Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadPulpit Commentary - Job 31:1 - 31:40
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
Job_31:1
I made a covenant with mine eyes; rather, for mine eyes. The covenant must have been with himself. Job means that be came to a fixed resolution, by which he thenceforth guided his conduct, not even to "look upon a woman to lust after her" (Mat_5:28). We must suppose this resolution come to in his early youth, when the passions are strongest, and when so many men go astray. How then should I look upon a maid! Having made such a resolution, how could I possibly break it by "looking upon a maid"? Job assumes that he could not be so weak as to break a solemn resolution.
Job_31:2
For what portion of God is there from above? The meaning seems to be, "For what portion in God would there be to me from above, if I were so to act?" i.e. if I were secretly to nurse and indulge my lusts. Impurity, perhaps, more than any other sin, cuts off from God, who is "of purer eyes than to behold iniquity" (Hab_1:13). And what inheritance of the Almighty from on high! What should I inherit, i.e. what should I receive, from on high, if I were so sinful? The next verse gives the answer,
Job_31:3
Is not destruction to the wicked? The inheritance of the wicked is "destruction"—ruin both of soul and body. This is what I should have to expect if I yielded myself to the bondage of lust and concupiscence. And a strange punishment to the workers of iniquity? The rare word neker ( âëø ), translated here by "strange punishment," seems to mean "alienation from God"—being turned from God's friend into his enemy (comp. Buxtorf, 'Lexicon Hebraicum et Chaldaicum,' who explains âëø by "alienatio;" and the comment of Schultens on Job_31:3, "Necer, a Deo alienatio").
Job_31:4
Doth not he see my ways, and count all my steps? (see above, Job_7:18-20; and below, Job_34:21. Comp. also Psa_139:3; Pro_5:21; Pro_15:3, etc.).
Job_31:5
If I have walked with vanity, or if my foot hath hasted to deceit. "If I have been a living lie, i.e. if, under a fair show of piety and righteousness of life, I have, as you my friends suppose, been all along a deceiver and a hypocrite, cloaking my secret sins under a mere pretence of well-doing, then the sooner I am exposed the better. Let me be weighed," etc. The painful suggestion of hypocrisy has been made by Job's friends repeatedly during the colloquy (Job_4:7-9; Job_8:6, Job_8:12; Job_11:4-6, '11-14; Job_15:30-35; Job_18:5-21; Job_20:5-29, etc.), and has deeply afflicted the patriarch. It is a charge so easily made, and so impossible to refute. All that the righteous man, thus falsely accused, can do is to appeal to God: "Thou, God, knowest. Thou, God, wilt one day show forth the truth."
Job_31:6
Let me be weighed in an even balance; literally, let him (i.e. God) weigh me in the balances of justice. The use of this imagery by the Egyptians has been already noted (see the comment on Job_6:2). It is an essential part of every Egyptian representation of the final judgment of souls by Osiris. Each man's merits are formally weighed in a balance, which is carefully depicted, and he is judged accordingly. Job asks that this may be done in his case, either immediately or at any rate ultimately. He would have the act performed, that God may know his integrity; or rather, may recognize it. (So Professor Leo.) Job has no doubt that a thorough investigation of his case will lead to a, acknowledgment and proclamation of his innocence.
Job_31:7
If my step hath turned out of the way. If; i.e; I have at any time knowingly and voluntarily departed from the way of thy commandments, as made known to me either by godly men or by thy law written in my heart, then let the consequences follow that are mentioned in the next verse. Or if mine heart hath walked after mine eyes, and if consequently any blot hath cleaved to mine hands; i.e. if I have been guilty of any plain act of sin. It is to be remembered that Job has the testimony of God himself to the fact that he was "a perfect and an upright man, one that feared God, and eschewed evil (Job_2:3).
Job_31:8
Then let me sow, and let another eat (comp. Job_5:5; Le 26:16; Deu_28:33, Deu_28:51, etc.). The expression is proverbial. Yea, lot my offspring be rooted out; rather, my produce, or the produce of my field (see the Revised Version).
Job_31:9
If mine heart have been deceived by a woman; rather, enticed, or allured unto a woman. If, that is, I have suffered myself at any time to be enticed by the wiles of a "strange woman" (Pro_5:3; Pro_6:24, etc.), and have so far yielded as to go after her; and if I have laid wait at my neighbour's door—watching for an opportunity to enter unseen, while the goodman is away (Pro_7:19) Job is not speaking of what he has done, but of what men may suspect him of having done.
Job_31:10
Then let my wife grind unto another; i.e. "let the wife of my bosom be brought so low as to be compelled to do the servile work of grinding the corn in the household of another woman." The condition of the female slaves who ground the corn was regarded as the lowest point in domestic slavery (see Exo_11:5; Isa_47:2). And let others bow down upon her. Let them, i.e; claim the master's right, and reduce her to the extremest degradation There would be a just nemesis in this punishment of an adulterer (see 2Sa_12:11).
Job_31:11
For this is an heinous crime. The crime of adultery subverts the family relation, on which it has pleased God to erect the entire fabric of human society. Hence, in the Jewish Law, adultery was made a capital offence (Le Job_20:10; Deu_22:22), both in the woman and in the man. Among other nations the adulteress was commonly punished with death, but the adulterer escaped scot-free. In modern communities adultery is mostly regarded, not as a crime, but as a civil wrong, on account of which an action lies against the adulterer. It is an iniquity to be punished by the judges; literally, it is an iniquity of judges; i.e. one of which judges take cognizance.
Job_31:12
For it is a fire that consumeth to destruction; i.e. it is a thing which brings down the wrath of God upon a man, so that "a fire is kindled in his anger, which shall burn unto the lowest hell" (Deu_32:22). Compare the sentence on David for his great transgression (2Sa_12:9-12). And would root out all mine increase; i.e. "would destroy all my estate;" either by leading me to waste my substance upon my companion in sin, or by bringing down God's judgments upon me to my temporal ruin.
