If I have despised the cause of my bondman or of my bondmaid, when they contended with me,
Near the end of his long defence, Job turns to the way he treated the people who worked for him. He does not measure himself by custom or by what his neighbours thought. He asks what he would say if God stood up to question him.
Job is not only saying he never mistreated a servant. He is saying that when a servant had a complaint and pressed it against him, he heard it out. Older translations read that he did not despise their cause, where the ESV says he did not reject it.
Leslie M. GrantHad Job despised the cause of any of his servants, whether male or female? (v.13). If this were true, he asks, what should he do when God raised the question with him? For God made these servants just as He had made Job. Job had surely weighed this fact long before, so he was not guilty of oppressing the creatures of God (vv.14-15).
Job stood far above his servants in rank. That never changed how he saw them.
William KellyHe shows, very movingly, that even in his high position his heart never forgot that his servants were of the same race and the same human family as himself. There was no room in him for cold personal pride. And it was not only a strong sense of ties within his own household. His compassion always went out to suffering people — the widow and the fatherless, the needy and the naked.
Job's reason comes a moment later. The same God formed both him and his servant in the womb. That fact cuts both ways, and neither rich nor poor should forget it.
William KellyIn what really matters, how small the difference is! They come into the world alike, and they stand alike when the world passes away. "The rich and the poor meet together; the LORD is the Maker of them all." The poor man has a right to remember this, and the rich man should not forget it.
Another writer traces Job's fairness back to the man himself:
Samuel RidoutHe starts with his household, whose well-ordered character grew out of the purity of its master. He claims that he was fair in all his dealings with his servants, recognising their common nature and their common standing before God, "who shows no partiality."
Job held back because he knew he would answer for it one day. The same duty rests on anyone with people under them, and it falls on the master:
Edward DennettServants are especially dependent on their masters. Their position itself is a claim on their masters for what is just and fair, and that covers both treatment and wages. They can safely leave themselves in their masters' hands, confident that their interests will be guarded. Masters are urged to this, knowing that they have a Master in heaven — One who watches all their conduct and holds them responsible for dealing faithfully with their servants. He shows no partiality.
So the duty becomes a question the master keeps putting to himself:
F. B. HoleEvery Christian master should keep asking himself about his servants, "What is just? What is fair?" And he is to remember that he himself is a servant, with his own Master in heaven.
Job's account of himself is true. Yet this chapter is also the peak of his self-defence, and the book will not leave him there.
C. StanleyRead chapters 29-31, and you will say, if any man could have justified himself by good works, Job was the man. There is not a man in all your town that can say as much as Job said, and say it truly. As to his kindness to the poor, he was the very opposite of the lying charges brought against him. So he lets memory list every good act of his life, but all fails to give rest to his troubled spirit. I, I, I, I did this, I did not do that. But it is all of no use.
Commentators differ on how hard to press this. Some stress that Job's claims were true. Others weigh what was wrong in the way he made them:
Samuel RidoutDivine truth, as well as divine love, will not allow him to wrap himself in these garments of self-righteousness. They are, for the most part, borrowed clothes belonging to God, to whom Job gives not one bit of glory.
- One Maker. The same God formed master and servant in the womb. The difference between them is real, but it is not deep. Both come into the world alike, and both stand alike when it ends.
- One claim. Servants depend on those over them. That dependence is itself a claim on the master for what is just and fair, in treatment and in wages.
- One Master. Whoever holds authority holds it under Someone. He has a Master in heaven who watches his conduct and shows no partiality.
- One question. Job held back by asking in advance what he would answer when God rose up. The daily form of that question is short: "What is just? What is fair?"
- One limit. No record of kindness, however true, gives rest to the soul. Job could say more than most men and say it truly, and it was still all of no use.
What then should I do when щGod riseth up? and if he visited, what should I answer him?
Job is making his final defence. Here he turns to how he treated the men and women who worked in his house, and he asks not whether they could complain, but what he would say if God stood up and called him to account.
One writer notes how thorough Job's self-examination is. Few of his accusers could have faced the same test.
