Abstract
A case is made for the sophistication of the prose of the Job Prologue. The issue of theodicy in Job is then re-investigated by looking at paratactic elements in the Divine Wager. Three aspects of the Divine wager are probed: (1) Use of Virtual Quotations; (2) The demands on credulity of a ‘Tall Tale’, where one would have it that the system of retributive justice be suspended just so that the suffering of one extra-ordinary individual need not reflect on his punishment due to sin; and (3) Prophetic Discernment: the spectre of a false vision report where the heavenly council scene is a canard. It is concluded that the real issue in Job is not theodicy per se but the folly of raging against God so as to absolve oneself of sin (Prov. 19:3). Thus, Job and the Friends represent a composite portrait of human folly in the manner of the Wisdom Literature. Job is linked to the deterioration of the fool depicted in Proverbs.
Keywords
I think we ought only to read the kind of books that wound and stab us.
The book of Job disappoints as a theodicy. As has often been noted, the God Speeches (Job 38-42) seem wholly irrelevant to the issue of innocent suffering, 1 this even though the theodicial question is explicitly posed by the sufferer himself (Job 21: 9). Rather than try to fathom the meaning of the God Speeches and unravel any mystery of God there might be in them, it is proposed here to instead look again at how the issue of theodicy is introduced in the Prologue. Have we understood correctly how the issue of theodicy has been framed and treated in the Prologue in the first place? The issue of theodicy arises directly from the introduction of the Divine Wager in the Divine Council scene (Job 1: 6-12; 2: 1-7). 2 For it is here that the satan intervenes to cause undue suffering on Job on the pretext of testing the true nature of his moral character. This inevitably raises the question of retributive justice in general for all such innocent sufferers, in the sense that Job is an emblematic sufferer representative of the everyman.
The nature of the literary art in the prose narrative of the Job Prologue has become an important critical issue in the interpretation of the book of Job. The Prologue has often been treated as a simple folktale (or even fairytale 3 ) that has been borrowed to provide a background setting (mise en scène) for the staging of the sophisticated poetry and serious theology of the Dialogues. 4 This stance persists in Newsom’s genre-critical reading of Job, where the Prologue is considered to be derived from a family of simple didactic narratives which function merely to establish the virtue of the hero facing adversity, such as, for instance, Joseph. 5 However, David Clines has proposed instead that the Job Prologue exhibits ‘false naivety’ in the sense that it is in fact highly sophisticated literature despite presenting itself as an artless and prosaic narrative. 6 Evidence of this sophistication and a sense of irony has been detected in the description of Job’s great largesse and exemplary pious virtues. Brenner has detected ironical overstatement in the characterization of Job as a paragon of virtue. 7 The present aim is to further elaborate on the exact nature of the literary sophistication of the Job Prologue, focussing on the Divine Council scene and the Divine Wager in particular, and the connotations that this has for retributive justice and theodicy.
First, a very brief review is made of what might be called the conventional (or ‘dispensable’) 8 reading of the Divine Council scene and the Divine Wager. Then an enquiry is made of what might be called the paratactic elements of the Divine Wager. Parataxis here refers to the fraughtness of meaning found in Hebrew prose as compared to the more explicit nature of Homeric literature. Specifically, it means a style of prose with economy of words and action and with interior thoughts and feelings left unexpressed which places a heavy burden on the reader to interpret. Often a large degree of background knowledge is required to fully interpret this style of prose; a knowledgeable reader is almost presumed. 9
This enquiry will involve three probes. The first probe looks at the use of virtual quotations in the book of Job and the Heavenly Council scene in particular. A second probe will look into the theological connotations of the Divine Wager and ask what demands it makes on the credulity of such an informed reader. Is such a reader likely to believe that the very fabric of the moral universe would be suspended just so the suffering of one extra-ordinary individual need not be seen as any reflection on the punishment for their sinfulness? A third probe will look at the Divine Council scene in terms of a prophetic vision report narrated in the third person. This raises further theological issues in the important area of prophetic discernment, which concerns true and false prophecy. The spectre of a false vision report will be raised and the possibility that the entire Divine Council scene is for all intents and purposes a canard. Finally a discussion will be made on the connotations this reading has for our understanding of the issue of theodicy in the book of Job. This will entail a re-interpretation of the book of Job as an elaboration on the type of folly that leads to the fool’s questioning of God’s justice and a judgement against this.
