JOB
there
are
many
exceptions,
some
no
doubt
due
to
textual
corruption,
but
more
in
all
probability
to
the
poet's
mastery
of
the
forms
which
he
employed.
(7)
Purpose
and
teaching.
—
The
chief
object
of
the
poet
to
whom
we
owe
the
dialogues,
and
probably
the
Prologue
and
the
Epilogue,
and
the
speeches
of
Jahweh,
and
we
may
add,
of
the
compiler
or
editor
of
the
whole
book,
is
to
give
a
better
answer
to
the
question,
'
Why
are
exceptionally
good
men
heavily
afflicted?'
than
that
generally
current
in
Jewish
circles
down
to
the
time
of
Christ.
A
subsidiary
object
is
the
delineation
of
spiritual
experience
under
the
conditions
supposed,
of
the
sufferer's
changing
moods,
and
yet
indestructible
longing
for
the
God
whom
he
cannot
understand.
The
poet's
answer,
as
stated
in
the
speeches
of
Jahweh,
seems
at
the
first
reading
no
answer
at
all,
but
when
closely
examined
is
seen
to
be
profoundly
suggestive.
There
is
no
specific
reply
to
Job's
bitter
complaints
and
passionate
outcries.
Instead
of
reasoning
with
His
servant,
Jahweh
reminds
him
of
a
few
of
the
wonders
of
creation
and
providence,
and
leaves
him
to
draw
the
inference.
He
draws
it,
and
sees
the
God
whom
he
seemed
to
have
lost
sight
of
for
ever
as
he
never
saw
Him
before,
even
in
the
time
of
liis
prosperity;
sees
Him,
indeed,
in
a
very
real
sense
for
the
first
time
(425).
xhe
book
also
contains
other
partial
solutions
of
the
problem.
The
speeches
of
Elihu
lay
stress,
as
already
observed,
on
the
educational
value
of
suffering.
God
is
a
peerless
teacher
(Se^^t),
who
'
deUvereth
the
afflicted
by
his
afflic-tion,
and
openeth
(uncovereth)
their
ear
by
adversity'
(36'S).
The
Prologue
lifts
the
curtain
of
the
unseen
world,
and
reveals
a
mysterious
personality
who
is
Divinely
permitted
to
inflict
suffering
on
the
righteous,
which
results
in
manifestation
of
the
Divine
glory.
The
intellectual
range
of
the
book
is
amazingly
wide.
Marshall
observes
that
'
every
solution
which
the
mind
of
man
has
ever
framed
[of
the
problem
of
the
adversity
of
the
righteous,
and
the
prosperity
of
the
wicked]
is
to
be
found
in
the
Book
of
Job.'
On
the
question
of
the
hereafter
the
teaching
of
the
book
as
a
whole
differs
little
from
that
of
the
OT
in
general.
There
is
yearning
for
something
better
(14"-"),
and
perhaps
a
momentary
conviction
(ig^s-w),
but
the
general
conception
of
the
hfe
after
death
is
that
common
to
Hebrews,
Assyrians,
and
Babylonians.
(8)
The
characters.—
The
interest
of
the
Book
of
Job
is
concentrated
mainly
on
the
central
figure,
the
hero.
Of
the
other
five
leading
characters
by
far
the
most
interesting
is
the'Satan
of
the
Prologue,
half-angel
half-
demon,
by
no
means
identical
with
the
devil
eis
usually
conceived,
and
yet
with
a
distinctly
diabolical
tendency.
The
friends
are
not
very
sharply
differentiated
in
the
book
as
we
have
it,
but
it
is
probable
that
the
parts
are
wrongly
distributed
in
the
tliird
dialogue,
which
is
Incomplete,
no
part
being
assigned
to
Zophar.
Some
ascribe
27'-"'-
"-^
to
Zophar,
and
add
to
Bildad's
speech
(which
in
the
present
arrangement
consists
only
of
ch.
25)
vv.'-"
of
ch.
26.
what
is
left
of
Job's
reply
being
found
in
26"-*
27'-«-
"'•.
Marshall
finds
Zophar's
third
speech
in
chs.
25
and
265-»,
and
Bildad's
in
24i»-».
There
seems
to
be
considerable
confusion
in
chs.
25-27,
30
that
it
is
difficult
to
utilize
them
for
the
study
of
the
characters
of
Bildad
and
Zophar.
Eliphaz
seems
to
be
the
oldest
and
most
dignified
of
the
three,
with
something
of
the
seer
or
prophet
about
him
(412-21).
Bildad
is
'
the
traditionalist.'
Zophar,
who
is
probably
bhe
youngest,
is
very
differently
estimated,
one
scholar
designating
him
as
a
rough
noisy
fellow,
another
regard-ing
him
as
a
philosopher
of
the
agnostic
type.
It
must
be
allowed
that
the
three
characters
are
not
as
iharply
distinguished
as
would
be
the
case
in
a
modern
poem,
the
writer
being
concerned
mainly
with
Job,
and
using
the
others
to
some
extent
as
foils.
Elihu,
who
las
been
shown
to
be
almost
certainly
the
creation
of
mother
writer,
is
not
by
any
means
a
copy
of
one
of
the
three.
He
is
an
ardent
young
man,
not
free
from
JOB
conceit,
but
with
noble
thoughts
about
God
and
insight
into
God's
ways
not
attained
by
them.
