“I I should Die Before I Wake….” The Death of Children and the Story of Job

January 15, 2013

Leaven–a theological journal designed for ministers and “lay” leaders–is now available online. This is a significant resource. Various issues focus on biblical texts and theological topics. Every issue includes additional bibliographical and liturgical resources.  The most recent issue focuses on Romans 5-8. I encourage everyone to look into the various issues and use the search function to access different topics.

I have contributed five articles to Leaven over the years and am even now working on my sixth. I will use n occasional post to link this blog to those articles.

In my article, “‘If I Should Die Before I Wake….’ The Death of Children and the Story of Job” I reflect on my own experience with the terminal illness of my son Joshua as I intersect that with the story of Job.

2 Comments | Pastoral Care, Theology | Tagged: , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by John Mark Hicks

The Epilogue: Job Rewarded? (Job 42:7-17)

October 15, 2011

Don’t you hate a happy ending?

Many find the Epilogue too good to be true. At best, it has the ring of a fairy tale–it might even be pure silliness. It ends like a bad movie. At worst, it underscores the satan’s point–people serve God for profit. Job is rewarded; Job profits.

Some dismiss it as an orthodox attempt to defend the principle of distributive justice–in the end, everyone gets what they deserve. Others value it as an ironic twist by the narrator who offers a back-handed slap at orthodox defenders. It functions as a reductio ad absurdum.

However, these perspectives miss the real point.  The drama of the work was resolved in Job 42:5-6. This is the conclusion of the matter. Job experiences God and his lament has become praise.

Job is comforted before the Epilogue. He finds comfort in Yahweh’s presence, address, and grace. The story is “resolved” in that encounter. The story of Job’s lament ends at 42:6 before his prosperity is restored.  Indeed, the book could have ended at that point.

But it did not. So, what is the point or purpose of the Epilogue?  Let me suggest a few perspectives.

The Epilogue is the narrator’s comment on the previous drama. The narrator makes it clear that the friends were wrong and Job was right. Yahweh makes this clear: “My anger burns against you [Eliphaz] and against your two friends, for you have not spoken of me what is right, as my servant Job has” (spoken twice in 42:7-8!). What is “right” uses a verb that mans to be set up, established, fixed, or substantiated (BDB). Job is God’s servant and his prayer is effective for his friends. Job served as a priestly mediator for his friends–a most gracious act on his part.

The narrator/editor gives the readers a retrospective hermeneutical lens for reading the dialogues…just in case there is any doubt. The Epilogue functions, at least in this respect, to underscore the integrity of Job, the rightness of his speech, and the erroneous speech of the friends. The narrator places his stamp of approval on Job with Yahweh’s own words.

The critique of the Epilogue often turns, however, on the fact that Yahweh restored Job’s fortunes. But it is important to note that God does not restore his fortunes in the light of his “repentance” (as many read Job 42:6) but in the light of his priestly act for his friends.  God restored Job’s blessings “when he had prayed for his friends.” The “reward” (if we want to use that language) is not a “reward” for his response to Yahweh’s speeches, but a “reward” (if you will) for how he loved his friends. Job, paradigmatically, assumes the role that Israel had in the world–he served as a priest among his friends just as Israel served as a priest among the nations.

The significance of this point is that this has nothing to do with the satan’s question in the Prologue. That was answered in 42:5-6. Yahweh blesses Job in the context of his love for his friends.

But I think we can say more. It is significant that Job receives a “double” portion. That is an inheritance portion; it is a sign of special favor.  The firstborn receives double (Deuteronomy 21:17). Hannah received a “double” portion because she was loved (1 Samuel 3:5). Elisha received a “double portion” as the successor of Elijah (2 Kings 2:9), and it is eschatological language in Isaiah 61:7. Serving as a priest among his friends, Job received a “double portion” just as Israel as a priest among the nations receives a double portion.

Job’s blessings are a figure of eschatological inheritance. It is an act of divine grace; it is a gift, unearned and undeserved. It is not profit, but gift. The “happy” ending is a blessed ending, a foretaste of eschatological joy.