The Divine Wager: a ‘dispensable’ reading
The Divine Wager (Job 1: 6-12; 2: 1-6) is usually understood to be a straightforward test to see if Job’s piety is genuinely altruistic and not utilitarian in any sense; in other words, it is not just calculated rather cynically only to be for personal gain. 10 The test is executed through the agency of a mysterious satan figure and first takes the form of a series of calamities (Job 1: 13-19) and then the physical deprivations of Job’s own person (Job 2: 7-8). A verbal criterion is used for the test; if Job ‘curses’ God 11 at any stage then the test has been failed. The whole scenario challenges the entire viability of religion. If all act out of self-interest then is any authentic religious faith at all possible? 12 This test motif has almost always been understood to be entirely self-contained within the Job Prologue. Once it has been established that Job has passed the test by not blaspheming against God through cursing his name (Job 1: 11; 2: 5) 13 then this establishes Job’s piety for once and for all; it should no longer be a negotiable fact when the issue of Job’s guilt or innocence subsequently arises in the debate with the Friends in the Dialogues. If we understand the satan figure merely in terms of a vehicle for the doubt about Job’s true moral status before God, 14 then the issue of Job’s possible sinfulness might be construed to disappear just as surely as the satan figure disappears from the scene forthwith. 15
However, more recently, there have been some interpretations which have striven to make the test for piety, especially in terms of Job’s integrity, a central unifying theme in the book of Job as a whole. So, in other words, the parameters of Job’s test continue in the ensuing Dialogues. 16 Also, the issue of the ethical conduct of God in the Divine Wager has attracted more critical attention, which is of some relevance to the present study. 17
First probe: virtual quotations
Fox notes that quotations occur in biblical wisdom, especially in Job and Qohelet, without any explicit signs and that their proper identification can have great significance in finding the correct interpretation of key passages perhaps even reversing meaning. 18 Quotations are excerpts of previous speakers which the present narrator may or may not agree with. 19 It is the latter case which is most important in interpretation; a proposition that the narrator wishes to scrutinise, test, or disagree with. One critical issue is whether an introductory verb of speaking (say, ask, or admit) or thinking (verbum dicendi) needs to be present to identify quotations. As Fox notes, Gordis stressed that quotations were often left unmarked by such verbs, so the reader must supply a verbum dicendi. Thus, we have the phenomena of so-called ‘virtual quotations’. 20 There is still a considerable amount of subjectivity in the interpretation of such quotations and Fox disagrees with Gordis on several passages from Job (Job 12: 7-8, 12; 21: 19a, 22, 30). One especially controversial and important quotation concerns Eliphaz’s night vision (Job 4: 12-21). Tur-Sinai originally proposed that Eliphaz was originally quoting Job and this was later supported by Smith. 21 However, Ken Stone has recently denied this possibility and thinks that the vision has been displaced from Job 3. 22
The vast majority of quotations in Job have been identified in the Dialogue section where Job or the Friends often quote each other. The proposal here is that the formulation of the Divine Wager involves a potential virtual quotation (Job 1: 8b; 2: 3). The effective verbum dicendi is the verbal phrase to ‘set the heart to’ (שם־לב) which is rather misleadingly sometimes translated as have you ‘heard of/noticed’ (my servant Job) (NRSV) in the prior cola (Job 1: 8a). A better idiomatic translation would be to ‘focus the mind/attention to’ or even just ‘consider’ or best ‘scrutinize’. The reader has to supply the same verb to the following verse in question in order to recognise the possibility of a virtual quotation. This radically alters the meaning of the verse. Instead of a bald statement of fact demonstrating Job’s exceptional piety, one has a proposition that is quoted to be put up to scrutiny, to be tested if it is really true and perhaps eventually even to be refuted. Have you (truly) scrutinised (the prospect) that this man Job has the utmost piety, and not that this man is whole and upright, fears God and shuns evil. This of course puts the narrator’s account of Job’s piety (Job 1: 1b) in a whole new light. Perhaps the narrator was only repeating either reportage or tradition about such a paragon of virtue. 23 Suddenly the statement of Job’s piety is on shaky ground; it is no longer a certain fact that is necessarily reliable.
Second probe: the tall tale
But there is a further dimension to the Divine Wager beyond the literal reading. What we have in the Divine Council Scene is the use of a common literary device in the Hebrew Bible. This is the device of the fictive scenario, where abstract theological and philosophical ideas are explored or explained through using concrete examples, albeit often somewhat contrived. 24 For instance, the book of Jonah can be seen as a fictive scenario that asks what happens when a prophet resists his mission to minister to sinners? Or in the case of Abraham, what would happen if a patriarch remonstrated with God over the justice of God’s impending judgement over Sodom and Gomorrah (Gen. 18)? The book of Job could also be seen as a fictive scenario that asks what happens when the most pious of innocent sufferers challenges the justice of God? In other words, can human virtue impinge on Divine attributes (Job 4: 17)?
