| I. |
TITLE: |
| |
A. |
In Hebrew the name is
boYa! probably from the root meaning "to come back," or "repent,"
thus describing one who "comes back" or "returns to" God. [1] |
| |
B. |
In Greek LXX the name is
transliteration of the Hebrew consonants IWB. |
| II. |
AUTHOR: Possibly Job,
Elihu, or a contemporary of Job |
| |
A. |
The author of the book is
unknown 1. The text does not identify its author 2. Rabbinic
tradition does not attempt to identify an author other than
suggesting that the writer must have preceded Moses |
| |
B. |
Ones understanding of
Date (below) contributes to one's understanding of the author |
| |
C. |
Jacques Bolduc suggested
in his commentary of 1637 that the book of Job may have been
authored in a secondary way by Moses who found it in its original
Aramaic form and translated it into Hebrew [2] |
| |
|
1. |
This could account for: |
| |
|
|
a. |
Its being possessed by
the Hebrews |
| |
|
|
b. |
Its attaining a canonical
status |
| |
|
|
c. |
The Aramaic tone in some
of the terms and modes of expression in the text |
| |
|
2. |
But the style of Job is
not really Mosaic; Moses uses the name of Yahweh often whereas Job
uses other names, Job uses Arabic words unlike Moses, Moses would
not have been familiar with Arabic customs, opinions, and manners |
| |
D. |
Job, Elihu, or a
contemporary of Job: |
| |
|
1. |
The date of the book
leans toward a patriarchal age |
| |
|
2. |
The foreign tone of the
book allows for it to have been written by Job (Arabic words,
nomadic habits, illustrations from sandy plains, awareness of
nature and the arts) |
| III. |
DATE: |
| |
A. |
Date of the Events:
Probably pre-Mosaic, even patriarchal from the second Millennium
B.C. |
| |
|
1. |
Job is lacking references
to historical events and reflects a non-Hebraic cultural
background which little is known about |
| |
|
2. |
Location: |
| |
|
|
a. |
Uz was located in
northern Arabia [3] |
| |
|
|
b. |
Job's friend, Eliphaz,
came from Teman, a city in Edom |
| |
|
|
c. |
Elihu came from the
Buzites who lived next to the Chaldeans in northeast Arabia [4] |
| |
|
3. |
Support for a pre-Mosaic
date: |
| |
|
|
a. |
The patriarchal
family-clan organization reflects the time of Abraham rather than
after the Exodus |
| |
|
|
b. |
The offering of sacrifice
by the head of the family rather than a priest reflects a time
before the Exodus |
| |
|
|
c. |
The mention of a qesitah
as a type of money (Job 42:11) suggests a date which is at least
during the time of Joshua (cf. Jos. 24:32), if not during the
patriarchal period (cf. Gen 33:19) [5] |
| |
|
4. |
Support for an early
second millennium date of Job as a contemporary with the
patriarchs: |
| |
|
|
a. |
The reference in Ezekiel
14:14 to Job and Daniel may be a reference to the ancient
Canaanite hero Dan'el who was a prominent figure in the Ugaritic
epics rather than to the contemporary prophet, Daniel [6]
b. Other names in Job are authentic for the second millennium
B.C.: |
| |
|
|
|
|
1) |
Bildad was short for Yabil Dadum, a
name found in cuneiform sources of the second millennium B.C. |
| |
|
|
|
|
2) |
Job is found in the "Babylonian Job",
a cuneiform composition [7] |
| |
B. |
Date of Composition:
Possibly during the time of the Patriarchs (Second Millennium
B.C.) |
| |
|
1. |
The Patriarchal Age: |
| |
|
|
a. |
This was the view of the
Talmud |
| |
|
|
b. |
This helps support the
accuracy of the conversations between Job and his friends; but
this is not necessary since portions of Genesis were accurately
transmitted by mouth until Moses wrote them down |
| |
|
|
c. |
The addition of 42:16-17
could have been added shortly after Job's death |
| |
|
|
d. |
The lifestyle and
longevity of Job are similar to that of the patriarchs found in
Genesis |
| |
|
|
e. |
The moving bands of
Sabaeans and Chaldeans (Job 1:15, 17) matches the early second
millennium B.C. |
| |
|
|
f. |
The literary genre of Job
(below) matches that of the patriarchal era |
| |
|
|
g. |
The name of Job is found
in the Amarna letters (c. 1350 B.C.) and the Egyptian Execration
texts (c. 2000 B.C.) [8] |
| |
|
|
h. |
Although the evidence
does not demand a second millennium B.C. date, it certainly allows
for it. " [9] |
| |
|
2. |
The Reign of Solomon: |
| |
|
|
a. |
This was the view of
Gregory Nazianzen (fourth century A.D.), Martin Luther, Haevernick,
