Then Eliphaz the Themanite answered, and said:

“What does Eliphaz say? "Have you often spoken in your suffering?" By "suffering" the Scripture may signify "sin," as it states, "Under his tongue is mischief." Eliphaz did not say, Have you committed any evil action? Eliphaz asks, "Have you spoken?" Indeed the fame of Job's life shone everywhere, and many still testified to Job's virtue. It is useless, Eliphaz says to Job, to say that your deeds are just and good, for the very reason that the fault is sometimes found in the words we speak. "And who can tolerate the violence of your words?" Consider now the expression "Have you often spoken?" The hesitation and uncertainty do not come from his moderation but from the fact that Eliphaz cannot convince Job about an evident fault on his part, "the violence of your words." What did Job say? He wished to die and to be delivered from his present life. Did Job actually say, "Is it in spite of my justice and virtues that I suffer such misfortunes"? No. He said, "I wanted to disappear with the impious, with my servants, with the stillborn. I wanted to have the same fate as the impious." He did not say, "I, who have such qualities and such importance."”

“Then Eliphaz the Temanite answered and said, If we assay to commune with thee, wilt thou be grieved? It has been already declared above, what there is set forth in the interpretation of these names. Therefore, because we are in haste to reach the unexamined parts, we forbear to unfold again what has been already delivered. Accordingly this is to be heedfully observed, that they, that bear the semblance of heretics, begin to speak softly, saying, If we assay to commune with thee, wilt thou be grieved? For heretics dread to incense their hearers at the outset of their communing with them, lest they be listened to with ears on the watch, and they carefully shun the paining of them, that they may catch their unguardedness, and what they put forward is almost always mild, while that is harsh which they cunningly introduce in going on. And hence at this time the friends of Job begin with the reverence of a gentle address, but they burst forth even to launching the darts of the bitterest invectives; for the roots of thorns themselves are soft, yet from that very softness of their own they put forth that whereby they pierce. It goes on; But who can hold in the discourse conceived? There be three kinds of men, which differ from one another by qualities carried forward in gradation. For there are some, who at the same time that they conceive evil sentiments to speak, restrain themselves in their speech by none of the graveness of silence; and there are others, who, whereas they conceive evil things, withhold themselves with a strong control of silence. And there are some, who being made strong by the exercise of virtue, are advanced even to so great a height, that, as to speaking, they do not even conceive any evil thoughts in the heart, which they should have to restrain by keeping silence. It is shewn then to which class Eliphaz belongs, who bears witness that he cannot 'withhold his conceived discourse.' Wherein too he made known this, that he knew that he would give offence by speaking. For he would never be anxious to withhold words that he cannot, unless he were assured beforehand that he would be inflicting wounds by the same; for good men check precipitancy of speech with the reins of counsel, and they take heedful thought, lest, by giving a loose to the wantonness of the tongue, they should by heedlessness of speech pierce their hearer's spirits; hence it is well said by Solomon, He that letteth out water is a head of strife. For 'the water is let out,' when the flowing of the tongue is let loose. And he that 'letteth out water,' is made the 'beginning of strife,' in that by the incontinency of the lips, the commencement of discord is afforded. Thus, as the wicked are light in mind, so they are precipitate in speech, and neglect to keep silence, thoroughly considering what they should say. And what a light spirit conceives, a lighter tongue delivers apace. Hence on this occasion Eliphaz infers from his own experience a thing, which in a feeling of hopelessness he believes concerning all men; saying, But who can withhold his conceived discourse?”

“Then Eliphaz the Temanite answering, and so forth. The friends of Job, who had come to console him, since they had earlier kept silent on account of the greatness of his grief, after Job's speech took the boldness to speak. And first Eliphaz the Temanite speaks, who did not take the words set forth by Job in the spirit in which they were said: for he attributed the hatred of the present life which Job had said he suffered to despair, the greatness of his bitterness to impatience, and his confession of innocence to presumption. First, therefore, he charges him with impatience, and begins to speak to him as to a man subject to the vice of impatience who is indignant at words addressed to him; hence he says, "if we begin to speak to you, perhaps you will take it ill," where he expresses well enough the custom of an impatient and angry man, who does not bear to hear words to the end but is provoked at once at the very outset of the speech. He adds, however, "perhaps," lest he be condemned for a rash judgment, although even in cases of presumptions or suspicions, words or deeds ought to be interpreted in the better sense. But while he himself charges Job with impatience, he shows himself guilty of impatience and of folly when he says, "but who can withhold the word he has conceived?" according to that saying of Ecclesiasticus 19:12, "an arrow fixed in the thigh of a dog, so is a word in the heart of a fool"; although even the just, out of divine zeal, are sometimes unable to keep silent about those things which they have conceived and which ought to be spoken for the honor of God, according to that saying of Jeremiah 20:9, "I said: I will not remember him," namely the word of the Lord, "nor will I speak any more in his name; and there arose in my heart as it were a burning fire, shut up in my bones, and I failed, not being able to bear it." He proceeds further, however, to show his impatience openly. He aggravates his impatience from two things, namely from his prior teaching and from his prior life: from his prior teaching indeed, because it is shameful for a man when he does not keep to that to which he induces others, according to that saying of Matthew 20, "for they say and do not"; but Job had before drawn many back from impatience, and in different ways as suited different persons. For there are some who fail through impatience out of ignorance, since they do not know how to use adversities