Job 22:6

“For thou hast taken a pledge from thy brother for nought, etc.] It can hardly be thought that it was for nothing at all, on no consideration whatever, or that nothing was lent, for which the pledge was taken; but that it was a small trifling sum, and comparatively nothing, not to be spoken of; or it was borrowed for so short a time, that there needed not any pledge it; and it was unkind to take it, especially of a brother, whether in nature, or in religion, whether a near kinsman, or friend, or neighbour. Some render the words, “thou hast taken thy brother”, or “brothers, for a pledge” f843; them themselves, their persons, as a security for what was lent, in order to sell them, and pay off…”

“The crimes alleged, on a harsh inference, by Eliphaz against Job are such as he would think likely to be committed by a rich man. The Mosaic law (Exo 22:26; Deu 24:10) subsequently embodied the feeling that existed among the godly in Job's time against oppression of debtors as to their pledges. Here the case is not quite the same; Job is charged with taking a pledge where he had no just claim to it; and in the second clause, that pledge (the outer garment which served the poor as a covering by day and a bed by night) is represented as taken from one who had not "changes of raiment" (a common constituent of wealth in the East), but was poorly clad--"naked" (Mat 25:36; Jam 2:15); a sin the…”

“For thou hast taken a pledge from thy brother for nought - The only evidence which Eliphaz seems to have had of this was, that this was a heinous sin, and that as Job seemed to be severely punished, it was to be “inferred” that he must have committed some such sin as this. No way of treating an unfortunate and a suffering man could be more unkind. A “pledge” is that which is given by a debtor to a creditor, for security for the payment of a debt, and would be, of course, that which was regardcd as of value. Garments, which constituted a considerable part of the wealth of the Orientals, would usually be the pledge which would be given. With us, in such cases, watches, jewelry, notes,…”

“Surely - He speaks thus by way of strong presumption, when I consider thy unusual calamities, I conclude thou art guilty of all, or some of these crimes. Brother - Of thy neighbour. Nought - Without sufficient and justifiable cause. Stripped - By taking their garment for a pledge, or by robbing them of their rights, all other injuries being comprehended under this. Job 22:8”

“22:6 Demanding clothing as security for lent money was forbidden by the law and condemned by the prophets (Exod 22:26-27; Deut 24:10-13; Ezek 18:7-8; Amos 2:8). In contrast, Job had provided clothing for the poor (Job 31:19-20).”

“For thou: Job 24:3, Job 24:9; Exo 22:26; Deu 24:10-18; Eze 18:7, Eze 18:12, Eze 18:16; Amo 2:8 stripped: etc. Heb. stripped the clothes of the naked, Job 24:10, Job 31:19, Job 31:20 Job 22:7”

“6 For thou distrainedst thy brother without cause, And the clothes of the naked thou strippedst off. 7 Thou gavest no water to the languishing, And thou refusedst bread to the hungry. 8 And the man of the arm-the land was his, And the honourable man dwelt therein. 9 Thou sentest widows away empty, And the arms of the orphan are broken. The reason of exceeding great suffering most be exceeding great sins. Job must have committed such sins as are here cited; therefore Eliphaz directly attributes guilt to him, since he thinks thus to tear down the disguise of the hypocrite. The strophe contains no reference to the Mosaic law: the compassionate Mosaic laws respecting duties towards widows and…”