Job Chapter 34 verse 33 Holy Bible
Shall his recompense be as thou wilt, that thou refusest it? For thou must choose, and not I: Therefore speak what thou knowest.
read chapter 34 in ASV
...
read chapter 34 in BBE
Shall he recompense according to thy mind? for thou hast refused [his judgment]; for thou so choosest, and not I; speak then what thou knowest.
read chapter 34 in DARBY
Should it be according to thy mind? he will recompense it, whether thou refuse, or whether thou choose; and not I: therefore speak what thou knowest.
read chapter 34 in KJV
Should it be according to thy mind? he will recompense it, whether thou shalt refuse, or whether thou shalt choose; and not I: therefore speak what thou knowest.
read chapter 34 in WBT
Shall his recompense be as you desire, that you refuse it? For you must choose, and not I. Therefore speak what you know.
read chapter 34 in WEB
By thee doth He recompense, That thou hast refused -- That thou dost choose, and not I? And what thou hast known, speak.
read chapter 34 in YLT
Pulpit Commentary
Pulpit CommentaryVerse 33. - Should it be according to thy mind? he will recompense it. The two clauses should be taken together, and the translation should run, "Should God recompense" (i.e. make his awards) "according to thy pleasure'" or "as thou wiliest?" Elihu turns to Job and directly addresses him, "Can he expect that God will make his decrees - condemn and absolve men - just as Job thinks right?" Whether thou refuse; rather, since thou refusest them. Job had refused to acknowledge the justice of God's awards and decisions. Or whether thou choose; and not I; rather, but thou must choose, and not I. It is Job who must determine how he will act. Elihu, a friend, can only point out and recommend a course, as he had done in vers. 31, 32. It is for Job himself to determine what course he will take. Therefore speak what thou knowest; i.e. "Say what thou hast determined on."
Ellicott's Commentary
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers(33) Should it be according to thy mind? is obscure from its abruptness. We understand it thus: "Should he recompense it (i.e., a man's conduct) according to thy mind, with thy concurrence, whether thou refusest or whether thou choosest?"And not I--i.e., "Then why not according as I refuse or choose? If thou art to influence and direct His dealing and government, why may not I? why may not any one? And if so, He is no longer supreme or absolute. What knowest thou, then? Speak, if thou hast anything to say to this reasoning."
