TRV
See on the biblical-era map
Study This Verse
Public-domain commentary
Matthew Henry
From his Commentary on the Whole Bible. Henry comments on passages, not single verses — this entry covers Job 31:1–8. His three-level outline is real structure in the source text, so it is rendered as structure.
The lusts of the flesh, and the love of the world, are the two fatal rocks on which multitudes split; against these Job protests he was always careful to stand upon his guard.
I.Against the lusts of the flesh.
He not only kept himself clear from adultery, from defiling his neighbour's wives (Job 31:9), but from all lewdness with any women whatsoever. He kept no concubine, no mistress, but was inviolably faithful to the marriage bed, though his wife was none of the wisest, best, or kindest. From the beginning it was so, that a man should have but one wife and cleave to her only; and Job kept closely to that institution and abhorred the thought of transgressing it; for, though his greatness might tempt him to it, his goodness kept him from it. Job was now in pain and sickness of body, and under that affliction it is in a particular manner comfortable if our consciences can witness for us that we have been careful to preserve our bodies in chastity and to possess those vessels in sanctification and honour, pure from the lusts of uncleanness. Now observe here,
1.What the resolutions were which, in this matter, he kept to (Job 31:1): I made a covenant with my eyes, that is, "I watched against the occasions of the sin; why then should I think upon a maid?" that is, "by that means, through the grace of God, I kept myself from the very first step towards it." So far was he from wanton dalliances, or any act of lasciviousness, that,
(1.)He would not so much as admit a wanton look. He made a covenant with his eyes, made this bargain with them, that he would allow them the pleasure of beholding the light of the sun and the glory of God shining in the visible creation, provided they would never fasten upon any object that might occasion any impure imaginations, much less any impure desires, in his mind; and under this penalty, that, if they did, they must smart for it in penitential tears. Note, Those that would keep their hearts pure must guard their eyes, which are both the outlets and inlets of uncleanness. Hence we read of wanton eyes (Isa 3:16) and eyes full of adultery, Pe2 2:14. The first sin began in the eye, Gen 3:6. What we must not meddle with we must not lust after; and what we must not lust after we must not look at; not the forbidden wealth (Pro 23:5), not the forbidden wine (Pro 23:31), not the forbidden woman, Mat 5:28.
(2.)He would not so much as allow a wanton thought: "Why then should I think upon a maid with any unchaste fancy or desire towards her?" Shame and sense of honour might restrain him from soliciting the chastity of a beautiful virgin, but only grace and the fear of God would restrain him from so much as thinking of it. Those are not chaste that are not so in spirit as well as body, Co1 7:34. See how Christ's exposition of the seventh commandment agrees with the ancient sense of it, and how much better Job understood it than the Pharisees, though they sat in Moses's chair.
2.What the reasons were which, in this matter, he was governed by. It was not for fear of reproach among men, though that is to be considered (Pro 6:33), but for fear of the wrath and curse of God. He knew very well,
(1.)That uncleanness is a sin that forfeits all good, and shuts us out from the hope of it (Job 31:2): What portion of God is there from above? What blessing can such impure sinners expect from the pure and holy God, or what token of his favour? What inheritance of the Almighty can they look for from on high? There is no portion, no inheritance, no true happiness, for a soul, but what is in God, in the Almighty, and what comes from above, from on high. Those that wallow in uncleanness render themselves utterly unfit for communion with God, either in grace here or in glory hereafter, and become allied to unclean spirits, which are for ever separated from him; and then what portion, what inheritance, can they have with God? No unclean thing shall enter into the New Jerusalem, that holy city.
(2.)It is a sin that incurs divine vengeance, Job 31:3. It will certainly be the sinner's ruin if it be not repented of in time. Is not destruction, a swift and sure destruction, to those wicked people, and a strange punishment to the workers of this iniquity? Fools make a mock at this sin, make a jest of it; it is with them a peccadillo, a trick of youth. But they deceive themselves with vain words, for because of these things, how light soever they make of them, the wrath of God, the unsupportable wrath of the eternal God, comes upon the children of disobedience, Eph 5:6. There are some sinners whom God sometimes out of the common road of Providence to meet with; such are these. The destruction of Sodom is a strange punishment. Is there not alienation (so some read it) to the workers of iniquity? This is the sinfulness of the sin that it alienates the mind from God (Eph 4:18, Eph 4:19), and this is the punishment of the sinners that they shall be eternally set at a distance from him, Rev 22:15.
