Today we see a new person, Elihu, come on the scene and it appears he has been there all along, remaining silent. The text tells us that he is much younger than all the others so perhaps that is why he was not mentioned among the respected men of advanced age. He has been remaining silent but he is about to make up for lost time!
We are given his lineage but not that of the other friends. Many believe that this is a tool to make sure we know this is not a fictitious character but an actual person. This is important because he just appears out of nowhere (no previous mention of him) and he will disappear just as quickly. As a result, over the years some have accused this person of being inserted into the story later. I’ve even heard one theory that Elihu was actually Messiah but when you read and see how much knowledge he is lacking in with regards to the true happenings, I find this to be highly unlikely – at best.
While we do not know his age we do know that he is apparently significantly younger than the others. Those of us who have raised teenage boys will likely shake our head and get a chuckle or two out of his boldness in addressing his elders and his confidence in his own judgement.
So know going into this that I can’t help but imagine Elihu as a teenage boy who thinks he knows everything. While he is clearly a well thought young man, I think his arrogance trips him up and he falls into a faulty thought pattern. So often in a situation we choose between two options given to us, our default believing that those are the only two options. When, in reality, there are often more options and therefore more opportunities beyond what is presented at surface level.
You see, in Job 32:1 we read that Job’s friends gave up on him essentially, they quit talking because they saw that Job was righteous in his own eyes. The Hebrew word for righteous in this case is tsaddiq and one of the ways it is used is to describe a person who is just and righteous in conduct and in character, according to Biblehub.com. Another descriptor is a lawful person.
Job knew he was a law abiding citizen in the kingdom of YHWH. However, his friends assumed he had done something wrong and that is the reason why all of this was happening to him, because YHWH is a just God.
Elihu fell into the same pattern of thinking of the rest of Job’s friends. We know that YHWH is right and just, and so they assumed that Job was neither right nor just due to all of the tragedies that had befallen him. However, we as the reader see that both Job AND YHWH were in the right. (YHWH always is, of course). Job’s friends just didn’t have the imagination to consider this possibility.
Remember: We do not see all that YHWH is doing in our lives. We must realize that we also do not see what YHWH is doing in the lives of others, either.
?Great men are not always wise: neither do the aged understand judgment. Job 32:9 (kjv)
This one always hits me in the gut. I remember the exact moment I realized one of my grandparents wasn’t perfect. I’ll never forget it. Not being perfect didn’t make them any less wonderful, but it was an awakening for someone who had put them up on a pedestal of being able to do no wrong in all things. I hope and pray we will always honor our seniors but this sentence is a stark reminder that just because someone is esteemed by the world or far older than us does not mean they are without fault or have perfect judgement.
Sidenote: I heard a statement this past week that really had an impact on me and I wanted to share it.
We don’t take our sin seriously enough.
In the era of prosperity gospel, cheap grace (grace that allows us to live however we want with only applause as response), and ear tickling, we’ve been taught to toss our sin aside when we walk in the door, like an old pair of shoes we don’t want to wear for the moment. Then, when it is time to leave our fellowships or churches we casually slip those old shoes on again as we walk out the door – as if YHWH doesn’t see us doing it.
We like ’em. They’re comfy. They fit our life. Our sins are much the same way.
We take our sins too lightly. When we are told that our sins are forgiven thanks to Messiah, we should say “My past sins are forgiven! I will now live as a changed man/woman!”. Instead, we use Messiah’s covering as a license to do whatever we want with no thought to the consequences. We offer up flimsy excuses such as “We can’t possibly NOT sin” as our reason to keep full boar ahead, willfully sinning in our comfy old shoes fashion. I’ve even heard, and this has been said with all seriousness by more than one person on more than one occasion “If we don’t sin then Jesus died for nothing.”
People actually say this. People actually mean this. This is how twisted things are.
We’ll do anything to keep us in those comfy shoes. Even if it means defaming our Messiah.
We don’t realize that sin is a direct offense against YHWH. Further, it separates us from Him because, when we choose to sin, we are choosing to walk away from the Father’s path.
It is a defiance, a disrespect, and a transgression against the Father who lovingly created our inmost being and knit us together in our mother’s womb. (Psalm 139:13) We don’t hold our Creator in reverence and we treat our sin flippantly.
We don’t take our sin seriously enough.
We don’t take our Father seriously enough.
Job took sin seriously, he revered YHWH as his God, and that is why he had the assurance that he did.
Elihu continues on in our reading today but we are in a unique position to grasp that he is lacking in understanding of the true situation just as the rest of Job’s friends and Job himself.
May we learn not to lean on our own understanding, may we take our sin more seriously, and may we praise His name for making His ways and His understanding so readily available to us through His word.
What a mighty God we serve!
Test everything, hold tight to what is good.~ 1 Thess 5:21
We are saved by Grace alone: Obedience is not the root of our salvation, it is the fruit!
Christy Jordan founded SeekingScripture for the purpose of helping as many people as possible develop a firsthand relationship with the whole word of God. You can find her writings on Seeking Scripture, all podcasting platforms, and in the Seeking Scripture Front Porch Fellowship group on Facebook.
34:31-37 When we reprove for what is amiss, we must direct to what is good. Job’s friends would have had him own himself a wicked man. Let will only oblige him to own that he spoke unadvisedly with his lips. Let us, in giving reproof, not make a matter worse than it is. Elihu directs Job to humble himself before God for his sins, and to accept the punishment. Also to pray to God to discover his sins to him. A good man is willing to know the worst of himself; particularly, under affliction, he desires to be told wherefore God contends with him. It is not enough to be sorry for our sins, but we must go and sin no more. And if we are affectionate children, we shall love to speak with our Father, and to tell him all our mind. Elihu reasons with Job concerning his discontent under affliction. We are ready to think every thing that concerns us should be just as we would have it; but it is not reasonable to expect this. Elihu asks whether there was not sin and folly in what Job said. God is righteous in all his ways, and holy in all his works, Ps 145:17. The believer saith, Let my Saviour, my wise and loving Lord, choose every thing for me. I am sure that will be wisest, and the best for his glory and my good.
That which I see not, teach thou me – That is, in regard to my errors and sins. No prayer could be more appropriate than this. It is language becoming every one who is afflicted, and who does not see clearly the reason why it is done. The sense is, that with a full belief that he is liable to error and sin, that he has a wicked and deceitful heart, and that God never afflicts without reason, he should go to him and ask him to show him “why” he has afflicted him. He should not complain or repine; he should not accuse God of injustice or partiality; he should not attempt to cloak his offences, but should go and entreat him to make him acquainted with the sins of heart and life which have led to these calamities. Then only will he be in a state of mind in which he will be likely to be profited by trials.
If I have done iniquity, I will do no more – Admitting the possibility that he had erred. Who is there that cannot appropriately use this language when he is afflicted?
I will no longer maintain mine innocency, but from thy judgments I will conclude and have reason to believe that there are some secret sins in me, for which thou dost chastise me, and which I through mine ignorance or partiality cannot yet discover, and therefore do beg that thou wouldst by thy Spirit manifest them to me. If I have done iniquity, I will amend my former errors.
That which I see not teach thou me,…. Which may be understood either of the chastisements of God, and his dealings with his people in a providential way, and of the design and use of them, which are sometimes unsearchable, and at most but a part of them only seen and known; it is meet to say to God, it is but a small part and portion of thy ways that is known by me; I can see but little into them: teach me more of thy mind and will in them, or else of sins and transgressions, the cause of chastisement; it is proper for an afflicted man to say unto God, I am conscious to myself of many sinful failings and infirmities, but there may be secret sins committed by me which have escaped my notice and observation; point them out to me, that I may be humbled for them, and make a free confession of them;
if I have done iniquity, I will do no more; that is, if I have committed any capital crime, any foul offence or gross enormity, for otherwise no man lives without sin, I sincerely repent of it, and will take care for the future, through divine grace, to do so no more.
Verse 32. – That which I see not, teach thou me; i.e. “If in anything I fail to see thy will, teach thou it me. Make thy way plain before my face.” If I have done iniquity, I will do no more. The hypothetical form seems to be preferred, as more acceptable to Job, who maintained his righteousness, than a positive confession of sin. Job 34:32
29 If He, however, maketh peace, who will then condemn?
And if He hideth His countenance – who then can behold Him? –
Both concerning numbers and individuals together:
30 That godless men reign not,
That they be not nets to the people.
31 For one, indeed, saith to God,
“I have been proud, I will not do evil;
32 “What I see not, show Thou me;
“If I have done wrong, I will do it no more”!? –
If God makes peace (ישׁקיט as Psalm 94:13, comp. Isaiah 14:7, הארץ שׁקטה כל־, viz., after the overthrow of the tyrant) in connection with such crying oppression of the poor, who will then condemn Him without the rather recognising therein His comprehensive justice? The conjecture ירעשׁ
(Note: Vid., Grtz in Frankel’s Monatsschrift, 1861, i.)
is not required either here or 1 Samuel 14:47 (where הרשׁיע signifies to punish the guilty); ירשׁע is also not to be translated turbabit (Rosenm.), since רשׁע (Arab. rs‛, rsg) according to its primitive notion does not signify “to be restless, to rage,” but “to be relaxed, hollow” (opposite of צדק, Arab. ṣdq, to be hard, firm, tight). Further: If God hides His countenance, i.e., is angry and punishes, who can then behold Him, i.e., make Him, the veiled One, visible and claim back the favour withdrawn? The Waw of וּמי, if one marks off the periods of the paratactic expression, is in both cases the Waw of conclusion after hypothetical antecedents, and. Job 34:29 refers to Job’s impetuous challenging of God. Thus exalted above human controversy and defiance, God rules both over the mass and over individuals alike. יחד gives intensity of the equality thus correlatively (et-et) expressed (Targ., Syr.); to refer it to אדם as generalizing (lxx, Jer. et super omnes homines), is forbidden by the antithesis of peoples and individuals. To the thought, that God giveth rest (from oppressors) and hides His countenance (from the oppressors and in general those who act wrongly), two co-ordinate negative final clauses are attached: in order that godless men may not rule (ממּלך, as e.g., 2 Kings 23:33, Keri), in order that they may no longer be (מ( e equals מהיות, under the influence of the notion of putting aside contained in the preceding final clause, therefore like Isaiah 7:8 מעם, Isaiah 24:2 מעיר, Jeremiah 48:2 מגוי, and the like) snares of the people, i.e., those whose evil example and bad government become the ruin of the community.
