Defending Job

Job did not sin. God's word declares it. Theologians who say Job sinned (and that this is inferred, they say, because he "repented"), affirm what the story of Job, and the witness of God himself, denies. Job's sufferings were not a result of any sin. Not only that, but nothing Job said was theologically wrong, even though denied by Job's three friends and by Elihu and by many commentators on Job. Those who say Job got what he deserved, that his sin was the cause of his sufferings, are in agreement with Satan, Elihu, and Job's three friends. They are also in opposition to what God says of Job. I will never follow the lead of such commentators who affirm that Job was self righteous and attacking God and his justice. 

The following are some of what I wrote on this several years ago. The whole series consisted in six postings (chapters) and the following gives the first two chapters complete with some excepts from the others. In particular please note the comments I make on what is meant by Job's repentance and abhorring of himself. I show that the Hebrew word for "repent" is not the word used for repenting of sin, but the word used for such repenting that even God does. If the Hebrew word means "repent of sin" then God does that. But, it does not mean that, but simply denotes a change of mind or purpose. I will always deride those theologians, like Dr. Piper, and others, who denigrate the prophet (and a prophet he was) and find themselves in agreement with Satan and Job's counsellors.

Job's Theology Job's Righteous Character - Chapter One (here)

Before examining the theology of Job, we should look at the character of Job. It is fair to say that Job has suffered (in the hands, ironically, of many Christian commentators) a "character assassination" of the worst kind. Many believe Job, in character, was not, in reality, as he is described, either in the Book of Job, or elsewhere in scripture. Many consider the things he said about God to be gross error, his theology to be heresy, and surely not, therefore, an inspired prophet of God. 

 

When one compares the divine judgment of Job's character with the judgment of many commentators on Job's character and theology, one sees an intriguing and surprising difference. God's commentary on the character of Job differs greatly from that of many Christian commentators. 

 

The Book of Job begins with a divine interrogative to "The Satan" (or The Accuser) -- "Have you considered my servant Job?" 

 

The same question may be asked of every person on earth, especially of those who read the story of Job, and of all those who are Christians. Have we "considered" God's prophet and servant, the man called "Job"? Have we deeply pondered his character, life experiences, and theology? 

 

In this series of essays on Job's Theology, this is precisely what we will be doing. We will be considering the character and teachings of Job. How will our judgments of Job compare with the judgment of God? With that of The Satan? With that of Job's "friends"? How will our portraiture of Job compare with the scriptural portrait of Job? 

  

Job's Character 

  

"In the land of Uz there lived a man whose name was Job. This man was blameless and upright; he feared God and shunned evil." (Job 1: 1 NIV) 

 

"Then the LORD said to Satan, "Have you considered my servant Job? There is no one on earth like him; he is blameless and upright, a man who fears God and shuns evil." (1:8) 

 

These are the words of both God and the inspired writer of the Book of Job concerning the character of Job. They give us a portrait of Job that ought not to be impugned. With such an holy character attributed to him, it is no wonder, as we shall see, that he is a type of the Lord Jesus Christ, the greater sufferer, or greater than Job. 

 

"None like him in the earth." 

"Upright" 

"Perfect" 

"Just" 

"Man of Integrity" 

"Fears God" 

"Eschews evil" 

"God's servant" 

"In all this Job sinned not" 

"In all this Job did not charge God foolishly" 

"Job has spoken concerning me what is right" 

These are the character descriptions of Job, given in the Book of Job. They are accurate and truthful, being the very judgment of God. One of the ways in which we may judge the correctness of our interpretations of the Book of Job is to compare our estimation of Job and his character with this divinely inspired estimation. Has our interpretation of the words of Job caused us to have a lower estimation of him and his character than that expressed in the above citations from the Book of Job and the oracles of God? 

  

Satan says Job is 

 

1. Selfish (serves God for what he can get from God, i.e., he "uses" God) 

2. Really a God hater, but who covers it up ("he will curse you" given the opportunity) 

3. A hypocrite 

4. Not what God thinks he is, that is, not perfect and upright, etc. 

5. Unfaithful, disloyal and unreliable 

6. Not a man of integrity 

 

In all this Satan not only condemns the character of Job but also the character and ways of God. 

 

"At this, Job got up and tore his robe and shaved his head. Then he fell to the ground in worship and said: "Naked I came from my mother's womb, and naked I will depart. The LORD gave and the LORD has taken away; may the name of the LORD be praised." In all this, Job did not sin by charging God with wrongdoing." (1: 20-22 NIV) 

  

"Then the LORD said to Satan, "Have you considered my servant Job? There is no one on earth like him; he is blameless and upright, a man who fears God and shuns evil. And he still maintains his integrity, though you incited me against him to ruin him without any reason." (2: 3) 

  

"So Satan went out from the presence of the LORD and afflicted Job with painful sores from the soles of his feet to the top of his head. Then Job took a piece of broken pottery and scraped himself with it as he sat among the ashes. His wife said to him, "Are you still holding on to your integrity? Curse God and die!" He replied, "You are talking like a foolish woman. Shall we accept good from God, and not trouble?" In all this, Job did not sin in what he said." (2: 7-10) 

 

These verses are clear and concise and tell us the truth about this man named "Job." Our view of him ought to be the same as that of God. If it is not, then something is wrong with our view of Job, and not with God's view of him. 

