|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
SBL Annual Meeting Papers — November 2007 WORKING DRAFT: Please do not cite without permission of the author See also the Reader's Guide to Job Laughter in the Book of Job? ABSTRACT The book of Job read as a whole combines storytelling, psalms of praise, lament, proverbs, legal disputation, wordplay, irony, and sarcasm, to explore the universal theme of a decent person suffering.1 From the beginning, we know YHWH is proving a point with the scoffer, ha-śatan (השטן) the wise guy adversary who wanders the earth, reports to YHWH, and is permitted to test this model human’s intentions by decimating his family, wealth, and well-being.2 At the end, YHWH announces that Job speaks the truth about the Divine, testifying to Job’s integrity against many who without evidence accuse him of wrong doing. Before praising Job, YHWH adds to the insult of this favorite with a magnificent presentation of divine power and wisdom. In 38-41, the Divine appears to ignore Job’s expectation of a fair hearing. Then in translations Job appears in 42:6 to repent, humbly submitting to Divine injustice. This reading explores YHWH’s intent and an alternative appreciation of Job’s response to his experience of the voice from the great wind. Prior
Interpretations Disturbed that Job despises God, B. L. Newell asks: “Job: Repentant or Rebellious?” and concludes Job is innocent before he suffers, then sins by exalting himself.6 If we respect the integrity of the entire book as a work of art written Before the Common Era (B.C.E.), we hear YHWH tell Eliphaz that Job spoke truth about the Divine (42:7-8). The dichotomy that either Job repents or despises God does not make sense of the character I hear. Job perseveres in recognizing what is true. He sees through everyone who changes the basis of an argument or spouts judgments from a dogmatic preconception of reality. Furthermore, Job is sharp, giving tit for tat in heated disputation.7 Given that Job speaks the truth, how can Job repent, despise YHWH, or apologize for unconsciously exalting himself?8 Or, how would knowing “that God does care for him” free Job to reverse or reject his view of how he has conducted his life?9 Tragicomedy Appreciating the entire book of Job as tragicomedy changes how we perceive YHWH’s apparent lack of concern with “covenantal, legal, moral and ethical questions” in relation to this innocent sufferer.10 A key to understanding the book of Job is ancient Hebrew wit.11 William Whedbee’s article, “The Comedy of Job,” points to examples of incongruities, caricature, sarcasm, satire, and exaggeration.12 The book starts with Job enjoying family, wealth, and respect in his community. Not only does Job try to do everything right, both narrator and YHWH attest to his success. His descent into disaster is swift and agonizing. His friends’ accusations and misrepresentations force him to clarify how he has lived his life and the nature of the Divine in contrast to popular wisdom. At the conclusion Job is wealthier and more content than at the start. Whedbee points out that this is the U shape of comedy. But Whedbee thinks Job’s “confession is genuine and becomes equivalent to the recognition scene in the comic plot.”13 I don’t think so. Perceiving the book as tragicomedy allows the reader to recognize how the friends propound a point of view which has no substance in reality, as Job repeatedly points out.14 The young upstart Elihu epitomizes a blowhard who says anything, truth or make believe, to keep audience attention.15 I suggest that Elihu is pivotal as a blatantly comic character who introduces the oncoming windstorm from which Job perceives YHWH speak.16 The writer presents the bellowing YHWH as a caricature of an ancient Egyptian school master, demanding a student answer questions that only the master can answer.17 YHWH charges this darling, whose skin is peeling off and whose body is emaciated: “Gird your loins like a hero; I will ask and you will inform Me. Where were you when I laid earth’s foundations?” (38:3-4 NJPS). After a magnificent description of creation, YHWH sarcastically remarks, “Surely you know, for you were born then, and the number of your years are many!” (38:21). YHWH goes on to describe the heavens and wilderness, peppered with unanswerable questions about wild creatures.18 So let us admire Job’s chutzpah and Divine pleasure in hearing this pride and joy speak truth to power.19 In 42:6, if Job recants, abhors himself, or his words, he would betray his integrity which the Divine most admires. If he rebels, despises God, how could he make peace with the Divine and pray for his friends? I suggest a reading which builds upon Whedbee’s insights about comedy, Michel’s and David Noel Freedman’s readings of the Divine speeches as a final test of Job, Edward Greenstein’s recognition that only Job draws upon personal