(4) Skin for skin.—This is a more extreme form of the insinuation of Job 1:9. He means Job takes care to have his quid pro quo; and if the worst come to the worst, a man will give up everything to save his life. If, therefore, Job can save his life at the price of subservience to God, he will willingly pay that price rather than die; but his service is worth no more than that selfish object implies.

Job 2:4. Skin for skin, &c. — The design of these words is plain, which was to detract from Job, and to diminish that honour and praise which God gave him, by pretending that he had done no more than the meanest men commonly do by the law of self-preservation. And it is equally clear that this was a proverbial speech then in use, to denote the great value in which life is held, insomuch that, to preserve it, a man would suffer even his skin to be torn off. It may signify also that a man, in order to save his life, would willingly suffer himself to be stripped of all his property. But the words בעד נפשׁוbegnad naphsho, rendered here, for his life, ought rather to be rendered, for his person. For the question was not about his life, which Satan had not the impudence to desire; nor indeed could the trial be made, by taking away his life, whether he would hold fast his integrity; but rather by smiting him in his bone, and in his flesh. And Satan, in these words, insinuates that severe bodily pain was much more grievous to the human nature, and would be less patiently borne by Job, than any outward calamities which did not affect his own person. It is as if he had said, How dear soever a man’s goods, or servants, or children, may be to him, yet still his own person is dearer; and seeing that Job is still under no pain of body, and in no danger of losing his life, his constancy is not to be boasted of: nor is his holding fast his integrity amidst his losses, nor his patience under them, an evidence of his sincere and generous piety, but these things are rather effects of mere self-love: he is content with the loss of his estate, and even of his children too, so long as he sleeps in a whole skin; and is well pleased that thou wilt accept of these as a ransom in his stead. And it is not true patience which makes him seem to bear his troubles so submissively, but rather policy, that he may in this way appease thy wrath against him, and prevent those further plagues, which, for his hypocrisy, he fears thou wouldst otherwise bring upon his body.

2:1-6. How well is it for us, that neither men nor devils are to be our judges! but all our judgment comes from the Lord, who never errs. Job holds fast his integrity still, as his weapon. God speaks with pleasure of the power of his own grace. Self-love and self-preservation are powerful in the hearts of men. But Satan accuses Job, representing him as wholly selfish, and minding nothing but his own ease and safety. Thus are the ways and people of God often falsely blamed by the devil and his agents. Permission is granted to Satan to make trial, but with a limit. If God did not chain up the roaring lion, how soon would he devour us! Job, thus slandered by Satan, was a type of Christ, the first prophecy of whom was, that Satan should bruise his heel, and be foiled.Skin for skin - This is a proverbial expression, whose origin is unknown, nor is its meaning as "a proverb" entirely clear. The general sense of the passage here is plain, for it is immediately explained that a man would give everything which he had to save his life; and the idea here is, that if Job was so afflicted in his body that he was likely to die, he would give up all his religion in order to purchase life. His religion, which had berne the comparatively trifling test before applied to it, would not bear the severer trial if his life was endangered. In regard to the proverb itself, a great variety of explanations has been given. The ancient versions throw no light on it. The Vulgate renders it, "Pellem pro pelle." The Septuagint Δέρμα ὑπέρ δέρυατος derma huper dermatos - skin for, or instead of, skin. The Chaldee renders it, "member for member," אברא אמטול אברא - and the author of that paraphrase seems to have supposed that it means that a man would give the members of his body or his limbs to preserve his life. Parkhurst renders it, "skin after skin," meaning, as he explains it, that a man may bear to part with all that he has, and even to have his skin, as it were, stripped off again and again, provided only that his life is safe. Noyes supposes that it means that any man will give the skin or life of another, whether animal or man, to save his own; and that: Job gave up all, without complaint, from the selfish fear of exposing his own life to danger. Dr. Good remarks on the passage, that the skins or spoils of beasts, in the rude and early ages of man, were the most valuable property he could acquire, and that for which he most frequently combated. Thus, Lucretius says,

Tam igitur "pelles," nunc aurum et purpura, curis

Exercent hominum vitam, belloque fatigant.

v. 1422.

"Then man for "skins" contended; purple now,

And gold, forever plunge him into war."

In various parts of the book of Job, however, Dr. Good remarks, the word skin imports the "person" of a man as well as his "property," the whole living body which it envelopes, as in Job 18:13; Job 19:26. "It is," says he, "upon the double meaning of the same term, and the play which is here given to it, by employing the term first in one sense and then in the other, that the gist of the proverb, as of a thousand others similarly constructed, depends. 'Skin for skin' is in this view, in plain English, 'property for person,' or 'the skin forming property for the skin forming person.'" See a somewhat similar view presented by Callaway, in Bush's Illustrations, "in loco." The editor of the Pictorial Bible coincides mainly with this view, and supposes that the reference is to the time when trade was conducted by barter, and when the skins of animals, being a most frequent and valuable commodity, were used to represent property.

Tributes, ransoms, etc., he observes, were paid in skins. According to this, it means that a man would give "skin upon skin;" that is, would pile one piece of property upon another, and give "all" that he had, in order to save his life. It refers to the necessity of submitting to one great evil rather than incur a greater, answering to the Turkish proverb, "We must give our beards to save our heads." According to Gesenius, it means "life for life." Drusius explains it as meaning, that he would give the skin of others, as of his sons, to save his own; that is, that he was unmoved so long as his own skin or life was safe. The same view is given by Ephrem the Syrian. "Skin for skin; the skin not only of flocks, but even of his sons will he give, in order to save his own." This view also is adopted by Urnbreit. That is, his religion was supremely selfish. The loss of property and even of children he could bear, provided his person was untouched.

His own health, and life; his own skin and body were dearer to him than anything else. Other people would have been afflicted by the loss of children and property. But Job was willing to part with any or all of these, provided he himself was safe. Rosenmuller supposes that the word skin here is used for the whole body; and says that the sense is, that he would give the body of another for his own, as in Exodus 21:23. "The meaning of this proverbial formula," says he, "is, that any one would redeem his own safety by the skin of others; that is, not only by the skins or lives of oxen, camels, servants, but even of his own children." Schultens supposes it means that a man would submit to any sufferings in order to save his life; that he would be willing to be flayed alive; to be repeatedly excoriated; to have, so to speak. one skin stripped off after another, if he might save his own life.

According to this, the idea is, that the loss of life was the great calamity to be feared, and that a man would give "any" thing in order to save it. Umbreit says, "there is nothing so valuable to a man that he will not exchange it - one thing for another; one outward good for another, 'skin for skin.' But life, the inward good, is to him of no value that can be estimated. That he will give for nothing; and much more, he will offer everything for that." Another solution is offered in the Biblische Untersuchungen ii. Th. s. 88. "Before the use of gold, traffic was conducted chiefly by barter. Men exchanged what was valuable to themselves for what others had which they wanted. Those who hunted wild beasts would bring their skins to market, and would exchange them for bows and arrows. Since these traffickers were exposed to the danger of being robbed, they often took with them those who were armed, who agreed to defend them on condition that they should have a part of the skins which they took, and in this way they purchased their property and life."

That is, they gave the skins of animals for the safety of their own; all that they had they would surrender, in order that their lives might be saved. See Rosenmuller's Morgenland, "in loc." None of these solutions appear to me perfectly satisfactory, and the proverb is involved in perplexity still. It seems to refer to some kind of barter or exchange, and to mean that a man would give up one thing for another; or one piece of property of less value in order to save a greater; and that in like manner he would be willing to surrender "everything," in order that his life, the most valuable object, might be preserved. But the exact meaning of the proverb, I suspect, has not yet been perceived.

Yea, all that a man hath - This is evidently designed to express the same thing as the proverb, "skin for skin," or to furnish an illustration of that. The meaning is plain. A man is willing to surrender all that he has, in order to preserve his life. He will part with property and friends, in order that he may be kept alive. if a man therefore is to be reached in the most tender and vital part; if any thing is to be done that shall truly reveal his character, his life must be put in danger, and his true character will then be revealed. The object of Satan is to say, that a test had not been applied to Job of sufficient severity to show what he really was. What he had lost was a mere trifle compared with what would be if he was subjected to severe bodily sufferings, so that his life would be in peril. it is to be remembered that these are the words of Satan, and that they are not necessarily true.

Inspiration is concerned only in securing "the exact record" of what is said, not in affirming that all that is said is true. We shall have frequent occasion to illustrate this sentiment in other portions of the book. In regard to the sentiment here expressed, however, it is in general true. Men will surrender their property, their houses, and lands, and gold, to save their lives. Many, too, would see their friends perish, in order that they might be saved. It is not universally true, however. It is possible to conceive that a man might so love his property as to submit to any torture, even endangering life, rather than surrender it. Many, too, if endangered by shipwreck, would give up a plank in order to save their wives or children, at the risk of their own lives. Many will give their lives rather than surrender their liberty; and many would die rather than abandon their principles. Such were the noble Christian martyrs; and such a man was Job. Satan urged that if his life were made wretched, he would abandon his integrity, and show that his professed piety was selfish, and his religion false and hollow. The Syriac and Arabic add, "that he may be safe."

4. Skin for skin—a proverb. Supply, "He will give." The "skin" is figurative for any outward good. Nothing outward is so dear that a man will not exchange it for some other outward good; "but" (not "yea") "life," the inward good, cannot be replaced; a man will sacrifice everything else for its sake. Satan sneers bitterly at man's egotism and says that Job bears the loss of property and children because these are mere outward and exchangeable goods, but he will give up all things, even his religion, in order to save his life, if you touch his bones and flesh. "Skin" and "life" are in antithesis [Umbreit]. The martyrs prove Satan's sneer false. Rosenmuller explains it not so well. A man willingly gives up another's skin (life) for his own skin (life). So Job might bear the loss of his children, &c., with equanimity, so long as he remained unhurt himself; but when touched in his own person, he would renounce God. Thus the first "skin" means the other's skin, that is, body; the second "skin," one's own, as in Ex 21:28. The design of these words is plain, which is to detract from Job, and to diminish that honour and praise which God gave to Job, by pretending that he had done no more than the meanest men commonly do by the law of self-reservation. And it is as clear that this was a proverbial speech then in use, wherein if there be some difficulty to understand it at this distance of time, it is no more than the common lot of many other proverbs, the sense, and especially the grounds, whereof are frequently unknown to persons of other nations and after-times. Moreover, it is known that in those ancient times, though they had some money, yet the main of their estate lay in cattle, of which the skins were a considerable part, and their chief traffic lay in the exchange of one commodity for another; and, among other things, it cannot be questioned but that they did commonly exchange skins of one kind for skins of another sort, according to their several inclinations or occasions. So the meaning may be this, As men willingly and commonly give one skin in exchange for another skin, and one commodity for another. So (the Hebrew particle vau being oft so used as a note of comparison, as it is Proverbs 17:3 25:3,23,25,27)

all that a man hath, his house, cattle, children, will he give, and that most willingly, for his life, i.e. to redeem or save his own life. Or rather thus,

skin for skin, might then be a proverb, like that of ours, Body for body, when one man is so far obliged for another. And we have some such expressions among us; as when we say of a man who doth some dangerous action, His skin, i.e. his body, will pay for it, i.e. it may cost him his life. And this proverb might be taken,

1. From sacrifices, in which there was skin for skin, i.e. the skin of a beast for, or instead of, the skin or body of the man, which deserved to be used as the beast was, and which was saved or preserved by the suffering of the beast, which was accepted by God instead of the man, and by which the man’s sins were expiated. Or,

2. From hostages or ransoms, wherein one man was given for or instead of another. So now the sense may be this, Any man will give skin for skin, i.e. the skin, or body, or life of another, whether man or beast, to save his own;

yea, all that a man hath, whether goods or persons, such as Job hath lost,

will he give for his life. Job is not much hurt nor concerned so long as his own skin is whole and safe. Others thus, Skin upon (for so the Hebrew particle behad is sometimes used, as 2 Kings 4:5 Amos 9:10; as also the Greek particle anti, which answers to it, is understood John 1:16, grace for grace, i.e. grace upon grace, or all kinds or degrees of grace) skin, and all that a man hath, (so all these words belong to the price which a man pays; now follows what he hath or expecteth to have for it,) will he give for his life, i.e. in exchange for his life, or to save his life. This also is a plausible interpretation, only it is not very probable that the same Hebrew particle behad should be used in two so differing senses in the same verse, in the former part to signify upon, (which if this sacred writer had meant, he would likely have expressed it rather by that other Hebrew particle al, which is commonly so used, than by this, which is so ambiguous, and seldom so taken, and otherwise used in this very verse,) and in the latter to signify for, or instead of. However the sense is plainly this, This is so far from being an evidence of Job’s sincere and generous piety, that it is only an act of deeper hypocrisy and mere self-love; he is well enough contented with the loss of his estate, and children too, so long as he sleeps in a whole skin; and he is well pleased that thou wilt accept of all these as a sacrifice or ransom in his stead; and it is not true patience and humility which makes him seem to bear his crosses so submissively, as depth of policy, that by his feigned carriage he may appease thy wrath against him, and prevent those further plagues which, for his hypocrisy and other sins, of which he is conscious, he fears thou wilt otherwise bring upon his own carcass; as will plainly appear upon further trial.

And Satan answered the Lord, and said,.... Satan would not as yet own that Job was the man the Lord had described; but still would suggest, that he was a selfish and mercenary man, and that what had been done to him was not a sufficient trial of his integrity; the thing had not been pushed far and close enough to discover him; he had lost indeed his substance, and most of his servants, and all his children, but still he had not only his own life, but his health and ease; and so long as he enjoyed these he would serve God, though only for the sake of them: and therefore, says he, as it is usually and proverbially said:

skin for skin, yea, all that a man hath will he give for his life; the Targum is,"member for member;''which the Jewish commentators, many of them, explain thus, that if a man's head or his eyes are in danger, he will lift up his hand or his arm, and expose that in order to save the other; but the word is generally used of the skin, and so it may in this sense; and mean the skin of his hand, as a shield for the skin of his head or eye, as Gussetius observes (r): some understand it of the skins of others for his own skin, which he will part with, that he may keep that; nay, he will give all that he is possessed of for the preservation of his life, so dear is that unto him; meaning either the skins of beasts, in whom the principal substance of men consisted in those times and countries, and whose skins slain for food, and in sacrifice, might be of worth and value, and used in traffic; or, as others think, money cut out of leather made of skins is meant, which a man would part with, even all such money he had in the world, and even his "suppellex", or all the goods of his house, for to save his life: or the sense is, that Job would not only give the skins of his beasts, even of all that he had, for his own skin, but the skins of his servants, nay, of his own children, provided he could but keep his own skin; and hereby Satan suggests, that Job did not regard the loss his cattle, nor of his servants, nor even of his children, so long as he had his own life and health; and thus represents him as a lover of himself, and as cruel and hardhearted, and without natural affections to his children; the contrary to which is very manifest from Job 1:5; or rather this designs his own skin, and may be rendered, "skin upon skin", or "skin even unto skin", or "skin within skin" (s); for man has two skins, an inward and an outward one, called the "cutis" and "cuticula", "derma" and "epidermis"; the latter is of a whitish colour, and is properly the covering of the skin, is very thin, and void of sensation (t), which may be raised up by a blister, and taken off without pain; but the other is reddish, and very sensible of pain, and cannot be taken off without putting a man to the most exquisite misery; and yet a man will part with both skins, and if he had ever so many, or he willing to be put to the greatest torment, rather than part with his life: and to this one point all the above senses, and others given by interpreters, tend, namely, to observe how precious the life of man is to him; and if this was all that Satan meant, it is very trite; but he seems to insinuate something more, and that is, that any man, and so Job though reckoned a good man, would not only part with all the skins he had, and the substance he was possessed of, to save his life, but he would part with his God, and his religion, and the profession of it, for the sake of it, which is false; for there is something more valuable than life to good men; they reckon the loving kindness of God better than life, and would sooner lose their lives than risk the danger of losing their interest in it; and are willing to part with their lives for the sake of God and true religion, for the sake of Christ and his Gospel, and for his cause and interest, as many have done.

(r) Ebr. Comment. p. 582. (s) "cutim super cute", Schultens. (t) Vid Bartholin. Anatomia Reform. l. 1. c. 1. & 9.

And Satan answered the LORD, and said, {e} Skin for skin, yea, all that a man hath will he give for his life.

(e) By this he means that a man's own skin is dearer to him than another man's.