ChristadelphianBooksOnline
David Baird
The Education of Job

Chapters 9, 10 - The First Cycle of Speeches - Job

Job's Reply to Bildad

	9:1-4	God is just - who can defy Him
	9:5-10	God is omnipotent
	9:11-13	God's ways are inscrutable
	9:14-21	Man cannot stand up to God
	9:22-24	Suffering is not always evidence of sin
	9:25-31	The hopelessness of Job's case
	9:32-35	Job's desire for an umpire

Job's Attempt to Reason with God

	10:1-7	"Why are You doing this to me?"
	10:8-12	God's former care of Job
	10:13-17	Job's confusion
	10:18-22	Job's cries of despair

This particular speech of Job is not without its difficulties. Virtually every verse provides a struggle for its interpreter. How deep is Job's despair? Is Job sarcastic or genuine in the statements he utters? Are these expressions of confusion or bitterness? Many commentators, in seeking to come to grips with this speech, arrive at conclusions that lose sight of the finale of Job's drama. Job's faith is stronger than his friends. His mind is more spiritually advanced. His desire to arrive at the truth is more pronounced, more adventurous.

To appreciate this speech we need to determine Job's thoughts and moods and, of course, words on paper do not fully convey the tone of his voice nor the state of his mind. We are required to make an assessment and this has to be made in the light of the overall picture. Yes, Job is confused but strong in his pursuit of answers. He is despairing but this does not upend his thought processes. Emotions do swirl throughout his utterances but there is still logic within them.

Job's opening question, "How can a man be righteous before God?" (NKJV) is not derisive. It is another step in his earnest quest to fathom God's relationship with man.

Job's Reply to Bildad

9:1-4 God is just - who can defy Him

Job commences his reply to Bildad by agreeing with him. God will not cast away the perfect man (8:20) but, continues Job in repeating one of the major questions of the Book, "How can a mortal (enosh) be righteous before God?" (NIV - Eliphaz asked this question in 4:17). This problem is as old as the fall in Eden. How can man attain to a position in which he is acceptable and well-pleasing to God? How can he be reconciled to God? The language used is legal. How can man win in a legal dispute with God? The answer, he cannot. The difference between man and God is so vast a negative answer is demanded. As 9:3 declares, should man contend (i.e. conduct a lawsuit - Andersen) with God, man is in a hopeless position. God could ask a thousand questions that would be beyond man's capacity to answer: a fact clearly displayed by Yahweh's questions in Chapters 39 and 41.

But is it hopeless? Job believes there must be some way that man can be reconciled to God else Job would have retired hurt long ago. You cannot harden yourself against God and expect to prosper in His eyes. This is Job's message in 9:4. God's wisdom far exceeds the puny intelligence of man and His strength is incontestable. That does not mean we harden ourselves against Him. Pharaoh hardened his heart and was destroyed. Nobody can defy God and succeed. Job was not about to do this.

Job's faith was still intact but how can he secure his vindication with God? Job puts his situation in its proper context as he exclaims the perfection of God and, defeated by his weakness, requests an umpire between himself and God (9:33). Surely, in light of the wonderful saving work of Christ hundreds of years later, a far-sighted solution.

9:5-10 God is omnipotent

In a soaring lyric outburst, full of figurative language, Job extols the omnipotence of God. While the description of God provided by Eliphaz (5:8-16) is reassuring, full of hope for the common man, and almost benevolent, Job's description is disturbing and powerful.

As the Creator, God has the potency to move mountains, to shake the earth, to cause the pillars of the earth (figurative language for the foundations of the earth - Job did not believe the earth to be supported by pillars - see 26:7) to tremble. This has to be sufficient evidence of God's power. No, Job takes our attention into the heavens.

The sun is subject to divine call. Only God can influence its operation (Gen 1:17-18; Exo 10:21-22; Josh 10:12). He can seal off the light of the stars. "He alone stretches out the heavens and treads on the waves of the seas. He is the Maker of the Bear, and Orion, the Pleiades and the constellations of the south" (9:8-9 NIV).

