Job

The setting for the book is a cosmic debate. Satan—frustrated in his attempts to attack God—has moved to Earth to attack those whom God loves: humanity. Like a mafia crime boss, he knows that if he can’t get to God, he should try to get to those he loves—his children. Satan accuses humans of being righteous for self-service. “Take away the blessings,” says Satan, “and these humans will hate you.” If loving God for his blessings is wrong, then even the godliest of men will be shown to be sinful! Once this accusation is raised, it needs to be defeated, not destroyed.

Job’s friends (Eliphaz, Bildad, and Zophar) are “orthodox” theologians, who end up arguing with Job about the nature of his suffering, rather than comforting him. Why do Job’s friends accuse Job? Alden^[1] argues that the friends hold to a legalistic view of God’s justice. In their view, the wicked get punished, and the righteous get rewarded. Therefore, if a righteous man like Job could be under God’s judgment, what hope was there for them? If they can get him to confess some secret sin, then they will be able to go home knowing that suffering won’t afflict them.

This book dialogues through the most important question of why bad things happen to good people. The dialogue goes on forever. Everyone has an opinion. But in the end, God gets the last word. In chapter 38, God speaks to Job, silencing Satan, his friends, and Job himself. He concludes the book by saying that we are too limited to know what we’re talking about. God sharply rebukes the three friends (42:7-9), saying that they misrepresented him in their speculations. And, he gently (but sarcastically?) brings Job through a series of questions to demonstrate that he is too limited to know what he’s talking about, too. God also doesn’t mention what he’s going to do to Satan, which is strange; it sparks the imagination.

Was Job a real and historical person?

Both the Old and New Testaments affirm that Job was a historical person. James writes, “We count those blessed who endured. You have heard of the endurance of Job and have seen the outcome of the Lord’s dealings, that the Lord is full of compassion and is merciful” (Jas. 5:11). Likewise, Ezekiel compares Job to Noah and Daniel (Ezek. 14:14, 20). We agree with Andersen^[2] that this is good evidence of a historical Job. The book is also cited in the NT (Job 5:13 in 1 Cor 3:19). Critics can offer only a few reasons for denying the historicity of Job.

REASON #1. The number of sheep, camels, and cattle are artificial numbers (Job 1:3) and doubled (Job 42:12). However, this claim backfires on the critic. In ancient times, people measured their wealth by the size of their flocks and herds, because this was a time before coinage. Therefore, this speaks to the antiquity of the account. Furthermore, the doubling of Job’s reward is a statement from God that those who follow him faithfully receive a great reward. This is a key theme of the book. Without this, the book would make little sense.

REASON #2. The ruin of Job’s life is told in a step-by-step way (Job 1:13-19). This does nothing to deny the historicity of Job. This could be the way the events happened, or it could be a summary of the historical events.

REASON #3. The people speak in poetry. This is certainly odd for a modern reader. However, this is simply the literary vehicle that the author chose to record historical narrative. As a case in point, Judges 4 is written as historical prose, but Judges 5 tells the same account in poetry. Poetry and history are not mutually exclusive categories.[3]

Is this really the best the critics can do? None of this can truly “impinge on the historicity of the account.” Indeed, “everything said about him is well within the realm of possibility. He did not do superhuman feats nor possess any magical power. Except for his extraordinary wealth and exceptional piety, he was like countless others past and present.”^[4]

Authorship

Job existed. However, this doesn’t require that he authored the book. Jewish tradition claims that Moses wrote this book (Sota, 5.8; Baba Bathra, 14b), but “most scholars do not find this compelling.”^[5] Archer writes, “The text of this book does not indicate its author, and there is no consistent tradition even in rabbinic circles as to who the composer of this work might have been… The Talmud ventures only to suggest that the writer must have been someone who lived prior to the time of Moses.”^[6]

Regarding the author’s extensive knowledge and literary skills, Hartley writes, “The author was a highly educated person and a devout servant of Yahweh; he may be numbered among the great wise men of ancient Israel.”^[7]

Andersen^[8] and Alden^[9] hold to anonymous authorship. Of course, anonymous authorship is different than pseudonymous authorship. The book never names the author, but it also never gives a false name for the author.

Date

Job is difficult to date. However, there is evidence that the events of the book date very early—perhaps even before the time of Moses. We can see this for a number of reasons:

First, it contains no datable historical events or knowledge of Israelite culture or religion. The book takes place in the land of Uz, which most scholars^[10] believe to be in Edom (Gen. 10:23; Lam. 4:21). This could explain the book’s conspicuous silence with regard to Abrahamic and Jewish references.

Second, Job is the patriarch of his family-clan. This family structure fits with the time of Abraham—not Moses.

Third, Job’s wealth is measured in the number of animals he owned, which fits with the patriarchal period (Gen. 12:16).

Fourth, Job offers a sacrifice for his family, rather than taking it to the priest. This is pre-Mosaic, where one would normally bring the sacrifice to a priest—definitely not the patriarch.

Fifth, Job’s long lifespan (140 years) seems to fit better with an early date (Job 42:16).

