The Dialogs
Counting Job’s opening speech, the
Dialog consists of seventeen parts; three arguments for Eliphaz; three for Bildad; two for
Zophar and an initial statement and eight rebuttals by Job. As the discussion progresses
between Job and his comforters, there is a classic example of the “wedge” theory
of argumentation. The more insistent the three friends get in their accusations, the more
defensive Job becomes. Job, in fact moves from a position where “he sins not with his
lips” to actual accusations against God for the injustice of his situation.
While the points made by the three
visitors are very similar, there are subtle differences. Eliphaz, as the oldest, speaks first in each of
the trilogies. Perhaps, tempered by age, his voice is the softest of the three. His
central argument, fitting to the definition of his name, “my god is gold,” is
that one can measure his relationship with his God by the quantity of his possessions.
There is a tone of crass materialism in his remarks. Yet, they are not totally without
merit, for God would shortly announce to the nation of Israel that their obedience would
be blessed “in basket and in store” (Deut. 28:1-5). His message is parallel to
that of didactic materialism, which holds that the change in either personal or national
forms of behavior is driven by economic goals.
Bildad, somewhat harsher, uses a questioning
approach, challenging Job to investigate his past life for sins against God. His
foundation points, as borne out by his name meaning either “confused love” or
“loved by Bel,” show the influence of paganism on his thought pattern. His
approach is the classical Socratic approach of the advancement of these by a series of
increasingly challenging the integrity of his subject. In that respect, his approach
befits the other suggested meaning of his name, “disputant, or son of
contention.”
Zophar, the youngest of the trio, is also the
most cutting in his criticisms of Job. Perhaps is was defensive of Job’s rebuttal to
his grandfather, Eliphaz. His main contribution to the dialog is his constant resorting to
theme, “Who are you to question God?” From the probable connection of his name
to the word “sparrow,” some expositors have drawn the extension of his name to
mean “twitterer,” or “vain babbler,” from the repetitiveness of the
sparrow’s song. His refusal to seek for a meaning to Job’s dilemma other than
stating the superiority of God to man amounts to a failure to “reason together”
with the Almighty (Isa. 1:26). Zophar is the only one of the friends who does not speak in
the third round of the dialog, as though he is put to silence and has no further answers
to offer. Some have taken from his speeches a representation of the clergy of Christendom
with their escape from reason into their unwillingness to seek a more definitive answer to
such questions as the permission of evil.|
The Speeches of Job
An outline of the rebuttals of Job can
be seen from the following chart:
JOB | Opening Speech | Chapter 3 |
ELIPHAZ | Speech – Chapters 4, 5 | Job’s Rebuttal – Chapters 6, 7 |
BILDAD | Speech – Chapter 8 | Job’s Rebuttal – Chapters 9-10 |
ZOPHAR | Speech – Chapter 11 | Job’s Rebuttal – Chapters 12-14 |
ELIPHAZ | Speech – Chapter 15 | Job’s Rebuttal – Chapters 16, 17 |
BILDAD | Speech – Chapter 18 | Job’s Rebuttal – Chapter 19 |
ZOPHAR | Speech – Chapter 20 | Job’s Rebuttal – Chapter 21 |
ELIPHAZ | Speech – Chapter 22 | Job’s Rebuttal – Chapters 23, 24 |
BILDAD | Speech – Chapter 25 | Job’s Rebuttal – Chapters 27-31 |
Job's First Speech—Chapter 3
The sorrows of the afflicted pour out in a steady stream from his mouth. He regrets the
fact that he was born. He desires death. Apparently he feared such calamities even in the
heights of his prosperity and health (v. 25, 26). Despite his negative feelings, there is
no thought of a lack of a resurrection hope. Later comments show his belief in an
after-life. Here he utters the fact that if he had been as "an untimely birth"
or "an infant that had not seen life"—a stillborn—he would go to a
place of rest and would sleep together with both "the small and the great."
0 comments:
Post a Comment