unto virtue, and as regards these he says, "behold, you have taught many"; but some indeed act virtuously at first in adversities, but with the adversity continuing, they grow weary as if of a correct action and fail, and as regards these he says, "and you have strengthened weary hands," namely by good exhortations; there are also some who, in adversities, fall into doubt whether these come from divine judgment, and as regards these he says, "your words have confirmed those who wavered"; there are also some who could bear a small adversity but fail under a great adversity as under a great weight, and as regards these he says, "and you have strengthened trembling knees," namely by your words: for the knees of a man carrying a great weight tremble. To the fulfilling of the aforesaid the Lord exhorts in Isaiah 35:3, saying, "strengthen the feeble hands, and confirm the weak knees." He wishes, however, to show consequently that Job did not fulfill what he had taught, hence it is added, "but now the scourge has come upon you, and you have fainted," namely from the firmness of mind which you seemed to have and which you were suggesting to others, and this must be referred to the adversity which he had suffered in outward things; "it has touched you, and you are troubled," that is, you have lost the quiet of mind which you seemed to have had, which must be referred to the affliction of body which he was enduring: hence also above Satan had said, "put forth your hand and touch his bone and his flesh." Thus, therefore, Job is charged with not having confirmed his prior teaching by subsequent patience, contrary to what is written in Proverbs 19:11, "the teaching of a man is known by patience." But he also aggravates the subsequent impatience from the past life which appeared in Job; for it seemed that there was no true virtue which failed so quickly in tribulation, because, as it is written in Ecclesiasticus 2:5, "gold and silver are tried in the fire, but men acceptable to God in the furnace of humiliation." Now by manifold virtue is someone preserved in tribulations lest he fail: first indeed through reverence for God, when men consider that the evils they suffer come from divine providence, just as Job had also said above, "as it has pleased the Lord, so it has been done"; and to exclude this he brings in, "where is your fear?" namely, by which you seemed to revere God. Secondly, some are preserved by firmness of soul, which indeed has two degrees: for in some there is such firmness of soul that their spirit is not too greatly troubled by adversities, and this seems to pertain to fortitude, hence he says, "where is your strength?" Nor is "strength" here taken as that which preserves a man from succumbing to fear, but as that by which he is not cast down through sadness; but some indeed suffer a grave passion of sadness from adversity, but are not led away from it because reason is well disposed, and this seems to pertain to patience, so that there is such a difference between patience and fortitude as the philosophers assign between continence and chastity, and therefore he adds, "your patience?" Thirdly, some are preserved from the love of honorable action and from the fact that they abhor acting basely, who, even if they are inwardly troubled in adversities, nevertheless break out neither in word nor in deed into anything unbecoming, and on account of this he adds, "and the perfection of your ways?" For by "ways" are understood the actions by which, as by certain roads, one arrives at an end; or by "ways" can be understood the devised plans by which someone trusts he will escape, whence he bears adversities more easily. "Remember, I beg you," and so forth. After Eliphaz had charged Job with impatience, taking the occasion from what he had said, "before I eat I sigh," he now intends to charge him with presumption because he had said he was innocent. But to show that he is not innocent, he takes his argument from Job's adversity, saying, "remember, I beg you, who ever perished being innocent, or when were the upright destroyed?" Here it must be considered that this was the opinion of Eliphaz, and of the other two, as was said above, that the adversities of this world do not come upon anyone except as punishment for sin, and conversely that prosperity comes as a reward of righteousness; hence according to his opinion it seemed unfitting that anyone innocent should perish temporally, or that anyone upright, that is, righteous according to virtue, should be destroyed by the loss of temporal glory, which he believed to be the reward of righteousness. And this opinion indeed he believed to be so true that even Job could not disagree with it; yet he judged that, his mind being disturbed, he had, as it were, forgotten the truth which he had once known, hence he says, "remember." Having therefore posited that adversity does not befall the innocent and the upright, he consequently adds to whom adversity does befall, saying, "but rather I have seen those who work iniquity and sow sorrows and reap them, perishing by the blast of God, and consumed by the breath of his wrath." Now in saying "I have seen" he gives to understand that he has proved these things by experience; and by "those who work iniquity" he understands those who manifestly commit injustice, and especially to the harm of others; and by "those who sow sorrows and reap them" he understands those who harm others by guile: for these sow sorrows when they prepare calumnies by which they make others sorrowful, which sorrows indeed they reap when they bring their malice to effect, and this they hold as great fruit. This metaphor he pursues further as regards the punishment: for crops are wont to be dried up and consumed by a burning wind, hence it is said in Malachi 3:11, "I will rebuke for your sakes the devourer," namely the wind, "and it shall not destroy the fruit of your land," and this is what he means when he says that they perish "by the blast of God," as if the divine judgment itself, proceeding to the vengeance of iniquity, were a certain blast of wind; and the vengeance of God itself is called the "spirit," that is, the wind, "of his wrath." He says not only that they perish, but that they are consumed, because they are punished not only in their own persons but also their children and their whole household perish, so that nothing of them seems to remain, in which he seemed to touch Job, who both had been scourged in his body and had lost his children, household, and wealth. But because this seemed to be against the opinion of Eliphaz, that for the sin of a parent the children and household should be punished, since he himself intends to defend the opinion that the adversities