Job 30:29--owls or ostriches?

[Logos1560]

Variation is again found in the Bibles on the KJV-only line of good Bibles at Job 30:29. Wycliffe’s, Coverdale’s, Matthew’s, Great, Geneva, and Bishops’ Bibles all have “ostriches” while the KJV has “owls.” William Tyndale had translated the same Hebrew as “ostrich” at Leviticus 11:16. Luther’s 1534 German Bible on the good line had the German word for ostriches at Job 30:29. The 1611 edition did have a marginal note at Job 30:29: “Or, ostriches.” Did those German-speaking believers who read the common German Bible made by Luther at this verse and those English-speaking believers who read the KJV understand the bird mentioned to be the same kind? Which one of these two renderings is more accurate?

 

[Athaliamum]

It doesn't matter. In the context of the passage it is talking about him being unclean. Both owls and ostriches are birds which are considered unclean as part of kosher laws. The uncleanliness of them not only relates to the eating of them but the touching of them as well.

So understanding the symbolism of the passage a good way to interpret it would be:

I have become a brother to deceivers
and a companion of the unclean.

 

[Logos1560]

Several sources support the rendering of the earlier pre-1611 English Bibles. J. G. Wood maintained that “the Hebrew word bath-haya’nah, which is translated in the Authorized Version as ’owl,’ ought really to be rendered as ’ostrich’” (Story, p. 523). Tristram affirmed that “the name by which it [ostrich] is most frequently expressed is ya’anah or bath haya’anah i. e. ’greediness,’ or ’daughter of greediness’ (or ’of shouting’). Our Bible reads ’owl,’ excepting in Lamentations 4:3, where ya’enim is rightly rendered ’ostriches’” (Natural History, p. 233). Concerning the Hebrew word at Lamentations 4:3, Cansdale suggested: “The root meaning is sometimes said to be ‘screamer,‘ but it seems more likely to have come from a word meaning ‘greedy,‘ perhaps from its well-known habit of eating unsuitable objects” (All the Animals, p. 191). Smith’s Bible Dictionary asserted that “the A. V. erroneously renders the Hebrew expression, which signifies either ’daughter of greediness,’ or ’daughter of shouting’ by owl” (p. 670). Unger’s Bible Dictionary asserted that “bath yaanah is certainly the ostrich” (p. 62). Fairbairn’s Bible Encyclopedia noted: “It is remarkable that wherever the ostrich is referred to under the epithet ’yaanah,’ it is always (except in Lam. 4:3) with the prefix ’bath’” (V, p. 98). Under its entry “owl,” Wilson’s O. T. Word Studies indicated that one of the Hebrew words translated “owl” in the KJV referred to “the female ostrich” (p. 300). Green’s Concise Lexicon defined this Hebrew word as “ostrich” (p. 100) and indicated that it was the feminine form of the Hebrew word translated “ostriches“ in the KJV at Lamentations 4:3. Young’s Analytical Concordance gave this definition: “daughter of howling, ostrich” (p. 728). Benjamin Blayney, editor of 1769 Oxford KJV, translated the same Hebrew used at Job 30:29 as “daughters of the ostrich” at Jeremiah 50:39 (p. 186). The 1657 English translation of the authorized Dutch Bible has the following rendering of the Hebrew at Job 30:29: “young ostriches” along with a note [“Heb. Daughters of the Ostriches”]. The 1948 Pilgrim Edition of the KJV indicated in a note that the “owls” at this verse were really “ostriches” (p. 711). The 2002 Zondervan KJV Study Bible has the following note: “’owls’=‘ostriches’” (p. 721). The 1842 revision by Baptists, the 1853 Jewish O. T. by Leeser, 1917 English translation by Jews, and 1985 Tanakh by Jews all have “ostriches” at Job 30:29.