Job 8:1–7

One of Job's friends, "the Shuhite," perhaps a descendant of Shuah the son of Abraham and Keturah. He in no way understood Job's case, and could only judge that God was punishing Job for wickedness, though God had called Job a righteous man. God became angry with Bildad. But Bildad and his two companions brought a sacrifice, and when Job prayed for them God accepted him.

Bildad the Shuhite now speaks to Job. He is less dogmatic than Eliphaz, and less courteous, but more outspoken. He must have lost his patience listening to Job's reply. Above all he resents what Job had said about God, the veiled accusations that had fallen from his lips. But as we will see, he too follows the logic of Eliphaz: God punishes Job for his sins. He starts at once to rebuke Job for what he had said.

Bildad now takes up what is fast becoming a controversy. He shows perhaps less of the courtesy and dignity that marked the speech of Eliphaz, and some harshness toward Job. This harshness seems to come from Job's bitter charge against God. For all his ignorance of divine principles, Bildad is jealous for the honor of God, and cannot let anyone accuse Him. In this he is surely right. But he fails to convince Job, because of the root error in the thinking of all of them: God must punish sin, and Job must be a sinner because God is punishing him.

Eliphaz had appealed to his own observation when he supposed that Job was guilty of some secret sin… Now Bildad appealed to tradition… In doing this, Bildad actually contradicted Eliphaz. If Eliphaz had only been born "yesterday", what was his observation worth? But Bildad's appeal to tradition was just as empty as Eliphaz's appeal to observation, because Bildad also reached the wrong conclusion.

Bildad assumes that Job's children had received the due reward of their wickedness, and had been cut off… This tears at the feelings of a parent who had found no evidence of such wickedness in his children, and who had watched carefully over their spiritual state. Bildad is driven to this by his wrong theory of God's ways.

There is nothing so dangerous as a truth falsely applied. One can do the greatest harm with a word of Scripture in a wrong place. This is one of the devil's methods, and only unbroken communion with God can keep us from it. How important, then, is the call to "be slow to speak," above all in spiritual matters. People often come to regret quick conclusions and hasty judgments. Job's friends were surely ashamed of their mistakes when it was too late.

Not one of the three friends understood Job. What is more, they did not know God's character, or His purpose in dealing with His dear servant… Instead of leading Job to judge himself, they only fed his desire to defend himself. They did not introduce God into the scene. They said some true things; but they had not the truth.

Bildad now takes up what is fast becoming a controversy. There is perhaps less of the courtesy and dignity that marked the speech of Eliphaz. There is also some harshness toward Job. It seems to come from the bitter charge Job had made against God. With all his ignorance of divine principles, Bildad is jealous for the honour of God, and cannot allow Him to be accused. In this he is surely right. But he fails to convince Job, because of the root error in the thinking of all of them: God must punish sin, and Job must be a sinner because God is punishing him.

By the latter expression he suggests that Job's speech was stormy like the wind, and as empty as the wind. He declares what is certainly true: God cannot be unrighteous. In this way Bildad called a decisive halt to the dangerous things Job had said, forced out of him by Eliphaz's cold and dogmatic claims. Job rejected the accusation that he was a sinner being punished for his sins. So he was fast approaching the edge of charging God with being unjust.

Eliphaz had claimed to be giving Job "the consolations of God." This moves Job to reply bitterly, "Miserable comforters are you all!" Instead of comfort, they had given heartless accusations, which Job calls "words of wind."

Job's words are like a strong wind, a blast of bitter complaint, and a still more bitter charge against God. Bildad's correction is harsh, but we may well call it just. Job's words were irreverent and extremely rash. Perhaps sympathy might have taken a gentler path, but when a man begins to charge God it is well to rebuke him sharply.

Here then this man breaks out into this rebuke of Job for his extreme feeling. How could a man do anything but feel? And what were they about that they did not deeply feel for him? There they were, quite comfortable. And there they were, judging that there must be something very bad. I need not tell you that this deeply wounded the poor injured man. It was pouring acid into his wounds. It was not binding them with wine and oil to clean the wound. Instead it was deepening and poisoning it.

