The Pulpit Commentary — Job — Section 176

justifies, them be al~o glorifies (Rom. viii. 30). "The gifts and calling of God are without repentance" (Rom. xi. 29). There is no condemnation to them who 11re in Chrisl Jesus (Rom. viii. 1).. God may eom_etimes hid~-~is face from a saint (Isa. Ii\', 8), but be never finally turns his back upon bun (Heb. XIII. 5), In the second sense it is a pra_,·er appropriate to all awakened sinners. And, thanks to Divine mercy, God never fastens guilt upon a soul that fastl'ns it upon itself, never condemns those who sincerely condemn themselves (Isa. i. 16; xliii. 25; 1 John i. 9). 2, Desiring illumination. " Show me whC'refore thou contendest with me." God contends with men when in his pro1·id<'nce he afflicts, and by his Spirit convicts, them. He contends with sinners on account of their unbelief (John xvi. 8, 9) and wickedness generally; he may contend with hi~ people on account or their backsliding (Micah vi. 2; Rev, ii. 4, 6), their for';lla_lit~: (Rev. i_ii. 1), their spiritual ind~!ference (Rev. iii. 15, 16), or simply to advance their rndmdual improvement (Gen. xxxn. 24). Yet when God does so contend with a saint the reason is not always p1'tent (eh. xxxvii. 21). Hence the prayer to be, di,·inely instructed as to the grounds of God's controversy with the soul is not only. not sinful, but highly proper and advantageous. Only it should be presented with reverence, with humility, with docility. III. APPEALING TO THE HEART OF Gon. Job remonstrates with God against the treatment accorded to him on two ma.in grounds. 1. It is derogatory to the Divine character. "Is it good unto thee [literally, 'is it becoming'] that thou shouldest oppress, that thou shouldest despise the work of thine hands, and shine upon the counsel of the wicked?" (ver. 3). Three considerations, according to Job, ought to have prevented God from inflicting upon him such tremendous calamities. (1) His personal gi-eatness. It was not becoming in a Being so transcendently glorious and powerful as he was to be guilty of oppression. (2) His personal interest. What proprietor ever destroyed his own property? What potter ever dashed to the ground the exquisite vessel which his hands had just fashioned? But Job was God's handiwork, and yet God despised him, and treated him as of no value I (3) His personal integrity. If God was a Being of absolute bolines,; and incorruptible justice, then it was clearly impossible that be could shine upon the counsel of the wicked, or favour bad men. But this, as it appeared to Job, was what God was doing in afflicting him, The three- fold argument was good if Job's premiss was correct. But Job's description of the Divine conduct towards him was in a.ll its particulars fallacious. The Almighty never oppresses any of his creatures, least of all man. The Creator never despises anything he bas made, least of all his own children. The Governor of. the universe cannot wrong the just, least of all can he favour the ungodly. Job's argument therefore should have led him to seek another solution for the dark problem that perplexed him. It could not be that God we.s treating him as above depicted : God's character for- ba<le that. Neither could it be that he, Job, was guilty: the testimony of bis own conscience protested against that. (It is not certain that a Christian would have been as tenacious of his own personal innocence as Job was.) Might it not, therefore, be that Job was putting a wrong construction on his sufferings ? 2. It is inconsistent with the Divine perfections. (I) With his omniscience, "Ha.st thou eyes of flesh?. or seest thou as man seeth?" (ver. 4). If God were like man, a being of limited ca.pacity in respect of knowledge, if be could only judge by appearance, then be might be act.ing in the present instance under a mistaken idea of the patriarch's guilt. But against that rose the transcendent objection that God's eyes were not "eyes of flesh" at all, but eyes "like a flame of fire" (Rev. i. 14), from which no thought can be withholden (eh. xiii. 2), and which seeth every precious thing (eh. xxviii. 10). (2) With his eternity. "Are thy days as the days of man? are thy years as man's days, that thou inquirest after mine iniquity, and searchest after my sin?" (vers. 5, 6). Job professes he could have understood the Almigbty's hot pursuit of him had the Almighty been a 11bort-lived being like himself, and afraid that his creat\lle might die before he ha? it out with him. But, then, God was not like man. There was no fear of God dymg. Hence Job could not, see the need for such a hasty and terrible inquisition as he had bee11 subjected to. If to find out his sin was God's object, why all this hurry? had not God an eternity to do it in? (3) With his justice. "Thou knowest [ra.ther, 'although t.bou knowest'] that I am not guilty; and there is none that [te.ther, 'and although none'] can deliver out of tb y hand" (ver. 7). The Divine conduct would h!'ve been Oil, X. 1-22,] 'fHE BOOK OF JOB. 181