SERIES: The Book of Job
When Theology Goes to Seed
SPEAKER: Michael P. Andrus
Introduction: What is God like? An ancient legend tells us that the richest man in the world, Croesus, once asked the wisest man in the world, Thales, “What is God?” The philosopher asked for a day in which to deliberate, and then for another, and then another, and another, and another. At length confessed that he was not able to answer and that the longer he deliberated, the more difficult it was for him to frame an answer. The fiery Tertullian, the early Church Father, eagerly seized upon this incident and said it was an example of the world’s ignorance of God apart from Christ. “There,” he exclaimed, “is the wisest man in the world, and he cannot tell you who God is. But the most ignorant laborer among the Christians knows God and is able to make him known to others.”
There are four kinds of people when it comes to the knowledge of God. There are honest agnostics who, like Thales, admit they don’t know God. Then there are those who don’t know Him and consider that fact as sufficient proof that He doesn’t exist—we call them atheists. Third, there are those who claim to know a lot about God but whose knowledge seems to be purely philosophical and intellectual. And finally, there are those who really know God, and there is little doubt they know Him, because they give clear evidence of walking with Him, talking with Him, and trusting Him daily.
Elihu, the angry young philosopher/theologian to whom we were introduced last week in the 32nd chapter of the Book of Job, strikes me as being in the third category—he knows a lot about God and can offer a very erudite description of God’s attributes and works, but I have a sneaking suspicion it’s all academic. Somehow, I can’t see him leading a young person to faith, or offering encouragement to a dying saint, or joining a flood relief team.
Am I suggesting that knowledge of God is strictly a mystical thing, and that doctrinal affirmations about the nature of God are useless? Not at all. The Westminster Shorter Catechism defines God as “infinite, eternal, and unchangeable in his being, wisdom, power, holiness, justice, goodness, and truth.” I believe every word of that affirmation, and I think there has been value for my life in learning it. But I also believe it is possible to memorize all the answers in the Catechism but never come to know God personally. Sadly, there are even those who teach the Catechism who don’t know Him.
One can usually tell such people by the fact that they are more interested in talking theology or arguing doctrine than in living godly lives or loving their neighbor or serving one another. They are quick to challenge you to an argument over predestination (by the way, you know the definition of predestination, don’t you? “Where you are when your flight’s canceled.” You know, pre-destination). As I was saying, they are quick to challenge you to an argument over predestination, or the time of the Rapture, or the extent of the atonement, but rarely will they challenge you to a life of prayer or sacrificial giving or a renewal of your marriage vows. The psychological explanation is simple: complex theological and philosophical issues serve as a convenient escape mechanism for those who wish to avoid the gut-wrenching issues where life meets the road.
I see in Elihu a case where theology has, to a certain extent, gone to seed. Frankly, for the most part He gives us a pretty valid description of God’s nature, particularly regarding two of His most important attributes—justice and transcendence. He addresses these topics because justice and transcendence are two attributes with which Job has wrestled a great deal. After all, here he is—one of God’s choice servants, suffering terribly for no apparent reason. God must be unfair, and if He’s not unfair, then He owes Job an explanation as to why he is suffering. But Elihu will have none of it. He steadfastly maintains that God is a God of perfect justice and He is transcendent above his Creation, owing no answers to anyone. Technically he is right. But something is still wrong with Elihu. His logic is good, but the results don’t ring true. His doctrine is off-balance. One gets the distinct impression that while Elihu may know a lot about God, he doesn’t really know God.
I want us to examine the 34th and 35th chapters of Job by means of two principal propositions which I trust will keep us from going to seed on these important spiritual truths.
Our God is a God of justice, as Elihu maintains, but His justice does not diminish His grace and mercy.