One variation of the fictive scenario involves extrapolating what might have happened in the Heavenly realm in order to have produced a certain result in human affairs (i.e. aetiological origins). For instance, in 1 Kings 22, a fictive scenario is contrived in the Heavenly Court in order to explain how a false prophecy could be generated so to mislead prophets into making a false prophecy (thus rendering them false prophets in the process). 25 In this particular case, the false prophecy concerned Ahab’s future success in battle against the Syrians. A mysterious ‘lying spirit’ is responsible for a false vision that Ahab will win in a battle that transpires to be God’s judgement against him. 26 In the case of the book of Job, a fictive scenario is created in the Heavenly Court in order to explain how God could act unjustly and afflict wanton violence on hapless and innocent people without just cause (Job 9: 17b). 27 The pretext for this unethical behaviour is given as a test to see whether disinterested piety is possible. As outlined above, the test is outrageous and ethically highly dubious, and reflects very poorly on God’s administration of the cosmos. But it is the connotations of such a scenario, in terms of sin, punishment, and repentance and the operation of the system of retributive justice in general, that most interests us here. 28
And also there is a further issue of what the text in its full connotations demands of the credulity of the discerning reader. Hoffman states the case most forthrightly and succinctly. He thinks that the whole Job Prologue is ‘anti-mimetic’, meaning that the author deliberately wrote a story that declares ‘I am not true’. 29 Hoffman considers the scene in heaven (Job 1: 6-12) to be so sharply contradictory to the conventions of the Hebrew Bible that it can only be interpreted as a wholly fictitious scenario that should never be taken seriously as an actual depiction of any realistic event that would ever have happened in the heavenly realm. The whole notion that God himself is seduced by satan flies in the face of normal conventions where it is God who dictates ‘satan’s’ actions (1 Kgs. 22: 19-22) or rebukes him for improper conduct (Zech. 3: 1-2). 30
But pause to consider the theological connotations of the Divine Wager. Job’s (covenantal?) relationship is subjugated to a wager to which he is the unwitting subject. God is now effectively acting outside the normal parameters of the moral universe. Retribution in the form of suffering is normally associated with sin. Indeed suffering was normally seen as a sign of sin. 31 But now God oversees the wanton infliction of suffering on an avowedly innocent Job. This rogue God has been likened to a monster. 32 It is as though the moral order has been suspended and the system of retribution held in abeyance, but just for this one exceptional personage. Just for this one exceptional case, suffering is not to be seen as a reflection on their sinfulness in any way.
But the above scenario can again be characterised as ‘anti-mimetic’; it simply strains the credulity of any informed reader beyond breaking point, that the system of retribution and the whole moral order of the cosmos be suspended just for one singular human being just so that they might seem above it. He endures great suffering that is inflicted against him, as if it were a sign of judgement, but it must not be seen as any reflection on his sinfulness. This strongly anti-mimetic quality is seen in the folk genre of the tall tale. The tall tale is a form of comic hyperbole told in narrative form. 33 The genre of the tall tale is not unfamiliar to the Hebrew Bible, although it has attracted very little critical scholarship. 34 We have heard of a young David felling a gigantic Philistine (1 Sam. 17) with a pebble—albeit a well-aimed one. Again we think of a rebellious prophet, Jonah, who flees from his duty to minister to sinners. Such an event would have to be seen to be believed. Of course it never happened; it is a tall tale. I will suggest that the Heavenly Council Scene and the whole scenario of the Divine Wager should be seen precisely in this vein. It is a tall tale of epic proportions which absolutely must not be taken seriously.
Third probe: prophetic discernment and false vision reports
Furthermore, an important observation can be made about the style of presentation of the Heavenly Council scene. Here, the reader is put into a highly privileged position when he or she acquiesces to the narrator who can, it seems, eavesdrop on the Divine Council with ease (cf. Isa. 40; Ps. 82; Zech. 3; 1 Kgs. 22). This is the type of perspective that the prophets claimed when they made their vision reports, that is they were able to partake of revelation from the deity. 35 In other words, the reader is rather unwittingly put into the boots of the would-be prophet. The question then arises as to whether this might have implications of how we might approach and interpret the text as readers. The claim to be able to access the Divine Council had great significance in the important area of prophetic discernment. This is the issue of being able to discern between true and false prophecy and thus between true and false prophets. 36
One criterion that was used to tell the difference between true and false prophets was the success or not of their predictions (Deut. 18: 22). Also the claim to have access to the Divine Council (Jer. 23: 18, 22) was part of the rhetoric they used to persuade their readers of their authenticity. This is precisely the privilege the reader enjoys in the Divine Council scenes in the book of Job. But is it a privilege the reader should enjoy or are they led to indulge in it? But why should one even consider the possibility of what might effectively be an unreliable false vision? Well first, as outlined above, the vision afforded to the reader is such a preposterous tall tale that it strains credulity. But there is also the powerful precedent of the unreliable false vision described in the peculiar case of Micaiah ben Imlah (1 Kgs. 22). Here the prophet reports of a ‘lying spirit’ accepting a commission to give a false vision predicting Ahab’s victory in battle. Nor is there any lack of lying spirits among the heavenly host able to supply false revelation, including in the book of Job itself (2 Kgs. 19: 7; 1 Sam. 16: 14-23; 18: 10-12; 19: 9-11; Job 4: 12-21). 37 Much depends on how the narrator treats the reader, for it is clear that false prophecies tended to be dealt to deceitful and sinful people to punish them for their perceived sins, as is the case of the prophets of Baal mentioned above (1 Kgs. 22). 38
The question then arises about the nature of the relationship between the vision reports of the Divine Council scene (Job 1-2) and Eliphaz’s uncanny night vision (Job 4: 12-21). Insight into this relationship may be provided by Pyper’s analysis of analogous episodes in 2 Samuel, Nathan’s parable of the Ewe-Lamb (2 Sam. 12) and the ‘Wise Women of Tekoa’ (2 Sam. 14). These two episodes are analogous examples of the parabolic ‘mousetrap’ device (or ‘juridicial parable’), 39 where David is told a fictive story by a third party so as to induce him to make a judgement against his own actions concerning others (Bathsheba and Absalom affairs, respectively). Pyper cites these two episodes as an example of auto-parodie. According to Pyper, the latter episode parodies the first and thus casts doubt on David’s abilities of discernment of the situations presented to him here. 40 Pyper further proposes that David is presented as a model reader, as a mirror held up to the reader themselves, in their ability to discern the situation presented to them and make sound judgements based on this. 41 The argument here is that Eliphaz’s uncanny night vision (Job 4: 12-21) does indeed reflect badly on the recipient’s ability to discern genuine revelation 42 but also that if Eliphaz is presented as a model to the reader, then it places doubt on that reader’s own ability to be able to discern the vision reports of the Divine Council scenes (Job 1-2) as false, when they had thought it was ‘good money’.
