ChristadelphianBooksOnline
David Baird
The Education of Job

Chapter 15 - The Second Cycle of Speeches - Eliphaz

Job is Rebuked

	15:1-6	Eliphaz rejects Job's claim to wisdom
	15:7-10	He declares Job's experience to be inferior
	15:11-13	He rebukes Job for his ingratitude
	15:14-16	He refutes the innocence of man

Doctrine of Exact Retribution Reaffirmed

	15:17-19	Listen to me and the wORDs of the ancients
	15:20-24	The life of the wicked
	15:25-28	The foolishness of the wicked
	15:29-35	God's judgements against the wicked

Job's lengthy response to the last of his antagonists not only demonstrated his inability to accept his visitor's reasoning, it incorporated speech that was, at times, borderline. The extremity of his physical suffering combined with the intransigence of his friends' clearly false conclusions saw Job use language that only inflamed Eliphaz.

And inflamed Eliphaz is as he now generates a two-pronged attack in a speech that no longer contains the courtesies that were part of his opening address. Eliphaz opens his assault by bluntly rebuking Job and follows it with a forthright reminder of the fate of the wicked. As far as Eliphaz is concerned, Job is wrong and must be corrected.

Job is Rebuked

Eliphaz launches into Job using a question-and-answer approach. He fires, possibly mimicking Job's technique in 13:7-12 and 13:23-28, a series of questions and, without waiting for Job to reply, provides what he considers to be the only appropriate responses. What is becoming obvious is that Eliphaz, in losing the debate, resorts to a personal attack on Job. While carefully avoiding such in his first speech he now adopts the approach begun by Zophar.

15:1-6 Eliphaz rejects Job's claim to wisdom

Eliphaz has been stung by the force of Job's words and therefore holds little back as he fires off the first set of questions. The overall sentiment that Eliphaz is expressing to Job is, "Who do you think you are?" Eliphaz cannot understand how Job could lay claim to wisdom when his outbursts are so immoderate. Does a wise man "fill his belly with the east wind?" (15:2)

The east wind is that fearsome hot air, devoid of any refreshment, that blows off the desert. By implication, Job's speaking is considered to be useless, maybe even harmful (Gen 41:6; Hos 12:1).

"And don't talk to me about reasoning (yakach - a favourite expression of Job's - see comments 13:1-12). Your arguments are degraded by your unprofitable talk and speeches that do no good" (15:3). Eliphaz is convinced that Job's responses are merely lengthy outbursts which lack quality and set a poor example. How could Job be considered wise?

In 15:4-6 Eliphaz answers the questions of the preceding two verses. Job is accused with doing worse than the questions imply. As the Jerusalem Bible conjectures with verse 4, "You do worse; you flout piety ..." In summary, Eliphaz castigates Job for:

Undermining the fear of God (direct contrast with 1:1,8; 2:3);
Hindering devotion to God (15:4 see NIV, Green etc);
Revealing his iniquity by his immoderate speech (Is this a belated attempt by Eliphaz to reveal Job's sin - a request made in 6:24 that until now was unanswered?); and
Adopting the tongue of the crafty (15:5 see also 5:12).

Not satisfied with this, Eliphaz, in verse 6, repeats his feelings and, as he had done previously (4:10-11), uses a number of words to express his thoughts. Not content with "thy mouth (peh) uttereth thine iniquity," he adds the "tongue (lashon) of the crafty," "thine own mouth (peh) condemneth thee" and "thine own lips (sapa) testify against thee."

In saying this Eliphaz contradicts the words of 2:10 (sapa). Had Job's lips, tongue and mouth deteriorated since the debates began in earnest from chapter 6? 40:4 (peh) would indicate as such but I don't believe that Job had reached the depths that Eliphaz is accusing him of.

15:7-10 He declares Job's experience to be inferior

Eliphaz maintains a barrage of humiliating questions that attempt to belittle Job, particularly Job's assertions of equality (13:1-5). Eliphaz ironically asks Job if he thinks the wisdom of the ages is embodied in him. Eliphaz's sarcasm is uppermost as he asks Job if he was the first man on earth and thereby a direct recipient of divine wisdom. Perhaps Job had listened in "on God's council" (15:8 NIV) and therefore had a monopoly on wisdom (15:9).

These questions overstate Job's declarations. He had not claimed that he was the sole repository of divine knowledge. He had not even claimed superiority over his friends. He had criticised their speaking on God's behalf (13:7-8) and asserted "I have understanding ... I am not inferior to you" (12:3). The charges of Eliphaz are unwarranted.

Eliphaz answers his questions by pointing out to Job that as he was old enough to be Job's grandfather Job should accept his reasoning. Accuracy, logic and commonsense have nothing to do with it. Age bestows superiority and that's all there is to it.

15:11-13 He rebukes Job for his ingratitude

It would seem that the question-answer format is preserved although this is not reflected in a number of versions. I favour the Jerusalem Bible that translates this section as:

11.	Do you scorn the comfort that God gives,
	and the moderation we have used in speaking?
12.	See how passion carries you away!
	How evil you look,
13.	when you loose your anger on God
	and utter speeches such as these!

What moderation had they used in speaking? Eliphaz, the most courteous, was not exactly gentle, whereas Bildad was infuriatingly patronising and Zophar downright brutal. In a way so typical of human nature, Eliphaz glorifies his side of the debate, even declaring that the comfort he gives is ordained by God, while exaggerating the negativity of Job; describing Job as evil looking and angry (AV "spirit" - ruah - in this context refers to Job's manner. See also Prov 16:32; 25:28).

Maybe Eliphaz's "consolations of God" is a reference back to the vision commencing in 4:12. Whatever the case, Eliphaz is now guilty of the accusations levelled against Job in 15:8 of claiming unique God-given knowledge.

15:14-16 He refutes the innocence of man

Eliphaz's frustration with Job is evident as he repeats the arguments of 4:17-19. It all seems so simple, so straightforward to Eliphaz, as he goes back over the same ground and, as before, mixes truth with error. Again he speaks generally and seems to be propounding a philosophy that was widely accepted: "Man is not morally clean (zaka) nor is he righteous (tzadak) before God." He has progressed the argument of chapter 4 away from the domain of physical frailty and into that of moral frailty.

The implication is that Job considered himself to be morally pure. But Job never uses zaka ("to be clear, clean, pure - always in a moral sense" TWOT) in his much speaking. Tzadak is found in a number of places (9:2, 15, 20; 10:15). His confidence in 13:18, "I know that I shall be justified" (tzadak), is obviously the catalyst for Eliphaz's strong response along with the words of Elihu in 34:5.

So strong was Eliphaz's reply that he repeats in 15:15 the error of 4:18. Does God put no trust in His angels ("holy ones" qadosh - see 5:1; 6:10)? Are the heavens impure in His sight? Eliphaz believes so. In emphasising the uncleanness of man Eliphaz pushes too far. Surely God's holy angels can be trusted and the heavens, the handiwork of God, unsullied by man, are a testimony to God's righteousness? Unfortunately, Eliphaz, in his senior role, was not alone in holding such a miserable point of view as Bildad repeats it, almost verbatim, in his final speech (25:4-5).

If the angels cannot be trusted and the heavens are unclean then man is in an appalling condition. This was Eliphaz's point. Man is in an appalling condition but to Eliphaz he is more than that. Man is detestable (Ges), stinking corrupt ("filthy" AV - "to become sour as milk" Ges, "corrupt morally" TWOT - Psa 14:3; 53:3) and drinks iniquity like water or, as the idiom infers, drinks iniquity in full gulps. One wonders if Eliphaz would apply such descriptors to himself. And clearly this language was redundant as Job had already acknowledged that man cannot bring a clean thing out of an unclean, however God could (14:4 JB).

Doctrine of Exact Retribution Reaffirmed

Having believed he has put Job in his rightful, rebuked place, Eliphaz next dwells upon the theme of the destruction that overwhelms the wicked. Despite Job's logical demolition of the doctrine of exact retribution, Eliphaz seems more convinced than ever before and refuses to be shaken from what is obviously a long-held "truth."

15:17-19 Listen to me and the wORDs of the ancients

After all, Eliphaz continues, his doctrines are based on:

His personal experience ("I have seen" 15:17 see 4:8. This could also be a reference to the revelation that begins in 4:12.);
The wisdom of the fathers (15:18 - The Bildad approach 8:8); and
Clear tradition unadulterated by the influence of foreigners (15:19 - perhaps Eliphaz felt Job had been contaminated by contact with foreigners).

15:20-24 The life of the wicked

Eliphaz now provides a vivid description of the misery and terror that haunts a wicked man. In a style not unlike the vision of chapter 4, Eliphaz's grisly picture of a wicked man's conscience is full of foreboding. Eliphaz may lack hard data but he is a brilliant dramatist. To him "the life of the wicked is unceasing torment" (15:20 JB). Not because he is poor or afflicted. No, it is because he fears becoming poor and afflicted. The wicked is terrified that his inevitable day of darkness is at hand.

His constant dread is that "in prosperity (shalom - peace) the destroyer (shadad) shall come upon him" (15:21). In saying this, Eliphaz is having a niggle at one of Job's clear refutations of his friends' philosophy (12:6). There Job exclaims, "The tabernacles of robbers (shadad) prosper (shala - at rest)." Job, while presenting a gloomy scenario, was essentially correct. The wicked can and do prosper. But Eliphaz in a smug play on Job's words reveals that wicked people are inevitably devoured by other wicked people. This could also be another reference to chapter 1 when marauders swooped upon Job's holdings and denuded his prosperity.

"Yes," we can hear Eliphaz sigh, "The wicked cannot escape." He is, as translated by the Jerusalem Bible, "marked down as meat for the vulture" (15:23). This unusual rendition is derived from the Septuagint and supported by the New English Bible. It best fits the flow of thought. The usual "He wandereth abroad ..." is more suited to the time period immediately after the wicked's desolation rather than, as used here, during his prosperity.

All the wicked can do is tremble as he awaits his terrifying destiny.

15:25-28 The foolishness of the wicked

Why is such a destiny inevitable? Because the wicked, in an attitude of insane hostility, has deliberately set himself against El and dared to defy the Almighty (shaddai). Surely Job has not done this? In the estimation of Eliphaz he has because Job has not responded positively to the advice of his elderly friend to commit his cause to God (5:8).

Instead Job appears to be defiant (9:22; 13:23). Rather than humbling himself before the Almighty and accepting His chastening (5:17) Job presumes to speak to Him (13:3). Job accused his friends of forsaking the fear of the Almighty (6:14 RSV) but Eliphaz sees Job as the sinner.

The wicked man is crazy. Not only does he defy God, he stupidly runs "stubbornly against Him with his strong embossed shield" (15:26 NKJV). The picture is comical and accurate but a somewhat exaggerated presentation of Job's conduct - if that's what Eliphaz is intending.

Furthermore, Eliphaz continues, the wicked's dreadful destiny is because of his gross self-indulgence (15:27). He also inhabits cities and houses that were appointed to be ruins (15:28).

Verse 28 has a number of interpretations and it can be suggested that the wicked dwelt in houses that ought to have been uninhabited (Delitzsch, JB). Perhaps they were under God's curse (Soncino). Perhaps the mere fact that those who defied God were dwelling in these houses was sufficient to say they should be uninhabited. It was better that their houses be left desolate rather than be abodes of self-indulgent haters of the Almighty.

15:29-35 God's judgements against the wicked

Such a person will not be rich (15:29). How comforting this must have been to the impoverished Job. It is interesting to note just how verbose Eliphaz becomes as his speech draws to its conclusion. After commencing by accusing Job of being a wind-bag, he ends with a host of repetitions and analogies. In verse 29, Eliphaz resorts to waffle as he basically says one thing three different ways.

Yes, the wicked "will not escape from darkness" (15:30 RSV, NIV). Eliphaz effortlessly moves into an extended analogy of the wicked being like a luxuriant growth that is uprooted and quickly withers. He is not adding anything original to the discussion as he simply reiterates the analogy used by Bildad in 8:16-19. In the midst of all his verbiage about herbage Eliphaz darts in a telling blow about Job's children - "the flame shall dry up his branches" (15:30).

After finishing his metaphor-laden references of olives, grapes and palms he strikes out severely against the wicked, and thus by brutal implication against Job, with fearsome accusations of being "soiled with sin" (Strong - AV "hypocrites" - chaneph see 8:13; 13:16), given to taking bribes, conceiving mischief (amal 4:8) and preparing deceit (15:35). These accusations were not part of Eliphaz's opening speech in which he commends Job for his beneficial work (4:3-4).

Eliphaz has remained untouched by the debate except to dig his position in deeper. He refuses to accept that the wicked can prosper. He cannot escape the conclusion that Job is a gross sinner. He is outraged by Job's refusal to accept the traditional point of view. He is flabbergasted that Job has not shown due deference to his seniority by agreeing with everything Eliphaz has said.

"Who does Job think he is?"