What did God find in Job? He found a person who did not turn from wisdom–he continued to fear and turn away from evil. Job maintained his integrity.  Though he lamented–often bitterly–he nevertheless trusted.

What did God find in Job? He found what Jesus said the Son of Man will be looking for when he returns to earth. Will the Son of Man faith upon the earth he comes again (Luke 18:8)?

Job is every person and every person is Job. Everyone is involved in the cosmic question–do we serve God for profit? Will we persevere in faith even when the circumstances are tragic? Will Jesus find us living in faith when he returns?

Leave a Comment » | Biblical Texts | Tagged: , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by John Mark Hicks

Job 42:1-6 — Did Job “Repent”?

October 14, 2011

Something climatic happens in Job 42:1-6 when Job responds to Yahweh’s second speech.

Some believe that Job is unmoved.  He has heard God and is not convinced. He maintains his defiant stance since God has not answered his questions. This is a rather recent critical position taken by several in the Academy (cf. Curtis, JBL [1979] 497-511).

Some believe Job is penitent. Job experiences a conversion. He acknowledges his sin–at least the sin of arrogance or the sin of justifying himself and putting God in the wrong–and submits to God. This is a rather traditional position (cf. Newell, WTJ [1984] 298-316]).

Others, a minority report, suggest that both of these misread Job.  I accept this minority report and hope to explain a version of it in this post.

Yahweh’s first speech silenced Job (Job 40:4-5). He confessed his finitude (“I am of small account”) and promised silence (“I lay my hand on my mouth”). Yet, Job does not seem content; he does not embrace God in doxology. He simply gives up his complaint (“I will proceed no further” ), but he does not appear satisfied. There is, at least, no indication of that. It is as if Job is saying, “I hear you and I recognize your creative wisdom and power, but….” And the “but” is left unexpressed.

But Yahweh expresses it. Job still wonders about the reign of evil in the world. Has God lost control? Where is the justice of God? Or, has God turned toward evil himself? Yahweh’s second speech addresses these questions. Yahweh says, “I am sovereign over evil and chaos.”

Job’s response to the second speech comes in two parts. First, Job praises Yahweh (42:2-3). Second, Job embraces Yahweh’s presence (42:4-6).

Job praises Yahweh (42:2-3). Job acknowledges that God is Almighty and that his every purpose will be accomplished. Interestingly, “purpose” is the same term Job used in 21:27 when he was talking the divine “schemes” against him. Job recognizes that he cannot disrupt God’s plans, purposes, or intent, even if he does not like them.

Job responds to Yahweh’s question, “Who is this that hides counsel without knowledge?” (cf. 42:3; 38:2). Job doxologically confesses that God’s purposes are “too wonderful” for him. Job uses the same term present in Psalm 139:6,14; it is a term Job himself had previously used in a doxological context in Job 9:10. He confesses God’s wondrous acts as well as his ignorance of their meaning and significance. Job knows he does not understand God. He has confessed this earlier as well (9:11; 12:13; 23:8′ 26:12).

So, what is new? Nothing here is new. It is rather a renewed confession, a remembrance of what Job already knew and confessed.  What is new is what comes next.

Job embraces Yahweh’s presence (42:4-6). Again, Job quotes Yahweh (cf. 42:4; 38:3; and, interestingly, both of these quotations of Yahweh go back to Yahweh’s first speech). In this second response, Job is responding to both speeches. His quotation is an acknowledgement that he cannot answer Yahweh’s questions. Job knows his limitations. But then the climactic confession appears: “I had heard of you by the hearing of the ear, but now my eyes see you” (42:5).

This is the turning point. Here Job confesses his encounter with Yahweh.  Previously, Job had only heard of Yahweh or had only listened to Yahweh through the various ways in which Yahweh spoke to the patriarchs. Now something is different; Job has experienced something new. Now, Job has “seen” God.

