The Anselm Project Bible · The Crux Registry

Job 13:15 — “I will hope in him”, or “I have no hope”?

Job 13:15 presents both “though he slay me, yet will I trust him” and “I have no hope” as readings, without settling between them. The margin and the written consonants point in different directions.

לו
lo (lamed-vav) — in him (I will hope)
לא
lo (lamed-alef) — not (I have no hope)
Two Hebrew words pronounced identically — one written with vav, one with alef. The scribes wrote one and told readers to say the other.
IThe Reading

What the APB prints.

Behold, he will slay me; I have no hope; nevertheless I will argue my ways to his face.
Job 13:15 (source numbering) · Anselm Project Bible
IIThe Witnesses

Every witness, on the record.

Masoretic Text (Westminster Leningrad Codex)
MT · codex A.D. 1008; tradition centuries older
לא lonot — “I have no hope” (as written, ketiv)
The consonantal text has the negative. The MT is the Westminster Leningrad Codex, codex A.D. 1008; its consonantal text reads the negative as written. Open Scriptures Hebrew Bible (WLC)
Masoretic qere (marginal reading)
Qere · Masoretic apparatus, medieval
לו loin him — “I will hope in him”
The Masoretes' own margin instructs the reader to pronounce “in him” — the reading behind the KJV's famous line. The Qere is a Masoretic marginal reading, medieval; it instructs readers to pronounce the form meaning in him. Open Scriptures Hebrew Bible (WLC)
supports if the margin (“in him”)supports if the letters (“not”)
IIIThe Blind Test

What a blind committee did here.

The APB's translation committee works blind: it is never told it is translating the Bible, never given a book name or a verse number, and it never sees the witnesses above. Whatever it did at this verse, it did on the language alone — and its record is public.

Committee recordaudit verdict: clean

The blind committee record supplies no rationale note for this crux. The APB text at Job 13:15 uses the negative reading, rendering the speaker as having no hope. For the pericope, the audit verdict is “clean.”

IVThe Stakes

The case for each reading.

If the margin (“in him”)

Reading A is the Masoretic qere, a marginal reading dated in the packet as “Masoretic apparatus, medieval.” Its instruction is specific: readers are to pronounce the form meaning in him, yielding I will hope in him. That reading accounts for the hopeful alternative in the question and makes the line a declaration of hope even as Job speaks of being slain. The case for A rests on the margin’s prescribed pronunciation, not on a different consonantal text: the packet says that the scribes wrote one form and directed readers to say the other.

If the letters (“not”)

Reading B follows the consonantal text of the Masoretic Text (Westminster Leningrad Codex). Its witness row identifies the reading as not, “I have no hope,” and explicitly says that the consonantal text has the negative. This is also the reading printed in the APB at Job 13:15, where the speaker says that he will be slain and has no hope before continuing to argue his ways to his face. The case for B therefore gives priority to what is written in the supplied consonantal verse rather than to the marginal instruction for pronunciation.

The packet establishes a real tension between written consonants and a marginal instruction for reading, but supplies no rationale that resolves it. The variant changes whether this clause voices hope in him or no hope. It does not alter the supplied statements that he will slay Job, that Job will argue his ways to his face, or the following statement about salvation.

VThe Registry

More places where the manuscripts argue.

Witness readings for critical editions are quoted from the SBLGNT apparatus (CC BY 4.0); Hebrew text from the Westminster Leningrad Codex (Open Scriptures Hebrew Bible). Readings of ancient manuscripts and versions are cited as published scholarly fact with their sources linked above. Nothing on this page declares a winner — the evidence is the point.

Weigh it yourself.

The registry doesn't tell you which reading is true. It puts every witness on one page, shows what a blind committee did with the same language, and leaves the verdict where it belongs — with the reader.