is the biblical Job a Jew or a Gentile
prepaid
hey i'm a Christian and I read the book of Job the other day and I
couldn't find out if he is a Jew or a Gentile! Can someone please shed
some light on this!! and also give some explaination and reasons on
it! thanks a bunch! God Bless
((( s.r.c.b-s is a moderated group. All posts are approved by a moderator. )))
((( See http://members.iglou.com/bible for details about this group. )))
Loren
cool...@hotmail.com (prepaid) wrote in message news:<3e8efcbf$3...@news.iglou.com>...
> hey i'm a Christian and I read the book of Job the other day and I
> couldn't find out if he is a Jew or a Gentile! Can someone please shed
> some light on this!! and also give some explaination and reasons on
> it! thanks a bunch! God Bless
Can't be a Jew because the Nation of Judah had not yet been called
out. Job is prior to Abrahamn.
Jacob Rizor
>Subject: Re: is the biblical Job a Jew or a Gentile
>From: lsen...@hotmail.com (Loren)
>Date: 4/5/2003 2:26 PM Central Standard Time
>Message-id: <3e8f3c02$1...@news.iglou.com>
>
>
>
>cool...@hotmail.com (prepaid) wrote in message
>news:<3e8efcbf$3...@news.iglou.com>...
>> hey i'm a Christian and I read the book of Job the other day and I
>> couldn't find out if he is a Jew or a Gentile! Can someone please shed
>> some light on this!! and also give some explaination and reasons on
>> it! thanks a bunch! God Bless
>
>Can't be a Jew because the Nation of Judah had not yet been called
>out. Job is prior to Abrahamn.
>
I think coolrock was referrring to the Hebrews. The concept of monotheism
was held by only that one group in that time period, so Job must have been a
Hebrew, Their male lines were mainly Chaldean.
Jacob/Israel had twelve sons. The mothers were Leah and Rachel, who were
daughters of Laban of the city of Ur of the Chaldeas, and Bilhah and Zilpah,
who had been maids of Laban of the city of Ur of the Chaldeas. All were
Chaldeans.
Isaac, Jacob's father, was born to Rebekah, who was Laban's sister and a
daughter of Abraham's brother Nahor, of the city of Ur of the Chaldeas..
And of course Isaac was a son of Abraham and Sarah, of the city of Ur of the
Chaldeas.
Thus the heads of the twelve tribes of Israel were all of pure Chaldean
ancestry.
Esau took Hittite wives and Ishmael was the son of an Egyptian wife.
Abraham had many other, non-Chaldean, wives, and children by them. These were
not included in the covenant.
Sarah Kanary
cool...@hotmail.com (prepaid) wrote in message news:<3e8efcbf$3...@news.iglou.com>...
> hey i'm a Christian and I read the book of Job the other day and I
> couldn't find out if he is a Jew or a Gentile! Can someone please shed
> some light on this!! and also give some explaination and reasons on
> it! thanks a bunch! God Bless
Job lived in the land of Uz, in what is now Arabia. (Job 1:1) So Job
was an Arab.
Job was a relative of Abraham, both being descendants of Shem. Though
not an Israelite, Job was a worshiper of Jehovah. (Job 1:1-3)
Peace.
--
for free home Scripture study:
http://www.watchtower.org/
in 75 languages
George Patton
lsen...@hotmail.com (Loren) wrote in message news:<3e8f3c02$1...@news.iglou.com>...
> cool...@hotmail.com (prepaid) wrote in message news:<3e8efcbf$3...@news.iglou.com>...
> > hey i'm a Christian and I read the book of Job the other day and I
> > couldn't find out if he is a Jew or a Gentile! Can someone please shed
> > some light on this!! and also give some explaination and reasons on
> > it! thanks a bunch! God Bless
>
> Can't be a Jew because the Nation of Judah had not yet been called
> out. Job is prior to Abrahamn.
I think you said, "Job is prior to Abraham". Can you offer compelling
evidence to support that theory?
Loren
beatle...@aol.committee (Jacob Rizor) wrote in message news:<3e8f85a5$1...@news.iglou.com>...
> >Subject: Re: is the biblical Job a Jew or a Gentile
> >From: lsen...@hotmail.com (Loren)
> >Date: 4/5/2003 2:26 PM Central Standard Time
> >Message-id: <3e8f3c02$1...@news.iglou.com>
> >
> >
> >
> >cool...@hotmail.com (prepaid) wrote in message
> >news:<3e8efcbf$3...@news.iglou.com>...
> >> hey i'm a Christian and I read the book of Job the other day and I
> >> couldn't find out if he is a Jew or a Gentile! Can someone please shed
> >> some light on this!! and also give some explaination and reasons on
> >> it! thanks a bunch! God Bless
> >
> >Can't be a Jew because the Nation of Judah had not yet been called
> >out. Job is prior to Abrahamn.
> >
> I think coolrock was referrring to the Hebrews. The concept of monotheism
> was held by only that one group in that time period, so Job must have been a
> Hebrew,
What time period? Job was long before Abraham so long before the
covenant, thus long before the "Hebrews." Job is the oldest book in
the Bible. Archeological discoveries have given light on personal
names of ancient times, and on the basis of the personal names
Albright concludes that the "original story must be dated back to the
second millennium B.C."
