JOBAB
Babylonian
myth
about
the
struggle
between
the
dragon
of
Chaos
and
Marduk,
the
god
of
light;
38
26'=,
where
reference
may
be
made
to
popular
notions
about
eclipses
and
to
the
claims
of
magicians;
and
perhaps
29"'>-,
where
some
find
an
allusion
to
the
fabulous
phcenix.
He
was
probably
familiar
with
the
Wisdom-lore
of
Israel,
and
possibly
of
Edom,
and
may
safely
be
assumed
to
have
known
all
that
was
worth
knowing
in
other
departments
of
Heb.
literature
(cf.
Job
7"'-
with
Ps
8"-,
and
Job
3'-
'»
with
Jer
20"-",
although
the
order
of
de-pendence
is
by
no
means
certain
in
the
latter
case).
The
poetic
execution
reveals
the
hand
of
a
master.
It
seems
most
natural
to
look
for
his
home
in
the
south
or
south-east
of
the
Holy
Land,
not
far
from
Edom,
where
he
would
come
in
frequent
contact
with
Gentile
sages,
and
could
glean
much
from
travellers.
(11)
Parallels
to
Job.
—
Cheyne
(in
EBi)
has
endeavoured
to
connect
the
story
of
Job
with
the
Babylonian
legend
of
Eabani,
but
the
similarity
is
too
slight
to
need
discussion.
A
far
closer
parallel
is
furnished
by
a
partially
preserved
poem
from
the
library
of
Ashurbanipal,
which
probably
reproduces
an
ancient
Babylonian
text.
It
represents
the
musings
of
an
old
king,
who
has
lived
a
blameless
and
devout
life,
but
is
nevertheless
terribly
afflicted
in
body
and
mind
—
pursued
all
day,
and
without
rest
at
night
—
and
is
apparently
forsaken
of
the
gods.
He
cannot
under-stand
the
ways
of
Deity
towards
either
himself
or
others.
'What
seems
good
to
a
man
is
bad
with
Ms
god.
.
.
,
Who
could
understand
the
counsel
of
the
gods
in
heaven?
'
The
poem
ends
with
a
song
of
praise
for
deliverance
from
sin
and
disease
(Der
Alte
Orient,
vii.
No.
3,
pp.
27-30,
and
extra
vol.
ii.
134-139;
and
M.
Jastrow
m
JBL
xxv
[1906],
p.
135
ff.).
The
Jesuit
missionary,
Pfere
Bouchet,
called
attention
in
1723
to
the
story
of
the
ancient
Indian
king
Arichandiren
who,
in
consequence
of
a
dispute
in
an
assembly
of
gods
and
goddesses
and
holy
men
as
to
the
existence
of
a
perfect
prince,
was
very
severely
tested
by
the
leader
of
the
sceptical
party.
He
was
deprived
of
his
property,
his
kingdom,
his
only
souj
and
his
wife,
but
stiU
trod
the
path
of
virtue,
and
received
as
rewards
the
restoration
of
wife
and
son,
and
other
marks
of
Divinefavour.
These
parallels,
however,
interesting
as
they
are,
do
not
in
the
least
interfere
with
the
originality
and
boldness
of
the
Hebrew
poem,
which
must
ever
be
regarded
as
the
boldest
and
grandest
effort
of
the
ancient
world
to
'justify
the
ways
of
God
to
men.'
W.
Taylor
Smith.
JOBAB.
—
1.
A
son
of
Joktan
in
the
genealogies
(Gn
1028,
1
Ch
1^'),
and
therefore
probably
an
Arabian
geographical
name.
Glaser
identifies
Jobab
with
YHYBB
(likely
Yuhaybab),
a
tribe
mentioned
in
the
Sabaean
inscriptions.
Sprenger
through
the
LXX
form
labor
relates
it
to
Wab&r,
a
considerable
region
in
S.
Arabia.
2.
A
king
of
Edom
(Gn
363"-,
l
Ch
1"'),
con-fused,
in
the
apocryphal
appendix
to
the
LXX
version
of
Job,
with
Job
(see
Job,
§
1).
3.
A
king
of
Madon,
ally
of
Jabin
of
Hazor
against
Joshua
(Jos
ll').
4.
5.
Name
of
two
Benjamites
(1
Ch
8=
and
").
W.
M.
Nesbit.
JOOHEBED.—
A
sister
of
Kohath,
married
to
Amram
her
nephew,
and
mother
of
Aaron
and
Moses
(Ex
e^")
and
Miriam
(Nu
26^').
An
earlier
writer,
E,
in
narrating
the
birth
of
Moses,
speaks
of
his
mother
as
a
daughter
of
Levi,
but
does
not
give
her
name
(Ex
2')-
JOD.
—
The
tenth
letter
oJ
the
Hebrew
alphabet,
and
as
such
used
in
the
119th
Psalm
to
designate
the
10th
part,
each
verse
of
which
begins
with
this
letter.
JODA.—
1.
A
Levlte
(1
Es
5");
called
in
Ezr
3»
Judah;
elsewhereHodaviah,
Ezr
2";
Hodevah,
Neh7";
Sudias,
1
Es
5^.
2.
An
ancestor
of
Jesus
(Lk
3^).
JOED.—
A
Benjamite
(Neh
11').
JOEL.
—
1.
The
prophet
(see
next
article).
Regarding
his
personal
history
we
know
nothing.
2.
A
son
of
Samuel
(1
S
8',
1
Ch
e^s
[RV]
63»).
3.
An
ancestor
of
Samuel
(1
Ch
&^,
called
in
v.«
Shaul).