(3.)It cannot be hidden from the all-seeing God. A wanton thought cannot be so close, nor a wanton look so quick, as to escape his cognizance, much less any act of uncleanness so secretly done as to be out of his sight. If Job was at any time tempted to this sin, he restrained himself from it, and all approaches to it, with this pertinent thought (Job 31:4), Doth not he see my ways; as Joseph did (Gen 39:9), How can I do it, and sin against God? Two things Job had an eye to: - [1.] God's omniscience. It is a great truth that God's eyes are upon all the ways of men (Pro 5:20, Pro 5:21); but Job here mentions it with application to himself and his own actions: Doth not he see my ways? O God! thou hast searched me and known me. God sees what rule we walk by, what company w walk with, what end we walk towards, and therefore what ways we walk in. [2.] His observance. "He not only sees, but takes notice; he counts all my steps, all my false steps in the way of duty, all my by-steps into the way of sin." He not only sees our ways in general, but takes cognizance of our particular steps in these ways, every action, every motion. He keeps account of all, because he will call us to account, will bring every work into judgment. God takes a more exact notice of us than we do of ourselves; for who ever counted his own steps? yet God counts them. Let us therefore walk circumspectly.
II.He stood upon his guard against the love of the world, and carefully avoided all sinful indirect means of getting wealth. He dreaded all forbidden profit as much as all forbidden pleasure. Let us see,
1.What his protestation is. In general, he had been honest and just in all his dealings, and never, to his knowledge, did any body any wrong.
(1.)He never walked with vanity (Job 31:5), that is, he never durst tell a lie to get a good bargain. It was never his way to banter, or equivocate, or make many words in his dealings. Some men's constant walk is a constant cheat. They either make what they have more than it is, that they may be trusted, or less than it is, that nothing may be expected from them. But Job was a different man. His wealth was not acquired by vanity, though now diminished, Pro 13:11.
(2.)He never hasted to deceit. Those that deceive must be quick and sharp, but Job's quickness and sharpness were never turned that way. He never made haste to be rich by deceit, but always acted cautiously, lest, through inconsideration, he should do an unjust thing. Note, What we have in the world may be either used with comfort or lost with comfort if it was honestly obtained.
(3.)His steps never turned out of the way, the way of justice and fair dealing; from that he never deviated, Job 31:7. He not only took care not to walk in a constant course and way of deceit, but he did not so much as take one step out of the way of honesty. In every particular action and affair we must closely tie ourselves up to the rules of righteousness.
(4.)His heart did not walk after his eyes, that is, he did not covet what he saw that was another's, nor wish it his own. Covetousness is called the lust of the eye, Jo1 2:16. Achan saw, and then took, the accursed thing. That heart must needs wander that walks after the eyes; for then it looks no further than the things that are seen, whereas it ought to be in heaven whither the eyes cannot reach: it should follow the dictates of religion and right reason: if it follow the eye, it will be misled to that for which God will bring men into judgment, Ecc 11:9.
(5.)That no blot had cleaved to his hands, that is, he was not chargeable with getting any thing dishonestly, or keeping that which was another's, whenever it appeared to be so. Injustice is a blot, a blot to the estate, a blot to the owner; it spoils the beauty of both, and therefore is to be dreaded. Those that deal much in the world may perhaps have a blot come upon their hands, but they must wash it off again by repentance and restitution, and not let it cleave to their hands. See Isa 33:15.
2.How he ratifies his protestation. So confident is he of his own honesty that,
(1.)He is willing to have his goods searched (Job 31:6): Let me be weighed in an even balance, that is, "Let what I have got be enquired into and it will be found to weigh well" - a sign that it was not obtained by vanity, for then Tekel would have been written on it - weighed in the balance and found too light. An honest man is so far from dreading a trial that he desires it rather, being well assured that God knows his integrity and will approve it, and that the trial of it will be to his praise and honour.