George Patton
ska...@yahoo.com (Sarah Kanary) wrote in message news:<3e90c68f$1...@news.iglou.com>...
> cool...@hotmail.com (prepaid) wrote in message news:<3e8efcbf$3...@news.iglou.com>...
> > hey i'm a Christian and I read the book of Job the other day and I
> > couldn't find out if he is a Jew or a Gentile! Can someone please shed
> > some light on this!! and also give some explaination and reasons on
> > it! thanks a bunch! God Bless
>
>
> Job lived in the land of Uz, in what is now Arabia. (Job 1:1) So Job
> was an Arab.
>
> Job was a relative of Abraham, both being descendants of Shem. Though
> not an Israelite, Job was a worshiper of Jehovah. (Job 1:1-3)
I read Job 1:1-3 and do not see anything about "Abraham" nor "Shem".
If the Abraham/Shem theory was your two cents worth, it was overpriced.
Ninure Saunders
In article <3e90c68e$1...@news.iglou.com>, gpa...@bayou.com (George
Patton) wrote:
-lsen...@hotmail.com (Loren) wrote in message
news:<3e8f3c02$1...@news.iglou.com>...
-> cool...@hotmail.com (prepaid) wrote in message
news:<3e8efcbf$3...@news.iglou.com>...
-> > hey i'm a Christian and I read the book of Job the other day and I
-> > couldn't find out if he is a Jew or a Gentile! Can someone please shed
-> > some light on this!! and also give some explaination and reasons on
-> > it! thanks a bunch! God Bless
->
-> Can't be a Jew because the Nation of Judah had not yet been called
-> out. Job is prior to Abrahamn.
-
-I think you said, "Job is prior to Abraham". Can you offer compelling
-evidence to support that theory?
O just want to know what difference does it make?
Ninure Saunders aka Rainbow Christian
http://Rainbow-Christian.tk
http://Ninure-Saunders.tk
My Yahoo Group
http//Ninure.tk
My Online Diary
http://www.ninure.deardiary.net
-
Universal Fellowship of Metropolitan Community Churches
http://www.MCCchurch.org
To send e-mail, remove nohate from address
EgwEimi
The events in Job occurred most likely between the times of Abraham and Moses.
There are a few pointers to the character of the book:
1. Job uses God's designation, Yahweh, at the end of chapter 1. This appears
to be unusual, though, as it does not occur throughout the book.
2. Job's three "friends" are referred to by their lineage. This was a common
practice for Jewish people after Abraham. In particular, Eliphaz is a
descendant of Teman (Gen 36:11); the others are not known, but the region that
they came from is northern Arabia. Eliphaz was most likely named for his
ancestor, who was a son of Esau. The portion naming the friends is considered
to be part of the early section of the work. Therefore, it was always
recognized that the generation of Job was at the oldest the contemporary of
Joseph's children.
3. Most likely, then, the land of Uz is mentioned nowhere else because it is
part of Edom -- the land of Esau's descendants.
4. Elihu was a descendant of Buz (32:2), who was a nephew of Abraham. Once
again, this places the story a few generations from Abraham. Some place the
Elihu sections as later additions, however.
5. There is no mention of the Torah, or of any written principle from Yahweh;
rather, Yahweh speaks directly to Job (38:1).
6. The offering at the end (ch. 42) is of a primitive nature found before the
Torah.
7. The end of the story is reminiscent of the patriarchal period more than the
time after Moses.
8. All of the names are Hebrew constructs.
If we consider Jacob's death to have been c. 1830 BCE, then Joseph's children
would have been prominent c. 1760-1750 BCE, but Job could have occurred
anywhere up to about 1650 BCE -- before the birth of Moses.
As a descendant of Abraham, Job was a "Hebrew" (descendant of Eber). Since
there were no "Judeans" then, he was neither "Jew" nor "Gentile." Also, since
he was a descendant of Esau, not Jacob, Job was not an "Israelite" either.
Frank
Sarah Kanary
"George Patton" <gpa...@bayou.com> wrote in message
news:3e91834f$1...@news.iglou.com...
> I read Job 1:1-3 and do not see anything about "Abraham" nor "Shem".
1Ch 1:17 The sons of Shem were Elam, Asshur, Arpachshad, Lud, Aram, *Uz*,
Hul, Gether and Meshech.
1Ch 1:18 Arpachshad became the father of Shelah and Shelah became the
father of Eber.
1Ch 1:19 Two sons were born to Eber, the name of the one was Peleg, for in
his days the earth was divided, and his brother's name was Joktan.
1Ch 1:20 Joktan became the father of Almodad, Sheleph, Hazarmaveth, Jerah,
1Ch 1:21 Hadoram, Uzal, Diklah,
1Ch 1:22 Ebal, Abimael, Sheba,
1Ch 1:23 Ophir, Havilah and Jobab; all these were the sons of Joktan.
1Ch 1:24 Shem, Arpachshad, Shelah,
1Ch 1:25 Eber, Peleg, Reu,
1Ch 1:26 Serug, Nahor, Terah,
1Ch 1:27 Abram, that is *Abraham*.
