The book of Job

[tttallison]

This is how you wrote your statement:

You wrote "after the second test" as if it's a comparison to before the second test. Well, God does not say anything *to* Job before the tests either, He only says things *about* him. It appears you are referring to when God saying Job is perfect and upright, fearing God and shunning evil, which is also *about* Job and not *to* him. That is how have framed the point.

This kind of equivocation is a disservice and only muddies the conversation.

Can we agree to only put one thing out there at a time?

I will take the hit on this one. I should have said God never had anything good to say to Job, only criticism.

 

[tttallison]

I have already provided the information ... you do not agree.

Just as someone saying it was written later is not evidence.
.

The fact that the language is late is evidence. Could you repost your evidence, as I could not find it.

 

[christophernyc]

Can we agree to only put one thing out there at a time?

I will take the hit on this one. I should have said God never had anything good to say to Job, only criticism.

Yes, that's fair. And I understand your point about God speaking to Job.

So here is one question regarding Job's story and its relationship to other Scripture:

1. What is your response to the words of the apostle James, and what James writes about Job in his epistle? James commends Job for persevering and enduring through his trial. One of the main themes of James's epistle is the believer being tested in their faith, and then he provides Job as an example. If Job is suffering because of his "pride" why would James commend him, and hold him up as an example? What say you? According to your interpretation, Job is persevering in stubborn pride and self-righteousness? Why would James commend Job for persevering in such a way?

 

[tttallison]

Yes, that's fair. And I understand your point about God speaking to Job.

So here is one question regarding Job's story and its relationship to other Scripture:

1. What is your response to the words of the apostle James, and what James writes about Job in his epistle? James commends Job for persevering and enduring through his trial. One of the main themes of James's epistle is the believer being tested in their faith, and then he provides Job as an example. If Job is suffering because of his "pride" why would James commend him, and hold him up as an example? What say you? According to your interpretation, Job is persevering in stubborn pride and self-righteousness? Why would James commend Job for persevering in such a way?

I don't believe James 5:11 supports your case that Job was already saved.

Mat 24:13 But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved. (Notice it says shall be.)

Lam 3:22 It is of the LORD'S mercies that we are not consumed, because his compassions fail not. This is what James says in James 5:11

Lam 3:25-39 The LORD is good unto them that wait for him, to the soul that seeketh him. It is good that a man should both hope and quietly wait for the salvation of the LORD. It is good for a man that he bear the yoke in his youth. He sitteth alone and keepeth silence, because he hath borne it upon him. He putteth his mouth in the dust; if so be there may be hope. He giveth his cheek to him that smiteth him: he is filled full with reproach. For the Lord will not cast off for ever: But though he cause grief, yet will he have compassion according to the multitude of his mercies. For he doth not afflict willingly nor grieve the children of men. To crush under his feet all the prisoners of the earth, To turn aside the right of a man before the face of the most High, To subvert a man in his cause, the Lord approveth not. Who is he that saith, and it cometh to pass, when the Lord commandeth it not? Out of the mouth of the most High proceedeth not evil and good? Wherefore doth a living man complain, a man for the punishment of his sins?

 

[reneweddaybyday]

The fact that the language is late is evidence.

Please provide information which supports your claim that the language is "late".

Here is what you said a few months ago when I asked you:

tttallison said:​

I cannot prove Job is a late book, I just believe it.​

Could you repost your evidence, as I could not find it.

see Post 83.

you also might like to review information provided at this link:

https://biblehub.com/q/when_did_job_live.htm​

.

 

[tttallison]

Please provide information which supports your claim that the language is "late".

Here is what you said a few months ago when I asked you:

tttallison said:​

I cannot prove Job is a late book, I just believe it.​

see Post 83.

you also might like to review information provided at this link:

https://biblehub.com/q/when_did_job_live.htm​

.

I see the book as no later than the eighteenth Century BC. I am not a scholar, but I am a pretty good investigator. Years ago I did a word search of every word of the book of Job, placing them either as pre Moses or post Moses. You should expect to find very few words post Moses, but that was not the case. If you were to base your conclusions on this study alone, the book would definitely have to be post Abraham.

My Jewish Learning put out an article on The Strange Language of The Book of Job. The following are a couple of extracts from it.

