Job 5:12-16 and Eliphaz's words and Elihpaz's ambiguities and Eliphaz's double entendres

Most scholars pass over these verses with only minimal mention. They stress that Eliphaz here gives standard and generalized wisdom platitudes. God raises the poor and cuts the crafty down to size. But whenever I run across biblical language that is seemingly impersonal or doctrinal, I try to probe behind the language to see if there are pictures that it suggests that might make the reading more vivid or memorable. That is what I would like to do in today's essay. I will point out a few words that Eliphaz uses, and then wander through the Scriptures for other uses of them.

One other preliminary comment, however. Rather than simply dismissing Eliphaz's words as pablum or second-hand wisdom theology, I think that if we understand them in the context of legal writing and speaking, they play a valuable role in his speech. That is, when appellate judges write legal opinions, they do three things. First, they review the facts and procedural posture of a case (i.e., how it got to the reviewing court). Second, they declare the relevant law that will apply to the case. Finally, they apply the law to the particular facts that the case presents. Eliphaz actually will follow steps two and three in 5:8-27. From 5:8-16 he declares general principles that are relevant to the case at hand and then, in 5:17-27, he will apply them to Job's particular situation (notice the proliferation of "you's" in those 11 verses). Therefore, in 5:8-16, Eliphaz is laying out the applicable law (i.e., principles of wisdom theology) that he will eventually apply to the "facts" of Job's case. Let's not accuse him, then, of retreating into an abstract world of irrelevant comments. They are highly relevant.

"Crafty" (arum)--5:12, 13

Eliphaz twice uses the word arum to describe the people whom God will bring to naught. The NRSV translates these verses as folows:

"He frustrates the devices of the crafty, so that their hands achieve no success. He takes the wise in their own craftiness; and the schemes of the wily are brought to a quick end" (5:12-13).

I don't want to give my own translation of that word immediately, but I want to tell you about it. It appears only 11 times in the Bible (you would think that God would be spending more time frustrating them since Eliphaz makes such a big point of it, but apparently not. Usually God frustrates the "proud," and not the arum). Of the 11 references, it occurs twice in Job (here and 15:5) and 8 times in Proverbs. But every time it appears in Proverbs the word is best translated "prudent" or "clever." A few examples: "Fools show their anger at once, but the prudent (arum) ignore an insult" (12:16). Or, "One who is clever (arum) conceals knowledge, but the mind of a fool broadcasts folly" (12:23). Or, "It is the wisdom of the clever (arum) to understand where they go, but the folly of fools misleads." Thus, in the wisdom tradition, other than Job 5:12,13, the word appears to have a positive connotation.

Where might Eliphaz derive the negative reading (as "crafty") of this term? From the story of the serpent's deception of Eve in Genesis 3. "Now the serpent was more 'subtle' ['crafty'-arum] than any other wild animal that the Lord God had made" (3:1)." Hm. But think about it for a minute. Maybe we should translate arum in 3:1 also as "prudent" or "clever," like the wise are in Proverbs. It surely would turn our picture of the serpent upside down, wouldn't it? Yet, in Job 5:12-13, Eliphaz seems unquestionably to be pointing out an undesirable trait of certain people. We have seen how ambiguous speech characterizes his words in 4-5; this is possibly another example of it.

Let's play with this idea for a minute more. How might Job have heard the term arum when Eliphaz used it twice? Probably, in the first instance, in the way it is primarily used in the wisdom theology--as a "clever" or "prudent" person. Thus he would have "heard" Eliphaz saying that God frustrates the plans of these people. Might Job, by now in his supersensitive phase, have first "heard" Eliphaz attacking him? Since he was blameless and upright and feared God and turned away from evil (1:1), and since he sacrificed for his children "lest they curse God in their hearts" (1:5), and since he dispensed justice in the city gates and made the widow's heart sing for joy (29:8-16), he certainly would have considered himself among the prudent people of wisdom. But then, it would have dawned on him that Eliphaz was probably using the term to describe the "so-called" wise or the "sinister" or "crafty" rather than those wise people whom the tradition revered. But Eliphaz just doesn't seem to be able to help himself: even when laying out unambiguous wisdom teaching, he manages to import ambiguity into the mix.

Concluding With Groping

Eliphaz goes on to say that "they grope around in noontime as if it were night" (5:14). Instead of being in light, they live in darkness. The word translated "grope around" (mashash) only appears 9X in the Bible. Four of them are in the stories in Gen 27 and 31, where the blind Isaac gropes around to decide if Jacob is speaking to him or where Laban is searching for his household gods. But 3 instances of its use are particularly arresting. In Ex. 10:21, God sends the tenth and final plague on the Egyptians. It will be "a darkness that can be felt" (a "groped-for" darkness). Again, in two appearances of the word in Deut 28, the great curse passage against a disobedient Israel, the people are warned that if they disobey God they will "grope about at noon as blind people grope in darkness, but you shall be unable to find your way" (28:29). All of a sudden, when reading Job 5:14, I see pictures in my mind, and Eliphaz's language comes to life.

Thus, certainly there is predictable wisdom theology here, but I think it is useful. Then, there is ambiguity in his speech, as we have learned to expect. Finally, there are some vivid words. I, for one, like all three of these things.

[Next]

1028