William KellyJob tests himself carefully and in detail against a very full list of possible offences. He does this toward God as well as toward man, for failing to do good as well as for self-indulgence and other sins. We can be sure that not one of the friends who as good as accused him could have afforded to test himself the way Job does here. He judges unclean desires as well as actions. He does it in the fear of Him who had power to throw soul and body into hell — Him who all the while was taking note of every step he took. He shows, very movingly, that even in his high position his heart never forgot that his servants were of the same race and the same human family as himself. That left no room for cold personal pride.
Job's question has one answer: he would have nothing to say. The reason follows at once — the same God made both him and his servants.
Leslie M. GrantHad Job despised the cause of any of his servants, whether male or female? If this were true, he asks, what should he do when God raised the question with him? For God made these servants just as He had made Job. Job had thought about this fact long before, we are sure, so he was not guilty of oppressing God's creatures.
Proverbs says the same about rich and poor.
William Kelly"The rich and the poor meet together; the LORD is the Maker of them all." The poor man has a right to remember this, and the rich man ought not to forget it. Job had it clearly before him.
Job lived before the law was given at Sinai, and before any part of Scripture was written.
William KellyThe law had its value — God does nothing in vain. Yet we can see how high the moral standard was for the soul and for the daily walk of godly men outside Israel, before the law was given at Sinai. The patriarchs of Genesis show it. God had spoken words. He had also acted in solemn ways with men, both one by one and as a whole race, in grace and in judgment. All this came long before He inspired men to write His mind by divine power. And faith received His word and thought over His dealings, with rich profit, before there was any Scripture.
Job's question survives into the New Testament instruction to masters, where the same accountability is spelled out.
W. W. FeredayMasters are then urged, and reminded that their Master is in heaven, and that "there is no partiality with Him." He notices threats and oppression. The cry of the poor and needy reaches His ears, and He will repay it in the coming day. Both master and servant answer to the one Lord, and they will stand together at the same judgment seat.
This shared standing does not cancel a master's authority. It changes how he uses it.
Edward DennettThey will govern, and govern firmly, as they should, because God has entrusted their authority to them. But they will remember that those under them answer directly to their Master in heaven. Together with the masters, they are the Lord's servants. So in this respect they are equal, despite the difference in their positions on earth. This of itself would prevent all harshness.
Job's conduct really was good, and one writer says so plainly. But listing it shows what Job was leaning on.
Charles StanleyJust read chapters 29-31, and you will say, if any man could have justified himself by good works, Job was the man. There is not a man in all your town that can say as much as Job said, and say it truly. As to his kindness to the poor, he was the very opposite of the lying charges brought against him. So he lets memory recount every good act of his life, but it all fails to give rest to his troubled spirit. I, I, I, I did this, I did not do that. But it is all of no use.
- One Maker. The same God formed Job and his servants, so their complaint carried weight he could not dismiss.
- One question. He ran his household by asking ahead of time what he would answer when God rose up to inquire.
- One judgment-seat. The New Testament tells masters that their Master is in heaven and shows no partiality. Employer and employee stand there together.
- One effect. Shared accountability does not weaken authority. It removes harshness from it.
- One limit. Job's record was real and admirable, yet listing it brought him no peace. Remembered good works cannot justify a man before God.
Did not he that made me in the womb make him? and did not One fashion us in the womb?
Job is defending his record, and he comes to the men and women who worked in his house. Behind each servant he sees a Maker — the same One who made him.
Job puts himself under the eye of God. Verses 13 and 14 set up the question this verse answers:
William KellyIf I despised the right of my bondman or of my bondmaid, in their contending with me, what then shall I do when God arises? And when He visits, what shall I answer Him?
The same reasoning appears in the proverb that the Lord is the maker of rich and poor alike. One writer draws out how far that levelling goes, and who most needs reminding of it:
William KellyIn the essentials, how little is the difference! Alike they come into the world, and alike they stand when the world passes away. "Rich and poor meet together; the Lord is the maker of them all." The poor man is entitled to remember this, and the rich man ought not to forget it.
