The First Exchange

The shortcoming of Eliphaz, then, consists in his confusion of these things. He and his companions are unable to see that the sufferings of Job do not mean that something is wrong with Job; they mean, on the contrary, that something is right with Job.

The Trial of Job: Orthodox Christian Reflections on the Book of Job, by Patrick Henry Reardon

In Chapters 3 – 7, we have the first exchange, this between Job and one of his three friends, Eliphaz the Temanite. Over the course of the book, Job is addressed eight times in total by his three friends. Eliphaz, the oldest, speaks first among these three, and also toward the end it is to Eliphaz that God speaks.

The exchange begins with Job; he is the one who decides when to end the silence, which has lasted one week. Job offers a prayer, a lamentation, reminding us of Jeremiah or many of the Psalms.

Job 3: “May the day perish on which I was born, and the night in which it was said, ‘A male child is conceived.’ 4 May that day be darkness; may God above not seek it, nor the light shine upon it.”

To say Job is weary of life is an understatement. Where God said, “let there be light,” Job prayers instead for darkness. The main question Job raises, raised by others in Scripture in such trying circumstances, is “Why?”.

Theodicy’s major problem, how to reconcile innocent suffering with a just, merciful, almighty God, is now introduced.

It is this “why” that Job’s three friends will attempt to answer throughout the discourse. Each of them has a theory on the matter. None of them see, not even Job, that more is happening than seems to be happening. God knows that Job’s faith is being tested; Satan knows that Job’s faith is being tested; the reader knows that Job’s faith is being tested. However, neither Job nor his friends see that his faith is being tested.

Eliphaz now responds. Eliphaz is a Temanite, representing the wisdom of the south – the Negev or even Arabia. He, unlike his two compatriots, is a visionary; he appeals to his religious experience. For him, the deep sense of the divine is absolute. He has a conviction of divine purity and justice.

Job 4: 7 “Remember now, who ever perished being innocent? Or where were the upright ever cut off? 8 Even as I have seen, those who plow iniquity and sow trouble reap the same. 9 By the blast of God they perish, and by the breath of His anger they are consumed.

Eliphaz demonstrates that his perspective is too narrow. He doesn’t discern the difference between punishment and trial. Reardon offers an example from the Book of Wisdom, where both the Egyptians and the Israelites suffered thirst: the Egyptians for punishment, and the Israelites for a test of their faith.

Eliphaz confuses these two things. He and his friends see this calamity as meaning something is wrong with Job; instead, it means that something is right with Job. St. Gregory the Great wrote of this: they attempted to vindicate the judgement of God by blaming Job. Instead, he was stricken such that his scourge might redound to the praise of God’s glory.

Job 5: 8 “But as for me, I would seek God, and to God I would commit my cause — 9 who does great things, and unsearchable, marvelous things without number.

Eliphaz is greatly troubled by Job’s tone. He counsels Job to seek God instead of curse God, as Job has done. It is Job’s perverse attitude that is the problem, his rebelliousness, according to Eliphaz. He becomes more critical of Job’s behavior.

Job 5: 17 “Behold, happy is the man whom God corrects; therefore do not despise the chastening of the Almighty.”

Don’t complain; put your trust in God.

Job, Eliphaz believes, by emphatically denying a moral causality with respect to his afflictions, menaces the moral structure of the world. This is the great shortcoming of Eliphaz’s comments.

Eliphaz is not wrong as he sees it, and as we would see it had we not had access to the setup in the first two chapters. He even ends his counsel by suggesting that Job will once again prosper. But the two men are arguing at cross purposes.

The difference between the two men is that Eliphaz has never been tested as Job is being tested. Job knows this difference; Eliphaz doesn’t.

Job replies, not with a point-by-point rebuttal, but by offering a detailed analysis of his own experience. As if saying, “no – you haven’t really heard me or understood me.” He sees that Eliphaz has universalized his experience, placing his own experience on that which has befallen Job.

Job 6: 2 “Oh, that my grief were fully weighed, and my calamity laid with it on the scales!”

His friends see Job’s sufferings as evidence of a sinful state; Job is telling them to see it as Job sees it.

Job 6: 14 “To him who is afflicted, kindness should be shown by his friend, even though he forsakes the fear of the Almighty. 15 My brothers have dealt deceitfully like a brook, like the streams of the brooks that pass away, 16 which are dark because of the ice, and into which the snow vanishes.

Whereas we have the testimony of God, who declared Job righteous, Job has only the testimony of his own conscience. It is in this space where Job is asking his friends for dialogue.

Job 6: 24 “Teach me, and I will hold my tongue; cause me to understand wherein I have erred. 25 How forceful are right words! But what does your arguing prove? 26 Do you intend to rebuke my words, and the speeches of a desperate one, which are as wind?

Job turns from answering Eliphaz to a lament: the tragedies to which human existence is subject.

Job 7: 11 “Therefore I will not restrain my mouth; I will speak in the anguish of my spirit; I will complain in the bitterness of my soul.”

These terrible things have befallen him, even though throughout his life he has loved God and knows God as someone who loves him. He addresses God, asking that God will remember him.

Whereas for Job’s friends his sufferings raise the question of justice, for Job himself those sufferings raise, rather, a question about friendship.

Conclusion

It is clear that Job’s religious experience by far transcends the experience even of Eliphaz. As the dialogue progresses, introducing the other two friends, we will see that the quality of the exchange steadily degrades.

Whereas Eliphaz appeals to his personal spiritual experience, Bildad has no such experience of his own – he relies on the experience of his elders. Zophar does not even have this to lean on; he merely will offer the voice of established prejudice.

Further, as each participant engages, they seem less confident in their positions. And by being less confident, they grow increasingly more strident against Job – all while Job will increase in coherence.