The book of Job - real or allegorical?

[bbyrd009]

What spiritual truth does that disqualify?

I understand that you don't like the idea of God allowing Job's children to be killed and for that reason you want to make Job an allegory. But how does that disqualify any spiritual truth?

Stranger

i would say that it calls the literal truth into question, not the spiritual one. Especially after satan is told that he cannot kill Job. Ergo the spiritual truth--whatever it is--is the only one that can be qualified. Imo "seven" sons and "three" daughters is purely symbolic language, otherwise you have to get into the salvational state of the children, and why they could be killed but Job could not, etc.

oh, and i guess i get your Q now; the spiritual truth might be disqualified here by taking the "seven" sons and "three" daughters as literal, wherein God is presented as capricious, in allowing satan to kill them and not Job, making God a respecter of persons, perhaps. The children are obviously objectified in Job, they remain nameless, etc. But Job is, to most Christians, an upright and sinless guy, when that is not what Scripture says. Job repented of his sin, twice, at the end.

and don't get me wrong here, i see no reason to believe that Job was not "real," but i might point out that he is still just a story to us, no matter what. It does strike me as awful funny though, that most Christians believe a story about Job that is not supported by the text; Job was a sinner, guilty of lack of personal relationship with God, who repented of his sin at the end of the story.

 

[Dcopymope]

just guessing, but literally killing Job's "children" strikes me as pretty capricious

Sounds like something an atheist would say about God killing untold numbers with the flood among other events. They love to bring that up to bash God as a despotic mass murderer. God will show mercy on whoever he chooses to show it, because he is sovereign and just.

(Romans 9:13-16) "As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated. {14} What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid. {15} For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion. {16} So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy."

 

[bbyrd009]

Sounds like something an atheist would say about God killing untold numbers with the flood among other events. They love to bring that up to bash God as a despotic mass murderer. God will show mercy on whoever he chooses to show it, because he is sovereign and just.

i'd have to think about that, but the flood victims got lots of warning, right, even if they refused to hear, whereas Job's "children" did not.

 

[Dcopymope]

i'd have to think about that, but the flood victims got lots of warning, right, even if they refused to hear, whereas Job's "children" did not.

Yeah, the "victims" of Sodom didn't get an explicit warning from God either, so that's beside the point. This is about a test of will on the part of Job's faith, your bleeding heart for his children need not apply as an excuse to make it an allegory.

 

[bbyrd009]

your bleeding heart for his children need not apply as an excuse to make it an allegory.

true, but their and the wife's stated behavior might even provide clues as to their nature. I am less interested in insisting they were completely allegorical than i am in understanding whatever spiritual principle is being imparted, and the children being "seven" and "three," along with their stated activities, and their lack of personification, just strongly suggests to me that there is a deeper meaning to the story, the fate of the Sodomites notwithstanding, as i believe they got warnings also?

"The warning to Sodom and Gomorrah came in the form of the judgment of the nation. Genesis 14 documents a war which was lost by the King of Sodom and Gomorrah. His entire nation was carried off by his enemies as a form of judgment. He was rescued by Abraham who inadvertently brought back the Sodomites to the locale, while God was really trying to remove them.

The judgment of God was lost on the King of Sodom. He was blind to the fa ct that he was being judged. However, scriptures told us very early that “the men of Sodom were wicked and sinners before the LORD exceedingly” (Genesis 13: 13). We were not told at this time about the nature of their sin.

The king of Sodom became dispossesed without people to rule. His first request to Abraham was to keep the stuff that were retrieved in the rescue of Lot, but to give him the people. One cannot be a king without people. God instructed Abraham not to take any of his contaminated goods because of the heinousness of his nation’s sins." Yes, God warned Sodom and Gomorrah about their sin

 

[bbyrd009]

This is about a test of will on the part of Job's faith

so you say, but i perceive Job more as a guy who kept the law, and had only belief, but lacked any demonstrable faith; as his prayer of rebound seems to confess.

5I had heard rumors about You, but now my eyes have seen You.
6Therefore I take back my words and repent in dust and ashes.

iow Job reps most any believer, seeking to please God by their works.