Job lived in the land of Uz, one of Shem's sons, and Shem was the ancestor
of Abraham.
Peace.
--
for free home Scripture study:
http://www.watchtower.org/
in 75 languages
((( s.r.c.b-s is a moderated group. All posts are approved by a moderator. )))
Rick
cool...@hotmail.com wrote:
<<hey i'm a Christian and I read the book of Job the other day and I
<<couldn't find out if he is a Jew or a Gentile! Can someone please shed
<<some light on this!! and also give some explaination and reasons on
<<it! thanks a bunch! God Bless>>
Neither. :-)
Most think that the story of Job pre-dates the Jewish/Gentile distinction (even
pre-dating the flood of Noah).
If this dating is correct, then the question of Jew/Gentile is irrelevant (even
nonsensical) as there is no such distinction at that time in history. It would
be like asking if Chengis Khan was Democrat or Republican... or even more like
asking if King David was Baptist or Lutheran. Get it?
If I may... Why are you asking this question? Perhaps there is an underlying
reason that the group can be of help with.
Rick
George Patton
RainbowChri...@hotmail.com (Ninure Saunders) wrote in message news:<3e91c434$1...@news.iglou.com>...
> In article <3e90c68e$1...@news.iglou.com>, gpa...@bayou.com (George
> Patton) wrote:
>
> -lsen...@hotmail.com (Loren) wrote in message
> news:<3e8f3c02$1...@news.iglou.com>...
> -> cool...@hotmail.com (prepaid) wrote in message
> news:<3e8efcbf$3...@news.iglou.com>...
> -> > hey i'm a Christian and I read the book of Job the other day and I
> -> > couldn't find out if he is a Jew or a Gentile! Can someone please shed
> -> > some light on this!! and also give some explaination and reasons on
> -> > it! thanks a bunch! God Bless
> ->
> -> Can't be a Jew because the Nation of Judah had not yet been called
> -> out. Job is prior to Abrahamn.
> -
> -I think you said, "Job is prior to Abraham". Can you offer compelling
> -evidence to support that theory?
>
> O just want to know what difference does it make?
None. I was just trying to poke a bit of fun at fiddle-faddle.
George Patton
egw...@aol.com (EgwEimi) wrote in message news:<3e91c434$1...@news.iglou.com>...
So the theory is based on speculation. I speculate that Job lived
after Adam but before Little Red Riding Hood.
George Patton
"Sarah Kanary" <ska...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<3e91c434$3...@news.iglou.com>...
> "George Patton" <gpa...@bayou.com> wrote in message
> news:3e91834f$1...@news.iglou.com...
>
> > I read Job 1:1-3 and do not see anything about "Abraham" nor "Shem".
>
> 1Ch 1:17 The sons of Shem were Elam, Asshur, Arpachshad, Lud, Aram, *Uz*,
> Hul, Gether and Meshech.
>
> 1Ch 1:18 Arpachshad became the father of Shelah and Shelah became the
> father of Eber.
> 1Ch 1:19 Two sons were born to Eber, the name of the one was Peleg, for in
> his days the earth was divided, and his brother's name was Joktan.
> 1Ch 1:20 Joktan became the father of Almodad, Sheleph, Hazarmaveth, Jerah,
> 1Ch 1:21 Hadoram, Uzal, Diklah,
> 1Ch 1:22 Ebal, Abimael, Sheba,
> 1Ch 1:23 Ophir, Havilah and Jobab; all these were the sons of Joktan.
> 1Ch 1:24 Shem, Arpachshad, Shelah,
> 1Ch 1:25 Eber, Peleg, Reu,
> 1Ch 1:26 Serug, Nahor, Terah,
> 1Ch 1:27 Abram, that is *Abraham*.
>
> Job lived in the land of Uz, one of Shem's sons, and Shem was the ancestor
> of Abraham.
Good logic. I live in Louisiana. Louisiana is named after King Louis
XIV. Therefore, I am a descendant of King Louis XIV. Well, I have
learn something new about myself today.
Sincerely:
His Excellency Prince George ;-)
Ninure Saunders
In article <3e920afa$1...@news.iglou.com>, gpa...@bayou.com (George
Patton) wrote:
-RainbowChri...@hotmail.com (Ninure Saunders) wrote in message
news:<3e91c434$1...@news.iglou.com>...
-> In article <3e90c68e$1...@news.iglou.com>, gpa...@bayou.com (George
-> Patton) wrote:
->
-> -lsen...@hotmail.com (Loren) wrote in message
-> news:<3e8f3c02$1...@news.iglou.com>...
-> -> cool...@hotmail.com (prepaid) wrote in message
-> news:<3e8efcbf$3...@news.iglou.com>...
-> -> > hey i'm a Christian and I read the book of Job the other day and I
-> -> > couldn't find out if he is a Jew or a Gentile! Can someone please shed
-> -> > some light on this!! and also give some explaination and reasons on
-> -> > it! thanks a bunch! God Bless
-> ->
-> -> Can't be a Jew because the Nation of Judah had not yet been called
-> -> out. Job is prior to Abrahamn.