We might take the verb “see” in a literal sense, that is, he saw God in the whirlwind. He saw the theophany.  Thus, Job’s hope was fulfilled. He had hoped to see God in the flesh again (19:26), and he did.  I think that is at least true, but it is more than that.  ”See” is also a metaphor for experience. Job has experienced Yahweh.  It is a theophanic encounter with or experience of God.

I have often referred to this as a “sanctuary” experience.  It is what the Psalmist in Psalm 73 experienced. He questioned God until he entered the sanctuary of God (73:16-17). It is what Habakkuk experienced. He questioned God until God appeared to him (expressed in the theophanic hymn of Habakkuk 3). It is the “nevertheless” of Psalm 13:5.  We cry “how long?”, but in our experience of God we “nevertheless” trust in God’s gracious purposes.

What happened in these instances is occasioned by the oppressive nature of the chaos or evil which burdened believers. They expressed that burden in lament. They cried, “how long?” or “why?” or “where are you?” Their questions were legitimate and faithful. This is also true of Job’s laments. But God showed up; he came to these lamenters. And they changed. This did not deligitimze their lament. Rather, it moved their lament to praise. They moved from lament to comfort. This is what happens to Job.

Job changes. Job, according to most English translations, repents. But repent is too strong for this word and leaves a false impression.  This is not the normal Hebrew term for “repentance” in the sense of a sorrow for sin or a turning away from sin.  Rather, this verb (nhm) fundamentally means a change of mind. Job changed his mind, just as God is depicted as changing his mind within the narrative of Scripture (cf.Exodus 32:12; Joel 2:13; Jonah 4:2; 1 Chronicles 21:15). There is nothing inherent in the word that denotes a change from evil to good, a kind of repentance as we normally think of the English term.

Job changed his mind, but from what to what?  I think the intertextual cue is how this Hebrew root is used in Job itself. The friends came to “comfort” Job (2:11); Job hopes that his bed would “comfort” him (7:13); Job calls his friends miserable “comforters” (16:2); Job questions whether his friends can “comfort” him (21:34); Job himself was one who “comforts mourners” (29:25); and in the Epilogue Job is “comforted” by his friends and family (42:11). Everywhere this root is used in Job, it always means “comfort” unless Job 42:6 is the exception.

So, why do translaters call it “repent” here? They believe that Job has somehow sinned in his addresses to God in the dialogue. Job must repent if there is to be resolution.  But if we do not assume that Job has sinned, then we might simply recognize that Job is comforted in this text.

However, Job’s language before he acknowledges his “change of mind” is problematic. The verb “I despise” has no object in Hebrew.  What does Job despise? What does he reject?   Job had previously used the term in how he had not “rejected the cause” of his servants (31:13), and how God had despised the work of his hands (10:3), and how Job had loathed his own life (9:21; cf. also 7:16). But without an object in 42:6 it is difficult to determine what Job despises/rejects except by context.

If we understand that Job has changed his mind, particularly that he has been comforted, perhaps what he now does is “despise” his case (or perhaps reject his lament). He gives up his lawsuit against God (“retract,” NASB). He will not press charges. Or, perhaps it is language that voices humility such as “I melt away” (NEB). I don’t think Job is recanting everything he said (as the NLT translates it) but is rather “letting go” of the lawsuit, “letting go” of lament, or humbling himself before God (“I am little/I melt [before you]“). He is letting go of whatever resentment (psychological) or legal proceedings (forensic) he had against God.He will no longer lament; he will no longer mourn.

Job’s encounter with God comforted him. Giving up his lawsuit or humbling himself before the divine theophany, Job is “comforted over [my] dust and ashes.” Perhaps “dust and ashes” is a metaphor for his mourning (a possible meaning of 30:19) or  ”dust and ashes” is a metaphor for the finitude of humanity who returns to dust and ashes in death (cf. Gen. 18:27). Either way, Job is consoled in his mortal humanity or in his mourning. Indeed, we may read Job 42:6 as Job’s reject and change of mind about mourning–he will now leave the place of mourning he has occupied since 2:11 and return to life (cf. Patrick, VT [1976], 369-371).

