The book of Job

[tttallison]

Reread my post. I was referring to Saul before he became Paul. So there is no need to distort the fact I do believe "Paul's" words are trustworthy. We can stick to the discussion at hand without introducing unrelated remarks.

But more to the point, I thought your post was referring to another point you made regarding Paul when he gave his pedigree. He includes the word "blameless" in there --- and that is what I thought you were referring to again. I understand now you were referring to your other point where you believe, in your interpretation, that there is a parallel between Israel and Job, with which I respectfully disagree.

Thank you for clarifying.

I apologize. Seems like I have been doing that a lot lately. I misinterpreted what you were saying. Having said that I do believe that there is no difference between Job and Paul. They both had a zeal for God. They both lacked knowledge in that Paul thought he was doing right in the way he was treating Christians, and Job thought he was doing right in the way he treated his servants.


Job 30:2 Yea, whereto might the strength of their hands profit me, in whom old age was perished?

It appears Job didn't have a pension plan for his workers when they were old, he just cast them out, and left their children to starve.

 

[christophernyc]

You have to admit that Elihu paints a pretty good picture of being born again when he says his flesh shall be fresher than a childs.

The picture God paints of Job is pretty much the same picture he presents in Deuteronomy 32 when God declares Israel as the apple of his eye. God calls Israel Jeshurun.(The upright) He then declares their sin when they turn from righteousness.

Deu 32:10 He found him in a desert land, and in the waste howling wilderness; he led him about, he instructed him, he kept him as the apple of his eye.

Deu 32:15 But Jeshurun (The upright) waxed fat, and kicked: thou art waxen fat, thou art grown thick, thou art covered with fatness; then he forsook God which made him, and lightly esteemed the Rock of his salvation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Deu 32:20 And he said, I will hide my face from them, I will see what their end shall be: for they are a very froward generation, children in whom is no faith.

Job 13:24 Wherefore hidest thou thy face, and holdest me for thine enemy?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Deu 32:28 For they are a nation void of counsel, neither is there any understanding in them.

Job 38:2 Who is this that darkeneth counsel by words without knowledge?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Job was a righteous man who became unrighteous. God foreknew it, and thus was the reason for Job's trials.

Eze 3:20 Again, When a righteous man doth turn from his righteousness, and commit iniquity, and I lay a stumblingblock before him, he shall die: because thou hast not given him warning, he shall die in his sin, and his righteousness which he hath done shall not be remembered; but his blood will I require at thine hand.

Yes, I can see your point how the picture Elihu paints has some semblance of being born again. At the same time, look at the context. Look at how Elihu posits this notion in the verses that follow:

Job 33:25-28
25 His flesh shall be fresher than a child's: he shall return to the days of his youth:
26 He shall pray unto God, and he will be favourable unto him: and he shall see his face with joy: for he will render unto man his righteousness.
27 He looketh upon men, and if any say, I have sinned, and perverted that which was right, and it profited me not;
28 He will deliver his soul from going into the pit, and his life shall see the light.

Elihu is framing this idea within the context of a person having committed a sin, and by extension implying this is what has happened with Job. However, it must be pointed out again that if anyone reads chapters 1 & 2, they know Job's suffering is not because he had committed any sin.

Elihu's errant advice is a mistake at best, but may also be intentionally misleading. His insinuation here, like his other false accusations against Job, highlights the fact he is entirely wrong about Job's situation. This is also a good example that Elihu is indeed *not* "perfect in knowledge", despite him making this claim about himself (Job 36:4).

Tempting as it may be, do not be deceived by Elihu.

 

[christophernyc]

There are only two types of righteousness that I know of. One is man's and the other is God's. If it is man's righteousness, than it has to be called self-righteousness. We know Job didn't possess God's righteousness because God asked Job if Job was condemning God so that Job might be righteous.

Romans 3:10-12
10 As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:
11 There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God.
12 They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one.

Paul appears to be quoting David from Psalm 14:1-3:
1 The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.
2 The LORD looked down from heaven upon the children of men, to see if there were any that did understand, and seek God.
3 They are all gone aside, they are all together become filthy: there is none that doeth good, no, not one.

The point seems to be that no one is righteous in and of themselves apart from God. But you believe that a person can be made righteous through faith in God, no?

