“I Know That My Redeemer Lives”: Job 19 in Two Voices
Part 3 of 4: Exploring the Septuagint’s Book of Job
Hello brothers and sisters.
In our journey through the Septuagint’s book of Job, we’ve encountered some fascinating surprises.
In Part 1, we discovered that the Greek text preserves a literal “bless” where we expect “curse,” creating a paradox that reveals the difference between authentic worship and empty religion.
In Part 2, we explored the Septuagint’s explicit promise: “It is written that he will rise again with those whom the Lord raises up.” Clear, unambiguous resurrection hope.
But here’s where things get really interesting.
That crystal-clear resurrection promise in LXX Job? It comes at the END of the book in the Septuagint’s epilogue at the end of chapter 42.
Yet the most famous declaration of resurrection hope in Job— “I know that my Redeemer lives, and in my flesh I shall see God” —appears much earlier, in chapter 19.
And when you compare how the Hebrew and Greek render Job 19:25-27, you’ll find something unexpected: the passage that’s most explicit about bodily resurrection in Hebrew is actually LESS clear about it in Greek.
The Septuagint that gives us a direct resurrection promise in the epilogue seems to downplay resurrection language in what might be Job’s most important moment of faith.
So what’s going on here? Why does the tradition that’s clearest at the end seem less clear in the middle?
Let me show you.
If you’re reading this in email, be aware that the text is likely to cut off without warning. For a smoother reading experience and all the features Substack has to offer (including audio voiceovers of my posts), you can go HERE or download the app.
The Hebrew Text: “In My Flesh I Shall See God”
Let’s start with the Hebrew Masoretic Text and see what it actually says.
I’m going to give you a very literal rendering first, then we’ll look at how major English translations handle it, because— and this is important —even the Hebrew of Job 19:25-27 is difficult.
Job 19:25 (Hebrew - Very Literal)
Hebrew: וַאֲנִי יָדַעְתִּי גֹּאֲלִי חָי וְאַחֲרוֹן עַל־עָפָר יָקוּם
Transliteration: wa-ani yada’ti go’ali chai v’acharon al-afar yaqum
Word-by-word:
וַאֲנִי (wa-ani) = “and I”
יָדַעְתִּי (yada’ti) = “I know”
גֹּאֲלִי (go’ali) = “my redeemer/kinsman-redeemer”
חָי (chai) = “lives” or “is living”
וְאַחֲרוֹן (v’acharon) = “and at the last” or “and as the last one”
עַל־עָפָר (al-afar) = “upon the dust” or “over the dust”
יָקוּם (yaqum) = “he will stand” or “he will arise”
Literal rendering: “And I know my redeemer lives, and at the last upon the dust he will stand.”
Job 19:26 (Hebrew - Very Literal)
This is where it gets really difficult. The Hebrew text here is so obscure that scholars debate almost every word.
Hebrew: וְאַחַר עוֹרִי נִקְּפוּ־זֹאת וּמִבְּשָׂרִי אֶחֱזֶה אֱלוֹהַּ
Transliteration: v’achar ori nikqu-zot u-mi-besari echezeh eloah
Word-by-word:
וְאַחַר (v’achar) = “and after”
עוֹרִי (ori) = “my skin”
נִקְּפוּ־זֹאת (nikqu-zot) = “they have struck off this” or “this is destroyed” (the verb is unclear)
וּמִבְּשָׂרִי (u-mi-besari) = “and from my flesh” OR “and in my flesh”
אֶחֱזֶה (echezeh) = “I will see”
אֱלוֹהַּ (eloah) = “God”
The crucial question: Is it מִבְּשָׂרִי (mi-besari) = “from my flesh” (meaning apart from? without?) or “in my flesh” (meaning embodied in)?
The preposition מִן (min) can mean either “from” (indicating separation) or “in” (indicating location/position).
Literal rendering (two options):
“And after my skin is destroyed thus, from my flesh I will see God” (disembodied?)
“And after my skin is destroyed thus, in my flesh I will see God” (embodied?)
