2. The Spanish version of CASSIODORO DE REYNA, Basel 1569 1622: "Yo se que mi Redemptor bue, y à la fin me leuantaré sobre el poluo. Y despues, desde este mi roto cuero y desde mi propria carne tengo de ver à Dios.—Al quál yo tengo de ver por mi, y mis ojos lo han de ver, y no otro, [aunque] mis riñones se consumen dentro de mi." 3. The version of TREMELLIUS, 1579:

"Equidem ego novi redemptorem meum vivere: & posteriorem super pulverem resurrecturum:-Et postquam vermes confoderint istud, evigilante me: tum carne mea me visurum esse Deum.—Idem qui sum, ac non alienus visurus sum mihi, & oculi mei aspecturi: tamen consumuntur renes mei in sinu meo."

4. The version of COCCEIUS, Op. xl. 191:

"

'Ego enim novi quod Redemtor meus vivit; et ultimus super pulverem stabit. Et postquam cutim meam destrinxerint hæc, ibi etiam ex carne mea videbo Deum.-Quem egomet videbo mihi: et oculi mei spectabunt, non inquam, alius; conficiuntur renes mei in sinu meo."

5. The version of DIODATI, Geneva, 1607:

'Ora, quant'è a me, io so che il mio Redentore vive, e che nell' ultimo giorno egli si leverà sopra la polvere;-e quantunque dopo la mia pelle, questo corpo sia roso, pur vedrò con la carne mia Iddio;—il quale io vedrò, gli occhi miei lo vedranno, e non un altro; le mie reni mi si consumano in seno."

The examination of the passage through so many versions has necessarily involved the demonstration of numerous renderings not in agreement with the original; it is therefore deemed unnecessary to discuss at length the reasons for the subjoined rendering which seeks to dispense with interpretative supplied matter, as far as practicable, and lays claim only to fidelity to the Hebrew; originality is entirely out of the question, and elegance of diction as well as the finer shades of idiomatic expression are better supplied by a concert of competent judges, than by any individual translator.

TRANSLATION.

25. "Yea I know that my Redeemer liveth, and that he will stand the Last upon the earth, 26. and though after my skin, even this be broken, yet from my flesh shall I see God, 27. Whom I, even I, shall see for myself, and mine eyes shall behold, and not a stranger. My reins faint away in my bosom."

This rendering is submitted on the following grounds:

v. 25.

יָדַע .place

ix. 17.

may be either and, or, as for me, yea; for, seems out of followed by a finite verb without occurs Job. xxx. 23; Ps.

alive, living, and predicated of

might, perhaps, be expressed in orat, dir. so as to read "my

Redeemer lives;" there seems to be no grammatical reason against

and הָי the • connecting it with וְאַחֲרוֹן govern וְאֲנִי יְדַעְתִּי making

affirming both of

may be taken as a substantive, or as an

adjective with substantive power, either in apposition with

the

subject of the first clause, or as the independent subject of the second clause; perhaps it might be rendered without supplying the; the adverbial renderings at last, hereafter, at, or in the latter day appear to be more or less arbitrary, for in such phrases as at first and at last, even where the reference is to the subject, we have the forms: matosa, mpinsh, e. g., Numb. ii. 31: x. 13; 1 Sam. xxix. ii.; Dan.

viii. 3, etc.

בְּאַחַרנָה

יָקוּם עַל־עָפָר

by, see Ps. xii. 6; Is. xxx. 10, appears to make good sense, if the arising, or standing up, be understood of Job's deliverance.

by, Zöckler says, denotes indisputably the dust of Job's decayed body; this may fairly be questioned, for while in ch. xvii. 16, xx. 11 and xxi. 26 the phrase signifies the grave, in xli. 25 it denotes the earth without any reference to the grave, also in xxii. 24, and in xxxix. 14 it means sand.

v. 26., a preposition, not a conjunction; if a conjunction, the verb would follow it immediately, cf. xlii. 7; Lev. xiv. 43; it goes therefore with the noun, not with the verb.

נקְפוּ

Ep, closely connected with, might be rendered impersonally; the position of between the preposition and renders the

clause an uncommonly difficult one for translation; the literal rendering, of course, is easy enough, viz., "and after my skin-it shall have been broken (or some other word)-this." But such a rendering seems too vague in English; its ruggedness would require too much explanation; "this my skin" (Ewald, Del. and Revised Bible) appears objectionable, for this may mean that which is under the skin, i. e., the whole frame, (Tayler Lewis), and this my skin would limit the reference to the skin; on the whole, therefore, the reproduction of the abrupt but pregnant may be desirable.

the admits of being rendered "yet," if "though" is supplied, otherwise even may be better than and.

if privative, denotes free from, separate from, without, not without as opposed to within, but as not having it, cf. xi. 15, xxi. 9; but from seems to be the least interpretative rendering, and preserves the ambiguity of the original.

v. 27. relates to

while

denotes benefit. The whole

and, and in order to bring

clause is emphatic, as is evident from

out the full sense, a rendering stronger than the simple relative might be desirable, perhaps, even I, may suffice.

זָר

has been rendered a stranger, alienum, although a good meaning may be had by translating alienus. Taking it as accusative is grammatically correct, and understanding it with Gesenius, Umbreit, Vaihinger, Stickel, Hahn, v. Hoffman and Tayler Lewis (q. v.) in the sense of adversarius, appears to me far better than the flat, tautological alius. As to the meaning enemy, that also seems to be well established by reference to Ps. liv. 5; Is. i. 7: xxix. 5; Ez. xi. 9: xxviii, 10: xxx. 12; Hos. vii. 9; viii. 7; Obad. 11; compare also Job. xvi. 9.

is rendered faint away, with reference to the use of that word in the Authorized Version at Ps. lxxxiv. 3: cxix. 81.

II. Summary of an interpretation of the passage.

I cannot resist the conviction that the passage is decidedly eschatological, and stands out in solitary grandeur as an ancient prophecy, or poetic vision of a resurrection. Careful study of the passage, in its true connection, the solemnity of its announcement, the abrupt ruggedness of its enunciation, the fiery rapture of its anticipated fulfilment, and the general sense of its meaning in ancient and modern times, combine to necessitate this view. It is unnecessary to transcribe here the history of the interpretation, a very full account of which is given in Lange's Commentary, Am. Ed. An outline of the ideas intended to

to be conveyed by the translation submitted may suffice.

I. Job felt himself irresistibly impelled to utter something so wonderful, so unheard-of, so momentous, that he desired it to be put on imperishable record in a roll, and as that might be destroyed, engraved upon the rock.

2. It is the announcement of a Redeemer, concerning whom he affirms that he is his Redeemer, his Goel, Avenger, Judge and Saviour, perhaps the Hero-Messiah, whom he conceives to be eternal, and therefore the survivor of earthly vicissitude and mundane destruction-come what may, let universal ruin prevail, He the great Goel is alive for evermore, and will stand upon the dust or the earth, whether that dust be only Job's, or the dust of all whose bodies have returned to earth.

3. His skin may waste away, the whole bodily organism may be destroyed by disease, death, and decomposition, it will not hurt him, for he is certain of the beatific vision, in a conscious state, of his God, in the body, or out of the body; he shall see God; be his body glorified, or his soul disembodied, the vision is certain, from the body as a position, he looking out, or without a body, without flesh, in some marvellous manner he will still see God, and his eyes will behold Him, not as an Avenger, not as a stranger, not as an enemy, but as his friend, the omnipotence of the Mighty God arrayed on his side. And for the consummation and ultimate enjoyment of that blissful estate he yearns with

a longing so intense, he is so carried away, that language seems to fail him, and he is almost ready to faint and die.

These are the ideas which, I believe, lie in the passage, and which its true exegesis cannot ignore; concerning those that have been carried into it, or made out of it, I do not feel called upon to express an opinion. The positions taken appear to me to be sustained by weighty authority, and while I cannot admit that the passage proves the Christian doctrine of the Resurrection, it is certainly the proclamation of a resurrection, and even the most divergent renderings of the original,-n -no matter how disguised, weakened, distorted and perverted,-bear their testimony to that. Thus much is certain.

NOTE. I wish to call attention to the remarkable targumistic addition to the book of Job in the LXX.: γέγραπται δὲ αὐτὸν πάλιν ἀναστή σεσθαι μεθ' ὧν δ κύριος ἀνίστησιν. It is, of course, the interpolation of some diaskenast, drawn from a Syriac version of the LXX. (see Böhl, Forschungen nach einer Volksbibel zur Zeit Jesu, etc. Wien, 1873. p. 129 sq.), but of dogmatic interest, for it reflects a very ancient view of this remarkable passage.

THE AUTHOR.

An Examination of the Use of the Tenses in

Conditional Sentences in Hebrew.

BY REV. H. FERGUSON.

A conditional sentence may be defined as a compound sentence in which the second clause is so limited by the first as to be necessarily dependent upon it, while it, in its turn, is equally necessary as explaining and completing the sense of the first clause. The First Clause or Protasis may express

Either a pure condition, i. e., "if I'come;"

or a temporal limitation, i. e., "when I come;"
or a causal limitation,

or a concession,

i. e., “since I am coming;"
i. e., "though I come."

This statement, though true in any language, is most evidently so in Hebrew: as the language uses the same particles indifferently to express any of these relations; accordingly, in this paper, temporal, causal and concessive clauses will be considered simply as forms of conditions.

My intention in this paper is to give, first, a statement of the different expedients made use of by the Hebrew to express a condition and conclusion, without regard to the class of the condition; and, secondly, to consider what rules may be gathered for the use of the tenses or other verbal forms in expressing the various classes of conditions.

VARIOUS METHODS USED.

The Methods used in the Hebrew writings that have come down to us, to express a Condition and its Conclusion, are as follows:

I.

Without any introductory particle, either (1) by simple juxtaposi tion of the clauses, or (2) after a relative or interrogative expression.

II.

With the Condition introduced by Waw.