Bible Study Job

[stovebolts]

Oh I definitely agree God answered Job! And in doing so He gave us a sort of blueprint for how we can expect Him to answer us ... not necessarily with words we can use to prove our experience to others, but with something much more deeply meaningful, that doesn't go away just because we don't remember the right words.

That "mashal" idea, I definitely got that from this literature as soon as I saw the description of Job as being blameless. It's the intent, the purpose to this literature that matters to us.

Absolutely. It is one thing to hear about our God, and another to "see" him.

The story cuts to the bone what it is to suffer unjustly to the world we live in and reach out to those that are close to you for comfort, only to be let down. His emotions at times are about as raw as the human experience gets.

The majority of the text deals with theological questions on the nature of God, and how he functions. Very difficult to discern at times IMHO. Within context a, it is a correct view, but fails miserably within context b. If anything, it should teach us humility as it expands our idea of God being in control.

 

[HeIsRisen2018]

April, I have one more post for you now:

his name isn't job like "get a job;" it's pronounced with a long O, so like Jobe (rhymes with rode)

Really? So apparently all these years I have been pronouncing it the wrong way then LOL!

 

[stovebolts]

Really? So apparently all these years I have been pronouncing it the wrong way then LOL!

Ha, no wonder so many people dont want a Job!

 

[HeIsRisen2018]

Ha, no wonder so many people dont want a Job!

LOL!! Sorry, I didn't respond sooner, I just came back from the beach.

 

[stovebolts]

LOL!! Sorry, I didn't respond sooner, I just came back from the beach.

Now that's Irony lol!

 

[HeIsRisen2018]

Now that's Irony lol!

What?? Don't tell me that you did too. Lol! Was the water as cold as it was here? I don't want to get too off topic, but I went swimming in Lake Erie.

 

[stovebolts]

What?? Don't tell me that you did too. Lol! Was the water as cold as it was here? I don't want to get too off topic, but I went swimming in Lake Erie.

Ha, no.
Nobody like a Job, because the beach is much nicer.

 

[HeIsRisen2018]

Ha, no.
Nobody like a Job, because the beach is much nicer.

Oh okay lol

 

[Jim Parker]

Who is satan, that he should be capable of entering into a bet with the Most High?

Exactly!
Evil does not deserve a straight answer.
Consider the manner in which Jesus addressed the pharisees, Sadducees, and scribes. They got no respect.

 

[Jim Parker]

I think Adam and Eve, Cain and Able predate Job, and we attribute Moses as the author.

Many attribute Moses as the author. I do not.

I have not heard he was the adopted brother of Abram.

That's a quip. It's not intended to be taken as reality.
"Adopted TWIN brother" is an oxymoron.

But we know he was a gentile based on the accounting of his death, for he was not laid to rest with his Fathers as is customary in Jewish writings.

The report of Job's death is as the report of the deaths in Genesis.
Job 42:16-17 After this Job lived one hundred and forty years, and saw his children and grandchildren for four generations. So Job died, old and full of days.
Gen 5:5 So all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years; and he died.
Gen 5:8 So all the days of Seth were nine hundred and twelve years; and he died.

It is in the books of Samuel and Kings that the phrase "rested with his fathers is used." That is from a much later period and the literary style had changed a bit.
1Ki 11:43 Then Solomon rested with his fathers, and was buried in the City of David his father. And Rehoboam his son reigned in his place.
1Ki 14:20 The period that Jeroboam reigned was twenty-two years. So he rested with his fathers. Then Nadab his son reigned in his place.

The change in phrasing may is likely a reflection of the fact that the kings were all descendants of Jacob. (AKA: "Israel") "The fathers" is very likely a reference to the 12 patriarchs.

Such a reference would not be possible for Job or for the people of genesis before Abraham.

iakov the fool

 

[stovebolts]

Many attribute Moses as the author. I do not.

That's a quip. It's not intended to be taken as reality.
"Adopted TWIN brother" is an oxymoron.

