Charles Ellicott Commentary Job 40

Shall he that contendeth with the Almighty instruct him?—Rather, Can he that reproves (e.g., Job) contend with the Almighty? Or, Can contending with the Almighty instruct Him? "Are you prepared still to dispute and contend with God? Or, if you do, is there any hope that you will instruct (i.e., convince) Him in argument? Let him that argues with God (i.e., Job) answer this question."

It might, perhaps, tend to make these verses (Job 40:4–5) more effective if we transposed them after Job 42:6 and regarded them as the very climax of the poem, as some have done.

But this is not necessary, and is an arrangement that has no support from external evidence. If, however, it were adopted, Job’s resolution, Once have I spoken; but I will speak no more: yea, twice; but I will not again (Job 40:5), would not be literally inconsistent, as it now is, with what he says in Job 42:1-6.

Wilt thou also disannul my judgment? — Compare what Job said in Job 19:6-7; Job 27:2. God is about to show Job his inability to govern the world and administer judgment among men, and thus rule them morally, an inability demonstrated by his acknowledged powerlessness to govern the more formidable wild animals. If he cannot restrain them, how is it likely that he will be able to tread down the wicked in their place?

And if he cannot hold the wicked in check and compel them to submission, how then can he protect himself from their violence? How can he save himself from the outbursts of their fury? Or, if he cannot save himself from them, how much less can he deliver himself from the hand of God? If he cannot hide them in the dust together, and bind them (i.e., restrain the threats of their rage in the hidden world) in the secret prison-house, how much less can he save himself and be independent of the help of a savior?

Behemoth. —The identification of behemoth has always been a great difficulty for commentators. The word in Hebrew is actually the natural plural of behçmâh, which means domestic cattle; and this fact would suggest that more than one animal may be meant in the description (Job 40:15–24), which hardly seems to apply to one and the same creature. In this way, Job 40:15–20 would describe the elephant very well, and Job 40:21-24 the hippopotamus.

The objection to this is that behçmâh is commonly used for domestic cattle in contrast to wild beasts, whereas neither the elephant nor the hippopotamus can be classified as domestic animals. There is a word in Coptic (p-ehe-emmou, meaning water-ox), used for the hippopotamus, which may, perhaps, be concealed in the word behemoth. Then the difficulty is to make the description apply in its entirety to the hippopotamus (e.g.,Job 40:20), since the hippopotamus does not frequent mountains, nor does it exactly eat grass like an ox (Job 40:15).

Which I made with you. —Your fellow creatures, made to inhabit the world with you: thus skillfully reminding him that he shared a common origin with the beasts.

In the navel. —Rather, in the sinews, or muscles.

(17) The sinews of his stones. —Rather, of his thighs.