God's hand made the servant as well as the master. Job had settled that long before:
Leslie M. GrantHad Job despised the cause of any of his servants, whether male or female? If this were true, he asks, what should he do when God raised the question with him? For God made these servants just as He had made Job. Job had considered this fact long before, we are sure, so that he was not guilty of oppressing the creatures of God.
The verse points to the womb, where God's work on a person begins in secret. One writer follows a word for embroidery into Psalm 139:
F. W. GrantThe Hebrew word rekem means "embroidery." The verb from it appears in a striking passage in that wonderful psalm, the 139th. That psalm traces God's thought and care of man from his beginnings in the womb: "My substance was not hidden from you, when I was made in secret, and skilfully wrought (that is, embroidered) in the depths of the earth." And indeed, the intricate interweaving of nerves, veins and arteries can be compared to nothing more justly than to a marvellous embroidery. This is true of every person. Can God be lacking in consideration and tenderness for a being on whom He has bestowed such wonderful care?
Job's defence starts at home, with his servants, and then moves outward:
Samuel RidoutHe begins with his household. Its well-ordered character grew out of the inherent purity of its master. He asserts his fairness in all his dealings with his servants, recognising their common nature and standing before God, who "shows no partiality." Then he moves out to the needy poor: the fatherless and the widow had shared his food, and he had warmed them with his clothing. In brief, he was as a father to the orphan and as a son to the widow. Surely we have here an illustration of religion that is "pure and undefiled" (James 1:27).
The same reckoning is set before masters today:
W. W. FeredayMasters are then urged, and reminded that their Master is in heaven, and that "there is no partiality with Him." He notes threatening and oppression. The cry of the poor and needy comes up in His ears, and He will repay it in the coming day. This verse should read, I believe, "their Master and yours is in the heavens." That adds an important point: both master and servant are responsible to the one Lord, and will stand together at the same judgment seat.
The record is clean. One writer still asks why Job put it into a speech:
Samuel RidoutTo all of this we can only say, True and excellent — but why should he speak of it? Why not let his fear of God keep him from these things, rather than boast of them?
- One Maker. The same God who formed Job in the womb formed his servants there. Rank comes later; the making is shared.
- One womb. God's care begins in secret, before anyone can earn it. No one He shaped with such skill is beneath your consideration.
- One standard. Fairness starts inside your own house, with your servants. From there it reaches the poor, the orphan and the widow.
- One reckoning. Job asks what he will answer when God rises up. Masters today have their own Master in heaven, and both will stand at one judgment seat.
- One caution. The record was true and excellent; the fear of God that produced it should have kept Job from parading it.
If I have withheld the poor from [their] desire, or caused the eyes of the widow to fail;
Job has reached his final defence. He goes through his life item by item, daring God to find the fault his friends keep insisting must be there. Here he touches money and mercy — what he did with what he had when the poor and the widow came to his door.
This chapter is not a general claim of innocence.
William KellyJob tests himself formally and in fine detail, with a very full list of charges. He does this toward God as well as man — for failing to do good, as well as for self-indulgence and other sins. We can be sure of this. Not one of the friends who as good as put him on trial could have afforded to test himself as Job does here.
Verse 16 is not about cruelty. It is about what Job would be guilty of if he had kept what was his and done nothing.
Leslie M. GrantIn verses 16-21 he speaks of sins of omission also. Suppose he had not helped the poor, or had ignored the plight of the widow. Suppose he had kept all he had for himself, so that the fatherless went hungry. Suppose he had seen someone die for lack of clothing, or a poor man with nothing to cover him. Suppose the heart of the poor had never blessed Job, never warmed by the fleece of his sheep — then he says, "let my arm fall from my shoulder."
Job's care was not charity at a distance. It reached into his own household and out to those who had no one.
Samuel RidoutReaching out beyond his household to the needy poor, he let the fatherless and the widow share his food, and he warmed them with his clothing. In brief he was as a father to the orphan, and as a son to the widow. Surely we have here an illustration of religion that is "pure and undefiled" (James 1:27).
Kelly adds another mark of it: Job never used his influence with others to take the smallest advantage.
