I do not find a satisfactory account of when someone wrote this book. Suggestions seem to range from around 900 BC (Solomon) to around 100 BC. I think of it as an exilic work or possibly post-exilic work, with similarities with II Isaiah and Zechariah 3. The book arises out of the wisdom tradition, especially from Mesopotamia.
The latest historical reference may be to the Persian Empire. However, the author has a profound grasp of history in the period before the exile and in the period of the Patriarchs. Yet, the question raised is one that pervades much of human history.
The most obvious point is that human suffering is not necessarily deserved. True, we may bring about our own suffering by neglecting though in some cases we may bring about our own suffering. The real problem with suffering comes with the many cases in which someone’s pain, sorrow, or distress are unrelated to anything they have done or failed to do. Job will argue this point forcibly against his friends. The friends, in order to safeguard the goodness of the Lord, argue that if a person suffers they must “somehow” deserve it. Of course, this leads to another point, that if suffering is deserved, suffering falsifies either the character of the sufferer or the character of the Lord. The friends argue that Job is a sinner, and Job argues that the Lord acted unfairly and is indifferent to human suffering. The point Job is making is that in spite of the suffering and evil he has encountered, God is good. He puzzles as to how his experience is consistent with that goodness. Thirdly, the reasons for suffering, if there are any, are simply beyond human comprehension, but the speech by the Lord at the end affirms the parental care of the Lord for all creation. This explains why the response of Job is to repent and state that now he sees God face to face. The suffering and evil he has experienced has shown Job to be the person of glowing and excellent character the Lord thought he was at the beginning of the book.
The book contains the struggle of believing in a good and powerful God on the one hand and the realities of suffering and evil in a human world on the other. For many people, this is a deal breaker. Any God worthy of worship would not allow a world of so much evil and suffering to exist. Yet, such a view can easily lead one toward resentment concerning the real and human world, full of its imperfections. It also ignores our obvious experience of people who have gone through deep suffering and have come out of it better, even glorious, persons. The belief in God holds out the hope of eventual reconciliation of even this tension that we find in this world.
We rightly puzzle about the reality of our world. It has so much suffering, pain, and evil in it. Much of it is irrational. Natural disaster hits one home and not the neighbor. Disease strikes in unexpected ways. For many, death comes far too early, and it leaves family and friends to suffer the loss. We desperately want a world that does not make sense to somehow make sense. Many of our attempts to justify suffering and evil are attempts to soften the blow, but also to help us move on with our lives. We must do so. Confronted with the dangers, it takes courage to lead a human life. Our fear, anxiety, and dread as we encounter the suffering, evil, and irrational nature of reality are realistic responses to reality. Our wonderment about such experiences is also realistic, for we must learn to cope and move foreward with our lives, knowing that death will be our end. Surrendering to the irrationality of reality can be a form of cowardice. Yet, blithely assuming that everything has its reasons is another form of cowardice in that we are unwilling to face the hashness and irrationality of reality. We must be willing to navigate some difficult waters when set out on this journey, knowing that there is no answer to our question.
The book has several structural issues that do not find scholarly consensus. How are the prose and poetry sections related? The poetry begins with a pattern that is abandoned by the end. Job offers his lament in Chapter 3, Eliphaz speaks, Job replies, Bildad speaks, Job replies, Zophar speaks, Job replies, and the cycle begins again. The third time, the first two repeat, but Zophar does not. The final Job speech is much longer and contains arguments that contradict what Job said previously. Chapter 32 introduces a new character, Elihu. When the Lord speaks in chapter 38, the response is to Job, not Elihu. One possible argument, presented by Nissim Masnuth (1100’s AD) and S. R. Driver, is that the reason the book omits a third speech by Zophar is to show that the friends had exhausted their arguments. Of course, some scholars will try to reconstruct a third speech from the material given.
The book of Job the patient (27-28) and the book of Job the impatient (the rest of the speeches) are both present, the latter clearly being the more profound struggle. One uniqueness of the book is that the friends of Job need to apologize both to Job and to the Lord.
