איוב, פרק י״א, פסוק ב׳

Stepping into the debate to support his friends, Zophar argues that human suffering is never a product of divine injustice. Instead, he views it as a consequence of sin and a call to repent, noting that God's methods of guiding His creations are sometimes hidden from human understanding [רמבן]. Frustrated by the ongoing dispute, Zophar directly attacks the lengthy and elaborate style of the arguments presented against him.

He first questions whether a massive flood of words should simply be left unanswered. The primary approach among commentators is that this is a rhetorical challenge. Zophar asks if speaking endlessly somehow guarantees that the claims cannot be countered [מצודת דוד, רמבן], or if a sheer volume of speech is enough to shut down a discussion and prevent anyone else from replying [ביאור שטיינזלץ]. Taking a different view, some understand this as a practical statement of fact: a person who talks excessively will ultimately receive no response from others simply because the endless chatter becomes impossible to engage with [רש״י]. From a psychological perspective, delivering a massive amount of arguments might be a calculated strategy. The speaker hopes the listeners will be too overwhelmed to process and counter every point, thereby saving him from the embarrassment of having to admit he is wrong [אלשיך].

Beyond the sheer quantity of words, Zophar also challenges the speaker's eloquence. He questions whether the mere talent to speak beautifully and persuasively automatically makes a person right [מצודת דוד, ביאור שטיינזלץ]. A skilled speaker might use long, passionate speeches to create a false illusion of innocence. The underlying tactic is to manipulate the audience into believing that such an emotional, relentless flow of words could only come from the heart of a truly righteous person who has suffered a terrible wrong with no one to save him [אלשיך].