"Rabbi Abraham Ibn Ezra, suggested that the book, which is basically Hebrew, must have been translated from another language. Some scholars in modern times too have proposed that the book’s difficulties must result from having been translated from another language, such as Edomite — a barely known Canaanite language akin to Hebrew —"

"One reason the language of Job is strange is that it is meant to sound archaic. We call language that is not actually old but is made to sound old as “archaizing.”-------"

"Moreover, the names of Job’s three companions are all derived either directly (in the case of Eliphaz the Teimanite) or by a small adaptation (such as Bildad from Bedo and Zophar from Zepho) from the list of Edomites in Genesis 36. The name “Job,” in post-exilic times, is identified with the Edomite name “Jovav,” which appears in the same chapter."

The Strange Language of the Book of Job | My Jewish Learning

The ideas of the Book of Job have always been challenging. How can a just God not only permit but ...

www.myjewishlearning.com

This article ties in with my belief that Job represented Esau, the other twin. When you examine Lamentations you should see the connection. Especially in Lamentations 3:1-18 and Lamentations 4:21-22.

In Ezekiel we see the connection of Noah, Daniel, and Job. We know Ezekiel was concurrent with Daniel, and we can see the order of the sequence. There is also a connection between Ezekiel's Father's name and the name of the father of Elihu.

 

[ZNP]

I see the book as no later than the eighteenth Century BC. I am not a scholar, but I am a pretty good investigator. Years ago I did a word search of every word of the book of Job, placing them either as pre Moses or post Moses. You should expect to find very few words post Moses, but that was not the case. If you were to base your conclusions on this study alone, the book would definitely have to be post Abraham.

My Jewish Learning put out an article on The Strange Language of The Book of Job. The following are a couple of extracts from it.

"Rabbi Abraham Ibn Ezra, suggested that the book, which is basically Hebrew, must have been translated from another language. Some scholars in modern times too have proposed that the book’s difficulties must result from having been translated from another language, such as Edomite — a barely known Canaanite language akin to Hebrew —"

"One reason the language of Job is strange is that it is meant to sound archaic. We call language that is not actually old but is made to sound old as “archaizing.”-------"

"Moreover, the names of Job’s three companions are all derived either directly (in the case of Eliphaz the Teimanite) or by a small adaptation (such as Bildad from Bedo and Zophar from Zepho) from the list of Edomites in Genesis 36. The name “Job,” in post-exilic times, is identified with the Edomite name “Jovav,” which appears in the same chapter."

The Strange Language of the Book of Job | My Jewish Learning

The ideas of the Book of Job have always been challenging. How can a just God not only permit but ...

www.myjewishlearning.com

This article ties in with my belief that Job represented Esau, the other twin. When you examine Lamentations you should see the connection. Especially in Lamentations 3:1-18 and Lamentations 4:21-22.

In Ezekiel we see the connection of Noah, Daniel, and Job. We know Ezekiel was concurrent with Daniel, and we can see the order of the sequence. There is also a connection between Ezekiel's Father's name and the name of the father of Elihu.

So according to your theory Esau was "a man in the land of Uz, whose name was Job; and that man was perfect and upright, and one that feared God, and eschewed evil."? And you also believe this word refers to Esau "the Lord said unto Satan, Hast thou considered my servant Job, that there is none like him in the earth, a perfect and an upright man, one that feareth God, and escheweth evil?" Meanwhile the book of Hebrews, also the word of God, condemns him for despising his birthright, calls him profane and immoral, and says he found no place for repentance with God.

The most fundamental rule in Bible interpretation is that no verse is of its own interpretation. The entire book must go together. Your interpretation makes the book of Job a malignant tumor in the word of God.

 

[aaravnayar5]

The book of Job really puts faith into perspective for me. Even in pain, confusion, and loss, Job kept turning back to God instead of walking away completely. That kind of perseverance is powerful.

 

[tttallison]

So according to your theory Esau was "a man in the land of Uz, whose name was Job; and that man was perfect and upright, and one that feared God, and eschewed evil."? And you also believe this word refers to Esau "the Lord said unto Satan, Hast thou considered my servant Job, that there is none like him in the earth, a perfect and an upright man, one that feareth God, and escheweth evil?" Meanwhile the book of Hebrews, also the word of God, condemns him for despising his birthright, calls him profane and immoral, and says he found no place for repentance with God.

The most fundamental rule in Bible interpretation is that no verse is of its own interpretation. The entire book must go together. Your interpretation makes the book of Job a malignant tumor in the word of God.

It would seem obvious that you are distorting everything I say in order to protect your narrative.