-> -
-> -I think you said, "Job is prior to Abraham". Can you offer compelling
-> -evidence to support that theory?
->
-> O just want to know what difference does it make?
-
-None. I was just trying to poke a bit of fun at fiddle-faddle.
-
My sense of humour must be on "hold" as I don't "get it"....
I often wonder if people who" poke fun" at the Bible also spend time
poking fun at things like the the IIliad(sp)?
Or do they challenger the wrtong of Julius Ceasar, for which there is
absolutely no supporting evidence from non-Roman sources?
Ninure Saunders aka Rainbow Christian
http://Rainbow-Christian.tk
http://Ninure-Saunders.tk
My Yahoo Group
http://Ninure.tk
My Online Diary
http://www.ninure.deardiary.net
-
Universal Fellowship of Metropolitan Community Churches
http://www.MCCchurch.org
To send e-mail, remove nohate from address
((( s.r.c.b-s is a moderated group. All posts are approved by a moderator. )))
Loren
egw...@aol.com (EgwEimi) wrote in message news:<3e91c434$1...@news.iglou.com>...
> The events in Job occurred most likely between the times of Abraham and Moses.
>
> There are a few pointers to the character of the book:
>
> 1. Job uses God's designation, Yahweh, at the end of chapter 1. This appears
> to be unusual, though, as it does not occur throughout the book.
I think if you did a little research on the Tetragram you would
realize that it was know long before Moses. The point of the
revelation to Moses was what it meant. So, from a historical point of
view, the objection holds no water.
> 2. Job's three "friends" are referred to by their lineage. This was a common
> practice for Jewish people after Abraham. In particular, Eliphaz is a
> descendant of Teman (Gen 36:11); the others are not known, but the region that
> they came from is northern Arabia. Eliphaz was most likely named for his
> ancestor, who was a son of Esau. The portion naming the friends is considered
> to be part of the early section of the work. Therefore, it was always
> recognized that the generation of Job was at the oldest the contemporary of
> Joseph's children.
Again, this is an argument from silence with no outside support.
> 3. Most likely, then, the land of Uz is mentioned nowhere else because it is
> part of Edom -- the land of Esau's descendants.
> 4. Elihu was a descendant of Buz (32:2), who was a nephew of Abraham. Once
> again, this places the story a few generations from Abraham. Some place the
> Elihu sections as later additions, however.
There is one only? How many James' do we have in the NT. How many
John's are there buried in Ephesis?
> 5. There is no mention of the Torah, or of any written principle from Yahweh;
> rather, Yahweh speaks directly to Job (38:1).
> 6. The offering at the end (ch. 42) is of a primitive nature found before the
> Torah.
You do know what the Torah is, don't you? You do know its history?
Again, an argument from silence.
> 7. The end of the story is reminiscent of the patriarchal period more than the
> time after Moses.
But what do we know of the patriarchal period which was not written by
Moses?
> 8. All of the names are Hebrew constructs.
>
And where did Hebrew come from? You really haven't thought this
through have you?
> If we consider Jacob's death to have been c. 1830 BCE, then Joseph's children
> would have been prominent c. 1760-1750 BCE, but Job could have occurred
> anywhere up to about 1650 BCE -- before the birth of Moses.
>
> As a descendant of Abraham, Job was a "Hebrew" (descendant of Eber). Since
> there were no "Judeans" then, he was neither "Jew" nor "Gentile." Also, since
> he was a descendant of Esau, not Jacob, Job was not an "Israelite" either.
>
You provided nothing which is substantial enough to counter the
traditional view that Job was prior to Abraham. Very weak
argumentation. Where did you get this info or did you glean it
yourself? Just wondering. Most contemporary archeological articles
dealing with the age of Job place him before 2000BCE if not even
further back. I've read articles dealing with the earliest Egyptian
dynasties which are not out of the realm of reason being dated at
5000BCE. My own ancient mystery religion studies of Memphis under the
"Old Kingdom" and the SHABAKA, the most important of all ancient
Egyptian religious texts, show many similarities with portions of Job.
For instance, the "Infinity of God".
Job 11:7-9 "Can you discover the depths of God? Can you discover the
limits of the Almighty? {They are} high as the heavens, what can you
do? Deeper than Sheol, what can you know? Its measure is longer than
the earth, And broader than the sea.
This is very close to the Shabaka's inscription (the Shabaka is also
very similar to the Westminster Larger Catechism with questions and
answers). The Shabaka is dated around 4500BCE to 4000BCE.
The great "Hymn to Ptah" in Berlin "shows the same attributes were
ascribed to him." [speaking of Ptah vs the picture of God given in
Job; cf "From Fetish to God in Ancient Egypt," Wallis Budge and
certainly you must reference John Gardner Wilkinson's "Manners &
Customs of Ancient Egyptians."]
Rick
Sarah wrote:
<<Job lived in the land of Uz, one of Shem's sons, and Shem was the ancestor
<<of Abraham.>>
... therefore Job lived after Abraham.
Hey Sarah... do you realize that you just re-dated much of Genesis, and removed
Moses as the author?
