Job 13 8

Job 13:8 kjv

Will ye accept his person? will ye contend for God?

Job 13:8 nkjv

Will you show partiality for Him? Will you contend for God?

Job 13:8 niv

Will you show him partiality? Will you argue the case for God?

Job 13:8 esv

Will you show partiality toward him? Will you plead the case for God?

Job 13:8 nlt

Will you slant your testimony in his favor?
Will you argue God's case for him?

Job 13 verses

Job 13 8 Meaning

Job 13:8 contains a pointed rhetorical question posed by Job to his three friends, Eliphaz, Bildad, and Zophar. He accuses them of defending God not with truth and righteousness, but with falsehood and bias. Job implies that their arguments, though ostensibly in God's defense, are built upon a deceptive and partial view, ultimately doing a disservice to the very God they claim to champion, and unjustly condemning an innocent man.

Job 13 8 Context

Job 13:8 is found within Job's third speech in response to his friends' accusations. His friends have repeatedly asserted that Job's suffering must be due to his sin, maintaining that God is always just and punishes only the wicked. In essence, they believe they are defending God's character and divine retribution theology. However, their defense comes at the cost of Job's integrity and leads them to invent reasons for his suffering. Job, knowing his own innocence, sees their arguments as fundamentally flawed and dishonoring to God, as they twist truth to fit their limited theological framework. This specific verse captures Job's frustration and challenges the ethical foundation of their 'defense.' He perceives their theological rhetoric as judicial malpractice, a form of intellectual dishonesty, where their zeal for God has blinded them to the reality of Job's situation and led them to bear false witness. The entire book of Job challenges the simplistic retribution theology that was common in ancient Near Eastern thought, affirming God's sovereignty even in seemingly unexplainable suffering and vindicating the blameless.

Job 13 8 Word analysis

• Will you: This is a direct rhetorical question (Hebrew: הֲלְאִ֖ל — haləʾēl), strongly implying "Surely you won't... will you?" or "You intend to...". It's a challenge, not an inquiry.

• contend: (Hebrew: תְרִיב֑וּן — t’rîvūn from the root רִיב, riv). This word signifies to strive, dispute, quarrel, or plead a cause, particularly in a legal or judicial sense. Job portrays his friends as prosecuting his case, and God's case, as lawyers.

• for God: (Hebrew: לָאֵל — lāʾēl, literally "to God" or "for God"). This indicates the object of their zealous argumentation. They claim to speak on God's behalf, to vindicate His justice.

• deceitfully: (Hebrew: עָֽוֶל — ʿāwel). This word means injustice, unrighteousness, wickedness, or iniquity. Here, it specifically denotes a crooked, false, or perverse way of speaking or acting in judgment. It points to dishonest or misleading arguments.

• Or will you: Another rhetorical interjection, connecting the two parts of Job's accusation.

• speak for him: (Hebrew: תְדַבְּר֣וּן ל֑וֹ — t’ḏabb’rûn lōw). t’ḏabb’rûn from דָּבַר, davar, to speak, to declare. lōw means "to Him" or "for Him." It reinforces the idea that they present themselves as God's spokesmen or advocates.

• with partiality: (Hebrew: פְנֵ֥י יַרְאוּנ֖וּ פָנִ֣ים לִנְשֹׂ֑א — lənešōʾ pānîm. The common phrase is נָשָׂא פָּנִים - nasa panim - "to lift up the face," meaning to show favor, to be partial to someone, to act with bias). It refers to the judicial act of favoring one party, usually because of their status, rather than impartially upholding justice. Job implies his friends are showing God undue favor in their argument, sacrificing truth and justice for an uncritical endorsement of their own theological presuppositions about Him, regardless of the actual facts of Job's life.

• contend for God deceitfully: This phrase exposes the core problem of Job's friends. They engage in a theological argument ostensibly to defend God's character, but they do so using dishonest, false, or unjust arguments. This is an indictment of zealous but unethical advocacy for God, where the perceived "good" end (defending God) is used to justify unrighteous means (lying about Job, distorting truth).

• speak for him with partiality: This amplifies the first accusation. It suggests that their defense of God is not driven by objective truth or unbiased assessment of Job's situation, but by a skewed favoritism toward their predetermined view of God and His justice. They "accept God's person" over truth and Job's experience, demonstrating an unrighteous bias that perverts true justice, which requires impartiality. It implies their judgment of Job is skewed because they are so bent on upholding their conventional view of God's justice, even if it means wrongly condemning an innocent person.

Job 13 8 Bonus section

The underlying ethical dilemma presented in Job 13:8—whether the end justifies the means in matters of faith—is a timeless challenge. It highlights the potential for religious fervor to devolve into self-righteousness, where defending a specific theological interpretation becomes more important than truth, compassion, or integrity. This verse implicitly teaches that God requires truth and justice from His advocates, even when speaking on His behalf. It reminds believers that true worship and testimony involve walking in integrity, demonstrating that righteous ends are achieved through righteous means, and that God Himself does not require or accept deceptive "help" in His defense.

Job 13 8 Commentary

Job 13:8 serves as a profound indictment against human attempts to defend God by unjust means. Job accuses his friends of advocating for God deceitfully and with partiality, revealing their theological arguments to be ethically flawed. They demonstrate a human tendency to prioritize rigid doctrines and conventional wisdom over compassionate, truthful engagement with reality. While intending to honor God, their methods—based on flawed logic and unsubstantiated accusations against Job—ultimately distort His character, presenting Him as a rigid dispenser of mechanistic justice who demands false loyalty. Job challenges them to consider whether a God of truth and justice would truly desire a defense founded on lies or partiality. The verse highlights that true defense of God is found in upholding truth and justice in all circumstances, not in abandoning integrity to maintain a particular theological position. This ethical challenge to Job's friends foreshadows God's eventual rebuke of them in Job 42 for having "not spoken of me what is right, as my servant Job has."