Job 35:3
For thou saidst, What advantage will it be unto thee? and, What profit shall I have, if I be cleansed from my sin?
Original Language Analysis
כִּֽי
H3588
כִּֽי
Strong's:
H3588
Word #:
1 of 8
(by implication) very widely used as a relative conjunction or adverb (as below); often largely modified by other particles annexed
מַה
H4100
מַה
Strong's:
H4100
Word #:
3 of 8
properly, interrogative what? (including how? why? when?); but also exclamation, what! (including how!), or indefinitely what (including whatever, and
יִּסְכָּן
What advantage
H5532
יִּסְכָּן
What advantage
Strong's:
H5532
Word #:
4 of 8
to be familiar with; by implication, to minister to, be serviceable to, to cherish, be customary
מָֽה
H4100
מָֽה
Strong's:
H4100
Word #:
6 of 8
properly, interrogative what? (including how? why? when?); but also exclamation, what! (including how!), or indefinitely what (including whatever, and
Historical Context
Covenant theology taught that righteousness brings blessing (Deuteronomy 28). Job's suffering thus raised legitimate questions about providence. However, later revelation clarifies that righteousness's ultimate value transcends earthly rewards—it's commanded because God is righteous and we're to reflect His image. Elihu's concern that righteousness must be pursued regardless of immediate benefit contains truth, even if his representation of Job's position is flawed.
Questions for Reflection
- What is the difference between questioning God's providence and denying the value of righteousness?
- How should Christians maintain obedience when earthly rewards don't follow?
- What does Job's experience teach about the relationship between covenant promises and individual providence?
Analysis & Commentary
Elihu quotes Job's question: "For thou saidst, What advantage will it be unto thee? and, What profit shall I have, if I be cleansed from my sin?" The noun sakan (סָכַן, "advantage") means benefit or profit. The verb ya'al (יָעַל, "profit") asks about usefulness. Elihu accuses Job of asking what good righteousness does. This is another mischaracterization—Job questioned why righteousness didn't protect from suffering, not whether righteousness matters. From a Reformed perspective, Elihu identifies a real danger: justifying righteousness by its earthly benefits rather than God's glory and command. Yet Job's actual question was more subtle: if covenant promises blessing, why does he suffer? This reflects wrestling with providence, not denying righteousness's value. The distinction matters: questioning God's ways isn't the same as rejecting His commands. Lament psalms similarly question God's dealings while maintaining obedience.