Within the prologue of Job’s story the reader observes first the character of Job as it is defined by the author — that of a righteous man who was very wealthy (cf. 1:1-5). This essay will contrast the character of Job from his identity by showing the esteem of God held by Job. However, first the identity of Job must be ascertained.
The exact identity of Job is somewhat inferred from passages contained within the narrative of his story. For instance, Job appears to have been of noble birth given certain descriptions of his person: his nobility is inferred in his plea to have been a stillborn and buried among kings and princes (3:13-15); his loss of glory and crown (19:9; this may be a reference to his baldness [cf. 1:20]); and his purported seat among the council of his city (29:7, 21-25). Concluding that Job was of some nobility — regardless to what degree — one is given a comparison of the modern idea of a wealthy noble (identity) and their character.
Those who enjoy the stature of wealth and position are often thought to be egocentric. The circles in which they mingle are the upper echelon of society, and the attention — if any — they pay to the lower classes of man are at best from a distance. The scathing accusation by Eliphaz was that Job was a man whose power led to corruption because he exacted — as Eliphaz stated — unjust pledges, deprived the naked of clothing, suppressed the downtrodden, and the source of his actions were his power (22:5-11). Job acknowledged that injustices were performed by many (24:1-21), but he contrasted himself from those who did such deplorable acts (24:22-25; 27:1ff). Job rejected Eliphaz’s evaluation, and rightly so. The view Eliphaz held of Job was not his initial view. Interestingly enough, Eliphaz’s first observation of Job was built upon Job’s benevolence (4:3-6), and Job reiterated his charity towards others before his friends and after Eliphaz’s more recent diatribe (29:12-17; 30:25). The sentiments of Eliphaz towards Job — that his power and stature were conducive to his abuse of humanity – are the same stereotype that is held by many in regards to those of stature and wealth. How often is the phrase heard from the lips of those less fortunate that “the rich get richer, and the poor get poorer?” The core of this assumption has to do with humanity’s inherent belief that the wealthy see to their desires rather than the needs of those less fortunate. Only humble servants — like Christ — see after the poor. Class warfare is escalated because the connection between a person’s identity — especially when it appears as privileged as Job’s — and their character are viewed in such a way as Eliphaz sought to later portray Job.
While it is true that many in positions of influence and prestige do act in such ways as Eliphaz accused Job, the opposite was true for Job. Although born in a favorable position, Job — as previously noted — extended his hand to the poor and less fortunate. While some connection may be made between one’s character and their identity, there is also a factor of contrast from one’s character based on their identity. The nucleus of this contrast had to do with Job’s personal view of God (cf. 42:7). In spite of being seemingly born with a silver spoon in his mouth, Job knew the Lord God and the justice he required of those who were in such positions to be a blessing to others.
Job’s relation to God is first observed when Job cautiously and carefully acted as a loving, but concerned patriarch (1:5). His primary concern at that point was with the prospect that his children’s behavior may have in some way offended the holiness of God; therefore, Job resolved to intercede through sacrifice and cleansing so that his children would stand approved in God’s sight. These actions may be related to Job’s identity and they may not. What is not told is whether Job’s parents were as faithful to God as he was. If so, Job’s fidelity maintained his favor in God’s eyes and he was further endowed to steward. If not, the lack of a contrast between his identity and character prove that one — through their relationship with God — may overcome or contradict the supposed impression of the relation between the two. Just as much as one who is born into wealth is perceived as a selfish snob, so is one who is born in the ghetto perceived as a drug dealer with no decorum. However, the view of those persons towards God permits their conduct to defy the perceived notion of what their character ought to be. Job may have defied this very bigotry.