Job_31:13
If I did despise the cause of my manservant or of my maidservant. Job now disclaims a fourth sin—the oppression of his dependants. Eliphaz had taxed him generally with harshness and cruelty in his relations towards those weaker than himself (Job_22:5-9), but had not specially pointed to this kind of oppressiveness. As, however, this was the commonest form of the vice, Job deems it right to disclaim it, before addressing himself to the several charges brought by Eliphaz. He has not ill used his slaves, either male or female. He has not "despised their cause," but given it full consideration and attention; he has heard them when they contended with him; he has allowed them to "contend;" he has been a just, and not a hard master. The slavery of which he speaks is evidently of a kind under which the slave had certain rights, as was the ease also under the Mosaic Law (Exo_21:2-11).
Job_31:14, Job_31:15
What then shall I do when God riseth up? Job regards God as the Avenger and Champion of all the oppressed. If he had been harsh and cruel to his dependants, he would have provoked God's anger, and God would assuredly "rise up" one day to punish. What, then, could he (Job) do? What but submit in silence? When he visiteth, what shall I answer him? There could be no valid defence. The slave was still a man, a brother—God's creature, equally with his master. Did not he that made me in the womb make him? and did not one fashion us in the womb? God "hath made of one Mood all nations of men," and all individual me, "to dwell on the face of the earth" (Act_17:26). All have rights—in a certain sense, equal rights. All are entitled to just treatment, to kind treatment, to merciful treatment. Job is before his age in recognizing the substantial equality of the slave with the freeman, which otherwise was scarcely taught by any until the promulgation of the gospel (see 1Ti_6:2; Phm_1:16).
Job_31:16
If I have withheld the poor from their desire. As Eliphaz had maintained (Job_22:6, Job_22:7), and as Job had already denied (Job_29:12, Job_29:16). The duty of relieving the poor, solemnly enjoined upon the people of Israel in the Law (Deu_15:7-11), was generally admitted by the civilized nations of antiquity. In Egypt it was especially insisted on. "The Egyptian's duties to mankind," says Dr. Birch, "were comprised in giving bread to the hungry, drink to the thirsty, clothes to the naked, oil to the wounded, and burial to the dead". Or have caused the eyes of the widow to fail. "Thou hast sent widows away empty," was one of the accusations of Eliphaz (Job_22:9). "I caused the widow's heart," replied Job, "to sing for joy" (Job_29:13). The widow's weakness has always been felt to give her a special claim on man's benevolence (see Exo_22:22; Deu_14:29; Deu_16:11, Deu_16:14; Deu_24:19; Deu_26:12, Deu_26:13; Psa_146:9; Pro_15:25; Isa_1:17; Jer_7:6; Mal_3:5; 1Ti_5:16; Jas_1:27).
Job_31:17
Or have eaten my morsel myself alone, and the fatherless hath not eaten thereof. With the widow, the fatherless is usually conjoined, as an equal object of compassion (see Exo_22:22; Deu_10:18; Psa_68:5; Isa_1:17; Jer_22:3; Eze_22:7; Zec_7:10, etc.). Eliphaz had specially charged Job with oppression of the fatherless (Job_22:9), and his charge had been denied by Job (Job_29:12). He now claims to have always shared his bread with orphans, and made them partakers or his abundance.
Job_31:18
For from my youth he was brought up with me, as with a father, and I have guided her from my mother's womb; i.e. I have always, so long as I can remember, protected the orphan and done my best to help the widow. It has been my habit from my earliest years so to act. The language is exaggerated; but it had, no doubt, a basis of fact to rest upon. Job was brought up in these principles.
Job_31:19
If I have seen any perish for want of clothing (scrap. Job_22:6, where Eliphaz taxes Job with so acting; and, on the duty of clothing the naked, see Isa_58:7; Eze_18:7, Eze_18:16; Mat_25:36). Or any poor without covering. A pleonastic parallelism.
Job_31:20
If his loins have not blessed me (see above, Job_29:11, Job_29:13), and if he were not warmed with the fleece of my sheep. Clothed, i.e; with a garment spun from wool yielded by my own sheep. A great sheikh like Job would keep in store many such garments, ready to be given to such as were naked or poorly clad, when they came under his observation (Isa_58:7).
Job_31:21
If I have lifted up my hand against the fatherless; i.e. if I have in any way oppressed him. When I saw my help in the gate; i.e.. when I had the power to do so—when I saw my friends and hangers-on mustered in force at the gate where causes were being tried. The wrong and robbery which the poor suffer in the East have always been camel, to a large extent, by failure of justice in the courts, where might, and not right, carries the day.
Job_31:22
Then let mine arm (rather, my shoulder) fall from my shoulder-blade. Job was, perhaps, led to make this rather strange imprecation by the fact that, in the disease from which he was suffering, portions of bone sometimes detach themselves and come away. And mine arm be broken from the bone. My forearm, i.e, detach itself from the bone of the upper arm, and come away from it.
Job_31:23
For destruction from God was a terror to me. I could not, i.e; have acted in the way charged against me by Eliphaz, since I was always God-fearing, and should have been deterred, if by nothing else, at any rate by dread of the Divine vengeance. And by reason of his highness I could not endure. God's majesty and excellency are such that I could not have had the face to resist them. If! had begun such a course of life as Eliphaz laid to my charge (Job_22:5-9), I could not have persisted in it.
Job_31:24
If I have made gold my hope. This is a sin with which the patriarch had not been directly charged. But it had been more or less insinuated (see Job_15:28; Job_20:10, Job_20:15, Job_20:19; Job_22:24, etc.). He may also, perhaps, have felt some inclination to it. Or have said to the fine gold, Thou art my confidence.
Job_31:25
If I rejoiced because my wealth was great, and because mine hand had gotten much. Job feels that it is wrong even to care greatly for wealth. He seems almost to anticipate the saying of St. Paul, that "covetousness is idolatry" (Col_3:5); and hence he passes on without pause from this sort of creature-worship to others common in his day (verses 26, 27). which he likewise disclaims.
