 29:6).

6) Having made these points, Elihu repeats himself, saying of God,

“Again (@a), he loads the thick cloud with moisture (b[

xyrjy yrb);1 the cloud of his light is scattered (wrwa !n[
#ypy); it turns round and round by his guidance (wtlwbxtb
$phtm twbsm awhw),2 to accomplish all that he commands
them on the face3 of the habitable world.” Job 37:11-12
(RSV Revised)

1 The Hebrew of this clause has two unique words and is therefore
uncertain. Pope notes that instead of “moisture” some scholars favour
“hail” or “lightning”, and instead of “load”, they favour “throw” or
“hurl”, thus giving, “…he hurls lightning”, Job, 282.
2 The Hebrew of this clause is difficult, it may be “…he, turning turnings

by his guidance”, which would pick up on the motif of God overturning

strategies and nations (e.g. Amos 4:11, 8:10).
3 The Hebrew of this clause ends with the normal expression for

“earthward” and often used with the word for “face”, e.g. Gen 42:6. The
clause therefore seems to contain a pun on this behaviour: “he commands
them on the face of the world earthward”. The point would appear to be
333
The RSV deletes “again”, but it is not superfluous as it signals Elihu’s
return to his earlier points. The repetition is not entirely clear, but the
overall point seems to be that God commands those who live on the
earth, and the weather is symbolic of this control.

7.3 Providence and the Weather

Having described the symbolic significance of the weather, Elihu
summarises its purpose in providential terms:

“Whether for a rod (jbv1), or for his land, or for love, he

causes it to happen (acm).” Job 37:13 (RSV revised)

In the RSV, Elihu suggests that God causes various meteorological

phenomena to happen for a reason. The problem with this is that the
Hebrew verb is basically about causing something to be found (acm)
rather than causing it to happen. Elihu’s point seems to be therefore that
God causes his purpose to be found out, i.e. the purpose he has in
bringing a whirlwind and other meteorological phenomenon upon the
people. This point fits Elihu’s claim to be speaking on behalf of God and
revealing to Job the purpose of his affliction.

Here the text echoes Isaiah when he refers to the “rod”, which the RSV
has rightly seen as a figure for correction:

“O Assyrian, the rod of mine anger, and the staff in their

hand is mine indignation.” Isa 10:5 (KJV)

“Therefore thus saith the Lord God of hosts, O my

people that dwellest in Zion, be not afraid of the
Assyrian: he shall smite thee with a rod, and shall lift up
his staff against thee, after the manner of Egypt.” Isa
10:24 (KJV)

“For through the voice of the Lord shall the Assyrian be

beaten down, which smote with a rod.” Isa 30:31 (KJV)

that God controls nations to bring them into subjection to his will
(bowing earthward)
1 As noted in the KJV margin, this is the normal Hebrew word for a

“rod” which the RSV interprets metaphorically; we retain the normal

sense in order to link the text with Isaiah.
334
Elihu is aware that God had brought a rod upon the land, and this is
described with the metaphor of the storm (Isa 4:6, 25:4, 28:2, 32:2, Job
24:8). Equally, Elihu is aware that God can act on behalf of his land and
out of love for the people, and such an act of deliverance can be equally
described using the metaphor of a storm (Isa 30:30). The storm of an
invasion can be countered with a storm of deliverance. The whirlwind in
Job is a storm of deliverance.

And so Elihu exhorts Job to “hearken” to what he is saying and consider

the “wondrous” works of God, i.e. the wondrous acts of deliverance that
God carried out in the Exodus (v. 14). Anticipating God’s line of
questioning in his speech, Elihu asks Job similar questions:

“Dost thou know when God disposed them, and caused

the light of his cloud to shine? Dost thou know the
balancings of the clouds, the wondrous works of him
which is perfect in knowledge? Thou whose (rva)
garments are warm, when he quieteth the earth from (!m)
the south.1 Hast thou with him spread out the sky, which
is strong, and as a molten looking glass?” Job 37:15-18
(KJV revised)

Job obviously does not know how God disposed the wondrous works
enacted in Egypt, nor how he caused the light of his cloud to shine.2 Job
does not know the balances of the clouds, a parallel figure to “balances of
mountains and hills”, because he does not know how the nations are
ordered by God (Isa 40:12). Job has not spread out the sky with God who
does this alone (Isa 44:24).

7.4 The Need for Teaching

Elihu concludes his speech in vv. 19-24 where there is a change of address
to God:

1 This description may appear out of place in a discourse centred on the

weather. The key notion is the “quiet” in the land, which signifies a rest
from war, and the direction, “south” may refer to the peace that the land
had when Assyria (the northern power) was occupied with Philistia (the
south).
2 This verb, “to shine” is not common (8x) and associated with the

Shekinah presence of God and used in contexts of deliverance and

conquest (Deut 32:2, Pss 50:2, 80:3, 94:1).
335
 “Teach us what we shall say unto him; for we cannot
order our speech by reason of darkness.” Job 37:19 (KJV)

Elihu is not addressing the friends and asking them to teach Job and
himself, because he has said that he will not use the wisdom of the friends
(Job 32:14). Neither is he sarcastically addressing Job and asking him to
teach himself and the three friends, because he has avowed that he will be
honest and forthright (Job 33:3). Elihu is addressing God who is coming
in the approaching storm to address Job (Job 10:2, 13:23).1

The need for God to teach is because of the “darkness” of false thinking
(Isa 5:20). Wolfers states that “…it is here that we find the essential
function of Elihu in the book of Job, as the second witness to summon
God to trial”.2

“Shall it be told him that I would speak? Or should a

man say that he would be swallowed up?” Job 37:20
(NASB)

Elihu is hesitant and asks whether a man should say that “…he [Job] will
be swallowed up” (v. 20). Hence, he has asked for God to intervene and
teach them what should be said about the crisis (Deut 19:15). Here the
text echoes an idea of swallowing found in Hosea,

“Israel is swallowed up: now shall they be among the

Gentiles as a vessel wherein is no pleasure.” Hos 8:8
(KJV)

Elihu goes onto say that, as for now, men do not see the “bright light”:

“And now men see not the bright light which is in the
clouds: but the wind passeth, and cleanseth them.” Job
37:21 (KJV)

The Hebrew expression, rwa war, for “see the light” only occurs elsewhere
in Job 3:16 and Isa 9:2,

“The people that walked in darkness have seen a great

light: they that dwell in the land of the shadow of death,
upon them hath the light shined.” Isa 9:2 (KJV)

1 See Wolfers, Deep Things, 259-262.

2 Wolfers, Deep Things, 264.
336
Elihu’s “bright light” can be compared to Isaiah’s “great light”. Isaiah’s
prophecy relates to the “light” that had been given to the people in the
person of Hezekiah. Accordingly, the “dimness” (Isa 9:1) associated with
the impending Assyrian invasion was not as dark as that associated with
the earlier invasions of Northern Israel. The people had had this light but
had turned to “looking upward” for knowledge on how to meet the
political and military crisis (Isa 8:21). The fact that a son had been given to
the people was their assurance that the government would return to his
shoulder (Isa 9:6) even if it looked as if the nation would be taken into
captivity.

The text of Job seems to making the same point: the people could not see
such a bright light. The KJV locates this light in the clouds, but the
Hebrew does not have the relative clause “which is in the clouds”, just “he
(it)…clouds”.1 The form of the Hebrew word for “clouds” occurs once
elsewhere,

“Ascribe ye strength unto God: his excellency is over

Israel, and his strength is in the clouds.” Ps 68:34 (KJV),
cf. 2 Sam 22:12, Ps 18:12

This echo suggests that Elihu is saying that God is in the clouds, that he is
a bright light, and that he will deliver Israel.

The KJV has “the wind passeth”, but the Hebrew is xwr and can be
equally rendered “spirit”. A revised translation of this statement of Elihu’s
could therefore be,

“And now men see not the bright light; he is in the

clouds: and the spirit passeth over, and cleanseth them.”
Job 37:21 (KJV revised)

The image of the spirit passing over is coupled with the idea of cleansing.
The cleansing mentioned here is purification, and the word is most
associated with Levitical purity. The idea could be a reference to the
bestowal of the spirit (Isa 32:15) and a cleansing of the people through
their reformation.

Elihu says next,

1 The pronoun is masculine whereas “light” is feminine.

337
 “Out of the north there will come (htay) golden splendour;
around God is awesome majesty.” Job 37:22 (NASB
revised)

The Hebrew here is difficult, but the NASB is better than the KJV and
RSV. The idea of “coming from the north” in the Prophets is either an
invasion (Isa 14:31,1 Jer 51:48) or the return of captives to the land (Ps
107:3, Isa 49:12). But here “gold” comes from the north, although the
NASB paraphrases this as “golden splendour”. The clearer assertion is the
reference to “awesome majesty”. Isaiah uses the same word for “majesty”
to describe God’s voice:

“And the Lord shall cause his glorious voice to be heard,

and shall shew the lighting down of his arm, with the
indignation of his anger, and with the flame of a
devouring fire, with scattering, and tempest, and
hailstones.” Isa 30:30 (KJV)

This text is about God’s action of deliverance of Jerusalem, and this is

described in terms of a terrible “storm”. This echo fits with the
interpretation of the “whirlwind” that we have been proposing for Job. If
we follow this connection, Elihu is saying that God’s storm of deliverance
will come from the north.

Elihu closes his speech then on the theme of deliverance: God was all-
powerful and would “not afflict” (v. 23), i.e. he would not carry Judah
away into captivity like Israel (2 Kgs 17:20). Some ordinary men among
the people believed this and did still fear him (v. 24).

8. Conclusion
The second day has been about Job and Elihu; the short interruption
from Bildad is of relatively little consequence. This day concludes the
human speeches, and the scene is now set for God’s resolution of the
debate.

1 The syntax of Isa 14:31 is the same as Job 37:22.

338
 CHAPTER SEVEN
God’s First Speech
1. Introduction
The traditional approach1 to God’s speeches interprets them in a literal
manner comparing the inadequacy of Job’s knowledge to God’s
knowledge of the wonders of nature. In this chapter, we will not pursue
this approach, as it is amply covered in commentaries.2 Instead, we will
explore the extent to which a parabolic reading of these speeches is
possible. This strategy is not designed to replace the traditional reading,
since both literal and symbolic levels of meaning can co-exist in any one
stretch of language. Instead, our proposal is that readers of the play would
have considered the dramatic portrayal of these speeches on a stage in
both ways: on one level of interpretation, an actor announces (off-stage)
the majesty and power of God, as Job sits and listens; on a second level,
the audience picks up echoes3 of the existing prophetic and historical
traditions, which enables them to see a Job who has not accepted the
providential plan of God in his own circumstances.

2. Job 38—The Creation of Israel

We will break the poem up into parts:

• introduction (38:1-3).
• the earth and the sea (38:4-21).
• foundations (38:4-11).
• light, darkness, earth and sea (38:12-21).
• the waters (38:22-38).
• control of the sea with the waters of heaven (38:22-24).
• famine relief from the waters of heaven (38:25-28).

1 This approach is as old as the LXX which was compiled between 300-
150
2 For example, see Gordis, The Book of God, ch. 10, Wolfers, Deep Things,

ch. 8, Pope, Job, 288-315, Habel, Job, 517-549.

3 This does not exclude the possibility that the audience picked up on

other echoes; it is just that these are not relevant to our study, see the
essay, “Job 38 and Ancient Egyptian Wisdom” in von Rad, From Genesis to
Chronicles.
339
• the freezing of “the sea” (38:29-30).
• Astrological Wisdom? (38:31-33).
• famine relief, the waters of heaven, and Wisdom (38:34-38).
• beasts of the earth and field (38:39-39:30).

The opening part of Job 38 does not fit the account of creation in
Genesis. There is no record of morning stars or the sons of God; no
cloud is mentioned; there are no proud waves addressed by God, and so on.
Instead, it has been taken as fresh material describing creation, and
scholars have linked its themes to the myths of the time about deities
taming the primeval sea.1

Scholars comment2 on the creation poem by paraphrasing its surface

intent and clarifying (and amending) the Hebrew; there is very little by
way of linkage to other Scripture. Furthermore, many commentators
remark upon the fact that the speech does not answer Job’s concerns.3

Linkage to other scriptural traditions, however, can be sustained if the

poem is approached symbolically. We can treat many expressions as
echoes of the deliverance of Israel at the Red Sea, when we see this
deliverance as a symbolic act of “creation”. Other expressions that do not
resonate with scriptural traditions may derive from the poet’s own
background as new descriptions of the deliverance of Israel at the Red
Sea. Such expressions may be used to make the connection between his
topic and Israel’s history.

1 For instance, see Fyall, Now my Eyes, 191-194; M. Fishbane, Text and
Texture, (New York: Schoken Books, 1979), 13-16. However, the Genesis
account contains no indication of such a conflict, and the sea monsters
are said to be “good”.
2 Alter comments that the poem represents “the kind of verse a poet of

genius could persuasively imagine God speaking”, Art, 96.

3 For example, Dell, Sceptical Literature, 37, asserts that the speeches do not

engage Job’s concerns. However, this fails to read them symbolically; it is

on this level that the dialogue is struck for engagement. Tsevat, Meaning,
90-94, reviews standard interpretations of God’s speeches and how they
“answer” Job including i) the satisfaction of an encounter and an
experience of God in a theophany, ii) making Job realise how little he
knows of God’s dealings by rehearsing God’s knowledge of nature, iii)
showing Job that God is in control of nature and therefore in control of
the fortunes of men, and iv) bringing Job to a position where he accepts
his suffering without knowing any reasons.
340
The echoes to the deliverance at the Red Sea come at the beginning of the
poem (vv. 4-11), in which Israel is the “earth” and Egypt is the “sea”. On
the basis of this historical deliverance, the poem turns to consider Job’s
dire historical circumstances. In the next few verses (vv. 12-15), Assyria is
the “morning” which God commands, and Judah is the “earth”; after this
(vv. 16-20) Judah is the “earth”, but Assyria is now the overflowing sea.
This section of the poem then concludes (v. 21) with an inclusio—a
recapitulation of the initial question in v. 4 about Job’s lack of knowledge.

The next part of the speech is about “the waters” in various forms, snow,
hail, the deep, flood, rain, ice and dew. It is a series of water-based similes
describing how God will deliver Judah from the “overflowing flood” of
the “deep” (Assyria) with thunder, lightning and rain. After this he will
restore the land of Judah to fertility, with rain and dew. Throughout all
this time of trouble and deliverance he will give the snow and hoary frost
of heaven, that is, the prophetic word. The face of the deep will be hidden
and “frozen” by another nation. Essentially, in all of this, God is using the
waters of heaven to control the waters of the earth.

The next part of the poem ridicules the leaders of the people for their
reliance on astrology, for their understanding of what is about to happen,
and how they might best deliver themselves. It does this by showing that
God sets the ordinances of the heavens. Job cannot command the waters
(clouds) of heaven in order the control the waters (nations) of the earth,
and should acknowledge that God places understanding inside the inner
man.

The speech then rehearses God’s superintendence over creatures, using

them as symbols for Assyria, Judah, Bashan, Ishmaelite and Negev
mercenaries and Edom; it shows how God is in control of Judah’s
destiny.

Thus, instead of reading the poem as a meditation upon God’s powers in

relation to nature and creation, we suggest that the meditation is about the
past and future deliverance of Israel.

Finally, the fact that God speaks is worth noting: this is not characteristic
of Wisdom literature, and this suggests the book of Job is not that kind of
literature.

341
2.1 Darkened Counsel
God’s first speech opens with, “Who1 is this that darkeneth2 counsel by
words without knowledge?” (v. 2), and as such picks up on Elihu’s
assertion, “Therefore doth Job open his mouth in vain; he multiplieth
words without knowledge” (Job 35:16). Job will assert that he has talked
about things of which he had no knowledge (Job 42:3). On our reading,
Job has lacked knowledge in respect of knowing why God has brought
about the crisis he faces and how God will deliver him from his situation.
God’s question here is a significant statement with political providential
overtones.

Whilst the word “counsel” (hc[) is common, it often carries the sense of
political counsel and political judgment.3 To take one example from Isaiah
5 and the days of Uzziah, a chapter with several links to Job 38:

“Woe unto them that draw iniquity with cords of vanity,

and sin as it were with a cart rope: That say, Let him
make speed, and hasten his work, that we may see it: and
let the counsel of the Holy One of Israel draw nigh and
come, that we may know it!” Isa 5:18-19 (KJV), cf. Ps
107:11

This, of course, is a jibe against God and whether he can make his counsel
come to pass. In the context of Job 38, the use of a political word
describing the speeches of Job (and possibly the friends) provides a key
for our interpretation.4

Job has darkened counsel “without knowledge” and this expression, t[d
ylb, is relatively rare, occurring nine times, four times in connection with
1 Some commentators make this an address to Elihu.
2 Alter, Art, 97, notes that this “darkening of counsel” picks up on Job’s
opening speech (Job 3) and Job’s desire for the darkening of the day of
his birth (v. 9); hence God calls Job a “mighty man” (Job 3:3, 38:3). God’s
counsel was that the Davidic king would suffer; Job wanted the birth-day
of that king to be dark. Alter’s study of Job, Art, 85-110, shows how
God’s speeches address Job’s opening speech; see also, Pyeon, ibid. chap
3.
3 For example taking just Isaiah, Isa 8:10, 14:26, 16:3, 19:3, 11, 30:1, 36:5,

44:26, 46:10, 47:13. In this light consider Isa 11:2—“the spirit of counsel
and might”.
4 See Dhorme, Job, 574, who gives a “providential” sense to the word, but

otherwise follows a traditional reading.

342
killing a man in ignorance, four times in Job, and, significantly, once in
Isaiah 5:

“Therefore my people are gone into captivity, because

they have no knowledge (t[d ylb): and their honourable
men are famished, and their multitude dried up with
thirst.” Isa 5:13 (KJV)

This is a further indication that there is a political symbology in the

speeches of the dialogue partners. We can construe the speeches of God
to have a political meaning in addition to any literal sense. This means that
on a symbolic level God’s speeches do engage Job. They engage him by
bolstering his faith that God will deliver Judah. The dialogue is a test of
Job for disinterested righteousness. He succeeds in this test in not
succumbing to the self-serving theology of the friends: repent and God
will restore his favour. However, in enduring the suffering, his faith in
God is shaken and his mind is conflicted. God does not explain the why
of his suffering, but he does offer an imminent deliverance from that
suffering. He reinforces Job’s faith that he would be delivered and dispels
his doubts about how this can be achieved.

God accuses Job of “darkening” counsel. Darkness is a common figure,

and it is a significant metaphor in the prophecies of Isaiah delivered in
Uzziah’s day. For instance, to take Isaiah 5 again,

“Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that
put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put
bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!” Isa 5:20 (KJV)

Here, “darkness” is being used as a figure to describe a certain kind of

knowledge rather than the dire straits of the country (as is the case for
example, in Isa 5:30), and this is the use of the figure in Job 38.

God exhorts Job to “gird up now thy loins like a man” and the word used
for “man” is rbg, which indicates the strength of a man. Idiomatically, we
might say, “gird up now thy loins like a real man”. The intent is to make
Job like a man of war. This instruction is another echo of Isaiah 5:

“None shall be weary nor stumble among them; none

shall slumber nor sleep; neither shall the girdle of their
loins be loosed, nor the latchet of their shoes be
broken…” Isa 5:27 (KJV)

343
This describes the readiness of the Assyrian army,1 but in terms of the
political symbology of Job, Job is being instructed to gird up his loins in
preparation for an intellectual “battle” of understanding. It is in this
military context that the prophecy of the Branch is set: “righteousness
shall be the girdle of his loins” (Isa 11:5).2

God requires Job to “declare” (rather than just “answer”—KJV) to him

what he knows in response to his questions. This is put as a challenge and
the character of the dramatic presentation here reflects the times of
Hezekiah in which challenging goes on between Yahweh and the people.

2.2 The Foundations of the Earth

The creation imagery that is now used by God in his address to Job has
been interpreted literally by commentators. A symbolic level of meaning
in this language is suggested by echoes with the Israelite scriptural
traditions. Our proposal is that creation imagery is used in relation to the
people, their land, and their capital city—Jerusalem. The language
considers Israel in terms of the building of a temple.

The first few verses in the KJV read,

“Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the

earth? declare, if thou hast understanding. Who hath laid
the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath
stretched the line upon it? Whereupon are the sockets
(!da) thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone
thereof; When the morning stars sang together, and all
the sons of God shouted for joy?” Job 38:4-7 (KJV
revised), cf. Prov 30:4

The standard reading of this passage regards it as about a single event —

the creation of heaven and earth. It asks Job about “where” he was at this
time, and this is a device for pointing up the fact that Job has no
understanding of nature. However, we need to note a complexity in the
passage: there is the event of laying the foundations of the earth, but the
event of stretching a line upon the earth is different and subsequent to the
laying of the foundations. This is an act of evaluation: are the foundations
“true”?

1 Isaiah 5 begins in the reign of Uzziah and moves into the prophetic
future from v. 27 onwards when describing a nation “from afar”.
2 The word for “loins” (10x) features in the Prophets (Isaiah 3x, Jeremiah

1x); the verb “girding” features in the Prophets (Isaiah 3x, Jeremiah 1x).
344
Similarly, we also need to note that when God asks about “where” Job
was at the laying of the foundations of the earth, he also provides a time
indication: this was “when” the morning stars sang together and “when”
all the sons of God shouted for joy. Our proposal is that the laying of the
foundations of the earth is illustrated in the exodus of the nation from
Egypt.

2.3 Israel and Creation

Since the Hebrew word #ra can mean “land” and “earth” there are many
occasions when it is difficult to know which is intended. For example,
take the following text,

“…for they say, The Lord seeth us not; the Lord hath
forsaken the earth.” Ezek 8:12 (KJV), cf. 9:9

The parallelism of Ezek 8:12 may persuade us that the prophet is thinking
of the people as the “earth” that God has forsaken, and that “earth” has a
metonymical reference to the people. Or again, David’s hymn of praise at
the setting up of the ark in Jerusalem exhorts:

“Sing unto the Lord, all the earth... Declare his glory among
the heathen; his marvellous works among all nations.” 1
Chron 16:23-24 (KJV)

“Fear before him, all the earth: the world also shall be stable,
that it be not moved.” 1 Chron 16:30 (KJV)

Here Israel is the “earth” and they are distinguished from the nations (or
the world) among whom they declare the glory of God.