  

"Though these three men, Noah, Daniel, and Job, were in it, they should deliver but their own souls by their righteousness, saith the Lord GOD...Though Noah, Daniel, and Job were in it, as I live, saith the Lord GOD, they shall deliver neither son nor daughter; they shall but deliver their own souls by their righteousness." (Ezekiel 14: 14, 20 KJV) 

 

Here Job is put in the company of prophets and righteous men. Yet Noah and Daniel have not suffered from "character assassination" as has God's "servant" Job. No reputable Christian commentator questions the holiness or inspiration of the words of either Noah or Daniel, yet a host of them question the holiness and inspiration of the godly Job. 

  

Job the Prophet 

  

"Take, my brethren, the prophets, who have spoken in the name of the Lord, for an example of suffering affliction, and of patience. Behold, we count them happy which endure. Ye have heard of the patience of Job, and have seen the end of the Lord; that the Lord is very pitiful, and of tender mercy." (James 5: 10, 11 KJV) 

 

Is not Job here clearly identified as one of "the prophets" who "spoke in the name of the Lord"? Is he not an "example" of "prophets" suffering affliction? Is he not an "example" of "prophets" having patience in suffering? 

 

Why would Christian theologians and bible students exclude Job from being one of the inspired prophets with so much evidence in support of it? 

Job's Theology 

Job The Prophet - Chapter Two (here)

 "Take, my brethren, the prophets, who have spoken in the name of the Lord, for an example of suffering affliction, and of patience. Behold, we count them happy which endure. Ye have heard of the patience of Job, and have seen the end of the Lord; that the Lord is very pitiful, and of tender mercy." (James 5: 10, 11 KJV) 

 

As shown in the previous chapter, these words of James prove that Job was a prophet of God, one who spoke in the name of the Lord. This testimony is sufficient in itself, but we will notice more. Job said: 

  

"For I know that my redeemer liveth, and that he shall stand at the latter day upon the earth: And though after my skin worms destroy this body, yet in my flesh shall I see God." (Job 19: 25, 26 KJV) 

 

Was this not a "prophecy" of Christ the Messiah? Does this prophecy not constitute Job as a "prophet"? 

 

Wrote Peter: 

  

"For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost." (II Peter 1: 21 KJV) 

 

Was Job not one of these "holy men of God"? Was he not one of "the prophets"? Did he not speak as "moved by the Holy Ghost"? Are his words not inspired? Approved by God himself in Job 42: 7? In that verse, God says: 

 

"And it was so, that after the LORD had spoken these words unto Job, the LORD said to Eliphaz the Temanite, My wrath is kindled against thee, and against thy two friends: for ye have not spoken of me the thing that is right, as my servant Job hath." (KJV) 

 

These words should settle all debate about the correctness of Job's theology, about the truthfulness of what he said about the nature and workings of God in his dialogues with his "friends." Yet, many commentators and interpreters of the Book of Job have found intriguing and crafty ways of "twisting" this divine commentary on the character and teachings of Job. In spite of what God said about Job's theological teachings, many "interpreters" nevertheless tell us that Job was wrong about many things he said about God and his providence! But, more on this in a future chapter. Clearly these words of Lord God confirm that Job was a prophet who spoke in the name of the Lord and as moved by the Holy Ghost. 

  

"I have also spoken by the prophets, and I have multiplied visions, and used similitudes, by the ministry of the prophets." (Hosea 12: 10 KJV) 

 

Did Job not see God face to face, as much so as Moses? Did he not receive the very words of God? What greater oracles are there than those given to the prophet Job? Did Job not receive from God "multiplied visions"? Was not the whole character and experiences of Job a "similitude" for the sufferings of Christ? Did God not identify Job as his "spokesman" by always faithfully calling him his "servant" and by affirming that Job had "spoken concerning me what is right"? (42: 7) 

 

"Therefore have I hewed them by the prophets; I have slain them by the words of my mouth: and thy judgments are as the light that goeth forth." (Hosea 6: 5 KJV) 

 

How can any legitimately exclude Job from this description of "the prophets"? Has not the theology of Job sculptured and shaped the thought of God's people? In the words of Job, and of God's words to Job, do we not have the "words of my (God's) mouth"? His "judgments"? Who can honestly read Job and not come away with the feeling of being "hewed" by the message? 

 

Also, as pointed out in the previous chapter, Lord God, through Ezekiel the prophet, put Job in company with two other prophets, with Noah and Daniel. Does this not also indicate that Job was a prophet?

