Notes on the Old and New Testaments

marks were rccnrdecl in tliis manner, to admonish travellers, or to transmit them to posterity. Numerous inscriptions of this kind are found by travellers in the East, on tombs, and on rocks in the desert. All that can be appropriate here is a notice of such early inscriptions of that kind in Arabia, as would render it probable that they existed in the time of Job, or such as indicate great antiquity. Happily we are at no loss for such inscriptions on rocks in the country where Job lived. The following cut, from Laborde, exhibits a view of the engravings on the rocks in the Wady Mokatta •

The Wady Mokatta, the cliffs of which bear these inscriptions, is a valley entering Wady Sheikh, and bordering the upper regions of the Sinai mountains. It extends for about three hours' march, and in most places its rocks present abrupt cliffs, twenty or thirty feet liigh. From these cliffs large masses have separated, and lie at the bottom of the valley. The cliffs and rocks are thickly covered with inscriptions, which are continued at intervals of a few hundred paces only, for at least the distance of two hours and a half. Burckhardt, in his travels from Akaba to Cairo^ by Mount Sinai, observed many inscriptions on the rocks, part of which he has copied. See his travels in Syria, Lond. Ed. pp. 506, 581, 582, 606, 613, 614. The following, found on the stones in the Wady Aleyat, will give an idea of the appearance of those inscriptions. Tijey are copied from Burckhardt's Travels in Syria, pp. 613, 614.

See other specimens in Burckhardt, Ibid. Pococke, who also visited the regions of Mount Sinai in 1777, has given adesciiption of the inscriptions which he saw on the rocks at Mount Sinai. Vol. i. 148, he says, ''There are on many of the rocks, both near these mountains and in the road, a great many inscriptions in an ancient character; many of them I copied, and observed that most of them were not cut, but stained, making the granite of a lighter color, and where the stone had scaled, I could see the stain had sunk into the stone." JXumerous specimens of these inscriptions

25 For I know that my Redeemer liveth, and that he shall

may be seen in Pococke. Vol. i., p. 148. These inscriptions were also observed by Robinson and Smith, and are described by them in Biblical Researches, vol. i., 108, 118, 119, 123, 161, 167. They are first mentioned by Cosmas, about A. D. 535. He supposed them to be the work of the ancient Hebrews, and says that certain Jews, who had read them, explained them to him as noting " the journey of such an one, out of such a tribe, in such a year and month." They have also been noticed by many early travellers, as Neitzschitz, p. 149; Moncongs, i. p. 245; and also by Niebuhr in his Reisebeschr. i. p. 250. The copies of them given by Pococke and J\iebuhr are said to be very imperfect; those by Seetzen are better, and those made by Burckhardt are tolerably accurate. Rob. Bib. Research. 1. 553. A large number of them have been copied and published by Mr. Grey, in the Transactions of the Royal Society of Literature, vol. iii., pt. 1, Lond. 1832; consisting of one hundred and seventy-seven in the unknown character, nine in Greek, and one in Latin. These inscriptions, which so long excited the curiosity of travellers, have been recently deciphered (in the year 1830) by Professor Beer, of the University of Leipzig. He had turned his attention to them in the year 1833, but without success. In the year 1839 his attention was again turned to them, and after several months of the most persevering application, he succeeded in making out the alphabet, and was enabled to read all the inscriptions which have been copied, with a good degree of accuracy. According to the results of this examination, the characters of the Sinajlic inscriptions belong to a distinct and independent alphabet. Some of the letters are wholly peculiar; the others have more or less affinity with the Palmyrene, and particularly

Stand at the latter day upon the earth: with the Estrangelo and the Cufic. They are written from right to left. The contents of the inscriptions, bo far as examined, consist only of proper names, preceded by a word which is usually l-?T^, peace, though occasionally some other word is used. In one or two instances the name is followed by a sentence which has not yet been deciphered. The names are those common in Arabic. It is a remarkable fact that not one Jewish or Christian name has been found. The question, as to the writers ot these inscriptions, receives very little light from their contents. A word at the end of some of them, may be so read as to aflirrn tliat they were pilgrims, and this opinion Professor Beer adopts; but this is not certain. That the writers were Christians^ seems apparent from many of the crosses connected with the inscriptions. The age, also, of the inscriptions, receives no light from their contents, as no date has yet been read. Beer supposes that the greater part of them could not have been written earlier than the fourth century. Little light, therefore, is cast upon the question who wrote them; what was their design; in what age they were written, or who were the pilgrims who wrote them. See Rob. Bib. Research, i. 552-556. That there were such records in the time of Job, is probable.

25. For I knoio that viy Redeemer liveth. There are few passages in the Bible which have excited more attention than this, or in respect to which the opinions of expositors have been more divided. The importance of the passage (vs. 25-27) has contributed much to the anxiety to understand its meaning — since, if it refers to the Messiah, it is one of the most valuable of all the testimonials now remaining of the early faith on that subject. The importance of the passage will justify a somewhat more extended examination of its meaning than it is customary to give in a commentary of a single passage of Scripture; and I sliall (1) give the views entertained of it by the translators of the ancient and some of the modern versions; (2) investigate the meaning of the tcords and phrases w^hich occur in it -, and (3) state the arguments, pro and con, for its supposed reference to the Messiah. The Vulgate renders it, "For I know that my Redeemer— Redcniptor me^is — lives, and that in the lust day I shall rise from the earth; and again, I shall be enveloped—circ«??i^/rt/'9/-— with my skin, and in my flesh shall I see my God. Whom I myself shall see, and my eyes shall behold, and not another—this, my hope, is laid up in my bosom." The LXX translate it, " For I know that he is Eternal who is about to deliver me— o fy.lvnv fif ttflXon' — to raise again upon earth this skin of mine, which draws up these things — TO dvai'r).ovr ravta — [the meaning of wliich, I believe, no one has ever been able to divine.] For from the Lord these things have happened to me of which I alone am conscious, which my eye has seen, and not another, and which have all been done to me in my bosom." Thompson's trans, in part. The Syriac is in the main a simple and correct rendering of the Hebrew. " I know that mj Redeemer(^-«^oi.s) liveth, and in the consummation)|«sa-aLci) he will be revealed upon the earth, and after my skin I shall bless myself in these things, and after my flesh. If my eyes shall see God, I shall see light." The Chaldee accords witli our version, except in one phrase. " And afterwards my skin shall be inflated, ^=^^3'? t^2P}^?) — then in my flesh shall I see God." It will be seen that some perplexity was felt by the authors of the ancient versions in regard to the passage. Much more has been felt by expositors. Some notices of the views of the modems, in regard to particular words and phrases, will be given in the exposition. TT / know. I am certain. On that point Job desires to express the utmost confidence. His friends might accuse him of hypocrisy— they might charge him with want of piety, and he might not be able to refute all that they said; but in the position referred to here he would remain fixed, and witii this firm confidence he would support iiis soul. It was this which lie wished to have recorded in the eternal rocks, that the record might go down to future times. If after ages should be made acquainted with his name and his snff"eiings— if they should hear of the charges brought against hiin. and of the accusations of impiety which had been so harshly and unfeelingly urged, he wished that this testimony might be recorded, to show that he had unwavering confidence in God. He wished this eternal record to be made, to show that he was not a rejecter of truth; that he was not an enemy of God; that he had a firm confidence that God vvould yet come forth to vindicate him, and would stand up as his friend. It was a testimony worthy of being held in everlasting remembrance, and one which has had, and will have, a permanency much greater than he anticipated. "W That vuj Redeemer. This important word has been variously translated. RosenmUller and Schultens render it, vindlcem; Dr. Good, Redeemer; Noyes and Wemyss, vindicator; Herder, avenger,, Luther, Erloser — Redeemer; Chaldee and Syriac, Redeemer. The Hebrew word, ^^^ — Xj-oe/, is from ^^^— i^«^'?, to redeem^ to ransom. It is applied to the redemplion of a farm sold, by paying back the price, Lev. xxv. 25; Ruth iv. 4,6; to any thing consecrated to God that is redeemed by paying its value. Lev. xxvii. 13, and to a slave that is ransomed. Lev. xxv. 48, 49. The word "^^^ — god, is applied to one who redeems a field, Lev. xxv- 26; and is often applied to God, who had redeemed his people from bondage, Ex. VI. 6, Isa. xliii. 1. See Notes on Isa. xliii. 1; and on the general meaning of the word, see Notes on Job iii. 5 Among the Hebrews, the?^?5 — gotl occupied an important place, as a blood- avenger^ or a vindicator of violated rights. See Numb. XXXV. 12, 10, 21, 24, 25, 27, Deut.xix. 6-12, Ruth iv. 1,6,8, Josh. XX. 3. The word ^i<'^ — goel, is ren. dered kinsman^ Ruth iv. 1, 3, 6, 8; near linsman, Ruth iii. 9, 12; avenger^ Num. XXXV. 12, Josh. xx. 3; jRedeevier^ Job xix. 25, Ps xix. 14, Isa. xlvii. 4, Ixiii. 16, xliv. 24, xlviii. 17, liv. 8, xli. 14, xlix. 26, Ix. 16; /.m. Lev. XXV. 25, et al. JMoses found the office of the goel, or avenger, already instituted, (seeMichaelis's Commentary on laws of Moses, § cxxxvi.) and lie adopted it into his code of laws. It would seem, therefore, not improbable that it prevailed in the adjacent countries in the time of Job, or that there may have been a reference to this office in the place before us. The go&l is first introduced in the laws of Moses, as ha'ving a right to redeem a mortgaged field. Lev. XXV. 25, 26; and tlien as having a right, as kinsman, to the restoration of any thing which had been iniquitously acquired. Num. v. 8. Then he is often referred to in the writings of Moses as the blood-avenger, or the kinsman of one who was slain, who would have a right to pursue the murderer, and to take vengeance on him, and whose dutij it would be to do it. This right of a near relative to pursue a murderer, and to take vengeance, seems to have been one that was early conceded every where. It was so understood among the American Indians, and probably prevails in all countries before there are settled laws for the trial and punishment of the guilty. It was a right, however, which was liable to great abuse. Passion would take the place of reason, the innocent would he suspected, and the man who had slain another in self-defence was as likely to be pursued an 1 slain as he who had been guilty of wilful murder. To guard against this, in the unsettled state of jurisprudence, Moses appointed cities of refuge^ where the man-slayer might flee until he could have a fkit opportunity of trial. It was impossible to put an end at once to the office of the goel. The kinsman, the near relative, would feel himselfcalled on to pursue the murderer; but the man-slayer might flee into a sacred city, and remain until he had a fair trial. See Num. xxxv. Deut. xix. 6, 7. It was a humane arrangement to appoint cities of refuge, where the man who had slain another might be secure until he had an opportunity of trial — an arrangement which eminently showed the wisdom of Moses. On the rights and duties of the o"o67, the reader may consul Michaelis's Com. on the laws of Moses, art. 136,137. His essential oflice was that of a vindicator — one who took up the cause of a friend, whether that friend was murdered, or was oppressed, or was wronged in any way. Usually, perhaps always, this pertained to the nearest male kin, and was instituted for the aid of the defenceless and the wronged. In times long subscfjuent, a somewhat similar feeling gave rise to the institution of chivalry, and the voluntary defence of the innocent and oppressed. It cannot now be determined whether Job in this passage has reference to the office of the goel., as it was afterwards understood, or whether it existed in his time. It seems probable that the office would exist at the earliest periods of the world, and that in the rudest stages of society the nearest of kin would feel himself called on to vindicate the wrong done to one of the feebler members of his family. The word properly denotes, therefore, either vindicator^ or redeemer; and so far as the tcrrn is concerned, it may refer either to God, as an avenger of the innocent, or to the future Redeemer — the Messiah. The meaning of this word, would be met, should it be understood as referring to God, coming forth in a public manner to vindicate the cause of Job against all the charges and accusations of his professed friends; or to God, who would appear as his vindicator at the resurrection; or to the future Messiah — the Redeemer of the body and the soul. No arguvient in favor of either of these interpretations can be derived from the use of the word. ]! Livcth. Is alive — "^H Sept. immortal — aevvaoq. He seems now to have forsaken me as if he were dead, but my faith is unwavering in him as a living vindicator. A similar expression occurs in ch. xvi. 19, "My witness is in heaven, and my record is on high." It is a declaration of entire confidence in God, and will beautifully convey the emotions of the sincere believer in all ages. He may be afflicted with disease, or the loss of property, or be forsaken b}^ his friends, or persecuted by his foes, but if he can look up to heaven and say, " I know that my Redeemer lives," he will have peace. U Jliid that he shall stand. He will stand up, as one does who undertakes the cause of another. Jerome has rendered this as though it referred to Job, " And in the last day I shall rise from the earth" — de terra surrecturus sum — as if it referred to the resurrection of the body. But this not in accordance with the Hebrew, (2^p'3) — "Ae shall stand." There is clearly no necessary reference in this word to the resurrection. The simple meaning is, ' he shall appear, or manifest himself, as the vindicator of my cause.' H At the latter day. The word " day" here is supplied by the translators. The Hebrev/ is, '■|'i'''n^'J — and after, afterwards, hereafter, at length. The word literally means, hinder, hinder part — opposite to foremost, former. It is applied to the Mediterranean sea, as being behind when the eye of the geographer was supposed to be turned to the East; (see Notes on ch. xviii. 20;) then it means after, later, applied to a generation or age.