George Patton
RainbowChri...@hotmail.com (Ninure Saunders) wrote in message news:<3e930d0f$1...@news.iglou.com>...
I poke fun, not at the Bible, but at some people's assumptions
(concerning the Bible) that they, for some reason, believe that other
people accept. There is no compelling reason to think that Job lived
prior to Abraham. If one has that opinion, one should say that it is
his assumption or give a reliable source for that conclusion. When one
expressed his personal assumptions as if such were established fact,
that is fiddle-faddle. And that is the label it put upon such
poppycock.
Jacob Rizor
>Subject: Re: is the biblical Job a Jew or a Gentile
>From: warpe...@aol.comblech (Rick)
>Date: 4/8/2003 4:31 PM Central Standard Time
>Message-id: <3e933fc5$1...@news.iglou.com>
>
>
>
>Sarah wrote:
>
><<Job lived in the land of Uz, one of Shem's sons, and Shem was the ancestor
><<of Abraham.>>
>
>... therefore Job lived after Abraham.
>
>
My grandfather Eugene and his cousin Isaac were grandchilodren of my
gggrandfather Joseph. That means Isaac lived after me? You are doing your
genealogy tracing wrong.
EgwEimi
>I think if you did a little research on the Tetragram you would
>realize that it was know long before Moses.
And _I_ think Loren will realize that I said that in my letter. What I was
saying was that it's use as a salutation was uncommon before Moses. Even so,
it does not preclude an date prior to Moses.
Regarding the lineages that were mentioned explicitly in Job, it was written:
>
>Again, this is an argument from silence with no outside support.
No, it's an argument from internal and external evidence.
>There is one only?
They reckoned lineage through "famous"
personages. That way, people could
identify from what ancestry a person came.
In Job, we have two distinct references to someone during the same time frame.
>But what do we know of the patriarchal period which was not written by
>Moses?
Did Moses claim to WRITE any of it, apart from certain principles told to him
by God?
Or is Loren saying that Moses revised the whole story?
>> 8. All of the names are Hebrew constructs.
>>
>And where did Hebrew come from? You really haven't thought this
>through have you?
The Hebrew language existed during the period that I mentioned and is
substantiated in inscriptions. The forms were not identical to so-called
Biblical Hebrew, but the language definitely existed.
In that earlier form, both it and its cognate languages were still very closely
related. Bits of alternate name forms exist in Job to support this.
>You provided nothing which is substantial enough to counter the
>traditional view that Job was prior to Abraham.
The traditional view is that Job was written between the times of Abraham and
Moses.
Let me cite a few other scholarly sources:
The RSV translators point to events some time during the "second millenium"
(1999 - 1000 BCE), which is quite broad. In the footnotes, they too indicate
that the Land of Uz was "probably Edom." They too indicate that "the friends
of Job came from northwest Arabia" -- based on the genalogies in Job 2. They
too say that "Buz in Gen 22:21 is a brother of Uz and an Aramean."
So, the RSV translators -- certainly mainstream theologians -- promoted the
traditional view that Job was written just before the advent of Moses, during
the period that I sketched out.
Matthew Henry's commentary -- again quite "traditional" -- not only indicates
that
"Eliphaz descended from Teman, the grandson of Esau" but adds the possibility
that Bildad descended "from Shuah, Abraham's son by Keturah." Again, we are
pointing to the same period in time.
The Catholic Encyclopedia says of Job's friends that Eliphaz "was an Edomite"
for the same reasons I gave. They also mention that Bildad (Baidad) was most
likely from Northern Arabia, descended from Shuah (Sue), and "Sue was a son of
Abraham by Cetura (Gen., xxv, 2, 6)."
This timing is promoted by the Orthodox Church as well.
A.R. Faussett's commentary places the events "about the time of Isaac," also
indicating that this was the view of Eusebius. He too gives the lineage of
Job's friends as I previously delineated, including the addition of Shuah as
"son of Abraham and Keturah."
Clarke's Commentary has the same, indicating that "Shuah was the son of Abraham
by Keturah" and that Eliphaz came from Teman, who was born to Eliphaz, who "was
one of the sons of Esau."
John Wesley commented that
"Eliphaz descended from Teman, the grandson of Esau...."
Thus, we see that the vast majority of mainstream scholars -- whether Catholic,
or Orthodox, or Protestant (including a few famous names) -- place the events
of Job during the same period that my previous post did. And they do so for
all of the same reasons.
More recent scholars, such as Dr. Thomas Constable, have maintained this
dating. He too indicates that Eliphaz was an Edomite and places the date of
the book between the times of Abraham and Moses.
Also, the most common date given for the "Shabaka Stone" (named for the later
pharaoh who ordered for it to be transcribed from stone to leather) is during
the 28th century BCE, and not such an early period as Loren describes. This
date is supported, for example, by anthropologists at the University of North
Texas.
The account of Job is more related to an account from the 2nd millenium BCE
that also exists in Babylonian.
Whatever Loren's doctrinal leanings may be that have caused him to support a
pre-Abrahamic date for Job, his view is certainly NOT supported by the internal
evidence, external evidence, or by the majority of Christian commentators.