The report of Job's death is as the report of the deaths in Genesis.
Job 42:16-17 After this Job lived one hundred and forty years, and saw his children and grandchildren for four generations. So Job died, old and full of days.
Gen 5:5 So all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years; and he died.
Gen 5:8 So all the days of Seth were nine hundred and twelve years; and he died.

It is in the books of Samuel and Kings that the phrase "rested with his fathers is used." That is from a much later period and the literary style had changed a bit.
1Ki 11:43 Then Solomon rested with his fathers, and was buried in the City of David his father. And Rehoboam his son reigned in his place.
1Ki 14:20 The period that Jeroboam reigned was twenty-two years. So he rested with his fathers. Then Nadab his son reigned in his place.

The change in phrasing may is likely a reflection of the fact that the kings were all descendants of Jacob. (AKA: "Israel") "The fathers" is very likely a reference to the 12 patriarchs.

Such a reference would not be possible for Job or for the people of genesis before Abraham.

iakov the fool

Yes, I do believe the Fathers represent the Patriarchs.

The Patriarchs are always referred to as the Fathers, as you already know.
Exodus 3:16
`Go, and thou hast gathered the elders of Israel, and hast said unto them: Jehovah, God of your fathers, hath appeareth unto me, God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, saying, I have certainly inspected you, and that which is done to you in Egypt;

Genesis 49:29
And he commandeth them, and saith unto them, `I am being gathered unto my people; bury me by my fathers, at the cave which [is] in the field of Ephron the Hittite;

There are many opinions on who the author of Job is, but most Jewish sources support the author as Moses, and these same sources readily accept he is gentile by his burial. But thank you for sharing your understanding.

 

[Jim Parker]

There are many opinions on who the author of Job is

The story of Job predates its being written as do the stories of Genesis.
Job is thought to have been a contemporary of the Patriarchs; Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.

most Jewish sources support the author as Moses

Hm. This is the first time I have heard that. I have read that the author is unknown.
I guess the word "author" is given a rather broad meaning. In the case of Moses, "author" would be used to refer to a person who had written down a story that has been widely known for centuries.

 

[Razeontherock]

Ha, no wonder so many people dont want a Job!

Hey, now we know how to convince US citizens to pick fruit! Lol

 

[Razeontherock]

Exactly!
Evil does not deserve a straight answer.
Consider the manner in which Jesus addressed the pharisees, Sadducees, and scribes. They got no respect.

Where two or three of them were gathered together, Rodney Dangerfield was among them

 

[Razeontherock]

Authorship is an "interesting" idea, when it comes to works from antiquity. Modern scholarship likes to contest that nothing Jewish was written before the Babylonian captivity. I find the short-sightedness of this view to be oppressive. Language surely changed by that time, which was a good reason to write out new versions; plus the fact they were in captivity. So if the oldest known manuscripts seem to be from that time period, it means none of it had ever been written down previously?!? Oy vey.

Attributing authorship of Job to Moses does make a lot of sense from a Jewish perspective, I'm surprised this is the first I've heard of it.

 

[Jim Parker]

Modern scholarship likes to contest that nothing Jewish was written before the Babylonian captivity.

Careful. Don't paint with too broad a brush. That is not a universally held view among modern scholars.

So if the oldest known manuscripts seem to be from that time period, it means none of it had ever been written down previously?!? Oy vey.

Oi veh indeed! Manuscripts don't last forever and, when a book of the Law began to wear out so that some of the words were not legible, the book would be destroyed and replaced with a fresh copy.
"Modern scholarship" is often a reference to the "documentary hypothesis." The book; Before Abraham Was, bay Kikawada and Quinn does a wonderful both refuting that theory and revealing the excellent literary ability of the writer of Genesis 1-11. The book is back in print and an excellent addition to the library of any student of the Bible.

Attributing authorship of Job to Moses does make a lot of sense from a Jewish perspective, I'm surprised this is the first I've heard of it.

Job can be considered a response to Proverbs which tends to be a "cut and dried" description of how God works.
And I am not familiar with Jewish OT scholarship. My focus has been on the Early Church Fathers and Orthodox scholars. (The former leading me to the latter)
Also, I don't get too interested in who we think wrote what. What we have in the scriptures is, I believe, (faith, not scholarship) what God has revealed for us. Who God used to write down the stories that had been memorized for generations does not seem that important to me.


iakov the fool

 

[stovebolts]

I agree Jim Parker. The meta data is not as important as some would have it to be. It has its place, but in my view, the text has much much more to offer.

The Sages have much to say about Iyov (Job) and there are many stories in Jewish circles that tell much about Job. Interestingly enough, there are ancient Hebrew words in the document that even Hebrew Scholars dont know the entire meaning, so they guess as best they can. In no other part of scripture are these to be found other than in Job.
Dating the book has enough of it's own problems, including the time Job was alive, if indeed he were a real person at all. This is why it is considered a Mashal. The details dont have to be accurate because the intent is where the weight is at.
The Jews have very different conversations about Job than we do. Such as, was Job greater than Abram? It would seem so in many ways I wont get into. However, they look at it in light of the rewards of the world to come. Job had his reward here, Abraham in the world to come.

 

[Razeontherock]

Absolutely. It is one thing to hear about our God, and another to "see" him.

The story cuts to the bone what it is to suffer unjustly to the world we live in and reach out to those that are close to you for comfort, only to be let down. His emotions at times are about as raw as the human experience gets.

The majority of the text deals with theological questions on the nature of God, and how he functions. Very difficult to discern at times IMHO. Within context a, it is a correct view, but fails miserably within context b. If anything, it should teach us humility as it expands our idea of God being in control.

There is yet more greatness to be gleaned from this conversation. And again April had no idea what a great question she was asking by starting a thread, that it should lead to such weighty matters.

You had mentioned that the text reveals Job to be a "gentile," and Jim showed Scriptural context to present a different angle. I will add I think it's a fair assessment to state that "Judaism" per se was never added until Moses; not that "Moses started it," but God created the institution through Moses.

In much the same way, God claimed that Moses parted the Red Sea, but Moses said God did it. All Moses did was raise a stick, and he couldn't even hold his arms up like he was supposed to! He had to have personal assistants help him just to do even that much. Wouldn't it be nice if we had that kind of assistance? And that is exactly where the changes in this forum come in: we are to "hold one another's arms up" when it appears we falter, not be like Job's supposed friends.

In that respect there is neither Jew nor Gentile.

 

[OzSpen]

So in other words are you saying that one of Job's sins was that he didn't ask forgiveness for his friends? And if it really is as difficult to read as you say it is, then hopefully the Message Bible will make it easier to follow and understand.

HIR,

I urge you not to use The Message because it is one man's paraphrase.

I find better and simple language in committee translation Bibles such as:

1. The New Living Translation, and
2. The New International Reader's Version.

Oz

 

[stovebolts]

There is yet more greatness to be gleaned from this conversation. And again April had no idea what a great question she was asking by starting a thread, that it should lead to such weighty matters.

You had mentioned that the text reveals Job to be a "gentile," and Jim showed Scriptural context to present a different angle. I will add I think it's a fair assessment to state that "Judaism" per se was never added until Moses; not that "Moses started it," but God created the institution through Moses.

In much the same way, God claimed that Moses parted the Red Sea, but Moses said God did it. All Moses did was raise a stick, and he couldn't even hold his arms up like he was supposed to! He had to have personal assistants help him just to do even that much. Wouldn't it be nice if we had that kind of assistance? And that is exactly where the changes in this forum come in: we are to "hold one another's arms up" when it appears we falter, not be like Job's supposed friends.

In that respect there is neither Jew nor Gentile.

You may appreciate this article.
https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/640221/jewish/What-is-the-Meaning-of-the-Name-Jew.htm