Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Job 14:4
Who can bring a clean [thing] out of an unclean? not one.
4. The question of astonishment in Job 14:3 supported by reference to the universal sinfulness of man. The verse reads,
Oh that a clean might come out of an unclean!
There is not one.
The phrase who will give (as margin) is a mere optative expression. Job throws his idea of the universal uncleanness of man, and that there is not one without sin, into the form of a wish that it were otherwise. If the race of men were not universally infected with sin, which each individual inherits by belonging to the race, God’s stringent treatment of the individuals would not be so hard to understand. For similar ideas of the universality of the sinfulness of mankind cf. Gen 6:5; Isa 6:5; Psa 51:5, also the words of Eliphaz ch. Job 4:17 seq. Job urges the admitted fact as a plea for forbearance on the side of God.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Who can bring a clean – thing out of an unclean? This is evidently a proverb or an adage; but its connection here is not very apparent. Probably, however, it is designed as a plea of mitigation for his conscious frailties and infirmities. He could not but admit that he had faults. But he asks, how could it be expected to be otherwise? He belonged to a race that was sinful and depraved. Connected with such a race, how could it be otherwise than that he should be prone to evil? Why then did God follow him with so much severity, and hold him with a grasp so close and so unrelenting? Why did he treat him as if he ought to be expected to be perfectly pure, or as if it were reasonable to suppose he would be otherwise than unholy? This passage is of great value as showing the early opinion of the world in regard to the native character of man. The sentiment was undoubtedly common – so common as to have passed into a proverb – that man was a sinner; and that it could not be expected that anyone of the race should be pure and holy.
The sentiment is as true as it is obvious – like will beget like all over the world. The nature of the lion, the tiger, the hyaena, the serpent is propagated, and so the same thing is true of man. It is a great law, that the offspring will resemble the parentage; and as the offspring of the lion is not a lamb but a young lion; of a wolf is not a kid but a young wolf, so the offspring of man is not an angel, but is a man with the same nature, the same moral character, the same proneness to evil with the parent. The Chaldee renders this: Who will give one pure from a man polluted in sin, except God, who is one, and who forgiveth him? But this is manifestly a departure from the sense of the passage. Jerome, however, has adopted nearly the same translation. As a historical record, this passage proves that the doctrine of original sin was early held in the world. Still it is true that the same great law prevails, that the off-spring of woman is a sinner – no matter where he may be born, or in what circumstances he may be placed. No art, no philosophy, no system of religion can prevent the operation of this great law under which we live, and by which we die; compare the notes at Rom 5:19.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 4. Who can bring a clean thing] This verse is thus rendered by the Chaldee: “Who will produce a clean thing from man, who is polluted with sins, except God, who is one?” By Coverdale thus: Who can make it cleane, that commeth of an uncleane thinge? No body.
The text refers to man’s original and corrupt nature. Every man that is born into the world comes into it in a corrupt or sinful state. This is called original sin; and is derived from fallen Adam, who is the stock, to the utmost ramifications of the human family. Not one human spirit is born into the world without this corruption of nature. All are impure and unholy; and from this principle of depravity all transgression is produced; and from this corruption of nature God alone can save.
The Septuagint, in the Codex Alexandrinus, reads the verse thus: , ; “Who is pure from corruption? Not one, although he had lived but one day upon the earth.”
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
I do not say, I am clean, as Zophar pretendeth, Job 11:4; but confess that I am a very unclean creature, and therefore liable to thy justice, if thou wilt deal rigorously with me; but remember that this is not my peculiar case, but the common lot of every man, who, coming from sinful parents, and being infected with original corruption, must unavoidably be unclean. Why then dost thou inflict such peculiar and extraordinary judgments upon me for that which is common to all men? And although my original corruption do not excuse my actual sins, yet I hope it may procure some mitigation to my punishments, and move thy Divine pity, which oft showeth itself upon such occasions. See Gen 8:21.