Ps. xlviii. 14, to a day — to future times— (Ti'^J^i< ^i^), Prov. xxxi. 25, Isa. XXX. 8. All that this word necessarily expresses here is, that at some future period this would occur. It does not determine whe7i it v/ould be. The language would apply to any future time, and might refer to the coming of the Redeemer, to the resurrection, or to some subsequent period in the life of Job. The meaning is, that however long he was to sutler, however protracted his calamities were, and were likely to be, he had the utmost confidence that God would at Icngtli, or at some future time, come forth to vindicate him. The phrase, " the latter day," has now acquired a kind of technical meaning, by which we naturally refer it to the day of judgment. But there is no evidence that it has any such reference here. On the general meaning of phrases of this kind, however, the reader may consult my Notes on Isaiah, ch. ii. 2. TI Ujwn the earth. Heb. '^SS^'P? — upon the dust. Why the word dust is used, instead of (^'^l^^J earth, is unknown. It may be because the word dust is emphatic, as being contrasted with heaven, the residence of the Deity. Koyes. What kind of an appearance God would assume when he should thus come forth, or how he would manifest himselfas the vindicator and Redeemer of Job, he does not intimate, and con jecture would be useless. The toords do not necessarily imply any visible manifestation — though such a manifestation would not be forbidden by the fair constructipn of the passage. I say, they do not necessarily imply it. See Psalms xii. 5, " For the sighing of the needy, now will I arise^ (Heb. stand up—'n^pi^,) saith the Lord." Ps. xliv. 26, "Arise (Heb H^^p — stand up) for our help." Whether this refers to any visible manifestation in behalf of Job is to be determined in other modes than by the mere meaning of this word.

26 And ' though after my skin

1 or, after I shall awake, though this body be destroyed, yet out ofmyfiesh shall I see Qod.

26. And though. Marg. Or, after I shall aif} like, though this body be destroyed, yet out of my flesh shall I see God. This verse has given not less perplexity than the preceding. Noyes renders it, And though with this skin thijs body be wasted away, Yet in my flesh shall I see God.

And, after the disease hath destroyed my skin, That in my flesh I shall see God.

RosenmUller explains it, " And w^hen after my skin {soil, is consumed and destroyed) they consume (scil. those corroding, or consuming, i. e. it is corroded, or broken into fragments) this, that is, this structure of my bones — my body (which he does not mention, because it was so wasted away that it did not deserve to be called a body) — yet without my flesh — with my whole body consumed, shall I see God." He translates it,

Et quum post cutem meara hoc fuerit con- sumptum, Tamen absque came mea videbo Deum.

The Hebrew is literally, ' and after my skin.' Gesenius translates it, " After they shall have destroyed my skin, this shall happen — that 1 will see God." Herder renders it, Though they tear and devour this my skin, Yet in my living body shall I see God.

The fair and obvious meaning, I think, is that which is conveyed by our translation. Disease had attacked his skin. It was covered with ulcers, and was fast consuming. Comp. ch. ii. 8, vii. 5. This process of corruption and decay he had reason to expect would go on until all would be consumed. But if it did, he would hold fast his confidence in God. He would believe that he would come forth as his vindicator, and he would still put his trust in him. II Worms. This word is supplied by our translators. There is not a semblance of it in the original. That is, simply, ' they destroy;'

worms destroy this body, yet in my flesh " shall I see ^ God:

where the verb is used impersonally, meaning that it would be destroyed. The agent by which this would be done is not specified. The word rendered ' destroy' (^S|53 from '^p.\)^ means to cut, to strike", to cut down (comp. Notes on ch. i. 5, for the general meaning of the word), and here means to destroy; that is, that the work of destruction might go on until the frame should be wholly wasted away. It is not quite certain that the word here would convey the idea that he expected to die. It ^nay mean that he would become entirely emaciated, and all his flesh be gone. There is nothing, liowever, in the word to show that he did not expect to die — and perhaps that would be the most obvious and proper interpretation. Tl TAi^ body. The word body is also supplied by the translators. The Hebrew is simply r\KT — this. Perhaps he pointed to his body — for there can be no doubt that his body or flesh is intended. RosenmUller supposes that he did not mention it, because it was so emaciated that it did not deserve to be called a body. IT Yet in my flesh. Heb. "From my flesh" — '^'ibs^, Herder renders this, " In my living body." Rosenmiiller, absque curne viea — "without my flesh;" and explains it as meaning, ' my whole body being consumed, I shall see God.' The literal meaning is, ' from, or out of, ni}'^ flesh shall I see God.' It does not mean iii liis flesh, which would have been expressed by the preposition 2 — but there is the notion that /r(»??i or 'ou« of his flesh he would see him; that is, clearly, as RosenmUller has expressed it, though my body be consumed, and I have Tio flesh, I shall see him. Disease might carry its fearful ravages through all his frame, until it utterly wasted away, yet he had confidence that he would see his Vindicator and Re*

27 Whom I shall see for myself, and mine eyes shall behold,

1 a stranger. 2 or, my reins within me are consumed with earnest desire for that day.

and not ^ another; though ^ my reins be consumed ^ within me.

deemer on the earth. It cannot bo proved that this refers to the resurrection of that body, and indeed the natural interpretation is against it. It is, rather, that thougii without a body, or though his body should all waste away, he would see God as his vindicator. He would not always be left overwiielnied in this manner witli calamities and reproaches. He would be permitted to see God coming forth as his Gocl or Avenger, and manifesting himself as his friend. Calmly, therefore, he would bear these reproaches and trials, and see his frame waste away, for it would not always be so — God would yet undertake and vindicate his cause. IT Shall I see God. He would be permitted to behold him as /unfriend and avenger. What was the nature of the vision which he anticipated, it is not possible to determine with certainty. Ifhe expected that God would appear in some remarkable manner to judge the world, and to vindicate the cause of the oppressed; or that he would come forth in a special manner to vindicate //i!5 cause; or ifhe looked to a general resurrection, and to the trial on that day, the language would apply to either of these events.

27. Whom I shall sec for myself. It will not come to me by mere report. I shall not merely hear of the decision of God in my favor, but I shall myself behold him He will at length come forth, and I shall be permitted to see him, and shall have the delightful assurance that he settles this controversy in my favor, and declares that I am his friend. Job was thus permitted to see God (ch. xlii. 5), and hear his voice in his favor. He spake to him from the whirlwind (ch. xxxviji. 1), and pronounced the sentence in his favor which he had desired. H And not ayiother. Marg. a stranger. So in the Hebrew. The meaning is, that his oxen eyes would be permitted to sec him. He would have the satisfaction of seeing God himself, and of hearing the sentence in his favor. That expectation he deemed worthy of a permanent record, and wished it transmitted to future times, that in iiis darkest days and severest trials — when God overwhelmed him, and man forsook him, he still firmly maintained his confidence in God, and his belief tliat he would come forth to vindicate his cause. ^ Though my reins. The margin renders this, " my reins ivithin me are consumed with earnest desire for that day." Noyes translates it, " For this my soul panteth within me." Herder,

I shall see him as my deliverer, Mine eyes shall behold him, as mine, For whom my heart so long fainted.

