The book of Job, my favorite book.

Job never cursed God and spoke the truth about him. However.... he was wrong on some things. Like saying it would be better for him to have never been born. That's when God questioned him "where were you the
day that I measured Sunk the banks and stretched the line over all the earth and carved out its corner stone?
Where were you the day that I spoke and
Told the sun to split the night open
Calmed the morning dawn with its light to show." Etc

Questioning why God even created you is actually a sin bc you're questioning God. Once he accepted he was wrong to question God everything he lost was restored.

In the translation from Hebrew to English some understanding has been lost. Satan did not say Job would curse God. Satan said Job would not bless God. In Job 1:11 Satan said Job will "barak" "lo" you. "barak" always means to bless and "lo" means not. It reads "bless not" you. After the first test Job blessed God, and after the second test Job did not bless God. Job failed the second test.

We have discussed this point already, namely God declaring Job has spoken rightly of Him (God). We can agree to disagree on this one because, as I have stated, the comparison being made are the words of the three friends and the words of Job in chapters 4 - 31. I see how you would want to bend what God is saying to apply to Job's words in 42, but I don't see the logic. The contrast God is making regards the heated speeches between Job and the three friends.

Reading Romans 10:1-3 makes me think of Elihu. He is a guy who says "right" things, but seems utterly bereft of any relationship with God, aka *knowledge* (which is like the word "yada" in Hebrew, a kind of knowledge like a man *knows* a woman). Job however spoke of things that were beyond him - and yet there were profoundly accurate. For example, "For I know that my Redeemer liveth, and that He shall stand at the latter day upon the earth."

Elihu is angry with Job and his friends (two separate parties), but the fact that he is angry is written four times in the text. Hebrew repeats things twice to create emphasis, so reiterating it four times is a way to emphasize just how angry Elihu is. Elihu even expresses it himself when he says he is like a wineskin ready to burst.

Still, my question about how you (or anyone) might feel being counseled by someone with anger. Would you (or anyone outside of this story) in general be open to a furious mediator?

Also, where does it say that God is angry with Job? Which verse are you referring to?

Be great if there was just one translation but some do translate it as "he will blaspheme".. thats just one there are more None the less Job did say something more then once that he should not have. In case anyone wonders we can head on down to the corner store steal something and since God didn't stop us must mean He allowed it. haha NOT. Our "words" can cause the enemy to act to do things in our lifes. What so many leave out do not focus on is Job got back double what he had. God to David.. I gave you this and that and put those women under your care.. and if all of that was not enough .. all you had to do is ask. That IS our GOD. The end of that one verse.. and believe He is a rewarder of them that seek Him.

God qualifies his statement in Job 42:7 with the words "of me", meaning God. You have a legitimate argument, whether God was talking about what they said, or didn't say. But who the speech, or lack of speech, was directed at you don't.

You need to identify what the three friends said about God, that was wrong.

Job 9:13, Job 14:13, Job 16:9, Job 19:11,

You sure know how to misunderstand Scripture. What was said in Job 9:13 and to whom did it apply? If God will not withdraw his anger, the proud helpers do stoop under him.
These words were spoken by Job, who ASSUMED that his calamities were due to God being angry with him. But that was a total misunderstanding. Had Job know what had happened to bring on his calamities, he would have seen that God wad out to prove to Satan (and the world) that Job was RIGHTEOUS. I will not discuss the other verses.

Rejecting what contradicts your beliefs
In an ideal world, rational people who encounter new evidence that contradicts their beliefs would evaluate the facts and change their views accordingly. But that’s generally not how things go in the real world.

Partly to blame is a cognitive bias that can kick in when people encounter evidence that runs counter to their beliefs. Instead of reevaluating what they’ve believed up until now, people tend to reject the incompatible evidence. Psychologists call this phenomenon belief perseverance. Everyone can fall prey to this ingrained way of thinking.

Being presented with facts – whether via the news, social media or one-on-one conversations – that suggest their current beliefs are wrong causes people to feel threatened. This reaction is particularly strong when the beliefs in question are aligned with your political and personal identities. It can feel like an attack on you if one of your strongly held beliefs is challenged.

Job 41:4 Will he make a covenant with thee? wilt thou take him for a servant for ever?
Job 41:34 He beholdeth all high things: he is a king over all the children of pride.

God asked Job if Job was going to take Satan for a servant forever.

Truth is the most sought after, but the least appreciated.

God is asking Job a question. I know I have asked this before, but it seems it needs to be asked again. What is Job's answer to God?
The question posed regards *how* God is communicating with Job and *how* Elihu is communicating with Job. Again, most of Elihu's words are full of judgment and accusations delivered in statements. Most of God's words to Job are framed in the form of questions. The question posed was to explain the discrepancy between Elihu making statements and God asking questions. Those are two different ways of communicating. Making a statement with finality is different than asking a question, hence a discrepancy.