Not one, i.e. no man can cleanse himself or any other from all sin. See 1Ki 8:46; Psa 14:3; Ecc 7:21. This is the prerogative of thy grace, which therefore I humbly implore of thee.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
4. A plea in mitigation. Thedoctrine of original sin was held from the first. “Man isunclean from his birth, how then can God expect perfect cleannessfrom such a one and deal so severely with me?”
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
Who can bring a clean [thing] out of an clean?…. Either produce a clean person from an unclean one: it is not to be expected that one, perfectly free from sin, should be generated by, or brought out of, one that is defiled with it; which is the case of all men; the first man, though made upright, sinned, and by sinning defiled himself, and all human nature in him: and so those that immediately descended from him were polluted likewise, and so on in all generations, every man being conceived and shaped in iniquity; so that it is not possible that man that is born of a woman, sinful and unclean, should be clean himself, or be free from sin; by which it is manifest, that the sinfulness of human nature is unavoidable; it is natural and necessary, and cannot be otherwise, such being the case and circumstances of immediate parents, from whom men descend; and that this is the case of all men that come into the world by ordinary and natural generation; there is none righteous or pure from sin: no,
not one; and things being so, Job thought it hard that he should be singled out, and so severely chastised, when the sinfulness of nature was from and by his birth, and was natural and unavoidable, and when there was not a single person on earth free from it. There never was but one instance of one clean being brought out of an unclean person, and that was our Lord Jesus Christ of the Virgin Mary; which was not in the ordinary way of generation, but by a supernatural and extraordinary production of his human nature, through the power of the Holy Ghost, whereby it escaped the original contagion and pollution of mankind: or else, in consequence of this, the sense is, who can bring forth or produce a good work from an impure person? or how can it be expected that a man that is defiled with sin should do a good work perfectly pure? for there is not even a just and good man that doth good and sinneth not; and much less is it to be looked for, that men in a mere state of nature, that are as they come into the world, sinful and impure, should ever be able to perform good works; it may as well be thought that grapes are to be gathered of thorns, or figs of thistles; men must be born again, created in Christ Jesus, have faith in him, and the Spirit of God in them, before they can do that which is truly good from right principles, and with right views; and man at most and best must be an imperfect creature, and deficient in his duty, and cannot bear to be strictly examined, and rigorously prosecuted: or the meaning is, “who can make” g an unclean man a clean one? “no, not one”; a man cannot make himself clean by anything he can do, by his repentance and humiliation, by his good works, duties, and services; none can do this but God; and to this sense some render the words, “who can–is there one” h? there is, that is, God, he can do it, and he only: though men are exhorted to cleanse themselves, this does not suppose a power in them to do it; this is only designed to convince them of the necessity of being cleansed, and to awaken a concern for it; and such as are made sensible thereof will apply to God to purge them, and make them clean, and create a clean heart within them: and this God has promised to do, and does do; he sprinkles the clean water of his grace, and purifies the heart by faith in the blood of Jesus, which cleanses from all sin, and is the fountain opened to wash in for sin and uncleanness; the Targum is,
“who can give a clean thing out of a man that is defiled with sins, except God who is one, and can forgive him?”
none can pardon sin but God, or justify a sinner besides him; and he can do both in a way of justice, upon the foot of the blood and righteousness of Christ.
g “quis potest facere?” V. L. “dabit”, i.e. “faciet”, Vatablus; “sistet aut efficiet”, Michaelis; “quis efficiet?” Cocceius. h “nonne tu qui solus est?” V. L. “annon unus?” sc. Mediator, Cocceius.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
4 Would that a pure one could come from an impure!
Not a single one – –
5 His days then are determined,
The number of his months is known to Thee,
Thou hast appointed bounds for him that he may not pass over:
6 Look away from him then, and let him rest,
Until he shall accomplish as a hireling his day.