experience, Scott Noegel’s and Robert Gordis’s appreciations of punful references, and the therapeutic use of sarcasm.20 In the Bible and ancient Near East words had power.21 Poetry and stories were read aloud.22 When the book of Job is performed, we move from the prologue in heaven to the heart-rending defense of the sufferer and outrageous responses of his friends. We hear exaggerations of characters spouting the “wisdom” of the ages as their fear of Job’s interpretation of his plight fuels their anger.23 Job vents his anguish, eloquently elucidating his perception of himself and the Divine as his friends deluge him with self-defensive misconceptions. In 19:25-27, Job asserts: “I know that my Vindicator lives; In the end He will testify on earth -- This, after my skin will have been peeled off. But I will behold God while still in my flesh, I myself, not another, will behold Him; will see with my own eyes.” Twice Job emphasizes he will perceive, that is grasp, possess God with his own eyes.24 In 38-42, Job does perceive God, but YHWH’s eloquent bluster provokes cleansing laughter, catharsis, “a release of emotional tension, as after an overwhelming experience, that restores or refreshes the spirit.”25 Let us experience the progression of how Job feels. On hearing God’s thunderous voice emanating from the storm, let us share Job’s awe and joy that the Divine is responding. As God describes the creation and rhetorically questions whether Job can do this or that impossible task for a human, sense wonder that with all this bluster God avoids the question of Job’s innocence, does not specify wrong doing. Instead, YHWH bellows about what it’s like to be Divine. What does Job know about that? Can Job put down arrogant men and tame monstrous Leviathan? In 40:2 YHWH demands, “Shall a faultfinder contend with the Almighty? Anyone who argues with God must respond“ (NRSV) Quite clear about his innocence, Job does respond. He acknowledges he is minuscule, slight, compared to the Divine. “What can I answer You? I clap my hand to my mouth. I have spoken once, and will not reply” (40:4-5) But Job does go on: “Twice, and will do so no more” (40:5).26 I see Job’s hand covering laughter, as Abraham throws himself on his face and laughs on hearing a child will be born to Sarah who is ninety years old (Gen 17:17)! Incongruity evokes laughter. Laughter disrupts the cycle
of stress, allowing Job to feel relief at doing as much as he humanly
can. His laughter breaks tension for the audience. The New International Version translates YHWH harshly asking: “Who has a claim against me that I must pay? Everything under heaven belongs to me” (41:11, 41:3 NJPS). 27 Alternatively I suggest YHWH may be understood as approving Job’s challenge: “Whoever confronts me I shall make whole (אשלם), for everything under heaven belongs to me,” thus anticipating the conclusion of the book when Job is granted well-being for speaking truth about YHWH.28 The Divine ends by describing the Behomoth, a creature even divine beings cannot conquer. Despite saying he will not reply, again Job speaks up. Granted license Job does NOT say politely “If you please...,” “My Lord, if I may speak...”29 Chuckle with Job as he affirms: “I know that You can do everything, That nothing you propose is impossible for You” (42:2). Now Job responds to God’s question: “Do you thunder with a voice like this?” (40:7). With deepened voice experience Job mimicking the sound of God bellowing: “Who is this who obscures counsel without knowledge?” (42:3a repeats 38:2). Scott Noegel points out: “punful referencing must be seen in the light of the frequent use of internal quotations in Job.”30 He notes Robert Gordis’s observation: “The use of quotation in Job (as elsewhere in Biblical and oriental literature) is a highly important element in the author’s style, and by that token, a significant key to the meaning of the book.”31 Job continues to acknowledge his limits, “Indeed, I spoke without understanding of things beyond me, which I did not know” (42:3b). Then again he imitates God’s thunder: “Hear now, and I will speak; I will ask, and you will inform Me” (42:4 repeats 38:3 and 40:7). Now recall Job’s earlier assertion that he would behold, perceive, grasp God with his own eyes (19:25-27). Job knows God witnesses everything, so he says simply: “I had heard You with my ear, But now my eye perceives You” (42:5). Then with deliberate ambiguity and a wave of his hand, he says “I reject . . . .”32 In Hebrew Job leaves the object that he rejects, despises, brushes aside, or waves away unstated, though translations often fill in with myself, my words, meaning he submits, or You, meaning he rejects God.33 Job knows God heard the dispute with his friends so with his choice of verb Job refers back to his question regarding treatment of servants: “Did I ever brush aside (אמאס) the case of my servants, man or maid, when they made a complaint against me?” (31:13 NJPS) thus challenging God’s treatment of himself, the Divine’s servant.34 Job can’t be any worse off than he already is for speaking truth to power.35 This is the man who said early on: “Would that my request were granted, That God gave me what I wished for; Would that God consented to crush me, Loosed His hand and cut me off. Then this would be my consolation (nhmty, נחמתי) as I writhed in unsparing pains: That I did not suppress my words against the Holy One” (6:8-10). Having brushed aside the irrelevance of all bluster, now Job concludes the dispute, “My consolation (nhmty, נחמתי ) is on dust and ashes” (42:6). 