Paul tells us in Romans 4:3
For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness.

It appears Paul is referencing Genesis 15:3:
And he [Abraham] believed in the LORD; and he [God] counted it to him [Abraham] for righteousness.

So does Job using the term "my righteousness" then automatically mean it is "self-righteousness" and pride? How so? Based on the text, it is quite clear that Job's faith in God was already established prior to his ordeal. One way this can be concluded is based on the fact Job consistently seeks God, and prays to Him, all throughout his suffering.

Let's look at these other verses from Scripture:

Psalm 4:1 (David)
Hear me when I call, O God of my righteousness: thou hast enlarged me when I was in distress; have mercy upon me, and hear my prayer.

Psalm 7:8 (David)
The Lord shall judge the people: judge me, O Lord, according to my righteousness, and according to mine integrity that is in me.

Psalm 18:21-25 & 2 Samuel 22:21-25 (David)
21 The Lord rewarded me according to my righteousness; according to the cleanness of my hands hath he recompensed me.
22 For I have kept the ways of the Lord, and have not wickedly departed from my God.
23 For all his judgments were before me, and I did not put away his statutes from me.
24 I was also upright before him, and I kept myself from mine iniquity.
25 Therefore hath the Lord recompensed me according to my righteousness, according to the cleanness of my hands in his eyesight.

Question: Do you believe David's testimonies here are true or false?

Based on Psalm 4:1 it seems when David refers to his righteousness, he understands that God is the Lord of that righteousness.

So then, if David says "my righteousness" and it is understood to be in the light of God and His righteousness, then isn't it possible that when Job says "my righteousness" it can be understood in the same way? Disagree if you like, but according to Scripture, it looks like it is possible.

When Job says "my righteousness" I believe it is in relation to his faith in God. It's not a righteousness apart from God. As stated before, Job's suffering then is a *testing* of that faith. This also comports with what the apostle James wrote in his epistle about enduring trials as a testing of our faith. Then when he references Job, it is precisely for this same reason.

 

[tttallison]

Yes, I can see your point how the picture Elihu paints has some semblance of being born again. At the same time, look at the context. Look at how Elihu posits this notion in the verses that follow:

Job 33:25-28
25 His flesh shall be fresher than a child's: he shall return to the days of his youth:
26 He shall pray unto God, and he will be favourable unto him: and he shall see his face with joy: for he will render unto man his righteousness.
27 He looketh upon men, and if any say, I have sinned, and perverted that which was right, and it profited me not;
28 He will deliver his soul from going into the pit, and his life shall see the light.

Elihu is framing this idea within the context of a person having committed a sin, and by extension implying this is what has happened with Job. However, it must be pointed out again that if anyone reads chapters 1 & 2, they know Job's suffering is not because he had committed any sin.

Elihu's errant advice is a mistake at best, but may also be intentionally misleading. His insinuation here, like his other false accusations against Job, highlights the fact he is entirely wrong about Job's situation. This is also a good example that Elihu is indeed *not* "perfect in knowledge", despite him making this claim about himself (Job 36:4).

Tempting as it may be, do not be deceived by Elihu.

Do you know any other place in the bible where a man has been given a whole chapter to write, and we are given the choice to decide if he is lying, or if he is telling the truth? That would be very unsettling to say the least. If we are given the choice to decide if it is true, or not true, are we in a position to examine every chapter in the bible to decide if it is true or not?

Allah is the great deceiver (Sura 3:54), but my God is not.

 

[christophernyc]

Do you know any other place in the bible where a man has been given a whole chapter to write, and we are given the choice to decide if he is lying, or if he is telling the truth? That would be very unsettling to say the least. If we are given the choice to decide if it is true, or not true, are we in a position to examine every chapter in the bible to decide if it is true or not?

Allah is the great deceiver (Sura 3:54), but my God is n

I apologize. Seems like I have been doing that a lot lately. I misinterpreted what you were saying. Having said that I do believe that there is no difference between Job and Paul. They both had a zeal for God. They both lacked knowledge in that Paul thought he was doing right in the way he was treating Christians, and Job thought he was doing right in the way he treated his servants.


Job 30:2 Yea, whereto might the strength of their hands profit me, in whom old age was perished?

It appears Job didn't have a pension plan for his workers when they were old, he just cast them out, and left their children to starve.

How did you conclude Job is speaking of his own servants?

The context is Job speaking about young people who are mocking him while he is suffering. He describes them as base and whose fathers he would not hire even for menial tasks. It is clear these are people who do *not* work for him.

 

[christophernyc]

The following are 10 consecutive chapters containing "lo". It should seem obvious that "lo" means not, or is negative.

“lo” occurs in 260 verses in Job

Job 1:10 Hast not (H3808) thou made an hedge about him, and about his house, and about all that he hath on every side? thou hast blessed the work of his hands, and his substance is increased in the land.

Job 1:11 But put forth thine hand now, and touch all that he hath, and he will curse (H1288-H3808) thee to thy face.
Bless not = curse

Job 1:22In all this Job sinned not (H3808), nor charged God foolishly.

Job 2:10 But he said unto her, Thou speakest as one of the foolish women speaketh. What? shall we receive good at the hand of God, and shall we not (H3808) receive evil? In all this did not Job sin with his lips.

Job 2:12 And when they lifted up their eyes afar off, and knew him not (H3808), they lifted up their voice, and wept; and they rent every one his mantle, and sprinkled dust upon their heads toward heaven.

Job 3:10 Because it shut not (H3808) up the doors of my mother's womb, nor hid sorrow from mine eyes.

Job 3:11 Why died I not (H3808) from the womb? why did I not give up the ghost when I came out of the belly?

Job 3:16 Or as an hidden untimely birth I had not (H3808) been; as infants which never saw light.

Job 3:18 There the prisoners rest together; they hear not (H3808) the voice of the oppressor.


Job 3:26 I was not (H3808) in safety, neither (H3808) had I rest, neither (H3808) was I quiet; yet trouble came.

Job 4:6 Is not (3808) this thy fear, thy confidence, thy hope, and the uprightness of thy ways?

Job 4:16 It stood still, but I could not (H3808) discern the form thereof: an image was before mine eyes, there was silence, and I heard a voice, saying,

Job 4:18 Behold, he put no (3808) trust in his servants; and his angels he charged with folly:

Job 4:21 Doth not (H808) their excellency which is in them go away? they die, even without wisdom.

Job 5:6 Although affliction cometh not (H3808) forth of the dust, neither doth trouble spring out of the ground;

Job 5:12 He disappointeth the devices of the crafty, so that their hands cannot (H3808) perform their enterprise.

Job 5:19 He shall deliver thee in six troubles: yea, in seven there shall no (H3808) evil touch thee.

Job 5:21 Thou shalt be hid from the scourge of the tongue: neither (H3808) shalt thou be afraid of destruction when it cometh.

Job 5:24 And thou shalt know that thy tabernacle shall be in peace; and thou shalt visit thy habitation, and shalt not (3808) sin.

Job 6:10 Then should I yet have comfort; yea, I would harden myself in sorrow: let him not (H3808) spare; for I have not (H3808) concealed the words of the Holy One.

Job 6:21 For now ye are nothing (H3808); ye see my casting down, and are afraid.

Job 6:30 Is there iniquity in my tongue? Cannot (3808) my taste discern perverse things?

Job 7:1 Is there not (3808) an appointed time to man upon earth? are not his days also like the days of an hireling?

Job 7:7 O remember that my life is wind: mine eye shall no (H3808) more see good.

Job 7:8 The eye of him that hath seen me shall see me no (H3808) more: thine eyes are upon me, and I am not.

Job 7:9 As the cloud is consumed and vanisheth away: so he that goeth down to the grave shall come up no (3808) more.

Job 7:10 He shall return no (H3808) more to his house, neither shall his place know him any more.

Job 7:11 Therefore I will not (H3808) refrain my mouth; I will speak in the anguish of my spirit; I will complain in the bitterness of my soul.

Job 7:16 I loathe it; I would not (H3808) live alway: let me alone; for my days are vanity.

Job 7:19 How long wilt thou not (H3808) depart from me, nor let me alone till I swallow down my spittle?

Job 7:21 And why dost thou not (H3808) pardon my transgression, and take away mine iniquity? for now shall I sleep in the dust; and thou shalt seek me in the morning, but I shall not be.

Job 8:11 Can the rush grow up without (H3808) mire? can the flag grow without water?

Job 9:24 The earth is given into the hand of the wicked: he covereth the faces of the judges thereof; if not (H3808), where, and who is he?



The first test has Job blessing God, and this is why Satan's cause was unjust because Satan had said Job would not bless God. After the second test Job did not bless God.

I stated at the end of the post you are responding to here:

"I realize you are committed to your interpretation and will likely not consider any alternative. However, a clear, legible, legitimate alternative has been provided for you to consider nonetheless."

This statement still stands.

 

[christophernyc]

Do you know any other place in the bible where a man has been given a whole chapter to write, and we are given the choice to decide if he is lying, or if he is telling the truth? That would be very unsettling to say the least. If we are given the choice to decide if it is true, or not true, are we in a position to examine every chapter in the bible to decide if it is true or not?

Allah is the great deceiver (Sura 3:54), but my God is not.

Are you able to address the substance of my post?

I realize it challenges the view you have of Elihu, but what say you regarding the facts and context of his statements about Job?

 

[tttallison]

Romans 3:10-12
10 As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:
11 There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God.
12 They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one.

Paul appears to be quoting David from Psalm 14:1-3:
1 The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.
2 The LORD looked down from heaven upon the children of men, to see if there were any that did understand, and seek God.
3 They are all gone aside, they are all together become filthy: there is none that doeth good, no, not one.

The point seems to be that no one is righteous in and of themselves apart from God. But you believe that a person can be made righteous through faith in God, no?

Paul tells us in Romans 4:3
For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness.

It appears Paul is referencing Genesis 15:3:
And he [Abraham] believed in the LORD; and he [God] counted it to him [Abraham] for righteousness.

So does Job using the term "my righteousness" then automatically mean it is "self-righteousness" and pride? How so? Based on the text, it is quite clear that Job's faith in God was already established prior to his ordeal. One way this can be concluded is based on the fact Job consistently seeks God, and prays to Him, all throughout his suffering.

Let's look at these other verses from Scripture:

Psalm 4:1 (David)
Hear me when I call, O God of my righteousness: thou hast enlarged me when I was in distress; have mercy upon me, and hear my prayer.

Psalm 7:8 (David)
The Lord shall judge the people: judge me, O Lord, according to my righteousness, and according to mine integrity that is in me.

Psalm 18:21-25 & 2 Samuel 22:21-25 (David)
21 The Lord rewarded me according to my righteousness; according to the cleanness of my hands hath he recompensed me.
22 For I have kept the ways of the Lord, and have not wickedly departed from my God.
23 For all his judgments were before me, and I did not put away his statutes from me.
24 I was also upright before him, and I kept myself from mine iniquity.
25 Therefore hath the Lord recompensed me according to my righteousness, according to the cleanness of my hands in his eyesight.

Question: Do you believe David's testimonies here are true or false?

Based on Psalm 4:1 it seems when David refers to his righteousness, he understands that God is the Lord of that righteousness.

So then, if David says "my righteousness" and it is understood to be in the light of God and His righteousness, then isn't it possible that when Job says "my righteousness" it can be understood in the same way? Disagree if you like, but according to Scripture, it looks like it is possible.

When Job says "my righteousness" I believe it is in relation to his faith in God. It's not a righteousness apart from God. As stated before, Job's suffering then is a *testing* of that faith. This also comports with what the apostle James wrote in his epistle about enduring trials as a testing of our faith. Then when he references Job, it is precisely for this same reason.

I disagree with you that David is referring to God's righteousness when David said my righteousness.

In Psalm 7:8 David said "my righteousness", and David also said "mine integrity". Is David also speaking of God's integrity?

The same thing for Psalm 18:21. David said, my righteousness and my clean hands. Is it God's clean hands David is referring to?

You have to understand that David was young when he said, Psa 7:8 The LORD shall judge the people: judge me, O LORD, according to my righteousness, and according to mine integrity that is in me. But later, after having Uriah killed, David asked God not to judge him. Psa 143:2 And enter not into judgment with thy servant: for in thy sight shall no man living be justified.
David said "My righteousness" four times and none after the 18th chapter. David used the term thy righteousness 24 times with only 1 occuring before the 31 chapter.

Job said, Job 27:6 My righteousness I hold fast, and will not let it go: my heart shall not reproach me so long as I live. But his heart did reproach him didn't it. This meant he could no longer hold on to his own righteousness.

It becomes very clear about whose righteousness we are discussing, when we hear God asking Job if he is going to condemn God so that Job might be righteous. (Job 40:8)

 

[tttallison]

Are you able to address the substance of my post?

I realize it challenges the view you have of Elihu, but what say you regarding the facts and context of his statements about Job?

Every statement of Elihu is true, and to say otherwise is to say the bible can't be trusted.

 

[JayWalker]

You left a portion of what I said out, thus portraying what I said out of context. Do you do that often?

Claiming God is imperfect and made some errors causes anything else that was said to need to be ignored.

Only someone not having the Holy Spirit would claim God makes errors since this is what the devil and his demons are trying to get people to believe.

Until you repent of the sin of claiming God is not perfect, all power, and all knowing then everything else you say should be ignored.

Being capable of evil is not being evil; Jesus suffered temptation but did not sin (Heb. 2:14-18).

And you did notice that Jesus never once did anything evil tight?
He decided that He would be faithful to the Father forever so He cannot be touched by evil.

 

[tttallison]

Claiming God is imperfect and made some errors causes anything else that was said to need to be ignored.

Only someone not having the Holy Spirit would claim God makes errors since this is what the devil and his demons are trying to get people to believe.

Until you repent of the sin of claiming God is not perfect, all power, and all knowing then everything else you say should be ignored.





And you did notice that Jesus never once did anything evil tight?
He decided that He would be faithful to the Father forever so He cannot be touched by evil.

I never made that claim, you took me out of context. This is what I said, "A perfunctory study of the text can lead one to believe that God exalted Job above a higher station than was intended."

What i meant was, if you don't do a deep study of the book you might think that Job had walked with God, but you would be mistaken. Job himself said that he didn't know God, or where he was. At the end of the book Job said he had heard of God before, but now he sees him. Job had seen the light.

 

[christophernyc]

Every statement of Elihu is true, and to say otherwise is to say the bible can't be trusted.

So we see here you are not addressing the substance of the post. You wrote nothing about what Elihu says about Job and the context in which he says it. Instead it appears you have retreated into one of your talking points. I find that avoiding the facts and evidence of this story makes your argument even less persuasive.

Also, conflating the idea that if Elihu's words are errant then the whole bible can't be trusted is just ludicrous. Your statement reads like a heavy-handed why to try and strong-arm your argument. Statements like that just can't be taken seriously.

Besides, consider other places in Scripture where Goliath is speaking against David, for example. I've pointed this out for you before, where Goliath is quoted *in Scripture* as saying something does not come true. There are also other examples of kings coming to battle against Israel and making threats. Their words are written *in Scripture* and yet what they say does not come true. So your heavy-handed argument does not work.

So the question still remains: are you able to address the substance of my post about what Elihu says to Job and the context in which he says it? Are you able to address it?

 

[tttallison]

So we see here you are not addressing the substance of the post. You wrote nothing about what Elihu says about Job and the context in which he says it. Instead it appears you have retreated into one of your talking points. I find that avoiding the facts and evidence of this story makes your argument even less persuasive.

Also, conflating the idea that if Elihu's words are errant then the whole bible can't be trusted is just ludicrous. Your statement reads like a heavy-handed why to try and strong-arm your argument. Statements like that just can't be taken seriously.

Besides, consider other places in Scripture where Goliath is speaking against David, for example. I've pointed this out for you before, where Goliath is quoted *in Scripture* as saying something does not come true. There are also other examples of kings coming to battle against Israel and making threats. Their words are written *in Scripture* and yet what they say does not come true. So your heavy-handed argument does not work.

So the question still remains: are you able to address the substance of my post about what Elihu says to Job and the context in which he says it? Are you able to address it?

Lets look at the facts.

Elihu was given a bigger part of the bible than 8 minor prophets and 2 Epistle writers. Elihu, at several points, speaks in the first person.

Goliath made a boast and six verses later it was shown to be false. There is no question in anyone's mind as to whether the bible has made a false statement. It was Goliath that lied, though he believed it to be true, and we are shown the truth of the matter. But when you say Elihu lied you bring in to question every statement in the Bible., because Elihu was given six chapters all to himself, and this was God's choice. All scripture is by inspiration of God, and God is not the author of confusion.