Job_31:26
If I beheld the sun when it shined; literally, the light; i.e. the great light, which God made to rule the day (Gen_1:16). Sun-worship, the least ignoble form of idolatry, was widely spread in the East, and in Egypt, from a very early date. According to the views of some, the religion el' t e Egyptians was little else than a complicated sun-worship from its earliest inception to its very latest phase. "The religious notions of the Egyptians," says Dr. Birch, "were chiefly connected with the worship of the sun, with whom at a later period all the principal deities were connected. As Hag, or Harmachis, he represented the youthful or rising sun; as Ra, the midday; and as Turn. the setting sun. According to Egyptian notions, that god floated in a boat through the sky or celestial ether, and descended to the dark regions of night, or Hades. Many deities attended on his passage or were connected with his worship, and the gods Amen and Khepr, who represented the invisible and self-produced god, were identified with the sun". Even those who do not go these lengths admit that the solar worship was, at any rate, a very main element in the cult of Egypt. In the Babylonian and Assyrian religion the position of the sun-god was leas prominent, but still, as San, or Shamas, he held an important place, and was the main object of religious veneration to a largo body of worshippers. In the Vedic system the sun figured as Mitra, and in the Zoroastrian as Mithra, in both holding a high position. Among the Arabians the sun, worshipped as Orotal, is said to have been anciently the only god, though he was accompanied by a female principle named Alilat (Herod; 3.8). Or the moon walking in brightness. The worship of the moon has. in most countries where it has prevailed, been quite secondary and subordinate to that of the sun. In Egypt. while nine gods are more or less identified with the solar luminary, two only, Khons and Thoth, can be said to represent the moon. In the Vedic and Zoroastrian systems the moon, called Soma, or Hems, almost dropped out of the popular religion, at any rate as a moon-god. In the Arabiun, Alilat, a goddess, probably represented the moon, as did Ashtoreth, a goddess, in the Pheonician. In Assyria, however, and in Babylonia, moon-worship held a higher position, Sin, the moon-god, taking precedence over Shamas, the sun-god, and being a very much more important personage. Thus both moon-worship and sun-worship were prevalent among all, or almost all, Job's neighbours.
Job_31:27
And my heart hath been secretly enticed, or my mouth hath kissed my hand. The sin of the heart is placed first, as the fens et origo mali, the spiritual root of the matter. On this naturally follows the outward act which, in the case of idolatry, was commonly the act exactly expressed by the word "adore"—the movement of the hand to the mouth in token of reverence and honour.
Job_31:28
This also were an iniquity to be punished by the judge (see the comment on Job_31:11, adfin.). It is rightly concluded from this expression that, in the country and age of Job, the sort of idolatry which is here mentioned was practised by some, and also that it was legally punishable. For I should have denied the God that is above. The worship of any other god besides the supreme God is, practically, atheism, since "no man can serve two masters." Moreover, to set up two independent gods is to destroy the idea of God, which implies supremacy over every other being.
Job_31:29
If I rejoiced at the destruction of him that hated me. "If at any time I was malevolent, if I wished evil to others, and rejoiced when evil came upon them, being (as the Greeks expressed it) ἐπιχαιρέκακος —if I so acted even in the case of my enemy—then," etc. The apodosis is wanting, but may be supplied by any suitable imprecation (see Job_31:8, Job_31:10, Job_31:22, Job_31:40). Or lifted up myself—i.e. was puffed up and exalted—when evil found him. In the old world men generally regarded themselves as fully entitled to exult at the downfall of an enemy, and to triumph over him with words of contumely and scorn (camp. Jdg_5:19-31; Psa_18:37-42; Isa_10:8-14, etc.). There appears to be but one other passage in the Old Testament, besides the present, in which the contrary disposition is shown. This is Pro_17:5, where the writer declares that "he who is glad at calamities shall not be unpunished."
Job_31:30
Neither have I suffered my mouth to sin by wishing a curse to his soul. Much less, Job means, have I gone beyond the thought to the word, and imprecated a curse upon him with my mouth, as the manner of most ,hen is towards their enemies (see 2Sa_16:5; 1Sa_17:43; Neh_13:25; Psa_109:28; Jer_15:10, etc).
Job_31:31
If the men of my tent said not, Oh that we had of his flesh! we cannot be satisfied. A very obscure passage, but probably to be connected with the following verse, in which Job boasts of his hospitality. Translate, If the men of my tent did not say, Who can find a man that has not been satisfied with his meat? The apodosis is wanting, as in verse 28.
Job_31:32
The stranger did not lodge in the street; i.e. "I did not suffer any stranger who came under my notice to lodge in the street, but, like Abraham (Gen_18:2-8), went out to him, and invited him in, to partake of my hospitality." This is still the practice of Arab sheikhs in Syria, Palestine, and the adjacent countries. But I opened my doors to the traveller; literally, to the way; i.e. "my house gave on the street, and I kept my house door open." Compare the Mishna, "Let thy house be open to the street" ('Pirke Aboth,' § 5).
Job_31:33
If I covered my transgressions as Adam; or, after the manner of men It does not seem to me likely that Job had such a knowledge of Adam's conduct in the garden of Eden as would have made an allusion to it in this place natural or probable. The religious traditions of the Chaldees, which note the war in heaven, the Deluge, the building of the Tower of Babel, and the confusion of tongues, contain no mention of Adam or of Paradise. Nor. so far as I am aware, is there, among other ancient legends, any near parallel to the story of the Fall as related in Gen_4:1-26. Much less does the subordinate detail of Adam hiding himself make its appearance in any of them. The marginal rendering, "after the manner of men," is therefore, I think, to be preferred. By hiding mine iniquity in my bosom. This is not particularly apposite to the case of Adam, who "hid himself from the presence of the Lord God among the trees of the garden" (Gen_4:8).
Job_31:34
Did I fear a great multitude! rather, because I feared the great multitude' or the great assembly; i.e. the gathering of the people in the gate on occasions of public business. It' Job had been conscious of any great and heinous sins' he would not have led the open and public life which, previously to his calamities, he had always led (Job_29:7-10, Job_29:21-25); he would have been afraid to make his appearance at public meetings, lest his sins should have become known, and should draw upon him scorn and contempt, instead of the respect and acclamations to which he was accustomed. Or did the contempt of families terrify me? rather, and the contempt of families terrified me. The contempt of the assembled tribes and families, which might have been poured out upon him at such meetings, would have been quite sufficient to prevent his attending them. If by any accident he had found himself at one, and had seen that he was looked upon with disfavour, he must have kept silence in order to avoid observation. Prudence would have counselled that more complete abstention which is implied in the phrase, and went not out of the door; i.e. "stayed at home in mine own house."