The justice of God has been defined as that attribute which distinguishes Him as equitable and fair. Almost always when we speak of fairness, we have a standard in mind. An umpire is just or fair when he calls balls and strikes the same for both teams and does so in accordance with a standard that says, for example, that any ball that crosses the plate between the knees and the letters is a strike. A judge is just or fair if he applies the Law impartially to every defendant, regardless of race, creed, gender, or social status—taking into consideration only those factors the Law itself allows, such as age, motive, and tendency to be a repeat offender.
The problem we face when we talk about the justice of God, however, is that there is no outside standard by which God’s justice can be measured. We have no right, for example, to demand that God reward the righteous and punish the wicked within two weeks of their righteous or wicked deeds, for as the Creator and Sustainer of the Universe, His timetable may run in years, not weeks. In fact, there is a Scripture passage which indicates that for God a millennium is like one day. In other words, justice is not an abstract concept by which we can judge what God does; rather, we know what justice is by observing what God does.
Now Elihu begins each of these two chapters (34, 35) by confronting Job for questioning God’s justice.
Elihu confronts Job for questioning God’s justice. (34:5-9; 35:2-3) In chapter 34 he begins by quoting Job in a quite incriminating fashion. Look at verse 5: “Job says, ‘I am innocent, but God denies me justice. Although I am right, I am considered a liar; although I am guiltless, his arrow inflicts an incurable wound.’ (Skip down to verse 9, where he continues to quote Job). ‘It profits a man nothing when he tries to please God.'” Then in the 3rd verse of chapter 35 he quotes Job again as affirming the corollary of verse 9: “What profit is it to me, and what do I gain by not sinning?” In other words, he accuses Job of questioning God’s justice by maintaining that “one gains nothing by trying to please God,” and “one gains nothing by trying to avoid sin.”
Now these are pretty serious charges, and we should be very concerned if Job really said such things, but in fact, one looks in vain for these words in any of Job’s lengthy speeches. The closest he came is in chapter 21 where he observed that expected judgment often does not fall on the wicked and n chapter 9 where he affirmed that trouble comes to good and bad alike. What Elihu is probably doing is drawing what he thinks are logical conclusions from what Job did say. That is always a dangerous endeavor, for people rarely follow their thoughts to their logical conclusions, especially when they are distraught.
Yes, it is true, Job had accused God of being unfair and he had no right to do so, but Elihu should have been able to see beyond Job’s words to his suffering. As a pastor I have had to learn that when people are deeply distressed, they sometimes say things they would never say in their right minds. You learn not to take everything personally and you learn not to react in shock when someone says they are angry at God. What they need at a time like that is a listening ear, not a condemning mouth. But Elihu, as we have already observed, is more of an ivory tower theologian than he is a mentor or pastor. He’s more concerned about being right than he is about being loving and compassionate. The fact is it doesn’t have to be either-or; I think it is possible for us to be both.
Having set Job up with his straw-man argument, Elihu then proceeds to knock him down with the truth that God is indeed perfectly just. Interestingly, in the process he does offer some valuable insight into this important attribute of God.
Elihu offers valuable insight into God’s justice. (34:10-33) And this shouldn’t be overly surprising, for even someone who doesn’t know God personally can nevertheless say true things about Him. Elihu begins with a kind of philosophical or logical argument.
1. It is unthinkable that God would do wrong. (10-12) Follow with me from verse 10: “So listen to me, you men of understanding. Far be it from God to do evil, from the Almighty to do wrong. He repays a man for what he has done; he brings upon him what his conduct deserves. It is unthinkable that God would do wrong, that the Almighty would pervert justice.” I agree. As soon as you accept the fact that God has been unfair you have dethroned Him. You have set yourself on the throne in His place and you have become Judge of what is fair and what is not. Elihu continues with a second important truth.
2. God’s justice is observable in human affairs. (18-27). Look at history, he says (verse 18):
“Is he not the One who says to kings, ‘You are worthless,’ and to nobles, ‘You are wicked,’ who shows no partiality to princes and does not favor the rich over the poor, for they are all the work of his hands?” Skip over to verse 24: “Without inquiry he shatters the mighty and sets up others in their place. Because he takes note of their deeds, he overthrows them in the night and they are crushed. He punishes them for their wickedness where everyone can see them, because they turned from following him and had no regard for any of his ways.”
Elihu would have no problem with the banishment of a Richard Nixon, the death of an Elvis Presley, or the fall of a Jimmy Swaggart—”they got what they deserved,” he would say, “People who thumb their noses at God’s Laws can expect to meet His justice.” Thirdly he observes, …
3. God’s justice doesn’t bend to human terms. (31-33) Look at verse 31: “Suppose a man says to God, ‘I am guilty but will offend no more. Teach me what I cannot see; if I have done wrong, I will not do so again.’ Should God then reward you on your terms, when you refuse to repent?” The Hebrew poetry here is very difficult, but it seems that Elihu is suggesting that Job believes he should receive reward from God without repentance, when it is the broken and contrite heart that God hears and accepts. While ameliorating his judgment slightly by admitting, “You must decide, not I,” the clear implication of Elihu’s words are that Job is guilty and has refused to repent. In this he is coming close to the position that Eliphaz, Bildad, and Zophar took—namely that Job’s suffering is due to his sin.
But the key message here is that God doesn’t bend the rules of justice to fit our terms—His justice is absolute. However, in upholding the justice of God so nobly, Elihu makes one important mistake—he shares the truth but not the whole truth, which often results in untruth. Elihu wrongly ignores God’s mercy and grace. You see, the attributes of God cannot be studied in isolation, but many people try to do so. For example, the religious liberals love to talk about the love of God, but they refuse to recognize that His love is a holy love, and He can never look upon sin with favor. His omnipotence, to take another attribute is not uncontrolled power but rather power informed by omniscience. His goodness is always balanced by His truth. And His justice is ameliorated by His grace and mercy.
This is the burden of a passage from the Apostle Paul’s pen in Romans 3. He has just chided his listeners for thinking of justice purely in terms of keeping the Law, and then he adds, beginning in verse 21:
“But now a righteousness from God, apart from law, has been made known, to which the Law and the prophets testify. This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference, for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus. God presented him as a sacrifice of atonement, through faith in his blood. (Now listen to this!) He did this to demonstrate his justice, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished—he did it to demonstrate his justice at the present time, so as to be just and the one who justifies those who have faith in Jesus.”
Now that may be confusing but let me try to explain it as simply as I can. Paul is saying that one of the dilemnas facing God was how to be just and merciful at the same time. He hates sin and can’t allow it to go unpunished. But He loves the sinner and wants to save Him for eternal fellowship. How can He be a just Judge and yet declare guilty sinners to be “Not guilty”? Ah, He found a way—by allowing His Son, who had no sin of His own to take our place, to die for us. So, when we turn in faith to Jesus, He dresses us in His own righteousness and then God can accept us into His presence.
This concept of a God of justice reaching out to a sinner in grace and mercy is lost on Elihu. Even if Job were the wicked man Elihu thinks he is, which he is not, Elihu still should have been able to tell him about God’s mercy and grace, for even in the OT that grace and mercy were evident in the sacrificial system. But he does not; instead, he condemns Job. In verse 36 he says, “Oh that Job might be tested to the utmost for answering like a wicked man! To his sin he adds rebellion; scornfully he claps his hands among us and multiplies his words against God.” In other words, Job, you’ve suffered a lot, but I hope you get more of what’s really coming to you. Wow! And these guys are called “the Comforters of Job?!!”
We need to remember this, friends. If God can hate the sin but love the sinner, so can we. If God can be both just and merciful, so can we. We may disapprove of the lifestyles of many around us, but we must never lose sight of the fact that they, too, are individuals created in the image of God; they deserve respect as human beings, and they should be objects of our love and compassion. We must find ways to condemn sin without condemning sinners.
As I said earlier, Elihu addresses two major attributes of God in these chapters. One is justice and the other is transcendence. We have already examined the fact that our God Is a God of justice, but that does not diminish His grace and mercy. Our second proposition is that …
Our God is a transcendent God, as Elihu also maintains, but that does not mean He is indifferent.
The transcendence of God is that attribute which describes Him as incomparably great, having absolute grandeur, power and sovereignty. In other words, He transcends every attempt we make to put Him in a box and tell Him what to do.
Elihu confronts Job for challenging God’s transcendence. (35:14-16). In Elihu’s mind that is exactly what Job was doing when he demanded that a transcendent God give him an audience to complain about his suffering. And in this I think we would agree with Elihu. No one has the right to demand anything of God. He is neither a genie to be rubbed nor a celestial Santa Claus whose job it is to deliver toys to His children. He is Almighty God. In fact, God Himself will confront Job on this very same issue in a remarkable speech beginning in chapter 38. But there is a qualitative difference between the way Elihu does it here and the way God does it later. God lets Job know who is in charge, but He demonstrates compassion for Job’s situation and forgiveness for His intemperate remarks. Elihu, on the other hand, lets Job know who is in charge and berates him for not submitting. He once again shows us that his gifts are theological and philosophical, not pastoral.
Nevertheless, we should not overlook the valuable insight Elihu offers concerning God’s transcendence. This man is no dummy; he may be a fool, but he is not stupid.
Elihu offers valuable insight into God’s transcendence. In fact, some of the most noble references to God’s transcendence in all the Bible are found in Elihu’s words. Let’s consider several of them.
1. God is the sustainer of human life. (34:13-15). “Who appointed him over the earth? Who put him in charge of the whole world? If it were his intention and he withdrew his spirit and breath, all mankind would perish together and man would return to the dust.” The point seems to be that the very inference that God owes Job an answer as to why he is suffering is an attack on God’s incomparable greatness. It reminds one of the Apostle Paul’s words in Romans 9:19ff: “Who are you, O man, to talk back to God? Shall what is formed say to him who formed it, ‘Why did you make me like this?’ Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for noble purposes and some for common use?”
Then consider verse 21-23, where Elihu tells us that …
2. God is sovereign over human affairs. (34:21-23) “His eyes are on the ways of men; he sees their every step. There is no dark place, no deep shadow, where evildoers can hide. God has no need to examine men further, that they should come before him for judgment.” (Skip down to verse 29) “But if he remains silent, who can condemn him? If he hides his face, who can see him? Yet he is over man and nation alike, to keep a godless man from ruling, from laying snares for the people.”
The picture here is of a God who is in absolute control. When I was teaching theology in a Christian college several decades years ago, I used to ask my students, “When was the last time you surprised God?” They would sit there thinking about the past week or the past year, wanting on the one hand to affirm the freedom of their individual will, but knowing, on the other hand, that the Bible states that “God works out everything in conformity with the purpose of his own will.” (Ephesians 1:11) Some of them would become very agitated by the question.
Let me ask you this morning, “When is the last time you surprised God?” Friend, if your answer is anything but “never,” I respectfully submit that you worship a different God from the God of the Bible. He is never surprised; He never has to go to Plan B; He knows everything and since he is eternal, He knows it all in advance. Thirdly,
3. God answers only to Himself. (36:22-23) I borrow this from chapter 36:22-23: “God is exalted in his power. Who is a teacher like him? Who has prescribed his ways for him, or said to him, ‘You have done wrong’?” That’s in essence the view of God’s transcendence and sovereignty that Elihu paints, and he’s right. Except for one thing. This attribute too is balanced by another truth about God which Elihu ignores.
But he wrongly ignores God’s immanence. (35:4-8). Both these terms—transcendence and immanence—may seem obtuse, and I wouldn’t use them if there were a single word synonym. Let me try to explain them this way: Where transcendence refers to the bigness of God, immanence refers to His smallness. Where transcendence implies His majesty and grandeur, immanence implies his compassion and empathy. Where transcendence indicates that He is wholly “other,” immanence indicates His intimate presence and involvement with His creatures. Does that help?
The best place to see the absence of immanence in Elihu’s theology is in chapter 35 beginning in verse 4. We need to read this:
“I would like to reply to you and to your friends with you. Look up at the heavens and see; gaze at the clouds so high above you. If you sin, how does that affect God? If your sins are many, what does that do to him? If you are righteous, what do you give to him, or what does he receive from your hand? Your wickedness affects only a man like yourself, and your righteousness only the sons of men.”
Wow, talk about a one-sided doctrine of transcendence! The problem is not that Elihu is dead wrong; the problem is that he is imbalanced. Frankly, there is a certain sense in which he is right. It is true that neither our sin nor our righteousness makes God any more or less the holy God that He is. In fact, he would still be God if the whole universe went out of existence. But is this the balanced view of God we see in the Scripture? Is this the picture we get of the Lord as our Shepherd or the Father searching for His lost son? Is God indifferent to human sin or righteousness? Is He not grieved when His children disobey Him, and does He not tell us of the joy in Heaven over one sinner who repents?
Elihu has let his theology go to seed, and frankly this is a danger we must all be cautious of. It is so easy for us to grab hold of part of the truth and turn it into the whole. It is so easy to ride theological hobby horses. I think I have shared before one of the favorite sayings of Dr. Chafer, the founder of DTS. He used to say that the only difference between a horse and a hobbyhorse is that you can get off a horse.
One of the greatest needs in the church today is for us to let God’s Word speak for itself. We love our theological systems; we love our theological labels, like Calvinist or dispensationalist, or covenantalist or amillennialist or premillennialist; and if you don’t know what I’m talking about, don’t worry about it. You may be better off in your ignorance, because there are some words and concepts that are far more important than the ones I just mentioned, like Jesus, the Holy Spirit, forgiveness, reconciliation, and fellowship.
Please understand that I am not anti-doctrine. I spent approximately 11 years of my life studying theology, earned four degrees in it, taught it on the college level for five years, and have taught it regularly in this church. But your relationship with God is a thousand times more important than your ability to argue theology, and your obedience to Christ is a thousand times more important than your ability to spout a creed.
Conclusion: In conclusion, allow me to point out one paragraph of significant insight which Elihu offers that brings us back to the fundamental issue in the Book of Job: how do we respond when faced with pain and suffering? Look at 35:9ff:
“Men cry out under a load of oppression; they plead for relief from the arm of the powerful. But no one says, ‘Where is God my Maker, who gives songs in the night, who teaches more to us than to the beasts of the earth and makes us wiser than the birds of the air?’ He does not answer when men cry out because of the arrogance of the wicked. Indeed, God does not listen to their empty plea; the Almighty pays no attention to it. How much less, then, Job, will he listen when you say that you do not see him, that your case is before him and you must wait for him.”
Now Elihu is wrong here in his condemnation of Job; in fact, he is blatantly wrong when he claims that God will never listen to a man like Job, for as soon as Elihu finishes speaking, the next words we hear are these (38:1): “Then the Lord answered Job.” But, fortunately Elihu demonstrates more insight into human nature than he does into God’s nature. He is correct that many people cry out under a load of oppression and plead for relief from the arm of the powerful. They plead to Congress, they plead to local politicians, they plead to benevolent organizations. But how many plead to the only Source who can really help them? They fail to see that their greatest need is not the mud in their house or the cancer in their body or the debit in their bank account. Rather their greatest need is for a personal relationship with Almighty God—the God who is absolutely just but also gracious and merciful, the God who is infinitely great but also infinitely small.
Do you know that God today. I don’t mean, do you know about Him? Do you know Him? The only way that can happen is to come by way of personal faith in His Son Jesus Christ. Jesus said, “I am the Way, the Truth and the Life. No one can come unto the Father except by Me.”
DATE: August 22, 1993
Tags:
Justice of God
Transcendence
Immanence
Sovereignty of God