 

[101G]

I find much if not all of the bible is literal as well spiritually understood.
But whoops, that is going off topic)

GINOLJC, This is CORRECT. if the book of Job is allegory, just right off the bat, why was Job keeping the LORD God almighty feast days. was that an allegory, and why was Job and his friends are called sons of God?. this is just two question I would like for those think the book and the man Job is an allegory. no the book of Job is spiritually discern. example, concering one of the two questions I asked. why was Job and his friends are called sons of God. Job 1:1-3 "There was a man in the land of Uz, whose name was Job; and that man was perfect and upright, and one that feared God, and eschewed evil. 2 And there were born unto him seven sons and three daughters. 3 His substance also was seven thousand sheep, and three thousand camels, and five hundred yoke of oxen, and five hundred she asses, and a very great household; so that this man was the greatest of all the men of the east".
there are two Hebrew words that Identify "man" clearly. #1. here used in Job,
H376 אִישׁ 'iysh (eesh) n-m.
אִישִׁים 'iysh (eesh) [plural]
a man as an individual or a male person.
often used as an adjunct to a more definite term (and in such cases frequently not expressed in translation). contracted for H582 (or perhaps rather from an unused root meaning to be extant).

#2. H582 אֱנוֹשׁ 'enowsh (en-oshe') n-m.
אֲנָשִׁים 'enowsh (en-oshe') [plural]
1. (properly) a mortal (and thus differing from the more dignified H120).
2. (hence) a man in general (singly or collectively).

but men above in RED is the Hebrew word,
H1121 בֵּן ben (bane) n-m.
בָּנִים baniym (ba-neem') [plural]
בְּנִי bniy (ben-ee') [possessive singular]
בָּנַי banay (baw-nah'ee) [possessive plural]
(used widely) a son (as a builder of the family name).

this is the exact same word used in Genesis chapter 6:2 for son. but here in Job it is used of natural born men .

 

[Stranger]

i would say that it calls the literal truth into question, not the spiritual one. Especially after satan is told that he cannot kill Job. Ergo the spiritual truth--whatever it is--is the only one that can be qualified. Imo "seven" sons and "three" daughters is purely symbolic language, otherwise you have to get into the salvational state of the children, and why they could be killed but Job could not, etc.

oh, and i guess i get your Q now; the spiritual truth might be disqualified here by taking the "seven" sons and "three" daughters as literal, wherein God is presented as capricious, in allowing satan to kill them and not Job, making God a respecter of persons, perhaps. The children are obviously objectified in Job, they remain nameless, etc. But Job is, to most Christians, an upright and sinless guy, when that is not what Scripture says. Job repented of his sin, twice, at the end.

and don't get me wrong here, i see no reason to believe that Job was not "real," but i might point out that he is still just a story to us, no matter what. It does strike me as awful funny though, that most Christians believe a story about Job that is not supported by the text; Job was a sinner, guilty of lack of personal relationship with God, who repented of his sin at the end of the story.

So all you are saying is the only reason to disqualify Job as real is because you don't think God should be like that. Not that anything can be taken away from any spiritual interpretation. But only on the basis that you or others don't think God should be like that and, I might add, you don't like trying to defend these actions of God before non-believers.

The seven sons and three daughters don't take away any spiritual truth. What spiritual truth are you talking about that it takes away from? Just because God takes some in death and not others, doesn't mean He is a respecter of persons. How silly. Then everyday when some die and some don't, God would be guilty of being a respecter of persons. Everyone dies, and God is involved in their deaths. Just because they don't occur at the same time doesn't make Him a respecter of persons.

I don't believe you are familiar with the book of Job. Job was a sinner, yes. But Job had a relationship with God.

Stranger

 

[bbyrd009]

So all you are saying is the only reason to disqualify Job as real is because you don't think God should be like that.

i kind of dislike this "disqualifying Job as real" tbh; i am not meaning to do this, but only to suggest that there are other interpretations of Job that might yield more fruit. If they don't, then they are worthless imo.

Not that anything can be taken away from any spiritual interpretation.

well, that is kind of not for me to even say, as i am not the arbiter here, but it seems to me that if one insists that Job's "children" were punished for Job's sins, then we have issues with Scripture that says this does not occur. Of course, we also have the exact opposite, Scriptures that state directly that this does occur, so there is obviously some dichotomy there that one must resolve for themselves, somehow.

I know you are familiar with the relevant passages, even the "children's teeth set on edge" one, so i might ask how you resolve these? Or at least suggest that Job's "children" might be relevant to this concept.

 

[Sword]

But Job had a relationship with God.

where did you read that?

