Bildad tells Job to investigate the testimony of the former age (Job 8:8), but what age is he referring to? He mentions the fact that their own lives in the present were but shadows of the lives of folks who lived in the former age (Job 8:9). If we allow that Job is a contemporary of Abraham, then Job might have expected to live, perhaps, to about one-hundred and seventy-five years (Genesis 25:7) or a reasonable facsimile. Moreover, at the age of one-hundred, Abraham didn’t expect to be able to sire a child, and at age ninety, Sarah’s womb was effectively dead (Genesis 17:17). Therefore, unless the Lord performed a miracle for Job, as he had done with Abraham, the fact that he sired seven additional children by his wife sometime after his present trial (cp. Job 42:13) shows his wife had to be less than ninety and probably less than eighty when the first of the second set of seven children was born.
Finally, if we allow that Job was about 30 when he sired his firstborn from the first set of seven children, and they were all at least 30 before they died (cp. Job 1:4-5, 13, 18-19), then Job couldn’t have been much less than seventy-five years of age, when he lost his first set of seven children. But what does this mean in the context of Bildad’s remarks (Job 8:8-9)?
If Job’s life was but a shadow of the longevity of life in the former age, then Bildad had to have been speaking of folks who lived prior to the Flood of Genesis 6-9. Most of their ages, as recorded in the Bible were less than one 1000 years, but over 700 years (see Genesis 5:5, 7, 11, 14, 17, 20, 23, 27, 31). Yet, after the Flood mankind’s life expectancy dropped dramatically. Indeed, Noah lived to be 950 years old (Genesis 9:29), and although Seth lived to be 600 (Genesis 11:10-11), those born after the Flood had a life expectancy of just over 400 years old (Genesis 11:12-17). Nevertheless, man’s life expectancy dropped considerably once again after the earth was divided or split (H6385; see Genesis 10:25), which probably means the continents were formed after the Flood, and prior to this time the earth had a single but very large landmass.
What’s my point in all this? It seems to me that although Eliphaz based his wisdom on experience, dreams and visions (cp. Job 4:8, 13-17), Bildad based his wisdom on tradition, or the testimony of men who lived long ago. Bildad believed those men must know, because their lives were so lengthy. Therefore, they would have been able to accumulate data, make comparative judgments and come to know the truth. According to Bildad, they testified that God judges iniquity and rewards righteousness. Therefore, since Job seems to be in the state of sever judgment, his iniquity must be very great. It makes no difference that none of the friends could identify Job’s sinful behavior, the fact remains, according to the wisdom of the former age, God judges iniquity and rewards righteousness. That is their unshakable worldview, and, therefore, Job must be a great sinner, because he is under the judgment of God!
This logic has never ceased to be embraced by folks, who permit themselves to be dependent upon the labor or the studies of other men. Whether we account age to be proof of wisdom or fame, folks will look to these men, giants (so-called) in their fields, and testify that they **must** be correct. The traditions begun by these men must be correct despite the testimony of others, who have either gone through the problems of life, and conclude differently. Nor does it matter that those who have studied thoroughly the things in question in the word of God and testify that the Lord, himself, contradicts the wisdom or testimony of these aged or famous sages (Job 8:10). Instead of investigating the matter themselves, folks like Bildad will cling to the testimony of tradition or their favorite prophet, whose ‘wisdom’ is itself based upon tradition, and draw their conclusions according to him, despite verifiable evidence to the contrary.
Smoodock's Blog 