The book of Job

[ZNP]

Say, for instance, Hebrews and James are the two witnesses, as you kind of indicated in your work "The Original Priesthood," where you said "James gives you the life. Hebrews gives you the office" (p. 13)

And Job, "the figure who stands at the center of the life, embodying in narrative form everything Hebrews argues theologially," is the third. Then where is the fourth, if there is one?

1 Peter is the fourth.​

The Central Argument


1 Peter builds its entire pastoral strategy on the book of Job — without ever mentioning Job by name. The controlling parallel is this: Job was a righteous man whose suffering was interpreted by those around him as proof of guilt. Peter's readers faced the same accusation structure. The surrounding culture assumed their marginalization was deserved. Peter's response, running through all five chapters, is to dismantle that assumption using the Job framework: suffering in righteousness is not evidence of guilt — it is the shape of the priestly vocation.


The Friends' Fatal Logic


Job's three friends held that suffering proves sin. Their accusations took predictable forms — you must have done something to deserve this; repentance would bring restoration; your complaints themselves reveal pride; God sees the guilt even if no one else does. This is precisely the pressure Peter's readers were experiencing in Asia Minor under similar persecution.


How Peter Dismantles the Accusation — Chapter by Chapter


Chapter 1 — Peter opens with the gold-refining metaphor (1:6–7). The friends' framework assumed trials expose sin. Peter inverts it: trials prove genuineness. To an outside observer, the refining furnace looks like destruction. Peter says the refining process is actually proof. And like Job in chapter 19 ("my Redeemer lives"), Peter locates the vindication in a future moment — the return of Jesus — rather than in present circumstances.


Chapter 2 — Peter tells his readers to maintain honorable conduct so that those who "speak against" them (a word carrying formal accusatory force, not mere criticism) will be silenced at the "day of visitation" — the rapture is when the Lord says "well done", mirroring Job 42 when God silences the three friends. Peter also states the Job dynamic directly: suffering for sin earns no credit — everyone expects consequences for wrongdoing. What registers before God is endurance when the suffering is undeserved. This is the precise logic of the heavenly courtroom in Job 1–2, where the adversary claimed Job's faith was transactional. Undeserved suffering, endured with integrity, disproves that accusation. Peter then points to Christ as the paradigm: he entrusted himself to "him who judges justly" — the assurance Job's friends refused to give him.


Chapter 3 — Peter commands his readers not to repay evil for evil, but to bless instead. This maps directly onto Job 42, where Job — despite every legitimate grievance against his friends — prays for them rather than retaliating. His intercession for them becomes the condition for their restoration. Peter frames this not merely as an ethical command but as a calling — priestly language, since the priest is the one who stands between the guilty and their deserved outcome and intercedes. Peter also addresses the weapon the friends used most effectively against Job: shame. Their pressure was designed to make him feel that insisting on his innocence was itself disgraceful. Peter's answer is conscience — a good conscience means the accusations are simply lying about the actual record. The accusers are not ultimately defeated in argument; they are put to shame by a verdict they cannot refute.


Chapter 4 — Peter makes the counter-interpretive move most explicitly: "Do not be surprised at the fiery trial." This directly counters the friends' framework, which treated Job's suffering as stunning evidence of hidden guilt. Peter says the trial is not strange — it is the expected shape of the path, because it is the path Christ himself walked. Peter adds a theological deepening not present in chapter 1: the suffering is participation in Christ's suffering. Job suffered as the righteous man; Peter's readers suffer with the righteous man.


Chapter 5 — The most structurally significant passage for the Job parallel. Peter names "your adversary the devil" using the Greek word antidikos — the standard legal term for a prosecuting adversary in a courtroom, which is precisely the adversary's role in Job 1–2. He is not primarily a tempter in those chapters; he is an accuser bringing a formal case before the heavenly court. The case is the same in both books: these people only follow God because it benefits them; remove the protection and they will collapse. Peter's counsel is the same implicit answer the heavenly court scene provides: hold firm. Faith that survives the test disproves the accusation more thoroughly than any argument. Then comes the ending — restoration, confirmation, strengthening, establishment — which is Job 42 in miniature. After the suffering comes the vindication and the blessing.


The Larger Pattern


The essay closes by placing 1 Peter within a three-book framework. James describes the Melchizedekian life — tested faith, patient endurance, the prayer that avails — with Job as the named example. Hebrews describes the Melchizedekian office — its permanence, its path through suffering to glory — with Job as the unnamed sufferer behind the argument. First Peter describes the Melchizedekian trial — the adversary's accusation, the suffering that looks like guilt from the outside, the endurance that disproves the charge, the eschatological reversal. None of the three books coordinates the point explicitly. The pattern runs through the whole of Scripture like a structural element beneath the surface, keeping the story coherent regardless of which part of it is being told.


The Bottom Line


Job answers, all at once, the questions James, Hebrews, and 1 Peter each address in part. He lived the life, occupied the office, and endured the trial. First Peter is the application of that trial — a letter written to people who are living inside the accusation structure Job faced, by an author who knows that the same adversary is running the same case, and that the same God will issue the same verdict.

