Laws Publishing

THE THREE FRIENDS AND THEIR ARGUMENT

JIM LAWS

Chapters 4-14 center around the theme of the character of God. Eliphaz lectures, supposedly speaking from experience, and refers Job to the purity of God. The friends, who have come to comfort Job (2:11), are adamant in their position.

Their position is that the righteous are rewarded; the unrighteous are punished, and that Job, therefore, is a willful sinner in need of repentance. Precisely stated they contend (1) all suffering is just punishment, (2) Job is suffering, therefore (3) Job is a sinner receiving just punishment for sin.

At this point it may be observed that the friends are contending that there is no innocent suffering. They contend that there is a type of cause and effect relationship, which says that a man gets what he deserves, and gets such immediately, that is, in this life.

It is interesting to realize that there are Christian people, who hold to this very position today. Those, who lack either health or wealth, have failed to be pleasing to God. However, the friends of Job, though they do not realize it, are wrong. They, in effect, argue Satan’s case for him, that case being that Job is not sincere in his devotion to God, but serves Him for what he will obtain from such; hence making god unworthy of such devotion. This position of the three is most deceptive. It might be termed a half-truth. Yes, often sin leads to suffering, however, it is false to say that all suffering can be traced directly to the sins of the sufferer. Consider the teaching of Jesus regarding the “eighteen, upon whom the tower in Siloam fell” (Luke 13:4). Jesus tells that it was not due to sin (Luke 13:5). Nor is one to conclude that physical infirmity in and of itself is an indication of sin (John 9:1-3). The very question of the disciples (vs.2) is but an indication of a commonly held vie, which holds that all difficulties, troubles, misfortunes, and illnesses are the result of punishment for sin. Though, as has been mentioned, there are times when one’s suffering is the result of sin. It is not always that way, as they three friends of Job try to argue.

In the second round of speeches the three friends of Job move from the suggestion to the insinuation that Job is a sinner and is suffering just punishment. In chapter 15 Eliphaz begins to speak in sharper tones, as he ridicules Job’s attitude, and accuses Job of irreverent talk (15:1-16). “Hast thou heard the secret of God? And dost thou restrain wisdom to thyself?”(15:8) Bildad makes the point that the wicked are snared and forgotten (chapter 18); Zophar accuses Job with heartless observation that the wicked are short-lived and lose their wealth (chapter20). Now the friends are shifting from their initial attempts to console Job to more of a bullying of him to accept their position.

In the third cycle of speeches (chapters 22-37) Job’s friends move even further in their attempts to convince him that he is guilty and, thus, deserving of such treatment. In the first cycle of speeches Job’s visitors implied (suggested) that Job was a sinner and appealed to him to repent. In cycle two they insinuated that he was guilty and stresses the terrible fate of the wicked. In the third cycle they attacked with open accusations of specific sins, and only Eliphaz gave a call for Job to turn back to God (22:21-30). Eliphaz attempted to cite six sins of which Job was supposed to be guilty (22:5-9).

It is clear that the dominating theme or basic argument, if you will, of Job’s three visitors centers on the fate of the ungodly. This theme occurs in each of the friends’ speeches, especially in both the first and second cycles. Eliphaz argues such in 4:7-11 (with Job responding to him in 5:2-7) and in 15:17-35. Bildad argues such in 8:8-19 and in 18:5-21, and so does Zophar in 11:11 and in 20:4-25 (with Job responding to him in 27:13-23). Therefore, in all of this there is really one argument which is presented, developed, altered, and expounded: that argument being that all suffering is just punishment for sin, Job is suffering; therefore, Job is receiving a just punishment for his sins. The righteous are rewarded, and the unrighteous are punished; there are no innocent sufferers. Hence, all three condemn Job based on their argument. This they must do, given their logical presupposition. Notice the dilemma the three friends are in: they must, either justify Job at God’s expenses, and in turn say that God is unworthy of devotion, adoration, and praise, or justify God at Job’s expense, and in turn say that Job is in reality the servant of Satan, rather than that of God (refer to 1:9). The three visitors share the latter horn of the dilemma.

JOB  continue

HOME