Job The Accused - Chapter Three (here - excerpts)

Sins of Job (supposed) 

 

1. Pride and arrogance (presumption) 

2. Self righteousness (self justification) 

3. Hypocrisy and idolatry 

4. Cowardness (too much complaining) 

5. Selfishness and greed 

6. Impenitence (refusal to confess sin) 

7. Impatience (complains too much) 

8. Unbelief (refusal to trust God) 

9. Unfaithfulness and disloyalty 

10. False Teacher (bad theology) 

11. Respecter of persons (envious) 

12. Murderer (for being suicidal) 

 

If one reads the words of Job's "friends," and of commentators and interpreters since their day, he will discover one or more of the above sins charged against Job. In fact, many commentators on the Book of Job invariably end up being just as accusatory and critical against Job's character and theology as were Job's "friends," the very ones God condemned in the Epilogue for sin and heresy!

Job's Repentance Chapter Six (here - excerpts)

“Wherefore I despise myself, and repent in dust and ashes.” (Job 42:6 KJV) 

 

Do these words of Job indicate that Job was in error and guilty of sin? And, such sin as to warrant his superlative sufferings? Those commentators and interpreters who are intent on indicting the righteousness, faith, and patience of Job, insist that they do indicate such. It is argued that his "abhorrence" and his "repentance" are proofs of his theological errors and his unrighteous character. Yet, nothing could be further from the truth.

 

If the above words indicate Job's theological and moral errors, then the testimony of God himself must be set aside, who both, at the beginning and at the end, testify to Job's righteous character and conduct and of his theological correctness. Wrote one interpreter: 

  

"Verse six is actually very difficult to translate into English. The Hebrew can be translated in two distinct ways, and there is no clue from the text itself how the author intended it to be understood. It can be understood as a confession of one’s sin and one’s inferiority to God: “I despise myself and repent in dust and ashes” (the traditional translation). But the Hebrew verb translated “I despise myself” can also be translated “I hate” or “I reject” (cf. Jer. 31:37; 33:26). And the Hebrew verb, nikhamti, can just as well be translated “rue” or “regret” as it can be translated “repent” (cf. Gen. 6:7; I Sam. 15:11; Jer. 4:28; 18:3). Therefore, the passage can be as legitimately translated “I reject and regret dust and ashes” as it can be translated “I despise myself and repent in dust and ashes”. See here 

Another writer sees the verse like this: Upon this I reject/despise [something] and am sorry/comforted For/Concerning/Upon the dust and ashes. He says: "The verb "reject" normally requires an object. Ancient manuscripts smudged easily, so accidental erasure is one possibility. A daydreaming copyist is another. At 34:33 and 36:5, "reject" is used without an object but the usage in those verses is pretty clearly not applicable here, though the coincidence of three abnormal usages in a row like that does give pause. Also, the Hebrew for "am sorry for / am comforted concerning" is a standard verb-preposition compound. The King James reading is still possible, but Job would have to put a definite break between the verb and the preposition to get his non-standard meaning across, and he would end up sounding awkward and a little pompous: "I reject [something] and I repent --pause-- upon the dust and ashes." 

Another writer said: 

  

"I despise" must have an object, and the nearest one is "dust and ashes." The preposition "al (upon), following upon the verb nhm, "I repent" or "I am comforted," introduces the object of the repentance or the subject of the comfort. "Dust and ashes," then, does double duty as the accusative of both "I despise" ('em' as) and "I repent" (nhmty)." (pg. 376, "In turns of tempest: a reading of Job, with a translation," By Edwin Marshall Good) 

Again, another writer, Robert Sutherland, says: 

  

"Naham" can be translated "repent" but only in the loosest possible sense and a potentially misleading sense in this context. The New Oxford Annotated Edition of the NRSV adds an important editorial note to its translation of the word "naham" as "repent": "Repent, a verb that is often used to indicate a change of mind on the Lord's part (Exodus 32: 14; Jeremiah 18: 8, 10). Here it does not mean repeantance for sin (see vv. 7-8, where Job is said to have spoken what is right)." "Shub" is the normal Hebrew word for a repentance that involves confession of wrongdoing or sin. "Shub" means "turning away from sin and returning to God through repentance." The author of the Book of Job has carefully chosen his words. He has deliberately chosen "naham" as opposed to "shub." 

The author is tempting the inattentive reader to premature judgment. He is tempting the reader to find that Job is confessing sin, either for his so-called excessive words, his Oath of Innocence or both. Nothing could be further from the truth. Job never confesses sin. He never confesses to having wrongfully used excessive language. He never confesses to having wrongfully instituted his Oath of Innocence. And he never retracts or withdraws his Oath of Innocence. God would later say Job was right in everything he said. (Job 42: 7,8) In the face of such a judgment, there is no room to attribute sin or wrongdoing to Job for either his so-called excessive words or his Oath of Innocence. If Job were actually confessing sin of any sort, then Job would be damned on the terms of his Oath of Innocence. The Oath of Innocence once sworn cannot be withdrawn as having been wrongfully instituted. If Job were actually confessing sin of any sort, the Satan would be proven right in his challenge of God. And the consequences would be enormous. God would be proven wrong in his three judgments on Job. (Job 1: 8,9; 3: 2; 42: 7) God should step down from his throne. And all humankind should be destroyed as a failed project." (pg. 131, 132, "Putting God on Trial: The Biblical Book of Job," By Robert Sutherland)