Part 33
3. The dramatic development suggested by the three prose introductions in 1:1—5, 2:11—13, an(^ 32:I~5 points to distinct episodes of conflict: YHWH afflicts Job, Job challenges God, YHWH rebukes Job. Alternatively, one may speak of hidden conflict, conflict explored, and conflict resolved (Habel 1985). In this view, the fundamental category of the book is prose, with poetry serving to retard the movement of the plot and heightening the emotions. This understanding of the book encounters considerable difficulty: the narrator's comments mark two closures in the prologue (1:22 and 2:10); the third section has two 'endings'; Elihu's speeches do not resolve the conflict between Job and God; and that resolution occurs in the poetic section.
1. The obvious structure of the book consists of (i) a story about Job's affliction, (2) a debate between him and three friends, (3) the speeches of Elihu, (4) divine speeches leading to Job's submissions, and (5) a story about Job's restoration. Rather than viewing the poetry as a retardation of the plot, one may see it as a way of introducing multiple responses to the problem of evil. Progress does occur, however, with Job gradually moving away from welcoming death and closer towards imagining a judicial resolution, one made possible by a third power, variously understood as umpire, arbitrator, or redeemer.
2. Texts from the Egyptian Twelfth Dynasty (1990—1785) with a similar theme demonstrate the extent of intellectual unease resulting from suffering that was perceived to be unjust. The Admonitions oflpuwer conjectures that the divine herdsman either loves death or has fallen asleep. Social turmoil forces the author to reflect on the appropriateness of traditional teachings, for how can the gods possess authority, knowledge, and truth when they permit such chaos in society? The Dispute of a Man and his Ba consists of an attempt by a person, overwhelmed by life's misery, to persuade his soul to
333 JOB
join him in suicide. The Eloquent Peasant depicts the suffering inflicted on a peasant by a governmental figure. These latter two texts abound in positive similes for death, e.g. death is like recovering from illness, like the fragrance of myrrh, like an infant's mouth reaching for milk.
2. The author of the EpistJe of James emphasizes Job's patience, but 'Abot de Rabbi Nathan accuses Job of sinning in his heart and Rashi faulted Job for excessive talking. According to Glatzer (1969), later Jewish interpreters called Job a rebel (Ibn Ezra, Nachmanides), a dualist (Sforno), a pious man searching for truth (Saadia Gaon), one who lacked love (Maimonides), an Aristotelian denier of providence (Gersonides), one who confused God's work with Satan's (Simeon ben Semah Duran), a determinist (Joseph Albo), one who failed to pacify Satan, a scapegoat, an isolationist (the Zohar), one who suffered as a sign of divine love (the Zohar, Moses ben Hayyim). A Jewish legend states that God turned Job over to Satan, called Samael, to keep him occupied while the Jews escaped from Egypt; then God rescued Job from the enemy at the last moment.
3. A text from Ugarit, the Epic ofKeret, tells about a hero who loses his wife and children but eventually finds favour with the gods and receives a new wife and more children. The Greek myth of 'Prometheus Bound' has been compared with Job, but Prometheus, a Titan, brought down Zeus's wrath through a wilful act. An Indian tale of a divine discussion leading to a test of the hero, Harischandra, by the god Shiva that demonstrates his virtue shows how the problem of evil pressed itself on thinkers far and near.
4. None of these texts provides an exact parallel to the book of Job, which adapts the traditional genre of debate and framing narrative from the Babylonian Theodicy and I Will Praise the Lord of Wisdom respectively, adding more friends and enhancing the theophany by incorporating it into the debate. In addition, the biblical author uses extensive catalogues, or lists, hymnic texts, a negative confession, and laments. In the end, the book of Job stands alone, like the hero ofthe book.
3. The early church emphasized Job's suffering as a moral lesson and included readings from the book of Job in the liturgy of the dead. Gregory the Great wrote thirty-five books of sermons on Job, and Augustine read the book as an example of grace. Thomas Aquinas used the book as a startingpoint for discussing the metaphysical problem of divine providence (Damico and Yaffe 1989). Calvin wrote 159 sermons on the book of Job, mostly polemical defences of providence
(Dekker 1952). In the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, the emphasis fell on Job as a rebel. Voltaire viewed Job as a representative of the human condition (Hausen 1972).
E. Canon and Text. 1. At least one Christian theologian, Theodore of Mopsuestia, questioned the authority of the book of Job, and Job's historicity was called into question in a rabbinic tractate (B. Bat. 153). The exact position ofthe book of Job in the canon was a matter of dispute. Jewish tradition designates the two different views by acrostic abbreviations, 'mt (truth) for Job ('iyyob), Proverbs (misle) and Psalms (tehillim) and I'm (twin) for the sequence Psalms, Job, and Proverbs.
4. Modern critics also tend to view the book in the light of prevailing intellectual or religious sentiment. Carl Jung (1954) used psychology as the key to interpreting the book. In his view, the marriage of the powerful but unreflective deity to hokmd (wisdom) resulted in the cross, an attempt to provide a more reasoned response to the problem of evil. Jack Kahn (1975) draws on psychiatry to trace the process of grief through which Job passed. Goethe's Faust and Archibald MacLeish's J. B. (1956) approach the problem of evil from a literary perspective, whereas Girard (1987) stresses the universal desire to establish order through identifying and murdering a scapegoat, and Gutierrez (1987) identifies the problem as that of speaking properly about God in the midst of poverty.
2. The Greek text ofthe book of Job, much shorter than the Hebrew, often amounts to a paraphrase. It shows definite theological bias at a few places, e.g. the repointing of a negative particle in 13:15 to affirm trust in God when confronted with the prospect of death at the hand ofthe deity (Pope 1973: 95—6). The Targum of Job from Qumran has the same disorder in chs. 24-7 as that in the MT. Surprisingly, the Targum seems to conclude the book at 42:11 instead of 42:17.
F. History of Interpretation. 1. The Testament of Job (ist cent. BCE?) is characterized by zeal against idols, extensive speculation about Satan, cosmological dualism, interest in women, burial customs, magic, mysticism, angelic glossolalia, and patience. The author diverges from the biblical story in a number of ways: (i) Job destroys Satan's idol and incurs his wrath, but when Satan disguises himself to trick Job, an angel reveals his identity; (2) Job's possessions and virtuous deeds are magnified in haggadic fashion (i.e. with sermonic or pious exposition); (3) Job's wife, Sitis, demonstrates her loyalty by begging for bread and selling her hair to obtain food; (4) Satan concedes defeat in the conflict with Job; (5) Bildad poses 'difficult questions' and Zophar offers royal physicians to Job, who relies on the one who made physicians; (6) Sitis expresses concern for her children who have not received proper burial, and Job tells her that God took them; (7) God condemns the friends for not speaking the truth 'about Job'; (8) Job's daughters inherit magical items and a gift of glossolalia; and (9) Job is transported into heaven by means of chariots.
5. A philosopher emphasizes Job's bitterness of spirit (Wilcox 1989); artists depict Job's suffering in the light of Greek mythology (William Blake) and the holocaust (Fronius 1980); and a Yiddish interpreter uses Goethe's Faust as a lens through which to view Job positively (Zhitlowsky 1919). A contemporary novelist and survivor of the Nazi concentration camps likens the Jewish fate under Hitler to Job's affliction (Elie Wiesel) but is opposed by a humanist who contrasts Job's survival with the victims of Auschwitz and Dachau (Rubenstein). Existentialists use Job as an example of the human situation (Camus, Kafka), and a Marxist philosopher sees him as an exemplary rebel against theism and the abuse of power by religious establishments (Ernst Bloch).
6. Within the circles of biblical scholarship, interpreters provide various literary readings of the book: a feminist, a vegetarian, a materialist, a NT ideological critique (Clines 1989). An older reading ofthe book as drama has been revived (Alonso-Schokel 1977), together with a shift to viewing it as comedy. The modern silencing of ancient dissent in the Roman Catholic liturgy (Rouillard 1983)—in which only
JOB 334
Adversary accuses Job of serving God because it pays well to do so. To determine who has correctly seen into Job's heart, the Adversary proposes to put him to a test by removing all indications of divine favour, here understood as possessions (including children). YHWH agrees to the test, turning Job's possessions over to the Adversary, with a single restriction, that he not harm Job's person.
affirmative passages are read publicly—and interpretation (Tilley 1989) has evoked dismay. A contemporary poet has provided a fresh translation, removing its sting by omitting crucial verses (Mitchell 1987). In short, interpreters of the book of Job have used it as a convenient means of putting forth their own understandings of reality.
