Job 5

Job 5:8-27

Your Own Future Is Secure (5:8-27) The solution which Eliphaz proposes is indeed simple, but it has little bearing on Job’s particular situation. To “seek God” and to “commit” his cause to God is precisely what Job wanted to do. But to Eliphaz this would mean a kind of submissive, patient trustfulness which was impossible for Job, since it involved trust in a deity of whose benevolent character Job was by no means sure. Verses 9 and 10 are a kind of doxology, in praise of the power of God. Such doxologies appear frequently in the book (see, for example, 22:12-14; 26:7-13; 36:24-33). The power of God as described by Eliphaz operates in the realm of nature (vs. 10) and in the realm of morals (vss. 11-16).

It is God who so moves human affairs that the lowly are exalted and the “crafty” are frustrated. The first part of verse 13 is quoted by Paul in 1 Corinthians 3:19, the only direct quotation from the Book of Job in the New Testament. For Eliphaz it was a statement of God’s moral governance of the world; for Paul it applied especially to the futility of all human wisdom or “craftiness” in the light of the true wisdom in Jesus Christ. Eliphaz sees the wicked unable to achieve their plans (for a parallel to verse 14 see Isaiah 59:10), and he draws the dogmatic conclusion that the “poor [usually, the righteous] have hope, and injustice shuts her mouth.”

In the conclusion of his speech Eliphaz turns to the contrasting side of God’s providential rule. Just as the wicked come to ruin and frustration, so the righteous must come to eventual prosperity and peace. Without making a pointed charge that Job has sinned, he counsels submission to the purpose of God in this personal tragedy. Eliphaz regards the experience as a corrective and purifying process, a point which Elihu later makes in greater detail (Job 33:19-28). Job is actually to be considered “happy,” in line with the dogmatic assumption that all suffering was from the hand of God and designed for good purposes (see Proverbs 3:11-12, a part of which Eliphaz restates here). The truth in such a view was never more beautifully put than by Eliphaz in verses 18-26. The reference to “six troubles” and “seven” recalls a simular use of numbers in Proverbs 6:16; Proverbs 30:29; and in Amos 1:3.

By the time Eliphaz reaches his climax it is again evident that he has lost all sense of the actualities of Job’s case. To say that in the end Job would be able to inspect his sheepfold and find nothing missing, that his descendants would be many, and that he would come to his grave “in ripe old age” was to intensify the pain already felt by a man in the prime of life facing death, with his children destroyed and his possessions gone. That it did actually so work out does not alter the situation. Here as elsewhere Eliphaz was not speaking “what is right” (Job 42:7). His confident and indeed arrogant conclusion (vs. 27) does not comfort Job but increases his irritation.

What are we to make of this speech in view of its strange mixture of truth and error? The simplest thing is to say that it is true in general; its error lies in the attempt to deal with the practical case. Many of the things Eliphaz says can be substantiated else-, where in Scripture; upon this same position intelligent faith rests. But although his words are true, they do not fit every situation. Eliphaz’ theology was too small. It could not deal with a terrible calamity in any other terms than the most general assertions.