Living in a chaotic world, Job’s finitude and ignorance generated unanswered questions, nagging doubts, and bewildering situations. His encounter with Yahweh changed him. Yahweh’s theophany spoke about sovereignty, wisdom, and care which generated peace, praise. and comfort. Job was comforted despite unanswered questions because the presence of  Yahweh assured him. Job turned from mourning to comfort. Job’s lament moved to praise.

1 Comment | Biblical Texts | Tagged: , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by John Mark Hicks

Job 40-41 — Yahweh’s Second Speech

October 12, 2011

Why a second speech? One might think that one speech from Yahweh would be enough.

Perhaps it is a literary device.  The two speeches may reflect the two council scenes in the Prologue–a “prologue” (1:1-5) heads the two council scenes and an “epilogue” (42:7ff)  follows the two Yahweh speeches.

That may be true, but it seems like something more is afoot. There appears to be movement from the first to the second speech as there is certainly movement from Job’s first response (40:4-5) to his second response (42:2-6). However we may interpret Job’s second response (repentance? comfort? rejection?), it provides some “resolution;” it is a climatic ending.

The second speech, then, provides the context in which the Yahweh-Job dialogue finds its “resolution.” There is something new, something climatic, about this speech. Consequently, the question is what does this speech offer that was not present in the first speech so that it moves beyond it in some sense.

The first speech surveys a well-ordered creation that exhibits divine wisdom and care (Job 38-39). God is active within the creation setting the boundaries of chaos (seas) and feeding the wild animals. The creation is functional and fruitful.

However, the first speech focuses on two animals, the Behemoth and Leviathan. Of the two, the Leviathan gets the most attention (34 verses of Job 41 vs. only 9 verses for the Behemoth in chapter 40). Unlike the first speech, this discussion is prefaced by a lengthy introduction. This introduction functions as a hermeneutical key for reading the rest of the speech, and the Leviathan section serves as the highlight (it is the most lengthy treatment of any of God’s creatures in all the Yahweh speeches)–the climatic point of the Yahweh speeches.  The speech may be outlined in this fashion.

  • God challenges Job (40:7; parallel to 38:3)
  • Introduction:  the Wicked (40:8-14)
  • Land Animal: the Behemoth (40:15-24)
  • Water Animal:  the Leviathan (41:1-34)

Each section grows in length, and each provides a context for the next.  What would Job with the wicked? What would Job do with the Behemoth? What, then, would Job do with the Leviathan? Job is powerless before them all. But God is not.

First Section (40:8-14)

The topic is no loner simply management of the creation or how God has ordered the cosmos. Now the topic is about justice; it is about the problem of evil.

Will Job put God in the “wrong” (misphat; justice) so that Job might be in the “right” (zadaq; righteousness)? Job had accused God of denying him justice (misphat; Job 27:2) and had claimed his own “rightness” (zadaq; Job 9:20). Yahweh questions whether Job’s rightness and divine justice are incongruent. Can Job discern this mystery? Can Job figure out how God’s justice and Job’s righteousness work in the circumstance of his own experience of chaos and suffering?

In particular, Yahweh is concerned with the question of the prosperity of the wicked. Job has raised this question on several occasions (cf. 21:7-16; 24:1-12; “there is no justice” [misphat] in 19:7).  Yahweh’s challenge is to question Job about what he will do with the wicked. Would Job pour out his wrath on the proud? Would Job trample the wicked where they stand? How would Job handle the wicked? Decked out in his own glory and splendor, can Job solve the problem of justice and equity in the world? If Job has a solution, God wants to hear it.

Yahweh’s response to his rhetorical questions cannot be overestimated (41:14).  Yahweh will acknowledge (yada; know) Job if his own “hand” can save him from the wicked. The use of the word “hand” is important as it recalls the prologue and the significant Yahweh confession by Job in 12:9.  The “hand” of Yahweh released the chaotic powers upon Job, both the moral acts by human agents and natural disasters. Job acknowledged that it was the “hand” of Yahweh that did it and reigns in the cosmos.