In Job 34:31 the view of those who by some jugglery concerning the laws of the vowel sounds explain האמר as imper. Niph. ( equals האמר), be it in the sense of להאמר, dicendum est (Rosenm., Schlottm., and others, after Raschi), or even in the unheard-of reflexive signification: express thyself (Stick., Hahn), is to be rejected. The syncopated form of the infin. בּהרג, Ezekiel 26:15, does not serve as a palliation of this adventurous imperative. It is, on the contrary, אמר with ה interrog., as Ezekiel 28:9 האמר, and probably also העמוּר Micah 2:7 (vid., Hitz.). A direct exhortation to Job to penitence would also not be in place here, although what Elihu says is levelled against Job. The כּי is confirmatory. Thus God acts with that class of unscrupulous men who abuse their power for the destruction of their subjects: for he (one of them) says (or: has said, from the standpoint of the execution of punishment) to God, etc. Ew. differently: “for one says thus to God even: I expiate what I do not commit,” by understanding the speech quoted of a defiance which reproachfully demands an explanation. It is, however, manifestly a compendious model confession. And since Elihu with כי establishes the execution of punishment from this, that it never entered the mind of the עדם חנף thus to humble himself before God, so נשׂאתי here cannot signify: I have repented (put up with and had to bear what I have deserved); on the contrary, the confession begins with the avowal: I have exalted myself (נשׂא, se efferre, in Hosea 13:1; Psalm 89:10), which is then followed by the vow: I will not (in the future) do evil (חבל synon. עוה, as Nehemiah 1:7, and probably also supra, Job 24:9), and the entreaty, Job 34:32 : beside that which I behold (elliptical object-clause, Ew. 333, b), i.e., what lies beyond my vision ( equals נסתּרות or עלמים, Psalm 19:13; Psalm 90:8, unacknowledged sins), teach me; and the present vow has reference to acknowledged sins and sins that have still to be acknowledged: if I have done wrong, I will do it no more. Thus speaking – Elihu means – those high ones might have anticipated the punishment of the All-just God, for favour instead of wrath cannot be extorted, it is only reached by the way of lowly penitence.
We run our website the way we wished the whole internet worked: we provide high quality original content with no ads. We are funded solely by your direct support. Please consider supporting this project.
“In your book were written all the days that were formed for me, when none of them as yet existed.”
Psalm 139 is a beautiful poetic expression of God’s personal moment-by-moment involvement in our lives. So intimate is his involvement that he knows our thoughts before we utter them (vs. 2–4). His loving presence surrounds us at every moment, wherever we go (vs. 5–12). And he was personally involved in the formation of our bodies while we were in the womb (vs. 13–16). God’s knowledge of us and care for us is simply unfathomable (vs. 17–18).
Many have argued that verse 16 of this chapter implies that the future is exhaustively settled. If the exact number of days we shall live is settled in God’s mind, they argue, the whole of the future must be settled as well. Hence this verse has been frequently cited in support of the classical view of the future. I find this line of reasoning based on this verse to be unconvincing for five reasons.
First, even if this verse said that the exact length of our life is settled before we’re born, it wouldn’t follow that everything about the future is settled before we’re born. God can predetermine and/or foreknow a great many things about the future without predetermining and/or foreknowing everything about the future.
Second, the use of hyperbolic expressions, which was a common devise of Semitic poetry, should caution us against relying on it to settle any doctrinal disputes. The point of this passage is to poetically express God’s care for the psalmist from his conception, not resolve metaphysical disputes regarding the reality of the future.
Third, the Hebrew in this passage is quite ambiguous in that a) the word translated in the NRSV as “formed” (yotsar) can be interpreted in a strong sense of “determined” or in a weaker sense of “planned”; and b) the subject matter of what was “formed” and written in the “book” before they existed is not supplied in the original Hebrew. It is thus not clear whether what was planned was the days of the psalmist’s life or rather parts of the psalmist’s body. The NKJV is an example of a translation that decided on the latter meaning. It reads:
“Thine eyes did see my substance, yet being unformed; and in thy book all my members were written, which in continuance were fashioned, when as yet there was none of them.”
This rendition of the verse, though admittedly awkward, has the advantage of consistency with the immediate context of the verse. As mentioned above, the theme of verses 13 through 15 is the formation of the psalmist’s body in the womb. Indeed, the first stanza of verse 16, “Your eyes beheld my unformed substance” also concerns the intimate awareness the Lord has of the psalmist even before he’s formed. An interpretation of this verse that continues the author’s poetic expression of the remarkable care that the Lord took in forming his body seems most appropriate.
If this interpretation is accepted, then we cannot conclude anything about the settledness of the future from it. Even if the poetic genre of the verse isn’t enough to discourage someone from trying to resolve a metaphysical issue on this basis, the ambiguity of the verse itself should certainly be enough.
Fourth, even if we choose to take the subject matter of what is “formed” and “written” in this verse to be the days of the psalmist’s life, this does not require that the length of his life is unalterable. Scripture elsewhere suggests that what is written in the Lord’s book of life can be changed (Exod. 32:33; Rev. 3:5). Hezekiah’s success in changing God’s mind regarding the length of his life supports this perspective (Isa. 38:1–5) as does the Lord’s self-professed willingness to alter decrees he’s made in the light of new circumstances (Jer. 18:6–10). The notion that what God ordains is necessarily unalterable is foreign to the Hebrew mind.
In the context of the whole council of Scripture, it therefore seems best to understand the term yotsar as well as the writing in God’s book as referring to God’s intentions at the time of the psalmist’s fetal development, not to an unalterable decree of God.
Finally, even if metaphysics continue to be read into this passage, and even if the subject matter of what was “formed” and written in the Lord’s book was the days of the psalmist’s life, and even if what was “formed” and written was unalterable, the verse still does not mean that all the days of the psalmist were ordained and written in God’s book. The verse only says (in the NRSV), “In your book were written all the days that were formed for me…” (emphasis added). What was written was not all the psalmist’s days, but only those days that were formed (or “ordained”) before they yet existed.
This interpretation can be understood to imply that certain events were predestined about this person’s life before he was born, though within the parameters of this predestined outline, his life is free. As with king Josiah which we examined above (1 Kings 13:2-3), it is possible that certain events are preordained for many of us prior to our birth. This assumption, in case it is true, does not conflict with the open view perspective which simply says that not everything about us is determined and/or foreknown.
I’ll never forget the night it first happened to me. I was thirteen, sharing a bedroom with my older brother. I woke up in the middle of the night and felt as if something was pinning me to the bed, choking me, and electrocuting me, all at the same time. The wind was blowing through…
Question: You may find this to be an odd question, but is it possible for two Christians of the same gender to remain a couple if they do not engage in sex? My partner and I love each other but our study of Scripture convinces us that having sex is wrong. Now, sex was never…
Here’s all of the videos of the speakers and their Q&A’s from Open2013. Unfortunately, there was a mix-up and we didn’t get Jessica Kelley’s presentation taped. We’re working to get her to speak again so we can get that to you. Thanks for posting this on youtube T. C.! And now, without further ado… Greg…
While many Christians have found the open view of the future to be the most helpful and accurate view of God’s foreknowledge of the future based on biblical, philosophical, and experiential evidence, others have criticized the view as unorthodox and even heretical. What follows is a brief description and defense of the open view prepared…
Thine eyes did see my substance, yet being unperfect; and in thy book all my members were written, which in continuance were fashioned, when as yet there was none of them.
(16) This difficult verse, rendered word for word, gives—
“My fœtus (literally, rolled) saw thine eyes,
And on thy book all of them were written;
Days were formed, and not (or, as the Hebrew margin, to him) one in them.”
The reading “substance yet being imperfect” of the Authorised Version follows the LXX. and Vulg., and (Symmachus, “shapeless thing”) periphrastically denotes the embryo, which the Hebrew word—literally, rolled, or wrapped, used in 2Kings 2:8, “of a mantle,” in Ezekiel 27:24, “bales” (Authorised Version, “clothes;” margin, “foldings”)—almost scientifically describes. (Comp. Job 10:8-12; 2 Maccabees 7:22.)
Others take it of the ball of the threads of destiny; but this is not a Hebrew conception. By inserting the word members, the Authorised Version suggests a possible, but not a probable, interpretation. The Hebrew language likes to use a pronoun before the word to which it refers has occurred (see Note, Psalm 68:14); and, in spite of the accents, we must refer all of them to “days” (Authorised Version, “in continuance”).
“Thine eyes beheld my embryo,
And in thy book were written
All the days, the days
Which were being formed,
When as yet there were none of them.”
But a much more satisfactory sense is obtained by adopting one slight change and following Symmachus in the last line—
“The days which are all reckoned, and not one of them is wanting.”
All the ancient versions make that which is written in God’s book either the days of life, or men born in the course of these days, each coming into being according to the Divine will.
Psalm 139:16. Thine eyes did see my substance — Hebrews גלמי, my rude mass, as Dr. Waterland renders the word: massa rudis et intricata adhuc, says Buxtorf, neque in veram formam evoluta, a mass, yet rude and entangled, and not unfolded into proper form. When the matter, out of which I was made, was an unshapen embryo, without any form, it was visible to thee how every part, however minute, would be wrought; and in thy book all my members were written — Before any of them were in being they lay open before thy eyes, and were discerned by thee as clearly as if the plan of them had been drawn in a book. Thy eternal wisdom formed the plan, and according to that, thy almighty power raised the structure. The allusion to the needlework seems to be still carried on. “As the embroiderer hath his book or pattern before him, to which he always recurs; so by a method as exact were all my members in continuance fashioned; and as from the rude skeins of silk, under the artificer’s hands, there at length arises an unexpected beauty, and an accurate harmony of colours and proportions; so, by the skill of the divine workman, is a shapeless mass wrought into the most curious texture of parts, most skilfully interwoven and connected with each other, until it becomes a body harmoniously diversified with all the limbs and lineaments of a man, not one of which at first appeared, any more than the figures were to be seen in the ball of silk. But then, (which is the chief thing here insisted on by the psalmist,)
whereas the human artificer must have the clearest light, whereby to accomplish his task, the divine work-master seeth in secret, and effecteth all his wonders within the dark and narrow confines of the womb.” — Horne.
139:7-16 We cannot see God, but he can see us. The psalmist did not desire to go from the Lord. Whither can I go? In the most distant corners of the world, in heaven, or in hell, I cannot go out of thy reach. No veil can hide us from God; not the thickest darkness. No disguise can save any person or action from being seen in the true light by him. Secret haunts of sin are as open before God as the most open villanies. On the other hand, the believer cannot be removed from the supporting, comforting presence of his Almighty Friend. Should the persecutor take his life, his soul will the sooner ascend to heaven. The grave cannot separate his body from the love of his Saviour, who will raise it a glorious body. No outward circumstances can separate him from his Lord. While in the path of duty, he may be happy in any situation, by the exercise of faith, hope, and prayer.
Thine eyes did see my substance, yet being unperfect – This whole verse is very obscure, but the “idea” in this expression clearly is, “Before I had shape or form thou didst see what I was to be.” The single word in the original translated “my substance, yet being unperfect,” is גלם gôlem. It occurs only in this place, though the verb – גלם gâlam – is found in 2 Kings 2:8, where it is used in reference to the mantle of Elijah: And Elijah took his mantle, and “wrapped it together,” etc. That is, he rolled it up, or he folded it. The noun, then, means that which “is” rolled or wrapped together; that which is folded up, and hence, is applicable to anything folded up or undeveloped; and would thus most aptly denote the embryo, or the foetus, where all the members of the body are as yet folded up, or undeveloped; that is, before they have assumed their distinct form and proportions. This is undoubtedly the idea here. Before the embryo had any such form that its future size, shape, or proportions could be marked by the eye of man, it was clearly and distinctly known by God.
And in thy book – Where thou recordest all things. Perhaps the allusion here would be to the book of an architect or draftsman, who, before his work is begun, draws his plan, or sketches it for the direction of the workmen.
All my members were written – The words “my members” are not in the original. The Hebrew is, as in the margin, “all of them.” The reference may be, not to the members of his body, but to his “days” (see the margin on the succeeding phrase) – and then the sense would be, all my “days,” or all the periods of my life, were delineated in thy book. That is, When my substance – my form – was not yet developed, when yet an embryo, and when nothing could be determined from that by the eye of man as to what I was to be, all the future was known to God, and was written down – just what should be my form and vigor; how long I should live; what I should be; what would be the events of my life.
Which in continuance were fashioned – Margin, “What days they should be fashioned.” Literally, “Days should be formed.” DeWette renders this, “The days were determined before any one of them was.” There is nothing in the Hebrew to correspond with the phrase “in continuance.” The simple idea is, The days of my life were determined on, the whole matter was fixed and settled, not by anything seen in the embryo, but “before” there was any form – before there were any means of judging from what I then was to what I would be – all was seen and arranged in the divine mind.
When as yet there was none of them – literally, “And not one among them.” Before there was one of them in actual existence. Not one development had yet occurred from which it could be inferred what the rest would be. The entire knowledge on the subject must have been based on Omniscience.
Ps 139:1-24. After presenting the sublime doctrines of God’s omnipresence and omniscience, the Psalmist appeals to Him, avowing his innocence, his abhorrence of the wicked, and his ready submission to the closest scrutiny. Admonition to the wicked and comfort to the pious are alike implied inferences from these doctrines.
Yet being unperfect; when I was a mere embryo, a rude and shapeless lump, when I was first conceived.
In thy book; in thy counsel and providence, by which thou didst contrive and effect this great work, and all the parts of it, according to that model which thou hadst appointed. This is a metaphor taken from workmen, who when they are to make some curious structure, they first draw a rude draught or delineation of it, by which they govern themselves in the building of it.
All my members; all the several parts of my substance.
When in continuance were fashioned; which in due time and by degrees were formed into bones, fleshy sinews, &c. Or, as it is in the margin, what days (and the days in which) they were or should be fashioned; by what steps, in what order and time, each part of the body should receive its proper form. This also was written or appointed by God.
When as yet there was none of them, Heb. and not one of them; understand either yet was, as it is in our translation; or, was lacking, to wit, in thy book. All my parts without exception were written by thee. But then these words are not to bc joined with those immediately foregoing, but with the former, and the words are to be read thus, in thy book all my members were written, (which in continuance were fashioned,) when as yet, &c.
Thine eyes did see my substance, yet being unperfect,…. The word (q) for “substance” signifies a bottom of yarn wound up, or any rude or unformed lump; and designs that conglomerated mass of matter separated in the womb, containing all the essentials of the human frame, but not yet distinguished or reduced into any form or order; yet, even when in this state, the eyes of the Lord see it and all its parts distinctly;
and in thy book all my members were written: which in continuance were fashioned, when as yet there was none of them; in the book of God’s eternal mind, and designs, the plan of the human body was drawn, all the parts of it described, and their form, places, and uses fixed, even when as yet not one of them was in actual being; but in due time they are all exactly formed and fashioned according to the model of them in the mind of God; who has as perfect knowledge of them beforehand as if they were written down in a book before him, Or “in thy book are written all of them, what days they should be fashioned”; not only each of the members of the body were put down in this book, but each of the days in which they should be formed and come into order: “when” as yet there was “none of them”; none of those days, before they took place, even before all time; the Targum is,
“in the book of thy memory all my days are written, in the day the world was created, from the beginning that all creatures were created.”
Thine eyes did see my substance, yet being unperfect; {l} and in thy book all my members were written, which in continuance were fashioned, when as yet there was none of them.
(l) Seeing that you knew me before I was composed of either flesh or bone, much more now must you know me when you have fashioned me.
16. my substance, yet being unperfect] R.V. mine unperfect substance. The word (gôlem) is a different one from that in Psalm 139:15, and denotes the undeveloped embryo. Cp. Aram, gôlmâ, an unfinished vessel.
all my members] Lit. all of them, which A.V. and R.V. interpret to mean all the members into which the embryo was to develop. But it is better (cp. R.V. marg.) to regard the pronoun as anticipatory, and to render,
And in thy book were all of them written,
Even days which were formed,
When as yet there was none of them.
Each day of his life with all its history was pre-determined by the Creator and recorded in His book, before one of them actually was in existence:—a clear expression of the truth that there is an ideal plan of life providentially marked out for every individual. (Ephesians 2:10.)
The Q’rç or traditional reading of the Hebrew text, reads lô, ‘for it’ instead of lô’ ‘not’ (see note on Psalm 100:3), giving the sense, and for it there was one among them: one of them was pre-ordained as ‘its day,’ the day of its birth. Cp. ‘his day,’ Job 3:1.
Verse 16. – Thine eyes did see my substance, yet being unperfect; or, “my embryo.” The Hebrew text has but the single word גלמי, which probably means, “the still unformed embryonic mass” (Hengstenberg). And in thy book all my members were written; literally, all of them; but the pronoun has no antecedent. Professor Cheyne and others suspect the passage to have suffered corruption. But the general meaning can scarcely have been very different from that assigned to the passage in the Authorized Version. Which in continuance were fashioned, when as yet there was none of them. Modern critics mostly translate “the days,” or “my days,” “were fashioned, when as yet there was none of them;” i.e. “my life was planned out by God, and settled, before I began to be.” Psalm 139:16
The embryo folded up in the shape of an egg is here called גּלם, from גּלם, to roll or wrap together (cf. glomus, a ball), in the Talmud said of any kind of unshapen mass (lxx ἀκατέργαστον, Symmachus ἀμόρφωτον) and raw material, e.g., of the wood or metal that is to be formed into a vessel (Chullin 25a, to which Saadia has already referred).
(Note: Epiphanius, Haer, xxx. 31, says the Hebrew γολμη signifies the peeled grains of spelt or wheat before they are mixed up and backed, the still raw (only bruised) flour-grains – a signification that can now no longer be supported by examples.)
As to the rest, compare similar retrospective glances into the embryonic state in Job 10:8-12, 2 Macc. 7:22f. (Psychology, S. 209ff., tr. pp. 247f.). On the words in libro tuo Bellarmine makes the following correct observation: quia habes apud te exemplaria sive ideas omnium, quomodo pictor vel sculptor scit ex informi materia quid futurum sit, quia videt exemplar. The signification of the future יכּתבוּ is regulated by ראוּ, and becomes, as relating to the synchronous past, scribebantur. The days יצּרוּ, which were already formed, are the subject. It is usually rendered: “the days which had first to be formed.” If יצּרוּ could be equivalent to ייצּרוּ, it would be to be preferred; but this rejection of the praeform. fut. is only allowed in the fut. Piel of the verbs Pe Jod, and that after a Waw convertens, e.g., ויּבּשׁ equals וייבּשׁ, Nahum 1:4 (cf. Caspari on Obadiah 1:11).
(Note: But outside the Old Testament it also occurs in the Pual, though as a wrong use of the word; vide my Anekdota (1841), S. 372f.)
Accordingly, assuming the original character of the לא in a negative signification, it is to be rendered: The days which were (already) formed, and there was not one among them, i.e., when none among them had as yet become a reality. The suffix of כּלּם points to the succeeding ימים, to which יצּרוּ is appended as an attributive clause; ולא אחד בּהם is subordinated to this יצּרוּ: cum non or nondum (Job 22:16) unus inter eos equals unus eorum (Exodus 14:28) esset. But the expression (instead of ועוד לא היה or טרם יהיה) remains doubtful, and it becomes a question whether the Ker ולו (vid., on Psalm 100:3), which stands side by side with the Chethb ולא (which the lxx, Aquila, Symmachus, Theodotion, the Targum, Syriac, Jerome, and Saadia follow), is not to be preferred. This ולו, referred to גלמי, gives the acceptable meaning: and for it (viz., its birth) one among them (these days), without our needing to make any change in the proposed exposition down to יצרו. We decide in favour of this, because this ולו אחד בהם does not, as ולא אחד בהם, make one feel to miss any היה, and because the ולי which begins Psalm 139:17 connects itself to it by way of continuation. The accentuation has failed to discern the reference of כלם to the following ימים, inasmuch as it places Olewejored against יכתבו. Hupfeld follows this accentuation, referring כלם back to גלמי as a coil of days of one’s life; and Hitzig does the same, referring it to the embryos. But the precedence of the relative pronoun occurs in other instances also,
(Note: The Hebrew poet, says Gesenius (Lehrgebude, S. 739f.), sometimes uses the pronoun before the thing to which it referred has even been spoken of. This phenomenon belongs to the Hebrew style generally, vid., my Anekdota (1841), S. 382.)
and is devoid of all harshness, especially in connection with כּלּם, which directly signifies altogether (e.g., Isaiah 43:14).
It is the confession of the omniscience that is united with the omnipotence of God, which the poet here gives utterance to with reference to himself, just as Jahve says with reference to Jeremiah, Jeremiah 1:5. Among the days which were preformed in the idea of God (cf. on יצרו, Isaiah 22:11; Isaiah 37:26) there was also one, says the poet, for the embryonic beginning of my life. The divine knowledge embraces the beginning, development, and completion of all things (Psychology, S. 37ff., tr. pp. 46ff.). The knowledge of the thoughts of God which are written in the book of creation and revelation is the poet’s cherished possession, and to ponder over them is his favourite pursuit: they are precious to him, יקרוּ (after Psalm 36:8), not: difficult of comprehension (schwerbegreiflich, Maurer, Olshausen), after Daniel 2:11, which would surely have been expressed by עמקוּ (Psalm 92:6), more readily: very weighty (schwergewichtig, Hitzig), but better according to the prevailing Hebrew usage: highly valued (schwergewerthet), cara.
(Note: It should be noted that the radical idea of the verb, viz., being heavy (German schwer), is retained in all these renderings. – Tr.)
“Their sums” are powerful, prodigious (Psalm 40:6), and cannot be brought to a summa summarum. If he desires to count them (fut. hypothet. as in Psalm 91:7; Job 20:24), they prove themselves to be more than the sand with its grains, that is to say, innumerable. He falls asleep over the pondering upon them, wearied out; and when he wakes up, he is still with God, i.e., still ever absorbed in the contemplation of the Unsearchable One, which even the sleep of fatigue could not entirely interrupt. Ewald explains it somewhat differently: if I am lost in the stream of thoughts and images, and recover myself from this state of reverie, yet I am still ever with Thee, without coming to an end. But it could only perhaps be interpreted thus if it were העירותי or התעוררתּי. Hofmann’s interpretation is altogether different: I will count them, the more numerous than the sand, when I awake and am continually with Thee, viz., in the other world, after the awaking from the sleep of death. This is at once impossible, because הקיצתי cannot here, according to its position, be a perf. hypotheticum. Also in connection with this interpretation עוד would be an inappropriate expression for “continually,” since the word only has the sense of the continual duration of an action or a state already existing; here of one that has not even been closed and broken off by sleep. He has not done; waking and dreaming and waking up, he is carried away by that endless, and yet also endlessly attractive, pursuit, the most fitting occupation of one who is awake, and the sweetest (cf. Jeremiah 31:26) of one who is asleep and dreaming.
Words in boxes are from the Bible. Words in brackets, ( ), are not in the *Hebrew Bible.
The notes explain some of the words with a *star by them. A word list at the end explains the other words that have a *star by them.
The translated Bible text has yet to go through Advanced Checking.
Jesus said, “Your Father (God) knows how many hairs there are on your head!” (Matthew 10:30)
Psalm 139
(This is) for the music leader. (It is) a psalm of David.
v1 *LORD, when you look at me you know all about me.
v2 You know when I sit down. And you know when I get up. You understand what I am thinking about (even when you are) far away.
v3 You see when I go (somewhere). And you see when I stay (at home). You remember everything that I do!
v4 For example, before I say a word, *LORD, you know all about it.
v5 You are all round me, in front (of me) and behind (me). You have put your *hand upon me.
v6 What you know (about me) is *wonderful. I cannot understand it. It is so high that I cannot climb up to it.
v7 Where can I go from your *Spirit? How can I run away from you?
v8 If I went up to *heaven, you would be there. If I went down to *Sheol, you would be there also.
v9 If I went: · to where the sun rises (in the east) · to the other side of the sea (in the west)
v10 your hand would be there. It would be my guide. Your right hand would give me help.
v11 If I say: · I am sure that *darkness will hide me · or, the light round me will change into night,
v12 *darkness and light are the same to you! *Darkness is not dark to you. The night shines as bright as the day (to you).
v13 But you, you made every part of me. You made me grow in my mother’s *womb.
v14 I *praise you for the *mysterious and *wonderful way that you made me. I know very well that everything that you made is *wonderful.
v15 (Nothing) hid my body from you when I was growing in a secret place. This happened deep in the earth.
v16 Your eyes saw my body growing. Before I had lived one day, you wrote in your book how long I should live for!
v17 You have so many ideas, God. They are so difficult for me to understand.
v18 If I could count them all, there would be more than the *grains of sand (by the side of the sea). I would have to live (as long) as you to count them all!
v19 God, I hope that you will kill the *wicked (people)! And go away from me you *men of blood (murderers).
v20 They are your enemies. They say bad things about you that are not true.
v21 Do I *hate them that hate you, *LORD? Do I really hate them that attack you?
v22 (Yes) I do hate them, I really hate them. I think of them as my enemies.
v23 Look at me, God. And know (what is in) my *heart. Look into my mind and know my thoughts.
v24 See if I am doing anything bad that might hurt me. And lead me in the old ways.
The Story of Psalm 139
We do not know when David wrote this psalm. Some people think that the *prophet Zechariah wrote it; maybe he used David’s words and rewrote (wrote again) them. Zechariah wrote a Book of the Bible. He lived 450 years after David.
What Psalm 139 means
This psalm is in 4 parts:
· Verses 1-6. God knows all about us.
· Verses 7-12. We cannot hide from God.
· Verses 13-18. God created (made) us.
· Verses 19-24. David prays about his enemies and himself.
God knows all about us
“When you look at me” in verse 1 means “when you study me, or give me an exam”. *LORD is a special name for God. It is his *covenant name. A *covenant is when two people (or groups of people) agree. Here, God agrees to love and give help to his people. They agree to love and obey him. The *LORD sees every part of us. He even knows what we are going to say. He knows before we say it, (verse 4)! “Your hand” in verse 5 means “your power”. It means what God does in this world. To understand this is like climbing a very high mountain, (verse 6). It is too high to get to the top!
We cannot hide from God
The Holy Spirit, or Spirit, (verse 7), is another name for God. If you go to *heaven (or the sky) or *Sheol (below the earth) God will find you. If you go to the east or the west, you cannot hide from him, (verses 8-9). His hand (or power) will always be with you, to be a guide and a help, (verse 10). David saw it as a good thing that God was always with him. He had God as a guide and someone to give him help. We cannot see in the *darkness, when there is no light. We cannot see when it is dark … but God can, (verses 11-12)!
God made us
“The secret place” and “deep in the earth” mean his mother’s womb, (verse 15). The womb is where mothers keep babies before they are born. Some Bible students think “difficult” should be “valuable” in verse 17. Both ideas are true! “Grains of sand” in verse 18 are “little bits of sand”.
David prays about things
There is a quick change in the next 4 verses. The *psalmist (David) makes a *prayer of imprecation (asks for bad things to happen) for his enemies. They are God’s enemies too, (verse 20). In verse 19, David says that they are “*wicked people”. “*Wicked” means “very, very bad”. He also says that they are “men of blood”, (or people that murder other people). Verse 21 asks if the *psalmist hates God’s enemies. Verse 22 gives the answer: “Yes!” “Hate” means the opposite of “love”. The psalm finishes where it started. God is looking into the *psalmist’s mind. “The old ways”, (verse 24), are the right ways that God told people to walk in. They will never come to an end.
Something to do
1. Pray the words of verses 23-24 and wait for God’s answer.
2. Read about Psalms of Imprecation in Psalm 69 of this set.
Word List
covenant ~ two people have agreed what each should do (here, God and his people). Look in Psalm 120 about the covenant.
darkness ~ when there is no light.
grains of sand ~ little bits of sand.
hate ~ the opposite of love.
heart ~ part of the body. *Jews believed that you thought in your heart.
heaven ~ the home of God.
Jew ~ a person who is born from Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and their children.
LORD ~ the *covenant name for God (in a *covenant you agree with someone).
men of blood ~ murderers.
mysterious ~ nobody understands it.
praise ~ to say how great someone is; or, words that say how great someone is.
prayer ~ you say a *prayer when you speak to God.
prophesy ~ tell people what God thinks and will do.
prophet ~ someone who *prophesies.
psalmist ~ the person that wrote a psalm (or psalms).
Sheol ~ *Jews believed that you went to Sheol when you died.
sin ~ not to obey God; or what you do when you do not obey God.
Spirit ~ the Holy Spirit.
wicked ~ very, very bad.
womb ~ where mothers keep babies before they are born.
It does not appear, nor is it material to enquire, upon what occasion David penned this psalm; but in it, I. He looks back with thankfulness upon the experiences he had had of God’s goodness to him (v. 1-3). II. He looks forward with comfort, in hopes, 1. That others would go on to praise God like him (v. 4, 5). 2. That God would go on to do good to him (v. 6-8). In singing this psalm we must in like manner devote ourselves to God’s praise and glory and repose ourselves in his power and goodness.
I. How he would praise God, compare Ps. 111:1. 1. He will praise him with sincerity and zeal—“With my heart, with my whole heart, with that which is within me and with all that is within me, with uprightness of intention and fervency of affection, inward impressions agreeing with outward expressions.” 2. With freedom and boldness: Before the gods will I sing praise unto thee, before the princes, and judges, and great men, either those of other nations that visited him or those of his own nation that attended on him, even in their presence. He will not only praise God with his heart, which we may do by pious ejaculations in any company, but will sing praise if there be occasion. Note, Praising God is work which the greatest of men need not be ashamed of; it is the work of angels, the work of heaven. Before the angels (so some understand it), that is, in religious assemblies, where there is a special presence of angels, 1 Co. 11:10. 3. In the way that God had appointed: I will worship towards thy holy temple. The priests alone went into the temple; the people, at the nearest, did but worship towards it, and that they might do at a distance. Christ is our temple, and towards him we must look with an eye of faith, as Mediator between us and God, in all our praises of him. Heaven is God’s holy temple, and thitherward we must lift up our eyes in all our addresses to God. Our Father in heaven.
II. What he would praise God for. 1. For the fountain of his comforts—for thy lovingkindness and for thy truth, for thy goodness and for thy promise, mercy hidden in thee and mercy revealed by thee, that God is a gracious God in himself and has engaged to be so to all those that trust in him. For thou hast magnified thy word (thy promise, which is truth) above all thy name. God has made himself known to us in many ways in creation and providence, but most clearly by his word. The judgments of his mouth are magnified even above those of his hand, and greater things are done by them. The wonders of grace exceed the wonders of nature; and what is discovered of God by revelation is much greater than what is discovered by reason. In what God had done for David his faithfulness to his work appeared more illustriously, and redounded more to his glory, than any other of his attributes. Some good interpreters understand it of Christ, the essential Word, and of his gospel, which are magnified above all the discoveries God had before made of himself to the fathers. He that magnified the law, and made that honourable, magnifies the gospel much more. 2. For the streams flowing from that fountain, in which he himself had tasted that the Lord is gracious, v. 3. He had been in affliction, and he remembers, with thankfulness, (1.) The sweet communion he then had with God. He cried, he prayed, and prayed earnestly, and God answered him, gave him to understand that his prayer was accepted and should have a gracious return in due time. The intercourse between God and his saints is carried on by his promises and their prayers. (2.) The sweet communications he then had from God: Thou strengthenedst me with strength in my soul. This was the answer to his prayer, for God gives more than good words, Ps. 20:6. Observe, [1.] It was a speedy answer: In the day when I cried. Note, Those that trade with heaven by prayer grow rich by quick returns. While we are yet speaking God hears, Isa. 65:24. [2.] It was a spiritual answer. God gave him strength in his soul, and that is a real and valuable answer to the prayer of faith in the day of affliction. If God give us strength in our souls to bear the burdens, resist the temptations, and do the duties of an afflicted state, if he strengthen us to keep hold of himself by faith, to maintain the peace of our own minds and to wait with patience for the issue, we must own that he has answered us, and we are bound to be thankful.
III. What influence he hoped that his praising God would have upon others, v. 4, 5. David was himself a king, and therefore he hoped that kings would be wrought upon by his experiences, and his example, to embrace religion; and, if kings became religious, their kingdoms would be every way better. Now, 1. This may have reference to the kings that were neighbours to David, as Hiram and others. “They shall all praise thee.” When they visited David, and, after his death, when they sought the presence of Solomon (as all the kings of the earth are expressly said to have done, 2 Chr. 9:23), they readily joined in the worship of the God of Israel. 2. It may look further, to the calling of the Gentiles and the discipling of all nations by the gospel of Christ, of whom it is said that all kings shall fall down before him, Ps. 72:11. Now it is here foretold, (1.) That the kings of the earth shall hear the words of God. All that came near David should hear them from him, Ps. 119:46. In the latter days the preachers of the gospel should be sent into all the world. (2.) That then they shall praise God, as all those have reason to do that hear his word, and receive it in the light and love of it, Acts 13:48. (3.) That they shall sing in the ways of the Lord, in the ways of his providence and grace towards them; they shall rejoice in God, and give glory to him, however he is pleased to deal with them in the ways of their duty and obedience to him. Note, Those that walk in the ways of the Lord have reason to sing in those ways, to go on in them with a great deal of cheerfulness, for they are ways of pleasantness, and it becomes us to be pleasant in them; and, if we are so, great is the glory of the Lord. It is very much for the honour of God that kings should walk in his ways, and that all those who walk in them should sing in them, and so proclaim to all the world that he is a good Master and his work its own wages.
I. The favour God bears to his humble people (v. 6): Though the Lord be high, and neither needs any of his creatures nor can be benefited by them, yet has he respect unto the lowly, smiles upon them as well pleased with them, overlooks heaven and earth to cast a gracious look upon them (Isa. 57:15; 66:1), and, sooner or later, he will put honour upon them, while he knows the proud afar off, knows them, but disowns them and rejects them, how proudly soever they pretend to his favour. Dr. Hammond makes this to be the sum of that gospel which the kings of the earth shall hear and welcome—that penitent sinners shall be accepted of God, but the impenitent cast out; witness the instance of the Pharisee and the publican, Lu. 18.
II. The care God takes of his afflicted oppressed people, v. 7. David, though a great and good man, expects to walk in the midst of trouble, but encourages himself with hope, 1. That God would comfort him: “When my spirit is ready to sink and fail, thou shalt revive me, and make me easy and cheerful under my troubles.” Divine consolations have enough in them to revive us even when we walk in the midst of troubles and are ready to die away for fear. 2. That he would protect him, and plead his cause: “Thou shalt stretch forth thy hand, though not against my enemies to destroy them, yet against the wrath of my enemies, to restrain that and set bounds to it.” 3. That he would in due time work deliverance for him: Thy right hand shall save me. As he has one hand to stretch out against his enemies, so he has another to save his own people. Christ is the right hand of the Lord, that shall save all those who serve him.
III. The assurance we have that whatever good work God has begun in and for his people he will perform it (v. 8): The Lord will perfect that which concerns me, 1. That which is most needful for me; and he knows best what is so. We are careful and cumbered about many things that do not concern us, but he knows what are the things that really are of consequence to us (Mt. 6:32) and he will order them for the best. 2. That which we are most concerned about. Every good man is most concerned about his duty to God and his happiness in God, that the former may be faithfully done and the latter effectually secured; and if indeed these are the things that our hearts are most upon, and concerning which we are most solicitous, there is a good work begun in us, and he that has begun it will perfect it, we may be confident he will, Phil. 1:6. Observe, (1.) What ground the psalmist builds this confidence upon: Thy mercy, O Lord! endures for ever. This he had made very much the matter of his praise (Ps. 13:6), and therefore he could here with the more assurance make it the matter of his hope. For, if we give God the glory of his mercy, we may take to ourselves the comfort of it. Our hopes that we shall persevere must be founded, not upon our own strength, for that will fail us, but upon the mercy of God, for that will not fail. It is well pleaded, “Lord, thy mercy endures for ever; let me be for ever a monument of it.” (2.) What use he makes of this confidence; it does not supersede, but quicken prayer; he turns his expectation into a petition: “Forsake not, do not let go, the work of thy own hands. Lord, I am the work of thy own hands, my soul is so, do not forsake me; my concerns are so, do not lay by thy care of them.” Whatever good there is in us it is the work of God’s own hands; he works in us both to will and to do; it will fail if he forsake it; but his glory, as Jehovah, a perfecting God, is so much concerned in the progress of it to the end that we may in faith pray, “Lord, do not forsake it.” Whom he loves he loves to the end; and, as for God, his work is perfect.
This website is AudioEye enabled and is being optimized for accessibility. To open the AudioEye Toolbar, press “shift + =”. Some assistive technologies may require the use of a passthrough function before this keystroke. For more information, activate the button labeled “Explore your accessibility options”.Skip To Main Content
Select a Bible Book Select Book GenesisExodusLeviticusNumbersDeuteronomyJoshuaJudgesRuth1 Samuel2 Samuel1 Kings2 Kings1 Chronicles2 ChroniclesEzraNehemiahEstherJobPsalmsProverbsEcclesiastesSong of SolomonIsaiahJeremiahLamentationsEzekielDanielHoseaJoelAmosObadiahJonahMicahNahumHabakkukZephaniahHaggaiZechariahMalachiMatthewMarkLukeJohnActsRomans1 Corinthians2 CorinthiansGalatiansEphesiansPhilippiansColossians1 Thessalonians2 Thessalonians1 Timothy2 TimothyTitusPhilemonHebrewsJames1 Peter2 Peter1 John2 John3 JohnJudeRevelation Select a ChapterSelect Chapter123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142
“This whole chapter is occupied with Job’s solemn oath of innocence. It was his final and explicit answer to the line of argument adopted by his three friends.” (G. Campbell Morgan)
A. Job proclaims his innocence
1. (1-4) He was not guilty of lust.
“I have made a covenant with my eyes; Why then should I look upon a young woman? For what is the allotment of God from above, And the inheritance of the Almighty from on high? Is it not destruction for the wicked, And disaster for the workers of iniquity? Does He not see my ways, And count all my steps?”
a. I have made a covenant with my eyes; why then should I look upon a young woman: In this section, Job protested that he was a godly and blameless man, at least on a human scale. His larger context was to explain the sense of injustice he felt at his suffering and humiliation, and to make a final defense before his friends who accused him of special sin deserving of special judgment.
i. This chapter has an interesting similarity to ancient “defense documents.” “The material is similar in form, if not in content, to the negative confession given by the deceased who stands before Osiris in the Egyptian Book of the Dead… Under oath the subject lists the evil things he has not done with the hope he will be vindicated and pass through the portals unscathed.” (Smick)
ii. “It is an oath of clearance in the form of a negative confession. The procedure was well known in ancient jurisprudence. A crime could be disowned by calling down a curse on oneself if one had committed it.” (Andersen)
iii. Yet it also has a clear connection to the Sermon on the Mount. “Chapter 31 is Job’s Sermon on the Mount, for in it he touches on many of the same issues of spiritual ethics that Jesus covers in Matthew 5-7, including the relationship between lust and adultery (Job 31:1, 9-12), loving one’s neighbor as oneself (Job 31:13-15), almsgiving and social justice (Job 31:16-23), and the love of money and other idolatries (Job 31:24-28).” (Mason)
iv. We are clearly told in Job 1 that Job was a blameless and upright man; this is the chapter that most clearly explains what that godly life looked like. “The chapter that we now open breathes, almost or quite throughout, a spirit that belongs rather to the New than to the Old Covenant. It is a practical anticipation of much of the teaching that was to come from Him Who ‘sat down and taught’ His disciples on the mountain. It is the picture of one perfect and upright, who feared God, and eschewed evil.” (Bradley)
b. I have made a covenant with my eyes; why then should I look upon a young woman: In defending his righteous life, Job began with explaining that he was a morally pure man who did not look upon a young woman in impure and inappropriate ways.
i. It is significant that in this long section where Job explained his righteous life, he began with noting that he guarded his eyes from lustful looks upon a young woman. This rightly suggests that a man’s ability to not look upon lustful images is an important indicator of his general righteousness and blamelessness.
ii. This also suggests that the eyes are a gateway for lust, especially for men. This is demonstrated over and over again by both personal experience and empirical study. When a man places enticing, sensual, lust-inducing images before his eyes, it is a form of foreplay, especially considering that it often or frequently causes some level of sexual arousal in the man.
iii. “In Hebrew the same word signifieth both an eye and a fountain; to show, saith one, that from the eye, as a fountain, floweth both sin and misery.” (Trapp)
iv. “Lustfully consider her beauty, till my heart be hot as an oven with lawless lusts, and my body be moiled with that abominable filth… Look upon the woeful chain of David’s lust, and remember how many died of the wound in the eye.” (Trapp)
c. A covenant with my eyes: Job’s ability to control himself was connected with a covenant he made. He made a vow, a promise, a commitment with his own eyes that he would not look upon a young woman in a sinful way.
i. Bullinger says that the Hebrew does not literally say that Job made a covenant with his eyes. “Not ‘made with’… The covenant here was made with God, against his eyes, which are regarded as an enemy likely to lead him astray.”
ii. “When Job says that he has made a covenant with his eyes to abstain from lust, he does not mean that he has stopped experiencing lust altogether. What he means is that he refuses to dwell upon the lustful feelings which, as the normal red-blooded male he is, come to him very naturally.” (Mason)
iii. Job insisted that he would not look upon a young woman – a maiden in this way. This was especially meaningful, because in that culture it would be somewhat accepted for a rich and powerful man like Job to seduce or ravish a maiden, and then add her as either a wife or a concubine. Job restrained himself from women that others in his same circumstances would not restrain themselves from.
iv. “He restrained himself from the very thoughts and desires of filthiness with such persons, wherewith the generality of men allowed themselves to commit gross fornication, as deeming it to be either none, or but a very little sin.” (Poole)
d. For what is the allotment of God from above: In the context of Job’s self-control when it came to lust, he considered what the allotment of God from above was. He understood that the young woman he would be enticed to look upon was not the allotment of God for him; she and her nakedness did not belong to Job in any sense.
i. Leviticus 18:1-18 reinforces this Biblical principle. It relates how the nakedness of an individual “belongs” to that individual and to their spouse, and it does not “belong” to anyone else. Therefore, when a man looks upon the nakedness of a woman who is not his wife, he takes something that does not belong to him.
ii. There certainly existed some type of pornography in Job’s day; some of the earliest artistic images are of women and men in highly sexualized motifs. Nevertheless, Job certainly did not have to contend with the sophisticated, gigantic, and far-reaching modern pornography industry. The availability of modern pornography has made it a significantly greater challenge for men to confine their visual arousal to the allotment of God from above for them.
iii. In this context, it is helpful for a man to ask himself: “Whose nakedness belongs to me, and whose does not?” Only a proud and depraved man would think that every woman’s nakedness belongs to him. A moment of thought reinforces the clear principle: only the nakedness of his own wife is the allotment of God from above for a man; only his own wife is the inheritance of the Almighty from on high for his visual arousal.
iv. “Hereby we plainly see that the command of Christ, Matthew 5:29, was no new command peculiar to the gospel, as some would have it, but the very same which the law of God revealed in his word, and written in men’s hearts by nature.” (Poole)
e. Is it not destruction for the wicked, and disaster for the workers of iniquity: In the context of Job’s self-control when it came to lust, he also considered the destructive nature of allowing one’s self to be aroused by alluring images. He perhaps considered the lives of others that had been destroyed by lust and sexual sin that began with visual arousal.
i. “For in those days, he knew well, he tells us, that God had assigned his heaviest judgments as the sure inheritance of those who infringed that noble law of purity which lifts man above the brute.” (Bradley)
ii. The potential for destruction is all the more real in the modern world, because the challenges to Biblical purity are all the more formidable. Using very rough estimates, we can, compare the world of a man in the year a.d. 1500 to the world a.d. 2000:
· In 1500 the average age of a man’s economic independence was 16; today it is 26.
· In 1500 the average age of marriage for a man was 18; today it is 28 (or more).
· In 1500 the average age of male puberty was 20; today it is 12.
iii. “The ruin of impure souls is infallible, unsupportable, unavoidable; if God hath aversion from all other sinners, he hath hatred and horror for the unchaste; such stinking goats shall be set on the left hand, and sent to hell; where they shall have so much the more of punishment as they had here of sensual and sinful pleasure, as sour sauce to their sweet meats.” (Trapp)
iv. This means that there are many biological, cultural, economic, social, and technological factors that make it much more difficult for a man today to make a covenant with his eyes to not look upon a young woman in the sense meant here by Job. It is much more difficult for a man to choose satisfaction with the allotment of God from above and to avoid the destruction and disaster Job spoke of. Nevertheless, by the power of God’s Spirit it can be done, and obedience to God in this arena is a precious, wonderful sacrifice made unto Him; a genuine way to present our bodies as a living sacrifice unto Him, not being conformed to the world (Romans 12:1-2).
f. Does He not see all my ways, and count all my steps: In the context of Job’s self-control when it came to lust, it was helpful for him to consider that God’s eye was upon him all the time. Most men indulge in ungodly visual arousal with the (at least temporary) delusion that their conduct is unseen by God. It helped Job to know that God did see all his ways.
2. (5-8) He was not guilty of falsehood.
“If I have walked with falsehood, Or if my foot has hastened to deceit, Let me be weighed on honest scales, That God may know my integrity. If my step has turned from the way, Or my heart walked after my eyes, Or if any spot adheres to my hands, Then let me sow, and another eat; Yes, let my harvest be rooted out.”
a. If I have walked with falsehood: Job also proclaimed his blameless life because he lived an essentially truthful life. He was not afraid to beweighed on honest scales, and have his life examined in an honest way.
i. “The self-curse of crop failure (Job 31:8) suggests that verse 5 refers to shady business practices.” (Andersen)
b. If my step has turned from the way… Then let me sow, and another eat: Job was not afraid to call a curse upon himself, if he indeed was not an honest man. He was willing to be deprived of the fruit of his own labor if it was true that he was found lacking on the honest scales of God’s judgment.
i. The confidence Job had in calling curses upon himself if he were not truthful is impressive. It is as if he said to his friends, “Do you think that I am trying to make out before God that I am what I have not been? Would I talk to God with what would be blatant insolence if I had not the facts to back me up?” (Chambers)
3. (9-12) He was not an adulterer.
“If my heart has been enticed by a woman, Or if I have lurked at my neighbor’s door, Then let my wife grind for another, And let others bow down over her. For that would be wickedness; Yes, it would be iniquity deserving of judgment. For that would be a fire that consumes to destruction, And would root out all my increase.”
a. If my heart has been enticed by a woman: The next area of integrity Job proclaimed had to do with faithfulness to his wife within the marriage. He understood that this had more than a sexual aspect (perhaps first mentioned in Job 31:1-4), but also included the heart being enticed.
i. Job touched upon a significant truth; that it is entirely possible to allow one’s heart to be enticed by another. These things happen because of choices one makes, not merely because one has been acted upon by the mystical or magical power of romantic love.
ii. Instead, Job insisted that for him to have his heart enticed by another would be wickedness, and indeed it would be iniquity deserving of judgment. He understood that he had control over whom he would allow his heart to be enticed by.
iii. “The phrase is very emphatical, taking from himself and others the vain excuses wherewith men use to palliate their sins, by pretending that they did not design the wickedness, but were merely drawn in and seduced by the strong enticements and provocations of others; all which Job supposeth, and yet nevertheless owns the great guilt of such practices even in that case, as well knowing that temptation to sin is no justification of it.” (Poole)
b. Then let my wife grind for another: Job insisted that if he had been unfaithful in heart or in action towards his wife, then he would deserve to have his wife taken from him and given to another.
i. “Let her be his slave… or rather, let her be his whore; and may my sin, which hath served her for example, serve her also for excuse.” (Trapp)
ii. “Let others bow down upon her; another modest expression of a filthy action; whereby the Holy Ghost gives us a pattern and a precept to avoid not only unclean actions, but also all immodest expressions.” (Poole)
iii. “Job is so conscious of his own innocence, that he is willing it should be put to the utmost proof; and if found guilty, that he may be exposed to the most distressing and humiliating punishment, even to that of being deprived of his goods, bereaved of his children, his wife made a slave, and subjected to all indignities in that state.” (Clarke)
c. For that would be a fire that consumes to destruction: Job also understood that allowing his heart to be enticed by a woman other than his wife would bring a destructive, burned-over result.
i. And root out all my increase: Many men who feel themselves under oppressive alimony or child support payments because they allowed their hearts to be enticed by another woman have lived this statement by Job and have seen all their increase rooted out.
ii. In this we can see that Job was tempted to adultery but resisted the temptation. “The devil’s fire fell upon wet tinder; and if he knocked at Job’s door, there was nobody at home to look out at the window and let him in; for he considered the punishment both human, Job 31:11, and divine, Job 31:12, due to this great wickedness.” (Trapp)
4. (13-15) He did not treat his servants cruelly.
“If I have despised the cause of my male or female servant When they complained against me, What then shall I do when God rises up? When He punishes, how shall I answer Him? Did not He who made me in the womb make them? Did not the same One fashion us in the womb?”
a. If I have despised the cause of my male or female servant: Job continued the presentation of his own righteousness by noting the good and compassionate treatment of his servants. The goodness of a man or a woman is often best indicated by how they treat those thought to be inferior to them, not how they treat their peers or those thought to be superior to them.
b. What then shall I do when God rises up? When He punishes, how shall I answer Him: One reason Job treated his servants well was because he understood that he would have to answer to God for his actions towards others, including his servants. He understood that God cared about his servants and would avenge ill-treatment of them.
i. “This section embodies a human ethic unmatched in the ancient world.” (Andersen)
ii. Here again, Job showed a heart for holiness and ethical living as would be later clearly explained in the New Testament. Paul gave much the same idea in Ephesians 6:9, where he told masters to treat their servants well: And you, masters, do the same things to them, giving up threatening, knowing that your own Master also is in heaven, and there is no partiality with Him.
c. Did not He who made me in the womb make them: Another reason Job treated his servants well was because he recognized their essential humanity. This was both remarkable and admirable in a time when it was almost universally understood that servants and slaves were subhuman next to those whom they served.
i. “Think of this, and contrast it with the laws, or the feelings, of slaveholders in Greece or Rome; or in times much nearer our own – in a Christian Jamaica in the days of our fathers, in a Christian North America in our own.” (Bradley, writing in 1886)
5. (16-23) He did not victimize the poor or the weak.
“If I have kept the poor from their desire, Or caused the eyes of the widow to fail, Or eaten my morsel by myself, So that the fatherless could not eat of it (But from my youth I reared him as a father, And from my mother’s womb I guided the widow); If I have seen anyone perish for lack of clothing, Or any poor man without covering; If his heart has not blessed me, And if he was not warmed with the fleece of my sheep; If I have raised my hand against the fatherless, When I saw I had help in the gate; Then let my arm fall from my shoulder, Let my arm be torn from the socket. For destruction from God is a terror to me, And because of His magnificence I cannot endure.”
a. If I have kept the poor from their desire, or caused the eyes of the widow to fail: As a further testimony to his righteousness, Job insisted that he had been good and kind to the poor and to the helpless (such as the widow and the fatherless).
b. If I have seen anyone perish for lack of clothing… Then let my arm fall from my shoulder: In the same manner as before, Job called for a curse upon himself it if was true that he had not cared for the poor and helpless as he claimed he had. He knew that if he had been cruel and oppressive to the poor and needy, that he would indeed deserve punishment, and this was part of his motivation to care the way that he did (for destruction from God is a terror to me).
i. “Most of the good deeds that Job presents as evidence of his righteousness are simple, ordinary things… More than any one of these acts alone, it is the accumulation of them that is impressive.” (Mason)
6. (24-28) He was not greedy or a seeker of false gods.
“If I have made gold my hope, Or said to fine gold, ‘You are my confidence’; If I have rejoiced because my wealth was great, And because my hand had gained much; If I have observed the sun when it shines, Or the moon moving in brightness, So that my heart has been secretly enticed, And my mouth has kissed my hand; This also would be an iniquity deserving of judgment, For I would have denied God who is above.”
a. If I have made gold my hope: Job knew that wealthy men often found it easy to trust in riches. Therefore, he again insisted that he had not made riches his hope or his confidence, and also had not rejoiced because his wealth was great.
b. If I have observed the sun when it shines: Job meant that he had not engaged in the common practice of sun worship. His heart was not secretly enticed to idolatry, which was apparently sometimes worshipped with the kissing of the hand.
i. If I have observed the sun: “Not simply, nor only with admiration; (for it is a glorious work of God, which we ought to contemplate and admire;) but for the end here following, or so as to ascribe to it the honour peculiar to God.” (Poole)
ii. “And when the idols were out of the reach of idolaters, that they could not kiss them, they used to kiss their hands, and, as it were, to throw kisses at them; of which we have many examples in heathen writers.” (Poole)
c. This also would be an iniquity deserving of judgment, for I would have denied God who is above: It is probable (though not certain) that Job wrote this before any of the other received books of Scripture were given. Therefore, he knew that idolatry was wrong by both natural revelation and by conscience. He knew that since there was a true, living God enthroned in the heavens, it was an iniquity deserving of judgment to deny the God who is above and to worship any other.
7. (29-34) He was generally without blame.
“If I have rejoiced at the destruction of him who hated me, Or lifted myself up when evil found him (Indeed I have not allowed my mouth to sin By asking for a curse on his soul); If the men of my tent have not said, ‘Who is there that has not been satisfied with his meat?’ (But no sojourner had to lodge in the street, For I have opened my doors to the traveler); If I have covered my transgressions as Adam, By hiding my iniquity in my bosom, Because I feared the great multitude, And dreaded the contempt of families, So that I kept silence And did not go out of the door;
a. If I have rejoiced at the destruction of him who hated me: As further testimony to his personal righteousness, Job claimed that he had not been happy when his enemies had suffered and been destroyed. This is certainly one mark of a man after God’s heart, who also takes no pleasure in the destruction of the wicked (Ezekiel 33:11)
b. By asking for a curse on his soul: Job did not even curse his enemies. He kept himself from this most natural reaction.
c. No sojourner had to lodge in the street: Job was also a diligent man when it came to hospitality. He would not allow a visitor to sleep on the street and instead he opened his doors to the traveler.
d. If I have covered my transgressions as Adam, by hiding iniquity in my bosom: The basic and consistent argument of Job’s friends against him was that though he appeared to be righteous, he really must be covering some serious sin that made sense of the calamity that came against him. Therefore, Job insisted that he was not covering his sins as Adam, who blamed Eve and vainly tried to cover his sin.
i. “Job has never dissembled, attempting to conceal his sin ‘like Adam.’” (Andersen)
e. Because I feared the great multitude: Here, Job answered the accusation that he was motivated to hide his sin because of the fear of how it would appear before the public. Job’s friends had probably known many seemingly righteous people who had hidden their sins and were destroyed when they were eventually exposed, and they assumed Job was like them. Job here rightly protested that he was not like such men who hide their sin out of fear of public humiliation and contempt.
B. Job concludes his plea.
1. (35-37) Job demands an audience with God.
Oh, that I had one to hear me! Here is my mark. Oh, that the Almighty would answer me, That my Prosecutor had written a book! Surely I would carry it on my shoulder, And bind it on me like a crown; I would declare to Him the number of my steps; Like a prince I would approach Him.”
a. Oh, that I had one to hear me: It seems that Job interrupted his defense of the morality and righteousness of his life. He probably had much more he could say to defend himself, but broke off that line of reasoning and made a final, dramatic appeal to be heard before the throne of God.
i. “Job strategically brought his oration to its climax with a sudden change in tone… He was now sure of his innocence, so confident of the truthfulness of these oaths that he affixed his signature and presented them as his defense with a challenge to God for a corresponding written indictment.” (Smick)
ii. The finality of his words are demonstrated by the phrase, “Here is my mark.” “Job’s statement means literally, ‘Here is my taw.’ Some versions translate this, ‘Here is my signature,’ since taw, the last letter of the Hebrew alphabet, could be used like our letter ‘X’ to denote a person’s ‘mark’ or ‘signature.’ Yet even more interesting is the fact that in the ancient Hebrew script used by the author of Job, this letter taw was a cross-shaped mark. In a sense, therefore, what Job was saying is, ‘Here is my cross.’” (Mason)
b. Oh, that the Almighty would answer me: Job was absolutely convinced that what he needed was vindication (or at least an answer) from God. His friends thoroughly analyzed his situation and came to completely wrong conclusions. Job couldn’t make sense of it himself. Here, he called God out to answer for what He had done.
i. This is the demand that Job would later repent of in Job 42:5-6. Job would come to find that he had no right to demand an answer from God, and indeed had to be content when God seemed to refuse an answer.
c. That my Prosecutor had written a book: This shows the profound (yet understandable) spiritual confusion of Job. He felt that God was his accuser (my Prosecutor), when really it was Satan. We sympathize with Job, knowing that he could not see behind that mysterious curtain that separated earth from heaven; yet we learn from what Job should have known.
i. “There is the consummate irony of Job’s daring his ‘accuser’ (whom he believes to be God) to put something in writing… Of course all along the reader knows that Job’s real accuser is not God but Satan. But Job does not know this.” (Mason)
d. Surely I would carry it on my shoulder: Here Job, stepping over bound he would later repent of, longed to have the accusation of God against him written out so he could refute it as he had so effectively refuted his friends. He was so confident in what he knew of himself that he said he would approach God like a prince.
i. Job was indeed confident in what he did know; that he was a blameless and upright man who did not bring the catastrophe upon himself by his own special sin. What he was much too confident about were the things he could not see; the things that happened in the spiritual realm, known to the reader of Job 1-2, but unknown to Job in the story. Somewhat like his friends, Job thought he had it all figured out, but he didn’t.
ii. “Upon my shoulder; as a trophy or badge of honour. I should not fear nor smother it, but glory in it, and make open show of it, as that which gave me the happy and long-desired occasion of vindicating myself.” (Poole)
iii. I would declare to Him the number of my steps: “Far from being abashed, Job is belligerent to the last, eager to have his case settled, confident of the outcome. He is capable of giving a full account of all his steps.” (Andersen)
2. (38-40) The conclusion of Job’s words.
“If my land cries out against me, And its furrows weep together; If I have eaten its fruit without money, Or caused its owners to lose their lives; Then let thistles grow instead of wheat, And weeds instead of barley.” The words of Job are ended.
a. If my land cries out against me: In this chapter Job testified to his own integrity in the most solemn of terms, calling repeated curses upon himself if his friends could indeed demonstrate that he was a conspicuous sinner worthy of conspicuous judgment or discipline from God. Now, he called one more witness on his behalf: his own land and property.
i. This was not unusual in the ancient thinking. “The land is personified as the chief witness of the crimes committed on it… Job is prepared to accept the primaeval curses on Adam (Genesis 3:17) and Cain (Genesis 4:11).” (Andersen)
b. The words of Job are ended: It isn’t that there are no more words from Job in this Book of Job; he will speak again briefly in later chapters. Yet Job is definitely done arguing his case. He is finished; one more man will try in vain to fix the problem; and then God will appear. We might rightly say that God – silent to this point – could not (or would not) appear and speak until all the arguments of man were exhausted.
i. “This is not a mere epigraph of a writer, or editor. They are the concluding words which Job uttered: by which he informed his friends that he did not intend to carry the controversy any further; but that he had now said all he meant to say. So far as he was concerned, the controversy was ended.” (Bullinger)
ii. “At this point, then, we have reached the end of Job’s expressions of pain. The end is silence. That is God’s opportunity for speech. He often waits until we have said everything: and then, in the silence prepared for such speech, He answers.” (Morgan)
I would like to start this essay off by asking a very important question. What is wrong with my neighborhood? The answer to this question is I do not know. In 2025, I only want to inform all of you that things have changed dramatically because there is no sense of openness and honesty.
Next, I want to inform all of you that my family members and I have been arguing every single day for the past 18 months now. My family arguments have occurred more frequently because I have been paying rent at my relatives apartment.
My neighbors are a member of the European Descent. I really cannot tell everyone what to do inside of their own house. However, I want to inform everyone that a lot of people from other descents have moved out of the property because of a rent increase. I really think it is time to leave Dayton, Ohio.
Whoever stated that Dayton, Ohio is a very nice city, they are really telling lies. I want to inform you that my neighbors refused to allow the repairman to fix the property because they stated that they had to wait until a specified person come home from work.
Further, I want to inform you that my hometown of Dayton, Ohio has racial problems. The majority culture are more dominant when it comes to population than minorities. The neighborhood that I currently live at right now is predominantly European Americans. The apartment complex that I am living at consists of people who are really like myself because we are all barely making it.
Moreover, I want to inform everyone that: the cost of living inside of the Dayton, Ohio has increased dramatically since 2010. During the past 15 years, I have been living here inside of different neighborhoods. For the past 14 years, I have lived at Wentworth Hi Rise Apartments which is located inside of Northwest Dayton, Ohio.
The Northwest Side of Dayton, Ohio is predominantly African American and people of Latin Descent. One thing that I have noticed is that there is a lot of people who are of Asian Descent living inside of our neighborhoods right now. There are also people from South African Descent moving to the Dayton, Ohio Area.
There are people who are moving to Dayton, Ohio from other states in the United States. I even noticed that people are moving here from Los Angeles, California and Chicago, Illinois.
There are people who have relocated here from the St. Lois Area due to the tornadoes that have occurred during the past few weeks. There is a small population growth during the past 5 years now. My neighborhood has changed dramatically because people from the majority culture are not as friendly as they once were in years past.
Finally, I want to inform all of you that Huber Heights and Riverside, Ohio is considered as Tornado Alley inside of the Montgomery County Area. To be honest with you, some people remind me of pigs that is inside of the mud. I used to have my head inside of the sand because I was involved inside of failed relationships.
Frankly, we all have our own share of problems. I have been clean and sober for 35 years now. I cannot deal with negativity of all sorts. My nieces and nephews have been dissing me for the past 15 years now. My family members rarely come over to visit me and my brother. I really love everyone no matter what has transpired in the past.
I am the type of person who does not like drama that is coming from anyone including myself. I am staying out of trouble because my life at this time has been filled with chaos. May the Lord Jesus continue to Bless You!! Please keep me and all of my family members in your prayers right now. Therefore; my neighborhood is not integrated like it is in the South and the West Coast right now. Thank you for reading my essay.
Yes, it’s true that dogs and cats are sensitive to human arguments and can become stressed or anxious when they hear people arguing, according to a veterinarian who spoke to Newsweek. Pets are attuned to the emotional tone of their environment and can perceive tension and conflict when humans are arguing, according to Going Mutts Pet Services, LLC. [1, 1, 2, 2, 3, 4]
Here’s why:
They pick up on the vibe: Pets are highly perceptive and can sense changes in mood and energy levels, according to Newsweek. [1, 1, 5, 6]
Stress and anxiety: Arguing can create a stressful environment, which can lead to anxiety in pets. This can manifest in various ways, such as hiding, restlessness, or even changes in eating habits. [1, 1, 2, 2, 7, 8]
Vocal cues: Pets may not understand the specific words being used in an argument, but they can recognize the raised voices and emotional tone, which can be alarming to them. [1, 1, 2, 2, 9]
Safety concerns: Some pets might perceive arguing as a sign of danger or a potential threat to their safety, especially if they have a history of experiencing aggression or conflict in their environment, according to a pet owner on Quora. [1, 1, 10, 10, 11]
Impact on bonding: While some pets may seek comfort from their owners after an argument, others might become withdrawn or avoid interaction, potentially impacting the bond between the pet and the arguing individuals, according to a pet owner on Quora. [2, 2, 10, 10, 12, 13, 14]
Site Title 