Job 19:27 (Hebrew)
Hebrew: אֲשֶׁר אֲנִי אֶחֱזֶה־לִּי וְעֵינַי רָאוּ וְלֹא־זָר
Transliteration: asher ani echezeh-li v’einai ra’u v’lo-zar
Literal: “Whom I myself will see, and my eyes will behold, and not a stranger”
This verse emphasizes the personal, direct nature of Job’s seeing God. It’s not someone else who will see. Not a stranger. Job himself, with his own eyes.
How English Translations Handle Job 19:25-27
Now let’s look at how major English translations— all working from the Hebrew Masoretic Text —render these verses:
NRSV:
“For I know that my Redeemer lives, and that at the last he will stand upon the earth; and after my skin has been thus destroyed, then in my flesh I shall see God, whom I shall see on my side, and my eyes shall behold, and not another.”
ESV:
“For I know that my Redeemer lives, and at the last he will stand upon the earth. And after my skin has been thus destroyed, yet in my flesh I shall see God, whom I shall see for myself, and my eyes shall behold, and not another.”
NKJV:
“For I know that my Redeemer lives, And He shall stand at last on the earth; And after my skin is destroyed, this I know, That in my flesh I shall see God, Whom I shall see for myself, And my eyes shall behold, and not another.”
NIV:
“I know that my redeemer lives, and that in the end he will stand on the earth. And after my skin has been destroyed, yet in my flesh I will see God; I myself will see him with my own eyes—I, and not another.”
Notice that all four major translations choose “in my flesh” over “from my flesh.”
They’re interpreting the ambiguous preposition in a way that emphasizes bodily resurrection.
And that interpretation makes sense in context. Job is saying:
My Redeemer lives (present reality)
He will stand on the earth at the last (future event)
After my skin/body is destroyed (acknowledging death)
In my flesh I will see God (resurrection!)
I myself, with my own eyes (personal, embodied encounter)
This is a clear statement of resurrection hope.
The Septuagint Text: A Very Different Picture
Now let’s look at how the Greek Septuagint translates these same verses.
And prepare yourself, the difference is striking.
Job 19:25 (Septuagint)
Brenton:
“For I know that he is eternal who is about to deliver me,”
N.E.T.S.:
“For I know that he is everlasting, the one who is going to deliver me”
Greek text:
ἀίδιος γάρ μοι ἐστιν ὁ ἐκλύειν με μέλλων
Word analysis:
ἀίδιος (aidios) = “eternal, everlasting”
γάρ (gar) = “for”
μοι (moi) = “to me” or “for me”
ἐστιν (estin) = “is”
ὁ (ho) = “the” (masculine singular)
ἐκλύειν (eklyein) = “to deliver” or “to set free”
με (me) = “me”
μέλλων (mellōn) = “the one about to” or “being about to”
Key difference #1: The Hebrew says “my Redeemer lives“ (present tense, emphasis on being alive). The Greek says “he is eternal“ (emphasis on timelessness, not temporal existence).
Key difference #2: The Hebrew גֹּאֲלִי (go’ali, “my redeemer/kinsman-redeemer”) becomes simply ὁ ἐκλύειν με μέλλων (”the one who is going to deliver me”). The specific kinsman-redeemer language is lost.
Key difference #3: The Hebrew speaks of standing “upon the earth/dust” at the last. The Septuagint omits this entirely. No mention of standing on the earth. No reference to “the last day.”
Job 19:26 (Septuagint)
Brenton:
“to raise up upon the earth my skin that endures these things: for these things have been accomplished to me of the Lord;”
N.E.T.S.:
“to raise up on earth my skin that endures these things. For from the Lord these things have been accomplished for me,”
Greek text:
ἐπὶ γῆς ἀναστῆσαι τὸ δέρμα μου τὸ ἀνατλῶν ταῦτα· παρὰ γὰρ κυρίου ταῦτά μοι συνετελέσθη
Word analysis:
ἐπὶ γῆς (epi gēs) = “upon the earth”
ἀναστῆσαι (anastēsai) = “to raise up” or “to restore”
τὸ δέρμα μου (to derma mou) = “my skin”
τὸ ἀνατλῶν ταῦτα = “that endures these things”
παρὰ γὰρ κυρίου = “for from the Lord”
ταῦτά μοι συνετελέσθη = “these things have been accomplished for me”
Key difference #4: The Hebrew “after my skin has been destroyed” becomes “to raise up my skin that endures these things.” “Raise up my skin”? That sounds like resurrection language, doesn’t it? But notice: it’s “my skin that endures” (present participle). The skin endures. It’s not destroyed and then raised. It’s being preserved through suffering.
