Meaning and context in Job and Tobit

1. Introduction

The book of Tobit ¹ rather chaotically describes a protagonist located in Galilee, a member of the tribe of Naphtali, in the Assyrian city of Nineveh. Because of the imprecise chronological order and geographical inaccuracy, it has been supposed that the story and characters are fictional. ² The book has frequently been compared with the book of Job, and previous studies have suggested that the author of Tobit draws heavily upon Israelite wisdom materials and especially the book of Job as its plausible predecessor, despite the fact that no previous studies offer convincing evidence that the book of Job is clearly the source of Tobit. ³ For instance, Irene Nowell merely insists that ‘the structure of the two books is similar’ and ‘the progress of Tobit’s life is modelled on that of Job’; ⁴ similarly, Devorah Dimant maintains that Tobit refers to ‘both the contents and sequence of the motifs of the book of Job’; ⁵ Francis Macatangay, for his part, insists that ‘Tobit employs motifs and contents found in Job, thereby making Job a literary model evoked in Tobit’. ⁶ Among scholars studying the book of Job, Choon-Leong Seow in his commentary claims that ‘pride of place in terms of the book’s most substantial early influence must go to the book of Tobit’. ⁷ Among recent interpreters, some point out that the common imagery of ‘light’ and ‘darkness’ is found frequently in both books. ⁸ For instance, Anathea Portier-Young insists that the author of Tobit ‘in conversation with the book of Job’ develops common themes such as ‘blindness, sight, and the hidden presence of God’, holy help. ⁹ Although pointing out differences between them, her claim is allegedly prompted by the presupposition that Tobit uses the earlier book of Job. ¹⁰

There is a scholarly consensus that the book of Tobit was probably composed between 250 and 175 BCE and certainly not earlier than 300 BCE—at least before the Maccabean period (167–135 BCE)—and that the book of Job was most probably written in the late Persian or early Hellenistic period in its present form. With this chronological order in mind, it might not be problematic to suppose that the author knew the text of Job and used it as a central storyline. As many have pointed out, there are similar motifs and common literary structures between the books of Tobit and of Job: ¹¹

It is certain that both Job and Tobit share affinities to some degree with respect to family relations. In particular, there is a noteworthy resonance between the portrayal of their wives, found in Job 2:9 (31:10 [LXX]) and Tob 2:11-14, so much so that a probable dependence of Tobit upon Job has been suggested. ¹² Nonetheless, though there may be some literary influence of Job on Tobit, the relationship of these similarities should be restricted only to Tob 1:1-3:6 and 14:2, 11. Furthermore, we need to keep in mind that the motif of the innocent sufferer was commonplace in the ancient Near East. ¹³ It is not difficult to imagine that Job’s story was in vogue in the Hellenistic period and would be learnt and known by many. No doubt, the book of Tobit interweaves mixed literary traditions from the Pentateuchal and deuteronomi(sti)c materials such as patriarchal stories, Deuteronomy, Judges, and Israelite wisdom literature (Proverbs and Psalms), ¹⁴ and from non-Israelite resources in fairy tales ¹⁵ such as ‘Tractate of Khons’ and ‘the Grateful Dead’, and ‘the Story and Wisdom of Ahiqar’. ¹⁶ The motif of the innocent courtier in Tobit looks similar to the Joseph narrative (Gen 37ff) and Daniel (Dan 3 and 6) ¹⁷ and closely follows the story of Ahiqar. The author of Tobit certainly knew Ahiqar’s tradition, though not the text from the Elephantine corpus (Tob 1:21-22; 2:10; 11:18; 14:10). ¹⁸ The general texts of ancient theodicy seem therefore to be just as influential as the book of Job. In this sense I agree with George Nickelsburg, saying that in understanding the book of Tobit, ‘it is inappropriate to use a single hermeneutical key to unlock this complex text’. ¹⁹ Indeed, Giancarlo Toloni argues that although the book of Tobit conceivably indicates regular and quite precise points of contact with the book of Job in terms of literary structure and themes, they have a different history of literary developments derived from ancient legends. ²⁰ In this article, I suggest why it is problematic to presume that the book of Tobit models Job and is expanded from the worldview of the book of Job. I also consider whether Job’s text is the Greek Job, MT Job, or other versions. ²¹ The discussion will be examined under four headings: (1) suffering and theodicy; (2) dialogue; (3) retribution, law, and piety; and (4) election, eschatology, and apocalyptic.