So to restate the question again, can you explain this discrepancy in how God and how Elihu communicate with Job?

This is very helpful. Thank you. Referring to 9:17, was job not broken by a tempest? Were his wounds not multiplied without cause? These things are true. These things did happen to Job, and much more besides. This is a perfect example of why God says that Job has spoken rightly of Him (God).

You wrote that God does not destroy the perfect. This sounds like something Job's three friends would say. That is their logic. But if we read chapters 1 & 2, we understand clearly that God allowed Job to suffer this ordeal undeservingly. Nothing Job did warranted these calamities, as God Himself explicitly states.

Additionally, did God allow His perfect Son Jesus to suffer and die and effectively be destroyed? (Yes, God raised Him from the dead, but God did allow Him first to be destroyed before raising Him back to life.) So if you cannot accept that Job was innocent and yet God let him suffer anyway, how are you able to accept the fact that Jesus was innocent and God allowed Him to suffer? If you do not believe God would destroy the perfect, is your position that Jesus Christ was not perfect then, too?

It's kind of amazing how someone is able to believe Elihu because Elihu (alone) claims he should be believed. And yet, when Job says he is speaking true, these same lovers of Elihu don't believe Job - even though God Himself affirms Job! Truly astounding.

The word in Hebrew that satan uses is yə·ḇā·ră·ḵe·kā, which only appears 2 times in the Bible. So it is very difficult to cross reference. Yes, "barak" can mean bless, but it can also mean curse, according to Strongs. Either way, the point of what satan is saying is that Job will abandon his relationship with God. Satan believes Job's faith is only due to Job be rewarded by God, and of course, satan was wrong. Job does not abandon his faith in God. That's one of the main points of the entire story.

Also, did you notice what it says in 2:9? It says plainly, "In all this did not Job sin with his lips."

I have considered Elihu to be right and good, and I have also considered other alternatives. My approach was to try and understand him and his role in this story regardless of pre-conceived notions either way. I just wanted to understand him, and what I believe was revealed was shocking.

Have you ever considered any other alternative about Elihu other than your current position? Or have you only ever been locked into this one opinion?

Yes, that's true you have provided verses to your point to this before. I guess we keep bumping into the points where we disagree.

Regarding Elihu's statement about Job adding rebellion to his sin, to me that reads as Elihu taking the same position as Job's friends. It seems Elihu is also claiming that the reason Job is suffering in the first place is because of some sin. Again, as we can read, this is not the case.

Thank you. Good question. The words of the three friends are all over the place. I would not say there is no truth in them whatsoever (as you have pointed out Paul quoting in the NT). What I would say, however, is that they were applying "right" principles (at times) to the wrong situation. Their logic is: if you're suffering, Job, it's because you've done something wrong. Confess, repent, and be restored. But that is not what was happening, as we read from the beginning of the story.

This is not the best analogy, but it's like someone trying to fix the engine in their car and someone approaches them reading instructions from a cookbook. Is the cookbook "correct" in how to make a certain dish? Yeah, but the person's problem is with fixing their car's engine. It's "right" advice being misapplied.

Additionally, it seems there is no character in this story (aside from God and satan) who believe God would allow someone to suffer such a horrendous ordeal when they have not directly committed any sin to warrant it. This is essentially the point that Elihu rakes Job over the coals about, and ultimately one of the reasons I believe Elihu is wrong, too. Elihu effectively claims God would never allow someone who is innocent to suffer. And yet, God did.

Yes, these verses are Job's words about what he was experiencing. Because he did not know what was happening behind the scenes (as the reader does), he was experiencing his suffering as God being angry with him, as a form of punishment for wrongdoing. How else could he have taken it under the circumstances and not knowing why?

But let me rephrase the question. Where does it say in the story that God is *actually* angry with Job? Again, we know Job is not suffering because God is angry with him. No, in fact, what we read is God appearing quite pleased with Job saying, "There none on earth like him." So even though Job may feel God is angry with him, we know God is not. God being angry with Job is not how the story begins.

So again, where does the author of the story tell us God is actually angry with Job? For that matter, where does God say He is angry with Job either? That is the question being asked. Where is that verse?

Which question are you referring to?

To start with, not everything God said was a question. "He that reproveth God" is not a question.

Job had told God he didn't trust God to be a fair judge. Job went on to describe what kind of Judge he wanted. Therefore, God did not sit as Job's judge. God sent Elihu as judge at the request of Job. Elihu's speech was that of a judge. That is the difference

In 40:2. God is basically asking Job if Job is going to follow through with his lawsuit against Him and press charges for wrongdoing. Going with a courtroom analogy, Job's answer is effectively "no". Job drops his case and withdraws his complaint.