Frank
tuppence
gpa...@bayou.com (George Patton) wrote in message news:<3e91834f$1...@news.iglou.com>...
> ska...@yahoo.com (Sarah Kanary) wrote in message news:<3e90c68f$1...@news.iglou.com>...
> >
> >
> > Job lived in the land of Uz, in what is now Arabia. (Job 1:1) So Job
> > was an Arab.
> > Job was a relative of Abraham, both being descendants of Shem. Though
> > not an Israelite, Job was a worshiper of Jehovah. (Job 1:1-3)
>
> I read Job 1:1-3 and do not see anything about "Abraham" nor "Shem".
> If the Abraham/Shem theory was your two cents worth, it was overpriced.
>
Actually, Sarah's point has much in common with some Jewish
commentary ( I emphasize some), although most agree the book
was written by Moses while the Hebrews were still in bondage
to Pharaoh in Egypt. Thus, Job would predate the giving of Torah
while not predating Torah itself. Some hold that he was descended
from Abraham's brother, Nahor, thus Gentile. Others say his line
came from the the brother of Jacob, Abraham's grandson, and
thereby possibly Hebrew. However, there is yet a third group
contending that Moses wrote the Book of Job as parable.
You pays yer money, you takes yer pick.
2
Rick
beatle...@aol.committee wrote:
(Rick)
>Sarah wrote:
>
>><<Job lived in the land of Uz, one of Shem's sons, and Shem was the ancestor
>><<of Abraham.>>
>
>>... therefore Job lived after Abraham.
>
>
>My grandfather Eugene and his cousin Isaac were grandchilodren of my
>gggrandfather Joseph. That means Isaac lived after me? You are doing your
>genealogy tracing wrong.
Jacob, you didn't read my post closely enough.
Dale DePriest
EgwEimi wrote:
> The traditional view is that Job was written between the times of Abraham and
> Moses.
> More recent scholars, such as Dr. Thomas Constable, have maintained this
> dating. He too indicates that Eliphaz was an Edomite and places the date of
> the book between the times of Abraham and Moses.
>
> Also, the most common date given for the "Shabaka Stone" (named for the later
> pharaoh who ordered for it to be transcribed from stone to leather) is during
> the 28th century BCE, and not such an early period as Loren describes. This
> date is supported, for example, by anthropologists at the University of North
> Texas.
>
> The account of Job is more related to an account from the 2nd millenium BCE
> that also exists in Babylonian.
Interesting but somewhat off topic. The question was about the person of
Job not necessarily the writing of the book. There is no reason to
believe the book itself was written by someone who was necessarily
present. Moses certainly wrote about periods much earlier than when he
lived. The content of the book used to justify an earlier writing does
not wash. I do not know when the actual contents of the book was written
down but the story shows an early date based on the content of the
story. I could have been a verbally handed down story for many
generations prior to be written down.
Dale
--
_ _ Dale DePriest
/`) _ // http://users.cwnet.com/dalede
o/_/ (_(_X_(` For GPS and GPS/PDAs
EgwEimi
>The question was about the person of
>Job not necessarily the writing of the book.
I never addressed the time of WRITING. Please go back and re-read my two
posts. The time of writing is thought to be hundreds of years after the events
took place. The events took place between the times of Abraham and Moses. The
book was written sometime between the time of Moses and the Exile, with most
sources placing it to the Monarchy.
>There is no reason to
>believe the book itself was written by someone who was necessarily
>present.
I never said that either.
>The content of the book used to justify an earlier writing does
>not wash
The content of the book justifies a certain date for the time of the events,
not for the time of writing.
Frank
Loren
egw...@aol.com (EgwEimi) wrote in message news:<3e946f40$1...@news.iglou.com>...
I'll give some credence to what you have written, as I think everyone
here is beginning to confuse the differece between when Job lived and
when the oral tradition actually was written. But one thing which is
I will not stand for is....
>
> Also, the most common date given for the "Shabaka Stone" (named for the later
> pharaoh who ordered for it to be transcribed from stone to leather) is during
> the 28th century BCE, and not such an early period as Loren describes. This
> date is supported, for example, by anthropologists at the University of North
> Texas.
>
Egyptologist, two of whom I quoted, hold to the older date as does the
Oriental Museum at Chicago University, a museum second only to the
London museum in Egyptology. 2800? Perhaps for the leather rendition
(never have seen nor read anything of this) but not for the stone
Shabaka. Wilkenson's 10-12 vol set was written in the 1800's and at
the time when many artifacts were being discovered and translated.
Budge goes without saying. THere is also Bunsen's "Egypt" as well as
Russell's. Another reference would be Vaux's, "Antiquities of the
Royal British Museum." I suppose more to your liking would be Budge's
"An Egyptian Hieroglyphic Dictionary" where supposedly he limits his
transliterations from the periods of 3000-600 BCE. But this
contradicts his testimony in the book which I quoted from as well as
his "Gods of the Egyptians" (2 vol set).
> The account of Job is more related to an account from the 2nd millenium BCE
> that also exists in Babylonian.