There is a lack of evidence to decide either way, but the possibility must be taken seriously that the Heavenly Council scene in the Job Prologue, that features the Divine Wager, might well be a false vision report. It is a hoax. It is a canard. Events in Heaven would never be so contrived such that an innocent man would be so wantonly afflicted with such undue suffering. Nor would events be so contrived that the suffering of one exceptional man need not reflect on his sinfulness. The system of retribution would never be suspended just for one person. These are both propositions that must be rejected.
A counter-proposal: judgement against folly
The book of Job now seems no longer to qualify as a genuine enquiry into theodicy as an ironical subtext indicates Job’s sinfulness after all. This ironical subtext arises from three paratactic elements: (1) Virtual Quotations (Job 1: 8b), (2) The Tall Tale (Job 1: 6-12; 2: 1-7) that makes Job’s suffering look as though it was unconnected to sinfulness, and (3) The False Vision report (Job 1: 6-12; 2: 1-7). These paratactic elements can all be seen in the context of an ironical undertone in the Job Prologue, specifically the use of ironical overstatement in the description of Job’s virtues (Job 1: 1b). 43
But what then is the point of the book of Job? The issue may be more about what Job’s agenda says about his moral character. 44 Anyone who would deign to rival God and challenge his justice could be deemed to be a fool. 45 Thus, what we might have is a rather indirect portraiture of human folly of the type which is reminiscent of the Wisdom Literature, especially Proverbs, for example, Dame Folly (Prov. 9: 13-18). Job is a self-conceited fool who is so self-righteous that he seeks to absolve himself of sin and instead rages against God for his suffering (Prov. 19: 3). 46 Job’s self-righteousness has been described in colloquial terms as like the unco guid. 47 The Friends too have been described as pedantic fools who indulge in pseudo-profundity, the recital of profound sounding platitudes to give the appearance of great wisdom. 48 Elihu (Job 32-7) too has been described as a buffoon who would give wise counsel but in the end appears only to re-iterate largely what the Friends have already said. 49 It should also be noted that the ‘Hymn to Wisdom’ (Job 28) no longer seems out of place in this context. It underlines the vanity of the fools, such as the likes of Job and the Friends, to attain Wisdom through their own (human) endeavour. Thus, Job 28 seems highly thematic rather than some extraneous interpolation. 50
It may be that the Dialogues are meant to tell us more about two types of folly than anything about theodicy per se; a kind of composite portrait of a particular type of fool. 51 In this case, the God Speeches may represent a resolution to the book of Job in the sense that they constitute a judgement scene against such folly. The Friends are deemed to have ‘not spoken well of God’ (Job 42: 7) and Job, while he has spoken well, is confronted by a God who appears out of the whirlwind (cf. Zech. 9: 14) in a scene reminiscent of prophetic judgement scenes (cf. Hab. 3: 3-15). 52 The question then arises that, if both Job and the Friends are somehow self-deluded fools, then do they accordingly receive false visions (Job 4: 12-21) meant to mislead them? 53 Then the language of Job 42: 1-6, which abounds in Wisdom vocabulary (to ‘see’, to ‘hear’, ‘understand’, cf. Isa. 6: 9-10) 54 , makes sense as the enlightenment of a fool of his folly through genuine Divine revelation, as opposed to the erstwhile false counsel of the Friends. Job now has true wise counsel in the wisdom of the Lord and is subsequently restored (Job 42: 10-17).
It is interesting to reconcile this judgement against folly in Job with the evaluation of wisdom and folly in Proverbs. In Proverbs, there is a clear contrast between the wise and the fool, and between wisdom and folly. Here there is a black and white distinction between the path of wisdom and the path of folly and the clear indication which path should be followed by the pupil. However, there is nowhere in the book of Job where this antithesis is developed. 55 There is an abundant vocabulary concerning Wisdom, the root חכם is very common (28x). 56 But mention of fools or folly is hardly developed 57 .
However, this does not mean that there is no relation between Job and Proverbs with respect to the development of themes of Wisdom and folly. For instance, the treatment of folly in Job can be placed in the context of the progressive deterioration of the fool that is mapped out in Proverbs. Pemberton describes four stages of the development of the fool in Proverbs, from isolated instances of folly, to the habitual foolish choices, through to ingrained character disposition, culminating in a tragic end which is referred to as the ‘fate of the wicked’. In this final stage, the ultimate fool blames all for their self-inflicted demise, most notably the deity, so as to absolve themselves of sin (Prov. 19: 3). 58 This most certainly resonates with the character of Job, who would not only blaspheme God 59 but go so far as to sue God in court for injustice, a prerogative normally reserved for God against other deities (Ps. 82). 60 One commentator has seen fit to compare Job to the hideously self-righteous person called the unco guid in the Scottish vernacular. 61 But also the ‘Fate of the Wicked’ theme has strong resonances with the book of Job, for the Friends insistently insinuate that Job must be guilty by likening his fate to the judgement against the wicked in several speeches (Job 15: 18; 20). 62
Conclusion
So, in conclusion, the recognition of paratactic elements in the Job Prologue, particularly concerning the Divine Wager, greatly changes the complexion of the entire composition. It creates an ironical twist that focuses attention on human folly rather than the more salient issue of the nature of God’s justice or theodicy. Although vision reports (true or false) are indeed more typical of Prophetic literature, the present interpretation aligns the book of Job with more traditional Wisdom themes, namely, the characterisation of the fool and their progressive moral deterioration. It can be argued that this recognition of literary sophistication of the prose of the Job Prologue helps address some difficult literary critical questions regarding the relevancy of the God Speeches and the role and function of Job 28 and thus the overall coherency of the book of Job as a whole. 63
Footnotes
1.
See for instance, M. Brettler, How to Read the Jewish Bible (2007), p. 246 and A. Steinmann, ‘The Structure and Message of the Book of Job’, Vetus Testamentum, 46, no. 1 (1996), pp. 85-100, (85-86).
2.
On the Divine Council, see J. Yindo, ‘The Divine Courtroom Motif in the Hebrew Bible: A Holistic Approach’, in A. Mermelstein & S. Holtz (eds.), The Divine Courtroom in Comparative Perspective (2015), pp. 76-93 and E. Mullen, The Assembly of Gods (1980). Also specifically with respect to the book of Job, L. Handy, ‘The Authority of Divine Power and the Guilt of God in the Book of Job’, Journal for the Study of the Old Testament, 60 (1992), pp. 104-18.
3.
Brettler, Jewish Bible, pp. 252-53.
4.
A. Cooper, ‘Reading and Misreading the Prologue to Job’, Journal for the Study of the Old Testament, 46 (1990), pp. 67-79, (67). W. Booth, The Rhetoric of Fiction, 2nd ed. (1983), pp. 1-2 presents the Job Prologue as a parade example of the unsophisticated use of the omniscient narrator in ancient tales as compared to the unreliable narration of characters in modern fiction. But note the objection of J. Watts, ‘The Unreliable Narrator of Job’, in S. L. Cook et al. (eds.), The Whirlwind: Essays on Job, Hermeneutics and Theology in Memory of Jane Morse (2002), pp. 168-80 who thinks that the God Speeches act to debunk such omniscient narration.
5.
C. Newsom, The Book of Job: A Contest of Moral Imaginations (1992), pp. 39-41. Newsom envisages interactions between successively more sophisticated genres in Job, starting with the most basic didactic narrative in the Prologue.
6.
D.J.A. Clines, ‘False Naivety in the Prologue to Job’, HAR, 9 (1985), pp. 127-36. Cooper, Misreading, p. 68 supports Clines’s stance and sees a case for unity between the prose and poetry of Job. V. Hoffer, ‘Illusion, Allusion and Literary Artifice in the Frame Narrative of Job’, in S. Cook et al. (eds.), The Whirlwind (2001), pp. 84-99 also notes the sophisticated use of intertextual allusion in the Job Prologue. However, note the objection by Newsom, Moral Imaginations, p. 47 that reading into the Prologue a sly and subversive meaning unnecessarily contravenes generic conventions.
7.
A. Brenner, ‘Job the Pious? The Characterization of Job in the Narrative Framework of the Book of Job’, Journal for the Study of the Old Testament, 43 (1989), pp. 37-52 focuses on the use of perfect numbers (3, 7, 10) in the Prologue, but contrasts Job’s piety in the Prologue with that in the Dialogues, an interpretation which is not followed here.
8.
The idea of a dispensable reading comes from E. Good, In Turns of Tempest: A Reading of Job with a Translation (1990).
9.
See J. Lundbom, ‘Parataxis, Rhetorical Structure, and the Dialogue over Sodom in Genesis 18’, in P. Davies & D.J.A. Clines (eds.), The World of Genesis (JSOTSup. 257), pp. 136-45, (136-38). Lundbom refers back to the classic analysis of Genesis 22 (Akedah) by E. Auerbach, Mimesis (trans. W. Trask; 1974) pp. 3-23 and applies the same methodology to Genesis 18. Both Genesis 18 and 22 have long been linked to the Job Prologue; see, for instance, J.L. Crenshaw, Defending God: Biblical Responses to the Problem of Evil (2005), pp. 65-67.
10.
Much hinges on what nuance of the relatively rare Hebrew adverb חנם is used; whether it has a purely compensatory meaning or not. See the discussions by T. Linafelt & A. Davis, ‘Translating חנם in Job 1:9 and 2:3: On the Relationship between Job’s Piety and His Interiority’, Vetus Testamentum, 63 (2013), pp. 627-39; and D. Hankins, The Book of Job and the Immanent Genesis of Transcendence (2015), pp. 41-44.
11.
