ChristadelphianBooksOnline
David Baird
The Education of Job

Chapters 6, 7 - The First Cycle of Speeches - Job

Job's Answer to Eliphaz

	6:1-7	Job justifies his grief and impatience
	6:8-13	He repeats his desire for death
	6:14-23	He reproaches his friends for their failure to help him
	6:24-30	Job rejects the conclusions of their arguments

Reflection and Appeal

	7:1-10	Job ponders his hopeless, helpless condition
	7:11-21	Job's intemperate appeal to God

How is Job to respond to Eliphaz? Eliphaz, while courteous, has been insensitive. While not accusing, he has been less than subtle. While offering a solution, he has only irritated Job with his moralising. Rather than offer sympathy, he has indicated that Job is overreacting. Even if we give Eliphaz the benefit of the doubt, his words still stung the tormented Job. Only the sufferer feels his own grief. Eliphaz has not helped and Job responds with an alarming emotional outburst.

He seeks to justify his behaviour. How could they possibly appreciate what he is going through? If only he could die. Eliphaz has not identified what he has done to deserve this treatment. "Teach me," Job exclaims, "And I will hold my tongue: and cause me to understand where I have erred" (6:24).

In Chapter 7 he relates the pitiful state of mankind and since death is the only remedy for that condition he becomes passionate in his plea for God to slay him. Job closes with words that almost doubt God's fairness. How far Job has been stretched that he, a man who greatly loved his Lord, is beginning to question God. He cannot understand "Why have You set me as Your Target?" (7:20 NKJV)

Job's Answer to Eliphaz

6:1-7 Job justifies his grief and impatience

Job is not in any way appeased by the words of Eliphaz. Instead he reacts very passionately to his statement that, "For he is a fool who is destroyed by complaining, And envy slays the simple one" (5:2 Delitzsch). Job picks up the word Delitzsch translates as "complaining" (kaas) and hurls it back. "Oh that my grief (kaas) were thoroughly weighed, and my calamity laid in the balances together!" (6:2). If only Eliphaz could appreciate the vexation and ruin of Job's life he would not be so glib in his treatment of it.

"To be honest," Job continues, "My calamity far outweighs my complaining." Job represents his tragedy with the familiar hyperbole of the sand of the sea. It is immeasurable. It is little wonder that his "words have been rash" (6:3 NKJV).

The reason why his grief is so overwhelming is not just because of the pain and the indignity but also the understanding that God is responsible. Job is addled and afraid. It appears that God is his adversary. God is likened to an archer who has fired poison-tipped arrows into Job's spirit. Job is seized with fear as he perceives God set in battle array against him.

Job next continues to justify his wild words while also chiding his friends. Are not his friends like wild asses in a field of lush grass? Surely they have no reason to complain. Does an ox low when its fodder is within reach? How can they fairly criticise a man when they are in clover and he is in need?

6:6 presents a few difficulties as the details are unclear. Two opinions are advanced:

i)	Job is referring to the speech of Eliphaz. It is insipid and tasteless, of no value to Job's situation; or
ii)	Job is alluding to his drama. How can he enjoy something like the traumas he has undergone and is undergoing? It is like trying to enjoy tasteless food.

I believe Job is referring to both. Job has recognised that God is behind his suffering. The link with 6:4 is thus made but Eliphaz's assertion, "Behold, happy is the man that God correcteth," is merely the platitude of a man who is like an ass in a lush field of grass or an ox in easy reach of its fodder. Both his suffering and the advice of Eliphaz are completely unappetising to Job.

As Job continues, "The very dishes which I cannot stomach, these are my diet in my sickness" (6:7 JB). Job's complaining is not without cause. How can Eliphaz object when as Job said in 3:24, "My only food is sighs, and my groans pour out like water" (JB)? And why must his vile diet be supplemented with the bland homily of Eliphaz?

6:8-13 He repeats his desire for death

All Job wants is simple. He desires death. He condenses the enormous amount of feeling that filled his opening lamentation (Chapter 3) into a few lines. Death is his request and it is not as Eliphaz would see it - the just destruction of a sinner by God (4:9,19-20, 5:2). Even if it pleases God to crush Job, so be it!

Note how Job again uses Eliphaz's words in his reply. Eliphaz spoke of sinners being "crushed (daka) before the moth" (4:19) and how the foolish man's children "are crushed (daka) in the gate" (5:4). Job declares that if God chose "to destroy (daka)" (6:9) him it would give Job comfort. How ironical. His friends came to comfort him (2:11) but now after the most venerated of the three offers advice Job proclaims that comfort can only come with death.