 

[bbyrd009]

ut only on the basis that you or others don't think God should be like that and, I might add, you don't like trying to defend these actions of God before non-believers.

well, the Sodomites have already been invoked here, and i am not sure if my rebut/copypaste is relevant or not, but can you think of instances where judgement came from God without warning?

Of course God, as Creator, may take any life that He likes, without explanation or warning, and there are several other elements to the Job story, which i guess i will go re-read now lol, but i am really not trying to apologize for God here, so much as interpret the story.

 

[bbyrd009]

The seven sons and three daughters don't take away any spiritual truth. What spiritual truth are you talking about that it takes away from? Just because God takes some in death and not others, doesn't mean He is a respecter of persons. How silly. Then everyday when some die and some don't, God would be guilty of being a respecter of persons. Everyone dies, and God is involved in their deaths. Just because they don't occur at the same time doesn't make Him a respecter of persons.

yes, you might be right here; it just seems to me from memory that Job's wife and children were taken because of their relationship to Job. Also, "then everyday when some die and some don't" does not really apply here, as they were all taken simultaneously.

What was Job's wife's name? Is there any other character in Scripture whose wife is mentioned but not named? Lot comes to mind. Hmm, didn't Lot have 3 daughters too? Hmm.

 

[bbyrd009]

What spiritual truth are you talking about that it takes away from?

well, it might keep one from contemplating why Job mysteriously has "three" unnamed daughters, same as Lot, or why "seven" sons, which is also a theme repeated in other parables, yes? Do you think these are just coincidences?

 

[Stranger]

i kind of dislike this "disqualifying Job as real" tbh; i am not meaning to do this, but only to suggest that there are other interpretations of Job that might yield more fruit. If they don't, then they are worthless imo.

well, that is kind of not for me to even say, as i am not the arbiter here, but it seems to me that if one insists that Job's "children" were punished for Job's sins, then we have issues with Scripture that says this does not occur. Of course, we also have the exact opposite, Scriptures that state directly that this does occur, so there is obviously some dichotomy there that one must resolve for themselves, somehow.

I know you are familiar with the relevant passages, even the "children's teeth set on edge" one, so i might ask how you resolve these? Or at least suggest that Job's "children" might be relevant to this concept.

Well, by 'other interpretations' you apparently mean those that consider Job not real but an allegory. And if so, what other spiritual interpretations yield more fruit due to Job being an allegory.

It never says Job's children were punished for Job's sins. They were not. So, the only reason you have to make Job an allegory and not real is because you don't like the idea of God allowing Jobs children to be taken.

Stranger

 

[bbyrd009]

But Job had a relationship with God.

so you say, but did he? What exactly did Job rebound from? Imo Job's relationship might be described as having evolved out of fear, and Job respected God, surely, but there was no lve relationship, possibly. God is referred to by title at first, etc.

 

[Stranger]

where did you read that?

(Job 1:1) "There was a man in the land of Uz, whose name was Job; and that man was perfect and upright, and one that feared God, and eschewed evil."

(Job 1:8) "And the LORD said unto Satan, Hast thou considered my servant Job, that there is none like him in the earth, a perfect and an upright man, one that feareth God, and escheweth evil?

Stranger

 

[bbyrd009]

It never says Job's children were punished for Job's sins. They were not.

boy, it sure seems strongly implied to me! I don't know if "punished" is the right characterization, but they were sure apparently "taken" from Job.

 

[bbyrd009]

one that feared God

hmm. exactly

 

[Stranger]

well, the Sodomites have already been invoked here, and i am not sure if my rebut/copypaste is relevant or not, but can you think of instances where judgement came from God without warning?

Of course God, as Creator, may take any life that He likes, without explanation or warning, and there are several other elements to the Job story, which i guess i will go re-read now lol, but i am really not trying to apologize for God here, so much as interpret the story.

There is nothing to indicate that the trials that came upon Job were judgement. They were not. That is the whole point of the book.

Stranger

 

[Stranger]

yes, you might be right here; it just seems to me from memory that Job's wife and children were taken because of their relationship to Job. Also, "then everyday when some die and some don't" does not really apply here, as they were all taken simultaneously.

What was Job's wife's name? Is there any other character in Scripture whose wife is mentioned but not named? Lot comes to mind. Hmm, didn't Lot have 3 daughters too? Hmm.

Job's wife was not taken.

Stranger