(2.)He is willing to forfeit the whole cargo if there be found any prohibited or contraband goods, any thing but what he came honestly by (Job 31:8): "Let me sow, and let another eat," which was already agreed to be the doom of oppressors (Job 5:5), "and let my offspring, all the trees that I have planted, be rooted out." This intimates that he believed the sin did deserve this punishment, that usually it is thus punished, but that though now his estate was ruined (and at such a time, if ever, his conscience would have brought his sin to his mind), yet he knew himself innocent and would venture all the poor remains of his estate upon the issue of the trial.
Historical interpretation
Historical Reception
2 surviving comments on this verse. Each one is dated, so this reads as a timeline rather than a list.
Select a marker to jump to its quote. Markers stagger vertically where authors wrote within a few decades of each other.
Deep affect is tightly united with this verse. Not even at the time, he says, when the sweetness of the harp softened my ears did I allow any lustful feeling to dwell in my heart, even though the sounds tuned with art affected the senses. “I have made a covenant with my eyes.” After the search for justice and the feeling of mercifulness, he places the virtue of chastity in the highest position.
6. As though he said in plain words; ‘If I defile, my mind in thought, I can never be the ‘inheritance’ of Him, Who is the Author of purity.’ For the rest are no good things at all, if to the eyes of the secret Judge they be not approved by the testimony of chastity. For all the virtues lift themselves up in the sight of the Creator by reciprocal aid, that because one virtue without another is either none at all or the very least one, they should be mutually supported by their alliance together. For if either humility forsake chastity, or chastity abandon humility, before the Author of humility and chastity, what does either a proud chastity, or a polluted humility avail to benefit us? And so that the holy man might obtain to be owned by his Maker in the remaining particulars of good, keeping purity of the heart, let him say, I made a covenant with mine eyes, that I should not even think on a maid. For what portion would God have in me from above, and what inheritance would the Almighty have from on high? As though he made the confession in plain words, saying, The Creator of the things on high refuses to own me for his possession, if in His sight my mind rots in the lowest desires.
7. But herein it should be known that that is one thing which the mind meets with from the tempting of the flesh, and another thing, when by consent it is tied and bound with gratifications. For very often it is struck by wrong thinking and resists, but very often when it conceives any thing wrong, it revolves this within itself even in the way of desire. And certainly impure thought never in the least defiles the mind when it strikes it, but when it subdues the same to itself by the taking delight. Thus it is hence the great Preacher says, There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man. [1 Cor. 10, 13] For that is ‘temptation common to man,’ by which we are very often reached in the thought of the heart even against our will, because this, viz. that even things forbidden sometimes occur to the mind, this assuredly we have in our own selves derived from the burthen of human nature as subject to corruption. But henceforth it is devilish and not ‘human’ temptation, when to that which the corruptibility of the flesh prompts, the mind attaches itself by the consent. Hence again he says, Let not sin reign in your mortal body. [Rom. 6, 12] For he forbad not that sin should ‘be’ in our mortal body, but that it should ‘reign in our mortal body.’ Because in flesh subject to corruption it may not ‘reign,’ but cannot help but ‘be.’ For this very thing to be tempted touching sin, is sin to it, which same because so long as we live, we are not perfectly and altogether without, holy preaching seeing that it could not wholly banish the same, took away from it its ‘reign’ from the dwelling-place of our heart, that the unlawful longing, though it very often secretly insinuate itself as a thief in our good thoughts, at all events should not, if it should even win an entrance, exercise dominion. Accordingly the holy man in saying, I made a covenant with mine eyes, that I should not even think upon a maid, would not at all be understood, that sin did not touch his mind in thought, but that it never mastered him by the consent. For he defends his soul as the most entire possession of God against the adversary’s making a prey of it, who directly subjoins, For what portion would God have in me from above, or what inheritance would the Almighty have from on high? As though he said in plain words; ‘In my mortal flesh indeed I am subject to the constitution of corruption; but wherein do I serve the Maker, if to Him I do not defend my mind whole and entire from the consent to sin?