Would that perfect sinlessness were possible to man; but since (to use a New Testament expression) that which is born of the flesh is flesh, there is not a single one pure. The optative seems to be used here with an acc. of the object, according to its literal meaning, quis det s. afferat , as Job 31:31; Deu 28:67; Psa 14:7. Ewald remarks (and refers to 358, b, of his Grammar) that , Job 14:4, must be the same as ; but although in 1Sa 20:14; 2Sa 13:26; 2Ki 5:17, might be equivalent to the optative , which is questionable, still here, as an echo of , Psa 14:3, is Job’s own answer to his wish, that cannot be fulfilled: not one, i.e., is in existence. Like the friends, he acknowledges an hereditary proneness to sin; but this proneness to sin affords him no satisfactory explanation of so unmerciful a visitation of punishment as his seems to him to be. It appears to him that man must the rather be an object of divine forbearance and compassion, since absolute purity is impossible to him. If, as is really the case, man’s days are , cut off, i.e., , determined (distinct from with an unchangeable Kametz: sharp, i.e., quick, eager, diligent), – if the number of his months is with God, i.e., known by God, because fixed beforehand by Him, – if He has set fixed bounds ( Keri ) for him, and he cannot go beyond them, may God then look away from him, i.e., turn from him His strict watch ( , as Job 7:19; , Job 10:20), that he may have rest ( , cesset), so that he may at least as a hireling enjoy his day. Thus is interpreted by all modern expositors, and most of them consider the object or reason of his rejoicing to be the rest of evening when his work is done, and thereby miss the meaning.
Hahn appropriately says, “He desires that God would grant man the comparative rest of the hireling, who must toil in sorrow and eat his bread in the sweat of his brow, but still is free from any special suffering, by not laying extraordinary affliction on him in addition to the common infirmities beneath which he sighs. Since the context treats of freedom from special suffering in life, not of the hope of being set free from it, comp. Job 13:25-27; Job 14:3, the explanation of Umbreit, Ew., Hirz., and others, is to be entirely rejected, viz., that God would at least permit man the rest of a hireling, who, though he be vexed with heavy toil, cheerfully reconciles himself to it in prospect of the reward he hopes to obtain at evening time. Job does not claim for man the toil which the hireling gladly undergoes in expectation of complete rest, but the toil of the hireling, which seems to him to be rest in comparison with the possibility of having still greater toil to undergo.” Such is the true connection.
(Note: In honour of our departed friend, whose Commentary on Job abounds in observations manifesting a delicate appreciation of the writer’s purpose and thought, we have quoted his own words.)
Man’s life – this life which is as a hand-breadth (Psa 39:6), and in Job 7:1. is compared to a hireling’s day, which is sorrowful enough – is not to be overburdened with still more and extraordinary suffering.
It must be asked, however, whether seq. acc. here signifies ( , lxx), or not rather persolvere ; for it is undeniable that it has this meaning in Lev 26:34 (vid., however Keil [ Pent., en loc.]) and elsewhere (prop. to satisfy, remove, discharge what is due). The Hiphil is used in this sense in post-biblical Hebrew, and most Jewish expositors explain by . If it signifies to enjoy, ought to be interpreted: that (he at least may, like as a hireling, enjoy his day). But this signification of ( ut in the final sense) is strange, and the signification dum (Job 1:18; Job 8:21) or adeo ut (Isa 47:7) is not, however, suitable, if is to be explained in the sense of persolvere , and therefore translate donec persolvat ( persolverit ). We have translated “until he accomplish,” and wish “accomplish” to be understood in the sense of “making complete,” as Col 1:24, Luther (“ vollzhlig machen ”) = .
