Job 35:15

15. This verse is very obscure, and the A. V. competes worthily with the original in darkness. The word translated extremity does not occur again, and, if it be a word at all and not a mere error of copyists (the Sept. read “transgression”), its meaning can only be guessed at. The connexion, however, suggests what general meaning the expression must have. Perhaps the easiest way to construe the verse is to take it in connexion with Job_35:16,

15. But now because his anger visiteth not,

And he doth not strictly regard transgression,

16. Therefore doth Job open his mouth in vanity,

He multiplieth words without knowledge.

Because sentence against an evil work is not executed speedily (Ecc_8:11), and God seems as if He took no knowledge of wrong and oppression, therefore Job draws the futile conclusion (Job_35:2-3), that there is no advantage in being righteous more than in sinning. Elihu has already accounted for God’s refusal to interpose on very different grounds (Job_35:10-13), grounds which Job would do well to lay to heart. The word rendered “extremity” (fash) may have a correspondent in the Arab. fashsha of which Lane says, “fashsha is syn. with fâsha as meaning, He gloried or boasted and magnified himself, imagining (in himself) what he did not possess.” This would suggest such a meaning as pride or arrogancy.

Though this construction of Job_35:15 is simple it is doubtful if it be the true one. Job_35:16 certainly looks independent, and if so Job_35:15 is also complete in itself,

But now because his anger visiteth not,

Therefore he careth nothing for transgression!

the second clause expressing the conclusion which Job draws from God’s inactivity and His refraining to punish (first clause), namely that God was indifferent to evil, or as expressed in Job_35:2-3, that righteousness was of no profit to a man more than sin. The sense remains the same as on the other construction. And Job_35:16, as before, expresses Elihu’s verdict regarding Job,

Nay, Job openeth his mouth in vanity,

He multiplieth words without knowledge.

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Job 35:15 But now, because [it is] not [so], he hath visited in his anger; yet he knoweth [it] not in great extremity:

Ver 15. But now, because it is not so, he hath visited in his anger] Because thou hast not yet done as I have prescribed, God is forced thus to treat thee, and to increase his plagues upon thee in great displeasure at thine incorrigibleness. Thus is good Job miscensured, whom God suffered so to be afflicted for his trial, and not for his punishment; though there wanted not in him cause enough if God should have taken advantages. But know now that his anger hath visited thee but a little (this is Beza’s translation of the whole verse); neither hath he made any great inquisition. Piscator readeth this and the next verse thus: But now, because his anger hath not visited, neither hath he taken notice of the multitude of his sins very much; therefore doth Job open his mouth with vanity, and heap up words without knowledge. Tremellius thus, For now, because there is nothing of these, doth his anger visit thee: viz. because thou neither rightly judgest thyself nor waitest upon God; but lookest upon thyself as utterly undone, casting away all hope of better, therefore art thou yet held under.

Yet he knoweth it not in great extremity] Job perceiveth not (so blind he is) though he have his back burdened with afflictions, and knows not how to be rid of them. This Elihu speaketh to the company, by an angry apostrophe.

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Job 35:15-16. But now, because it is not so — That is, because Job doth not acknowledge God’s justice and his own sins, and wait upon God in a proper way for mercy; he hath visited in his anger — God hath laid grievous afflictions upon him, all which appear to be too little to bring Job to a compliance with God’s will. Yet he knoweth it not — Job is not sufficiently sensible of it, so as to be humbled under God’s mighty hand. In great extremity — Or, though in great extremity, namely, of afflictions. Though Job hath hitherto been, and still is, exercised with very sore calamities: yet they have not brought him to the knowledge of God and himself. Therefore doth Job open his mouth in vain — Hence it is manifest that he pours forth his complaints without any success, and gets no relief by them. He multiplieth words without knowledge — Thereby discovering his ignorance of God and of himself.

Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

35:15-16 Elihu echoed and then rejected Job’s words (9:24; 12:6-10; 21:7-15, 17).

Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

As it is, because Job waited not trustingly and patiently (Job 35:14; Num 20:12; Zep 3:2; Mic 7:9), God hath visited . . . ; yet still he has not taken (severe) cognizance of the great multitude (English Version wrongly, "extremity") of sins; therefore Job should not complain of being punished with undue severity (Job 7:20; Job 11:6). MAURER translates: "Because His anger hath not visited (hath not immediately punished Job for his impious complaints), nor has He taken strict (great) cognizance of his folly (sinful speeches); therefore," &c. For "folly," UMBREIT translates with the Rabbins, "multitude." GESENIUS reads with the Septuagint and Vulgate needlessly, "transgression."

Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Verse 15. But - because it is not so] Rather, "But now, because he visiteth not in his anger." This is more literal than the versions generally proposed; and the sense of the place appears to be this: Because vengeance is not speedily executed on an evil work, therefore are the hearts of the children of men set in them to do iniquity. This is, in effect, the charge which Elihu brings against Job.

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

(15) But now, because it is not so, is very obscure. The Authorised Version refers the first clause to God and the second to Job. Perhaps we may render, But now, what His anger has visited upon thee is as nothing (compared with thy deserts); yea, He hath not regarded the great abundance (of thy sin), i.e., hath not visited it with anger. Therefore doth Job, &c. Others render it, “But now, because it is not so (i.e., there is no judgment), He hath visited in His anger, saith Job, and He regardeth it not, saith He, in His exceeding arrogance;” or, “But now, because He hath not visited in His anger, neither doth He much regard arrogance, therefore Job,” &c. The word thus rendered arrogance is not found elsewhere; it appears to mean abundance or superfluity. Of these renderings, the first seems to give the better sense. The general bearing of the verse is perhaps apparent however rendered, namely, that Job is encouraged in his murmurings, because God hath dealt too leniently with him. Elihu’s reproaches must have been some of the heaviest that Job had to bear. Happily the judgment was not to be long deferred. (See Job_38:1.)

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

But now, because it is not so,.... Because there was not such trust, hope, patience, and quiet expectation in Job that God would appear for him, and do him, justice openly and publicly; for though he had hope and confidence of an interest in his living Redeemer and Saviour, and of eternal life and happiness through him; yet not of his bringing his judgment to the light, and of his beholding his righteousness, as he ought to have had, see Psa 37:5;

he hath visited in his anger; corrected and chastised in fatherly anger and displeasure, though not in wrath and vengeance, and in a way of punishment in strict justice; but consistent with his invariable love and free favour in Christ; being displeased at his want of faith and patience, failing in the exercise of which is oftentimes resented by the Lord, see Num 20:12;

yet he knoweth it not in great extremity: so stupid was Job, that though he was in the utmost extremity of affliction, in his body, family, and substance, yet was not sensible it was his duty to trust in God, and patiently wait for him; he knew that the hand of God was upon him, and that he had visited him in anger, and that his arrows stuck fast in him, and his hand pressed him sore; but was insensible of the cause of the continuance of it, his unbelief, impatience, and non-submission to the will of God. The word for "extremity" signifies "abundance" (d), and may be applied to an abundance and plenty of good things; and therefore some understand it of Job's prosperity, and take the sense to be, that God took no notice of this; it did not hinder him from visiting him, but he destroyed it all: though Mr. Broughton, on the other hand, interprets it of the great plenty of sorrows and distresses Job was attended with, the true cause of which he did not advert to: some (e) think the whole refers to the merciful dealings of God with Job, and read the first clause,

"know now his anger hath visited but a little or noticing;''

the affliction is but a light one comparatively speaking, scarce any thing at all in comparison of what sin deserves, being abundantly less than that:

"neither hath he made great inquisition, or inquired out the multitude''

of sins; not strictly and severely marking them, and dealing with and for them according to their deserts; see Ezr 9:13; with which compare Co2 4:17; and therefore Job had no reason to complain of God, or of any hard usage from him.