Continue studying Job 31:2 across the web’s major study libraries — every link below opens this exact verse, chapter, or book on the destination site.
Read & Compare
BibleGatewayThis verse in more than 200 translations and 70 languages.
Bible.comThe YouVersion reader — hundreds of translations, reading plans, and highlights.
ESV.orgCrossway's official English Standard Version reader.
NET BibleThe NET translation with 60,000+ translators' notes on every rendering decision.
STEP BibleTyndale House's free study tool — original text, vocabulary, and scholarly resources.
BibliaLogos Bible Software's free web reader.
USCCBThe New American Bible (Revised Edition) with the U.S. bishops' study notes.
Commentaries
BibleHub CommentariesDozens of classic commentaries on this verse, gathered on one page.
StudyLightMore than 100 commentary sets — the largest collection on the web.
BibleRefPlain-English commentary on what this verse means, verse by verse.
Enduring WordDavid Guzik's free commentary on this chapter, widely used by Bible teachers.
Bible Study ToolsVerse commentary alongside Greek and Hebrew study aids.
Original Language & Research
- BibleHub InterlinearThe verse word by word — original language, transliteration, and English.
- BibleHub LexiconEvery word's original-language definition and Strong's entry.
Blue Letter BibleDeep-study tools — Strong's numbers, concordance, and word studies.
SefariaThe Hebrew text with Rashi and centuries of Jewish commentary.
Sermons, Hymns & Audio
TrulyRandomVerse is not affiliated with these sites and doesn’t control their content. They’re linked because they’re genuinely useful.
Summary
Job 31:2 encapsulates a profound rhetorical challenge from Job, forming a cornerstone of his final, impassioned defense against his friends' accusations of hidden sin. Through this pivotal question, Job appeals directly to God's ultimate justice, querying what negative "portion" or "inheritance" the Almighty would justly assign him from His heavenly throne. This verse powerfully conveys Job's unwavering conviction in his own integrity, asserting that his blameless conduct should logically preclude the severe suffering he endures, and implying that if he were indeed guilty of the transgressions he has just denied, he would fully expect a commensurate divine consequence.
Context
Literary Context
Job 31 serves as the climactic and most extensive segment of Job's final monologue, which commenced in Job 29. After vividly recounting his former esteemed position and the subsequent profound anguish of his current state in Job 29 and Job 30, Job dedicates the entirety of Job 31 to an elaborate oath of purgation. This chapter functions as a legal-theological defense, where Job systematically denies a comprehensive list of sins—ranging from lust and deceit to social injustice, oppression, and idolatry—and invokes severe self-imprecations if he is found to be lying. Verse 2, specifically, acts as a foundational rhetorical question that undergirds all his subsequent denials, establishing the premise for his detailed self-vindication by appealing to God's righteous and discerning judgment.
Historical & Cultural Context
The concepts of "portion" and "inheritance" were fundamental in ancient Near Eastern (ANE) societies, typically referring to one's allotted share of land, possessions, or even one's destiny, often perceived as divinely determined. In the Israelite tradition, the "inheritance" of the land of Canaan was a central covenantal promise, directly linked to faithfulness to God, as extensively detailed in Deuteronomy 28. Job's rhetorical question, therefore, draws upon a deeply understood cultural and theological framework where divine justice was expected to manifest in tangible blessings for the righteous and tangible curses or deprivation for the wicked. His repeated appeal to God's judgment "from above" and "from on high" powerfully emphasizes the widespread belief in a transcendent, sovereign God who actively observes and judges human conduct—a common ANE theological understanding that Job's unique experience ultimately challenges in its simplistic application.