Whose “hand” can control the wicked? Whose “hand” can best deal with evil in the world?Whose “hand” is sovereign over the chaos in the world? Is it Job’s “hand” or is it Yahweh’s?

Yahweh’s exhibits A & B, the Behemoth and Leviathan, are evidence that only Yahweh’s hand can control evil; only Yahweh is sovereign over the chaos in the world.

Behemoth (40:15-24)

Behemoth (a transliteration of Hebrew word) is the plural of the normal word for “beast, animal.” But the plural here is majestic in character, that is, it the “beast of beasts.” Indeed, it is the “first of the great acts of God” (40:19). It is the beast par excellence–incomparable to other beasts or land animals.

Yet, the description of this beast is very different from Yahweh’s depictions in Job 39. There are no mythic or hyperbolic embellishments of the wild animals in Job 39 but they abound here for both the Behemoth and the Leviathan. Further, Job 39 utilizes the normal names of the animals, but these two natures are not “normal” zoological descriptions. These are no mere description of another animal–if it is, then it does not amount to much more than what chapter thirty-nine did. Something more is going on here, especially regarding Yahweh’s relation to evil (the wicked).

Many identify the Behemoth with the hippopotamus just as they identify the Leviathan with the crocodile. There are some reasons to do this as the descriptions do seem rooted in those two animals to some degree. However, neither description fits a mere naturalistic understanding of these animals. Rather, the descriptions have mythic proportions.

Both the hippopotamus and crocodile appear in Egyptian mythology. There the evil Lord Seth is associated with both in mythic stories as Seth battles Horus. Seth is the god of chaos. In addition, Ugarit Canaanite myths may form something of the background here as well. In those myths Mot, the god of death, battles Baal. Many of the descriptions of the Behemoth correspond with language describing Mot (Fyall, Now My Eyes Have Seen You, pp. 131-137) and the Leviathan reflects the mythology of the great battles of creation mythology where the Seas (Leviathan as chaos monster) contest creation. The Behemoth is a land monster and the Leviathan is a sea monster (perhaps even similar to the two beasts in Revelation 13).

The Behemoth is beyond Job’s ability. “Only the Maker,” Yahweh says, “can approach it with the sword.” Unlike other wild animals, only God can do battle with the Behemoth. Yahweh announces the inability of humanity to deal with chaos.

Job cannot crush the Behemoth, so how could he ever hope to crush the wicked? If Yahweh can capture and tame the Behemoth whose ferocity frightens all other creatures, can not Yahweh deal with the evil and chaos in Job’s life?

But did God create the Behemoth, a chaos animal? Did God create chaos? The prophet Isaiah confesses that Yahweh creates both good and evil (disaster; Isaiah 45:7), and Job has already confessed that humans receive both good and evil from Yahweh (Job 1:20). The point is that Yahweh is sovereign over chaos; it does not have an autonomous reign within the world. God reigns over the chaos, manages it, and utilizes it for his own purposes.

Leviathan (41:1-34)

This mythic animal is associated with the water (41:1-2)  and breathes fire (41:19-21). Apparently, it depicts the mythic sea monster that generates chaos and rules over the chaos–the Leviathan is a prince in the world (41:34). Job himself referred to the Leviathan in his opening lament (Job 3:8). In that poem Job hoped that the Leviathan would reverse creation and destroy the day of his birth.

The Leviathan is a princely figure (and some even identify him with the satan). He has no equal in all creation and “is king over all that are proud” (40:33-34). Chaos (and evil) reigns within the creation–nothing under heaven can compete with the Leviathan (41:11). B he does not reign over the creation because Yahweh can rein in the Leviathan. Chaos fills the earth but it is limited, controlled, and managed by Yahweh as everything belongs to Yahweh (41:11).

Job cannot crush the Leviathan, so how could he ever hope to crush the wicked? If Yahweh can tame the Leviathan who crushes the proud, can Yahweh not crush the chaos and evil in Job’s life?