Allowing for metonymical reference, a number of passages paint a picture

of Israel as “the earth”, and use the language of the Genesis creation
accounts to enforce this perspective. Another example would be,

“I looked on the earth, and behold, it was formless and

void; and to the heavens, and they had no light. I looked
on the mountains, and behold, they were quaking, and all
the hills moved to and fro. I looked, and behold, there
was no man, and all the birds of the heavens had fled. I
looked, and behold, the fruitful land was a wilderness,
and all its cities were pulled down before the Lord,
before his fierce anger.” Jer 4:23-26 (NASB)
345
This passage betrays a parallelism signalled by the expressions, “I
looked…I looked” (this echoes “And God saw…”). The first description
is of the land viewed in terms of the Genesis creation: it has returned to
formlessness and chaos (Gen 1:2); this is not a description of the actual
earth and the actual heavens, since these are protected from being
returned to chaos by the Noahic covenant. Rather, it is a description of
the land, and this is made clear as the poetic symbolism is unpacked in the
second set of descriptions: there is “no man” (Adam) and the “cities”
have been pulled down.

The notion of “foundations” (dsy) is mostly applied to the building of the

temple; it is also used in connection with the founding of nations:

“Behold, tomorrow about this time I will cause it to rain

a very grievous hail, such as hath not been in Egypt since
the foundation thereof even until now.” Exod 9:18
(KJV)

The concept of “foundations” is also applied to Israel. In Psalm 82, the

psalmist describes the “gods” of Israel (v. 6). The accusation is that they
did not exercise their duties—they did not judge in a just manner, nor did
they defend the poor and needy (vv. 2-3). As a result they walked in
darkness, and “the earth” was out of course, which one might expect if
the rulers of the nation were unfaithful.

“They know not, neither will they understand; they walk on in darkness:
all the foundations of the earth are out of course.” Ps 82:5 (KJV)

There are a number of architectural references to the foundations of the

earth, and the creation of the heavens as the work of God’s hands, for
example,

“And forgettest the Lord thy maker that... laid the

foundations of the earth...that divided the sea.”
Isa 51:13-15 (KJV)

“Of old thou hast laid the foundation of the earth: and
the heavens [are] the work of thy hands.” Ps 102:25
(KJV)

In this Psalm the references to “the prisoner”, and God “looking down”
to see the “groaning” of the captive, clearly evoke Israel’s bondage and
346
redemption under Moses (vv. 19, 20). It was at this time that the
foundation of “the earth” was laid and the typical heavens were fashioned
by hands.

The choice of the figure of “building foundations” is complemented by

the mention of “sockets” and a “corner stone”. We can speculate that the
“architectural” metaphor is motivated by the poet’s understanding of the
time of Hezekiah. If the people had confidence in the temple and in the
city of Jerusalem, then the poet could use this confidence to describe the
land as a “temple” with God as its builder. The book of Isaiah has the
only other occurrence of the motif of a “corner stone”, but in relation to a
future corner stone for a temple:

“Therefore thus saith the Lord God, Behold, I lay in

Zion for a foundation a stone, a tried stone, a precious
corner stone,1 a sure foundation: he that believeth shall
not make haste.” Isa 28:16 (KJV)

When Yahweh therefore challenges Job,

“Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the

earth? declare, if thou hast understanding.” Job 38:4
(KJV)

the intertexts of this text allow the suggestion that Yahweh is challenging
Job about the deliverance of Israel at the exodus.

The expression “understanding” (hnyb, “declare if thou hast

understanding”) is used in political and providential contexts:

“And of the children of Issachar, which were men that had

understanding of the times, to know what Israel ought to
do; the heads of them were two hundred; and all their
brethren were at their commandment.” 1 Chron 12:32
(KJV)

“Therefore, behold, I will proceed to do a marvellous

work among this people, even a marvellous work and a
wonder: for the wisdom of their wise men shall perish,

1The Hebrew is slightly different to Job, being “a stone, testing, of the

corner”.
347
 and the understanding of their prudent men shall be hid.”
Isa 29:14 (KJV)

“And he informed me, and talked with me, and said, O

Daniel, I am now come forth to give thee skill and
understanding.” Dan 9:22 (KJV)

These texts suggest that the understanding that Yahweh is seeking from
Job is not the understanding of moral wisdom, nor the problem of human
suffering, but the understanding of practical matters of providence and
prophecy.

This reading is further supported by the figure of the “measuring line”

(wq), but its use elsewhere suggests that the stretching of the line is an act
subsequent to the laying of any foundations, and an act taking place in
Job’s own experience.

“Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest?

or who hath stretched1 the line upon it?” Job 38:5 (KJV)

The word “line” occurs mostly in Isaiah’s prophecies,

“Judgment also will I lay to the line, and righteousness to

the plummet: and the hail shall sweep away the refuge of
lies, and the waters shall overflow the hiding place.” Isa
28:17 (KJV)

“But the cormorant and the bittern shall possess it; the
owl also and the raven shall dwell in it: and he shall
stretch out upon it the line of confusion, and the stones
of emptiness.” Isa 34:11 (KJV)

“The Lord hath purposed to destroy the wall of the

daughter of Zion: he hath stretched out a line, he hath
not withdrawn his hand from destroying: therefore he
made the rampart and the wall to lament; they languished
together.” Lam 2:8 (KJV)

1 See Job 15:25—our proposal is that the Assyrians were the line that God
stretched.
348
These texts show that the figure of the “line” is used mainly in contexts of
judgment.1 The only occurrence of the word in the historical books is in
relation to Manasseh,

“And I will stretch over Jerusalem the line of Samaria,

and the plummet of the house of Ahab: and I will wipe
Jerusalem as a man wipeth a dish, wiping it, and turning it
upside down.” 2 Kgs 21:13 (KJV)

The point here is that the line of judgment applied to Samaria will be
applied to Jerusalem, and in terms of the language of Job, to the “earth”.

These inter-textual echoes support a reference to the foundation

(establishment) of the nation in the land in the opening words of God’s
speech.

2.4 Israel and the Dry Land

Several events could be construed as the “laying of the foundations of the
nation”; for instance, Joshua’s conquest of the land, the making of the
covenant at Sinai, or the crossing of the Red Sea. Our proposal is that
God refers to the crossing of the Red Sea as “the laying of the foundation
of the earth”. This proposal is prompted by an echo with Isaiah,

“And forgettest the Lord thy maker, that... laid the

foundations of the earth...that divided the sea.”
Isa 51:13-15 (KJV)

This text echoes the tradition of the crossing of the Red Sea and connects
this event with the laying of the foundations of the earth.

However, our argument has a complication. God’s speech appeals to the

crossing of the Red Sea, not because the nation is founded in that event,
but because that event is a parabolic display of Israel’s conquest of the
land. We have noted above that prophetic traditions viewed Israel in their
land as an “earth” separated from the sea. Other traditions use the story
of the Red Sea deliverance to associate Israel with the “dry land” of the
creation account.

1 Contrast Zech 2:1-2 where a rope-line is applied to Jerusalem to measure

its breadth. Two examples of the figure in connection with the temple (2
Chron 4:2, Ezek 47:3) are not jejune to Job.
349
The account in Genesis is peculiar in that it describes, not the creation of
earth, but the emergence of the dry (hvby):

“…and let the dry [land] appear...and God called the dry [land] earth...”
Gen 1:9-10 (KJV revised)

This is a detail that is mimicked in the crossing of the Red Sea:

“But lift thou up thy rod, and stretch out thine hand over the sea, and
divide it: and the children of Israel shall go on dry ground through the
midst of the sea.” Exod 14:16 (KJV)

“And the children of Israel went into the midst of the sea upon the dry
ground and the waters were a wall...” Exod 14:22 (KJV), cf. v. 291

The sea is gathered so that “the dry” appears and Israel passes through the
middle of the seas. The typology is suggestive of a nation created by God
and separated from the seas, passing through upon what God has called
“the earth”. The seas are gathered back and the earth appears; similarly,
the sea is held back and Israel appears.

“Let the waters...be gathered together... and let the dry

land appear...” Gen 1:9 (KJV)

“He gathereth the waters of the sea together as an

heap...” Ps 33:7 (KJV)2

“He divided the sea, and caused them to pass through;

and he made the waters to stand as an heap.” Ps 78:13
(KJV)

The sea is a “great deep”; its proud waves roar; but it is nevertheless
“dried” and “divided” (Isa 51:10, 15).3 In this act of salvation Israel is the
separated nation that “walked on the dry” (Exod 15:19), in the middle of
the sea. The basis for the use of the figure of “the earth” for Israel lies in
this typical function: Israel is a typical creation of God; hence they are a

1 See also Neh 9:11, Pss 66:6, 95:5, 114:3, Isa 44:3.
2
There are a number of echoes in Psalm 33 to both the Genesis and
Exodus creations.
3 See also Jer 31:35, 51:36, Nah 1:4, Zech 10:11.

350
separated “earth”. They are separated from the “chaos” of the formless
and void planet covered by the seas.1

Israel are viewed as the “earth”, and their deliverance through the Red Sea
is typical of their created status. Habakkuk echoes the story of the Red
Sea in a song that celebrates Israel’s conquest of the land.

“Thou didst walk through the sea with thine horses,

through the heap2 of great waters.” Hab 3:15 (KJV)

This suggests that the conquest of the land should be viewed in the same
light as the crossing of the Red Sea—as a walk through the sea of
nations.

The crossing of the Jordan foreshadows this conquest, and this crossing is
described with language echoing the crossing of the Red Sea:

“…the waters which came down from above stood and rose up upon an
heap very far from the city Adam...” Josh 3:16 (KJV)

There is the same emphasis upon “the dry ground” in this crossing (Josh
3:17, 4:22).3

Accordingly, the Psalmist declares,

“The earth is the Lord’s...and they that dwell therein...he

hath founded it upon the seas...Who shall ascend into the
hill of the Lord? Or who shall stand in his holy place?”
Ps 24:1-3 (KJV)

The relationship of earth and seas is one where the earth is founded above the
seas. This “earth” is where the holy place of the Lord is present, and this
holy place corresponds to heaven—the dwelling place of God.

The earth is also positioned between the seas in the future restored
kingdom of Israel:

1 The Promised Land is demarcated between two stretches of water, i.e.

two rivers (Gen 15:18).
2
The word “heap” here can be translated as “mud”.
3 Twelve stones are taken from Jordan (out of the dry river bed), and

twelve stones are taken to Jordan and left in the middle of the river’s flow.
351
 “And it shall be in that day, that living waters shall go out
from Jerusalem; half of them toward the former sea, and
half of them toward the hinder sea: in summer and in
winter shall it be.” Zech 14:8 (KJV), cf. Ps 72:8, Dan
11:45

The dividing of the sea and the emergence of the land positions Israel
between two waters (Ps 80:11).

In sum, the prophets and psalmists did not just see the crossing of the
Red Sea as an act of deliverance; they also saw it as a display of what God
was doing with Israel. With Israel between the walls or heaps of the Red
Sea there is presented a photograph of what God was achieving in bringing
Israel out of Egypt; he was establishing a separated nation, a separated
earth situated in the sea.

2.5 Deliverance at the Red Sea

The picture of the singing of the morning stars and the shouting of the
sons of God is an attractive figure of the exodus.

“When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons
of God shouted for joy?” Job 38:7 (KJV), cf. Zeph 3:14,
Prov 8:31

A number of inter-textual arguments link this text to Israel:

i) The “stars” are a figure for Israel, and in particular the tribes, derived
from Joseph’s dreams (Gen 37:9f).1

ii) Moses and the tribes “sing” after they cross the Red Sea as they watch
their deliverance in the “morning”2 (Exod 14:27), seeing the destruction
of the Egyptians in the Red Sea.

iii) The expression “…all the sons of…”—ynb-lk—is typically used of

Israel—“all the children of Israel”; so Israel could be the “sons of God”.

1 Examples of texts which apply the figure of the “stars” to Israel include,
Judg 5:20, where the stars fight Sisera, the aspiration of the king of
Babylon to be exalted above the stars (Isa 14:13), the casting of the stars
to the ground in Dan 8:9-11.
2 Compare here the morning upon which Jerusalem saw their deliverance

from Sennacherib’s army.

352
If this approach is correct, God’s challenge to Job is an implicit claim that
Job does not understand the lessons of Israel’s past. Job is confronted
with the dissolution of the nation and the destruction of the city of
Jerusalem, but he has not understood how God has in the past laid the
foundations of the nation: through miraculous deliverance and
destruction of the enemy.

The catalogue of questions that God puts to Job in the early part of his
speech are linked by the expression ‘when’ (b) and it is useful to set them
out in a schematic form:

“Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth…

when the morning stars sang together…
when [the sea] brake forth…
when I made the cloud the garment thereof…

This catalogue of questions and points are all part of the topic “the
foundations of the earth” about which God is challenging Job.1

The motifs of the sea “breaking forth”, a “cloud”, and “darkness”, feature
in the deliverance at the Red Sea:

• Egypt “broke forth” like the sea after Israel.

• God covered2 the “sea” of Egypt at the Red Sea.
• A “cloud” and “darkness” were put between Israel and Egypt.

The proposal that Egypt be thought of as “the sea” breaking forth after
Israel is not out of step with prophetic language generally, nor is it
inappropriate that traditions should present the deliverance at the Red Sea
in creation language. In holding back Egypt, the Sea, God is making Israel

1 This catalogue is echoed in Isa 40:21, a chapter which has other points
of connection with Job: princes are brought to nothing (Isa 40:23, Job
12:21); they are carried away in the whirlwind of deliverance (Isa 40:24,
Job 38:1, 40:6) and replaced by righteous plants; God is the creator of the
stars (Isa 40:26, Job 38:31-34); Job complained that his way was hid (Isa
40:27, Job 3:23).
2 The KJV has “shut” but “covered” is more consistent with usage

elsewhere.
353
emerge as the “dry land”;1 he places darkness and a cloud between the
two camps.

“And the angel of God, which went before the camp of

Israel, removed and went behind them; and the pillar of
the cloud went from before their face, and stood behind
them: And it came between the camp of the Egyptians
and the camp of Israel; and it was a cloud and darkness to
them, but it gave light by night to these: so that the one
came not near the other all the night.” Exod 14:19-20
(KJV)

We can set out the structure of God’s opening statement more fully thus,

“Where wast thou…

when I laid the foundations of the earth?

declare, if thou hast understanding.

Who hath laid the measures thereof, if

thou knowest?
or who hath stretched the line upon it?
(Whereupon are the foundations thereof
fastened?)
or who laid the corner stone thereof;

When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons
of God shouted for joy?

Or who shut up ($ks2) the sea with

doors, when it broke forth, as if it had
issued out of the womb?

When I placed a cloud for its garment, and thick darkness

a swaddling band for it…?”

Job 38:4-9 (KJV revised)

1 In Genesis 1, the waters (not the sea) are separated; the sea is not said to
break forth.
2 The verb is translated “hedged” in Job 3:23 and its use here is one of

several links between Job’s opening speech and God’s closing speeches.
354
The KJV has “Or who shut up the sea with doors”, but the Hebrew does
not have a word for “who”; the KJV continues the style of the poetry,
which is a series of “who” “where” and “when” questions.

God says that he made “thick darkness” a swaddling-band for the sea.
The Hebrew word for “swaddling-band” is unique to this verse in the
Bible, and this rendering is based on the context, which has the figure of a
birth and garments. The word for “thick darkness”, lpr[, is used in two
precise contexts. Firstly, it is used to describe the phenomena
accompanying a theophany and the presence of God:

“And the people stood afar off, and Moses drew near
unto the thick darkness where God was.” Exod 20:21
(KJV), cf. Deut 4:11, 5:22,

“He bowed the heavens also, and came down; and

darkness was under his feet.” 2 Sam 22:10 (KJV), cf. Ps
18:9, 97:2

“Then spake Solomon, The Lord said that he would

dwell in the thick darkness.” 1 Kgs 8:12 (KJV), cf. 2
Chron 6:1, Isa 60:2

Secondly, it is used to describe the day of the Lord. A typical example is,

“Blow ye the trumpet in Zion, and sound an alarm in my

holy mountain: let all the inhabitants of the land tremble:
for the day of the Lord cometh, for it is nigh at hand; A
day of darkness and of gloominess, a day of clouds and
of thick darkness, as the morning spread upon the
mountains: a great people and a strong; there hath not
been ever the like, neither shall be any more after it, even
to the years of many generations.” Joel 2:1-2 (KJV), cf.
Jer 13:16, Ezek 34:12, Zeph 1:15

God’s presence is to be seen both in the temple or a holy mountain as

well as in the wrath that he metes upon his people through a northern
invader.

The former aspect is the sense in Job: God was present in the cloud and
the darkness which he “placed” between Israel and Egypt; the cloud
enveloped the whole scene as Israel crossed over during the night. The
355
cloud gave Israel light, but kept the Egyptians in the dark, so that their
pursuit was unsuccessful. This cloud was therefore the “garment” that
God gave the Egyptians as “sackcloth”—their bursting forth from the
womb of their homeland was a still-birth; their swaddling clothes were a
burial shroud. The choice of this figure to describe Egypt echoes Isaiah’s
description of the fate of the king of Assyria:

“But thou art cast out of thy grave like an abominable

branch, and as the garment of those that are slain, thrust
through with a sword, that go down to the stones of the
pit; as a carcase trodden under feet.” Isa 14:19 (KJV
revised)

God goes onto record,

“And I broke upon it (wyl[) my decree (yqx), and set a bar

and doors…” Job 38:10 (KJV revised)

God broke upon the sea his decree, and the decree is, “hitherto shalt thou
come and no further”, which accurately describes the effect of the
deliverance at the Red Sea. The use of the common verb “to break” has
puzzled commentators. The same form of this verb, “broke”, only occurs
elsewhere in Leviticus 26:13,

“I am the Lord your God, which brought you forth out

of the land of Egypt, that ye should not be their
bondmen; and I have broken the bands of your yoke,
and made you go upright.” Lev 26:13 (KJV)

This supplies a clue for its choice in Job. In the destruction of the
Egyptians at the Red Sea the bands of Israel’s yoke were finally broken;
the instrument of that final breaking was God’s final decree—thus far and
no further.1

The figure of “bars and doors” being used to describe God’s action of
deliverance does not echo Exodus language, but it does reflect the
political circumstances of Hezekiah. This is a figure of speech about cities,
their safety and destruction (Deut 3:5. Judg 16:3, 1 Sam 23:7, Ps 147:13,
Amos 1:5). The comparison made by the choice of this figure is that God

1Breaking is an act of violence from the Lord in Ps 29:5 (Lebanon), Ps

74:13-14 (Egypt), and Isa 14:25 (Assyria).
356
can set Jerusalem’s bars and gates shut to the Assyrian invader, just as he
set bars and doors at the Red Sea.

“And said, Hitherto shalt thou come, but no further: and

here you are stayed—your proud waves ($yllg !wagb tyvy
apw)…” Job 38:11 (KJV revised)

This figure aptly portrays the proud waves of the Egyptian sea; equally,
the Assyrian invasion was a sea with proud waves. The same kind of
language is used by the Prophets to describe Israel’s future hopes,

“[God will] pass through the sea with affliction, and shall
smite the waves in the sea, and all the deeps of the river
shall dry up: and the pride of Assyria shall be brought
down, and the sceptre of Egypt shall depart away.” Zech
10:11 (KJV)

3. Commanding the Morning

The next section of the poem concerns the morning:

“Hast thou commanded the morning since thy days; and

caused the dawn (rxv) to know his place; to take hold of
(zxal) the ends (@nk) of the land (#rah), that the wicked
ones might be shaken out of it?” Job 38:12-13 (KJV
revised)

The purpose of the commanding is so that “the dawn” may be caused to

take hold of the ends of the earth and shake the wicked out of the land.
Here “the dawn” and “the morning” are personified and receptive to
commands. There appears to be an echo here with Isaiah,

“Behold, the day of the Lord cometh, cruel both with

wrath and fierce anger, to lay the land desolate: and he
shall destroy the sinners thereof out of it.” Isa 13:9

The echo consists in the ideas of “sinners” (“wicked ones”), “land”, an

action of removal (“shaking”, “destruction”) and “out of it”.

In these thoughts we move from recounting God’s deliverance at the Red

Sea to Job’s situation. Our proposal is that this text describes the Assyrian
invader as “the dawn”. Several echoes support this proposal.

357
i) God asks Job whether he had commanded the morning “since your
days”. The expression “your days” ($ymy) occurs twice in connection with
Hezekiah (2 Kgs 20:6, Isa 38:5), and the Hebrew expression means “all
your days” as in 1 Sam 25:28.

ii) God was both commanding this “dawn”, to bring it forth, and when it
had done its work, he was going to send it back to its “place”.1 The same
point is made in Joel, describing an Assyrian invasion:

“A day of darkness and of gloominess, a day of clouds

and of thick darkness, as the dawn (rxvk) spread upon
the mountains: a great people and a strong; there hath
not been ever the like, neither shall be any more after it,
even to the years of many generations.” Joel 2:2 (KJV
revised), cf. Isa 28:19

iii) God asks Job whether he has “commanded the morning” and caused
“the dawn”2 to know its place. This term is used in Isaiah:

“How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the

dawn (rxv)! how art thou cut down to the ground, which
didst weaken the nations! For thou hast said in thine
heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne
above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of
the congregation, in the sides of the north:” Isa 14:12-13
(KJV revised)

The king of Babylon (an Assyrian at the time of Isa 14 (v. 25)) was the
morning star (“Lucifer”), son of the dawn, and it is this power that God
was commanding: “the morning (star) and the dawn”. The objective was
for the morning star and the dawn, as symbols of the morning, to take
hold of the ends of the earth or the land.

The word for “ends” in “ends of the earth” is overwhelmingly translated

as the ends of a garment or the tips of a bird’s wings. Only once is it used
elsewhere in the sense of the ends of the earth, in Isa 24:16:

“From the uttermost part of the earth have we heard

songs, even glory to the righteous. But I said, My leanness,

1 This third person possessive form of the common word for “place” is
used for home in Ezra 1:4, Deut 21:19.
2 The LXX translates (interprets) the Hebrew here as “morning star”.

358
 my leanness, woe unto me! The treacherous dealers have
dealt treacherously; yea, the treacherous dealers have
dealt very treacherously.” Isa 24:16 (KJV)

If we follow this echo, the “ends of the earth” in Job is a figure for the
extent of the land of Judah. The common verb, “taking hold”, can be a
military action,

“Their roaring shall be like a lion, they shall roar like

young lions: yea, they shall roar, and lay hold of the prey,
and shall carry it away safe, and none shall deliver it.” Isa
5:29 (KJV), cf. Amos 3:4

The purpose of the action was to shake1 “the wicked ones” out of the
land (Isa 24:13), which is why Assyria came down upon the land (Isa 8:7).

God next says,

“It is turned as clay to the seal; and they stand as a

garment. And from the wicked ones their light will be
withheld2, but (w) the high arm shall be broken.” Job
38:14-15 (KJV revised)

This describes the land being turned like clay to a seal. The figure of a
“seal” introduces the aspect of foreign kingly rule being stamped upon the
land (1 Kgs 21:8, Jer 22:24, Hag 2:23). The situation here is reversed in Isa
41:25, where it is stated of a northern power, “…he shall come upon
princes as upon mortar, and as the potter treadeth clay”. In response, the
religious and political establishment (“the wicked ones”) take a stand3 as
(or like) a garment before a moth—an ironical remark, since a garment
cannot “stand”.4

This section of the poem concludes with a literal irony:5 as a result of the
invasion of the son of the dawn and the morning star, the “light” of these

1 The word here is not common, and it is used in Exod 14:27, Ps 136:15
to describe God “overthrowing” Pharaoh in the Red Sea.
2 The verb has a “future” aspect.
3 The verb is plural and links to “the wicked ones” of the previous verse,

see Habel, Job, 522.

4 The Hebrew here “like a garment” only occurs in Ps 102:26, Isa 51:6, 8.
5 The irony may not be literal; it may be metaphorical—if “the wicked

ones” sourced their prophetic authority from the temples associated with
359
bodies will be withheld from the wicked ones because they have been
taken into captivity to sit in darkness. Nevertheless, the “high arm” of the
invader (Isa 14:13, Ps 37:17, Jer 48:25, Ezek 30:21) shall be broken.

3.1 The Deep and the Shadow of Death

The general prophetic message is that if Israel were unfaithful, the “earth”
would be destroyed and the agent of the destruction would be the nations
who are described as overflowing waters. Jeremiah and Ezekiel use the
figure for the later invasion of the land:

“Egypt riseth up like a flood, and his waters are moved

like the rivers; and he saith, I will go up, and will cover
the earth...” Jer 46:8 (KJV)

“Thus saith the Lord; Behold, waters rise up out of the

north, and shall be an overflowing flood, and shall
overflow the land...” Jer 47:2 (KJV)

“For thus saith the Lord God; When I shall make thee a
desolate city, like the cities that are not inhabited; when I
shall bring up the deep upon thee, and great waters shall
cover thee…” Ezek 26:19 (KJV)

The overflowing waters of a flood are the opposite figure to the

maintenance of the earth as dry land. These may be the waters of a river
or the waters of the sea:

“And he shall pass through Judah; he shall overflow and

go over, he shall reach even to the neck; and the
stretching out of his wings shall fill the breadth of thy
land, O Immanuel.” Isa 8:8 (KJV), cf. 30:28

This general prophetic symbology can be used to explain the next

questions that God poses to Job:

“Hast thou gone (awb) as far as (d[) the springs of the

sea? or hast thou paced up and down (tklhth) in search
of the depth?” Job 38:16 (KJV revised)

the sun and the moon. With the Assyrian army turning on Jerusalem, such
“light” would appear hollow and withheld—a source of false hope.
360
The questions here are about linear distance—has Job travelled as far as
the “springs” of the sea, and has he paced up and down in search of the
depth. There is an intensive quality to his search—a pacing.1 The use of the
figure of a “search” indicates a search for the understanding2 of the
problem confronted by the “depth”, i.e. the problem of an overflowing
nation coming upon the land. Job is not questioned on whether he can
“find” the depth, as if the source of the sea was a mythical fountain which
he had no prospect of finding; it was a challenge about political
understanding. Contrawise, the figure of going as far as the springs of the
sea is a question about Job’s diplomacy—he had gone as far as Lachish (2
Kgs 18:14-26) in an attempt to “solve” the problem through tribute.

God next asks,

“Have the gates of death been opened unto thee? or hast

thou seen the doors of the shadow of death (twmlc)?Hast
thou perceived the breadth of the earth? declare if thou
knowest it all.” Job 38:17-18 (KJV)

Intertextual echoes suggest a political sense for these questions. The

expression “shadow of death”3 is the same as that used in Job 3:5, where
Job challenges the “shadow of death” to redeem his day, and the
expression occurs in Isaiah:

“And they shall look unto the earth; and behold trouble
and darkness, dimness of anguish; and they shall be driven
to darkness. Nevertheless the dimness will not be upon
her who is vexed. When at the first he lightly afflicted the
land of Zebulun and the land of Naphtali, and afterward
did more grievously afflict4 her by the way of the sea,
beyond Jordan, in Galilee of the nations. The people that
walked in darkness have seen a great light: they that dwell
in the land of the shadow of death (twmlc), upon them

1 The same verb form occurs in Ezek 28:14.

2 This is the sense of all occurrences, e.g. Isa 40:28, Ps 145:3.
3 The figure of a “shadow” is important in describing Hezekiah’s life: at

the height of his sickness his days were as a “shadow that declineth” (Ps
102:11), and when his life was extended, the “shadow” on the sun-dial
went backwards (Isa 38:8).
4 The NASB and RSV interpret the verb as “make glorious” which is

possible. In favour of the KJV is the usage in 1 Kgs 12:11, 14, 2 Chron
20:9, Lam 3:7.
361
 hath the light shined.” Isa 8:22-9:2 (KJV revised), cf. Ps
107:10, 14, Amos 5:8

This prophecy compares Israel and Judah. One reading of the oracle is as
follows: the Northern tribes had walked in darkness and now dwelt in the
land of the shadow of death—in captivity. They were now seeing a great
light in Judah in the form of Isaiah and his children, who were given for
signs and wonders (Isa 8:18). Nevertheless, Judah will experience trouble
and darkness and some of the people will also be driven to darkness;
however, the darkness will not be upon “her”—the city of Jerusalem,
where the great light was shining.

The same Hebrew expression, “gates of death” occurs once elsewhere:

“Fools because of their transgression, and because of

their iniquities, are afflicted. Their soul abhorred all
manner of meat; and they drew near unto the gates of
death.” Ps 107:17-18 (KJV)

In this Psalm the Northern tribes have been fools; they have been taken
into captivity, they have abhorred captivity food, and they have drawn
near the gates of death.

The point of God’s question to Job is that he had not yet seen these gates;
he was yet untouched by their plight. This should have been the basis of
his hope, and yet he was expressing doubt about his salvation.

Hezekiah had uttered a similar doubt:

“I said in the cutting off of my days, I shall go to the

gates of the grave: I am deprived of the residue of my
years.” Isa 38:10 (KJV)

And this is Job’s fear—his sickness was a sign that he was destined to die
and the nation was to fall.

The purpose in God’s question about the “gates” or “doors” of death is

not about Job’s putative knowledge of death, or who is worthy of death,
nor of who will live or die; rather it is simply: in Jerusalem, have the doors
of the shadow of death been opened unto Job? Has he entered, or is he
about to enter into death as a consequence of the Assyrian invasion, (or
will God redeem him from death). The implication is that he was not
sitting in the shadow of death; he would not enter death at this time.
362
God next asks,

“Hast thou perceived the breadth (bxr) of the land

(#ra)? declare if thou knowest it all.” Job 38:18 (KJV
revised)

This question concerns the “breadth (bxr) of the land” rather than the
earth. An echo here to the Abrahamic promise secures the reference to
“the land”:

“Arise, walk through the land in the length of it and in

the breadth (bxr) of it; for I will give it unto thee.” Gen
13:17 (KJV)

“And he shall pass through Judah; he shall overflow and

go over, he shall reach even to the neck; and the
stretching out of his wings shall fill the breadth (bxr) of
thy land, O Immanuel.” Isa 8:8 (KJV), cf. 30:28

The enemy would fill the breadth of the land; but God’s question points
up the lack of knowledge on the part of Job about the state of the land
and what God was doing in the land. The challenge “to declare” is a
prophetic challenge,

“Thou hast heard, see all this; and will not ye declare it? I
have shewed thee new things from this time, even hidden
things, and thou didst not know them.” Isa 48:6 (KJV)

This declaration is about a typical new creation of restoration; but the

language of prophetic declaration is the same as we find in Job. God’s
challenge to Job is to declare what will happen to the land. The
implication is that he should have confidence in God’s declaration.

3.2 Light and Darkness

The attempt on the part of God to give Job confidence continues with his
next question:

“Where is the way where light dwelleth? and as for

darkness, where is the place thereof, That thou shouldest
take it to its border (wlwbg) thereof, and that thou

363
 shouldest know the paths to its house (wtyb) thereof?” Job
38:19-20 (KJV revised)

The light of the Shekinah Glory dwelt in the temple. Job should have
confidence in this abiding presence. The place of darkness was the
Assyrian homeland. God is inviting Job to contrast the two homelands.
The LXX interprets as follows: “And in what kind of a land does the light
dwell? And of what kind is the place of darkness”?

Can Job therefore take “darkness” to the border1 of its land; does he
know the paths or byways (not roads—Judg 5:6) to the house of
darkness? Intertextual echoes allow the reading that this is a political
question about the location of the enemy:

“And in that day they shall roar against them like the
roaring of the sea: and if one look unto the land, behold
darkness and sorrow, and the light is darkened in the
heavens2 thereof.” Isa 5:30 (KJV)

This text shares a thematic correspondence with the later oracle,

“For, behold, the darkness shall cover the land (#ra), and
gross darkness the people: but the Lord shall arise upon
thee, and his glory shall be seen upon thee.” Isa 60:2
(KJV revised)

If we follow these echoes, the challenge to Job is whether he can remove

“darkness” to the border. The contrast with “light” suggests a religious
perspective upon the invading army—that they represented a foreign
religion destroying the religion of Yahweh.

God concludes his question in this section of the poem with a reference
to Job’s limited life-span and as such it forms an inclusio with v. 4. This is
indicated by the occurrence of the same form of the verb “to know”:

1 This translates the common (196x) Hebrew for “border” or “coast” and
the focus is territory; the book of Joshua contains the clearest examples.
Metaphorical usage for the word is rare; with this verse in Job and Ps
104:9 the only candidates.
2 There may be two types of darkness in this text: a darkness represented

by the Assyrian horde and a darkness of prophetic light associated with

the heavens.
364
 “You know (t[dy), because thou wast then born, and (w)
because the number of thy days is great.” Job 38:21 (KJV
revised)

“Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the

earth? declare, if you know (t[dy)?” Job 38:4 (KJV
revised)

While it is normal to read exasperation or sarcasm into the tone of the

question in vv. 4 and 21, this is not necessary. The tone of v. 21 could be
supportive, if Job is being taken as representative of the people of Israel.
Thus it would read, “You do know because you were born then, and it is
recorded in the Law what I have performed, and you have existed in the
land for many days since that time in the face of many enemies”. In short,
Job as representative of his people was “born” at the time of that first
deliverance.

4. Times of Trouble and of Peace

The next section of the poem is dominated by verbs of doing; the
manipulation of nature as opposed to the knowledge of nature.

“Hast thou gone (awb) to the treasures1 of the snow? or

are you seeing (hart) the treasures of the hail, which I
have reserved against the time of trouble, against the day
of battle and war?” Job 38:22-23 (KJV revised)

The figure here is one of defense: a time of trouble requires a defensive

reaction. The expression “time of trouble” contains common words and it
occurs in a number of places, for instance,

“And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince
which standeth for the children of thy people: and there
shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there
was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy
people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found
written in the book.” Dan 12:1 (KJV)

This text shows a “last days” application and sets the later military and
political range of the figure, “time of trouble”. However, various crises in

1There is possibly an ironical echo here to Hezekiah’s love of treasure—2

Chron 32:27.
365
the history of Israel were thought of as the “last days”, so that the
prophets described their own crises as a “time of trouble”:

“O Lord, be gracious unto us; we have waited for thee:

be thou their arm every morning, our salvation also in
the time of trouble. At the noise of the tumult the people
fled; at the lifting up of thyself the nations were
scattered.” Isa 33:2-3 (KJV)

The expression also occurs in some Davidic psalms. So, for example,
Psalm 41 expresses the hope that the Lord will deliver the “poor” from a
time of trouble (v. 1), from his enemies (v. 2); restore him from his bed of
sickness (vv. 3, 8), vanquishing his political enemies (vv. 4-7), and uphold
his integrity (v. 12). There are clear echoes here with the portrait of
Hezekiah’s life.

God says to Job that he has reserved the snow and hail for a time of
trouble. The Assyrian invasion was such a time of crisis. Hail is used in
descriptions of this invasion (Isa 28:2, 17) and God’s defensive response
(Isa 30:30-31). Snow is not mentioned elsewhere in connection with an
invasion or a defensive response.

We have noted in connection with Job 6:16, 24:19 and 37:6 that snow is a
figure for the word of God, a figure that resonates with Isa 55:10-11,

“For as the rain cometh down, and the snow from

heaven, and returneth not thither, but watereth the earth,
and maketh it bring forth and bud, that it may give seed
to the sower, and bread to the eater: So shall my word be
that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto
me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and
it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.” Isa 55:10-11
(KJV)

This text affirms that God controls the affairs of men through his word
which is compared to rain and snow. It is a short step to see that snow is
also a figure for the prophetic word which declares what God is about to
do through his word.

God asks Job whether he has “entered” the treasures of the snow and
“seen” the treasures of the hail. These two common verbs presuppose
two different possibilities. For Job to enter the treasures of the snow
would be for him to understand God’s prophetic word; for him to see the
366
treasures of the hail would be for him to see the hail that sweeps away the
refuge of lies that militate against his word:

“Judgment also will I lay to the line, and righteousness to

the plummet: and the hail shall sweep away the refuge of
lies, and the waters shall overflow the hiding place.” Isa
28:17 (KJV)

This hail is the hail of the Assyrian invasion upon the land. The question
is phrased in terms of the “treasures” of these forces of nature because
treasuries funded war (Jer 10:13, 51:16).

4.1 Deliverance
The next question continues the prophetic terminology and its terms
relate to the deliverance of the land from the Assyrian invasion and the
restoration of its fertility.1

“By what way will the light be plundered (qlxy), how will
the east wind be scattered (#py) upon the land? Who hath
divided a watercourse (hl[t) for the overflowing of
waters, or a way for the lightning thunders (twlq zyzxl);
To cause it to rain on the earth—no man; on the
wilderness—no man in it; To satisfy the desolate and
waste ground; and to cause the bud of the tender herb to
spring forth?” Job 38:24-27 (KJV revised)

One way to unpack the prophetic nature of these assertions is as follows:

i) The invader was “the light” (v. 15), “the morning” (v. 12) or “the dawn”
(v. 12) coming upon the land. The question that God poses is therefore
how would such light be plundered (qlxy)?2 Clearly, neither Hezekiah nor
Judah could do this (plunder the Assyrian Empire, its land and cities), but
God had devised a watercourse for this overflowing flood to take the
invader from the land, and another nation would plunder Assyria.

1 Famine in the land would have been an inevitable result of invasion (Joel
1).
2 This is the imperfect (future) tense of a common verb, and texts where

the sense is “plunder” include Zech 14:1, Mic 2:4, Amos 7:17, Joel 3:2,
and Dan 11:39.
367
ii) The wind1 coming upon the land was from the east, but it would be
scattered. The wind is identified as Assyria in Hos 12:1—

“Ephraim feedeth on wind2, and followeth after the east

wind: he daily increaseth lies and desolation; and they do
make a covenant with the Assyrians, and oil is carried
into Egypt.” Hos 12:1 (KJV)

The Northern tribes had pursued the folly of alliances with Assyria. This
wind had destroyed them and taken them into captivity (Hos 13:15). As
for Judah, the east wind would be scattered. This is the opposite of what
might be expected: normally it is the east wind that scatters,3 but God
declares here that the reverse will be true—the wind itself will be scattered.

iii) The language of “scattering” is echoed in Isaiah and the Psalms in

contexts of deliverance,

“Thou shalt fan them, and the wind shall carry them
away, and the whirlwind shall scatter (#wp) them: and
thou shalt rejoice in the Lord, and shalt glory in the Holy
One of Israel.” Isa 41:16 (KJV)4

“Bow thy heavens, O Lord, and come down: touch the

mountains, and they shall smoke. Cast forth lightning,
and scatter them: shoot out thine arrows, and destroy
them. Send thine hand from above; rid me, and deliver
me out of great waters, from the hand of strange
children; Whose mouth speaketh vanity, and their right

1 In the prologue a great wind smites the four corners of the land. And
the “wind” is mentioned by Bildad and Eliphaz (Job 8:2, 15:2) in their
summaries of the content of Job’s speeches.
2 The figure of “feeding on wind” is a mixed image and political in intent.

It will be used in respect of the animals in the latter part of God’s speech,
where Job will be asked whether he can feed the whelps of the lioness.
3 Judah was scattered, “I will scatter them as with an east wind before the

enemy; I will shew them the back, and not the face, in the day of their
calamity.” Jer18:17
4 Scholars typically see in this oracle an expression of exilic hope, but we

apply it to the aftermath of the deliverance of Jerusalem in Isaiah’s day; it

refers to the action of Hezekiah’s men scattering the nations of the
Assyrian alliance from the land as God’s new threshing instrument (Isa
41:15)
368
 hand is a right hand of falsehood.” Ps 144:5-8 (KJV), cf.
Ps 18:13-14

The language of this psalm can be applied to the Assyrian crisis: the
Assyrians were “strange children”, and they came down upon the land as
“great waters”; their mouthpiece, Rabshakeh, spoke “vanity”, and their
right hand had fashioned idols of falsehood; and from these, Hezekiah
prayed for deliverance.

iv) God will handle the overflowing water (@jv1) by building a

watercourse (hl[t) to divert its flow. The use of this figure is a
contrasting echo with Hezekiah’s own building of a watercourse to
provide water during the anticipated siege of Jerusalem and, thereby,
hopefully, affecting deliverance.

“And the rest of the acts of Hezekiah, and all his might,
and how he made a pool, and a watercourse (hl[t), and
brought water into the city, are they not written in the
book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah?” 2 Kgs
20:20 (KJV revised)

Hezekiah had sought to bring water into the city; God’s

watercourse would take “water” away from the city.

v) The next question is: Who will divide…a way for the lightning of
thunder? The reference here is to the noise of the war machine, and who
will divide a way for this machine to be diverted. The Hebrew word
translated “thunder” (lwq) is the common word for “sound”. A
comparable use of the word describing an army is,

“The noise (lwq) of a multitude2 in the mountains, like as

of a great people; a tumultuous noise of the kingdoms of
nations gathered together: the Lord of hosts mustereth
the host of the battle.” Isa 13:4 (KJV)

Deliverance is implied by the provision of a “way” for

this lightning and thunder. This then leads to restoration

1 Other texts with this word for “flood” include Dan 9:26, 11:22, and Nah
1:8.
2 We have argued (Chapter One) that this is the Assyrian army; see Isa

14:25.
369
 and the lifting of the widespread famine caused by the
invasion (vv. 26-27).

4.2 Restoration
Deliverance is followed by restoration. The language in Job for restoration
is the language of “rain”:

“…To cause it to rain on the earth—no man; on the

wilderness—no man—through him; To satisfy the
desolate and waste ground; and to cause the bud of the
tender herb to spring forth? Job 38:26-27 (KJV revised)

These infinitives, “to cause it to rain…to satisfy”, imply

the earlier “who”, and so the question is—who causes it
to rain and who satisfies the ground, given that there is
no man to do these things? However, this reading belies
a complexity in the text. There is a transition in thought
here from rain as a destructive power wielded by God
against the Assyrian army, and rain as a creative power to
satisfy the ground. The Hebrew of v. 26 is distinctive,

…to cause it to rain

upon the land— (where) no man (vya al)

(upon) the wilderness— (where) no man (~da al)

…in it (wb)

This combination is found in one other text, Isa 31:8,

…Assyria shall fall

by the sword— (of) no man (vya al)

and a sword— (of) no man (~da al)
will devour him

The point is that Assyria will fall by a sword but of “no man”, and this is
repeated twice. Similarly, the rain comes upon the land and the wilderness
where there is “no man”. This rain begins the recovery of the land from
famine and leads to abundant harvests after the invasion. God destroys
the invader and causes the tender herb to bud in his place.

370
Prophetic pictures of the future restoration of Israel duplicate the detail in
Job:

I will open rivers in high places, and fountains in the

midst of the valleys: I will make the wilderness a pool of
water, and the dry land springs of water. Isa 41:18 (KJV)1

He turneth rivers into a wilderness, and the watersprings

into dry ground; A fruitful land into barrenness, for the
wickedness of them that dwell therein. Ps 107:33-34
(KJV)

God goes onto ask,

Hath the rain a father? or who hath begotten the drops

of dew?” Job 38:28 (KJV)

The figure of “drops of dew” echoes with the theme of

new life in the Psalms and Prophets:

“And the remnant of Jacob shall be in the midst of many

people as a dew from the Lord, as the showers upon the
grass, that tarrieth not for man, nor waiteth for the sons
of men.” Mic 5:7 (KJV)

“Thy dead men shall live together with my dead body shall
they arise. Awake and sing, ye that dwell in dust: for thy
dew is as the dew of herbs, and the earth shall cast out
the dead.” Isa 26:19 (KJV)

“As the dew of Hermon, and as the dew that descended

upon the mountains of Zion: for there the Lord
commanded the blessing, even life for evermore.” Ps
133:3 (KJV)

The picture here is of the blessings that flow from a

widespread bestowal of the Spirit.

This part of the poem concludes by implying that God is

the source of “ice” and the “hoary frost”. These are also

1 Scholars treat Isaiah 41 as an expression of exilic hope; we take its

catalyst to be Hezekiah’s restoration.
371
 figures of the word of God that is given through the
bestowal of the Spirit.

“Out of whose womb came the ice? and the hoary frost
of heaven, who hath begotten (dly) it? Job 38:29 (KJV
revised)

As we noted in connection with Elihu’s speech, the terms “hoary frost”

and “ice” occur in Psalm 147.

“He giveth snow like wool: he scattereth the hoarfrost

like ashes. He casteth forth his ice like morsels: who can
stand before his cold?” Ps 147:16-17 (KJV), cf. Job 38:12

Here the echo is with the scattering of the manna upon the wilderness
ground, which was in appearance like hoarfrost (Exod 16:14). This echo is
secured by the mixed figure of “morsels of ice”—the term “morsels”
indicating the morsels of bread (the manna). This kind of “ice and frost”
is God’s kind of “cold”.

Accordingly, God gives Job the assurance that.

“The waters will be hidden as a stone and the face of the

deep will be frozen (dkl)” Job 38:30 (KJV revised)

This is the language of deliverance: the overflowing

waters are returned and hidden in their own land “as a
stone”,1 and the “deep”2 that came down upon the land
will be frozen in its place. The word (dkl) for “frozen” is
commonly used of the capture of cities (frozen ice is
captured water). Thus God is saying that the face of the
“deep” (a figure we have already linked to the Assyrians)
will be frozen.

1 The echo here is to Exod 15:16, which describes the nations’ response

to Israel’s deliverance from Egypt as being like a “stone”.

2 Gen 1:2 equates “face of the deep” with “face of the waters”, which Job

echoes, comparing the overflowing waters of the Assyrian invasion to the

primeval state.
372
5. Questions, Answers and Astrology
Our argument so far concerning the interpretation of God’s speech is as
follows: Job is asked questions about God’s control over the political
circumstances of his time, and God uses the language of nature because
he has used nature to control events in Israel’s history. The questions
appear unreasonable when they are read “on the surface”, because they
ask Job about the physics of nature, subjects about which he could know
nothing. However, our proposal is that this is not their intent: they are
intended to be read as political metaphors, and they are therefore
questions about God’s providential control over Judah and Israel.

Accordingly, Job should know these things—from the Psalms, from the
earlier Prophets, and from the Law. Job’s complaint has been that he did
not know why God had afflicted him. Job had darkened the counsel of the
people’s scriptural traditions with “words without knowledge” to the
extent that he had not taken into account God’s miraculous deliverance of
Israel in the past. This would appear to be the implied critique of the
author, but it is important to note here, however, that the author presents
Job at the height of his sickness and with a conflicted mind.

The same sort of mental conflict is recorded of the psalmist,

“Truly God is good to Israel, even to such as are of a

clean heart. But as for me, my feet were almost gone; my
steps had well-nigh slipped…Verily I have cleansed my
heart in vain, and washed my hands in innocency. For all
the day long have I been plagued, and chastened every
morning…Until I went into the sanctuary of God; then
understood I their end.” Ps 73:1-2, 13-17 (KJV)

This Psalm expresses Hezekiah’s struggle with understanding at the time

of his sickness. It says that he did not understand until he went to the
Temple, and then he understood the end of the “wicked”. Such revelation
corresponds to the encounter with God in whirlwind in Job. Isaiah
expresses a similar point about the Suffering Servant,1

“Who is blind, but my servant? or deaf, as my messenger

that I sent? who is blind as he that is perfect, and blind as
the Lord’s servant? Seeing many things, but thou
observest not; opening the ears, but he heareth not. The

1 We have argued above (Chapter Three) that the “Suffering Servant”

songs in Isaiah have a basis in the experience of Hezekiah.
373
 Lord is well pleased for his righteousness’ sake; he will
magnify the law, and make it honourable.” Isa 42:19-21
(KJV)

This passage expresses the conviction that the Servant of the Lord was
temporarily blinded but would recover and again magnify the Law.

In the late eighth century, at the time of Hezekiah’s sickness, the exercise
of power in Jerusalem and the land passed to political officials such as
Eliakim, son of Hilkiah, Shebna the Scribe and Joah the Recorder, son of
Asaph (2 Kgs 18:18). At the same time, our hypothesis is that Hezekiah’s
judgment was also conflicted and impaired.

If we transfer this scenario to the book of Job, it indicates the influence to

which Job was now susceptible: he was open to pressure from those who
would advise him on how events would turn out with the Assyrian
invasion and how he should respond. Since astrology was rife in the land,
and a respected source of political wisdom, those in power in Jerusalem
would have taken readings from such diviners. This practice was the
subject of prophetic complaint:

“And they left all the commandments of the Lord their

God, and made them molten images, even two calves, and
made a grove, and worshipped all the host of heaven,
and served Baal. And they caused their sons and their
daughters to pass through the fire, and used divination
(¬~sq) and enchantments (vxn), and sold themselves to do
evil in the sight of the Lord, to provoke him to anger.” 2
Kgs 17:16-17 (KJV)

The distinction between divination and enchantments is not clear from

this passage, but individuals would likely practice a mix of techniques in
order to discern the times. The Northern tribes “worshipped all the host
of heaven”; doubtless, they had names for these hosts, and it is likely that
they consulted with those who could read the signs in the heavens.

The root word for “divination” (¬~sq) only occurs in texts from the eighth
century prophets of Judah—Isaiah and Micah. For example,

“For, behold, the Lord, the Lord of hosts, doth take

away from Jerusalem and from Judah the stay and the
staff, the whole stay of bread, and the whole stay of
water, The mighty man, and the man of war, the judge,
374
 and the prophet, and the diviners (¬~sq), and the ancient.”
Isa 3:1-2 (KJV revised)

Here God declares that he will remove all those figures of the
“establishment” upon which the state relied for its survival and growth.
One way in which this was done was to make diviners mad:

“Thus saith the Lord, thy redeemer, and he that formed

thee from the womb, I am the Lord that maketh all things;
that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth
abroad the earth by myself; That frustrateth the tokens of
the liars, and maketh diviners (¬~sq) mad; that turneth
wise men backward, and maketh their knowledge
foolish.” Isa 44:24-25 (KJV)

The contrast in this invective is between God’s claim to have stretched

out the heavens alone, and the diviners’ claim to interpret the heavens.
Divination was obviously practiced by false prophets who required good
conditions at night for observing the stars:

“Thus saith the Lord concerning the prophets that make

my people err, that bite with their teeth, and cry, Peace;
and he that putteth not into their mouths, they even
prepare war against him. Therefore night shall be unto
you, that ye shall not have a vision; and it shall be dark
unto you, that ye shall not divine; and the sun shall go
down over the prophets, and the day shall be dark over
them. Then shall the seers be ashamed, and the diviners
confounded: yea, they shall all cover their lips; for there is
no answer of God.” Mic 3:5-7 (KJV)

The metaphor used to describe how God would frustrate the false
prophets is aptly chosen: the dark clear sky upon which they depended
would be dark to them. The hypocrisy of these prophets is laid bare in the
following text:

“The heads thereof judge for reward, and the priests

thereof teach for hire, and the prophets thereof divine
for money: yet will they lean upon the Lord, and say, Is
not the Lord among us? none evil can come upon us.”
Mic 3:11 (KJV)

375
That the art of enchantments was evident in Judah at this time is shown
by the fact that it was practiced by Manasseh, Hezekiah’s son (2 Kgs 21:6,
2 Chron 33:6).

Against this background the next series of questions posed to Job make
sense:

“Canst thou bind the chains (twnnd[m1) of Pleiades (hmyk),

or loose the bands of Orion (lsyk)? Canst thou bring
forth Mazzaroth in his season? or canst thou guide
Arcturus with his sons? Knowest thou the ordinances of
heaven? canst thou set the dominion thereof in the
earth?” Job 38:31-33 (KJV revised)

These questions are not about any knowledge that Job does or does not
have about the creation of the heavens and the stars (such information is
absent from Genesis and so some other religious cosmology is
presupposed); rather, they are about the futility of astrology—Job has no
power in respect of the heavens.

The references of the Hebrew terms used in these questions are not
certain, but some astrological reference is the most likely. The KJV has
followed the lead of the LXX in choosing some of its “astronomical”
terms. In the Hebrew Bible, “Pleiades” (hmyk) only occurs elsewhere in
the eighth century prophet, Amos, who was the first prophet to warn
Northern Israel prior of the imminent judgment of God through invasion:

“Seek him that maketh the seven stars (hmyk) and Orion
(lsyk), and turneth the shadow of death into the
morning, and maketh the day dark with night: that calleth
for the waters of the sea, and poureth them out upon the
face of the earth: The Lord is his name…” Amos 5:8
(KJV)

The rhetorical emphasis here is to seek the one who made the stars, rather
than those who claim to “divine” the future by the stars. The language of
this advice is remarkably reminiscent of the language of Job in relation to
the Assyrian invasion of Judah: “shadow of death”, “morning”, and
“overflowing waters”. The counsel is to eschew the astrologers and their
reading of the stars and seek the one who made hmyk and lsyk.

1 This word only occurs elsewhere in 1 Sam 15:32, where following Pope,
Job, 300, Agag might have approached Samuel in fetters.
376
The Hebrew term translated “Orion” in Job also occurs in Isaiah in a
related but different context,

“For the stars of heaven and the constellations (lsyk)

thereof shall not give their light: the sun shall be
darkened in his going forth, and the moon shall not
cause her light to shine.” Isa 13:10 (KJV)1

This text refers to the temples (and house-tops) in Samaria devoted to the
worship of the host of heaven. The oracles of such places would not give
the “light” from the sun, moon and stars. Once the Assyrians had turned
on Samaria, the oracles (and their astrologers) associated with these
temples would offer no hope. Their “light” would be worthless because
this “light” had supported idolatry.

In Job, the point is slightly different. The host of heaven, in addition to

being objects of worship, the subject of the divination, and the basis for
telling the signs of the times, also represented the nations and city-states.
An example of this thinking is seen in the following text:

Taurus, Virgo, and Capricorn (are) 3 regions (of significance) for Elam;
Gemini, Libra, and Aquarius (are) 3 regions (of significance) for Amurru;
Cancer, Scorpius, and Pisces are 3 regions of significance for Suburtu.2

Here Mesopotamian diviners associate specific constellations with

particular enemies of Assyria. Whether these assignments of constellations
were the same elsewhere is not known, although the sun and moon were
Assyrian and Babylonian gods. The eclipses of the sun and the moon, the
stars and their position in the sky, as well as the relationship of the
heavenly bodies in the sky, were all matters that affected the political
decisions of the day amongst the Mesopotamian powers.3

1 We have argued in Chapter One that this oracle is directed against

Assyria (Isa 14:25). It is a “day of the Lord” oracle and should be
compared with Isa 24-27, Joel 1-3 and Amos 5. These oracles depict
catastrophe for their audience (Israel, Judah). The links between Job and
these various oracles make Job into a “day of the Lord” play.
2 BM 47494 rev. 17-22, cited in Rochberg, Heavenly Writing, 109.
3 For examples, see J. Bottéro, Mesopotamia: Writing, Reasoning and the Gods,

(Chicago: Chicago University Press, 1995), ch. 9; Rochberg, Heavenly

Writing, 66-78.
377
This background explains the language of God’s question. He does not
ask if Job knows about the heavens; he asks whether Job can “bind” (rvq)
the seven stars (hmyk), which is a verb used in political and military
contexts. This word for “binding” is also quite often translated as
“conspire” (e.g. Amos 7:10, Neh 4:8, 2 Chron 33:25). Confederacies were
a feature of the times of Hezekiah (Isa 8:12), and the diplomatic objective
for Judah would have been to “loose” unfavourable alliances and “bind”
favourable bands.

The figures easily fit this context of interpretation—Orion might have had
“alliances” or bands (the Hebrew is unique); Mazzaroth (the Hebrew is
unique) might have offered military support at the right time, the season
when a nation might go to war (2 Sam 11:1); and Arcturus (the Hebrew is
unique) might have had “sons” (armies) and been susceptible to influence.

5.1 Controlling the Rain

The final part of this section of the poem returns to the theme of famine
relief and forms a bridge to the next section which will introduce figures
about the feeding of animals. The point that God makes is that Job
cannot control the waters of heaven, as if he could relieve the famine, by
“looking upward” and seeking wisdom in the clouds, because God puts
wisdom into the inward parts.

“Canst thou lift up thy voice to the clouds, so that an

abundance of waters may cover thee?1 Canst thou send
lightnings that they may go, and say unto thee, Here we
are? Who hath put wisdom in the inward parts? Or who
hath given understanding to the heart? Who can recount
(rps) the clouds in wisdom? Or who can lay down (bkv)
the bottles2 of heaven, when the dust is cast for distress
(qcwml rp[ tqcb), and the clods cleave fast together?”
Job 38:34-38 (KJV revised), cf. Jer 10:13, Zech 10:1

Seeking wisdom in “the clouds” is typical of celestial divination in the

Near East. Rochberg states, “…the systematic recording of ominous
celestial and terrestrial occurrences subject to observation, imagination, or
experience was an intellectual expression of an assumption that the gods
were not only inseparable from all natural phenomena by virtue of their

1God here picks up on Eliphaz’ point in Job 22:11.

2 This figure of “bottles” has caused comment. Wolfers re-points the
Hebrew to give “fools”, Deep Things, 218, but the Jerusalem hierarchy is
pictured as “bottles” in Lam 4:2.
378
cosmology, but were also responsible for the associations between
phenomena in nature and events in human society”.1

For example, one text illustrating the relevance of clouds to such

divination is the following,

“If the sun is red like a torch when it becomes visible on

the first of Nisannu, and a white cloud moves in front of
it, variant: stands at its side…[other conditions are
stated]…in that month the king will die.”2

Rochberg documents the close connection between weather phenomena

and prognostication about the king and affairs of state.

The image in Job is one of famine and its relief; Job is invited to lift his
voice to the clouds and bring rain to a parched land. But the symbology of
the image is about the source of wisdom. The leaders of the people
sought wisdom in the configuration of the clouds, but God placed
wisdom into the inward parts (Ps 51:6). The placement of this wisdom
was through God’s spirit, and the pouring out of that spirit was like being
covered by an abundance of water. The “rain” is a figure for the bestowal
of the Spirit of prophecy which gives knowledge to the people, so that
they grow as the plants of the Lord. The people should seek this
“abundance of water” (Isa 44:3, 45:8).

This literal reading of the KJV (“groweth into hardness”) obscures the
difficulty of the Hebrew figure, which speaks of the dust being “cast for
distress” (qcwml rp[ tqcb). The Hebrew verb qcy (KJV “groweth”) is
used mostly for the idea of pouring and casting, for example, pouring oil
or making a brass casting, and while that may be the sense here, the
Hebrew word qcwm (KJV “hardness”) is also used to denote distress or
vexation.

The Hebrew figure suggests that the “dust” is both Job the king, along
with Jerusalem and, more generally, the people. The (rather rare) Hebrew
word qcwm (KJV “hardness”) is used in Isa 9:1,

“Nevertheless the dimness shall not be such as was in her

vexation (qcwm)” Isa 9:1 (KJV)

1 Rochberg, Heavenly Writing, 4.

2 Cited in Rochberg, Heavenly Writing, 72.
379
This prophecy of Isaiah states that the forthcoming vexation of Jerusalem
(Isa 29:2, 7) was not to be as severe as that which had come upon the
northern tribes.

This idea of “dust” being “cast for distress/vexation” suggests that Job is
“the dust” (Job 30:19, Ps 103:14), and that his disease was “cast” in him
and therefore a cause for distress. The verb “cast” occurs in Ps 41:8,

“An evil disease, say they, is cast (qwcy) in him: and now that
he lieth he shall rise up no more.” Ps 41:8 (KJV revised)

However, since Job’s disease is symbolic of the distress being experienced

in Jerusalem, the “dust” is equally symbolic of “the people” and the city.1
Isaiah uses “dust” several times in relation to Jerusalem and the people in
describing their reaction to the Assyrian invasion:

“Enter into the rock, and hide thee in the dust, for fear
of the Lord, and for the glory of his majesty.” Isa 2:10
(KJV), cf. v. 19

“Thy dead men shall live, together with my dead body shall
they arise. Awake and sing, ye that dwell in dust: for thy
dew is as the dew of herbs, and the earth shall cast out
the dead.” Isa 26:19 (KJV)

“And thou shalt be brought down, and shalt speak out of

the ground, and thy speech shall be low out of the dust,
and thy voice shall be, as of one that hath a familiar
spirit, out of the ground, and thy speech shall whisper
out of the dust.” Isa 29:4 (KJV)

“Shake thyself from the dust; arise, and sit down, O

Jerusalem: loose thyself from the bands of thy neck, O
captive daughter of Zion.” Isa 52:2 (KJV)2

On a symbolic level, then, the “dust being distressed” and the “clods
cleaving fast together” denotes the condition of the people. The “speech”
of the king (Isa 29:4) was to be “low” out of the dust because he was to

1 Of the 103 occurrences of the word “dust”, 41 are in Job and Isaiah.
2 These four texts are different. Isa 2:10 is prospective of the Assyrian
crisis, Isa 26:19 and 29:4 is from the middle of the crisis, and Isa 52:2 is
retrospective.
380
be brought down. This consequence of the distress (low speech) explains
the coupling in Job of the themes of famine relief and the source of true
wisdom (Amos 8:11). There was a need both for the “rain” of God’s spirit
and the rain that would bring fruitfulness to the land.

6. Job 39—Creatures
The next section details characteristics of various creatures1 and our
proposal is that these provide clues either to the identity of the various
nations around Judah, some of whom were confederate with Assyria (e.g.
Edom), or to the identity of government individuals,2 who were players in
the political context of Job.

In the following table, we have listed these animals:

Creature Characteristic Symbology

Lioness and its Requires prey Assyria
young
Raven and its young God provides food Job the Prophet
Wild Goats and Time of birth Edom and Negev
Hinds tribes
Wild Ass and Swift Free roaming Ishmaelite
Ass Mercenaries
Wild Ox Servitude Bashan Crack
Troops
Ostrich Neglect of Eggs Judah’s Ruling Elite
Horses Battle Assyrian Army
Hawk Flying toward the A Judean Envoy
south
Eagle Command the The King of Edom
Hunter

The use of creatures as symbols for nations or individuals is, of course,

common today. It was to become common in Jewish Apocalyptic, and
here in Job 38-39 there are present some aspects of this style. The
purpose of these questions is to show to Job that God rules among the

1 Some of these identifications are uncertain, but the key details are the
descriptions which convey the symbology.
2 We have the same symbology today—there are hawks and doves in a

war cabinet.
381
kingdoms of men.1 The symbology was also common in Assyrian
portrayals of their monarch. Royal lion hunts were an essential ritual in
which the Assyrian king’s control over the wilderness was confirmed; wild
bulls were also killed, ostriches, and deer are also represented. Dick
observes that such hunts demonstrated “divinely ordered royal attempts
to incorporate civilization within the Neo-Assyrian city”.2

This table (following the RSV) does not include one of the creatures
mentioned in the KJV—peacocks, as it is unlikely that the KJV is correct
here, and there is only a mention of ostriches. We have replaced the usual
(KJV, RSV, NASB) reference to a “lion” with “lioness”, because of the
mention of young lions.

The table exhibits the following pattern: the first two creatures are
mentioned in relation to their young; the next two table entries are pairs
of creatures and each pair has the same characteristic (the mystery of the
timing of their birthing for the first pair, and a love of free roaming for
the second pair); the final five table entries are single creatures. This
structure indicates,

i) The “wild goats” and “hinds” are in some sort of alliance, which can be
figuratively characterized by the way in which they give birth and rear
young.

ii) The “wild ass” and the “swift ass” are in some sort of alliance, which
can be figuratively characterized by a joint interest in freedom.

iii) The lioness and the raven have a similar responsibility for their
“young” but they are opposing creatures.

iv) The birds of this list represent individuals—raven (prophet), ostrich

(political elite), hawk (envoy), and eagle (king), while the land based
animals (wild asses, wild oxen, and wild goats) are armies.

1 For a discussion of animals as military and political figures see W. P.

Brown, Seeing the Psalms A Theology of Metaphor, (Louisville: Westminster
John Knox Press, 2002), ch. 6. Wolfers, Deep Things, 219-223 does not
offer much support for his identification of the animal-peoples (the raven
and lion are Ammon and Moab, the hind and wild goat are Tyre and
Sidon, the hawk is Edom and the eagle is Philistia); he also identifies the
ostrich as Job. Nevertheless, he is correct to assert that they are “allegories
of the nations of the Middle East”, Deep Things, 221.
2 “Neo-Assyrian Royal Lion Hunt”, 266.

382
This group of creatures can appear an arbitrary selection. However, a
coherent development of thought in three stages can be proposed:

Stage 1—The basic problem confronting Job is the Assyrian invasion.

The knowledge to address this problem lies with the raven-prophet
(Isaiah), but the people have false prophets. Judah can do nothing to pull
away the allies of Assyria.

Stage 2—Futile solutions are being promoted in seeking alliances with

southern and eastern nations, Bashan, Edom, Negev tribes, and
Ishmaelite tribes, whose armies are like wild goats, hinds, wild asses and
wild oxen (untameable).

Stage 3—And so Judah is like an ostrich in facing the might of the

Assyrian horse, sending a hawk south to seek an alliance with the Edomite
eagle, who instead will scavenge the battlefield.

6.1 Lioness and its young

The sequence begins with an example of a hunter seeking prey for young
(lions). Job is asked whether he can provide this food: can he hunt the
prey for the lioness.

“Wilt thou hunt the prey for the lioness (aybl)? or fill the
appetite of the young lions (rypk), When they couch in
their dens, and abide in the covert to lie in wait?” Job
38:39-40 (KJV revised)

The identity of the lioness1 is suggested by the mention of “young lions”

in Job 4:10 and the link made there with the Assyrian lioness, which we
have already discussed. Here God is asking Job whether he can hunt
prey—whether he can be the lioness hunting prey for her whelps.2 In our
reading, the “young lions” are the confederate allies of Assyria, and the
question is about what Job and Judah can possibly offer them by way of a
comparable prey to that which Assyria is able to supply through its
military conquests.

1 See the discussion of Brown, Seeing the Psalms, 136-139.

2 The figure of “prey” for captives is used in Isa 49:24-25.
383
6.2 Raven and its Young
The “raven”1 symbolizes the prophet who is responsible for teaching and
direction. In Israelite traditions Elijah was fed by ravens, and God’s
question resonates with this incident by asking who feeds the ravens. This
echo suggests that the raven is God’s prophet.

The symbolic identity of the “raven” is in the action of its young: they cry
unto God and wander for lack of food (it does not say they wander looking
for food).