(1:13-22) The third scene begins on a happy note but quickly descends to the depths of human suffering. Successive messengers inform Job and the reader simultaneously of four calamities, two of heavenly origin and two inflicted by human foes (note the symbolism, four for completion, heaven and earth for the entirety of space). Repetition gives the awful news a stupefying effect. One by one the lone survivors tell Job of his losses: marauding Sabeans killed his oxen and donkeys, a heavenly fire consumed his sheep, Chaldeans stole his camels, and a mighty wind demolished the house in which his children were feasting, killing all of them. These messengers mirror the heavenly ones reporting to YHWH; only the fourth interjects a sign of emotional distress (hinneh). The Sabeans were probably northern Arabians rather than people from the south or Africa. Chaldeans were semi-nomads, not the later Neo-Babylonians of the seventh and sixth centuries BCE, who conquered Judah in 587 BCE and took many citizens of Judah into exile. As this tale of woe unfolds, 'Satan lurks, waiting for the blasphemy' (Dhorme 1967: p. xxx).
The Prologue (1:1-2:13)
In five scenes of elevated prose (1:1—5; 1:6—12; 1:13—22; 2:1—6; 2:7—13 (3:1)) the narrative introduces the main characters in dramatic conflict and the theological issue that will be explored. Part of the problem is the heavenly backdrop of two scenes, for this information is hidden from the hero and his detractors. The Adversary poses the issue in a terse question: Does Job serve God ('Udhim)for nothing? Its staccato rhythm expresses impudence, as does the laconic answer in 2:2 (Gordis 1978:15). A series of calamities puts Job to the test, and he emerges as a faithful servant despite excruciating circumstances. The arrival of Job's three friends advances the conflict to a different level, one occasioned by poetic debate. (1:1-5) Th£ five scenes alternate between earth and heaven. The story opens with a description of an exceptional man, Job, who had a full quota of children (seven sons, three daughters; both 7 and 3 are complete numbers) and possessions (7,000 sheep, 3,000 camels, 500 each of oxen and she-asses; 7 and 3 again, equalling 10; 5 and 5 equals ten, a complete number). The description moves outward, from the most intimate to the most distant (Newsom, 1996: 349). v. i, the reversal of normal order for the verb calls attention to the predicate, Job. A complete (tarn has this meaning rather than 'perfection') man of integrity, he was also morally straight, religious, and ethical. A non-Israelite, his home was Transjordanian Uz, a name probably chosen as an audial pun on the sages' word for counsel, fesd (Weiss 1983: 23). v. 3, none surpassed him in the East, just as no king rivalled Solomon in wisdom, according to i Kings 4:30 [MT 5:10]. v. 4, 'in turn' (lit. each on his day) probably refers to the several birthdays of the sons, not to constant rounds of feasting. The brothers' inclusion of their sisters in these festivities is extraordinary for the ancient culture; their unusual generosity is matched by their father in the epilogue (42:15). v. 5, the narrator views Job's offering of sacrifices as another positive attribute. Job worries that the children may have missed the mark and blessed Elohim without recognizing their guilt. Alternatively, the verb b-r-k is used euphemistically, in place of g-l-l, hence 'cursed'. Ironically, Job's goodness brings about his terrible misfortune, including the death of his children. (1:6-12) The idyllic setting, except for Job's unease about his children, shifts, both in location and tenor. An Adversary (hassatan, a title rather than a proper name) joins the assemblage of divine beings and responds to the deity by means of a pun on his name (sut, to wander). This heavenly Adversary is a counterpart to Job, suspecting everyone just as Job suspected his sons (Weiss 1983: 40). In a rhetorical question indicating ongoing rivalry, YHWH brings up Job's name and vouches for his integrity, using the same language as v. i, but the cynical
Job responds to this litany of destruction in the manner of a faithful servant; he mourns according to custom and quotes a proverb, adding his resolve to bless YHWH. Job does not say he will return to his mother's womb—not even mother earth. The Hebrew word samma is a euphemism for Sheol, the land of the dead (cf Eccl 5:15; Sir 40:1). The proverb uses synonymous and antithetic parallelism (naked/came from 11 naked/return to), while Job's addition limits itself to antithetic parallelism (gave || took away), v. 22, the narrator intrudes long enough to pronounce judgement on Job, whom he declares blameless.
(2:1—6) The fourth scene opens like the second, as if nothing has intervened, although YHWH concludes with an indictment of the Adversary. The word hinnam (tr. 'for no reason') repeats the word that the Adversary singled out as Job's flaw 'Does Job serve God for nothing [ for no reason] ?' v. 4, 'Skin for skin' implies a culture characterized by barter rather than monetary exchange, but its meaning is unclear. It may suggest equal value, or the expression may refer to exchanging one kind of skin for another kind. Job's possessions accord with the (pre-)patriarchal setting, but his sons dwelt in houses, not tents. The Adversary incites YHWH to intensify the test by striking at Job's health. When referring to the deity, the stretched-out hand signifies misfortune. This time, too, YHWH limits the Adversary; Job's survival was essential to the story's dramatic unfolding. (2:7-13) Smitten with a disease of the skin that cannot be identified on the basis of the poetic allusions in the dialogue, Job scrapes himself with a piece of broken pottery, either to ease the itching or as a sign of self-mortification. In his isolation, Job's wife repeats YHWH's affirmation of her husband but turns it into a question: 'Do you still persist in your integrity?' What she urges him to do is unclear. The verb barak
335 JOB
identical. The poet echoes the myth of a chaos-dragon in the ancient Near East (Tiamat in Mesopotamia, Lotan and Yamm at Ugarit), one that was also at home in several biblical texts, where various names for the monster occur (Rahab, Leviathan, Tannin, cf. Isa 27:1; 51:9; Ps 74:14). Professional cursers recall Balaam (Num 22—4; a non-biblical text from Deir Alia mentions this prophet whose reputation became tarnished in biblical memory). In 3:12 Job alludes to a ritual by which a parent acknowledged a newborn by holding it on the knees (cf. Sir 15:2). The threefold use ofsam ('there') in 3:17-19 recalls the euphemism for Sheol in 1:21. The image of grave-robbers informs 3:20-2, where Job ironically compares their excitement in digging for treasure, buried along with the dead, with his own fantasy of death. The word for 'fenced in' (3:23) differs from that in 1:10 (suk and suk respectively). Tenses in Hebrew are notoriously difficult, making it impossible to know whether or not Job's fear expressed in 3:24 was habitual; if the verbs designate the past, they undercut Job's extraordinary piety (Good 1990: 208). Three parallel expressions (no ease, quiet, rest) contrast grammatically with the fourth (dread) and the verb 'come' links this verse with the previous one. By this means the poet indicates that Job's character is more complex than the prose acknowledges.
may be undecipherable (Linafelt 1996). In favour of translating it 'curse' is Job's harsh reply. He likens her to foolish or vulgar women. The LXX attributes a longer speech to Job's wife, and the Testament of Job presents her in a much more favourable light, giving her an actual name, Sitis (the Targum at 2:9 calls Job's wife Dinah). Job reminds his wife that we receive both good and evil from God. He implies that if people receive good they cannot reject the bad. The narrator enters the story for a second time, changing the language ever so slightly. Later Jewish interpreters seized this opening to accuse Job of sinning in his heart while outwardly uttering devout sentiments. The visit by Job's three friends (kings in the LXX) from Edom and Arabia provides a transition from prose to poetry, one appropriately characterized by profound silence. Their stated purpose in coming was pastoral—to bring consolation—and their long silence (only here does the phrase 'seven nights' occur) as they sat with him on the ash heap confirms that positive intention. Their act of throwing dust heavenward may have been apotropaic, to frighten away evil powers. The name Eliphaz occurs in Gen 36:15; the names Bildad and Zophar are not found elsewhere in the Bible. Teman was in Edom; the location of Shuah and Naamah is uncertain. The final scene of this popular narrative appears in 42:7-17, which tells about Job's restoration.