Job had asked God for a man like Job to be a mediator between Job and God, because Job didn't believe God could be a fair mediator. Two times Job had asked for this mediator, and when Elihu spoke, he said to Job, "Stand up (You are in my court room), I am according to thy wish in the place of God."

The bible says when a righteous man turns from his righteousness, and sins, he is no longer righteous, and will die.(Ezekiel 3:20)

Paul was blameless in the law, when he killed the followers of Christ, because of his lack of knowledge.

Job was also blameless in his sin due to his lack of knowledge. God said he was blameless and upright, blameless because of his ignorance, and upright because he thought he was doing right. Job and Paul were more alike than not.

Job failed the second test. His heart failed failed him. Job had said his heart would not condemn him so long as he lived. But at the end he confessed that he was vile, and his heart abhorred him.

 

[christophernyc]

Lets look at the facts.

Elihu was given a bigger part of the bible than 8 minor prophets and 2 Epistle writers. Elihu, at several points, speaks in the first person.

Goliath made a boast and six verses later it was shown to be false. There is no question in anyone's mind as to whether the bible has made a false statement. It was Goliath that lied, though he believed it to be true, and we are shown the truth of the matter. But when you say Elihu lied you bring in to question every statement in the Bible., because Elihu was given six chapters all to himself, and this was God's choice. All scripture is by inspiration of God, and God is not the author of confusion.

Job had asked God for a man like Job to be a mediator between Job and God, because Job didn't believe God could be a fair mediator. Two times Job had asked for this mediator, and when Elihu spoke, he said to Job, "Stand up (You are in my court room), I am according to thy wish in the place of God."

The bible says when a righteous man turns from his righteousness, and sins, he is no longer righteous, and will die.(Ezekiel 3:20)

Paul was blameless in the law, when he killed the followers of Christ, because of his lack of knowledge.

Job was also blameless in his sin due to his lack of knowledge. God said he was blameless and upright, blameless because of his ignorance, and upright because he thought he was doing right. Job and Paul were more alike than not.

Job failed the second test. His heart failed failed him. Job had said his heart would not condemn him so long as he lived. But at the end he confessed that he was vile, and his heart abhorred him.

So many things to address here, but let's stay on topic, shall we? Once again, it appears you are avoiding the substance of the post. So here it is again below. You quoted Elihu in Job 33:25 and I responded:

(begin previous post)
Yes, I can see your point how the picture Elihu paints has some semblance of being born again. At the same time, look at the context. Look at how Elihu posits this notion in the verses that follow:

Job 33:25-28
25 His flesh shall be fresher than a child's: he shall return to the days of his youth:
26 He shall pray unto God, and he will be favourable unto him: and he shall see his face with joy: for he will render unto man his righteousness.
27 He looketh upon men, and if any say, I have sinned, and perverted that which was right, and it profited me not;
28 He will deliver his soul from going into the pit, and his life shall see the light.

Elihu is framing this idea within the context of a person having committed a sin, and by extension implying this is what has happened with Job. However, it must be pointed out again that if anyone reads chapters 1 & 2, they know Job's suffering is not because he had committed any sin.

Elihu's errant advice is a mistake at best, but may also be intentionally misleading. His insinuation here, like his other false accusations against Job, highlights the fact he is entirely wrong about Job's situation. This is also a good example that Elihu is indeed *not* "perfect in knowledge", despite the fact that he makes this claim about himself (Job 36:4).

Tempting as it may be, do not be deceived by Elihu.
(end post)

Question: are you able to respond to the substance of this post?

 

[tttallison]

So many things to address here, but let's stay on topic, shall we? Once again, it appears you are avoiding the substance of the post. So here it is again below. You quoted Elihu in Job 33:25 and I responded:

(begin previous post)
Yes, I can see your point how the picture Elihu paints has some semblance of being born again. At the same time, look at the context. Look at how Elihu posits this notion in the verses that follow:

Job 33:25-28
25 His flesh shall be fresher than a child's: he shall return to the days of his youth:
26 He shall pray unto God, and he will be favourable unto him: and he shall see his face with joy: for he will render unto man his righteousness.
27 He looketh upon men, and if any say, I have sinned, and perverted that which was right, and it profited me not;
28 He will deliver his soul from going into the pit, and his life shall see the light.