Bildad follows the line of Eliphaz, and says, "How long will you say these things?" He could not understand it in the least. That was because Job could not understand why. He was quite sure of the perfection of God, quite sure of the faithfulness of God, quite sure that God loved him, quite sure that he loved God. So he cried, "How has all this come upon me? What is the key to all this terrible suffering that I am sure God has sent?" He would not blame it on circumstances.

We need not be surprised that Bildad could not anticipate the lessons God meant this very book to teach. But a believer should not rush ahead. He should wait where he has no assurance of God's mind. Least of all should he put the worst possible reading on what he does not understand. This is what Bildad did. He made Job's trial worse and provoked his spirit, which in turn gave an appearance of evil to those who suspected evil. So the confusion grew worse, and deeper darkness hid the true solution from their eyes. Does it ever seem to have occurred to the three friends that their wisdom would have been to pray rather than to talk, judge, and censure?

Bildad asks Job a plain question: "Does God pervert justice?" Is He unrighteous? For anyone who knows Him there can be but one answer. "Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right?" He would not be God, if He were not perfectly righteous. This shows the dreadful cliff edge Job was approaching. He was driven on by this false principle that God always punishes for sin. Job was not a sinner; therefore God was unjust! This reasoning is frightening. Both the starting assumption and the statement of fact are wrong, and the conclusion is blasphemous. Why did Job — and Bildad too — not stop and question the assumption? Does God always punish for sin alone? Why does Job not examine the facts; is he sinless?

The reasoning of Bildad rests on precisely the same principle as that of Eliphaz. It is all founded on God's moral government. On that principle, no one can cause God grief, and no truly righteous man can be cast to the ground. And God will certainly bring every wicked man to nothing. It is all founded on what is going on in the world now. There was no faith in it. There was conscience, conscience toward God. Conscience is useful and very important for the soul. But it never does and never can reveal God. It detects our bad state... Everything was more or less confused, and people saw God only as a righteous God. But God is the God of all grace.

And what shows the falsity of the principle is the universal test. Bring Christ in. Was it any lack of God's delight in Christ that allowed Christ to be the greatest sufferer, far beyond Job? So the estimate was completely false, and the principle underneath it was false too. It imagined that there must be evil in anyone who came to this depth of suffering.

Abstract truth is altogether useless for the saints of God. Things that are true but misunderstood and misapplied may do more harm than many a thing that is false. Misapplied truth gives the apparent authority of God to an error. And that error carries all the more weight because it comes as the truth. If someone says a foolish thing, or one plainly false, people despise it; but no believer can brush aside the truth of God. So suppose someone uses the truth of God wrongly. Suppose he applies it to crush a person who is the object of God's intense interest at that moment. How foreign and offensive that is to His mind!

He did not begin in the gentle way that Eliphaz did. He did not even try to show any understanding of Job's feelings. Instead, he spoke like a man out of patience. He at once accused Job of letting words come out of his mouth that were only "a strong wind" (v. 2). "Does God pervert justice? Or does the Almighty pervert the right?" he asks (v. 3). He did not know how God was dealing with Job. Yet he was sure God was punishing him justly, though he knew of no actual evil on Job's part.

He offers two proofs of God's justice, and the first is, to put it mildly, arbitrary and unkind. We may read verse 4, "When your children sinned against Him, He gave them over to the hand of their wickedness." In other words, Bildad assumes that Job's children got what their wickedness deserved, and so were cut off... This cuts deep into a father who had found no evidence of such wickedness in his children. He had watched over their spiritual state with care.

Bildad asks Job a plain question, "Does God pervert judgment?" Is He unrighteous? For anyone who knows Him there can be only one answer... This shows the dreadful cliff edge Job was approaching. He was driven on by the false principle that God always punishes for sin. Job was not a sinner; therefore God was unjust! This is terrible reasoning. Both the premise and the statement of fact are wrong, and the conclusion is blasphemous. Why did Job not stop, and Bildad too, and ask whether something was wrong in the premise: does God always punish for sin alone?

He suggested that God must have cast Job's children away as the penalty of their transgression. This must have been a bitter blow to Job, since he had so regularly offered sacrifice on their behalf. Even so, he advised Job that if only he would be upright and seek God, he would be blessed in his latter end.