The prologue and epilogue tell the story of a question raised in heaven and an answer given on earth. The story is a didactic tale about how to respond properly to undeserved suffering. It reads like a folk-tale,[1] especially with phrases like 1:1 there was once a man in the land of Uz whose name was Job. Job is not an Israelite. He was from the land of Uz, and thus an Edomite or Aramean, for which see Genesis 36:28 and Lamentations 4:21. He receives a mention in Ezekiel 14:14, in which the point is that not even someone as righteous as he would save a faithless land. However, what is important about him is not ancestry, but his character. That man was blameless (complete, finished, wholesome, perfect, having integrity). We find the word mainly in poetic contexts, especially in Psalms, Job and the Song of Songs, and usually in texts dating from later periods. Job was also upright (yashar straight), reaching the height of moral perfection. The Deuteronomic History refers to God in this way. It applies to the character of persons in Job, Proverbs, and Psalms. Yet, while God made human beings straightforward, they devise many schemes (Ecclesiastes 7:29) and no one is left in the land who is upright (Micah 7:2). Thus, on the one hand, human beings can be upright, but some passages deny such uprightness on the part of human nature. Job was one who feared God, and was thus a religious man. The midwives who protected Moses also feared God (Exodus 1:17, 21). Nehemiah appointed Hananiah as commander of the citadel because he feared God more than others did did (Nehemiah 7:2). “Fearing God” occurs ten times, mainly in wisdom literature. The more common phrase is “fear the Lord your/our God.” That phrase refers to psychological fear of a powerful and unpredictable and to a benign sense of awe and reverence appropriate to true religion. Further, Job turned away from evil. This description is common for people who avoid wickedness. In Proverbs, the advice is turn away from evil (3:7), turn your feet from evil (4:27), fools will turn from evil (13:19), and the wise turn from evil (14:16). Jeremiah urges the people turn from evil (18:11), other prophets urged the people to turn from evil (25:5), the people may turn away from evil and thus avert disaster (26:3), the Lord sent prophets to urge them to turn from their evil ways (35:15). In its obverse, Jeroboam did not turn away from his evil way (I Kings 13:33) and Pekiah did not turn away from the evil of Jeroboam (II Kings 15:24).
In Chapter 2, we begin with round two between Yahweh and Satan. This text is troubling. It depicts God and Satan chatting abut mortals, Satan has just returned from a "feet-on-the-ground" tour ("going to and fro on the earth," 1:7). 2:1One day the heavenly beings came to present themselves before the Lord. The reference is “sons of God” suggests superhuman creatures who make up the court and council of God. In Genesis 6:1-4 they had sex with human women and generated the heroes of old. Psalm 29, 82, and 89 all mention this heavenly council of divine beings. Interestingly, one can envision a similar scene with a prophet in the time of Ahab (874-853). According to the prophet, the Lord wanted to deceive Ahab, and called a heavenly council. As Micaiah envisions it, the Lord sits upon a throne, the armies of heaven stand to the right and left, and the Lord asks who is willing to entice Ahab! The heavenly beings talk among themselves. Finally, “a spirit” comes before the Lord and volunteers to entice Ahab. When the Lord asks the spirit how, the spirit says he will put a lying spirit in the mouth of the prophets. Micaiah then affirms that the Lord has decreed disaster for Ahab (I Kings 22:19-23). In Genesis 3:1, the serpent has a similar role of testing and enticing Eve in the Garden of Eden. Zechariah 3:1-2, written in 520 BC, has the Lord rebuking Satan. In Luke 22:31-32, Satan wants to sift Peter like wheat, but the prayer of Jesus is that he will recover and strengthen the other disciples. This heavenly being is an ambiguous, questionable figure, skeptical as regarding human beings, anxious to find fault in them, and capable of unleashing disaster on them and enticing them to sin. This heavenly being is at least skeptical about the success of God in creating humanity. Further, Satan (hasatan, the satan or accuser) also came among them to present himself before the Lord. In the prologue of Job, the accuser is an official of the royal household of Yahweh, a kind of heavenly public prosecutor. Interestingly, the ancient story of Balaam gives the angel of the Lord the title of “the accuser” in Numbers 22:22. In addition, the Philistines call David “the accuser” in I Samuel 29:4. The point of this title is that this heavenly being stands in opposition or is an obstacle. The author seems to have in mind the pattern followed by Persia, where secret agents roamed the road system of the Persian Empire as part of a secret intelligence system. We note this with the use of the definite article, "the Satan," in that the name appears a title rather than a personal name.