Conclusion

It is important to note that God does not, as yet (but will, cf. Isaiah 27:1), destroy these monsters of chaos. Chaos still exists within creation, but God manages, controls and limits it. Job is powerless before chaos, but Yahweh is not. Yahweh is sovereign over chaos.

The reign of God over the chaotic cosmos is the primary theme of God’s speeches to Job. Whether it is the gracious power of God to create and sustain his universe (as in Job 38-39), or whether it is the power of God to control and tame the chaotic forces in nature like the Leviathan and the Behemoth (as in Job 40-41), the point is the same. Job cannot claim to control or even know about these forces, but God does. God reigns over nature, and while there is chaos, it is not beyond his control. On the contrary, that chaos is at God’s command. It will do his bidding. The Behemoth is one whom no one can capture, but his maker can tame him (Job 40:19,24). The Leviathan is one whom no one can bridle, but he belongs to his maker (Job 41:11,13). No one but God can control the chaotic forces of nature, and we must confess with Job, “I know you can do all things; no plan of yours can be thwarted” (42:2).
kdkd

3 Comments | Biblical Texts | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by John Mark Hicks

Job 32-37 — Elihu Confronts Job

October 5, 2011

Elihu, whose name means “he is my God,” appears from nowhere. He is neither named among the friends who come to comfort Job in the Prologue nor nor among the friends in the Epilogue whom God rebukes. He only appears here in Job 32-37.

This has generated considerable speculation. Some, perhaps the majority of contemporary scholarship, think the Elihu speeches were added by a later (or final?) editor who was dissatisfied with the Yahweh speeches and the coherence of the book as it appeared at the time.  In this view Elihu is either a defender of orthodoxy or a shrewd commentator on the previous dialogue that neither sides with the friends nor Job. The interpolator “corrects” the version of Job that had come down to him through tradition.

However, there is nothing compelling about this scenario. There is no textual tradition that supports this conclusion. On the contrary, structurally, the three monologues in Job 29-42 (Job, Elihu and Yahweh) parallel the three dialogue cycles in Job 3-27. But the key question is theological and rhetorical, that is, what is the function of Elihu’s monologue in the present form?

Does Elihu side with the friends by reiterating some of their arguments? In other words, does he agree with the friends but thinks they did not do a very good job in refuting Job? Viewed in this way, Elihu is another protagonist; he responds to Job’s monologue just as the friends–who have now given up as indicated by Zophar’s silence in the last cycle of the dialogue–had previously responded to Job.

Or, does Elihu attempt to arbitrate between Job and God? In other words, he prepares us for the Yahweh speeches while at the same time he rebukes Job for his overreaching arrogance and self-righteousness. Elihu, then, appears more as a mediator than a protagonist even though he does confront Job regarding his excesses.

Or, is it some mixture of the two? In general, it seems to me that what Elihu says about Job is inaccurate or misapplied, but what Elihu says about God prepares us to hear the Yahweh speeches. In this light, Elihu’s four speeches may read in the following way:

  • First Speech (32-33): Job is self-righteous and God disciplines such.
  • Second Speech (34): Job deserved suffering and God is just.
  • Third Speech (35): Job is wicked and God is transcendent.
  • Fourth Speech (36-37): Job must listen and God is active.

So, why is Elihu absent from the Prologue and the Epilogue? Of course, one explanation is that the Elihu speeches were added after the Prologue and Epilogue or another is that Elihu’s words are sanctioned by the narrator/editor.  But it is also possible that something more subtle is at work in the rhetoric. Elihu is introduced by the narrator in Job 32 as a young man who thinks he can do better than the traditional and aged wisdom of the friends. He even denies that wisdom is associated with age and years (experience; 32:9). His youth is underscored and youth usually thinks it can do better. And, in fact, he does worse  in some ways (as I hope to demonstrate below). His youthful intrusion into the discussion among his elders is itself arrogant and angry (noted four times in the narrator’s introduction of Elihu in Job 32). In this way he sides with the friends as he wants to improve their arguments rather than contravene them. When God condemns the words of the friends–naming Eliphaz, Bildad, and Zophar–in the Epilogue that condemnation includes Elihu.

