Eliphaz uses these questions to accuse Job of holding heretical beliefs about God’s limited knowledge and inability to judge human affairs. By framing Job’s supposed theology as questions, Eliphaz attempts to demonstrate how absurd and impious Job’s complaints have become, thereby justifying his harsh rebuke.

Job does not directly respond to these specific accusations in the immediate context. Instead, Job continues his defense in chapter 23, insisting he would present his case directly to God if he could find Him, confident in his integrity.

Eliphaz attributes blasphemous theology to Job that Job never expressed. The questions “What does God know?” and “Can he judge through the deep darkness?” are presented as Job’s supposed beliefs, not Eliphaz’s own doubts. The Hebrew construction implies Eliphaz is quoting what he imagines Job thinks. By using questions rather than statements, Eliphaz makes Job’s alleged skepticism sound more shocking and self-evidently foolish. The term עָרָפֶל (araphel, “deep darkness”) intensifies the imagery, suggesting impenetrable obscurity. This rhetorical strategy falsely portrays Job as a practical atheist who denies divine omniscience. The tragedy is that Job never denied God’s knowledge, only questioned God’s apparent absence in his suffering. Eliphaz’s theological certainty blinds him to the difference between honest lament and heretical denial, making him a false comforter who wounds rather than heals.