Key Themes
This verse significantly contributes to several overarching themes that permeate the book of Job. Firstly, it highlights the pervasive theme of Divine Justice and Retribution, affirming the deeply held biblical principle that God is intimately involved in human affairs, observing and judging conduct, and dispensing consequences. Job's question implicitly acknowledges that God dispenses consequences for sin, aligning with the covenant curses found in passages like Deuteronomy 28:15-68. Secondly, it underscores the Consequences of Sin, suggesting that certain actions lead to a loss of divine favor or a specific form of divine judgment—an undesirable "portion" or "inheritance." Job's rhetorical question serves as a powerful declaration, "Surely, if I had done these things, I would indeed be justly punished." Finally, and perhaps most crucially, it is central to the theme of Job's Integrity and Expectation, as his consistent defense of his blamelessness throughout the book culminates in this comprehensive oath. He believes his uprightness should guarantee him a positive "portion" from God, directly challenging the conventional wisdom of his friends who insisted his suffering must be due to hidden sin, and thereby setting up the profound theological tension that the entire book seeks to explore.
Exposition and Analysis
Key Word Analysis
This term (H2506, חֵלֶק) denotes a share, a lot, or a part, often referring to a division of land or spoils, or one's assigned destiny. In a theological context, it signifies what God allots to an individual, whether for good or ill. Job uses it here to refer to a negative consequence or judgment that would be his rightful share if he were guilty, contrasting with the positive "portion" or inheritance God grants the righteous.
The word (H5159, נַחֲלָה) typically refers to an inherited possession, patrimony, or heritage, most notably the land of Israel as an inheritance from God. It carries strong covenantal connotations, implying a lasting possession or legacy. Here, Job extends its meaning to encompass the spiritual and existential consequences meted out by God, again implying a negative, undesirable outcome for the wicked, a lasting divine assignment.
This divine name (H7706, שַׁדַּי) emphasizes God's omnipotence and absolute power. Its use here reinforces the ultimate authority and irresistible might of the one who dispenses the "portion" and "inheritance." It highlights that the judgment Job speaks of would come from the supreme, all-powerful God, underscoring the gravity and certainty of such a divine decree.
Verse Breakdown
"For what portion of God [is there] from above?"
This opening rhetorical question immediately establishes the premise for Job's self-vindication. Job is not asking if a portion exists, but rather what kind of negative portion or destiny would be justly assigned by God (from His heavenly abode) to someone who committed the sins he has just denied (e.g., lust in Job 31:1). The implied answer is a severe, undesirable fate, a just retribution for wickedness, and Job's question implies that he has not earned such a fate.
"and [what] inheritance of the Almighty from on high?"
This clause functions as a synonymous parallel to the first, reinforcing the same profound idea with different but related terminology. "Inheritance" (נַחֲלָה) further emphasizes a divinely ordained, lasting consequence, a permanent lot. The phrase "from on high" (מִמְּרוֹמִים, H4791) reiterates the divine, sovereign source of this judgment, highlighting that God, the "Almighty" (שַׁדַּי, H7706), is the ultimate arbiter of human destiny and the one who dispenses righteous judgment from His exalted, transcendent position.
Literary Devices
Job 31:2 is rich in literary artistry, employing several potent devices to convey Job's emphatic defense. The most prominent is the Rhetorical Question, which is not posed to elicit an answer but to make a forceful, self-evident assertion. By asking "For what portion...?" and "what inheritance...?", Job is emphatically stating that if he were truly guilty of the sins he is about to deny, he would indeed expect a terrible divine consequence, thereby implying his innocence by the very absence of such a deserved fate. This question also utilizes Synonymous Parallelism, a hallmark of Hebrew poetry, where the second clause ("and [what] inheritance of the Almighty from on high?") largely repeats and intensifies the thought of the first clause ("For what portion of God [is there] from above?") using different but equivalent terms ("portion" and "inheritance," "from above" and "from on high"). This repetition serves to amplify the rhetorical force and underscore the comprehensive nature of divine judgment. Furthermore, within the broader context of Job 31, this verse functions as a foundational element of Job's Oath of Purgation or Negative Confession, a legal-theological device common in the ancient world where an accused party solemnly denies wrongdoing and invokes a divine curse upon themselves if they are lying. The question in verse 2 sets the premise for this elaborate oath, framing his subsequent detailed denials as a direct challenge to God's justice to find him guilty.
Theological and Thematic Connections
Job 31:2 serves as a powerful testament to the ancient Israelite understanding of divine justice and retribution, a concept deeply woven into the fabric of the Old Testament. Job, despite his inexplicable suffering, still operates within a theological framework where God is actively involved in human affairs, observing and judging conduct, and dispensing consequences. His rhetorical question implicitly affirms that wickedness should lead to a negative "portion" or "inheritance" from God, reflecting the covenantal blessings and curses outlined in the Torah. However, the very fact that Job, a righteous man, is experiencing a "negative portion" (suffering) despite his blamelessness, sets up the central theological tension of the entire book: how does this conventional understanding of justice reconcile with inexplicable suffering? This verse, therefore, is not just Job's defense but also a profound theological challenge, prompting deeper reflection on the complexities of God's ways, the nature of true righteousness, and the limits of human understanding concerning divine providence.
Reflection and Application
Job's rhetorical question in Job 31:2 invites us to consider the profound connection between our actions and their ultimate consequences, as well as the ultimate source of all blessing and judgment. While the book of Job ultimately challenges simplistic, mechanistic views of immediate retribution, it unequivocally affirms God's ultimate justice and sovereignty. Job's unwavering commitment to integrity, even in the face of immense suffering and accusations, serves as a powerful example for believers today. He appeals to a God who sees all and judges righteously, reminding us that true integrity is lived before God, not merely before people. This verse encourages us to cultivate a life of genuine righteousness, not solely out of fear of punishment, but out of a deep reverence for God's holy character and a trust in His perfect, though often mysterious, justice. It calls us to examine our own lives, asking if our conduct aligns with the character of God, and to rest in the assurance that our ultimate "portion" is found in Him, regardless of our earthly circumstances or the immediate appearance of justice.
Questions for Reflection
FAQ
What does Job mean by "portion" and "inheritance" in this verse?
In Job 31:2, Job uses "portion" (חֵלֶק, chêleq) and "inheritance" (נַחֲלָה, nachălâh) to refer to a divinely assigned lot or destiny, encompassing both material and spiritual consequences. These terms, often used in the Old Testament for land or possessions given by God as a blessing (e.g., the tribal inheritance in Canaan), are here employed by Job to describe the negative outcome or judgment that would justly befall him if he were guilty of the sins he denies. He is essentially asking, "What terrible fate or consequence would God justly give me if I were truly wicked?" This rhetorical question underscores his belief that his innocent conduct should preclude such a negative divine assignment, thereby asserting his blamelessness.
How does this verse relate to the broader theme of suffering in the book of Job?
Job 31:2 is crucial because it highlights Job's adherence to the conventional wisdom of his time: that God justly rewards the righteous with blessing and punishes the wicked with suffering. By asking what negative "portion" he would receive if he were guilty, Job is asserting his innocence and, by extension, challenging the simplistic application of this retribution principle to his own inexplicable suffering. The verse sets up the central dilemma of the book: why is a righteous man receiving the "portion" typically reserved for the wicked? It forces the reader to look beyond a direct cause-and-effect relationship between sin and suffering, paving the way for a deeper, more nuanced understanding of God's sovereignty, justice, and the multifaceted purposes of suffering that transcend human comprehension.
Christ-Centered Fulfillment
While Job 31:2 speaks of a "portion" or "inheritance" from God based on human conduct and divine retribution, the New Testament reveals a profound transformation and ultimate fulfillment of this concept in the person and work of Jesus Christ. Our ultimate "portion" and "inheritance" are no longer contingent upon our perfect adherence to the law or a flawless record of righteousness, which Job so earnestly contended for and sought to maintain. Instead, through Christ, believers receive an inheritance that is imperishable, undefiled, and unfading, kept in heaven. Jesus Himself is presented as the ultimate "portion" for His people, far surpassing any earthly blessing or curse. He is the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world, bearing the negative "portion" of divine judgment and the curse of the law that humanity justly deserved, thereby securing for us an eternal and glorious inheritance. Our standing before God is not based on our own integrity, as Job contended for, but entirely on the imputed righteousness of Christ, making us heirs according to the promise and co-heirs with Christ. Thus, the question of what "portion" God gives is answered definitively in the person and work of Jesus, who grants us a divine inheritance of grace, not earned retribution, through His perfect sacrifice and resurrection.