>
Which Babylonian empire? BTW, have your read Gregory the Great's
exposition of the book of Job? That that is a real work of art for
unfettered spiritualizing interpretation.
>
> Whatever Loren's doctrinal leanings may be that have caused him to support a
> pre-Abrahamic date for Job,
Means nothing to me doctrinally. Where on earth did you pull this out
from?
> his view is certainly NOT supported by the internal
> evidence, external evidence, or by the majority of Christian commentators.
Well, Frank, I noted internal evidences. What about the Egyptian
linquistics of Job 8:11? There is also the Chaldean saying "set his
nest on high, that he may be delivered from the hand of evil!" of
which Keil remarks that the reference to the Chaldean's nest is a
figure referring neither to the capital city nor the royal palace nor
the royal castle, but rather the founding of government and the
securing of it against all attacks: "As the eagle builds its nest on
high, to protect it from harm (cf. Job 39:27), so does the Chaldean
seek to elevate and strengthen his rule by robbery and plunder, that
it may never be wrested from his family again." [The Twelve Minor
Prophets] This places it back prior to Abraham. Joseph Free in
"Archeology and Higher Criticism" in the chapter "Archeology and
Purpose and Integrity of Books" writes concerning HC's later dating
of some books, " the internal evidence of both Psalms and Job point
toward the long accepted early dates for both." The HC view has
regularly held in the past that much of Mosaic law was codified
hundreds of years after the time of Moses, much of it in the ninth to
the seventh centuries B.C., and some as late as 500 B.C. The Code of
Hammurabi, found 1901-02, and dating from the period 2000-1700 B.C.,
was one of the early discoveries to show the existence of early
advanced laws preceding the time of Moses. In succeeding years of the
20th century, the Hittite code, the Assyrian code, and more recently
Sumerian law codes have been found. The Lipit-Ishtar code was
published in 1947 and the code of Bilalama in 1948.
In all, neo-orthodoxy accepts what is commonly called "the assured
results of Biblical criticism," and this includes a general acceptance
of the documentary theory. Many whole volumes have been written which
show the breakdown of the documentary theory and other kindred aspects
of literary and historical criticism of the Bible. To mention a few:
James Orr, "Problem of the Old Testament", Robert Dick Wilson,
"Scientific Investigation of the OT", Oswald T. Allis, "The Five Books
of Moses" and some more recent books by truly conservative writers on
OT introduction, including those by Edward J. Young and Merrill F.
Unger. Might I also suggest, Gleason Archer's "OT History and Recent
Archeology." But probably the greatest conservative anthropologist is
Edwin Yamauchi. He books and articles are too numerous to list.
The dates you suggest are often refered to as the "middle period," not
the ancient. Yamauchi in one of his articles under the heading of
"Anthropomorphism in Ancient Religions," discusses discussed the
anthropomorphic concepts of ancient pagan religions in comparison with
the anthropomorphic expressions of the OT. Anthropomorphism were more
akin to Mesopotamia, while theriomorphisms are to found in later
Egyptian, Cannanite and Greecian religious expression Yamauchi
teaches in the Department of History at Miami University, Oxford,
Ohio. His expertise in more on "middle period" influence and
documentation but does write on ancient Mesopotamia marriages
arrangements as noted in the Code of Eshnunna (no. 27, ca. 1900 B.C.)
One does not have to be much of a Bible student to know that
chronology is an area of real disagreement and difficulty. If John
Bowman had issued a reference Bible in 1909 or 1917, one wonders what
system of chronology he would have followed. The question is, is
there any system which all would receive as adequate? Monday morning
quarterbacking is a rather sure way to play a good game. From our
vantage point we can say that it might have been wise to omit all
dates earlier than, say, 2500 B.C. One can well imagine Scofield
blinking when he saw 4004 B.C. in the center column opposite Genesis
1:1, but he certainly had the right to feel that a reader would read
the footnotes on the first page before he jumped to conclusions. This
was the way the uniform format turned out. He plainly said the world
was created in the dateless past. Surely the reader would understand
that this was Ussher's date for the creation of man, and not
Scofield's. Scofield plainly says in note 2 on page 3 in commenting
on Genesis 1:1 that this "first creative act," i.e., the creation of
the heavens and the earth, "refers to the dateless past". In the light
of this plain statement, it is demonstrably untrue that Scofield
believed the creation of the world took place in 4004 B.C.
Really this whole issue cascades from Isaac La Peyrère.
Dale DePriest
EgwEimi wrote:
>>The question was about the person of
>>Job not necessarily the writing of the book.
>
>
> I never addressed the time of WRITING. Please go back and re-read my two
> posts. The time of writing is thought to be hundreds of years after the events
> took place. The events took place between the times of Abraham and Moses. The
> book was written sometime between the time of Moses and the Exile, with most
> sources placing it to the Monarchy.
This is a quote of your post:
EgwEimi wrote:
> The traditional view is that Job was written between the times of
Abraham and
> Moses.
When you said "Job was written" I assumed mistakenly that you meant that
Job was written. I guess I can't really believe what you write which is
a problem I think.
Sorry for my mistake in believing you meant what your wrote.
