# 10 Job Continued

I’m still struck by the self-description of Job in chapter thirty-one. It is an oath of innocence that Job swears to. He has put himself on the witness stand and is asking God to answer. Though Job is barking up the wrong tree in thinking that God has wrongfully punished Him, it is nevertheless an astonishing description of personal character.

a) Job Has Not Lusted: 31:1-4

b) Job Has Not Lied or Deceived: comparatively-8

c) Job Has Not Committed Adultery: 31:9-12

d) Job Has Not Failed to Help His Slaves: 31:13-15

e) Job Has Not Failed to Help the Poor and Needy: 31:16-23

f) Job Has Not Trusted in His Wealth: 31:24-25

g) Job Has Not Turned to Idolatry: 31:26-28

h) Job Has Not Treated His Enemies Unfairly: 31:29-30

i) Job Has Not Been Stingy: 31:31-32

j) Job Has Not Hidden His Sins: 31:33-34

k) Job Wishes God Would Hear Him: 31:35-37

l) Job Has Not Been Unfair to His Farm-workers 31:38-40

After Job’s final speech we are introduced to the intriguing commentary of one Elihu. A comparatively young man, he is confident that he alone has the answer to Job’s problem. Scholars differ as to the significance of this speech in the debate. Some suggest that Elihu’s answer is the correct one and that he alone gets it right. This position is bolstered by the fact that when God corrects the speeches of Job’s three older friends, he does not correct Elihu. The problem for me, is that I don’t see Elihu saying anything much different than what they said. He doesn’t seem to introduce anything new to the discussion.

As we wrap up the readings on the speeches it seems that we have heard the wisest men of the age, addressing the problem of human suffering and though they are very confident in their positions, they are wrong. They are wrong at least as far as it concerns the peculiar case of Job. This alone should, make us aware of the weakness of human reasoning.

A final thought on the speeches. I’ve wondered about why these men were so adamant in maintaining Job’s sinfulness as the cause of his misfortune. Could it be that there is some psychological mechanism that produces this line of argument? In other words, nobody wants to think that such a horrible calamity could befall them. Even the thought of losing one’s children, possessions and health is overwhelming. It is comforting to build up a theology that says, “that kind of tragedy only happens to those who do deeds of great wickedness, therefore I am safe from the threat of it happening to me.”  Just a thought.