Job 22:1-28:28

Thomas Coke Commentary on the Holy Bible - Job 22:1

CHAP. XXII. Eliphaz asserts, that Job's justification of himself doth not please God, and that he is surrounded with snares, because he had been guilty of many iniquities. He exhorts him to repentance, with promises of mercy. Before Christ 1645. Job 22:1. Then Eliphaz the Temanite answered— Eliphaz here, increasing in his indignation, charges Job home with particular facts of cruelty and oppression; to which he adds the atrocious crime of atheism, and a denial or disbelief of Providence; and... read more

Robert Jamieson; A. R. Fausset; David Brown

Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible - Job 22:1

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 (Psalms 16:2; Luke 17:10; Acts 17:25; 1 Chronicles 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. read more

Thomas Constable

Expository Notes of Dr. Thomas Constable - Job 22:1-5

God’s disinterest in Job 22:1-5Job 22:2 should end "Him" (i.e., God) rather than "himself" (i.e., the wise man).These verses reveal Eliphaz’s very deficient concept of God. To him, God did not delight in fellowship with man or in blessing man. His only reason for intervening in life was to punish people when they misbehaved. Many people today share this unfortunate view of God. Truly God does not need people, but He delights in our righteousness and fellowship, and He loves us. read more

Thomas Constable

Expository Notes of Dr. Thomas Constable - Job 22:1-23

D. The Third cycle of Speeches between Job and His Three Friends chs. 22-27In round one of the debate Job’s friends probed his intellect, and in round two they probed his conscience. In round three they probed specific issues."The lamentable fact is that the friends endorsed Satan’s view of Job as a hypocrite. Thinking to defend God, they became Satan’s advocates, insisting that he whom God designated as His servant belonged to the devil." [Note: Kline, p. 477.] We could summarize the... read more

Thomas Constable

Expository Notes of Dr. Thomas Constable - Job 22:1-30

1. Eliphaz’s third speech ch. 22In his third speech Eliphaz was even more discourteous than he had been previously."He [Eliphaz] made three serious accusations against Job: he is a sinner (Job 22:1-11), he is hiding his sins (Job 22:12-20), and he must confess his sins and repent before God can help him (Job 22:21-30)." [Note: Wiersbe, p. 47.] read more

John Dummelow

John Dummelow's Commentary on the Bible - Job 22:1-30

The Last Speech of Eliphaz1-11. Eliphaz ignoring Job’s last speech, perhaps because he could not answer it, argues that God’s treatment of man must be impartial, since He has nothing to gain or lose at his hands. Job can therefore only be suffering for his sins, and Eliphaz suggests those of which he has been guilty.2b. RV ’Surely he that is wise is profitable to himself’: i.e. benefits himself only.3. Pleasure] rather, ’advantage.’4. RV ’Is it for thy fear of him that he reproveth thee, that... read more

John Dummelow

John Dummelow's Commentary on the Bible - Job 22:1-40

The Third Series of Speeches (Job 22-31)Having failed to convince Job by the argument derived from God’s greatness and wisdom, and to make good their assertion that it fared ill with the wicked, the friends have only one new line of argument left. This is a downright accusation of Job as a high-handed tyrant. Eliphaz adopts this, though he softens its severity by a fervent exhortation to Job, and a description of the felicity that awaits him if he will but make peace with God. The rest of the... read more

Charles John Ellicott

Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers - Job 22:1

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. read more

William Nicoll

Expositor's Dictionary of Texts - Job 22:1-30

Job 22:5 f 'There was no shadow of truth in the accusation,' Mark Rutherford observes. 'But what a world that must have been when the Church's anathemas were reserved for him who exacted pledges from his brother, who neglected the famishing, and who paid undue respect to the great!' We require higher tasks because we do not recognize the height of those we have. Trying to be kind and honest seems an affair too simple and too inconsequential for gentlemen of our heroic mould; we had rather set... read more

William Nicoll

Expositor's Bible Commentary - Job 22:1-30

XIX.DOGMATIC AND MORAL ERRORJob 22:1-30ELIPHAZ SPEAKSTHE second colloquy has practically exhausted the subject of debate between Job and his friends. The three have really nothing more to say in the way of argument or awful example. It is only Eliphaz who tries to clinch the matter by directly accusing Job of base and cowardly offences. Bildad recites what may be called a short ode, and Zophar, if he speaks at all, simply repeats himself as one determined if possible to have the last word.And... read more

Group of Brands