Job · Chapter 40
Moreover the LORD answered Job, and said,
Shall he that contendeth with the Almighty instruct him? he that reproveth God, let him answer it.
John Wesley
V. 2. Reproveth-That boldly censureth his ways or works; it is at his peril.
Adam Clarke
Verse 2. He that reproveth God, let him answer it.] Let the man who has made so free with God and his government, answer to what he has now heard.
Joseph Benson
Verse 2. Shall he that contendeth with the Almighty instruct him? — Shall Job, who presumeth to contend with me in judgment, and to dispute the reasonableness and equity of my proceedings, give me instructions or directions how to govern my creatures? The Hebrew, however, may be rendered, Is it instruction, or learning, or does it indicate instruction or erudition, to contend with the Almighty? An eruditi est? Buxtorf. Is it the part of a well-instructed and wise man? This agrees with Ab. Ezra’s comment, which is, Is it the way of instruction for a man to contend with the Almighty? The words are also capable of being translated, He that disputeth with the Almighty shall be chastised: thus Heath. God’s almightiness is fitly mentioned as an argument of his justice. For how can he be unjust, who, having boundless power and every other perfection in an infinite degree, must necessarily be all-sufficient within himself, and therefore can neither have any inclination to unrighteousness, which is an imperfection, nor any temptation to it, from any need he can have of it to accomplish his designs, which his own omnipotence is sufficient to accomplish, or from any advantage that can accrue to him by it? He that reproveth God — That boldly censureth his ways or works; let him answer it — Or, answer for it; or, he shall answer for it, that is, it is at his peril.
Daniel Whedon
JEHOVAH’S SECOND ADDRESS TO JOB, verses 1, 2.
After a suitable pause, that the impression of the discourse may be deepened, during which humbled Job ventures no response, Jehovah makes a pointed application of the preceding discourse to Job himself, ver. 2.
2. Shall he that contendeth — Will the censurer contend with the Almighty? Murmuring over the doings of God is nothing less than faultfinding with God himself. The censurer is summoned from his long-protracted silence by this terse and pungent, but kindly call, to answer the appeals of the Almighty. Job ought to be as ready to reason as he was to reprove; at least, to answer some one of the questions out of nature’s catechism. It is significant that the last words in this address. “let him answer,” are, in the original, the very verb that rang out so defiantly at the close of Job’s protracted defence (Job 31:35,) “Let the Almighty answer.” Compare Job 13:22; 23:5. He that reproveth — jykwm, a hiphil form, is used in a forensic sense, and signifies to argue, (Proverbs 30:6,) prove; thence, in an offensive sense, to argue down, reprove, chastise. See note, Job 16:21; and for other forms of the verb, Job 6:25; 13:15; 19:5; 22:4; etc. Job, who at the outset bore the title in heaven of “God fearing,” (Job 1:1,) now hears the humiliating designation of “God’s accuser,” (Hitzig,) or “one that sets God right.” (Dillmann.)
Then Job answered the LORD, and said,
Joseph Benson
Verses 3-5. Then Job answered — Job, whose confusion had made him silent, at length answered with great humility, and said, Behold I am vile — I am a mean, sinful, and wretched creature, and not worthy to speak unto thy majesty; nor do I know what to answer. I will lay my hand upon my mouth — I will, for the future, check and suppress all passionate thoughts that may arise in my mind, and, by keeping my mouth, as it were, with a bridle, will prevent them from breaking out in intemperate speeches. I will humbly and willingly submit myself to thee. Once have I spoken, but I will not answer — Or speak again. I confess my fault and folly, and will contend no more with thee. Yea, twice — That is, oft-times, or again and again, the definite number being used indefinitely. I will proceed no further — In such bold and presumptuous expressions, and accusations of thy providence toward me. Vain, therefore, are the excuses which some interpreters make for Job, as if he were faultless in his foregoing speeches, when both God charges him with blame therein, and Job himself confesses that he was blameable.
Behold, I am vile; what shall I answer thee? I will lay mine hand upon my mouth.
Adam Clarke
Verse 4. Behold, I am vile] I acknowledge my inward defilement. I cannot answer thee.
I will lay mine hand upon my mouth.] I cannot excuse myself, and I must be dumb before thee.
Joseph Benson
Verses 3-5. Then Job answered — Job, whose confusion had made him silent, at length answered with great humility, and said, Behold I am vile — I am a mean, sinful, and wretched creature, and not worthy to speak unto thy majesty; nor do I know what to answer. I will lay my hand upon my mouth — I will, for the future, check and suppress all passionate thoughts that may arise in my mind, and, by keeping my mouth, as it were, with a bridle, will prevent them from breaking out in intemperate speeches. I will humbly and willingly submit myself to thee. Once have I spoken, but I will not answer — Or speak again. I confess my fault and folly, and will contend no more with thee. Yea, twice — That is, oft-times, or again and again, the definite number being used indefinitely. I will proceed no further — In such bold and presumptuous expressions, and accusations of thy providence toward me. Vain, therefore, are the excuses which some interpreters make for Job, as if he were faultless in his foregoing speeches, when both God charges him with blame therein, and Job himself confesses that he was blameable.
Joseph Sutcliffe
Verse 4. Behold, I am vile. Job boldly answered his friends; but when the Lord speaks, he lays his mouth in the dust.
Daniel Whedon
JOB’S ANSWER — HIS SELF-HUMILIATION AND CONFESSION, 4, 5. Job confesses that he is base, and that he has been foolish in his repeated speeches; and, finally, retracting his arrogant challenges of God, covenants with him that he will no longer contend with Deity, 4, 5. “From the marvellous in nature, Job now divines that which is marvellous in his affliction. His humiliation under the mysteries of nature, is at the same time humiliation under the mystery of affliction; and only now, when he penitently reverses the mystery he has hitherto censured, is it time that its inner glory should be revealed to him. The bud is mature, and can now burst forth in order to disclose the blended colors of its natural beauty.” — Delitzsch.
4. Behold, I am vile — In the sense of mean, despicable: ytlq; a word Job had in part applied to the wicked — “light (lq) is he on the face of the waters.” (Job 24:18.) Job’s sense of shame is quickened. He feels his folly; but is not yet sufficiently sensible of his spiritual deformity. Hence the necessity that God should speak again. The conciseness of the reply points to trouble within; deep conviction is never wordy. It is thus with the cry “God be merciful to me, the sinner.” Luke 18:13. Hand upon my mouth — See Job 21:5; 29:9.
JEHOVAH’S THIRD AND LAST ADDRESS TO JOB, Job 40:7-41:34. First division — AN IRONICAL CHALLENGE TO JOB, TO TAKE INTO HIS OWN HANDS THE REINS OF THE WORLD, AND CHIEFLY THE MORAL GOVERNMENT OF MEN, 7-14. Strophe a. Preliminary questions to Job, by implication demonstrating the reasonableness and justness of the challenge God is about to make to Job, the representative grumbler against the divine government, 7-9.
Once have I spoken; but I will not answer: yea, twice; but I will proceed no further.
John Wesley
V. 5. Answer-Speak again; I will contend no more with thee. Twice-Often, the definite number being used indefinitely.
Adam Clarke
Verse 5. Once have I spoken] See on Job 42:3, &c. I will proceed no farther.] I shall attempt to justify myself no longer; I have spoken repeatedly; and am confounded at my want of respect for my Maker, and at the high thoughts which I have entertained of my own righteousness. All is impurity in the presence of thy Majesty.
Joseph Benson
Verses 3-5. Then Job answered — Job, whose confusion had made him silent, at length answered with great humility, and said, Behold I am vile — I am a mean, sinful, and wretched creature, and not worthy to speak unto thy majesty; nor do I know what to answer. I will lay my hand upon my mouth — I will, for the future, check and suppress all passionate thoughts that may arise in my mind, and, by keeping my mouth, as it were, with a bridle, will prevent them from breaking out in intemperate speeches. I will humbly and willingly submit myself to thee. Once have I spoken, but I will not answer — Or speak again. I confess my fault and folly, and will contend no more with thee. Yea, twice — That is, oft-times, or again and again, the definite number being used indefinitely. I will proceed no further — In such bold and presumptuous expressions, and accusations of thy providence toward me. Vain, therefore, are the excuses which some interpreters make for Job, as if he were faultless in his foregoing speeches, when both God charges him with blame therein, and Job himself confesses that he was blameable.
Daniel Whedon
JOB’S ANSWER — HIS SELF-HUMILIATION AND CONFESSION, 4, 5. Job confesses that he is base, and that he has been foolish in his repeated speeches; and, finally, retracting his arrogant challenges of God, covenants with him that he will no longer contend with Deity, 4, 5. “From the marvellous in nature, Job now divines that which is marvellous in his affliction. His humiliation under the mysteries of nature, is at the same time humiliation under the mystery of affliction; and only now, when he penitently reverses the mystery he has hitherto censured, is it time that its inner glory should be revealed to him. The bud is mature, and can now burst forth in order to disclose the blended colors of its natural beauty.” — Delitzsch.
4. Behold, I am vile — In the sense of mean, despicable: ytlq; a word Job had in part applied to the wicked — “light (lq) is he on the face of the waters.” (Job 24:18.) Job’s sense of shame is quickened. He feels his folly; but is not yet sufficiently sensible of his spiritual deformity. Hence the necessity that God should speak again. The conciseness of the reply points to trouble within; deep conviction is never wordy. It is thus with the cry “God be merciful to me, the sinner.” Luke 18:13. Hand upon my mouth — See Job 21:5; 29:9.
JEHOVAH’S THIRD AND LAST ADDRESS TO JOB, Job 40:7-41:34. First division — AN IRONICAL CHALLENGE TO JOB, TO TAKE INTO HIS OWN HANDS THE REINS OF THE WORLD, AND CHIEFLY THE MORAL GOVERNMENT OF MEN, 7-14. Strophe a. Preliminary questions to Job, by implication demonstrating the reasonableness and justness of the challenge God is about to make to Job, the representative grumbler against the divine government, 7-9.
