Taking Things Personally
Bildad
begins with the classical human defense: make it about me and no longer about
you. I think this is one of the
absolutely most frustrating aspects of humanity. As soon as I get upset with someone else, if
I try and talk about it they want to immediately jump to the defensive and try
to tell me what the problem is from their perspective. {And
before anyone says it, yes, I do the same to other people…}
So don’t
get me wrong. I’m not saying the other
person’s perspective is wrong and has no place.
It absolutely does have a place and if I am going to talk to a person
about a problem, I had better be willing to listen to their side of the
issue. What I’m objecting to isn’t that
they speak their mind; what I am objecting to is that they aren’t willing to
listen before speaking their mind.
Take an
example of a married couple in which one spouse (let’s say the wife, just to
make the conversation easier) is upset with the other person (obviously, the
husband). If the wife goes to the
husband and begins to explain why she is upset, the husband has two choices:
listen or rebuttal. What most husbands
do is launch into immediate rebuttal. It
goes something like: “Have you ever thought about it from my perspective?” or “No,
you’re wrong. Let me tell you what is
really going on.” If rebuttal is chosen,
then an argument ensues and we have the proverbial “butting of heads.” Another potential growing edge turns into
marital strife.
If the
husband were instead to devote himself to listening to his wife and allowing
herself to explain her position thoroughly, then he could have the opportunity
to repent of what he has legitimately done to make her mad (or at the least
repent of making her mad even if unintentionally). The wife would feel resolution and her anger
could be dissipated. Then, having
dissipated his wife’s irritation the husband could say, “Now that I’ve listened
to you and genuinely repented, can we look at this from my perspective?” The woman would then need to return the
favor, listen completely, and probably repent of how she erred – or at the very
least had some part of the problem. After
all, it usually takes two to tango.
Listening to
and resolving one problem at a time leads to forgiveness and restored
relationships. Skipping the listening step
and immediately trying to force people to see your side of the issue only leads
to further argument. It’s true about
spouses. It’s true about friends. It’s true about church councils. It’s true about Job and Bildad throughout
this whole book. It’s true about all
human relationships.
It’s
actually back to our old friend the self-monger. The self-monger hears a person laying blame
at their feet and immediately wants to toss the blame away and make it someone
else’s problem. The self-monger cannot
admit that they have erred. But the
person who is “killing the self-monger within” – the true disciple of Jesus
Christ – is willing to listen first and receive what blame genuinely belongs to
them. The true Christian is not afraid
of fault and error because the true Christian believes in forgiveness and
restored relationships.
So now
let’s return to the opening of this chapter.
Where Bildad makes a huge error in this chapter is in his opening 4
verses. Basically, he turns to Job and
says, “Who are you to call us ‘cattle’ and stupid?’ Have you even considered that it might be you
who is wrong?”
Bildad
doesn’t give any credence to what Job is saying. Rather than listen, Bildad jumps immediately
to rebuttal. It has actually been the
whole pattern of Job so far! When has
any of Job’s friends said anything other than, “If your life stinks, you must
have sinned. So repent before it’s too
late.”
The Book Of Job: How Not To Communicate
As I read
through Job, I see so many examples of bad communication happening. I see so many examples of people lining up
like two battleships on the ocean and they plan on just leveling broadside
after broadside at each other. They only
listen deeply enough to be able to make a rebuttal and make their point. They aren’t listening in order to actually
understand and resolve issues. They are
convinced their point is right and they will continue to fire broadside after
broadside until the other capitulates from the weariness of the fight. Unfortunately, I think that is true about
many of our human interactions. It is a
condition for which we all deserve to be pitied.
More About “Bad Things Happen To Bad People” Theology
If we
actually talk about Bildad’s response in the short space that remains, I do
think we can see a repeat of bad theology here.
Bildad’s response to Job is centered on a “bad things happen to bad
people” theology. Or let me phrase it
another way. What goes around comes
around. I don’t find either of those clichés
to be true. The devious person gets away
with far more than they get caught. The
manipulative person gets their way far more than they get called on the carpet
for being manipulative. The dominator
dominates far more than they get called out.
The kind-natured person doesn’t receive near as much kindness from
humanity as they give out. The gentle
person doesn’t see too much human gentleness returned. What goes around doesn’t usually come back
nearly as much as it should.
To be
honest, I think a better phrase would be “if you dish out good, be prepared to
get more selfishness back than good.” I
know that’s rather pessimistic, but I think it is true. We live in a sinful and selfish world. When I choose to be different, I can’t
honestly expect everyone else to be different, too.
I just can’t
agree with the thrust of Bildad’s words – at least not from the perspective of
this life. Sure, in the end God will set
the record straight. But in this life,
we cannot judge a person’s righteousness by the amount of good and the amount
of bad that comes his way. Just because
a person is crushed by life, rejected by others, scorned, mocked, and given a
rough go isn’t proof that they are evil and deserve it. Just look at what happened to Jesus, after
all. Jesus was the most righteous person
who ever lived. He got crucified.
Bildad
wants to evaluate people by what happens to them. But in order to determine righteousness, we
must look within, not without. We must
gaze internally, not externally. We must
know a person’s spirit, not their circumstances. We must know them, not know about them.
<><
No comments:
Post a Comment