It is commonly accepted that the Hebrew root brk (bless) is used euphemistically, but see T. Linafelt, ‘The Undecidibility of ברך in the Prologue to Job’, BibInt, 4, no.2 (1996), pp. 55-72 for a full discussion and critique.
12.
Crenshaw, Defending God, pp. 183-84.
13.
On the issue of Job’s speech ethics, see W. Baker, Personal Speech-Ethics in the Epistle of James (1995), pp. 193-95 and J. Anderson, The Blessing and the Curse: Trajectories in the Theology of the Old Testament (2014), pp. 273-87 which look at Job’s ‘rhetorical brinkmanship’.
14.
The satan figure is surely more complicated than this. See, for instance, M. Weiss, The Story of Job’s Beginning (1987); E. Pagels, The Origin of Satan (1995); and H. Kelly, Satan: A Biography (2006). Two good reviews on critical study of the satan are D. Brown, ‘The Devil in the Details: A Survey of Research on Satan in Biblical Studies’, Currents in Biblical Research, 9, no.2 (2011), pp. 200-27 and K. Nielsen, Satan: The Prodigal Son? A Family Problem in the Bible (1995), Ch. 4.
15.
But even this is not a surefire presumption as, as has been noted by a few commentators, there is a missing scene in the divine realm where we would expect satan to concede defeat in the test of Job’s piety. See Clines, False Naivety, p. 130 and J. Wharton, Job (1999), p. 22. So it may be that the issue of Job’s piety is yet still open for negotiation!
16.
See S. Ticciati, ‘Does Job fear God for Naught?’, MT, 21, no.3 (2005), pp. 353-66, (353-54). She develops this idea further by linking it specifically to Covenant piety and the idea of obedience as a central issue in S. Ticciati, Job and the Disruption of Identity (1999), p. 50. Wharton, Job, also emphasizes the continuing test of Job’s integrity but without the linkage to covenant piety and Deuteronomic ideology.
17.
See D.J.A. Clines, ‘Job’s Fifth Friend: An Ethical Critique’, Bib.Int, 12, no.3 (2004), pp. 233-50, S. Balentine, ‘For No Reason’, Int, (2003), pp. 359-61 and K. Dell, ‘Does God Behave Unethically in the Book of Job’, in Dell (ed.), Ethical and Unethical in the Old Testament: God and Humans in Dialogue (LHBOTS 528, 2010), pp. 170-86.
18.
‘The Identification of Quotations in Biblical Literature’, ZAW, 92, no. 3 (1980), pp. 416-43. Fox builds on the previous work by R. Gordis, ‘Quotations in Wisdom Literature’, JQR, 30 ([1939] 1940), pp. 123-47 and R. Gordis, ‘Quotations as a Literary Usage in Biblical, Oriental and Rabbinic Literature’, Hebrew Union College Annual 22 (1949), pp. 157-219. Note however that the existence of virtual quotations is still a controversial finding within ‘See E. Ho, “In the Eyes of the Beholder: Unmarked Attributed Quotations in Job”, JBL 124/4 (2009), pp. 703-15.
19.
A good example of a quotation that the narrator agrees with is in the case of proverb recital (e.g. Job 2: 4).
20.
Fox, Quotations, p. 416.
21.
N. Tur-Sinai, The Book of Job—A New Commentary (1957), G. Smith, ‘Job IV 12-21: Is It Eliphaz’s Vision?’, Vetus Testamentum, XL (1990), pp. 453-63.
22.
K. Stone, The Vision in Job 4 and Its Role in the Book (2015), p. 43. J. Harding, ‘A Spirit of Deception in Job 4: 15?: Interpretative Indeterminacy in Eliphaz’s Vision’, Bib.Int, 13 (2005), pp. 137-60 thinks that the uncanny and problematic nature of the vision reflects poorly on the recipient (a false vision?), but who was the original recipient, Job or Eliphaz?
23.
The strong parallels between Job as a legendary figure of tradition (Ezek. 14: 12-20) and Abraham as a patriarchal figure have been noted above. I strongly suspect that Job is a cipher for Abraham and attached tradition (of an unconditional promise for the land) and it is this tradition that is being critiqued as it is in Ezekiel’s revisionist history, but that is another article. See R. Clements, Abraham and David: Genesis 15 and its Meaning for Israelite Tradition (1967), pp. 69-76 and more recently T. Römer, ‘Abraham Traditions in the Hebrew Bible outside the Book of Genesis’, in C. Evans et al. (eds.), The Book of Genesis: Composition, Reception, and Tradition (VTSup. 152, 2017), pp. 159-80.
24.
J. Stek, ‘Job: An Introduction’, CTJ, 32 (1997), pp. 443-58 (444). Also see R.W.L. Moberly, ‘Jonah, God’s Objectionable Mercy, and the Way of Wisdom’, in D. Ford et al. (eds.), Reading Texts, Seeking Wisdom: Scripture and Theology (2004),pp. 154-68 (157) who compares the creation of an extreme scenario with a ‘larger-than-life storyline’ in Jonah to the imaginative narrative of Job 1-2.
25.
Prophetic discernment was a major concern in the Bible. See R.W.L. Moberly, Prophecy and Discernment (2006).
26.