(9)
Da(e.—
In
the
Heb.
Sirach
(49»-i»)
Job
is
referred
to
after
Ezekiel
and
before
'the
Twelve.'
which
may
possibly
suggest
that
the
writer
regarded
the
book
as
comparatively
late.
The
oldest
Kabbinic
opinion
(jBo6a
balhra,
lib)
ascribed
the
book
to
Moses.
Two
Kabbis
placed
Job
in
the
period
of
the
return
from
the
Exile
(i6.
15a),
one
as
late
as
the
Persian
period
(ib.
156).
These
opinions
have
no
critical
value,
but
the
first
has
exercised
considerable
Influence.
Modern
students
are
generally
agreed
on
the
following
points:—
(1)
The
book
in
all
its
parts
implies
a
degree
of
reflexion
on
the
problems
of
life
which
fits
in
better
with
a
comparatively
late
than
with
a
very
early
age.
(2)
The
dialogue,
which
is
unquestionably
one
of
the
oldest
portions,
indicates
familiarity
with
national
catastrophes,
such
as
the
destruction
of
the
Idngdom
of
Samaria,
the
over-throw
of
Damascus,
and
the
leading
away
of
large
bodies
of
captives,
including
priests
and
nobles,
from
Jerusalem
to
Babylon
(12i'-25),
which
again,
on
the
as-sumption
that
the
writer
is
an
Israelite,
points
to
an
advanced
stage
of
Israeli
tish
history.
Many
take
a
further
step.
'The
prophet
Jeremiah
in
his
persecutions.
Job
who
is
called
by
Jahweh
"
my
servant
Job
"
(42'),
and
the
suffering
Servant
of
Jahweh
in
the
exilic
prophet
are
figures
which
seem
to
stand
in
the
connexion
of
a
definite
period'
(Baudissin,
Binleitung,
768),
and
so
point
at
the
earUest
to
the
Exile
and
the
decades
immediately
preceding
it.
These
and
other
considerations
have
led
most
recent
critics
to
date
the
main
poem
near,
or
during,
or
after
the
Exile.
Some
earlier
scholais
(Luther,
Franz
Delitzsch,
Cox,
and
Stanley)
recommended
-the
age
of
Solomon,
others
(Noldeke,
Hitzig,
and
Reuss)
the
age
of
Isaiah,
and
others
(Ewald,
Riehm,
and
apparently
Bleek)
the
period
between
Isaiah
and
Jeremiah.
Marshall
thinks
that
the
dialogue
may
have
been
written
as
early
as
the
time
of
Tiglath-pileser
III
(B.C.
745-726),
but
not
earlier.
Dillmann,
Konig,
Davison
(in
Hastings'
DB),
and
Driver
favour
the
period
of
the
Exile;
Cheyne
(in
EBi)
puts
the
earliest
part
after
e.g.
519;
G.
Hoffmann,
c.
B.C.
50O;
Duhm,
from
500
to
450;
Budde,
E.
Kautzsch,
and
Peake,
c.
400;
the
school
of
Kuenen,
the
4th
or
3rd
cent.;
O.
Holtzmann
the
age
of
the
Ptolemys;
and
Siegfried
(in
the
JE),
the
time
of
the
Maccabees.
At
present
the
period
from
c.
b.c.
600
to
c.
400
seems
to
command
most
approval.
The
later
portions
of
the
book,
especially
the
speeches
of
EUhu,
may
have
been
written
a
century
or
more
after
the
main
poem.
Marshall
thinks
that
the
latest
element
may
be
as
late
as
the
age
of
Malachi,
and
Duhm
confidently
assigns
'EUhu'
to
the
2nd
cent.
B.C.
A
definite
date
is
evidently
un-attainable
either
for
the
whole
or
for
parts,
but
it
seems
to
be
tolerably
certain
that
even
the
earlier
portions
are
much
later
than
used
to
be
assumed.
(10)
Authorship.
—
Besides
the
Talmudic
guess
cited
above,
very
few
attempts
have
been
made
to
fix
on
an
author.
Calmet
suggested
Solomon,
Bunsen
Baruch,
and
Royer
(in
1901)
Jeremiah.
None
of
these
views
needs
to
be
discussed.
Whoever
was
the
author
of
the
main
poem,
he
was
undoubtedly
an
Israelite,
for
a
Gentile
would
not
have
used
the
Tetragrammaton
so
freely.
Of
familiarity
with
the
Law
there
are,
indeed,
very
few
traces,
but
that
is
doubtless
owing
to
the
poet's
wonderful
skill,
which
has
enabled
him
to
maintain
throughout
a
Gentile
and
patriarchal
colouring.
There
is
no
reason
for
thinking
that
he
wrote
either
in
Baby-lonia
or
in
Egypt.
He
must
have
lived
in
some
region
where
he
could
study
the
life
of
the
desert.
It
has
been
remarked
that
all
the
creatures
he
names
(except
the
hippopotamus
and
the
crocodile,
whiph
may
have
been
introduced
by
a
later
hand)
are
desert
creatures.
He
was
intimately
acquainted
with
the
life
of
caravans
(616-20).
He
knew
something
of
the
astronomy
of
his
time
(9',
cf.
38"').
He
had
some
acquaintance
with
the
myths
and
superstitions
of
Western
Asia:
cf.
91'
252
2612,
where
there
may
be
allusions
to
the