of this world are punishments for sin, in answer to this objection he adds, "the roaring of the lion, and the voice of the lioness, and the teeth of the whelps of lions are broken." Here it must first be considered that man excels other animals by reason; when therefore, reason being set aside, he follows brutish passions, he is made like the beasts, and the name of that beast whose passion he imitates befits him, so that one who lies subject to the passions of concupiscence is compared to a horse or a mule, according to that saying of the Psalm, "do not become like the horse and the mule, which have no understanding"; but on account of ferocity or anger a man is called a lion or a bear, according to that saying of Proverbs 28:15, "a roaring lion and a hungry bear is a wicked prince over a poor people," and Ezekiel 19:3, "he became a lion and learned to catch prey and to devour men"; so then he now compares a ferocious man to a lion, saying "the roaring of the lion," for a roar is an indication of leonine ferocity. Now it often happens that ferocity is added to a man by the suggestion of his wife, and so those things which the man does ferociously are imputed as a fault to the wife, as is clear of the wife of Herod who impelled him to behead John, on account of which it is said, "and the voice of the lioness." And with those things which some tyrant ferociously acquires, his children sometimes make use luxuriously, and so they delight in the plunder of their father: hence they too are not free from fault, on account of which it is subjoined, "and the teeth of the whelps of lions are broken," according to that saying of Nahum 2:12, "and the lion caught enough for his whelps." And so he seems to have answered the aforesaid objection, because when for the sin of the husband the wife and children are punished, it is not unjust, since they too were participants in the fault; and all this he said because he wished to make Job and his household notorious for plunder. It seemed, however, that what he had said did not pertain to Job, since his wife did not seem to have been punished, and therefore to remove this he adds, "the tiger perished because it had no prey": for those who have been accustomed to plunder reckon themselves punished by this very fact, that it is not lawful for them to plunder. It must be considered, however, that he compares the woman to the lioness on account of the ferocity of her anger, and to the tiger on account of the readiness or swiftness to anger, for it is said in Ecclesiasticus 25:23, "there is no anger above the anger of a woman," and again, "all malice is brief in comparison with the malice of a woman." And because the children of Job had wholly perished, he adds, "and the whelps of the lions are scattered." "Now a word was said to me in secret," and so forth. Because Eliphaz had asserted that the adversities of this world do not come upon anyone except on account of his sin, wishing thereby to charge Job and his household with having been subject to sins, the contrary of which seemed evident from those things which had manifestly appeared in Job and his household, he wishes to show that neither Job nor his household was free from sin. And because, on account of the authority of Job and his fame, his own word seemed of little weight, he has recourse to a greater authority, showing that what he is about to propose he learned from revelation; and to show the loftiness of the revelation he sets forth its obscurity: for the loftier certain things are, the less perceptible they are to human regard, hence the Apostle also says in 2 Corinthians 12:4, that he was caught up into the Paradise of God and heard secret words which it is not lawful for a man to utter; in like manner Eliphaz here speaks, whether truly or feignedly, saying, "now a word was said to me in secret." It must be considered, however, that some truth, although on account of its loftiness it is hidden from man, is nevertheless revealed to some clearly, and to others obscurely; therefore, to avoid the appearance of boasting, he says that this truth was revealed to him obscurely, hence he adds, "and my ear received, as it were by stealth, the veins of its whisper," where a threefold manner of concealment is suggested, which is wont to occur in revelations. The first of these is when an intelligible truth is revealed to someone through an imaginary vision, according to what is said in Numbers 12:6, "if there be among you a prophet of the Lord, I will speak to him in a dream or in a vision; but not so my servant Moses: I will speak to him mouth to mouth, and he sees God openly and not through riddles"; Moses, therefore, heard this hidden word by way of a clear voice, but others by way of a whisper. The second manner of concealment is that in the imaginary vision itself certain words are sometimes uttered expressly containing the truth, as that saying of Isaiah 7:14, "behold, a virgin shall conceive," but sometimes under certain figurative expressions, as that saying of Isaiah 11:1, "there shall come forth a rod from the root of Jesse, and a flower," etc.; in this, therefore, that Isaiah heard, "behold, a virgin shall conceive," he perceived the whisper itself, but in this, that he heard, "there shall come forth a rod from the root of Jesse," he perceived the veins of the whisper: for figurative expressions are, as it were, certain veins derived from the truth itself by way of likeness. The third manner is that sometimes someone has a frequent and long-lasting divine revelation, as is said of Moses in Exodus 33:11, that "the Lord spoke to Moses face to face, as a man is wont to speak to his friend"; but sometimes someone has a sudden and transitory revelation: this sudden manner of revelation, therefore, he signifies in that he says "as it were by stealth," for we hear as it were by stealth those things which come to us hastily and, as it were, in passing. Thus, therefore, the loftiness of the vision having been shown, he pursues the circumstances of the revelation, and first the time, saying, "in the horror of a nocturnal vision, when sleep is wont to seize men." For the nighttime, on account of its quiet, is more suited to the perceiving of revelations: for in the day the mind suffers a certain din from the tumults of men and the occupations of the senses, so that it cannot perceive the whisper of the hidden word. Secondly, from the disposition of the one perceiving, hence he adds, "fear seized me": for men are wont to fear at unaccustomed things, hence when unaccustomed revelations occur to someone, at the beginning they suffer fear. And to show the greatness of this fear he adds, "and trembling," for trembling of the body is an indication