Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] NXM

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: David Kummerow <farmerjoeblo AT hotmail.com>
  • To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] NXM
  • Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2008 11:07:24 +1000

Hi Stephen,

1. Yes, Habel is not at all sensitive to the actually occurring words in 27:5. In my view, he has Job saying things which he does not actually say. I see Job rather as not unlike some Psalms which cycle from despair to hope and something which I've attempted to demonstrate in arguing in my article that Job does in fact maintain a trust in the goodness of God to him despite present circumstances which would seem to suggest otherwise.

2. Fyall is indeed a stimulating read. I am quite reluctant to agree with him for at least two main reasons. Firstly, despite his analysis of the final chapters, they can still me naturally read as NOT referring to satan. Secondly, he skips dealing with 42:7, 8 -- quite a significant oversight!

3. 40:8 need not read as if God takes this to be what Job has indeed done or was attempting to achieve. It is, after all, a question, and I would suggest one which expects a negative answer. In my article I've tried to show that Job does indeed maintain a trust in the justice of God -- to the extent that he can paradoxically affirm that God will plead his case for him with God!

4. I would suggest that Job's response in 42:1-5 is a response that is always right in the face of divine revelation. That is, it is always right to affirm that God is God and that we are limited humans. Whether one was right or wrong is simply a non-issue when God appears. In Job's words: "I had heard of you by the hearing of the ear, but now my eyes have seen you" (42:5).

I'm indeed sorry, but I'm off with my family for a holiday for a week or so which means I will likely be unable to continue this conversation. Thanks for pushing my thinking!

Regards,
David Kummerow.



Hi David,

I agree with you that all these questions continue through the book. I'm
just not sure that it's due to the Satan's ongoing rebuttals. The sense of
closure at 2:10, and the failure of the Satan to reappear, along with the
nature of God's eventual response, lead me to think that God chooses to keep
the sterner test going, for his own reasons. (Then again, if Fyall is right
in his argument that the Leviathan is a image of the Satan, maybe I'm
wrong.)

You're right on 27:5 - I was lazy there. Nevertheless, I do think that Job,
in maintaining his own integrity, at least comes very close to "condemning
God" (e.g. 9:21-24; 10:2-7). How else do we understand 40:8? In the light of
that, and of the entirety of the divine speeches, not to mention 42:1-5,
isn't it true that Job DOES have something to "regret" in what he had said,
and/or how he had said it?

Of course, that doesn't prove that NXM is "regret" as opposed to "be
consoled" in 42:6. But I am trying to show that, given the context, it can't
be dismissed too easily; I can see strong arguments for both. And for me,
the translation "regret/repent" sharpens the very interesting issue which
would remain in any case: How is it that Job "spoke what is right" of God,
in contrast with the friends (42:7), given that he has just been shown to
have "darkened counsel without knowledge" (42:3)?

Regards,
Stephen Shead.





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page