“Who provideth for the raven his food? when his young
ones cry ([wv) unto God, they wander (h[t) for lack of
meat.” Job 38:41 (KJV), cf. Ps 147:92

This finds a resonance in Micah where the people cry unto the Lord, at
the same time as wandering under the influence of false prophets:

“Then shall they cry ([wv) unto the Lord, but he will not
hear them: he will even hide his face from them at that
time, as they have behaved themselves ill in their doings.
Thus saith the Lord concerning the prophets that make
my people wander (h[t),3 that bite with their teeth, and
cry, Peace; and he that putteth not into their mouths,
they even prepare war against him. Mic 3:4-5 (KJV
revised), cf. Isa 3:12

Following this echo, the implication of God’s question to Job could be

that as a prophet he was not feeding the people with the knowledge that he

1 The Hebrew word for ‘raven’ is br[ and elsewhere it is transliterated as

“Oreb”, the name of a former prince of Midian (Judg 8:3), but it is
unlikely that the raven symbolizes Midian because of the textual links with
Mic 3:5-6.
2 This psalm’s focus is Jerusalem and it has many links with Job 38-39,

including i) the strength of the horse (v. 10, Job 39:19), ii) bars (v. 13, Job
38:10), iii) gates (v. 13, Job 38:17), iv) borders (v 14, Job 38:20), v) snow
(v. 16, Job 38:22), vi) hoarfrost (v. 16, Job 38:29), vii) ice (v. 17, Job
38:29), viii) naming stars (v. 4, Job 38:31), ix) the wicked (v. 4, Job 38:13),
and x) clouds and rain (v 8, Job 38:34) In addition, “cold” is used by
Elihu (v. 17, Job 37:9), and “flowing waters” (v. 18, Job 36:28).
3 “Wandering” could be a figure for erring in the ways of God (Isa 9:16,

28:7, 29:24).
384
had been given. He was darkening counsel without knowledge, and the
young of the raven were wandering without meat.

The lion and the raven are paired in the opening part of this section of
God’s speech because there are two types of “food”. There is the meat
that God alone can give the beasts of the field, and over which Job has no
power. This is illustrated in Hosea:

“And I will destroy her vines and her fig trees, whereof
she hath said, These are my rewards that my lovers have
given me: and I will make them a forest, and the beasts
of the field shall eat them.” Hos 2:12 (KJV), cf. Isa 56:9,
Jer 12:9

And there is the “food” which is meant to come from a prophet and be
given to the people to stop them from wandering.

6.3 Untameable Creatures

The next three categories symbolize Edom, the Sinai wilderness tribes
descended from Ishmael, and the territory of Bashan. Edom at least was
confederate with Assyria, and so these questions address Job’s prospects
of persuading already committed nations, as well as possibly neutral
groups.1

6.3.1 Wild Goats and Hinds

The identity of the “wild goats” is easier to hypothesize than that of the
“hinds”. The question is,

“Knowest thou the time when the wild goats of the rock
([ls) bring forth?2 or canst thou mark when the hinds do
calve?” Job 39:1 (KJV)

This question is puzzling insofar as this knowledge is knowable by simply

observing the times and seasons for such animals. The wild goats are of
“the rock”3 and echoes identify them as Edom:

1 These three nations are “wild creatures” because Judah cannot tame
them, i.e. Job cannot bring them into an alliance in order to meet the
Assyrian threat. On this characteristic, but not its parabolic significance,
see Davis, Job and Jacob, 117.
2 Ironically, Esau had sold the time of his birth.
3 See also Jer 48:28 (the migration from Moab to “the rock” of Edom),

and 2 Chron 25:12 (the slaughter of the Edomites on “the rock”).

385
 “He slew of Edom in the valley of salt ten thousand, and
took the rock ([ls) by war…” 2 Kings 14:7 (KJV mg.)

“Thus saith the Lord God concerning Edom… The

pride of thine heart hath deceived thee, thou that
dwellest in the clefts of the rock ([ls)” Obad 1:1-3
(KJV), cf. Jer 49:7-161

The symbology of giving birth could indicate a nation’s armies breaking

forth2 from its territory and going to war.

God’s accusation about Edom is that they “bow” before their gods and
bring forth their young ones who are not healthy and sacrifice them:

“They bow themselves, they bring forth their young

ones, they cast out their sorrows. Their young ones
become strong (~lx), they grow up with corn; they go
forth, and return not unto them.” Job 39:3-4 (KJV
revised)

This description of Edom is designed to demonstrate that they are

“unsuitable” allies for Judah. But the question that God poses to Job is
about, we suggest, whether he even knows the basis upon which they
decide to engage in militaristic expansion.

The mention of “hinds” and their “calving” echoes Ps 29:9,

“The voice of the Lord maketh the hinds to calve, and

discovereth the forests: and in his temple doth every one
speak of his glory.” Ps 29:9

This psalm answers God’s question to Job insofar as his “voice” makes
the hinds to calve. The psalm describes God’s control over the nations in

Compare the geographical naming practise in Judg 15:8f, 20:45f, and

contrast the usage of “the rock” as a term for Zion or “the rock” in the
wilderness journey.
1 These two texts are related because the Edomites were practising the

same policy in Jeremiah’s day and during the invasion of Babylon, as they
were in the days of Hezekiah and the invasion of Assyria.
2 We noted this figure above with regard to Egypt breaking forth from the

womb (Job 38:8).

386
figurative terms. For example, Lebanon skips like a young wild ox (Ps
29:6), and the voice of the Lord breaks out upon the “cedars of Lebanon”
(Ps 29:5). The Lord thunders upon “many waters”, and strips “the
forests” (Ps 29:3, 9). These terms refer to nations.

The verb translated “calving” is lwx1 and it is translated “shaking” in the

previous verse:

“The voice of the Lord shaketh the wilderness; the Lord

shaketh the wilderness of Kadesh.” Ps 29:8

This sets up a pun in which the wilderness “shakes” (v. 8) and the hinds
“shake” loose their calves. This allows the suggestion that the hinds are in
the wilderness of Kadesh and a figure for tribes living in that region.

This echo between Ps 29:9 and v. 1 allows the suggestion that God is
asking Job about whether he knows the basis upon which Kadesh tribes
(“hinds”) commit to war.

6.3.2 Wild Ass and Swift Ass

The mention of a wild ass is an echo of Ishmael and therefore to the
tribes that dwelt in the wilderness.

“Who hath sent out the wild ass (arp) free? or who hath
loosed the bands of the swift ass2?” Job 39:5 (KJV
revised)

The Hebrew word for “wild ass” is the same word translated “wild man”
in Gen 16:12,3

“And he will be a wild man (arp); his hand will be against

every man, and every man’s hand against him; and he
shall dwell in the presence of all his brethren.” Gen 16:12
(KJV)

In the light of this link, the language of Job can be seen as quite
suggestive: Ishmael was “sent out” into the “wilderness” just as the wild

1 The verb is in the Hiphil form for “calve” and the Polel form for
“shake”.
2 The Hebrew for “swift ass” in “loosed the bands of the swift ass” is a

different word and unique to this text.

3 This connection is noted by Wolfers, Deep Things, 222.

387
ass was “sent out” into the “wilderness”; Ishmael was sent out “free”
from slavery (he was the son of a slave), just as the wild ass was sent out
“free”.

The Hebrew for “bands” occurs as a place-name in the wilderness:

“And they departed from Hashmonah, and encamped at

Moseroth.” Num 33:30 (KJV), cf. v. 31, Deut 10:6

This is consistent with the view that it was to this region south of Edom
that Judah also looked for help (mercenaries)—among the nomadic tribes
descended from Ishmael. The “house” that God had made for Ishmael
was the “wilderness”; this is where his descendants lived.

“He will scorn (qxfy) the army (!wmh) of the city; neither
will he hear ([mvy) the noises (hawvt) of the oppressor
(fgn).” Job 39:7 (KJV revised)

Accordingly these tribes will pour scorn upon the plight of “the city”
(Jerusalem) and ignore the noise of the invading army (Job 3:18, Isa 14:4,
“the Oppressor”). Instead, they will be joyful when the city is forsaken,

“Because the palaces shall be forsaken; the multitude of

the city shall be left; the forts and towers shall be for
dens forever, a joy of wild asses (arp), a pasture of
flocks.” Isa 32:14 (KJV)

He explores the mountains for his “pasture”, i.e. he roams the mountains
for his “living” as bandits, but afterwards he will seek every green plant
from the devastated land (i.e. pillage the land).

“The range of the mountains is his pasture, but

afterwards (rxaw) he will search out every green thing.”
Job 39:8 (KJV revised)

The thrust of the description of the wild ass is that Job cannot tame him:
he scoffs at the city, he roams free in the wilderness, and he does not even
heed to the call of the taskmaster (the Oppressor), i.e. even the Assyrian
overlord cannot bring this wild ass to heel.

6.3.3 Wild Ox
The next animal is the “wild ox”:

388
 “Will the wild ox (~ar) be willing to serve thee, or abide
by thy crib? Canst thou bind the wild ox with his band in
the furrow? or will he harrow the valleys after thee? Wilt
thou trust him, because his strength is great? or wilt thou
leave thy labour to him? Wilt thou believe him, that he
will bring home thy seed, and gather it into thy barn?” Job
39:9-12 (KJV revised)

The Hebrew for “wild ox” is uncertain; some sort of animal that could be
used for “domestic service” with multiple horns can be discerned from
the usage of the term. The language being used has connections to a
variety of places, which point to the figure of the wild ox being used for
another nation.

i) God asks whether the wild ox will “lodge” (!wl) by Job’s crib; the sense
of the verb is of lodging overnight (e.g. Jer 14:8). The word for “crib” is
rare, occurring twice elsewhere and once in Isaiah—Isa 1:3 “The ox
knoweth his owner, and the ass his master’s crib: but Israel doth not
know, my people doth not consider.” This conveys the sense of service
that one nation might give to Judah, which was to “bring home thy seed”.
On this reading the “seed” would be Job’s children, who were partly in
exile in Assyria.1

ii) God asks whether Job can “bind” the wild ox; this is the same question
God asked in respect of Job’s capacity to “bind” the seven stars. The verb
is used in contexts of political alliances. Can Job bring about such
alliances “to bring his seed home”?

iii) God asks whether Job will trust the wild ox, and the implied contrast is
“instead of the Lord”. This marries well with the theme of Isaiah to trust
the Lord in the time of trouble rather than other nations.

iv) God asks whether Job “will leave all his labour to him” and this could
refer to the inevitable (heavy) price of tribute that would be needed to
secure an alliance (Deut 28:33, Jer 20:5).

1 Of the 12 uses of “thy seed” in the Hebrew Scriptures, 11 refer to

children. For example, see Isa 43:5 where God declares that he will bring
“thy seed” from the east; Sennacherib did take large numbers of Judah
into exile (Isa 6:12). Within the book of Job, a symbolic sense for
“children” seems necessary because the prologue has narrated the death
of Job’s children.
389
v) The nations did not ally with Judah and scavenged after the Assyrian
invasion (Obad vv. 10-16). Isaiah 34 narrates Yahweh’s response to such
scavenging. The “indignation of the Lord” would be upon all nations (v.
2) round about, after the Assyrian invasion was repulsed, and this was to
be worked out in the land of Idumea:

“The sword of the Lord is filled with blood, it is made

fat with fatness, and with the blood of lambs and goats,
with the fat of the kidneys of rams: for the Lord hath a
sacrifice in Bozrah, and a great slaughter in the land of
Idumea. And the wild oxen (~ar) shall go down (dry)
with them, even (w) the bullocks with the bulls; and their
land shall be soaked with blood, and their dust made fat
with fatness.” Isaiah 34:6-7 (KJV revised)

The focus of this action is the land of Edom, but the “wild oxen” will “go
down” with Edom; Edom was clearly of a piece with other southern and
eastern groups. These other groups are further identified as the “bulls”
and “bullocks”, which would be figures for their armies (e.g. Ps 68:30, Jer
8:16). These were to fall (Isa 11:14, 1 Chron 4:41-42) in the retaliation
initiated by Yahweh after the invasion was repulsed. The geographical
identity of the bulls and bullocks is suggested by the association of bulls
with Bashan, on the east of Jordan.

Bashan was hostile to Judah, even though it was a land assigned to the
Northern tribes. This was the case in David’s day (Ps 22:12); it was the
same in Hezekiah’s day, after the decimation of Northern Israel. It was a
land marked out for retaliatory action by Micah,

“Feed thy people with thy rod, the flock of thine

heritage, which dwell solitarily in the wood, in the midst
of Carmel: let them feed in Bashan and Gilead, as in the
days of old.” Mic 7:14 (KJV)

Isaiah confirms this picture when he says that the Day of the Lord will
affect Bashan (Isa 2:13, 33:9, Ps 68:22, Nah 1:4).

390
6.4 Ostrich1
There is a break in the treatment of the creatures with the mention of the
ostrich. Some translations of the verse are,

“Gavest thou the goodly wings unto the peacocks? Or

wings and feathers unto the ostrich?” Job 39:13 (KJV)

“The wings of the ostrich wave proudly; but are they the
pinions and plumage of love?” Job 39:13 (RSV)

“The ostrich’s wings are glad, if pinions…” (Good)2

“The wing of the ostrich rejoices; she has gracious

plumage and pinions.” (Habel)3

“The ostrich-wing would rejoice were she stork-wing and

feather.” (Wolfers)4

The break in the poem is indicated by the absence of the question form.
Up until now the poem has employed Hebrew particle words to indicate
its questions in an alternating sequence: (lioness (h), raven (ym), wild goat
(h), wild ass (ym) and wild ox (h)). Here there is no question-indicating
word and translators have assumed the question form, either explicitly as
indicated by the KJV with italics, or implicitly as in the RSV; this is
incorrect.

The Hebrew of the verse is difficult in the second clause, as indicated by

the difference between these translations, which are just hypothetical
reconstructions, but the following description of the creature (vv. 14-18)
indicates an ostrich, which is why translators have chosen to translate the
Hebrew as “ostrich” in the first clause, which is reasonably secure.

1 A. Walker-Jones, “The So-called Ostrich in the God Speeches of Job

(Job 39:13-18)” Bib 86 (2005): 494-510, argues that the “ostrich” is in fact
a sand-grouse.
2 Good, Turns of Tempest, 160. He amusingly comments, “The line says,

‘…if pinions a stork and a falcon’, anyone who can find meaning in that is
welcome to do so”. However, Good is just speculating that the Hebrew
has a reference to a falcon.
3 Habel, Job, 519.
4 Wolfers, Deep Things, 221, 369.

391
Of the translations, Wolfers is to be preferred, because it removes any
question-form (like the LXX) from the text, refers to only one creature—
the ostrich, and has a conditional element, which is present in the Hebrew.
The Hebrew word translated “ostrich” (~ynnr) is descriptive and conveys
the idea of a “shouter of joyous praise”.1 As a fast land-bird it is a strong
contrast with the splendour of the battle-horse.

“So that she leaves her eggs in the earth, letting them
warm in dust, and forgets that the foot may crush one, or
that the beast of the field (hdf) may trample one. She is
hardened against her young ones, as though they were not
hers: her labour is in vain2 without dread (dxp);3 because
God hath deprived her of wisdom, neither hath he
imparted to her understanding, like the time (t[k) she
lifteth up (arm) herself on high, she scorneth the horse
and his rider.” Job 39:14-18 (KJV revised)

As well as the absence of a rhetorical question, the voice in this section

has changed: God is referred to in the third person—“because God hath
deprived her of wisdom”—by some other voice. The tone of this part of
poem is also different: it paints the ostrich in a negative light. So, this
section about the ostrich is an interjection into the speech of Yahweh. A
number of clues give away the identity of the ostrich as the elite of Judah:4

i) The bird has left its eggs and is flightless,

“So that she leaves her eggs in the earth, and warms
them in dust, and forgets that the foot may crush one, or
that the beast of the field (hdf) may trample one.” Job
39:14 (KJV revised)

1 This deduction is derived from the analogous word !nr, which is the verb
for crying out in joy—see e.g. Ps 132:16.
2
Contrast Isaiah 65:23, “They shall not labour in vain, nor bring forth for
trouble; for they are the seed of the blessed of the Lord, and their
offspring with them”.
3 Some of the rich lacked the “dread” that Job saw in the Assyrian

invasion and were ignoring their “young”. We might hypothesize that the
reason for this is that they had done deals with the Assyrian in order to
retain their estates.
4 Wolfers avers that the ostrich is Job, Deep Things, 221.

392
 “And my hand hath found as a nest the riches of the
people: and as one gathereth eggs1 that are left, have I
gathered all the earth; and there was none that moved the
wing, or opened the mouth, or peeped.” Isa 10:14 (KJV)

These are the words of the Assyrian about Judah—he had come into the
land and found it like a place where eggs are left and none in the land
moved the wing in response. This movement of the wing that the
Assyrian expected would be the flapping of the wing by a bird aiming to
frighten and warn off the attacker.

Using this text as a clue, it is not difficult to read a symbology in Job’s

ostrich: some2 of the rich had left their landed estates and fled (eggs); they
had left their estate workers (young ones) and any flapping of their wings
from afar was as ridiculous as the flapping of an ostrich’s stubby wings.3

ii) The ostrich is said to be deprived of wisdom and understanding. This

corresponds to God taking away wisdom and understanding from the
political elite in Jerusalem:

“Therefore, behold, I will proceed to do a marvellous

work among this people, even a marvellous work and a
wonder: for the wisdom of their wise men shall perish,
and the understanding of their prudent men shall be hid.”
Isa 29:14 (KJV), cf. Isa 6:9-10, Job 17:4

This denial of wisdom is like the time when the ostrich reared up and
laughed at the horse and its rider. This refers to the arrogant reaction of
the elite to the warnings of Isaiah about the Assyrian threat.

6.5 Horses
Horses are mentioned and their clear symbology is that of an army.4

1 Eggs are rarely mentioned in the Hebrew Bible—just four times; it is

significant that there should just happen to be a mention here in the
context of the Assyrian invasion, along with a mention of wings.
2 Only some of the rich had done this; others were in collusion with the

Assyrian army and/or the local satellite powers and had done deals to
retain their estates.
3 Ostriches figure in reliefs depicting royal hunts for both Assyrian and

Persian kings; here Yahweh depicts Judah as an ostrich in a royal hunt.

4 The presence of such a military figure in this speech lends support to the

political and military reading we have offered.

393
 “Hast thou given the horse strength? hast thou clothed
his neck with thunder (hm[r1)? Canst thou make him
shake (v[r) as a locust (hbra)? the glory of his nostrils is
terror (hmya). He paweth in the valley, and rejoiceth in his
strength: he goeth on to meet the armed men. He laughs
(qxf) at fear, and is not affrighted; neither turneth he
back from the sword. The quiver rattleth against him, the
glittering spear and the javelin (!wdyk). He swalloweth the
ground with shaking (v[r) and troubling (zgr): neither
believeth he that it is the sound of the trumpet. He saith
among the trumpets, Ha, ha; and he smelleth the battle
afar off, the thunder of the captains, and the shouting.”
Job 39:19-25 (KJV revised)

Here Yahweh resumes his speech after the interjection relating to the
ostrich. The essential point is that Job has not given the horse its strength,
the Assyrian army has been raised up by God (Isa 5:28). Some details of
this description of the horse:

1) The army is compared to locusts and this is the figure used to describe
the Assyrian invasion in Joel 1:4, 2:25. The “shaking” of the locust is the
effect of the swarm upon the ground as it moves and destroys everything
in its path.

2) The glory of the army is “terror”, a word used to describe the Assyrian
invasion after the event when the people are invited to “meditate upon
the terror” (Isa 33:18, see Job 9:34, 13:21, 20:25, 33:7).

3) He digs in the “valley” and is unafraid of the men of arms—the

presence of the Assyrian army in the “valleys” and unafraid is described in
Isa 22:7-8.

4) The Assyrian “laughs” at the kind of fear that Job was experiencing; he
was not dismayed; he was unafraid of the weapons of war. Yet, Isaiah had
prophesied that he would be dismayed—Isa 30:31.

5) The army “shakes” (v[r) the ground and this denotes the military
counterpart to the “earthquake” metaphor that is common for war (Isa

1 This word is rare (4x) and elsewhere the place “Ramah” (e.g. Ezek
27:22). Its meaning here is uncertain; it could be “mane” (NASB) or
“strength” (RSV), see Pope, Job, 311.
394
29:6, v[r, Nah 3:2). This is a “troubling” and denotes the day of trouble
that came upon Hezekiah (Job 3:17, 26).

6.6 Hawk
The hawk is a hunter, but it is not a nation; rather we propose that it is an
individual in the government of Hezekiah.1 He “flies” south or flies to
“Teman” (!myt), seeking a political alliance with Edom, according to the
wisdom of “Job”. (The state of Hezekiah’s mind during his illness is in
some doubt). Job’s wisdom is mentioned, because in this symbology the
question is whether Job’s political acumen can forge an alliance with
Edom to assist Judah against the invader. Hence, we have the
juxtaposition of the “hawk” with the eagle closing this section of the
poem. The hawk flies south seeking an alliance, but the eagle is a hunter
that nests on a high rock seeking its prey from a far distance—it will not
ally with Judah.

The hawk and the eagle are paired in the concluding part of this section of
God’s speech because God’s perspective is that Job has sent a hawk south
to consult with the eagle about resisting Assyria.

6.7 Eagle
The last creature is the eagle. Again, it is not an army, but the king of
Edom, the one to whom the offer of an alliance would be presented. Job
is asked whether he can command the eagle to provide its own food.

“Doth the eagle mount up at thy command, and make

her nest on high?2 She dwelleth on the rock, and will
lodge (!nltyw) upon the crag of the rock, and the
stronghold (hdwcm). From thence she seeketh the prey,
and her eyes behold afar off. Her young ones also suck
up blood: and where the slain are, there is she.” Job
39:27-30 (KJV revised)

“Thus saith the Lord God concerning Edom…Though

thou exalt thyself as the eagle, and though thou set thy

1According to the LXX, Shebna was a military scribe (Isa 36:22).

2 There is an echo here of Job’s earlier speech (Job 29) in which he says
that he was secure in his “nest”—this nest was Jerusalem, and God’s
question to Job therefore is whether Edom will make her nest “on
high”—on Mount Zion.
395
 nest among the stars, thence will I bring thee down, saith
the Lord.” Obad 1:1-4 (KJV), cf. Hab 2:9

“Concerning Edom…Thy terribleness hath deceived

thee, and the pride of thine heart, O thou that dwellest in
the clefts of the rock, that holdest the height of the hill:
though thou shouldest make thy nest as high as the eagle,
I will bring thee down from thence, saith the Lord.” Jer
49:7-16 (KJV)1

Edom makes a nest on high rocks as in Jer 49:16; from here she beholds
the prey from afar off, and her young suck up the blood from the slain.
The description is suggestive, not of the hunt for small mammals, but the
devouring of creatures that are already slain, as in the case of vultures.
This fits the political context of Hezekiah in which a smaller nation feeds
on the slain of the invading superpower. The question to Job however is
whether he can recruit Edom to his cause and make him “hunt” the
invader.

7. Job’s Response
Job’s response to Yahweh’s first speech is to declare that he is of little
account (llq—RSV) and has nothing to answer God by way of
instruction (Job 40:4). He has spoken twice (over two days—Job 23:2),
but he can no longer proceed (Job 40:5).