Then answered the LORD unto Job out of the whirlwind, and said,
John Wesley
V. 6. Whirlwind-Which was renewed when God renewed his charge upon Job, whom he intended to humble more throughly.
Joseph Benson
Verse 6. Then answered the Lord out of the whirlwind — Which was renewed when God renewed his charge upon Job, whom he intended to humble more thoroughly than he had yet done. This and the next verse are repeated out of Job 38:1, 3, where the reader will find them explained.
Daniel Whedon
6. Whirlwind — Storm, as before, (chap. 38:1,) but now without the article.
Gird up thy loins now like a man: I will demand of thee, and declare thou unto me.
Adam Clarke
Verse 7. Gird up thy loins] See Job 38:1-3. Some think that this and the preceding verse have been repeated here from Job 38:1-3, and that several of the words there, here, and Job 42:3, have been repeated, in after times, to connect some false gatherings of the sheets of parchment, on which the end of this poem was originally written. See on Job 40:1, and at the end of the chapter. See Clarke “Job 40:24”.
Daniel Whedon
7. Gird up… man — Same as chap. 38:3. The objects contemplated by the following discourse, are similar to those of the preceding discourses, and on this account begin with a like appeal to Job, whose condition is not yet that demanded by the grace of God in order to its complete work. Job’s robes of righteousness hang in tatters, but he is not yet ready to cast them aside as “filthy rags.” Isaiah 64:6.
Wilt thou also disannul my judgment? wilt thou condemn me, that thou mayest be righteous?
John Wesley
V. 8. Wilt thou-Every word is emphatical, wilt (art thou resolved upon it) thou (thou Job, whom I took to be one of a better mind) also (not only vindicate thyself, but also accuse me) disannul (not only question, but even repeal and make void, as if it were unjust) my judgment? My sentence against thee, and my government and administration of human affairs? Wilt thou make me unrighteous that thou mayst seem to be righteous?
Adam Clarke
Verse 8. Wilt thou condemn me] Rather than submit to be thought in the wrong, wilt thou condemn MY conduct, in order to justify thyself? Some men will never acknowledge themselves in the wrong. “God may err, but we cannot,” seems to be their impious maxim. Unwillingness to acknowledge a fault frequently leads men, directly or indirectly, to this sort of blasphemy. There are three words most difficult to be pronounced in all languages,—I AM WRONG.
Joseph Benson
Verse 8. Wilt thou also disannul my judgment? — Wilt thou take exceptions to what I say and do, and not only call in question and dispute, but even censure, condemn, and endeavour to make void, my judgment? — My sentence against thee, and my government and administration of human affairs. God’s judgment cannot, must not, be disannulled, for we are sure it is according to truth, and therefore it is a great piece of impudence and iniquity in us to call it in question. Wilt thou condemn me, &c.? — Must my honour suffer for the support of thy reputation? Must I be charged as dealing unjustly with thee, because thou canst not otherwise clear thyself from the censures that thou liest under? Must I be represented as unrighteous, and be condemned, that thou mayest seem to be righteous, and be justified? Our duty is to condemn ourselves, that God may be righteous. David was, therefore, ready to own the evil he had done in God’s sight, that God might be justified when he spake, and clear when he was judged, Psalm 51:4: see Nehemiah 9:33; Daniel 9:7. But those are very proud, and very ignorant, both of God and themselves, who, to clear themselves, will condemn God. And the day is coming when, if the mistake be not rectified in time by repentance, the eternal judgment will be both the confutation of the plea, and the confusion of the prisoner; for the heavens shall declare God’s righteousness, and all the world shall become guilty before him.
Daniel Whedon
8. Wilt thou also disannul my judgment — The word cpvm, judgment, means also right; “the right I exercise in the government of the world, is equivalent to my righteousness in the same.” — Hirtzel. As used by Elihu, and the Almighty also, the term involves both moral and physical power; for the ideas of might and right have been closely blended in the Elihuistic section, and thus far in the Jehovistic section. Elihu, it will be remembered begins his third discourse (Job 35:2) with the significant question, “Thinkest thou this to be right, cpvml, [third word of first clause,] that thou saidst,” etc., and now the third address of the Almighty opens with the question, “Wilt thou altogether annul my right?” in which this word appears in the same order as in Elihu. Wilt thou “reduce to nothing my right?” “altogether destroy it?” rpt, from parar, “to break in pieces,” “crush;” a word which corresponds to katargew, to “make void,” (Romans 3:31,) to “destroy,” to “do away,” — a word used twenty-five times in Paul’s epistles. The word mishpat, “judgment,” “right,” appearing frequently in Job, (for varied meanings, see Job 8:3; 9:32; 13:18; 23:4; 27:2, etc.,) furnishes a key, we think, to the mystery of the monsters soon to be exposed to our view, viz: — instead of questioning my right (moral power) in the moral world, as implied in the challenge, try your right (mental or physical power) in the natural world. To both appeals Job has no reply to make; see further on verse 15. That thou mayest be righteous — Self justification under the chastening of the Almighty arraigns the judgment and justice of God. It calls in question the righteousness of the divine ways, and thereby virtually condemns God. It assumes to know more than Jehovah, and justifies the challenge he now makes to Job. If Job be wiser than Deity, he must possess all the attributes of God — for instance, he must be almighty, he must have “an arm like God.”
Hast thou an arm like God? or canst thou thunder with a voice like him?
Adam Clarke
Verse 9. Hast thou an arm like God?] Every word, from this to the end of Job 40:14, has a wonderful tendency to humble the soul; and it is no wonder that at the conclusion of these sayings Job fell in the dust confounded, and ascribed righteousness to his Maker.
Joseph Benson
Verse 9. Hast thou an arm like God? — Hast thou, a poor, weak worm of the earth, an arm comparable to his, who upholdeth all things? The power of creatures, even of angels themselves, is derived from God, limited by him, dependant on him; but the power of God is original, independent, and unlimited: he can do every thing without us; we can do nothing without him; and therefore we have not an arm like God. The meaning is, Thou art infinitely short of God in power, and therefore in justice: for all his perfections are equal and infinite. Injustice is much more likely to be in thee, an impotent creature, than in the Almighty God; see on verse 2. Canst thou thunder with a voice like him? — No: his voice will soon drown thine; and one of his mighty thunders will overpower and overrule thy weak speeches. Therefore do not presume to contend with him.
Daniel Whedon
9. An arm like God — The arm of the Lord is the symbol of omnipotence, as in Isaiah 51:9, in which, in sublime strains, Jehovah is represented as personifying his own omnipotence.
Strophe b. Job’s practical denial of God’s righteousness, and presumptuous readiness to supersede the righteousness of God by that of his own, leads to a challenge without parallel in all literature: that once and for all, instead of indulging in chimerical schemes of divine government, man should array himself in the attributes of Deity, and assume the summary punishment of the wicked in this and in the next world, 10-14.
The nearest classical approach to the sublime conception of the text is the fatal aspiration of Phaethon to drive the chariot of his father, Helios, the sun. OVID, Metamor., 2. 1-337.
Deck thyself now with majesty and excellency; and array thyself with glory and beauty.
John Wesley
V. 10. Deck-Seeing thou makest thyself equal, yea, superior to me, take to thyself thy great power, come and sit in my throne, and display thy Divine perfections in the sight of the world.
Adam Clarke
Verse 10. Deck thyself now with majesty] Act like God, seeing thou hast been assuming to thyself perfections that belong to him alone.
Joseph Benson
Verses 10-14. Deck thyself with majesty, &c. — Seeing thou makest thyself equal, yea, superior to me, take to thyself thy great power, come and sit in my throne, and display thy divine perfections in the sight of the world. These and the following are ironical expressions, to make Job more sensible of his distance from, and subjection to God. Cast abroad the rage of thy wrath — Inflict heavy judgments on thy enemies, the Chaldeans, and Sabeans, and others who have injured or provoked thee. Behold every one that is proud, and abase him — Destroy him with an angry look, as I can do, and delight to do, with such persons. Tread down the wicked in their place — Either, 1st, Wherever they are; or, 2d, Where they are in their greatest strength and glory, and therefore are most secure and confident; or, 3d, Forthwith upon the spot, that the quickness and immediateness of the stroke may discover that it comes from a divine hand. Hide them in the dust together — Kill every one of them at one blow. Bind their faces — Condemn or destroy them. He alludes to the manner of covering the faces of condemned persons and of dead men. In secret — Either secretly, with a secret and invisible stroke, that it may appear to come from the hand of God, or in a secret place: that is, bury them in their graves. Then will I confess unto thee, &c. — That thou art my equal, and mayest venture to contend with me.
Daniel Whedon
10. Array… glory and beauty — The Hebrew words re-appear in the same order as attributes of Deity in Psalm 104:1, that short but magnificent prelude to what has been called the “inspired oratorio of creation.” If Job be equal to God in righteousness and wisdom, let him attire himself in the essential splendour and glory of Deity.
Cast abroad the rage of thy wrath: and behold every one that is proud, and abase him.
Joseph Benson
Verses 10-14. Deck thyself with majesty, &c. — Seeing thou makest thyself equal, yea, superior to me, take to thyself thy great power, come and sit in my throne, and display thy divine perfections in the sight of the world. These and the following are ironical expressions, to make Job more sensible of his distance from, and subjection to God. Cast abroad the rage of thy wrath — Inflict heavy judgments on thy enemies, the Chaldeans, and Sabeans, and others who have injured or provoked thee. Behold every one that is proud, and abase him — Destroy him with an angry look, as I can do, and delight to do, with such persons. Tread down the wicked in their place — Either, 1st, Wherever they are; or, 2d, Where they are in their greatest strength and glory, and therefore are most secure and confident; or, 3d, Forthwith upon the spot, that the quickness and immediateness of the stroke may discover that it comes from a divine hand. Hide them in the dust together — Kill every one of them at one blow. Bind their faces — Condemn or destroy them. He alludes to the manner of covering the faces of condemned persons and of dead men. In secret — Either secretly, with a secret and invisible stroke, that it may appear to come from the hand of God, or in a secret place: that is, bury them in their graves. Then will I confess unto thee, &c. — That thou art my equal, and mayest venture to contend with me.