While death is what Job longs for (tikvah - hope - 6:8) so that his misery may end, how is it his "consolation" (Ges)? The original Hebrew is obscure in 6:10 but the New International Version probably approaches the correct sense with, "Then I would still have this consolation - my joy in unrelenting pain - that I had not denied the words of the Holy One (qadosh)."

Had Eliphaz accused Job of denying the Holy One? Not directly, but perhaps that was the underlying message of 5:1 - "Call if you will, but who will answer you? To which of the holy ones (qadosh) will you turn?" (NIV).

Job in his aggrieved state gives the impression that he is clutching at Eliphaz's comments and veiled accusations intent on defending himself. To which holy one could Job turn? Even if it pleased the Holy One to crush him, he would never be condemned for denying Him. We see Job lifting his mind to a higher spiritual plane. What is his consolation? Clearly, the resurrection, judgment and future reward. There is no doubt that such concepts were part of his understanding (14:13-15, 19:25-27). Job could see beyond the grave and this faint scent of the Kingdom age seems to marginally dilute Job's desperation; especially as evidenced in Chapter 3 where Job wished he had never been born and exposed to God's ways. As we progress in our consideration of the dialogue between Job and his comforters we will find that Job's desire for oblivion is less strident and the prospect of salvation occasionally bobs to the surface.

Having requested death, Job wants to know why he has to wait for it (6:11). Eliphaz told him to wait as sooner or later God would save him (5:17-27). Job claims that he just does not have the physical strength to do so. He is not strong like stone or brass. He is frail and, unlike inanimate objects, possesses intense sensitivities. He is a man of flesh whose resources are spent. He has nothing to live for.

In concluding 6:13 Job again questions another of Eliphaz's observations. He had declared that God "disappointeth the devices of the crafty, so that their hands cannot perform their enterprise (tushiya)" (5:12). In other words, God confounds the shrewd so that they cannot perform in accordance with their wisdom. Perhaps Job detected another underhanded poke at him; that Job's affliction was divine retribution against his shrewdness. Job's response - "Is not wisdom (tushiya) driven quite from me?" In his adversity, Job had all shrewdness, any ability to succeed, driven from him. Not only was he physically debilitated, he was incapable of using his intellect to develop a solution. To whom could he turn (Jer 9:23-24)?

6:14-23 He reproaches his friends for their failure to help him

If shrewdness has been driven from him then somebody must help Job. Up until this moment Job had been defending himself as well as disputing some of Eliphaz's reasonings. Now he turns and confronts his comforters. How good were they? In not demonstrating kindness to one who is afflicted (mas) they could not claim to be religious men.

There is some dispute over the meaning of 6:14. Of the options presented I prefer that advanced by the Revised Standard Version: "He who withholds kindness from a friend forsakes the fear of the Almighty" (see also JB, Andersen). Job is afflicted or as the Hebrew (mas) means, "one who is consumed with calamities" (Ges). Mas is derived from a word meaning, "to melt, to flow down, to waste away" (Ges). Job expected his friends to comfort him. Indeed he could be close to casting off his faith in God (Delitzsch) and therefore should be treated with sensitivity, not with insinuations of guilt. Why should he be vexed further? Surely his pain is enough. If they truly feared God they would not be so callous in their treatment of Job. This, I believe, is Job's intended meaning. The context bears this out as Job continues to reproach his friends.

I suppose we can easily do an Eliphaz. Instead of assisting our needy brother we psychoanalyse him. We ponder rather than provide. We hypothesize rather than help. What use is that (Jas 2:16)? Practical loving help is the spirit of the true brotherhood (1Pet 4:8).

In 6:15 he begins by saying that his brothers (note: they are his brothers not his foes) are as false as a wadi - a winter steam that can be a rushing torrent but dries up, often completely, in the summer. Such are his friends whose sympathy has also dried up. When he does not need their help, symbolically winter when water is plentiful, their help is overflowing. When he needs their help the ground is parched. No help is forthcoming.

In case they missed Job's complaint, he elaborates it in 6:16-17. In winter the streams cascade off the snow-clad slopes turbid with ice, soil and snow. When summer comes they are dried up. What value are they to the traveller? When the streams are needed they are gone.

6:18 describes the wanderings of the ancient caravans in their struggle to find water. They follow a promising water source only to have it disappear into the rocks or evaporate in the aridity of the desert. Streams that were once bubbling, full of sustenance, are now dry, mocking creek beds.

