Job 22:1

Then Eliphaz the Temanite answered and said,

EXPOSITORY (ENGLISH BIBLE)

Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers

XXII.

(1) Then answered Eliphaz.—Eliphaz proceeds to reply in a far more exaggerated and offensive tone than he has yet adopted, accusing Job of definite and specific crimes. He begins by asserting that the judgment of God cannot be other than disinterested, that if, therefore, He rewards or punishes, there cannot be anything personal in it.

Benson Commentary

Job 22:1. Then Eliphaz answered — Eliphaz, in this chapter, charges Job home with particular facts of cruelty and oppression, which he supposes him to be guilty of, though he cannot allege one proof of them; to which he adds the atrocious crime of atheism, and a denial or disbelief of God’s providence; and this latter he assigns as the reason of Job’s obstinacy in refusing to submit and acknowledge his guilt. He compares his wickedness to that of the mighty oppressors of the antediluvian world; to that of the inhabitants of Sodom and the cities of the plain; not obscurely intimating that his end would probably be the same as theirs, unless prevented by a speedy submission and full restitution; to which he therefore earnestly presses him, and endeavours to allure him by placing full in his view the great advantages he would probably reap from such a conduct. — Heath.

Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary

22:1-4 Eliphaz considers that, because Job complained so much of his afflictions, he thought God was unjust in afflicting him; but Job was far from thinking so. What Eliphaz says, is unjustly applied to Job, but it is very true, that when God does us good it is not because he is indebted to us. Man's piety is no profit to God, no gain. The gains of religion to men are infinitely greater than the losses of it. God is a Sovereign, who gives no account of his conduct; but he is perfectly wise, just, faithful, good, and merciful. He approves the likeness of his own holiness, and delights in the fruits of his Spirit; he accepts the thankful services of the humble believer, while he rejects the proud claim of the self-confident.

Barnes' Notes on the Bible

How then comfort ye me in vain ... - That is, how can you be qualified to give me consolation in my trials, who have such erroneous views of the government and dealings of God? True consolation could be founded only on correct views of the divine government; but such views, Job says, they had not. With their conceptions of the divine administration, they could not administer to him any real consolation. We may learn hence,

(1) That all real consolation in trial must be based on correct apprehensions of the divine character and plans. Falsehood, delusion, error, can give no permanent comfort.

(2) They whose office it is to administer consolation to the afflicted, should seek after the "truth" about God and his government.

They should endeavor to learn why he afflicts people, what purpose he proposes to accomplish, and what are the proper ends of trial. They should have an unwavering conviction that he is right, and should see as far as possible "why" he is right, before they attempt to comfort others. Their own souls should be imbued with the fullest conviction that all the ways of God are holy, and then they should go and endeavor to pour their convictions into other hearts, and make them feel so too. A minister of the gospel, who has unsettled, erroneous, or false views of the character and government of God, is poorly qualified for his station, and will be a "miserable comforter" to those who are in trial. Truth alone sustains the soul in affliction. Truth only can inspire confidence in God. Truth only can break the force of sorrow, and enable the sufferer to look up to God and to heaven with confidence and joy.

(The end of Part One of the Commentary on Job)

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary

CHAPTER 22

THIRD SERIES.

Job 22:1-30. As Before, Eliphaz Begins.

1. Eliphaz shows that man's goodness does not add to, or man's badness take from, the happiness of God; therefore it cannot be that God sends prosperity to some and calamities on others for His own advantage; the cause of the goods and ills sent must lie in the men themselves (Ps 16:2; Lu 17:10; Ac 17:25; 1Ch 29:14). So Job's calamities must arise from guilt. Eliphaz, instead of meeting the facts, tries to show that it could not be so.Eliphaz’s answer: man’s righteousness profiteth not God; nor can God fear man, Job 22:1-4. He chargeth Job’s misery on his sins, Job 22:5-11; which God beheld, and knew, nor could they be hid from him, Job 22:12-14. The wicked, and their misery, Job 22:15-17. If they prospered, he would not hold with them; but their destruction the righteous should laugh at, Job 22:18-20. He exhorteth Job to know God and his law, and return to him: he should grow rich: God shall be his defence, his joy and confidence, Job 22:21-26. If he would pray, God would hear; and his desire and purpose should stand, Job 22:27-30.