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament
(4) Who can bring a clean thing . . .How can man be clean that is born of woman, who is unclean? This question is reiterated by Bildad (Job. 25:4). We ought perhaps, however, rather to render Oh, that the clean could come forth from the unclean! but none can.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
4. Who can bring Literally, who will give. In almost every case in the Old Testament this form of question is idiomatic, and is used (as in Job 14:13) to express a desire. Some would accordingly read, “Could but a clean thing come out of an unclean!” Schlottmann. The idea would still be, that such a result, however much to be desired, is an impossibility. Not one pure being comes forth. Compare the not one of Psa 14:3. The law of evil is such that a pure nature cannot spring from an impure one. “That which is born of the flesh is flesh.” Hence the intervention of the Holy Ghost was indispensable that one pure being might be born of a woman. Luk 1:35.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Job 14:4. Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean? Who can be clean, that is born of the unclean? Not one. Houbigant, who observes, that Job, without doubt, here alludes to our natural corruption. The Vulgate renders it, Who can bring a clean thing from unclean seed?
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
“Handfuls of Purpose”
For All Gleaners
“Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean? not one.” Job 14:4
The answer is correct, and incorrect. Everything depends upon the limits within which it is treated. As regards man, it is impossible for him to change causes or to upset the laws of the universe. With men this is impossible, but with God all things are possible. This is the very thing that God is constantly doing: he is bringing strength out of weakness, purity out of impurity, life out of death; this is the eternal miracle of the divine administration. It is of infinite importance, however, that man should realise his own helplessness in this matter, otherwise he will never look in the right direction for guidance and succour. It is something to know that men have discovered beyond all question that to bring a clean thing out of an unclean is impossible. The text is more than an inquiry; it is also a verdict. Great importance attaches to these incidental intimations of the results of human inquiry and experience. If any man had brought a clean thing out of an unclean it would be known, and the example would have been held up as pointing to a law, at least to an occasional possibility, and therefore perhaps to a reality which could be established upon the broadest bases. But the very inquiry has in it a tone of helplessness. When, therefore, man is done, God must take up the case, and, let us repeat again and again, it is his glory to do what man cannot do, and to show us that that which is sown in corruption is raised in incorruption, and that which we sow cannot live until it has died. The Bible is continually upsetting the so-called laws of nature and laws of sequence. It would seem to be the delight of the spirit of the Bible to make the last first, and the first last, and to confuse all the thinking of the craftiest minds. The Church of Christ is a clean thing brought out of an unclean. Every renewed heart is a clean thing brought out of an unclean. Every generous and noble deed is likewise a clean thing brought out of an unclean. But the first motive was never in the unclean: as water cannot rise above its own level, neither can depravity: anything, therefore, that is now pure, wise, noble, true, and useful must be credited to the almighty grace of God. That innumerable hard questions gather around this view of life is evident enough; still we have to deal with the practical end and issue of things, and there we find that even the man himself who does the good deeds is unwilling to ascribe them to the action of his own depraved motive and thought, but willingly accepts the solution that this is the Lord’s doing and marvellous in his eyes. Here the great gospel of salvation may be preached in all its unction and fulness and power. God makes the tree good, and thus makes the fruit good. He purifies the fountain, and thus he cleanses the stream. God does not begin to work from the outside, cleansing the hands; but from the internal life, purifying the heart; then all the rest becomes morally sequential, and illustrative of the miracle that has been wrought within.
Fuente: The People’s Bible by Joseph Parker
Job 14:4 Who can bring a clean [thing] out of an unclean? not one.
Ver. 4. Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean? not one ] q. d. I confess I am unclean; but what can I do withal? or how can I do otherwise, since I do but my kind? But was this a sufficient plea? David was of another mind when he alleged this as a great aggravation of his bloodguiltiness, “Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me,” Psa 51:5 : q.d. I have not only fallen into these foul sins, but I have done it out of the venomousness and vitiosity of my nature, commonly called original, and by the apostle inhabiting sin, Rom 7:17 , as by the schools peccatum peccans, the sinning sin, as that which is the source and seminary of all actual disobedience. And because this uncleanness is natural to us, therefore it maketh us as loathsome to God as a toad is to us, because poison is in the nature of it. Papists say (but not truly) that original sin is the smallest of all sins, not deserving any more of God’s wrath than only a want of his blessed presence; and that too without any pain or sorrow of mind from the apprehension of so great a loss. They hold also those motions of the heart not consented to be no sins, but necessary conditions, arising from our constitution, and such as Adam had in his innocence. Contrariwise, Job here grants a birthblot upon all, and lays his hand upon it as the cause of the length of men’s troubles and shortness of their lives; only he forgetteth himself (saith Mercer here) when he pleadeth that he should rather be pitied than thus sharply punished, because he was naturally inclined to sin, and cannot avoid it. For as Aristotle saith of drunkards, that they deserve double punishments, (Ethic. lib. 3, cap. 5); first, for their drunkenness, and then for the sin committed in and by their drunkenness: so do all men deserve double damnation; first, for the corruption of nature (signified by those legal pollutions, by bodily issues), and then for the cursed effects of it, Gen 6:5 Rom 7:8 . But it may be Job here had an eye to that promise made to Noah after the flood, Gen 8:21 , where the Lord moveth himself to mercy by consideration of man’s native corruption, even from his childhood, for he knoweth our frame, &c., Psa 103:14 , that is (as the Chaldee paraphrast explaineth it), he knoweth our evil figment or thought which impelleth to sin; he knoweth it, and weigheth it. See the like Isa 48:8-9 . We may beseech the Lord to spare us when we act in sin, because our natures are sinful; but let not any go about either to palliate or extenuate their acts of sin by the sinfulness of their natures; as those do, who, being told of their evil pranks and practices, plead for them, saying, We are flesh and blood, &c.
Not one
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Who . . . ? Figure of speech Erotesis.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
Who can bring: Heb. Who will give, Job 15:14, Job 25:4-6, Gen 5:3, Psa 51:5, Psa 90:5, Joh 3:6, Rom 5:12, Rom 8:8, Rom 8:9, Eph 2:3
a clean: Luk 1:35
Reciprocal: Gen 8:21 – the imagination Lev 12:2 – If a woman Lev 12:7 – make Num 32:14 – an increase 1Ki 8:46 – there is no man Job 4:17 – shall a man Job 9:2 – how Job 11:4 – I am clean Psa 14:3 – there Psa 53:1 – Corrupt Pro 20:9 – General Pro 22:15 – Foolishness Isa 64:6 – are all Mat 1:18 – of the Mat 11:11 – born Mar 2:7 – who Mar 7:21 – out Luk 18:19 – General Joh 9:34 – wast Act 4:27 – thy Rom 3:10 – none Rom 7:18 – that in me 1Co 15:48 – such are they also that are earthy 1Jo 1:8 – say
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Job 14:4. Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean? I confess I am an unclean creature, and therefore liable to be abhorred by thy holiness, and condemned by thy justice, if thou wilt deal rigorously with me. But, remember, this is not my peculiar case, but the common lot of every man, who descended from sinful parents, and, being infected with original corruption, must unavoidably be unclean. Why, then, dost thou inflict such peculiar and extraordinary judgments upon me for that which is common to all men? And although my natural corruption do not excuse my actual sins, yet I hope it may procure some mitigation of my punishment, and move thy divine pity to deal less severely with me. Observe, reader, clean children can no more come from unclean parents, nor clean performances from an unclean principle, than pure streams can proceed from an impure spring, or grapes from thorns. Our habitual corruption is derived, with our nature, from our progenitors, and is therefore bred in the bone: and our blood is not only attainted by a legal conviction, but tainted with an hereditary disease. And hence flow all actual transgressions, which are the natural product of habitual corruption. This holy Job here laments, as all that are sanctified do, tracing the streams up to the fountain. The Chaldee paraphrase reads this verse, Who can make a man clean that is polluted with sin? Cannot one? that is, God: or, who but God, who is one, and will spare him? God can change the skin of the Ethiopian, and to him we ought to direct our prayer, saying, It is the prerogative of thy grace to bring a clean thing out of an unclean, and that grace I humbly implore.