So Wemyss, " My reins faint with desire of his arrival." Jerome renders it {Vulgate)., rcposita est hcec spes mea in sinu meo — " this, my hope, is laid up in my bosom." The LXX, " All which things have been done — oin'T^rtlforai, — in my bosom," but what they understood by this it is difficult to say. The word rendered reins ('^'IJ^'^ — or in the plural J^'i'^^2 — in which form only it is found), means properly the reins, or the kidneys (Job xvi. 13), and then comes to denote the inward parts, and then the seat of the desires and affections, bccavse in strong emotions the inward parts are affected. We speak of the heart as the seat of the atlections, but with no more propriety than the Hebrews did of the upper viscera in general, or of the reins. In the Scriptures the heart and the reins are united as the seat of the affections. Thus, Jer. xi. 20, God " tricth the reins and the heart." Jer. xvii. 10, xx. 12. Ps. vii. 10. I see no reason why the word here may not be used to denote the viscera in general, and that the idea may be, that he felt that his disease was invading the seat of life, and his body, in all its parts, was wasting away. Onr word vitals, perhaps, expresses the idea. H Be consumed. Gesenius renders this, " Pine away." So Noyes, Wemyss, and some others. But the proper meaning of the word IS, to consume, to be wasted, to be destroyed. The word ("^^S) strictly means to finish, complete, render entire; and thence has the notion of completion or finishing — whether by making a thing perfect, or by destroying it. It is used with reference to the eyes that fail or waste away with weeping, Lam. ii. 11, or to the spirit or heart as fainting with grief and sorrow. Ps. Ixxxiv. 3, cxliii. 7, Ixix. 4 It is used often in the sense of destroying. Jer. xvi. 4. Ezra v. 13. Ps. xxxix. ]l. Isa. xxvii. 10, xlix. 4. Gen. xli. 30. Jer. xiv. 12, et scejje al. This, I think, is the meaning here. Job affirms that his whole frame, external and internal, was wasting away, yet he had confidence that he would see God. II Within we. Marg. in iny hosom. So the Hebrew. The word bosom is here used as we use the word chest — and is not improperly rendered ' within me.' In view of this exposition of the words, I would translate the whole passage as follows:

For I know that my Avenger liveth,

And that hereafter he sliall stand upon the earth; And though after my skin this [flesh] shall be destroyed, Yet even without my flesh shall I see God: Whom I shall see for myself, And mine eyes shall behold, and not another, Though my vitals are wasting away within me.

It has already been observed, that very various views have been entertained of this important passage of Scripture. The great question has been, whether it refers to the Messiah, and to the resurrection of the dead, or to an expectation which Job had that God would come forth as his vindicator in some such way as he is declared afterwards to have done. It may be proper, therefore, to give a summary of the arguments by which these opinions would be defended. 1 have not found many arguments stated for the former opinion, though the belief is held by many, but they would be probably such as the follovCing: — I. Arguments which would be adduced to show that the passage refers to the Messiah and to the future resurrection of the dead. (1.) The language which is used is such as would appropriately describe such events. This is undoubted, though more so in our translation than in the original; but the original would appropriately express such an expectation. (2.) The impression which it would make on the mass of readers, and particularly those of plain, sober sense, who had no theory to defend. It is probably a fact, that the great body of the readers of the Bible suppose that it has such a reference. It is usually a very strong presumptive proof of the correctness of an interpretation of Scripture when this can be alleged in its favor, though it is not an infallible guide. (3.) The probability that some knowledge of the Messiah would prevail in Arabia in the time of Job. This must be admitted, though it cannot be certainly demonstrated. Comp. Num. xxiv. 17. The amount of this is, that it could not be regarded as so improbable that any such knowledge would prevail as to demonstrate certainly that this could not be referred to the Messiah. (4.) The probability that there would be found in this book some allusion to the Redeemer — the great hope of the ancient saints, and the burden of the Old Testament. But this is not conclusive, or very weighty, for there are several of the books of the Old Testament which contain no distinct allusion to him. (5.) The pertinency of such a view to the case, and its adaptedness to give to Job the kind of consolation which he needed. There can be no doubt ot the truth of this; but the question is, not what would have imparted consolation, but what knowledge he actually had. There are many of the doctrines of the Christian religion which would have been eminently fitted to give comfort in such circumstances to a man in affliction, which it would be exceedingly unreasonable to expect to find in the book of Job, and which it is certain were wholly unknown to him and his friends. (6.) The importance which he himself attached to his declaration, and the solemnity of the manner in which he introduced it. His profession of faith on the subject he wished to have engraved in the eternal rocks. He wished it transmitted to future times. He wished a permanent record to be made, that succeeding ages might read it, and see the ground of his con fidence and his hope. This, to my mind, is the strongest argument which has occurred in favor of the opinion that the passage refers to the Re deemer and to the resurrection. These are all the considerations which have occurred to me, or which I have found stated, which would go to sustain the position that the pas- | sage referred to the resurrection. | Some of them have weight; but the { prevailing opinion, that the passage j has such a reference, will be found to j be sustained, probably, more hij the! feelings of piety than by solid argu- I ment and sound exegesis. It is fa-! vored, doubtless, by our common ver- | sion, and there can be no doubt that i the translators supposed that it had such a reference.

n. On the other hand, weighty considerations are urged to show that the passage does not refer to the Messiah, and to the resurrection of the dead. They are such as the following:

(].) The language, fairly interpreted and translated, does not necessarily imply this. It is admitted that our translators had this belief, and without doing intentional or actual violence to the passage, or designing to make a forced translation, they have allowed their feelings to give a complexion to their language which the original does not necessarily convey Hence, the word *' Redeemer," ]8 which is now used technically to denote the Messiah, is employed, though the original may, and commonly doi^^ have a much more general signification; and hence, the phrase " at the latter day," also a technical phrase, occurs, though the original means no more than afterwards, or after this, and hence, they have employed the phrase "in my flesh," though the original means no more than ' though my flesh be all wasted away.' The following I believe to express fairly the meaning of the Hebrew; ' I knovv that my deliverer, or avenger, lives, and that he will yet appear in some public manner on the earth; and though after the destruction of my skin, the process of corruption shall go on till all my flesh shall be destroyed, yet when my flesh is entirely wasted away, I shall see God; I shall have the happiness of seeing him for myself, and beholding him with my own eyes, even though my very vitals shall be consumed. He will come and vindicate me and my cause. I have such confidence in his justice, that I do not doubt that he will yet show himself to be the friend of him who puts his trust in him.'

(2.) It is inconsistent with the argument, and the whole scope and connection of the book, to suppose that this refers to the Messiah and to the resurrection of the body after death. The book of Job is strictly an argument — a train of clear, consecutive reasoning. It discusses a great inquiry about the doctrines of divine Providence and the divine dealings with men. The three friends of Job maintained that God deals with men strictly according to their character in this life — that eminent wickedness is attended with eminent suffering; and that when men experience any great calamity, it is proof of eminent wickedness. All this they meant to apply to Job, and all this Job denied. Yet he was perplexed and confounded. He did not know what to do with the facts in the case; but still he felt embarrassed. All that he could say was, that God would yet come forth, and show himself to be the friend of those who ioved him, aiid that though they suffered now, yet he had confidence that he would appear for their relief. Now, had they possessed the knowledge of tlie doctrine of the resurrection of the dead, it would have ended the whole debate. It would not only have met all the difficulties of Job, but we should have found him perpetually recurring to it — placing it in every variety of form — appealing to it as relieving his embarrassments, and a.3 j demanding an answer from his friends.! But, on the supposition that this re- j fers to the resurrection, it is remark- j able that the passage here stands | alone. Job never adverted to it before, but allowed himself to be great-, ly embarrassed for the want of just such an argument, and he never refers to it again. He goes on to argue again as if he believed no such doctrine. He does not ask his friends to notice this; he expresses no surprise that they should pass by in entire neglect an argument which must have been seen to be decisive of the controversy. It is equally unaccountable that his friends should not have noticed it. If the doctrine of the resurrection was true, it settled the case. It rendered all their arguments worthless, and would have met the case just as we meet similar cases now. It was incumbent on them to show that there was no evidence of the truth of any such doctrine as the resurrection, and that this could not be urged to meet their arguments. Yet they never allude to so important and unanswerable an argument, and evidently did not suppose that Job referred to any such event. It is equally remarkable that neither Elihu nor God himself, in the close of the book, make any such allusion, or refer to the doctrine of the resurrection at all, as meeting the difficulties of the case. In the argument with which the Almighty is represented as closing the book, the whole thing is resolved into a matter o^ sovereignty, and men are required to submit because God is great, and is inscrutable in hi.s ways — not because the dead will be raised, and the inequalities of the present life will be recompensed in a future state. The doctrine of a resurrection — a great and glorious doctrine, such as, if once suggested, could not have escaped the profound attention of these snge^ — would have solved the whole difficulty; and yet, confessedly, it is uever alluded to by them — never introduced— never examined — never admitted or rejected — never becomes a matter of inquiry, and is never referred to by God himself as settling the matter — never occurs in the book in any form, unless it be in this. This is wholly unaccountable on the supposition that this refers to the resurrection.

(3) The interpretation which refers this to the resurrection of the dead, is inconsistent with numerous passages where Job expresses a contrary belief. Of this nature are the following: ch. vii. 1), "As the cloud is consumed, and vanisheth away, so he that goeth down to the grave shall come up no more:" vii. 21, "I shall sleep in the dust — thou shalt seek me in the morning, but I shall not be." See ch. x. 21, 22, " I go whence I shall not return — to the land of darkness, and the shadow of death; a land of darkness as darkness itself" Ch. xiv. throughout, particularly vs. 7, 9, 11, 12, " For there is hope of a tree, if it be cut down, that it will sprout again, and that the tender branch thereof will not cease. But man dieth, and wasteth away; yea, man giveth up the ghost, and where is he ^ As the waters fail from the sea, and the flood decayeth and drieth up, so man lieth down and riseth not — till the heavens be no more, they shall not awake, nor be raised out of their sleep." Ch. xvi. 22, "When a few years are come, then I shall go the way whence I shall not return.' These passages all imply that when he should die, he would not appear again on the earth. This is not such language as one would use who believed in the resurrection of the dead.

