Neither is there any daysman - Margin, One that should argue, or, umpire. The word daysman in English means " "an umpire or arbiter, a mediator." Webster. Why such a man is called a daysman I do not know. The Hebrew word rendered "daysman" מוכיח môkı̂yach is from יכח yâkach, not used in the Qal, to be before, in front of; and then to appear, to be clear, or manifest; and in the Hiphil, to cause to be manifest, to argue, prove, convince; and then to argue down, to confute, reprove; see the word used in Job 6:25 : "What doth your arguing reprove?" It then means to make a cause clear, to judge, determine, decide, as an arbiter, umpire, judge, Isaiah 11:3; Genesis 31:37. Jerome renders it, "Non est qui utrumque valeat arguere." The Septuagint, "if there were, or, O that there were a mediator ὁ μεσίτης ho mesitēs, and a reprover (καί ἐλέγχων kai elengchōn), and one to hear us both" (καί διακούων ἀναμέτον ἀυφοτέρων kai diakouōn anameton amphoterōn).
The word as used by Job does not mean mediator, but arbiter, umpire, or judge; one before whom the cause might be tried, who could lay the hand of restraint on either party. who could confine the pleadings within proper bounds, who could preserve the parties within the limits of order and propriety, and who had power to determine the question at issue. Job complains that there could be no such tribunal. He feels that God was so great that the cause could be referred to no other, and that he had no prospect of success in the unequal contest. It does not appear, therefore, that he desired a mediator, in the sense in which we understand that word - one who shall come between us and God, and manage our cause before him, and be our advocate at his bar. He rather says that there was no one above God, or no umpire uninterested in the controversy, before whom the cause could be argued, and who would be competent to decide the matter in issue between him and his Maker. He had no hope, therefore, in a cause where one of the parties was to be the judge, and where that party was omnipotent; and he must give up the cause in despair.
It is not with strict propriety that this language is ever applied to the Lord Jesus, the great Mediator between God and man. He is not an umpire to settle a dispute, in the sense in which Job understood it; he is not an arbiter, to whom the cause in dispute between man and his Maker is to be referred; he is not a judge to listen to the arguments of the respective parties, and to decide the controversy. He is a mediator between us and God, to make it proper or possible that God should be reconciled to the guilty, and to propose to man the terms of reconciliation; to plead our cause before God, and to communicate to us the favors which he proposes to bestow on man.
That might lay his hand upon us both - It is not improbable that this may refer to some ancient ceremony in courts where, for some cause, the umpire or arbiter laid his hand on both the parties. Or, it may mean merely that the umpire had the power of control over both the parties; that it was his office to restrain them within proper limits, to check any improper expressions, and to see that the argument was fairly conducted on both sides. The meaning of the whole here is, that if there were such an umpire, Job would be willing to argue the cause. As it was, it was a hopeless thing, and he could do nothing more than to be silent. That there was irreverence in this language must be admitted; but it is language taken from courts of law, and the substance of it is, that Job could not hope to maintain his cause before one so great and powerful as God.

Neither is there any day's-man - בינינו מוכיח beyneynu mochiach, a reprover, arguer, or umpire between us. Day's - Man, in our law, means an arbitrator, or umpire between party and party; as it were bestowing a day, or certain time on a certain day, to decree, judge, or decide a matter - Minshieu. Day is used in law for the day of appearance in court, either originally or upon assignation, for hearing a matter for trial - Idem. But arbitrator is the proper meaning of the term here: one who is, by the consent of both parties, to judge between them, and settle their differences. Instead of לא יש lo yesh, there is not, fifteen of Kennicott's and De Rossi's MSS., with the Septuagint, Syriac, and Arabic, read לו יש lu vesh, I wish there were: or, O that there were! Ειθε ην ὁ μεσιτης ἡμων, και ελεγχων και διακουων αναμεσον αμφοτερων; O that we had a mediator, an advocate, and judge between us both! - Sept. Poor Job! He did not yet know the Mediator between God and man: the only means by which God and man can be brought together and reconciled. Had St. Paul this in his eye when he wrote 1-Timothy 2:5, 1-Timothy 2:6? For there is one God, and one Mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; who gave himself a ransom for all. Without this Mediator, and the ransom price which he has laid down, God and man can never be united: and that this union might be made possible, Jesus took the human into conjunction with his Divine nature; and thus God was manifest in the flesh.

Neither is there any daysman betwixt us, (a) [that] might lay his hand upon us both.
(a) Who might make an accord between God and me, speaking of impatience, and yet confessing God to be just in punishing him.

Neither is there any daysman betwixt us,.... Or "one that reproves" (q); who upon hearing a cause reproves him that is found guilty, or is blameworthy, or has done injury to another; but there is no such person to be found, among angels or men, capable of this, supposing, as if Job should say, I should appear to be the injured person; or there is no "umpire" or "arbitrator" (r), to whom the case between us can be referred; for, as Bar Tzemach observes, he that stands in such a character between two parties must be both more wise and more mighty than they; but there is none among all beings wiser and mightier than God:
that might lay his hand upon us both; and restrain them from using any violence to one another, as contending persons are apt to do; and compromise matters, settle and adjust things in difference between them, so as to do justice to both, and make both parties easy, and make peace between them. Herodotus (s) makes mention of a custom among the Arabians,"when they enter into covenants and agreements with each other, another man stands in the midst of them both, and with a sharp stone cuts the inside of the hands of the covenanters near the larger fingers; and then takes a piece out of each of their garments, and anoints with the blood seven stones that lie between them; and while he is doing this calls upon a deity, and when finished the covenant maker goes with his friends to an host or citizen, if the affair is transacted with a citizen; and the friends reckon it a righteous thing to keep the covenant.''To which, or some such custom, Job may be thought to allude. Now, whereas Christ is the daysman, umpire and mediator between God and men, who has interposed between them, and has undertaken to manage affairs relating to both; in things pertaining to God, the glory of his justice, and the honour of his law, and to made reconciliation for the sins of men, and to make peace for them with God by the blood of his cross; which he has completely done, being every way qualified for it, inasmuch as he partakes of both natures, and is God and man in one person, and so could put his hand on both, and make both one; or bring them who were at variance to an entire agreement with each other, upon such a bottom, as even the strict justice of God cannot object unto. Now, I say, Job must not be understood as if he was ignorant of this, for he had knowledge of Christ as a Redeemer and Saviour, and so as the Mediator and Peacemaker; the Septuagint version renders it as a wish, "O that there was a mediator between us!" and so it may be considered as a prayer for Christ's incarnation, and that he would appear and do the work of a mediator he was appointed to, which Job plainly saw there was great need of; or, as others (t), "there is no daysman yet"; there will be one, but as yet he is not come; in due time he will, which Job had faith in and full assurance of: but there is no need of such versions and glosses: Job is here not speaking of the affair of salvation, about which he had no doubt, he knew his state was safe, and he had an interest in the living Redeemer and blessed Mediator; but of the present dispensation of Providence, and of the clearing of that up to the satisfaction of his friends, so that he might appear to be an innocent person; and since God did not think fit to change the scene, there was none to interpose on his behalf, and it was in vain for him to contend with God.
(q) "arguens", Montanus, Bolducius, Drusius; "redarguens", Vatablus, Mercerus. (r) "Arbiter", Junius & Tremellius, Piscator, Cocceius, Schultens. (s) Thalia, sive, l. 3. c. 8. (t) So some in Caryll.

daysman--"mediator," or "umpire"; the imposition of whose hand expresses power to adjudicate between the persons. There might be one on a level with Job, the one party; but Job knew of none on a level with the Almighty, the other party (1-Samuel 2:25). We Christians know of such a Mediator (not, however, in the sense of umpire) on a level with both--the God-man, Christ Jesus (1-Timothy 2:5).

Days - man - Or, umpire. Lay his hand - Order and govern us in pleading; and oblige us to stand to his decision. Our Lord Jesus is now the blessed days - man, who has mediated between heaven and earth, has laid his hand upon us both: to him the father hath committed all judgment. But this was not made so clear then, as it is now by the gospel, which leaves no room for such a complaint as this.