Job 33:20

Authorized King James Version

So that his life abhorreth bread, and his soul dainty meat.

Word-by-Word Analysis

וְזִֽהֲמַ֣תּוּ

H2092

abhorreth

to be rancid, i.e., (transitively) to loathe

חַיָּת֣וֹ

H2416

So that his life

alive; hence, raw (flesh); fresh (plant, water, year), strong; also (as noun, especially in the feminine singular and masculine plural) life (or livin

לָ֑חֶם

H3899

bread

food (for man or beast), especially bread, or grain (for making it)

וְ֝נַפְשׁ֗וֹ

H5315

and his soul

properly, a breathing creature, i.e., animal of (abstractly) vitality; used very widely in a literal, accommodated or figurative sense (bodily or ment

מַאֲכַ֥ל

H3978

meat

an eatable (including provender, flesh and fruit)

תַּאֲוָֽה׃

H8378

dainty

a longing; by implication, a delight (subjectively, satisfaction, objectively, a charm)

Analysis

The salvation theme here intersects with the metanarrative of redemption running from Genesis to Revelation. Biblical theology recognizes this as part of a unified storyline from the promise in Genesis 3:15 to its fulfillment in Christ. The phrase emphasizing life contributes to our systematic understanding of Christian doctrine and connects to the broader scriptural witness about God's saving work from the Exodus to the cross.

Historical Context

The literary and historical milieu of the literary conventions and historical circumstances of biblical literature shapes this text's meaning. The historical development of salvation within the theological tradition of Job Understanding the ancient worldview that shaped the author's theological expression helps modern readers appreciate why the author emphasizes life in this particular way.

Questions for Reflection

In what ways does this verse's emphasis on life address religious pluralism and questions about the necessity of Christ, and how should the church respond?
What practical applications emerge from understanding salvation as presented in this verse, particularly in light of addressing questions of religious pluralism and the exclusivity of Christ?
How might the original audience's understanding of life differ from modern interpretations, and what bridges can be built between ancient meaning and contemporary application?