The question concerning most commentators is how God’s reply to Job

answers any of his demands. There is nothing in the speech to explain
why Job has been afflicted with his disease; there is nothing in the speech
that challenges Job’s assertion of righteousness. The speech does,
however, answer one question: the purpose of the political calamity facing
Judah is to shake the wicked out of the land (Job 38:13).

Over and above this explanation, there is a great deal to answer Job’s
concerns and fears for the nation. God dismisses all political strategies
that have been discussed by Job and the friends (and the corresponding
efforts by the ruling individuals to control events), and he shows that only
he can control events.

1Jeremiah reflects the common identification of Edom as an “eagle”. His

political symbology is like that in Job, because he also reflects an invasion
by a superpower with satellite countries.
396
Job’s expectation was that as a righteous king, he would benefit from the
protection of God and look forward to the blessings promised to those
who had faith. This expectation of something (engendered by the
blessings of Deuteronomy 28) mirrors the challenge posed by Satan as to
whether Job served God for nothing. Job’s speeches show that he had
made a very firm link between righteousness and expectation. Job’s
speeches do not show that he only had faith in order to receive a reward;
rather they show Job struggling to keep his faith (and succeeding) in the
face of destitution. This is exactly the test required by Satan, and Job
vindicates Yahweh.

8. Conclusion
This first speech of Yahweh takes Job back to the birth of the people and
compares God’s handling of Egypt with his handling of the Assyrian. It
argues that there is no point in the rulers of Jerusalem seeking political
solutions to the crisis facing the nation. It offers hope in God’s control
over the nations.

397
398
 CHAPTER EIGHT
God’s Second Speech
1. Introduction
The traditional approach to this second speech identifies Behemoth and
Leviathan as two separate creatures, perhaps a hippo and a crocodile. This
is not convincing,1 even if we are taking just the surface meaning of Job
and ignoring the parabolic reading. However, when we consider the
second speech parabolically, this traditional identification falls by the
wayside completely.

Whereas God’s first speech has concerned Judah, its history and its
current dealings with the nations in the face of the Assyrian invasion, we
propose that the second speech solely concerns Assyria, and as such it is
an appropriate closing speech for the book, given that the book has been
concerned with Hezekiah, his affliction, the circumstances of the invasion,
and the way that the rulers in Judah have sought to deal with this
judgment from God. The climax of all the speeches therefore tackles the
crux of the whole matter: God’s control over Assyria.2

There are not two creatures in focus, but one. Several lines of intertextual
evidence establish this point.

The word, “Behemoth”, is the ordinary Hebrew plural for “beast”

(beasts), but here in Job it is used with singular pronouns and singular
forms of the verb.3 “Behemoth” is functioning as a descriptive title, “the
beast”:

1 See Pope, Job, xxix.

2 The crux of the speeches is not necessarily the crux of the book; the
crux of the book is the test for disinterested righteousness, but the
speeches have largely concerned the invasion by Assyria.
3 The LXX just ignores these and translates the Hebrew as “beasts” and

uses plural pronouns and verbs. Other occurrences of “Behemoth” in the

MT should be distinguished from Job as genuine plurals (e.g. Deut 32:24,
Ps 50:10, Isa 30:6, Jer 12:4, Hab 2:17). The only other occurrence in Job is
a plural with a singular verb and should be rendered, “but ask now the
beast and it shall teach you” (Job 12:7). The occurrence in Ps 73:22 is
possibly a singular form, as the manuscripts of the MT disagree at this
point between singular and plural forms, “I was as a beast before thee”.
399
 “Behold now the beast (twmhb), which I made with thee”
Job 40:15 (KJV revised)

The word, “Leviathan”, on the other hand, is a name of this beast.1 The
whole passage is introduced by a “Behold” for Behemoth, but there is no
corresponding “Behold” for Leviathan, which suggests that the text is
dealing with one beast.

Isaiah is the only prophet who uses the name “Leviathan” (Isa 27:1, RSV).
As to what type of creature this is, it is plausibly a mythical creature with
composite characteristics. Our argument, detailed below, is that the point
behind each of its varied features and behaviours is political: this creature
is first and foremost a political animal. Following Isaiah’s lead, we
propose that the identity of Behemoth as “Leviathan” is the Assyrian
Empire.2 This is consistent with the use of “Leviathan” as a figure for a
superpower, for in Ps 74:14 it is used of Egypt. This suggestion is
supported by the self-perceptions of Assyrian monarchs as recorded in
Assyrian annals. Shalmaneser III (858-824) states,

Brown, Seeing the Psalms, 148-149, uses Ps 73:22 to argue that Behemoth is
a figure for Job as “the beast in man”, but this is implausible given the
distinction between Job and Behemoth in Job 40:15. Wolfers takes the
same line and notes an echo between Ps 73:22, $m[ ytyyh twmhb, and Job
40:15, $m[ ytyf[ rva, Deep Things, 166. However, “the beast in man” was
not made with man; it followed upon the Fall.
1 The proposal that Behemoth and Leviathan are the same is radical. Early

interpretation treated them as different creatures; see 1 Enoch 60:7-9, II

Esdras 6:49-53. Wolfers, Deep Things, 162, notes that Leviathan was a
mythological creature of the Near East, but there is no such mythological
Behemoth. This is evidence that Leviathan and Behemoth are expressions
for one creature, although Wolfers treats them as different creatures.
2 In addition to arguing that Behemoth is “the beast in man”, Wolfers,

Deep Things, 165-178, argues that Behemoth is Judah. His key argument is
based on Isa 30:6, which we would take to be a literal (plural) reference to
a camel train carrying tribute south to secure the help of Egypt; Wolfers
misinterprets it as a reference to Judah.
400
 “(I am) Shalmaneser, the legitimate king, the king of the
world, the king without rival, the “Great Dragon”, the
only power within the (four) rims (of the earth)…”1

2. Job 40—Behemoth
God asks Job,

“Wilt thou also disannul (rrp) my judgment? wilt thou

condemn me,2 that thou mayest be righteous?” Job 40:8
(KJV)

This question connects with Isaiah:

“For the Lord of hosts hath purposed, and who shall

disannul (rrp) it? and his hand is stretched out, and who
shall turn it back?” Isa 14:27 (KJV)

The purpose of God here refers to his intentions with Assyria (see Isa
14:25). Job could not disannul God’s judgement in bringing Assyria
against the land by saying that a righteous king did not deserve such
treatment. Job could not condemn God for his decision to bring about
the invasion(s) of Assyria to cleanse the land of “the wicked”.

God now asks some obvious questions of Job and invites him to assume
control in Jerusalem:

“Hast thou an arm like God? or canst thou thunder with

a voice like him?” Job 40:9 (KJV)

This language of the “arm” and “voice” of God is particularly used at the
time of the Assyrian invasion (2 Chron 32:8, Isa 30:30). God’s question
can be seen against this backdrop.

“Deck thyself now with majesty and excellency; and array

thyself with glory and beauty.” Job 40:10 (KJV)

1 ANET, 276. Pritchard footnotes this title saying that it was a general title
taken up by the Assyrian kings, and one borrowed from religious
mythology.
2 God’s speech is here picking up on Job 10:2.

401
God invites Job to clothe himself as a king and assume the reigns of
power and tackle “the wicked ones” (the political elite) in Jerusalem:

“Cast abroad the rage of thy wrath: and behold every one
that is proud, and abase him. Look on every one that is
proud, and bring him low; and tread down the wicked
ones (~y[vr) in their place. Hide them in the dust
together; and bind their faces in secret.” Job 40:11-131
(KJV revised)

This language has point if Job is a king with a ruling class who were
opposed to his policies and to whom he had ceded power on account of
his disease. God is challenging Job to take on his opponents, and by
saying this, he accepts that he has been right in what he has said about
them. The language anticipates what Job will do when (shortly) he is cured
of his sickness.

2.1 Characteristics
i) The beast eats grass. The symbolic significance here is that the beast
“eats people”. The Hebrew word for “grass” is common enough (21x)
but the only prophet to use this word is Isaiah (9x); it is used as a figure
for humankind (e.g. Isa 40:6-8, 44:4, 51:12).Yahweh uses this word to
describe the victims of the Assyrian invader in his response to Hezekiah:

“Therefore their inhabitants were of small power, they

were dismayed and confounded; they were as the grass of
the field, and as the green herb, as the grass on the
housetops, and as corn blasted before it be grown up.” 2
Kings 19:26 (KJV), cf. Isa 37:27

This describes the inhabitants of the cities that Sennacherib laid waste in
Judah. In the previous verse (2 Kgs 19:25), Yahweh had said of the
Assyrian army, “I have made (it)”, and this is the same form of the
Hebrew verb (ytiyf[) used in v. 15, “Behold now behemoth, which I

1 The language here is used in Isaiah but in contexts that are a counterpart
to what God invites of Job. Thus, “people of my wrath” (Isa 10:6),
“casting abroad”” (Isa 28:25), “the proud” (Isa 2:12), “abasing” (Isa 2:11,
17, 5:15, 29:4), “bringing low” (Isa 25:5), “hiding in the dust” (Isa 2:10)
and “binding” (Isa 1:6, 3:7, 30:26) give the rhetorical context for God’s
remarks to Job. In effect God says to the wicked ones, “let them hide in
the dust” while he arises to shake terribly the land (Job 40:13, Isa 2:10,
19).
402
made (ytiyf[) with thee”. Behemoth has been made along with Job
(Hezekiah as representative of the people of Judah) in the sense that God
has made all the nations and is therefore in control of history (Isa 19:25,
27:11).

ii) The strength of the beast. Here the Hebrew word for strength (xk) is
common enough, and it is used by the Assyrian invader in his boasts,
“For he saith, By the strength (xk) of my hand I have done it” (Isa 10:13,
Assyria v. 5)). The strength of the beast is “in his loins” and this word
“loins” is only ever used (45x) of the loins of a man, so the picture being
painted here is a composite image. The idea appears to be that the
strength of the beast exists in his firstborn, as the parallel clause, “and his
strength (!wa) is in the navel1 of his belly” (v. 16b), uses a Hebrew word for
“strength” which includes in its semantic field the connotation of “the
firstborn” (Deut 21:17, Pss 78:51, 105:36).

In the light of these possibilities, it can be suggested that the strength of

the Assyrian consisted in his firstborn sons (his army).

iii) The Tail. Yahweh says of Behemoth, “he delights (KJV “moveth”2) in
his tail as cedar” (v. 17). The only prophet to use “tail” is Isaiah (4x out of
the 9x in the Hebrew Bible). The use of the word is in political and
military contexts, but the sense conveyed by the word is that of someone
who serves and does the bidding of a superior. This sense is clearly seen
in the statement that “…the ancient and honourable, he is the head; and
the prophet that teacheth lies, he is the tail” (Isa 9:15). Isaiah’s point in
this passage (Isa 9:13-15) is that whether a person was a “head” or a “tail”,
they would be cut off from the people in one day.

The derogatory tone of “tail” is seen in the description of Syria and

Ephraim as “two tails of these smoking firebrands” (Isa 7:4). This war
propaganda is designed to belittle the significance of the threat posed to
Judah by these two nations.

The Deuteronomy curses are relevant to this detail about Behemoth:

1 The Hebrew here is unique, and this is as good a guess as any, deriving
from the LXX.
2 This is an odd translation as the Hebrew is the common word for taking

delight in something. It is not necessary for there to be an b—see Isa 58:2,

Ecc 8:3, Ps 68:31 and Wolfers, Deep Things, 168.
403
 “And the Lord shall make thee the head, and not the tail;
and thou shalt be above only, and thou shalt not be
beneath; if that thou hearken unto the commandments
of the Lord thy God, which I command thee this day, to
observe and to do them.” Deut 28:13 (KJV)

“He shall lend to thee, and thou shalt not lend to him: he
shall be the head, and thou shalt be the tail.” Deut 28:44
(KJV)

This “blessing and curse” reflects the sense of a “tail” as a subordinate

servant as seen in the Isaiah texts. This provides a clue to the description
in Job.

The echo with Deuteronomy suggests that the “tail” of the Assyrian
Empire is Judah and that the Assyrian king delighted in his tail “as cedar”.
He viewed Judah as the tail of the empire and a country that ought to be
subservient to his geo-political policies. The comparison with “cedar” may
indicate a comparison with Lebanon and that the Assyrian view of Judah
was comparable to their attitude to Lebanon. Assyria was not going to
relinquish control over this part of their empire:

“By thy servants hast thou reproached the Lord, and hast
said, By the multitude of my chariots am I come up to
the height of the mountains, to the sides of Lebanon;
and I will cut down the tall cedars thereof, and the choice
fir trees thereof: and I will enter into the height of his
border, and the forest of his Carmel.” Isa 37:24 (KJV)

iv) The Sinews. Here the figure of “sinews” is obscure, but it is a likely to
be a political figure with parallel meaning to the sense we have given to
“tail”.

“He moveth his tail like a cedar: the sinews of his fear
(dxp) are wrapped together.” Job 40:17 (KJV revised)

While the RSV and NASB render dxp as “thighs” and the KJV has
“stones”, this is because they treat the word as a homonym with the
common Hebrew for “fear”. Accordingly, we propose to treat the figure
as one using the idea of “fear”. Wolfers has “the sinews of his fear (dxp)
are intertwined”.1 The use of this word is common in Job as a description

1 Wolfers, Deep Things, 169.

404
of the effect that the Assyrian invasion had had on the people. Hence, Job
has said, “the fear which I greatly feared has come upon me” (Job 3:25).
This suggests that the “sinews” of this beast are the Assyrian army in its
various divisions who have wrapped their hands around Judah’s neck
(Lam 1:141).

v) Bones and Limbs. The strength of this beast is conveyed in a

metaphor of “brass and iron”:

“His bones are tubes of brass, his limbs like bars of

iron.” Job 40:18 (RSV revised)

This is a straightforward military metaphor (i.e. “brass and iron” together),

and it occurs in Job 20:24 (RSV) and Mic 4:13. In a comparable way,
Leviathan esteems the military machines of other nations as straw and
rotten wood (Job 41:27).

The RSV translates the Hebrew as “tubes of bronze”, but the ordinary
sense of the word rendered “tubes” is of a “water-channel”. In our
prophetic and political reading of Job the phrase could just as well be
“water-channels of brass” and the mixed figure2 would be consistent with
the prophetic description of the invasion of Assyria as an overflowing
flood (Isa 8:7). Conceived as a flood over the land, the various arms of the
Assyrian forces could be pictured here as water-channels.

vi) Controlled by the Sword. There is now an interjection3 into the

speech of God:

“He is the beginning (tyvar) of the ways of God: he that

made him can make his sword to approach...” Job 40:19
(KJV revised)

1 This is the only other occurrence of the verb for “wrap together”.
2 One of the factors motivating commentators to amend the text, or
translation committees to go against the common meaning for a word is
the perceived awkwardness of mixed figures. Here the RSV does not like
“water-channels of brass” despite this being the ordinary meaning of the
words in the figure outside the book of Job.
3 The interjection refers to God in the third person and it breaks the

rhythm of the first-person address of Yahweh to Job.

405
Behemoth is the “beginning or first (tyvar) of the ways of God”, which
we suggest is a political figure for Assyria’s current dominance in God’s
purpose.

This is supported by the use of tyvar in Gen 10:10, Num 24:20, Jer 49:35,
and Amos 6:1, which is variously translated “beginning of…”, “chief
of…” or “first of…” in relation to nations. Behemoth/Assyria is the
“beginning of the ways of God” because this nation had primacy in God’s
current “ways” with the nations. The failure to understand God’s ways
with the nations is a feature of Job—see Job 21:14.

The key point is that “he that made him can make his sword approach”
(v. 19), i.e. God can approach Behemoth with his sword. This picks up on
a detail about Leviathan found in Isaiah:

“In that day the Lord with his hard and great and strong
sword will punish Leviathan the fleeing serpent,
Leviathan the twisting serpent, and he will slay the
dragon that is in the sea.” Isa 27:1 (RSV), cf. Isa 31:8

While we have identified Leviathan here as Assyria, it can be argued that it

is Egypt. The argument for this reading comes from Ezekiel’s use of
“dragon” for Egypt (Ezek 29:3, 32:2 (RSV), Isa 51:9) along with the
description of Egypt as dwelling in rivers and amongst reeds (Ezek 29:3,
Isa 36:6).

Against this proposal, however, there is the fact that Babylon is also a
“dragon” (Jer 51:34), which may suggest that any world-power could be a
dragon. Similarly, a “serpent” could be any world-power (Amos 9:3, Isa
14:29, Jer 46:22). We should also note that Leviathan is the dragon “in the
sea”, whereas Ezekiel has Egypt as a dragon “in the midst of his rivers”
(Ezek 29:3). Although there are these question-marks about “dragon” and
“serpent”, the “sword of the Lord” figure suggests that Assyria is the
target.

Isaiah refers to the “sword of the Lord” and this picks up on angelic
traditions:

“And it came to pass, when Joshua was by Jericho, that

he lifted up his eyes and looked, and, behold, there stood
a man over against him with his sword drawn in his
hand: and Joshua went unto him, and said unto him, Art
thou for us, or for our adversaries? And he said, Nay; but
406
 as captain of the host of the Lord am I now come. And
Joshua fell on his face to the earth, and did worship, and
said unto him, What saith my lord unto his servant?
“Josh 5:13-14 (KJV)

“Either three years' famine; or three months to be

destroyed before thy foes, while that the sword of thine
enemies overtaketh thee; or else three days the sword of
the Lord, even the pestilence, in the land, and the angel
of the Lord destroying throughout all the coasts of Israel.
Now therefore advise thyself what word I shall bring
again to him that sent me. 1 Chron 21:12 (KJV)

“And the ass saw the angel of the Lord standing in the
way, and his sword drawn in his hand: and the ass turned
aside out of the way, and went into the field: and Balaam
smote the ass, to turn her into the way.” Num 22:23
(KJV)

This background for the “sword” that God uses against Leviathan would
suggest that Leviathan is Assyria as it was an angel of the Lord that
punished Assyria (LXX, “made to be played with by his angels.”). Psalm
74 supports this identification insofar as Leviathan is given to the people
of the desert:

“Thou brakest the heads1 of leviathan in pieces, and

gavest him to be meat to the people inhabiting the
wilderness.” Ps 74:14 (KJV)

The figure suggests that the divisions (heads) of the Assyrian army are
broken and a rout ensues as they flee (the fleeing serpent) back home
through the desert.

vii) Supplies. The next figure describes the nations (“the mountains”, e.g.
Mic 6:2) supplying Assyria:

“Surely the mountains bring him forth food, where all

the beasts of the field mock (qxf2).” Job 40:20 (KJV
revised)

1In Ugaritic mythology, “Lotan” (Leviathan) had multiple heads.

2In context, “mock” is possible—see Lam 1:7, but “play” may echo Ps
104:26, which would support our “beasts of the field” symbology.
407
The nations themselves, conceived now as “beasts of the field” (Hos 2:14,
13:8, Isa 43:20), also “mock” Judah from the safety of the mountains.

viii) Lying Down. This detail describes Behemoth lying and waiting
under shady trees and by brooks of water.

“He lieth under the shady trees, in the covert of the reed,
and fens. The shady trees cover him with their shadow;
the willows of the brook (lxn) compass him about.” Job
40:21-22 (KJV)

Not all the terms here are certain. The RSV and NASB prefer “lotus
plants” instead of “shady trees” and “reeds and marshes” for “reeds and
fens”.

This detail could be a contrasting echo with the preparations that

Hezekiah had made for the siege:

“So there was gathered much people together, who

stopped all the fountains, and the brook (lxn) that ran
through the midst of the land, saying, Why should the
kings of Assyria come, and find much water?” 2 Chron
32:4 (KJV)

The river or brook that ran through the midst of the land was now the
place where the Assyrian army had encamped. A particular region may be
indicated by the expression “willows of the brook” (Isa 15:7).

A further area may be indicated by the expression “covert of the reed”.

The term for “reed” is used for Egypt (Isa 36:6), which allows the
suggestion that the “covert” of the “reed” is a region where Assyrian
armies are encamped. Certainly, Sennacherib’s campaign in 701 had
encountered Egyptian forces to the south of Jerusalem and subdued
Philistine cities. The Assyrians may have had detachments in various
locales of Judah. A similar political figure is likely in Isa 19:6, “the reeds
and flags shall wither”.

Using the figure of the beast lying by shady waters, the next verse uses the
river Jordan as a metonym for Judah:

408
 “Behold, he oppresses (KJV mg.) a river1 and hastes not:
he trusts that Jordan will burst forth (xyg) into his mouth.
In his opinion (wyny[b),2 he will take it (xql), with lures he
pierces a nose (@a bqny ~yvqwmb).” Job 40:23-24 (KJV
revised)

Here we follow the suggestion of the KJV margin and render the first
Hebrew verb as “he oppresses”. Behemoth is oppressing a river and this
is the river Jordan. A context for this oppression can be given by the
retrospective comment,

“For thus saith the Lord God, My people went down

aforetime into Egypt to sojourn there; and the Assyrian
oppressed them without cause.” Isa 52:43 (KJV)

It is plausible to suggest that the Assyrian is not making haste because this
is the nature of a siege-like oppression. Assyria expects that the Jordan
(Judah and Jerusalem) will eventually burst forth into his mouth.

The Hebrew verb we have translated as “burst forth” is rare (5x) and
conveys the sense of “going forth” (Judg 20:33, Job 38:8, Ezek 32:2, Mic
4:10). An echo with Micah may supply the interpretation of the figure in
Job:

“Be in pain, and labour to bring forth, O daughter of

Zion, like a woman in travail: for now shalt thou go forth
out of the city, and thou shalt dwell in the field, and thou
shalt go even to Babylon; there shalt thou be delivered;
there the Lord shall redeem thee from the hand of thine
enemies.” Mic 4:10 (KJV)

Here people go forth from the city of Jerusalem; similarly, in Job,

Behemoth may expect the city’s inhabitants to burst forth suddenly in a
capitulation.

1 I take the river to be the object of the verb because this verb often has
an object and an implied rather than explicit subject—see Lev 19:13, Deut
24:14, Prov 14:31, 22:16, 28:3, Mic 2:2. Wolfers, Deep Things, 174, takes the
river to be the subject, which is grammatically possible.
2 See Wolfers, Deep Things, 177.
3 Two other texts can be noted here—Isa 23:12 and Hos 5:11.

