Job 9 – If It Doesn’t fit, You Must Acquit

September 28, 1995, an attorney by the name of Johnny L. Cochran defended OJ Simpson in the trial

of the Century for the murder of OJ’s wife, Nicole.  Mr. Cochran’s statement: “If it (an alleged leather glove used during the murder) doesn’t fit; you must acquit” blew everybody away and it was a crushing blow to the prosecution.  Tried as they did, Marsha and Chris were unsuccessful in reaching the guilty verdict they so desperately desired.  It reminds me just a little about the desperation of the Three Amigos (Eliphaz, Bildad and Zophar). 

But before we proceed, let’s re-cap some of the truths discovered yesterday.  For years I have heard people preach, teach and/or talk about Job as the perfect person who suffered a lot of persecution without blowing it like the rest of us humans.  I am so glad that I know how to read, comprehend and regurgitate what I read because there is nothing more powerful than the truth.  Not that those people I heard preach about Job lied, that’s not what I am insinuating, it’s just that many of them omitted the parts of his life story which reflect that he had some issues, which are all understandable at least when we view Job through compassionate lenses:  1) he allowed self to be on display from time to time and indulged in pity parties, however, he indulged so much, so often that it became a norm; 2) the pity parties attracted blame, primarily of God; 3) he allowed himself to be courted by bitterness which just about had her full hooks in him; 4) the first three allowed him to spiral into deep depression.  The good news is that he was surrounded by friends who I believe were genuinely concerned about Job but because they came with their own agenda they didn’t bother to listen to him or ask if he had sinned, they just assumed.  Let me warn you about assuming things, you should never do it.  What I believe happened is that they combined all of the stories they heard, decided that at least some of the gossip, I mean information, must true.  Why else would their dear old friend be the subject of God’s wrath if he hadn’t sinned?  They developed an agenda that was full of piety and self-righteousness laced with off.  What?  Don’t pretend you don’t know what I mean, those jokers was off, plain and simple.  Their agenda was far more important than their friend or the truth.

In Job Chapter 11, Zophar, the third Amigo finally speaks but he is the most arrogant, unsympathetic, judgmental and confrontational of them all.  Mind you, they came to “comfort” Job, however, they go from the passive aggressive Elihpaz who got a “word” from an evil spirit; to Bildad accusing Job of being a liar and now Zophar has the unmitigated gall to accuse Job of being a hypocrite!!  But wait, it gets worse.

(Webster): a person who pretends to have virtues, moral or religious beliefs, principles, etc., that he or she does not actually possess, especially a person whose actions belie stated beliefs.  A person who feigns some desirable or publicly approved attitude, especially one whose private life, opinions, or statements belie his or her public statements.

What I believe happened is that Zophar had enough of Job's protests to innocence and all three friends were losing patience with him. But let’s moonwalk back to Job 2:13 when they all sat with him for seven silent days which was the most unselfish thing they did in their entire visit.  They only spoke in response to Job's agonizing responses for the sole purpose of helping Job to “see” that it must be some sin on his part that had caused this great calamity in his life, but Job refused to see it.   The more they insisted, the more Job stubbornly denied it, the more frustrated they became.  This bottled up frustration was a direct result of their hidden agenda.  It is evident that by the time Zophar speaks things are heating up.   Zophar's is described as callous, unsympathetic, etc., but his disposition may also have been due to the standoff they had reached and out of desperation they level direct accusations at Job.  Job's bewilderment and his outbursts are natural.  You know full well if it had been one of us we would have probably acted far worse than Job, let’s be real.  I personally am thankful for the outbursts because we see his humanity and our own.

Tania Not Tanya Moment:  If more “church” leaders would be transparent about how they deal with every day real life situations (not to the extent of full blown meltdowns on Sunday mornings) but when appropriate – e.g. sermon, one-on-one, bible class to identify with a character of the bible).  Can you imagine what that would do for our ministries?  In my mind I believe it may reduce the amount of self-imposed stress on both sides of the fence?   1) The naïve Christians may not be so quick to put their leaders on the “make believe” perfect pedestal they created which assumes those leaders are perfect and never make mistakes, suffer or have challenges; 2) The Leaders may not feel the need to maintain an image created by the groupies who idolize them (with or without cause) as opposed to God.  I realize this statement may sound very anti-leader/anti-church, however, it is not.  First of all I am not talking about every leader because every leader doesn’t get caught up in the hype.   I have seen countless people in the body of Christ who practically worship their leadership and those leaders who appear to enjoy it are the ones I’m talking about.  You know the ones I mean, the ones that drink their own red Kool-Aid with a touch of lemon juice and lots of ice.  While we should not be men-pleasers or idolize another man or woman it happens and then when that leader falls (and eventually they will) the idolizer is crushed, loses their “shallow” faith and turns their back on God (as if it was God’s fault), leave the “church” and/or they become bitter.  Now granted, the idolizer may have been looking for an excuse to leave the “church” because if you really really love God, you’ll get past the “church” hurt and find another home or become a believer in exile until God leads you to your next home. Some would argue that the people would lose respect for the leaders because they would see their vulnerability and view their challenges as weaknesses.  In my personal opinion, that’s a bunch of dung.  Ya heard me -- C ara A P.  Done in good form and from the heart, I know personally how much more your members will connect with you.

Zophar takes Job’s comments out of context when Job said:  "My doctrine is pure, and I am clean in your eyes": Zophar misrepresented Job's words here because Job didn’t claim to be “pure and clean”, as if he were sinless and perfect; but in fairness to Zophar, we must say that Job claimed to be in the right and this was virtually a claim to be pure and clean in this matter.  It was one of those damned if you do, damned if you don’t statements and at this point it didn’t matter.  Job knew there was no special or specific sin on his part behind the loss of his children, his health, his servants, and his material wealth.  However, Job knew that he was a sinner in a general sense and could not be considered righteous compared to God.  So Job’s claim that he was blameless referred to the above fact that he had not sinned.

I want to make one more point about Zophar’s monologue before concluding when he associated Job

with the “empty-headed man, who will be wise as soon as wild donkeys start giving birth to human beings”.   In essence Zophar called Job stupid.  Dude, are you serious right now?  It seems to me that Zophar was analytical, there were no gray areas.  In his mind there was no mystery in Job's situation at all. God was sovereign, God was just, Job was a sinner, and therefore he should be thankful that he wasn't worse off because wherever there is suffering, there is sin, real and tangible sin, proportioned to that suffering. Zophar also believed that God governs the world by rewards and punishments, and those rewards and punishments are befitting Job as far as Zophar is concerned and that’s all that matters in his “off” thinking.  That said, it makes sense that this seeming Saint (Job) is really a man full of heinous sin, which by the way neither of the Three Amigos could prove.

Tania Not Tanya moment:  Today, September 8, 2014 while writing this declaration, I had an “aha” moment which allowed me to empathize further with Job (even though he’s a man that lived thousands of years ago and I’m “every” woman).  To look for answers, the truth, support and resolution but instead to be steamrolled over by someone’s agenda, their insatiable need to be right and to be in control of everything in their world is one of the most hurtful things that one can experience especially, when it comes from someone you respect and admire.  It is impossible to understand because there is no understanding for it.  It is sad beyond words, frustrating and insulting to say the least because there is nothing you can do except to become bitter or better.  I am better as a result of my Job experience because bitterness was not an option.

In His New Excellence,

Tania Not Tanya