And there came a messenger to Job: with verse 14 begins a swift succession of events, each repeated in much the same language until the end of verse 19. The word translated messenger can also mean “angel” (as it does in 4.18 and 33.23), but here the context makes clear that a human messenger is meant. Good News Translation “came running to Job” translates “came to Job” (also in verses 16, 17, 18), and in the context of the rapid series of events, “running” is appropriate; it is used likewise in New English Bible, Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch. The author does not pause to tell where Job may be; however, in verse 20 he stands up and shaves his head. It is probably implied that he was in his house, and in languages which require locating Job, one may translate “a messenger ran to Job’s house and told him…,” or more generally, “a messenger ran to where Job was sitting and told him….”

The oxen were plowing and the asses feeding beside them: the scene reveals a normal agricultural day in the Middle Eastern winter, when plowing is done; winter in the Middle East starts in October and ends in April. This is the second time the author calls attention to the fact that life was going along in its habitual routine. Job’s sons, if they ever worked, certainly did not do so when feasting was called for. Plowing was done by Job’s farm hands using teams of oxen joined by a yoke. The asses refers to the female donkeys of verse 3. Feeding beside them gives a picture of these animals grazing in a freshly plowed field, which is hardly the case. The Good News Translation rendering has the messenger report to Job as a participant in the work, “We were plowing…,” which is more natural and vivid than in Revised Standard Version. Good News Translation also makes it clear “the donkeys were in a nearby pasture.” In languages in which “oxen” and “plowing” are unknown, some adaptations will have to be made. As suggested in verse 3, sometimes a borrowed word from a major language has to be used. It is also possible sometimes to use a generic such as “animal” joined with a limiting qualifier such as “work”; for example, “work animals” or “work animals called oxen.” The same procedure may be necessary where the plow is unknown. For example, one may say “the animals were pulling the instrument called plow.” It is also possible to express the idea without using “plow” by saying “the work animals were preparing the ground for planting.” If the ox is unknown and another animal is used for plowing, it may be possible to substitute that animal, provided it can also be done with no conflict in verse 3. Illustrations can usually help make the picture clear. In some languages the absence of a possessor in The oxen and the asses will suggest that these animals were wild. Accordingly we should say “Job’s oxen” and “Job’s donkeys.”

Quoted with permission from Reyburn, Wiliam. A Handbook on Job. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1992. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Why did the knees receive me?: it is not clear from the Hebrew whose knees are meant. Joseph’s great-grandchildren are said to have been born on his knees (Gen 50.23). Some have suggested that the knees are those of Job’s father, who in this manner legitimizes or formally acknowledges his infant son as his own. However, line 12b refers to the mother’s breasts, and so Good News Translation and others are perhaps right in relating the knees to the mother. Living Bible (Living Bible) has “why did the midwife let me live? Why did she nurse me at her breasts?” There is no justification in the text for introducing a midwife into this verse. The question in line a is literally “Why were the knees before me?” In translation it is again possible to restructure the rhetorical question Why did the knees …, using “I wish…,” as done by Good News Translation in verse 11. However, in some languages this type of repeated structure may be less satisfactory than varying them as Good News Translation has done. In some languages it will be more natural to say “lap” or “arms”; for example, “Why did my mother hold me on her lap?” or “… hold me in her arms?” If the translation follows a wording similar to Revised Standard Version, it may be advisable to provide a note saying, for example, “This is an act showing that the child is formally welcomed into the family.”

Or why the breasts, that I should suck?: Revised Standard Version translates the Hebrew literally, and the result is stilted, awkward English. Good News Translation has restructured this line so that “she feed me” is parallel with “my mother hold me” from line 12a. To avoid monotony of style Good News Translation has used the double “Why” question instead of the wish of the previous verse.

Quoted with permission from Reyburn, Wiliam. A Handbook on Job. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1992. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

In Dhorme’s view verse 1 does not seem to relate to what goes before or after. Therefore he shifts verse 1 to immediately before 5.8. Many translations, however, keep verse 1 in its traditional position. Call now: Job is challenged to make a futile appeal by shouting out. This may be understood as a rebuke for Job’s calling upon the forces of destruction to remove his origins in 3.3-9. That it is a rebuke is not certain, however, because Eliphaz has until this point been sympathetic with Job. Is there any one who will answer you?: the very general term any one is matched in line b by holy ones. Call now may sometimes be rendered “shout to someone,” “call someone’s name,” or “make a shout.” Answer is not to reply to a question but simply to respond to Job’s call, that is, “help you” or “listen to you.”

To which of the holy ones…?: in 33.23 angels are referred to as mediators, and Eliphaz seems to suppose that Job might think of appealing to them for help. Holy ones translates the Hebrew qedoshim, the same beings that were referred to in 4.18 as “servants” and “angels.” Eliphaz has argued there that these creatures are not fully trustworthy. In the present verse, translations are divided between those that follow Revised Standard Version holy ones and those that follow Good News Translation “angels.” Translators should make certain that a translation of holy ones does not mean “religious teachers or leaders,” as it does in some languages. For further discussion see 4.18. Will you turn: the meaning is look to, appeal to for help, guidance, deliverance. In some languages this expression may be rendered “which angel will you ask to come and help you?” or, as direct address, “to which angel will you say ‘Help me!’?”

Quoted with permission from Reyburn, Wiliam. A Handbook on Job. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1992. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Feeling that he has endured all he can, Job implies that his strength cannot hold out. Eliphaz’s promise of a secure future and death at a ripe old age is more than Job can wait for. He is impatient to be finished with his miserable existence.