Daniel Whedon
11. Cast abroad… thy wrath — Literally, Let the outbreakings of thy wrath pour forth. A solemnly prominent thought in this personification of Job as deity is this, that wrath belongs to God. And abase him — A constantly recurring conception in Oriental and classical literature represents the work of Deity to be, the abasement of the proud. The answer of AEsop to Chilon, who asked, “What is God engaged, in doing?” — that “He is abasing the high and lifting up the low,” Bayle calls “the epitome of human history,” and says that a book might be written “concerning the centre of moral oscillation.”
Look on every one that is proud, and bring him low; and tread down the wicked in their place.
Joseph Benson
Verses 10-14. Deck thyself with majesty, &c. — Seeing thou makest thyself equal, yea, superior to me, take to thyself thy great power, come and sit in my throne, and display thy divine perfections in the sight of the world. These and the following are ironical expressions, to make Job more sensible of his distance from, and subjection to God. Cast abroad the rage of thy wrath — Inflict heavy judgments on thy enemies, the Chaldeans, and Sabeans, and others who have injured or provoked thee. Behold every one that is proud, and abase him — Destroy him with an angry look, as I can do, and delight to do, with such persons. Tread down the wicked in their place — Either, 1st, Wherever they are; or, 2d, Where they are in their greatest strength and glory, and therefore are most secure and confident; or, 3d, Forthwith upon the spot, that the quickness and immediateness of the stroke may discover that it comes from a divine hand. Hide them in the dust together — Kill every one of them at one blow. Bind their faces — Condemn or destroy them. He alludes to the manner of covering the faces of condemned persons and of dead men. In secret — Either secretly, with a secret and invisible stroke, that it may appear to come from the hand of God, or in a secret place: that is, bury them in their graves. Then will I confess unto thee, &c. — That thou art my equal, and mayest venture to contend with me.
Daniel Whedon
12. In their place — Same as Job 36:20. See note.
Hide them in the dust together; and bind their faces in secret.
John Wesley
V. 13. Hide-Kill every one of them at one blow. Bind-Condemn or destroy them. He alludes to the manner of covering the faces of condemned persons, and of dead men. In secret-In a secret place, bury them in their graves.
Adam Clarke
Verse 13. Hide them in the dust together] Blend the high and the low, the rich and the poor, in one common ruin. Show them that thou art supreme, and canst do whatsoever thou pleasest.
Bind their faces in secret.] This seems to refer to the custom of preserving mummies: the whole body is wrapped round with strong swathings of linen or cotton cloth. Not only the limbs, but the very head, face, and all, are rolled round with strong filleting, so that not one feature can be seen, not even the protuberance of the nose. On the outside of these involutions a human face is ordinarily painted; but as to the real face itself, it is emphatically bound in secret, for those rollers are never intended to be removed.
Joseph Benson
Verses 10-14. Deck thyself with majesty, &c. — Seeing thou makest thyself equal, yea, superior to me, take to thyself thy great power, come and sit in my throne, and display thy divine perfections in the sight of the world. These and the following are ironical expressions, to make Job more sensible of his distance from, and subjection to God. Cast abroad the rage of thy wrath — Inflict heavy judgments on thy enemies, the Chaldeans, and Sabeans, and others who have injured or provoked thee. Behold every one that is proud, and abase him — Destroy him with an angry look, as I can do, and delight to do, with such persons. Tread down the wicked in their place — Either, 1st, Wherever they are; or, 2d, Where they are in their greatest strength and glory, and therefore are most secure and confident; or, 3d, Forthwith upon the spot, that the quickness and immediateness of the stroke may discover that it comes from a divine hand. Hide them in the dust together — Kill every one of them at one blow. Bind their faces — Condemn or destroy them. He alludes to the manner of covering the faces of condemned persons and of dead men. In secret — Either secretly, with a secret and invisible stroke, that it may appear to come from the hand of God, or in a secret place: that is, bury them in their graves. Then will I confess unto thee, &c. — That thou art my equal, and mayest venture to contend with me.
Daniel Whedon
13. The dust is used for the grave, as in Job 17:16. Compare Psalm 22:15; 30:9. Bind their faces — Clarke and Carey think there is here an allusion to the bandaging of mummies. Pettigrew (in his work on Mummies, p. 89) speaks of such, in whose preparation more than one thousand yards of cloth were used. The bandaging of the head prior to burial was quite common among Oriental nations, so that there is no need of confining the allusion to the mummy. Job is challenged to exert the power of death as God exerts it; to send forth that unseen, baleful, and omnipresent spirit of destruction which is ever removing our race to the hidden realms of the dead. In secret — Some suppose to refer to sheol. Job must have been reminded of his outrageous charge against Deity, that he “covereth the faces of the judges” of the earth, Job 9:24.
Then will I also confess unto thee that thine own right hand can save thee.
Adam Clarke
Verse 14. Thine own right hand can save thee.] It is the prerogative of God alone to save the human soul. Nothing less than unlimited power, exerted under the direction and impulse of unbounded mercy, can save a sinner. This is most clearly asserted in this speech of Jehovah: When thou canst extend an arm like God, i.e., an uncontrollable power-when thou canst arm thyself with the lightning of heaven, and thunder with a voice like God-when thou canst deck thyself with the ineffable glory, beauty, and splendour of the supreme majesty of Jehovah-when thou canst dispense thy judgments over all the earth, to abase the proud, and tread down the wicked-when thou canst as having the keys of hell and death, blend the high and the low in the dust together; then I will acknowledge to thee that thy own right hand can save thee. In other words: Salvation belongeth unto the Lord; no man can save his own soul by works of righteousness which he has done, is doing, or can possibly do, to all eternity. Without Jesus every human spirit must have perished everlastingly. Glory be to God for his unspeakable gift!
Joseph Benson
Verses 10-14. Deck thyself with majesty, &c. — Seeing thou makest thyself equal, yea, superior to me, take to thyself thy great power, come and sit in my throne, and display thy divine perfections in the sight of the world. These and the following are ironical expressions, to make Job more sensible of his distance from, and subjection to God. Cast abroad the rage of thy wrath — Inflict heavy judgments on thy enemies, the Chaldeans, and Sabeans, and others who have injured or provoked thee. Behold every one that is proud, and abase him — Destroy him with an angry look, as I can do, and delight to do, with such persons. Tread down the wicked in their place — Either, 1st, Wherever they are; or, 2d, Where they are in their greatest strength and glory, and therefore are most secure and confident; or, 3d, Forthwith upon the spot, that the quickness and immediateness of the stroke may discover that it comes from a divine hand. Hide them in the dust together — Kill every one of them at one blow. Bind their faces — Condemn or destroy them. He alludes to the manner of covering the faces of condemned persons and of dead men. In secret — Either secretly, with a secret and invisible stroke, that it may appear to come from the hand of God, or in a secret place: that is, bury them in their graves. Then will I confess unto thee, &c. — That thou art my equal, and mayest venture to contend with me.
Daniel Whedon
14. Confess unto — The Hebrew also means praise, and is thus rendered by Ewald, Delitzsch, etc. If Job can do all this which God has suggested, then God will acknowledge that he is not only great in speech and faultfinding, (Hirtzel,) but that he is mighty to “save himself,” and able to carry into execution his inflated ideas of justice.
Second division — A HUMILIATING DESCRIPTION OF TWO AMPHIBIOUS MONSTERS, IN PHYSICAL STRENGTH VASTLY JOB’S SUPERIORS, BEHEMOTH AND LEVIATHAN, WHICH IN MANY RESPECTS RESEMBLE EACH OTHER, BUT IN HABITS AND MODE OF LIFE RADICALLY DIFFER, ver. 15-41:34; a carrying forward of the main thought of chap. 39. See p. 252. Strophe a. FIRST: BEHEMOTH, FIRSTLING OF THE WAYS OF GOD, MIGHTY IN HIS STRENGTH AND MARTIAL IN HIS CONSTRUCTION, BUT A PEACEFUL COMPANION OF THE BEASTS OF THE FIELD, 15-24.
These and similar contrarieties, which verse 15 in brief sets forth, and which also antedate Job’s puny arrival in the world, he may enter side by side with his perplexities of providence, and first attempt their solution. a. A physical description of this wonderful animal, 15-18.
Behold now behemoth, which I made with thee; he eateth grass as an ox.
John Wesley
V. 15. Behemoth-Very learned men take the leviathan to be the crocodile, and the behemoth to be the river-horse, which may fitly be joined with the crocodile, both being well known to Joband his friends, as being frequent in the adjacent parts, both amphibious, living and preying both in the water and upon the land. And both creatures of great bulk and strength. Made-As I made thee. Grass-The river-horse comes out of the river upon the land to feed upon corn, and hay, or grass, as an ox doth, to whom also he is not unlike in the form of his head and feet, and in the bigness of his body, whence the Italians call him, the sea-ox.
Adam Clarke
Verse 15. Behold now behemoth] The word twmhb behemoth is the plural of hmhb behemah, which signifies cattle in general, or graminivorous animals, as distinguished from wtyj chayetho, all wild or carnivorous animals. See Genesis 1:24. The former seems to mean kine, horses, asses, sheep, &c., and all employed in domestic or agricultural matters; the latter, all wild and savage beasts, such as lions, bears, tigers, &c.: but the words are not always taken in these senses.
