As a Bible Student, I’m always looking for patterns in the text. Complementary patterns. Contrasting patterns. Repeating patterns. Patterns give me a structure around which meaning can be determined and clarified.

As I was reading Eliphaz’s first speech in the book of Job, I saw a pattern that suddenly gave me a ton of insight into how Jobs friends were arguing with him. 

As I read on through all the subsequent speeches and Job’s answers, every single one of them followed this pattern.

Eliphaz the Temanite offers his first speech in Job chapters 4 and 5.  By the time I finished reading chapter 5 I had spotted the pattern. As I read the rest of the speeches, it was so easy to see how every one followed the pattern.

Clearly in the time of Job, this was an accepted way to conduct an argument or to make a point. The pattern gave structure to the argument and allowed the speaker to organize their points in a way to present their larger objective.

Hints if you want to stop now and look for the pattern in Job 4-5:

• The number 2 definitely has something to do with it.
• It’s certainly grammatical (the rules/definitions of grammar have something to do with it)
• Every time it occurs the words are different, but there is something identical related to them.

Ok, from here on, I’m going to dive straight into the pattern.

In Job 4:2 Eliphaz opens his “advice” to Job with 2 questions:

• If someone ventures a word with you, will you be impatient?
• But who can keep from speaking?

In Job 4:7 he returns to the question format, asking 2 more questions:

• Consider now: Who, being innocent, has ever perished?
• Where were the upright ever destroyed?

Again in Job 4:17 he asks:

• Can a mortal be more righteous than God?
• Can even a strong man be more pure than his maker?

Then in Job 5:1 he asks:

• Call if you will, but who will answer you?
• To which of the holy ones will you turn?

Four times through his first speech, Eliphaz asks a pair of questions. In 5:8 he makes his recommendation and in 5:17 he summarizes his whole argument. But when he wanted to make a point, he started with questions.

Asking questions creates a structural format to the argument he is making.

But questions demand answers. And, believe it or not, Eliphaz doesn’t answer his own questions! The verses in between the sets of questions aren’t really designed to be answers. They are advancing the point. That’s because in every case (all 8 questions), the questions are rhetorical.

The Oxford dictionary gives the following definition of “rhetorical”

(of a question) asked in order to produce an effect or to make a statement rather than to elicit information.

The question is asked to make a statement. This occurs when the question is asked, and in asking, supplies its own answer. If you look at all of Eliphaz’s questions, and think about how they could possibly be answered you’ll see even more pattern.

In every case, the answer Eliphaz wants us to arrive at is the Negative answer to the question.

• If someone ventures a word with you, will you be impatient? (No – the assumption is Job is waiting for his friends to speak)
• But who can keep from speaking? (No one – This situation is such that Job’s friends must speak about it)
• Consider now: Who, being innocent, has ever perished? (No one – Of course the innocent enjoy the favor of God)
• Where were the upright ever destroyed? (Nowhere – The upright live the right way and God protects them unlike the wicked whom He punishes)
• Can a mortal be more righteous than God? (No! – There is no other possible answer)
• Can even a strong man be more pure than his maker? (No! – Nobody is stronger than God)
• Call if you will, but who will answer you? (No one – in this case, no one will come to Job’s defense because he is clearly in the wrong)
• To which of the holy ones will you turn? (None – there are none who would side with Job as an ally)

Eliphaz’s pattern is to ask 2 questions that have an implied negative answer as a way of making his point. He then offers commentary about the truth of those assertions, applying them to Job’s situation, telling Job what to do.

The beauty is that all of the friends follow this highly stylized pattern of arguing. Job even answers in the same structure.

My goal in this post isn’t to interpret or apply the book of Job. Just to point out the structure that repeats itself throughout the majority of the book. I encourage you to read the book of Job and look at the points that Job and his friends make back and forth at each other. From there you can gain insight into what living the God-centered good life is all about.