book of job

[Valke2]

Whoever the author of Job was is immaterial. We don’t know who wrote Hebrews, either, and that doesn’t bring it into questionability either. Actually, who wrote the Pentateuch is still up for debate, which only makes sense, since Moses dies before Deuteronomy is finished.

Also, I don’t think using the Jewish modernist authority above is really reliable. Below are articles by the same author that are called “kabbalisitc” which is rather dubious form of Jewish gnoticism. This author might be well educated, but has some eccentric beliefs, and you know what they say about scholarly articles found on the internet…

I’m not inclined to trust the Talmud either, since the portion on Jewish history was written around 500 AD, meaning that it’s hardly a source. It is also inextricably tied to the customs, worhsip, and opinions of the Pharisees, who at the time were railing against persecution and the rapid spread of Christianity. And even though the Talmud records customs that are thousands of years old, some its critical discussion is not necessarily objective or historical. The writings of the Church fathers on scripture are earlier and more reliable.

Without getting into which is more trustworthy as a historical text, I’ll just say that the Tractate regarding Job does not conclude that it was a parable and that Job was not real. It argues the point. In other words it says “A rabbi asked what if Job is not real?” (paraphrasing) and then goes on to explain why Job is real. The same tractate also offers the belief by R. Joshua ben Levi that Job lived in the time of Moses (because Moses is said to have written at least part of the book of Job). But then the Talmud goes on to argue why this is not necessarily correct.

In response to the argument that Job is just a figure meant to teach us a lesson, R. Samuel ben Nahmani responds that Job was real because the story gives him a name, tells us he was from UZ, in the opening line. If it were a parable, why mention the name and the city?

So, it is not correct to say the Talmud says Job wasn’t real. The post that quoted the Talmud was only quoting one side of the argument that appears in the Talmud.

 

[DustinsDad]

A traditional catholic and a liberal catholic were debating whether Job was a real person or a parable. Traditional catholic saying he was real, and the liberal catholic saying he was parable.

Traditional Catholic says, “Of course he’s real and he’s in heaven right now with the Lord.”

Progressive Catholic says, “Nonsense, and if he was real you can’t say whether he’s in heaven or hell anyway.”

Traditional Catholic says, “Tell you what, if he’s in heaven I’ll ask him when I get there if he was real. If he’s in hell, then you ask him.”

 

[Brother_John]

A traditional catholic and a** liberal **catholic were debating whether Job was a real person or a parable. Traditional catholic saying he was real, and the liberal catholic saying he was parable.

Traditional Catholic says, “Of course he’s real and he’s in heaven right now with the Lord.”

Progressive Catholic says, “Nonsense, and if he was real you can’t say whether he’s in heaven or hell anyway.”

Traditional Catholic says, “Tell you what, if he’s in heaven I’ll ask him when I get there if he was real. If he’s in hell, then you ask him.”

http://www.fisheaters.com/forumpix/grouchosmiley.gif

More traditionalist self-righteousness…can’t even make up your mind what name to call someone who disagrees with you.

'scuse me while I go barf.

 

[DustinsDad]

More traditionalist self-righteousness…can’t even make up your mind what name to call someone who disagrees with you.

'scuse me while I go barf.

Lighten up will ya - it was a joke. I thought us traditional folks were supposed to be the stuffy ones.

 

[Yerusalyim]

Job? I allow the possibility that he was a real person, but don’t insist upon it.

 

[Brother_John]

Job? I allow the possibility that he was a real person, but don’t insist upon it.

Personally, I think a whole lot of the OT is metaphorical, but that’s just me.

And before the rants start, whether or not I believe Job was real or not doesn’t make a hill of beans where my salvation is concerned. Peter isn’t gonna turn me away at the gates just for that.

 

[Yerusalyim]

I won’t go that far, we are required to believe in a first pair, though not in Creationism, I accept that the Patriach stories are based on real people…that there really was a figure akin to Moses, though I’d bet he led just a few thousand rather than almost a million.

 

[Brother_John]

I won’t go that far, we are required to believe in a first pair, though not in Creationism,

Just out of curiosity, who did Cain “take as his wife”, Mom?