No text from Poole on this verse.

Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible

Then Eliphaz the Temanite answered and said. As Eliphaz was the first that entered the discussion with Job, being perhaps the oldest man, and might be reckoned the wisest, so he gives the lead in every course of disputation; and here, instead of replying to Job's arguments and instances, at which he was very angry, betakes himself to calumny and reproach, and to draw invidious consequences, instead of making use of solid reasons for conviction and confutation.

Geneva Study Bible

Then Eliphaz the Temanite answered and said,

EXEGETICAL (ORIGINAL LANGUAGES)

Pulpit Commentary

Verses 1-30. - Eliphaz returns to the attack, but with observations that are at first strangely pointless and irrelevant, e.g. on the unprofitableness of man to God (vers. l, 2), and on the slight importance of Job's case (ver. 3). After this weak prelude, however, there is more vigour in his assault. In vers. 4-9 he directly charges Job with a number of specified sins, and in vers. 10, 11 declares his sufferings to be the consequence of them. He then proceeds to accuse him of denying God's omniscience (vers. 12-14), and, alter some not very successful attempts to retort on him his own words (vers. 15-20), finally recurs to his favourite devices (see Job 5:17-26) of exhorting Job to submission and repentance, and promising him restoration to God's favour and a return of prosperity (vers. 21-30). Verses 1, 2. - Then Eliphaz the Temanite answered and said, Can a man be profitable unto God? Job had said nothing upon this point; but perhaps Eliphaz thinks his complaints and expostulations to imply a higher value in man, and a greater claim to consideration at God's hands, than can rightly be challenged. Certainly God does not depend on man for profit or advantage of any kind. Neither our wisdom nor our goodness "extendeth to him." As he that is wise may be profitable unto himself; rather, truly he that is wise is profitable unto himself; i.e. to himself only, and not to God. Man's intelligence and researches can add nothing to God's knowledge. Job 22:1

Keil and Delitzsch Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament

1 Then began Eliphaz the Temanite, and said:

2 Is a man profitable unto God?

No, indeed! the intelligent man is profitable to himself.

3 Hath the Almighty any profit if thou art righteous,

Or gain if thou strivest to walk uprightly?

4 Will He reprove thee for thy fear of God,

Will He go with thee into judgment?

5 Is not thy wickedness great,

Thine iniquities infinite?