Keil and Delitzsch, Raven, Young, and Unger [10] |
| |
|
|
b. |
Solomon's age was a
peaceful one and thus particularly interested in wisdom's approach
to the deepest, practical problems of life (e.g., Ecclesiastes,
Song of Solomon, Proverbs) |
| |
|
|
c. |
The wisdom of Proverbs 8
and Job 28 is similar |
| |
|
|
d. |
While the above arguments
are plausible, they are not determinative; as Archer writes, "most
of the ... features above mentioned are reconcilable with an
earlier date as well, particularly if the account was composed by
a non-Israelite author on non-Israelite soil" [11] |
| |
|
|
e. |
In addition a delay of
four centuries from the actual experience to the writing down of
the experience raises the question of accuracy [12] |
| |
|
3. |
The Reign of Manasseh: |
| |
|
|
a. |
This was the view of
Ewald and Hitzig. |
| |
|
|
b. |
Since this was a time of
injustice, the thought is that Job fits the social setting well
(cf. Job 9:24) |
| |
|
|
c. |
But Job does not present
trouble that is any greater than could be found at any time in
human history, and here the hardship is individual and private
rather than national |
| |
|
4. |
The Reign of Jeremiah: |
| |
|
|
a. |
This was the view of J.
E. Steinmueller |
| |
|
|
b. |
Similarity in language
with Job and the writings of Jeremiah are cited as the basis for
this time of composition (cf. Jer. 12:1-3 & Job 21:7; Jer.
20:14-18 & Job 3:3; the land of Uz is only mentioned outside of
Job in Jeremiah 25:20 and Lamentations 4:21) |
| |
|
|
c. |
But the comparisons and
language are not determinative since they can be found in other
writings (cf. Ps 37), and it is also possible that Jeremiah
borrowed from Job to express his themes of suffering and, "the
fact that Uz is mentioned in Jeremiah 25:20 is hardly of pivotal
significance unless it can be proved by other evidence that the
name had not arisen until the age of Jeremiah or else was unknown
to the Hebrews before his time" [13] |
| |
|
5. |
During or after the Exile
(sixth century B.C.): |
| |
|
|
a. |
This was the view of
Genung in ISBE, Driver, Budde, Cheyne |
| |
|
|
b. |
Arguments and Solutions
are as follows: [14] |
| |
|
|
|
1) |
The book is understood to
be legend and a depiction of the imprisonment and eventual release
of king Jehoiachin But Jehoiachin was not a righteous men and was
not ever restored to his kingdom prior to his death |
| |
|
|
|
2) |
Although the problems of
suffering was severe for the nation at the time of the exile, the
exile was not the only time the nation suffered, and again the
suffering in the book is personal rather than national [15] |
| |
|
|
|
3) |
The identification of the
tempter as "Satan" was Persian, but it was also an identificatio n
under David (1 Chron 21:1; Ps 109:6) |
| |
|
|
|
4) |
The Aramaisms in the book
suggest a late date, but Aramaic was used for hundreds of years
before the Exile |
| |
|
|
|
5) |
Although several passages
seems to refer to a national tragedy (9:24; 12:6, 13- 25; 24:12)
they are not clear enough, nor particular enough to demand an
exilic interpretation |
| |
|
|
|
6. |
Conclusion: Although it
is not possible to be certain, a patriarchal date is reasonable
and perhaps best explains the material as we have it |
| IV. |
CANONICAL CONSIDERATIONS: |
| |
A. |
Job is placed in
different places in different canons: |
| |
|
1. |
In the Talmud: Ruth,
Psalms, Job, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Solomon, Lamentations |
| |
|
2. |
In the LXX: Psalms,
Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Solomon, Job |
| |
|
3. |
In the Peshitta:
Deuteronomy, Job, Joshua |
| |
|
4. |
In the Council of Trent
and Most English Bibles: Job, Psalms, Proverbs |
| |
|
5. |
In most Hebrew Bibles:
Psalms, Proverbs, Job |
| |
|
6. |
In Kittel's Biblica
Hebraica (3rd edition) and Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia: Psalms,
Job, Proverbs |
| |
B. |
Except for Theodore of
Mopsuestia of the Antiochian school (A.D. 350-428) the book of Job
has not been questioned with respect to its canonicity [16] |
| V. |
LITERARY GENRE: |
| |
A. |
Job is wisdom literature |
| |
B. |
Some wisdom literature of
the Ancient Near East dealt with the same philosophical questions
as Job: [17] |
| |
|
1. |
A Sumerian work entitled
"Man and His God" (Ur III period, c. 2000 B.C.) |
| |
|
2. |
An Akkadian monologue
