Job 27:13

The portion. Verses 13-23 present a problem in that they are a complete denial of Job’s former position regarding the punishment of the wicked in this life (see chs. 9:22-24; 21; 24). Various attempts have been made to account for the apparent change of theory by assuming:

(1) That this passage is really an address by Zophar. This view is untenable, for to maintain it one must suppose the omission of two verses, one between vs. 10 and 11 introducing Zophar as the speaker and one at the beginning of ch. 28 reintroducing Job. It also requires the alteration of all the pronouns in vs. 11, 12, from the second person plural to the second person singular, since Zophar would be considered as addressing these words to Job.

(2) That Job is endeavoring to retract his former statements spoken rather hastily in the heat of the controversy, and not too well considered. This view has in its favor that it retains Job as the speaker, but has against it the fact that it makes Job teach his friends that which they already believed and had repeatedly affirmed (see v. 12). It further makes him reproach his friends for the folly of not being ignorant of what they had tried to urge upon him with such persistence (see v. 13).

(3) That Job is repeating the argument he anticipates his friends will use in reply to his present speech. However, there is nothing to indicate such a purpose, and there is no rebuttal of the argument such as might be expected if Job were calling attention to an anticipated argument.

(4) That Job is speaking of the final judgment. This view is ruled out by a careful analysis of the calamities which reveals that all of them are to come in this present life. The death spoken of is the first death, not the second.

(5) That Job is here turning the weapons of his friends against them and is calling down upon them the calamities they had declared to be the doom of the wicked. This view seems to fit into the sequence of thought. Job has reaffirmed his innocency (vs. 1—6). By implication his friends are indicted, for they bring false charges against another. Job threatens them with the same terrors with which they had attempted to intimidate him. He reproaches them for their slowness of perception in not realizing that they have spoken these things against themselves. This view, like the others, is also conjectural, but it seems to require the minimum of adjustments to make it fit into the over-all picture.