 

[LTL]

1 Peter is the fourth.​

The Central Argument


1 Peter builds its entire pastoral strategy on the book of Job — without ever mentioning Job by name. The controlling parallel is this: Job was a righteous man whose suffering was interpreted by those around him as proof of guilt. Peter's readers faced the same accusation structure. The surrounding culture assumed their marginalization was deserved. Peter's response, running through all five chapters, is to dismantle that assumption using the Job framework: suffering in righteousness is not evidence of guilt — it is the shape of the priestly vocation.


The Friends' Fatal Logic


Job's three friends held that suffering proves sin. Their accusations took predictable forms — you must have done something to deserve this; repentance would bring restoration; your complaints themselves reveal pride; God sees the guilt even if no one else does. This is precisely the pressure Peter's readers were experiencing in Asia Minor under similar persecution.


How Peter Dismantles the Accusation — Chapter by Chapter


Chapter 1 — Peter opens with the gold-refining metaphor (1:6–7). The friends' framework assumed trials expose sin. Peter inverts it: trials prove genuineness. To an outside observer, the refining furnace looks like destruction. Peter says the refining process is actually proof. And like Job in chapter 19 ("my Redeemer lives"), Peter locates the vindication in a future moment — the return of Jesus — rather than in present circumstances.


Chapter 2 — Peter tells his readers to maintain honorable conduct so that those who "speak against" them (a word carrying formal accusatory force, not mere criticism) will be silenced at the "day of visitation" — the rapture is when the Lord says "well done", mirroring Job 42 when God silences the three friends. Peter also states the Job dynamic directly: suffering for sin earns no credit — everyone expects consequences for wrongdoing. What registers before God is endurance when the suffering is undeserved. This is the precise logic of the heavenly courtroom in Job 1–2, where the adversary claimed Job's faith was transactional. Undeserved suffering, endured with integrity, disproves that accusation. Peter then points to Christ as the paradigm: he entrusted himself to "him who judges justly" — the assurance Job's friends refused to give him.


Chapter 3 — Peter commands his readers not to repay evil for evil, but to bless instead. This maps directly onto Job 42, where Job — despite every legitimate grievance against his friends — prays for them rather than retaliating. His intercession for them becomes the condition for their restoration. Peter frames this not merely as an ethical command but as a calling — priestly language, since the priest is the one who stands between the guilty and their deserved outcome and intercedes. Peter also addresses the weapon the friends used most effectively against Job: shame. Their pressure was designed to make him feel that insisting on his innocence was itself disgraceful. Peter's answer is conscience — a good conscience means the accusations are simply lying about the actual record. The accusers are not ultimately defeated in argument; they are put to shame by a verdict they cannot refute.


Chapter 4 — Peter makes the counter-interpretive move most explicitly: "Do not be surprised at the fiery trial." This directly counters the friends' framework, which treated Job's suffering as stunning evidence of hidden guilt. Peter says the trial is not strange — it is the expected shape of the path, because it is the path Christ himself walked. Peter adds a theological deepening not present in chapter 1: the suffering is participation in Christ's suffering. Job suffered as the righteous man; Peter's readers suffer with the righteous man.


Chapter 5 — The most structurally significant passage for the Job parallel. Peter names "your adversary the devil" using the Greek word antidikos — the standard legal term for a prosecuting adversary in a courtroom, which is precisely the adversary's role in Job 1–2. He is not primarily a tempter in those chapters; he is an accuser bringing a formal case before the heavenly court. The case is the same in both books: these people only follow God because it benefits them; remove the protection and they will collapse. Peter's counsel is the same implicit answer the heavenly court scene provides: hold firm. Faith that survives the test disproves the accusation more thoroughly than any argument. Then comes the ending — restoration, confirmation, strengthening, establishment — which is Job 42 in miniature. After the suffering comes the vindication and the blessing.


The Larger Pattern


The essay closes by placing 1 Peter within a three-book framework. James describes the Melchizedekian life — tested faith, patient endurance, the prayer that avails — with Job as the named example. Hebrews describes the Melchizedekian office — its permanence, its path through suffering to glory — with Job as the unnamed sufferer behind the argument. First Peter describes the Melchizedekian trial — the adversary's accusation, the suffering that looks like guilt from the outside, the endurance that disproves the charge, the eschatological reversal. None of the three books coordinates the point explicitly. The pattern runs through the whole of Scripture like a structural element beneath the surface, keeping the story coherent regardless of which part of it is being told.


The Bottom Line


Job answers, all at once, the questions James, Hebrews, and 1 Peter each address in part. He lived the life, occupied the office, and endured the trial. First Peter is the application of that trial — a letter written to people who are living inside the accusation structure Job faced, by an author who knows that the same adversary is running the same case, and that the same God will issue the same verdict.

That is beautiful. Wow!

 

[ZNP]

2Corinthians is the Fifth witness of the Priesthood according to the order of Melchisedek​

2 Corinthians is the fourth pillar of a New Testament framework built across James, Hebrews, and 1 Peter — each book addressing a distinct dimension of the Melchizedekian priestly vocation. James gives you the life. Hebrews gives you the office. First Peter gives you the trial. Second Corinthians gives you the ministry — what it looks like when the Melchizedekian priest is actually sent out into the world to do the work of reconciliation, carrying it in circumstances that look, from the outside, like disqualification.

Paul never mentions Melchizedek. He doesn't need to. The pattern carries itself.