Elihu is framing this idea within the context of a person having committed a sin, and by extension implying this is what has happened with Job. However, it must be pointed out again that if anyone reads chapters 1 & 2, they know Job's suffering is not because he had committed any sin.

Elihu's errant advice is a mistake at best, but may also be intentionally misleading. His insinuation here, like his other false accusations against Job, highlights the fact he is entirely wrong about Job's situation. This is also a good example that Elihu is indeed *not* "perfect in knowledge", despite the fact that he makes this claim about himself (Job 36:4).

Tempting as it may be, do not be deceived by Elihu.
(end post)

Question: are you able to respond to the substance of this post?

Job had not sinned against God prior to the first test, and we both agree on that. I don't know if you agree with my next statement, or not. "Losing possessions is not always punishment." If that were the case than losing a child could always be considered punishment from God, but that is not the case.

The limitations God set for the first test was that Job's body could not be touched. At the end of the first test Job blessed God, and God stated that Job was blameless and upright, and retained his integrity.

The limitations God set for the second test was that Job's life had to be spared. At the end of the second test Job did not bless God, and God did not state that Job was blameless and upright, nor that Job retained his integrity.

Even if you believe Job passed the second test he still sinned afterward, when he reproved God. (Job 40:2)

When a righteous man sins, all his righteousness will not be remembered, and he will die in his sins. (Ezekiel 3:20)

Even if Job had not sinned in the first two chapters, Elihu would still be correct in that Job had sinned later.

 

[JayWalker]

A perfunctory study of the text can lead one to believe that God exalted Job above a higher station than was intended

Only to those that believe the Lord makes mistakes and is not perfect and all powerful.

 

[tttallison]

Only to those that believe the Lord makes mistakes and is not perfect and all powerful.

Let me rephrase my statement. Only those that do not do a deep study of the book of Job will come to the conclusion that Job's integrity lasted beyond the second test. God does not make mistakes.

 

[christophernyc]

Job had not sinned against God prior to the first test, and we both agree on that.

Yes, we agree Job had not sinned against God prior to the first test. Also, neither had Job sinned prior to the second test either. God states Job's suffering is "without cause" (Job 2:3) --- meaning Job had not committed any sin to incur his suffering. So if he had not sinned prior to the first test --- and he passed --- then neither had he sinned prior to the second test.

The limitations God set for the first test was that Job's body could not be touched. At the end of the first test Job blessed God, and God stated that Job was blameless and upright, and retained his integrity.

The limitations God set for the second test was that Job's life had to be spared. At the end of the second test Job did not bless God, and God did not state that Job was blameless and upright, nor that Job retained his integrity.

God calls Job blameless and upright, one who fears God and shuns evil in Job 1:8 (as does the author of the book, by the way, in Job 1:1) prior to the first test. Then in Job 2:3 God describes Job's character in this same way again prior to the second test. Yes, in Job 2:3 God references Job's response after the first test --- but the context in which God says it is as a precursor to the second test, not strictly as a review of Job's reaction post his first test.

So unless there was a third test or another scene in heaven, it follows there would be no commentary from God about Job's response. That's how the story is written. It seems you are trying to use the absence of God speaking here at this point as some kind of proof Job had failed, but it literarily and logically makes no sense. It's like a bizarre bending of the story to achieve a preconceived conclusion.

Even if you believe Job passed the second test he still sinned afterward, when he reproved God. (Job 40:2)

Even if Job had not sinned in the first two chapters, Elihu would still be correct in that Job had sinned later.

Yes, Job did pass the second test. How do we know? Because Job did not curse God to His face as satan falsely predicted.

The overall point of these recent exchanges here in this chat was in response to your reference to Elihu's words in Job 33:23-28. The whole argument between Job and his 3 friends was about Job having sinned or not to incur his suffering. So when Elihu comes into the conversation, his assessment is effectively the same thing, as we find in the verses you mentioned. Here they are again:

Job 33:25-28
25 His flesh shall be fresher than a child's: he shall return to the days of his youth:
26 He shall pray unto God, and he will be favourable unto him: and he shall see his face with joy: for he will render unto man his righteousness.
27 He looketh upon men, and if any say, I have sinned, and perverted that which was right, and it profited me not;
28 He will deliver his soul from going into the pit, and his life shall see the light.