entitled "Ludlul bel Nemeqi" ("I will praise the lord of Wisdom"
dating to the end of the second millennium B.C. |
| |
|
3. |
"The Babylonian Theodicy"
dated about 1000 B.C. |
| |
C. |
The similarity of Job
with the Mesopotamian pieces with the use of dialogue (Job 4--27),
soliloquy (Job 3), discourse (Job 29--41), narrative (Job 1--2),
and poetic skill may argue against Job being a stage play even
though it may have been used in this way later on in history |
| VI. |
PURPOSES: |
| |
A. |
To demonstrate that God
is worthy of love apart from the blessings He provides [18] |
| |
B. |
To explain that God may
allow suffering as a means to purify and strengthen a person in
godliness [19] |
| |
C. |
To emphasize that man is
unable to view life from God's vast perspective [20] |
| |
D. |
To explore the justice of
God who treats the righteous with suffering [21] |
| |
E. |
To demonstrate to the
evil angels (Satan) that God's practice of blessing the righteous
is not a hindrance to the development of true righteousness [22] |
| |
F. |
To address Mankind's
wrestling with affliction which defies human explanation [23] |
|
[1]
Gleason L. Archer, Jr. A Survey of Old Testament
Introduction, 462. He notes that while another possible
etymology for the name could be "assailed one" or "one who
is the object of enmity", the Arabic etymology matches
better since "the whole setting of the story is Arabic
rather than Hebrew" (Ibid.).
[2]
Gleason L. Archer, Jr. A Survey of Old Testament
Introduction, 464.
[3]
Archer writes, "the Septuagint refers to it as the
land of the Aistai, a people whom Ptolemy the geographer
locates in the Arabian desert adjacent to the Edomites of
Mount Seir" (Gleason L. Archer, Jr. A Survey of Old
Testament Introduction, 464).
[4]
Gleason L. Archer, Jr. A Survey of Old Testament
Introduction, 464.
[5]
Archer writes, "But if the scene was laid in North Arabia
near Edom, a clan type of society may well have persisted
there as late as the time of the Hebrew monarchy. Possibly
private sacrifices by the heads of families persisted
alongside the official tribal priesthood."
The foreign locale would also account
for the comparative rarity of the name Yahweh in most
chapters of the book. Job shows a distinct preference for
the pan-Semitic term, 'Eloah or 'Elohim, for God ..."
Interestingly enough, the title Shaddai, the Almighty,
occurs no less than thirty-one times in Job as against its
sixteen occurrences in the rest of the Old Testament. This
evidence from the use of the divine names certainly tends to
confirm the theory of a non-Israelite background" (Gleason
L. Archer, Jr. A Survey of Old Testament Introduction,
464-65).
[6]
Archer considers this "dubious" (Gleason L. Archer,
Jr. A Survey of Old Testament Introduction, 465), but Taylor
writes, "Daniel alone is unknown from the Bible. He can
hardly be Ezekiel's contemporary in exile: in any case the
word used here is 'Dani'el' and not 'Daniyye'l' as in the
book of that name. The likelihood is that this is the 'Dan'el'
of the ancient Canaanite epic discovered in 1930 at Ras
Shamra, the ancient Ugarit, on the north Syrian coast, and
dating form about 1400 B.C. [The Tale of Aqhat: see DOTT,
pp. 124-128; ANET, PP. 149-155]. he appears there mainly as
the dispenser of fertility, but also as the upright one,
judging the cause of the widow and of the fatherless. We
must suppose either that this early Semitic literature was
known to later Hebrew generations or, more likely, that
ancient Hebrew traditions which have not survived
incorporated material centered around a character of the
same name and similar character to the Ugaritic Dan'el"
(John B. Taylor, Ezekiel: An Introduction and Commentary.
Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries [Downers Grove:
InterVarsity Press, 1969], 129).
[7]
Archer writes, "This is the story of a righteous man who
underwent the bitterest agony of body and spirit, even
though he was conscious of having lived an upright life, and
nevertheless remained steadfast in the midst of his
affliction. Ultimately he was granted a happier life than
ever, to the glory of Marduk, the god of Babylon. This
Babylonian account may go back to 1200 B.C., and may rest
upon materials even earlier" (Gleason L. Archer, Jr. A
Survey of Old Testament Introduction, 465).
[8]
LaSor, Hubbard, and Bush, Old Testament Survey, 560.