He says, "If your children have sinned against him and he has cast them away for their transgression" — there they thought they had him. How could God do such a thing as to kill all his children unless there was something very bad in them? It was all the same principle, and the same false principle. And what shows the falsity of the principle is the universal test. Bring Christ in. Was it any lack of God's delight in Christ that allowed Christ to be the greatest sufferer, far beyond Job? So the estimate was entirely false, and so was the principle underneath it: that there must be evil in anyone who came to this depth of suffering.

Then he makes a cruel thrust at Job. He suggests that Job's sons had died because they had sinned against God, and that God coldly cast them away for their transgressions (v.4). This was not true, but what was Job to answer? So Bildad condemned Job's dead sons, then went on to attack Job himself. He told him this: if he would earnestly plead with God, and if he were pure and upright, then God would surely awake for him at once and turn his misery into prosperity.

We need not be surprised that God turns to Eliphaz and his friends with stern rebuke for their part in the argument... He addresses Eliphaz, the leader of the three, and declares His anger against them all. They had not spoken of Him what is right, as His servant Job had. And yet their whole contention had apparently been for God's righteousness! Had they not maintained this from the very start, with noble descriptions and fierce attacks on evil? Had they not pinned the charge of wrongdoing on Job with no proof at all, and against well known facts?

Bildad now takes up what is fast becoming an argument. He shows less of the courtesy and dignity that marked the speech of Eliphaz, and more harshness toward Job, apparently caused by Job's bitter charge against God. For all his ignorance of God's principles, Bildad is jealous for the honor of God, and will not let anyone accuse Him. He is right about that. But he fails to convince Job, because of the root error in the thinking of all three friends: God must punish sin, so Job must be a sinner, since he is being punished.

Bildad condemned Job's dead sons, then went on to attack Job himself. He told Job that if he would seek God earnestly in prayer, and if he were pure and upright, then God would certainly rouse Himself for him at once and turn his misery into prosperity (vv.5-6). Of course, in saying this he implied that Job had not been pure and upright, and had not sought God earnestly before.

So instead of bluster and complaint, let Job simply turn to God the Almighty in earnest prayer. Then, if only he is pure, he will soon find that God crowns his home with prosperity, and that his last days flourish beyond his first. And so it happened — but not at all in the way Bildad imagined. Bildad falls back on the old sayings of earlier generations to support the idea that God repays every man strictly, here and now.

In seven places the word for God [El] is combined with Shaddai, which is usually translated "the Almighty." Some understand the name to mean "Almighty in sustaining resources" (like a mother's breasts for her baby). It occurs 48 times in the Old Testament, and the book of Job accounts for no fewer than 31 of them. In that book one thought stands out above all others: the Lord is Almighty. That suits the book well, since it tells the story of God's controversy with Job, who found no relief or blessing until he came to a right view of himself in God's presence.

Things that are true, but misunderstood and misapplied, can do more harm than many a thing that is false. Misapplied truth lends the apparent authority of God to an error, and that error carries all the more weight because it comes as truth. If someone says a foolish thing, or a plainly false one, people dismiss it. But no believer can brush aside the truth of God. So if the truth of God is used wrongly — if it is used to crush someone God cares about deeply at that moment, how foreign and offensive that is to His mind!

They did not know God's character, or His purpose in dealing with His dear servant. They were completely mistaken. They did not know how to present God to Job, and so they did not know how to bring Job's conscience into God's presence. Instead of leading him to judge himself, they only fed his desire to defend himself… They said some true things; but they did not have the truth.

He did not understand Job's case at all. He could only conclude that God was punishing Job for wickedness, though God had called Job a righteous man. God's anger burned against Bildad. But Bildad and his two companions brought a sacrifice, and when Job prayed for them, God accepted him.

Bildad condemned Job's dead sons, then went on to attack Job himself. He told Job this: if he would seek God with earnest prayer, and if he were pure and upright, then God would surely wake up for him at once and turn his misery into prosperity (vv. 5-6). Of course, in saying this he implied that Job had not been pure and upright and had not earnestly sought God before.

Instead of bluster and complaint, let Job only turn to God the Almighty with earnest prayer. Then he will soon find — provided he himself is pure — that prosperity from Him will crown his home. His latter end will flourish beyond the beginning.

Bildad here sharply rebukes Job, telling him that the words of his mouth are like a strong wind, and that if he were pure and upright God would wake up for him. So he throws Job back on himself even more. He implies that Job's trials are judicial payments for sin. In fact they were the discipline of God, leading him to the full end of himself. Job knew that he had done nothing to deserve it. But he had to learn that he could claim nothing. His friends knew this no more than he did; they stood on righteousness alone.

"If you were pure and upright" — ah, there they were at it again! So it was not only the children who had sinned! "If you were pure and upright" — why, Job was much more so than they were! "If you were pure and upright, surely now He would wake up for you." Certainly not. The Lord was going to bring the trial to its full completion. He allowed all these discussions to bring out everything that was in their hearts. Then He came in with His own word and cast down completely these principles that governed the three friends — and Job could not properly answer them.

Next, he proves the justice of those ways. He tells Job there is restoring mercy for him, if he will only turn to God in prayer. "If you are pure and upright" — there is a strong hint of suspicion here — God will restore everything, and bless Job's latter end. This did come true, but in a very different way from what Bildad expected. Job is not blessed for his purity, and not for confessing the evil they suspected in him.

Things that are true, but misunderstood and misapplied, may do more harm than many a thing that is false. Misapplied truth gives the apparent authority of God to an error, and that error carries all the more weight because it comes as the truth.

This is just where Job's friends were. They saw that God loves righteousness and hates evil, and that Job was suffering. What conclusion did they draw from it all? That if Job had been a righteous person, God would have accepted him. They were on wrong ground altogether. It is quite true, and blessedly true, that God loves righteousness. But the fallacy lies in the idea that a man can be righteous with God. That thought must always produce either self-righteousness, or despair and misery.

Bildad condemned Job's dead sons, then went on to attack Job himself. He told Job this: if he would earnestly seek God in prayer, and if he were pure and upright, then God would surely wake up for him at once and turn his misery into prosperity (vv.5-6). Of course, in saying this he implied that Job had not been pure and upright and had not earnestly sought God before. But now, if Job did as Bildad advised, his end would increase greatly, though his beginning was small (v.7).

It was all the same principle, and the same false principle. What shows the falsity of the principle is the universal test. Bring Christ in. Was it any lack of God's delight in Christ that allowed Christ to be the greatest sufferer, far beyond Job? So the estimate was completely false, and so was the principle underneath it. It was wrong to imagine that there must be evil in the person who came to this depth of suffering.

Next, he proves the justice of those ways by telling Job there is restoring mercy for him, if he will only turn in prayer to God. He adds, "If you are pure and upright." There is a strong suggestion of suspicion here. Then God will restore everything and bless Job's latter end. This did come true, but in a very different way from what Bildad expected. Job is blessed not for his purity, nor because he confessed some suspected evil.

They were all arguing on the ground of righteousness. Not one of them had taken in, up to this point and for long after, any thought of grace. And Job only arrived at it at last by God stepping in. There he was dust and ashes. There he took the place of nothingness and worse than nothingness. Then God blessed him. Then God vindicated him — and not till then.

The story of Job's friends should be a solemn warning to us. There is nothing so dangerous as a truth wrongly applied. You can do the greatest harm with a word of Scripture in the wrong place. This is one of the devil's methods, and only unbroken communion with God can keep us from it. How important, then, is the call to "be slow to speak," especially in spiritual matters. People often bitterly regret quick conclusions and hasty judgments. Job's friends were surely ashamed of their mistakes when it was too late.

But people often mistake inspiration for revelation, that is, for the infallible statement of divine truth. We have the inspired record of what Satan said to Eve, and to our Lord. We also have the words of wicked men like Pharaoh and Rabshakeh. Yet no one thinks of these words as the truth of God. In the same way, we have here an inspired record of what Job and his three friends said. Most of it was true, but it was out of place and misapplied.