Verse 1
Job 40:1. Moreover the Lord
answered Job — Having first made
a little pause to try what Job
had to allege in his own defence,
or could answer to his
questions; and he continuing
silent, as being, it seems,
astonished at God’s rebukes, or
expecting what he would further
say, the Lord proceeded with his
questions and rebukes. What
follows is not said to be spoken
out of the whirlwind, and
therefore some think God said it
in a still, small voice, which
wrought more upon Job (as upon
Elijah) than the whirlwind did.
Though Job had not spoken any
thing, yet God is said to answer
him: for he knows men’s
thoughts, and can return a fit
answer to their silence.
Verse 2
Job 40:2. Shall he that
contendeth with the Almighty
instruct him? — Shall Job, who
presumeth to contend with me in
judgment, and to dispute the
reasonableness and equity of my
proceedings, give me
instructions or directions how
to govern my creatures? The
Hebrew, however, may be
rendered, Is it instruction, or
learning, or does it indicate
instruction or erudition, to
contend with the Almighty? An
eruditi est? Buxtorf. Is it the
part of a well-instructed and
wise man? This agrees with Ab.
Ezra’s comment, which is, Is it
the way of instruction for a man
to contend with the Almighty?
The words are also capable of
being translated, He that
disputeth with the Almighty
shall be chastised: thus Heath.
God’s almightiness is fitly
mentioned as an argument of his
justice. For how can he be
unjust, who, having boundless
power and every other perfection
in an infinite degree, must
necessarily be all-sufficient
within himself, and therefore
can neither have any inclination
to unrighteousness, which is an
imperfection, nor any temptation
to it, from any need he can have
of it to accomplish his designs,
which his own omnipotence is
sufficient to accomplish, or
from any advantage that can
accrue to him by it? He that
reproveth God — That boldly
censureth his ways or works; let
him answer it — Or, answer for
it; or, he shall answer for it,
that is, it is at his peril.
Verses 3-5
Job 40:3-5. Then Job answered —
Job, whose confusion had made
him silent, at length answered
with great humility, and said,
Behold I am vile — I am a mean,
sinful, and wretched creature,
and not worthy to speak unto thy
majesty; nor do I know what to
answer. I will lay my hand upon
my mouth — I will, for the
future, check and suppress all
passionate thoughts that may
arise in my mind, and, by
keeping my mouth, as it were,
with a bridle, will prevent them
from breaking out in intemperate
speeches. I will humbly and
willingly submit myself to thee.
Once have I spoken, but I will
not answer — Or speak again. I
confess my fault and folly, and
will contend no more with thee.
Yea, twice — That is, oft-times,
or again and again, the definite
number being used indefinitely.
I will proceed no further — In
such bold and presumptuous
expressions, and accusations of
thy providence toward me. Vain,
therefore, are the excuses which
some interpreters make for Job,
as if he were faultless in his
foregoing speeches, when both
God charges him with blame
therein, and Job himself
confesses that he was blameable.
Verse 6
Job 40:6. Then answered the Lord
out of the whirlwind — Which was
renewed when God renewed his
charge upon Job, whom he
intended to humble more
thoroughly than he had yet done.
This and the next verse are
repeated out of Job 38:1; Job
38:3, where the reader will find
them explained.
Verse 8
Job 40:8. Wilt thou also
disannul my judgment? — Wilt
thou take exceptions to what I
say and do, and not only call in
question and dispute, but even
censure, condemn, and endeavour
to make void, my judgment? — My
sentence against thee, and my
government and administration of
human affairs. God’s judgment
cannot, must not, be
disannulled, for we are sure it
is according to truth, and
therefore it is a great piece of
impudence and iniquity in us to
call it in question. Wilt thou
condemn me, &c.? — Must my
honour suffer for the support of
thy reputation? Must I be
charged as dealing unjustly with
thee, because thou canst not
otherwise clear thyself from the
censures that thou liest under?
Must I be represented as
unrighteous, and be condemned,
that thou mayest seem to be
righteous, and be justified? Our
duty is to condemn ourselves,
that God may be righteous. David
was, therefore, ready to own the
evil he had done in God’s sight,
that God might be justified when
he spake, and clear when he was
judged, Psalms 51:4 : see
Nehemiah 9:33; Daniel 9:7. But
those are very proud, and very
ignorant, both of God and
themselves, who, to clear
themselves, will condemn God.
