|
Author
|
Topic: The mystery of Job.
|
Raha
Inactive Member
|
|
Message 1 of 50 (53089)
08-31-2003 4:38 PM
|
|
|
Bible, Old Testament, the book of Job: Where this book came from? It is quite evident that it is very different from the rest of Old Testament.
- The very first thing that is very peculiar is form of this book — it looks almost like some kind of play.
- It is very transparent and straightforward religious propaganda — so transparent, that one would think it can never work, but it serves its purpose perfectly, as we can see from here for instance:
defenderofthefaith writes: I will admit that in the book of Job, which is the earliest in the Bible (written about 2000 BC) some pretty nasty things happen to Job, but remember - they are not God's doing. Basically, Job was an extremely prosperous man who was faithful to God, and God told satan, "See, here is a man who truly loves Me." satan replied, "But only because he has everything his way. He might be a fair-weather friend." So, at satan's insistence, God allowed satan to inflict evil deeds on Job. Evil things happen to everybody. God had unusually blessed Job because of the man's faithfulness, but satan, in order to pull him away from God, purposely inflicted a more-than-usual amount of nasty stuff on him. It was thus satan who was cruel, not God, and this shows how, when evil occurs (as a result of sin, not God's instigation) God can twist it to His own good. Job had his faith tested and I would think strengthened. And, when satan failed in his little plot, God restored more blessings to Job than ever before. - When was it written? There are passages like this one:
Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD which seem to correspond with Genesis:
That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.
I think these are the only places where the sons of God are mentioned.
But how Satan fits in it? Where did he came from? Is it Zoroastrian influence? How come that YHWH, who was supposed to be the only supreme power in the universe, suddenly have an adversary here? The message of book of Job is definitely for early (Saducean) Judaism, where was no Messiah, no resurrection so far.
- There is also a question why this book was chosen for Christian canon. Its purpose for early Judaism is evident — God was supposed to reward those who where firm in their belief by good things in their lives. With absence of afterlife this was only possible reward. So some sort of explanation why somebody is miserable despite his religious effort was certainly needed. But according to Christ teachings those who believe will be given their reward in the Kingdom of Heaven. Another discrepancy between book of Job and New Testament is that Job was rich. He was deprived of his wealth, but was given new one afterwards. Jesus taught that people should stay poor.
- (edited)It is also quite unusual that God pays attention to ordinary man. In the rest of Old Testament God cares mostly only about "nation" and speaks to its leaders and prophets. This personal relationship between God and Job is also rather unique (IMO).
[This message has been edited by Raha, 08-31-2003]
|
Raha
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 8 of 50 (53107)
08-31-2003 7:49 PM
|
|
|
Can you, please, take this discussion about what Jesus said or not into another thread? This one is supposed to be about the origin of book of Job.
|
Raha
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 13 of 50 (58174)
09-27-2003 1:14 PM
|
Reply to: Message 12 by Prozacman
09-27-2003 12:31 PM
|
|
Yes, but how come God has sons? What is their supposed status? Are they gods as well? (where is monotheism then?) or demi-gods? or what? And also - how he begot them? Does God have a wife? Or is he parthenogenetic? I think the most prevalent theory for Christian Satan is that he is based on Zoroastrian Ahriman, but Satan of Job does not fit that picture, because, as you pointed out, he does not appear to be God’s enemy. And why God needs someone to test people’s faith? ------------------ Life has no meaning but itself. [This message has been edited by Raha, 09-27-2003]
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 12 by Prozacman, posted 09-27-2003 12:31 PM | | Prozacman has replied |
|
Raha
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 17 of 50 (58196)
09-27-2003 3:40 PM
|
|
|
Interesting. Both Prozacman's and Doctrbill's answers perfectly fit my theory that monotheism is in fact very unnatural system, very difficult for people to grasp and hold. (see my #61 post in http:// EvC Forum: Is Akhenaton the founder of monotheism? --> EvC Forum: Is Akhenaton the founder of monotheism? for more info). [This message has been edited by Raha, 09-27-2003]
|
Raha
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 24 of 50 (58626)
09-29-2003 7:54 PM
|
Reply to: Message 23 by Prozacman
09-29-2003 4:26 PM
|
|
Re: YHVH or Elohim
I've also read (but forgot the source) quite interesting theory which traced OT Satan to Sumerian god Enki (who was known trickster and mischiefmaker, but who cheated An and Enlil and saved people during Great Flood). As far as I remember this theory also claimed that over time cult of Enki merged with cult of Ishtar, so Satan is also (partialy) Ishtar, therefore female force in contrast with male YHWH (but if YHWH is "related" to Artemis, the whole story becames little bit too complicated  ) ------------------ Life has no meaning but itself.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 23 by Prozacman, posted 09-29-2003 4:26 PM | | Prozacman has replied |
|
Raha
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 33 of 50 (58713)
09-30-2003 6:02 AM
|
Reply to: Message 27 by Amlodhi
09-29-2003 10:27 PM
|
|
Re: YHVH or Elohim
Welcome, Amlodhi and thanks for your contributions. Only one little thing - the myths you cite are not Sumerian but Babylonian. Of course - Babylonian pantheon and mythology evolved from Sumerian, but are significantly different (creation story is different as well as the "family tree" of gods). Therefore Anu, Ea etc. are Babylonian gods, while An, Enki etc. Sumerian. Recently I was informed by friend that Sumerian god should be called Anu as well, because An is wrong translation. It might be true, but this mistake (if it really is mistake) is quite convenient one, because it enables us distinguish between Sumerian and Babylonian gods. ------------------ Life has no meaning but itself. [This message has been edited by Raha, 09-30-2003]
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 27 by Amlodhi, posted 09-29-2003 10:27 PM | | Amlodhi has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 36 by Amlodhi, posted 09-30-2003 2:01 PM | | Raha has not replied |
|
Raha
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 37 of 50 (58793)
09-30-2003 3:14 PM
|
|
|
In fact the resemblance of Sumerian/Babylonian myths and biblical stories is astonishing. Except Flood story and story of Adapa, there is also a Sumerian myth about creation of men from clay, the myth about lady of the rib, myth about king Sargon which resembles story of Moses, myth about the island of Dilmun, which is like garden of Eden etc. So according to my opinion, Judaism is at large part based on Sumerian religion. So the question is — is it possible for such a developed polytheistic system to evolve into monotheism spontaneously? I think that IT IS possible, but with very low probability, while getting infected by Atonism appears more probable and logical. ------------------ Life has no meaning but itself.
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 39 by Prozacman, posted 09-30-2003 3:48 PM | | Raha has not replied |
|
™ Version 4.2