TEXT [Commentary]

  2.   Can a person be righteous before God? (4:12-21)

12 “This truth was given to me in secret,

as though whispered in my ear.

13 It came to me in a disturbing vision at night,

when people are in a deep sleep.

14 Fear gripped me,

and my bones trembled.

15 A spirit[*] swept past my face,

and my hair stood on end.[*]

16 The spirit stopped, but I couldn’t see its shape.

There was a form before my eyes.

In the silence I heard a voice say,

17 ‘Can a mortal be innocent before God?

Can anyone be pure before the Creator?’

18 “If God does not trust his own angels

and has charged his messengers with foolishness,

19 how much less will he trust people made of clay!

They are made of dust, crushed as easily as a moth.

20 They are alive in the morning but dead by evening,

gone forever without a trace.

21 Their tent-cords are pulled and the tent collapses,

and they die in ignorance.

NOTES

4:13 a disturbing vision at night. The vision is described as one of confusing and disturbing thoughts. The Heb. se‘ippim [TH5587A, ZH8546] is probably a metaphorical usage of the word “branch” (se‘appah [TH5589, ZH6190]), as suggested by Rowley (1970:53): “Just as the boughs branch off from the trees, so thoughts and opinions can branch off in more than one direction, leading to bewilderment and indecision.”

deep sleep. This sleep (tardemah [TH8639, ZH9554]) was not ordinary, but a very deep sleep (Prov 19:15), often one with a supernatural dimension (Gen 2:21; 1 Sam 26:12). This vision is described in the same terms as when God came to Abraham to confirm his promise (Gen 15:1, 12).

4:15 A spirit swept. The word ruakh [TH7307, ZH8120] can be either wind or spirit; this verse suggests there was a wind, but in that wind was the divine presence as in other theophanies. In his response, Job will imply that he received divine words (6:10c, 26).

my hair stood on end. The NLT mg reads, “Or, its wind sent shivers up my spine.” The Heb. is a homonym which can mean either “hair” (sa‘arah [TH8185, ZH8553]) or “wind, gale” (se‘arah [TH8183, ZH8554]), so the phrase is often translated “the hair of my body bristled.” But the meaning with “wind” is preferable for several reasons (Blommerde 1969:40): (1) wind forms a parallel with ruakh in the previous line (cf. Pss 107:25; 148:8); (2) in the only other occurrence of the word “bristle” (samar [TH5568, ZH6169]), it speaks of the body trembling in fear (Ps 119:120); and (3) the form of the word is not genitive but absolute (cf. Gesenius §80b).

4:17 Can a mortal be innocent before God? The translation of this phrase as a comparative, asking if one can be more just than God (NIV, KJV, ASV), is decidedly incorrect. The preposition min [TH4480, ZH4946] simply indicates presence before God, equivalent to its use in Num 32:22: “fulfilled your duty to the LORD.” The comparative does not make sense in the present argument, and the question cannot be translated this way in any of its other occurrences (9:2; 15:14; 25:4).

4:20 gone forever without a trace. They disappear with no awareness of what has happened. The question is whether it is the moth itself that is unaware, or whether others take no notice. Almost certainly this line is meant to be parallel with 21b (Gordis 1978:51); moths die without wisdom—that is, they learn nothing about their own existence. The expression of verse 20 (mibbeli mesim) is elliptical for turning the mind to something (sim leb [TH7760/3820, ZH8492/4213]), a favorite expression of Haggai (Hag 1:5, 7; 2:15, 18). Before the moth can give attention to its life or death, it is gone.

COMMENTARY [Text]

Eliphaz spoke as though the truths he had just uttered came to him via a vision. This vision was related as a disturbing and frightful experience. It may have been the apparition itself that produced the fright, as might be expected from the sudden experience of a divine encounter. It would seem to be a preternatural sleep that was described, as in the experience of Adam (Gen 2:21) or Abraham (Gen 15:12). Below, it will be argued that he is actually recounting a vision that Job has reported, but first we will examine the content of the vision.

In this vision, a question is raised: “Can a mortal be innocent before God?” (4:17; cf. 9:2; 15:14; 25:4). The meaning of the question must be determined through the explanation that follows (4:18-21). The question has often been assumed to describe the universal sinfulness of humanity, with the result that suffering will come to all. This, however, is not the problem in the book of Job, nor is it the point of the following argument. The problem is the complete disproportion of suffering Job must endure. If sin were the problem, then it could be forgiven (7:20-21). The explanation is provided in a traditional form of wisdom disputation, in which the argument is made from the greater to the lesser. Essentially it points out the frailty and vulnerability of all created beings. Even the heavenly servants do not escape God’s scrupulous attention and may be suddenly charged with folly; the inference to be made is that even they cannot understand or control what may happen to them. How much less, then, can those whose formation was from the dust understand or control what happens to them? In the words of Gibson, “The implication is clearly of a capricious deity, who sows discord in the heavenly places and permits only ignorance on earth” (1975:267).

