Job 9:19 echoes the impossibility of contending with God—if it's about strength or justice, God is unapproachable, reinforcing Eliphaz's rhetorical question about judgment.

Job 9:32 states God is not a man to be summoned to court—directly addressing the impossibility of the legal dispute Eliphaz implies.

Job 14:3 uses the same phrase 'bring me into judgment'—Job laments that God opens his eyes on a mortal to judge him, mirroring Eliphaz's question.

Job 23:6 contrasts Eliphaz's implication: Job believes God would not contend with overwhelming power but would listen to him.

Job 23:7 asserts an upright person could argue and be acquitted—directly opposing Eliphaz's accusation that Job's suffering is due to sin.

Job 16:21 expresses a longing for a mediator to argue man's case with God—a related legal theme but focused on advocacy rather than reproof.

Psalm 143:2 pleads 'enter not into judgment' because no one is righteous—a direct parallel to the judgment Eliphaz questions.

Isaiah 3:14 uses the same phrase 'enters into judgment' — God judges leaders for oppressing the poor, similar to Eliphaz's accusation.

Revelation 3:19 presents reproof as an act of love, contrasting Eliphaz's implication that reproof is for sin, not piety.

Psalm 39:11 describes God's rebuke for sin, supporting Eliphaz's implied assumption that reproof comes because of wrongdoing, not piety.

Psalm 130:3 asks who could stand if God marked iniquities—echoing the theme of human inability to withstand divine judgment.

Ecclesiastes 12:14 affirms universal judgment, echoing the concept of God entering into judgment mentioned here.