2. Suffering and theodicy

One may suppose that the two characters, Job and Tobit, symbolically exemplify the exiled Israelite community so that both books insinuate to their readers that their suffering comes from the reality of the national disaster. It has been argued that Job symbolises the Israelites in the Babylonian Exile like ‘the Suffering Servant’ in Isa 52:13-53:12. By contrast, Tobit would be much easier to set in the Diaspora after the Assyrian invasion. According to Levine, Tobit ‘represents the nation in temporary exile’ and ‘Sarah represents what could be its fate in the diaspora: ignorant, childless, and in the undesired embrace of idolatry represented by the demon’. ²² This symbolic interpretation, linking the exilic life with the national disaster, is interesting. Nonetheless, those parallels fail to offer sufficiently precise analogies. On the one hand, Job’s protests against God’s justice seem to be a dubious analogy for Yahweh’s suffering servant carrying the sins of others voluntarily and with a purpose. ²³ On the other hand, Tobit often attempts to isolate himself from the apostasy of his community. Sarah’s misfortunes and successful marriage to Tobias do not necessarily represent the fate of the nation. Israel was not in trouble because of the unknown affliction of a demon modelled upon Sarah’s oppression. Exile is scarcely used to illustrate the disastrous character of Tobit and Sarah’s situation, but rather for the exhibition of pious Jews under political turmoil. ²⁴ While in both books they are not simply symbolic figures, the book of Tobit does not pay as much attention to the issue of undeserved suffering and agony as the book of Job consistently does.

Does the issue of human suffering matter in both books, especially in Tobit? The most obvious difference between the two books, regardless of the common issue of the innocent sufferer, is that while Tobit does not seriously consider the problem of his suffering, Job devotes a good deal of space to why justice is broken and the innocent should agonise. Job knuckles down to the problem of suffering ‘without reason’ (חנם‎; Job 2:3) in a dialogue of ponderous profundity, and protests against the disorder of God’s management of the world (Job 2:3; 9:17; 24:1-17). Job’s dialogical speech (3-37; 38-41) dramatically shows that the traditional belief of Job’s friends cannot explain the unfair affliction of the righteous ²⁵ and that God’s decision breaks the universal rule of retribution. In the epilogue, although Job seems to be reconciled with God, Job does not repent having obscured the divine design (Job 38:2), and there is no clue as to whether he is satisfied with God’s answer. ²⁶ The issue of theodicy is by no means resolved in the entire composition, and Job decides to withdraw his argument (Job 42:2-6). On the contrary, the author of Tobit speaks of the accident being due to his carelessness and sparrows’ droppings (Tob 2:9-10). In another scene, the tragedy of Sarah, the daughter of Raguel at Ecbatana in Media, does not result from her sins and impurity, but from being a captive of the evil demon Asmodeus (3:8). However, when all of Tobit’s properties are suddenly taken away, the retribution results in the assassination of Sennacherib (1:21). The fact that ‘Tobit returned to Nineveh’, his home, and that his family is reunited, means that his fortune and social position are restored (1:22). Since Tobit’s blindness (chap. 2), Tobit neither challenges God’s order over the world nor summons God into the court to give him an answer (Tob 3:2-6), as Job desperately does (Job 9:17-35; 10:1-22). Sarah is being reproached by her father’s servants and wishes to end her life (Tob 3:7-10). She, however, keeps her personal integrity by giving up her suicidal thoughts so as not to bring her father into contempt, and throughout this she never doubts the moral order of her deity (3:11-15).

It is noteworthy that the legitimate reason for suffering is hidden in the book of Job, but in Tobit, its reason is to some degree revealed to Tobit. On the one hand, when their prayers were accepted by ‘the presence of the glory of God’ (ἐνώπιον τῆς δόξης τοῦ θεοῦ; esp. GII Tob 3:16) ²⁷ and Raphael was instantly sent to heal them (3:16-17), their restoration was announced. It does not say that Tobit’s blindness and the loss of Sarah’s seven bridegrooms were caused by God’s involvement or the supervision of God. There is no reasonable explanation for their loss until it is revealed to Tobit and stated as the ‘test’ (πειράσαι) to individuals by Raphael the angel (esp. GII Tob 12:14). On the other hand, the reason for Job’s suffering is not answered by speeches of any characters including Yahweh; all we can know is that the evil comes from the arbitrary determination in the heavenly council and that this is hard for Job to take.

The author of Tobit downplays God’s accountability, by stating that Tobit’s blindness was invoked by the angel sent from God, but not by God Himself. ²⁸ The setting of Job’s prose-tale throughout the entire development of Job’s story is whether God’s unanswered permission of Job’s loss is justifiable or not. Thus, Job deals with the theological and intellectual issue of the innocent sufferer, ²⁹ while Tobit is not interested in the fundamental reason of an unbalanced principle of retribution. Theodicy then is not theologically ‘a can of worms’ to Tobit, because his trouble is easily explained, by his personal sins, to God (Tob 3:3). The prayers of Tobit and Sarah efficiently invoke a successful answer instantaneously through an angel: the cure of Tobit’s eye and the restoration of Sarah’s tragedy (3:17).

3. Dialogue

It is remarkable that the literary structure both of Job and of Tobit opens up the story of a sufferer, develops dialogues between characters, and encloses the main body in the parenthesis of the restoration and grand death of the main character. The book of Job adopts a form of dialogues demonstrating visible tension between Job and Eliphaz, Bildad, Zophar, Elihu, and Yahweh: such a dialogical form—which Middle Egyptian literature such as ‘The Debate between a Man and His Soul’ and Mesopotamian texts such as ‘Dialogue between a Man and His God’, ‘Babylonian Job’, and ‘Babylonian Theodicy’ prominently employ—was commonplace. ³⁰ In its dialogic form (Job 4-37), this composition utilises the process normally in the law courts to emphasise the dispute between the two parties with lamentations for human pain and despair. The disputational form between the two parties is maintained in Yahweh’s speech, in which Yahweh changes the problem of justice into the concern of cosmic ruling. What this literary statement achieves is that readers focus more upon the absurd reality of an individual suffering and expect Yahweh’s answer at a later stage.

Likewise, the book of Tobit has many dialogues and conversations between its characters, but the performance of such characters as Tobit, Tobias, Raphael, and Sarah explains little (e.g. Tobit/Tobias 2:2-3; 5:9, 17; Tobias/Raphael 5:4-8; Tobit/Raphael 5:10-17), is didactic between Tobit and Tobias (e.g. 4:3-5:3; 6:4-18) and rarely builds up tension between characters (e.g. Tobit/Anna 2:13-14; 5:18-22). ³¹ Dialogues in Tobit do not bring such a well-constructed dialogue, including the literary form of lawsuit, but it uses the narrative of Tobias’ adventurous journey for a money collection from Gabael, for marrying a wife from Tobias’ kindred and for getting medicine for Tobit and Sarah. This deliberate scene and plot could be derived from two potential texts. First, this literary form would probably be drawn from the Telemachus’s story of Homer’s Odyssey where Telemachus departs on his journey with the Mentor/Athena, who develops as a helper to the young man; in comparison to Tobias/Raphael. ³² Second, the literary dependence of characters and plot in the book of Tobit on the book of Genesis has been sustained as hard evidence of a Pentateuchal connection: ³³ from the journey of Abraham’s servant (Gen 24) ³⁴ and the journey of Jacob (Gen 27-35; esp. chap. 29) to obtain wives for the patriarchs, and the Joseph story (Gen 37; 39-50). Patriarchal figures and Tobit living outside their land are described as models of piety due to the burial of their dead and kinship marriage, and hospitality to others. It is difficult to recognise which source Tobit is directly referring to in the main body, ³⁵ but what concerns us is that the journey of Tobias accompanied by Raphael is different from the disputational and tension-invoking dialogue in Job.

