free while helping to build churches and support pastors in Uganda.
Click here to learn more!
There would seem to have been a pause after Job's answer to Bildad. The suggestion is that he waited for Zophar, and seeing that Zophar was silent, he took the initiative, and made general reply.
This reply opens with a protestation of innocence (1-6). This was his direct answer to the charge made by Eliphaz. Its terms are to be carefully noted. He swore by God, while yet repeating his complaint, that God had taken away his right and vexed his soul. He refused to move from the position he had occupied throughout. He would not justify his opponents in the debate. He had been righteous, and he reaffirmed it. From this protestation his answer proceeded in terms of anger. In this imprecation, in which he expressed the desire that his enemy might be as the wicked, the deepest conviction of his soul seems to rise, in spite of himself, and it is in direct contradiction of the complaints he had made of the withdrawal of God from interference in the affairs of men. Summoning all the strength of his faith, he declared that he would teach his opponents "concerning the hand of God," and he now practically took hold of all that they had said about God's visitation on the wicked, and hurled it back on them as an anathema. He splendidly admitted the truth of their philosophy, but denied its application to himself. He thus left the whole problem full of mystery. All the things they had said were true, but they were not true to him. There must be some other way to account for his suffering. These arguments as here stated are not declared, but they are of plain inference from this angry retort on Job's foes.
These files are public domain.
Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.
Morgan, G. Campbell. "Commentary on Job 27". "Morgan's Exposition on the Bible". https://www.studylight.org/
the Third Sunday after Epiphany