Job's lament combines a number of grotesque images: a perpetually pregnant woman, Job's mother; a day robbed of its essence, light; two personified lovers, night and dawn, awaiting one another and condemned to an absence of sexual ecstasy; former enemies, oppressors and the oppressed, at rest together; and an instance of divine mockery, the giving of light to the blind. YHWH's speeches from the tempest will return to this notion of divine largesse; there, too, the gift does not benefit the human population.
The Poetic Debate (3:1-42:6)
The familiar folk-tale about a virtuous man who loses everything for no apparent reason (cf. Ezek 14:14, 20 where Job is mentioned along with Noah and Dan'el (of Ugaritic legend)) occasions a debate about the relationship between goodness and suffering. A poem about wisdom follows; then Job contrasts his glorious past with his ignoble present and utters an oath of innocence aimed at forcing God to respond (chs. 28— 31). Instead, Elihu answers (chs. 32-7) but evokes silence until YHWH speaks from the whirlwind (38:1-42:6), reducing Job to two brief responses (40:3—5; 42:1—6). The poetry is some of the most difficult in the Bible, due partly to the number of rare words but also to the distinctive syntax and grammar. Multiple readings are inherently necessary, both because of the rhetorical strategy and the poetic language. Perhaps also the emotional intensity contributes to unintelligibility at crucial points (e.g. 19:25-7; 42:5-6).
(4:1-5:27) Eliphaz Introduces the Parameters of the Debate The only one of Job's three friends whose character is rounded, or fleshed out, Eliphaz sets forth the different arguments that will be explored in the course of the debate: you can trust in God to restore you (here Eliphaz uses two words that earlier characterized Job, 'blameless' and a 'God-fearer', 1:1, 8; 2:3); wickedness is punished; human beings are naturally culpable; the prosperity of the sinful will be cut short; the best course is to seek God; suffering is an indication of divine discipline; you will attain a ripe old age. Beginning on a positive note (unless 4:10 cruelly refers to the death of Job's children through the metaphor of a lion), Eliphaz mildly rebukes Job for impatience when personally victimized. The charge of duplicity weakens his positive affirmation of his friend, one who strengthened others in misery. The rich vocabulary permits the poet to use five different words for lion in 4:10—11 (cf. Joel 1:4 for similar richness). Convinced that a principle of reward and punishment governed the universe, Eliphaz is oblivious to the pain resulting from this dogma (4:7—9, where a divine wind brings destruction like the tempest that killed Job's children). According to Gen 2:7 the breath of YHWH animated the first human; now that wind wields devastation.
(3:1—26) Job Curses his Birthday A lament is Job's way of opening the debate; instead of cursing God he pronounces a curse on the day of his birth and the night of his conception (the beginning and end of gestation), as if wishing it to be obliterated from the calendar. The verb for curse (g-l-l) differs from that of the prologue, where b-r-k occurs. In 3:3-10 the curse encompasses the whole creation, seeking to reverse the favourable conditions set into place by God in Gen 1:1—2:40. A similar anticosmic description occurs in Jer 4:23-6, where the prophet seems to behold a reversal of conditions that rendered life on earth possible, and a curse of one's birthday can be found in Jer 14:14—18 (with an allusion to the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah). The reference to an infant as a geber (elsewhere used of much older boys, even a soldier) contains a pun on the word for grave, geber. Poetic parallelism between Leviathan and Yam (the Sea) favours this reading over 'day'; in an unpointed text the Hebrew words for 'day' and 'sea' are
(4:12-5:8) The closest thing in wisdom literature to the mantic wisdom of the book of Daniel, a type of wisdom widespread in Mesopotamia, this section resembles a theophany, particularly the divine manifestation to Elijah in the cave at Mt.
JOB 336
32:39; Ps 94:12; 107:42; Prov 3:11; Hos 6:1). A significant metaphor for YHWH in the story of the Exodus, the healer (Ex 15:26), informs Eliphaz's advice in v. 18. Here, as in Exodus, this metaphor vies with its opposite, that of the warrior (Ex 15:3). Eliphaz understands both wounds and healing as acts of the one deity. Both parental discipline and teachers' punishment of students in Egypt and in Mesopotamia included corporal punishment. Its purpose was to instil reliable teaching in the minds of youth and thus to form character. This motive behind harsh discipline explains Eliphaz's 'macarism' (an expression, frequent in Psalms, that begins with 'Happy', Heb. 'asre), 'Happy is the one whom God [Eloah] reproves', v. 19, numerical parallelism, rarely found in Mesopotamian and Egyptian literature, occurs more often in the Bible and in Ugaritic texts. Biblical usage varies, at some times referring to a total number symbolizing fullness (as in the Epic ofKeret from Ugarit) but at other times actually specifying the higher number of items, with emphasis on the final number. The former occurs in Am 1:3-2:16 ('For three... indeed for four...') and the latter is exemplified by numerous proverbial sayings (Prov 6:16-19; 30:15-16, 18—19, 2I~31)- Eliphaz uses the numerical saying for fullness: 'he will deliver you from every trouble', v. 22, the allusion to destruction may conceal a play on the divine name Shaddai. v. 23, elsewhere the Bible does not mention a covenant with stones, but Isa 11:6—9 gives poetic form to the anticipated peaceful relationship between animals and humans, v. 25, the usual biblical similes for Israel's countless progeny, 'like the stars' or 'like the sands of the sea shore' (cf. Gen 15:5), give way here to an appropriate image for a desert nomad: 'like the grass ofthe earth', v. 26, Job does not share this comforting view of death, for in his miserable state he cannot imagine that he will reach old age. Eliphaz's prediction is precisely what happens in the epilogue. How differently the author of Ecclesiastes viewed old age and death (cf. Eccl 11:7—12:7).
Horeb (i Kings 19:11-18) and to Abraham in Gen 15:12-17. Like Abraham, Eliphaz receives the divine visitation while in a deep sleep (tardcma). An elusive word steals past, quiet like a whisper; the prophet Elijah experienced YHWH's word as a faint echo, in contrast to the spectacular phenomena of wind, fire, and earthquake preceding it. Whereas Job felt dread as a result of the calamities that befell him, a sleeping Eliphaz encountered it when a wind (ruah) glided past his face. It is not stated whether or not Abram saw the smoking fire-pot and flaming torch that passed through the severed pieces and secured the covenant with a powerful promise, but Eliphaz is said to have been unable to make out the exact appearance of the deity. He does grasp the brief word that follows an eerie silence: 'Can a mortal be more righteous than God (Eloah)?' This reading takes into consideration the broader context where the issue becomes that of Job's claim to be pure at the same time as he indicts God for crimes against humanity. Those translators who read 'Can a mortal be righteous before God?' emphasize the immediate context, which stresses human vulnerability, as well as angelic fallibility. The irony of this reference to God's lack of trust in his servants is missed by Eliphaz, who does not know about the Adversary. Does Eliphaz also miss the irony of his own counsel? If humans really die without ever attaining wisdom, what does he dispense? Folly? Eliphaz appeals to consensus (4:7), expecting Job to concur in the common dogma of retribution; he also appeals to individual experience (4:8, 'As I have seen'), to special revelation (4:12-21), to collective experience (5:270, 'See, we have searched this out; it is true'), and to the obvious insights encapsulated in proverbial sayings (4:8, 'those who plough iniquity and sow trouble reap the same'; 5:2, 'Surely vexation kills the fool, and jealousy slays the simple'). In 5:3-5 Eliphaz's remarks border on cruelty, for Job had 'taken root' only to have his dwelling cursed and to discover that his children lacked safety. Does his precipitous fall mark Job as a fool like those scorned by Eliphaz? It appears that Eliphaz considers finitude a breeding-ground for trouble (5:7, where the Heb. words tr. 'sparks' are literally 'sons of Resheph'; in Canaanite mythology Resheph was the god of plague and pestilence). There may be a clever pun between the Hebrew words for ground ('adamd) and mortal ('adam) in 5:6-7 as in
(6:1-7:21) Job's Response to Eliphaz Employs both Sarcasm and Parody The participants in this debate seldom respond to the issues raised by the previous speaker, making it difficult to track the development of ideas. Job excuses his bold language by appealing to the deep agony enveloping him at the moment. He thinks it would outweigh the heaviest thing he can imagine: the sand of the sea. The image is striking; psychological and physical suffering in one side ofthe balance, all the sand ofthe sea in the other half of the scale, v. 4, no evidence of poison arrows has survived in the ancient Near East, although the dipping of arrowheads in poison was known to Virgil (Aeneid, 9.773) and Ovid (Epist. ex Ponto, 1.2.17-18). The expression may be Job's rhetorical manner of emphasizing the devastating effect ofthe divine arsenal. Job uses familiar imagery of a divine warrior; ancient peoples, biblical and non-biblical, understood their deities as accomplished fighters. The epithet, YHWH of hosts, probably alludes to heavenly hosts who did battle at YHWH's behest, later coming to mean also Israelite soldiers. Job uses the divine name Shaddai in this instance, w. 5-6, two 'difficult questions' emphasize the appropriateness of Job's complaint. An animal does not bray when its mouth is full; Job would have no reason to complain if he were contented like well-fed oxen. Life has become for him like tasteless food; he has no
Gen 3:17. A striking feature of 5:8 is the initial aleph (the first letter of the Heb. alphabet) in eight of the nine words; the last word breaks the pattern. In this verse, too, the reader encounters two general words for deity, 'el and 'elohim.