Just so Eliphaz is fully aware of Job's chagrin, Job refers to people very familiar to Eliphaz. "The caravans of Tema (Eliphaz's district - 2:11) look to them, and on them Sheba's convoys build their hopes. Their trust proves vain, they reach them only to be thwarted" (6:19-20 JB). Job's hopes had just as swiftly been built up. His friends came from afar to comfort him and mourn with him. But, like a desert mirage, he was thwarted. He was humiliated by his friends. Job uses two words, similar in meaning, to stress his shame. "Confounded" (bosh) means "to be ashamed" (Ges), "disconcerted, disappointed" (TWOT) and "ashamed" (haper) means "to blush, be ashamed ... Mostly used of shame arising from disappointed hope" (Ges). Haper is primarily used in Scripture to reinforce the emotion of bosh (e.g. Psa 35:26; Isa 24:23; Jer 15:9; Mic 3:7).

6:21 is the punchline. The New International Version gives us a solid, conservative rendering of this Hebraically difficult verse with, "Now you have proved to be of no help, you see something dreadful and are afraid." How were they afraid? They have all had the fortitude to sit for days with the disease-ridden Job. Eliphaz has not been afraid to express his opinion. Perhaps their fear was that they did not want to get too close to Job; a man who by their conventional theology must be experiencing the displeasure of God. Fear can present a barrier between counsellor and client and Job is accusing his friends of being fearful to help him.

Job had not asked anything of them. He did not request that they bring something, or a ransom from their wealth, or redemption from an enemy. All Job wanted from them was comfort, their sympathy. He had received veiled accusations of wrong-doing. Not good enough. But is Job being illogical? Even if he did ask for the items he mentioned in 6:22-23 not only would they be difficult to procure, they would be inappropriate for his circumstances. Job, in his tormented state, is using these examples, not because he desired them, but to expose the little he did need and his disappointment at not receiving it. Job is being a bit extreme because his friends did come to comfort and mourn without waiting for a specific invitation. Their good intentions broke down only because, after seven days meditating on Job's dilemma, they arrived at the wrong conclusions.

6:24-30 Job rejects the conclusions of their arguments

How severe Job's trials were. And how difficult it would have been for Eliphaz to counsel a man almost hysterical with grief, particularly when his creed dictated that Job was a sinner. Job knows where Eliphaz's line of thought is heading - an open accusation of sin - so Job gets in first, "Put me right, and I will say no more; show me where I have been at fault" (6:24 JB). The crucial issue is crystallized in Job's outburst. Eliphaz has not directly accused him but Job, sensitive to the first speech he heard, easily detected Eliphaz's message. "Where have I erred (shaga)." The primary emphasis in shaga is sin done inadvertently (TWOT). If only they could identify the causative sin, he would accept their logic and cease complaining.

After all, he continues in 6:25, "Right words are powerful, but what does your arguing argue" (Green). Thus far they had not revealed anything of note. He was not seeking condemnation wrung out of familiar philosophy. He wanted proof, specific evidence, before he would accept their reasonings.

Perhaps they could accuse him of being rash with his mouth. He had admitted such in 6:3 but these words were subsequent to the disasters of the first two chapters. Even those words, justifies Job, are merely desperate speech that the wind blows away (see RSV, JB). Despite Eliphaz's criticism of complaining speech (5:2) Job is convinced that the rash words he uttered are not worthy of reproof.

Job attacks in 6:27. It is Job's conviction that they are the ones who stand condemned, not him. If they accuse him, he can accuse them. Job can give as good as he gets. His accusations against them are exaggerated, rough and designed to hurt. In Job's estimation they are so pitiless, so remarkably dispassionate, they would cast lots for an orphan of a debtor in order to sell the child into slavery. They would barter away a friend. The relationship between Job and his friends is deteriorating. In 6:15 they are his brothers. By 6:27 he feels they would gladly sell him to the highest bidder.

Are such insults justified? We must never forget the extremity of Job's condition coupled with the insensitivity of Eliphaz's carefully constructed opening speech. Despite this, Job's words would not have enhanced objective discussion.

After stunning his friends with the force of his feelings, Job returns to his primary debating point. Convinced of his innocence he asks his friends to "be content" ("show willingness" TWOT) to look him straight in the face. No longer should they avert their eyes as one may do to a repulsive sight or a dying man. He is confident that he is correct and sure that they will arrive at the same conclusion.