Sixth, Job mentions qesita (Job 42:11), which places the book at least as early as Joshua (Josh. 24:32) or perhaps earlier (Gen. 33:19).

Seventh, Job owned unclean animals like camels. Camels were unclean animals in the Law (Lev. 11:4; Deut. 14:7). Alden writes, “This is one more reason to believe that the man Job was earlier than Moses (or at least outside the pale of Israelite influence).”^[11] The former interpretation makes better sense. After all, why would an Israelite invent a “righteous” man who was an owner of 3,000 (unclean!) animals? (Job 1:1)

Eighth, the name “Lord” (Yahweh) doesn’t appear in the book (with the except of Job 12:9). Alden thinks this is “probably is either a quotation from a proverb or a scribal error.”^[12] He observes, “The speakers used more generic names for God; ʾêl (about fifty times), ʾĕlôah (about forty times), and ʾĕlôhîm (four times) all translate as ‘God’; šadday (about thirty times) is ‘Almighty.’ This indicates that the speakers lived before or beyond the influence of the religion of Israel, in the patriarchal period (Exod 6:3), or in an area outside ‘the promised land.’ There is no hint of polytheism; in fact, there are strong suggestions against it.”^[13]

Ninth, the book contains the most amount of unique Hebrew words (hapax legomena) of any book in the Bible.^[14] This seems as though the book is not incorporated with the mainstream of Israelite culture. This could argue for predating this culture—though others argue that it was simply outside this culture.

Andersen^[15] considers these examples of conspicuous silences “quite astonishing.” We agree. Those who hold to a later date argue that the author “deliberately suppressed” this information in order to “give his work a neutral or more universal setting in the Gentile world.” But this suggestion is ad hoc, and Andersen correctly argues that the main characters certainly aren’t pagans. Andersen states that the writing of the document must be before the 7^th century BC, and he concludes that the book “could have been written at any time between Moses and Ezra,” perhaps in the reign of Solomon.

Job refers to “iron” (Job 19:24), which was not created until the 12^th century BC. However, this could be a case of a later redactor updating the text to fit with the contemporaneous culture (see Objection #3 under “Authorship of the Pentateuch”).

Conclusion

The historical setting for the events in the book of Job is considerably early. However, the writing and composition of the book is unclear. Was it written during the time of the events in question? Or was it written far later? We simply are not sure.

Canonicity of Job

Despite the theological and linguistic difficulties in Job, Smick notes that “its place in the canon was never seriously challenged.”^[16] Likewise, Hartley concurs that “the canonicity of Job has never been seriously questioned.”^[17] This is quite amazing considering the fact that the central hero of the book comes near to blaspheming God.^[18]

Major lessons and themes of Job

First, we are too limited to understand God’s purpose for us, while we suffer. Instead, we need to trust that God is in the privileged position of being all-knowing, and he will work all things for the good for those who love him (Rom. 8:28). We know that God will get the last word, and he will take care of us in the end. As one pastor liked to say in counseling sessions with the grieving, “Don’t forfeit what you don’t know for what you do know. You don’t know why God allowed your suffering… But you do know that God is good, he loves us, he is giving us eternal life, and he will eventually get the last word.”[19] If Job could learn to trust God in his suffering before the Cross, how much more should we learn to trust him after the Cross?

Second, God is worthy of love even apart from his blessings. God wanted to teach Job that he should enjoy his presence more than his presents. After he learns this, God lavishes him with blessing—twice as many as he possessed at the beginning. God wasn’t required to do this, but he does it because he is a Giver; this is in his nature. God holds out on blessing Job, so that Job can get the supreme blessing—knowing God (42:5).

Third, Job is never told why he was suffering. This is odd, isn’t it? His life was the battleground for a cosmic battle between God and Satan, but he is never told this. And yet, he still trusts God after seeing him. God is most likely telling us that there is much more going on surrounding our suffering than we can possibly fathom.

Fourth, friends can be intentionally or unintentionally cruel when we go through grief. Very often, friends will want to give theological and philosophical answers to the problem of suffering. But this is sort of like explaining the science of cancer to a man dying of lymphoma: the explanation isn’t as important as the comfort that is needed. While Job’s friends were able to make true theological statements,[20] they were wrong in their application of their theology.

Fifth, suffering isn’t always due to sin. Many religions teach that people suffer because this is some form of divine retribution. However, the book of Job blows this thinking out of the water. Job didn’t suffer because he was unrighteous, but because he was righteous (Job 1:1).

Sixth, we cannot give absolute answers for why individuals are suffering. Christian philosophers have given good answers for the problem of evil in general (i.e. “How could a good God allow evil?”), but we do not have clear answers for the problem of evil for specific persons and for specific incidences (i.e. “Why did God allow this to happen to me?”).

Readers often find themselves frustrated reading through 35 chapters of speculation on Job’s suffering, but this is exactly the point! We can speculate all day long about why God allowed a specific instance of suffering, but we simply do not have access to this information. Instead, we can only cling to the promises that God will bring good out of evil when we trust him (Rom. 8:28).