(5:9-13) Participles set this brief unit apart as a doxology, a hymn extolling God whom Job is urged to seek. The language is traditional. Beginning with a reference to innumerable wonders, the hymn then highlights an important specific action, the sending of rain, an oft-mentioned vital necessity in the ancient Near East. It moves on to consider the activity of God in exalting the lowly and bringing down wicked schemers, v. 13, this is the only passage from Job that is cited in the NT (cf i Cor 3:19).
(5:14-27) v. 17, two names for deity occur here, 'doah (Eloah) and sadday (Shaddai). The meaning of the latter is often taken to be related to the Akkadian word for 'mountain' or to mean 'destroyer'. The ideas expressed in w. 17—18, that God disciplines the ones he loves, are widespread in the Bible (cf. Deut
337 JOB
w. 14—16, the usual time for resting from one's labour offers no comfort to Job, whose nights are full of terrifying dreams. (The idea of psychological anxiety as punishment for sin is developed further in Sirach and Wisdom of Solomon.) Does Job refer to Eliphaz's allusion to a frightening nocturnal visitor? Breath (hebel) as a metaphor for life goes beyond the image of wind in 7:7 (riiah). The author of Ecclesiastes uses hebel in this way thirty-eight times; its meaning is generally 'futile' or 'absurd', occasionally 'ephemeral', w. 17—21, these verses sound like a parody on Ps 8. In this psalm the author expresses wonder that the majestic creator thinks so highly of humankind and watches over the vulnerable creatures with extraordinary solicitude. In contrast, Job views the divine attention as entirely unwanted, a test rather than comfort. Such divine surveillance interferes with Job's need to swallow his spittle. In v. 20 he gives voice to wholly unconventional theology: human sin does notaffect God. Moreover, the epithet, 'watcher of humanity', contains an accusing tone, whereas traditionalists often spoke enthusiastically of YHWH's providential care, a shepherding of the people. In Job's view, the guardian has turned villainous. The last verse in this unit may contain an ironical allusion to an ancient worthy, Enoch, who is said to have walked with God and 'was no more, because God took him' (Gen 5:24). Job has suggested that God's watchful eye cannot prevent his lapsing into death (7:8); now he thinks of the deity searching for him after he has descended into Sheol.
more appetite for either food or life. v. 10, following a kind of imitation prayer, the best Job can muster at the moment, he identifies the deity as the Holy One (cf Isaiah, who often called YHWH the Holy One of Israel). In 5:1 Eliphaz had asked Job which of the holy ones he would turn to; the reader knows about one member of the divine assembly, the Adversary, who would be a poor choice indeed.
(6:14—21) Job imagines a wadi in the wilderness that has so much water that caravaneers have come to rely on it. To their dismay, the stream-bed has dried up in the heat of summer, precisely when they need water most. Sixth-century texts mention traders from far-off Tema and Sheba, apparently travelling a lucrative trade route. The application of this image to Job's circumstances is obvious; he expected comfort from friends, only to get a rebuke. A pun between similar Hebrew words occurs in v. 21, rd'd ('to see') and ydre' ('to fear').
(6:22—30) w. 22—3, the language derives from more than one context. A gift implies that Job's deepest need is economic; bribe suggests that he is facing a judicial trial; the reference to saving him fits into a context of attack; ransom refers to a situation in which the opponents have taken Job hostage. By using these different ideas, he hopes to cover all possibilities, v. 24, Job's appeal to be taught anticipates the divine speeches, which succeed in silencing him. An Egyptian proverb states that 'There can be no instruction where love is absent' (Papyrus Insinger, 8:24). The intent is ambiguous: love of the teacher, the student, the subject? In Job's case, the evidence persuades him that the friends do not love, for they speak dishonestly, v. 26, the word for desperate (nd'ds) may play on the word for humankind ('ends), w. 28-9, a rhetorical ploy aims at converting—turning around—the friends. Alternatively, Job watches as they start to walk away; concerned that he could not be vindicated in their eyes unless they remain, he appeals to them to turn back.
(8:1—22) Bildad Makes God's Character the Issue The fundamental premiss of Bildad's argument is stated in the form of a rhetorical question: 'Does God ['el] pervert justice? Or does the Almighty [sadday] pervert the right?' (v. 3). Such distortion is unthinkable to Bildad, who consequently deduces that Job's children were terrible sinners and that their father's sins were less serious, since he survived divine retribution. With this cruel conclusion, Bildad actually states the central problem that will exercise the imaginations of the four friends throughout the debate: is God at fault? The reader knows that the answer to this haunting question is a resounding 'yes'. A clearer answer can scarcely be found than the deity's concession that the Adversary had provoked him to afflict Job without cause (2:3). Lacking any knowledge of the heavenly proceedings, Bildad relies on traditional belief that one's external conditions accurately reflect inner states. Good people prosper and wicked people do not; this axiom lies behind everything he says. v. 2, the Hebrew expression for 'great wind' differs from that employed by the narrator in describing the death of Job's children (riiah kabbtr in v. 2, riiah gedold in 2:19). v.3, the twin concepts, justice and righteousness (mispdt and sedeq), are central to many biblical texts describing the Lord's activity. The earth is established on these two principles, as is God's throne (Ps 97:2). God requires these qualities of Israel (Isa 5:7), and the covenant is grounded in justice and righteousness (Hos 2:19). The prophet Amos singles out these two concepts as the Lord's requirement for Israel (Am 5:24). w. 4—7, Bildad's language implies that sinful deeds possess an inherent power to destroy those perpetrating them. Such language has led to the hypothesis that an automatic principle governed human lives, punishing the guilty and rewarding the virtuous. YHWH's only role, according to
(7:1-10) Job portrays human existence in an entirely negative manner, culminating in a graphic image of a weaver's shuttle that speedily comes to an end without hope. The Mesopotamian myth of creation, Enuma Elish, states that the gods created humankind to serve their makers. Job refers to sleepless nights occasioned by bodily sores infested with worms. The Testament of Job uses this idea to illustrate Job's complete willingness to bear his suffering patiently. In this version, he picks up a worm that has dropped to the ground and places it on his sore from which it had fallen. He rejects Eliphaz's optimistic view that hope remains for him (6:20); in doing so, Job creates a pun on the Hebrew words for hope and thread (tiqwd). v. 8, the one to whom Job directs these remarks is unclear, but the following verses will reveal that he has turned away from Eliphaz momentarily to address God. Job does not expect to live long. (7:11-21) Job's distress prompts him to utter bold concepts and even to parody traditional hymnody. v. 12, unlike the monster in the myth of chaos, either Yam (the Sea) or Tannin, Job presents no threat to the deity. Why, then, does the deity find it necessary to set a guard over him? Both Yam and Tannin echo the Canaanite myth of chaotic forces that are ultimately defeated by Baal. The enemy is also called Mot; the Hebrew word for death is the same (mot, or mawet, 7:15).
