Commentary - Job 22:1-5

Bird's-eye view

We now come to the third and final round of speeches from Job’s friends, and Eliphaz the Temanite leads the charge once more. If we thought his previous counsel was unhelpful, we now find him doubling down on his error. The argument here is a masterpiece of flawed theology, a pristine example of what happens when men reason from their circumstances back to God, instead of the other way around. Eliphaz erects a theological system on the sand of human observation and then demands that Job build his house upon it. He represents the kind of pious, well-meaning, but ultimately destructive advice that is so common in the world. His core error is a transactional view of righteousness. He sees God as a celestial merchant who is only interested in profitable servants. Because Job is suffering, he must be unprofitable, and therefore wicked. This is the logic of the accuser, and it is a world away from the logic of the gospel, which is a logic of grace for the unprofitable.

Eliphaz’s speech is a crescendo of accusation, moving from supposedly self-evident theological principles to direct and baseless charges of gross sin. He is a model of how not to comfort the afflicted. He speaks with great confidence, but it is the confidence of a man who has mistaken his own tidy system for the profound and often mysterious wisdom of God. The central problem with his reasoning is that it leaves no room for the cross. It leaves no room for a righteous man to suffer unjustly, for the Son of God to be crucified. Eliphaz’s tidy world of moral cause-and-effect is shattered by Calvary, and it is shattered here in the prologue to Calvary that is the book of Job.

Outline

Context In Job

This is the third speech from Eliphaz, and his patience has clearly worn thin. In his first speech (Job 4-5), he was more gentle, suggesting Job’s suffering was the common lot of man and a form of divine discipline. In his second speech (Job 15), he grew harsher, accusing Job of windy words and impiety. But here in chapter 22, he throws off all restraint. He moves from insinuation to direct accusation. Job’s steadfast refusal to confess some secret sin has convinced Eliphaz that Job is not just mistaken, but hardened in his rebellion. This speech is significant because it represents the full flowering of the friends’ bankrupt theology. It is the clearest expression of the idea that all suffering is a direct and proportional punishment for specific sins. It is this theology that God will ultimately rebuke at the end of the book (Job 42:7).

Key Issues

Commentary

22:1 Then Eliphaz the Temanite answered and said,

Eliphaz speaks again, and we should brace ourselves. He is the oldest and likely the most respected of the three friends, but his wisdom is the wisdom of this world, which is foolishness with God. He "answered," but he is not responding to what Job has actually said so much as he is responding to Job's refusal to fit into his pre-fabricated theological box. This is what happens when we love our systems more than we love our brothers. We stop listening and start pontificating.

22:2 “Can a mighty man be of use to God, Or an insightful man be useful to himself?

Eliphaz begins with a series of rhetorical questions designed to put Job in his place. The first question is intended to establish God’s utter transcendence and self-sufficiency. Can a man, even a mighty one, be "of use" to God? The Hebrew word is sakan, which means to be profitable or beneficial. Eliphaz’s point is that God has no need of us. He is not a cosmic employer looking to hire good help. In this, Eliphaz is, on one level, correct. God is not dependent on us for anything (Acts 17:25). But he draws a diabolical conclusion from a correct premise. He uses God's sovereignty as a club to beat Job with. The second clause is a bit trickier: "Or an insightful man be useful to himself?" The logic seems to be that if a wise man cannot even guarantee profit for himself in this life, how could he possibly think he is bringing any profit to God? It's a way of saying, "Job, your wisdom has failed you. You are destitute. How can you claim to have any standing with God?" This is the logic of legalism. It always measures a man's standing with God by his outward performance and prosperity.

22:3 Is there any pleasure to the Almighty if you are righteous, Or profit if you make your ways perfect?

Here Eliphaz sharpens his point. He asks if God derives "pleasure" or "profit" from a man's righteousness. The answer he expects is a resounding "No." He is painting a picture of a distant, detached deity who is unmoved by human virtue. God is too big, too grand, to care about the petty righteousness of a man like Job. Again, there is a sliver of truth here, which makes the error all the more dangerous. Our righteousness does not put God in our debt. We cannot "add" anything to God that He does not already possess. But Eliphaz misses the heart of the covenant. God certainly does take pleasure in the obedience of His people (Psalm 147:11)! He delights in righteousness, not because it profits Him in some crude, transactional way, but because He is a good Father who delights to see His character reflected in His children. Eliphaz’s God is a Stoic deity, an unmoved mover. The God of the Bible is a Father who loves, delights, and grieves.

22:4 Is it because of your reverent fear that He reproves you, That He enters into judgment against you?

This question is dripping with sarcasm. "Job, do you really think God is disciplining you because you are so pious? Are you suggesting this terrible judgment has come upon you on account of your great reverence?" Eliphaz is mocking Job's claim to integrity. Since, in Eliphaz's system, God only punishes sin, and Job is clearly being punished, then Job’s claim to fear God must be a sham. The only possible reason for this "judgment" must be sin, and not just any sin, but egregious sin. This is a classic tactic of the accuser: misrepresent the other person's position in the worst possible light and then attack the caricature. Job has never claimed that God is punishing him for his righteousness, but rather that he is suffering despite his righteousness. But Eliphaz cannot hear this distinction because his theological grid has no category for it.

22:5 Is not your evil great, And your iniquities without end?

And here we have it. The gloves are off. After his series of rhetorical questions, designed to soften the ground, Eliphaz now delivers the direct blow. He moves from theological principle (as he sees it) to direct, slanderous accusation. This is not a question; it is an assertion framed as a question. "Your evil is great. Your iniquities are endless." Notice the progression. Job's suffering is great, therefore his sin must be great. This is the brutal, graceless math of the moralist. Eliphaz has no evidence for this. He has not witnessed any of the sins he is about to list in the following verses. He is reasoning entirely from the fact of Job's suffering. He has become a false witness against his brother, all in the name of defending God. And this is a profound warning to all of us. When our theology leads us to slander the saints, it is high time to repent of our theology.

Key Words

sakan, "Profit"

The Hebrew word sakan is central to Eliphaz's argument in verse 2. It carries the idea of benefit, use, or profit. Eliphaz uses it to argue that man can offer nothing of value to God. While it is true that God is self-sufficient, the Bible uses commercial language in other ways. We are told to "store up for yourselves treasures in heaven" (Matt. 6:20). God speaks of His people as His treasured possession. Eliphaz's error is not in affirming God's aseity, but in using it to create a cold, impersonal distance between God and man, denying the covenantal delight God takes in His people. He turns a glorious truth about God's fullness into a despairing conclusion about man's worthlessness, missing the gospel truth that our value is not in what we offer God, but in what Christ has done for us.

Application

The reasoning of Eliphaz is alive and well today. It is the default setting of the fallen human heart. We see it in the health and wealth gospel, which teaches that righteousness always leads to material prosperity. We see it in the prosperity gospel's evil twin, which teaches that all suffering is a direct result of some specific, unconfessed sin. Both are two sides of the same transactional coin. They are attempts to manage God, to make Him predictable and controllable.

The gospel demolishes this entire framework. The gospel tells us that the only truly righteous man who ever lived suffered the greatest judgment imaginable. Jesus was not punished because His evil was great; He was punished because our evil was great. He was crushed for our iniquities, which are without end. Eliphaz looked at Job's suffering and deduced great sin. The Christian looks at the cross and deduces great love and unfathomable grace.

Therefore, when we encounter suffering, either in our own lives or in the lives of others, we must resist the temptation to become little Eliphazes. We must not rush to a simplistic diagnosis. Instead, we are called to weep with those who weep, to bear one another's burdens, and to point one another to the cross, where suffering and righteousness met in a way that Eliphaz could never have imagined. It is at the cross that we learn that God's pleasure is not in our profitability, but in His Son, and in us, because we are hidden in His Son.