Job 5:2 · Bible study
Job 5:2 Commentary: Wrath That Kills, God's Anger or Human?
Hebrew · 10 what the commentators say
Meaning in one sentence
Does 'wrath' in Job 5:2 refer to God's judgment or to self-destructive human anger? Two main readings debated across Christian tradition.
Research Summary
- Meaning: A maxim stating that wrath and jealousy bring destruction to the morally foolish and gullible. Whether that wrath is divine or human is the central interpretive question.
- Key words: ka‘as (vexation, wrath), qin’ah (jealousy, envy, zeal), ’evil (fool, morally corrupt), poteh (simple, easily seduced).
- Main debate: Divine judgment vs. self-destructive human passion. Barnes and Gill represent the former; Cambridge, Jamieson-Fausset-Brown, Wesley, and Keil & Delitzsch the latter.
- Theological theme: The consequences of sin, whether inflicted by God or generated internally, are real and deadly. The book of Job complicates any direct link between suffering and specific sin.
- Best use: As a warning against harboring anger and envy, and as a pastoral caution against using proverbs to condemn the suffering.
Translation Comparison
BSB Berean Standard Bible 2020
For resentment kills a fool, and envy slays the simple.
WEB World English Bible 2000
For resentment kills the foolish man, and jealousy kills the simple.
KJV King James Version 1769
For wrath killeth the foolish man, and envy slayeth the silly one.
ASV American Standard Version 1901
For vexation killeth the foolish man, And jealousy slayeth the silly one.
YLT Young's Literal Translation 1898
For provocation slayeth the perverse, And envy putteth to death the simple,
Darby Darby Bible 1890
For vexation killeth the foolish man, and envy slayeth the simple.
Douay-Rheims Douay-Rheims Bible 1899
Anger indeed killeth the foolish, and envy slayeth the little one.
Translations in other languages (10 available)
Es cierto que al necio la ira lo mata, y al codicioso consume la envidia.
Pois a ira acaba com o louco, e o zelo mata o tolo.
L’insensé périt dans sa colère,
Einen Toren aber erwürgt wohl der Unmut, und den Unverständigen tötet der Eifer.
Want den dwaze brengt de toornigheid om, en de ijver doodt den slechte.
No, il cruccio non uccide che l’insensato e l’irritazione non fa morir che lo stolto.
Zaiste głupiego zabija gniew, a prostaka umarza zawiść.
Так, глупца убивает гневливость, и несмысленного губит раздражительность.
忿怒 害死 愚妄人；嫉妒 殺死 癡迷人。
For wrath is the cause of death to the foolish, and he who has no wisdom comes to his end through passion.
Verse in Context
Original Language (Biblical Hebrew)
Old Testament · Biblical Hebrew · Job 5:2
Source: STEPBible TAGNT/TEHB (CC-BY 4.0). Click or tap a morphology code to see the full parsing.
Scholars' Consensus
Commentators agree that Job 5:2 states a general truth: the foolish and the simple are destroyed by some form of wrath and jealousy. Barnes, Gill, and the Targum interpret the wrath as God’s own judgment against the wicked. They note that the Hebrew word ka‘as can refer to divine anger (e.g. Deuteronomy 29:20, Psalm 79:5). The Cambridge Bible, Jamieson-Fausset-Brown, Wesley, and Keil & Delitzsch, however, read the verse as describing the self-destructive nature of a person’s own anger and envy. They point to Proverbs 14:30 (“envy makes the bones rot”) and Job 6:2, where Job himself uses the same word ka‘as for his own impatience. The structural parallelism, “wrath kills the foolish, envy slays the simple”, suggests both lines refer to the same kind of destruction, but the agent of that destruction remains sharply contested across the tradition.
How settled is the interpretation?
Interpretive difficulty: High
Main views:
- Divine judgment view: Targum, Barnes, Gill, and some readings of the Psalms (e.g., Psalm 79:5) support interpreting 'wrath' as God's anger against the wicked.
- Self-destructive passion view: Cambridge Bible, Jamieson-Fausset-Brown, Wesley, Keil & Delitzsch, and cross-references like Proverbs 14:30 and James 1:20 support reading it as the person's own anger and envy.
What is clear: The verse states that the foolish and simple are killed by some form of wrath and jealousy, whether divine or human, and that this destruction is presented as a real consequence.