 

[tttallison]

The book of Job really puts faith into perspective for me. Even in pain, confusion, and loss, Job kept turning back to God instead of walking away completely. That kind of perseverance is powerful.

Yes it is.

 

[ZNP]

It would seem obvious that you are distorting everything I say in order to protect your narrative.

Did you say that your research has led you to conclude that Esau was Job?

"This article ties in with my belief that Job represented Esau, the other twin. " Yes, that is what you said.

It seems obvious you are trying to muddy the waters on this instead of being open to a fair critique of your theory.

Surely you would address what Hebrews says about Esau as part of your theory, rather than accusing me of distorting what you said when I am simply responding to what you said.

 

[tttallison]

Did you say that your research has led you to conclude that Esau was Job?

"This article ties in with my belief that Job represented Esau, the other twin. " Yes, that is what you said.

It seems obvious you are trying to muddy the waters on this instead of being open to a fair critique of your theory.

Surely you would address what Hebrews says about Esau as part of your theory, rather than accusing me of distorting what you said when I am simply responding to what you said.

I never said Job was Esau. What I was inferring was that Job represented the nation of Edom in Lamentations 4:21-22 Just as Jacob represents Israel as the nation of Zion.

Did you imply I said "Esau was Job" on purpose, or are you just incompetent?

 

[christophernyc]

I don't believe James 5:11 supports your case that Job was already saved.

Mat 24:13 But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved. (Notice it says shall be.)

Lam 3:22 It is of the LORD'S mercies that we are not consumed, because his compassions fail not. This is what James says in James 5:11

Lam 3:25-39 The LORD is good unto them that wait for him, to the soul that seeketh him. It is good that a man should both hope and quietly wait for the salvation of the LORD. It is good for a man that he bear the yoke in his youth. He sitteth alone and keepeth silence, because he hath borne it upon him. He putteth his mouth in the dust; if so be there may be hope. He giveth his cheek to him that smiteth him: he is filled full with reproach. For the Lord will not cast off for ever: But though he cause grief, yet will he have compassion according to the multitude of his mercies. For he doth not afflict willingly nor grieve the children of men. To crush under his feet all the prisoners of the earth, To turn aside the right of a man before the face of the most High, To subvert a man in his cause, the Lord approveth not. Who is he that saith, and it cometh to pass, when the Lord commandeth it not? Out of the mouth of the most High proceedeth not evil and good? Wherefore doth a living man complain, a man for the punishment of his sins?

Thank you. So it looks like we may be in agreement here. Excellent!

You quoted Matthew 24:13:
But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved.

The word "endure" here in Matthew 24:13 is the same word in James 5:11, Strong's #5278 hupomenó, meaning "endured, endure, endures, endure with patience, patiently endure, perseveres, persevering."

Now, who is it Jesus is speaking to in this context? Let's look a few verses earlier at Matthew 24:3 to find out.

Matthew 24:3
And as He sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto Him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?

Jesus was talking to those who believed in Him, who had put their faith in Him, and who had committed their lives to following Him. He is admonishing them to remain faithful in their belief in Him, even when they face persecution and trials.

Matthew 24:9-13
Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name's sake. And then shall many be offended, and shall betray one another, and shall hate one another. And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many. And because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold. But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved.

Why would they be persecuted? Jesus says it is for His name's sake. They will be persecuted because they believe in and follow Jesus. He is exhorting them to remain faithful in their belief, to hold onto their faith, to endure their testing by staying loyal and faithful to the One in whom they believe.

James is encouraging believers along the same lines as Jesus taught His disciples.

James 1:2,3
My brethren, count it all joy when ye fall into divers temptations; Knowing this, that the trying of your faith worketh patience. But let patience have her perfect work, that ye may be perfect and entire, wanting nothing.

This is clearly Job's story.

And this is clearly why James holds Job up as an example of a man who endures his trial by remaining faithful to God. Job, a man of faith in God, an established believer, like the disciples, and like the brethren James is writing to, faces horrific suffering and persecution. Job endures, he perseveres in his faith, and in the end matures and grows beyond where he began. Job, through his faith in God, is saved and finally delivered from his awful ordeal.

 

[reneweddaybyday]

My Jewish Learning put out an article on The Strange Language of The Book of Job. The following are a couple of extracts from it.