William KellyHis compassion always went out to people who were suffering — the widow and the fatherless, the needy and the naked. This was no passing gesture. He cared for them steadily and tirelessly, as a father would, and he watched himself carefully, so that he never took the least advantage of them through his influence with others.
Job lived before God gave the law at Sinai, and before any Scripture existed. That makes his standard here remarkable.
William KellyThe law had its value, for God does nothing in vain. Yet look how high the moral standard already was — in the soul, and in the daily walk of godly men outside Israel, before the law came from Sinai. And it was not only in matters of right and wrong, which conscience could judge more or less exactly, depending on how much light a man had. We can also see what God's revelation did inside the soul, in its affections and its judgments.
Everything Job says here is accurate. The trouble is what he is doing with it.
C StanleyNow, just read chapters 29-31, and you will say, if any man could have justified himself by good works, Job was the man. There is not a man in all your town that can say as much as Job said, and say it truly. As to his kindness to the poor, he was the very opposite of the lying charges brought against him. So he lets memory recount every good act of his life, but it all fails to give rest to his troubled spirit. I, I, I — I did this, I did not do that. But it is all of no use.
Kelly adds what God meant to do about it.
William KellyThe friends were completely wrong. They had no excuse and no kindness. What Job says was true, but he does not yet know the whole truth about himself — as no one could, until He came who is the Truth, and proved it in grace to the very end at His cross. But Job was taken up with himself and pleased with himself. God would set him free from that, and bless him more than ever. No human being will boast in God's presence. Job had to learn this — to boast only in Him.
- Test. Job puts himself on trial with a detailed list of charges. It covers not only wrong he did, but good he may have failed to do.
- Omission. Verses 16-21 name a second kind of sin. It is keeping all you have while the poor, the widow and the fatherless go without.
- Reach. His care began in his own household and reached the widow, the orphan, the needy and the naked. It was steady, not occasional.
- Source. This standard was already there before Sinai and before any written Scripture. Conscience, and what God had revealed, shaped the soul.
- Limit. Every word of it was true, and none of it gave him rest. God meant to free him from himself and bless him more than ever.
Or have eaten my morsel alone, so that the fatherless ate not thereof,
Commentary for this verse has not been generated yet.
(For from my youth he grew up with me as with a father, and I have guided the [widow] from my mother's womb;)
Job's last speech is a sworn defence of his whole life, listed sin by sin before God. Verse 18 breaks in with a memory of an orphan and a widow, and it raises two questions: who is the father here, and can a good record settle anything before God?
The verses around it list kindnesses Job never withheld — and the curse he calls down on himself if he is lying:
Leslie M. GrantIn verses 16-21 he speaks of sins of omission also. Suppose he had not helped the poor. Suppose he had ignored the plight of the widow, and had kept all he had for himself, so that the fatherless were left hungry. Then, he says, "let my arm fall from my shoulder, let my arm be torn from the socket" (v.22). In contrast to this, notice his words in parenthesis (v.18), "But from my youth I reared him (the fatherless) as a father, and from my mother's womb I guided the widow."
An orphan has no father. A widow has no husband. Job did not just send help. He stepped into the empty place:
Samuel RidoutReaching out to the poor in need, he shared his food with the fatherless and the widow, and he warmed them with his clothing. In short, he was as a father to the orphan, and as a son to the widow. Surely we have here an illustration of religion that is "pure and undefiled" (James 1:27).
"From my youth" is the key phrase. It turns single acts of kindness into a settled way of living. And that way of living reached far beyond Job's own household:
William KellyIt was not only a strong sense of kinship inside his own household. His compassion always went out to suffering people — the widow and the fatherless, the needy and the naked. He did not help them now and then. He cared for them as a father does, with care that was constant and never tired. And he kept watch over himself, so that he never used his influence with others to take the least advantage.
The phrase "from my mother's womb" pushes the claim back to birth, and translations and commentators handle it in two ways. The writers above read Job as the one who raised the orphan. On the other reading, God is the father here, caring for Job from before his birth. That makes the end of the book sharper still:
The Bible TreasuryThe book of Job records God's lovingkindness in His dealings with this patient man from his earliest days (Job 31:18, amended). "He brought me up as a father, and guided me from my mother's womb." Yet Job is brought to confess, despite all that God had been to him, "I despise myself, and repent in dust and ashes." In the end his sufferings set him free from himself, and even greater blessing marks the close of his story.
So Job's conscience was clear. Why did that not settle his case?
William KellyHe had a completely good conscience, but that is not enough. There is the great principle of self-judgment. There is also the grand principle of full submission to God, and of vindicating Him. He is right and wise in all of it — not only in what He does, but in what He allows.
So the chapter ends in exhaustion, not peace:
Charles StanleyIf any man could have justified himself by good works, Job was the man... As to his kindness to the poor, he was the very opposite of the lying charges brought against him. So he lets his memory count up every good act of his life, but it all fails to give rest to his troubled spirit. I, I, I, I did this, I did not do that. But it is all of no use.
- Parenthesis — The verse breaks into a list of things Job never did. His answer to the charge is a memory: he raised the orphan and guided the widow.
- Substitute — Job did more than give. He took the missing place: a father to the orphan, a son to the widow. That is religion pure and undefiled.
- Lifelong — "From my youth" marks care that was constant and never tired. It reached past his own household, and he never used his influence to take the least advantage.
- Reversed — On the other reading it is God who fathers Job from the womb. Job still ends by saying he despises himself and repents in dust and ashes.
- Not enough — The record is true, but a clear conscience toward people is not enough. "I, I, I did this" gives no rest. Job must still bow to God.
If I have seen any perishing for want of clothing, or any needy without covering;
Commentary for this verse has not been generated yet.
If his loins have not blessed me, and if he were not warmed with the fleece of my lambs;
Job is answering his friends' accusations by walking through his own life. Here he points to a poor man who left his door warm instead of shivering. The wool came off Job's own flock, so the claim is concrete. Yet the way he tells it raises a second question: who was the good in Job, and who deserves the credit?
The verse belongs to a run where Job defends himself not for what he did, but for what he never failed to do.
Leslie M. GrantIn verses 16-21 he speaks of sins of omission also. Suppose he had not helped the poor, or had ignored the plight of the widow. Suppose he had kept all he had for himself, so that the fatherless went hungry. Suppose he had seen anyone die for lack of clothing, or any poor man without covering. Suppose the heart of the poor had not blessed Job, because it was not warmed by the fleece of his sheep. Then, he says, "let my shoulder blade fall from my shoulder, and let my arm be broken from its socket" (v.22).
The thanks Job speaks of comes from a part of the body, not from a speech. Where the ESV says "his body," older translations read "his loins."
Andrew MillerThe loins are the body's chief seat of strength, when they are properly belted for work.
So the blessing is the poor man's own strength giving thanks. Warmth had returned to a body that once lay exposed.
Job's care ran through his household and reached far past it. It also kept watch over itself.
William KellyHis care was not only a strong sense of family inside his own household. His compassion always went out to suffering people — the widow and the fatherless, the needy and the naked. He did not help now and then, but with the constant, tireless care of a father. And he watched himself, so that he never took the smallest advantage by using his influence with others.
Another writer traces the same care outward, from the servants in Job's house to the poor at his door.
Samuel RidoutHe starts with his household. Its good order grew out of the purity of its master. He claims he was fair in every dealing with his servants, since he saw that they shared his nature and stood before a God "who shows no partiality." Then he moves outward to the needy poor. The fatherless and the widow had shared his food, and he had warmed them with his clothing. In short, he was a father to the orphan and a son to the widow. Here we surely have an example of religion that is "pure and undefiled" (James 1:27).
The verse is not only a defence of one man. It is a measure anyone can hold up to their own life.
A. J. PollockTo close, and to be practical: what is my life, and what is your life? Am I a fruitful vine? Are you? Am I, are you, touching the world's need, for God's glory and to show His character?... Clearly Job was not an empty vine.
Everything Job says here is true. The trouble is the telling. A man wrapping himself in his own record has taken something that was never his to wear.
Samuel RidoutWe cannot question the truth or the sincerity of all that he says. But we may well ask: is his conclusion a happy one even for himself?... Divine truth, as well as divine love, will not let him wrap himself in these clothes of self-righteousness. Most of them are borrowed garments that belong to God, and Job gives Him not the least bit of glory for them. The rest are only filthy rags, fit for the dust and ashes where Job will soon put himself.
The wool was real, and so was the warmth. The kindness came from God working in Job. Yet something was still missing, and God set out to deal with it.
J. N. DarbyNow Job needed this, and God saw that he needed it. He was gracious and godly, but he did not know himself. He had never seen God in a way that brought him to a real knowledge of himself in His presence. So God deals with him in a way that brings his sinfulness right out into the open. Then He sets him, with that sinfulness now clear to his conscience, in His own presence... Job had acted well, for grace had acted in him; but he did not know himself before God.
- Seen. Job counts failure to act as guilt. Passing a man with no covering would have been sin, not just a missed chance to do good.
- Given. The covering came off his own flock. Real mercy costs the giver something he owned.
- Warmed. The loins are the body's seat of strength. The poor man's restored strength is the thanks Job receives.
- Blessed. Steady care — from the servants in his house out to the widow and the orphan — is an example of religion that is pure and undefiled.
- Boasted. The deeds were true, but grace had worked them. Worn as self-praise, they become borrowed garments. The man who wears them still does not know himself before God.
If I have lifted up my hand against an orphan, because I saw my help in the gate
Near the end of his long defence, Job swears an oath about the town gate — the public court, where a strong man could ruin a weak one and stay within the law. He says he never used his power there against a fatherless child, and he stakes his own arm on it.
Job's claim is not that he never met an orphan. It is that he never pressed his advantage when the judges leaned his way. One writer draws out both halves of the picture: the influence Job had, and the case he refused to push. (His quotation reads "let my arm drop from my shoulder blade." The ESV renders the same line, "let my shoulder blade fall from my shoulder.")
Samuel RidoutWhile dwelling on his kindness, Job shows how he had not taken advantage of any legal technicality that would have cleared him in any harsh dealing with the needy. When he saw his "help in the gate" — the judges inclined to decide in his favour, not because they were bribed, but because they were giving him his just dues — he had not pressed his case against the orphans. If he had lifted his hand against them, he says, "let my arm drop from my shoulder blade."
Job is not speaking into the air. His friend Eliphaz had already made this exact charge. One writer shows how wide of the truth it was.
William KellyEliphaz is only imagining what he thinks Job must have done to explain his troubles. "… You have sent widows away empty, and the arms of the fatherless have been broken. Therefore snares are all around you." You see, all the reasoning is quite mistaken.
So Job answers with the same image. Eliphaz spoke of broken arms. Job offers his own.
This oath sits inside a list of sins of omission. Neglect counts too: not feeding the hungry, not clothing the poor, not defending the fatherless in court.
Leslie M. GrantIn verses 16-21 he speaks of sins of omission also. Suppose he had not helped the poor, or had ignored the plight of the widow, but had kept all he had for himself, so that the fatherless went hungry. Suppose he had seen anyone die for lack of clothing. Suppose Job had not championed the cause of the fatherless in the gate, the place of judgment. Then, he says, let his own arm fall from his shoulder, torn from the socket.
Job lived long before God gave the law at Mount Sinai. Yet his moral standard is high. One writer traces that back to how God dealt with people before any Scripture existed.
William KellyThis closing burst of indignant self-defence on Job's part is deeply interesting and instructive… We can see how high the moral standard was for the soul and for the walk of godly men outside Israel, before the law came from Sinai… God had spoken words. He had also worked in solemn ways with people, one by one and all together, in grace and in judgment. All this was long before He inspired men to write His mind by divine power. And faith received His word, and thought over His dealings, to rich profit, before Scripture existed.
Everything Job claims here is true. That is what makes the chapter so searching: a man can be right about his record and still need to judge himself.
William KellyHe had a perfectly good conscience, but that is not enough. There is the great principle of self-judgment. There is also the grand principle of entire submission to God, and of vindicating Him — that He is right and wise in all, not only in what He does, but in what He allows.
The chapter ends without peace. One writer points to the reason: Job counts his own good deeds one by one.
C StanleyNow, just read chapters 29-31. You will say that if any man could have justified himself by good works, Job was the man… So he lets memory recount every good act of his life. But it all fails to give rest to his troubled spirit. I, I, I, I did this, I did not do that. But it is all of no use.
- Gate. The scene is the public court, where Job had the judges' ear and could have ruined an orphan within the law.
- Hand. Innocence here is not only what Job did. It is the advantage he refused to press.
- Omission. Job's list counts neglect as guilt: not feeding, not clothing, not defending the fatherless.
- Arm. Job stakes his own arm on the claim: if he lied, let it fall from his shoulder.
- Rest. A clean record still leaves Job restless. A good conscience is not enough; he must submit to God and own that God is right.
[Then] let my shoulder fall from the shoulder-blade, and mine arm be broken from the bone!
Job's last speech closes with a string of solemn oaths. Each one names a sin he denies. Then he calls down a punishment on himself if the denial is false. Verse 22 is one of those punishments. Job offers up the very arm he could have raised against an orphan, broken out of its socket.
The arm comes into it because of a hand Job never lifted. He is thinking of a court case he could have won, and of the orphan he could have crushed by winning it.
Samuel RidoutWhile dwelling on his kindness, Job shows how he had not taken advantage of any legal technicality that would have cleared him in any harsh dealing with the needy. When he saw his "help in the gate" — the judges leaning to decide in his favour — he had not pressed his case against the orphans. They were not bribed; they were giving him his just dues. If he had lifted his hand against them, he says, "let my arm drop from my shoulder-blade."
(Ridout quotes verse 22 from an older translation here.)
The oath covers things left undone as much as things done.
Leslie M. GrantIn verses 16-21 he speaks of sins of omission also. Suppose he had not helped the poor, or had ignored the plight of the widow, but had kept everything for himself, so that the fatherless went hungry. Suppose he had seen anyone perish for lack of clothing, or any poor man without covering. Suppose the heart of the poor had not blessed Job, because the fleece of his sheep had never warmed him. Suppose Job had not championed the cause of the fatherless in the gate, the place of judgment. Then, he says, let my arm fall from my shoulder.
Job is not just listing good deeds. He is under attack. The self-curse denies that anything rotten hides under his decent surface.
William KellyHere, at the close of his last speech, Job makes the most solemn and complete protest of his innocence. He does not deny what he had already admitted about man's condition, his own included. But he flatly refuses the idea of grievous wickedness concealed under a fair exterior, which God could now be waging war against, as his friends had supposed. He lists his personal purity — and this as a married man too — his behaviour toward his servants, his remembrance of the poor and the exposed, his hatred of idolatry and greed, his generous and hospitable ways, his hatred of hypocrisy. If he is false in any of it, he prays to be put to utter shame.
The next verse gives the reason Job never lifted that hand.
Leslie M. GrantHe ends this section by showing that the fear of God was a vital matter with him (v.23). It was a terror to him even to think of the reality of God's destructive power against evil. He would not dare to offend One whose magnificence filled him with awe, to the point that he said, "I cannot endure."
That fear reached beneath behaviour to motive, and it did so long before any written law existed.
F. B. HoleThis chapter shows that before God gave the law, God-fearing men still held to a high standard of morality. That standard looked not only at the outward act but also at the inward motive that prompts it.
Everything Job swears here is true. The commentators still find something wrong with the swearing of it.
Samuel RidoutTo all of this we can only say: true and excellent — but why should he speak of it? Why not let his fear of God keep him from these things, rather than boast of them?
The record itself is not in doubt. The question is what it counts for before God.
F. B. HoleThis "righteousness," as Job 29 will show us, concerned his outward conduct, because God's searching light had not yet entered his soul. He had been charged with being a deceiver and a hypocrite. He knew he was not, and he was not going to plead guilty to it for a moment. We too know that he was not. But outward correctness does not in itself count for righteousness before God.