On such ‘lying spirits’, see E. Hamori, ‘The Spirit of Falsehood’, Catholic Biblical Quarterly, 72, no.1 (2010), pp. 15-30.
27.
The issue at hand in Job 2, that is the possibility of disinterested religion, is effectively reframed to be an issue of God’s unjust conduct in human affairs. See K. Ngwa, ‘Did Job Suffer for Nothing? The Ethics of Piety, Presumption and Reception of Disaster in the Prologue of Job’, Journal for the Study of the Old Testament, 33, no. 3 (2009), pp. 359-80 (361).
28.
The correct technical term for his large area of theological concern is ‘elenctics’, see C. Bosma, ‘Jonah 1: 9- An Example of Elenctic Testimony’, CTJ, 48 (2013), pp. 65-90 (66-67).
29.
Y. Hoffman, Job: A Blemished Perfection (JSOTSup. 213, 1996), p. 271.
30.
Hoffman, Perfection, p. 273. Also note Brenner, Job the Pious?, p. 45 comment on Job’s pre-emptive sacrifice for his children (Job 1: 5) as being so far removed from Biblical tradition (as to be unbelievable).
31.
On the relationship between sin and suffering in the Bible, see, for instance, G. Anderson, Sin: A History (1998) and B. Ehrmann, God’s Problem: How the Bible Fails to Answer Our Most Important Question—Why We Suffer (2008).
32.
D. Schlobin, ‘Prototypical Horror: The Genre of the Book of Job’, Semeia, 60 (1992), pp. 23-35. On God as monster, see also D. Penchansky, What Rough Beast? The Image of God in the Hebrew Bible, 1st ed. (1999), R. Whybray, ‘The Immorality of God: Reflections on some passages in Genesis, Job, Exodus and Numbers’, Journal for the Study of the Old Testament, 72 (1996), pp. 89-120 and more recently, focusing on prophetic texts, A. Kalmanofsky, Terror All Around; Horror, Monsters, and Theology in the Book of Jeremiah (OTS 390, 2008) and Kalmanofsky, ‘The Dangerous Sisters of Jeremiah and Ezekiel’, Journal of Biblical Literature, 130, no. 2 (2011), pp. 299-312.
33.
See M. Abrams, A Glossary of Literary Terms. 7th ed. (1999), p. 120.
34.
But see R. Boer, ‘Fleets of Tarshish: Trading Ventures and other Tall Tales of the Bible’, Scandinavian Journal of the Old Testament, 28, no. 1, pp. 58-80 (65) which concentrates on 1 Kings 10: 22 and R. Routledge, ‘The Nephilim: A Tall Story?: Who were the Nephilim and How did they survive the Flood?’, Tyn.Bull, 66, no. 1 (2015), pp. 19-40, which looks at Gen. 1-11; Num. 13-21 and Ezek. 25-32.
35.
On prophetic vision reports and their classification, see B. Long, ‘Reports of Visions among the Prophets’, Journal of Biblical Literature, 95, no. 3 (1976), pp. 353-61 and J. Horst, ‘Die Visionsschilderungen der alttestamentlichen Propheten’, EvT, 20 (1960), pp. 193-205. Both adopt a three-fold scheme. Horst recognizes (1) ‘presence vision’ (Isa. 6); (2) ‘word assonance vision’ (Amos 8: 1-3); (3) ‘event vision’ of some future event (Nah. 3: 1-3). Long recognizes (1) ‘oracle vision’ (Amos 7: 7-8); (2) ‘dramatic word vision’ (Isa. 6); ‘revelatory-mysteries-vision’ involving a divine guide (cf. Daniel 8).
36.
The issue of prophetic discernment was of great importance in Deuteronomy, Kings, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel in the context of the Exile, but also in the broader sense of revelatory religions, for example, Abrahamic faiths. See Moberly, Prophecy and Discernment, pp. 41-99 and M. Sweeney, ‘The Truth in True and False Prophecy’, in C. Helmer et al. (eds.), Truth: Interdisciplinary Dialogues in a Pluralistic Age (2003), pp. 9-26. Both studies cover prophetic discernment using Jeremiah 23 as a key text, but Moberly stresses the moral character of the speaker as the prime criterion for the discernment of truth while Sweeney looks at the circumstances of the fulfillment of an Isaianic prophecy with respect to Jeremiah and his rivals. Moberly’s approach could be seen as a reaction to the studies in Jeremiah that see the truth claims of the prophet as being too subjective for theological purposes, for example, R. Carroll, From Chaos to Covenant: The Uses of Prophecy in the Book of Jeremiah (1981).
37.
See Hamori, Falsehood.
38.
The motif of divinely induced delusion was a form of poetic justice; both the enemies of Israel and Israel’s own leaders who were already self-deluded deserved even further delusion, even though the prophetic word itself (Isa. 6: 9-10), see K. Hayes, ‘“A Spirit of Deep Sleep”: Divinely Induced Delusion and Wisdom in Isaiah 1-39’, Catholic Biblical Quarterly, 74 (2012), pp. 39-54. On the ancient Near Eastern origins of the motif, see J.J.M. Roberts, ‘Does God Lie? Divine Deceit as a Theological Problem in Israelite Prophetic Literature’, in Roberts, The Bible and the Ancient Near East: Collected Essays (2002), Ch. 11.
