Neither is there any judge between us, that might lay his hand on us both.
There are two attributes of God — His might and His righteousness. The one a natural and the other a moral attribute. One manifested in creation, the other dimly discernible in the moral nature, that is, the conscience of man, and yet greatly needing a revelation to bring it home to man's heart with awful reality and power. Job's thoughts were evidently occupied in this chapter with both these attributes. But if we are asked with which he is most occupied, we must answer, not with the highest, not with the righteousness so much as with the power of God. These verses seem to show a two-fold feeling in Job's mind, corresponding to the two attributes — the righteousness and the power of God; but the predominating feeling was that of the irresistible power of God. Job longed for something to bridge over the terrible chasm between the Creator and himself, and not for some thing only, but some living person, some "daysman, who should lay his hand upon them both." Taken critically and historically, the word "daysman" seems to signify an "umpire." If Job felt "the power of God" more than His righteousness, and his own weakness more than his guilt, this is precisely what he would want. He could not, he felt, contend with God himself; could not stand on a level with the Creator in this great controversy. He felt, therefore, his need of an umpire. But what is the difference between a "daysman" so explained and a mediator? The difference is not great, but such as it is, it corresponds to the difference between feeling the "power" and the "righteousness" of God. The feeling of wanting a mediator is the higher. A consciousness of guilt and inward corruption is a higher feeling than that of weakness; and the longing for a "Mediator" a higher longing than that for a "daysman."
Parallel VersesKJV: Neither is there any daysman betwixt us, that might lay his hand upon us both.