What Scholars Agree and Debate
| Topic | Agreed | Debated |
|---|---|---|
| The agent of wrath in Job 5:2 | Both readings agree that the verse describes the destruction of foolish and simple people. | Some (Barnes, Gill, Targum) understand 'wrath' as God's judgment; others (Cambridge, Jamieson-Fausset-Brown, Wesley) identify it as the person's own anger and envy. |
| The meaning of 'fool' | The term carries a moral sense: one who rejects wisdom and God's ways. | Whether 'fool' here refers specifically to impenitent sinners (divine judgment view) or to anyone who gives in to angry passions (self-destruction view). |
| The use of the verse in Eliphaz's argument | Eliphaz uses the verse to support his claim that suffering results from sin. | Whether he means God actively strikes down the wicked (divine judgment) or that the wicked bring ruin on themselves (self-destruction). |
| Implications for Job's situation | Eliphaz intends this as a direct indictment of Job's complaints. | Does the book's larger narrative vindicate Eliphaz's principle conditionally (Job repents) or reject it entirely (Job's suffering was not punitive)? |
Historical & Cultural Context
Job 5:2 comes from Eliphaz the Temanite’s first speech, a response to Job’s opening lament in chapter 3. Eliphaz believes that suffering is always a direct consequence of personal sin, and he builds his case with a series of proverbial observations. Verse 2 functions as a maxim: a general principle about how fools and simple ones meet their end.
In ancient Near Eastern wisdom literature, the “fool” (’evil) is not merely unintelligent but morally corrupt, someone who despises correction and lives without the fear of God (Proverbs 1:7). The “simple” (poteh) is gullible, easily led astray, and lacking discernment. Both terms carry strong ethical weight.
The speech that follows (vv. 3-5) describes the fool’s sudden ruin: his children crushed in the gate (the city’s legal center), his harvest stolen, his substance swallowed by robbers. This is the fate Eliphaz expects for anyone who resists God. By applying the principle to Job, Eliphaz implies that Job’s angry laments and envy at others’ prosperity prove him to be a fool under divine judgment. The verse thus becomes a weapon in the friends’ accusation, though the book of Job as a whole challenges that simplistic equation.
Poole’s annotations note that Eliphaz is appealing to observed experience: “I have seen the foolish taking root, but suddenly I cursed his habitation.” The cultural assumption is that prosperity does not last for the wicked, and that visible calamity signals hidden sin.
Textual Notes
The consulted sources note no significant textual variants for Job 5:2. The Hebrew consonantal text is stable across manuscripts, and the verse is not quoted in any early Greek or Latin source with a variant reading.
Reception History
Job 5:2 has been read in two distinct streams through church history. Early church Fathers often quoted it as a moral warning: anger and envy destroy the soul, so believers must cultivate patience and contentment. Medieval commentators like Gregory the Great saw in it a caution against murmuring under divine discipline. After the Reformation, Protestant exegetes such as Calvin and later Matthew Henry emphasized the self-destructive nature of resentment, urging sinners to repent before consuming wrath overtakes them. In Catholic tradition, the verse has appeared in teachings on the capital vices, particularly ira (anger) and invidia (envy). Modern pastoral literature frequently cites the verse to explore the psychological and spiritual damage of harbored bitterness.
Preaching This Verse
Three-point outline
- The killing power of wrath and envy. Both divine judgment and human resentment can bring destruction. The text forces us to ask: is my anger poisoning me?
- The moral weight of “fool” and “simple.” Scripture uses these terms for those who reject God’s ways. Are we living wisely or foolishly?
- The danger of misapplying truth. Eliphaz had the right maxim but used it to condemn an innocent man. We must use God’s Word with humility, not as a weapon.
Five-point outline
- Verse as a proverb: universal observation about consequences.
- Two readings, one warning: whether divine or human, wrath kills.
- Eliphaz’s error: he assumes Job’s suffering proves his guilt.
- Job’s response (6:2): he turns the word ka‘as back on himself, “my impatience.”
- The gospel correction: suffering is not always punishment; God redeems even through unjust accusations.
Illustration hooks
- A worker watches a colleague get promoted unfairly. The simmering resentment begins to affect his health, sleep, and relationships. That internal fire is what the verse warns about.
- Road rage: a moment of anger leads to a collision. Wrath literally kills in that moment.
- A church member silently envies another’s family, finances, or spiritual gifts. The envy eats away at her joy and distorts her view of God.
Questions your congregation is asking
- If this verse is about God’s anger, how do I know if I am under that judgment?
- If it is about my own anger, what do I do when I cannot stop being angry?
- How do I speak truth to a suffering friend without sounding like Eliphaz?
Leading a Discussion
Eliphaz’s maxim sounds like a proverb, but its meaning is disputed. Does he mean that God punishes the foolish with wrath, or that the fool’s own anger destroys him? Both readings have support. As a group, read Job 5:2 in several translations, then discuss the questions below. Remember that the whole book of Job cautions us against assuming we know why someone is suffering.
Discussion questions
- What does this verse say about the fate of the foolish and the simple?