When Job and Tobit are placed in parallel with the piety and faith of patriarchal figures, the divergence between the two becomes more obvious. For instance, it is argued that Abraham’s journey with Isaac to Mount Moriah in Genesis 22 is referred to in Job and Tobit. Then the model of Abraham in Job 1-2 appears only in the motive of testing Job’s faith and his silent submission without any challenge (cf. T. Job 1:6; LXX Job 42:17). ³⁶ Job in dialogue, however, is contrasted with Abraham. The latter is submissive, but Job is not. The journey of Tobiah and Raphael from Nineveh to Ecbatana in Tobit 6 is in order to receive medicaments in the Tigris River, and Raphael instructs him about the immediate marriage with Sarah. ³⁷ Tobit is not concerned with the tension between God’s commandment and human obedience as shown in stories of Job and Abraham, but with the healing and restoration against a fish and a demon and with Tobit’s instruction of endogamy (Tob 4:12-13; 6:16-18). Furthermore, Jacob’s story may be compared with figures of Tobit and Job. Compared with Jacob’s journey and marriage in Gen 28-29 and Tob 7-8, we see similarities such as the appearance of an angel (מלאך‎ in Gen 28:12; ἄγγελος in 5:4), endogamy (Gen 29:6; Tob 7:5), kissing/weeping (Gen 29:11; Tob 7:6-8), and the wedding night (Gen 29:25; 8:2-3). ³⁸ Job’s protest against the world order and Jacob’s struggle for blessing in Gen 32:22-32 diverge from Tobit’s positive attitudes towards divinity. ³⁹

4. Retribution, law, and piety

How then do the two books engage with God’s judgement? Although the books of Job and Tobit are interested in the retributive principle regarding correct human behaviours and consequent blessings, they accentuate different aspects of this issue. For instance, Job’s legal declaration in Job 31 is that if he ever broke any of the moral laws, he would deserve appropriate punishment—but he did not do so. Job’s agony exclusively results from God’s unfair treatment (Job 9:17-19; 16:6-17; 19:7-12, 21) and the absurd problem of social justice (Job 23:1-17). By contrast, the book of Tobit (e.g. Tob 4:6, 9-10, 14, 19) emphasises the principle of reward and prosperity in this earthly life for those who are dutiful and follow truth (e.g. almsgiving), but the notion of God’s punishment on sinners is less stated, except for the comment on those guilty of ‘pride’ (ὑπερηφανίᾳ) and ‘worthlessness’ (ἀχρειότης) in Tob 4:13b (GI). ⁴⁰

The differences between Tobit and Job become even clearer when considering the way in which these two books take their stand on laws in the Pentateuch. Job does not mention the phrase ‘the Law of Moses’. In Tobit, it is used in several places, for example, ‘the Law of Moses’ (νόµῳ Μωση; GI Tob 6:13; GII 1:8) and ‘according to the decree of the book of Moses’ (κατὰ τὴν κρίσιν τῆς βίβλου Μωυσέως; GII 6:13; 7:12). Certainly, undeserved suffering in Job is largely incompatible with keeping Mosaic laws or, say, the book of Job is less Deuteronomi(sti)c (Job 31). How then does the book of Tobit engage with the Deuteronomi(sti)c heritage? Many have insisted that Tobit was shaped by reference to the Pentateuch and with Deuteronomistic materials. ⁴¹ Of course, we may not deny that, in a broad sense, the entire structure of Tobit agrees with the principle of the consequence of one’s deed, and that the Torah, whether it is written or oral, was well known to the author of Tobit. But one should be wary of Tobit’s understanding of Deuteronomi(sti)c theology. ⁴² Its author does not use the Torah as a central text in his or her writing. ⁴³ For instance, Tobit’s initial commission to Tobias in Tobit 4 before the journey of Tobias to collect silver from Gabael at Rages puts forth many instructions, such as burying Tobit, honouring Tobias’ mother, practising righteousness, giving alms, marrying a woman within one’s own tribe, giving employees their wages and avoiding drunkenness. These duties, of course, could be associated with many passages in Deuteronomy, but it is more appropriate to see them as aphorisms and proverbs indicating how Tobias should behave for a successful life (GI Tob 4:6, 19), ⁴⁴ although it is not certain that this instruction ‘has a distinctly sapiential character’. ⁴⁵

