Peer pressure can be helpful, when it is properly experienced. For example, if the group wishes to excel in a certain matter, such as good governance, a young politician is likely to desire to govern righteously. A young journalist is often inspired by the excellence of those whose labor had changed the course of history or defended a just cause, which inspired society to behave honorably. Nevertheless, peer pressure, which is always established by the group, may also be a hindrance and a great threat to progress in many things. If truth isn’t important to the group, righteous government would be an unattainable jewel, kept out of reach for the aspiring young politician, as would also be the case of a young journalist, as that pertains to an informed society.
Such a thing would be equally so of religion. Jesus spoke of those who embraced tradition over righteousness, holding them responsible for holding back the truth and falsifying righteous behavior (Mark 7:1-13). Eventually, Jesus was crucified, because the group believed keeping tradition was of more value than hearing and obeying the truth, as it was found in Jesus’ Gospel of the Kingdom of God. In the context of the debate between himself and his friends, vis-à-vis the group, Job had been holding traditional truth in question, because his own calamity didn’t support the idea that God always punished evil and always rewarded good. On the other hand, the group held Job must be wicked, because his calamity proved traditional truth, namely, God always punished evil, and according to the group, Job’s sin had found him out!
During his second speech, Eliphaz waxed ironical, as he set aside his gentler disagreement with Job, which he used during the first round of the colloquy. Taking off the gloves, so to speak, and adopting sarcasm, as a pertinent response to his friend, Eliphaz asked Job, if he believed he were the first man ever born (Job 15:7). Of course, he knew Job didn’t believe such a thing, but the accusation has the effect of: “Who do you think you are?” It was intended to put Job in his proper place. Adam was punished for his sin, so, indeed, Job’s own suffering bemoaned his own sin! Eliphaz accused Job of assuming too much for himself, and he went on: “Were you created before the hills?” In other words, are you actually telling us you witnessed God’s creative labors (cp. Proverbs 8:22-30)? Who do you think you are, Job? Who are you trying to fool? Certainly not us!
Apparently, Eliphaz was deeply offended with Job’s most recent reply, particularly with: “No doubt but ye are the people, and wisdom shall die with you” (Job 12:2), so Eliphaz retorted: Were you the first man ever born… and did you receive your wisdom directly from God? Are you the only wise man on earth (Job 15:7-8)? In other words: “Are you, then, the man, and will wisdom die with you” (cp. Job 12:2)?
Job had taken issue with Bildad’s argument that the wisdom of those before the Deluge was greater than their own due to their great age (Job 12:20; cp. 8-10). Therefore, Eliphaz came to the defense of traditional thought (Job 15:10), because the group had no other foundation for their argument. While Job argued that he wasn’t inferior in knowledge and understanding to the group (Job 12:3; 13:2), Eliphaz used similar language, not to claim equality, but to claim superiority over Job (Job 15:9-10). The group can never be equal with the opposition, but must always be superior, if it hopes to maintain power to bully the minority into orthodoxy.
Obviously offended in Job’s replies to the group’s arguments, Eliphaz now dealt in irony in an effort to defend the group’s position. No longer seeking to defend the truth, he assumed the truth was in the group’s corner, a God is on our side! position. Therefore, Eliphaz made light of Job’s replies, even stooping to taking his words out of context, in an effort to make Job look foolish. Such tactics are used by those who have no logical reply that would support or defend the position of the group. Therefore, when one has no logical means of support in a debate, the only tactic left is to make the opposition appear irrational, if the representative of the group holds out any hope of maintaining any power over the position held by the opposition.
Smoodock's Blog 