In this place it has been supposed to mean some animal of the beeve kind. The Vulgate retains the Hebrew name; so do the Syriac and Arabic. The Chaldee is indefinite, translating creature or animal. And the Septuagint is not more explicit, translating by qhria, beasts or wild beasts; and old Coverdale, the cruell beaste, perhaps as near to the truth as any of them. From the name, therefore, or the understanding had of it by the ancient versions, we can derive no assistance relative to the individuality of the animal in question; and can only hope to find what it is by the characteristics it bears in the description here given of it. These, having been carefully considered and deeply investigated both by critics and naturalists, have led to the conclusion that either the elephant, or the hippopotamus or river-horse, is the animal in question; and on comparing the characteristics between these two, the balance is considerably in favour of the hippopotamus. But even here there are still some difficulties, as there are some parts of the description which do not well suit even the hippopotamus; and therefore I have my doubts whether either of the animals above is that in question, or whether any animal now in existence be that described by the Almighty.
Mr. Good supposes, and I am of the same opinion, that the animal here described is now extinct. The skeletons of three lost genera have actually been found out: these have been termed palæotherium, anoplotherium, and mastodon or mammoth. From an actual examination of a part of the skeleton of what is termed the mammoth, I have described it in my note, See Clarke “Genesis 1:24”.
As I do not believe that either the elephant or the river-horse is intended here, I shall not take up the reader’s time with any detailed description. The elephant is well known; and, though not an inhabitant of these countries, has been so often imported in a tame state, and so frequently occurs in exhibitions of wild beasts, that multitudes, even of the common people, have seen this tremendous, docile, and sagacious animal. Of the hippopotamus or river-horse, little is generally known but by description, as the habits of this animal will not permit him to be tamed. His amphibious nature prevents his becoming a constant resident on dry land. The hippopotamus inhabits the rivers of Africa and the lakes of Ethiopia: feeds generally by night; wanders only a few miles from water; feeds on vegetables and roots of trees, but never on fish; lays waste whole plantations of the sugar-cane, rice, and other grain. When irritated or wounded, it will attack boats and men with much fury. It moves slowly and heavily: swims dexterously; walks deliberately and leisurely over head into the water; and pursues his way, even on all fours, on the bottom; but cannot remain long under the water without rising to take in air. It sleeps in reedy places; has a tremendous voice, between the lowing of an ox and the roaring of the elephant. Its head is large; its mouth, very wide; its skin, thick and almost devoid of hair; and its tail, naked and about a foot long. It is nearly as large as the elephant, and some have been found seventeen feet long. Mr. Good observes: “Both the elephant and hippopotamus are naturally quiet animals; and never interfere with the grazing of others of different kinds unless they be irritated. The behemoth, on the contrary, is represented as a quadruped of a ferocious nature, and formed for tyranny, if not rapacity; equally lord of the floods and of the mountains; rushing with rapidity of foot, instead of slowness or stateliness; and possessing a rigid and enormous tail, like a cedar tree, instead of a short naked tail of about a foot long, as the hippopotamus; or a weak, slender, hog-shaped tail, as the elephant.”
The mammoth, for size, will answer the description in this place, especially Job 40:19: He is the chief of the ways of God. That to which the part of a skeleton belonged which I examined, must have been, by computation, not less than twenty-five feet high, and sixty feet in length! The bones of one toe I measured, and found them three feet in length! One of the very smallest grinders of an animal of this extinct species, full of processes on the surface more than an inch in depth, which shows that the animal had lived on flesh, I have just now weighed, and found it, in its very dry state, four pounds eight ounces, avoirdupois: the same grinder of an elephant I have weighed also, and found it just two pounds. The mammoth, therefore, from this proportion, must have been as large as two elephants and a quarter. We may judge by this of its size: elephants are frequently ten and eleven feet high; this will make the mammoth at least twenty-five or twenty-six feet high; and as it appears to have been a many-toed animal, the springs which such a creature could make must have been almost incredible: nothing by swiftness could have escaped its pursuit. God seems to have made it as the proof of his power; and had it been prolific, and not become extinct, it would have depopulated the earth. Creatures of this kind must have been living in the days of Job; the behemoth is referred to here, as if perfectly and commonly known.
He eateth grass as an ox.] This seems to be mentioned as something remarkable in this animal: that though from the form of his teeth he must have been carnivorous, yet he ate grass as an ox; he lived both on animal and vegetable food.
Joseph Benson
Verse 15. Behold now behemoth — The word properly means beasts, and is so understood by the LXX., whose interpretation of the verse is, idou qhria para soi, cortun isa bousin esqiousin, Behold the beasts with thee, they eat grass, like oxen. According to Ab. Ezra, and the Targum, it is the name of any great beast. But R. Levi says, bestiam esse specialem, that it is an animal peculiarly called by that name. This, indeed, is probable from what follows, namely, His strength is in his loins: he moveth his tail, &c., and though the word, according to the termination oth, be strictly a plural in the feminine gender, yet we sometimes find it irregularly used for a singular. Thus, Psalm 73:22. So foolish was I, &c., I was, behemoth, a beast before thee. But the great question is, What beast it meant? The ancient and most generally received opinion has been, that it is the elephant. Thus Buxtorf, Singulariter, capitur pro elephante proper ingentem magnitudinem, It is taken in the singular number for the elephant, because of its vast greatness. “And I confess,” says Henry, “I see no reason to depart from the opinion, that it is the elephant that is here described, which is a very strong, stately creature, of a very large stature, above any other, and of wonderful sagacity, and of such great reputation in the animal kingdom, that, among so many four-footed beasts as we have had the natural history of, chap. 38. and 39., we can scarce suppose this should be omitted.” They who understand this of the elephant, take the following animal, called leviathan, for the whale; observing, that as these are two of the goodliest and vastest creatures which God hath made, the one of the land, the other of the sea, and withal such as the description here given, for the most part, manifestly agrees to, it is most probable they are here intended. But some later and very learned men take the leviathan to be the crocodile, and the behemoth to be a creature called the hippopotamus, or river-horse, which may seem to be fitly joined with the crocodile, both being very well known to Job and his friends, as being frequent in the adjacent places, both amphibious, living and preying both in the water and upon the land, and both being creatures of great bulk and strength. Dr. Dodd, who is of opinion that Bochart has proved to a demonstration that the behemoth is the hippopotamus, has presented us with two descriptions, one from the ancients, and the other from a modern, who saw the creature; which descriptions, he thinks, may serve instead of a commentary upon the passage. The ancient is Achilles Tatius, who thus describes the animal: “Some persons chanced to meet with, and take a river monster, which was very remarkable. The Egyptians call it the river-horse, or horse of the river Nile; and it resembles a horse, indeed, in its feet and body, excepting that its hoofs are cloven. Its tail is short, and without hair, as well as the rest of the body. Its head is round, but not small; its jaws, or cheeks, resemble those of a horse; its nostrils are very large, and breathe out a vapour like smoke; its mouth is wide, and extends to the temples; its teeth, especially those called the canine, are curved like those of a horse, both in their form and situation, but thrice as large. It is a very voracious animal, and would consume the produce of a whole field. It is very strongly made all over, and its skin so hard that it is impenetrable to any weapon.” The modern traveller is the Sieur Thevenot, who saw one of these animals at Cairo. “This animal,” says he, “was of a tan colour; its hind parts resembled those of an ox, or buffalo, excepting that its feet were shorter and thicker; in size it is equal to a camel; its snout, or nose, is like that of an ox, and its body twice as big; its head resembles that of a horse, and is of the same size; its eyes are small; its crest is very thick; its ears are small; its nostrils very wide and open; its feet are very thick, pretty large, and have each four toes, like those of a crocodile; its tail is small, without any hair, like that of an elephant; its lower jaw has four large teeth, about half a foot long, two of them crooked, and as thick as the horns of an ox, one of which is on each side of the throat; beside these, it has two others, which are straight, of the same thickness as those which are crooked, and project forward.” “The river-horse,” says the doctor,” shelters himself among the reeds; and the behemoth is said to be in the coverts of the reeds and fens, and to be compassed about with the willows of the brook. The river-horse feeds upon the herbage of the Nile; and the behemoth is said to eat grass as an ox. No creature is known to have stronger ribs than the river-horse; and the bones of the behemoth are as strong pieces of brass, like bars of iron.” See Lowth’s Notes on his sixth Prelection, 8vo. edit.
Joseph Sutcliffe
Ver. 15. Behold now behemoth. Here sacred criticism is divided in opinion; and not less than about the unicorn and the rhinoceros. The ancients believed that the behemoth, ta therial, the beast, was an elephant. The description of this noble animal is too large to be transcribed here. It should be remarked that there is little of hyperbole in the description of animals in these two chapters. Hence one is the more surprised that his tail should be said to be like a cedar; for it resembles the tail of a hog.— Modern authors, among whom are Buffon and our Dr. Shaw, contend that the behemoth of Job is the Hippopotamus or river horse, an animal found on the Nile, and in the interior of Africa. This animal, though often noticed by the ancients, has not till lately been exactly described. “Hippopotame has four cutting teeth in each jaw. Those in the middle are straight and pointed forward, the two middle-most the largest. It has four tusks, those in the upper jaw are short, and the lower very long, and truncated obliquely. The head is of an enormous size, and the mouth is immensely wide and large. The ears are small and pointed, and lined within very thickly with short fine hairs. The eyes and nostrils are small in proportion to the bulk of the animal. On the lips are some strong hairs scattered in patches here and there. The hair on the body is very thin, of a whitish colour, and scarcely discernible at first sight. There is no mane on the neck, as some writers feign, only the hairs on that part are rather thicker. The skin is very thick and strong, and of a dusky colour. The tail is about a foot long, taper, compressed, and naked. The hoofs are divided into four parts; but notwithstanding it is an amphibious animal, they are not connected by membranes. The legs are short and thick. In bulk, it is second only to the elephant. The length of a male has been found to be seventeen feet, the circumference of the body is fifteen, the height near seven, the legs near three, the head above three and a half, and the girth near nine.” Pennant’s Synops. of quad. p. 78. But here we are more at a loss than before. This prodigious animal is amphibious. He floats in lakes and rivers by day, and eats the herbage at night. Hence he does not resemble the ox. Secondly, he is not chief of all the ways of God. His tail is remarkably short, and therefore in no sense can it resemble a cedar. The elephant therefore, not the river horse, seems to be the beast described in Job. But the mammoth, which has so much interested the learned world during the last fifty years, is obviously a species of the elephant. Mr. Peal of Philadelphia dug up one, as described by Mr. Ashe, of the following magnitude. “Height over the shoulders eleven feet, length from the chin to the rump fifteen feet, from the end of the tusk to the end of the tail thirty one feet, width of the hips and body five feet eight inches, length of the under jaw three feet one inch, weight of the same sixty three pounds and a half, length of the thigh bones three feet seven inches, smallest circumference of the same one foot six inches, length of the bone of the fore leg two feet nine inches; length of the tusks, defences, or horns, ten feet seven inches; circumference of one tooth one foot six inches and a half; weight of the same four pounds ten ounces. The whole weighing about a thousand pounds.” Other remains of the mammoth or large elephant, and of much larger magnitude, have been dug up in Siberia; as also skeletons of the terrific Megalonyx. See note on Numbers 24:9.
Daniel Whedon
15. Behold now behemoth — See Excursus VIII, page 274. The transition is easy, as even Dillmann acknowledges, notwithstanding he doubts the authenticity of the entire section. Delitzsch thus links it with the preceding appeal: “Try it only for once — this is the collective thought — to act like me in the execution of penal justice, I would praise thee. That he cannot do it, and yet ventures with his short-sightedness and feebleness to charge God’s rule with injustice, the following pictures of foreign animals are now further intended to make evident to him.” There is, we think, a deeper spiritual relationship between the solemn challenge and the behemoth-leviathanistic section, than Delitzsch recognises. That Job is not mighty to save, but helplessly impotent in spiritual matters, God proceeds forcibly to impress upon his mind by a view of two monsters of the brute creation, who despise and defy the power of man. Before Job makes himself bold to take the moral government of the world into his hands, he might better try his strength upon the controlling and subduing of some of the creatures God has made. Let him first take a view of himself in the mirror of the animal creation — “a mirror of morals, now warning, now encouraging and shaming us; a gallery of pictures, ethical and hortatory, collected for men by God himself.” — Zockler. The fathers, and some moderns, have given a spiritual interpretation to these lengthened descriptions, and found in behemoth and leviathan a figurative representation of our ghostly enemy himself. The most of recent commentators, however, see in this divine portraiture of these two creatures a setting forth of God’s infinite power to carry out the purposes of his providence. If the power and wisdom blended together in the creation of such ugly, huge, and repulsive beings, are infinitely beyond Job’s comprehension, how much more that providence which embraces all earthly creatures, all existence, and every grade of being, superhuman and angelic. Made with thee — A similar form of expression appears in Ecclesiastes 2:16; How dieth the wise? with the fool! i.e., as well as the fool. A pertinent rebuke to Job’s pride. This monster is God’s creature no less than Job, and in some respects vastly Job’s superior. He eateth grass — The marvel is, that so powerful an animal, instead of being carnivorous, should be strictly graminivorous. In his frequent inland excursions at night he makes sad havoc among the rice-fields and the cultivated grounds along the Nile. “At every turn,” says Gordon Cummings, p. 297, “there occurred deep, still pools, and occasionally sandy islands, densely clad with lofty reeds. Above and beyond these reeds stood trees of immense age, beneath which grew a rank kind of grass on which the sea-cow [hippopotamus] delights to pasture.”
Lo now, his strength is in his loins, and his force is in the navel of his belly.
John Wesley
V. 16. Strength-He hath strength answerable to his bulk, but this strength by God’s wise and merciful providence is not an offensive strength, consisting in, or put forth by horns or claws, as it is in ravenous creatures, but only defensive and seated in his loins, as it is in other creatures.
Adam Clarke
Verse 16. His strength is in his loins] This refers to his great agility, notwithstanding his bulk; by the strength of his loins he was able to take vast springs, and make astonishing bounds.
Joseph Benson
Verse 16. His strength is in his loins — He hath strength answerable to his bulk, but he is of a mild disposition, and his strength, by God’s wise and merciful providence, is not an offensive strength, consisting in, or put forth by, horns or claws, as it is in ravenous creatures, but only defensive, and seated in his loins. And his force is in the navel of his belly — From hence Bochart argues that behemoth cannot be the elephant, as is generally supposed: because the strength of an elephant consists not in his belly; for though his hide on the back is very hard, yet on the belly it is soft. And therefore the rhinoceros, contending with him, aims chiefly at his paunch, knowing, as it were, that to be a soft place, and more capable of being injured. On the other hand, the description, he urges, agrees well with the hippopotamus, which is remarkable, both for the strength of his belly and navel, as well as other parts of his body; the skin being so firm and thick as to be almost impenetrable, and able to resist the force of spears and darts.
Daniel Whedon
16. Navel — Sinews; “The loins and the belly are mentioned because they immediately call up to the imagination the form of the beast’s huge circumference, and of the mighty pillar-like feet, the whole assuming a wonderful and almost quadrangular aspect.” — Schlottman.
He moveth his tail like a cedar: the sinews of his stones are wrapped together.
John Wesley
V. 17. Tail-Which though it be but short, yet when it is erected, is exceeding stiff and strong. Thighs-The sinews of his thighs. His thighs and feet are so sinewy and strong, that one of them is able to break or over-turn a large boat.
Adam Clarke
Verse 17. He moveth his tail like a cedar] Therefore it was neither the elephant, who has a tail like that of the hog, nor the hippopotamus, whose tail is only about a foot long.
The sinews of his stones] I translate with Mr. Good, and for the same reasons, the sinews of his haunches, which is still more characteristic; as the animal must have excelled in leaping.
Joseph Benson
Verse 17. He moveth his tail like a cedar — Though the tail be but short, both in the elephant, and in the hippopotamus; yet, when it is erected, it is exceeding stiff and strong. The sinews of his stones, &c. — Rather, of his thighs, as the Hebrew may be rendered. The thighs and feet of the river-horse are so sinewy and strong that one of them is able to break or overturn a large boat.
Daniel Whedon
17. Like a cedar — Short and firm though the tail may be, it is swayed by the volition of the vast animal like a cedar bough by the wind. The interpretation turns on xpj, moveth, the fundamental meaning of which is “to will,” “move at pleasure.” The name for cedar, zra, “has been handed down on the spot [Lebanon] intact throughout all the changes of language, and the name arz is never applied by the natives to any tree but the true cedar.” — Tristram. See farther his Land of Israel, 628-632. The sinews, etc. — Rather, The sinews of his thighs. Are wrapped together — wgrcy. Better, knit together. According to Gesenius and Delitzsch the cognate noun µygyrc, signifies “vine branches;” the speaker evidently choosing this word on account of its beautiful appropriateness for expressing complex and delicate intertwining of texture.
His bones are as strong pieces of brass; his bones are like bars of iron.
Adam Clarke
Verse 18. His bones are as strong pieces of brass-bars of iron.] The tusk I have mentioned above is uncommonly hard, solid, and weighty for its size.
Joseph Benson
Verses 18, 19. His bones — Under which title are comprehended his ribs, (as the LXX. here render it,) and his teeth; are as strong pieces of brass — Exceeding hard and strong. Such they are both in the elephant and river-horse. He is the chief of the ways of God — That is, of God’s works, namely, of that sort, or among living and brute creatures. This is eminently and unquestionably true of the elephant, in regard of his vast bulk and strength, joined with great activity; and especially of his admirable sagacity, and aptness to learn; and of his singular usefulness to man, his lord and master; and many other commendable qualities. And the hippopotamus also is, in some sort, the chief, or one of the chief, of God’s works, in regard of his bulk, which, say the authors of the Encyclopedia Britannica, “is so great that twelve oxen were found necessary to draw one ashore, which had been shot in a river beyond the Cape of Good Hope; and Hasselquist says, his hide is a load for a camel.” His strength and sagacity also are very remarkable, as well as the manner of his living, both in the water and on the land. But it must be granted, that the elephant exceeds the hippopotamus in many things. Can make his sword to approach unto him — Though he be so strong and terrible, yet God can easily subdue, or destroy him, either immediately, or by arming other creatures against him. But, wbrj vgy wv[h, hagnosho jaggesh charbo, may be properly rendered, He that made him hath applied, or given to him, his sword, or arms, that is, He hath formed him so as to make him appear dreadful and terrible. Heath renders it, He who made him hath furnished him with his scythe, taking the Hebrew word, rendered sword, or scythe, to denote the instrument by which this animal gathers his food. Houbigant’s translation of the clause is, His Creator sharpeneth his crooked tooth.
Daniel Whedon
18. His bones… strong pieces of brass, etc. — Although he eat grass, his bones are as tubes of brass — are like hammered bars of iron. The second word rendered bones µymrg, may mean “ribs,” in contrast with the hollow bones before spoken of.
b. A description of the strange life and habits of this powerful beast, which, though undaunted by the river flood, is easily captured and destroyed by the guile of man, 19-24.
He is the chief of the ways of God: he that made him can make his sword to approach unto him.
John Wesley
V. 19. The chief-He is one of the chief of God’s works, in regard of its great bulk and strength.
Adam Clarke
Verse 19. He is the chief of the ways of God] The largest, strongest, and swiftest quadruped that God has formed.
He that made him] No power of man or beast can overcome him. God alone can overcome him, and God alone could make his sword (of extinction) approach to him.