It is true, that in the discourses of Job, various and sometimes apparently contradictory feelings are expressed. He was a severe suflerer; and under strong conflicting emotions he sometimes expressed himself in a manner vvliich he at other times regrets, and gives vent to feelings which, on mature reflection, he confesses to have been wrong. But liow \s\t possible to believe that a man, in his circumstances, would ever deny the doctrine of the resurrection if he held it? How could he forget it.'' How could he throw out a remark that seemed to imply a doubt of it.'' If he Jiad known of this, it would have been a sheet-anchor to his soul in all the storms of adversity — an unanswerable argument to all that his friends advanced — a topic of consolation which he could never have lost sight of, much less denied. He would have clung to that hope as the refuge of iiis soul, and not for one moment would he have denied it, or expressed a doubt of its truth.

(4.) I may urge as a distinct argument what has before been hinted at, that this is not referred to as a topic of consolation by either of the friends of Job, by Elihu, or by God himself. Had it been a doctrine of those times, his friends would have understood it, and it would have reversed all tiieir theology. Had it been understood by Eliliu, he would have urged it as a reason for resignation in affliction. Had God designed that it should be known in that age, no more favorable opportunity could be conceived for the purpose than at the end of the arguments in this book. What a flood of light would it have lluown on tlie design of afflictions! How eflectually would it have rebuked the arguments of the friends of •lob! And liow clear is it, therefore, that God did not intendilmt it should then be revealed to man, but meant that it should be reserved for a more advanced state of the world, and particularly that it should be reserved as the grand doctrine of the Christian revelation.

(5.) A fiflA consiJeration is, that on the supposition that it refers to the resurrection, it would be inconsistent with the views which prevailed in the age when Job is supposed to have lived. It is wholly in advance of that age. It makes little diflerence in regard to this whether we suppose him to have lived in the time of Abraham, Jacob, or Moses, or even at a later period — such a supposition would be equally at variance with the revelations which had then been given. The clear doctrine of the resurrection of the dead, is one of the peculiar doctrines of Christianity — one of the last truths of revelation, and is one of the glorious truths which seem to have been reserved for the Redeemer himself to make known to man. There are, indeed, obscure traces of it in the Old Testament. Occasionally we meet with a hint on the subject that was sufficient to excite the hopes of the ancient saints, and to lead them to suppose that more glorious truths were in reserve to be communicated by the Messiah. But those hints occur at distant intervals; are obscure in their character, and perhaps if all in the Old Testament were collected, they would not be suflicient to convey any very intelligible view of the resurrection of the dead. But on the supposition that the passage before us refers to that doctrine, we have here one of the most clear and full revelations on the subject, laid far back in the early ages of the world, originating in Arabia, and entirely in advance of the prevailing views of the age, and of all that had been comnumic"ated by the Spirit of inspiration to the generations then living. It is admitted, indeed, that it was possible for the Holy Spirit to communicate that truth in its fulness and completeness to an Arabian sage; but it is not the way in which revelation, in other re spects, has been imparted. It has been done gradiialhj. Obscure intima tions are given at first — they are increased from time to time — the lighbecomes clearer, till some prophet discloses the whole truth, and the doctrine stands complete before us. Such a course we should expect to find in regard to the doctrine of the resurrection, and such is exactly the course pursued, unless this passage teaches what was in fact the highest revelation made by the Messiah.

(6.) All which the words and phrases fairly convey, and all which the argument demands, is fully met by the supposition that it refers to some such event as is recorded in the close of the book. God appeared in a manner corresponding to the meaning of the words here upon the earth. He came as the Vindicator, the Redeemer, the Go67, of Job. He vindicated his cause, rebuked his friends, expressed his approbation of the sentiments of Job, and blessed him again with returning prosperity and plenty. The disease of the patriarch may have advanced, as he supposed it would. His flesh may have wasted away, but his confidence in God was not misplaced, and he came forth as his vindicator and friend. It was a noble expression of faith on the part of Job; it showed that he had confidence in God, and that in the midst of his trials he truly relied on him; and it was a sentiment worthy to be engraved in the eternal rock, and to be "transmitted to future times. It was an invaluable lesson to sufferers, showing them that confidence could, and should be placed in God in the severest trials. So far as I can see, all that is fairly implied in the passage, when properly interpreted, is fully met by the events recorded in the close of the book. Such an interpretation meets the exigency of the case, accords with the strain of the argument and Vv^ith the result, and is the most simple and natural that has been proposed. These considerations are so weighty in my mind that they have conducted me to a conclusion, contrary I confess to what I had hoped to have reached, that this passage has no reference to the Messiah and the doctrine of the resurrection. We do not 7ieed it— for all the truths respecting the Messiah and the resurrection which we need, are fully revealed elsewhere; and though this is an exquisitely beautiful passage, and piety would love to retain the belief that it refers to the resurrection of the dead, yet truth is to be preferred to indulgence of the wishes and desires of the heart, however amiable or pious, and the desire to find certain doctrines in the Bible should yield to what we are constrained to believe the Spirit of inspiration actually taught. I confess that I have never been so pained at any conclusion to which I have come in the interpretation of the Bible, as in the case before us. I would like to have found a distinct prophecy of the Messiah in this ancient and venerable book. I would like to have found the faith of this eminent saint sustained by such a faith in his future advent and incarnation. I would like to have found evidence that this expectation had become incorporated in the piety of the early nations, and was found in Arabia. I would like to have found traces of the early belief of the doctrine of the resurrection of the dead sustaining the souls of the patriarchs then, as it does ours now, in trial. But I cannot. Yet I can regard it as a most beautiful and triumphant expression of confidence in God, and as wholly worthy to be engraved, as Job desired it might be, in the solid rock for ever, that the passing traveller might see and read it; or as worthy of that more permanent record which it has received by being <■'■ printed in a book" — by an art unknown then, and sent down to the end of the world to be read and admired in all gonerations.

The opinion which has now been expressed, it is not necessary to say, has been held by a large number of the most distinguished critics. Grotius says that the Jews never applied it to the Messiah and the resurrection. The same opinion is held by Grotius himself, by Warburton, RosenmOller, Le Clerc, Patrick, Kennicott, Dalthe,

28 But ye should say, Why persecute we him? ' seeing the root of the matter is found in me.

1 or, and what root of matter is found in me.

and Jahn. Calvin seems to be doubtful— sometimes giving it an interpretation similar to tliat suggested above, and then pursuing his remarks as if it referred to the Messiah. Most of the fathers, and a large portion of modern critics, it is to be admitted, suppose that it refers to the Messiah, and to the future resurrection.

28. But ye should say. Noyes renders this, " Since ye say, ' How may we persecute him, and find grounds of accusation against him?' " Dr. Good,

Then sliall ye say, " How did wg persecute liim.?'"' Wlien the root of the matter is disclosed in

The Vulgate, " Why now do ye say, let us persecute him, and find ground of accusation — radkcmverhi — against

'' The LXX, " If you also say.

What shall we say against him? and what ground of accusation — oCQav Ao^'ni'— shall we find in him.?" Rosenmuller renders it, " When you say, let us persecute him, and see what ground of accusation we can find in him, then fear the sword." Most critics concur in such an interpretation as implies that they had sought a ground of accusation against him, and that they would have occasion to fear the divine displeasure on account of it. It seems to mc, however, that our translators have given substantially the fair sense of the Hebrew. A slight variation would, perhaps, better express the idea: ' For you will yet say, Why did we persecute him.'' The root of the matter was found in him — and since this will be the case, fear now that justice will overtake you for it, for vengeance will not always slumber when a friend of God is wronged.' IT Seeing the root of the matter. Marg. and what root of matter is found in me.

29 Be ye afraid of the sword t for wrath hringcth the punishments of the sword, that " ye may know there is a judgment.

means, properly, xcord or thing — and may refer to any thing. Here it is used in one of the two opposite senses, piety or guilt — as being ihe thing under consideration. The interpretation to be adopted must depend on the view taken of the other words of the sentence. To me it seems that it denotes piety, and that the idea is, that the root of true piety was in him, or that he was not a hypocrite. The word root is so common as to need no explanation. It is used sometimes to denote the bottom., or the lowest part of any thing — as e. g. the foot (see ch xiii. 27, margin), i\iG bottom of the mountains (Job xxviii. 9), or of the sea. Job xxxvi. 30, margin. Here it means the foundation, support, or source — as the root is of a tree; and the sense, I suppose, is, that he was not a dead trunk, but he was like a tree that had a root, and consequently support and life. Many critics, however, among whom is Gcsenius, suppose that it means that the root of the controversy, that is, the ground of strife, was in him., or that he was the cause of the whole dispute.

29. Be ye afraid of the sword. Of the sword of justice, of the wrath of God. In taking such views, and using such language, you ought 40 dread the vengeance of God, for he will punish the guilty. IF For tcrath bringeth the punishments of the sioord. The word ' bringeth'' is supplied by the translators, and as it seems to me improperly. The idea is, that wrath or anger, such as they had manifested, was proper for punishment; that such maHce as they had shown was a crime that God would not suff'er to escape unpunished. They had, therefore, every thing to dread. Literally it is, ' for wrath the iniquities of the sword 3' that is, wrath is a crime for the sword. IT That ye may know that there is a judgment. That there is justice; that God punishes injuries done to the character, and tliat he will come forth to vindicate his friends. Probably Job anticipated that when God should come forth to vindicate him^ he would inflict exemplary punishment on them; and that this would be not only by words, but by some heavy judgment, such as he had himself experienced. The vindication of the just is commonly attended with the punishment of the unjust; the salvation of the friends of God is connected with the destruction of his foes. Job seems to have anticipated this in the case of himself and his friends; it will certainly occur in the great day when the affairs of this world shall be wound up in the decisions of the final judgment. See Matth.xxv.

ZopHAF, the third of the friends of Job, replies. He is not moved to compassion by the tender appeals of Job in the previous chapter, but seems rather provoked and urged on by the Bolemn warning with which Job concluded his discourse. He begins (vs. 1-3) by stating the reasons which induced him to reply at all, the principal of which was, the injurious reproach and threat with which Job had concluded his speech, and then proceeds with the main topic of the argument, that calamity must be, and always had been, the lot of the wicked, vs. 4-29. He says, that it had been the settled course of events from the beginning of the world that the triumphing of the wicked would be short, and then proceeds to show this by striking images and examples. The point of his remarks is, that it was no matter liow high a wicked man was exalted, he would be suddenly brought low; no matter what comforts he drew around him, they would be suddenly stripped away; no matter how much he obtained by oppression and fraud, he would not be permitted to enjoy it; and no matter how much he endeavored to conceal his guilt, the heavens would reveal it, and would show his true character to the world. All this he doubtless intended should be applied to Job, and the application was so obvious to the circumstances of the case, that it could not fail to be made, 'i'he speech is remarkable for severity, and remarkable because it does not notice the solemn profession of confidence in God which Job had made in the previous chapter, (vs. 25-27,) further than that it is implied all along in this speech that his belief was, that the wicked, once cast down, would not be restored. Had the solenm profession of Job there referred to the Messiah and the resurrection, it is hardly conceivable that it should not have been noticed in this reply. It is, indeed, remarkable, on any supposition, that he did not refer to it, or that even Job did not refer to it again.

n^HEN answered Zophar the -*- Naamathite, and said, 2 Therefore do my thoughts

2. Therefore. ",2^. In view of what has been just said. Or perhaps the word means merely certainly^ truly. IT Do m.y thoughts cause m,e to anstcer. This is variously rendered. The Vulgate renders it, Idcirco cogitationes meaj variaj saccodunt sibi, et mens in diversa rapitur — " There-

cause me to answer, and for this ' I make haste.

fore my various thoughts follow on in succession, and the mind is distracted." The LXX, " I did not suppose that thou wouldst speak against these things, and you do not understand more than I." How this was ever made from the Hebrew it is impossible to say. On the word

3 I have heard the check of my reproach, and the spirit of my understanding causeth me to answer.

thoughts^ see Notes on ch. iv. 13. The word denotes thoughts which divide and distract the mind; not calm and collected reflections, but those which disturb, disconcert, and trouble. He acknowledges that it was not calm reflection which induced him to reply, but the agitating emotions produced by the speech of Job. The word rendered ' cause me to answer' p3!in'iT2:'i) means 'cause me to return' — and Jerome understood it as meaning that his thoughts returned upon him in quick and troublesome succession, and says in his Commentary on Job, that the meaning is, " I am troubled and agitated because you say that you sustain these evils from God without cause, when nothing evil ought to be suspected of God." If And^for this I make haste. Marg. my haste is in me. The meaning is, ' the impetuosity of my feelings urges me on. I reply on account of the agitation of my soul, which will admit of no delay.' His heart was full, and he hastened to give vent to his feelings in impassioned and earnest language.

3. I have heard the check of my reproach. I have heard your violent and severe language reproaching us. Probably he refers to what Job had said in the close of his speech (ch. xix. 29), that they had occasion to dread the wrath of God, and that they might anticipate heavy judgments as the result of their opinions. Or it may be, as Schultens supposes, that he refers to what Job said in ch. xix. 2, and the rebuke that he had administered there. Or possibly, and still more probably, I think, he may refer to what Job had said in reply to the former speech of Zophar (ch. xii. 2), where he tauntingly says that

5 That the triumphing of the wicked is short, ^ and the joy of the hypocrite but for a " moment?

" they were the people, and that wisdom would die with them." The Hebrew literally is, ' the correction of my shame' C^P^^ '^^^^), that is, the castigation or rebuke which tends to cover me with ignominy. The sense is, ' you have accused me of that which is ignominious and shameful, and under the impetuous feelings caused by such a charge, I cannot refrain from replying.' TI And the spirit of my understanding. Meaning, perhaps, ' the emotion of his mind.' The word mind or soul would better express the idea than the word understanding; and the word sjnrit here seems to be used in the sense of violent or agitating emotions — perhaps in allusion to the primary signification of the word (D^"^) wind.

4. Knowest thou not this of old. That is, dost thou not know that this has always happened from the beginning of the world, or that this is the invariable course of events. His purpose is to show that it was the settled arrangement of Providence that the wicked would be overtaken with signal calamity. It was so settled that Job ought not to be surprised that it had occurred in his case. Zophar goes OS to show that though a wicked man might rise high in honor, and obtain great wealth, yet that the fall would certainly come, and he would sink to a depth of degradation corresponding to the former prosperity. IT Since man teas placed upon earth. Since the creation; that is, it has always been so.

5. That the triumphing. The word 'triumphing' here ('^5'") means shouting, rejoicing — such a shouting as men make after a victory, or such as occurred at the close of harvesting. Here it means that the occasion which the wicked had for rejoicing would be brief. It would be but for a moment, and he then would be overwhelmed with calamity or cut off by death. TT Short. Marg. as in Heb. fromnear. That is, it would be soon over. TI Jlnd the joy of the hypocrite but for a moment? This probably means, as used by Zopliar, that the happiness of a hypocrite would be brief — referring to the happiness arising from the possession of health, life, property, friends, reputation. Soon God would take away all these, and leave him to sorrow. This, he said, was the regular course of events a.=? they l»ad been observed from the earliest times. But the language conveys most important truths in reference to the spiritual joys of the hypocrite at all times, though it is not certain that Zophar used it in this sense. The truths are these. (1.) There is a kind of joy which a hypocrite may have — the counterfeit of that which a true Christian possesses. The word hypocrite may be used in a large sense to denote the man who is a professor of religion, but who has none, as well as him who intentionally imposes on others, and who makes pretensions to piety which he knows he has not. Such a man may have joy. He supposes that his sins are forgiven, and that he has a well-founded hope of eternal life. He may have been greatly distressed in view of his sin and danger, and when he supposes that his heart is changed, and that the danger is passed, from the nature of the case lie will have a species of enjoyment. A man is confined in a dungeon under sentence of death. A forged instrument of pardon is brought to him. He does not know that it is forged, and supposes the danger is past, and his joy will be as real as though the pardon were genuine. So with the man who supposes that his sins are forgiven. (2.) The joy of the selfdeceiver or the hypocrite will be

mount up to the heavens, and his head reach unto the ^ clouds;

short. There is no genuine religion to sustain it, and it soon dies away. It may be at first very elevated, just as the joy of the man who supposed that he was pardoned would fill him with exultation. But in the case of the hypocrite it soon dies away. He has no true lOve to God; he has never been truly reconciled to him; he has no real faith in Christ; he has no sincere love of prayer, of the Bible, or of Christians; and soon the temporary excitement dies away, and he lives without comfort or peace. He may be a professor of religion, but with him it is a matter of form, and he has neither love nor zeal in the cause of his professed Master. Motives of pride, or the desire of a reputation for piety, or some other selfish aim, may keep him in the church, and he lives to shed blighting on all around him. Or if, under the illusion, he should be enabled to keep up some emotions of happinesa in his bosom, they must soon cease, for to the hypocrite death will soon end it ail. How much does it become us, therefore, to inquire whether the peace which we seek and which we may possess in religion, is the genuine happiness which results from true reconciliation to God and a well-founded hope of salvation. Sad will be the disappointment of him who has cherished a hope of heaven through life, should he at last sink down to hell! Deep the condemnation of him who has professed to be a friend of God, and who has been at heart his bitter foe; who has endeavored to keep up the forms of religion, but who has been a stranger through life to the true peace which religion produces!

6. Though his excellency mount up to the heavens. Though he attain to the highest pitch of honor and prosperity. The LXX render this, " Though his gifts should go up to heaven, and his sacrifice should touch the clouds;" a sentence conveying a

7 Yet he shall perish for ever, like ■" his own dung: they which have seen him shall say, Where is he '?

8 He shall fly away as a dream, * and shall not be found; yea, he shall be chased away as a vision of the night.

true and a beautiful idea, but which is not a translation of the Hebrew. The phrases, to go up to heaven, and to touch the clouds, often occur to denote any thing that is greatly exalted, or that is very high. Thus in Virgil,

Attingit solium Jovis. Comp. Gen. xi. 4, "Let us build us a tower whose top may reach unto heaven." In Homer the expression not unfrequently occurs, toi' yao y.lf'ni; nvoarov i'y.ei. In Seneca (Thyest. Act. V. vs. 1, 2, 4,) similar expressions occur:

-(Equalis astris gradior, et cunctos super Altum supcrbo vertice attingens polum, Dimitto superos: summa votorum attigi.

The language of Zophar would also well express the condition of many a hypocrite whose piety seems to be of the most exalted character, and who appears to have made most eminent attainments in religion. Such a man may seem to be a man of uncommon excellence. He may attract attention as having extraordinary sanctity. He may seem to have a remarkable spirit of prayer, and yet nil may be false and hollow. Men who design to be hypocrites, aim usually to be eminent liypocrites; they who have true piety often, alas, aim at a much lower standard. A hypocrite cannot keep himself in countenance, or accomplish his purpose of imposing on the world, without the appearance of extraordinary devotedness to God; many a sincere believer is satisfied with much less of

9 The eye also which saw him shall see him no more; neither shall his place any more behold him.

10 His ' children shall seek to please the poor, and his hands shall restore their " goods.

the appearance of religion. He is sincere and honest. He is conscious of true piety, and he attempts to impose on none. At the same time he makes no attempt scarcely to be what the hypocrite wishes to appear to be; and hence the man that shall appear to be the most eminently devoted to God maij be a hypocrite — yet usually not long. His zeal dies away, or he is suffered to fall into open sin, and to show that he had no true religion at heart.

8. He shall jly away as a dream. As a dream wholly disappears or vanishes. This comparison of man with a dream is not uncommon, and is most impressive. See Psalm Ixxiii. 20. Notes on Isa. xxix. 7, 8. ^ ^s a vision of the night. As when one in a dream seems to see objects which vanish when he awakes. The parallelism requires us to understand this of what appears in a dream, and not of a spectre. In our dreams we seem to see objects, and when we awake they vanish.

9. The eye also which saw him. This is almost exactly the language which Job uses respecting himself. See ch. vii. 8, 10, and the Notes on those verses.

10. His children shall seek to please the poor. Marg. or, the poor shall oppress his children. The idea in the Hebrew seems to be, that his sons shall be reduced to the humiliating condition of asking the aid of the most needy and abject. Instead of being in a situation to assist others, and to indulge in a liberal hospitality, they themselves shall be reduced to the necessity of applying to the poor for the means of subsistence. There

11 His bones are full of the sin " of his youth, which shall 'ie down with him in the dust.

IS great strength in this expression. It is usually regarded as humiliating to be compelled to ask aid at all; but the idea here is, that they would be reduced to the necessity of asking it of those who themselves needed it, or 7could be beggars of beggars. IF J3nd his hands shall restore their goods. Noyes renders this, " And their hands shall give back his wealth." Rosenmiiller supposes it means, " And their hands shall restore his iniquity;" that is, what their father took unjustly away. There can be but little doubt that this refers to his sons, and not to himself — though the singular suffix in the word ('^''^t) ' his hands' is used. But the singular is sometimes used instead of the plural. The word rendered ^ gojods' (""iK) means strength, poicer, and then icealth; and the idea here is, that the hands of his sons would be compelled to give back the property which the father had unjustly acquired. Instead of retaining and enjoying it, they would be compelled to make restitution, and thus be reduced to penury and want.