He is the great and wonderful creator.

How do we relate to such force? How do we compare to Almighty God? God's omnipotence in Creation is beyond all human understanding. Man is helpless before it. Job in virtually a verbatim repeat of Eliphaz (5:9) agrees that God's acts are too numerous to count and too meticulous to comprehend.

Even in this doxological section Job seems to find opportunity to respond to one of Bildad's jibes. Bildad (8:18) had picked up on Job's use of "place" (maqom) in 6:17. There Job compared his friends to wadis in summer; valueless to the parched traveller. Bildad's retort was that they were not the ones consumed out of their place, Job was. Job in 9:6 puts a stop to this unpleasant raillery by declaring that God "shaketh the earth out of her place (maqom)." What value were they to God, He who can master all the forces of nature? Is this pernickety point-scoring relevant when God alone has all the points?

9:11-13 God's ways are inscrutable

In 9:5-10 God's potency is manifestly grand - earthquakes, incomprehensible creative acts and possibly volcanic activity. In spite of this overwhelming evidence, God is invisible and indiscernible. God's unseen working fills Job with dread. As if startled by a sudden awareness of God's imperceptible dealings, Job proclaims, "Behold, He takes away, who can turn Him back; who will say to Him, What are You doing?" (Soncino).

We cannot question God's activity. He is above the thinking of man. God is not responsible to man. Man is responsible to God (Isa 45:8-12). He works invisibly, irresistibly and does not turn or restrain His anger without having accomplished His purpose. "The allies of the proud lie prostrate before Him" (9:13 NKJV).

"Proud" (rahab) is not easy to interpret in this context. It literally means, "fierceness, insolence, pride" (Ges), has allusions to Egypt elsewhere in Scripture (Psa 87:4, 89:10; Isa 30:7), is linked with the sea (26:12; Isa 51:9-10) and is prevalent in Hebrew folklore as the ocean monster of chaos defeated by Yahweh in primordial conflict so as to permit an ordered universe. Therefore, some would consider 9:13 as a reference to God's destruction of Egypt. This is unlikely as it is not reflected by 26:12 nor is the Book of Job replete with identifiable historical notations. Others are convinced that Job is referring to the mythological upheavals of the primeval world to emphasise the power of God. While there may be such an allusion in 7:12, it seems incongruous that Job would use such a reference in regard to Almighty God.

There is simply no record of belief in the instance or reality of such mythological creatures in the Old Testament. 7:12 is a maybe, but even there Job evinces no belief in Tiamat. He is using hyperbole and the language of his time to bewail his circumstances and to stress the invincible might of God.

In 9:13, in describing God's irresistible ways, Job insists that those who were once helpers of arrogance lie at his feet. What incident could this be? It could be any number that were apparent to Job and his three friends. We do not know, but his friends do not cross-examine Job on this point.

9:14-21 Man cannot stand up to God

Job is convinced. The evidence is conclusive. Even if Job is innocent before God, he cannot presume to dispute with God. He is so feeble in His presence.

Job now appears to be dealing with Bildad's solution, "If thou wouldest seek unto God betimes and make supplication to the Almighty: If thou wert pure and upright" (8:5-6). The Hebrew in 9:15 is vague and numerous interpretations abound. The circumstances would favour the interpretation that Job is not necessarily questioning his innocence, moreso the usefulness of Bildad's advice. Even though he may be convinced of his innocence (RSV, NEB) Job would accept God's judgment and appeal for mercy.

For Job, Bildad's advice is simplistic. Job believes that even if he did call on God and God did make some kind of response, "I would not believe that he was listening to my voice" (9:16 RSV). God is so remote that Job would not believe that He would bother to answer man. He could not believe his senses.

Is Job contradicting himself? Possibly, but he attempts to explain his reasons for this. While Andersen considers these expressions incredible and believes that Job did not actually say this as it contradicts what Job uttered elsewhere (13:15), Job is betraying the emotions he is experiencing. His speech is not perfect in its expression or consistency. It cannot be. His words change with his feelings, sometimes within a few verses. This is not to detract from Job's overall philosophy. That always remains consistent.

How taxing it is for Job. In 5:1 Eliphaz says, "Make your appeal then. Will you find an answer? To which of the Holy Ones will you turn?" (JB). In other words, Job's case does not hold up unless it is compatible with the wisdom of Eliphaz. In 8:5 Bildad states that it is simply a matter of asking God for mercy and doing the right thing. Job is bewildered. Eliphaz's wisdom is faulty but God does not appear to want to answer Job. Job believes he has done nothing wrong yet he is not vindicated by God.

Instead he feels the pain of being under the finger of God. Contrary to Job's earlier statement, God is not remote. Job feels His strength. "For He crushes me with a tempest, and multiplies my wounds without cause" (9:17 NKJV). "Tempest" is searah in Hebrew (used elsewhere only in Nah 1:3) and is derived from a word that is used to describe the motion and creeping of the skin of a person stricken with terror. Job was not just dispirited and wracked with pain, he was also terrified by what has happened and what could still happen. He gains no respite. The only thing he feels that God is giving him is bitterness. His sufferings seem to him to go beyond what is just.

What is the answer? "Shall I try force? Look how strong he is! Or go to court? But who will summon him?" (9:19 JB). There was no person who would be Job's advocate to take up Job's case on his behalf. Perhaps he could defend himself? No, even though he thought himself right he would condemn himself. His sufferings combined with his awe of God would blind his eyes to facts and move him to speak without proper thought. It is not that God would prove Job perverse, Job is afraid that he would be so overawed and confused by God's presence he could not carry out his defence triumphantly or even accurately.

Job feels so inadequate before God. While convinced of his innocence (9:20 - most versions) he cannot establish his righteousness. He cannot elevate himself above that of a mortal man. He has come to realise his true position before God and despises his life. He would be happy to die. Job could also be using this term to respond to Bildad's confident assertion, "Behold, God will not cast away (mahas) a perfect man" (8:20), and the advice of Eliphaz, "Despise (mahas) not the chastening of the Almighty" (5:17). "No," infers Job, "You have it all wrong. I do not despise God, nor do I believe that God despises me. I despise (mahas) myself (9:21)!"

9:22-24 Suffering is not always evidence of sin

Job now directly touches on the principle that he and his friends were debating. It is only a brief visitation as he returns to the consideration of his case by 9:25. Nevertheless it demonstrates that Job's philosophy has been invariable since 2:10. God can give both good and evil to a righteous man. Job insists, "There is one thing - therefore I maintain - The innocent and the wicked He destroyeth" (9:22 Delitzsch).

Even in this essentially accurate observation we can witness the depths of Job's gloom. Jesus Christ spoke of his Father as a nourisher who "maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and the unjust" (Matt 5:45). Job only sees God as a destroyer. The sentiments may be similar - God is equitable in His dealings - but Job sees little hope, only destruction.

Job has directly contradicted the stanchion of the argument of Eliphaz (4:7) and Bildad (8:20). He provides clear and plain substantiation of his viewpoint but in doing so his speech becomes extreme. While his point is valid, his description of God's behaviour is a misrepresentation. The purport is this, when the scourge (a word used in Old Testament Scripture to represent a calamity such as famine, war or epidemic - Isa 10:26; 28:15,18) slays does it discriminate? No, famine will strike both good and evil, as will war and epidemic. It does not slay the wicked and spare the blameless.

But does God laugh "at the plight of the innocent" (9:23 NKJV, JB)? Does He mock their despair? Job is at his most vitriolic thus far. He is filled with bitterness (9:18). God does, in man's eyes, seem indifferent to human suffering. He does not appear to interpose to relieve suffering when He clearly has the power to do so. But while these humanistic sentiments have been in existence for decades it is almost inconceivable that Job imagines God to be chortling at the calamity of the guiltless.

Unfortunately, Job is not content to leave the matter there. His circumstances make it difficult for him to calmly dismember the principle promoted by his friends. He utters another rash statement whereby he accuses God of being responsible for wicked rulers and corrupt judges. In the ultimate sense God may be responsible and Job's question at the end of 9:24 ("if it is not he, who then is it?" RSV) could possess rare insight but Job is too vociferous, too uneven in his approach. It implies that justice cannot be found, even with God.

Job could not abide a theory that stated he was suffering as a result of sins; sins he was convinced he had not committed. But his vehement defence inflamed his spiritual pride. As Brother Sargent wrote, "The portrait of the patriarch is true to life in this mingling of good and bad. The honesty was pleasing to God, but the spiritual pride - that peril of the righteous man, which Job only revealed under stress - had to be purged."

9:25-31 The hopelessness of Job's case

Job reconsiders his existing environment. His rash statements regarding God are past. He does not use such language about God again but he plummets into a self-pity that is close to irredeemable.

Remember Bildad's three examples that explained, as far as he was concerned, some of the unanswered issues that concerned Job (8:11-19). Job now uses three examples to explain his standpoint. In possible imitation of Bildad, he uses at least one that has a distinctive Egyptian identity about it.

What did Job see his life as? It is brief and flimsy. It is like the fastest of runners; the couriers who sped across the landscape with their sealed messages. His days flee away "without a glimpse of joy" (9:25 NIV). No good fortune is experienced now, nor is there any prospect of such in the days remaining. Yes, his days "skim past like boats of papyrus" (9:26 NIV) - those speedy Egyptian boats that silently glide along the waters of the Nile. Even faster than that, his days are "like eagles swooping down on their prey" (9:26 NIV).

What can he do? "Perhaps," suggests Job, "I can take the advice of Eliphaz (5:17), forget my complaint, change my countenance, take courage and be happy." He couldn't. He was afraid. There was no guarantee of deliverance. The pain was still there. Try smiling as you ache all over, as you do not understand why, as you are told that God has condemned you as the greatest of sinners. Superficial cheerful bearing up under oppression would not eradicate the fears that filled his being.

What hope did he have? "I shall be condemned; why then do I labour in vain?" (9:29 RSV). There is no point. Why must he struggle to clear himself? Job has sunk to new depths. He leaves the door firmly shut. Perhaps he could wash himself with snow and thoroughly cleanse his hands with repeated washings. The symbology is that of moral purification ("wash" rachats - is used metaphorically for washing the defilement of sin adhering to man - Isa 1:16, 4:4; Ezek 16:4,9 - as well as for ritual washings throughout the Old Testament). All to no avail. God will simply dunk him into a filthy pit and Job would become so detestable that even his "very clothes recoil from" (9:31 JB) him.

Surely from this nadir of pessimism Job can only begin to climb slowly upwards.

9:32-35 Job's desire for an umpire

What can Job do? To whom can he turn? Job felt he could not turn to God, because aware of his comparative minuteness he felt overwhelmed by God's greatness and authority. He was just a man. Job and God could not come together at a tribunal to resolve Job's dilemma and there was no arbiter between them.

Job could be expressing a longing for an arbiter (9:33 RSVmg, NIV, LXX, NEB). But what is Job decrying the lack of? What does he mean by "daysman" (yakach)? Yakach means "to arbitrate" (Ges) and is sourced in the word meaning "to judge, to decide." It would seem that Job is bemoaning that there is not an individual with sufficient authority "to arbitrate between us, to lay his hand upon us both, someone to remove God's rod from me, so that his terror would frighten me no more" (9:33-34 NIV - see also JB). No umpire could make God submit to his directions. There is nobody who can stand between God and Job interpreting each to the other. Job is crying out for a point of contact; a chance to meet with God or somebody who is in contact with Him.

Job's dignity is stripped away. His life is desperately incomplete as God is mute to Job's cries. If only the rod of affliction (see Lam 3:1 for similar usage) was taken away and he was no longer terrified. The so-called evidence of his guilt would be no more and he could openly speak to vindicate himself.