409
In the opinion of the invader, he can take the city.1 The language of
“piercing a nose with lures” may describe the taunts and boasts directed
towards Yahweh by the Rabshakeh:2

“Lo, thou trustest in the staff of this broken reed, on

Egypt; whereon if a man lean, it will go into his hand,
and pierce it: so is Pharaoh king of Egypt to all that trust
in him.” Isa 36:6 (KJV)

This is a typical taunt, but it shares three Hebrew words with our passage
in Job: “trust”, “reed” and “pierce”. This correspondence sets up echoes
between these two texts: Judah had placed its “trust” on a broken “reed”
(Egypt); Assyria lounged by reeds trusting that it could take the city. Judah
trusted on Egypt, but they would pierce Judah’s hand; Assyria was
piercing Yahweh’s nose with this taunt, but the taunt itself was part of a
lure to persuade Jerusalem to surrender; in due time Yahweh would pierce
Assyria’s nose (Isa 37:29).

3. Job 41—Leviathan

3.1 Characteristics
The description of Leviathan continues the ideas of Job 40:23-24:
Behemoth oppresses a river, and so God asks whether Job can draw out
Leviathan with a fishhook; Behemoth uses lures to pierce a nose, and so
God asks Job whether he can put a hook into Leviathan’s nose.

“Can you draw out Leviathan with an hook (hkx)? or his

tongue with a cord which you let down? Can you put a
rush (!wmga) into his nose? or bore his jaw through with a
thorn (xwx)?” Job 41:1-2 (KJV revised)

These questions can be seen against Yahweh’s declaration about Assyria:

“Because thy rage against me, and thy tumult, is come up

into mine ears, therefore will I put my hook (xx) in thy

1 The Hebrew is idiomatic and literally “in his eyes”, e.g. Prov 28:11, as
one example out of many.
2 It is Job 40:24 which more than any other detail shows that Behemoth is

Assyria.
410
 nose,1 and my bridle in thy lips, and I will turn thee back
by the way by which thou camest.” Isa 37:29 cf. 2 Kgs
19:28 (KJV)

The opening description uses a rare Hebrew word (v. 2, !wmga, 5x) which
occurs elsewhere only in Isaiah, which I have translated “rush”, following
the RSV,2

“Therefore the Lord will cut off from Israel head and
tail, branch and rush, in one day.” Isa 9:14 (KJV)

“Neither shall there be any work for Egypt, which the

head or tail, branch or rush, may do.” Isa 19:15 (KJV)

This suggests a symbology where a “rush” stands for a government

official. In the light of this, Yahweh’s question challenges Job to match
the taunts of the Rabshakeh: can Job put up an individual who will
incense Sennacherib through taunts.

“Will he make many supplications unto thee? will he

speak soft3 words unto thee? Will he make a covenant
with thee? wilt thou take him for a servant forever?” Job
41:3-4 (KJV)

Here the question reverses the situation: Judah made supplications to

Assyria and sought a treaty that made them a subservient state (Isa 28:15,
18, 33:8); so God reverses the question: could Assyria be any of these
things to Judah?

The next question picks up on contemporary enemy propaganda:

“Wilt thou play4 with him as with a bird? or wilt thou

bind him for thy maidens?” Job 41:5 (KJV)

1 An illustration of leading captives on a leash through a hook in the nose

exists on a stela depicting Esarhaddon leading captive Tirhakah of Egypt
and Ba’alu of Tyre. For a photograph, see J. B. Pritchard, The Ancient Near
East: An Anthology of Texts and Pictures, (2 vols; Princeton: Princeton
University Press, 1973), 1: illustration 121.
2 The occurrences are Job 41:2, 12, Isa 9:13, 19:15, 58:5,
3 The Hebrew is not common and only occurs twice in the Prophets—see

Isa 47:1.
4 The use of this verb here strikes an echo with Ps 104:26.

411
 “He himself I shut up like a caged bird within Jerusalem,
his royal city.” Annals of Sennacherib1

And consistent with the idea that Judah might defeat Leviathan, God asks
whether traders will bargain over Judah’s spoils of war,

“Will traders bargain over him? Will they divide him up

among the merchants?” Job 41:6 (RSV)

The futility of thinking of such a battle is then mentioned:2

“Lay hands on him; think of the battle; you will not do it

again!” Job 41:8 (RSV)

The text may strike an echo with a specific battle as a warning, or to those
prophecies which describe the battle (2 Chron 32:2, 6, 8, Job 38:23, 39:25,
Isa 28:6, 30:32, Joel 2:5, 7).

A change of perspective is then introduced:

“Behold, his hope (wtlxt) has been found false (hbzkn).

Should one also (~gh) be cast down at the sight of him?
No one is so fierce that he dares to stir him up.” Job
41:9-10 (KJV revised)

Here God declares that the hopes of Leviathan are false, and implies that
Job should not be cast down at the sight3 of him.

Yahweh then quotes Job’s words (Job 3:8, RSV) about rousing Leviathan.
This language of “raising up” is used in the Prophets to describe the
raising up of the nations to fight other nations (e.g. Isa 10:26, 13:17, 14:9).
In Job’s earlier speech he accused the political establishment of rousing
Leviathan in the sense of “playing with fire”—they were playing a
dangerous game making treaties with both Egypt and Assyria. Here
Yahweh confirms Job’s criticism of such flag-wavers: no nation is so
emboldened to rouse Leviathan.

1 ANET, 200.
2 It is this vain hope of entering into battle with Leviathan that further
shows the symbolic identity of Leviathan to be Assyria rather than Egypt.
3 Joel 2:4 uses the same verb for “looking” at the Assyrian army as Job

41:9.
412
God says next,

“Who then is he that can stand before me? Who hath

come before (~dq) me that I should repay him? whatsoever
is under the whole heaven is mine.” Job 41:11 (KJV
revised)

This series of questions address the invader standing before the city. The
Hebrew verb ~dq occurs in Isaiah 37:

“Therefore thus saith the Lord concerning the king of

Assyria, He shall not come into this city, nor shoot an
arrow there, nor come before (~dq) it with shields (!gm),
nor cast a bank against it.” Isa 37:33 (KJV)

Isaiah may contradict Job; on the other hand, it may be a question of

perspective. Isaiah’s statement is concerned with Sennacherib himself,
whereas it has been Rabshakeh and the army with him that has come
before Jerusalem (Isa 36:2). The book of Job has been concerned with the
siege prior to any arrival of the Assyrian king, when there is posturing,
skirmishes and an early breach. Yahweh declares through Isaiah that
Sennacherib will not come before the city. However, the first stage of a
siege does occur: the long wait to reduce the resources and morale of the
city’s population.1

Thus the invader does come before the city but his main army does not
get the chance of coming to the walls in their shield formations. The KJV
mg. of v. 15 picks up the same detail:

“His pride2 lies in channels3 of shields (!gm), a seal shut

tight.” (KJV mg. revised) Job 41:15 (KJV revised), cf. Job
15:26

1 The length of the siege is uncertain. If Sennacherib finished his

Babylonian campaign in late 702 (removing Merodach-Baladan from
Babylon) and then came across the Fertile Crescent for a spring campaign
in Palestine, it is reasonable to estimate a six-month siege broken in the
autumn.
2 The Hebrew carries the sense of majesty, excellence or pride.
3 This is the normal sense outside Job, so we include it here to convey the

mixed image of “water-channels of shields”, an image derived from the

figure of the Assyrian invasion as a overflowing flood (Isa 8:7).
413
The invader comes before the city demanding tribute—hence Yahweh’s
question as to why he should compensate him (v. 11).

Yahweh now proceeds to describe Leviathan rather than question Job’s

capabilities to handle the beast. The description is long and it is as well to
itemise those characteristics that have a clear political and military sense.
(Some of the political and military imagery is lost to us.) The description is
of a war machine viewed as an animal. The focus is entirely upon the head of
the beast—face, teeth, eyes, mouth, nose, neck, skin—and then the heart.
The language can be interpreted “literally” as a description of an animal,
but the words often have ambiguity that allows a political and military
sense, and it is these meanings we emphasize.

The following table offers an interpretation of Leviathan:

v. 12 I will not conceal (vrx)i) The Hebrew db is usually

his parts (db), his wordtranslated as “body parts”
(rbd) of power, or his because this is what the passage
own good order ($r[) goes on to describe.
(KJV revised) ii) The normal Hebrew for
“word, thing, matter” (rbd) is
eliminated in the KJV, RSV and
NASB.
iii) The Hebrew word $r[ is
normally “order” as in
arrangement, e.g. Exod 40:4;
particularly liturgical order.
iv) God appears to be saying he
will not be silent about Leviathan
including his boasts of power.
v. Who has uncovered i) This is a figure of conquest and
13a (hlg) the face of his it is used in Nah 3:5 of Nineveh
garment? (KJV revised) using the same words for
“uncover” and “face”: “I will
uncover your skirts upon your
face”.
ii) God appears to be saying that
he has already “conquered”
Assyria in decreeing that he is in
control.
414
 v. Or who can approach i) God appears to be saying that
13b him with his double no one in Judah can take a double
bridle? (KJV revised) bridle and approach the Assyrian
war beast; only he can tackle him.
v. Who has opened (xtp) i) This figure suggests that God
14a the doors of his face? has opened the face of Assyria
(KJV revised) and can therefore shut his mouth.
v. Round about his teeth is i) The word for “teeth” occurs in
14b terror. (RSV) three places in the Prophets one
of which is Joel 1:6 in relation to
an Assyrian invasion.
ii) The teeth are “round about”,
encircling the city.
iii) The word for “terror” is rare
(5x) only occurring in the
Prophets at Isa 33:18 and Jer
50:38. In Isaiah the context is of
Hezekiah meditating upon the
terror of the invasion after he has
been delivered.
v. 15 Channels of shields are i) The normal Hebrew for
his pride, a seal shut “water-channel” is coupled with
tight. (RSV revised, see the normal Hebrew for “shield”
above) to give a mixed figure of an army
formation.
ii) The Hebrew for “seal” occurs
in Job 38:14, which describes the
land as “clay” impressed by the
royal seal of an invader.
iii) These “shields” are a figure
for his “teeth” shut tight—they
are a line that cannot be broken
through.1
v. 16 One is so near to i) This could picture the battle
another, that no air can formation: one by one they draw
come between them. near in an encirclement, cf. Joel
(KJV) 3:9.

1The KJV and NASB have “scales” but this does not fit the context
which focuses on the mouth of the creature.
415
v. 17 A man with his brother i) They are joined as “brothers”,
(whyxab vya), they are an indication of the confederate
joined one to another; composition of the Assyrian
they capture (dkl) army.
together, and they ii) The Hebrew dkl in the
cannot be sundered. second clause is used for the
(KJV revised) capture of cities, e.g. 2 Chron
32:18, Isa 28:13. The cities
cannot be retaken.
v. 18 His sneezings flash forth i) The invader is like “the
light, and his eyes are like morning” and led by the “son of
the eyelids of the dawn. the Dawn”; cf. Job 38:12, Isa
(RSV) 14:12, Joel 2:2.
ii) The “eyes” could be fires kept
burning through the night, cf.
Job 3:9.
ii) The sneezing could be siege
engines catapulting balls of
flame.
v. 19 Out of his mouth go i) This figure could denote
burning lamps, and chariots with torches of fire
sparks of fire leap out. lighting up the night; see Nah
(KJV) 2:4, Judg 7:20 for the application
in war.
v. 20 Out of his nostrils comes i) This figure could refer to the
forth smoke, as from a smoke from the fires lit at night.
boiling pot and burning
rushes. (RSV)
v. 21 His breath kindleth i) The Hebrew for “kindleth”
coals, and a flame goeth occurs in the description of an
out of his mouth. (KJV) earlier Assyrian invasion in Joel
1:19, 2:3 (Tiglath-Pileser).
ii) The deliverance of Jerusalem
is described using the Hebrew
for “flame”—Isa 29:6.
iii) God could be describing the
visual qualities of the night-time
during the siege.

416
 v. In his neck abides i) This is a figure of strength, but
22 strength, and terror the second clause has unique
dances before him. words; the RSV fits the military
(RSV) context better than the KJV.
v. The folds of his flesh i) The verb for “cleaving” is the
23 cleave together; pour same as in v. 17 for the
upon him, he shall not “brothers” of the army cleaving
shake. (RSV revised) together.
ii) God seems to say that a
counter-attack cannot shake him.
iii) The second clause uses
common words for “pour” and
“shake” (e.g. Isa 24:19).
v. His heart is hard as a i) This appears to be a figure for
24 stone, hard as the nether determination of purpose.
millstone. (RSV)
v. On account of his i) There are the mighty (rulers) in
25 excellency (wtfm) the Jerusalem who secured their
mighty ones (~yla) dwell position of power on the back of
(wrwgy); on account of apparent success in appeasing
breakings (~yrbvm) the Assyria.
mighty are going wrong ii) They are now concerned
(wajxty). (KJV revised)1 whether they can “dwell” with
him (Isa 33:14), because of his
treachery.
iii) Because of the “breakings” in
the city (Isa 28:13, 30:14, 38:13),
they are going wrong.
v. Though the sword i) This appears to describe the
26 reaches him, it does not futility of engaging in battle from
avail; nor the spear, the the city walls.
dart, or the javelin.
(RSV)
v. He esteemeth iron as i) This is a military metaphor for
27 straw, and brass as rotten strength and it occurs in Lev
wood. (KJV) 26:19, Job 20:24, 41:27, Mic 4:13.
ii) Leviathan esteems the military
machines of other nations as
straw and rotten wood.

1 This verse as rendered in the KJV, NASB or RSV fits a military

situation, but once a military context is applied, the choices made in our
translation come to light.
417
v. The arrow cannot make i) Assyria has superior weaponry
28 him flee: slingstones are and the weapons that the
turned with him into Jerusalem defences offer are like
stubble. (KJV revised) slingstones.
ii) The figure of “flight” and
“the bow” is found in Isa 22:3.
v. Clubs (xtwt) are counted i) Stubble is a common figure
29 as stubble: he laugheth at for destruction (Isa 5:24, Joel
the shaking of a spear. 2:5). The weapons of the city are
(KJV) belittled as “clubs”.
ii) Shaking spears—a vain
defence of cities.
iii) Leviathan is just like the
Assyrian horse of Job 39:23,
unafraid of the spear/dart.
v. Under him (txt) is like i) Under the invader (Mic 1:4)
30 sharp potsherds; he there are sharp potsherds, a
spreads himself like a figure applied to the Assyrian
threshing sledge on the impact on Judah (Isa 30:14).
mire. (RSV revised) ii) The figure of the “threshing
instrument” is used of military
action (Isa 28:27, Joel 3:13,
Amos 1:3).
v. He maketh the deep to i) The “deep” is a figure for the
31 boil like a pot: he maketh nations (e.g. Zech 10:11).
the sea like a pot of ii) Ezek 24:1-10 uses the figure
ointment. (KJV) of the pot of ointment to
describe Jerusalem.
iii) God appears to be saying
that Assyria does what he wants
with the nations.
v. Behind him he leaves a i) The creature swims on the
32 shining wake; one would surface of the sea leaving a
think the deep to be foamy wake that shines as it
hoary. (RSV) reflects the sunlight.
ii) The deep is compared to the
old (hoary), as if to suggest they
cannot withstand the rolling
might of this superpower.

418
 v. Upon earth there is not i) The only other two
33 the like of his dominion occurrences of the Hebrew lvm
(lvm),1 which is made are Dan 11:4, Zech 9:10, and the
without fear. (KJV idea of dominion is required,
revised) which fits the parabolic reading.
v. He beholdeth all high i) This figure identifies the beast
34 things: he is a king over all as a king, and shifts the focus
the children of pride. from the power of the king as
(KJV) represented in his armies to the
king himself.
ii) High things include nations
(Isa 30:25).
iii) The sons of pride are
confederate lions (Job 28:8).

4. Job’s Response
Yahweh has not addressed the issue of Job’s righteousness in his second
speech; what he has done is show his control over the events and
circumstances surrounding Job. The relevance of this speech to the
previous dialogue can now be summarised:

The last speech is a fitting crescendo to the preoccupation of Job and the
friends with the political and military situation. God describes the
Assyrian war machine as Leviathan, but only he can combat him with his
sword; Job is powerless to confront the beast.

Job answers God’s question,

“Who is he that hideth counsel without knowledge?

therefore have I uttered that I understood not; things too
wonderful (alp) for me, which I knew not.” Job 42:3
(KJV)

The key word here is “wonderful”: Job has seen in God’s two speeches
something “wonderful”. The Hebrew word alp occurs in Isaiah:

“Therefore, behold, I will proceed to do a marvellous

work (alp) among this people, even a marvellous work
(alp) and a wonder: for the wisdom of their wise men
shall perish, and the understanding of their prudent men

1 The KJV and RSV have “not his like” and drop “dominion”.
419
 shall be hid.” Isa 29:14 (KJV), cf. Isa 28:29, Joel 2:26,
Mic 7:15

The wonderful work promised in God’s speeches was that he would take
his sword to Leviathan, and this is the subject also of the text in Isaiah.
The word also picks up on the “wonder-based” deliverance that God
enacted in Egypt (Exod 3:20, 34:10). The things that Job now sees in
God’s speech are not the amazing characteristics of a mythical creature,
but the knowledge and control that God has over the Assyrian war
machine —a knowledge that guarantees deliverance. Now Job is in the
position to reject what he has heard from the friends and comfort himself
in “dust and ashes” (Job 42:5-6).1

The essential argument of the friends is that Job has to acknowledge his
sin and God will restore to him his former prosperity. The counter-
argument of Job is that he has done nothing wrong of a sufficient gravity
to merit the calamity that faces both him and the nation, of which he can
repent. In this attitude, Job reflects God’s estimate of him in the prologue.
For God the issue is whether Job only serves him for something. This
issue is resolved in Job’s words after God’s second speech:

“Wherefore, I will reject (sam) it, and I will take comfort

(~xn) in dust and ashes.” Job 42:6 (KJV revised)

“Wherefore, I will reject (sam) it, and I will change my

mind (~xn) about dust and ashes.” Job 42:6 (KJV revised)

Here I offer two translations.2 The KJV and RSV have Job “repent” in
dust and ashes, but this suggests moral culpability for a modern reader.
Such a reading puts to one side God’s witness about Job in the prologue
and Job’s constant avowals of righteousness; furthermore, it ignores the
principal meanings of the Hebrew verb ~xn.

1 See the exposition in the last chapter on Job 42:6.

2 For a discussion of the issues involved in the translation of the verse, see
W. Morrow, “Consolation, Rejection, and Repentance in Job 42:6” JBL
105 (1986): 211-225. Morrow argues that the various translations of this
verse, including the one presented here, are valid and arise from
intentional ambiguity in the Hebrew. This thesis would fit a view that the
book of Job had both literal and parabolic levels of meaning.
420
Of the uses of this form of the verb ~xn (47x1), the rough breakdown of
meaning is: God repenting of a course of action (31x, e.g. 1 Sam 15:29,1
Chron 21:15, Jer 18:8, Jon 3:10), someone being comforted (9x, e.g. Jer
31:15, Ezek 14:22), and men changing their behaviour (7x, e.g. Exod
13:17, Judg 21:6, Jer 8:6, 31:17). Since Job is not referring to any actions
about which he needs to repent, the sense in Job 42:6 is either of
“comfort” or “change his mind”. Job has been railing against his situation
in “dust” and “ashes” (Job 2:8); now he changes his mind or takes
comfort in his “dust and ashes”. The two senses can be combined if we
read the statement as affirming that Job takes comfort from a change of
mind about his situation. Thus he accepts the “nothing” of his
circumstances.2 The challenge between “the Satan” and God from the
prologue is resolved: Job serves God for nought.

We can see that Job means to close his remarks by a reference to

“comfort” (rather than repentance3) by the fact that it is “comfort” (~xn)
that the friends came to offer (Job 2:11). They had not offered comfort,
and Job concludes his dialogue with them by saying that he took comfort
in dust and ashes. God reinforces Job’s rejection of their comfort when
he says that they had not spoken that which was right (Job 42:7).

There is another dimension to Job’s response—he rejects something. The

KJV and RSV render the Hebrew sam as “abhor” or “despise”, which is
possible. The database of usage for this term is equally balanced between
the idea of “rejection” (38x) and the stronger attitudinal response of
“despising” (22x).

The Hebrew here has no object for what is rejected or despised, whereas
an object is the norm elsewhere (Job 5:17, 8:20, 9:21, 10:3, 19:18, 30:1,

1 The verb occurs 100x and this passive form occurs 47x.
2 The phrase “dust and ashes” only occurs outside Job in Genesis 18:7 in
relation to Abraham’s appeal for Sodom and Gomorrah; this echo
compares Job to Abraham and configures Job’s attitude as an appeal to
Yahweh to “save” Sodom and Gomorrah, i.e. Jerusalem (Isa 1:9-10). The
phrase also occurs in Job 30:19, where it is a figure for the situation in
which God has placed Job, i.e. the Assyrian devastation. It is not a figure
of the human condition (sin and mortality).
3 While moral repentance is not in view, Davis suggests that the sentiment

should be “reconsider about dust and ashes”, Job and Jacob, 118. This
suggestion is close to mine insofar as Job changes his mind about “dust
and ashes” and takes comfort in his situation.
421
31:13). The object is therefore to be understood (i.e. implicit1) as that
which Job has heard from others:

“I have heard of thee by the hearing of the ear: but now

mine eye seeth thee.” Job 42:5 (KJV)

There is a strong contrast here between what Job has heard and what he
now sees, and this contrast feeds into the next verse where Job says he
“rejects” what he has heard. The Hebrew expression translated “hearing
of the ear” occurs only once elsewhere in Ps 18:44,

“As soon as they hear of me, they shall obey me: the
strangers shall submit themselves unto me.” Ps 18:44
(KJV)

This text refers to the rumours and reports received among the nations;
likewise, Job refers to the rumours and reports he has heard about what
Yahweh was doing in the land; it is this that Job rejects. Job’s contrast is
therefore that he rejected such rumours, and he took comfort instead in
the “dust and ashes” of his situation.

God now says to the three friends that they had not spoken of him what
was “right” (!wk). The normal translation of this word outside Job would
convey the idea of preparation, getting something ready, establishing
something that was planned. An example is,

“And for that the dream was doubled unto Pharaoh

twice; it is because the thing is established (!wk) by God,
and God will shortly bring it to pass.” Gen 41:32

What the friends had not done was show that God had planned to bring
the Assyrian invader into the land, irrespective of Hezekiah’s
righteousness, and that he would remove him as and when he had
predetermined. They had not expounded that God had brought the
Assyrian into the land to shake “the wicked ones” out of the land (Job
38:13). They had not explained that God intended to do a marvellous
work at this time and thereby reinforce the good king Hezekiah in a
restored kingdom. They had not explained that God was also “proving”
Hezekiah to see whether he would serve him when all of Judah had been
taken. The friends instead had reasoned that God had planned to punish

1A similar missing object is found in Job 7:16, where Job says “I loathe”
and assumes we understand that the object is “his life”.
422
Job for his sin and, if he repented, God would remove the invader from
the land. Consequently, their ideas were “not right” and they needed to be
reproved.