The verb סכן, in the signification to be profitable, is peculiar to the book of Job (although also סכן and סכנת elsewhere, according to its primary signification, does not differ from מועיל, מועילה, by which it is explained by Kimchi); the correct development of the notion of this verb is to be perceived from the Hiph., which occurs in Job 21:21 in this speech of Eliphaz (vid., Ges. Thes.): it signifies originally, like שׁכן, Arab. skn, to rest, dwell, especially to dwell beside one another, then to become accustomed to one another (comp. שׁכן, a neighbour, and Arab. sakanun, a friend, confidant), and to assist one another, to be serviceable, to be profitable; we can say both סכנתּי, I have profit, Job 34:9, and סכן, it is profitable, Job 15:3; Job 35:3, here twice with a personal subj., and first followed by ל, then with the על usual also elsewhere in later prose (e.g., טוב על, 1 Chronicles 13:2, comp. supra, Job 10:3, to be pleasant) and poetry, which gladly adopts Aramaisms (as here and Psalm 16:6, שׁפר על, well-pleased), instead of ל, whence here עלימו, as Job 20:23, pathetic for עליו. The question, which is intended as a negative, is followed by the negative answer (which establishes its negative meaning) with כּי; משׂכּיל is, like Psalm 14:2, the intelligent, who wills and does what is good, with an insight into the nature of the extremes in morality, as in Proverbs 1:3 independent morality which rests not merely on blind custom is called מוסר השׂכל. היה חפץ ל, it is to the interest of any one (different from 1 Samuel 15:22, vid., on Job 21:21), and היה בצע ל, it is to the gain of any one (prop. the act of cutting, cutting off, i.e., what one tears in pieces), follow as synonyms of סכן. On the Aramaizing doubling of the first radical in the Hiph. תתּם (instead of תתם), vid., Ges. 67, rem. 8, comp. 3. It is translated an lucrum (ei) si integras facias vias tuas. The meaning of the whole strophe is mainly determined according to the rendering of המיּראתך (like המבינתך, Job 39:26, with Dech, and as an exception with Munach, not removed to the place of the Metheg; vid., Psalter, ii. 491, Anm. 1). If the suff. is taken objectively (from fear of thee), e.g., Hirz., we have the following line of thought: God is neither benefited by human virtue nor injured by human sin, so that when He corrects the sinner He is turning danger from himself; He neither rewards the godly because He is benefited by his piety, nor punishes the sinner because by his sinning he threatens Him with injury. Since, therefore, if God chastises a man, the reason of it is not to be found in any selfish purpose of God, it must be in the sin of the man, which is on its own account worthy of punishment. But the logical relation in which Job 22:5 stands to Job 22:4 does not suit this: perhaps from fear of thee ... ? no, rather because of thy many and great sins! Hahn is more just to this relation when he explains: "God has no personal profit to expect from man, so that, somewhat from fear, to prevent him from being injurious, He should have any occasion to torment him with sufferings unjustly." But if the personal profit, which is denied, is one that grows out of the piety of the man, the personal harm, which is denied as one which God by punishment will keep far from Himself, is to be thought of as growing out of the sin of the man; and the logical relation of Job 22:5 to Job 22:4 is not suited to this, for. Job 22:5 assigns the reason of the chastisement to the sin, and denies, as it runs, not merely any motive whatever in connection with the sin, but that the reason can lie in the opposite of sin, as it appears according to Job's assertion that, although guiltless, he is still suffering from the wrath of God.

Thus, then, the suff. of המיראתך is to be taken subjectively: on account of thy fear of God, as Eliphaz has used יראתך twice already, Job 4:6; Job 15:4. By this subjective rendering Job 22:4 and Job 22:5 form a true antithesis: Does God perhaps punish thee on account of thy fear of God? Does He go (on that account) with thee into judgment? No (it would be absurd to suppose that); therefore thy wickedness must be great (in proportion to the greatness of thy suffering), and thy misdeeds infinitely many. If we now look at what precedes, we shall have to put aside the thought drawn into Job 22:2 and Job 22:3 by Ewald (and also by Hahn): whether God, perhaps with the purpose of gaining greater advantage from piety, seeks to raise it by unjustly decreed suffering; for this thought has nothing to indicate it, and is indeed certainly false, but on account of the force of truth which lies in it (there is a decreeing of suffering for the godly to raise their piety) is only perplexing.

First of all, we must inquire how it is that Eliphaz begins his speech thus. All the exhortations to penitence in which the three exhaust themselves, rebound from Job without affecting him. Even Eliphaz, the oldest among them, full of a lofty, almost prophetic consciousness, has with the utmost solicitude allured and terrified him, but in vain. And it is the cause of God which he brings against him, or rather his own well-being that he seeks, without making an impression upon him. Then he reminds him that God is in Himself the all-sufficient One; that no advantage accrues to Him from human uprightness, since His nature, existing before and transcending all created things, can suffer neither diminution nor increase from the creature; that Job therefore, since he remains inaccessible to that well-meant call to penitent humiliation, has refused not to benefit Him, but himself; or, what is the reverse side of this thought (which is not, however, expressed), that he does no injury to Him, only to himself. And yet in what except in Job's sin should this decree of suffering have its ground? If it is a self-contradiction that God should chastise a man because he fears Him, there must be sin on the side of Job; and indeed, since the nature of the sin is to be measured according to the nature of the suffering, great and measureless sin. This logical necessity Eliphaz now regards as real, without further investigation, by opening out this bundle of sins in the next strophe, and reproaching Job directly with that which Zophar, Job 20:19-21, aiming at Job, has said of the רשׁע. In the next strophe he continues, with כי explic.: