The hungry eat his harvest, and he takes it even out of thorns, and the thirsty pant after his wealth.
Eliphaz is telling Job what he has watched happen, and here the picture reaches its grim end. The question is not whether such things happen — they do — but whether Eliphaz has any right to aim them at Job.
Where the words fall in the speech
Eliphaz speaks through chapters 4 and 5. This verse closes the part he builds on what he says he has seen:
Samuel Ridout(1) A rebuke for Job's despair (Job 4:1-5). (2) God's favour to the righteous (vv. 6-11). (3) A vision of God's greatness and holiness (12-21). (4) Experience of God's ways (Job 5:1-5). (5) A call to Job to seek God (vv. 6-11). (6) God's triumph over evil (vv. 12-16). (7) What affliction is for (vv. 17-27).
So the lost harvest is the last link in a chain. The foolish man takes root, the curse falls, his sons are crushed, and now his crop is gone.
What the harvest stands for
The crop here is not just grain in a field. It covers everything Job had gained, and Eliphaz reasons back from its loss to a fault in Job:
Leslie M. GrantEliphaz had observed foolish people suffering, and reasoned that since Job was suffering as he did there must be something seriously wrong in Job. Job's harvest (all the substance he had gained) was eaten up… Trouble does not happen by chance. This is true, for there is no doubt that God is behind it.
The weight Eliphaz puts on his own eyes
Everything here rests on one foundation: what Eliphaz himself has watched happen. He returns to it again and again.
F. B. HoleAs we open Job 5, we find Eliphaz going on in the same way, and again he refers to what he had seen. Verse 3 begins, "I have seen …". Turn to Job 15, where he gives his second speech, and again we find him saying, "What I have seen I will declare" (verse 17). So his whole argument clearly stands or falls on his own powers of observation.
The trouble is not that his observations are false. It is the leap from them to a rule that must cover every case:
C. H. MackintoshBut it is a total mistake to build a general rule on one person's experience, and yet thousands of people are prone to it. What, for instance, had the experience of Eliphaz to do with Job? Perhaps he had never met a case quite like it. And if there is even one point of difference between the two cases, then the whole argument from experience counts for nothing.
The hint Job could not miss
Eliphaz never names Job, and he does not have to. The way he judges is itself the problem:
William Kelly"Do not judge by appearances," said the law. We must wait for solid fact… Sometimes a good man is in such circumstances that appearances are very much against him. There we have to take great care. So judging by appearance is very dangerous ground… Eliphaz did not make it personal; still, there are many ways of giving a hint… Something very like that had happened to Job. I do not say that he charged it against him, but that was still the spirit at work.
Some of what Eliphaz says is true. That is what makes his method so slippery:
F. B. HoleSome of the things Eliphaz says in this chapter are quite true… But we can see that he brings all these facts forward in a way that turned them against poor Job. He had seen men take root and then suddenly come under a curse, but these were "the foolish." Their children were struck down too, and robbers swallowed up their possessions. All these remarks clearly carried a veiled charge against Job.
Why the reasoning collapses
Read suffering as proof of guilt, and the best men in Scripture stand condemned along with Job:
Samuel RidoutSuppose Abraham, Jacob, or David reasoned like this about their sufferings: then they were wicked, because they suffered! And in the New Testament, how could anyone glory in the suffering that produces patience? How could "this light momentary affliction" be said to prepare "for us an eternal weight of glory beyond all comparison"? Eliphaz, with all his experience, shows that he knows little of God's ways with His suffering people.
The book settles the matter at the end, with God's own verdict on these speeches:
C. H. MackintoshThis is plain from Job 42:7-8. There the LORD says to Eliphaz the Temanite, "My anger burns against you and against your two friends, for you have not spoken of me what is right, as my servant Job has."… They had utterly failed to bring God before the soul of their friend, and so they failed to produce the self-judgment Job needed.
Summary
- Seen — Eliphaz's whole case rests on his own observation; "I have seen" is his motto here and again in chapter 15.
- Generalised — What he saw may be true. But building a rule for everyone on one man's experience is a mistake thousands still make.
- Aimed — The lost harvest stands for all Job had gained. Eliphaz never names Job, yet the hint lands.
- Appearance — Judging by how things look is dangerous ground. A good man can be in circumstances that look very much against him.
- Answered — Abraham, Jacob and David suffered too. God's closing word is that Eliphaz did not speak what is right about Him.