One’s worldview incorporates what one believes is true, vis-à-vis what one perceives to be reality. It determines what can and cannot be done, and, similarly, what should and should not be done. If one is religious, God is the great Determinator of truth. Truth is what God says it is, and, therefore, God is one’s only true Reality. He is the Creator of all we see, hear, smell, touch and taste. He is also the Creator of those realities, which we are unable to see, hear, smell, touch and taste but know they must exist. One’s worldview constitutes all of what makes sense of what we experience. When one’s worldview becomes a collective thought, that is, when others embrace the very same worldview, that understanding becomes the working reality of the community. In our present context of the debate between Job and his friends, it is theology! The community, vis-à-vis the friends, must defend and protect its worldview, its theology, against the challenge of Job’s individual faith. How this is done is what our author skillfully presents in this wonderful record of the character he calls Job.
Bildad began his second attempt to silence Job by asking how long Job intended to continue speaking. He demands that Job set a mark, say whatever he wishes, then let the friends respond with the final word (Job 18:1-2). Next, he asks Job why he and the other two friends are counted as beasts and vile or unclean in Job’s eyes (Job 18:3). In other words, why did Job claim the friends’ argument was of no value or void of understanding (cp. Job 17:4, 10)?
No doubt, referring to Job 16:9, where Job accused the Almighty of tearing him in his wrath, Bildad claims that Job was solely responsible for his condition, which was due to his own wrathful rebellion against the world order. In other words, Job had brought his calamitous circumstances upon himself. What did he hope to gain by blaming God (cp. 16:9)? Does he actually believe, as the Septuagint translates: “if thou should die; would the earth under heaven be desolate? or shall the mountains be overthrown from their foundations?” In other words, and according to Bildad, Job was saying:
“…I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north. I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the Most High” (cp. Isaiah 14:13-14).
Bildad’s point was that the friends’ worldview was the traditional understanding of God and his dealings with men. To challenge this was to challenge the scheme of world rule.[1] Bildad accused Job of wanting to overturn the “rule of God” (properly understood as the friends’ worldview). This is the rock that, presumably, Job wishes to remove, and Bildad accuses Job of wanting to replace it with his own perverted wisdom of what the world order should look like. He “tears himself,” vis-à-vis in a violent rage, Job decides to replace God’s plan with his own (Job 18:4)!
Bildad accused Job of being a rebel against God. He had challenged the scheme of world rule, which is the Almighty’s unchangeable world order. This unchangeable world order is, according to the friends’ worldview, traditional theology, a conclusion, concerning which, the scholars are agreed. How dare Job believe that he could single handedly overthrow prevailing theology! The life of such a one is condemned to endure tragedy after tragedy. His understanding, such as it is, would be taken away, and he would be blinded to the things of God (Job 18:5-6). Once moving confidently and freely, Job’s way was suddenly hindered. He must be more and more deliberate in his manner of living (Job 18:7), ultimately to be cast into a divine net, capturing him and keeping him from carrying out his wicked plans to overturn the scheme of world rule.
__________________________________________________
[1] I adopted the phrase: “scheme of world rule” from the Expositors Bible Commentary. The authors indicate that Bildad’s attack on Job is “the raison d’etre of the book,” and I quite agree.
Smoodock's Blog 