Key difference #5: The phrase “from the Lord these things have been accomplished” is past tense. The deliverance has already happened or is happening now. This isn’t future hope, it’s present/past reality.
Key difference #6: There is no mention of flesh (בָּשָׂר, basar). The critical Hebrew phrase “in my flesh I shall see God” simply doesn’t appear in the Greek.
Job 19:27 (Septuagint)
Brenton:
“which I am conscious of in myself, which mine eye has seen, and not another, but all have been fulfilled to me in my bosom.”
N.E.T.S.:
“of which I myself am conscious, which my eye has seen and no other, and which have been fulfilled for me in my bosom.”
Greek text:
ἃ αὐτὸς συνόοιδα ἐμαυτῷ, ἃ ὁ ὀφθαλμός μου ἑώρακεν καὶ οὐκ ἄλλος, συντετέλεσται δέ μοι πάντα ἐν κόλπῳ
Word analysis:
ἃ (ha) = “the things which”
αὐτὸς (autos) = “myself”
συνόοιδα (synoida) = “I am conscious of” or “I know in my own mind”
ἐμαυτῷ (emautō) = “within myself”
ἃ (ha) = “which”
ὁ (ho) = “the”
ὀφθαλμός (ophthalmos) = “eye”
μου (mou) = “of me” or “my”
ἑώρακεν (heōraken) = “has seen”
καὶ (kai) = “and”
οὐκ (ouk) = “not”
ἄλλος (allos) = “another”
συντετέλεσται (syntetelestai) = “has been fulfilled” or “is completed”
δέ (de) = “and” or “but”
μοι (moi) = “to me” or “for me”
πάντα (panta) = “all things”
ἐν (en) = “in”
κόλπῳ (kolpō) = “bosom” or “heart”
Key difference #7: The Hebrew’s future tense (”I shall see,” “my eyes shall behold”) becomes past or perfect tense in Greek (”has seen,” “have been fulfilled”).
Key difference #8: The emphasis shifts from future seeing to present consciousness. “Which I am conscious of in myself” rather than “whom I shall see.”
Key difference #9: “All have been fulfilled to me in my bosom” suggests completion, not future hope.
What the Septuagint Is Saying
Let me put the entire Septuagint passage together:
Job 19:25-27 (Septuagint - synthesized):
“For I know that he is everlasting, the one who is going to deliver me, to raise up on earth my skin that endures these things. For from the Lord these things have been accomplished for me, of which I myself am conscious, which my eye has seen and no other, and which have been fulfilled for me in my bosom.”
This is not about bodily resurrection in the future.
This is about present vindication and deliverance.
Job is saying:
God is eternal and will deliver me
My skin (my body) is being sustained through this suffering
These things are being accomplished by the Lord now
I am conscious of this now
My eyes have seen it (present/past, not future)
This is being fulfilled in me
The focus is on God’s present sustaining power, not future resurrection.
Why Are They So Different?
This is one of the most dramatic divergences between the Masoretic Text and the Septuagint in the entire book of Job.
So what’s going on?
Scholarly Explanations
Scholars offer several theories:
1. The LXX translator found the Hebrew too difficult and paraphrased.
Job 19:26 is one of the most obscure verses in the Hebrew Bible. Even modern scholars with all their tools struggle to translate it confidently.
The Septuagint translator, working 2,200+ years ago, may have simply done his best with a text he couldn’t fully understand, and focused on what seemed clearest: God’s deliverance of Job in the present moment.
2. The LXX translator worked from a different Hebrew text.
It’s possible the Hebrew manuscript the Greek translator used read differently than our Masoretic Text. Some of these differences might reflect variant Hebrew readings that didn’t survive in the Masoretic tradition.
3. The LXX translator had theological reasons to avoid resurrection language here.
This is less likely, but some have suggested the translator wanted to emphasize God’s faithfulness in the present life rather than speculation about the afterlife.
4. The Hebrew itself is ambiguous, and different traditions emphasized different aspects.
Even if both translators worked from the same Hebrew text, the ambiguities in Job 19:26 allow for different interpretations. The Masoretic tradition emphasized future resurrection; the Septuagint tradition emphasized present vindication.
My Perspective: Both Are Revealing God’s Truth
Here’s what I believe, and it’s the heart of my both/and approach:
Both the Masoretic and Septuagint traditions are authoritative. Both have been intentionally preserved by God to tell the fuller story. They complement, rather than contradict, one another.
The Masoretic Text emphasizes future hope. Job will see God in his flesh. After death, after the body is destroyed, there will be resurrection. The Redeemer will stand on the earth at the last day. This is eschatological faith, trust in God’s ultimate vindication beyond this life. I personally read this as being in line with Revelation where in the last days, Jesus will stand upon the Mount of Olives.
The Septuagint emphasizes present sustaining. God is delivering Job now. God is raising up Job’s skin— his body —that endures suffering. Job is conscious of God’s work in him in the present moment. This is incarnational faith, trust in God’s presence in the midst of suffering.
Do we need to choose between them?
I don’t think so. As I’ve expressed many times, there are very, very few occasions when the Hebrew and Greek are so directly contradictory that we have to choose one over the other.
What Job Really Needed to Hear (Both Messages)
Think about Job’s situation in chapter 19.
He’s sitting on an ash heap. His body is covered in painful sores. He’s scraping his skin with broken pottery. His children are dead. His wealth is gone. His wife has told him to give up. His friends are accusing him of secret sin.
In this moment, what does Job need?
He Needs Future Hope
He needs to know that this isn’t the end of the story.
Even if he dies in this ash heap. Even if his body completely wastes away. Even if he never sees vindication in this life.
My Redeemer lives.
At the last day, when all seems lost, God will stand on the earth.
After my skin is destroyed, after my body returns to dust, I will see God in my flesh.
This is the hope that enables Job to endure. Death is not the final word. The grave is not the end. There will be resurrection.
The Hebrew text gives Job— and us —this essential future hope (just as the epilogue in the Septuagint version does).
He Needs Present Sustaining
But Job also needs to know that God is with him right now.
Not just at some distant future resurrection. Not just “at the last day.”
Now. In this moment. In this suffering.
God is eternal, and He is about to deliver me. Now.
My skin, this suffering skin covered in sores, is being sustained. It endures these things because God is raising it up.
These things are being accomplished for me by the Lord. Not in the distant future, but now.
I am conscious of it. My eyes see it. It’s being fulfilled in my heart, in my experience, in this present moment.
The Septuagint gives Job— and us —this essential present comfort.
Both/And: Future Resurrection and Present Sustaining
Here’s the beautiful thing: Job needs both truths.
And so do we.
When you’re suffering— really suffering, the kind of suffering that breaks you —you need to know:
1. This is not the end. There will be resurrection. God will vindicate you. Justice will be done. Your pain has meaning. Death doesn’t win.
That’s the Hebrew’s message. Future hope. Eschatological confidence.
2. God is with you right now. He hasn’t abandoned you. He’s sustaining you even as you suffer. Your body, weak and broken as it is, is being held together by divine power. God is accomplishing His purposes in you in this very moment.
That’s the Greek’s message. Present sustaining. Incarnational comfort.
Do you see how both are true? How both are necessary?
If you only have future hope without present sustaining, you might despair: “God will vindicate me someday, but where is He now? I’m dying. I can’t make it to ‘someday.’”
If you only have present sustaining without future hope, you might lose perspective: “God is with me in this suffering, but what if I die before vindication comes? What if this pain never makes sense in this life?”
Job needed both. We need both.
The Masoretic Text and the Septuagint aren’t competing. They’re working together to give us a fuller picture.
They’re singing the same song in different voices; soprano and alto, if you will. Different notes, different registers, but one song.
