Job began his reply to Bildad by saying, “he knows it is so of a truth” (Job 9:1-2), but what does he know of a truth? Well, although Bildad wasn’t looking for an answer per se, Job replied to Bildad’s rhetorical question: “Does God pervert judgment? or does the Almighty pervert justice?” (Job 8:3). In other words, Bildad expected Job to agree with him on this point. However, Job specifically mentioned that he agreed with Bildad’s implication that God doesn’t pervert judgment or justice, in order that he might add a rhetorical question of his own: “…how should mankind be just with God?” (Job 9:2). Job’s point was that his friends were missing the obvious.
Job asked how man’s sense of justice could be so correct that God, himself, was required to agree with and support mankind’s judgment or sense of justice? Consider the fact that we, as readers of the Book of Job, are privy to the cosmic drama occurring behind the scenes, concerning, which neither Job nor his friends are aware. God has afflicted Job and destroyed his life without cause (Job 2:3). He is responsible, despite the fact that it was actually Job’s enemy who conspired to rob him. However, it was the Lord who permitted it all to take place. It was God, himself, who killed Job’s children, and it was God who afflicted Job with the painful disease that had given him no rest. It was Job’s friends’ sense of justice that that caused them to accuse Job of committing a great secret, which up to this point even they had been unable to identify. Yet, he must have acted wickedly, because he was collapsing under God’s apparent judgment.
This is the only conclusion their worldview of God’s relationship to man would permit. Nevertheless, Job disagrees, for he knows he hasn’t committed such an horrendous crime that would warrant his then present circumstance. Moreover, according to Job’s worldview, the Lord isn’t required to correct the friends by offering them an explanation for what he has done; and we, the readers of the book, are compelled to agree with Job, because we are privy to the fact that the friends have erred in accusing him of sinning and bringing the wrath of God upon him. The friends’ judgment is wrong, so it necessarily follows that their sense of justice is wrong. Indeed, God will not pervert judgment or justice (Job 8:3). Nevertheless, man will, and the problem at hand is that Job’s friends require God to support their own inaccurate sense of justice. Hence, Job’s question: how should mankind be just with God (Job 8:2)?
Therefore, Job opens his second reply to the friends by telling them they erroneously believe they have God figured out well enough to speak for him and accuse Job of a secret sin, which they can’t even identify. Job’s point is not so much that they have mischaracterized him, as the fact that they have mischaracterized God. We do much the same today! Some of us may believe we understand the truth through experience (Eliphaz) or through tradition (Bildad) or our emotions tells us what’s true (Zophar). Not only so, but we then expect God to establish our truth. For example, experience told the folks in Nazareth that Jesus couldn’t be the Christ (Mathew 13:54-56), because he simply didn’t fit their concept of what the Messiah should be.[1] On another occasion, Jesus and his disciples were expected to observe the traditions of the elders (Bildad’s argument), but Jesus told the Jewish authorities that their traditions violated the truth of the word of God (Mark 7:5-13). On still another occasion, Jesus asked a question of the Jewish authorities: who among them was able to prove he was sinning (John 8:46). They argued out of their emotions rather than the word of God (cp. Zophar) in an effort to condemn Jesus, and failing, they sought to kill him (John 8:48-59).
As for us, we blindly support a political party and accuse those who don’t agree with us of sinning against God. Imagine, through our support of the power that crucified Christ, we accuse our own brethren of sin (cp. Zophar). Or, we blindly pontificate, through long tradition and well accepted arguments, that human life begins HERE (pick a month or week in the womb) and accuse brethren of murder, if they abort the fruit of the womb. Yet, nothing in the word of God supports such a point of view (cp. Bildad).[2] Finally, we pass judgment upon brethren who have no experiential witness. This is, what they believe about the word of God, vis-à-vis Genesis 1:1, has no visible support in what we are able to reasonably conclude from what we see in life’s experiences (science/Eliphaz)![3] Thus, the arguments of Job’s friends continue to this day, and they argue against the truth as revealed by God.
__________________________________________________________________
[1] Compare Eliphaz’s argument that Job’s condition simply didn’t fit his concept of what should occur to a righteous man.
[2] See my previous studies on the issue of abortion.
[3] That is, what is falsely called science. See my previous studies on the subject of evolution.
Smoodock's Blog 
7 responses to “How Is Mankind Just With God?”
The old saying of ‘as much as things change they stay the same’ applies here. We still tie bad things that happen to us to sin in our lives, and we project that to others. Churches do the same thing today and pastoral leadership often hold us to a standard that is not biblical but based in their worldview.
Regarding your political positions, we couldn’t be further apart my friend. I am a conservative voter, leaning towards libertarianism, and I usually vote Republican. Further I am a staunch Pro lifer and support pro life causes. But I also support our local pregnancy care.
But I study your writings and don’t hold judgment against you for those views on which we differ. I do recognize that the Bible does not have much to say about such subjects.
God Bless
Dave
Greetings Dave, Lord bless you, my friend,
I too am a Republican, but I was raised in a Democratic household, so my leanings are more liberal than yours. However, I do have a Libertarian son-in-law, and we get along fine! :-)
My vote is usually split, but more Republican than Democratic. However, since Trump, I vote totally Democratic, because I believe he represents an evil that is gripping our society that warrants my doing so. But, thank you for not judging me for my stand on abortion. I made enemies in my previous church because of it. I don’t like being different, but I won’t apologize for doing and saying what I believe is true.
Concerning “as much as things change they stay the same” I agree. Some years ago several famous “evangelists” (who shall remain nameless) blamed gays for various troublesome events, like 9/11; and the Haitians for a “pact with the devil” which caused volcano eruptions, hurricanes and earthquakes that fell upon them, and there are many other instances, but the one that sticks out in my mind was a horrifying statement made by one of them: “If God doesn’t judge America, he’ll have to apologize to Sodom and Gomorrah!”
Does God have to fit into man’s sense of justice? I believe the Book of Job proves he does not. God does not have to image us, but we do have to image him. Yet, far too often we don’t, and we even praise men and contribute to their causes, men who have a name for not imaging God. Such are rebels, and in as much as is possible for me, I will not give my hand to a rebel.
But, thank you for your kind heart toward me, Dave, even when we differ. I do appreciate it, especially because of folks, former friends, who are now my enemies. I’ve even had preachers preach directly at me for positions I had taken–not advertised as though I was a troublemaker, but when they found out, usually a face to face discussion, they did what they did. One, while on the left side of the stage, came to the right/center stage to look directly at me to say “abortion is murder” paused for the applause, while continuing to look directly at me, and then returned to the left stage to continue preaching. By the way, this the third preacher to do this, is the only one I respect. We differ both on this subject and how our difference should be addressed, but I don’t judge him. I respect him as a brother.
Lord bless you, Dave.
My name is Landon. Hello again! Thank you for continuing your studies so faithfully and sharing them.
If I could veer for a moment, perhaps you’ve encountered this thought, perhaps not. Regarding abortion, after reading your position – consider removing politics, belief, the scriptures, and opinions out of the equation temporarily. The one belief we’d all maintain is that human life is sacred/valuable.
From this presupposition alone, would we not agree with the writers of the Constitution who reasoned that through the right to life all of the other rights flow? All other rights are insignificant without this prerequisite.
I know this isn’t quite your argument, but just consider that from a strictly scientific and logical standpoint, the beginning of human life can be defined by biological markers. Conception, the fusion of sperm and egg, forms a genetically unique entity with its own distinct DNA—a fundamental characteristic of a new human. At that moment, the genetic blueprint is established, determining physical traits, including gender, eye color, and more.
Throughout gestation, this entity exhibits consistent growth, cellular division, and development, marking successive stages of human life. At no discernible point does a radical shift occur in the nature of this entity that would justify a fundamental change in its classification from non-human to human.
Biologically speaking, the development from zygote to embryo to fetus constitutes a continuum of human life. Science identifies the unborn child as a living, growing member of the human species from the point of conception. Is that alone not worth protecting? The most vulnerable and innocent of God’s image, our brothers and sisters.
Additionally, the scientific principle of continuity supports the concept that life progresses seamlessly from one stage to another. Birth marks a transition in location and environment for the developing human but doesn’t signify a fundamental change in the nature of the being. The first breath, while symbolically significant, doesn’t biologically alter the entity’s intrinsic humanity, which began at conception. Human life is either intrinsically valuable or it’s subject to our meagerly assessments.
The unborn child deserves acknowledgment and protection as a member of the human species from the earliest stages of existence.
Furthermore, does one evil perpetrated against an individual find it’s justice in doing further evil to the innocent?
It seems very simple to me. Humans have been blessed by being created in the image of the Living God. The right to life acknowledges this truth. Removing that right from anyone is evil and treats His image as something less than divine…and science has come too far to leave us with any excuse to the contrary. What honors the value God has assigned to every life the most?
The ole saying – two wrongs don’t (and never will) make a right.
Thank you, again, and God bless you.
Greetings Landon and thank you for your comment and for your demeanor; Lord bless you.
First, let me apologize, because you were unable to place your comment with the “Abortion” study. It belongs there for people to read and understand your argument, but I had to limit responses. I do that with all my studies. I’m not an expert in many of the things I write. I just try to do a good job to honor the Lord. While I do what research I can on my subject matter at the time, I find it impossible to stay current on everything. So, I limit the responses to my studies. Some folks will email me, but I prefer to reply to folks like you on my site, because you not only deserve an answer, but others often find it difficult to express what’s on their hearts quite so eloquently as you have. So, they deserve to see what you have to say, as well as how I might respond, if, indeed, I could do so, logically and correctly.
I also wish to say that it was a very fearful thing for me to do, vis-à-vis to place such a study on the web, and on **my** website. I did it prayerfully and continue to let it remain available, prayerfully. Personally, I am not what one would call ‘pro-abortion’ – I’m not. However, calling it murder is wrong, but even in this context—not right, but not murder—it gets complicated. What if the life of the mother is at risk? Whose life is more important, when a choice must be made? And, many other questions could be asked. But, let’s address what you have said.
Science is a wonderful tool, and you have used it to express your point quite eloquently, far more eloquently than I am equipped to offer an informed reply. Why, because I agree with just about everything you’ve said. I do disagree with your conclusion, but you’ve described the life process in the womb wonderfully, just as the Psalmist says it is in reality (Psalm 139:14).
About ten years ago I did a study on the subject of evolution. My whole argument had to be addressed without scripture in order to be effective. I used less scripture in it than in any other study I’ve done in the past. It was a very problematic time for me. I read and researched, but I’m far from being an expert on the subject, and it was because of this study that I limited responses to all my studies to about a month or so after publishing. I forget the exact limit. Anyway, while science is a wonderful tool to study the physical world, it is a poor tool to study the work of God, distinguishing his spiritual works from his work in bringing the universe into existence (which we are able to study). Science can tell us all about life in the womb, but when does that life become a life Jesus died for? That’s the question, which science cannot answer, and that is why many of us call abortion murder, and at the other end of the pendulum many ‘on-demand’ folks use abortion as just another means of birth control.
What does God say about the subject? I’ve written about it, but it is difficult to take when it strikes against one’s heart. I know, because it struck against my heart. When I went to God, and understood what he had to say from scripture, I was very fearful, to put it into words and publish what I embraced as true. Paul quotes the Psalms, which prophesies about what the Messiah would say: “Sacrifice and offering You did not desire; but a body You have prepared for me” (Hebrews 10:5; Psalm 40:6).