At the same time, his last speech–as well as occasional flashes in the other speeches–soars high in its account of God’s relation to creation. In this sense, Elihu moves the drama toward the Yahweh speeches. But Elihu’s speeches are flawed in the way they treat Job.

It is Elihu who is self-righteous. As Bartholomew and O’Dowd (Old Testament Wisdom Literature, 143) note, “Where God and the narrator declare Job ‘upright’ (yoser), Elihu claims to speak from an ‘upright’ heart (Job 33:3) and claims that God could send an angel (perhaps Elihu?) to teach Job what is ‘upright’ (Job 33:23) so that Job might in turn repent and confess that he perverted what was ‘upright’ (Job 33:27).” In essence, Elihu denies Job the very commendation that Yahweh gave Job in the Prologue. Elihu, like the friends, thinks Job is a sinner and has been disciplined for his wickedness. The condemnation of the friends, then, is also the condemnation of Elihu.

What does Elihu say?

First Speech (32:6-33:33).

Elihu is confounded by the silence of the friends after Job’s monologue (32:15) and he cannot sit idly by while God is defamed by Job. So, he must answer (32:17) or else he will burst like new wineskins (32:19). And he will tell it straight without flattery and without deference to their age. After this introduction, Elihu addresses Job directly (33:1-33). The Spirit of God, he claims, moves him to speak and he will do so out of the uprightness and sincerity of his heart (33:3-4).

Elihu gets to his point by quoting Job in 33:9-11. He summarizes Job’s protestations of innocence (cf. 9:21; 10:7,13; 13:24,27; 16:17; 19:11; 23:10; 27:5; 30:21). But the quotations are not exact. Elihu uses a word for “pure” or “clean” that only appears here in the Hebrew Bible. Further, Elihu absolutizes Job’s words, e.g., “without transgression” and “there is no iniquity in me.” Though Job did view God’s attack as an expression of hostility, Job never intimated that God invented sins (“occasions”) in order to assault him. Elihu denies Job’s innocence, but this is the substance of the Prologue.

Elihu believes, contrary to Job’s perception of divine silence, that God is actually speaking to Job in the circumstances of his suffering. Elihu contends that God is speaking through Job’s nightmares (33:15-18) and through the pain Job endures (33:19-22). And now, it seems, God is speaking to Job through Elihu, a messenger (angel) of God (33:23). Elihu will mediate God’s grace to Job. If Job repents and prays to God, then God will refresh him and repay Job for his conversion (33:26-28). According to Elihu, God is using this suffering in order to move Job to repentance (33:29-30). Job must confess his sin (33:27). This, Elihu assures Job, is wisdom (33:33). This is the same message that Job heard from his three friends in the dialogue and significantly parallels Eliphaz’s first speech in Job 4-5.

Second Speech (34:1-37).

Now Elihu addresses the friends (“wise men,” 34:2) and speaks of Job in the third person (cf. 34:5). He talks to the friends about Job in front of Job, which appears to me as rather insensitive. His imprudence is indicated by his second misquotation of Job (34:5-6; cf. 9:15, 20; 13:18; 16:8; 27:2, 6). He quotes him as saying he is “without transgression” (34:6). And he accuses Job of walking with the wicked and sharing the company of evildoers (34:8). He proves this by quoting Job again in 34:9:  ”For he has said, ‘It profits me nothing to take delight in God’.”

But this is the opposite of what Job actually said in 21:15-16 (cf. 9:22; 21:7; 24:1). Job quotes the wicked as saying that there is no profit in serving God, and he explicitly rejects that orientation. Elihu’s approach entails that the satan was correct–Job only serves God for profit and now has cursed God when God failed him. Elihu has manipulated Job’s words.

Yet, on the basis of this misapplication of Job’s words, Elihu appeals to the friends (the verb in “hear” in 34:10 is plural) to judge Job. God does only what is just and repays the wicked for their deeds. The point, it seems, is that the friends should see what happened to Job as a just judgment.