Joseph Benson
Verses 18, 19. His bones — Under which title are comprehended his ribs, (as the LXX. here render it,) and his teeth; are as strong pieces of brass — Exceeding hard and strong. Such they are both in the elephant and river-horse. He is the chief of the ways of God — That is, of God’s works, namely, of that sort, or among living and brute creatures. This is eminently and unquestionably true of the elephant, in regard of his vast bulk and strength, joined with great activity; and especially of his admirable sagacity, and aptness to learn; and of his singular usefulness to man, his lord and master; and many other commendable qualities. And the hippopotamus also is, in some sort, the chief, or one of the chief, of God’s works, in regard of his bulk, which, say the authors of the Encyclopedia Britannica, “is so great that twelve oxen were found necessary to draw one ashore, which had been shot in a river beyond the Cape of Good Hope; and Hasselquist says, his hide is a load for a camel.” His strength and sagacity also are very remarkable, as well as the manner of his living, both in the water and on the land. But it must be granted, that the elephant exceeds the hippopotamus in many things. Can make his sword to approach unto him — Though he be so strong and terrible, yet God can easily subdue, or destroy him, either immediately, or by arming other creatures against him. But, wbrj vgy wv[h, hagnosho jaggesh charbo, may be properly rendered, He that made him hath applied, or given to him, his sword, or arms, that is, He hath formed him so as to make him appear dreadful and terrible. Heath renders it, He who made him hath furnished him with his scythe, taking the Hebrew word, rendered sword, or scythe, to denote the instrument by which this animal gathers his food. Houbigant’s translation of the clause is, His Creator sharpeneth his crooked tooth.
Joseph Sutcliffe
Ver. 19. He is chief of the ways of God. The Mastodon or Mammoth might have existence in ancient times, though now extinct; and indeed its remains are still found immersed in marshes, both on the Wabash and in Siberia.
Daniel Whedon
19. The chief of the ways of God — He is a chief, tyvar, a firstling, perhaps masterpiece of God’s creative energy. The allusion seems to be to the immense bulk, possibly to his type as being that of the earliest of the extinct pachydermata. Jewish and patristic commentators found on this expression, “firstling of God’s ways,” a symbolic representation of Satan. Can make his sword to approach — Rather, Furnished [him] his sword. Thus, essentially, Bochartus, Umbreit, Schlottmann, Renan, Zockler, etc. Dillmann’s rendering, “which was created so as to attach thereon a sword,” gives a sense weak and clumsy, which by no means satisfies his proposed pointing. The utterly irreconcilable renderings of the Septuagint, “made to be mocked at (egkatapaizesqai) by the angels;” and of Ewald, “Yet his Maker blunts his sword,” serve only to show the contrariety of views that have been taken of this vexed passage. Delitzsch well says, “It is not meant that he reached his sword to behemoth, but (on which account wl is intentionally wanting) that he brought forth, i.e., created, its (behemoth’s) peculiar sword, viz.: the gigantic incisors ranged opposite one another.”… The happy paraphrase of the elegant poet Sandys, early (1638) embodied the true sense:
Of God’s great works the chief, lo! he who made
This behemoth, hath armed him with a blade.
He feeds on lofty hills; lives not by prey;
About this gentle prince the subjects play.
The lower jaw of this animal is provided with enormous ripping, chisel-like canines. (Tristam.) “With these apparently combined teeth the hippopotamus can cut the grass as neatly as if it were mown with the scythe, and is able to sever a tolerably stout and thick stem.” — WOOD, Mammalia, p. 762. He also states that in anger it has been known to bite a man completely in two. (Bib. Animals, page 322.) Ruppel, the German naturalist, captured one of these animals measuring from the snout to the end of the tail fifteen feet; his tusks, from the roots to the point, along the external curve, being twenty-eight inches in length. It is an interesting coincidence that the sword should appear as a characteristic of this animal, in its hieroglyphic name inscribed on Egyptian monuments in an age prior to that of Moses. The third figure from the left is a good representation of the ancient Egyptian scythe or reaping-hook, as depicted on the monuments, and at the same time of the tusk of the hippopotamus. See Excursus VIII, p. 275. Nicander, a Greek poet who lived in the second century B.C., treating of the hippopotamus, speaks of his “destructive sword, or scythe.” kakhn… arphn. — Theriaca, 566. Divinely equipped with a sword, he bears the insignia of a warrior; brought to the test, he proves to be a peaceful grazer of the fields; his sword he wields, not that he may destroy life, but that he may reap the tender and succulent growths of the marsh. Labelled a warrior for nature’s battlefield, he appears simply a successful forager. Other interpreters, (T. Lewis and Canon Cook,) accept the authorized version, and understand that the monster is impenetrable by the sword of man. The latter cites a very ancient Egyptian inscription: “The tepi, (i.e., hippopotamus,) the lord of terrors in the water, which man can not approach unto.”
Surely the mountains bring him forth food, where all the beasts of the field play.
John Wesley
V. 20. Mountains-Though he lives most in the water, yet he often fetches his food from the land, and from the mountains or hills, which are nigh the river Nile. Play-They not only feed securely, but sport themselves by him, being taught by experience that he is gentle and harmless.
Adam Clarke
Verse 20. The mountains bring him forth food] It cannot therefore be the hippopotamus, as he is seldom found far from the rivers where he has his chief residence.
Where all the beasts of the field play.] He frequents those places where he can have most prey. He makes a mock of all the beasts of the field. They can neither resist his power, nor escape from his agility. All this answers to what we know of the mammoth, but not at all to the hippopotamus.
Joseph Benson
Verse 20. The mountains bring him forth food — Though this creature be so vastly large, and require much food, and no man careth for it, yet God provides for it out of his own stores, and makes the desert mountains to afford it sufficient sustenance. This particular of the description seems more applicable to the elephant than the hippopotamus, which, though he fetches his food, in a great measure, from the land, feeding on the herbage on the banks of the Nile, and among the lakes and fens of Ethiopia, through which that river passes, yet can hardly be said to pasture upon the mountains. Both animals consume great quantities of food, and it must be acknowledged to be an instance of the goodness of God that he hath so ordered it that they feed on grass, and the other products of the field, and not on flesh; for if the latter had been their usual food, great multitudes of creatures must have died continually to keep them alive. Where all the beasts of the field play — This is equally applicable both to the elephant and the river-horse. The beasts of the field not only feed securely, but sport themselves by both of them, being taught by experience that they are gentle and harmless, and never prey upon them.
Joseph Sutcliffe
Ver. 20. The mountains bring him food; therefore it cannot be the African hippopotame, which never leaves the shores of lakes and rivers, when he feeds on vegetables.
Daniel Whedon
20. Surely — Yet; used adversatively. The mountains — Ezekiel (Ezekiel 43:15) calls the altar a rh, “mountain” of God. The word µyrh may also mean “hills.” In the Praeneste pavement, hippopotami are pictured on eminences. “Not only do these animals visit the margin of the river,” says Sir Samuel Baker, “but they wander at night to great distances from the water, attracted by good pasturage; and, although clumsy and ungainly in appearance, they clamber up steep banks and precipitous ravines with astonishing power and ease. In places where they are perfectly undisturbed, they not only enjoy themselves in the sunshine by basking half asleep upon the surface of the water, but they lie upon the shore, beneath the shady trees, upon the river’s brink. I have seen them when disturbed by our sudden arrival during the march, take a leap from a bank, about twenty feet perpendicular depth, into the water below.”… — Nile Tributaries of Abyssinia, page 342. The mountain ranges that skirt the Nile in some places approach the river very closely. Where all the beasts of the field play — All authorities attest the peaceable disposition of this animal, except when hunted by man. The distinguished traveller above quoted remarks: “Although the hippopotamus is generally harmless, the solitary old bulls are extremely vicious, especially when in the water. I have frequently known them charge a boat, and I have myself narrowly escaped being upset in a canoe by one of these creatures, without the slightest provocation. The females are extremely shy and harmless, and they are most affectionate mothers. The only instances I have known of a female attacking a man have been those in which the calf had been stolen.” — Ibid., page 340.
He lieth under the shady trees, in the covert of the reed, and fens.
Adam Clarke
Verse 21. He lieth under the shady trees] This and the following verses refer to certain habits of the behemoth, with which we are and must be unacquainted,
Joseph Benson
Verses 21, 22. He lieth under the shady trees, &c. — Or, He lieth down secretly between the shady trees, under the covert of the reed, and in the fens, Houbigant and Heath. The shady trees cover him — The Hebrew, literally translated, is, The shady trees, (wllx, tzillo,) his shadow, cover him, or, are his arbour: the willows of the brook, or, as ljn, nachal, is often rendered, of the river, compass him about. Bochart argues, that the elephant is not described here, because he rarely lies down, sed rectus dormit, sleeps standing upright. And he quotes a passage from Marcellinus, exactly parallel to this, to show that it is perfectly applicable to the river-horse, which inter arundines celsas et squalentes nimia densitate cubilia ponit, makes his bed among the lofty reeds and in muddy fens.
Joseph Sutcliffe
Ver. 21. In the covert of reeds and fens, the identical places where the remains of the mammoth are discovered.
Daniel Whedon
21. Shady trees — Lotus trees. The lotus silvestris, a thorny shrub, bearing fruit-like plumes, growing abundantly in Syria, Arabia, and along the banks of the upper Nile. The reed — Hebrews, kaneh; Greek and Latin, canna, from which probably comes our own word cane. It is a shrub plant, with a knotty root, out of which spring many long, hollow stems; the arundo donax of Linnaeus, which was common on the banks of the Nile. Several species of reed still grow along the Jordan as well as the Nile. According to Rosenmuller, (Biblical Botany, p. 185,) the Hebrews used the word kaneh for reeds in general, and agmon for rushes, as in Job 41:2, which see; also Job 41:20. And fens — Bitsah, rendered mire in Job 8:11. Wilkinson gives a pictorial representation from the monuments, of this animal lying among tall reeds and beneath the shade of the lotus. (Ancient Egyptians, 3:71.)
The shady trees cover him with their shadow; the willows of the brook compass him about.
John Wesley
V. 22. Brook-Or, of the Nile, of which this word is often used in scripture. His constant residence is in or near this river, or the willows that grow by it.
Adam Clarke
Verse 22. The willows of the brook compass him] This would agree well enough with the hippopotamus.