[9]
Archer writes, "We may conclude therefore that there
is no convincing evidence for either denying or insisting
upon a pre- Mosaic date of composition (A Survey of Old
Testament Introduction, 466)
Likewise Hill and Walton write, "There
are no real problems with this view, though it must be
recognized that the evidence is scant (A Survey of the Old
Testament, 264).
[10]
Gleason L. Archer, Jr. A Survey of Old Testament
Introduction, 467.
[11]
Gleason L. Archer, Jr. A Survey of Old Testament
Introduction, 467.
[12]
See Archer's discussion where he allows for the form of the
book to express the sense of what happened without insisting
that it be a verbatim account of the words of the characters
(Gleason L. Archer, Jr. A Survey of Old Testament
Introduction, 467-68). See also Andrew E. Hill and John H.
Walton, who say, "Once it is recognized that Job is part of
the corpus of wisdom literature, it is possible to accept,
as most scholars do, that the dialogue presented is not
offered as a reporter's transcript quoting the precise words
of each person involved. A high view of biblical inspiration
requires one to take into consideration the literary genre
of a book in order to understand how it ought to be
interpreted" (A Survey of the Old Testament, 263-64).
[13]
Gleason L. Archer, Jr. A Survey of Old Testament
Introduction, 469.
[14]
Gleason L. Archer, Jr. A Survey of Old Testament
Introduction, 469; Roy Zuck, "Introductory Questions about
Job" (unpublished class notes in 303 Old Testament History
II. Dallas Theological Seminary, Fall 1981), 6-7).
[15]
Walton and Hill write, "the book of Job may have
become of interest to the Israelites who were experiencing
the Babylonian exile and trying to reconcile that event with
their view of God.
Although the book unquestionably
contains discussion and information that would be invaluable
to the exiles (especially the idea that God's wisdom is the
basis on which his justice may be vindicated), the scenario
in Job seems too unlike Israel of the sixth century to
invite too close a correlation. Most obviously, the book is
insistent on Job's absolute innocence and vindicates him in
the end. Such could hardly be said of Israel. Undoubtedly,
however, the minority who were righteous in Israel may well
have taken solace and found comfort in the teachings of the
book of Job" (Andrew E. Hill and John H. Walton, A Survey of
the Old Testament, 268; see also LaSor, Hubbard, and Bush,
Old Testament Survey, 561-62).
[16]
LaSor, Hubbard, and Bush, Old Testament Survey, 561,
n. 2.
[17]
Andrew E. Hill and John H. Walton, A Survey of the Old
Testament, 264-67. All of these deny such a thing as a
righteous sufferer. See also LaSor, Hubbard, and Bush, Old
Testament Survey, 562, 572-82.
[18]
Gleason L. Archer, Jr. A Survey of Old Testament
Introduction, 462.
[19]
Gleason L. Archer, Jr. A Survey of Old Testament
Introduction, 462.
[20]
Archer writes, "God's thoughts and ways are moved by
considerations too vast for the puny mind of man to
comprehend, since man is unable to see the issues of life
with the breadth and vision of the Almighty; nevertheless
God really knows what is best for His own glory and for our
ultimate good. This answer is given against the background
of the limited concepts of Job's three "comforters," Eliphaz,
Bildad, and Zophar.
An adequate psychological motive for
their persistence in carrying on the controversy with Job
over so many chapters is to be found in the dilemma into
which his catastrophic disaster had placed them. If a man of
such high reputation could suffer so devastating a
misfortune, their own security was imperiled by the
possibility that the same thing could happen to themselves.
Their basic motive in attempting to elicit from Job a
confession of sin was to establish their own sense of
security. If in point of fact Job had been guilty of some
grievous sin of which they public had not knowledge, his
overwhelming disaster could be easily understood as the
retribution of the righteous god. Failing to secure from him
any such confession despite all their diligent efforts to
compel from him an admission of guilt, they felt unable to
return home relieved and reassured that calamity would be
kept from their door if they only "lived a good life"
(Gleason L. Archer, Jr. A Survey of Old Testament
Introduction, 462-63).
[21]
Andrew E. Hill and John H. Walton, A Survey of the Old
Testament, 268.
[22]
Andrew E. Hill and John H. Walton, A Survey of the Old
Testament, 268.
[23]
Childs writes, "The primary effect of the concluded
dialogue is to register the failure of human wisdom in its
ability to penetrate into the mystery of human suffering"
(Brevard S. Childs, Introduction to the Old Testament as
Scripture, 536). Later he writes, "Job argues from his
personal conviction of his innocence which refused to be
coerced by deductions from an application of traditional
wisdom. Yet his own experience also fails to penetrate the
darkness" (Ibid.).
Taken from
Bible.org
|