The book of Job - real or allegorical?

[Stranger]

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.

They were taken from Job. But they were not taken because of Jobs sins.

Stranger

 

[bbyrd009]

They were taken from Job. But they were not taken because of Jobs sins.

Stranger

what did Job repent of, do you think? This might shed some light on the matter.

 

[bbyrd009]

seven sons in the bible -Sceva - Google Search

if one takes Scripture literally, these become like coincidences, which i doubt. "3 daughters" in the Bible is similarly repeated, many times. What do you think is the point of these?

 

[bbyrd009]

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

so you say, but Job repented of something lol--what was it?

Granted the Book of Job does not lead with this perspective; we are given a picture of Job as "righteous," but the language is subtly different from say the description of Noah, to which it is often compared. And at the end of the Book, Job repents. Twice.

 

[bbyrd009]

Job's wife was not taken.

Stranger

ah, i was sure that she was taken also; i'll be back tomorrow then

 

[bbyrd009]

Hast thou considered my servant Job

not "my son, Job," but "my servant." might not be anything, dunno.

 

[Stranger]

ah, i was sure that she was taken also; i'll be back tomorrow then

Try and read the book of Job before you do. I am not interested in giving a running commentary on the book.

Stranger

 

[aspen]

No...literal is not opposite of spiritual, but spiritual is not limited to the literal either. Considering the allegorical meaning of scripture does not exclude the literal. Stranger, it sounds like you believe that interpreting scripture allegorically actually changes the scripture! It does not. Allegory is a tool used in interpretation, not a chemical reaction.

 

[bbyrd009]

9This is the account of Noah and his family. Noah was a righteous man, blameless among the people of his time, and he walked faithfully with God.

1In the land of Uz there lived a man whose name was Job. This man was blameless and upright; he feared God and shunned evil.

 

[Sword]

(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

It never metioned a relationship. You said that the bible does not say that any where. What it does say is Job had and integrity towards God./
He never new nothing about God. Other than He believed God existed. He did not know God and had no relationship with God.
Job 2:3 and 2:9 No relationship. Job was a man who lived NOT FOT HIMSELF

But I do believe you are on the right track with Job.

 

[Sword]

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

It is clear what it was. satan was ruler of the earth legally. He was upright and integral. God was pleased with him. satans the accuser. He accussing all men to God. Have you conciderd yeah well you look after him take away all he has and he will curse you. all he has is in your hands. satans has rule over the earth and he wants to kill steal and destroy. Dont kill him hes told. legally he can hurt Job and did to the full.

 

[bbyrd009]

Try and read the book of Job before you do. I am not interested in giving a running commentary on the book.

Stranger

too much Khabala prolly, lol. Job has two wives there, and the story is quite different, one dies in childbirth, etc. My bad.

 

[Job]

Doesn't that give modern science a valid motive to disprove God's omniscience, considering that God's explanation of natural phenomena from the Book of Job contradicts the scientific discoveries of our times?

Enjoy the contradictions.

 

[Stranger]

too much Khabala prolly, lol. Job has two wives there, and the story is quite different, one dies in childbirth, etc. My bad.

I see why you like allegorical interpretation. You don't even have to read the book.

Stranger

 

[bbyrd009]

I see why you like allegorical interpretation. You don't even have to read the book.

Stranger

c'mon Stranger, you're back to being gratuitous now? Either way you have to read the Book, yes? i have been in the Jewish version for about a year, and the story is quite different in Jewish lore, you'll have to pardon me there. I have prolly forgotten more Job than you have learned, not to be condescending here or anything; it has just been a while since i have read the Christian version, where Job's wife is unnamed and only has like one line.

You have read the Book, so what was Job rebounding from? Repenting of? Or do you just want to keep avoiding this one?

 

[bbyrd009]

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

note the change in Job's tone from the Opening to chapter 42 or so, when he repents. I agree with you, that the Opening suggests something different, and Job's rebound is occluded; but see how the Christian Job is broadly understood to be like this perfect guy, another Noah, when even the Christian version details his rebound. It is actually a more refined story imo, because...well, several reasons, Job's wife dying would imo be "taking Job's life" in a sense, etc, but nevermind all that.

Job was being judged, or tested, and rebounded from his sin, that of...lack of personal relationship with God? is how i would put it i guess, and i'm not sure how one might get away from a "capricious God" otherwise. Job got what he deserved, whether this agrees with Christian understanding or not. Imo this is much harder to find in our version, but then it is much harder to find IRL too.

the crime to me is that many pastors even believe "that is the whole point of the Book."

 

[bbyrd009]

It never metioned a relationship.

I would say that a relationship based upon "fear" is stated twice, in the opening...

 

[Stranger]

c'mon Stranger, you're back to being gratuitous now? Either way you have to read the Book, yes? i have been in the Jewish version for about a year, and the story is quite different in Jewish lore, you'll have to pardon me there. I have prolly forgotten more Job than you have learned, not to be condescending here or anything; it has just been a while since i have read the Christian version, where Job's wife is unnamed and only has like one line.

You have read the Book, so what was Job rebounding from? Repenting of? Or do you just want to keep avoiding this one?

Since you have forgotten more than I have learned about the book of Job, why are you asking me these elementary questions. And why do you not know elementary things concerning Job?

Read the book of Job at least, and then get back with me.

Stranger

 

[aspen]

Now I want to read the Jewish version!

 

[bbyrd009]

why are you asking me these elementary questions.

i asked because i do not know, and Job's confession is strange and hard to interpret, as well as buried in the back of the Book, and not in keeping with the tone of the opening.

And why do you not know elementary things concerning Job?

the wife thing? as i said, i have not been in the Christian version for about a year. But fwiw it is the better one imo.

See that i might ask the same Q of you; you have not yet granted that Job was in sin, and confessed twice, and that most Christians hold Job up as a shining example of "bad things happening to good people (who didn't deserve it, iow)" which is exactly not what Job is about imo, yet the writing is so inspired, the Opening so masterful, that the Closing is virtually ignored, and i now suspect that this is intentional.

Or at least it strikes me as rich, how people identify with Job, the perfect guy who never sins yet has Bad Things happen to him, but they do not even know that Job was a law-keeper who was in sin, and got what he deserved.