- Arm. Job offers to have broken the very limb he could have raised against orphans in court. The punishment fits the crime he denies.
- Omission. The oath covers the poor left unfed, the naked left unclothed and the orphan left undefended. The arm falls for what Job withheld as much as for what he struck.
- Fear. Dread of God's power against evil kept that arm down. That fear reached the inward motive, not just the outward act.
- Answer. The friends claimed hidden wickedness lay under Job's fair exterior. The whole self-curse answers them: shame me, if it is true.
- Limit. The record is true, yet outward correctness is not righteousness before God. God's searching light had not yet reached the man who boasts of it.
For calamity from щGod was a terror to me, and by reason of his excellency I was powerless.
Job is closing his final defence. He has listed every wrong he never did to his servants, the poor, the widow and the fatherless. Now he names the reason he never dared to do them. But the verse raises a question. Is a life ruled by the fear of God also a life that can stand before God?
The verse is Job's explanation, not just another claim. One writer sees it as the close of the section, where Job names what drove him:
Leslie M. GrantHe ends this section by showing that the fear of God mattered deeply to him (v.23). Just thinking about God's real power to destroy evil filled him with terror. So he would never dare to offend One whose greatness left him in awe — to the point where he said he could not endure it.
Job was a man of wealth and high position. One commentator shows what the fear of God did to his heart toward the people below him:
William KellyHe shows, very movingly, that even in his high position his heart never forgot that his servants were of the same race and the same human family as himself. There was no cold personal pride in him. And it was not only a strong sense of ties inside his own household. His compassion always went out to people who suffered — the widow and the fatherless, the needy and the naked. He did not care for them now and then, but with the steady, tireless care of a father. He also watched himself, so that he never gained the smallest advantage over them through his influence with others. The fear of God, and his angry defence of all such people, had worked in him so strongly that hardness was a complete stranger to his heart.
That fear did not only govern Job's public dealings. It reached his private life too. One commentator sets Job beside two other men tested in the same area:
Samuel RidoutJob insists that he is pure, and points out that the fear of God moved him — God, who would certainly repay the wicked for their sin. "How then can I do this great wickedness and sin against God?" said Joseph when a woman tried to seduce him (Gen. 39:9). In a time of spiritual laziness, David let his eyes wander, and he fell (2 Sam. 11:2). Job knew that God watched his every step, and he asks God to test him and weigh him in the balance.
The verse comes right after Job's oath about the fatherless. Job could have taken the fatherless to court and won, and still stayed within his rights:
Samuel RidoutAs he speaks of his kindness to others, Job shows that he never used a legal loophole to excuse himself for dealing harshly with the needy. He saw his "help in the gate" — the judges ready to rule in his favour, not because they were bribed, but because they were giving him his due — and even then he did not press his case against the orphans.
Commentators differ here. Some read the verse as proof that Job truly feared God. Others ask why a man who fears God needs to talk about it at all:
Samuel RidoutTo all of this we can only say: true and admirable — but why should he talk about it? Why not let his fear of God keep him from these things, instead of boasting about them?
Job's friends had called him a hypocrite. On that charge he was right to defend himself. But his defence answers the wrong court:
F. B. HoleThis "righteousness," as Job 29 will show us, had to do with his outward conduct, because the searching light of God had not yet entered his soul. His friends had charged him with being a deceiver and a hypocrite. He knew he was not, and he was not going to plead guilty to it for a moment. We know he was not either. But outward correctness does not in itself count as righteousness in the presence of God.
- Fear first. Job's kindness to the weak was not just soft feeling. Behind it stood his terror of God's judgment on evil.
- Fear softens. That same fear kept a rich man from growing hard. It made the widow and the orphan his constant care.
- Fear restrains. It held him back even when the judges in the gate would have ruled in his favour against the fatherless.
- Fear reaches inward. It governed his eyes and desires where no human court could ever have called him to account.
- Fear is not enough. A clear conscience before men answers his friends. But outward correctness is not righteousness before God. Job must still meet God Himself.