36 The Hebrew root nhm usually translated repent in Job 42:6, when used in the Bible with regard to humans most frequently, at least forty-three times, has to do with comforting the bereaved.37 The context of dust and ashes further points to consolation. For example, as Job sits in ashes, his friends come to comfort or console him (2:11).38 In contrast, it is the Divine who most often repents, renounces, relents, or changes course at least thirty-five times in the Bible.39 By now Job is confident that YHWH reads him correctly. With his elliptical reference in 42:6 he challenges YHWH to change course then consoles himself. Conceding Job’s point YHWH addresses Eliphaz, “I am incensed at you and your two friends, for you have not spoken the truth about Me as did My servant Job” (42:7).40 Experience Job’s relief as his Vindicator affirms his truthfulness, acknowledges he is YHWH’s servant, and puts down his tormentors. Throughout his ordeal Job is consistent with his earlier declaration: “By God who has deprived me of justice! By Shaddai who has embittered my life! As long as there is life in me, And God's breath is in my nostrils, My lips will speak no wrong, Nor my tongue utter deceit” (27:2-4). In the dynamic of this relationship Job does not repent. He comforts himself, and God changes the course of events.41 Perceiving humor after all the anguish does not diminish our experience of Job’s losses and pain. Each character is a portrayal by a divinely inspired author. This genius is well familiar with his or her own people’s history and literature, Egyptian and Mesopotamian tales and renditions of an innocent sufferer in relation to many gods, the power of word play, disputation, indeed with all the genres practiced at the time, with a command of proverbial wisdom. Our task as readers is to hear and see, that is experience, the vision of this ancient maven. Reading aloud the book of Job as tragicomedy reveals a brilliant example of ancient Hebrew wit, a survival technique in an unjust world. Job is an exploration of truthfulness about an excruciating aspect of reality with hope for relief from a merciful Divine Being. Divine bluster evokes laughter which, in the case of Job, prepares us for the joyful conclusion.42 In this magnum opus, the author’s intention is to reveal erroneous thinking and how an ethical human, regardless of gain, can stand up to opponents who ignore, distort, or concoct evidence. Job’s integrity survives the final test. He laughs at God’s preposterous demands of a mortal, and the Divine is pleased. If we accept Divine judgment of Job, we listen with openness to and reflect on how a decent human lives, promotes justice with contempt for evil-doers, and responds to tragedy. The friends help us recognize fabrications and how not to treat a suffering fellow being. A sense of humor allows us, in the end, to rejoice with God, Job, and his community. As tragicomedy the book of Job offers a means to deal with our fragility. ************ Endnotes 1. For wordplay, punning, and integrity of the whole book of Job, see S. B. Noegel’s Janus Parallelism in the Book of Job (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1996). Noegel builds upon the insight of C. H. Gordon. See also G. W. Parsons, “Literary Features of the Book of Job,” Bibliotheca Sacra 138 (551) (July, 1981) 213-29. 2. Ha-śatan (השטן) in this context is one who treats YHWH’s assessment of Job’s intentions with derision, thus I translate “the scoffer.” 3. Humble submission is reflected in both Jewish and Christian translations of Job 42:,6 such as: NJPS: “Therefore, I recant and relent, Being but dust and ashes.” JPS: “Wherefore I abhor my words, and repent, seeing I am dust and ashes.” KJV: “Wherefore I abhor (NRS “despise,”) myself, and repent in dust and ashes.” NAS: “Therefore I retract, And I repent in dust and ashes." [Italicized words were added by translators to fill in the ellipsis, the missing object of the verb.] 4. “DID
JOB OR GOD REPENT? JOB 42:5-6: Ellipses and Janus Parallelism
in Job’s Final Response to an Abusive God and the Message
of the Book of Job,” Prof. Dr. Walter L. Michel (Hebrew
and Semitic Studies) Emeritus Professor of Old Testament.