2 The Lord said to Satan, “Where have you come from?” Satan answered the Lord, “From going to and fro on the earth, and from walking up and down on it.” This phrasing comes from the same verbal root and stem for “walking up and down” as used to describe the LORD “strolling” in the Garden of Eden in Genesis 3:8. The form used suggests iterative or habitual action, which may in turn indicate that the Accuser’s role was to patrol the earth (and, perhaps, the heavens as well) looking for trouble. Further, I Peter 5:8 has the devil strolling about as a roaring lion and seeking prey, thereby preserving the image presented here. The goal of the accuser is to get Job to “curse” God in 1:11, 2:5. The prologue of Job would rather trace evil, misfortune, and destructive forces to God than recognize a power of evil that is independent of God. For that reason, even Satan is a servant of Yahweh.[2] 3 The Lord said to Satan, “Have you considered my servant Job? There is no one like him on the earth, a blameless and upright man who fears God and turns away from evil. He still persists in his integrity, although, Yahweh notes significantly, you incited me against him, to destroy him for no reason.” Within this story, in fact, Satan has a boundary that only God can change. Satan entices the Lord to act against Job, thus admitting that the cause of the suffering and evil is in the hands of God.[3] I find so much disturbing about this. Can someone “incite” God against us? God admits that what has happened will “destroy him for no reason.” That is our biggest fear. When the ebb and flow of life take away the gifts of God, does it happen for no reason? We want it to make sense. God seems to admit that what happened to Job was for no reason. This observation by God that the suffering of Job has no cause is consistent with the complaint of Job in the dialogues. It also sets up a situation where the author lets the reader know that the author does not have an answer to the question of suffering in which life becomes fair. Life is not fair, either in nature or in the social world. The world is not set up in a way in which justice and morality are the outcomes of nature and the social world. Further, God has already observed that Job is blameless, upright, fears Go0d, and turns away from evil. All of this consistent with the claim Job will make throughout the dialogue. At the same time, this is a disturbing theological point. Can anyone “incite” God to cause you suffering? According to this story, it happened with Job. What type of deity allows the faithful to suffer just to prove a point? Is God simply avoiding direct responsibility for what happened to Job? If we drop the matter here, we have a puzzling of the relationship between God and humanity. Yet, if we look at the prologue differently, we might see that the conversation between God and Satan has another message. Satan clearly is far from the Lord, “roaming the earth.” His purpose is to cause damage to that which God has created. Yet, God may well be drawing Satan out as to his purpose in the presence of the heavenly court. Satan wants God to cause the suffering, but instead, God allows Satan to act. When Satan acts, he goes to the extreme, revealing his character. Satan has wanted to show the weakness of Job, but instead, Satan reveals his weakness and cruelty. Satan wants to show God that human beings will move far away from God if given an opportunity. The story of Job shows that human beings, confronted with immense suffering and evil, can display the highest of character, to the point that they deserve remembering for generations.[4] 4 Then Satan answered the Lord, “Skin for skin! A proverbial saying. The Lord has allowed Satan to get at the outer wall, but now is the time to let him penetrate Job himself. All that people have they will give to save their lives. 5 However, stretch out your hand now and touch his bone and his flesh, and he will curse you to your face.” 6 The Lord said to Satan, “Very well, he is in your power; only spare his life.” The conclusion of the wager with the conversation partner with God is that God places Job in the power of Satan. How would you like it if God spoke to the devil, referring to you? How would you like to be in Satan's power with God's permission? Job's children die — over a bet!!!
