As for the first objection, it overlooks the fact that the author is alien to the separation of divine omnipotence from justice. From the very first speech it is evident that the Almighty, Who by His power brings order and harmony into visible nature, is at the same time the Just. In the same way, the description of the two gigantic animals, the symbols of the evil one who rebels against the God of power, makes it clear that the almighty and all-righteous Lord humbles the manifestations of evil. The inappropriateness and weakness of the second objection is shown by the fact that, on the same grounds, we must suspect the authenticity of the description of earthquakes, eclipses of the sun (IX:5-6), the remarks about Orion (XXXVIII:31), etc.: not all the inhabitants of Palestine were witnesses of the first appearances, not everyone knows the location of the stars in the constellation of Orion (see commentary). The third objection is also invalid. If the Lord's second discourse had embraced the first nine verses of chapter XL, it would have been too brief in comparison with the first, and could not have aroused in Job a consciousness of his own insignificance and divine omnipotence (XLII:2). On the other hand, with the present composition of the book, it is perfectly prepared both by the remark of verses 2-3 of Chapter XL and by the final touches in the description of the crocodile (XLI:26).

The reasons on which the scholars, Eichhorn, De Wette, Schrader, Meyer, Ewald, Dielman, Davidson, Renan, and others, of the latest Leys, suspect the authenticity of Elihu's speeches are as follows. (1) Not a word is said about Elihu in the prologue or epilogue, and only three friends are mentioned in both cases. He speaks quite unexpectedly. In fact, the omission of Elihu in the prologue and epilogue does not constitute a proof that he was not with his friends, that this person was invented afterwards and inserted into the book by another writer. Elihu was young compared to his three friends, and he had come, in his own words, not to speak, but to listen to the speeches of his elders (XXXII:3–7). In view of this, the writer is silent about it until it becomes necessary to introduce it into the circle of actions. There is no mention of Elihu in the epilogue: he was not guilty for his speeches before God and Job. Divine wrath extends only to the three elder friends (XLII:7). (2) Elihu's utterances seem to forcibly break the connection between Job's last discourse and Jehovah's utterances. The introduction to these latter necessarily presupposes that Job spoke directly before the Lord, and the fragmentary end of his last speech (XXXI:33-40) is explained only by the fact that he was suddenly interrupted by Jehovah. But if the Lord's speech is directly related to the last speech of Job, and not to the words of Elihu, this does not mean that the latter are inserted later. God enters into a conversation with Job of his own free will (XXXI:35), and therefore His words must refer directly to the last speech of the sufferer. Moreover, Job was silent in the continuation of Elihu's speeches, according to which they stand quite apart, not like the speeches of the first three friends, of whom Job gave an answer to each. It is God who summons Job, who has fallen silent, to answer (XXXVIII:1). If he does not give an answer to his equal (XXXIII:4-7), can he contradict the Lord? The transition from Elihu's speeches to Jehovah's speeches is quite natural and clear. Externally, it is prepared by the fact that Elihu's last speech is delivered before the storm (XXXVII:2-4), and then the Lord appears in the storm. Finally, it is in vain to declare that Job's discourses are not finished, so that the Lord interrupts them. On the contrary, his last defense refers to everything he had previously said about his innocence, as a signature that seals the letter; It is the same as "tav," the last letter of the Hebrew alphabet, used to testify to something (see Commentary. XXXI:35). (3) There is a sharp contrast between the lengthy introduction to Elihu's discourse (XXXII:2-6) and the brief remark about the arrival of the friends. The introduction to Elihu's speech is necessary to determine the personality of the new interlocutor, to clarify his attitude to the previous speakers. In them, he acts as an arbitrator between the disputants. Elihu tries to find out the mistakes that Job made in his speeches, and does not touch on the question of his sinfulness. And from this point of view he prepares the Lord's speeches, pointing out to the sufferer new errors in his judgments, which Elihu did not note. For this reason, in the introduction to Elihu's speeches, his wisdom is noted. (4) In accordance with Job's answer to the speeches of his friends, it is natural to expect that he will not leave Elihu's speech without objection, which, however, is not noticed. Job's silence is nothing special, given the contrast between the friends arguing with Job and Elihu, who stands above the party scores. His reasoning prepares the denouement of the action: in the denunciation of Job's wrong judgments, they indicate the way in which his faith can be supported. And if the author's purpose is to indicate how Job's doubts are resolved, how faith in God triumphs in him over doubt, and to this Elihu's speeches are directed, then it is strange to demand that he involve Job in a dispute with a new friend. This would mean delaying the resolution of the issue. 5) The inauthenticity of Elihu's speeches is proved, finally, by their Aramaic coloring and peculiarities in the syllable, the use of words and phrases unknown to the speeches of the rest of the friends. But the Aramaisms in Elihu's speeches are explained by his Aramaic origin from the generation of Buz (XXXII:2). A representative of a different tribe than his friends, Elihu speaks differently. That the author intentionally gave Elihu's speeches an Aramaic tinge is evident from the fact that it is noticeable only on two occasions (XXXII:6ff.; XXXVI:2&c).

THE BOOK OF JOB

Chapter I

1–5. Job's piety and complete prosperity as a reward for him. 6–12. The causes of Job's suffering. 13–19. The calamities that befell the righteous man. 20–22. The patience of the sufferer. 1. There was a man in the land of Uz, his name was Job; and this man was blameless, just, and God-fearing, and shunned evil.

1. Revealed in the first five verses with the help of a specific example, the life of Job, the general idea of the correspondence of piety to earthly well-being begins with a description of the religious and moral life of the main person of the book. "Blameless," i.e., devoted with all his heart to God and goodness (II:3; cf. I:21; XXIII:11–12; XXXI), Job was irreproachable in this respect, as is proved by his "justice" and "truthfulness" (Slav.), the correspondence of thought to deeds. More specifically, at the heart of Job's religiosity, his relationship to God, lay "fear," a reverent idea of God, aroused by the consciousness of His greatness and perfections (XV:4; XXVII:23-24), and turning into awe when it was joined by the thought of God as the righteous Judge and Rewarder, who tolerates no evil (Genesis III:10; XVIII:15; Psalm LXlV:9). The idea of a God who does not tolerate evil determined Job's morality: it boiled down, as with all Old Testament people, to shunning evil (Psalm XXXIII:15; XXXVI:27; Proverbs XIV:16). For the place of Job's residence, see the Introduction.

2. And seven sons and three daughters were born to him. 3. He had estates: seven thousand flocks, three thousand camels, five hundred pairs of oxen and five hundred donkeys, and a very large number of servants; and this man was more famous than all the sons of the East.

2–3. For piety, according to the teaching of the Old Testament, a person was rewarded with temporary, earthly goods (Deuteronomy XXVIII:1-13). A similar point of view is fully shared by the author of our book. Putting into the mouth of Satan the words: "Is it for nothing that Job fears God? Have you not protected him around him, blessed him with the work of his hands?", he makes it clear that the many children of Job, the abundance of cattle that provided food and clothing (sheep), served to carry loads and cultivate the fields (camels, oxen, and donkeys (v. 15; cf. Gen. XLII:26; 1 Samuel XXV:18), as well as the multitude of servants that are inevitable in this case (Heb. "Buddha", "δουλεία" of Aquila, and the LXX at the same time take a double meaning to this word: "υπηρεσία πολλή σφόδρα" — "many servants," and "έργο μεγάλα ήv αύτω επί τής γής" — "the works of great things for him on earth," meaning, it seems, by works agriculture, since the Hebrew "ebuddha" in Genesis XXVI:14 they render by the term "γεωργία") is the reward of piety. According to Deuteronomy XXVIII:13, Job's glory among "all the sons of the East," the descendants of Abraham from his concubines sent to the East (Genesis XXV:6) and who inhabited Arabia, as well as the population of Mesopotamia, since it is called "the land of the East" (Genesis XXIX:1; Num XXIII:7).

4. His sons came together, each making feasts in his own house on his own day, and sent and invited his three sisters to eat and drink with them. 5. When the circle of feasting days was completed, Job sent for them and sanctified them, and rising early in the morning, offered burnt offerings according to the number of all of them (and one bull for the sin of their souls). For Job said, "Perhaps my sons have sinned and blasphemed God in their hearts." This is what Job did in all such days.

4–5. Xарактеристика благочестия Иова восполняется новою чертою. Он заботится не только о личной нравственности, но и нравственности своих детей, выражая это в приношении жертвы всесожжения (замечание синодального текста о жертве за грех заимствовано из перевода LXX; еврейский текст упоминает только о жертве всесожжения) за возможные с их стороны грехи в дни пиршеств. Последние устроялись его сыновьями, «каждым в своем доме, в свой день» (ст. 4), т. е. или в дни рождения, как полагают некоторые, ссылаясь в подтверждение данного взгляда на III:1: «проклял день свой» и Быт XL:20 (обычай праздновать дни рождения), или же ежедневно, как думают другие. Последнее понимание представляется более вероятным. Семь пиршественных дней, падающих, сообразно с днями рождения, на различное время года, и потому отделенных друг от друга такими или иными промежутками, едва ли могут быть названы «кругом» (ст. 5). Второй взгляд не требует непременно допущения той невероятной мысли, что дети Иова все время, круглый год проводили в пирах. После семидневного пиршества мог быть перерыв.

6. И был день, когда пришли сыны Божии предстать пред Господа; между ними пришел и сатана.

6. При благочестии Иова причина постигших его бедствий заключалась не в нем; она лежала вне его, — в клевете злого духа (ст. 9–11), давшей Божественному Правосудию повод доказать на примере Иова торжество правды и добра над злом. На поэтическом языке автора книги данная мысль выражена образно: им нарисована небесная картина явления пред лице Божие «сынов Божьих», т. е. ангелов (Пс XXVIII:1; LXXXVIII:7; Дан III:92), названных так по своей богосозданной и богоподобной природе, и вместе с ними сатаны (ср. 3 Цар XXII:19–22). Последнее имя, выражая идею злого, коварного существа, в смысле нарицательном обозначает вообще противника, клеветника (Чис XXII:22; 1 Цар XXIX:4; 3 Цар V:18; XI:14, 23, 25; Пс CVIII:6), а в смысле собственном — злого духа (1 Пар XXI:1; Зах III:1). «Гассатан» (с опред. членом) — враг в абсолютном смысле, — враг Божий, божественных планов и творений — людей, их спасения.

7. И сказал Господь сатане: откуда ты пришел? И отвечал сатана Господу и сказал: я ходил по земле и обошел ее.

7. На обращенный к сатане вопрос Господа: «откуда ты пришел?», вопрос, свидетельствующий не об отсутствии у Бога всеведения, а о полной нравственной противоположности между ним и злым духом, доходящей как бы до незнания Господом дел сатаны (ср. XXI:14), последний отвечает общей фразой: «ходил по земле» (евр. «шут» обозначает быстрый обход от одного конца местности до другого — 2 Цар XXIV:2, 8; Ам VIII:12; Зах IV:10) «и обошел ее» — с целью наблюдения (1 Пет V:8).