LUTHERAN SCHOOL OF THEOLOGY AT CHICAGO May 2002 (1997, 1994) http://www.michelwl.net/job42art.pdf 5. See Michel. 6. B. Lynne Newell, “Job: Repentant or Rebellious?” Job’s “sin was in the words he spoke, accusing and condemning God, though in measure unconsciously, as he justified himself. He also sinned in thus exalting himself as a ‘rival god.’” http://faculty.gordon.edu/hu/bi/Ted_Hildebrandt/OTeSources/18-Job/Text/Articles/Newell-JobRep-WTJ.pdf Westminster Theological Journal 46 (1984) 298-316, p 315. 7.Disputation in the ANE is well documented genre beginning with Sumerian tales. See for example: “Dumuzi and Enkidu: The Dispute between the Shepherd God and the Farmer God,” trans. John A. Wilson (ANET, 1955, 41-42). “The psychological ingredient is the same throughout, an aggressive attitude on the part of one of the characters resulting, at least in some cases, from a feeling of inferiority or frustration.” One character “is impelled to enumerate his superior qualities” (41). In contrast to this divine dispute, the mortal Job is impelled to defend the way he conducted his life against many who fear Job’s perception of reality. 8. A Targum circumvents the problem by filling in the ellipses with: “Therefore I despise my wealth, and comfort myself for my children who are dust and ashes.” Job neither repents nor rebels, he consoles himself in his situation. Michel’s translation W Targum. The text is quoted according to Paul de Lagarde, Hagiographa Chaldaica, 1873. The translation is by Wolters, Al, “‘A Child of Dust and Ashes’ (Job 42,6b)” ZAW 102 (1990) 116-119. Cf OTA 15.2 (June 1992) 805. 9. D. N. Freedman recognizes the quality of the interchange between YHWH and Job in “Is It Possible to Understand the Book of Job?” (BAR 04:02, 1988, electronic version). Appreciating the nature of testing in Job, Freedman points out: “Just as Satan may not finally kill Job, so God is not allowed to reassure Job about his positive and supportive interest in this frail human being. That would completely spoil the test. But Job gets the right message even from the wrong words. What God denies in his words is affirmed by the fact of his speaking. Job understands that Yahweh’s blast from heaven is nevertheless the very word that Job needs—to know that Yahweh has his eye on him and has expressed his concern for him.” In the epilogue “Yahweh clearly and cheerfully concedes that Job has been wronged and that he has a just cause and claim against the deity.” Nonetheless, after 42:5 Freedman concludes: “Now he knows that God does care for him and he can freely repent and thus pave the way for the conclusion of the book—his restoration and reward.” I suggest that when we hear Divine sarcasm as Job does we alleviate the need to distinguish the author’s point from editor’s strategy in understanding the book of Job. 10. Michel characterizes “the God-Speeches now as the final test of Job.The Prologue and the God-Speeches portray God as a pompous, authoritarian, and abusive deity who is only concerned with the ultimate creative powers, without any concern for the covenantal, legal, moral and ethical questions of God, the ‘suzerain,’ in the relationship to the ‘servant’ Job.” Though I respect Michel’s assessment of YHWH’s speeches and applaud his daring, an earnest reading of Job traps a reader: Either Job repents or God should repent. Experiencing humor relieves us from the dichotomy. 11. See H. Kohut, “The empathic use of sarcasm: Humor in psychotherapy from a self psychological perspective,” Clinical Social Work Journal, Volume 16, Number 3 / September, 1988, pp. 297-305. For another take on unexpected humor, see, David A. Westbrook’s “Kafka's Laughter: Markets, Alienation, and the Possibility of Affection” http://www.law.buffalo.edu/dwestbro/KafkaLaughter.htm: “The very formality on which Kafka’s stories turn makes his stories, as awful as they were, funny. As Kafka’s friend and biographer Max Brod recalled: ‘When Kafka read aloud himself, this humor became perfectly clear. Thus, for example, we friends of his laughed quite immoderately when he first let us hear the first chapter of The Trial. And he himself laughed so much that there were moments when he couldn’t read any further. Astonishing enough, when you think of the fearful earnestness . . . .’” Max Brod , Franz Kafka: A Biography 178 (G Humphreys trans.) (1937). Imagine the author of Job reading aloud to a group of friends! 12. W. Whedbee, “The Comedy of Job,” in On Humour and the Comic in the Hebrew Bible, eds. Y.T. Radday & A. BrennerJSOT Supplemental Series 92 (Sheffield: Almond Press, 1990), 217-249. 13. Whedbee, 243. 14. If tragedy is “a drama or literary work in which the main character is brought to ruin or suffers extreme sorrow, especially as a consequence of a tragic flaw, a moral weakness, or an inability to cope with unfavorable circumstances,” (AHD) then the book of Job is not a tragedy. The frame story makes clear that Job has no flaws. God seems flawed in allowing the scoffer to chide the Almighty into tormenting this outstanding human. However, the Divine has a plan and the author takes us through Job’s excruciating experience to relief. 15. Elihu is often omitted by readers who question the artistic integrity of the book. For clarification of how to distinguish a blowhard, see Harry Frankfort’s essay On Bullshit (Princeton, NJ: Princeton U. Press, 2005). For an earnest treatment of Elihu see R. V. McCabe “Elihu’s Contribution to the Thought of the Book of Job” DBSJ 2 (Fall 1997): 47–80. 16. Early on, while questioning Job, Bildad introduces the element of windy speech: “How long will you speak such things? Your utterances are a mighty wind!” (8:2) It is significant that YHWH’s voice emanates not from an earthquake, fire, nor murmur, but from a great wind. 17. For the schoolmaster see G. von Rad “Job XXXVIII & Ancient Egyptian Wisdom” 1955, in The Problem of the Hexateuch and other essays (Edinburg & London: Oliver & Boyd, 1965) 281-291. 18. Why is YHWH testing a favorite this way? Just as YHWH tested Abraham and Moses, YHWH tests Job. Two obvious examples are Abraham in Genesis 18:16-33 and Moses in Exodus 32. All three men have an up front personal relationship with YHWH. Each has courage to speak up. When YHWH announces to Abraham the Divine intent to destroy Sodom and Gomorrah
Then Abraham asks the question of Job and his friends, “Shall not the Judge of all the earth deal justly?" (Gen 18:16-25) Without saying “if you please,” Abraham launches into questioning divine justice. And YHWH is willing to forgive the whole lot if there are fifty innocent. This encourages Abe to engage in bargaining. After his first success, he mutes his manner a bit, saying, ‘‘Here I venture to speak to my Lord, I who am but dust and ashes” (Gen 18:27) until they get to ten innocent and the conversation ends. One cannot help but chuckle at Abe’s chutzpah and YHWH’s indulgence in this test of a darling. On Mount Sinai, YHWH, who knows what’s going on below, tells Moses who hasn’t a clue:
Wow! What an opportunity! The people have been driving Moses nuts. And YHWH says leave Me alone to destroy them, as if Moses has a say in the matter! Does Moses accept the Divine offer? Nope. Moses has the chutzpah to speak “to the face of YHWH his God (literal),”
Turning the Divine words around, Moses sticks to what is true and emphasizes Divine power. Then Moses appeals to YHWH’s concern with public opinion. “Let not the Egyptians say, 'It was with evil intent that He delivered them, only to kill them off in the mountains and annihilate them from the face of the earth.” (Exodus 32:12) As a clincher Moses again has the chutzpah to prod the Divine memory about a prior commitment: “Remember Your servants, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, how You swore to them by Your Self and said to them: ‘I will make your offspring as numerous as the stars of heaven, and I will give to your offspring this whole land of which I spoke, to possess forever.’ And the LORD renounced נחם (see below endnote 39) the punishment He had planned to bring upon His people.” (Exodus 32:13-14) Within the Bible YHWH’s confrontation with Job most resembles Abraham regarding Sodom and Moses on Mount Sinai. Each man is tested by YHWH. Each episode deals with horrific issues but has comic elements, especially regarding the relationship of the Divine and a special human. Chutzpah, among other qualities, endears each to YHWH. Job too is special. The narrator tells us and YHWH announces it more than once. 19. While our class was reading aloud, Barbara Hozinsky and Barbara Schnitzer burst forth with the insight, “Job is about speaking truth to power.” If Job repents, he is a model of humility–the opposite of the feisty man who, while experiencing pain and anguish, brilliantly distinguishes between truth and fantasy spouted by his fickle, self-serving friends, then reiterated by the blowhard Elihu who characterizes himself: “For I am full of words; The wind in my belly presses me. My belly is like wine not yet opened, Like jugs of new wine ready to burst.” (32:18-19) “Chutzpah is the quality of audacity, for good or for bad. The word derives from the Yiddish” which “in turn, derived from the Hebrew word h.us.pâ, meaning ‘insolence,’ ‘audacity,’ and ‘impertinence’; though, by now, the English, usage of the word has taken on a wider spectrum of meaning, having been popularized through vernacular use, film, literature, and television. In Hebrew, chutzpah is used indignantly, to describe someone who has over-stepped the boundaries of accepted behaviour for selfish reasons. But in Yiddish and English, chutzpah has developed interesting ambivalent and even positive connotations. Chutzpah can be used to express admiration for non-conformist but gutsy audacity.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chutzpah. I suggest the current use of chutzpah has ancient origins. For contrast see G. W. Parsons, “The Structure and Purpose of the Book of Job,” Bibliotheca Sacra 138 (550) (Apr. 1981) 139-57. “It is this writer's belief that the purpose of the Book of Job is to show that the proper relationship between God and man is based solely on the sovereign grace of God and man's response of faith and submissive trust.” (p. 142) The “idea of a man going to court with God is unprecedented in the Old Testament.” (p.148) In footnote 63, Parsons suggests: “However, a servant could litigate against his master (Job 31: 13) or a subject against his king (1 Sam. 24:8-22) . . . . This unprecedented act perfectly illustrates Job's audacity and hubris for which he must repent.” (p. 148) I urge us to remember, it is YHWH who says Job suffers for no good reason and that Job speaks the truth about God. 20. E. L. Greenstein, “‘On My Skin and in My Flesh’: Personal Experience as a Source of Knowledge in the Book of Job” Eds. K. F. Kravitz & D. M. Sharon, Bringing the Hidden to Light: The Process of Interpretation, Studies in Honor of Stephen A. Geller (Winona Lake, Indiana: JTS & Eisenbrauns, 2007) 63-77. 21. SeeNoegel, p. 20. E. L. Greenstein, in his paper, “From Oral Epic to Writerly Verse and Some of the Stages in Between,” reflects “on the relations between early Canaanite epic and early Hebrew verse and on the relations between early Hebrew verse and later biblical poetry.” He sorts out a variety of stages and types of oral and written literature, between the orally performed text that would in all likelihood have been orally composed, at one end of the spectrum, and a text with oral qualities that would seem nevertheless to have been written to be read, on the other.” He draws on illustrations “diverse texts, from Ugaritic epic to the Book of Job.” Abstract for paper at the SBL Annual Meeting, Washington, D.C. November 18, 2006. I thank Ed for generously sending me his fascinating articles. In a congregational setting where students voluntarily come with no concern for grades or the amount of time spent on any book in the Bible, we read biblical texts orally, discuss, then read again with expression. 22. For example of performance in the ancient Near East, see Robyn Gillam, Performance and Drama in Ancient Egypt (London: Gerald Duckworth and Co, Ltd., 2005). 23. After a six month study of reading aloud and discussing each discourse in the book of Job, a group met to read the book aloud in one sitting. It took 1 hour and 45 minutes with no break, then we celebrated. The interpretation proposed in this paper makes sense. Reviewing S. Noegel’s book for this paper confirms my reading. 24. “See,”חזא, ’ zh means “to behold” Ps 17:15, “to hold” or “to possess” Gen 47:11, “to grasp” or “to capture” Lev 25:46; Nu 27:4; Song of Songs 7:9, so in the context of Job beholding is “to perceive fully,” “to comprehend.” Contrast Job’s anticipation of “seeing” God while alive to the Egyptian “Protestation of Guiltlessness,” trans. John A. Wilson (ANET, 1955, 34-36). After death an Egyptian is presented to the gods in the “Broad-Hall of the Two Justices” to “see” their beauty while iterating sins not committed. 25. American Heritage Dictionary. 26. Following Elihu’s buffoonery combined with YHWH’s caricature of a schoolmaster, the intense arguing about innocence, suffering, divine injustice, is disrupted. Laughter would account for Job continuing in 42:1-6, after he had said “what can I answer You?” in 40:4. 27. See Job 8:6 (NJPS), Bildad, “If you are blameless and upright, He will protect you, And grant well-being שלם to your righteous home.” Ironically, Bildad unintentionally prophecies the conclusion of the book of Job. In light of Job 8:6, what the Divine says in Job 41:2-3 NJPS (other translations 41:10-11) may be read: “Who is he that stands up to me? Who confronts me, אשלם I will make whole/requite/reward/repay/restore.” Compare to alternative translations which miss Divine playfulness through a word with multiple meanings. Notice the mean spirited challenge in: NJPS Job 41:2-3, “Who then can stand up to Me? Whoever confronts Me I will requite,” and Job 41:10-11 in JPS, “who then is able to stand before Me? Who hath given Me anything beforehand, that I should repay him?”; NKJ “Who then is able to stand against Me? Who has preceded Me, that I should pay him?”; NIV “Who then is able to stand against me? Who has a claim against me that I must pay?”; KJV “Who then is able to stand against Me? Who hath prevented me, that I should repay him?”; NRS“Who can stand before it? Who can confront it and be safe?”; NAS “Who can stand before it? Who has given to Me that I should repay him?”; RSV “Who then is he that can stand before me? Who has given to me, that I should repay him?” 28. For שלם as restoring, making well see Is 57:18-19 “I note how they fare and will heal them: I will guide them and mete out solace to them, נהמים אשלם And to the mourners among them, heartening, comforting words: It shall be well שלם, Well with the far and the near -- said the LORD -- And I will heal them (NJPS).” 29. J. Miles, God, A Biography (New York: Knopf, 1995), p. 321. 30.Noegel, p. 17. 31. R. Gordis, The Book of God and Man: a study of Job (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1965), p. 189. 32. See Noegel, p. 20, for the importance of the manner of speaking in the ancient Near East and the Bible. For 31:13, אמאס “rejected” (NRS, RSV), “despised” (JPS, NKJ, KJV, NAS), “denied justice” (NIV), “brush aside” (NJPS). For the gesture of waving the hand, see the parallel construction in: Isaiah 33:15 NJPS: “He who walks in righteousness, Speaks uprightly, Spurns profit from fraudulent dealings, Waves away a bribe instead of grasping it,”; NKJ “He who despises the gain of oppressions, Who gestures with his hands, refusing bribes,”; NRS “who despise the gain of oppression, who wave away a bribe instead of accepting it.” See also translations recognizing מאס a gesture in NRS Isaiah 41:9 “you whom I took from the ends of the earth, and called from its farthest corners, saying to you, ‘You are my servant, I have chosen you and not cast you off’”; NRS Isaiah 54:6 “For the LORD has called you like a wife forsaken and grieved in spirit, like the wife of a man's youth when she is cast off, says your God;” NRS in Jeremiah 7:29 “Cut off your hair and throw it away; raise a lamentation on the bare heights, for the LORD has rejected and forsaken the generation that provoked his wrath.” See also M. Gruber, Aspects of Nonverbal Communication in the Ancient Near East (Studia Pohl 12 [2 volumes]. Rome: Biblical Institute, 1980). 33. In
a dramatization, “The Trial of Job,” Roger Eaton attributes
42:6 to God who rejects Satan and accepts Job. http://www.intermix.org/job/job38t42.htm 34. See Samuel A. Meier’s very interesting insights in “Job and the Unanswered Question,” Prooftexts, 19:3, 1999, 265-276. He points out the difference between modern and ancient conventions of questioning. As in the Egyptian Papyrus Anastasi I. “In the Hebrew Bible, there is also evidence for a presumption that it is the second question that has a priority for response” (271) as distinguished from the modern convention of giving priority to the first question. Unable to withstand God’s “crushing exposure of his limitations, . . . (Job) finally pleads, I recant and relent, being but dust and ashes (Job 42:6; NJPS)” (p. 272). Meier argues that “these final words of Job unambiguously express his withdrawal from the questioning, regardless of the specific object of his disavowal” (p. 272). “Once one recognizes the convention where the second question has the priority in deserving a response, the close of the Book of Job is explicable: God will not answer Job's question because Job will not answer his. (p. 272)” If Meier is correct, I suggest that the author of Job uses conventions to highlight an unconventional view. I hear Job laugh, mimic God, not “repent.” Job has the last word in the disputation. Divine judgment–the answer Job hopes for–is addressed to Eliphaz. 35. YHWH is capable of humor as well as everything else. This is a subject for another essay. Job’s speaking truth to power, experienced by our adult Bible study group, is confirmed by Edward L. Greenstein: “In 42:7 God commends Job for having spoken truth to power.” In his review of D. W. Nam’s, “Talking about God: Job 42:7.9 and the Nature of God in the Book of Job,” Studies in Biblical Literature 49, New York: Lang, 2003. See: http://www.bookreviews.org/pdf/3195_3573.pdf 36. Compare with the Palmist: “This is my comfort (nhmti) in my affliction, that Your promise has preserved me.” Ps 119:50. 37. Hol
5471 presents a variety of meanings for nmty, נחמתי: regret:
a) have regrets, a change of heart 1S
1529; b) allow oneself. a change of heart regarding, relent regarding
Ex 32:12; c) abs. turn fm. former attitude, repent Jb
42:6; — 2. (allow oneself to) be sorry:
a) subj. God Ps 90:13, w. kî that Gn
6:6f; b) subj. man, w. for Ju
21:6•15, abs. Je 31:19; — 3. comfort,
console oneself.: a) find comfort, consolation Gn
24:67, w. about 2S 13:39;
b) obtain satisfaction, take relish in Is
1:24; c) observe time of mourning Gn
38:12; d) complete the rites of mourning, be consoled Je
31:15.” For “regret,” 1 Sam 15:29 and Ex 32:12
relate to God. For humans comforting or being consoled I find at
least 43 times, see Gen 5:29; 24:67; 27:42; 37:35; 38:12;50:21; 2
Sam 10:2, 3; 12:24; 13:39; Isaiah 40:1; 49:13, 51:3,12; 52:9;
54:11; 61:2; 66:13; Jer 16:7; 31:15; Ezek 14:22, 23;16:54; 32:31;
Ruth 2:13; Pss 23:4; 69:21; 77:3; 86:17; 119:76, 82; Job 2:11; 7:13;
16:2; 21:34; 29:25; 42:11; Eccl 4:11; Lam 1:2, 9, 16, 17, 21. For “console” see
D.J. O'Connor, "Job's Final Word - 'I am Consoled...' (42:6b)," Irish
Theological Quarterly 50 (1983/84): 181-97. For discussion of
translations, see Thomas Krüger, “ Did Job Repent?” 2006: “So
one could interpret Job 42:6, e.g., also in the following sense: ‘I
will waste away, but then I will be consoled above dust and ashes.’” Or ““I
am comforted about dust and ashes.” Krüger presents a
strong case for translating יתמחנ as “consoled” or “comforted.” p.