In 34:16, Elihu turns attention to Job (“hear” is now singular). He condemns the way Job has approached God. Job has no right to speak to God as he has. It is Job who is unjust and Job’s accusations against God are a case of the pot calling the kettle black (34:17-20).

Elihu clearly considers Job one with the “evildoers” (34:22), burdened with “wickedness” (34:26), and sharing the life of the “godless” who afflict the poor (34:28-30). And he appeals–in the second person singular (“you, Job”; 34:30-34)–to Job to repent, to choose submission. Job’s arrogance is beyond measure, and Elihu wishes that he “were tried to the limit” (34:36) though it is difficult to imagine what more Job would need to endure in order to fulfill Elihu’s wish-prayer.

Third Speech (35:1-16).

Elihu now rehearses the same argument based on divine transcendence that Eliphaz and Bildad employed. In attempting to apply the meaning of the chasm between God and humanity, Elihu–like the friends–undermines the dignity of humanity. What is God to humanity? Nothing, according to Elihu.  But actually humanity is highly valued by God and worth his attention, as the Prologue indicates (cf. Psalm 8).

This high view of transcendence, however, means that God will not hear Job, according to Elihu. He again quotes Job in 35:2, “You say, ‘I am in the right before God’.” On this ground, Job expects God to listen and hopes for vindication. Elihu regards this as the height of arrogance. If oppressed humanity cries out and God does not answer, why should Job expect God to answer him (35:9-15)? Elihu concludes that Job speaks “words without knowledge,” but the ignorance Elihu perceives is Job’s mistaken notion that God would actually listen to Job’s arrogant cries for relief.

Fourth Speech (36:1-37:24).

Strikingly, Elihu claims integrity (“perfect in knowledge.” 36:4), and he uses the same word that describes Job in the Prologue (“blameless;” 1:1, 8; 2:3, 9). Who do we believe? Whose integrity is in tact?

Elihu assures us that God “does not keep the wicked alive” and “does not withdraw his eyes from the righteous” (36:6-7). When the righteous are afflicted because of their sins, God will “complete their days in prosperity” if they will listen, repent and serve God (36:9, 11). And if they do not listen, then they will die with the wicked (36:12). Elihu is responding to Job’s question about the prosperity of the wicked (36:17-23) and he assures Job that they will be punished, even dying in their youth (36:13-14), but God wants something better for Job if only Job will repent (36:15-16).

It is at this point that Elihu prepares us for the Yahweh speeches. As he speaks of the transcendence and mystery of God within the world–who can prescribe the way for God? (36:23)–Elihu anticipates Yahweh’s own accounting of his transcendence. “Surely God is great, and we do not know him” (36:26). He even anticipates Yahweh’s questioning of Job. “Do you know…” (37:15-16)?

Elihu grounds the greatness of God in God’s presence in the creation.  From 36:27 to 37:13 Elihu offers a doxological poem on God’s activity within creation. God sends rain on the wastelands and his voice thunders over the land. All creation “accomplish[es] all that he commands” (37:12). Moreover, God is active for a purpose–”for correction, or for his land, or for love” (37:13). God is at work within the creation to accomplish his purposes.

What does this mean for Job? Elihu will not leave Job with any doubts (37:14-24).  ”Hear this, O Job,” Elihu announces. Given God’s sovereign work within the creation, “mortals fear him” but “he does not regard any who are wise in their own conceit” (literally, “heart”; 37:24).  Job, did you hear it?

According to Elihu, Job is conceited and arrogant. Job does not fear God. God will not listen to Job. God will not answer Job because God does not listen to the pleas of the wicked.  Only if Job would repent, then God would answer him.

Elihu was probably more surprised than anyone when God showed up and answered Job.

10 Comments | Biblical Texts | Tagged: , , , , | Permalink
Posted by John Mark Hicks

« Previous Entries
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 938 other followers

%d bloggers like this: