Hot answers tagged

15

The problem is that the three friends, Zophar, Eliphaz and Bildad, claim that God always brings punishment to the wicked and blessings to the good. Their theology states that if something bad happens to someone, it must be because they did something bad. If something good happens, it must be because they did something good. Using this theology, they try to ...


15

That's not feminine; that's masculine. These are "pausal forms", so when the preposition lamed plus 2 msc sg suffix would normally be lĕkā, in "pause" it is lāk -- which is the same form as the 2 fem sg, and thus the confusion. See Gesenius-Kautzsch-Cowley, Gesenius' Hebrew Grammar (2nd edn; Clarendon Press, 1910), at § 29n, p. 97 (last line of that ...


13

This is an intriguing interpretation, but there are a couple things that I think militate against it: First, Job 32:2-3 seems to frame the discussion that precedes it in terms similar to the traditional interpretation as concerning theodicy. Elihu is angry because Job has taken up the cause of his own justice rather than that of God's. He is also angry ...


11

While I agree with Soldarnal's analysis, this question is interesting enough that I would like to play devil's advocate. I've been mulling over the issue all week so bear with my (overly-long) answer. God's Accuser The setup of Job is the Adversary looking for a way to discredit God: The Adversary answered the Lord, “Does Job not have good reason to ...


11

Who are the morning stars? From the text, I would say the morning stars are the sons of God that are mentioned. This passage seemed to follow a common parallel format found in the surrounding text. Look at the repetitious nature of the surrounding passages for my reasoning: 5 Who determined its measurements—surely you know! Or who stretched the line ...


11

An angel as a primeval enemy of humanity The Hebrew noun satan, along with related nouns and verbs, are semi-common in the Hebrew scriptures. These terms are used in a variety of contexts and refer to a variety of individuals. In Numbers 22.22,32, for example, it is an angel explicitly acting on God's behalf who is identified as a satan, meaning ...


10

Perhaps it's a case of YAPSM (Yet another primordial sea monster) in the Bible. In recollecting from the only secular scripture class I've taken, which you may take with a grain of salt if you wish, there's Leviathan and Behemoth which represent crocodiles and hippos accordingly. Rahab, is another sea monster, (s)he also makes her presence known in ...


10

The events of Job 1 say "in that same hour", so that chapter appears to have occurred at the same time. Job 2 occurs at the next meeting between God and the Accuser, but there is no mention of the frequency with which those occurred. But, Job 2 says: And they sat with him on the ground seven days and seven nights, and no one spoke a word to him, for they ...


9

Are Job's friends the voice of the Accuser? In my framework for understanding Job, in the context of justice, the men roughly represent: Job: The wisdom of Ecclesiastes (mis-applied) Eliphaz, Bildad and Zophar: The wisdom of Proverbs (also mis-applied) Elihu: the voice of one crying in the wilderness: "Prepare the way of the Lord" Job identifies ...


9

No Certain Answer to Give Disclaimer and Explanation of Citations and Notations: The evidence here is largely gleaned from Protestant source material (my tradition), and is presented in a way that argues toward Job being an ancient composition (my view); but the evidence also mentions there are numerous other views on this. A bibliography of all ...


9

The Hebrew text of Job 6:14 runs as follows: לַמָּ֣ס מֵרֵעֵ֣הוּ חָ֑סֶד וְיִרְאַ֖ת שַׁדַּ֣י יַעֲזֽוֹב׃ lammās mērēʿēhû ḥāsed, wəyirʾat šadday yaʿăzôb Ambiguity has long been recognized as one of the "features" of the Hebrew of the book of Job.1 That enters into the picture here, although there are other issues, too. Context The book of Job has a ...


8

The context at hand is not concerning the maidens, but concerning the ferocious creature of the sea, Leviathan. This is the key to understanding the context. There is no cynicism, but in fact grave awe. The word Leviathan (לִוְיָתָן) is only mentioned five times in the Hebrew Bible, and refers to either a ferocious creature of the sea, or to an angelic ...


8

At first glance it seemed strange to me as well. However, given that the context is the good things that occur to the wicked, and in the next verse (14) we see how the wicked take these things for granted, it makes sense that it would be a positive thing, and going down to sheol in a moment wouldn't be. The root is רגע , which aside for 'moment' can actually ...


8

It's actually quite difficult, sticking to just the Hebrew Scriptures, to link the two persons. The New Testament contains far more references to Satan - and, of course, Revelation 20:2 pretty explicitly links the two - but in the Hebrew Bible there are only three instances of the Satan/Adversary: Job 1-2; Zechariah 3:-12 and 1 Chronicles 21:1. Even at that, ...


8

The question is really an issue of what kind of cosmology the authors of the various biblical books assume in the course of their writing. When we read the Hebrew scriptures, the few books that have anything to say on the subject never explicitly say 'the earth is flat'. But if we can determine the overall shape of the cosmos as the different writers ...


7

In my framework for understanding Job, Elihu is an Elijah figure. He is the voice of one crying in the wilderness: "Prepare the way of the Lord" This is part of a wider Bible pattern of both: God finally arriving in person to judge (not just in the sense of 'judgement', but also in the sense of leadership and personal presence with his people). God being ...


7

Abstract Elihu continues the accusations of Eliphaz, Bildad, and Zophar, lacks their wisdom, and is beneath contempt. Structure of the dialogue The core of Job follows a strict order of speeches for three cycles: Job Eliphaz Job Bildad Job Zophar The basic content of Job's words is always the same: questioning God why the calamities of chapter 1 and ...


6

Mark Edward did a fantastic job of covering the Biblical link between the serpent and Satan, so I will not re-hash that, but I would like to directly address the second part of the OPs question: was John the first to link these two figures together? Or had the two already been connected in Jewish thought at the time? If not, is there any way to explain ...


6

It's not a feminine pronoun (although it looks like one)! Lakh (לָךְ) in this case is a form of the male pronoun lekha known as "pausal," which because of its position as the final word of the verse. Pausal forms generally expand a shva or e-vowel into a qamatz; for example, at the end of Genesis 1:1 eretz becomes aretz. See for example the chart here, or ...


6

It is commonly believed that Job's original 10 children are in Heaven. The texts do say that Job received a "twice as much", and that he had "more": Job 42:10 And the LORD turned the captivity of Job, when he prayed for his friends: also the LORD gave Job twice as much as he had before. Job 42:12 So the LORD blessed the latter end of Job more ...


6

Job lived 140 years (Job 42:16), a long life, similar to the patriarchs. For that reason it is said that he lived during the period of the patriarchs. During the patriarchal age, the head of the family also covered the function of offering sacrifices. In other words, he was the priest of his family. (1) So Job, conceived by the writer as living in ...


6

Reference is to Improper Blessing The word ברך in the piel, when God is the object, typically means to actively "praise God" for something, and in the pual, to refer passively to "God being praised" for something. I do not think there is reason to have that meaning changed in these instances, nor to conjecture that it is a euphemism, as many have.1 ...


5

I realise I'm a little late to the party, but in the interest of posterity and despite Ecclesiastes 1:15, I would like to answer all those comments and claims that the root רגע has no basis as "calm" or "peaceful" in the tanakh. I'm not sure this is the most natural reading of the verse or even the one I subscribe to, however it certainly has a very solid ...


5

OP poses three very different questions, a couple couched in different terms at various points. 1. What did Job believe? Which appears in a variant form as: How did he believe one could be right with God? This latter wording is, of course, simply to restate Job's own question in Job 9:2b (as the NASB has it, "But how can a man be in the right before ...


5

The genre of Job The book of Job falls clearly in the category of wisdom literature: Wisdom literature is a genre of literature common in the Ancient Near East. This genre is characterized by sayings of wisdom intended to teach about divinity and about virtue. The key principle of wisdom literature is that while techniques of traditional story-telling ...


5

Differentiating between "Purpose" and "Grounds" You ask: Why would The Lord allow Satan to have the power to take other lives just for the purpose of proving that Job is a loyal servant? The short answer is that God's "grounds" for having those people die is their own sin, not Job's testing. God allowed it to happen when and how it did for the ...


5

@Joseph's reference document (positing this statement as "euphemism"; mentioned in his comment above) is most compelling to me. Here are some similar suggestions from scholarly commentaries: From John Hartley, NICOT (p. 65, n.7): The word translated "curse", barak (also in 2:5. 9), which usually means "bless," is used euphemistically. Many consider it a ...


4

I would follow the view of Rashi who at Job 9:13 says that Rahab would be the angel assigned to assist Egypt. Rashi understands this from the use of the word Rahav (רָהַב), which he translates as "haughty," in Isaiah 30:7. There it says: "And the Egyptians help in vain and to no purpose, therefore I called this, 'They are haughty (רָהַב), idlers." They ...


4

The Idea in Brief There are three words in the verse which provide ambiguous meaning, however, the Masorah Parva of the Masoretic Text helps to shed light to the verse. In spite of these difficulties, the MT can be seen to yield good sense. Discussion The first and most significant problem in the verse is the word for "friend." If the Hebrew word is רֵעַ, ...


4

Why then would this more common, collective word for "hair" not appear instead of the former word (considering that both words are "singular" in form)? I think the why question is probably unanswerable as such. OP describes this odd situation very clearly so there is no need, then, to rehearse again the details provided in the question. There have been ...



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible