Job had been accused by the friends of being very wicked (Job 22:5-9) and of harboring secret sins (Job 15:11-12), sins of the heart, plans executed away from the watchful eye of those who knew him. Job seems to gather from these accusations that he had been accused of being unfaithful to his wife, and had either enticed his neighbor’s wife or allowed himself to be enticed by her (Job 31:9). Therefore, Job calls down curses upon his house, if he had done this terrible thing (Job 31:10), for he considers it a very egregious offense (Job 31:11).
On the other hand, there is nothing in the text, from the time the friends came to comfort Job to Bildad’s third reply (Job 25), where the friends’ arguments end, that would indicate they had ever accused Job of actually committing adultery. Therefore, I wonder, if Job isn’t addressing accusations of spiritual adultery. That is, Job had committed himself to be faithful to God through a covenantal sacrifice (Job 31:1), If he had later rescinded his vow to God and behaved wickedly, as the friends had claimed (Job 15:11-12; 22:5-9), this would have been considered spiritual adultery, according to the scriptures, and, therefore, according to God (Hosea 4:13-14). Such sins carried with them the punishment of one’s own wife being abused by others (2Samuel 12:11; Jeremiah 8:10) and becoming so destitute that she would perform the most menial of tasks (Judges 16:21; Isaiah 47:2). Moreover, those who were engaged in such labor were considered next to the beasts in importance (cp. Exodus 11:5). So, adultery, whether physical or spiritual, is a very destructive and heinous sin. It destroys both one’s home (verse-10) and eventually the nation, if it is permitted by those in authority to spread throughout the land (Job 31:11-12; cp. Jeremiah 5:7-9; 8:10-14).
According to the context of the Book of Job, Job lived before Moses and the Exodus, and, therefore, before the giving of the Law.[1] At that time the Code of Hammurabi was in force in the East. Nevertheless, Job dealt more gently with his servants/slaves than the law demanded, and he listened to their complaints and desires for fair treatment (Job 31:13). On the other hand, Job testified that he was aware that his servants no longer obeyed his commands or heeded his calls (Job 19:15-16), yet he didn’t respond in kind by punishing their behavior. He wasn’t so concerned over his own rights, as their master, that he was ready to punish their misbehavior forthrightly and without question (Proverbs 16:32). Why was Job so lenient? It is because he was aware of his own position before God (Job 31:14), and understood that he was the Lord’s servant (cp. Ephesians 6:9; Colossians 4:1). Justice demands that a man be treated by those in authority over him in the same manner that he treats those under his authority (Job 31:15; cp. Matthew 7:12). Job’s point was that he feared God, and because he did, he treated all men, including his own slaves, with kindness and respect.
___________________________________________________________
[1] According to the first chapter of Job, as the head of his own family, he sacrificed to God (Job 1:5), and this would have ended with Moses and the giving of the Law of God. Therefore, Job lived in the time of the Patriarchs, yet after the Flood, as Eliphaz mentions it in the past (Job 22:16). Some make him out to be the son of Issachar (Genesis 46:13), which would place his experiences between the time Jacob went down to Egypt and the Exodus. Others put him in the time of Abraham, but in either case the righteous lived by the Code of Hammurabi (see my study (Abram’s Call), and Judah sought to burn his daughter-in-law for the crime of adultery (Genesis 38:24), which was according to the laws of Hammurabi (see Laws Before Sinai). Therefore, Job lived during the time when slaves had very little rights, for the Code of Hammurabi dealt harshly with the slave who hurt or offended a free man, but dealt lightly with the free man who hurt or killed a slave. Job’s behavior, therefore, was very merciful toward his slaves in light of how other slave owners around him probably behaved.
Smoodock's Blog 