The Ministry of Reconciliation

The clearest entry point is 2 Corinthians 5:18–20, where Paul says God has given believers "the ministry of reconciliation" and calls them "Christ's ambassadors." The Melchizedekian priestly act, as established throughout the framework, is standing between the guilty and their deserved outcome and interceding. That is exactly what Paul describes — not mere proclamation but active mediation. The ambassador speaks with the full authority of the one who sent him, which is precisely the Melchizedekian pattern: a priesthood defined not by institutional credentials but by the character and standing of the one who holds it. This traces directly back to Genesis 3:21, where God performed the first priestly act by covering the guilty. Paul says that act has now been entrusted to every person who has been reconciled.

Jars of Clay and the Outside-the-Camp Dynamic

Second Corinthians 4:7–10 — the treasure in jars of clay — maps onto what Hebrews establishes about the Melchizedekian priest working "outside the camp." Jesus died outside Jerusalem. Job sat in ashes outside every social and religious structure that should have sustained him. Paul says the apostolic ministry looks the same way: deliberately fragile, deliberately unimpressive. The jar of clay is the outside-the-camp location in human form. The very fragility is the point — it makes the surpassing power visible as God's rather than the minister's own. The catalog of hardships in verses 8 and 9 (afflicted, perplexed, persecuted, struck down) is a compressed version of Job's experience, and the conclusion (not crushed, not despairing, not forsaken, not destroyed) is the Job 19 confession in miniature: my Redeemer lives, the vindication is coming, I will not let go.

Suffering as Credential

In 2 Corinthians 11, Paul lists his apostolic credentials — imprisonments, beatings, stonings, shipwrecks — in terms that would baffle anyone operating inside a credentials-by-bloodline or credentials-by-office framework. The proof of the office is the quality of the life that has been tested and held. Paul does exactly what Hebrews 11 does with the unnamed sufferers: presents suffering endured as evidence of genuine standing. The world's verdict on Paul — weak, unimpressive, not worth following — is the friends' verdict on Job. Paul's response is Job's response: the record speaks differently than the appearances suggest. His conclusion in chapter 12, "when I am weak, then I am strong," is the theological statement of the Melchizedekian paradox running from Genesis through Job and through all four books of the New Testament framework.

The Transparent Conscience

First Peter's answer to false accusation is a good conscience — the record is clean, and that fact renders the loudest social pressure powerless at the final verdict. Paul makes the identical move in 2 Corinthians 1:12: "our boast is this, the testimony of our conscience, that we behaved in the world with simplicity and godly sincerity." He is being accused of being unimpressive and self-serving by the very community he founded. His answer is not a counter-argument but a conscience — precisely Job's posture in chapters 29–31, where he lays out his record in exhaustive detail and rests his case before God. The accusers are not answered in debate. They are answered by a verdict they cannot refute.

Melchizedek over Levi

Second Corinthians 3 mirrors the Hebrews 7 argument directly: the Levitical system had genuine glory, but it was always pointing beyond itself. The new covenant ministry — of the Spirit, of reconciliation, of unveiled faces — is the Melchizedekian ministry made fully operational in the age of the Spirit. The unveiled face of 3:18, where believers are transformed "from glory to glory," is the Whirlwind experience of Job generalized to every believer. The veil that kept the glory at a distance and required an institutional intermediary has been removed. The transforming encounter with God is now the ongoing experience of everyone in the new covenant order — not through ritual but through the quality of the life being formed by the Spirit.

The Better Word

Hebrews 12:24 contrasts Abel's blood, which cried out for retribution, with the blood of Jesus, which speaks a better word: intercession. Job 42 is the Old Testament enactment of that better word — Job, vindicated before God, prays for the friends who wronged him instead of demanding punishment. Paul enacts the same word throughout 2 Corinthians. He has every reason to condemn the Corinthian community. Instead he implores: "We implore you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God" (5:20). The apostle does not command. He intercedes. This is Genesis 3:21. This is Job 42. This is the pattern traced since the garden.

The Bottom Line

Job is the answer to all four questions the framework raises. He lived the life James describes. He occupied the office Hebrews argues. He endured the trial 1 Peter addresses. And in Job 42, he was sent out — to the very people who had wronged him — to do the ministry 2 Corinthians describes. The four New Testament books cover the whole ground between them without apparent coordination, because the pattern was already there, running through Scripture like a keel through water, keeping the story on course regardless of who is telling which part of it. It started in a garden with God. It never really stopped.

 

[LTL]

2Corinthians is the Fifth witness of the Priesthood according to the order of Melchisedek​

2 Corinthians is the fourth pillar of a New Testament framework built across James, Hebrews, and 1 Peter — each book addressing a distinct dimension of the Melchizedekian priestly vocation. James gives you the life. Hebrews gives you the office. First Peter gives you the trial. Second Corinthians gives you the ministry — what it looks like when the Melchizedekian priest is actually sent out into the world to do the work of reconciliation, carrying it in circumstances that look, from the outside, like disqualification.

Paul never mentions Melchizedek. He doesn't need to. The pattern carries itself.

