Thomas Aquinas Commentary Job 15:1-13

"Then answered Eliphaz the Temanite, and said, Should a wise man make answer with vain knowledge, And fill himself with the east wind? Should he reason with unprofitable talk, Or with speeches wherewith he can do no good? Yea, thou doest away with fear, And hinderest devotion before God. For thine iniquity teacheth thy mouth, And thou choosest the tongue of the crafty. Thine own mouth condemneth thee, and not I; Yea, thine own lips testify against thee. Art thou the first man that was born? Or wast thou brought forth before the hills? Hast thou heard the secret counsel of God? And dost thou limit wisdom to thyself? What knowest thou, that we know not? What understandest thou, which is not in us? With us are both the gray-headed and the very aged men, Much elder than thy father. Are the consolations of God too small for thee, Even the word that is gentle toward thee? Why doth thy heart carry thee away? And why do thine eyes flash, That against God thou turnest thy spirit, And lettest words go out of thy mouth?" — Job 15:1-13 (ASV)

After hearing Job’s response, Eliphaz does not address the depth of his reasoning. Instead, he tries to slanderously misrepresent certain words Job has spoken, interpreting them according to their surface meaning rather than their deeper intent.

He first reproaches Job for his statement at the beginning of his speech: I too have a heart as you do, and this heart is not less than yours (Job 12:3). In this, Eliphaz accuses him of two things. First, he says Job is guilty of empty boasting because he commends himself, addressing this theme by saying, Will the wise man answer as though he were speaking to the wind? This is because a person seems to speak to the wind when they compose a speech merely to gain glory. Second, he accuses him of anger, because Job had begun by reproaching them, saying, So you think only you are men (Job 12:2). Therefore, Eliphaz says, and will he fill his stomach with passion?—that is, his spirit with anger.

Next, Eliphaz reproves Job for saying, I want to dispute with God (Job 13:3), and again, Spare me in only two things, and then I will not hide myself from your face... (Job 13:20). In this reproach, he accuses him of many things. First, he accuses him of pride because he contends against someone who is greater than he is, addressing this by saying, You blame with words one who is not equal to you. Second, he accuses him of foolishness because Eliphaz thought such a dispute was harmful, and so he says, You say what is not profitable for you by arguing with God.

Eliphaz shows why it is not advantageous to debate with God: because this kind of dispute excludes two essential things. The first is the fear of God, for someone who fears another does not presume to argue contentiously with him. Job had already expressed this same idea, saying, And let your power not terrify me (Job 13:21). Therefore, Eliphaz says here, As much as you can, you have rejected fear, because you tried to exclude the fear of God from yourself.

The second thing excluded is prayer to God, for arguing with someone and pleading with him are two different things. So Eliphaz then says, You have borne away—that is, taken away—prayer from the presence of God. This goes against what Eliphaz himself had said: This is why I entreat the Lord (Job 5:8). Job had not disputed with God out of pride, but out of confidence in the truth. Eliphaz, however, rashly judged this to flow from wickedness. And so he says, For your wickedness has taught your tongue, as if to say that the effect—Job's blasphemy—is apparent. He then adds, and you imitate the tongue of blasphemers.

In reality, the person who blasphemes denies the justice of God. But one who disputes with God about His justice seems to imitate the language of blasphemers. To argue about something seems characteristic of someone who doubts it, and one who doubts it is close to denying it.

So Eliphaz wishes to condemn Job for arguing. He first says that Job had spoken such manifest evil that no other reproof is necessary; his own words reveal his evil intent. He expresses this by saying, Your mouth will condemn you, and not I; and your lips will answer for you, as if to say, "Your words need no other answer, for they destroy themselves."

Still, he shows that the argument Job used was unfitting in many ways:

1. By comparison of Job to all creatures. If any creature could argue with God, this would be fitting only for the first and most excellent of creatures—a condition that does not apply to Job. And so Eliphaz asks, Were you born the first man and formed before all the hills? implying, "Do you for this reason have the competence to argue with God on behalf of the whole human race and every creature?"
2. By comparison with God. One can fittingly dispute with someone about their deeds only when one knows the reason for their actions. This knowledge can be gained in two ways: by learning it from the person directly, or by judging their deeds from a higher wisdom. Neither of these applies to Job in his comparison to God. So Eliphaz asks, Have you been a party to the counsel of God? to address the first way (learning from Him), and, and will his wisdom be beneath you? to address the second.
3. In comparison to other men. Job does not seem to be any wiser than others, possessing no higher knowledge that would give him the confidence to presume to dispute with God. So Eliphaz asks, What do you know that we do not know? What do you understand that we do not know? The first question refers to knowledge from faith or revelation, the second to natural knowledge. Since Job could boast of knowledge received from others, Eliphaz then says, Both old men—referring to dignity of knowledge and life—and the elders—referring to age—are among us, much older than your fathers. "Fathers" here could mean Job's teachers from whom he received knowledge or, in the literal sense, his ancestors. Eliphaz wants to claim greater knowledge from greater age, because a person is made wiser by long experience.
4. On the part of Job himself, he shows his dispute with God has not been fitting for several reasons:
   1. Because it was harmful to him, expanding on what he had already said: You say what is not profitable for you (Job 15:3). So, he asks, Is it a great thing for God to console you? (Job 15:11). He means: It is easy for God to lead you back to a state of prosperity, for he both wounds, and he binds up, as was already said (Job 5:18). But your evil words prohibit this, by which you provoke God's anger even more against you.
   2. Because the debate was vain and proud, expanding on his earlier statement: Will the wise man answer as though he were speaking to the wind? (Job 15:2). So he then asks, Why does your heart lift you up (Job 15:12) in pride, to make you presume so much about your wisdom? He tries to demonstrate a sign of this pride, saying, and as if you were thinking great things, why do you open your eyes wide in astonishment? (Job 15:12). For when someone thinks about great, wonderful things, he is entranced and opens his eyes wide in astonishment.
   3. Because the dispute was presumptuous and impious, also explaining his previous statement: You blame with words someone who is not equal to you (Job 15:3). Here he says, What causes your spirit to swell against God, so that you speak words like this from your mouth? (Job 15:13)—words with which you start an argument with God.