For one who once had it all, he would now be thrilled to be able to speak up without fear of God. He feels deprived even of this as he concludes this section with the lament, "But as it stands with me, I cannot" (9:35 NIV).

Job's Attempt to Reason with God

10:1-7 "Why are You doing this to me?"

Job, as he did during his response to Eliphaz (7:11), reverts to direct address to God. An umpire is not forthcoming. A court of law is not possible. Bildad has failed him. It is to God he must plead. Even if God does not answer at least Job has not ignored the opportunity to express to God his confusion and concerns while in the extremity of his suffering.

His mood is humbler but occasionally he shows flashes of the uncharacteristic vitriol that marred his comments in 9:23-24. Job is sick; horribly stricken. Life is uncompromisingly wearisome. He will speak freely in the bitterness (mar - see also 3:20, 7:11) of his soul. Mar, in this context, means to be "sad, sorrowful" (Ges). Job takes his courage in his hands and asks God the simplest of questions, "Why?"

Job is patently puzzled. He begs God not to condemn him. He just wants to know the reason why God treats him as one would expect the wicked to be treated. 10:3 conveys his bewilderment. Does God think it good to oppress the poor; the helpless human being? Does God despise (mahas) the work of his hands? Bildad said that God would not cast away (mahas) a perfect man. Job thinks that God has done so. Worse than this, it would appear that God has a preference for the counsel of the wicked, even though Eliphaz explicitly said this was not the case (5:13).

All these questions are unworthy of God. Job is not being arrogant nor defiant but in the misery of his life he is being frank, forthright and horribly careless. Yet in the gloom of his mood, Job hits on truth. In the double question of 10:4 Job broaches an issue that for the moment gives pain but ultimately gives contentment (42:2). God is different to man. God extends well beyond the thought processes and methods of mortal man. Job seems to understand this, but God appears to be behaving like a mortal man.

Is God's life so short, He must work quickly and thoroughly in order to search out Job's faults? Job was convinced that not only was he innocent but God concurred with that verdict. There is no denying the perplexed condition of Job's mind. He is crying out for an answer. God is not defective in thought nor limited by time. Job is totally at the mercy of God. Job is unequivocal in the belief in his rectitude. "Why is God doing this to me?" protrudes out of every question and statement uttered by Job in this heart-rending section.

10:8-12 God's former care of Job

Why is God doing this to Job, especially in the light of God's meticulous and wondrous care for Job in times past? This care that began with his development in his mother's womb, possibly even with the moment of his conception. Why would God want to destroy something He had lavished so much carefulness on? Surely God's intentions in creating man, creating Job, were essentially good.

Job in this short and delicate section eloquently relates the manifestation of God in his earliest moments. In his perplexity we find praise in a way that is almost unique in Scripture (the notable exception being Psa 139:13-16). Job reminds God, not that He needed reminding, "Your hands have fashioned me, an intricate unity; yet You would destroy me" (10:8 NKJV).

This is not enough detail. Job embellishes his point with analogous entreaty. "Remember," Job beseeches, "That You are like the finest of potters; carefully, skilfully working a malleable substance to produce a quality product." Such intricacy, such patience. It looks pointless, almost wanton, that God should thoroughly grind the clay vessel into the dust it originated from. Job was of the earth. He was of no great beauty, except for that which God had moulded him into. Look at the vessel now! Why?

Job communicates the birth process by vivid allusions. To be "poured out as milk" (10:10) has reference to the work of the male reproductive fluid and to be "curdled like cheese" speaks of the development of the embryo in the womb.

God has displayed extraordinary care. The care of the potter, the care of the dairy hand and now the care of a tailor and a weaver. Job was conceived, developed and as Job asks God, "Did you not clothe me with skin and flesh, and weave me of bone and sinew" (10:11 JB).