While Job’s blameless religiosity is anchored within the quintessential Israelite wisdom through the two expressions, תם וישׁר וירא אלהים וסר מרע‎ (the man ‘blameless and just’ and ‘the one fearing God and turning away from evil’; Job 1:1, 8; 2:3), the character of Tobit as a pious Jew concentrates on obeying duties and customs in Judaism, such as granting charitable works for his kindred (Tob 1:3, 16), Jerusalem temple worship, attending festivals of Jerusalem (1:6), giving a tithe (1:6-7), marrying within his own tribe (1:9), keeping food regulations (1:12), and burying the dead (1:18). These repeated utterances of customs are intended to confirm Jewish identity in the Diaspora, and this emphasis on the pious life by maintaining Jewish customs is likely to be eccentric and excessive when compared to Job’s character in the book of Job. ⁴⁶ There are some weighty points about Jewish laws and customs related to Torah.

First, Tobit’s advice with regard to almsgiving (Tob 4:7-11) is restricted to proselytes who joined Israel (1:8), and in Tobit’s speech to his son, he advises the giving of alms to those who ‘practice righteousness’ (4:7, 11); this tradition of almsgiving is likely to be paralleled with Ben Sira (Sir 12:3; 28:8-13; 35:9-10) rather than Deuteronomistic laws (Deut 15:10-11). ⁴⁷ Second, when Tobit was in the land of Israel before the Exile, his pious activities attest to his moral and religious supremacy over his kindred and even his ancestors, who deserted the Jerusalem temple and followed King Jeroboam’s apostasy (Tob 1:4-5). He also separates himself from his tribal kindred, stating that he ‘alone went to Jerusalem’ (1:6), and abstains from eating ‘the food for Gentiles’ (1:10). ⁴⁸ Third, Jewish piety is highlighted by the notion of endogamy, that a man should marry a woman from the same tribe. Although it permeates the Hebrew Bible such as in Genesis and Ezra-Nehemiah, ⁴⁹ Tobit’s concern for endogamy is quite different from that of Deuteronomy, Ezra 9-10, Neh 13:23-27, and Jubilees, which are more concerned with the intermarriage with foreign women. ⁵⁰ Fourth, Tobit buries the persecuted dead (cf. Tob 4:3; 14:9) under the Assyrian king’s reign which both caused the loss of his property (1:18-19) and, after the burial of the dead body, the loss of his eyesight (2:3-10). These examples of the burial of the dead among their nearest kindred present Tobit as the model of a pious Jew following Jewish customs and laws, which are common in Greek culture and in the New Testament (the burial of Jesus; e.g. Matt 27:57-60). ⁵¹

Presumably, we may say that Job and Tobit are exemplary models of pious activities, but they diverge at some points. For example, Tobit’s piety gets him into trouble with his family, especially with his wife Hannah, and her retort to Tobit is different from the misconduct of Job’s wife. ⁵² The utterance (ברך אלהים ומת‎; ‘Curse God and die’; Job 2:9) of Job’s wife is the same as the intended result of the Adversary in the Heavenly council (Job 1:11; 2:5), and her criticism of the morally impeccable man affirms that Job is indeed integral (תמה‎)—by asking ‘Do you still hold your integrity?’ On the contrary, the fact that Tobit suspects Hannah’s achievement (Tob 2:11-14)—although one may argue that Hannah broke the social custom that a wife should not support her husband (cf. Sir 25:22) ⁵³ —embarrasses readers who hear that Tobit’s generous almsgivings benefitted his community (Tob 2:1-8, 4:7, 11, 15). His distrust and accusation of Hannah seem to say that his piety is faulty, egocentric, and disturbs family harmony. In Hannah’s answer—‘Now where are your acts of charity? Where are your righteous deeds?’ (GII Tob 2:14)—she is not retorting in response to the impractical outcome of Tobit’s charitable work itself, but more plausibly accuses Tobit of hypocrisy. ⁵⁴ Otherwise, it is hard to understand why the death wish of Tobit should be attributed to the retort of his wife (3:6). ⁵⁵

