Job C

 Other than being mentioned in the book of Job, nothing more is known about his three friends. Given their words and individual approach to Job’s suffering, one can readily discern that these men were not dullards but rather men of great intellect and wisdom. It’s not a stretch to conclude that between the three, the entirety of what has come to be known as philosophy in our modern age was proffered to Job as an explanation for his suffering, concentrated in the handful of words each of them spoke.

Eliphaz was clearly an empiricist, given to utilitarianism, who insisted that all knowledge is based on experience derived from the senses. In his discourse, he constantly pointed out the things he’d seen, heard, and experienced as proof positive that what Job was going through was a direct result of something he’d done to displease God. His conclusions were not based on things he’d read but rather on things he’d seen, and the prism through which he saw Job’s condition was one of empiricism. Eliphaz thought in straightforward lines based on lived experience. If this, then that, and it must be so because all I’ve ever witnessed has confirmed the truth of it.

On the other hand, Bildad is what we can readily define as a traditionalist. He is a man for whom history is of paramount importance because learning from history means never repeating the mistakes of the past in the present. History was his forte, and his insistence upon the things which have been a guiding light for the things which are and which will be is evident in his utterances. Others have come before us, as others will follow, and we have not attained the zenith of wisdom by any means. He calls back to the former age and the things discovered by their fathers as a means of explaining Job’s predicament.

Then there is Zophar the Naamathite, a textbook rationalist if ever there was one, who bases the entirety of his discourse on reason and logic rather than a religious belief or emotional subtext. The prism through which he sees Job’s situation is one of causality because, in his mind, there must be a cause for every effect. To Zophar, there will always be a logical, rational, lucid, and analytical reason for why something is happening at any given moment, and to him, Job was no exception. Due to his predisposition toward rationalism, of Job’s three friends Zophar tried the hardest to convince Job that he had sinned because, in his understanding, he saw no other possibility than this.

When the hubris of man collides with the wisdom of God, there can only ever be one clear winner. It won’t even be close. Whether the philosophies of men or their long-held beliefs, they aren’t even in the running when stacked up against the wisdom of God. There are things men suspect; then there are things God knows. There is the wisdom of man, which is nascent on its best day, and then there is the wisdom of God, which dwarfs the most brilliant mind of any age without even trying.

Insisting that we know the mind of God because we attended junior college and have a piece of paper confirming that we’re biblical scholars of world renown when even one such as Job, whom God considered blameless and upright and who sought to know Him all the days of his life wouldn’t make such a claim calls into question whether our estimation of our own understanding isn’t baselessly inflated.

It’s more difficult by far to convince someone who is sure of their position and who believes they have attained all truth that things are not as they seem to their eyes than it is someone who is genuinely and sincerely seeking after truth. It takes less time to write on a blank slate than it does to clear it of preexisting scribblings so that you can write upon it anew.

Those who’ve already determined they know everything they’ll ever need to know are looking for either confirmation of their preconceived notions or an echo chamber where their opinions are spoken back to them by others of like mind. Such individuals detest the idea of iron sharpening iron or having to defend their position biblically and in any meaningful way.

If history has proven anything, it’s that people can be rooted in a particular belief and be genuine in their assertions yet still be wrong because the litmus test isn’t whether or not notable figures agree with us or a given denomination has given the green light to our machinations, but whether God agrees and consents. The whole world can think you’re right, but if God says you’re wrong, you’re wrong, and there’s no two ways about it.

Although all three of Job’s friends sat on different branches of the philosophical tree and made cogent arguments defending their conclusions, although all three were well-educated men who had more than a passing understanding of deeper truths those of their day likely did not possess, ultimately they were wrong because they neither knew the mind of God nor did they have insight into what was truly going on with Job.

If something you feel certain about is contradicted by the Word, your feelings and certainty matter, not a whit. The Word is the final authority in all manners spiritual, and we must defer to it even if it means swallowing our pride and admitting our errors.

Job’s response to Eliphaz was straightforward enough, insisting that to him who is afflicted, kindness should be shown by his friend, but neither Bildad nor Zophar took the rebuke to heart. I’m hurting over here, and the best you can do is kick dirt in my eye. Perhaps a bit of grace, a bit of kindness, a bit of empathy would be warranted, don’t you think? Nope, you did something; we know you did because that’s the way it’s always been. Cause and effect, buddy, there’s no escaping it. Your suffering is a direct consequence of something you did; you just have to think about it and figure out what it was.

Posted on 21 January 2025 | 12:18 pm