Eliphaz isn't just saying people are imperfect; he's using Job's own past words to highlight how utterly impossible it is for any human, born of a woman, to stand pure before a holy God. This isn't about Job's specific innocence or guilt, but a fundamental truth about our inherent fallenness that challenges any claim to self-righteousness.
What is man, that he can be pure? Or he who is born of a woman, that he can be righteous? Behold, God puts no trust in his holy ones, and the heavens are not pure in his sight; how much less one who is abominable and corrupt, a man who drinks injustice like water!
English Standard Version (ESV)
Eliphaz, continuing his argument with Job, echoes sentiments he shared earlier, essentially saying that no human being can possibly be pure or righteous before God. He uses Job's own previous statements about human frailty and sinfulness against him, suggesting that Job's insistence on his own innocence is fundamentally flawed given humanity's inherently corrupt nature. Eliphaz is trying to shut down Job's claims of undeserved suffering by asserting that all people, without exception, are sinful and cannot expect to stand blameless before their Creator.
Eliphaz throws back at Job the very words that hint at human weakness. What does it mean to be 'born of a woman' in the eyes of God?
Eliphaz uses the phrase 'enosh' (often translated as frail, weak, or miserable man) to describe humanity. This isn't just about physical weakness; it points to an inherent imperfection and corruption passed down through generations. From the moment of conception, derived from a mother, humanity carries this inherited infirmity, corruption, and guilt. It's a deep-seated condition, not just a series of bad choices.
It's one thing to try and be 'good' in our own eyes, but what about standing spotless before an all-holy God?
Eliphaz isn't just saying people aren't perfect; he's contrasting human nature with God's absolute purity. The question isn't whether we have flaws, but whether we can ever be clean or righteous in God's sight. This verse confronts the idea that human efforts or self-justification can bridge the infinite gap between sinful humanity and a holy Creator. Even the highest created beings, like angels, are not considered pure enough when compared to God's perfect standard.
Understand the original words
Ask a follow-up
zakah · Hebrew Adjective
In a moral and legal context, it refers to being free from guilt, sin, or corruption before God. It indicates a state of ritual or ethical cleanness and integrity that aligns with God's holiness.
tsadaq · Hebrew Adjective
The state of being in right standing with God, acting in accordance with His divine standard of holiness, justice, and truth. It implies a life lived in conformity with God's law and moral requirements.
qadosh · Hebrew Noun
Beings set apart for God's service or those who participate in His holiness, often referring to angels or celestial beings in the heavenly court. It denotes beings belonging to God’s realm of sanctity.
to'ebah · Hebrew Adjective
An object, action, or state that is morally detestable, loathsome, or causes extreme revulsion, especially in the sight of God. In a biblical context, it often refers to actions that violate God's law or character.
alach · Hebrew Adjective
Refers to something that has become spoiled, ruined, or morally depraved. It suggests a state of moral decay or spiritual putrefaction that has tainted one's nature.
avlah · Hebrew Noun
A deviation from the standard of God's righteousness; perversion of truth, fairness, or legal rectitude. It denotes behavior that is wrong, crooked, or contrary to the revealed will of God.
This passage introduces the same core idea that Eliphaz is pushing: human impurity in the face of divine perfection.
Psalm 51:5This psalm directly addresses the inherited sinfulness of humanity, echoing the 'born of a woman' theme and its implications for righteousness.
Romans 3:10Paul quotes extensively from the Old Testament to demonstrate the universal sinfulness of all people, reinforcing the verse's point about human impurity.
Isaiah 64:6This passage powerfully illustrates human righteousness as flawed and insufficient, likening it to dirty rags before a holy God, much like Job 15:14 suggests.
jfbJob 15:14: "What is man, that he should be clean? and he which is born of a woman, that he should be righteous?"
- Eliphaz repeats the revelation (Job 4:17) in substance, but using Job's own words (see on [507]Job 14:1, on "born of a woman") to strike him with his own weapons.
bensonJob 15:14: "What is man, that he should be clean? and he which is born of a woman, that he should be righteous?"
Job 15:14-15 . What is man? — Hebrew, אנושׁ , enosh, frail, weak, imperfect man; that he should be clean? — That is, that he should pretend to be so; or, that any should expect to find him so: and he that is born of a woman — A sinful woman, from whom he has derived infirmity, corruption, and guilt; that he should be righteous? — Just and holy in his own eyes, or in the eyes of other…
Eliphaz isn't just saying people are imperfect; he's using Job's own past words to highlight how utterly impossible it is for any human, born of a woman, to stand pure before a holy God. This isn't about Job's specific innocence or guilt, but a fundamental truth about our inherent fallenness that challenges any claim to self-righteousness.
Eliphaz, continuing his argument with Job, echoes sentiments he shared earlier, essentially saying that no human being can possibly be pure or righteous before God. He uses Job's own previous statements about human frailty and sinfulness against him, suggesting that Job's insistence on his own innocence is fundamentally flawed given humanity's inherently corrupt nature. Eliphaz is trying to shut down Job's claims of undeserved suffering by asserting that all people, without exception, are sinful and cannot expect to stand blameless before their Creator.
Eliphaz, continuing his argument with Job, echoes sentiments he shared earlier, essentially saying that no human being can possibly be pure or righteous before God. He uses Job's own previous statements about human frailty and sinfulness against him, suggesting that Job's insistence on his own innocence is fundamentally flawed given humanity's inherently corrupt nature. Eliphaz is trying to shut down Job's claims of undeserved suffering by asserting that all people, without exception, are sinful and cannot expect to stand blameless before their Creator.
"What is man, that he can be pure? Or he who is born of a woman, that he can be righteous? Behold, God puts no trust in his holy ones, and the heavens are not pure in his sight; how much less one who is abominable and corrup…" — Eliphaz isn't just saying people are imperfect; he's using Job's own past words to highlight how utterly impossible it is for any human, born of a woman, to stand pure before a holy God. This isn't a…
Get the original Greek and Hebrew, verse-by-verse context, and related passages inside the app.
Last reviewed October 2026
