Job 22

In the third series of the controversy, which commences here, Job’s friends seem to have become greatly exasperated. Eliphaz passes from the insinuations of former speeches to the direct charge of specific sins on account of which, he says, these calamities have come upon Job (2-11); then refers him to signal Divine judgements (12-20); and exhorts him to repentance, the advantages of which he states (21-30).

2. As he that is wise may be profitable unto himself. Or, “Nay, for the wise man profiteth himself,” not God. Eliphaz with truth asserts that as God can be neither profited nor injured by men, it cannot be for any such reason that He favours some and afflicts others; but he thence erroneously infers that the cause of the difference in treatment must be found in their difference of character.

4. Will He reprove thee for fear of thee? Or, “punish thee for thy religion.” Eliphaz asks sarcastically whether God punishes men for their piety.

5. And thine iniquities infinite. This is the first direct accusation of Job by Eliphaz.

6 for nought. Or, “without cause.”

8 the mighty man. Heb., “the man of arm”; i.e., might: see ver. 9. Job is here charged with having obtained land unjustly, by force or undue partiality, or with having helped others to do so. The “honourable man” is literally “he whose person is accepted.” Such acts are especially condemned in the law of Moses (Exod. xxii. 21; Deut. xxiv. 17, 19; xxvii. 19).

12 is not God in the height of heaven? Eliphaz now declares what he regards as the source of Job’s crimes—the practical atheism of regarding God as a Being too exalted to observe human affairs.

14. He walketh in the circuit (or, on the vault) of heaven. Not noticing the earth and its affairs (Ezek. viii. 12).

15. Hast thou marked? Or, “Wilt thou keep?” (R.V.).

16 cut down out of time. That is, before the time; prematurely.

Whose foundation was overflown with a flood? Rather, as R.V., “whose foundation was poured out as a stream?” The historic reference to the Deluge is here recognised by the best critics.

17 what can the Almighty do for them? Or, “And what does the Almighty to them?” This seems to be a sarcastic reference to Job’s words in xxi. 14-16. Eliphaz adduces the foregoing case to refute Job’s assertion that God makes the wicked prosperous in the present life. The R.V., however, makes the clause part of the impious language of the wicked: “What can the Almighty do for us?”

18 yet He filled, etc. These were Job’s words (xxi. 16), which Eliphaz repeats, apparently as being in his opinion more agreeable to the doctrines maintained by himself.

20. Whereas, etc. This is given as the language of the “innocent” (as R.V., which prefixes saying): and may be better translated, “Truly our enemies are destroyed, and their residue (i.e., goods) the fire devoureth.”

21 good shall come unto thee. This exhortation to godliness is based upon an appeal to the sense of the advantages which it will secure. Finely wrought as it is, the argument discloses the essential defect in the character of Eliphaz.

23 thou shalt put away, etc. Rather, “If thou put away iniquity from thy tabernacles, and cast to the dust precious ore, and gold of Ophir to the stones of the brooks, then the Almighty shall be thy precious ore, and treasures of silver to thee.” I.e., If thou wilt despise and reject riches as thy portion, then thou shalt have all-sufficiency in the Almighty: ep. R.V.

25 thy defence. Or, “thy treasure,” as R.V.

27 thou shalt pay thy vows. Implying that the prayer would be favourably answered. Worshippers were accustomed to vow some sacrifice or gift to God if the prayer should be granted.

28 decree. Or, “determine”; “resolve upon”; and the thing will be done.

30 the island of the innocent. For “island” read “coast,” i.e., country.

the pureness of thine hands. An expression signifying integrity and uprightness.