The issue of piety is prominent in both texts. In Job, it interacts more with the issue of personal piety in the Persian period and is quite unlike Jewish piety in the Hellenistic period, as can be seen from the book of Daniel. ⁵⁶ Job’s benevolence (Job 29:11-17; cf. 31:16-21) presented in his final speech is much closer to ethical values in ancient Near Eastern legal and wisdom texts and is possibly viewed as ‘an arrogant man’s testimony’. ⁵⁷ Such a charity about Job’s righteousness is most conspicuous in the later reception of Job’s tradition, such as OG book of Job and in the T. Job 9-15. ⁵⁸

5. Election, eschatology, and the apocalyptic

The issue of the human suffering in Tobit, as discussed above, is insignificant, compared with issues of Israel’s national sin and their dispersion among nations. ⁵⁹ Tobit’s misbehaviours are often designated as those of his ancestors and the exiled community in Nineveh (Tob 3:3-5). Some questions relevant to the conclusion of the two books can be raised. Do these texts have the notions of ‘the elect’ and ‘election’, related to pious individuals living in the Diaspora? ⁶⁰ What is the role of God in the endings of both texts? Furthermore, how can we comprehend the elements of the apocalyptic ⁶¹ (or apocalypticism), if there are any, in the two books?

6. Conclusion

The book of Tobit employs the literary motif of an innocent sufferer, just as Job’s story highlights; this motif is prevalent in ancient Near East literature. Many similarities could bring to mind the book of Job to readers of Tobit, but at the same time, both books are likely to engage ancient folklore, patriarchal narratives, Deuteronomy, and the story of Ahiqar. More significantly, the book of Tobit does not approach the issue of human suffering with great interest. It eliminates the problem of God’s justice, but works on the principle of act-deed and the fulfilment of prophetic eschatology for Israel. The dialogic form in Job successfully achieves this conflicting structure between the two parties and between God and an individual, while Tobit essentially adopts the adventurous journey framework to achieve the urgent tasks of characters. There is no firm evidence to indicate that both books put forth Deuteronomi(sti)c theology as central, although the author of Tobit seems to acknowledge texts related to Moses’ Law. Jewish piety in Tobit presents many social and family regulations and duties that lead to blessings and prosperity. Finally, the last dialogue in Job 38-41 shows God’s control and freedom over the universe, while Tobit is more concerned with the fate of Israel and nations, the notion of election, and prophetic eschatology, though Tobit is not apocalyptic literature.

Consequently, it is not easy to assume that Tobit intentionally responds to problems posed by Job, in that Tobit does not competently discuss the issue of justice and brings about other religious concerns. All we can say, perhaps, is that the author of Tobit was aware of the broad tradition of Job’s tale and partly employed the motif of an underserved sufferer (Tob 2:11-14). However, a better question to raise here would be what kind of circumstances produced such a complicated book. As Dimant insists, Tobit’s literal setting in the Northern kingdom and the exile to Nineveh most likely reflects the belief and practice of Second Temple period Judaism as a direction for all Jews living outside Palestine, by contrasting the Northern background to ‘ “Judaite” ethos’. ⁸⁷ Tobit significantly reflects fresh religious ideas and the life of the Diaspora that interacts with Hellenistic culture, distinguished from Job mainly engaging Persian scribal ideas. ⁸⁸