Job 22:1-5

III. FALLACIES, FOLLIES, AND LOGOTHERAPYTHIRD TIME'S A CHARM (Job 22:1, Job 26:14)

A.

ELIPHAZ ON THE FUNCTIONAL VALUE OF MAN (Job 22:1-30)

1.

God, needing nothing, is not self-seeking in punishing Job; so the punishment must be the result of sin. (Job 22:1-5)

TEXT 22:1-5

1 Then answered Eliphaz the Temanite, and said,

2 Can a man be profitable onto God?

Surely he that is wise is profitable unto himself.

3 Is it any pleasure to the Almighty, that thou art righteous?

Or is it gain to him, that thou makest thy ways perfect?

4 Is it for thy fear of him that he reproveth thee,

That he entereth with thee into judgment?

5 Is not thy wickedness great?

Neither is there any end to thine iniquities.

COMMENT 22:1-5

I can still hear his cries. It's unbearable. It almost makes you believe in God.. Cries like that seem to call God back to life, much more surely than all the happiness in the world, and end-of-the-world silence, more frightening even than instant justice.

Monteilhet, Policiers Pour la forme

Job 22:1The third cycle of speeches now begins. From the very beginning Eliphaz has found Job obstinately perverse. The movement in the content of the speeches has thus far been along three lines of thought: (1) In earlier speeches the three friends have argued from their preconceived notions of God's nature to the conclusion that Job has sinned and that his suffering can be alleviated only through his repentance. (2) The second cycle develops the thesis of the fate of the wicked and that the universe is governed by moral structures and (3) in the third series to turn with vehemence upon Job and charge him with grave sins. Their assumptions about God, evil, and suffering are once more in evidence; their conclusions follow from their presuppositions, not the evidence in Job's life, as anyone else'S. Eliphaz returns to his earlier theme that repentance would lead to Job's restoration. His speech contains four divisions: (1) Since God is disinterested, i.e., silent, Job's suffering is proof of his sinsJob 22:2-5; (2) Eliphaz's deduction concerning Job's sinJob 22:6-11; (3) Eliphaz's envisagement of Job's assumption concerning God's silenceJob 22:12-20; and (4) Eliphaz's promise and appeal to JobJob 22:21-30.

The central issue in this speech is the distance between God and man because of sin.[242] If man suffers, it is a result of his personal sins. Eliphaz here abandons all efforts at gentleness. In his first speech (chps. 45) he set forth encouragement; in his second speech (chp. 15) he spoke of Job's irreverence; and now he openly charges Job with hypocrisy and secret sins. The principle from which Eliphaz begins his reasoning is true, i.e., God is just (Romans 3:21 ff), but it is not the entire picture; God is also loving. By isolating God's love and justice, Eliphaz distorts the entire relationship between God and man. Eliphaz still cannot understand how anyone can serve God for nothing. Somebody must gain from it. Is it man, or is it God?

[242] Note the history of this fundamental problem of the relationship between God's immanence and transcendence: (1) There is no separation between God and man because there is no God, naturalistic atheism; (2) Kierkegaard's total separation, God as wholly other; (3) After Hegel's phenomenologically based pantheism the separation is only one of degree. From the Newtonian world Machine Model to 19 Organiamic ModelEvolutionary naturalism is 1 Thessalonians 19th dress; (4) Kierkegaard Buber-Otto-Barth in neo-orthodoxy; (5) God is totally immersed in realityDeath of God, Revolutionary political, Liberation Theologies of all types; and (6) Biblical alternatives.

Job 22:2God can derive no possible advantage from man, but a pious life style can benefit man. God would gain nothing by deviating from strict justice in dealing with human behavior (Elihu expresses the same theme in Job 35:7). God doth not need either man's work or his giftsMilton. Job has previously used this argumentJob 7:20. Man cannot harm God; why then should God care what man does? He should just leave man alone.

Job 22:3Is it any advantage (note parallel word in the second line gain) or pleasure (Job 21:21) to God, if you are righteous? Can a gebher (strongest specimen of man) be useful to God? Can a professional wise man give instruction to the Almighty? As a theologian of transcendence, Eliphaz dismisses these ludicrous possibilitiesIsaiah 62:5; Luke 15:7; Luke 17:10.

Job 22:4Both Testaments witness to our unprofitableness and God's gracious concern. Eliphaz has used the word yirah (fear, reverence, piety) before (Job 4:6) in the sense of piety. He is assuming that since God is disinterested, His relationship to man must be our advantage and not God'S. The A. V. translation fear is quite inappropriate in this discussion.

Job 22:5Job will later protest that he is innocent in Job 31:5 ff, which also contains his response to Eliphaz's charges. Job's accuser has no evidence; his accusations are derived from his presuppositions. The two words for sin in this verse are (1) wickednessresha, loose, ill-regulated; and (2) peshadeliberate and premeditated; and Job 34:37 speaks of adding pesha to hattahmiss attaining of goal (see Brown, Driver, Briggs). Eliphaz declares that if God's discipline is not for your piety, then it must be for your sinful rebellion. If your suffering is limitless and God is just, then your sins must also be boundless.