(d) "in copia", Montanus; "ad auctum valde", Cocceius; "prosperitatem", De Dieu; so Patrick. (e) Tigurine version, Mercerus, Piscator; so Ben Gersom.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

But now, because it is not so - This verse, as it stands in our authorized translation, conveys no intelligible idea. It is evident that the translators meant to give a literal version of the Hebrew, but without understanding its sense. An examination of the principal words and phrases may enable us to ascertain the idea which was in the mind of Elihu when it was uttered. The phrase in the Hebrew here (ועתה כי־אין kı̂y-'ayin ve‛attâh) may mean, “but now it is as nothing,” and is to be connected with the following clause, denoting, “now it is comparatively nothing that he has visited you in his anger;” that is, the punishment which he has inflicted on you is almost as nothing compared with what it might have been, or what you have deserved. Job had complained much, and Elihu says to him, that so far from having cause of complaint, his sufferings were as nothing - scarcely worth noticing, compared with what they might have been.

He hath visited in his anger - Margin, that is, “God.” The word rendered “hath visited” (פקד pâqad) means to visit for any purpose - for mercy or justice; to review, take an account of, or investigate conduct. Here it is used with reference to punishment - meaning that the punishment which he had inflicted was trifling compared with the desert of the offences.

Yet he knoweth it not - Margin, that is, “Job.” The marginal reading here is undoubtedly erroneous. The reference is not to Job, but to God, and the idea is, that he did not “know,” that is, did not “take full account” of the sins of Job. He passed them over, and did not bring them all into the account in his dealings with him. Had he done this, and marked every offence with the utmost strictness and severity, his punishment would have been much more severe.

In great extremity - The Hebrew here is מאד בפשׁ bapash me'ôd. The word פשׁ pash occurs nowhere else in the Hebrew. The Septuagint renders it παράπτωμα paraptōma, “offence.” and the Vulgate “scelus,” that is, “transgression.” The authors of those versions evidently read it as if it were פשׁע pesha‛, iniquity; and it may be that the final ע (‛) has been dropped, like שו for שׁוא shâv', in Job 15:31. Gesenius, Theodotion and Symmachus in like manner render it “transgression.” Others have regarded it as if from פוש “to be proud,” and as meaning “in pride” or “arrogance;” and others, as the rabbis generally, as if from פוש, to “disperse,” meaning “on account of the multitude,” scil. of transgressions. So Rosenmuller, Umbreit, Luther, and the Chaldee. It seems probable to me that the interpretation of the Septuagint and the Vulgate is the correct one, and that the sense is, that he “does not take cognizance severely (מאד me'ôd) of transgressions;” that is, that he had not done it in the case of Job. This interpretation agrees with the scope of the passage, and with the view which Elihu meant to express - that God, so far from having given any just cause of complaint, had not even dealt with him as his sins deserved. Without any impeachment of his wisdom or goodness, his inflictions “might” have been far more severe.

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

For. Protestants, "But now because it is not so, he hath visited in his anger; yet he (marginal note, Job) knoweth it not, in great extremity." (Haydock) --- In this world, God punishes not with rigour. (Calmet)

George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).

Because it is not so, i.e. because Job doth not acknowledge God’s justice and his own sins, and wait upon God in his way for mercy, according to the last advice given to him, Job 35:14.

He, to wit, God, to whom this great work of visiting is ascribed every where in Scripture.

Hath visited in his anger, i.e. hath laid grievous afflictions upon him; all which is too little to bring Job to compliance with God.

He knoweth it not; Job is not sufficiently sensible of it, so as to be humbled under God’s hand.

In great extremity; or, though (which particle is sometimes understood, of which examples have been before) in great extremity, or abundance, to wit, of afflictions. Though Job hath hitherto been and still is exercised with very sore calamities, yet they have not brought Job to the knowledge of God and of himself. But this verse is and may be rendered thus, And now know that his (i.e. God’s) anger hath visited thee little or nothing, (to wit, in comparison of what thou hast deserved and mightest reasonably expect,) neither hath he known (i.e. judged or punished, as this word is used, Pro 10:9, and elsewhere) thee in or according to (as the prefix beth is sometimes used) the great abundance, to wit, of thy sins. And therefore thy complaints against God are very unrighteous and unreasonable.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

15. But now… great extremity — But now, because his anger visits not, nor strictly marks transgression. Compare Psa_130:3. Extremity — פשׁ, pash, iniquity, or transgression. This interpretation of this doubtful word, which appears but once in the Scriptures, accords with the Septuagint and the Vulgate, and is adopted by Hirtzel, Conant, Renan, Noyes, etc. It is probably an abbreviated form of the Hebrew word for transgression, (פשׁע,) a word Elihu has already used against Job. See Job_34:37. Delitzsch and Dillmann derive it from the Arabic, the former making it to signify “sullenness,” the latter, either folly or arrogance.

