Too Many Friends? (Proverbs 18:24)

Complete this Proverb: “There are friends who pretend to be friends, but there is a friend is a friend ________________________________.” Who sticks closer than a brother (Proverbs 18:24)

The term “friend” has a wide range of meanings, especially in the age of Facebook. One of the strongest Biblical affirmations of friendship occurs in the final verse of the eighteenth chapter of Proverbs (Proverbs 18:24).

A man of too many friends comes to ruin,
But there is a friend who sticks closer than a brother. (Proverbs 18:24 NASB)

Here, the sage breaks from offering advise and instead simply calls ’em like he sees ’em. Richard J. Clifford (b. 1934) observes:

Like many observations, this verse simply records a fact—many friends (plural) are quite happy to socialize. How different is their company from the love of a friend (singular) who does not walk away in adversity. (Clifford, Proverbs: A Commentary (Old Testament Library), 174)

The verse serves as a fitting conclusion to Proverbs’ eighteenth chapter. Robert Alter (b. 1935) analyzes:

Although the chapter divisions are not original to the text, the textual unit from Proverbs 18:1 to Proverbs 18:24 is neatly marked by an antithetical inclusio: in the first verse, we see someone who is isolated or separated from others, focusing on his own desire, and who consequently gets into trouble; this last verse affirms the sustaining power of friendship. (Alter, The Wisdom Books: Job, Proverbs, and Ecclesiastes: A Translation with Commentary, 273)

While the second clause of the proverb is easily understood and consistently translated, the first is highly problematic as evidenced by surveying commentators who provided their own translations of the text:

• Robert Alter (b. 1935): There is a companionable man to keep company with
• Richard J. Clifford (b. 1934): There are friends who spend time with you
• Michael V. Fox (b. 1940): There are companions for socializing with
• Duane A. Garrett (b. 1953): A man of many companions may come to ruin
• Leonard S. Kravitz (b. 1928) and Kerry M. Olitzky (b. 1954): To friends, a person must show oneself to be friendly
• Tremper Longman III (b. 1952): There are friends who want to associate
• Roland E. Murphy (1917-2002): Friends—for one to associate with
• Allen P. Ross (b. 1943): A man of many companions may come to ruin
• Daniel J. Treier (b. 1972) : Some friends play at friendship
• Bruce K. Waltke (b. 1930): A person who has unreliable companions is about to be broken

Christine R. Yoder (b. 1968) explains the reason for the discrepancies:

The first line is obscure. Following a few ancient versions, NRSV interprets the first words (’îš, “person” or “man”) as a particle of existence (yēš, “there are”; but cf. NIV, NASB). Confusion between the two terms occurs elsewhere (e.g. II Samuel 14:19; Micah 6:10) and the emendation affords a good parallel with the second line—the first word of which is yēš. A second concern is lěhitrō‘ēa‘, which NRSV interprets as from the Hebrew root meaning “to associate with” (rā‘â) but which may be from the root “to be beaten up” or “shattered” (rā‘a‘, Isaiah 24:19; e.g. NIV, NASB). The proverb apparently distinguishes between many (plural) who appear to be friends—and possibly do harm—and the one who, even more than family members, “clings to” a person through thick and thin (e.g., Proverbs 17:17, 19:4, 25:19; Wisdom of Sirach 6:10). (Yoder, Proverbs (Abingdon Old Testament Commentaries), 201)

Some translations (KJV, NKJV) interpret that the proverb’s first cola is advising as did Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803-1882), “The only way to have a friend is to be one.” This reading is consistent with the Greek, Syriac, Targum and Vulgate translations.

Others believe that the verse is setting up a dichotomy between casual friends and true friends. David Atkinson (b. 1943) guesses:

This probably means that there are different sorts of ‘friendship’. There is the sort of nominal friendship found among those who seek others’ company only in order to exploit it for themselves (‘a man of many companions’); such ‘friends’ bring only disaster. A true friend is there when needed, will stand by you when things are really hard, and can be relied on even more, sometimes, than one’s relatives. (Atkinson, The Message of Proverbs (Bible Speaks Today), 108)

It is equally possible that the expression intends to describe those who feign friendship (NRSV, RSV). Tremper Longman III (b. 1952) explicates:

Another understanding of the hitpael of r‘h II is “to pretend to be friends”...If so, the contrast between the two cola would be between false friends and true friends rather than between casual acquaintances and true friends. Other versions (REB, NAB, NJB) repoint the verb as a form of r‘‘ (“to be bad, harmful”). Here the contrast is between people who harm and people who help. (Longman, Proverbs (Baker Commentary on the Old Testament Wisdom and Psalms), 353)

Translations commonly assert that having too many nominal or false friends can actually lead to destruction (ASV, ESV, HCSB, NASB, NIV, NLT). From this perspective, the verse reads like modern quip, “With friends like these...”

The underlying assumption of this reading is that true friends are essential to survival. Daniel J. Treier (b. 1972) asserts:

Help is necessary at times for everyone, and God graciously meets this need through family, friends, and neighbors. However, some are truer friends than others: “Some friends play at friendship / but a true friend sticks closer than one’s nearest kin” (Proverbs 18:24). Given the strong dependence on family in the context from which this proverb stems, it contains a remarkable affirmation of friendship! (Treier, Proverbs & Ecclesiastes (Brazos Theological Commentary on the Bible), 81)

Leonard S. Kravitz (b. 1928) and Kerry M. Olitzky (b. 1954) note:

Rashi [1040-1105] adds that the reason that one should be friendly to others is that when friends are needed, they will be available. At such a time, friends may be even closer than family. (Kravitz and Olitsky, Mishlei: A Modern Commentary on Proverbs Mishlei: A Modern Commentary on Proverbs, 185)

One of the problems with the first cola is that all of the interpretations can be construed as truisms.

While first half of Proverbs 18:24 is difficult to translate, it is clear that it is antithetical to the second. Dave L. Bland (b. 1953) deduces:

Regardless of the decision one makes in translating the first line, there is an obvious contrast between the first and second lines. In the first line, companions is plural. In the second line, friend (אהב, (’ōheb ; “he who loves”) is singular. The contrast is between casual friends on the one hand and a close friend on the other; it is the contrast between the appearance of friendship and real friendship. The friend who sticks (דבק, dābaq) closer than a brother reminds one of the story of Ruth, who clings dābaq to Naomi [Ruth 1:14]. The friend/neighbor took on new meaning for the Jews during the postexilic period when the clan (extended families with a common ancestor) no longer lived in close proximity. A neighbor became more important than even a brother for the sake of support and moral development of community. (Bland, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes & Song of songs (The College Press NIV Commentary), 172-73)

The proverb invites the question, just what constitutes a true friend? The Hebrew vocabulary provides little help as the term “friend” is layered with as many nuances as its English counterpart.

Bruce K. Waltke (b. 1930) examines:

Rēa‘ is glossed “neighbor,” “another,” or “companion” when it refers to a neutral or somewhat negative relationship and by “friend” when it refers to a positive relationship (Proverbs 17:17, 22:11, 27:9-10, 14 [?]). In Proverbs 17:17, 22:11 “the friend” is qualified by ’ōhēb, (“a lover [i.e., a true friend]”). The absolute plural found here is used four other times: of superficial sexual partners (Jeremiah 3:1) versus true ones (Song of Solomon 5:1), of companions attracted to wealth (Proverbs 19:4), and of falsely denounced neighbors (Job 17:5). Here also companions (i.e., partners who fail to come through in adversity) are in view. (1) With them one is on the verge of being shattered. (2) They are contrasted with the ’ōhēb (the singular true friend; cf. Proverbs 17:17, 22:11). (3) The rē‘îm rabb´îm of Proverbs 19:4, 6, who also belong to this unit, are also pseudo, for they rally to the rich and abandon the poor. (4) This interpretation admirably suits the next unit warning against the folly of hastening after money. The person who has these fair-weather friends is a rich person according to Proverbs 19:6, linking Proverbs 18:24 to Proverbs 18:23...One who sticks (dābēq) mixes both an essentially psychological stative notion of clinging with the activity of adhering tightly to someone or something (cf. Deuteronomy 4:4), so closely that even death could not separate them (Ruth 1:14-17). The comparative closer than a brother...uses the blood relative as a basis of comparison for sticking to someone through thick and thin but which the subject has to an even greater degree (see Proverbs 17:17). Economic survival was precarious in ancient Israel, and one needed the “insurance” of a true friend. One also needed such a friend in court. The similar proverb in Proverbs 17:17 shares with this proverb three keywords, “friend” (’ōhēb and rēa‘) and brother (’āh). A friend more loyal than a brother is needed because even a brother inwardly “hates” a poor relative (Proverbs 19:7). The friend in view is a wise person who belongs to the community of the faithful and/or possibly God. The significance of friends is found in their quality, not quantity. Thus, the proverb implicitly warns the disciple against pursing wealth and having pseudo-friends, or of belonging to their company, but exhorts him to pursue wisdom and pick his friends among the wise (cf. Proverbs 12:26, 13:20, 22:24, 28:7, 29:3). (Waltke, The Book of Proverbs, Chapters 15-31 (New International Commentary on the Old Testament), 96-97)

According to this proverb, the status of a friendship is determined during hardship. Michael V. Fox (b. 1940) notes:

A true friend is contrasted with a less constant companion, the sort one spends time with socially but cannot expect more of. Though the latter is not necessarily “superficial” or “untrustworthy” (Crawford H. Toy [1836-1919]), he is not as close and reliable as the true friend, here designated ’oheb, literally “one who loves.” The words ’oheb “friend” and rea‘ “companion” or “friend” do not in themselves distinguish the degree of fidelity. An ’oheb my be opportunistic (Proverbs 14:20), and a rea‘ may “love at all times” (Proverbs 17:17). The implication of higher fidelity comes from the distinction between socializing” and “cleaving closer than a brother.” (Fox, Proverbs 10-31 (Anchor Bible Commentaries), 646-47)

The proof is in the pudding: true friendship reveals itself during adversity. Will a person assert that a friend in need is a friend indeed or that a friend in need is a pest?

Josh McDowell (b. 1939) and Ed Stewart (b. 1940) philosophize:

Friendships are as different as flowers. Some are beautiful yet delicate, needing special care. Others grow anywhere in practically any conditions, even in the blistering desert. And you find out quickly which ones wilt when the temperature starts to rise. (McDowell and Stewart, One Year Book of Josh McDowell's Youth Devotions 2, 263)

Charles Stanley (b. 1932) applies:

Casual, shallow friendships crumble in a crisis. People you thought were your friends tend to disappear in times of persecution, criticism or trouble. “Ruin” in this verse means to be shaken so badly that you fall to pieces. Casual friends do nothing to help you keep yourself together emotionally and spiritually in times of severe loss, rejection, or sickness. Casual friendships have no bonds of strength or tenacity. (Stanley, Walking Wisely: Real Guidance for Life’s Journey, 163)

Allen P. Ross (b. 1943) summarizes:

It is better to have one good, faithful friend than numerous unreliable ones. The first line of the contrast...is difficult...The idea may be that there are friends to one’s undoing...If a person has friends who are unreliable, he may still come to ruin, especially if these nominal friends use him. The second line is clearer: “there is a friend...who sticks closer than a brother.” This is indeed a rare treasure! (Tremper Longman III [b. 1952] and David E. Garland [b. 1947], Proverbs-Isaiah (The Expositor’s Bible Commentary), 166)

Who a person associates with is a matter of extreme importance. Not all “friends” are good friends as true friends are rare. The proverb tacitly advises to be discerning and to appreciate a true friend wherever she is found.

How would you restate this proverb? In Proverbs 18:24, is the sage trying to get the reader to take action? Can you have too many friends? Have companions ever contributed to your downfall? Who have you incorrectly labeled “friend”? How many true friends do you have who stick as close as family? Are you this type of friend? Who is your best friend?

Many may not feel as though they have the type of friend that is depicted in Proverbs 18:24. Countless devotional writers have reminded that Jesus is the embodiment of this verse.

Robert J. Morgan (b. 1952) exemplifies:

The second part of Proverbs 18:24 describes an ultimate Friend for each of us, a Friend who is closer than a brother, a Friend who is truly interested in us with no thought of what’s in it for Him. Somewhere there’s someone who cares about us more than anyone else. There is someone who sees us and quietly interprets every line on our faces, every care in our hearts, every tear in our eyes...In the Upper Room, Jesus said, “Greater love has no one than this, than to lay down one’s life for his friends. You are my friends...I have called you friends (John 15:13-15)...You have a Friend Who Sticks Closer Than a Brother and He’s as near right now as He was to those twelve disciples. (Morgan, He Shall Be Called: 150 Names of Jesus and What They Mean to You, 250-51)

Have you accepted Jesus’ friendship? How is the friendship of Jesus different from other relationships you have?

“A friend is one who walks in when others walk out.” - Walter Winchell (1897-1972)

With Friends Like These... (Job 2:11)

Eliphaz, Bildad and Zophar were friends of whom? Job

Job and his tale of woe have become synonymous with suffering. While the majority of the book that bears his name is a philosophical dialogue, the prologue relays how his vast holdings, children and good health are systematically eradicated (Job 1:1-2:13). When tragedy strikes one of their core group, Job’s friends, Eliphaz, Bildad and Zophar, spring into action and plot to console their friend (Job 2:11).

Now when Job’s three friends heard of all this adversity that had come upon him, they came each one from his own place, Eliphaz the Temanite, Bildad the Shuhite and Zophar the Naamathite; and they made an appointment together to come to sympathize with him and comfort him. (Job 2:11 NASB)

The friends opt to make the visit together; such awkward visits are always more pleasant when conducted in groups. Eliphaz, Bildad and Zophar assemble around Job in much the same way as God’s council gathers around Yahweh in the preceding chapter (Job 1:6).

The text does not indicate how the group learns of Job’s plight. The Targum relays that the friends are alerted by the sight of garden trees withering, meat regressing into raw meat while being eaten, and their wine transmuting to blood.

Unlike the four messengers who appear in hurried procession to inform Job of his catastrophic losses (Job 1:14, 16, 17, 18), Job’s friends’ trip is planned and lengthy (Job 2:11-13). As it took time for the news to reach them, they had to make long-distance arrangements to meet and then had to travel a considerable distance to reach Job’s side, it was possibly months between Job’s trials and his friends’ arrival.

Stephen M. Hooks (b. 1947) speculates:

The fact that these men met by appointment suggests that they know one another as well as Job. How they have learned of Job’s misfortune we are not told. News of Job must have spread far and wide. These developments imply the passing of some time, and information gleaned from the dialogues confirms this. In Job 7:3, for example, Job speaks of “months” of pain he has already endured. (Hooks, Job (College Press NIV Commentary), 79)

Job’s friends will serve as major players for the remainder of the book. Aside from their names and places of residence, little is revealed about them.

Eliphaz (whose name means “God is fine gold” or “God conquers”) has been identified with Edom as both his name and nationality (Teman) appear in Edomite genealogies (Genesis 36:4, 15). Some have speculated that Eliphaz is the oldest of Job’s counselors as he is listed first (Job 2:11, 42:9), speaks first, gives longer and more mature speeches and perhaps most tellingly God addresses him as representative of the group (Job 42:7).

Of Job’s counselors’ hometowns, only Eliphaz’s can be definitively located. Teman was a principle sight in the northern region of Edom (Ezekiel 25:13; Genesis 36:34). The location was known for its wisdom (Jeremiah 49:7; Obadiah 1:8).

The name Bildad (possibly meaning “son of Hadad”) does not appear elsewhere in the Bible. Bildad is a Shuhite which some associate with Shuah, a son born to Abraham by Keturah (Genesis 25:2). Others connect Bildad’s region to Sūhu, a site referenced in Akkadian documents located on the Middle Euphrates River below the mouth of the Khabur River.

Zophar (“young bird”) hails from Naamah. Naamah is both the name of a female descendant of Cain (Genesis 4:22) and an Ammonite princess who marries Solomon (I Kings 14:21). A site known as ‘Ain Sopar on the road between Beiruit and Damascus has been identified as a possible location of Naamah.

While the geography involving Job’s friends cannot be pinpointed with any certainty, it can be determined that ,like Job himself, his friends live outside of Israel and they descend upon him from diverse places. Job has international connections.

Job’s friends are literally three wise men. All three are old (Job 32:6), possibly older than Job (Job 15:10) and presumably all are eastern patriarchs.

Samuel E. Balentine (b. 1950) comments:

Three “wise” friends journey toward Uz, where Job’s life had exemplified Edenic harmony. Now, “evil” (Job 2:11: rā‘āh, NRSV: “troubles”) has fallen upon this once paradisiacal world, and the one who had always “turned away from evil (rā‘; Job 1:8, 2:3) is “sitting among the ashes.” With such a scenario, the prologue suggests that a world like Job’s requires the best insights wisdom can offer. (Balentine, Job (Smyth & Helwys Bible Commentary), 66-67)

The theology presented in Job will not come from anonymous voices; each of Job’s friends has a distinct personality. It has even been suggested that they represent varying strands of philosophy.

In addition to their social standing, these men are well intentioned friends (Job 2:11), not detached messengers (Job 1:14, 16, 17, 18). They have been described as comforters, companions, counselors and friends. The Hebrew rea’ is a very common word and in this context is universally translated “friends” (ASV, CEV, ESV, HCSB, KJV, MSG, NASB, NIV, NKJV, NLT, NRSV, RSV). James L. Crenshaw (b. 1934) defines, “The noun re‘a indicates an intimate, a companion from whom one accepts advice (Crenshaw, Reading Job: A Literary and Theological Commentary, 45).”

Norman C. Habel (b. 1932) analyzes:

These visitors have come to perform a traditional role of the friend in ancient society, namely, to “console” (nwd) and “comfort” (nhm). A “friend” (rēa‘) is characterized by deep loyalty and close bonds of faithfulness (hesed; cf. Proverbs 18:24; II Samuel 16:17)...It is precisely this loyalty which Job later accuses his friends of violating, thereby not fulfilling their true role as “friends”. (Habel , The Book of Job: A Commentary (The Old Testament Library), 97)

John E. Hartley (b. 1940) expounds:

The term for friends has a wide range of meanings, including an intimate counselor (I Chronicles 27:33), a close friend (Deuteronomy 13:6), a party in a legal dispute (Exodus 22:9). Friends often solemnized their relationship with a covenant, promising to care for each other under all kinds of circumstances. The relationship between Job and his three friends gives every evidence of being based on a covenant (Job 6:14-15, 21-23, 27). Such a relationship was characterized by loyal love (hesed; e.g., Jonathan and David, I Samuel 20:14-15)...With the noblest intentions, these three earnestly desired to help Job bear his sorrow. (Hartley, The Book of Job (New International Commentary on the Old Testament), 85)

Their visit constitutes a grand gesture. Job’s companions take great efforts to see him and risk contagion and public censure to be with their friend in his time of need.

Mike Mason (b. 1952) observes:

What a blessing it would be to have just one friend like this in time of need—one friend who would drop everything at a moment’s notice, travel any distance, and stick by one’s bedside night and day for an entire week! Job, apparently, had not just one such friend-in-need, but three. Even in the Bible we do not often hear of people having this many close friends. One memorable exception is the paralytic of Mark 2:3-4, who had no less than four friends who loved him so much that they actually went to all the trouble and embarrassment of carrying him through a large crowd and then digging down through a roof in order to get him to Jesus. In the New Testament, understandably, heart-to-heart friendship becomes an increasingly common phenomenon, and the long genealogical lists of the Old Testament gradually give way to a very different sort of list, such as the one in the last chapter of Romans in which Paul gives us just a glimpse into the vast network of people who, far more than being mere friends, were his true family, his brothers and sisters in the Lord. These are blood ties indeed, for here the family tree is the cross. (Mason, The Gospel According to Job: An Honest Look at Pain and Doubt from the Life of One Who Lost Everything, 49)

What makes a person a friend? Who are your best friends? Who would travel to meet you during your darkest hour? When have friends come to your rescue during a time of need? When have you seen someone suffer? What did you do? Why do Eliphaz, Bildad and Zophar visit Job? What can they possibly do to ameliorate Job’s situation?

Eliphaz, Bildad and Zophar’s visit has a two-fold objective (Job 2:11). Gerald H. Wilson (1945-2005) appraises:

The purpose of the friends’ visit is to sympathize with him and comfort him. The Hebrew verb for “sympathize” is nud, which denotes shaking the head or body back and forth as an indication of taking on the pain or grief of another. The Hebrew for “comfort” is nkhm, which normally means (in the Piel stem as here) to comfort with words—in contrast to the silent waiting that ultimately characterizes the friends’ vigil. (Wilson, Job (New International Biblical Commentary), 33)

Though they plan to bring words of comfort and have a long trip in which to gather their thoughts, when they arrive, they realize that they have no words for this occasion. Sometimes there is nothing that can be said. In these instances, silence is golden.

In a touching scene, Job’s friends bind themselves to Job even in his suffering. They simply sit with him, saying nothing, for an entire week (Job 2:13). James A. Wharton (b. 1927) analyzes:

Like God’s servant in Isaiah 52:14, Job is so ravaged by suffering that he is “marred...beyond human semblance,” so that his friends cannot recognize in him the Job they had known before. Rather than turning away from this horror, however, they join Job in the signs of ritual mourning (compare Job 1:20 and Job 2:12), indicating that Job’s distress is their distress, to be lamented before God. The high-water mark of their compassion comes during these seven days when they found grace just to be there with Job—and to keep their mouths shut, “for they saw that his suffering was very great.” Consoling words rarely improve on the silent comfort of a friend’s presence. (Wharton, Job (Westminster Bible Companion), 23)

Charles R. Swindoll (b. 1934) imagines:

As he sits there covered with skin ulcers that have begun erupting with pus, swelling his body with fever and giving him a maddening itch that will not cease, he looks up into the faces of three friends who arrive on the scene. They sit and stare at the man for seven days and nights without uttering a word. Just imagine. First, they don’t recognize him, which tells you something of the extent of his swelling and the sores that covered his body. The sight causes them to be at a loss for words for a full week. (Swindoll, Job: A Man of Heroic Endurance, 5)

Beth Lueders (b. 1959) commends:

Now, that’s a ministry of presence and a ministry of waiting. These guys don’t check Job and themselves into a luxurious hotel room with a wide-screen TV. They don’t pull up overstuffed couches or recliners. They don’t hit the hot tub, shoot some hoops, or go off-roading in their souped up-chariots...The four men just hunkered down on the ground...in silence...for nearly 170 hours. (Sorry, gals, but I know of no woman who’d even attempt that!) And this no-talk gathering around Job is no feat to set a Guinness World Record or to win Survivor: The Land of Uz. Eliphaz, Bildad, and Zophar are three amigos who just want to comfort their hurting friend. (Lueders, Two Days Longer: Discovering More of God as You Wait For Him, 146)

Simply by their very presence Eliphaz, Bildad and Zophar convey compassion and sympathy, enter into Job’s sorrow and demonstrate that they are in this together with him.

Despite being Gentiles, Job’s friends follow Jewish tradition. Harold S. Kushner (b. 1935) notes, “In accordance with the custom followed by observant Jews to this day, Job’s comforters sit quietly until Job breaks the silence in an outburst of pain and grief (Kushner, The Book of Job: When Bad Things Happened to a Good Person, 49).”

Sitting seven days in silence demonstrates true compassion. Unfortunately, in time, silence gives way to speech (Job 3:1) and a debate ensues. As soon as the friends speak, their sympathy is replaced by professional pride and the need to defend God (Job 13:8). Eliphaz (Job 4:1-5:27, 15:1-35, 22:1-30) and Bildad (Job 8:1-22, 18:1-21, 25:1:5) address Job three times each while Zophar speaks twice (Job 11:1-20, 20:1-29). They follow conventional wisdom, concluding that Job’s suffering must be the result of some deep rooted personal sin. In doing so they become disputants, each time confronting Job with the sin that they perceive he has committed.

Job’s own friends prove to be the biggest challenge the Accuser throws at him. Their arrival symbolizes bringing in the big guns. What could not have been predicted was who they would be firing upon.

Steven J. Lawson (b. 1951) determines:

Next came the greatest assault Satan would hurl at Job—the counsel that came from his friends. What the devil spoke through Job’s wife [Job 2:9], he would speak even more convincingly through his three friends. Satan’s lies can be spoken through another person, even from the lips of another believer (Matthew 16:22-23). (Lawson, Job (Holman Old Testament Commentary), 27)

The fact that Job’s friends account for his greatest assault is evidence by the results. His companions do what the calamities could not: they break Job. Instead of friends, they function more as the requisite three witnesses needed to convict by Hebrew law (Deuteronomy 17:6, 19:15; II Corinthians 13:1). Job will eventually question their friendship (Job 6:14) and God, when finally intervening, expresses divine displeasure with his “defenders” (Job 42:7). Throughout the dialogue, Job wants God to start talking (Job 13:22) and his friends to stop. Unfortunately for most of the book, he experiences just the opposite.

Even so, Job’s friends, at one time, model true friendship at its finest. Ewan R. Kelly reminds:

When Job’s friends were willing in the face of his suffering to be with him and say nothing, not offering him advice, sharing their worldview, not judging him or asking about his feelings, at this time they were truly his comforters. (Kelly, Marking Short Lives: Constructing and Sharing Rituals Following Pregnancy Loss, 87)

This “ministry of presence” exhibited by Job’s friends is often what is most needed in crisis. Frank G. Honeycutt (b. 1957) advises:

Shared silence (see Job 2:13) is better than quick Hallmark-like pastoral sound bites. There will be times, says Eugene H. Peterson (b. 1932), when we won’t feel like doing this ministry and even the church will lure clergy to mouth theological nonsense that goes down easily. However, pastors “are not the minister[s] of our changing desires, or our-time conditioned understanding of our needs, or our secularized hopes for something better. With these vows of ordination we are lashing you fast to the mast of word and sacrament so that you will be unable to respond to the siren voices.” (Honeycutt, The Truth Shall Make You Odd: Speaking with Pastoral Integrity in Awkward Situations, 98)

Richard J. Foster (b. 1942) and Julia L. Roller (b. 1976) conclude:

Job has lost his children, all that he owns, and is now covered head to foot with “loathsome sores” (Job 2:7). The friends come to Job in his need. They weep with him and sit quietly with him. Their quiet ministry of presence speaks loudly to those who think that only words heal. (Foster and Roller, A Year with God: Living Out the Spiritual Disciplines, 322)

What would you have said to Job? How would you characterize Eliphaz, Bildad and Zophar? Do you think that Job still considered them friends at the end of his story? How could they have best achieved their goals of providing sympathy and comfort (Job 2:11)? When in your life has a true friend not acted like one? When have you thought you were acting for God when in reality you were aiding the opposition? Have you ever experienced the “ministry of presence”?

“It is better to have a heart without words than words without a heart.” - Mahatma Ganhdi (1869-1948)

David’s Bromance (II Samuel 1:26)

Who was David’s best friend? Jonathan

Only two men in Scripture are explicitly said to be the friend of David: Hushai (II Samuel 15:37, 16:16-17; I Chronicles 27:33) and Hiram (I Kings 5:1). Both of these men were actually Gentiles which may be why it was found necessary to state that they were friends of the king.

The language when referring to the relationship between David and King Saul’s son Jonathan is stronger than friendship. The first time they are seen together, the narrator informs “the soul of Jonathan was knit to the soul of David, and Jonathan loved him as himself (I Samuel 18:1 NASB).” In fact, the two even made a covenant with one another (I Samuel 18:3, 19:8, 16, 22:8, 23:18). Jonathan even sided with his friend when his father unjustly sought to eliminate David (I Samuel 19:1-7, 20:1-29).

Proverbs claims:

A man of too many friends comes to ruin,
But there is a friend who sticks closer than a brother. (Proverbs 18:24 NASB)

David and Jonathan were friends who stuck closer than brothers. At Jonathan’s death, David eulogized:

I am distressed for you, my brother Jonathan;
You have been very pleasant to me.
Your love to me was more wonderful
Than the love of women. (II Samuel 1:26 NASB)

Why do you think David and Jonathan bonded so tightly? Who is your best friend? Were you to get married today, which friends would serve as your wedding party? In your opinion, what makes someone a true friend?

Jonathan repeatedly demonstrated his love for David, consistently showing that he loved David as himself (I Samuel 18:1). Jonathan frequently assisted David in fleeing his father’s murderous advances. He was a big part of the mechanism by which David became king. Had David not become king, Jonathan himself would have ruled. Jonathan chose friendship over the kingdom.

The Mishnah expounds:

Whenever love depends on some selfish end, when the end passes away, the love passes away; but if it does not depend on some selfish end, it will never pass away. Which love depended on a selfish end? This was the love of Amnon and Tamar. And which did not depend on a selfish end? This was the love of David and Jonathan. (Avot 5:15)

When have you placed your friends above yourself? How did you meet your friends? Do you think God was involved in the process?

“A true friend never gets in your way unless you happen to be going down.” - Arnold H. Glasow (1905-1998)