And the day is coming when, if
the mistake be not rectified in
time by repentance, the eternal
judgment will be both the
confutation of the plea, and the
confusion of the prisoner; for
the heavens shall declare God’s
righteousness, and all the world
shall become guilty before him.
Verse 9
Job 40:9. Hast thou an arm like
God? — Hast thou, a poor, weak
worm of the earth, an arm
comparable to his, who upholdeth
all things? The power of
creatures, even of angels
themselves, is derived from God,
limited by him, dependant on
him; but the power of God is
original, independent, and
unlimited: he can do every thing
without us; we can do nothing
without him; and therefore we
have not an arm like God. The
meaning is, Thou art infinitely
short of God in power, and
therefore in justice: for all
his perfections are equal and
infinite. Injustice is much more
likely to be in thee, an
impotent creature, than in the
Almighty God; see on Job 40:2.
Canst thou thunder with a voice
like him? — No: his voice will
soon drown thine; and one of his
mighty thunders will overpower
and overrule thy weak speeches.
Therefore do not presume to
contend with him.
Verses 10-14
Job 40:10-14. Deck thyself with
majesty, &c. — Seeing thou
makest thyself equal, yea,
superior to me, take to thyself
thy great power, come and sit in
my throne, and display thy
divine perfections in the sight
of the world. These and the
following are ironical
expressions, to make Job more
sensible of his distance from,
and subjection to God. Cast
abroad the rage of thy wrath —
Inflict heavy judgments on thy
enemies, the Chaldeans, and
Sabeans, and others who have
injured or provoked thee. Behold
every one that is proud, and
abase him — Destroy him with an
angry look, as I can do, and
delight to do, with such
persons. Tread down the wicked
in their place — Either, 1st,
Wherever they are; or, 2d, Where
they are in their greatest
strength and glory, and
therefore are most secure and
confident; or, 3d, Forthwith
upon the spot, that the
quickness and immediateness of
the stroke may discover that it
comes from a divine hand. Hide
them in the dust together — Kill
every one of them at one blow.
Bind their faces — Condemn or
destroy them. He alludes to the
manner of covering the faces of
condemned persons and of dead
men. In secret — Either
secretly, with a secret and
invisible stroke, that it may
appear to come from the hand of
God, or in a secret place: that
is, bury them in their graves.
Then will I confess unto thee,
&c. — That thou art my equal,
and mayest venture to contend
with me.
Verse 15
Job 40:15. Behold now behemoth —
The word properly means beasts,
and is so understood by the
LXX., whose interpretation of
the verse is, ιδου θηρια παρα
σοι, χορτυν ισα βουσιν
εσθιουσιν, Behold the beasts
with thee, they eat grass, like
oxen. According to Ab. Ezra, and
the Targum, it is the name of
any great beast. But R. Levi
says, bestiam esse specialem,
that it is an animal peculiarly
called by that name. This,
indeed, is probable from what
follows, namely, His strength is
in his loins: he moveth his
tail, &c., and though the word,
according to the termination
oth, be strictly a plural in the
feminine gender, yet we
sometimes find it irregularly
used for a singular. Thus,
Psalms 73:22. So foolish was I,
&c., I was, behemoth, a beast
before thee. But the great
question is, What beast it
meant? The ancient and most
generally received opinion has
been, that it is the elephant.
Thus Buxtorf, Singulariter,
capitur pro elephante proper
ingentem magnitudinem, It is
taken in the singular number for
the elephant, because of its
vast greatness. “And I confess,”
says Henry, “I see no reason to
depart from the opinion, that it
is the elephant that is here
described, which is a very
strong, stately creature, of a
very large stature, above any
other, and of wonderful
sagacity, and of such great
reputation in the animal
kingdom, that, among so many
four-footed beasts as we have
had the natural history of,
chap. 38. and 39., we can scarce
suppose this should be omitted.”
They who understand this of the
elephant, take the following
animal, called leviathan, for
the whale; observing, that as
these are two of the goodliest
and vastest creatures which God
hath made, the one of the land,
the other of the sea, and withal
such as the description here
given, for the most part,
manifestly agrees to, it is most
probable they are here intended.