Job’s complaint is that he is simply God’s target, and the watchful eye of God allows him no moment of relief (7:19-20). This point is driven home by the comparison of the human experience with the moth. In a moment without warning the moth is crushed. It knew no significance to its life or its death; it dies in ignorance. The painful truth is that human experience is no different. In the end it is impossible to comprehend the destiny of our earthly lives; we are cut off before we are any wiser about what has happened.

This understanding of the vision and its explanation is not only in harmony with Job’s later perceptions (7:19-21) but also with what we know from the prologue. Job’s troubles began in the heavenly court in dealing with the Accuser. What happened to Job was completely under the sovereign control of God, and there was nothing that Job could have known or done to prevent its occurrence. This is precisely what the vision affirms. We do not have the power to determine that goodness will come to our lives.

This first speech of Eliphaz is a crux in understanding the argument and structure of the dialog. It is here that the major theme of Job, the mystery of evil, is discussed in response to a question that will be repeated throughout the dialog: “Can a mortal be innocent before God?” (4:17; cf. 9:2; 15:14; 25:4). The question is introduced in a vision (4:12-21) in this first speech of Eliphaz. The dialog progresses with formal indicators of speech (e.g., 4:1; 6:1), which mark the change of speaker, but quotations are found within the speeches as reference is made to the arguments of opposing speakers. Sometimes these have the explicit marks of citation (15:12-13 introduces 15:14-15 in this way and 15:16 closes the quote), but at other times the reference to the thoughts of an opponent is more subtle. In the first speech Eliphaz begins politely (4:1-11), but following the vision and its interpretation (4:12-21) his speech resumes with a rebuke to Job for seeking someone other than God. In 5:1 he says, “Cry for help, but will anyone answer you? Which of the angels will help you?” He continues with what must be regarded as a further rebuke (5:8); using a strong adversative (’ulam [TH199, ZH219]), Eliphaz contrasts himself to Job: “If I were you, I would go to God.” To this point Job had not made any statements about the problem of evil. Why does Eliphaz think Job is consulting someone other than God for answers? Eliphaz speaks as if the vision contained a message contrary to what he believes but one that Job does believe. The direct challenge to Job (5:1, 8) indicates that the vision reflects the thoughts of Job, and Eliphaz is responding to this in his speech.

Since Job himself asks the question of the vision (9:2), and the last word of Bildad is the same question (25:4-6), the reader must ask about the source of this question. The origin of the question is also important to understanding its significance in the dialog. As discussed under “Major Themes” in the Introduction, the question must be answered negatively; mortals cannot be righteous before God. The question is not suggesting mortals can be sinless, since it is implicitly evident that Job and the friends know that no mortal is sinless (cf. 7:20-21). The question is asking whether it is possible for humans to live in a manner so righteous that they will be assured of blessing. The answer is that humans cannot guarantee blessing for themselves through their righteousness; they will die like moths, not knowing the time or the reason for the events of their lives. This is the position that Job maintains in the dialog. He is righteous, but he is not blessed; instead he is suffering, and he will soon die. The friends assert that the righteous are blessed, so they exhort Job to determine a future of blessing for himself. The dialog revolves around these two intransigent positions. Thus, the dialog makes the most sense if the vision with the question in the first speech is one Eliphaz has been told by Job. This is the reason Eliphaz rebukes Job immediately following his description of the vision. Understanding this clarifies the meaning and importance of the question, explains why Job asks the question, why Eliphaz twice reacts negatively to the question (5:1-8; 15:12-18), and why Bildad is cut short by Job when he raises the question in his last abbreviated speech.

Eliphaz introduces the cause and effect relationship with two analogies from nature. The first is drawn from agriculture (you reap what you sow), and the second from the wilds of nature (even the mightiest of the violent die). Having illustrated this self-evident truth, Eliphaz reports a terrifying vision concerning the mystery of evil. His first response is to assert again that people are the source of their own trouble (5:2-7), then he declares that God always punishes the wicked (5:8-16); therefore, if the righteous do suffer, it is to correct them so they are blessed in the end (5:17-27).