5. Conclusion
Whereas the surface reading of God’s last speech sees a description of
one or two impressive mythological beasts, our parabolic reading
identifies only one beast as a figure for Assyria. The last speech of the
book climaxes by dealing with the crux of Job’s circumstance. In
consequence, Job puts to one side his avowal of personal righteousness
and takes comfort in dust and ashes; he waits for the salvation of the
Lord.

Closing the dialogue with a soliloquy on Leviathan identifies the point of

the speeches. They begin with Leviathan (Job 3:8, RSV) and end with
Leviathan. How Leviathan can be defeated is the problem facing Job and
the friends. Renouncing his integrity is not a solution for Job; he is not
prepared to repent of a sin in order to invoke God’s saving power. This is
the friends’ default position. Instead, Job has expressed confidence in the
deliverance of God, but he does not know why God has afflicted him or
how he will deliver him.

Hence, the position of the friends is a real challenge: is his repentance the
missing pre-condition for God acting? This question torments his mind
and results in intense avowals of his innocence (to the friends and to
God), and a railing against the justice of God in bringing about his
calamity. God’s speech addresses Job’s torment by reminding him of his
past miraculous act of deliverance at the Exodus and his complete control
over current events. This does not address the question of his innocence,
but it bolsters Job’s faith to the point where he is assured that he is not
faced with sacrificing his integrity.

423
424
 CONCLUSION
The book of Job is about Judah and its position in God’s plan. It is about
Hezekiah at the time of the Assyrian crisis. Its exact date of composition
is uncertain. The intensity of its subject-matter probably reflects a
provenance in Judah in the late seventh century, i.e. close to the
experience that has engendered its theme but in a context where the
themes of Jeremiah’s prophesying are important in Jerusalem. The writing
of Job presumes at least two types of literate audience: one familiar with
the eighth century prophets and one familiar with “wisdom traditions”.

Job and the friends share much of their analysis of the political situation.
Job rejects their belief that he has displeased God and needs to repent in
order that the current calamity might be averted. Job’s constant avowal of
righteousness is the counter-claim that he has not done anything wrong
proportionate to the catastrophe facing the nation. (A calamity brought
about by “the Satan”). Accordingly, it appears to the friends that he
impugns God’s righteousness for bringing this disaster upon him. Elihu
accepts Job’s avowal of righteousness, but believes that he has reacted
wrongly to his afflictions and is guilty in this respect. At times Job does
not see how the disaster can be averted, and he expects to suffer its fate;
in fact, he wishes for death in order to avoid the consequences of the
invasion; at other times he expresses confidence in God; his mind is
conflicted.

The intertextual echoes between Job and the eighth/seventh prophets are
too extensive and too deep to be controverted. Hence, there is a need to
reconfigure the conventional approach to Job to embrace a prophetic
reading based in the political reality of the Assyrian Crisis. The book is not
an abstract discussion of the problem of suffering; it has a “real” setting.
The book is not a discussion of the wisdom of God vis-à-vis the suffering
of general classes of people called “the righteous” and “the wicked”; the
book is not a piece of anthropocentric wisdom literature. The “wisdom”
of the book of Job is providential.

The suffering at the heart of the book serves the purpose of testing Job
for disinterested righteousness. Job does not understand why he has
suffered, but the reader knows that he is suffering in order to test whether
he will serve God for nothing. Job’s suffering is the way in which he is
brought to a state of “nothingness” in order to determine if he will
425
continue to serve God. Job does not understand why he is suffering or
how long this suffering will continue. At times he is in despair and at
other times he expresses hope of eventual deliverance. His conflicted
mind is only put at ease after the divine speeches when he takes comfort
in dust and ashes and waits for the salvation of the Lord.

Our reading of the dialogues is similar to many commentaries in that we

see Job’s avowal of righteousness, the friends’ accusation of prior sin, and
Elihu’s middle way of accepting affliction as a discipline. We differ from
standard commentaries in setting all this in an historical situation with
political and military aspects. The book is an explanation of the affliction
of Hezekiah and Judah in the crisis of 701

426
 BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. Primary Texts

1.1 Scriptural Texts

Biblica Hebraica Stuttgartensia (eds., K. Elliger and W. Rudolph; 4th Ed.;

Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1990).

Septuaginta (ed., A. Rahlfs; 2 vols; Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft,

1979).

1.2Ancient Near East Texts

Luckenbill, D. D., The Ancient Records of Assyria and Babylon (Chicago: The
University of Chicago Press, 1926).

Pritchard, J. B., Ancient Near Eastern Texts (Princeton: Princeton University

Press, 1969).

Tadmor, B. H., The Inscriptions of Tiglath-Pileser King of Assyria (Jerusalem:

The Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities, 1994).

Thomas, D. W., Documents from Old Testament Times (New York: Harper
Torchbooks, 1961).

2. Encyclopaedias, Grammars and Dictionaries

Brown, F., S. R. Driver and C. A. Briggs, A Hebrew and English Lexicon of

the Old Testament (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1907).

Buttrick, G. A., ed., Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible (4 vols; Nashville:

Abingdon, 1962).

Freedman, D. N., ed., Anchor Bible Dictionary (6 vols; New York:

Doubleday, 1992).

Gelb, I. J., et. al., Chicago Assyrian Dictionary (21 vols; Chicago: University of
Chicago, 1956-).

427
Gesenius, W., Hebrew Grammar (eds. E. Kautzsch and A. E. Cowley; 2nd
Edn.; Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1910).

Williams, R. J., Hebrew Syntax: An Outline (Toronto: University of Toronto

Press, 1967).

3. Secondary Literature

Alexander P. S., “The Targumim and Early Exegesis of the ‘Sons of God’
in Genesis 6” JJS 23 (1972).

Alter R., The Art of Biblical Poetry (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1990).

Anderson F. I., Job (Tyndale; Leicester: Inter-Varsity Press, 1976).

Aufrecht W. E., ed., Studies in the Book of Job (Waterloo, Ontario: Wilfred
University Press, 1985).

Baker D. W. and B. T. Arnold, eds., The Face of Old Testament Studies:

A Survey of Contemporary Approaches (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2004).

Barker Margaret, The Gate of Heaven: the History and Symbolism of the
Temple in Jerusalem (London: SPCK, 1991).

Barr J., “The Synchronic, the Diachronic and the Historical” in De Moor,
ed., Synchronic or Diachronic, 1-14.

Barstad, H. M., “On the So-Called Babylonian Literary Influence in

Second Isaiah” SJOT 2 (1987): 90-110.

Barton Payne J., “Eighth Century Israelitish Background of Isaiah 40-66”

WTJ 29 (1966-67): 179-190; WTJ 30 (1967-68): 50-58, 185-203.

Baskin J. R., “Rabbinic Interpretations of Job” in Perdue and Gilpin, ed.,

The Voice from the Whirlwind, 101-110.

Bastiaens J. C., “The Language of Suffering in Job 16-19 and in the

Suffering Servant Passages of Deutero-Isaiah” in Rutien and Vervenne,
ed., Studies in the Book of Isaiah, 421-432.

Begg C. T., “Babylon in the Book of Isaiah” in Vermeylen, ed., The Book of
Isaiah, 121-125.

428
Beuken W. A. M., ed., The Book of Job (Leuven: Leuven University Press,
1994).

— “Job’s Imprecation as the Cradle of a New Religious Discourse. The

Perplexing Impact of the Semantic Correspondences between Job 3, Job
4-5 and Job 6-7” in Beuken, ed., The Book of Job, 41-78.

— “Isaiah 28: Is It Only Schismatics That Drink Heavily? Beyond the

Synchronic Versus Diachronic Controversy” in De Moor, ed., Synchronic or
Diachronic, 15-38.

Black J. and A. Green, eds., Gods, Demons and Symbols of Mesopotamia

(London: British Museum Press, 1992).

Blenkinsopp J., Isaiah 40-55; Isaiah 56-66 (AB; New York: Doubleday,
2002; 2003).

— Opening the Sealed Book: Interpretations of the Book of Isaiah in Late Antiquity
(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2006).

Bosman H. J. and H. van Grol, eds., Studies in Isaiah 24-27 (Leiden: E. J.

Brill, 2000).

Bottéro J., Mesopotamia: Writing, Reasoning and the Gods (Chicago: Chicago
University Press, 1995).

Bright J., A History of Israel (London: SCM Press, 1977).

Brown W. P., Seeing the Psalms A Theology of Metaphor (Louisville:

Westminster John Knox Press, 2002).

Childs B. S., Introduction to the Old Testament as Scripture (London:

SCM Press, 1979).

— The Assyrian Crisis (London: SCM Press, 1967).

Clines D. J. A., D. M. Gunn and A. Hauser, eds., Art and Meaning: Rhetoric
in Biblical Literature Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1982).

— “The Arguments of Job’s Three Friends”, in Clines, Gunn and Hauser,

eds., Art and Meaning, 199-214.

— Job 1-20 (WBC; Dallas, Texas: Word Publishers, 1989).

429
— “Why is there a Book of Job?” in Beuken, ed., The Book of Job, 1-20.

— ed., The Poetical Books (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1997).

— “The Significance of the ‘Sons of God’ Episode” in On the Way to the

Postmodern: Old Testament Essays (2 vols; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic
Press, 1998), 1:337-350.

— “A Brief Explanation of Job 12-14” in Zuck, ed., Sitting with Job, 261-
264.

Collins J. J., Jewish Wisdom in the Hellenistic Age (Edinburgh: T & T Clark,
1998).

Cook S. L., C. L. Patton and J. W. Watts, eds., The Whirlwind (Sheffield:

Sheffield Academic Press, 2001).

Craigie P. C., “Job and Ugaritic Studies” in Aufrecht, ed., Studies in the
Book of Job, 28-25.

Crenshaw J. L., Introduction to Old Testament Wisdom (Atlanta: John Knox

Press, 1981).

— A Whirlpool of Torment (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1984).

— Joel (AB; New York: Doubleday, 1995).

— Defending God (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005).

Cross F. M., Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic (Cambridge, Massachusetts:

Harvard Univ. Press, 1977).

Davidson A. B., The Book of Job (ed., H. C. O. Williamson; Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press, 1962)

Davidson M. J., Angels at Qumran (Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1992).

Davis E. F., “Job and Jacob: The Integrity of Faith” in Cook, Patton, and
Watts, eds., The Whirlwind, 100-120.

Day J., Psalms (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1992).

430
— and R. P. Gordon and H. G. M. Williamson, eds., Wisdom in Ancient
Israel (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995).

Dell K. J., The Book of Job as Sceptical Literature (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1991).

De Moor J. C., ed., Synchronic or Diachronic? A Debate on Method in

Old Testament Exegesis (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1995).

Dhorme E. H., Job (trans. Harold Knight; London: Nelson, 1967).

Duhm B., Das Buch Jesaja (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1892).

Eaton J. H., Job (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 2004).

Ehrensvärd, M., “Linguistic Dating of Biblical Texts” in Biblical Hebrew:

Studies in Chronology and Typology (ed., I. Young; London: T & T Clark,
2003), 164-188.

Eissfeldt O., The Old Testament: An Introduction (Oxford: Basil Blackwell,

1956).

Enns P., Poetry & Wisdom (IBR Bibliographies 3; Grand Rapids: Baker
Books, 1997).

Ewald G. H. A. von, Book of Job (London: Williams and Norgate, 1882).

Fewell D. N., ed., Reading Between Texts: Intertextuality and the Hebrew Bible
(Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1992).

Fishbane M., “Jeremiah 4:23-26 and Job 3:3-13: A Recovered Use of the
Creation Pattern” VT 21 (1971): 151-168.

— Text and Texture (New York: Schoken Books, 1979).

Forsyth N., The Old Enemy: Satan and the Combat Myth (Princeton, New
Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1987).

Fox M. V., “Job the Pious” ZAW 117 (2005): 351-366.

Freedman D. N., Pottery, Poetry and Prophecy (Winona Lake, Indiana:

Eisenbrauns, 1980).

431
Fyall R. S., Now my Eyes have seen You: Images of Creation and Evil in
the Book of Job (Leicester: Apollos, 2002).

Gibson A., Text and Tablet (Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing, 2000).

Gillingham S. E., The Poems and Psalms of the Hebrew Bible (Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 1994).

Good E. M., Irony in the Old Testament (Philadelphia: Westminster Press,

1965).

— In Turns of Tempest: A Reading of Job with a Translation (Stanford,

California: Stanford University Press, 1990).

Gordis R., The Book of God and Man: A Study of Job (Chicago: University of
Chicago Press, 1978).

— The Book of Job (New York: Jewish Theological Seminary, 1978).

Gottwald N., The Hebrew Bible: A Socio-Literary Introduction (Philadelphia:

Fortress Press, 1985).

Greenberg Moshe et al, eds., The Book of Job (Philadelphia: JPS, 1980).

Habel N. C., The Book of Job (OTL; Philadelphia: Westminster Press,

1985).

Harding J. E., “A Spirit of Deception in Job 4:15? Interpretive

Indeterminacy and Eliphaz’ Vision” BibInt. 13 (2004): 137-166.

Harrison R. K., Introduction to the Old Testament (Leicester: Inter Varsity

Press, 1970).

Hartley J. E., The Book of Job (NICOT; Grand Rapids, Michigan:

Eerdmans, 1988).

— “The Genres and Message of the Book of Job” in Zuck, ed., Sitting with
Job, 65-78.

Hayes, J. H. and S. A. Irvine, Isaiah: The Eighth Century Prophet (Nashville:

Abingdon Press, 1987).

432
Hoffer V., “Illusion, Allusion and Literary Artifice in the Frame” in Cook,
Patton, and Watts, eds., The Whirlwind, 84-99.

Hooke S. H., Babylonian and Assyrian Religion (Oklahoma: University of

Oklahoma Press, 1963).

Irvine, S. A., Isaiah, Ahaz and the Syro-Ephraimite Crisis (SBL Dissertation
Series 123; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1990).

Jacobsen T., The Treasures of Darkness (New Haven: Yale University Press,
1976).

Janzen J. G., Job (IBC; Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1985).

Johnson T. L., “Job as Proto-Apocalypse: A Fresh proposal for Job’s

Governing Genre”, (Paper, SBL 2004; Online: http://www.sbl-
site.org/PDF/Johnson_Job.pdf).

Kissane E., The Book of Isaiah (2 vols; Dublin: Browne & Nolion, 1941).

Knoppers G. N., “There Was None Like Him” CBQ 54 (1992): 418-425.

— “The Historical Study of the Monarchy: Developments and Detours”

in Baker and Arnold, eds., The Face of Old Testament Studies, 207-235.

Kooij A. van der, “The Cities of Isaiah 24-27 according to the Vulgate,
Targum and Septuagint” in Bosman and van Grol, eds., Studies in Isaiah
24-27, 183-188.

Leick G., Mesopotamia (London: Penguin, 2001).

Limburg J., “The Root byr and the Prophetic Lawsuit” JBL 88 (1969):
291-304.

Lo A., Job 28 as Rhetoric: An Analysis of Job 28 in the Context of Job

21-31 (SVT; Leiden: E. J. Brill, 2003).

Luckenbill D. D., The Annals of Sennacherib (Eugene: Wipf & Stock, 2005).

Mason R., Micah, Nahum, Obadiah (Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1991).

McConville J. G., “Restoration in Deuteronomy and the Deuteronomic

Literature” in Scott, ed., Restoration, 11-40.
433
Miller J. Maxwell and John H. Hayes, A History of Ancient Israel and Judah
(London: SCM Press, 1986).

Morrow W., “Consolation, Rejection, and Repentance in Job 42:6” JBL

105 (1986): 211-225.

Mosca P. G., “Once Again the Heavenly Witness” JBL 105 (1986): 27-37.

Motyer J., The Prophecy of Isaiah (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1993).

Newsom C. A., The Book of Job (NIB IV; Nashville: Abingdon Press,
1996).

— The Book of Job: A Contest of Moral Imaginations (Oxford: Oxford

University Press, 2003).

Nicholson E. W., “The Limits of Theodicy as a Theme of the Book of

Job” in Day, Gordon and Williamson, eds., Wisdom in Ancient Israel, 71-82.

— The Pentateuch in the Twentieth Century (Oxford: Oxford University Press,

1998).

North C. R., The Suffering Servant in Deutero-Isaiah (Oxford: Oxford

University Press, 1948).

Oates J., Babylon (London: Thames Hudson, 1986).

Owen G. Fredrick, “The Land of Uz” in Zuck, ed., Sitting with Job, 245-
248.

Pagels E., The Origin of Satan (London: Penguin, 1995).

Parsons G. W., “The Structure and Purpose of the Book of Job” in Zuck,
ed., Sitting with Job, 17-34.

— “Literary Features of the Book of Job” in Zuck, ed., Sitting with Job, 35-
50.

Partridge A. C., English Biblical Translation (London: Andre Deutsch, 1973).

Payne, J. B., “The Relationship of the Reign of Ahaz to the Accession of

Hezekiah” Bibliotheca Sacra 126 (1969): 40-52.
434
Perdue G. L., Wisdom in Revolt (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1991).

— and W. C. Gilpin, eds., The Voice from the Whirlwind (Nashville:

Abingdon Press, 1992).

— “Metaphorical Theology in the Book of Job: Theological

Anthropology in the First Cycle of Job’s Speeches” in Beuken, ed., The
Book of Job, 129-156.

Perry, A., Joel (Sunderland: Willow Publications, 2009).

Pfeiffer R. H. in “The Dual Origin of Hebrew Monotheism” JBL 46

(1927): 202-206.

Pollock S., Ancient Mesopotamia (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,

2004).

Pope M. H., Job: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary (AB;
Garden City, New York: Doubleday, 1965).

Pritchard J. B., The Ancient Near East: An Anthology of Texts and Pictures (2
vols; Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1973).

Pyeon Y., You Have Not Spoken What is Right About Me: Intertextuality
and the Book of Job (New York: Peter Lang, 2003).

Rad G. von, From Genesis to Chronicles (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2005).

Rochberg F., The Heavenly Writing: Divination, Horoscopy, and

Astronomy in Mesopotamian Culture (Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 2004).

Rogerson J., Genesis 1-11 (Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1991).

Rooker M. F., “Dating Isaiah 40-66: What Does the Linguistic Evidence
Say?” WTJ 58 (1996): 303-312.

Roux G., Ancient Iraq (London: Penguin, 1992).

Rowley H. H., The Servant of the Lord (London: Lutterworth Press, 1954).

435
Rutien J. Van, and M. Vervenne, eds., Studies in the Book of Isaiah (Leuven:
Leuven University Press, 1997).

Scott J. M., ed., Restoration: Old Testament, Jewish and Christian

Perspectives (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 2001).

Seitz C., Isaiah 1-39 (Louisville, Kentucky: John Knox Press, 1995).

Smick E. B., “Mythology and the Book of Job” in Zuck, ed., Sitting with
Job, 221-229.

Snaith N. H., The Book of Job (London: SCM Press, 1968).

Sommers B. D., A Prophet Reads Scripture: Allusion in Isaiah 40-66 (Stanford,

California: Stanford University Press, 1998).

Stevenson W. B., The Poem of Job (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1943).

Tate M. E., “The Book of Isaiah in Recent Study” in Watts and House,
eds., Forming Prophetic Literature¸ 22-56.

Terrien S., The Book of Job (IB III; Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1954).

— “Quelques remarques sur les affinité de Job avec le Deutéro-Esaie”

VTSup 15 (1966): 295-310.

Thiele E. R., The Mysterious Numbers of the Hebrew Kings (Grand Rapids:
Kregel Publications, 1983).

Thirtle J. W., Old Testament Problems (London: Henry Frowde, 1907).

Torrey C. C., The Second Isaiah (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1928).

Tsevat M., “The Meaning of the Book of Job” HUCA 37 (1966):73-106.

Tur Sinai N. H., The Book of Job (Jerusalem: Kiryath Sepher Ltd, 1957).

Vermes G., The Dead Sea Scrolls in English (4th Edition; London: Penguin,
1995).

Vermeylen J., ed., The Book of Isaiah (Leuven: Leuven University Press,
1989).

436
Walker-Jones, A., “The So-called Ostrich in the God Speeches of Job (Job
39:13-18)” Bib 86 (2005): 494-510.

Waltke Bruce and K. D. Diewert, “Wisdom Literature” in Baker and

Arnold, eds., The Face of Old Testament Studies, 318-327.

Wallace H., “Leviathan and the Beast of Revelation” in Wright and

Freedman, eds., The Biblical Archaeologist Reader, 290-298.

Watson Francis, Paul and the Hermeneutics of Faith (Edinburgh: T & T Clark,
2004).

Watts J. D., Isaiah 1-33 (WBC; Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1984).

Watts J. W. and P. R. House, eds., Forming Prophetic Literature (Sheffield:

Sheffield Academic Press, 1996).

Webster E. C., “Strophic Patterns in Job 3-28” in Clines, ed., The Poetical
Books, 232-259.

— “Strophic Patterns in Job 29-42” in Clines, ed., The Poetical Books, 260-
273.

Weigle, L. A., An Introduction to the Revised Standard Version of the

Old Testament (London: Thomas Nelson & Sons, 1952).

Wenham, G. J., “Pondering the Pentateuch: The Search for a New

Paradigm” in Baker and Arnold, eds., The Face of Old Testament Studies, 116-
144.

Westermann, C., Isaiah 40-66, (London: SCM Press, 1969).

— Genesis 1-11 (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1994).

— “The Literary Genre of the Book of Job” in Zuck, ed., Sitting with Job,
51-64.

Whybray, N., Job (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1998).

Whittaker, H. A. W., Isaiah (Cannock: Biblia, 1988).

Williams, R. J., “Current Trends in the Study of the Book of Job” in

Aufrecht, ed., Studies in the Book of Job, 1-27.
437
Winton-Thomas, D., Documents from Old Testament Times (New York:
Harper Torchbooks, 1961).

Wolfers, D., Deep Things out of Darkness (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995).

— “The Speech-Cycles in the Book of Job” VT 43 (1993): 385-402.

Wright, G. E. and D. N. Freedman, eds., The Biblical Archaeologist Reader (2

vols; New York: Anchor Books, 1961).

Young, I., ed., Biblical Hebrew: Studies in Chronology and Typology

(London: T & T Clark, 2003).

Zuck, R. B., ed., Sitting with Job (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1992).

438