In what seems to be deliberate irony, Job urges them to "Think again" (NEB), "Relent" (NIV, JB) about their assessment of him (6:29). It was not that long ago Eliphaz was indirectly telling Job that he should repent - "Despise not the chastening of the Almighty" (5:17) - and that his words were for Job's well-being (5:27). Job now encourages them to relent from their original dogma, rethink their stance on the matter because his righteousness was at stake and, as far as he was concerned, it "still stands" (NKJV).

Maybe they thought there was iniquity in his tongue. No, infers Job. To him there was no disclaiming the rectitude of his speech. He acknowledged its rashness but will not back down from its essence. Did they consider his taste, his moral discernment, to be suspect? He knew they thought he has spoken ill-advisedly and that his moral sense was befuddled. Until he could convince them otherwise he was wasting his breath on them. He has reasoned with them, rebuked them, insulted them, challenged them, pre-empted them. Now he turns from them.

Reflection and Appeal

7:1-10 Job ponders his hopeless, helpless condition

Job, having rejected his friend's counsel, moves into a soliloquy that leads to a remonstration against God Himself. Briefly, he reflects on the endless drudgery of human existence before describing the unmitigated abjection of his dread disease. Just when it appears that Job may rise above his environment, his recall of his condition plunges him into despair. In chapter 6 there were tiny specks of light as he brushed against the future (6:10) and he confidently challenged his comforters to reveal the sin their philosophy required for its vindication. All that is past. His lament is that his life is but a breath speeding hopelessly to oblivion.

His opening statement is general, "Is not man's life on earth nothing more than pressed service, his time no better than hired drudgery?" (JB). Job would not have used such language to describe his lot prior to his affliction. Even in its early stages Job could see more to life than "pressed service" or "hired drudgery" (1:20-22, 2:10). But Job is now some months removed from then.

He felt trapped, unable to escape. He was like a servant working in the fierce heat of the day longing for shade and respite. The indignity of it all. He reduces mankind to the symbols of servants (ebed - commonly used for "slave") and hirelings (sakir - "one who works for wages" - a description of the lowly working class. Job's servants were not sakir. They were the less derogatory naar - "young men" Green - 1:15,16,17,19). Job was not averse to hard work. It was his loss of dignity that rankled. He was worse off than the slave and the hired labourer. At least the slave had shade and the labourers received a salary. He had "months of emptiness" (RSV) or "futility" (NKJV, NIV) and "nights of misery" (RSV, JB).

Think about what Job is saying with "months of emptiness". It gives us a sharper insight into why he was reacting the way he was. When we read the Book of Job we could understand it to cover a short, albeit dramatic, period of time. No, even at this early stage we are talking of months. Job could be exaggerating. I think not. The message of Job's plight had to travel considerable distances in order to reach his three friends. They met together before deciding to travel as a group to visit Job (2:11). After what would have been slow and laborious travel, not forgetting that Eliphaz was quite old, they finally arrived in Uz only to be stunned into seven days of silence. It is little wonder that the emotion of Chapter 3 is so vigorous. It has been months of unrelenting distress. It should hardly surprise that Job is appalled by Eliphaz's comments and is pitched into deep despair. His condition over those months has degenerated, both mentally and physically.

He wants relief in sleep but even this is denied him as night is the worst time for depression. We usually have difficulty sleeping when we are vexed with a problem. Imagine the quality of Job's sleep. Time is so magnified for Job. Everything is in slow-motion. He wants the new day. Perhaps it offers hope. "But the night is long" (RSV). He would love to sleep but he is "full of tossings to and fro unto the dawning of the day" (7:4). Even when he does sleep he is plagued with nightmares (7:13-14).

His body is creeping with maggots, born in his putrefaction, and covered with dirt-like scabs ("clods of dust") which alternately harden and crack open oozing vile pus. His mind is raging with conflicting thoughts. While the nights seem long and very slow, he laments "Swifter than a weaver's shuttle my days passed, and vanished, leaving no hope behind" (7:6 JB).

"Hope" (tikvah) also means "cord" or "thread" and is translated as "line" in Joshua 2:18,21. In keeping with the analogy of the weaver's shuttle, the New English Bible renders 7:6 as, "My days are swifter than a shuttle and comes to an end as the thread runs out." Job sees no prospect of recovery. The suggestions of Eliphaz (5:17-27) have not encouraged him to think otherwise.

In 7:7 Job's soliloquy changes as he addresses somebody. Most suggest God (NIV even inserting a textually unsupported, "O God."), few suggest his friends. I believe that 7:7-10 is spoken by Job to anybody who would care to listen. It is a general lament. His life is but a breath. It can cease at any moment. His eyes would never again see joy. Sorrow mars his final days and in sorrow he expects to die. Job is but a cloud dissolved by the hot sun, whisked away on the breeze. He goes down to the grave not to come up again.