Unwittingly, Job employs the term used of him by the Satan in 1:10. God was accused of placing a wall of protection around Job. It's gone. Job is now aware of the divine superintendence he had received in that God had granted him life and favour. More than that, God's "care, oversight" (Ges - "visitation" AV) guarded (Green mg; see also Ges - "preserved" AV) his "breath" (ruah Ges). The Jerusalem Bible masterfully translates this phrase, "Watched each breath of mine with tender care." For what purpose?

10:13-17 Job's confusion

Job appeared to have lifted himself up with his recall of how it used to be. But that remembrance fades as he returns to the present. He sinks back exhausted and dispirited. He reverts to his previous misgivings. "If" statements abound as he ponders God's methods. What was the purpose of God's meticulous preparation of Job? Look at him now.

Job draws the fearful conclusion that God was dissembling! Divine goodness was but a veil over a purpose recently manifested! From this unfortunate extrapolation Job outlines what he believes to be its implications.

As far as Job was concerned, if he sinned God would take particular note and ensure he would not go unpunished. God would not forgive until he had censured Job first. Job does not deem himself guilty but "woe unto me" (10:15) if he is. He deserves it and God will guarantee that a penalty is imposed.

But what if Job is innocent? How would that fit into this new scheme that God's early care was but a cover for the later terror. Job suggests it makes no difference to God whether he is innocent or guilty. Even if Job is right he will not lift up his head, "being full of shame (kalon) and conscious of my misery" (10:15 Delitzsch). Kalon ("confusion" AV) means "contempt, shame, ignominy" (Ges) and even if he is blameless, his condition, sitting in the rubbish tip, observed by numerous incredulous eyes, was one of public disgrace. He could not be proud nor could he cheerfully lift his head and confidently display his rectitude.

But what if he did? "And if I lift myself up, thou dost hunt me like a lion" (10:16 RSV). Job is still in terror of God's apparent hostility (see 9:34). He was sure that God was determined to destroy him.

Job is a man under siege as affliction squeezes all hope out of him. Guilty - woe is me. Innocent - the shame would still be unrelieved. What if I did raise my head - God would bring new sufferings; indicators to others that Job is guilty. His grief and God's indignation (kaas - see 6:2) would be increased against him. His tormentors would be like an attacking army where fresh relays of troops are constantly sent to assail the enemy. There would be no respite - "wave upon wave" (NIV), "continuously advancing troop and host" (Delitzsch), "host succeeding host" (Soncino), "You attack, and attack me again, with stroke on stroke of your fury, relentlessly your fresh troops assail me" (10:17 JB).

What is there left for Job?

10:18-22 Job's cries of despair

Job expects to die soon. How he wished he was not brought to this point in time. Why is God using His power in a way that does not make sense? In 10:8-12, Job extolled the creative work of God, even alluding to his conception in 10:10, but now the baffled sufferer reverses direction and summarises his lamentation of 3:10-26.

"Why was I born," bewails Job, "Why have You brought me out of the womb" (10:18 NKJV). Job wishes he were still-born, that he never saw the light of day. Better still that he was never in existence, that nobody saw him. Maybe he could have scarcely existed before being carried from the womb to the grave.

Now that he has survived birth and is full grown with but a few days left to live, he pines for just a little respite. Just a little joy before he is swallowed up in death. There is no room in Job's disposition for light. Whereas death was portrayed as a place of rest after a life of misery (3:20-22), here he virtually exhausts the Hebrew language as he piles gloomy synonym on gloomy synonym to describe the dreariness of the grave.

The grave is the "land of darkness (chosek - see 3:4-5) and the shadow of death (tsalmaveth - see 3:5 - "poet. for very thick darkness" Ges); a land of obscurity (ephah - only here and Amos 4:13), the darkness (ophel - see 3:6 - "darkness, especially thick" Ges) of the shadow of death (tsalmaveth), and not any order, even the shining is as darkness (ophel)" (10:21-22 Green). There is no ray of hope. Will Zophar pour balm on or rub salt in the wounds of the afflicted one?