 

[DustinsDad]

Just out of curiosity, who did Cain “take as his wife”, Mom?

No … sis. Still a , but not so much. He got a Divine waiver in order to get the human race kickstarted.

 

[Brother_John]

No … sis. Still a , but not so much. He got a Divine waiver in order to get the human race kickstarted.

So, Arkansas has precedent ?

 

[DustinsDad]

So, Arkansas has precedent ?

Hah - no such luck. I don’t think they got the waiver.

 

[Yerusalyim]

Just out of curiosity, who did Cain “take as his wife”, Mom?

No, it works this way…you can believe in divinely guided evolution where we have thousands of humans running around, but that at some point God infused a living soul into a first pair, or to whom he made himself know, and true humanity spread from there…we as Catholics are not restricted to believing a literal 7 day creation.

 

[Brother_John]

We as Catholics are not restricted to believing a literal 7 day creation.

Sank yew, velly much…we’re on the same page, more or less.

 

[wisdomseeker]

I read Job as a true story. a real person whom misfortune came upon. that is pretty real to me. just look around us. it happen all the time. i specially like the part in which job remembers the days when he was honored by all old and young, how he used to help the poor, the orphans and widows. when he remembers the good days he had. he explains his days in detail. I dont recall parables being with such details.

 

[Sherri_Irvin]

If anyone has every known a “Job” then they know that the scripture is real. I have known a true “Job” who has been through the fire and tribulations and has been given a real life through God. That is my confirmation. I pray that most of you will never have to live through a “Job” experience or have a loved friend do the same. But if you do…you will know the existence and the truth.

 

[Fone_Bone_2001]

I’m surprised that many people here consider it “modernist” to believe that perhaps Job was not himself a real person, historically speaking, or that Jonah is also a parable.

I agree with the two posters before me who say that it is crystal clear that the Book of Job can be known to be true and important and real by anyone who has known someone like that in real life, or been one. That is what matters. Job is an extremely poetic book, and is part of the Ketuvim for a reason.

I myself do not have an opinion as to whether Job himself was a real person historically, or whether the book of Jonah is meant to be historically true. I have not studied these matters sufficiently.

But seriously, people. There is nothing heretical or modernist about the claim that Jonah and Job are not meant to be historically literal. They are not in the same category as people whose existence was obviously literally historical, like Jesus (obviously) or Abraham or King David.

 

[Genesis315]

I think with things like this, it is best to go with the general understanding of the Fathers unless some evidence is discovered which makes such a belief completely unreasonable–if there is any doubt, go with the Fathers.

(This was St. Robert Bellarmine’s advice on such issues).

 

[Aramis]

A traditional catholic and a liberal catholic were debating whether Job was a real person or a parable. Traditional catholic saying he was real, and the liberal catholic saying he was parable.

Traditional Catholic says, “Of course he’s real and he’s in heaven right now with the Lord.”

Progressive Catholic says, “Nonsense, and if he was real you can’t say whether he’s in heaven or hell anyway.”

Traditional Catholic says, “Tell you what, if he’s in heaven I’ll ask him when I get there if he was real. If he’s in hell, then you ask him.”

http://www.fisheaters.com/forumpix/grouchosmiley.gif

This catholic asks, “Isn’t St Job on the canonized list, along with St Moses, St. Abraham, and St. John the Forerunner?” For, as he was beloved of God at the time of his death, why would he not be one of the ones Christ lead from Hell into Heaven?

 

[japhy]

I accept Job as a real person, but I wonder about the nature of the book, simply because Job talks “normally” until chapter 3, when he and his friends begin to speak in poetry to one another.

 

[Lapell]

Interesting question. I did a bible study on Job and it was taught as a parable and not a real person. Maybe we can settle the question by going back to the source. I found a reference stating that not only was Job not real, it was written by Moses as a parable for the sufferring of the Jewish people:“Job never was and never existed, but it is only a parable.” --Talmud (Tr. Baba Bathra 15a)."Moses wrote his book …and also the book of Job."-- Talmud (Tr. Baba Bathra 14b)From: donmeh-west.com/Job.shtml
Reminds of what Fr Benedict Groeschel said was the definition of a legend:“A legend is something that never happened but is true anyway!”