6. 38. Job consoles himself “on dust and ashes” associated with grieving: “The frequent pairing and interchange of the two words in the Bible simply reflects a common combination in real life.” For example: “When Abraham speaks of being but dust and ashes, this was a combination he—or the writer—knew well. [The mixture] was a common material for paving. When Job speaks of being cast down like dust and ashes, the image is one of being trampled upon by man and beast like the dust and ashes that covered the street. When the mourner speaks of pouring dust and ashes on himself, he could do so by the handful whenever he sat in the street.” “ The Archaeology of dust and Ashes,” Hershel Shanks: BAR 01:02 (June 1975). Biblical Archaeology Society, 2004. See A. F. Rainey, “Dust and Ashes,” Tel Aviv, The Journal of the Tel Aviv University Institute of Archaeology, Vol. 1, p.77 (1974)). 39. Divine “regret,” “change of heart,” renouncing a plan, “relents” occurs more than 35 times compared to only 5 times for humans. For the Divine see: Gen 6:6-7; Ex 32:12; 32:14; Dt 32:36; Judges 21:18; 1 Sam 15:11, 28; 2 Sam 24:16; Is 57:6; Jer 4:28; 18:8, 10; 26:3 13, 19; 42:10; Joel 2:13, 14; Amos 7:3, 6, 6; Jonah 3:9, 10; Zech 8:14-15; Ps 71:21; 90:13; 106:45; 119:52. The notion that God does not repent appears in Nu 23:19 according to Balaam; 1 Sam 15:29 two times in the context that God “regretted” making Saul king (15:10, 35) but will not “repent” in rejecting Saul. See also Jer 4:28; 15:6; 20:16. 40. “I am incensed” is literally “My nostrils are flaring!” 42. For appreciation of the difficulties at the end of Job, see David R. Blumenthal’s Facing the Abusing God: a Theology of Protest (Louisville, KY: Westminster/John Knox Press:1993), 254-255. While he disagrees with Jung’s “christological resolution,” Blumenthal agrees “that the ending of the book of Job according to the poetic section reveals a God Who is an abuser.” C. Jung, Answer to Job, trans. F. C. Hull (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1958), 16. Blumenthal poses important questions on the end of Job: “What became of the relationship of Job and God after this tirade? Did Job trust and worship God again? Does the enigmatic last sentence mean that Job was so terrified that he repressed his question completely? Or does it mean that Job had a religious, or mystical, experience which transformed his question and his spiritual being to a higher plane? Does the ending signify that Job was somehow satisfied with having attracted God’s direct attention and that that was good enough? Do these closing verses indicate that Job resolved his suffering by ultimately accepting his inferior status and hence God’s judgment? “The prose ending to the book of Job (42:7-17) is no easier to understand: Job’s happiness is returned to him in greater measure than before; he is reinstated in this world, better off than he was. But did Job simply take up his relationship with God again, with no after-effects? Did Job accept his second blessing without question? Did he resume his pious life without reservation?” p. 255. I suggest Job could “resume his pious life without reservation” if we experience Job’s laughter at the Divine’s intentional pomposity in prodding this favored one, if we hear Job stick to the truth about God, then we witness God’s approving Job’s audacity and instructing the friends on how to achieve mercy with Job as the intermediary. Fully justified, free from fear, after his ordeal Job is blessed.
|
|
|
|
|