The Ministry of Reconciliation

The clearest entry point is 2 Corinthians 5:18–20, where Paul says God has given believers "the ministry of reconciliation" and calls them "Christ's ambassadors." The Melchizedekian priestly act, as established throughout the framework, is standing between the guilty and their deserved outcome and interceding. That is exactly what Paul describes — not mere proclamation but active mediation. The ambassador speaks with the full authority of the one who sent him, which is precisely the Melchizedekian pattern: a priesthood defined not by institutional credentials but by the character and standing of the one who holds it. This traces directly back to Genesis 3:21, where God performed the first priestly act by covering the guilty. Paul says that act has now been entrusted to every person who has been reconciled.

Jars of Clay and the Outside-the-Camp Dynamic

Second Corinthians 4:7–10 — the treasure in jars of clay — maps onto what Hebrews establishes about the Melchizedekian priest working "outside the camp." Jesus died outside Jerusalem. Job sat in ashes outside every social and religious structure that should have sustained him. Paul says the apostolic ministry looks the same way: deliberately fragile, deliberately unimpressive. The jar of clay is the outside-the-camp location in human form. The very fragility is the point — it makes the surpassing power visible as God's rather than the minister's own. The catalog of hardships in verses 8 and 9 (afflicted, perplexed, persecuted, struck down) is a compressed version of Job's experience, and the conclusion (not crushed, not despairing, not forsaken, not destroyed) is the Job 19 confession in miniature: my Redeemer lives, the vindication is coming, I will not let go.

Suffering as Credential

In 2 Corinthians 11, Paul lists his apostolic credentials — imprisonments, beatings, stonings, shipwrecks — in terms that would baffle anyone operating inside a credentials-by-bloodline or credentials-by-office framework. The proof of the office is the quality of the life that has been tested and held. Paul does exactly what Hebrews 11 does with the unnamed sufferers: presents suffering endured as evidence of genuine standing. The world's verdict on Paul — weak, unimpressive, not worth following — is the friends' verdict on Job. Paul's response is Job's response: the record speaks differently than the appearances suggest. His conclusion in chapter 12, "when I am weak, then I am strong," is the theological statement of the Melchizedekian paradox running from Genesis through Job and through all four books of the New Testament framework.

The Transparent Conscience

First Peter's answer to false accusation is a good conscience — the record is clean, and that fact renders the loudest social pressure powerless at the final verdict. Paul makes the identical move in 2 Corinthians 1:12: "our boast is this, the testimony of our conscience, that we behaved in the world with simplicity and godly sincerity." He is being accused of being unimpressive and self-serving by the very community he founded. His answer is not a counter-argument but a conscience — precisely Job's posture in chapters 29–31, where he lays out his record in exhaustive detail and rests his case before God. The accusers are not answered in debate. They are answered by a verdict they cannot refute.

Melchizedek over Levi

Second Corinthians 3 mirrors the Hebrews 7 argument directly: the Levitical system had genuine glory, but it was always pointing beyond itself. The new covenant ministry — of the Spirit, of reconciliation, of unveiled faces — is the Melchizedekian ministry made fully operational in the age of the Spirit. The unveiled face of 3:18, where believers are transformed "from glory to glory," is the Whirlwind experience of Job generalized to every believer. The veil that kept the glory at a distance and required an institutional intermediary has been removed. The transforming encounter with God is now the ongoing experience of everyone in the new covenant order — not through ritual but through the quality of the life being formed by the Spirit.

The Better Word

Hebrews 12:24 contrasts Abel's blood, which cried out for retribution, with the blood of Jesus, which speaks a better word: intercession. Job 42 is the Old Testament enactment of that better word — Job, vindicated before God, prays for the friends who wronged him instead of demanding punishment. Paul enacts the same word throughout 2 Corinthians. He has every reason to condemn the Corinthian community. Instead he implores: "We implore you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God" (5:20). The apostle does not command. He intercedes. This is Genesis 3:21. This is Job 42. This is the pattern traced since the garden.

The Bottom Line

Job is the answer to all four questions the framework raises. He lived the life James describes. He occupied the office Hebrews argues. He endured the trial 1 Peter addresses. And in Job 42, he was sent out — to the very people who had wronged him — to do the ministry 2 Corinthians describes. The four New Testament books cover the whole ground between them without apparent coordination, because the pattern was already there, running through Scripture like a keel through water, keeping the story on course regardless of who is telling which part of it. It started in a garden with God. It never really stopped.

Interesting. So Job is not part of the NT set of four.
Is there an order to this set of four? Like the four creatures in Ezekiel 1 have an order. And the four beasts of Rev. 4 have an order.

Also, is the order of the four gospels, as we have them in the Bible, correct?

 

[ZNP]

Interesting. So Job is not part of the NT set of four.
Is there an order to this set of four? Like the four creatures in Ezekiel 1 have an order. And the four beasts of Rev. 4 have an order.

Also, is the order of the four gospels, as we have them in the Bible, correct?

The book of Job is in the Old Testament, it is the Old Testament witness of the Melchisedek ministry.

Genesis 3 --> Melchisedek

This is then expounded on in the New Testament.

Hebrews (Priesthood with Jesus Christ as the High Priest according to the order of Melchisedek) --> James (Life) --> 1 Peter (Trial at the beginning of Job) --> 2 Corinthians (Ministry at the end of Job)

 

[ZNP]

The book of Job is in the Old Testament, it is the Old Testament witness of the Melchisedek ministry.