Job_31:35
Oh that one would hear me! i.e. Oh that I had an opportunity of plea, ling my cause before a just judge l of having charges openly brought against me, and having "one" to hear my reply to them! Job does not regard his "comforters" as such persons. They are prejudiced; they have even made themselves his accusers. Behold, my desire is, that the Almighty would answer me; rather, behold' here is my signature I let the Almighty answer me. This passage is parenthetic. Job would prefer to be judged by God, if it were possible, and therefore throws out the wish. Here is his plea in ch. 29-31.; and here is his attestation by word of mouth, which is equivalent to his signature. And that mine adversary had written a book; or, had penned an indictment against me. Job would have matters brought to an issue. In default of a Divine trial and sentence, which he cannot expect, it would suffice tot him that his arraigner should formally draw out his list of charges, and present him with a copy, and so give him an opportunity of making answer to it. If this were done, then (he says)—
Job_31:36
Surely I would take it upon my shoulder—the place of honour (see Isa_9:6; Isa_22:22)—and bind it as a crown to me; i.e. adorn my head with it, as with a diadem.
Job_31:37
I would declare unto him the number of my steps; i.e. I would conceal nothing. I would willingly divulge every act of my life. I would make full and complete answer to the indictment in every particular. As a prince would I go near unto him. There should be no timidity or cringing on my part. I would face my accuser boldly, and bear myself as a prince in his presence.
Job_31:38-40
It is generally supposed that these verses, with the exception of the last clause of Job_31:40, are misplaced. As a termination, they form an anti-climax, and greatly weaken the peroration. Their proper place would seem to be between Job_31:32 and Job_31:33.
Job_31:38
If my land cry against me; i.e. if my land disclaim my ownership, as having been acquired by wrong or robbery. If the furrows likewise thereof complain; or, weep, as having been torn from their rightful proprietors, and seized by a stranger. The apodosis is in Job_31:40.
Job_31:39
If I have eaten the fruits thereof without money; i.e. without acquiring a title to them by purchase. Or have caused the owners thereof to lose their life. Either by actual violence or by depriving them of the means of support (see the comment on Job_29:13). Job had been accused of robbery and oppression both by Zophar (Job_20:12-19) and Eliphaz (Job_22:5-9). He had not, however, been accused of actual murder.
Job_31:40
Let thistles grow instead of wheat, and cockles instead of barley. Then let me be appropriately punished by finding the land, whereof I have wrongfully become possessed, produce nothing but thistles (or thorns) and noxious weeds, such as cockles (Authorized Version) or hemlock (Professor Lee). The words of Job are ended. This may be regarded either as Job's own conclusion of his long speech, or as a remark of the author's. On the whole, the former view is to be preferred.
1. The wickedness he eschewed. Not alone the crime of seduction, or the actual defilement of virginal innocence, but even the indulgence of so much as a lascivious desire in connection with an unmarried female, was an ungodliness which Job regarded with abhorrence and indignation. Job's morality on this point, as also upon some others, is a remarkable anticipation of the sermon on the mount, which forbids the unchaste look, the unclean imagination, the impure desire, as well as the lewd and incontinent act (Mat_5:28). Job's interpretation of the Law of God is like St. Paul's (Rom_7:14)—the precepts of the Decalogue covered the entire realm of the inner no less than of the outer life.
2. The rule he observed. That he might the better guard against the uprise within his heart of any prurient desire or lustful imagination, Job "made a covenant with his eyes," as their lord and master prescribed for them a law that they should not" fixedly gaze upon a maiden." Considering bow much of evil enters by the eye (e.g. the cases of Eve, Gen_3:6; of the wife of Lot, Gen_19:26; of Achan, Jos_7:21), the wisdom of Job's resolution cannot be questioned. In particular the eye has often proved itself "the inlet of lust" (Robinson), of according to a Talmudic proverb, "the procuress of sin;" as, for instance, it did with Judah (Gen_38:5), Samson (Jdg_16:1), David (2Sa_11:1-5), Amnon (2Sa_13:1-20). Few things are more dangerous to an unprincipled, or indeed a principled, mind, than the too ardent contemplation of female beauty, which, besides being a deceitful vanity in itself (Pro_31:30), is prone to inflame the heart with unlawful passions. Hence the propriety of the royal preacher's counsel (Pro_6:25), the Hebrew psalmist's prayer (Psa_119:37), and the Divine Saviour's warning (Mat_18:9).
3. The motives he possessed. In thus habitually exercising self-restraint, gob was actuated by two considerations.
(1) Fear of the Divine power. "It was no fear of man, no dread of temporal consequences, no respect for public order and well-being, no pure and stately self-respect even, which made and kept him pure" (Cox). It was the calm, clear, deliberate conviction that such wickedness could hot escape the just and righteously allotted punishment of Eloah, and that sooner or later, if he should enter on such a course of impiety, he would find himself overwhelmed by some strange, startling, intolerable calamity; nay, that he should deserve to be so overwhelmed (verses 2, 3). Job was manifestly no milk-and-water moralist, like some of the nineteenth century, who regard fornication and seduction as indiscretions, and uncleanness generally as an infirmity rather than a sin. Instead of being leniently judged and softly scolded, if not lovingly caressed, as, alas] is too frequently his portion and inheritance from modern society, the violator of virgin innocence, in Job's estimation, was a monster of iniquity, who deserved to be castigated by some horrible and degrading punishment, and who, he believed, would ultimately get his deservings. Nor was Job too spiritual, on the other hand, to admit that this formed one of the arguments which drove him to strict watchfulness over his heart and eyes. He was afraid of t he just judgment of Almighty God upon them that committed such appalling wickedness; and accordingly he acted on the principle of resisting its first beginnings. So St. Paul, knowing the terror of the Lord, persuaded men (2Co_5:11); and Christ counselled his apostles to fear him who could destroy both soul and body in hell (Luk_12:5). If not the highest motive for leading a chaste and virtuous life, it is still a sound and good one, and the only one by which many are capable of being impressed.