Elihu's viewpoint --- like Job's 3 friends --- is that Job had sinned to incur his suffering and that Job should confess his sin. We know Job's 3 friends were wrong, and we also know by his statement here, for example, that Elihu is also wrong. Just because Elihu says things that sound right does not mean his ideas are being applied correctly to Job and Job's ordeal.

The story is not about whether or not you believe Job sinned after the tests. The premise of the arguments in the story are regarding if Job had sinned prior to his suffering.

Elihu believes that Job has sinned from the outset. It is a foregone conclusion for him. Elihu does not even consider the fact that Job had not sinned. Elihu trying to coerce Job then to confess his "sin" is an attempt to manipulate Job into committing an error and forsake his integrity. If Job were to confess he had sinned (when he had not) would itself be a sin. This appears to be Elihu's goal, and likely why Job rightfully ignores him.

 

[JayWalker]

Yes, we agree Job had not sinned against God prior to the first test.

Actually he did because walking in fear is a sin. See Revelation 21:8, and also notice how many times in scripture the Lord commands His people to FEAR NOT! That's not a suggestion, it's a command.

The hedge of protection God had put around Job came down because he started walking in fear concerning his children being scared that his children were going to curse God and die which is exactly what happened to them

Job tells us what he feared came upon him, so he admits that he started living in fear.

However Job was heart right before the Lord and I don't think he got in to fear maliciously or knowingly being fearful so because of this the Lord considered him to be upright.

They does not mean though that Job is not going to reap corruption for getting in to fear. Now days we have the whole counsel of God in printed form (the Bible) which Job did not have at that time so where there is no law, there is no transgression (Romans 4:15)

If Job had God's entire Word in printed form like we have today, He never would have gotten in to fear like people are still doing today when they should know better but they don't and have no excuse for their lack of knowledge of God's Word.
Job would have known to "Give no place to the devil" (Ephesians 4:27) if he had access to the entire Word of God as we do today and yet he still paid a price for getting in to fear which was the cause of God's hedge of protection being taken down allowing satan to come in and attack him.

Sadly many today believe it was God's will for satan to attack and God instructed satan to attack because they think God gets some perverted pleasure in seeing His people suffer. This is common among calvinists who make God in to a monster.

They failed to study God's Word which tells us it's the devil that comes to steal, kill, and to destroy (John 10:10) and that God is not tempting, testing, or trying any man with evil (James 1:13), and they don't believe man reaps what he sows (Gal 6:7,8) which is what God built His entire Kingdom on - Mark 4:26 (see Genesis 1:11 also)

Sowing and reaping, aka seedtime and harvest is the operating system of God's creation.

The premise of the arguments in the story are regarding if Job had sinned prior to his suffering.

If Job did not cause God's hedge of protection to be removed opening the door for satan to come in and attack him, then that is claiming the Lord decided He wanted Job to suffer which is the claim the God is evil further claiming that the Lord lied in John 10:10 and in James 1:13

Blaming God is something that came out gnostic teachings and they got it from the devil.

It's a tactic used in warfare of attacking your enemy in such a way that your enemy thinks the attack came from someplace else which is why satan teaches people to blame God through gnostic teachings which supposedly comes from "special revelation".

Yeah, special revelation from the devil that God is evil rather than the truth that satan is the one who is evil.

There are those among us (such as those that belong to the masonic lodge that claim to be Christians, almost always calvinists) that believe satan is the true light, the true creator and God is jealous of satan and is lying about satan being evil. These people are of course demonic and have things backwards.

 

[tttallison]

If Job had God's entire Word in printed form like we have today, He never would have gotten in to fear like people are still doing today when they should know better but they don't and have no excuse for their lack of knowledge of God's Word.
Job would have known to "Give no place to the devil" (Ephesians 4:27) if he had access to the entire Word of God as we do today and yet he still paid a price for getting in to fear which was the cause of God's hedge of protection being taken down allowing satan to come in and attack him.

Job surely knew that Satan had deceived Eve. Job had knowledge of God's word. Job just didn't know God.

Job 23:12 Neither have I gone back from the commandment of his lips; I have esteemed the words of his mouth more than my necessary food.

Job 42:5 I have heard of thee by the hearing of the ear: but now mine eye seeth thee.