Applying the legal metaphor integral to the book of Job to reevaluate the evidence for Job’s innocence, this article discusses the various attempts made by Christian interpreters to come to terms with the final form of the book of Job, including its testimony to Job’s complaints. Though many interpreters simply ignore the complaints in their attempts to hold up Job as an exemplar of patience, following, it is often argued, the example of James 5:11, for those who wrestle with Job’s apparent blasphemy, three general approaches emerge (denial, mitigation, and absolution). However, none is able to satisfactorily reconcile Job’s accusations with the innocent verdict God delivers at the end of the book (42:7) and affirm that Job has indeed said what is right about God. Even so, the broader biblical testimony to a tradition of ‘faithful revolt’ offers evidence to exonerate Job by testifying to divine favorable response to and even initiation of complaint. Thus, as in the book of Job, Job’s ‘friends’ becomes his accusers due to their application of a limited view of God and God’s relationship to humanity.