But some later and very learned
men take the leviathan to be the
crocodile, and the behemoth to
be a creature called the
hippopotamus, or river-horse,
which may seem to be fitly
joined with the crocodile, both
being very well known to Job and
his friends, as being frequent
in the adjacent places, both
amphibious, living and preying
both in the water and upon the
land, and both being creatures
of great bulk and strength. Dr.
Dodd, who is of opinion that
Bochart has proved to a
demonstration that the behemoth
is the hippopotamus, has
presented us with two
descriptions, one from the
ancients, and the other from a
modern, who saw the creature;
which descriptions, he thinks,
may serve instead of a
commentary upon the passage. The
ancient is Achilles Tatius, who
thus describes the animal: “Some
persons chanced to meet with,
and take a river monster, which
was very remarkable. The
Egyptians call it the
river-horse, or horse of the
river Nile; and it resembles a
horse, indeed, in its feet and
body, excepting that its hoofs
are cloven. Its tail is short,
and without hair, as well as the
rest of the body. Its head is
round, but not small; its jaws,
or cheeks, resemble those of a
horse; its nostrils are very
large, and breathe out a vapour
like smoke; its mouth is wide,
and extends to the temples; its
teeth, especially those called
the canine, are curved like
those of a horse, both in their
form and situation, but thrice
as large. It is a very voracious
animal, and would consume the
produce of a whole field. It is
very strongly made all over, and
its skin so hard that it is
impenetrable to any weapon.” The
modern traveller is the Sieur
Thevenot, who saw one of these
animals at Cairo. “This animal,”
says he, “was of a tan colour;
its hind parts resembled those
of an ox, or buffalo, excepting
that its feet were shorter and
thicker; in size it is equal to
a camel; its snout, or nose, is
like that of an ox, and its body
twice as big; its head resembles
that of a horse, and is of the
same size; its eyes are small;
its crest is very thick; its
ears are small; its nostrils
very wide and open; its feet are
very thick, pretty large, and
have each four toes, like those
of a crocodile; its tail is
small, without any hair, like
that of an elephant; its lower
jaw has four large teeth, about
half a foot long, two of them
crooked, and as thick as the
horns of an ox, one of which is
on each side of the throat;
beside these, it has two others,
which are straight, of the same
thickness as those which are
crooked, and project forward.”
“The river-horse,” says the
doctor,” shelters himself among
the reeds; and the behemoth is
said to be in the coverts of the
reeds and fens, and to be
compassed about with the willows
of the brook. The river-horse
feeds upon the herbage of the
Nile; and the behemoth is said
to eat grass as an ox. No
creature is known to have
stronger ribs than the
river-horse; and the bones of
the behemoth are as strong
pieces of brass, like bars of
iron.” See Lowth’s Notes on his
sixth Prelection, 8vo. edit.
Verse 16
Job 40:16. His strength is in
his loins — He hath strength
answerable to his bulk, but he
is of a mild disposition, and
his strength, by God’s wise and
merciful providence, is not an
offensive strength, consisting
in, or put forth by, horns or
claws, as it is in ravenous
creatures, but only defensive,
and seated in his loins. And his
force is in the navel of his
belly — From hence Bochart
argues that behemoth cannot be
the elephant, as is generally
supposed: because the strength
of an elephant consists not in
his belly; for though his hide
on the back is very hard, yet on
the belly it is soft. And
therefore the rhinoceros,
contending with him, aims
chiefly at his paunch, knowing,
as it were, that to be a soft
place, and more capable of being
injured. On the other hand, the
description, he urges, agrees
well with the hippopotamus,
which is remarkable, both for
the strength of his belly and
navel, as well as other parts of
his body; the skin being so firm
and thick as to be almost
impenetrable, and able to resist
the force of spears and darts.
Verse 17
Job 40:17. He moveth his tail
like a cedar — Though the tail
be but short, both in the
elephant, and in the
hippopotamus; yet, when it is
erected, it is exceeding stiff
and strong. The sinews of his
stones, &c. — Rather, of his
thighs, as the Hebrew may be
rendered. The thighs and feet of
the river- horse are so sinewy
and strong that one of them is
able to break or overturn a
large boat.