Genesis 3 --> Melchisedek

This is then expounded on in the New Testament.

Hebrews (Priesthood with Jesus Christ as the High Priest according to the order of Melchisedek) --> James (Life) --> 1 Peter (Trial at the beginning of Job) --> 2 Corinthians (Ministry at the end of Job)

This is not everything, for example Lamentations gives you the ash heap that Job is sitting in. The complete document is close to 30 pages, I am just giving a summary.

 

[LTL]

The book of Job is in the Old Testament, it is the Old Testament witness of the Melchisedek ministry.

Genesis 3 --> Melchisedek

This is then expounded on in the New Testament.

Hebrews (Priesthood with Jesus Christ as the High Priest according to the order of Melchisedek) --> James (Life) --> 1 Peter (Trial at the beginning of Job) --> 2 Corinthians (Ministry at the end of Job)

Very interesting, and thank you for this information.
So the order in the NT, not that it matters, is:
1) 2 Corinthians (Ministry at the end of Job)
2) Hebrews (Priesthood with Jesus Christ as the High Priest according to the order of Melchisedek)
3) James (Life)
4) 1 Peter (Trial at the beginning of Job)

So, the two witnesses are in the center. Not trying to get you off topic. But do you know if this order is the same for the four creatures in Ezekiel 1. I had thought the order in Ezekiel 1 had the witnesses on the outside of the four, but I may be reading that order incorrectly.

Also, the four beasts in Rev. 4 are different again, with the two witnesses at the end of the order of four.
Just laughing. I know it does not really matter.

 

[LTL]

This is not everything, for example Lamentations gives you the ash heap that Job is sitting in. The complete document is close to 30 pages, I am just giving a summary.

Where do I find that document?

 

[tttallison]

Where do I find that document?

I would be careful. This document stands on the premise that Job was a priest after the order of Melchizedek, who had neither father or mother, and was the prince of peace, and also on the premise that Job's heart never condemned him.

 

[ZNP]

Where do I find that document?

THE ORIGINAL PRIESTHOOD.pdf

drive.google.com

It is pages 26-30

 

[LTL]

I would be careful. This document stands on the premise that Job was a priest after the order of Melchizedek, who had neither father or mother, and was the prince of peace, and also on the premise that Job's heart never condemned him.

The fact that ZNP answered my question about the fourth book and then included a fifth book speaks volumes to me. Wow, that was beautiful.

 

[reneweddaybyday]

I actually believe the same as Eliphaz, Bildad, Zophar, Elihu,

I know you do.

and God.

if you have submitted a post wherein you acknowledge/agree with what God said about Job in Job 1:1; Job 1:8; and Job 2:3, I'd sure like to see it ... otherwise from what you have submitted thus far, you definitely do not believe what God said about Job in Job 1:1; Job 1:8; and Job 2:3.

I believe God when he says, "Woe unto him that striveth with his Maker! Let the potsherd strive with the potsherds of the earth. Shall the clay say to him that fashioneth it, What makest thou? or thy work, He hath no hands?"

Where in the book of Job did God call Job a potsherd?

There are 2 uses of the word "potsherd" in Job ...

Job 2:8 And he took him a potsherd to scrape himself withal; and he sat down among the ashes.

Job 2:8 refers to Job having taken a piece of pottery to scrape his itching, inflamed skin.


Job 41:30 Sharp stones are under him: he spreadeth sharp pointed things upon the mire.

Job 41:30 refers to hide of leviathan ... there were sharp stone-like scales on the underside of the hide of leviathan.


And please note ... Job was striving with (Eliphaz, Bildad, Zuphar, Elihu).

Job was not striving with God. Job begged God to show him if he had sinned so he could repent:

Job 13:23 How many are mine iniquities and sins? make me to know my transgression and my sin.

When God finally responded to Job (Job 38-41), God did not reveal sin on Job's part ... instead God revealed Himself more intimately to Job.

The three friends never said anything wrong, and in fact the New Testament quotes the words of Eliphaz as scripture. It wasn't what they said that God admonished them for, but rather what they didn't say. They hadn't repented.

What Job went through with his three "friends" was false accusations against which Job continuously declared his innocence. There was no sin on the part of Job for which he was chastened by God.

God makes clear that it was satan who instigated the attack against Job's family and when Job did not do what satan accused him of, satan then went after Job himself.

This was not chastening by God ... this was a full on revealing by God that the ministry of satan is to steal, kill, destroy ... although God stayed satan's hand and did not allow satan to kill Job (Job 2:6).
What God said about Eliphaz, Bildad, Zophar was "My wrath is kindled against thee, and against thy two friends: for ye have not spoken of me the thing that is right, as my servant Job hath" (Job 42:7). Job had spoken rightly about God ... Eliphaz, Bildad, Zophar had not spoken what was right about God.

They three friends were sent as witnesses against Job, by God, according to Job.

Elihu was sent by God at Job's request to stand in God's place because Job stated God would not be a fair arbitrator. Job had said God would laugh at the trial of the innocent.

The only thing you have in defense of Job is a couple of verses in the first and second chapter that Job was self righteous, and then a couple in the last chapter that you misinterpret. What about the other thirty nine chapters?

I have explained my understanding of the Book of Job ... you disagree.