of the greatness of fear. And to magnify this trembling he adds, "and all my bones were terrified," as if to say: the trembling was not superficial but vehement, so as even to shake the bones; similar is what is found in Daniel 10:8, "I saw this great vision, and no strength remained in me, but my appearance also was changed in me, and I fainted away, and I had no strength left in me." He then shows the cause of this fear, saying, "and when a spirit passed before me, the hairs of my flesh stood up": for it is reasonable that at the presence of a greater power a lesser one should be stupefied; and it is manifest that the power of a spirit is greater than that of flesh, hence it is no wonder if at the presence of a spirit the hairs of the flesh stand up, which proceeds from sudden fear, and especially since the presence of the spirit is perceived by some unaccustomed bodily sign: for things that are unaccustomed are wont to induce wonder and fear. And that the disposition of the time might suit this terror which he recalls having suffered, he said above, "in the horror of a nocturnal vision": for since in the time of night things cannot be discerned by sight, whatever slight commotion occurs is wont to induce disturbance in those who reckon it to be something greater, and this is what is said in Wisdom 17:17, "whether it were a whistling wind, or among the thick branches of birds a sweet sound," they failed for fear. Thirdly, the person revealing is set forth, when it is said, "there stood one whose face I did not recognize, an image before my eyes," where he sets down three things pertaining to the certainty of the vision. For it must be known that sometimes, on account of an excessive commotion of vapors and humors, dreams either do not appear at all, the phantasms being wholly suffocated, or dreams appear disturbed and unstable, as is wont to happen in those with fever, and dreams of this kind, since they have little or no spirituality, exist altogether without significance; but when the humors and vapors have subsided, quiet and orderly dreams appear, which, since they are more spiritual, the intellective part breaking forth into a certain vigor, dreams of this kind are wont to be truer, and therefore he says, "there stood one," by which he shows the stability of the vision. Likewise it must be considered that dreams, even when they are quiet, are for the most part the remnants of preceding thoughts, hence a man more frequently sees in sleep those with whom he was accustomed to converse; and because such dreams have their cause from ourselves and not from any higher nature, they are of no great significance: to remove this, therefore, he says, "whose face I did not recognize," by which he shows that this vision did not draw its origin from things previously seen but from some more hidden cause. Thirdly, it must be considered that visions of this kind, which arise from some higher cause, sometimes appear to those sleeping, sometimes to those waking, and they are wont to be truer and more certain when they appear to those waking than to those sleeping, because in waking reason is freer, and because in sleep spiritual revelations can less be discerned from frivolous and habitual dreams; and therefore, to show that this revelation was made not to one sleeping but to one waking, he adds, "an image before my eyes," by which he signifies that he saw this with eyes opened through wakefulness, which he also signified above when he said, "when sleep is wont to seize men," where he suggests that he was not seized by sleep. Then he narrates the manner of the announcement made to him, saying, "and I heard a voice as of a gentle breeze." Here it must be considered that apparitions of this kind sometimes come from a good spirit, sometimes from an evil spirit: in either manner, however, a man at first suffers fear on account of the unaccustomed vision; but when the apparition proceeds from a good spirit, the fear ends in consolation, as is clear of the angel comforting Daniel, Daniel 10:18, and of Gabriel comforting Zachariah and Mary, Luke 1; but an evil spirit leaves a man troubled. By this, therefore, that he says, "I heard a voice as of a gentle breeze," he shows a certain consolation calming the previous fear, so that by this the vision is shown to be from a good spirit and not from an evil spirit, by which false visions are frequently shown, according to that saying of the last book of Kings, "I will go forth and be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets"; in this manner also it is read in 3 Kings concerning the apparition made to Elijah, that "after the commotion, a whistling of a gentle breeze, and there the Lord." It must be known, however, that even in visions which proceed from a good spirit, sometimes great commotions and horrible voices are heard, as is clear in Ezekiel 1:4, where it is said, "and I saw, and behold, a whirlwind came from the north," and after many things it is added, "and I heard the sound of wings as the sound of many waters," and in Revelation 1:10 it is said, "I heard behind me a great voice as of a trumpet," but this is to designate threats or certain grave dangers which are contained in revelations of this kind; but because here something consoling was to be said, therefore the voice of the one speaking is brought in as like a gentle breeze. Last of all are set down the words which he asserts were revealed to him, when he says, "shall mortal man be more just than God? Shall a man be more pure than his maker?" These words he brings in to confirm his opinion which he had touched on above, namely, that the adversities of this world do not come upon anyone except for sin. So that no one might excuse himself from suffering adversities by asserting himself free from sin, he brings in three arguments, of which the first is taken from a comparison to God, and leads to an impossibility: for if a man is punished by God without fault, it follows that man is more just than God. For since it is the work of justice to render to each what is his own, if God should inflict punishment on an innocent man to whom punishment is not owed, while man, who suffers from God, has inflicted punishment on no man without fault—which must be granted if he is supposed innocent—it follows that the man punished by God is more just than God, which is for man to be justified in comparison with God, namely, that he be justified in comparison of righteousness with God. And because perhaps this would not seem incongruous to someone, he leads to another, more evidently incongruous point, saying, "or shall a man be purer than his maker?" For anything has purity insofar as it is preserved in its nature, which it has from its