Lines a and b are parallel, with wait being matched by patient. What is my strength, that I should wait?: Job’s rhetorical question is a way of saying “I do not have the strength, stamina, courage to wait for a happy end.” And what is my end, that I should be patient?: end translates a word which in Psalm 39.4 is parallel with “the measure of my days,” that is, the span of life that remains to be lived, and therefore “my future,” “the remainder of my life.” Bible en français courant says “But I no longer have the strength to continue: why should I be patient, I no longer have a future.” Alternatively we may say, for example, “I do not have the strength to go on living, so why should I be patient when I have no future?” or “… why should I wait patiently for the end of my life?” or “… for the time when I will die?”

Quoted with permission from Reyburn, Wiliam. A Handbook on Job. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1992. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Although this verse is stated as a question, the force of Job’s words is a plea for God to take his eyes off Job and leave him in peace. How long wilt thou not look away from me: this question is awkwardly constructed in English. New English Bible, which retains the liturgical language when addressing God, says “Wilt thou not look away from me for an instant?” Nor let me alone till I swallow my spittle?: Job complains that God does not take his observant gaze off Job long enough for him to swallow his spittle. In 9.18 Job asks for time to take a breath. If the expression swallow my spittle is unfamiliar or has a different meaning than in Hebrew, it should be avoided or replaced by an equivalent expression. In Arabic the same expression is commonly used with the meaning “to take a break” or “to catch one’s breath.” The two lines of verse 19 need to be more closely related than they are in Revised Standard Version. This is done well in Good News Translation: “look away long enough for me….”

Quoted with permission from Reyburn, Wiliam. A Handbook on Job. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1992. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Lo, he passes by me, and I see him not: in these parallel lines Job speaks of the mystery of God’s ways in relation to his own. God is not only the powerful creator who hangs the stars in the sky, but he is also elusive and invisible. In 4.15-16 Eliphaz experienced an eerie wind gliding over his face. Here Job cannot see him. For comments on Lo see 5.27; and see discussion on the synonymous term “behold” in 1.12, 19. Passes by me means that God passes close to where Job is. The verb translated see carries also the connotation of “being acquainted with.” He moves on, but I do not perceive him: perceive translates a word very close in meaning to see in line a, so that Good News Translation reduces the two lines to one. Perceive him may need to be expressed “I do not know that he is there” or “I am not aware of him.”

Quoted with permission from Reyburn, Wiliam. A Handbook on Job. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1992. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Thou didst clothe me with skin and flesh: Job continues to remind God how he has been intimately responsible for Job’s prenatal development. Some translations take this verse to be a question, as in verse 10. God is the subject of the verb. And knit me together with bones and sinews: the verb translated knit implies in today’s English the use of needles to intertwine two threads to form a fabric or cloth. The meaning of the Hebrew term is better conveyed by “weave, intertwine, form, or shape.” Good News Translation reverses the two lines to give a more logical sequence. That is, it prefers to have the body formed first with bones and sinews and then covered with muscles and skin, and this may be preferred in other languages. Reversing the sequence in this fashion, the whole verse may be expressed as “wove my body together with bones and muscles, and covered it with flesh and skin.”

Quoted with permission from Reyburn, Wiliam. A Handbook on Job. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1992. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

The tents of robbers are at peace: in this verse Job is saying that, while the prosperous or fortunate people are causing misery for the unfortunate and looking down on them as wicked, violent robbers and godless people are enjoying a good life. There are three lines, with a and b being closely alike in meaning. Tents of robbers refers to the homes of those lawless people who violently attack others. Good News Translation “thieves” is less satisfactory, as the aspect of violence is largely lacking. At peace means that they live at home without trouble, threat, worry, or concern. This line reinforces the thought of verse 5. Good News Translation contrasts line a with the last line of verse 5. We may also say, for example, “But robbers who attack people live at home in security,” “But the tents of plunderers are left unharmed,” or “But bandits live at home in peace.”

And those who provoke God are secure: the shift in line b is from robbers who attack people to those who provoke God or make him angry. Good News Translation calls them “godless men” and combines this line with line a. It is not suggested how people provoke, irritate, or anger God. Are secure is parallel in meaning with at peace in line a. Line b may be rendered, for example, “and people who make God angry are without threat,” “and nobody threatens people who make God angry,” “and no one threatens the peace of those who make God angry,” or “and no one disturbs the safety of those who cause God to be angry.”

Who bring their god in their hand: this line is literally “whom ʾeloah brings in his hand.” Numerous attempts have been made to understand these words. Leaving aside all the proposed emendations or changes in the Hebrew vowels to make it clearer, there are two major approaches. The first is that of Gordis, who asserts that it is a Hebrew idiom which means to deceive; and he translates “all those who have deceived him (God).” However, Gordis gives no evidence of such an idiom used elsewhere in the Bible. The second interpretation is based on similar language used in Genesis 32.29; Deuteronomy 28.32; Micah 2.1. Each of these passages contains the term ʾel, which is taken by Dhorme to refer to God, and he translates these passages respectively “Their hand serves as their God,” “My hand serves me as God,” and “Your hand will not be able to serve as God.”

As is seen in Revised Standard Version and Good News Translation, ʾeloah is here an object under the control or power of the thieves and godless people in line a and is appropriately translated “god.” The best sense that can be made is that some people think they control or have power over God, but in reality they have only a god, idol, false god in their hand or power.

Good News Translation translates as a concessive clause “though their only god is their own strength.” We may also say, for example, “They are the ones who have power over their gods” or “Their strength is the god they trust.” In languages in which it is difficult to express the idea of a “god,” we may say, for example, “What they worship is their own power” or “Their own strength takes the place of God.”

Quoted with permission from Reyburn, Wiliam. A Handbook on Job. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1992. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .