April’s Foolish

But he said to her, “You are speaking as one of the foolish women speaks. Shall we actually accept good from God but not accept adversity?” Despite all this, Job did not sin with his lips.  Job 2:10 NASB

Foolish – Hebrew has several words translated as “fool.”  It’s important to know what each of them means since they are not equal.  The three are nābāl, ʾĕwîl, and kĕsîl.

nābāl. Fool. The noun nābāl is widely used in the wisdom literature. In Prov, the term nābāl includes the concepts associated with kĕsîl and ʾĕwîl (q.v.), and also emphasizes being ignoble and disgraceful, a downright boor. Insensibility to God, as well as a moral insensibility, close the mind to reason.^[1]

The ʾĕwîl identifies himself as soon as he opens his mouth. He would be wise to conceal his folly by keeping quiet (Prov 17:28). When he starts talking without thinking, ruin is at hand (Prov 10:14). While a wise man avoids strife, the fool quarrels at any time (Prov 20:3). He cannot restrain himself and will “display his annoyance at once,” whereas a wise man overlooks an insult (Prov 12:16 NIV). A fool has no balance in his relations with others. The wisdom instructor indicates that while stones and sand are most burdensome, a fool’s anger is even more intolerable.

As indicated, ʾĕwîl primarily refers to moral perversion or insolence, to what is sinful rather than to mental stupidity. This kind of a fool despises wisdom and is impatient with discipline^[2]

kĕsîl I. Fool, dullard. This noun, except for three occurrences in Ps, is found only in Prov and Eccl. In Prov three words are rendered fool, kĕsîl referring to the dull or obstinate one, referring not to mental deficiency, but to a propensity to make wrong choices. ʾewîl refers to moral insolence, and nābāl to the boorish man of mean disposition.

Folly and fool are opposite to wisdom and wise. kĕsîl refers to a way of life that is enticing to the immature, but can lead to destruction and ruin^[3]

The NIV renders “fool” in Prov 1:7 with a footnote: “The Hebrew words rendered fool in Proverbs, and often elsewhere in the ot denote one who is morally deficient.” Such a person is lacking in sense and is generally corrupt. If one can posit a gradation in the words for fool, ʾĕwîl would be one step below kĕsîl and only one step above nābāl^[4]

You may find this reference helpful:

https://hebrewwordlessons.com/2023/11/12/naval-eveel-sakal-kesil-so-many-fools/

Now that we have some lexical distinctions, what does Job use for the term “foolish”?  The answer is nābāl (here a feminine plural).  What does this tell us?  Well, first it clarifies that Job is not talking about stupidity or moral deficiency.  He does not mean that his wife is ignorant nor corrupt.  Nor is she like the ʾĕwîl who blurts out something without thinking.  What he emphasizes is that her statement is insensitive toward God and disgraceful.  She is not thinking correctly and by expressing her mind, she has insulted God.

This casts a different light on her remark.  First, it emphasizes the sarcasm by treating it as it was intended, that is, with religious contempt.  Secondly, it underscores the utter collapse of her role as the ‘ezer kenegdo.  She is designed and expected to provide the spiritual awareness for both, to act as the intercessor in stressful conditions and uphold the relationship with God.  But her remark tells us just the opposite.  She has sided with the serpent, challenging God’s authority and questioning His character.

This element of the story demonstrates the fundamental and absolutely essential designed role of the ‘ezer kenegdo.  It is Job, the man, who must correct this travesty rather than his wife who should have acted as God’s voice in this situation. The reversal of the intended role relationship only demonstrates how incongruous the whole event really is.  We expect the “perfect” man to not only honor the intended role of the ‘ezer kenegdo but to actually discover this in living reality in his own marriage.  The story not only undermines all of our usual expectations about God’s benevolence toward the righteous, it also disrupts any hope that his wife recognizes his innocence.  A blow to his external confidence isn’t sufficient.  In this story, his closest ally and spiritual partner has also turned away.  Perhaps we empathize even if for us it is only a possibility.  But since it is Job’s reality, we realize that the real attack of the enemy is to make sure that Job deeply feels abandoned!

Topical Index: nābāl, kĕsîl, ʾĕwîl, fool, ‘ezer kenegdo, abandon, Job 2:10

^[1] Goldberg, L. (1999). 1285 נָבַל. In R. L. Harris, G. L. Archer Jr., & B. K. Waltke (Eds.), Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament (electronic ed., p. 547). Moody Press.

^[2] Goldberg, L. (1999). 44 אול. In R. L. Harris, G. L. Archer Jr., & B. K. Waltke (Eds.), Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament (electronic ed., p. 19). Moody Press.

^[3] Goldberg, L. (1999). 1011 כָסַל. In R. L. Harris, G. L. Archer Jr., & B. K. Waltke (Eds.), Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament (electronic ed., p. 449). Moody Press.

^[4] Goldberg, L. (1999). 44 אול. Op. cit..