Search results

I think it is about one of the most righteous men that lived and yet his own righteousness could not save him. I believe the story to be literal.

Let me make it simple for you. Is the answer A. or is the answer B.? A. Job was depending on God's righteousness for his salvation. B. Job was depending on Job's righteousness for his salvation.

The first Hebrew word to describe Job’s character in Job 1:1 is “tam”. The first time “tam” is used it is to describe Jacob. For me it seems that there is a connection between Job and the twin brothers Jacob and Esau. God said Esau have I hated. Job’s name means hated. The cup of woe that was...

Consider the first verse. It doesn’t tell us the identity of the main figure, while at the same time identifying everyone else later in the book. The first phrase of the first verse states where Job is from, “the land of Uz. The second phrase of the first verse reveals his name, Job, which...

OK! Is your answer then that you don't know whether Job was depending on his own righteousness, or God's righteousness for salvation? And are you saying it doesn't matter whether it was his own righteousness that Job was depending on for his salvation? I ask this because God asked Job this same...

No one has answered it. A simple God's or Job's righteousness. You know you can't answer it because it will destroy your narrative.

Why are you afraid to answer this question? Was Job's faith in God's righteousness to save him, or was Job depending on Job's righteousness to save him? You have refused to answer this question, God's righteousness, or Job's righteousness? It is a very simple question to answer. The answer is...

Just as I thought you have no evidence just as you have no motive. Job had a zeal for God, but Job had no knowledge. Just as Paul thought he was doing God's work in destroying Christians, so did Job think he was doing God's work when he made judgments about people that was wrong. Job seemed to...

That is a pretty tall assumption. You are assuming Job's children are not in the fiery pit. Don't you reap what you sow? You plant an apple seed and expect a mustard tree to grow?

Was God confused when he said to Job, Job 40:2 Shall he that contendeth with the Almighty instruct him? he that reproveth God, let him answer it.

I am sorry but you just don't reprove God and remain righteous.

Right, Job was retaining his integrity? Did he do that by cursing?

If Jethro was a Melchizedekian priest, how is it Jethro didn't know YAHWAH was above all other god's until Moses explained it to him?

I had missed this post. You are saying Job was not saved until the end of the book?

You said she made a statement and that is not true. She asked a question. In God himself what? That God exists! A lot of people believe that. Does that mean they are saved? Do you really not understand what I asked you, or are you playing me?

This question was not directed to you and no you have not been answering my questions.

You are defying logic. You can't answer whether Job was relying on his own righteousness to save him, or God's righteousness, an yet you claim he was saved. How can this be? Are you saying it doesn't matter whether or not it was Job's righteousness, or God's righteousness that Job was depending on?

Would either answer lead a person to salvation?

What evidence do you present that Eliphaz is lying?

It would seem that intellectual integrity is somewhat missing. Job's wife did not state that Job was maintaining his integrity. I have asked whether Job was trusting in his own righteousness, or God's righteousness for his salvation. It is simple. Job's righteousness, or God's righteousness?