Was the ending added later? (chs.38-42)

Critics think that the final chapters of Job were a later interpolation. The book is confusing and complicated, and the ending ties everything together to give it a “happily-ever-after” conclusion. However, several observations can be made.

First, there is no material evidence for this. We possess no manuscripts that excise the final chapters. This is a purely speculative argument.

Second, the language and style of the final chapters fit with the rest of the book. Andersen writes, “It is generally admitted that the Yahweh speeches are written in the same language and style as the discussion between Job and his friends, allowing, of course, for the different subject-matter and the more elevated tone.” Later, he adds, “The coherence of Job 1-31 and 38-42 is widely recognized. The simplest explanation of its unity is that it was all written by the same person.”^[21]

Third, the “happily-ever-after” conclusion is the story of Scripture itself. We currently live in a world that began with God, experienced a fall, and will find eternal redemption. Denying the end of Job on this basis is to deny the arc of biblical history.

Were Elihu’s speeches added? (chs.32-37)

Critics charge that Elihu’s speeches were interpolated. They come out of the blue right before God speaks, and they are different than Job’s other three comforters. However, who are we to state that another figure wasn’t present to offer a kind interpretation before the end of the book? Perhaps he heard the way the three comforters were speaking to Job—only to offer a different perspective. Indeed, “when we come to the Elihu speeches, we find that they are full of quotations from and allusions to chapters 3-31.”^[22]

Critics claim that there are more Aramaisms in Elihu’s chapters, which could signal a later interpolator. However, this could equally be evidence of a different contemporary speaker. Andersen writes, “These may be explained simply as another means used by the author to give Elihu a different character from the others.”^[23]

Consulted Commentaries

Elmer B. Smick, “Job,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: 1 & 2 Kings, 1 & 2 Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, Job, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein, vol. 4 (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1988).

Francis I. Andersen, Job: An Introduction and Commentary, vol. 14, Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1976).

Andersen’s commentary is highly rated, and it didn’t disappoint. While we are partial to the NAC series, Andersen’s commentary was the best in our opinion. Very thoughtful and well written. This would be the number one commentary that we would suggest.

Robert L. Alden, Job, vol. 11, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1993).

^[1] Robert L. Alden, Job, vol. 11, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1993), 22-23.

^[2] Francis I. Andersen, Job: An Introduction and Commentary, vol. 14, Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1976), 83.

[3] Homer’s Iliad (8^th c. BC) was composed as poetry, but it recorded historical events like Trojan War and the mention of real people and places. Critics could observe that the Iliad contains much mythological material as well. However, this shows the vast difference between Homer and Scripture. The mythology of Homer is obvious, while no mythological events surround Job’s life.

^[4] Robert L. Alden, Job, vol. 11, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1993), 25-26.

[5] See footnote 4 below. Eugene H. Merrill, Mark F. Rooker, and Michael A. Grisanti, The World and the Word: An Introduction to the Old Testament (Nashville, TN: B&H Academic, 2011), 500.

^[6] Gleason Archer, A Survey of Old Testament Introduction, 3rd ed. (Chicago: Moody Press, 1994), 505.

^[7] John E. Hartley, The Book of Job, New International Commentary on the Old Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1988), 17.

^[8] Francis I. Andersen, Job: An Introduction and Commentary, vol. 14, Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1976), 64.

^[9] Robert L. Alden, Job, vol. 11, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1993), 28.

[10] Eugene H. Merrill, Mark F. Rooker, and Michael A. Grisanti, The World and the Word: An Introduction to the Old Testament (Nashville, TN: B&H Academic, 2011), 501.

^[11] Robert L. Alden, Job, vol. 11, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1993), 50.

^[12] Robert L. Alden, Job, vol. 11, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1993), 38.

^[13] Robert L. Alden, Job, vol. 11, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1993), 38.

^[14] Alden writes, “After Isaiah, which has twice as many words, Job has the largest number of hapax legomena (words found only once in the Bible) of any book in the Bible; and words that occur only a handful of times elsewhere in the Old Testament are found throughout the book.” Robert L. Alden, Job, vol. 11, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1993), 36.

^[15] Francis I. Andersen, Job: An Introduction and Commentary, vol. 14, Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1976), 64-66.

^[16] Elmer B. Smick, “Job,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: 1 & 2 Kings, 1 & 2 Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, Job, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein, vol. 4 (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1988), 855.

^[17] John E. Hartley, The Book of Job, New International Commentary on the Old Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1988), 3.

^[18] Robert L. Alden, Job, vol. 11, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1993), 30-32.

[19] We are indebted to Chuck Smith for this insight.

[20] Paul cites Eliphaz (compare Job 5:13; 1 Cor. 3:19-20).

^[21] Francis I. Andersen, Job: An Introduction and Commentary, vol. 14, Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1976), 51, 52.

^[22] Francis I. Andersen, Job: An Introduction and Commentary, vol. 14, Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1976), 54.

^[23] Francis I. Andersen, Job: An Introduction and Commentary, vol. 14, Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1976), 54.