For ye have not spoken of me, &c.— Mr. Peters has proved, beyond contradiction, that this is properly translated, ye have not spoken of me that which is right. See also Job 42:8 in which there is a repetition of the same declaration in express terms by God himself, that Eliphaz and his companions had not spoken of him the thing which was right, and that Job had. Now, it will be difficult to find any thing in their speeches which should make the difference here supposed, if we set aside the doctrine of a future state; for in this view the others would speak more worthily of God than Job, by endeavouring to vindicate his Providence in the exact distribution of good and evil here in this life. Whereas Job's assertion, chap. Job 9:22. This is one thing, therefore I said it; he destroyeth the perfect and the wicked, (which is the argument upon which he all along insists,) would upon this supposition be directly charging God in the same reproachful terms which Achilles uses to Agamemnon in Homer; that with him,
u917?ν δε ιη τιμη η μεν κακος η δε και εσθλος. Iliad. ix. 399 that he made no distinction between the good and bad, the coward and the brave; which, in a ruler, is an error that reflects both upon his wisdom and his justice. But now, take into the account the life to come, and the thing will appear in a quite contrary light; and we shall easily see the reason why God approves of the sentiments of Job, and condemns those of his friends. For, suppose the friends of Job to argue (as seems to be the general tendency of their reasoning) that the righteous are never afflicted without remedy here, nor the wicked prosperous upon the whole in this life, (which is a wrong representation of God's Providence;) and Job to argue on the other hand, that the righteous are sometimes afflicted here, and that without remedy, but shall be rewarded in a life to come; and that the wicked prosper here, but shall be punished hereafter, which is the true representation of the divine proceedings; and here is a very apparent difference in the drift of the one's discourse, and of the others; for Job, in this view, speaks worthily of God; the rest unworthily. The best moral argument which mankind have ever had to believe a life to come, is this which Job insists upon, that good and evil are for the most part dealt out here promiscuously. On the contrary, the topic urged by his friends, and which they push a great deal too far, that God rewards and punishes in this world, tends in its consequence (like that other opinion which was held by the stoics in after-times, that virtue is its own reward) to sap the very foundation of that proof which we have from reason, of another life. No wonder, therefore, that the sentiments of the one are approved, and those of the other condemned. And, taking the matter in this light, I am almost led to conclude, that as God bestowed upon Solomon all other temporal advantages in reward for his asking wisdom, so he restored Job to his temporal prosperity and happiness, and gave him a long enjoyment and increase of it, as a recompence for his having so well defended the doctrine of a future state. Peters.