(2) Respect for the Divine omniscience. Job knew that, though it might be possible to elude the utmost vigilance of man, he could not evade him who beheld all his ways, and counted all his steps (verse 4). The Divine omniscience is not dependent on, but co-ordinate with, the Divine omnipresence. God's minute and universal knowledge of mundane affairs, and in particular of all that enters into the complicated texture of a human life, frequently denied by the ungodly (Job_22:13), and sometimes forgotten by the pious (Isa_40:27), is emphatically asserted in Scripture (1Ki_8:39; Psa_11:4; Psa_139:1 4), and nowhere more so than in this book (Job_21:22; Job_23:10; Job_24:1, Job_24:23; Job_28:24; Job_34:21, Job_34:22, Job_34:25). Rightly viewed, it operates as a powerful deterrent from sin, not only by proving the certainty of detection, and therefore the impossibility of escaping punishment, but also by filling the mind with a constant sense of the Divine presence, forgetfulness of which is perhaps one of the most frequent causes of sin.
II. WITH RESPECT TO THE LAW OF JUSTICE. (Verses 5-8.)
1. An explicit declaration. Hypothetical in form, Job's language amounts to a vehement assertion that his life was as unimpeachable with regard to equity as with regard to chastity. With falsehood in every shape and guise he had lived at open war. With deceit and imposition in either word or deed he had had no dealings whatever. From the straight path of integrity he had never turned aside. Never once under the dominion of secret avarice had he suffered his heart to be beguiled into hankering alter his neighbour's property, as Ahab coveted the vineyard of Naboth (1Ki_21:2). Not so much as a speck of defilement cleaved to his palm after any transaction in which he had been engaged. No living man could accuse him of underhand dealings or extortionate practices. So Samuel called his countrymen (1Sa_12:3), and St. Paul challenged the elders of Miletus (Act_20:33-35), to attest his personal integrity. So are Christ's people exhorted to renounce the hidden things of dishonesty (2Co_4:2), to provide things honest in the sight of all men (2Co_8:21), and to carefully maintain a good conscience, in all things willing to live honestly (Heb_13:18).
2. A solemn invocation. So confident does Job feel that he has not swerved a hair's breadth from the law of equity, that he does not hesitate to appeal to God, challenging Eloab, as few men besides would have done (Psa_130:3), to weigh him in an even balance, literally, in the scales of righteousness, when his integrity, or moral perfection, would become apparent. If Job meant this absolutely, it was presumption and self-righteousness; but the probability is he understood, by preferring such a claim, no more than God himself did when he declared Job to be perfect and upright; though the vehemence with which he asserted and protested his blamelessness insensibly obscured his vision of the truth which he at other times acknowledged, that in God's sight no flesh living could be justified.
3. A dreadful imprecation. Not content with calmly submitting the question of his innocence to the severe and impartial arbitrament of Heaven, he invokes upon himself a curse of extreme severity. If by legal chicanery or violent extortion he has robbed another of his land, the commonest and most valuable sort of property, then he desires that he himself may be made the victim of a like oppression, that he may sow and another reap, and that his "things which spring up," not his descendants or children, as elsewhere the word is employed (Job_5:25; Job_21:8; Job_27:14), but, as the parallelism demands, the produce of his ground, his harvest, may be rooted up. God's punishments are often similar in kind to the offences they follow. "Whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap" (Gal_6:7).
III. WITH RESPECT TO THE LAW OF MARRIAGE. (Verses 9-12.) Different from the opening section, which treated of seduction, the present stanza alludes to the sin of adultery. In the former instance it is an unmarried virgin, in the latter it is a wedded wife, that is sinned against. The adulterous enterprise, which Job for himself disavows, is described in detail.
1. By its origin. It takes its rise in a bewitched or befooled heart. "Out of the heart proceed adulteries" (Mat_15:19). Therefore "keep the heart with all diligence" (Pro_4:23). This beguilement of the heart may be deliberately effected by the adulterous woman displaying her charms so as to fascinate her lover's eye (Pro_7:10-21); or, as in the case of David, it may result from lascivious admiration of the married woman's beauty.
2. By its practice. The adulterous lover, waiting for the twilight, disguiseth his face, and lieth in wait at his neighbour's door, obviously a common crime in Job's time (Job_24:15), as it afterwards was in David's and Solomon's (Psa_50:18; Pro_6:24-29; Pro_7:5-9), Jeremiah's (Jer_5:8) and Ezekiel's (Eze_18:6), Christ's (Joh_8:3-9) and the apostles' (1Co_6:9; 2Pe_2:10).
3. By its criminality. Job stigmatizes it as an act of infamy, and an iniquity to be brought before the judges (verse 11), meaning that, besides being a violation of the moral law (Exo_20:17), it is likewise an offence falling within the penal code of the land. Punished by death under Moses (Le Job_20:10; Deu_22:22), in patriarchal times it was visited by burning (Gen_38:24). Probably this was the penalty attached to it in the land of Uz (verse 12). Most heathen nations of antiquity pronounced it a capital offence.
4. By its demerit. The sinner who defiled his neighbour's wife deserved to have the same sorrow meted out to himself—a thought euphemistically expressed in verse 10 (vide Exposition). So David's sin against Uriah's wile was punished by Absalom's wickedness in lying with his father's concubines (2Sa_16:22).
5. By its results. In addition to civil penalties and providential retributions, its ultimate issue is widespread sorrow, if not fatal ruin. Like a consuming fire, if persevered in, it has nothing but physical, moral, and eternal destruction for the perpetrator (Pro_6:32; Pro_7:23, Pro_7:26, Pro_7:27; 1Co_6:18; Heb_13:4; Rev_21:8). Even a solitary act is like the taking of a hot coal into one's bosom (Pro_6:27-29). Not only does it demoralize the nature of him who commits it, but it spreads sorrow and desolation through the heart of her against whom it is committed. It breaks the peace of otherwise happy families. It awakens the demon of jealousy, even when it is not discovered. Detected or concealed, it is a secret fountain of death.
IV. WITH RESPECT TO THE LAW OF MASTER AND SERVANT. (Verses 13-15.)
1. The case supposed. Job instances a state of matters that might readily have occurred in his household, viz. the existence of some ground of complaint against him, the master, on the part of his manservant or maidservant, i.e. his bondman or bondwoman. Such contendings and disputings between master and servant, which are not unusual in modern free society, were much more likely to arise in ancient times when servants were simply slaves.
2. The course pursued. In the event of any such charge or complaint being preferred against him, Job protests that he neither crushed it out by the strong hand of oppression nor tossed it aside with contemptuous indifference, but gave it the most kindly attention and the most patient, careful, and impartial examination. If his accusers proceeded to impeach him at a bar of justice, he did not deny them the right of public redress, as other masters might have done and as the Israelitish master was entitled by the Law to do. But counting them as persons, not as goods and chattels, he accorded to them equal rights in this matter with himself. Slavery in Job's house, as also in Abraham's, was a widely different thing from that practised in modern times.
3. The reasons allied.
(1) He was answerable to God for the treatment he accorded to his servants. He should tremble when God arose to judgment, arid be speechless when God came round as an Inspector, to examine into the controversy pending between him and his servants, unless he acted on the principles of strictest equity. That God will one day hold such a court of inquiry, in which masters and servants, rulers and ruled, will be judged, is announced in Scripture (Psa_96:13; Ecc_11:9; Act_17:31; 2Co_5:10). Hence masters are responsible for their treatment of servants (Col_4:1); and this thought should deter them, as it did Job, from inflicting upon those who serve, or are dependent upon them, either injustice or severity (Eph_6:9).
(2) His servants were possessed of the same human nature with himself. They had been fashioned by the same Divine power as himself. Both alike were God's handiwork (Job_34:19; Psa_33:15), God's creatures (Isa_45:12), God's offspring (Mal_2:10; Act_17:29). Both had been produced by the same human agency. Both had been curiously and secretly elaborated in a woman's womb (Psa_139:13). Both had been made of one blood (Act_17:26). Hence both belonged to a common brotherhood. Physically, intellectually, morally, the slave is the fellow of his master, having on the ground of a common humanity equal rights with that master in the light of God and before men. The language of Job is a powerful condemnation of the modern kind of slavery.
V. WITH RESPECT TO THE LAW OF KINDNESS. (Verses 16-220.
1. The objects of Job's compassionate regard. The poor and the needy, the hungry and the naked, the fatherless and the widow. The care of such persons is a dictate of nature, which, however, is frequently powerless to enforce obedience to its own precepts. Among heathen nations generally the helpless and the destitute have been neglected and left to perish, if not openly oppressed and destroyed. Religion, however, both natural and revealed, prescribes kindness to the poor and needy as one of its essential virtues. The Mosaic code provided special legislation for the poor (Le Job_19:10, Job_19:13; Job_23:1-17 :22; Exo_23:11; Deu_15:7-11; Deu_14:28, Deu_14:29), for the widow (Exo_22:22; Deu_24:17; Deu_27:19), for the orphan (Exo_22:22; Deu_10:18; Deu_14:29). In the Hebrew Church these were the objects of God's peculiar care (Psa_68:5; Psa_146:9; Jer_49:11; Mal_3:5). In the Christian Church they are regarded as Christ's brethren (Mat_25:40). The care of them a special duty of the pious (Jas_1:27).
2. Job's habitual behaviour towards the poor and needy. Previously described (Job_29:11-17), it is here again set forth both negatively and positively.
(1) Negatively, by reciting the special acts of unkindness towards the poor which he was careful W avoid, such as
(a) withholding the poor from their desire (verse 16), it might be from the wages for which they had toiled or the aims which they had craved;
(b) causing the eyes of the widow to fail, by denying her assistance or refusing her redress against her powerful oppressor (Job_24:3);
(c) eating his morsel alone, "in misery and grudging seclusion," lest the fatherless should see it and require to be invited to partake (verse 17);
(d) looking on with heartless unconcern while the naked shivered in their rags, and perished for want of clothes (verse 19);
(e) shaking the hand, i.e. using a threatening gesture towards the orphan who sued him in a court of justice, the moment he recognized the judges to be his friends (verse 21).
(2) Positively, by sketching the manner of life towards them which from his youth up he had pursued (verse 18), and which in large measure had become a second nature to him; according to which Job had been a father to the orphan and a son to the widow (verse 18), training up the one with paternal solicitude and comforting the other with filial devotion, while the bunny never failed to find a meal at his hospitable board (verse 17), or the naked to exchange their rags for the warmest fleeces of his sheep (verse 20), his own heart finding its truest joy and amplest reward in the happiness he conferred on others.
3. The Spirit that inspired Job in his charitable deeds. He was afraid of the Divine retribution, and he stood in awe of the Divine majesty. It was the fear, not of man, but of God, that deterred him; the apprehension, not of unpleasant consequences in time, if he acted otherwise, but of the all-devouring wrath of the Almighty in the future.
4. The proof that Job offered of his veracity in what he said. He invoked upon himself a curse if he had sinned in any of the ways above named, but more particularly if he had lifted up his hand against the orphan; he desired that his shoulder might fall from its shoulder-blade, and that his arm might be broken from its bone (verse 22).
VI. WITH RESPECT TO THE LAW OF WORSHIP. (Verses 24-28.)
1. The twofold idolatry from which Job had abstained.
(1) Mammonism, or the worship of money. Formerly possessed of great wealth (Job_1:3; cf. Job_22:24), Job had carefully avoided those particular sins which great wealth is prone to foster.
(a) He had not allowed his confidence for time or for eternity to rest in the abundance of his gold. Probably money, in consequence of the seeming almightiness which belongs to it (Ecc_7:2; Ecc_10:19), is the most formidable rival God encounters in his demands upon the human heart (Mat_6:24), which almost universally betrays a disposition to trust in uncertain riches rather than in the living God (1Ti_6:17). But Job had never permitted his gold to usurp the throne el his affections, had never even esteemed it as the chief good, and certainly had not accorded it the homage due to the Supreme. The all-absorbing devotion of a human soul to the pursuit or possession of wealth is idolatry (Eph_5:5; Col_3:5), is incompatible with true piety (Mar_10:24; 1Jn_2:15), and should be carefully eschewed by all followers of Christ.