Verse 18-19
Job 40:18-19. His bones — Under
which title are comprehended his
ribs, (as the LXX. here render
it,) and his teeth; are as
strong pieces of brass —
Exceeding hard and strong. Such
they are both in the elephant
and river- horse. He is the
chief of the ways of God — That
is, of God’s works, namely, of
that sort, or among living and
brute creatures. This is
eminently and unquestionably
true of the elephant, in regard
of his vast bulk and strength,
joined with great activity; and
especially of his admirable
sagacity, and aptness to learn;
and of his singular usefulness
to man, his lord and master; and
many other commendable
qualities. And the hippopotamus
also is, in some sort, the
chief, or one of the chief, of
God’s works, in regard of his
bulk, which, say the authors of
the Encyclopedia Britannica, “is
so great that twelve oxen were
found necessary to draw one
ashore, which had been shot in a
river beyond the Cape of Good
Hope; and Hasselquist says, his
hide is a load for a camel.” His
strength and sagacity also are
very remarkable, as well as the
manner of his living, both in
the water and on the land. But
it must be granted, that the
elephant exceeds the
hippopotamus in many things. Can
make his sword to approach unto
him — Though he be so strong and
terrible, yet God can easily
subdue, or destroy him, either
immediately, or by arming other
creatures against him. But,
העשׁו יגשׁ חרבו, hagnosho
jaggesh charbo, may be properly
rendered, He that made him hath
applied, or given to him, his
sword, or arms, that is, He hath
formed him so as to make him
appear dreadful and terrible.
Heath renders it, He who made
him hath furnished him with his
scythe, taking the Hebrew word,
rendered sword, or scythe, to
denote the instrument by which
this animal gathers his food.
Houbigant’s translation of the
clause is, His Creator
sharpeneth his crooked tooth.
Verse 20
Job 40:20. The mountains bring
him forth food — Though this
creature be so vastly large, and
require much food, and no man
careth for it, yet God provides
for it out of his own stores,
and makes the desert mountains
to afford it sufficient
sustenance. This particular of
the description seems more
applicable to the elephant than
the hippopotamus, which, though
he fetches his food, in a great
measure, from the land, feeding
on the herbage on the banks of
the Nile, and among the lakes
and fens of Ethiopia, through
which that river passes, yet can
hardly be said to pasture upon
the mountains. Both animals
consume great quantities of
food, and it must be
acknowledged to be an instance
of the goodness of God that he
hath so ordered it that they
feed on grass, and the other
products of the field, and not
on flesh; for if the latter had
been their usual food, great
multitudes of creatures must
have died continually to keep
them alive. Where all the beasts
of the field play — This is
equally applicable both to the
elephant and the river-horse.
The beasts of the field not only
feed securely, but sport
themselves by both of them,
being taught by experience that
they are gentle and harmless,
and never prey upon them.
Verse 21-22
Job 40:21-22. He lieth under the
shady trees, &c. — Or, He lieth
down secretly between the shady
trees, under the covert of the
reed, and in the fens, Houbigant
and Heath. The shady trees cover
him — The Hebrew, literally
translated, is, The shady trees,
( צללו, tzillo,) his shadow,
cover him, or, are his arbour:
the willows of the brook, or, as
נחל, nachal, is often rendered,
of the river, compass him about.
Bochart argues, that the
elephant is not described here,
because he rarely lies down, sed
rectus dormit, sleeps standing
upright. And he quotes a passage
from Marcellinus, exactly
parallel to this, to show that
it is perfectly applicable to
the river-horse, which inter
arundines celsas et squalentes
nimia densitate cubilia ponit,
makes his bed among the lofty
reeds and in muddy fens.
Verse 23
Job 40:23. Behold, he drinketh
up a river — A great quantity of
water, hyperbolically called a
river. He swalloweth the waters
to such a degree, says Aben
Ezra, as to diminish their
fulness. This may be fitly
applied to the elephant, says
Poole, ‘which, because of its
great bulk and vehement thirst,
drinks a great quantity of water
at one draught, as naturalists
and historians have observed.”
