Is the Job narrative evidence of human construction?

[marco]

To many the story of Job is an embarrassment in its artificiality and the ludicrous collusion between heaven and hell. The chorus line that follows each of the disasters that initially beset the man is "and I only am escaped alone to tell thee." Would an author today get off with what seems such a silly scenario?

We can say the story illustrates the goodness and patience of a splendid individual but what can we say about the divinity who presided over Job's tribulations?

Have the writers of the story gone too far this time in trying to illustrate God can do what he likes?

Can we find anything good to say about the God in this story?

Satan turned up at what seems to have been an absurd AGM of angels and their master and instead of being turned away he was listened to and his challenge accepted - to torture a good human being for being good.

Does this suggest the Bible sometimes wanders into nonsensical tales?

Or can we find any good in the God-Satan plot?

[theophile]

[Replying to post 4 by marco]

Perhaps we are reading different versions. In the Authorised Version we have Job saying: "I abhor myself and repent in dust and ashes," as though he had been the instigator of the tribulations.

This verse is the crux of the matter. Carol Newsom, a leading Job scholar, suggests there are something like 5-6 viable interpretations of this, and that the ambiguity is complete. (We can't say from the text alone what the true meaning is. We need the broader context to decide...)

My suggestion, which is among the viable, is that Job is consoled about dust and ashes.

The whole poetic dialogue is a consolation. Job needs to be consoled about the human status / condition (see my last post). The question is, does God console Job (subtle reading of God's speeches in 38-41), or does God blow Job away, and put him in his place (superficial reading of God's speeches, which would lead to the interpretation and translation you cite here).

To your broader question about the goodness of God, I think that a close reading shows that God consoles Job through his words (God does not debase Job).

Thus Job, who at last gets it, responds: I am consoled about dust and ashes. Or more precisely, I change my mind about what I concluded was my status as a human being (due to the way I was treated).

[Willum]

[Replying to JehovahsWitness]

You do know that the Greek and Roman did not take those myths very seriously?
Their flood story was a comedy, for example.

And all those other stories, were, well, stories.

Unlike Biblical stories, which are venerated as if it was possible for them to happen. Like so many things, the Greeks and Romans were far advanced barring the Christian Dark Ages. Ho-hum.

My point being, don't disparage others, until you know their story.

No one believes George Washington threw a dollar across the Potomac, for example, but it is still a popular fable.

[marco]

I prefer the Greek and Roman pantheon.

Then I should think the best thing for you would be to read Greek and Roman pantheon. I generally think people should do what they prefer especially when it comes to reading material, I enjoy reading the bible, I get a lot out of it but if you don't it might be best not to read it.

I read classical literature for knowledge and the Bible for entertainment. There are similarities, of course, such as the accounts of the Flood, but I find classical literature more intelligently written.

You should at least read Ovid's Metamorphoses. And Seneca would give you some fine instruction in moral behaviour, without the need to sacrifice a bull. Go well.

[theophile]

[Replying to post 10 by marco]

Well the King James sensibly writes Satan. I find your elaborate interpretation less likely and barely comprehensible or plausible in a very, very simple story.
An accuser, brought on to the stage in this silly way, would surely melt before the sight of God. The scenario is even worse than the Satan-God set-up.

Look into any serious academic treatment. There is no question. It is not "Satan."

We are being serious? In God's court? A litigant? And why does God require to ask where the being comes from? Fine in a play, where the audience need to know, but stupid in the mouth of God. As fiction it is mildly entertaining.

Again, check any serious academic treatment. And you tell me why God asks the question. In the text, God clearly asks the question! I gave you a reason why. Maybe God's asking of the question should have you question all these biases you're bringing to the text about God...

(God clearly does not know everything and even shows surprise.)

A proper God would have punished such presumption rather than indulge in a dialogue.

What? A "proper God"? Where does this come from? Back it up please.

God condones violence and suppresses any kind of assistance. Wicked, I think. God's response to Job's lament is to express selfish anger first, and demand some sort of sacrificial apology. As if HE had suffered! His insensitive restoration of a new family indicates the God that is depicted here is an example of vengeance and cruelty. He was responsible for Job's suffering since a simple word would have ended it.

God never demanded a sacrifice from Job, but from the friends for speaking falsely.

HOW DID THE FRIENDS SPEAK FALSELY? (And Job true?) Answer that, and show how it backs up what you say here, and maybe I'll consider what you say about God in the book of Job.

[marco]

This verse is the crux of the matter. Carol Newsom, a leading Job scholar, suggests there are something like 5-6 viable interpretations of this, and that the ambiguity is complete. (We can't say from the text alone what the true meaning is. We need the broader context to decide...)

We can take an unmade bed as a modern art exhibit and attach dozens of interesting meanings to it. It is the job of the Modern Art critic to do this. I've seen a picture of Carol Newsom but haven't read any of her theological material. I wonder what is meant by a "leading Job scholar" but I suppose it is not unlike the modern art critic who makes much of little, that being their way of life.

Basically the simple folk for whom the tale was written would gasp at how powerfully nasty God can be, even to the righteous. Job, prostrating himself obediently before divine oppression, gains some points. But in the end if Yahweh is himself a fabrication, which I am sure he is, then Carol's take on what Job's words mean won't bring Yahweh into existence.

However, if she's taking an objective view and not conceding God's reality, then I don't suppose it matters what interpretation we take. Volumes are written about Keats's beautiful:
" Beauty is truth, truth beauty;
That is all ye know on earth and all ye need to know."

Literature is full of beautiful phrases. I wouldn't place Job's among them.

[marco]

Look into any serious academic treatment. There is no question. It is not "Satan."

I have no doubt there are folk who see it in the way you describe. I'm not sure what "serious academic" means in the interpretation of an anecdote.

Again, check any serious academic treatment. You tell me why God asks the question. In the text, God clearly asks the question! I gave you a reason why.

God asks the question because nomads put it into his mouth. He asks a similarly silly question in the opening of Genesis when he's playing hide and seek with Adam. Another embarrassment. It is interesting that "academics" can tell us why God did this or that. The academics I associate with have no such powers.

What? A "proper God"? Where does this come from? Back it up please.

Read the tales of gods in Greek and Roman mythology. All gods are basically the same. Normally Yahweh behaves like the Queen of Hearts in Alice in Wonderland.

God never demanded a sacrifice from Job ............

Amusing. Job had nothing left to sacrifice, except perhaps his wife.

[theophile]

[Replying to marco]

I've seen a picture of Carol Newsom but haven't read any of her theological material. I wonder what is meant by a "leading Job scholar" but I suppose it is not unlike the modern art critic who makes much of little, that being their way of life.

Umm, I count someone who has a PhD from Harvard, is a professor of Old Testament and has been published multiple times on the subject as a "leading Job scholar."

I trust her more than you or even myself for that matter, unless you care to share your credentials. I could bring other scholars to the table as well.

But look, you can't just take a translation of the text or some modern notion of God and assume it is correct, as you do, for example, when insisting it is "Satan" in the book of Job. That is blatantly wrong and shows you don't really care to understand or read the text closely. All you want to do is setup and knock down strawman versions. So sorry, but you're not making any case here at all.

Basically the simple folk for whom the tale was written

What? What simple folk for whom the text was written? I think it's a story that takes up some pretty serious concerns and deals with them in a pretty significant manner. It's far from simple or for "simple folk."

Where do you get these conclusions from?

theophile wrote:

Look into any serious academic treatment. There is no question. It is not "Satan."

I have no doubt there are folk who see it in the way you describe. I'm not sure what "serious academic" means in the interpretation of an anecdote.

Have you even looked at the original Hebrew? There is no question of what I say.

theophile wrote:

Again, check any serious academic treatment. You tell me why God asks the question. In the text, God clearly asks the question! I gave you a reason why.

God asks the question because nomads put it into his mouth. He asks a similarly silly question in the opening of Genesis when he's playing hide and seek with Adam. Another embarrassment. It is interesting that "academics" can tell us why God did this or that. The academics I associate with have no such powers.

So your whole argument is that the writers of the bible were stupid, and didn't realize they were putting stupid words in God's mouth that contradicted God's nature.

Okay.

How about we assume that they were reasonably intelligent, that they would not make such a blatant contradiction, and that maybe, just maybe, it is your view of God that needs correction...

Read the tales of gods in Greek and Roman mythology. All gods are basically the same.

Woah. Pretty sure the Jews, Christians, Muslims, Hindus, Pagans, etc, etc, would all disagree. But okay.

You have a very coarse view of things. No subtlety. Black or white.

theophile wrote:

God never demanded a sacrifice from Job ............

Amusing. Job had nothing left to sacrifice, except perhaps his wife.

What is amusing? Have you even read the book? In the end, God demands a sacrifice from the friends, not from Job. That is what you were referring to...

And Job had plenty still to sacrifice. His life?...

[Willum]

[Replying to post 17 by theophile]
So how do you explain God's role in Job?

Read the tales of gods in Greek and Roman mythology. All gods are basically the same.

Woah. Pretty sure the Jews, Christians, Muslims, Hindus, Pagans, etc, etc, would all disagree. But okay.

Hey Theo-So I have researched the Bible quite a bit, and have not yet found a unique story in the Bible, Old or New. Jesus is practically verbatim for Dionysus, whom Christians later perverted.

Every tale in the OT is stolen and badly interpolated into the new culture. We have actually known, but not accepted that the Israelites never were in Egypt, or built the pyramids.

What say you?

[JehovahsWitness]

My point being, don't disparage others, until you know their story.

Good point; why are you making it to me?

[Replying to post 12 by Willum]

I'm sorry, did I give the impression I wanted to discuss greek or roman literature? My bad. I was just commenting on a poster's preference, and saying that I am in favor of people reading what they enjoy. That was my point, I didn't mean to give the impression that I actually wanted to persue a discussion Greek and Roman pantheon.

Regards,

JW

[JehovahsWitness]

You should at least read Ovid's Metamorphoses.

You should read "Mankind's search for God". It gives some wonderful insights into the human nature as expressed thorugh religion (published by Jehovah's Witensses). I also recommend the book

"What does the bible really teach" (free online book available below)
https://www.jw.org/en/publications/books/bible-teach/