Is Job denying the resurrection? Has his despair reached such a level? Maybe, but 7:10 may clarify the problem. Perhaps he is stating that he would have no further participation in the present dispensation. He would not see his family and his friends would see him no more. They would return home with only memories of their deceased friend.

7:11-21 Job's intemperate appeal to God

This is all too much for Job. He must speak out. Not to his friends, not in soliloquy, but to God Himself.

Most versions start 7:11 with "Therefore." Literally it should read, "Even I" (Green) or, "I cannot restrain my mouth" (Roth). Of all people, Job, he who refused to speak against God, he who blessed God (1:21-22), feels constrained to say something. Before he dies Job will pour out his complaint in the bitterness of his soul. Once started his pent-up bitterness pours out to God. Has the Satan succeeded? Has Job finally cracked under the pressure, fulfilling his adversary's prediction? No, Job does not curse. He questions. He complains. He seeks forgiveness. His language seems intemperate but Job's adversary is not vindicated.

How he cries to God! He wants to know if he really is such a threat that he needs to be so stringently controlled. Is he the sea, a mighty ocean, that must not exceed its limit (Gen 1:10)? Is he the sea monster, the mythical Tiamat of eastern mythology who was subdued by the Creator and closely guarded lest it break loose and destroy the world? Job is just a frail mortal, a helpless creature who does not need such divine watchfulness.

Even the benefit of sleep is kept from him as he remains virtually in a state of insomnia. When he does manage some sleep he is plagued with nightmares. And it is God who brings them on to Job - "thou scarest me with dreams, and terrifiest me through visions" (7:14).

Why must he be kept alive "So that my soul chooseth strangling, Death rather than these my bones!" (7:15 Roth)? But Job is becoming careless. He considers God to be his terrorist. So he wants God to leave him alone; to stop harassing him.

In 7:17-19 Job continues to bitterly question why God ascribes to man so much of His attention. In stark contrast to Psalm 8:4, where God is praised for lifting man from the dirt to be crowned with glory, Job feels that God should leave mankind alone. After all, man should not be magnified. This is a true statement. But, Job also declares that God's attention has exacerbated man's situation. This is a false statement pulled out of a bitter mind begotten by its circumstances. Rather than feel separated from God, Job is vividly aware of being under His constant scrutiny. We can almost feel his exasperation as he interrogates, "Will you never take your eyes off me long enough for me to swallow my spittle?" (7:19 JB). "Swallow my spittle" is a proverb for the minimum of time. The New International Version interprets it as, "Even for an instant."

Job's attitude is in contrast with the sentiments of some of the faithful elsewhere in Scripture. Psalm 22:11 states, "Be not far from me; for trouble is near." Psalm 121 is given over to gratitude for the closeness of God when the Psalmist is in distress. Job's reaction is confined by his limited view. He is consumed by his condition. He believes he is an object of ceaseless suffering.

Job will eventually be educated in such a way that he will learn to never again question God's methods (42:2-6). But who of us would not react at least as Job has done? In similar circumstances, the words we would have uttered could well have made Job's appear respectable.

Despite the abrasiveness of Job's talking, he acknowledges that he has sinned. He does not pretend to be sinless. Some authorities insert "If" at the start of 7:20 thus making sin hypothetical. Not only does this vary with 7:21 - "Why dost thou not pardon my transgression" - it lacks support in the original Hebrew. Literal versions (e.g. Roth, Green, YLit) support the Authorised Version. Job's question is not, "Have I sinned?", but, "What have I done to You to deserve this?" Does the punishment fit the crime? Why has Job been set up as an "object to attack" (Soncino)? Why should Job be a burden to God (not "myself" - considered an Emendation of the Sopherim - see comments on 1:5)?

Job is bemused. Why doesn't God simply pardon his transgression? He cannot understand why he has not been forgiven. He had made offerings for sin (1:5), he demanded that his friends reveal his unsuspected sin (6:24), he is unaware of any sin that may have provoked God's anger. "In a short time" (Ges - preferred over "Now" 7:21) he will be dead. Job is concerned that God will seek for him ("in the morning" is not in the original), perhaps to improve his lot, and it will be too late.

So Job ends his reply to Eliphaz and awaits the words of Bildad. Satan has not won. Job still puts his faith in God but God's inexplicable ways have stretched Job to breaking point. Job does not know that God is watching and waiting for the test to run its course so that He can state His approval of Job publicly (42:8).