Sermon for April 6th, 2014

From Neal's Wiki
Revision as of 08:05, 29 March 2014 by Iraneal (Talk | contribs) (Created page with "I generally hear Job's friends criticized for one of two different reasons. One view is slightly more charitable than the other, but both still paint the friends in a pretty ...")

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

I generally hear Job's friends criticized for one of two different reasons. One view is slightly more charitable than the other, but both still paint the friends in a pretty negative light.

The first (and worst) judgment is that WHAT the friends say is to Job is wrong: Their theology is just bad, flawed, not in line with scripture, wisdom, or good teaching of any sort. The second (slightly better) judgment is that WHAT the friends say is ok, but HOW they say it is wrong. They had good intent, put poor execution. They weren't sensitive enough to Job's situation. They had poor bedside manner. I think both of those arguments disappear when we actually read what the friends have to say, and how they say it.

The first, that WHAT they say is wrong, is based on God's words at the end of the book, where he tells the friends, "You have not spoken of me what is right, as my servant Job has." But that whole understanding hinges on one little preposition: OF (or in some translations, ABOUT). Prepositions in most languages are pretty ambiguous. This preposition, in Hebrew, is אל. Brown, Driver Briggs Hebrew dictionary defines it as "to, toward, unto, into, in, among, toward, against, in addition to, concerning, in regard to, in reference to, on account of, according to, at, by, in between, and within." I hope you realize by now that Biblical translation isn't an exact science. In any case, I prefer to use the very first definition given here. Not "of" but rather "to." You have not spoken TO me what is right. You spoke to Job what was right, but you ignored me. Job, on the other hand, spoke directly to me, and even though what he said about me (his theology) was completely messed up and wrong (that's why I gave him a four-chapter-long lecture) at least he was addressing me to my face.

Now, this may seem to actually support the idea it wasn't WHAT Job's friends said, but HOW they said it that was the problem. But remember that God's point is how the friends speak (or do not speak) to God, not Job. We've already seen how Job's friends sat with him in silence and sympathy for seven days and seven nights. We saw last week how Eliphaz, the first of the friends, speaks with gentle, thoughtful concern for his friend, balanced with appropriate reverence for God.