(b) He had not exultingly rejoiced in the greatness of his wealth. A person might stop short of actually reposing his heart's trust in his money, and yet be guilty of excessive delight therein. But not even of the common sin of setting too high an estimate upon his gold and silver, of looking on with inward gratification at the growing pile of his material goods, was Job guilty. Having the Almighty as his gold and his silver of strength (Job_22:25), i.e. esteeming the Divine favour and fellowship as greater riches than any earthly treasures, it was impossible that the mere increase of material possessions could fill him with extravagant rejoicing. The most effectual way to prevent the soul from delighting in a creature is to teach it to delight in the Creator.
(c) He had not even arrogantly taken credit to himself for achieving his immense fortune. No doubt his personal industry and sagacity had contributed to the grand result (Pro_10:4; Pro_13:4), but he piously refrained from saying. "My power and the might of my hand hath gotten me this wealth" (Deu_8:17), probably remembering, as the Israelites were counselled to do (Deu_8:18), that it was the Divine blessing alone which enabled him to become rich (Pro_10:22).
(2) Sabaeism, or the worship of the heavenly bodies. "The eldest and also comparatively the purest form of heathenism" (Delitzsch), the adoration of the stars, prevailed amongst the Chaldeans in the time of Abraham, Uruk, one of the early monumental kings of Babylonia, having found, it at Ura temple of the moon, at Larsa a temple of the sun, and at Erech a temple of Venus, called Bitanna, or the house of heaven. It was practised by the ancient Arabians, who "adored the sun and the moon as Divine," ancient testimonies being witness. It was diffused throughout Syria in the time of Moses, so that the Israelites, prior to their occupation of Canaan, were specially warned against it (Deu_4:19). Nevertheless, under the monarchy, Israel frequently relapsed into this abomination (2Ki_23:5, 2Ki_23:11). In later Babylonia it was rampant (Eze_8:16), as again the monuments attest, Nebuchadnezzar having erected in the centre el Babylon "a great temple of Ninharissi (wife of the sun)," "to the moon-god a large house of alabaster as his temple," and "to the sun a house of cement and brick". The customary method of paying homage to these stellar deities was by kissing the hand to them (1Ki_19:18; Heb_13:2), which, it may be noticed, is the literal import of the English verb" to, adore." The early and widespread diffusion of this particular form of idolatry affords a striking testimony to man's need of a God outside of himself. Perhaps also, in the absence of revelation, it is not surprising that the human heart, impressed with the brilliance of the sun, the great light, shining in meridian splendour, and the exceeding beauty of the moon, the solemn and majestic night-wanderer, should ascribe to them supernatural Power and dignity. Yet man's position at the crown and summit of creation renders all devotion offered to the creatures not only sinful, but absurd. From such impiety Job declared that he had kept himself free.
2. The twofold argument by which Job had been deterred. Had Job been addicted to either of the above specified forms of idolatry, he would have been guilty
(1) of a punishable crime. Probably Job means that in his day sun-worship was an offence against the statute law of the land (vide on verse 11), as under the Mosaic code in Israel it could be expiated only by death (Deu_17:2-7); but possibly the phrase, "an iniquity for judges." may only signify a transgression deserving to be punished, in which case it will hold good of both forms of idolatry. Job shrank from making a god to himself out of either the gold and silver which he possessed, or the celestial luminaries which he beheld, because of the penal consequences to which he knew such a misdeed would lead. And also because he felt that he would be guilty
(2) of a detestable hypocrisy in professing to worship God while secretly he was adoring the sun and kissing hands to the moon. A noble testimony to Job's spirituality of mind and sincerity of heart! He could easily have offered homage to the host of heaven without exposing himself to observation by his fellows; or if, wanting courage to risk detection, he had refrained from outward gestures of devotion, he might have inwardly with his heart acknowledged their supremacy. But Job understood that God could read the heart as well as interpret the outward act, and that only that was acceptable worship which was inwardly sincere as well as outwardly correct. Here, again, the doctrine of the sermon on the mount (Mat_6:6) and of the New Testament generally (Joh_4:23, Joh_4:24) has been marvellously anticipated.
VII. WITH RESPECT TO THE LAW OF LOVE. (Verses 29, 30.) Job declares his manner of life in dealing with his enemies.
1. Their treatment of him. They hated him. Their enmity was in all likelihood excited and fostered by his piety. Good men seldom pass through the world without meeting adversaries and opponents. David did not (Psa_38:19, Psa_38:20). St. Paul did not (1Co_16:9). Even Christ did not (Joh_15:18). Neither can Christ's followers expect to live without molestation (Joh_15:20). They that will live godly shall suffer persecution (2Ti_3:12).
2. His treatment of them. Not only did he not rejoice in their destruction when evil fortune overtook them (verse 29), but he was conscious of never having wished that such evil fortune should overtake them (verse 30). To exult in the downfall of an enemy, if natural to the sinful heart, is yet heathenish, fiendish, diabolic (Mic_7:8); it was sorely punished in the case of Edom when she rejoiced over Judah (Oba_1:12, Oba_1:13); it is explicitly condemned in the Old Testament (Pro_24:17, Pro_24:18); and is directly antagonistic to the spirit of the Mosaic Law (Exo_23:4; Le Exo_19:18), and much more to that of Christ's gospel (Mat_19:19; Rom_13:9; Gal_5:14; Jas_3:8), which enjoins not only a negative abstinence from wishing harm to one's enemies, the virtue which Job claimed (verse 30), but the positive bestowment on them of acts of kindness (Mat_5:44; Rom_12:20), which also we may be sure Job practised. Job's doctrine is here again a striking approximation towards the teaching of Christ, and Job's conduct a lofty exhibition of the spirit of Christianity, which will only shine out with brighter lustre if the reading (verse 31) be adopted which supposes Job was urged by the men of his tabernacle to avenge himself upon his adversary.
VIII. WITH RESPECT TO THE LAW OF HOSPITALITY. (Verses 31, 32.) This also Job maintained he had observed:
1. With conspicuous publicity. So open-handed had been his beneficence that with triumphant confidence he appealed to the members of his vast household to give witness in his behalf. They could testify, he was certain, that they had never seen a poor man depart unsatisfied from his mansion gate, but rather that they had every day beheld the contrary. So Job allowed his light to shine before men.
2. With unrestricted liberality. So lavish had been his hospitality that his domestics could fairly ask—Where was the man whom their master had not sumptuously entertained? His table had stood open for all comers—for friends and relatives, as a matter of course, but also for strangers and travellers of every sort and degree. So did Abraham and Lot invite travellers and strangers to their tents (Gen_18:1-4; Gen_19:1); so are Christians exhorted to be gives to hospitality (Rom_12:13; Heb_13:2).
