Job 22:10

⁹You sent widows away empty-handed, and the strength of the fatherless was crushed. ¹⁰Therefore snares surround you, and sudden peril terrifies you; ¹¹it is so dark you cannot see, and a flood of water covers you.

Summary

In this verse, Eliphaz, one of Job's friends, accuses Job of being chastised by God due to his wickedness. Eliphaz suggests that Job's suffering is a result of his sinful actions, implying that he is being punished for his transgressions. This accusation reflects the common belief in the Old Testament that suffering was a direct consequence of sin, a concept that Job vehemently challenges throughout the book. Job's story challenges the traditional understanding of suffering and righteousness, highlighting the complexity of human experiences and the need for a deeper understanding of God's ways beyond simplistic explanations.

Commentary

Adam Clarke
Keil-Delitzsch
Jamieson-Fausset-Brown
John Gill

Adam Clarke Bible Commentary

Therefore snares - As thou hast dealt with others, so has God, in his retributive providence, dealt with thee. As thou hast spoiled, so art thou spoiled. Thou art taken in a net from which thou canst not escape. There is an allusion here to the hunting of the elephant: he is driven into an inclosure in the woods, passing from strait to strait, till brought into a narrow point, from which he cannot escape; and then his consternation is great, and his roaring terrible. God hath hunted thee down, as men hunt down those wild and dangerous beasts. See on Job 18:21 (note).

Carl Friedrich Keil and Franz Delitzsch Old Testament Commentary

10 Therefore snares are round about thee, And fear terrifieth thee suddenly; 11 Or percievest thou not the darkness, And the overflow of waters, which covereth thee? On account of this inhuman mode of action by which he has challenged the punishment of justice, snares are round about him (comp. Bildad's picture of this fate of the evil-doer, Job 18:8-10), destruction encompasses him on every side, so that he sees no way out, and must without any escape succumb to it. And the approaching ruin makes itself known to him time after time by terrors which come suddenly upon him and disconcert him; so that his outward circumstances being deranged and his mind discomposed, he has already in anticipation to taste that which is before him. In Job 22:11, לא תראה is by no means to be taken as an eventual circumstantial clause, whether it is translated affirmatively: or darkness (covers thee), that thou canst not see; or interrogatively: or does darkness (surround thee), that thou seest not? In both cases the verb in the principal clause is wanting; apart from the new turn, which או introduces, being none, it would then have to be explained with Lwenthal: or has the habit of sinning already so dulled thy feeling and darkened thine eye, that thou canst not perceive the enormity of thy transgression? But this is a meaning forced from the words which they are not capable of; it must have been at least או חשׁך בּעדך, or something similar. Since או חשׁך (to be accented without Makkeph with Mnach, Dech) cannot form a principal clause of itself, תראה is without doubt the verb belonging to it: or (או as Job 16:3) seest thou not darkness? Because, according to his preceding speeches, Job does not question the magnitude of his sufferings, but acknowledges them in all their fearfulness; therefore Hahn believes it must be explained: or shouldst thou really not be willing to see thy sins, which encompass thee as thick dark clouds, which cover thee as floods of water? The two figures, however, can only be understood of the destruction which entirely shrouds Job in darkness, and threatens to drown him. But destruction, in the sense in which Eliphaz asks if Job does not see it, is certainly intended differently to what it was in Job's complaints. Job complains of it as being unmerited, and therefore mysterious; Eliphaz, on the other hand, is desirous that he should open his eyes that he may perceive in this darkness of sorrow, this flood of suffering, the well-deserved punishment of his heinous sins, and anticipate the worst by penitence. לא תכסּךּ is a relative clause, and belongs logically also to חשׁך, comp. Isa 60:2, where שׁפעת is also found in Job 22:6 (from שׁפע, abundare; comp. Arab. šf‛, ספק, Job 20:22). Eliphaz now insinuates that Job denies the special providence of God, because he doubts the exceptionless, just government of God. In the second strophe he has explained his affliction as the result of his uncharitableness; now he explains it as the result of his unbelief, which is now become manifest.