Иов 4:17

17 Is a mortal just before Eloah, Or a man pure before his Maker? 18 Behold, He trusteth not His servants! And His angels He chargeth with imperfection. 19 How much more those who dwell in houses of clay, They are crushed as though they were moths. 20 From morning until evening, - so are they broken in pieces: Unobserved they perish for ever. 21 Is it not so: the cord of their tent in them is torn away, So they die, and not in wisdom? The question arises whether מן is comparative: prae Deo, on which Mercier with penetration remarks: justior sit oportet qui immerito affligitur quam qui immerito affligit; or causal: a Deo, h.e., ita ut a Deo justificetur. All modern expositors rightly decide on the latter. Hahn justly maintains that עם and בּעיני are found in a similar connection in other places; and Job 32:2 is perhaps not to be explained in any other way, at least that does not restrict the present passage. By the servants of God, none but the angels, mentioned in the following line of the verse, are intended. שׂים with בּ signifies imputare (Sa1 22:15); in Job 24:12 (comp. Job 1:22) we read תּפלה, absurditatem (which Hupf. wishes to restore even here), joined with the verb in this signification. The form תּהלה is certainly not to be taken as stultitia from the verb הלל; the half vowel, and still less the absence of the Dagesh, will not allow this. תּרן (Olsh. 213, c), itself uncertain in its etymology, presents no available analogy. The form points to a Lamedh-He verb, as תּרמה from רמה, so perhaps from הלה, Niph. נהלא, remotus, Mic 4:7 : being distant, being behind the perfect, difference; or even from הלה (Targ. הלא, Pa. הלּי) = לאה, weakness, want of strength. (Note: Schnurrer compares the Arabic wahila, which signifies to be relaxed, forgetful, to err, to neglect.…

Job having warmly given vent to his passion, and so broken the ice, his friends here come gravely to give vent to their judgment upon his case, which perhaps they had communicated to one another apart, compared notes upon it and talked it over among themselves, and found they were all agreed in their verdict, that Job's afflictions certainly proved him to be a hypocrite; but they did not attack Job with this high charge till by the expressions of his discontent and impatience, in which they thought he reflected on God himself, he had confirmed them in the bad opinion they had before conceived of him and his character. Now they set upon him with great fear. The dispute begins, and it soon becomes fierce. The opponents are Job's three friends. Job himself is respondent. Elihu appears, first, as moderator, and at length God himself gives judgment upon the controversy and the management of it. The question in dispute is whether Job was an honest man or no, the same question that was in dispute between God and Satan in the first two chapters. Satan had yielded it, and durst not pretend that his cursing his day was a constructive cursing of his God; no, he cannot deny but that Job still holds fast his integrity; but Job's friends will needs have it that, if Job were an honest man, he would not have been thus sorely and thus tediously afflicted, and therefore urge him to confess himself a hypocrite in the profession he had made of religion: "No," says Job, "that I will never do; I have offended God, but my heart, notwithstanding, has been upright with him;" and still he holds fast the comfort of his integrity. Eliphaz, who, it is likely, was the senior, or of the best quality, begins with him in this chapter, in which, I. He bespeaks a patient hearing (Job 4:2). II. He complim…

4:17 As the characters in the book repeatedly acknowledge, no one is truly innocent or pure (see 9:2; 15:14; 25:4; 35:7) because all are depraved (Pss 14:3; 53:3; Rom 3:10-11). Eliphaz used these terms to mean that human beings are sinful creatures and God is the sinless Creator. Job and God used them to mean that Job had faithfully carried out the duties inherent in his relationship with God. Job and Eliphaz never agreed on the meaning of these terms. Later, God said that Eliphaz had spoken inaccurately (Job 42:7).