Delitzsch, whom Zockler calls “one of the weightiest opponents of the genuineness of the whole Elihu section,” here makes an important admission, that “even at the close of the third speech of Elihu, the Arabic, and in fact Syro-Arabic colouring common to this section, with the rest of the book, is confirmed;” while, on the other hand, he urges that we miss the bold original figures which, up to chapter 31, followed like waves upon one another; and that we perceive a deficiency of skill, as now and then between Koheleth (in Solomon’s Songs) and Solomon. This supposed defect of genius in the first speeches of Elihu, Zockler adequately meets by the suggestion that Elihu is now the preacher of repentance, speaking as plainly, simply, and with as little art as possible. Soon he shall stand forth the “eulogist and glorifier of God, surpassing the former speakers in the power, loftiness, and adornment of his discourse; nay, even rivaling in this respect the representation of Jehovah himself.” See Excursus VII, page 208.

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Vers. 15, 16. Leaving his advice to sink into Job"s mind, Elihu turns from him to the bystanders, and remarks, with some severity, that it is because Job has not been punished enough, because God has not visited him for his petulance and arrogance, that he indulges in "high swelling words of vanity," and continues to utter words which are foolish and" without knowledge.

But now, because it is not so, he hath visited in his anger. This is an impossible rendering. The Hebrew is perfectly plain, and is to be translated literally as follows: But now, because he hath not visited his (i.e. Job"s) anger. (So Schultens, Canon Cook, and, with a slight difference, our Revisers.) God had not visited Job with any fresh afflictions on account of his vehement expostulations and overbold and reckless words. Yet he knoweth it not in great extremity. The Authorized Version again wholly misses the meaning. Translate, with the Revised Version, Neither doth he greatly regard (Job"s) arrogance.

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Because - Because Job doth not acknowledge God's justice and his own sins. He - God. Anger - Hath laid grievous afflictions upon him. He - Job is not sensible of it, so as to be humbled under God's hand.

John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.

General Information:

Elihu continues speaking.

Now you say that his anger does not punish, and he does not take even a litte notice of transgression

Because Job is saying these things about God that are untrue, it is even less likely that God will answer Job's prayers.

his anger does not punish

Here "his anger" is a metonym for "him." AT: "he never punishes anyone because he is angry"

he piles up words without knowledge

Elihu speaks of "words" as if they were objects, and of speaking many words as if it were piling those objects one on top of the other. The word "knowledge" can be translated with a verbal phrase. AT: "he speaks many words without knowing what he is talking about" (See: Metaphor and Abstract Nouns)

translationWords

anger

fool

word

know

unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.

And now you should know that this visitation [of His Wrath upon you is nothing according [compared] to your many iniquities.

and He did not know because of the great multiplicity Because of your many sins, the Creator acted as though He did not know them.

of the...multiplicity Heb. בפש, an expression of multiplicity, like (Malachi 3:20), “and be fat (ופשתם),” and like (Jer. 50:11), “as you become fat (תפושו)”; (Lev. 13:51), “that the mark has spread (פשה).”

Rashi on the Tanakh — English translations: “The Judaica Press complete Tanach with Rashi, translated by A. J. Rosenberg” (CC BY 4.0); “Pentateuch with Rashi's commentary by M. Rosenbaum and A.M. Silbermann, 1929-1934” (public domain); “The Metsudah Tanach series, Lakewood, N.J” (CC BY 4.0); and “The Book of Joshua, Metsudah Publications, 1997” (CC BY 4.0). Text via Sefaria.