Is it for your fear of him that he reproves you and enters into judgment with you?
Job 22:4 · ESVView all translations

Eliphaz answers Job again, and he starts from one idea: God gains nothing from a good man. From that he draws a verdict on why Job is suffering. His question expects the answer "no" — surely God is not correcting Job because Job fears Him. That assumption drives everything he says next.

What the Question Asks

Eliphaz asks the question to make it sound absurd. Would God really correct a man for revering Him? One commentator points out that the answer Eliphaz ruled out was the true one.

Eliphaz considered this impossible, and therefore that Job did not fear God at all. But it was actually true that, because of Job's fear of God, God was correcting him. What Eliphaz took for God's judgment against Job was not judgment at all. It was discipline and correction.

Leslie M. Grant

The Courtroom Image

"Enters into judgment with you" is legal language, and Job had been asking for exactly that — a hearing. Eliphaz finds the very idea outrageous.

He resents the idea as absurd and insolent — that God could be influenced to turn aside from His unbending uprightness. So from the extreme dealings of God's hand he concludes that Job's wickedness is extreme. Was it not monstrous for Job to challenge Him to a court case? And it was unthinkable that God would argue with Job because He was afraid of him. There was only one reasonable conclusion. Job was suffering greatly because his wickedness was great, and his iniquities had no end.

William Kelly

An Argument That Proves Too Much

The verse is the hinge of his argument. God would never punish a man for godliness. God is punishing Job. So Job cannot be godly.

Eliphaz asks Job, does not his chastisement prove his sin? For would God rebuke a man for piety — his godly fear? Therefore Job's sin is proven! Surely an easy way, in a world of suffering, to prove a man a sinner. But it proves too much, for it includes every sufferer — the righteous as well as the wicked.

Samuel Ridout

What Eliphaz Got Right

Not everything Eliphaz says is wrong. His mistake lies in what he builds on a true foundation.

Job had certainly been defending his own character. But did he give any profit or benefit to the Almighty by the righteousness and perfection that he claimed? And would God enter into judgment with him as though he were His equal? There could be only one answer to these questions, and it would be good for Job to realize what it was. As our Lord told His disciples, the confession of us all has to be, "We are unworthy servants; we have only done what was our duty" (Luke 17:10).

F. B. Hole

A God Too Distant To Be Good

Eliphaz's God is untouchable — so far above human conduct that He cannot be affected by it. One commentator answers that God is neither untouched by our sin nor distant from His creatures.

Has God not suffered? Not in His blessed nature, but in what should have displayed it — righteousness in His creature. Everything was created for His glory and pleasure. So God is a loser when man fails to show in his life what displays the wisdom and goodness of his Creator. We get a cold view of God in the way Eliphaz describes Him. The word of God shows the opposite. He is deeply concerned in all our affairs, and closely bound up with His creation. There would be no room for the gospel in the partial statements of Eliphaz. God is not simply holding the scales of justice like a bystander with no stake, handing out punishment to the one who falls short.

Samuel Ridout

Where the Question Leads

The question is the last step before the accusation. Having ruled out every innocent reason for Job's suffering, Eliphaz must supply a guilty one.

Then Eliphaz comes out with his strong accusation against Job, without the slightest proof of it: "Is not your evil abundant? There is no end to your iniquities" (v.5). Eliphaz probably thought that Job's claim to fear God was total hypocrisy, and that Job therefore deserved the strongest rebuke. Eliphaz was just the man to give that censure, for he was sure he was speaking for God. How sad was the delusion he was labouring under! How carefully we must watch ourselves here! We must not jump to conclusions about how another believer is doing, or about anything in their life that we suspect may be questionable.

Leslie M. Grant

Summary

- Question — Eliphaz asks whether God corrects a man for fearing Him. He expects the answer "never." In Job's case the answer was yes.

- Correction, not judgment — Eliphaz saw a sentence being carried out. God was giving discipline, and discipline is not a verdict.

- Half true — no one profits God or can face Him as an equal; that much stands. The error is the conclusion drawn from it.

- Proves too much — if suffering proves sin, the test condemns every sufferer, the upright along with the wicked.

- Then the accusation — Eliphaz is sure he speaks for God, so he moves straight from his logic to charges he cannot prove. The warning for us is against passing verdicts on another person's life.

Reviewed by Orion on September 20, 2026