Dale
--
_ _ Dale DePriest
/`) _ // http://users.cwnet.com/dalede
o/_/ (_(_X_(` For GPS and GPS/PDAs
EgwEimi
I apologize to Dale for having misquoted my first letter in my second one.
Frank
Dale DePriest
EgwEimi wrote:
> I apologize to Dale for having misquoted my first letter in my second one.
>
> Frank
Apology accepted. Actually you made some good observations but I only
was concerned that we separate the writing of story from the story
itself. It is true that the Bible says we need to be subject to one
another. Unfortunately some in the group fall in the category of those
Paul said we should ignore and not enter into arguments with. There is
plenty of room for discussions without arguments.
Dale
>
--
_ _ Dale DePriest
/`) _ // http://users.cwnet.com/dalede
o/_/ (_(_X_(` For GPS and GPS/PDAs
doulos Theou
> I poke fun, not at the Bible, but at some people's assumptions
> (concerning the Bible) that they, for some reason, believe that other
> people accept. There is no compelling reason to think that Job lived
> prior to Abraham. If one has that opinion, one should say that it is
> his assumption or give a reliable source for that conclusion. When one
> expressed his personal assumptions as if such were established fact,
> that is fiddle-faddle. And that is the label it put upon such
> poppycock.
A lack of proof does not necessitate falsity, just perhaps a lack of
time. I agree with Loren here based on the facts that I know. Here
are some for you to consider........
1. The authorship of the book does not have to be concurrant with the
date of the events. This would be the case with Moses writing about
the Genesis account and Adam and Eve. This helps us understand that
the date of the writing itself, may or may not matter in relation to
the events that it records.
2. Job's age (42:16) this was an age that early men lived (near 200
years) and was declining particularly since the flood itself.
3. 200 years of age was near the patriachal period (Abraham lived to
be 175)
4. The social unit was the patriachal family (rf. Job's family)
5. It was the Chaldeans who murdered Job's servants (1:17) were
nomads and had not yet become city dwellers.
6. Job had a priestly role within his own family (1:4,5)
7. Silence on the most evident events like the Abrahamic covenant,
Israel is not mentioned, the Exodus, and the law of Moses.
8. Job, however, knew about Adam (31:33) and Noah (12:15)
9. The cultural/historical setting place the chronology after after
Babel, but either before or a contemporary of Abraham.
The importance of these things is more than fiddle faddle I believe as
the realm of Higher Critisism has done a great damage to the integrity
of the Scriptures themselves. Also, theologically, there is much we
can learn from a man living and pleasing God pre law/covenants.
Best,
Tom Gindorf
6.
Steve Khinoy
"doulos Theou" <tjgi...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3ea0b781$1...@news.iglou.com...
>
>
> > I poke fun, not at the Bible, but at some people's assumptions
> > (concerning the Bible) that they, for some reason, believe that other
> > people accept. There is no compelling reason to think that Job lived
> > prior to Abraham.
> A lack of proof does not necessitate falsity, just perhaps a lack of
It doesn't matter whether Job lived before Abraham or about contemporary
with him. He lived in the ";and of Uz." All the Uz's are from the
patriarchal period. As Doulos Theou points out, the cultural indicators
point to patriarchal times. The point is that Job is a "man of the East,"
not an inhabitant of Canaan, not a relative of, or a descendant of
Abraham -- hence not a participant in the Abrahamic covenant. He is simply a
righteous man from the earliest possible times.
Link
cool...@hotmail.com (prepaid) wrote in message news:<3e8efcbf$3...@news.iglou.com>...
> hey i'm a Christian and I read the book of Job the other day and I
> couldn't find out if he is a Jew or a Gentile! Can someone please shed
> some light on this!! and also give some explaination and reasons on
> it! thanks a bunch! God Bless
Some say that Job was the first book of the Bible written, but it is
said that the language book has no distinguish it as having been
written early or late. If I remember correctly, Job was in the land
of Uz, which elsewhere in scripture is associated with the Edomites.
Perhaps Job was a descendant of Abraham through Esau, if the story is
from that late a time period. The book is not clear.
When Jacob and Laban sware by the God of Abraham, they also identified
him as the God of some of their other ancestors. Laban had some
idols. He may have worshipped God in addition to worshipping idols.
Melchezedek, king of Salam, and priest the Most High God worshipped
God, and Abraham paid tithes to him. Some think Salam here is
Jerusalem. If Melchezedek were a literal human priest who is a type
of Christ (rather than a teophany who is the King of peace) then he
was probably ministering as a priest of God for Gentiles. I do not
know if Jerusalem was a Jebusite town at that time, but it would be
interesting if the Jebusites were worshipping God at that time
(whether or not they were engaging in idolatry at that same time.)
The cup of iniquity of some of those local Canaanite peoples was not
yet full at that time.
Later when Israel had come out of Egypt, we see that a Gentile named
Balaam was able to hear God's voice and talk to Him. Whether Balaam
worshipped idols as well is not clear. We do read that he normally
resorted to divination, but he prophesied when he came to speak over
Israel.
Paul wrote that men, when they knew God, glorified Him not as God,
neither were they thankful. Romans 1 explains how men fell into
idolatry.