Job 15 15

Job 15:15 kjv

Behold, he putteth no trust in his saints; yea, the heavens are not clean in his sight.

Job 15:15 nkjv

If God puts no trust in His saints, And the heavens are not pure in His sight,

Job 15:15 niv

If God places no trust in his holy ones, if even the heavens are not pure in his eyes,

Job 15:15 esv

Behold, God puts no trust in his holy ones, and the heavens are not pure in his sight;

Job 15:15 nlt

Look, God does not even trust the angels.
Even the heavens are not absolutely pure in his sight.

Job 15 verses

Job 15 15 Meaning

Job 15:15 asserts that even those held in the highest esteem – God's "holy ones" (often interpreted as angels or divine beings) and the literal "heavens" themselves – are not considered absolutely perfect or pure in God's transcendent sight. Eliphaz uses this statement to argue that if even such exalted entities fall short of divine perfection, then certainly no human, like Job, can be declared completely righteous before God, implying that Job must therefore be guilty of some sin. It underscores God's supreme holiness and the relative imperfection of all created existence.

Job 15 15 Context

Job 15:15 is part of Eliphaz the Temanite's second discourse, in which he intensifies his accusation against Job. His argument follows a common wisdom tradition, emphasizing God's transcendence, power, and absolute holiness. Eliphaz's reasoning is deductive: if God's holiness is so great that even the most exalted beings (His holy ones/angels) and perfect parts of creation (the heavens) are not pure or trustworthy in His sight, then how much less pure or righteous can a mere mortal like Job be? He presents this as irrefutable proof of Job's hidden sin, suggesting that Job's suffering is a direct consequence of his presumed iniquity, a common tenet of retribution theology among Job's friends.

Job 15 15 Word Analysis

• Behold (הֵ֣ן, hēn): This is an emphatic particle meaning "Lo!" or "Indeed." It introduces a weighty statement, calling the listener's immediate attention to a profound truth being presented. In this context, it sets a tone of authoritative declaration, inviting Job to consider this foundational principle that undergirds Eliphaz's argument.

• God (אֱל֣וֹהַּ, ʾeloha): This is a common singular term for "God" in the Old Testament, frequently used in poetic and wisdom literature. It denotes the supreme Being, highlighting the subject of Eliphaz's assertion – the one against whom even "holy ones" and "heavens" are measured.

• puts no trust (לֹא־יַאֲמִ֑ין, loʾ-yaʾamîn): This phrase comes from the Hebrew root ʾaman (אָמַן), which fundamentally means "to be firm, stable, trustworthy, reliable." In the Hiphil (causative) stem, it means "to cause to be firm, believe, trust." Here, with the negation (loʾ), it signifies that God does not find complete steadfastness, dependability, or ultimate perfection even in His holy ones. It is not an accusation of God lacking faith in them in the human sense, but rather that He does not deem them absolutely perfect or worthy of the same ultimate "trust" or reliance as His own being. It implies a finding of intrinsic imperfection relative to His absolute holiness.

• in His holy ones (בִּקְדֹשָׁ֗יו, biqədōšāw): Derived from qadosh (קָדוֹשׁ), meaning "holy" or "set apart." In the plural with the possessive suffix "His," it typically refers to divine or angelic beings who serve God and reside in His presence. These are creatures inherently set apart and devoted to God, yet even they, in their set-apartness, are not deemed absolutely perfect in God's eyes. This challenges the notion of inherent purity of created "holy" beings when compared to uncreated Divine holiness.

• and the heavens (וְשָׁמַ֗יִם, wəšāmayim): Shamayam (שָׁמַיִם) is the standard Hebrew term for "heavens" or "sky." In this context, it refers to the literal cosmic heavens, often seen in ancient cultures as a symbol of vastness, purity, and stability. Its inclusion extends the scope of divine scrutiny beyond sentient beings to the very fabric of creation itself, demonstrating the comprehensiveness of God's transcendent standard.

• are not pure (לֹא־זַכּ֥וּ, loʾ-zakkū): This comes from the root zakah (זָכָה), meaning "to be pure, clean, clear." With the negation (loʾ), it means "they are not pure/clear." For the physical heavens, this "impurity" does not signify moral sin, but rather an ontological imperfection, a lack of absolute clearness, transparency, or perfection when contrasted with the blinding, ultimate purity of God. It can also subtly refer to spiritual entities or forces within the heavens (like those mentioned in Eph 6:12, where even spiritual forces of wickedness can inhabit heavenly places), highlighting that not all "heavenly" things are necessarily without flaw or spiritual blemish from God's perfect view.

Words-group by words-group analysis:

• "Behold, God puts no trust in His holy ones": This powerful assertion emphasizes God's supreme authority and discerning judgment over even the highest echelon of created beings. It disarms any appeal to a standard of "holiness" apart from God's absolute standard, positing that angelic or spiritual perfection is still finite and subordinate to the Divine. It's a statement about divine sovereignty and the relative nature of created "perfection."

• "and the heavens are not pure in His sight": This phrase broadens the scope of God's perfect standard to encompass all creation, even that which appears vast, pristine, and distant. It underlines that nothing created, no matter how majestic or seemingly untainted, possesses absolute purity or perfection when viewed against the unparalleled and uncreated holiness of God Himself. It implies that creation itself, though good, has an inherent finitude and lack of the ultimate, divine "spotlessness" that defines God.

Job 15 15 Commentary

Job 15:15 is a declaration from Eliphaz meant to humble Job by emphasizing the vast chasm between God's absolute perfection and the relative imperfection of all created existence. Eliphaz argues that if even God's closest servants—the "holy ones" (angels), who possess immense purity and power—and the very "heavens," considered pristine and glorious, are found lacking or not perfectly "pure" in God's transcendent sight, then a mere human being like Job must certainly be stained with imperfection.

The "no trust" applied to the holy ones does not imply God literally distrusts their loyalty, but rather that He finds nothing within them (or within the heavens) that possesses an uncreated, self-sufficient, and unblemished perfection. They cannot be absolutely relied upon in the way God relies on Himself, as they are created and thus finite and imperfect by definition when compared to the infinite Creator. Their "impurity" or "not pure" status refers to a comparative flaw, an ontological or qualitative distinction between the perfect God and His perfect-for-their-purpose creation, which still falls short of God's inherent, unblemished purity.

Eliphaz's point about God's absolute transcendence and the inherent limitation of creation is fundamentally sound and aligns with broader biblical theology (e.g., God alone is truly holy). However, his application of this truth to Job is flawed. He uses this theological principle not as comfort or insight into divine majesty, but as a punitive tool, forcing Job into an impossible corner by equating creaturely imperfection with specific moral guilt in Job's context, failing to recognize God's grace or His unique purpose in Job's suffering.

Examples:

• The flawed crystal ball: Imagine a perfectly clear crystal ball. In the everyday world, it appears pure. But under a microscopic, divine gaze, even the tiniest inherent flaw, impurity, or speck that is part of its creation is revealed. It's not "bad," but not "absolutely pure" like the very light itself.
• The holiest person: The holiest person on earth might seem flawless in human eyes, yet when measured against the unblemished holiness of Christ or the Father, their human frailty and remaining sin become evident.