Most Christians, and I am one of them, believe Jesus was God in the flesh. The implication of the above scripture is: Jesus lived prior to his human birth (taking on flesh). The body (not the Lord) was formed in Mary’s womb, and Jesus left his almighty form to take on the form of flesh (Philippians 2:6-7). In other words, Jesus was never a mindless embryo. God was never mindless. God prepared a body for Jesus, and in the beginning, God prepared a body for the one who became Adam. In each case the ‘life’ that was important to God was the life that lived on its own, and one lives on his own, when one takes his first breath. Jesus’ life wasn’t given him by his mother. He lived it and breathed it. The body in which he lived and breathed was, indeed, formed within Mary’s womb, but Jesus’ **life** was separate from that life. The only difference between him and Adam, as far as human life is concerned, is that Adam became a living soul with his very first breath (not before), but Jesus already existed, but when his human body was fully prepared, he exchanged ‘forms’ as we are told by Paul in his letter to the Philippians.
I know this is not the conclusion you wanted, Landon, but it is the one I embrace as true. Science won’t move me. If you wish to prove your point to me, you need to use the scriptures. I have changed some studies, because I was proved wrong. Indeed, some had to be removed, because they simply couldn’t be repaired. However, in each case I was proved wrong with scripture. Science is wonderful in its place, but by its nature, it is the study of the physical. It is not an authority on the spiritual, and human life, the life that isn’t vegetable or animal life, the life Jesus died for is spiritual and cannot be found out by science.
Thank you for your well contemplated response. I always enjoy your dialogue with others, and wish it was more frequent.
It’s not really about having a desired conclusion. I too have had to change my mind so many times that I have sympathy and grace for both myself, and all others regarding such beliefs and worldviews.
I believe I understand your position better. I discovered your site many years ago and have enjoyed your style, your reasonings, and your approach quite alot. As I’ve come to understand you and the lens in which you study, I felt compelled to respond primarily because I perceived an unexpected and out of character scriptural reasoning point to base your conclusion from. It wasn’t to express politics, or even the life/choice dynamic per se. With that said, like you, I remain open and able to be convinced. You’ve been successful in the past without your knowledge!
Here are my thoughts regarding your points:
1. Adam was never in the womb – though I’ve been challenged with reading it less literally and more covenantal lately. However, for the sake of your point, he was never in the womb and therefore doesn’t qualify to be a reference point. A body created from the dirt is literally lifeless, unable to even move and without heartbeat, until He breathed into him. Again, I’m not even prepared to defend those points as I’m undergoing some challenges with this concept, and am simply using it as you referenced it. The human baby is very much alive in the womb.
2. Your other reference seems to imply (though I know it is not your heart) the meaninglessness of conception, the divine spark where new DNA is written. Preparing a body language is simply to say that He always intended to be Emmanuel – God with us as part of His creation. His human body being prepared was more of a time related prophecy as we know it doesn’t take centuries to prepare a human body in the womb.
The reason John (the Baptizer) jumped in his mother’s womb at the sound of Mary’s voice and the nearness of the Lord was for the fact that he was very much alive, spirit and all, despite having taken no breath of his own. There are many other examples time won’t allow me to expound on currently. We are known in our mother’s wombs, is that not enough? He knows us.
3. “Science can tell us all about life in the womb, but when does that life become a life Jesus died for?”
This question, or many variations of it, have led to some of the greatest atrocities of human history. Humankind judging the lesser developed of our own species and picking/choosing who qualifies and who doesn’t… I chose to go the very safe route that I feel aligns with God’s heart that each of His creation is special, loved, and known. His creation is on explosive display at the moment of conception and we know that fetus will draw it’s first breath unless we judge it unworthy before it’s time. I find your view out of line with your own beliefs, and inconsistent with many of your other writings, or in the very least inconsistent with your great reasoning abilities.
Thank you for the freedom to speak plainly and in love. I mean that. I’m very thankful for you.
Merry Christmas and Grace and peace to you!