From the article you provided (bold/underline mine):

The story of Job is set long ago in the period of Israel’s patriarchs and matriarchs. The verse describing Job’s extraordinary wealth (1:3) — “His livestock were seven thousand small-cattle and three thousand camels and five hundred yoke of large-cattle and five hundred she-asses, and a very large servantry; that man was greater (in wealth) than all the sons of Qedem”— alludes to the wealth of Isaac, as it is described in Genesis 26:13–14. Not only are the terms for “cattle” (miqne) and “great (in wealth)” (gadol) shared, but the unique terms for “servantry” (avudda) occurs in only these two verses.​

You posted this excerpt from the article ...

"Moreover, the names of Job’s three companions are all derived either directly (in the case of Eliphaz the Teimanite) or by a small adaptation (such as Bildad from Bedo and Zophar from Zepho) from the list of Edomites in Genesis 36. The name “Job,” in post-exilic times, is identified with the Edomite name “Jovav,” which appears in the same chapter."

but you left out this information (bold/underline mine):

Moreover, the names of Job’s three companions are all derived either directly (in the case of Eliphaz the Teimanite) or by a small adaptation (such as Bildad from Bedo and Zophar from Zepho) from the list of Edomites in Genesis 36. The name “Job,” in post-exilic times, is identified with the Edomite name “Jovav,” which appears in the same chapter. All of this serves to set the book, from the perspective even of its author, in a time long ago and a place far away.​

In Ezekiel we see the connection of Noah, Daniel, and Job. We know Ezekiel was concurrent with Daniel, and we can see the order of the sequence.

Here you imply that the names Noah, Daniel, and Job are listed chronologically (Noah lived before Daniel ... Job must have lived after Daniel). However, the order of the sequence may not be chronological. Please consider ...

In the case of Noah ... the whole world was destroyed, yet Noah's family was saved on the basis of Noah's faith (Heb 11:7).

In the case of Daniel ... Daniel and his friends (Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah) were saved from execution when Daniel interpreted the king's dream (Dan 2:13).

In the case of Job ... Job delivered only himself ... Job's children were slain (Job 1:18-19).

.

 

[reneweddaybyday]

Did you imply I said "Esau was Job" on purpose, or are you just incompetent?

ZNP quoted exactly what you submitted in your post.

The first time ZNP questioned your reasoning, you didn't answer the question ... you replied with your standard inference that anyone who does not agree with you is "protecting their own narrative".

ZNP again requested clarification and quoted exactly what you submitted and your response was to claim ZNP is incompetent.

It is extremely difficult to discuss Scripture with you (or anyone else) when you (or anyone else) engage in this behavior.


Ephesians 4:29 Let no corrupt communication proceed out of your mouth, but that which is good to the use of edifying, that it may minister grace unto the hearers.

.

 

[tttallison]

Thank you. So it looks like we may be in agreement here. Excellent!

This is clearly Job's story.

And this is clearly why James holds Job up as an example of a man who endures his trial by remaining faithful to God. Job, a man of faith in God, an established believer, like the disciples, and like the brethren James is writing to, faces horrific suffering and persecution. Job endures, he perseveres in his faith, and in the end matures and grows beyond where he began. Job, through his faith in God, is saved and finally delivered from his awful ordeal.

Here is the problem I see.

We are talking about faith, and about believing.

We have to ask ourselves, faith in what and believing in what.

Yes we can say faith in God, but does that means we have faith that God exists, or does it mean more than that.

Yes Job said he believed God would save him, but then, don't we have to ask why God would save him?

And herein lies the sum of the problem. Job believed his own righteousness would save him. How would you answer this problem?

 

[ZNP]

I never said Job was Esau. What I was inferring was that Job represented the nation of Edom in Lamentations 4:21-22 Just as Jacob represents Israel as the nation of Zion.

Did you imply I said "Esau was Job" on purpose, or are you just incompetent?

No, your use of "the other twin" is the error. But it doesn't change the fact that you have to reconcile this with the other prophecies concerning Esau.

The book of Obadiah says that Esau's pride will bring him down. Isaiah said his land would be devoted to destruction. Jeremiah says he would become an object of horror, the land uninhabitable and they would be shamed among the nations.

So how does this reconcile with the book of Job and why would the Old Testament, which is a legal document about the inheritance of God to Jacob and his descendants, why would an entire book be devoted to Esau? Now I understand why the prophecies would explain why Esau was cut out of the inheritance, so again, why give a whole book to Esau indicating contrary to all the prophecies that they would get a double portion in the end?

Once again, there are many prophecies concerning Esau or Edom and you haven't reconciled your interpretation with them.

 

[reneweddaybyday]

Here is the problem I see.