3. With unstinted generosity. Not simply had he practised hospitality, but he had done so with no niggard band. The stranger he had welcomed to a lodging in his house. To the hungry traveller by the way he had extended, not a crust of bread merely, but a full meal, yea, a rich feast. So are Christians commanded to use hospitality without grudging (1Pe_4:9).
IX. WITH RESPECT TO THE LAW OF SINCERITY. (Verses 33-37.) The Language may be understood as conveying:
1. An important admission. Job's use of the phrase, "my transgressions," is by some (Canon Cook) regarded as tantamount to an acknowledgment that, notwithstanding his blameless character and life, he was not free from sin—a statement which was certainly correct in itself, since "there is not a just man on earth, that doeth good, and sinneth not" (Ecc_7:20), and hopeful as an indication of the mind of Job, inasmuch as it proved he was not depending on his virtues for salvation, as well as comforting for those who should afterwards peruse the story of his life, and who but for this recognition of the fact of sin might be prone to think that Job's morality was beyond their reach. Still, it is open to grave question whether Job really intended to make this admission, or whether he did not rather design to convey an opposite idea, viz. that, as he had perpetrated no open crime, so neither was he hiding any secret wickedness. In either case his words contain:
2. An emphatic protestation. He was not attempting, and never had attempted, to play the hypocrite by either denying his guiltiness in general, or concealing his wicked acts in particular. In all he had said to them about the manner of his life, as in all the approaches he had ever made to God, he had acted with transparent sincerity. There was no secret stain upon his soul which he had not confessed to God; there was no undivulged crime which he feared to make known to man. Pre-eminently Job claimed to be one in whose spirit there was no guile (Psa_32:2). Job's accents contain a ring of defiance, which seems to ask whether he was likely to be afraid of either the hootings of the mob or the contempt of the aristocratic families of the land, that he required to skulk within doors, and keep silent about anything that he had ever done. Doubtless Job was universally recognized as a man of courage; and, because it was so, he could appeal to that in proof of his sincerity. But beyond this his utterance, if really intended, exhibits:
3. An instructive comparison. The contrast which Job institutes between himself and Adam, if the translation of the Authorized Version be followed, is a valuable authentication of the biblical tradition of the Fall. It proves that the writer of the Book of Job, to whatever age he belonged, accepted the story in Genesis concerning Adam as historically correct. By putting the name Adam into the mouth of one who flourished in pre-Mosaic times, it also demonstrates that, in the judgment of the author at least, the contents of the Hebrew narrative were credited beyond the bounds of Palestine at a time when the First Book of Moses was probably not yet composed. And now, having strenuously asserted that he was guilty of no concealment, he adds, in authentication of his truthfulness:
4. A personal subscription. "Behold my signature!" he exclaims, alluding to the practice in ancient courts of law of submitting a defence in writing, attested by the signature or mark of the accused party, and meaning that, so far as he was concerned, so confident did he feel in his own integrity, and so well prepared was he to reply to any indictment that might be brought against him, that he was willing to see the case go to trial without delay. Nay, having tendered his defences, he closes with a shout of triumph, throwing out as his ultimatum:
5. A sublime proclamation, in which he challenges his unseen adversary, God (Job_9:15; Job_16:9), to draw up an indictment against him (Carey, Cox), or, according to another interpretation (Delitzsch), in which he draws attention to the already prepared indictment of his opponents, viz. the three friends. In either case he offers, if only God will allow the matter to go to trial, not to shrink from the ordeal of examination, but binding the indictment (God's or what of the friends) on his shoulder as a badge of distinction, "winding it around his head like a magnificent crown of diadems, (Delitzsch), to approach God with all the princely majesty of one who is conscious of innocence, and to lay bare before his searching gaze, with the most assured confidence of ultimate vindication, every step in his by-past career.
X. WITH RESPECT TO THE LAW OF PROPERTY, (Verses 38-40.)
1. The crime which Job disowns. The fraudulent appropriation of land, by either withholding the stipulated rent or murdering the legal proprietor, was apparently not unknown in the days of the patriarch, as, alas I in our time it is both known and practised. But of any such iniquity Job's hands were clear. For every rood of soil he cultivated be had honestly paid the market price; and, of course, he had never dreamt of killing his landlord to get his farm, as Jezebel despatched Naboth to secure his vineyard.
2. The curse which Job invokes. Had Job been guilty of any such wickedness, not only would his fields have cried out against him, and the furrows which he ploughed have wept over his ungodliness, but he would have richly deserved that Heaven's blight should descend upon his acres; and such a blight he prays to descend upon his broad domain if he has been guilty of any such wickedness as that which he has just disowned. "May thistles spring up instead of wheat, and darnel instead of barley!"
Learn:
1. That the Law of God, i.e. the moral Law, or the law of holiness, has been the same from the beginning of the world until now.
2. That the spirituality of the Law el God is only concealed from them who make no attempt to keep it.
3. That the Law of God takes cognizance of man in every department of his being and every sphere of his life.
4. That the Law of God is as certain and severe in its penalties as it is stern and imperative in its requirements.
5. That the Law of God is the one absolute and invariable rule of life for men under the Christian as well as under the Mosaic or patriarchal dispensation, for the pardoned believer no less than for the unconverted sinner.
6. That the true gauge of a soul's piety is the earnestness with which it endeavours to keep the Law of God in all its precepts.
7. That the loftiest incentive to such a keeping of the Law of God is a reverential regard for the Lawmaker, especially as he is seen in Christ.
8. That no mere man is able to keep the Law of God perfectly, even Job's performances being not altogether unmixed with sin.
9. That the most dangerous thing a man can do with his transgressions of the Law of God is to cover them.
10. That that man is grossly deceived who imagines God could not indict him for violations of his Law, because he (the man) cannot indict himself.
11. That those who are advancing in holiness, or sincere keeping of the Law of God, should guard against being either too proud of, or too reliant on, their own attainments.
12. That the loftiest morality attainable on earth will not enable man to dispense with the services of a Daysman or Mediator.