39.
After U. Simon, ‘The Poor Man’s Ewe Lamb: An Example of Juridicial Parable’, Bib, 48 (1967), pp. 207-42.
40.
H. Pyper, ‘The Enticement to Re-Read: Repetition as Parody in 2 Samuel’, Bib Int, 1, no.2 (1993), pp. 153-66. On the use of parody in the Hebrew Bible, see W. Kynes, ‘Beat Your Parodies into Swords, and Your Parodied Books into Spears: A New Paradigm for Parody in the Hebrew Bible’, Bib Int, 19 (2011), pp. 276-310.
41.
Pyper, Enticement, pp. 163-65.
42.
So Harding, Deception.
43.
Brenner, Job the Pious?, pp. 43-44.
44.
Compare D.J.A. Clines, ‘Those Golden Days: Job and the Perils of Nostalgia’, in Clines (ed.), On the Way to the Postmodern (JSOTSup. 293, 1998), pp. 792-800 who suggests Job’s Oath of Innocence (Job 29) reveals too much of Job’s own questionable character than he would like. Some scholars link the Wisdom Literature specifically to character formation. See W. Brown, Character in Crisis: A Fresh Approach to the Wisdom Literature of the Old Testament (1996) and D. Timmer, ‘Character Formation in the Crucible: Job’s Relationship with God and Joban Character Ethic’, Journal of Theological Interpretation, 3, no.1 (2009), pp. 1-16 who thinks Job gains a sense of fear of God from the God Speeches.
45.
E. Levine, ‘Qohelet’s Fool: A Composite Portrait’, in Y. Radday & A. Brenner (eds.), On Humour and the Comic in the Hebrew Bible (1990), p. 285.
46.
For this interpretation, see L. Bostrom, ‘Retribution and Wisdom Literature’, in D. Firth & L. Wilson (eds.), Interpreting Old Testament Wisdom Literature (2017), pp. 134-54 (142).
47.
A. Hunter, ‘Could Not the Universe Have Come into Existence 200 Yards to the Left?’, in R. Carroll (ed.) Text as Pretext (JSOTSup. 138, 1992), pp. 140-59 (158).
48.
W. Whedbee, The Bible and the Comic Vision (1998), pp. 233-35.
49.
Whedbee, Comic Vision, pp. 236-37. D. Gowan, ‘Reading the Book of Job as a “Wisdom Script,” Journal for the Study of the Old Testament, 55 (1992), pp. 85-95, thinks Elihu’s role as a fourth wise counselor is parodied by the true wise counsel of the God Speeches.
50.
On the coherence of Job 28 with the Job Prologue, see R.W.L. Moberly, ‘Solomon and Job’, in S. Barton (ed.), Where Shall Wisdom Be Found? (1999), pp. 3-17. On recent research into Job 28, see E. van Wolde (ed.), Job 28: Cognition in Context (2003).
51.
The Wisdom Literature is characterized by the use of antithetical character types (e.g. wise, foolish). See R. Clifford, The Wisdom Literature (1998), p. 54.
52.
N. Habel, The Book of Job (1985), p. 535. A. Luc, ‘Storm and the Message of Job’, Journal for the Study of the Old Testament, 87 (2000), pp. 111-23 thinks the use of the storm motif reflects negatively on Job.
53.
On the adoption of Wisdom types and vocabulary in prophetic prophecy, see Hayes, Deep Sleep, pp. 52-54.
54.
See Hayes, Deep Sleep, pp. 42-44.
55.
T. Donald, ‘The Semantic Field of ‘Folly’ in Proverbs, Job, and Psalms, and Ecclesiastes’, Vetus Testamentum, 13, no. 3 (1963), pp. 285-92 (289).
56.
R. N. Whybray, ‘Wisdom, Suffering and the Freedom of God in the Book of Job’, in Whybray et al. (eds.), Wisdom: The Collected Essays of Norman Whybray (2005), pp. 194-208 (196).
57.
N. Tur-Sinai, The Book of Job (1957), pp. 20-21. Indeed the term כסל is absent in any relevant sense, when it is present in all other relevant literature. See Donald, Semantic Field, p. 286.
58.
G. Pemberton, ‘It’s A Fool’s Life: The Deformation of Character in Proverbs’, RQ, 50, no. 4 (2008), pp. 213-24.
59.
See Baker, Speech-Ethics, pp. 193-95.
60.
Come to think about it, Job’s lawsuit against God has the same anti-mimetic qualities that Hoffman assigns to the Divine Wager, see n. 29.
61.
A. Hunter, ‘Could Not the Universe Have Come Into Existence 200 Yards to the Left?’, in R. Carroll (ed.), Text as Pretext (JSOTSup. 138, 1992), pp. 140-59 (158).
62.
C. Newsom, The Book of Job: A Contest of Moral Imaginations (2003), pp. 115-21.
63.
D. Patrick & R. Scult, Rhetoric and Biblical Interpretation (JSOTSup. 26, 1990), Ch. 5 argue that the best interpretations from a literary perspective afford the greatest sense of cohesion and relevance (among other values) to various elements that constitute any literary composition.