If/when you go through the onslaught of the adversary for no reason other than that you believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, you reverence God, and you eschew evil, you may want to recall what Job went through and endure to the end.

There is a difference between the chastening of God if and when we fall short ... and the adversary seeking to devour ... maybe one of these days you will learn to discern the difference.

.

 

[LTL]

The fact that ZNP answered my question about the fourth book and then included a fifth book speaks volumes to me. Wow, that was beautiful.

I had previously found the document and copy-pasted it to a document page for printing.
And I thought that I had the full document. But I only had part of the document. Pages 1-14.

Then I asked the question about the fourth book. Because I knew there should be four books, and I only had three in the first fourteen pages.

And I have to admit, I only skimmed the document. So there could have been four there, and I perhaps overlooked the fourth.

And it was a surprise to me that ZNP answered the question, and all four books were in the NT.

Four books, four gospels, four creatures, four beasts, four horsemen, etc. There had to be four.

 

[tttallison]

if you have submitted a post wherein you acknowledge/agree with what God said about Job in Job 1:1; Job 1:8; and Job 2:3, I'd sure like to see it ... otherwise from what you have submitted thus far, you definitely do not believe what God said about Job in Job 1:1; Job 1:8; and Job 2:3.

.

Our perspectives are different. What you see is not what I see.

First, I treat all scripture equally, as inspired by God. It doesn't matter if God is the speaker, it all has equal value. God is the author while there are many writers. I accept that what the writer is writing is true, unless the writer makes it clear that it is a lie. If you don't believe the writer is speaking truth, then you have no reason to believe what God is saying is true, because God is not the writer.

What I see the writer saying about Job in the beginning is that Job is trying his ultimate best to be righteous. Job is without knowledge so his perceptions of righteousness and not the same as God's, but God gives him a pass since he is trying so hard and believes he is doing right. The words the bible uses to express Job as being blameless and upright are not as strong as the ones used to compliment Noah, for they are weaker.

For instance, the word translated "perfect" in the KJV in the book of Job is translated "plain or mild" when applied to Jacob in Genesis 25:27. And the word translated "upright" in the KJV is not the word translated "righteous" when applied to Jesus, which means without blemish.

My perception of what God is saying here is the same as what Paul says about himself in Philippians 3:4-6.

Phl 3:4 Though I might also have confidence in the flesh. If any other man thinketh that he hath whereof he might trust in the flesh, I more: Circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews; as touching the law, a Pharisee; Concerning zeal, persecuting the church; touching the righteousness which is in the law, blameless.

While Paul says he is blameless he is destroying Christians.

You might see what Paul is saying as not equal to God saying it, but I hold all scripture equal, as inspired by God.

 

[tttallison]

Continued--

You are looking at an angelic type person while I see a type of Paul before he is saved.

 

[tttallison]

Where in the book of Job did God call Job a potsherd?

There are 2 uses of the word "potsherd" in Job ...

Job 2:8 And he took him a potsherd to scrape himself withal; and he sat down among the ashes.

Job 2:8 refers to Job having taken a piece of pottery to scrape his itching, inflamed skin.

Job 41:30 Sharp stones are under him: he spreadeth sharp pointed things upon the mire.

Job 41:30 refers to hide of leviathan ... there were sharp stone-like scales on the underside of the hide of leviathan.
.

God called Job a potsherd in Isaiah, but I guess to your mind the books are not connected.

Isa 45:9 Woe unto him that striveth with his Maker! Let the potsherd strive with the potsherds of the earth. Shall the clay say to him that fashioneth it, What makest thou? or thy work, He hath no hands?

Job 40:2Shall he that contendeth with the Almighty instruct him? he that reproveth God, let him answer it. (God speaking to Job)

Striveth and contendeth are from the same Hebrew word. Strong's H7378 - rîḇ

You say Job 41:30 refers to the hide of leviathan ... And yet the verse, that obviously was posted from the KJV, says nothing about the hide of leviathan.

The reading from the book you posted that verse from says sharp potsherds are under leviathan, and he spreads (or threshes) those potsherds upon the mire. At least that is what the Hebrew behind it states.

 

[ZNP]

The Psalms are a journal of the Melchisedec Priesthood (part 1)

There is a structural principle running through everything we see in the Priesthood of Melchisedec.

The Melchizedekian priest is never stationed above the need he addresses. He is placed inside it. The qualification for the ministry is not immunity from the crisis but passage through it. What we receive in the furnace is precisely what we are then equipped to offer — not as a theory but as a testimony.

Paul names this principle directly: "the God of all comfort, who comforts us in all our affliction, so that we may be able to comfort those who are in any affliction, with the comfort with which we ourselves are comforted by God" (2 Corinthians 1:3–4). The comfort flows through, not around, the one who ministers. The channel must first receive what it will carry.

But Paul inherited this principle. So did Peter and James and the writer of Hebrews. They inherited it from the Psalms.

Hannah and the Logic of Shared Need

Before turning to the Psalter itself, consider the case of Hannah in 1 Samuel, because she makes the principle visible.

Israel is in crisis. The priestly house of Eli has collapsed from within — his sons are corrupt, they despise the offering, and as a result "the word of the LORD was rare in those days; there was no frequent vision" (1 Samuel 3:1). God needs a priest, a son who can stand in the gap.

Hannah is barren. She is mocked and provoked by Peninnah. She cannot eat. She weeps. She is in a state of desolation that makes her, from the outside, look like a woman God has passed over.

But notice the precise symmetry: Hannah is experiencing what God is experiencing. She desperately needs a son who will honor her name and put an end to her reproach. God desperately needs a son who will honor His name and put an end to His reproach in Israel. The two needs are the same need, mirrored across the divine-human relationship.

When Hannah prays and vows to give the child back, she is not making a transaction. She is being formed into the instrument the moment requires. Her barrenness was the qualification, not the disqualification. The very thing that made her cry out to God is what made her the mother of Samuel.

This is the Melchizedekian pattern in its most compressed form: the priest is placed in the same situation God is in — both need the same salvation — and the shared need becomes the basis of the shared ministry. God needs His priest and the priest needs God.

Peter's instruction to wives with unbelieving husbands operates on exactly this logic. The woman who is in a household waiting for her husband's salvation is the woman who knows, from the inside, what it means to live in hope of someone you love coming home to God. That is precisely the interior posture from which she can minister to him — not from above, but from within. God desires that husband to be saved and has given the believing wife this ministry. God needs her and she needs God.

Hebrews 4:15–16 brings this into focus as a theological principle: "For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who in every respect has been tempted as we are, yet without sin. Let us then with confidence draw near to the throne of grace, that we may receive mercy and find grace to help in time of need." The high priest's sympathy is not a courtesy. It is the mechanism of his intercession. He can help in the time of need because he was placed in the time of need. He knows the way through because he has been through it.

And it is this principle — the priest qualified by shared experience, approaching the throne with what he has received in order to give it to others — that the Psalms enact across one hundred and fifty poems.

 

[ZNP]

The Psalms are a journal of the Melchisedec Priesthood (part 2)

The Psalms as the Melchizedekian Prayer Book

The Psalter is not a collection of religious sentiments. It is a record of priests at work.

David is described in Acts 2:30 as a prophet who knew that God had sworn to set one of his descendants on his throne. The Psalms he wrote are not merely personal expressions — they are the intercessions of a man who, like Job, stood before God on behalf of others, whose sufferings were not only his own, and whose prayers were accepted in ways that outlasted his lifetime by millennia.

The structural principle, once identified, appears throughout the Psalter: the psalmist is placed in the same situation — the same crisis, the same need, the same cry — that those for whom he prays are also in. The shared need is the qualification for the shared prayer.

Psalm 22

It opens with the cry that Jesus spoke from the cross: "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?" What follows is not poetry about abandonment — it is a priest entering the experience of godforsakenness so completely that his prayer becomes the prototype for every person who has ever felt that God has looked away. The psalmist does not merely describe this condition. He inhabits it to its depths.

And then — at the hinge of the psalm — something shifts: "For he has not despised or scorned the suffering of the afflicted one; he has not hidden his face from him but has listened to his cry for help" (v. 24). The priest who went down into the abandonment comes out the other side with a testimony. "They will proclaim his righteousness, declaring to a people yet unborn: He has done it" (v. 31). The prayer outlasts the psalmist. It goes forward to people who will one day need to know that someone survived this and was heard.

This is Job 19:25 — "I know that my Redeemer lives" — spoken in song form. The priest who confessed resurrection in the depths of his suffering bequeathed that confession to every sufferer who came after him.

Psalm 51

David has sinned catastrophically. His prayer is not a performance of contrition — it is a man going down into his own guilt and staying there long enough to receive something real. "Create in me a clean heart, O God, and renew a right spirit within me" (v. 10). And then — the Melchizedekian turn: "Then I will teach transgressors your ways, and sinners will return to you" (v. 13). The man who was a transgressor becomes the one qualified to reach transgressors. Not despite the failure but because of what was received in it.

Psalm 88

The darkest psalm in the Psalter — and perhaps for that reason the most important for understanding the Melchizedekian vocation. It has no resolution. The light does not break through at the end. The final word is "darkness." This psalm exists so that the person in that place has a companion in the Scriptures. Someone went here before you. Someone prayed from here and their prayer was preserved. The preservation of the prayer is the intercession — the priest who went into the darkness before you left a lamp.

Psalm 102

The psalmist's private anguish opens onto something cosmic: the rebuilding of Zion, the gathering of the nations, generations yet unborn praising God. The personal crisis becomes the vessel for a prayer that carries far more than the individual. This is the pattern traced from Genesis 3 through Job through James through Hebrews through 1 Peter through 2 Corinthians: the priest's particular suffering becomes the entry point into an intercession larger than himself.

Psalm 69

"Save me, O God, for the waters have come up to my neck." This psalm is quoted in the New Testament more often than almost any other. Its sufferer is mocked, ostracized, consumed by zeal for God's house, estranged from family, falsely accused. What he is experiencing is not unique to him. And so his prayer became the prayer of every person who has ever been in that water. The New Testament writers reached for it again and again because it names what no private prayer captures — the condition of the righteous sufferer accused by those who should have been defenders.

The pattern across these psalms is consistent. The psalmist is placed inside the need. He prays from within it. And the prayer, preserved and handed forward, becomes the instrument by which others who enter the same need find that someone was there before them and was heard.

 

[reneweddaybyday]

reneweddaybyday said:
if you have submitted a post wherein you acknowledge/agree with what God said about Job in Job 1:1; Job 1:8; and Job 2:3, I'd sure like to see it ... otherwise from what you have submitted thus far, you definitely do not believe what God said about Job in Job 1:1; Job 1:8; and Job 2:3.

Our perspectives are different. What you see is not what I see.

so you still do not believe what God said about Job ???

Job 1:1. There 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.

Job 1:8 And 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?

Job 2:3 And 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? and still he holdeth fast his integrity, although thou movedst me against him, to destroy him without cause.

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

First, I treat all scripture equally, as inspired by God. It doesn't matter if God is the speaker, it all has equal value. God is the author while there are many writers. I accept that what the writer is writing is true, unless the writer makes it clear that it is a lie. If you don't believe the writer is speaking truth, then you have no reason to believe what God is saying is true, because God is not the writer.

You do realize that the Book of Job contains discussion between Job, Eliphaz, Bildad, Elihu, yes? When the words of men (or women) are included in Scripture, that is the word of men ... not God.

When God has written that He said something, that is the Word directly from God.

When God has written that a man or a woman said something, it may not be in your best interest to believe what is said as truth.

What I see the writer saying about Job in the beginning is that Job is trying his ultimate best to be righteous. Job is without knowledge so his perceptions of righteousness and not the same as God's, but God gives him a pass since he is trying so hard and believes he is doing right. The words the bible uses to express Job as being blameless and upright are not as strong as the ones used to compliment Noah, for they are weaker.

you are comparing two completely different scenarios.

In the case of Noah being perfect in his generations (Gen 6:9), God was speaking of Noah's bloodline not having been contaminated by whatever occurred back in the early days of Genesis which resulted in the nephilim.

In the case of Job being perfect, BDB lexicon describes the word as "complete, morally innocent, having integrity" and cites Job 1:1, Job 1:8, Job 2:3.

your claim that "God gives him [Job] a pass since he is trying so hard and believes he is doing right" is nothing but your refusal to believe the Word of God.

I believe both Noah and Job walked with God ... you do not. so be it.

For instance, the word translated "perfect" in the KJV in the book of Job is translated "plain or mild" when applied to Jacob in Genesis 25:27. And the word translated "upright" in the KJV is not the word translated "righteous" when applied to Jesus, which means without blemish.

Jacob and Job believed in the same God I believe in ... and you may believe in.

Since God said Job was upright, why do you question and doubt what God said about Job?

My perception of what God is saying here is the same as what Paul says about himself in Philippians 3:4-6.

Phl 3:4 Though I might also have confidence in the flesh. If any other man thinketh that he hath whereof he might trust in the flesh, I more: Circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews; as touching the law, a Pharisee; Concerning zeal, persecuting the church; touching the righteousness which is in the law, blameless.

keep reading:

Philippians 3:7-9

7 But what things were gain to me, those I counted loss for Christ.

8 Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung, that I may win Christ,

9 And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith

According to Job 1:1, Job 1:8, Job 2:3, Job was a believer before he "suffered the loss of all things". Job continuously called out to God in his efforts to have God clarify what was going on and why he was suffering. After a period of time, God heeded the call of Job and Job's knowledge of God was greater after his ordeal was over.

While Paul says he is blameless he is destroying Christians.

correction ... Paul was no longer "destroying Christians" when he wrote to the church at Philippi.

Before Paul met the Lord Jesus Christ on the road to Damascus (Acts 9), Paul was a pharisee who had trained at the feet of Gamaliel. Gamaliel was a well respected teacher, a pharisee, a member of the sanhedrin.

Gamaliel was the one who advised the council and the high priest to release the apostles (Acts 5).

You might see what Paul is saying as not equal to God saying it, but I hold all scripture equal, as inspired by God.

well ... you might just want to discern the difference between what God says a man or woman says ... and what God says.

In the case of the conversations between Job, Eliphaz, Bildad, Zophar, Elihu, there is some truth spoken by each of them ... and there is some error spoken by each of them.

In the case of what God said in the Book of Job ... His Word is truth and you can believe Him. So believe God when He says:

Job 1:1. There 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.

Job 1:8 And 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?

Job 2:3 And 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? and still he holdeth fast his integrity, although thou movedst me against him, to destroy him without cause.


and believe God when He says:

Job 42:7 And it was so, that after the LORD had spoken these words unto Job, the LORD said to Eliphaz the Temanite, My wrath is kindled against thee, and against thy two friends: for ye have not spoken of me the thing that is right, as my servant Job hath.

.

 

[christophernyc]

Because Job blessed God after the first test even though he had lost everything.

This question to you still remains unanswered:

How does your whole interpretation of Job’s story comport with the actual words the apostle James writes about Job in his epistle to believers?

The only answer you provided was that you would commend Job because he blesses God after the first test. But did you notice James does not write about whether or not Job blesses God? The question is about what James wrote about Job, but you responded by repackaging one of your talking points.

Are you able to answer the question? Yes or no? And not responding comes across as a clear “no”. If yes, then the question is:

How does your whole interpretation of Job’s story comport with the actual words the apostle James writes about Job in his epistle to believers?

Why does James hold up Job as an example to people of faith? Why does James commend Job in the way he does and with the words he uses?