11. His bones are full of the sin of his youth. The words " of the sin" in our common translation are supplied by the translators. Gesenius and Noyes suppose that the Hebrew means, " His bones are full of youth;" that is, full of vigor and strength, and the idea according to this would be, that he would be cut off in the fulness of his strength. Dr. Good renders it forcibly, " His secret lusts shall follow his bones,

Yea, they shall press upon him in the dust." The Vulgate renders it, " His bones are full of the sins of his youth." The LXX, " His bones are full of his youth." The Chaldee Paraphrase, " His bones are full of his strength." The Hebrew literally is, " His bones are full of his secret things" (Ta^i^iyj

sweet '' in his mouth, though he hide it under his tongue;

— referring, as I suppose, to tho secret, long-cherished faults of his life; the corrupt propensities and desires of his soul which had been seated in his very nature, and which would adhere to him, leaving a withering influence on his whole system in advancing years. The effect is that which is so often seen, when vices corrupt the very phj-sica'l frame, and where the results are seen long in future life. The eff'ect would be seen in the diseases which they engendered in his system, and in the certainty with which they would bring him down to the grave. The

Syriac renders it, |.*k3.>o — marrow^ as if the idea were that he would die full of vigor and strength. But the sense is rather that his secret lusts would work his certain ruin. 1[ Which shall lie down icith him. That is, the results of his secret sins shall lie down with him in the grave. He will never get rid of them. He has so long indulged in his sins; they have so thoroughly pervaded his nature, and he so delights to cherish them, that they will attend him to the tomb. There is truth in this representation. Wicked men often indulge in secret sin so long that it seems to pervade the whole system. Nothing will remove it; and it lives and acts until the body is committed to the dust, and the soul sinks ruined into hell.

12. Though, loichedness be siDeet in his mouth. Though he has pleasure in committing it, as he has in pleasant food. The sense of this and the following verses is, that though a man may have pleasure in indulgence in sin, and may find happiness of a certain kind in it, yet that the conse- (juences will be bitter — as if the food which he ate should become like gall, and he should cast it up with loathing. There are many sins which,

13 Though he spare it, and forsake it not, but keep it still ' within his mouth;

14 Yet his meat in his bowels is turned, it is the gall of asps

from tJi3 laws of our nature, are attended with a kind of pleasure. Such, for illustration, are the sins of gluttony and of intemperance in drinking; the sins of ambition and vanity; the sins of amusement and of fashionable life. To such we give the name of pleasures. We do not speak of them as happiness. That is a word which would not express their nature. It denotes rather substantial, solid, permanent joy — such joy as the ' pleasures of sin for a season' do not furnish. It is this temporary pleasure which the lovers of vanity, fnshiou and dress, seek, and which, it cannot be denied, they often find. As long ago as the time of Zophar, it was admitted that such pleasure might be found in some forms of sinful indulgence, and yet even in his time that was seen, which all subsequent observation has proved true, that such indulgence must lead to bitter results. II Though he hide it under his tongue. It is from this passage, probably, that we have derived the phrase, ' to roll sin as a sweet morsel under the tongue,' which is often quoted as if it were a part of Scripture. The meaning here is, that a man would find pleasure in sin, and would seek to prolong it, as one does the pleasure of eating that which is grateful to the palate by holding it long in the mouth, or by placing it under the tongue.

13. Though he spare it. That is, though he retains it long in his mouth, that he may enjoy it the more. *^ And.

forsake it not. Retains it as long as he can. 1i But keep it still within his mouth. Marg. as in Heb. in the viidst of his palate. He seeks to enjoy it as long as possible.

15 He hath swallowed down riches, and he shall vomit them up again: God shall cast them out of his belly.

as if he had taken food which was exceedingly pleasant, and had retained it in his mouth as long as possible, that he might enjoy it, but when he swallowed it, it became bitter and offensive. Comp. Rev. x. 9, 10. Sin may be pleasant when it is committed, but its consequences will be bitter. 11 It is the gall of asps. On the meaning of the word here rendered asps ("lO?.), see Notes on Isa. xi. 8. There can be little doubt that the asp, or aspic, of antiquity, which was so celebrated, is here intended. The bite was deadly, and was regarded as incurable. The sight became immediately dim after the bite — a swelling took place, and pain was felt in the stomach, followed by stupor, convulsions, and death. It is probably the same as the hoetan of the Arabians. It is about a foot in length, and two inches in circumference — its color being black and white. Pict. Bib. The word gall (p^i^^)> means bitterness, acridness (compare Job xiii. 26); and hence bile or gall. It is not improbable that it was formerly supposed that the poison of the serpent was contained in the gall, though it is now ascertained that it is found in a small sack in the mouth. It is here used as synonymous with the poison of asps — supposed to be bitter and deadly. The meaning is, that sin, however pleasant and grateful it may be when committed, will be as destructive to the soul as food would be to the body, which, as soon as it was swallowed, became the most deadly poison. This is a fair account still of the effects of sin.

15. He hath swalloiced dozen riches He has glutted down riches— or gormandized them — or devoured them greedily The Hebrew word S'PS,

16 He shall suck the poison ° of asps: the viper's tongue shall slay him.

means to absorb, to devour with the idea of greediness. It is descriptive of the voracity of a wild beast, and means here that he had devoured tliem eagerly, or voraciously. IT Jlnd he shall vomit. As an epicure does that which he has drunk or swallowed with delight. JVoyes. The idea is, that he shall lose that which he lias acquired, and that it will be attended with loathing. All this is to a great extent true still, and may be applied to those who aim to accumulate wealth, and to lay up ill-gotten gold. It will be ruinous to their peace; and the time will come when it will be looked on with inexpressible loathing. Zophar meant, undoubtedly, to apply this to Job, and to infer, that since it was a settled maxim that such would be the result of the ill-gotten gain of a wicked man, where a result like this had happened, that there must have been wickedness. How cuttingand severe tliis must have been to Job can be easily conceived. The LXX renders this, " Out of his house let an angel drag him."

16. He shall suck the poison of asps. That which he swallowed as pleasant nutriment, shall become the most deadly poison; or the consequence shall be as if he had sucked the poison of asps. It would seem that the ancients regarded the poison of the serj)ent as deadly, however it was taken into the system. They seem not to iiave been aware that the poison of a wound may be sucked out without injury to him who does it; and that it is necessary that the poison should mingle with the blood to be fatal. *[ The viper's tongue shall slaij him. The early impression probably was, that the injury done by a serpent was by the fiery, forked, and brandished tongue, which was supposed to be sharp and penetrating. It is now

17 He shall not see the rivers, the floods, ' the brooks of honey and butter.

known, that the injury is done by the poison ejected through a groove, or orifice in one of the teeth, which is so made as to lie flat on the roof of the mouth, except when the serpent bites, when that tooth is elevated, and penetrates the flesh. The word viper here ("^^.S!!*), is probably the same speciesof serpent that is known among the Arabs by the same name still — El Effah. See Notes on Isa. XXX. 6. It is the most common and venomous of the serpent tribe in Northern Africa and in South-western Asia. It is remarkable for its quick and penetrating poison. It is about two feet long, as thick as a man's arm, beautifully spotted with yellow and brown, and sprinkled over with blackish specks. They have a large mouth, by which they inhale a large quantity of air, and when inflated therewith, they eject it with such force as to be heard a considerable distance. Jackson. Capt. Riley, in his '' Authentic Narrative,'' (New York, 1817,) confirms this account. He describes the viper as the "most beautiful object in nature," and says that the poison is so virulent as to cause death in fifteen minutes.

17. He shall not see the rivers. That is, he shall not be permitted to enjoy plenty and prosperity. Rivers or rills of honey and butter are emblems of prosperity. Comp. Ex. iii. 17. Job xxix. 6. A land flowing with milk, honey, and butter, is, in the Scripture, the highest image of prosperity and happiness. The word rendered " rivers" (HiiiPQ), means rather rivulets^ small streams — or brooks, such aa were made by dividing o. large stream (from ^53 — to cleave., divide)., and would properly be applied to canals made by separating a large stream, or dividing it into numerous water

18 That which he laboured for shall he restore, and shall not swallow it down ■ accordinor to

courses for the purpose of irrigating lands. The words rendered floods, and in the margin, streaming brooks (*ibn3 '^'^na), means " the rivers of the valley," or such as flow through a valley when it is swelled hy the melting of snow, or by torrents of rain. A flood, a rapid, swollen, full stream, would express the idea. These were ideas of beauty and fertility among the Orientals; and where butter and honey were represented as flowing in this manner in a land, it was the highest conception of plenty. The word rendered honey i'OZ'^) may, and commonly does, mean honey; but it also means the juice of the grape, boiled down to about the consistency of molasses, and used as an article of food. The Arabs make much use of this kind of food now, and in Syria, nearly two-thirds of the grapes are employed in preparing this article of food. It is called by the Arabs Dibs, which is the same as the Hebrew word used here. May not the word mean this in some of the places where it is rendered honey in the Scriptures.'' The word rendered butter ('^i$''?n) probably means, usually, curdled milk. See Notes on Isa. vii. 15. It is not certain that the word is ever used in the Old Testament to denote butter. The article which is used still by the Arabs is chiefly curdled milk, and probably this is referred to here. It will illustrate this passage to remark, tiiat the inhabitants of Arabia, and of those who live in similar countries, have no idea of butter, as it exists among us, in a solid state. What they call butter, is in a fluid state, and is iience compared with flowing streams. An abundance of these articles was regarded as a high proof of prosperity, as they constitute a considerable partof the diet of Orientals.

^ his substance shall the restitution be, and he shall not rejoice therein.

Tile same image, to denote plenty, is often used by the sacred writers, and by classic poets. See Isa. vii 22:

Tliat a man shall keep alive a youn^ cow and two sheep, And it shall ho that from the plenty of milk which they shall give, he shall eat butter. For butter and honey shall every one eat, Who is left alone in the midst of the land.

See also in Joel iii. 18: And it shall come to pass in that day, The mountains shall drop down new wine And the hills shall flow with milk, And all the rivers of Judah shall flow with water.

Fiumina jam lactis, jam fluminanectaris ibunt

Mclla cava manant ex illicc; montibus altis Levis crepante lympha desilit pede. Fiom oaks pure honey flows, fioni lofty hills Bound in light dance the murmuring rills.

18. That which he labored for shall he restore. This means that he shall give back the profit of his labor. He shall not be permitted to enjoy it or to consume it. U And shall not sicalloicit dozen. Shall not enjoy it; shall not eat it. He shall be obliged to give it to others. IT According to his substance shall the restitution be. Literally, according to Gesenius, " As a possession to be restored in which one rejoices not." The sense is, that all that he has is like properly which a man lias, which he feels not to be his own, but which belongs to another, and which is soon to be given zq). In such property a man does not find that pleasure which he does in that which he feels to be his own. He cannot dispose of it, and he cannot look on it and feel that it is his. So Zophar says it is with the wicked man. He can look on Jiis property only as that which lie will

19 Because he hath ^ oppressed and hath forsaken the poor; because he hath violently taken away an house which he builded not;

20 Surely he shall not * feel

soon be compelled to part with, and not having any security for retaining it, he cannot rejoice in it as if it were his own. Dr. Lee, however, renders this, " As his wealth is, so shall his restitution be; and he shall not rejoice." But the interpretation proposed above, seems to me to accord best with the sense of the Hebrew.

10. Because he hath oppressed. Marg. crushed. Such is the Hebrew. II.^nd forsaken the poor. He has plundered them, and then forsaken them — as robbers do. The meaning is, tliat he had done this by his oppressive manner of dealing, and then left them to suffer and pine in want. IT He hath rinlcntly taken away an house ichich he builded not. That is, by overreaching and harsh dealings he has come in possession of dwellings which he did not build, or purchase in any proper manner. It does not mean that he had done this by violence — for Zophar is not describing a robber, but he means that he took advantage of the wants of the poor and obtained their property. This is often done still. A rich man takes advantage of tlie wants of the poor, and obtains tlieir little farm or liouse for much less than it is worth. He takes a mortgage, and then forecloses it, and buys the property himself for much Ipss than its real value, and thus practises a species of the worst kind of robbery. Such a man, Zophar says, must expect punishment — and if there is any man who lias occasion to dread the wrath of heaven it is he.

20. Surely he shall not feel quietness. Marg. as in the Heb. knoic. The sense is, he shall not know peace or tranquillity. He shall be agitated and troubled. Wemyss, liowever,

quietness in his belly, he shall not save of that which he desired.

21 There shall ^ none of his meat be " left; therefore shall no man look for his goods.

renders this, " Because his appetite could not be satisfied." Noyes, " Because his avarice was insatiable." So Rosenmiiller explains it. So the Vulgate renders it, JVec est satiatus venter ejus. The LXX, " Neither is there safety to his property, nor shall he be saved by his desire." But it seems to me that the former is the sense, and that the idea is, that he should not know peace or tranquillity after he had obtained the things, which he had so anxiously sought. H In his belly. Within him; in his mind or heart. The viscera in general in the Scriptures are regarded as the seat of the aflections. We confine the idea now to the heart. IF He shall not save of that which he desired. Literally, he shall not escape with that which was an object of desire. He shall not be delivered from the evils which threaten him by obtaining that which he desired. All this shall be taken from him.

21. There shall none of his meat be left. Marg. ' or, be none left for his meat.'' Noyes renders it, " Because nothing escaped his greatness." Prof. Lee, " No surviver shall remain for his provision." But the meaning, probably, is, nothing shall remain of liis food, or it shall all be wasted, or dissipated. ^'Therefore shall vo man look for his goods. Or rather, his goods or his property shall net endure. But a great variety of interpretations has been given to the passage. The Hebrew word rendered ' shall look,' '^"^nf? i^ ^lom "^^n, which means to turn round, to twist, to whirl; and thence arises the notion of being firm, stable, or strong — as a rope that is twisted is strong. That is the idea here; and the sense is, that his property should not be secure

22 In the fulness of his sufficiency he shall be in straits: every hand of the wicked ' shall come upon him.

28 When he is about to fill his belly, God shall cast the fury

or firm; or that he should not prosper. Jerome renders it, "Nothing shall remain of his goods." The LXX, "Therefore his good things — dvTovTa d'/aO-d — shall not flourish" — df'dt'jnfi.

22. In the fulness of his svfficiencT/. When he seems to have an abundance. IT He shall he in straits. Either by the dread of calamity, or because calamity shall come suddenly' upon him, and his property shall be swept away. When every thing seemed to be abundant he should be reduced to want. IT Everij hand of the loicked shall come upon /t,m. Marg. ' or, tronblcsome.' The meaning is, that all that the wretched or miserable endure should come suddenly upon him. RosenmOller suggests, however, that it means that all the poor, and all who had been oppressed and robbed by him, would suddenly come upon him to recover their own property, and would scatter all that he had. The general meaning is clear, that he would be involved in inisery from every quarter, or on every liand.

2.3. When he is about to fdl his belly. Or rathei, 'there shall be enough to fill his belly.' But what kijid of food it should be, is indicated in the following part of the verse. God would fill him with the food of his displeasure. It is spoken sarcastically, as of a gormandizer, or a man who lived to enjoy eating, and the meaning is, that he should for once have enough. So Rosenmiiller interj)rets it. TT God shall cast the fury. This is the kind of food that he shall have. God shall fill him with the tokens of his wrath — and he shall have enough. TT A7id shall rain it upon him ichile he is eating. Noycs

of his wrath upon him, and shall rain it upon him while "■ he is eating.

24 He shall flee from the iron weapon, and the bow of steel shall strike him through.

renders this, " And rain it down upon him for his food." The meaning is, that God would pour down his wrath like a plentiful shower while he was in the act of eating. In the very midst of his enjoyments God would fill him Avith the tokens of his displeasure. There can be no doubt that Zophar designed that this should be understood to be applicable to Job. Indeed no one can fail to see that his remarks are made with consummate skill, and that they are such as would be fitted to cut deep., as they were doubtless intended to do. The speaker does not, indeed, make a direct application of them, but he so makes his selection of proverbs that there could be no difficulty in perceiving that they were designed to apply to him, who, from such a height of prosperity, had been so sudderily plunged into so deep calamity.

24. He shall flee from the iron weapon. The sword, or the spear. That is, he shall be exposed to attacks, and shall flee in cowardice and alarm. Bands of robbers shall come suddenly upon him, and he shall have no safety except in flight. Prof Lee explains this as meaning, " While he flees from the iron weapon, the brazen bow shall pierce him through." Probably the expression is proverbial, like that in Latin, Incidit in Scyllnm cupiens vitare Charybdin. 11 The bo20 of steel shall strike hi/m through. That is, the arroxo from the bow of steel shall strike him down. Bows and arrows were commonly used in hunting and in war. To a considerable extent they are still employed in Persia, though the use has been somewhat superseded by the gun. Boxes were made oi various materials. The first were, undoubtedly,

25 It is drawn, and cometh out of the body; yea, the glittering sword cometh out of his gall: terrors " are upon him.

of wood. They were inlaid with horn, or ivory, or were made in part of metal. Sometimes, it would seem that the whole bow was made of metal, though it is supposed that the metal bow was not in general use. The tccight, if nothing else, would be an objection to it. The word which is here rendered 5fec/ (HTZJ^n;), means properly hrass^ or cupper — but it is certain that brass or copper could never have been used to form the main part of the bow, as they are destitute of the elasticity which is necessary. Jerome renders it, et irruet in arcum aereum — he rushes on the brazen bow. So the LXX, ro^ov xd).y.etor. So the Chaldee, &<^'i3"J3^ ^^'^15 — the boio of brass. There is no certain proof that steel was then known — though iron is often mentioned. It is possible, however, that though the whole bow was not made of brass or copper, yet that such quantities of these metals were employed in constructing bows, that they might, without impropriety, be called bows of brass. The Oriental bow consists of three parts. The handle, or middle part — that on which the arrow rested — was straight, and might be made of wood, brass, copper, or any other strong substance. To this was affixed, at each end, pieces of horn, or of any other elastic substance, in this form, and to the ends of these horns the string was applied. The straight piece might have been of brass, and so without impropriety it might be called a brazen bow. It is not properly rendered steel at any rate, as the word here used is never employed to denote iron or steel.

26 All iarkness shall he hid in his secret places; a fire ^ not blown shall consume him; it shall go ill with him that is left in his tabernacle.

draws" — that is, he draws out the arrow that has been shot at him; or it may mean, as Prof. Lee supposes, that he draws, that is, some one draws the arrow from its quiver, or the sword from its sheath, in order to smite him. The object is to describe his death, and to show that he should be certainly overtaken with calamity. Zophar, therefore, goes through the process by which he would be shot down, or shows that he could not escape. H And cometh out of the body. That is, the arrow, or the glittering blade. It has penetrated the body, and passed through it. He shall be pierced through and through. IT The glittering sicord. Heb. p'H^ — the glittering; sci\. thing, or weapon, and is given to the sword, because it is kept bright. ^\ Cometh out of his gall. Supposed to be the seat of life. See Notes, ch. xvi. 13. IT Terrors are upon him. The terrors of death.

26. All darkness shall be hid in his secret places. The word darkness here, as is common, means evidently calamity. The phrase is hid, means is treasured up for him. The phrase in his secret places, may mean " for his treasures," or instead of the great treasures which he had laid up:or himself. The Apostle Paul has a similar expression, in which, perhaps, he makes an allusion to this place. Rom. ii. 5, " But, after thy hardness and impenitent heart, treasurest up unto thyself wrath, against the day of wrath." Treasures formerly were laid up in secret places, or places of darkness, that were regarded as inaccessible. See Notes on Isa. xlv. 3. IT Afire not blown. A fire uiikindled. Probably the meaning is, a fire that man has not kindled, or that is of heavenly origin. The language is such as would convey tiie idea of being consumed by lightning, and

27 The heaven shall reveal his iniquity; and the earth shall

probably Zophar intended to refer to such calamities as had come upon the family of Job, ch. i. 16. There is much tact in this speech of Zophar, and in the discourses of his friends on tliis point. They never, I believe, refer expressly to the calamities that had come upon Job and his family. They never in so many words say, that those calamities were proof of the wrath of heaven. But they go on to mention a great many similar cases in the abstract; to prove that the wicked would be destroyed in that manner; that when such calamities came upon men, it was proof that they were wicked, and they leave Job himself to make the application The allusion, as in this case, was too broad to be misunderstood, and Job was not slow in regarding it as intended for himself. Prof Lee (in loc.) supposes that there may be an allusion here to the " fire that shall not be quenched," or to the future punishment of the wicked. But this seems to me to he foreign to the design of the argument, and not to be suggested or demanded by the use of the word. The argument is not conducted on the supposition that men will be punished in the future world. That would at once have given a new phase to the whole controversy, and would have settled it at once. The question was about the dealings of God in this life, and whether men are punished according to their deeds here. Had there been a knowledge of the future world of rewards and punishments, the whole difficulty would have vanished at once, and the controversy would have been ended. 11 It shall go ill icith him in his tabernacle. Heb. '■^^^'C "^:]— «' It shall be ill with whatever survives or remains in his tent." That is, all that remains in his dwelling shall be destroyed. Prof. Lee renders it, "In his tent shall his survivor be broken" — supposing that the word 5-"!!!] is from

28 The increase of his house

r:^*l — to break. But it is more probably from 5?^"l — to be ivil; to suffer evil; to come off' ill; and the sense is, that evil, or calamity, would come upon all that should remain in his dwelling.

27. The heaven shall reveal his iniqtiity. The meaning here is, that the whole creation would conspire against such a man. Heaven and. earth would be arrayed against him. The course of events would be so ordered as to seem designed to bring his character out, and to show what he was. He would attempt to conceal his sin, but it would be in vain. He would hide it in his bosom, but it would be developed. He would put on the air of piety and innocence, but his secret sin would be known. This seems to be the general sense of the verse; and it is not necessary to attempt to show how it would be done — whether by lightning from heaven, as Koyes supposes, or whether by some direct manifestation from the skies. Probably the meaning is, that the divine dispensations towards such a man — the overwhelming calamities which he would experience, would show what he was. The word heaven is not unfrequently put for God himself Dan. iv. 23, " The heavens do rule." Luke xv. 21, "I have sinned against heaven." H The earth shall rise up against him. Calamities from the earth. The course of events here. Want of success — sterility of soil— blight and mildew, would rise up against such a man and show what he was. His real character would in some way be brought out, and it would be seen that he was a wicked man. Comp. Judges, v. 20.

They fought from heaven The stars in their tourses fought against Sisera. 28. Tlie increase of his house shall depart. Sept. " Destruction shall bring his house to an end." The word rendered ^^ depart" 0'^!'. —from!n^a), means, properly, shall go into

shall depart, and his goods shall flow away in the day of his wrath.

captivity. The sense is, that whatever he had laid up in his house would entirely disappear. IT His goods shall fiuto away. What he had gained would seem to flow away like water. ^ In the day of his lorath. The wrath of God — for so the connection demands.

20. This is the portion of a zoickcd man. This conclusion is similar to that which Bildad drew at the close of his speech, ch. xviii. 21. Zophar intended, undoubtedly, that Job should apply it to himself, and that he should draw the inference, that one who had been treated in this manner, must be a wicked man. IT Jlnd the heritage appointed. Marg. of his decree from. Tlie Hebrew is, "Of his word" (i-i^X)_that is, of his purpose. The idea is, that this is the divine rule, or arrangement, it is not a matter of chance. It is the result of appointment, and when men

20 This is the portion of a wicked man from God, and the heritage ' appointed unto him by God.

are afflicted in this manner, we are to conclude that God regards them as guilty. The whole object of the discussion was to arrive at the principles of the divine administration. Nothing is attributed to chance; and nothing is ascribed to second causes, except as indicating the will of God, It is assumed, that the course of events in the world was a sufficient exponent of the divine intention, and that when they understood how God treated a man, they could clearly understand how he regarded his character. The principle is a good one, when the whole of existence is taken into the account; the fault here was in taking in only a small part of existence— this short life — and hastening to the conclusion, that the character could be certainly determined by the manner in which God deals with men here.

In this chapter, Job takes up the subject which had been under discussion, and replies, not only to Zophar, but to Eliphaz and Bildad, who had maintained the same opinions. They liad asserted, and endeavored to prove at great length, that the wicked are punished in this life, and had inferred that when a man suflcrs much, it is full proof that he is eminently wicked. This point they had argued as the result of their own observation, and had maintained that it was the doctrine which had been settled by the course of events, and embodied in numerous proverbs. It was time to examine that position, and to see whether it was so, and Job enters on that task in this chapter. The chapter comprises the following points:

(1.) The exordium, in which he asks their patient attention to what he had to say, and says, that when he had spoken, they might mock on, vs. 1-3.

(2.) He says that his complaint is not to man, and that his condition was such as to excite commisetition, and should, at least, have led them to be silent, tad not to have overwhelmed him with reproaches, vs. 4-6.

(3.) He then enters on the greal question. He takes up the inquiry, whether it is a matter of fact that the wicked suffer in this life, and are overwhelmed with calamity, as his friends maintained. He defends the contrary opinion, and shows that so far was this from being a fact, that they were often eminently prosperous, and that their just doom must be in another state, vs. 7-34. This important argument comprises the following particulars, viz.— (a) He states a^ a/act that they are prosperous, vs. 7-15. They live to a great age; they are mighty; their houses are secure; tlaey are successful in business; they have instruments of joy in their dwellings; they and their families live in thoughtless mirth; they die without long-continued pain; and all this when « he effect of their whole lives has been to exclude God from their dwellings, and they have been saymg to him depart from us. (6) It might be said, that calamity came often upon the wicked, and th:\t their candle was suddenly put out, and that woes were laid up for their children (vs. 16-21)- but Job maintaias that this is no certain rule of judging. This happened not to them alone." Of two persons of the same character, one might be seen dying in the midst of comforts, hisbrea.=!tf full of milk, and his bones moistened with marrow, and another in the bitterness of his soul and ho\y could any certain inference be drawn respecting their character from the dispensations' of Providence towards them? How could it be certainly inferred that the man who suffered much was a wicked man, and that the other was a favorite of heaven? They lie down alike i.\ the dust, after the various dispensations in regard to them, and both come to the same end ill the grave, vs. •22~2'6. (c) Job seems to have supposed, from something in their manner, that his friends were not satisfied still, v. 27. They would ask. Where were the dwelling places of the mighty men of wickedness? What became of princes, and the great and proud oppressors? AVere they not cut off, and prematurely consigned to the grave.' To these questions, which they might be disposed to ask, Job states what he supposes to be the true doctrine in regafd to the wicked, and what would accord with all the facts, as far as we can observe them. This doctrine he professes to have learned from travellers, and says that it was the result of their careful inquiries on this important subject in foreign lands. He maintains, therefore (vs. 29-34) that the true doctrine was, the wicked were reserved for future destruction. Now, he maint lias, they were prospered. No one dares attack them to their face; no one punishes them. They live in prosperity, and they lie down peacefully in the grave, and the clods of the valley are as sweet to them as to other men. They are accompanied to the grave by multitudes • they drew numbers after them by their example; and in their death they are publicly bemoaned,' Their punishment must be beyond the tomb. Job thus, with boldness, attacks the main prin'- ciple— a principle which they regarded as settled. He carried the war into their camp, and the controversy after this became feebler, until his opponents were wholly silenced, and they ceased to attempt to answer him.

2 Hear diligently my speech; and let this be your consola-

2. Hea7' diligently. Heb. " Hearing hear" — that is, hear attentively. What he was about to say was worthy of their solemn consideration. IF And let this he your consolations. That is, ' You came to me for the professed purpose of giving me consolation. In that you liave wliolly failed. You have done notliing to sustain or romfort me; but all that you have said has only tended to exasperate me, and to increase my sorrow. If you will now hear me attentively, I will take that as a consolation, and it shall be in the place of what I had a right to expect from you. It will be some comfort if I am permitted to express my sentiments without interruption, and I will accept it as a proof of kindness on your part.'

3. Suffer me that I may speak. Allow me to speak without interruption, or bear with me while I freely

3 Suffer me that I may speak; and after that I have spoken, mock on.

express my sentiments — it is all that I now ask. IF Aiid after that I have spoken^ mock on. Resume your reproaches, if you will, when I am done. I ask only the privilege of expressing my tiioughts on a very important point, and when that is done, I will allow YOU to resume your remarks 5s you have done before, and you may utter your sentiments without interruption. Or it may be, that Job utters this in a kind of triumph, and that he feels that what he was about to say was so important that it would end ihe argument; and that all they could say after that would be mere mockery and reviling. The word rendered mock on (^?^) means, originally, to stammer, to speak unintelligibly — then, to speak in a barbarous or foreign language — then, to deride or tc mock, to ridicule or insult. The idea is, that they might mock his woes,

4 As for me, is my complaint to man? and if it were so, why should not my spirit be ' troubled?

and torture his feelings as they had done, if they would only allow him | to express his sentiments. j

4..^s for me, is my complaint to I man? There is some difficulty in the! interpretation of this verse, and con- j siderable variety of explanation may he seen among expositors. The ohjcct of the verse is plain. It is to state a reason why they should hear him with patience and without interruption. The meaning'of this part of the verse probably is, that his principal difficulty was not with his friends, but with God. It was not so much what they had said, that gave him trouble, as it was what God had done. Severe and cutting as were their rebukes, yet it was far more^ trying to him to be treated as he had been by God, as if he were a great sinner. That was what he could not understand. Perplexed and troubled, therefore, by the mysteriousness of the divine dealings, his friends ought to be willing to listen patiently to what he had to say; and in his anxiety to find out tchy God had treated him so, they ought not at once to infer that he was a wicked man, and to overwhelm him with increased anguish of spirit. It will be recollected that Job repeatedly expressed the wish to be permitted to carry his cause at once up to God, and to have his adjudication on it. See Notes on ch. xiii. 3, 18, seq. It is that to which he refers when he says here, that he washed to have the cause before God, and not before man. It was a matter which he wished to refer to the Almighty, and he ought to be allowed to express his sentiments with entire freedom. One of the difficulties in understanding this verse arises from the word complaint. We use it in the sense of murimiring, or repining; but this, I think, is not its meaning here. It is used rather in the sense