- What clues in the immediate context (vv. 1-5) help us decide who “kills”, God or the person’s own passion?
- Compare verse 2 with Proverbs 14:30 and James 1:20. What do these cross-references suggest about the effects of anger and envy?
- Why do you think the Targum (ancient Aramaic paraphrase) interprets the wrath as God’s? What might have motivated that reading?
- If we adopt the “self-destructive” reading, how does that change the way we see Eliphaz’s accusation against Job?
- How might a person today recognize destructive anger or envy in their own heart? What would repentance look like?
- The book of Job ultimately vindicates Job, not Eliphaz. What does that teach us about using biblical proverbs to judge others?
Word Study
The key original-language words in this verse. Select any word for its full lexicon entry — meaning, every occurrence in Scripture, and related words.
Cross-References
Source: Treasury of Scripture Knowledge (TSK, public domain)
| Genesis 30:1 | When Rachel saw that she bore Jacob no children, Rachel envied her sister. She said to Jacob, “Give me children, or else I will die.” |
| I Samuel 18:8 | Saul was very angry, and this saying displeased him. He said, “They have credited David with ten thousands, and they have only credited me with thousands. What can he have more but the kingdom?” |
| I Samuel 18:9 | Saul watched David from that day and forward. |
| Job 18:4 | You who tear yourself in your anger, will the earth be forsaken for you? Or will the rock be removed out of its place? |
| Psalms 14:1 | For the Chief Musician. By David. The fool has said in his heart, “There is no God.” They are corrupt. They have done abominable deeds. There is no one who does good. |
| Psalms 75:4 | I said to the arrogant, “Don’t boast!” I said to the wicked, “Don’t lift up the horn. |
| Psalms 92:6 | A senseless man doesn’t know, neither does a fool understand this: |
| Psalms 107:17 | Fools are afflicted because of their disobedience, and because of their iniquities. |
Interlinear and lexical data from STEPBible (CC BY 4.0). Cross-reference data from OpenBible.info (CC BY 4.0). Commentaries are public domain.
For personal reflection
Read the devotional page — prayer, application, and "for families"
What the Commentators Say
10 public-domain commentaries, condensed into plain language.
Adam Clarke's Commentary Methodist/Wesleyan 1826
Clarke notes that Solomon uses words like foolish and simple to describe sinners. He believes God’s wrath appears only against the wicked and would not be directed at those who are not.
Barnes' Notes on the Bible Protestant 1832
Barnes reads Eliphaz's description of the foolish man as a pointed, indirect attack on Job. He focuses on the Hebrew word translated "silly one," arguing it means simple-minded or easily misled, and that Eliphaz deliberately applies this label to Job himself, accusing him of weak thinking for holding his misguided views.
Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges Anglican 1880
Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges sees the foolish person’s impatience as a direct cause of his own greater suffering. This kind of rebellious anger leads him to more severe punishment until he finally dies.
Geneva Bible Notes Reformed 1599
Doubtlesse anger killeth the foolish, and enuie slayeth the idiote.
Gill's Exposition of the Bible Baptist 1748
Gill explains that Eliphaz accuses Job of being a foolish and silly man, consumed by wrath and envy. These passions, whether human anger or God's own jealous zeal, lead to ruin and death. For Gill, Eliphaz is painting Job as hot-tempered and envious toward others, deserving of his suffering.
Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Commentary Protestant 1871
Jamieson Fausset Brown notes that wrath and envy refer to angry complaints like those Eliphaz made against Job. These terms describe human anger not God’s punishment.
Keil & Delitzsch OT Commentary Protestant 1876
Keil and Delitzsch highlight that Eliphaz's warning reveals the book's belief that both good and evil spirits are involved in human affairs. Eliphaz argues that complaining against God brings destruction, and he supports this by describing a fool he saw prospering until divine judgment suddenly struck his household and property.
Lange's Commentary Reformed 1857
Lange argues that Eliphaz, though noble and wise, represents a one-sided doctrine of external retribution and works-righteousness. His discourse, though theologically true in parts, is cold and heartless, lacking genuine sympathy for Job's extraordinary suffering. Eliphaz fails to recognize that suffering may be a test of faith, not simply punishment for sin.
Matthew Henry's Commentary Reformed/Presbyterian 1710
Henry notes that Job has no one who suffers like him among the saints and no one who agrees with his words. He believes all such people will side with him in the dispute.
Wesley's Explanatory Notes Methodist/Wesleyan 1754
Wesley warns that anger and impatience eat away at a person’s spirit, hastening death, and also provoke God to cut them off. He calls envy of the wicked foolish, since their present success only masks the certain misery awaiting them. Wesley adds that he has personally seen this proved true.