What’s in a name? In the Book of Job, much! The name of Job’s friend,Zophar, comes from a Hebrew noun referring to a bird’s annoying tweeting. (No reference intended to modern Twitter!)

The JewishAbarim Biblical Dictionaryexplains the allegorical symbolism Zophar’s name would have suggested to a Jewish contemporary: “[The Hebrew word forZopharis] a common word forbirdand appears to refer to birds' signature piercing shrieks.”

Zophar seems aptly named, because as Dr. C. I. Scofield explains in his commentary on Job, “Zophar was a religious dogmatist who assumes to know all about God: what God will do in any given case, why He will do it, and all His thoughts about it.” We certainly understand, then, how Job must have received Zophar’s dogmatic badgering as the “piercing sheiks” of an irritating bird.

But dogmatism is not just irritating. Dr. Scofield continues in explaining the real significance of Zophar’s dogmatic argument: “Of all forms of dogmatism, [Zophar’s type] is most irreverent, [because it is] least open to reason.” In other words, Zophar’s shrieking tweets are not just annoying: they’re dangerous!

Regrettably, dogmatism didn’t disappear from Judeo-Christian thought after Job. In fact, we generally agree that Christianity is so fragmented into denominations and factions because thinkers through the centuries have given over to dogmatic arguments and entrenched positions, often rooted more in tradition, politics, and culture than in truth.

So hopefully, what we find in Job is a serious reminder that no one is so singularly gifted or privileged to understand everything about life, death, or suffering. At every turn, we should avoid fruitless debates and contentious arguments about doctrine, as well as infusing religion with partisan politics (or vice versa). Let us instead practice the counsel that Paul gave to the Colossians in the interest of protecting their witness and guarding their unity: may our “conversation be always full of grace, seasoned with salt, so that [we] may know how to answer everyone.”

May we understand, also, that knowinghow to answerin some cases means knowingnot to answer,orat least admitting we don’t have an answer for every situation. Thereby, may our conversation shriek not like annoying birds, but instead flow with grace, seasoned with understanding and discernment as Christ’s spirit reveals.