How the Church Fathers Read This Passage
The early Church Fathers, working primarily from the Septuagint, still understood Job 19 as pointing to resurrection.
How?
Because they read Scripture as a unified whole. They didn’t isolate Job 19:25-27 from the rest of Job, from the rest of the Old Testament, or from the revelation of Christ in the New Testament.
Tertullian (c. 155-240 A.D.)
Tertullian, in his treatise On the Resurrection of the Flesh, quotes Job 19:25-27 as proof of bodily resurrection.
Interestingly, Tertullian seems to be working from a Latin translation influenced more by the Hebrew than the Septuagint, because he emphasizes “in my flesh I shall see God.”
But the point is: the early Church saw this passage as teaching resurrection, regardless of which textual tradition they were reading.
Origen (c. 185-254 A.D.)
Origen knew both the Hebrew and Greek texts. In his commentaries, he acknowledged the differences but insisted both pointed to the same truth: God vindicates His servants, both in this life and in the resurrection.
Origen saw no contradiction. Present deliverance and future resurrection were both part of God’s redemptive work.
John Chrysostom (c. 349-407 A.D.)
Chrysostom, preaching in Greek from the Septuagint text, still proclaimed resurrection hope from Job 19.
He understood “raise up my skin” as resurrection language, even though the Greek doesn’t explicitly say “in my flesh.”
Why? Because the larger narrative of Scripture— and especially the promise in Job 42:17b (”he will rise again with those whom the Lord raises up”) —made clear that resurrection was the ultimate hope.
Augustine of Hippo (354–430 A.D.)
In his monumental work The City of God, Augustine quotes Job 19:25–27 to argue against those who believed the resurrection would be purely spiritual. He points to Job’s specific language— “in my flesh I shall see God” —as a prophetic certainty that our earthly bodies will be restored and transformed, rather than discarded.
For Augustine, Job was not just expressing a vague hope for the afterlife; he was providing a “testimony of the resurrection” that predated the New Testament. Augustine emphasized that because our Redeemer lives and has a body, our own future involves a literal, physical seeing of God with “these same eyes.”
The Pattern
Do you see the pattern?
The Church Fathers didn’t get hung up on textual differences. They read the text theologically, holistically, christologically.
They understood that Scripture reveals one God, one plan of redemption, one hope. And that different texts might emphasize different facets of that one truth.
Resurrection and Vindication: Not Either/Or, But Both/And
Let me bring this home with a theological point that ties everything together.
Resurrection isn’t separate from vindication. Resurrection IS vindication.
When Job says (in the Hebrew), “In my flesh I shall see God,” he’s not just making a claim about the mechanics of afterlife. He’s making a claim about God’s justice.
Job is saying: “God will prove me right. And the proof will be so complete, so total, that even my body— this body that’s wasting away, this flesh that’s covered in sores —will be restored and will see God.”
When Job says (in the Greek), “God is raising up my skin that endures these things,” he’s not denying future resurrection. He’s affirming God’s sustaining justice in the present.
Job is saying: “God is proving me right even now. And the proof is that my body— weak as it is —hasn’t given out. God is holding me together. God is accomplishing His purposes in my suffering.”
Both are vindication. Both are resurrection power.
One looks forward to the final resurrection.
One looks to the present sustaining that makes endurance possible.
They’re not contradictory. They’re the same divine power, working in different temporal modes.
Paul would later capture this perfectly in 2 Corinthians 4:16-18:
“So we do not lose heart. Even though our outer nature is wasting away, our inner nature is being renewed day by day. For this slight momentary affliction is preparing us for an eternal weight of glory beyond all measure, because we look not at what can be seen but at what cannot be seen; for what can be seen is temporary, but what cannot be seen is eternal.”
Present renewal (like the Septuagint’s emphasis).
Future glory (like the Hebrew’s emphasis).
Both true. Both necessary.
What This Means for Your Suffering
So here’s the application.
When you’re in the middle of suffering— when your body is failing, when your hope is thin, when you’re tempted to despair —you need Job 19 in both voices.
From the Hebrew, you need to hear: Your Redeemer lives. At the last day, He will stand on the earth. After your body is destroyed, you will see God in your flesh. This isn’t the end. Death doesn’t win. There will be resurrection. Hold on.
From the Greek, you need to hear: God is eternal, and He is delivering you right now. Your body, weak as it is, is being sustained by divine power. These things are being accomplished for you in this moment. God hasn’t abandoned you. You are seeing His work with your own eyes, even now.
You need both.
The hope of future resurrection keeps you from despair when present deliverance seems distant.
The reality of present sustaining keeps you from giving up while you wait for future resurrection.
Job declares both. The Hebrew emphasizes one. The Greek emphasizes the other.
And God, in His wisdom, has preserved both traditions so we would have the full truth.
The Tension Is the Point
I want to close with this: the tension between these two readings isn’t a problem to solve. It’s a gift to receive.
It would be easier if they said the exact same thing. Then we wouldn’t have to wrestle. We wouldn’t have to hold two truths in tension.
But Scripture isn’t interested in making things easy. It’s interested in making us whole.
And wholeness requires tension.
The tension between:
Future hope and present experience
“Not yet” and “Already”
Waiting for resurrection and experiencing resurrection power now
Trusting God’s ultimate vindication and seeing God’s immediate faithfulness
This is the tension of the Christian life.
We live in the “already but not yet.”
Christ has risen (already), but we await our own resurrection (not yet).
The Kingdom has come (already), but creation still groans (not yet).
We are being saved (present tense, like the Septuagint), and we will be saved (future tense, like the Hebrew).
Both are true.
Job 19, in its two textual traditions, holds this tension perfectly.
And rather than choosing one tradition over the other, rather than flattening the difference, rather than harmonizing them into bland uniformity…
We receive both as God’s Word.
Different voices. Different emphases. Same truth.
My Redeemer lives. He will stand on the earth at the last day. I will see Him in my flesh.
God is eternal. He is delivering me now. My suffering body is being sustained by His power.
Both.
Always both.
Discussion Questions:
Before reading this post, how did you understand Job 19:25-27? Does seeing the Septuagint’s very different rendering challenge or enrich your understanding?
Which emphasis resonates more with you in your current season of life: the Hebrew’s future resurrection hope, or the Greek’s present sustaining power? Why?
Have you experienced suffering where you needed both the promise of ultimate vindication AND the assurance of God’s present help? How did those two truths work together in your experience?
Do you find it difficult to hold two different textual traditions in tension without feeling like you need to choose one as “more correct”? What would it look like to receive both as authoritative?
How does Paul’s language in 2 Corinthians 4:16-18 help us understand the relationship between the Hebrew and Greek readings of Job 19?
If you’ve found this helpful or insightful, please share it with a friend who loves Scripture as much as you do.
Coming Up Next
In Part 4, we’ll explore the remaining significant differences between the Masoretic and Septuagint versions of Job, including the fascinating change from “sons of God” to “angels of God” in the heavenly court, the length discrepancies between the two texts, and what we learn about translation philosophy, textual transmission, and reading Scripture from multiple traditions.
We’ll also tie together everything we’ve learned in this series and reflect on what it means to approach Scripture with a both/and framework that honors multiple textual witnesses without forcing them into artificial uniformity.
The LXX Scrolls is free to read and always will be. If this work has been worth something to you, there are a few ways to say so:
Buy the ebooks. Completed teaching series are available as polished ebooks under the Two Witnesses, One Truth series. Buying through Curios will support this work most directly but they’re also available on Amazon (and elsewhere) if you’re loyal to a particular ereader.
Become a supporter. A monthly or annual pledge through Substack helps me to bring the Septuagint to those who never knew they needed it.
Send a one-time tip. If this post has blessed you and you want to express that directly, you can Buy Me a Coffee.
Thank you for being part of this journey, your support makes this work possible.
© 2026 LXX Scrolls. All rights reserved.
Before you got to the conclusion, I was thinking that both could be true, and then that's exactly what you said. And I also think the the distinction of future and present hope is important, and we need both.
YHWH is Savor yesterday, today, and tomorrow.
Thanks for sharing, Kevin.
Appreciate your discussion questions and, particularly, this enriching point: "God is delivering Job now."