Albert Barnes Commentary Job 40:23

"Behold, if a river overflow, he trembleth not; He is confident, though a Jordan swell even to his mouth." — Job 40:23 (ASV)

Behold, he drinks up a river—The margin says, “oppresses.” The margin expresses the proper meaning of the Hebrew word, עשׁק (‛âshaq). It usually means to oppress, to treat with violence and injustice, and to defraud, or extort. But a very different sense is given to this verse by Bochart, Gesenius, Noyes, Schultens, Umbreit, Professor Lee, and Rosenmuller. According to the interpretation given by them, the meaning is, “The stream overflows, and he fears not; he is secure, even though Jordan rushes forth even to his mouth.” The reference then would be, not to the fact that he was greedy in his mode of drinking, but to the fact that this huge and fierce animal, that found its food often on the land, and that reposed under the shade of the lotus and the papyrus, could live in the water as well as on the land, and was unmoved even though the impetuous torrent of a swollen river should overwhelm him.

The names by which this translation is recommended are a sufficient guarantee that it is not a departure from the proper meaning of the original. It is also the most natural and obvious interpretation. It is impossible to make good sense of the phrase “he oppresses a river,” nor does the word used properly admit of the translation “he drinks up.” The word “river” in this place, therefore (נהר nâhâr), is to be regarded as in the nominative case to יעשׁק (ya‛âshaq)—and the meaning is, that when a swollen and impetuous river rushes along and bears all before it, and, as it were, oppresses everything in its course, he is not alarmed; he makes no effort to flee; he lies perfectly calm and secure. What was remarkable in this appears to have been, that an animal that was so much on land, and that was not properly a fish, should be thus calm and composed when an impetuous torrent rolled over him.

The Septuagint appears to have been aware that this was the true interpretation, for they render this part of the verse: Ἐάν γέηται πλνμμύρα, κ.τ.λ. Ean genētai plēmmura, etc.—“Should there come a flood, he would not regard it.” Our common translation seems to have been adopted from the Vulgate—“Ecce absorbebit fluvium.”

He trusts that he can draw up Jordan into his mouth—Or, rather, “He is confident, that is, unmoved, though Jordan should rush forth to his mouth.” The idea is, that though the whole river Jordan should seem to pour down upon him as if it were about to rush into his mouth, it would not disturb him. Even such an impetuous torrent would not alarm him. Being amphibious, he would not dread what would fill a land animal with alarm. There is no evidence that the hippopotamus was ever found in the river Jordan, nor is it necessary to suppose this in order to understand this passage.

The mention of the Jordan indeed shows that this river was known to the writer of this book and that it was probably written by someone who resided in the vicinity. In speaking of this huge foreign animal, it was not unnatural to mention a river that was familiarly known, and to say that he would not be alarmed should such a river rush suddenly and impetuously upon him. Even though the hippopotamus is an inhabitant of the Nile, and was never seen in the Jordan, it was much more natural to mention this river in this connection than the Nile. It was better known, and the illustration would be better understood, and to an inhabitant of that country would be much more striking. I see no reason, therefore, for the supposition of Bochart and Rosenmuller, that the Jordan here is put for any large river.

The illustration is just such as one would have used who was well acquainted with the Jordan—that the river horse would not be alarmed even though such a river should pour impetuously upon him.