We are talking about faith, and about believing.

We have to ask ourselves, faith in what and believing in what.

Yes we can say faith in God, but does that means we have faith that God exists, or does it mean more than that.

God tells you that Job was a man who was perfect (moral, had integrity), upright (just, righteous) ... Job feared (revered, honored) God ... Job eschewed (turned away from) evil.

This is what God said about Job ... not what Job said about himself.

Job was not a man who believed there was a God, a Creator as some folks do and then turn to their own devices. Job was a man who heard from God Himself ... God spoke to Job (Job 42:5) and Job heeded what God said.

Job was not like some who "talk the talk" ... Job "walked the walk".

Yes Job said he believed God would save him, but then, don't we have to ask why God would save him?

No.

And herein lies the sum of the problem. Job believed his own righteousness would save him.

No ... Job believed God. Job believed in his Redeemer. Job believed he would see his Redeemer in a life yet to come.

Job 19:25-27

25 For I know that my redeemer liveth, and that he shall stand at the latter day upon the earth:

26 And though after my skin worms destroy this body, yet in my flesh shall I see God:

27 Whom I shall see for myself, and mine eyes shall behold, and not another; though my reins be consumed within me.

How would you answer this problem?

Go back and read the book without any preconceived notions.

More than a few folks have explained to you ... pointed out where you have veered from what is stated to something that is not stated.

Read the Book of Job just as it is laid out ... Job was a believer ... satan attacked Job ... Job's friends tried to console Job ...

read Job 2 ... Job's suffering was so great (Job 2:13) that his friends hardly recognized him when they first saw him (Job 2:11-12).

read Job 3 ... Job's lament where Job thought he was dying and he wished he had never been born rather than to go through what he was suffering.

read Job 4-5 ... what Eliphaz said in response to Job. Eliphaz basically stated that those who are "innocent" do not perish and those who are "righteous" are not "cut off" ... only those who "plow iniquity and sow wickedness" reap suffering ... that's chapter 4. In chapter 5, Eliphaz stated that Job was undergoing God's chastening for some sort of sin on Job's part.

And it goes on from there ... Job's friends telling Job he had sinned and needed to repent and turn to God ... and Job responding that he had not sinned or if he had sinned asking God to reveal his sin to him so he could repent.

However, none of Job's friends knew that Job was suffering at the hand of satan. It was not Job that was being tested ... it was satan's accusations that were being tested. Job stood firm ... Job did not turn from God ... Job called out to God and God was faithful in His promise that He works good to those who love Him.


1 Thessalonians 5:21 Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.

.

 

[tttallison]

No, your use of "the other twin" is the error. But it doesn't change the fact that you have to reconcile this with the other prophecies concerning Esau.

The book of Obadiah says that Esau's pride will bring him down. Isaiah said his land would be devoted to destruction. Jeremiah says he would become an object of horror, the land uninhabitable and they would be shamed among the nations.

So how does this reconcile with the book of Job and why would the Old Testament, which is a legal document about the inheritance of God to Jacob and his descendants, why would an entire book be devoted to Esau? Now I understand why the prophecies would explain why Esau was cut out of the inheritance, so again, why give a whole book to Esau indicating contrary to all the prophecies that they would get a double portion in the end?

Once again, there are many prophecies concerning Esau or Edom and you haven't reconciled your interpretation with them.

What I presented was that Job represented Edom as Jacob represented Israel. Gen 25:30 And Esau said to Jacob, Feed me, I pray thee, with that same red pottage; for I am faint: therefore was his name called Edom. Gen 36:1 Now these are the generations of Esau, who is Edom. Jacob's name was changed to Israel, and Esau's name was changed to Edom. Gen 35:10 And God said unto him, Thy name is Jacob: thy name shall not be called any more Jacob, but Israel shall be thy name: and he called his name Israel.

Isn't that amazing, Obadiah hit the nail right on the head. Job 41:4 Will he make a covenant with thee? wilt thou take him for a servant
for ever? Job 41:34 He beholdeth all high things: he is a king over all the children of pride.

It was Job's pride in his own righteousness that brought Job down. Job 40:8 Wilt thou also disannul my judgment? wilt thou condemn me, that thou mayest be righteous?

 

[Mem]

It was Job's pride in his own righteousness that brought Job down. Job 40:8 Wilt thou also disannul my judgment? wilt thou condemn me, that thou mayest be righteous?

The employment of this tactic proliferates throughout the discussion forum.