7 Therefore, Satan went out from the presence of the Lord, and inflicted loathsome sores on Job from the sole of his foot to the crown of his head. The disease was probably a boil that becomes ulcerous and leaves a deep scar. 8 Job took a potsherd with which to scrape himself, and sat among the ashes. The scraping is probably a sign of grief.
9 Then his wife said to him, “Do you still persist in your integrity? Curse God, and die.” She wants Job to do what Satan expects Job to do. Chrysostom suggests this was the greatest trial the Satan could leave behind. Rabbis noted that Job did not listen to her, as did Adam. 10 Nevertheless, he said to her, “You speak as any foolish woman would speak. Shall we receive the good at the hand of God, and not receive the bad?” Job unexpectedly again (first in 1:20-22) offers his worship to God. He confines himself to the solemn assertion that he can see nothing in the suffering that must cast doubt on his loyalty to Yahweh. Job shows himself a vulnerable man. He can only ask with amazement whether one would really grant to God only the power to grant good and not the power to grant bad. This form of resignation to destiny or fate is an important element of the piety of the Sumerians. Job’s response articulates one of the theological puzzles with which ancient Israel, along with all other monotheistic religions, had to deal, namely, both evil and good residing within the same source. Much of the rest of the book considers this painful problem, which remains no less puzzling today than it did to the first hearers of Job’s story. In all this Job did not sin with his lips.While the narrator declares Job innocent of spoken sin (subtly narrowing the declaration of Job’s innocence from 1:22), the narrator says nothing of the torment doubtless under way in Job’s heart and mind. In Jewish monotheism, theodicy arises because it taught that God is the sovereign author of evil as well as good. Only the suffering of the righteous and the good fortune of the wicked brought an assault against Jewish faith, since both seemed to be incompatible with the righteousness of God. Jewish eschatology developed out of the failure of the first attempts at theodicy.[5]
What sort of God is this, anyway? Well, this is the God in whom Job believed, No doubt, as awful as God seems in this text, God fares well in comparison with other tribal gods of this era. Today, what we know about the justice of God helps us not to lay disasters and personal tragedies at his doorstep. If Job could refrain from "sinning with his lips" (badmouthing God) while believing in a God who could hand his children, as well as himself, into the clutches of Satan, then how much easier should it be for us to honor and trust God when tragedy strikes?
A cartoon showed an elderly bearded man in a white robe sitting before a panel of television monitors. It was obviously God keeping his world and children under surveillance. In front of God were two buttons, one said "Smite" and the other "Bless." God's finger was on the "smite" button. His attention was on a monitor that showed a piano falling from a building, about to crush an unwary pedestrian.
This part of Job can make us wonder. The vision of God rather arbitrarily smiting and blessing lingers into the present. Someone has called this the vision of the cosmic jailer.
This text is troubling on so many levels. It cannot be a pleasant feeling to realize that you — your life, possessions, and all that you have worked for— are not much more than the object of a parlor game between two cosmic beings. My own suggestion is that we look upon this scene as a parable, a picture, rather than take it literally. After all, God has nothing to prove, especially to Satan. The idea of God actually directing such affliction on Job is not a healthy or helpful image to have of God.
The point of the passage is in the response of Job. “Shall we receive the good at the hand of God, and not receive the bad?” Job is not overwhelming in his affirmation of God at this point. Life is what it is. God is God. What is at stake here is that Job worship God, not because of any earthly blessing, but because of who God is. In his response, Job removes the circumstances of his life — whether good or bad — from having any bearing on his relationship with God. Job’s life — whether one of prosperity or misery — is what it is. His relationship to God is that of the created to the Creator. The Creator is worthy of awe, fear, admiration, worship, praise and glory without factoring anything else into the equation.
[1] Barth (Church Dogmatics, I.2 [14.1], 51). Barth tries to separate such a tale from myth because it refers to a “day.” Yet, I find it hard to separate Chapter 1-2 from mythical notions.
[2] Pannenberg (Systematic Theology, Volume 2, 16, 109)
[3]
[4]
[5] Pannenberg (Systematic Theology, Volume 3, 632)
No comments:
Post a Comment