Joseph Benson
Verses 21, 22. He lieth under the shady trees, &c. — Or, He lieth down secretly between the shady trees, under the covert of the reed, and in the fens, Houbigant and Heath. The shady trees cover him — The Hebrew, literally translated, is, The shady trees, (wllx, tzillo,) his shadow, cover him, or, are his arbour: the willows of the brook, or, as ljn, nachal, is often rendered, of the river, compass him about. Bochart argues, that the elephant is not described here, because he rarely lies down, sed rectus dormit, sleeps standing upright. And he quotes a passage from Marcellinus, exactly parallel to this, to show that it is perfectly applicable to the river-horse, which inter arundines celsas et squalentes nimia densitate cubilia ponit, makes his bed among the lofty reeds and in muddy fens.
Daniel Whedon
22. The willows — A kind of weeping willow, (salix Babylonica,) same as in Psalm 137:2. Of the new Israel, Isaiah tenderly says, they shall spring up as “willows (ibid.) by the water courses.” Chap. 44:4.
Behold, he drinketh up a river, and hasteth not: he trusteth that he can draw up Jordan into his mouth.
John Wesley
V. 23. River-A great quantity of water, hyperbolically called a river. Hasteth not-He drinks not with fear and caution; but such is his courage, that he fears no enemy either by water or by land. He drinks as if he designed, to drink up the whole river. He mentions Jordan, as a river well known, in and nigh unto Job’s land.
Adam Clarke
Verse 23. Behold, he drinketh up a river] A similar mode of expression, and of precisely the same meaning, as that in Job 39:24: “He swalloweth the ground with fierceness.” No river can stop his course: he wades through all; stems every tide and torrent; and hurries not as though he were in danger.
He trusteth that he can draw up Jordan] Even when the river overflows its banks, it is no stoppage to him: though the whole impetuosity of its stream rush against his mouth, he is not afraid. Mr. Good has seized the true idea in his translation of this verse:—
“If the stream rage, he revileth not:
He is unmoved, though Jordan rush against his mouth.”
From this mention of Jordan it is probable that the behemoth was once an inhabitant of the mountains, marshes, and woods, of the land of Palestine.
Joseph Benson
Verse 23. Behold, he drinketh up a river — A great quantity of water, hyperbolically called a river. He swalloweth the waters to such a degree, says Aben Ezra, as to diminish their fulness. This may be fitly applied to the elephant, says Poole, ‘which, because of its great bulk and vehement thirst, drinks a great quantity of water at one draught, as naturalists and historians have observed.” And hasteth not — He does not drink with fear and caution, and sparingly, as the dogs do, who drink at the Nile, for fear of the crocodile; but such is his courage and self-confidence, that he fears no enemy either by water or by land, but drinks securely and freely. He trusteth he can draw up Jordan into his mouth — He drinks as if he designed, or hoped, to drink up the whole river. Bochart and others say that Jordan is put here, by a figure, for any river; but Houbigant is of opinion that Jordan itself is meant, which was not far from the land of Uz, and at which not only many elephants, no doubt, used to drink, but in which it is probable there were river-horses, as well as in the Nile. For, it is supposed, they might come into Jordan from the Dead sea, and into that by subterraneous passages from the Red, or the Mediterranean sea. It may be proper to observe here, that many other learned men who interpret this paragraph of the hippopotamus propose a different translation of this verse: thus, Behold, let the river press him, he will not tremble; he trusteth that he can spout forth Jordan with his mouth. And they paraphrase it thus, No sudden rising of the river, which makes it flow with uncommon violence and fury, gives him any alarm or fear. He is not borne away with the rapidity of the stream from his place, but enjoys himself the same as if the river ran with its usual flow: and, were such a river as Jordan to break forth suddenly from the earth, he would not be terrified; for he trusteth he can throw back its waters from his mouth.
Daniel Whedon
23. Behold, he drinketh… Jordan into his mouth — Behold the river swelleth, he trembleth not: he trusteth, though a Jordan rush to his mouth. By making the river the object rather than the subject of the verb qv[, oppress, (margin,) “do violence,” “swell,” the A.V. obscures the true sense. The word ‘ha-shak, “swell,” is now by almost universal consent admitted to be used of the river metaphorically, and to indicate the violence that comes from a flood. With this agrees the Septuagint, “should there come a flood he would not regard it.” In like manner the Syriac and Arabic. Trusteth — Is confident; partly from the fact that the water is his habitat. That — k, though; thus Noldius. Being amphibious, he is at home in the water as well as on the land, and is not driven away by any flood. His comparative serenity at the sight of a flood arises rather from his natural sluggishness than from his innate courageousness. With this agree Dr. Livingstone’s observations: “The rapids in that part of the river [the Leeambye] are relieved by several reaches of still, deep water, fifteen or twenty miles long. In these, very large herds of hippopotami are seen, and the deep furrows they make in ascending the banks to graze during the nights, are everywhere apparent. They are guided back to the water by the scent, but a long continued pouring rain makes it impossible for them to perceive, by that means, in which direction the river lies, and they are found bewildered on the land. The hunters take advantage of their helplessness on these occasions to kill them. It is impossible to judge of the numbers in a herd, for they are almost always hidden beneath the waters; but as they require to come up every few minutes to breathe, when there is a constant succession of heads thrown up, then the herd is supposed to be large. They love a still reach of the stream, as in the more rapid parts of the channel they are floated down so rapidly that much exertion is necessary to regain the distance lost, by frequently swimming up again. Such constant exertion disturbs them in their nap. They prefer to remain by day in a drowsy, yawning state, and, though their eyes are open, they take but little notice of things at a distance. The males utter a long succession of snorting grunts which may be heard a mile off.… In the rivers of Londa, where they are in much danger of being shot, even the hippopotamus gains wit by experience.”… (Trav. in South Africa, 261, 262.) “They spend most of their time in the water, lolling about in a listless, dreamy manner. When they come out of the river by night they crop off the soft, succulent grass very neatly. When they blow, they puff up the water about three feet high.” — Ibid., 284. With greater particularity Sir Samuel Baker remarks: “Although the animal is amphibious, he requires a large and constant supply of air; the lungs are of enormous size, and he invariably inflates them before diving. From five to eight minutes is the time that he usually remains under water. He then comes to the surface and expends the air by blowing; he again refills the lungs almost instantaneously, and, if frightened, he sinks immediately. In places where they have become exceedingly shy from being hunted or fired at, they seldom expose the head above the surface, but merely protrude the nose, to breathe through the nostrils. It is then impossible to shoot them.” — Nile Tributaries, p. 341. Jordan — Here used generically for any turbulent river, whose sudden overflow is an occasion of fear to the wild beasts along its banks. Dr. Tristram says of a sudden rise of the Jordan: “By measurement, we found that the river had been lately fourteen feet higher than its present margin, and yet it was still many feet above its ordinary level.… Everywhere are traces of wild boar, hyena, and jackal, washed probably out of their usual lairs, and taking refuge in the higher grounds.” — Land of Israel, page
223. The original family relationship of the Hebrew Yarden (Jordan) to the Egyptian Jor or Aur, words used for the Nile, may have possibly led to its appearance in the text. See on Job 28:10.
He taketh it with his eyes: his nose pierceth through snares.
John Wesley
V. 24. Sight-Can any man take him in his eyes? Openly and by force? Surely not. His strength is too great for man to overcome: and therefore men are forced to use wiles and engines to catch him.
Adam Clarke
Verse 24. He taketh it with his eyes] He looks at the sweeping tide, and defies it.
His nose pierceth through snares.] If fences of strong stakes be made in order to restrain him, or prevent him from passing certain boundaries, he tears them in pieces with his teeth; or, by pressing his nose against them, breaks them off. If other parts of the description would answer, this might well apply to the elephant, the nose here meaning the proboscis, with which he can split trees, or even tear them up from the roots! Thus ends the description of the behemoth; what I suppose to be the mastodon or mammoth, or some creature of this kind, that God made as the chief of his works, exhibited in various countries for a time, cut them off from the earth, but by his providence preserved many of their skeletons, that succeeding ages might behold the mighty power which produced this chief of the ways of God, and admire the providence that rendered that race extinct which would otherwise, in all probability, have extinguished every other race of animals!
I am not unapprized of the strong arguments produced by learned men to prove, on the one hand, that behemoth is the elephant; and, on the other, that he is the hippopotamus or river-horse, and I have carefully read all that Bochart, that chief of learned men, has said on the subject. But I am convinced that an animal now extinct, probably of the kind already mentioned, is the creature pointed out and described by the inspiration of God in this chapter.
ON Job 40:1 of this chapter we have seen, from Mr. Heath’s remarks, that the fourteen first verses were probably transposed. In the following observations Dr. Kennicott appears to prove the point.
“It will be here objected, that the poem could not possibly end with this question from Job; and, among other reasons, for this in particular; because we read in the very next verse, That after the Lord had spoken these words unto Job, &c. If, therefore, the last speaker was not Job, but the Lord, Job could not originally have concluded this poem, as he does at present. “This objection I hold to be exceedingly important; and, indeed, to prove decisively that the poem must have ended at first with some speech from God.
“And this remark leads directly to a very interesting inquiry: What was at first the conclusion of this poem? This may, I presume, be pointed out and determined, not by the alteration of any one word, but only by allowing a dislocation of the fourteen verses which now begin the fortieth chapter. Chapters 38., 39., 40., and 41., contain a magnificent display of the Divine power and wisdom in the works of the Creator; specifying the lion, raven, wild goat, wild ass, unicorn, peacock, ostrich, horse, hawk, eagle, behemoth, and leviathan.
“Now, it must have surprised most readers to find that the description of these creatures is strangely interrupted at Job 40:1, and as strangely resumed afterwards at Job 40:15; and therefore, if these fourteen verses will connect with and regularly follow what now ends the poem, we cannot much doubt that these fourteen verses have again found their true station, and should be restored to it.
“The greatness of the supposed transposition is no objection: because so many verses as would fill one piece of vellum in an ancient roll, might be easily sewed in before or after its proper place. In the case before us, the twenty-five lines in the first fourteen verses of chapter xl. seem to have been sewed in improperly after Job 39:30, instead of after Job 42:6. That such large parts have been transposed in rolls to make which the parts are sewed together is absolutely certain; and that this has been the case here, is still more probable for the following reason:— “The lines here supposed to be out of place are twenty-five, and contain ninety-two words; which might be written on one piece or page of vellum. But the MS. in which these twenty-five lines made one page, must be supposed to have the same, or nearly the same, number of lines in each of the pages adjoining. And it would greatly strengthen this presumption if these twenty-five lines would fall in regularly at the end of any other set of lines, nearly of the same number; if they would fall in after the next set of twenty-five, or the second set, or the third, or the fourth, &c. Now, this is actually the case here; for the lines after these twenty-five, being one hundred or one hundred and one, make just four times twenty-five. And, therefore, if we consider these one hundred and twenty-five lines as written on five equal pieces of vellum, it follows that the fifth piece might be carelessly sewed up before the other four.
“Let us also observe that present disorder of the speeches, which is this. In chapters 38. and 39., God first speaks to Job. The end of chap. 39. is followed by, ‘And the Lord answered Job and said,’ whilst yet Job had not replied. At Job 40:3-5, Job answers; but he says, he had then spoken TWICE, and he would add no more; whereas, this was his first reply, and he speaks afterwards. From Job 40:15-41:34 are now the descriptions of behemoth and leviathan, which would regularly follow the descriptions of the horse, hawk, and eagle. And from Job 42:1-6 is now Job’s speech, after which we read in Job 42:7, ‘After the Lord had spoken these words unto Job!’
“Now, all these confusions are removed at once if we only allow that a piece of vellum containing the twenty-five lines, (Job 40:1-14,) originally followed Job 42:6. For then, after God’s first speech, ending with leviathan, Job replies: then God, to whom Job replies the second time, when he added no more; and then God addresses him the third, when Job is silent, and the poem concludes: upon which the narrative opens regularly, with saying, ‘After the Lord had spoken these words unto Job,’ &c. Job 42:7.” —Kennicott’s Remarks, p. 161.
The reader will find much more satisfaction if he read the places as above directed. Having ended chap. 29., proceed immediately to Job 40:15; go on regularly to the end of Job 42:6, and immediately after that add Job 40:1-14. We shall find then that the poem has a consistent and proper ending, and that the concluding speech was spoken by JEHOVAH. JOB
Joseph Benson
Verse 24. He taketh it with his eyes — He imagines, when he sees it, that he can take the whole river and drink it up. His nose pierceth through snares — The elephant will not be kept from the water by any snares or impediments, but removes them all by his trunk; and both he and the river-horse securely thrust their snouts deep into the river, through their eagerness to satisfy their thirst. But different constructions are put upon this verse also by learned men. Bochart and several others think the former clause should be read with an interrogation, thus, Who will, or who can take him in his eyes? That is, while he sees them, and is sensible what they are about: or openly, and by manifest force? Surely none. His force and strength are too great for men to resist and overcome, and therefore they are compelled to make use of many wiles and stratagems to take him; which is true, both of the elephant and of the hippopotamus. And the latter clause is rendered by Heath, Can cords be drawn through his nose? and by Houbigant, Can his nose be perforated with hooks? “The way of taking these animals,” (the hippopotami,) says Dr. Dodd, “as related by Achilles Tatius, will explain this passage. The huntsmen, having found the places where they haunt, dig a trench or ditch, which they cover with reeds and earth, having placed underneath a wooden chest whose lids are opens like a folding-door, on each side, to the height of the cavity; after this they conceal themselves, watching till the beast is taken; for as soon as ever it treads on the surface of the hole, it is sure to fall to the bottom. The huntsmen run up immediately to the cavity and shut down the lids, and by these means catch the beast, which could not be taken by any other method, on account of its prodigious strength.” The latter clause of the verse signifies literally, Canst thou bore his nose with cords? But this kind of boring is made by a hook, in order to insert a cord to lead the creature about with pleasure. It is very remarkable, that this cord in the ox’s nose serves instead of a bit to guide him. This Thevenot confirms in his Voyage to Indostan, where, having mentioned that oxen are used instead of horses for travelling, he adds, “These creatures are managed like our horses, and have no other bits or bridles than a cord which passes through the tendon of their nose or nostrils.” So that this boring his nose and introducing a cord were not to take, but to keep him, in order to make him serviceable when taken. — Heath. I would just observe upon this and the following description, that nervous and excellent as they are, they do not strike us with the same degree of admiration as the foregoing description of the horse, because we are not so well acquainted with the nature of the animals described. Dr. Young renders the last two verses of this chapter thus: “His eye drinks Jordan up, when fired with drought,
He trusts to turn its current down his throat:
In lessen’d waves it creeps along the plain,
He sinks a river, and he thirsts again.”
The reader who can have access to the Encyclop. Brit. may there find a full account both of the elephant and the hippopotamus.
Daniel Whedon
24. He taketh it with his eyes — Before his eyes do they take him: literally, in his eyes, one takes him. So Ewald, Conant, Hitzig, etc. The sluggish, peaceable disposition of this beast (verses 20, 21) exposes him to easy capture. With the same indifference with which he floated with the floods he surveys preparations made for his capture before his very eyes. Immense powers of resistance is he endowed with; but these, owing to the sluggishness of his nature, lie in abeyance. His nose pierceth through snares — His nose is pierced with snares; or, as Gesenius and Furst express it, “with hooks;” literally, one pierces the nose with hooks. The sense, therefore, is similar to that of 2 Kings 19:28, where Jehovah threatens Sennacherib, “I will put my hook in thy nose.” This interpretation is also that of the Septuagint, “In his sight, one shall take him; he shall catch him with a cord and pierce his nose.” In like manner, the Chaldee and Vulgate versions. Others (Rosenmuller, Hirtzel, Welte) read the verse as an ironical challenge, “Just catch him while he is looking, with snares let one pierce his nose,” (Delitzsch:) while others regard the passage as an interrogation, denoting the extreme difficulty of taking the animal. The older commentators were partly induced to take such a view of this verse, from the supposition that the beast is bellicose and difficult of capture, which is really the case only in exceptional instances, such as those produced by Ruppell (Reisen in Nubien, 52, seq.) and Sir Samuel Baker, (Ismalia, 37, 120;) and more specifically when the mother is robbed of her young, as in Livingstone. Ibid., p. 537. (See ver. 20.) The latter case of offensive warfare is so unusual an occurrence, says Livingstone, that his men, when once attacked by a hippopotamus, exclaimed ‘Is the beast mad?’ Stickel, (p. 219, 220,) shows satisfactorily and at large, that neither the interrogative nor the ironical rendering of the passage is justified by the usage of Job, or by the laws of the language. In illustration of the A.V., it may be proper to cite Wood (Bible Animals, p. 327,) who says, “This faculty of detecting snares, is one of the chief characteristics of the hippopotamus, when it lives near places inhabited by mankind, who are always doing their best to destroy it.” Oddly enough, Pliny remarks of the animal, that “it enters the field backwards, to prevent any ambush being laid for it on its return.” — Nat. Hist., 8:39. The monuments of Egypt leave us little doubt, but that this animal was easily taken in ancient times. Wilkinson thus describes the accompanying engraving: “The chasseur is here in the act of throwing the spear at the hippopotamus, which he has already wounded by three other blades, indicated by the ropes in his left hand; and having pulled the animal towards the surface of the water, an attendant endeavors to throw a noose over its head, as he strikes it for a fourth time. Behind him is his son, holding a fresh spear in readiness; and in order that there should be no question about the ropes belonging to the blades, the fourth is seen to extend from his hand to the shaft of the spear he is throwing.” See Ancient Egyptians, 3:68-71.
John Wesley
V. 1. Answered-Having made a little pause to try what Job could answer. This is not said to be spoken out of the whirlwind, and therefore some think God said it in a still, small voice, which wrought more upon Job, (as upon Elijah) than the whirlwind did. Tho’ Job had not spoken any thing, yet God is said to answer him. For he knows mens thoughts, and can return a fit answer to their silence.
Adam Clarke
Verse 1. Moreover the Lord answered] That is, the Lord continued his discourse with Job. Answered does not refer to any thing said by Job, or any question asked.
I think it very likely that this whole piece, from the beginning of this first verse to the end of the fourteenth, was originally the ending of the poem. Mr. Heath has noticed this, and I shall lay his words before the reader: “The former part of this chapter is evidently the conclusion of the poem; the latter part whereof seems to be in great disorder; whether it has happened from the carelessness of the transcriber, or, which appears most probable, from the skins of parchment composing the roll having by some accident changed their places. It is plain from the seventh verse of the forty-second chapter {Job 42:7} that Jehovah is the last speaker in the poem. If, then, immediately after the end of the thirty-ninth chapter, we subjoin the fifteenth verse of the forty-second chapter, and place the fourteen first verses of the fortieth chapter immediately after the sixth verse of the forty-second chapter, and by that means make them the conclusion of the poem, all will be right; and this seventh verse of the forty-second chapter will be in its natural order. The action will be complete by the judgment of the Almighty; and the catastrophe of the poem will be grand and solemn.” To these reasons of Mr. Heath, Dr. Kennicott has added others, which the reader may find at the end of the chapter. {Job 40:24} Without taking any farther notice of the transposition in this place, I will continue the notes in the present order of the verses.
Joseph Benson
Verse 1. Moreover the Lord answered Job — Having first made a little pause to try what Job had to allege in his own defence, or could answer to his questions; and he continuing silent, as being, it seems, astonished at God’s rebukes, or expecting what he would further say, the Lord proceeded with his questions and rebukes. What follows is not said to be spoken out of the whirlwind, and therefore some think God said it in a still, small voice, which wrought more upon Job (as upon Elijah) than the whirlwind did. Though Job had not spoken any thing, yet God is said to answer him: for he knows men’s thoughts, and can return a fit answer to their silence.