JOB 338
trustworthy men are rare and comparable women non-existent (Eccl 7:28), and with reference to childlessness, which Ben Sira understands as preferable to having ungodly children (Sir 16:3). The phrase also occurs in Egyptian wisdom literature.
this theory, was to act as a kind of midwife assisting in the birth of disaster or its opposite (Koch 1955). Each of the first three verses in this unit begins with the same Hebrew particle, 'im (if). In its first use, the hypothetical aspect is attenuated, giving the sense of'although', for Bildad has no doubt about the guilt of Job's children. Ironically, Bildad's speculations about Job correspond with reality. He does seek God, but not in the manner intended by Bildad, and is restored. Bildad's description of Job's beginning as 'small' hardly accords with the narrative (1:1—3) or with Job's own account of his previous fortune (29:1—25). Nevertheless, Bildad's assessment of things is not far off, for Job's possessions are doubled in the end (cf 42:12). w. 8-10, Bildad appeals to ancient tradition, a sure corrective to individual insight. The accumulation of knowledge over the years is reliable, he thinks, and offsets human ephemerality. Whereas several psalms emphasize life's brevity as a decisive difference between humankind and deity (Ps 90:5—6; 103:14—16), Bildad uses the contrast to call into question knowledge acquired by a single individual. The lengthening of a shadow as the sun slowly goes down provides a vivid image of life itself, w. 11-15,two impossible questions (Crenshaw 1980) introduce the theme of this unit: just as one cannot expect papyrus to grow without marshy conditions or reeds to flourish away from water, so those who turn away from God cannot thrive. Initial promise quickly fades, as hope proves to be no more substantial than a spider's web. This difficult text is understood differently in the LXX, where 'destiny' replaces 'paths'. Perhaps the author intended a wordplay between 'orhotand 'ahmt ('path' and 'end, destiny'), w. 16—19, mis section can be understood in directly contrasting ways. Unlike the flimsy web of a spider, plants with roots firmly penetrating the rocky ground can endure. Alternatively, such plants do not last because the roots lack adequate nourishment. It seems that Bildad returns to his earlier remark about Job's hope and a promising latter end, the word 'aher (behind) recalling 'ahmt (another plant arises), w. 20-2, Bildad does not know that God has declared Job to be blameless. Ironically, Job will later reject (mcfas) something unspecified in his second response to God (42:6). The last word of Bildad's speech and the last word in Job's previous speech are the same, except for the pronominal suffix (Inennu/'enenni). Bildad and his other two friends will become Job's enemies and will experience shame.
(9:5—11) Job employs a traditional hymn (w. 5—10) and gives his own bewildered response to an invisible deity (v. n). In 5:9-16 Eliphaz used hymnic material to emphasize the orderly universe and the power of its creator. In Job's deft fingers this imagery carries an opposite stamp, connoting the chaotic aspects of reality: earthquakes, a sun that does not rise, stars that exhibit no light. The claim in v. 4 that El is wise finds no support in the doxology that follows (w. 5-7). The next four verses of the unit do, however, reinforce the identification of El as powerful. Job alludes to the chaos myth in which Marduk conquers Tiamat, the linguistic equivalent of the biblical tchom (great deep) in Gen 1:2. The expression, 'trampled the waves of the sea' derives from military combat and signifies victory over an enemy (Crenshaw 1972: 39—53). The sea is personified as in Canaanite myth. v. 9, which refers to four constellations, resembles the doxological fragment in Am 5:8—9, where two, possibly four, constellations are named, v. 10, Job uses conventional views to increase the shock-value of his conclusion in w. 11-12. Yes, God's deeds defy understanding and cannot be counted, but this concession brings little comfort. For Moses (Ex 33:18—23) and Elijah (i Kings 19:11—12) God's passing by was revelatory. Job experiences El as elusive and concludes that God is beyond challenge when seizing someone's possessions (v. 12). (9:12-24) v. 13, Job despairs of facing an angry El who conquered the chaos-dragon, here called Rahab as in Ps 89:10 (MT n). v. 15, the universe is fundamentally twisted when an innocent person is obliged to appeal for mercy, v. 16, Job does not subscribe to the traditional credo in Ex 34:6-7; indeed, he does not believe he could obtain a hearing even if he were successful in catching El's attention, v. 17, the rabbis understood this verse as a foreshadowing of God's appearance to Job in a tempest (B. Bat. i6a). In the light of Job's addition of the particle hinnam (without cause), which functions thematically in the Prologue, some interpreters emend the Hebrew word for a tempest (se'ard) to a similar word for hair (sa'ard) and obtain a better parallel for hinnam. The meaning would then be that El crushes Job for a trifle and multiplies wounds gratuitously, v. 21, confident that he is blameless, although lacking any knowledge of higher confirmation of this fact
(9:1—10:22) Job Wishes to Enter into a Lawsuit with God In 9:2—4 Job either agrees with Bildad's concluding remarks or insists on the truth of the rhetorical question: 'how can a mortal be just before God fe!]?' If the former, Job speaks ironically; if the latter, he emphasizes the utter impossibility of being vindicated before God. The verb s-d-q carries two senses, 'to be just' and 'to be legally in the right'. The prophet Jeremiah also despaired of receiving a fair trial, because YHWH acts as prosecuting attorney and judge (Jer 12:1). Eliphaz has asked, 'Can a mortal be more just than Eloah' (4:170, see NRSVmarg.), but Job uses different language ('im, before). A decisive shift occurs in v. 3, one from morality to legality. Job introduces an entirely different metaphor, of the heavenly Judge. He uses the technical word for a lawsuit (rib) but quickly acknowledges the absurdity of such an idea. The expression 'once in a thousand' occurs elsewhere to imply that
(God's, 1:8; 2:3; the narrator's, 1:1; Job's wife's, 2:9), Job does not recognize himself. Therefore he rejects life itself (in contrast to 7:16, Job now supplies the object of his loathing), v. 22, the logic of Job's reasoning leads him to reject the concept of individual retribution, the comforting belief that God rewards the virtuous and punishes the wicked. Job now believes that God makes no distinctions between the innocent and the guilty. The Mesopotamian Erra Epic, which deals with a similar collapse of the moral order, has the god of Pestilence confess: 'The righteous and the wicked, I did not distinguish, I felled.' w. 23—4, even worse, God has taken sides with the wicked, gleefully mocking the innocent when they fall and blinding judges so that they cannot distinguish between guilt and innocence. Because Job subscribes to a modified
339 JOB
for Job the decisive issue was moral rectitude, and that issue applied to God as well as to him. Zophar sees things differently; he concentrates on ritual purity (cf. also v. 15 where he uses the word 'blemish'). His inaccurate quotation of Job's words puts the emphasis on external matters rather than moral integrity, w. 5—6, this expression of a wish that God would answer Job is an example of literary foreshadowing, one filled with irony at Zophar's expense. God will indeed answer Job, but in a tirade of words and without divulging wisdom's hidden qualities. That topic will be addressed in a different fashion (ch. 28), and its meaning will be considerably less ambiguous than Zophar's comment about wisdom (cf. Sir 6:22, 'For wisdom is like her name; she is not readily perceived by many'). Zophar takes offence at Job's certainty that he is blameless; taking up his language of knowing, Zophar turns on him: 'Know then that God [Eloah] exacts of youless than your guilt deserves.' Israel's sages were reluctant to reckon with the notion of divine compassion, for it seemed to place in jeopardy their belief in a principle of moral retribution. In this scheme, an individual received the appropriate reward or punishment for conduct, and there was no place for mercy. One's destiny lay in one's own hands. Historical circumstances eventually undermined such optimism and prompted the sages to incorporate traditional teachings about divine compassion (cf. the ancient creed in Ex 34:6-7, which occurs with some frequency in later liturgies, e.g. Neh 9:17,31; Ps 86:15; Joel 2:iy> Jon 4:2> always in truncated form). The struggle to keep both sides of the equation, justice and mercy, in tension required constant watchfulness (Fishbane 1985: 335—50). w. 6—12, Zophar's attempt to match the earlier hymnic passages falls short. He does succeed in pointing to the mystery beyond human grasp, but the thoughts quickly descend to the mundane. Ironically, Zophar has just claimed to know the nature of Eloah: that God acts leniently towards Job. Now, however, Zophar implies that Job, and presumably no one else, can discover the mystery that God withholds (cf. Deut 29:29 (MT 28), 'The secret things belong to the Lord our God, but the revealed things belong to us and to our children forever, to observe all the words of this law').
monotheism, he must attribute both good and evil to the one deity. The question in v. 24 functions rhetorically: God alone has done it. (9:25-35) For the first time, Job addresses God directly. Convinced that God would besmirch him even after his hands are washed, Job returns to the idea of a trial but imagines that he has an advocate (an arbitrator or umpire). The odiousness of divine perversity has resulted in the ridiculous notion of a neutral figure powerful enough to force God to act fairly towards Job. Such an umpire does not exist for Job, who must hope for God's partial relenting. Meanwhile, his days are swiftly running out; the three images in v. 25 from land, water, and air refer to movements of increasing swiftness.
J> in 9:21 Job complained that he no longer understood himself and thus loathed his life; in 10:1 he returns to the earlier conclusion, but he uses a different verb here (nqtor qut). Because he despises life, he will speak freely to God. v. 3, Job thinks of God's behaviour as cruel, irrational, and immoral: cruel because God enjoys oppressive conduct, irrational because God destroys what he has fashioned with care, immoral because he gives preferential treatment to the wicked, w. 4—5, Job underscores the absurdity of God's behaviour by implying that God has forgotten the fundamental difference between ephemeral mortals and the eternal Creator. In v. 7 Job acknowledges that God's eyes have no fleshly components that would make them fallible, so God knows that Job is innocent.
(10:1—7) v-
(10:8—22) Returning to the idea of humans as works of God's hands (v. 3), Job develops this theme in some detail. He employs three basic images (a potter, a cheesemaker, the force behind gestation). According to the tradition in Gen 2:4/7— 3:24, the return to dust was a result of human choice, a refusal to obey the divine command. Either Job understands the curse as unfair, or he thinks of premature death. According to v. 12, the Creator bestowed life, compassionate love, and providential care on the finished product of the creative force (cf 2:6). v. 14, the thought of God keeping watch over newly formed humans leads Job to object that in his case the scrutiny has been oppressive, as he did at 7:20. v. 16, Job understands God in terms of ancient Near-Eastern concepts of royal sport. God, the King of Heaven, hunts the vulnerable lion, Job. w. 20-2, the dreary picture of Sheol as unrelenting gloom, chaos, and darkness concludes with an oxymoron ('light is like darkness') that is the mirror image of'That day, let there be darkness' in 3:412 (Good 1990: 229). (11:1-20) Zophar Thinks that God is Lenient The link between excessive talk and sin was acknowledged in a biblical proverb: 'In a multitude of words, sin is not lacking' (Prov 10:19). m v2 Zophar describes Job as a 'man of lips' (NRSV 'one full of talk'), a person of superficial speech. Such an one, he thinks, can never be vindicated. He goes one step farther, accusing Job of mocking his friends. Clearly, Job's sarcasm and parody have not escaped Zophar's attention. Such talk falls under the category of senseless babble, Zophar believes, and deserves an answer. Although failing to recognize the real reason for Job's extreme language, Zophar does possess the ability to see what is at stake, for he returns to the theme of vindication that Job has brought into the discussion (v. 2). v. 4,
The verb haqar means 'to probe deeply', and the noun heqer refers to the act of searching as well as the result, as here. Having used this nominative form of the verb for intellectual inquiry, Zophar seems at a loss for a suitable parallel to masa' (to find), which he uses twice, v. 8, Ben Sira makes a similar point ('The height of heaven, the breadth of the earth, the abyss, and wisdom—who can search them out?', Sir 1:3). v. 10, the language of theophany, already used by Eliphaz and Job, appeals to Zophar also, but he places it in the context of a judicial trial, v. 12, a proverbial impossible saying, like Ovid's remark, 'Then will the stag fly,' seems to accuse Job of stupidity in addition to iniquity. An echo of Gen 16:12 may be detected; there Ishmael is described as a wild ass of a man. As Zophar employs it, the proverb views ignorance rather than morality as the dividing line between humanity and deity, v. 13, like Ps 73, which identifies the heart (mind) as decisive in determining purity, Zophar understands Job's problem as a misdirected heart, which he can correct through prayer, v. 18, having repented and been cleansed of impurity (v. 15), Job will finally have hope and confidence (a recurring
JOB 340
on a revelatory disclosure; Bildad appealed to ancestral tradition; Zophar deduced the facts from a preconceived notion about divine knowledge, v. 3, frustrated over his friends' inability to comprehend Job's viewpoint, he contemplates a bold alternative: he will argue his cause with Shaddai. The debate will take a different turn as Job gradually moves away from addressing his friends and directs his words to God, but first he will express his contempt for the way they have treated him.
theme thus far), v. 20, Job has longed for death; Zophar threatens him with loss of an escape route and the death of hope unless his guilt is removed.
(12:1—14:22) Job Reflects on the Nature of Wisdom and Life's Brevity 12:2 reeks of sarcasm as Job suggests that the total accumulation of human wisdom is concentrated in his three friends and will die along with them. 12:3, twice in this section (cf. also 13:2) Job claims equality with his friends with respect to knowledge. 12:4-6, before resuming the ideas expressed in the first three verses, Job contrasts his own situation with the divinely protected life of marauders. Although he once enjoyed a special relationship with God, one characterized by prayer followed by divine response, Job has now become an object of scorn. In this setting Job once more characterizes himself in the language of the narrator and God: a just and blameless man. The reference to a vital relationship with God stands in tension with Job's later confession that his previous knowledge of God was derivative, information based on hearing rather than sight (cf. 42:5), if that is what the later text implies. The meaning of v. 6 is not entirely clear. Does it refer to idolatry? Or should one understand the subject as God, who empowers egregious sinners? 12:7-9, Israel's sages believed that the movement of heavenly bodies, the activity of the weather, and the actions of animals contained hidden knowledge about ways of coping with life. By studying these phenomena, one discovered truth that, by analogy, applied to human conduct. Job recognizes the significance of this avenue to knowledge. His use of the plural form, behemot, anticipates the description of the partly mythic creature in 40:15-24. Otherwise the singular behlmd would have sufficed (note the singular verb that follows). 12:9, Job's point is that such knowledge is readily accessible, not hidden beyond human grasp. In making this point, Job uses a cliche: 'For the hand of the LORD [YHWH] has done this'. Here alone in the poetic dialogue between Job and his three friends does the divine name YHWH appear; in some MSS it also occurs in a familiar cliche in the poem about wisdom (28:28). 12:11 emphasizes the importance of possessing powers of discrimination. As the palate distinguishes between appetizing and unappetizing foods, so the ear discriminates between wisdom and folly. 12:12, the accepted view that only the aged possess wisdom appears here in interrogative form; Job will deny its accuracy shortly (v. 20).
(13:4—12) He accuses them of hypocrisy and ineptitude; they have covered the real situation with an attractive facade and offered him worthless medicine. These are strong accusations, given the prophetic language about false prophets who whitewash their lies and the dubious status of physicians in a society that viewed sickness as divine punishment for sin (cf. Ben Sira's valiant effort to salvage the medical profession in Sir 38:1-15). v. 5, in Egyptian wisdom silence was so important that the expression 'Silent Person' came to signify anyone who embodied the virtues. Job's use of the verb haras has a narrow sense ('stop talking'). Elsewhere the mere withholding of one's tongue is seen for what it is, for it may be an indication of ignorance, v. 6, he who has been called 'a man of lips' (11:2) proudly describes his appeal to the friends as 'pleadings of his lips'. In w. 7—11 Job's questions contain irony that will not become clear until the Epilogue, where the Lord rebukes the friends for failing to speak the truth about the deity.
(13:13—19) Once more Job asks his friends to keep silent, and he begins to muster courage as he contemplates the consequences of taking his life in his own hands. The ambiguity of the text matches his own uncertainty. Is he essentially a Promethean rebel who shakes his fist in God's face or 'a person wracked by the paradoxes of God' (Newsom 1996: 435)? The body of the text has a negative in v. 15 (T have no hope'), but a marginal note reads differently (T will hope in him'). The verse can be read as determination: 'See, he may slay me; I cannot wait, for I must argue my ways to his face.' v. 16, this verse focuses the dramatic action of the book: Job argues that only a virtuous person can survive a face-to-face encounter with God. If Job can appear before God and live to tell it, he will have been vindicated. That is true regardless of how 42:6 is understood. Job's use ofyesu'd (salvation) instead of the earlier tiqwd (hope) emphasizes the finished deed, a reality as opposed to an anticipated event, w. 18—19, judicial terminology abounds here: mispat, sedeq, and rib. Job imagines that he will achieve vindication through litigation, acting in his own defence, and then he welcomes death.
(12:13-25) In royal ideology the king was thought to have wisdom, strength, counsel, and understanding (cf. Isa 11:2, where an additional dimension, religious devotion, occurs). Job attributes these four characteristics to God, who frustrates human efforts at being wise. Kings, counsellors, priests, judges, and elders—the entire ruling class of society—are mere pawns in a divine game aimed at exposing human stupidity. This game also involves whole nations, whose fortunes depend on God's whim, and whose leaders are reduced to staggering in darkness like drunkards.
(13:20^7) Job makes an appeal to God lest divine majesty overwhelm him but concludes that he is being treated like an enemy. This allusion to an enemy may be a pun on Job's name ('oyeb, enemy; 'iyyob, Job), v. 20, the prayer attributed to the foreign sage Agur (Prov 30:7-9) has a request that two things be granted: that deception be banished from him and he be given neither poverty nor riches, v. 23, in the Prologue Job fretted over the possibility that his children had unconsciously sinned; here he may wonder if he himself is unaware of guilt that is obvious in God's eyes, or he challenges God to identify a single transgression, v. 26, God was believed to have kept a ledger containing the names of virtuous people (Ex
(13:1—3) w. i—2, having completed his parody of the friends' claim to possess wisdom and of conventional hymnic descriptions of divine power, Job now insists on his own ability to observe reality and draw accurate conclusions on the basis of experience. The difference between Job and his friends with respect to epistemology is striking. Eliphaz relied
341 JOB
traditional view changed radically (Crenshaw 1986). w. 14—16, this linking of purity and morality results in a low opinion of humankind, for Eliphaz assumes that everyone drinks iniquity like water. If he is right, Job's effort to obtain vindication does not stand a chance, w. 17—19, Eliphaz will give Job the benefit of his own experience, coupled with ancestral tradition. In v. 18 the Hebrew reads (nonsensically): 'which the wise have declared and have not concealed from their ancestors'. The gift of land and an absence of foreigners (v. 19) confirms the sages' wisdom and goodness, in Eliphaz's logic. The desire to dwell among kindred people arose from suspicion of foreigners (cf. Joel4:17). FortheauthorofProvi-g.the strange, or foreign, woman represented the greatest threat to youth, w. 20—35, Eliphaz uses a traditional topos about the fate of sinners, including psychological anxiety. The primary visual image is that of faded blossoms (cf. 8:12) and wilted plants, corresponding to human isolation (living in ruins). In w. 31—2 a failed commercial transaction focuses the concept of futility that underlies this entire unit.
32:32). Does Job imply that God also keeps a record of one's sins? Or that God jots down the punishments that will be directed against sinners? (13:28-14:6) The simile (13:28-14:1) for the brevity of life fits better with what follows than with what precedes it. Job characterizes life as both short and miserable. Youthful vigour (a flower) soon fades, and disappears like a shadow. 14:4, Eliphaz's low estimate of mortals seems to have found a parallel in Job's ruminations about extracting something clean from an unclean thing. The Sumerian parallel to Job, A Man and his God, states that no sinless person has been born of a woman. This expression has nothing to do with any supposed taint involving the birth canal; instead, it merely means 'everyone'.
(14:7—17) Drawing on his knowledge of horticulture, Job contrasts the fate of trees and human beings. The trunk of a felled tree will sprout new growth if given adequate water, but mortals die and cease forever—just as the water in a lake or river dries up. In Job's view, death is final. Not everyone in ancient Israel shared his opinion, and gradually a belief in an afterlife emerged (cf. Isa 26:19 (collective Israel), Dan 12:2, and Ps 73:23-8). v. 13, Job fantasizes about a kindly deity who would hide him in Sheol until his anger waned, a God who really longed for the work of his hands and who would not monitor his actions in search of transgressions. (14:18-22) The inevitability of death is foreshadowed by the effect of water on seemingly impenetrable rock. The mighty mountains waste away, and so do mortals. Job ascribes this destructive activity to God: 'so [in like manner] you destroy the hope of mortals' (v. 19). In Sheol the dead do not know the events transpiring on earth; here Job reverses the customary talk about remembering the dead. The isolation of the dying
(16:1-17:16) Job Identifies God as his Attacker and Abandons all Hope Job accuses his friends of failing as comforters in the same way they did not succeed as physicians. He claims that he could do better than they, although in his present state speaking out brings no solace. He imagines that God has singled out Job as his personal target, coming against him with exceptional brutality. His archers hittheir mark, and God disembowels the fallen Job. At 16:15 J°b thinks of his mourning as a permanent condition, for it seems as though he has sewn sackcloth to his skin. Such material was worn during mourning and periods of grief associated with repentance and calling upon God for deliverance. 16:17, Eliphaz's assumption that everyone carries a taint (15:14) is not shared by Job, who insists on the purity of his prayer. Not all who lifted their hands and voices in prayer could make such a claim, as various prophets recognized (cf. Isa 1:15). 16:18-19, according to Gen 4:10, the blood of an innocent victim cried out to YHWH for revenge. Job addresses the earth and asks that it leave his own blood exposed until vindication is assured. In v. 19 his imagination soars to new heights as Job envisions a heavenly vindicator—in 9:33 he had dismissed such hope as wishful thinking. Beginning with 16:22, and ending in 17:16, Job concentrates on the grave and the present conditions that will hasten his arrival there. Surprisingly, he thinks in terms of years instead of days or weeks; but when referring to his broken spirit, he shortens the time span to days, as if to emphasize the grave's readiness to receive him. 17:3—4, the appeal seems to be directed to God, whom Job wants to provide surety for him. Because he attributes the friends' closed minds to divine intervention, he thinks God owes him something. 17:10, again Job urges his friends to come back, although he believes that they will do him no good. 17:11-16, returning to the temporal language of 16:22 and 17:1, Job views his life as over. The description of Sheol as a house gains force when one realizes that ossuaries were shaped like houses. The other images are readily comprehensible; in death one appears to be sleeping, and the lifeless body is soon inhabited by worms. Job's fertile imagination portrays him as an intimate of the personified underworld and its denizens, personified worms. In such circumstances,
(v. 22) seems misplaced; perhaps Job uses this language to emphasize the thin line between the dying and the dead. (15:1-35) Eliphaz Defends Conventional Wisdom Eliphaz now appears convinced that his friend is an inveterate sinner, for Job's speech confirms this conclusion. Arguing on the basis of age and consensus, Eliphaz makes two points: Job has sinned, and the punishment for sinners is certain, v. 2, Eliphaz accuses Job of being full of hot air (which comes from the east), v. 4, this is the only instance in the debate of anyone other than Job using this Hebrew word for meditation (sihd). In Eliphaz's view there was no place for honest expression of doubt, v. 7, Job was not the only one capable of sarcasm; Eliphaz responds to his challenge that the friends consult earth's creatures in search of knowledge by asking if Job were the firstborn of the human race. Rarely does the HB refer to the primal couple outside Genesis. A shift occurs in the early second century, for Ben Sira alludes to the story twice
(Sir 25:24; 49:16). v. 8, as illustrated by the Prologue, the destiny of mortals was determined by a divine council. The prophets Amos and Jeremiah claimed to have listened to YHWH's council (Am 3:7; Jer 23:21—2; cf. also the story about the prophet Micaiah ben Imlah preserved in i Kings 22:1—28). v. 10, youth was generally understood as a period of immaturity and rashness (cf. i Kings 12:1-6), whereas old age was viewed as a time of wisdom. Neither Job nor Elihu accepted this understanding of things, but Eliphaz and his two companions took it for granted. Under Hellenistic influence, this
JOB 342
things and imputed the guilt to him. The image of God as a fowler hurling a net to capture prey occurs in ancient Near-Eastern political treaties as a deterrent against rebellion, w. 7-12, Job's innocence contrasts with Eloah's guilt. He calls for help and God pays no attention (cf. Hab 1:2 and Lam 3:8); instead Eloah's violent conduct towards Job escalates. The elaborate preparations to attack his tent, more appropriate for laying siege to a city, suggest the personal animus that Eloah has towards Job. The idea of a divine enclosure in v. 8 differs greatly from Satan's understanding of YHWH's protective fence around the prosperous Job. In w. 9-10 he accuses God of stripping away his wealth and honour (the Heb. noun kabod has both senses), removing his crown, and uprooting his hope. Unlike the earlier image of a tree-stump left in the ground and capable of regeneration, the complete removal of the roots from the source of nourishment rules out all hope. w. 13-22, this description of social reversals resembles a literary topos from ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia. An individual complains that society has been turned upside down, with slaves riding horses and nobles walking. Friends have become enemies, and no one can be trusted. Job's servants consider him a foreigner (contrast 31:13-15); the irony in this conception may be lost on those who do not know that most slaves were foreigners acquired through warfare or purchase. Job's loss of control over his slaves means total humiliation within the intimacy of the home. Even his wife finds his breath unpleasant; the Hebrew can also mean: 'my spirit is alien to my wife'. The reference to 'children of my belly' (NRSV: 'my own family') in v. 17 presents difficulty, inasmuch as children would be more appropriately designated as products of his wife's womb and, moreover, Job's children are dead, according to the Prologue. Ancient sexist views may explain such language, which would assume that ownership of a wife gave Job the right to claim her belly as his own (cf. the awful punishment imagined for his wife if he were guilty of adultery, 31:10). Alternatively, Job may refer to his brothers, 'my belly' implying the one from which he emerged, that is, his mother's womb. The topsy-turvy world extends to Job's body; his bones cling to his skin and flesh, instead of the reverse (v. 20). Like El, the friends pursue him relentlessly. The imitatio del is here understood as an undesirable trait; God sets a bad example for them. The simile, 'like God ['el]', stands out in v. 22, as does the negated verb, 'to satisfy'. Job has escaped with nothing ('by the skin of my teeth') and now his friends want more than his flesh, w. 23—7, Job gives voice to an impossible wish, that his words be inscribed as a perpetual testimony to his innocence (cf. Isa 30:8). Precisely in what medium remains unclear. He may refer to three different forms of preserving words, representing progressively more enduring media: a scroll, a lead tablet, and a stone with lead inlay, like the famous Behistun Rock on which the Persian king, Darius, boasts of his exploits. More probably, Job indicates a single medium for displaying his words, a stone with lead inlay. Textual difficulties render it impossible to interpret w. 25-7 with any confidence, and familiarity with Handel's Messiah gives the impression that one already understands the verses. The word go'el ('redeemer') derives from family law. According to Num 35:19 and Deut 19:6 this avenger of blood, the nearest male relative, would
he laments, hope has vanished. Hence the rhetorical question in v. 15 with its repetition of the word 'hope'. The obvious answer to the questions in v. 16 is 'no'. Hope will not accompany Job into Sheol, the land from which no one returns.
(18:1-21) Bildad's Horrifying Description of the Fate of Sinners The plural verbs in w. 2—3 may be an error for the second person singular; it is much more likely that Bildad addresses Job rather than his two friends, v. 4, from Bildad's perspective, Job's demands would require the suspension of the moral order of the universe, which guarantees that the wicked are punished. Job wishes to be an exception to this rule, Bildad argues, even if it means catastrophic changes on earth, w. 5-6, in the Bible light often serves as a metaphor for life, as in Othello's famous speech: 'Put out the light, and then put out the light' (cf the extended metaphors for death in Eccl 12:6—7, as well as the symbolic use of light in Prov 6:23—30, which contrasts parental teaching with lust that burns within). w. 810, Bildad thinks that an intricate network of traps has been laid out to capture the wicked who wander unsuspectingly into the snares like wild animals, v. 13, death was frequently personified in ancient Near-Eastern literature. No record of Mot's firstborn has survived in Canaanite texts, but the Mesopotamian god of plague, Namtar, seems to have been the firstborn of Erishkigal, queen of the underworld. Bildad's meaning is unclear, but it should probably be translated 'Death, the firstborn', v. 15, according to a practice mentioned by Homer (Odyssey, 22.480—1,492—4), sulphur was sprinkled over a site to purge it from contamination by corpses. In the Bible salt and sulphur were spread over a location to make it unfit for habitation (Deut 29:23 (MT 22); cf. Judg 9:45 (salt alone)). w. 16—20, a double merism occurs in v. 16 (above/ below; branches/roots). Bildad denies that the wicked enjoy either of the two means of surviving death available in popular thought: survival in others' memory and permanence through offspring. The author of Ecclesiastes extended the argument, making it universal with respect to memory and meaningless where descendants were concerned. The reference to inhabitants of west and east may be symbolic; if so, it signifies past and future generations, v. 21, this summary-appraisal expresses Bildad's certainty that the wicked will dwell in darkness—precisely what Job has said characterizes his own existence.
(19:1-29) Job's Imagination Scales New Heights The conviction that he is being persecuted relentlessly by God leads Job to wish the impossible: either that a redeemer would avenge his death on the basis of a permanent record or that he would actually live to behold his vindication. Here for the first time Job concludes his speech with something other than a meditation on death. In its place is a threat aimed athis friends, v. 3, thus far the friends have spoken only five times; the reference to ten times may be taken as a round number or it may indicate Job's impression that his friends have talked excessively (cf. Gen 31:7 and Num 14:22 for references to a full quota of tests). The verb kalam (to humiliate, insult) indicates that Job thinks of his friends' words as insulting, w. 4-6, the conditional sentence does not implicate Job for sins of some kind; he reasons that even if such were true, the consequences would settle on him. Instead, Job argues, Eloah has perverted
343 JOB
(21:1—34) Job's View of an Immoral Universe Job utters words that must surely have horrified his friends, for he denies the moral order of the universe, which they take for granted. In his considered opinion, the wicked enjoy the pleasant life that Job's friends believed was reserved for good people. He realizes how outrageous his remarks will sound; hence he anticipates their mockery (v. 3). Indeed, he urges them to use a gesture indicating shock; placing one's hand over one's mouth could also express respectful speechlessness, but Job does not hope for this type of response from his erstwhile friends, w. 7-16, this picture of the prosperity of the wicked contrasts with Job's own misery and serves as self-justification. The particularities of the account constitute a powerful indictment of God, who fails to act even when the wicked ignore him. They reach old age, their children thrive, their cattle multiply, the wicked rejoice. The Babylonian Theodicy has the sufferer complain that he has not profited from serving his personal god, whereas 'those who do not seek the god go the way of prosperity while those who pray to the goddess become destitute and impoverished', w. 17-18, the fourfold rhetorical question in the NRSV, 'How often?' is represented by a single kammd with sequential verbs. Job asks his friends to test the traditional theory that God punishes the wicked. How often have they witnessed it? w. 19-26, here Job addresses a possible response: that God punishes the children of evildoers (cf. Jer 31:29 and Ezek 18:2). Job assumes that such scoundrels as he has been describing will lose no sleep over their children's destiny, v. 22, beginning with a common cliche ('Will any teach God knowledge...?'), Job proceeds to argue that God does not distinguish between good and evil people (w. 23—6). In life and in death God makes no distinction, w. 27-34, J°b urges his friends to test his theory by consulting travellers who have observed things far and near. He is certain that they will confirm his conclusion that the wicked are spared when calamity strikes the innocent. The beginning and end of this section reveals Job's distrust of his friends. The semblance of dialogue has completely vanished; insults have taken its place.