Why doth thy heart carry thee away? and why do thine eyes wink?
Eliphaz turns from argument to accusation, pointing at Job's face and demanding to know what drives it. He treats strong feeling as proof of guilt — an assumption the whole book sets out to correct.
Eliphaz is not really asking. He has already settled the answer, and one writer shows where it came from:
Leslie M. GrantEliphaz considered that Job's heart was carrying him away and he was turning his spirit against God (vv.12-13). Why? Because Job set his spirit against what his friends were saying, and Eliphaz thought they were speaking for God. He could sharply rebuke Job for ever letting such words come out of his mouth. But Eliphaz did not stop to consider that he needed to restrain such words as came from his own mouth.
Just before this question, Eliphaz complains that Job has brushed aside God's comfort. The two men were not describing the same conversation:
Leslie M. GrantWhat does Eliphaz mean by asking, "Are the comforts of God too small for you, or the word that deals gently with you?" (v.11). No doubt he meant that he and his friends had brought the consolations of God to Job, and Job did not appreciate such help. Of course Job did not think their words were gentle. He did not think they were showing him "the comforts of God." No wonder Job said in chapter 16:2, "miserable comforters are you all!"
Commentators render the second line differently — one translates it "why do your eyes wink," where the ESV has "flash" (William Kelly). Either way, Eliphaz treats Job's look as a confession:
Samuel RidoutWhy, he asks, do Job's eyes flash the rebellion of his wayward heart, instead of bowing to the charges of the friends? He counts this as turning away from God. It is a charge of heresy against a man who will not bow to his questioners, and such charges are common enough.
Eliphaz was not wholly wrong about Job's speech. Job had said rash things. But the craftiness he reads into Job is his own invention:
Samuel RidoutJob had indeed opened himself to the charge of casting off fear. His wild words were the opposite of prayer or devotion. His own words, says Eliphaz, confirm what the friends suspect and charge him with: wickedness and godlessness. But when he accuses Job of craftiness, he charges what is untrue. The poor sufferer had poured out his misery with no thought of what it would cost him. Whatever he is, Job is no hypocrite.
His speech is powerful, and much of it is true. The target is wrong:
William KellyThe second round of debate now opens with the appeal of Eliphaz. He shows more openly the growing sense in his soul that Job must lack integrity. As before, there is weighty truth in what he presses, and he presses it with great force. But applying it to the sufferer had no ground, and so it was unjust in the highest degree.
The mistake was not a slip of temper but a settled principle:
William KellyHere was where they went astray; they assumed that the present state of the world is an adequate expression of His judgment of men's ways. This assumption runs through the speeches of all three friends. At first they express it fairly calmly. In time it ripens into severity, as Job's passionate outburst resents what they point to more and more as the hidden explanation of the facts.
Eliphaz speaks much about God. Yet one thing is missing from the way he sees Him:
William KellyThe friends spoke much of God, but they looked on Him only as a judge. This was a great defect, and the correction is the moral of the whole book. Some make the one question before God now to be whether He marks out what we deserve in this present life. They completely miss the truth. God has taken advantage of the evil that is here to show the grace that is in Himself, above the evil.
- Question: Eliphaz asks what carries Job's heart away. He has already fixed the answer: Job resists his friends, so Eliphaz counts it as resisting God.
- Assumption: Behind the question lies one belief — how life goes now shows how God rates a man. The whole book corrects it.
- Misapplication: Eliphaz speaks with weight and force. He ruins it by aiming true words at a man they do not fit.
- Misreading: Job's rash speech was real. The hypocrisy read into his flashing eyes was not. Whatever else he is, Job is no hypocrite.
- Missing: The friends knew God as judge, never as the God of grace. That is why their "consolations" landed on Job as accusations.
That thou turnest thy spirit against щGod, and lettest words go out of thy mouth?
Eliphaz is speaking, and by verse 13 his questions have hardened into a verdict. He reads Job's flashing eyes and hot words as proof that Job has set himself against God — but is that what they prove?
Eliphaz had offered what he called God's consolations. Job would not take them, and Eliphaz treats that refusal as turning against God.
Samuel RidoutJob is no wiser than others. So why does he refuse the "consolations of God" that these friends were offering him? It certainly takes a stretch of imagination to call their galling words — like vinegar on soda — by such a tender name. … Why, he asks, do Job's eyes flash the rebellion of his wayward heart, instead of bowing to the charges of the friends? He counts this as turning away from God. That is a charge of heresy against a man who will not bow to his questioners, and such charges are common enough.
Earlier in the same speech Eliphaz had said Job was casting off fear and holding back prayer. One writer denies the charge outright. He also explains why Job sounded the way he did.
William Kelly"You cast off fear and hold back prayer before God." Now he did nothing of the kind. Job always clung to God, always looked up to God; but he said, "I cannot find Him. He has shut me out, keeping me taken up with this agony I am passing through, so that I cannot get at Him. I know that if I could only get there, I would find goodness and mercy." It was no doubt very inconsistent; but that is always the case with poor man when he is not in the presence of God.
The quote above uses an older wording of Job 15:4. The ESV reads, "you are doing away with the fear of God and hindering meditation before God."
Eliphaz points to what comes out of Job's mouth. Earlier in the chapter he makes that mouth his whole proof, judging Job from the surface.
William KellyThere cannot be a more instructive lesson for us on the danger of judging by appearances. … A surface survey is never the way to reach a righteous judgment, as the Lord Himself warned in His day. … Appearances were against Job. "Your own mouth condemns you," says Eliphaz, pointing to words of Job's that were improper beyond question.
What Eliphaz says about God here is true. The fault lies in where he aims it.
F. B. HoleFurther questions follow in verses 11-16. His statements about the holiness of God are quite right. Satan's presence has defiled the lower heavens, and they are indeed "not clean in His sight." What he says about the filthiness of man is just as true. But he then concluded that Job must be guilty of secret evils, which he ignored instead of admitting. That conclusion was wide of the mark.
One mistaken principle stands under every accusation the three friends make.
William KellyTheir error was not a rare one. You find it among righteous people who know God, yet have never been fully broken down about themselves. … Here is where they went astray. They assumed that the present state of the world fully shows God's judgment on men's ways. This assumption runs through the speeches of the three friends. At first they said it calmly enough, but in time it hardened into severity.
Eliphaz named something real, even if he aimed it wrongly. Under God's hand, complaint turns upward before it turns toward the people who caused the loss.
The Bible TreasuryThe heart rebels more against God than against man. Even Job complained of God more than of the Sabeans and the rest. It is because God touches the conscience. It is a sad thing when His voice is not heard in chastening.
- Surface. Eliphaz judged Job by what he could see: flashing eyes and hot words. There is no more instructive lesson in the book on the danger of judging by appearances.
- Assumption. One false idea sat under that judgment: that what happens to a person now shows God's verdict on his ways.
- Charge. From it came the accusation in this verse: refusing what the friends said counted as turning against God.
- Misread. What Eliphaz said about God's holiness was right. What he drew from it was wrong: Job hid no secret evils, and he had never stopped praying.
- Lesson. The pull to argue with God, not with people, is real, because chastening touches the conscience. The real danger is not rough words, but missing God's voice in the chastening.