And hasteth not — He does not
drink with fear and caution, and
sparingly, as the dogs do, who
drink at the Nile, for fear of
the crocodile; but such is his
courage and self-confidence,
that he fears no enemy either by
water or by land, but drinks
securely and freely. He trusteth
he can draw up Jordan into his
mouth — He drinks as if he
designed, or hoped, to drink up
the whole river. Bochart and
others say that Jordan is put
here, by a figure, for any
river; but Houbigant is of
opinion that Jordan itself is
meant, which was not far from
the land of Uz, and at which not
only many elephants, no doubt,
used to drink, but in which it
is probable there were
river-horses, as well as in the
Nile. For, it is supposed, they
might come into Jordan from the
Dead sea, and into that by
subterraneous passages from the
Red, or the Mediterranean sea.
It may be proper to observe
here, that many other learned
men who interpret this paragraph
of the hippopotamus propose a
different translation of this
verse: thus, Behold, let the
river press him, he will not
tremble; he trusteth that he can
spout forth Jordan with his
mouth. And they paraphrase it
thus, No sudden rising of the
river, which makes it flow with
uncommon violence and fury,
gives him any alarm or fear. He
is not borne away with the
rapidity of the stream from his
place, but enjoys himself the
same as if the river ran with
its usual flow: and, were such a
river as Jordan to break forth
suddenly from the earth, he
would not be terrified; for he
trusteth he can throw back its
waters from his mouth.
Verse 24
Job 40:24. He taketh it with his
eyes — He imagines, when he sees
it, that he can take the whole
river and drink it up. His nose
pierceth through snares — The
elephant will not be kept from
the water by any snares or
impediments, but removes them
all by his trunk; and both he
and the river- horse securely
thrust their snouts deep into
the river, through their
eagerness to satisfy their
thirst. But different
constructions are put upon this
verse also by learned men.
Bochart and several others think
the former clause should be read
with an interrogation, thus, Who
will, or who can take him in his
eyes? That is, while he sees
them, and is sensible what they
are about: or openly, and by
manifest force? Surely none. His
force and strength are too great
for men to resist and overcome,
and therefore they are compelled
to make use of many wiles and
stratagems to take him; which is
true, both of the elephant and
of the hippopotamus. And the
latter clause is rendered by
Heath, Can cords be drawn
through his nose? and by
Houbigant, Can his nose be
perforated with hooks? “The way
of taking these animals,” (the
hippopotami,) says Dr. Dodd, “as
related by Achilles Tatius, will
explain this passage. The
huntsmen, having found the
places where they haunt, dig a
trench or ditch, which they
cover with reeds and earth,
having placed underneath a
wooden chest whose lids are
opens like a folding-door, on
each side, to the height of the
cavity; after this they conceal
themselves, watching till the
beast is taken; for as soon as
ever it treads on the surface of
the hole, it is sure to fall to
the bottom. The huntsmen run up
immediately to the cavity and
shut down the lids, and by these
means catch the beast, which
could not be taken by any other
method, on account of its
prodigious strength.” The latter
clause of the verse signifies
literally, Canst thou bore his
nose with cords? But this kind
of boring is made by a hook, in
order to insert a cord to lead
the creature about with
pleasure. It is very remarkable,
that this cord in the ox’s nose
serves instead of a bit to guide
him. This Thevenot confirms in
his Voyage to Indostan, where,
having mentioned that oxen are
used instead of horses for
travelling, he adds, “These
creatures are managed like our
horses, and have no other bits
or bridles than a cord which
passes through the tendon of
their nose or nostrils.” So that
this boring his nose and
introducing a cord were not to
take, but to keep him, in order
to make him serviceable when
taken. — Heath. I would just
observe upon this and the
following description, that
nervous and excellent as they
are, they do not strike us with
the same degree of admiration as
the foregoing description of the
horse, because we are not so
well acquainted with the nature
of the animals described. Dr.
Young renders the last two
verses of this chapter thus:
“His eye drinks Jordan up, when
fired with drought,
He trusts to turn its current
down his throat:
In lessen’d waves it creeps
along the plain,
He sinks a river, and he thirsts
again.”
The reader who can have access
to the Encyclop. Brit. may there
find a full account both of the
elephant and the hippopotamus. |