proper causes; the purity, therefore, of any effect depends on its cause, hence it cannot surpass its cause in purity: hence neither can a man be purer than his maker, namely God. He sets down the second argument from a comparison to the angels, and it is from the greater, when he says, "behold, those who serve him are not steadfast, and he found perversity in his angels," which statement, according to the teaching of the Catholic faith, is plain: for the Catholic faith holds that all the angels were created good, of whom some fell from the state of rectitude through their own fault, while others attained to greater glory. Now that the angels fell from the state of rectitude seems wonderful for two reasons, one of which pertains to their contemplative power, the other to their active power. From the contemplative power it seemed that there ought to be stability in the angels. For it is manifest that the cause of mutability is potency, and the cause of immutability is act: for it belongs to the nature of potency that it stand in relation to being and not-being, but according as it is more perfected by act it stands more firmly in one state, while that which is act in itself is altogether immovable. It must be known, however, that just as matter is compared to form as potency to act, so is the will compared to the good; that, therefore, which is the good itself, namely God, is altogether immutable, but the wills of other natures, which are not the good itself, are compared to it as potency to act, hence the more they cling to it the more they are made stable in the good; and therefore, since the angels among other creatures seem to cling to God more, and more closely, as those who contemplate him more subtly, they seem more stable among other creatures, and yet they were not stable; hence much less can inferior creatures, namely men, however much they may seem to cling to God by worshipping him, which is to serve him, be judged stable. From the active power, however, it seemed that there could be little or nothing of perversity in the angels: for the closer a rule is to the first rectitude the less it has of crookedness; but God, in whom is the first rectitude, directing all things by his providence, disposes lower creatures through higher ones; hence in the higher creatures, which are called angels, sent, as it were, by God to direct other things, it seemed there was very little or nothing of perversity; hence, since perversity was found in them, it must be believed that in any man whatsoever, however great he may appear, perversity can be found. It must be guarded against, however, lest anyone fall from these words into the error of Origen, who asserted that all created spirits, even now, are unstable and can be led to perversity; for this some have attained by grace, that they cling to God immovably, seeing him through his essence; and according to this, even to some men, although they are of a lower nature than the angels, it is granted by grace, even in this life, that they be free from the perversity of mortal sin. He sets down the third argument, taken from the human condition, to which is joined the conclusion of the preceding argument, hence one argument could even be formed from the two, and this when he says, "how much more those who dwell in houses of clay." Now the human condition is such that his body is compacted from earthly matter, which he designates when he says, "how much more those who dwell in houses of clay": for the human body is called "of clay" because it consists more abundantly of earth and water, the heavier elements, which its movement makes clear, hence in Genesis 1 it is said that "God formed man from the slime of the earth"; this clay body, therefore, is called the house of the soul because the human soul, in a certain respect, is in the body as a man is in a house, or as a sailor in a ship, inasmuch as it is the mover of the body. There were, however, some who on this account said that the soul is united to the body only accidentally, as a man to his garment or a sailor to his ship, but to exclude this opinion he adds, "who have an earthly foundation," by which it is given to understand that the human soul is united to the body also as form to matter: for matter is called the foundation of form because it is the first part in generation, as a foundation in the constitution of a house. Now he uses such a manner of speaking as to attribute to man what belongs to the soul, not because the soul is the man, as some have supposed, saying that man is nothing other than a soul clothed with a body, but because the soul is the more principal part of man: for each thing is wont to be named from that which is more principal in it. Now these two things which he says about the weakness of man seem to be set in opposition to what he had said above about the excellence of the angels: for what he says, "who dwell in houses of clay," seems to be set against what he had said, "who serve him," which is to cling to him and dwell in him spiritually; and what he says, "who have an earthly foundation," is set against what he had said, "in his angels": for angels are incorporeal by nature, according to that saying of the Psalm, "who makes his angels spirits." From the aforesaid condition of man he concludes his miserable outcome, saying, "they shall be consumed as by a moth," and indeed this can be understood, according to the surface of the letter, of bodily death, which man necessarily suffers from the fact that he has an earthly foundation; and according to this a twofold death can be designated, namely natural death in this, that he says, "they shall be consumed as by a moth": for a moth corrodes a garment in such a way that it is born from the garment itself, so also natural death arises from the interior causes of the body; and violent death in this, that it is added, "from morning even to evening they shall be cut down": for the cutting down of a tree proceeds from an external cause. And quite significantly he says, "from morning even to evening," because natural death can indeed be foreknown by certain natural signs, but violent death is altogether uncertain, as being subject to various chances, hence it cannot be known whether a man will come from morning even to evening. It must be known, however, that this is not the intention of the letter: for above he set forth the defect of sin when he said, "he found perversity in his angels"; hence, that the conclusion may correspond to the premises, this too must be referred to sin, by which the life of righteousness is consumed in man in two ways: in one way from interior corruption, which he signifies when he says, "they shall be consumed as by a moth": for just as a garment is consumed by a moth which is born from it, so the righteousness of man is consumed by those things which are in man, such as the corruption of the tinder of sin, evil thoughts, and other such things; in another way from exterior temptation, which is noted in this, that he says, "from morning even to evening they shall be cut down." But it must be considered that interior temptation does not suddenly overthrow a man but gradually, while through negligence someone does not take care to repress in himself the beginnings of sin, according to that saying of Ecclesiasticus, "he who neglects small things falls away little by little," just as also a garment which is not shaken out is consumed by a moth; but exterior temptation for the most part suddenly overthrows a man, as David broke out into adultery at the sight of a woman, and also many have denied the faith under torments. But in whatever way a man falls through sin, if he recognizes his sin and repents he will obtain mercy; but since there is no one who can know all his sins, according to that saying, "who understands sins?", it follows that very many men, not recognizing their sins, do not apply the remedies by which they might be freed, and this is what he adds, "and because no one understands," namely the fall of sinners, "they shall perish forever," namely very many, as it were never freed from sin. But because there are some who apply remedies against sins, although they do not fully understand them, as David who said, "cleanse me, Lord, from my hidden sins," he adds, "but those who shall be left," namely from the number of those who perish forever, "shall be taken away from them," that is, they shall be separated from their company; they shall indeed die, because although a man repents of sin, he is not freed from the necessity of death, but wisdom does not die in them, and this is what he says, "and not in wisdom." Or this saying, "they shall die, and not in wisdom," does not correspond to what was said immediately before but to what he had said above, "they shall perish forever," so that the sense is that they shall die without wisdom. Or this that he says, "those who shall be left," can be understood of the children who are left by their perishing parents, who, because they imitate the sins of their parents, are themselves also taken away, dying without wisdom. Eliphaz, therefore, wishes to gather from all these things that, since the condition of man is so fragile, he easily falls into sin, so that while a man does not recognize it he goes to perdition, both he and his children; and thus, although Job did not recognize himself as a sinner, it was to be believed that on account of some sins he and his children had perished. Thus, therefore, after he had expounded the revelation made to him, because Job might not believe this revelation, he therefore adds, "call, then, if there is anyone who will answer you," as if to say: if you do not believe that this was revealed to me, do you yourself call upon God, if perhaps he should wish to answer you concerning this doubt; and if you do not think you can obtain this from God by your own merits, "turn to one of the saints," so that through his mediation you may be able to know the truth of this matter from God. And it must be noted that he says, "to one of the saints," because it is not lawful to seek by unclean spirits, by whatever manner or hidden art, but only through God or through the saints of God, according to that saying of Isaiah 8:19, "when they shall say to you: seek of pythons and of diviners who mutter in their incantations, should not a people seek of their God a vision for the living or for the dead?"”

“In these verses, I. Eliphaz excuses the trouble he is now about to give to Job by his discourse (Job 4:2): "If we assay a word with thee, offer a word of reproof and counsel, wilt thou be grieved and take it ill?" We have reason to fear thou wilt; but there is no remedy: "Who can refrain from words?" Observe, 1. With what modesty he speaks of himself and his own attempt. He will not undertake the management of the cause alone, but very humbly joins his friends with him: "We will commune with thee." Those that plead God's cause must be glad of help, lest it suffer through their weakness. He will not promise much, but begs leave to assay or attempt, and try if he could propose any thing that might be pertinent, and suit Job's case. In difficult matters it becomes us to pretend no further, but only to try what may be said or done. Many excellent discourses have gone under the modest title of Essays. 2. With what tenderness he speaks of Job, and his present afflicted condition: "If we tell thee our mind, wilt thou be grieved? Wilt thou take it ill? Wilt thou lay it to thy own heart as thy affliction or to our charge as our fault? Shall we be reckoned unkind and cruel if we deal plainly and faithfully with thee? We desire we may not; we hope we shall not, and should be sorry if that should be ill resented which is well intended." Note, We ought to be afraid of grieving any, especially those that are already in grief, lest we add affliction to the afflicted, as David's enemies, Psa 69:26. We should show ourselves backward to say that which we foresee will be grievous, though ever so necessary. God himself, though he afflicts justly, does not afflict willingly, Lam 3:33. 3. With what assurance he speaks of the truth and pertinency of what he was about to say: Who can withhold himself from speaking? Surely it was a pious zeal for God's honour, and the spiritual welfare of Job, that laid him under this necessity of speaking. "Who can forbear speaking in vindication of God's honour, which we hear reproved, in love to thy soul, which we see endangered?" Note, It is foolish pity not to reprove our friends, even our friends in affliction, for what they say or do amiss, only for fear of offending them. Whether men take it well or ill, we must with wisdom and meekness do our duty and discharge a good conscience. II. He exhibits a twofold charge against Job. 1. As to his particular conduct under this affliction. He charges him with weakness and faint-heartedness, and this article of his charge there was too much ground for, Job 4:3-5. And here, (1.) He takes notice of Job's former serviceableness to the comfort of others. He owns that Job had instructed many, not only his own children and servants, but many others, his neighbours and friends, as many as fell within the sphere of his activity. He did not only encourage those who were teachers by office, and countenance them, and pay for the teaching of those who were poor, but he did himself instruct many. Though a great man, he did not think it below him (king Solomon was a preacher); though a man of business, he found time to do it, went among his neighbours, talked to them about their souls, and gave them good counsel. O that this example of Job were imitated by our great men! If he met with those who were ready to fall into sin, or sink under their troubles, his words upheld them: a wonderful dexterity he had in offering that which was proper to fortify persons against temptations, to support them under their burdens, and to comfort afflicted consciences. He had, and used, the tongue of the learned, knew how to speak a word in season to those that were weary, and employed himself much in that good work. With suitable counsels and comforts he strengthened the weak hands for work and service and the spiritual warfare, and the feeble knees for bearing up the man in his journey and under his load. It is not only our duty to lift up our own hands that hang down, by quickening and encouraging ourselves in the way of duty (Heb 12:12), but we must also strengthen the weak hands of others, as there is occasion, and do what we can to confirm their feeble knees, by saying to those that are of a fearful heart, Be strong, Isa 35:3, Isa 35:4. The expressions seem to be borrowed thence. Note, Those should abound in spiritual charity. A good word, well and wisely spoken, may do more good than perhaps we think of. But why does Eliphaz mention this here? [1.] Perhaps he praises him thus for the good he had done that he might make the intended reproof the more passable with him. Just commendation is a good preface to a just reprehension, will help to remove prejudices, and will show that the reproof comes not from ill will. Paul praised the Corinthians before he chided them, Co1 11:2. [2.] He remembers how Job had comforted others as a reason why he might justly expect to be himself comforted; and yet, if conviction was necessary in order to comfort, they must be excused if they applied themselves to that first. The Comforter shall reprove, Joh 16:8. [3.] He speaks this, perhaps, in a way of pity, lamenting that through the extremity of his affliction he could not apply those comforts to himself which he had formerly administered to others. It is easier to give good counsel than to take it, to preach meekness and patience than to practise them. Facile omnes, cum valemus, rectum consilium aegrotis damus - We all find it easy, when in health, to give good advice to the sick. - Terent. [4.] Most think that he mentions it as an aggravation of his present discontent, upbraiding him with his knowledge, and the good offices he had done for others, as if he had said, "Thou that hast taught others, why dost thou not teach thyself? Is not this an evidence of thy hypocrisy, that thou hast prescribed that medicine to others which thou wilt not now take thyself, and so contradictest thyself, and actest against thy own know principles? Thou that teachest another to faint, dost thou faint? Rom 2:21. Physician, heal thyself." Those who have rebuked others must expect to hear of it if they themselves become obnoxious to rebuke. (2.) He upbraids him with his present low-spiritedness, Job 4:5. "Now that it has come upon thee, now that it is thy turn to be afflicted, and the bitter cup that goes round is put into thy hand, now that it touches thee, thou faintest, thou art troubled." Here, [1.] He makes too light of Job's afflictions: "It touches thee." The very word that Satan himself had used, Job 1:11, Job 2:5. Had Eliphaz felt but the one-half of Job's affliction, he would have said, "It smites me, it wounds me;" but, speaking of Job's afflictions, he makes a mere trifle of it: "It touches thee and thou canst not bear to be touched." Noli me tangere - Touch me not. [2.] He makes too much of Job's resentments, and aggravates them: "Thou faintest, or thou art beside thyself; thou ravest, and knowest not what thou sayest." Men in deep distress must have grains of allowance, and a favourable construction put upon what they say; when we make the worst of every word we do not as we would be done by. 2. As to his general character before this affliction. he charges him with wickedness and false-heartedness, and this article of his charge was utterly groundless and unjust. How unkindly does he banter him, and upbraid him with the great profession of religion he had made, as if it had all now come to nothing and proved a sham (Job 4:6): "Is not this thy fear, thy confidence, thy hope, and the uprightness of thy ways? Does it not all appear now to be a mere pretence? For, hadst thou been sincere in it, God would not thus have afflicted thee, nor wouldst thou have behaved thus under the affliction." This was the very thing Satan aimed at, to prove Job a hypocrite, and disprove the character God had given of him. When he could not himself do this to God, but he still saw and said, Job is perfect and upright, then he endeavoured, by his friends, to do it to Job himself, and to persuade him to confess himself a hypocrite. Could he have gained that point he would have triumphed. Habes confitentem reum - Out of thy own mouth will I condemn thee. But, by the grace of God, Job was enabled to hold fast his integrity, and would not bear false witness against himself. Note, Those that pass rash and uncharitable censures upon their brethren, and condemn them as hypocrites, do Satan's work, and serve his interest, more than they are aware of. I know not how it comes to pass that this verse is differently read in several editions of our common English Bibles; the original, and all the ancient versions, put thy hope before the uprightness of thy ways. So does the Geneva, and most of the editions of the last translation; but I find one of the first, in 1612, has it, Is not this thy fear, thy confidence, the uprightness of thy ways, and thy hope? Both the Assembly's Annotations and Mr. Pool's have that reading: and an edition in 1660 reads it, "Is not thy fear thy confidence, and the uprightness of thy ways thy hope? Does it not appear now that all the religion both of thy devotion and of thy conversation was only in hope and confidence that thou shouldst grow rich by it? Was it not all mercenary?" The very thing that Satan suggested. Is not thy religion thy hope, and are not thy ways thy confidence? so Mr. Broughton. Or, "Was it not? Didst thou not think that that would be thy protection? But thou art deceived." Or, "Would it not have been so? If it had been sincere, would it not have kept thee from this despair?" It is true, if thou faint in the day of adversity, thy strength, thy grace, is small (Pro 24:10); but it does not therefore follow that thou hast no grace, no strength at all. A man's character is not to be taken from a single act.”

“Then Eliphaz the Temanite answered and said. When Job was done cursing his day, and had finished his doleful ditty on that subject, then Eliphaz took the opportunity of speaking, not being able to bear any longer with Job and his behaviour under his afflictions; Eliphaz was one of Job's three friends that came to visit him, Job 2:11; very probably he might be the senior man, or a man of the greatest authority and power; a most respectable person, had in great esteem and reverence among men, and by these his friends, and therefore takes upon him to speak first; or it may be it was agreed among themselves that he should begin the dispute with Job; and we find, that in the close of this controversy the Lord speaks to him by name, and to him only, Job 42:7; he "answered"; not that Job directed his discourse to him, but he took occasion, from Job's afflictions and his passionate expressions, to say what he did; and he "said" not anything by way of condolence or consolation, not pitying Job's case, nor comforting him in his afflicted circumstances, as they required both; but reproaching him as a wicked and hypocritical man, not acting like himself formerly, or according to his profession and principles, but just the reverse: this was a new trial to Job, and some think the sorest of all; it was as a sword in his bones, which was very cutting to him; as oil cast into a fiery furnace in which he now was, which increased the force and fury of it; and as to vinegar an opened and bleeding wound, which makes it smart the more. ; he "answered"; not that Job directed his discourse to him, but he took occasion, from Job's afflictions and his passionate expressions, to say what he did; and he "said" not anything by way of condolence or consolation, not pitying Job's case, nor comforting him in his afflicted circumstances, as they required both; but reproaching him as a wicked and hypocritical man, not acting like himself formerly, or according to his profession and principles, but just the reverse: this was a new trial to Job, and some think the sorest of all; it was as a sword in his bones, which was very cutting to him; as oil cast into a fiery furnace in which he now was, which increased the force and fury of it; and as to vinegar an opened and bleeding wound, which makes it smart the more. Job 4:2 job 4:2 job 4:2 job 4:2If we assay to commune with thee, wilt thou be grieved?.... Eliphaz speaks in the name of himself and his two friends, who had doubtless consulted together, and compared their sentiments of Job; which appearing to be the same, they formed a plan and scheme in which they should attack him, and the part which each should take, and the order in which they should proceed: these words are said, either as seemingly doubting whether they should speak or be silent; for they may be rendered, "shall we try", or attempt, to drop or speak a "word to thee"; to enter into a conversation with thee? or, "shall we take up a discourse", and carry it on with thee, "who art grieved" already? or art weary and heavy laden, and bore down with the burden of affliction, with sorrows and troubles; or art impatient (h) under them; we fear, should we, that thou wilt be more grieved and burdened, and become more impatient; and therefore know not well what to do: or else, as supposing and taking it for granted that he would be grieved and burdened, and made more restless and uneasy, impatient and outrageous, yet they had determined to enter into a debate with him; for so the words are by some rendered, "should we speak a word unto thee"; or, "against thee" (i); even should the least word be spoken against thee, thou wilt be weary (k), or burdened, or grieved, or take it ill: we know thou wilt; yet, nevertheless, we must not, we cannot, we will not forbear speaking: or else interrogatively, as our version and others, "wilt thou be grieved?" we desire thou wouldest not, nor take it ill from us, but all in good part; we mean no hurt, we design no ill, but thy good, and beg thou wilt hear us patiently: this shows how great a man Job had been, and in what reverence and respect he was had, that his friends bespeak him after this manner in his low estate; however, this was artifice in them, to introduce the discourse, and bring on the debate after this sort: but who can withhold himself from speaking? be it as it will; Eliphaz suggests, though Job was already and greatly burdened, and would be more so, and break out into greater impatience, yet there was a necessity of speaking, it could not be forborne; no man could refrain himself from speaking, nor ought in such a case, when the providence of God was reflected upon, and he was blasphemed and evil spoken of, and charged with injustice, as was supposed; in such circumstances, no good, no faithful man, could or ought to keep silence; indeed, when the glory of God, the honour of the Redeemer, and the good of souls require it, and a man's own reputation with respect to his faithfulness lies at stake, silence should not be kept, let the consequence be as it may; but how far this was the case may be considered. (h) "num suscipiemus verbum ad te, qui impatiens es?" Schmidt; "qui jam dum lassatus", Michaelis. (i) "Contra te", Piscator. (k) "Forsitan moleste accipies", V. L. "fatisces", Schultens.”

“Themanite. People of this city, about twelve miles from Petra, in Arabia, were renowned for wisdom, Jeremias xlix. 7., and Baruch iii. 22. Pythagoras therefore visited this country. (St. Cyril, contra Jul. x.) — Eliphaz attempts to prove that no innocent person is chastised. He does not speak of small faults, to which any person may be exposed, and which God may severely punish. But he will have Job to be a great offender, at least in secret, and represents himself in too advantageous a light; though he was really a good man, and meant well. (Calmet) — But this did not exempt him from sin, (chap. xlii.) no more than Eliu, chap. xxxii. Bonum ex integra causa; malum ex quolibet defectu; as theologians agree. (Haydock)”