4.
A
Simeonite
prince
(1
Ch
i^).
5.
A
Reubenite
(1
Ch
S'-
').
6.
A
Gadite
chief
(1
Ch
S'*).
7.
A
chief
man
of
Issachar
(lCh7').
8.
One
of
David's
heroes
(ICh
ll's).
9.10.
11.
Levites
(1
Ch
15'""
238
26»,
2
Ch
2912).
12.
A
Manassite
chief
(1
Oh
27").
13.
One
of
those
who
JOEL,
BOOK
OF
married
a
foreign
wife
(Ezr
lO*'
[i
Es
^
Juel]).
14.
A
Benjamite
overseer
after
the
Exile
(Neh
11»).
JOEL,
BOOK
OF.—
1.
Analysis.-
The
Book
of
Joel
clearly
falls
into
two
parts:
(1)
a
call
to
repentance
in
view
of
present
judgment
and
the
approaching
Day
of
Jahweh,
with
a
prayer
for
deliverance
(1-2");
(2)
the
Divine
answer
promising
relief,
and
after
that
spiritual
blessing,
judgment
on
the
Gentile
world,
and
material
prosperity
for
Judah
and
Jerusalem
(2'8-3
[Heb.
4]
21).
(1)
The
immediate
occasion
of
the
call
to
repentance
is
a
plague
of
locusts
of
exceptional
severity
(l^'-),
extending,
it
would
seem
from
the
promise
in
the
second
part
(2^5),
over
several
yearSj
and
followed
by
drought
and
famine
so
severe
as
to
necessitate
the
discontinuance
of
the
meal-
and
drink-offering,
i.e.
probably
the
daily
sacrifice
(cf
.
Ex.
29*^,
where
the
same
Heb.
words
are
used
of
the
daily
meal-offer-ing
and
drink-offering).
This
fearful
calamity,
which
is
dis-tinctly
represented
as
present
('before
our
eyes'
l^^),
heralds
'the
great
and
very
terrible
day
of
Jahweh'
(2n),
which
will
be
ushered
in
by
yet
more
fearful
distress
of
the
same
kind
(2i-u).
The
reason
of
all
this
suffering
actual
and
prospective
is
national
sin,
which,
however,
is
not
specified.
Jahweh's
people
have
turned
away
from
Him
(implied
in
2'2)
.
Let
them
turn
back,
giving
expression
to
their
penitent
sorrow
in
tears,
mourning
garb,
general
fasting,
and
prayer
offered
by
priests
in
the
Temple
(2'2-n).
(2)
"The
second
part
opens
with
the
declaration
that
the
prayerformercywasheard:
'Then
.
.
.
the
Lord
.
.
.had
pity
on
his
people'
(2^8
RV).
It
seems
to
be
implied
that
the
people
had
repented
and
fasted,
and
that
the
priests
had
prayed
in
their
behalf.
The
rendering
of
this
passage
in
the
AV,
'Then
will
.
.
.
the
Lord
pity
his
people,'
is
gener-ally
rejected
by
modem
scholars
as
inaccurate,
being,
according
to
Driver,
'
grammatically
indefensible.'
What
we
have
in
the
original
is
not
prediction,
but
historical
statement.
This
Divine
pity,
proceeds
the
prophet,
speak-ing
in
Jahweh's
name,
will
express
itself
in
the
removal
of
the
locusts
(220)
and
in
the
cessation
of
the
drought,
which
will
restore
to
the
land
its
normal
fertihty,
and
so
replace
famine
by
plenty
(222-28).
But
higher
blessings
yet
are
in
store
for
the
people
of
Jahweh.
His
Spirit
shall
afterwards
be
poured
out
on
all,
inclusive
even
of
slaves
^228'-
[Heb.
3^'-]).
And
when
the
Day
of
Jahweh
comes
in
all
its
terror,
it
will
be
terrible
only
to
the
Gentile
world
which
has
oppressed
Israel
The
gathered
hosts
of
the
former,
among
whom
Phoenicians
and
Philistines
are
singled
out
for
special
con-demnation
(3
[Heb.
43
4-8),
shall
be
destroyed
by
Jahweh
and
His
angels'm
the
Valley
of
Jehoshaphat
(3
[Heb.
4"°
^-j),
and
then
Jerusalem
shall
be
a
holy
city,
no
longer
haunted
by
unclean
aliens
(3
[Heb.
4]
"),
and
Judah,
unlike
Egypt
and
Edom,
will
be
a
happy
nation
dwelling
in
a
happy
because
well-watered
land,
and
Jahweh
will
ever
abide
in
its
midst
(3
[Heb.
4]
18-21).
2.
Integrity.
—
The
unity
of
the
book
was
questioned
by
the
French
scholar
Vernes
(in
1881),
who,
however,
admitted
the
weakness
of
his
case,
and
by
the
German
scholar
Rothstein
(in
1896),
the
latter
finding
a
follower
in
Ryssel
(in
the
JE).
These
critics
assign
the
two
parts
to
different
writers
in
different
ages.
Baudissin
(Einleit-ung)
suggests
extensive
revision.
These
theories
have
found
little
acceptance.
Recent
criticism
generally
regards
the
book,
with
the
exception
of
a
gloss
or
two,
as
the
work
of
one
hand.
There
are
indeed
two
distinctly
marked
parts,
as
was
shown
in
the
analysis,
but
that
is
in
no
way
incompatible
with
unity
of
authorship,
for
the
following
reasons:
(a)
'The
second
part
does
not
contradict
but
supplements
the
first.
(5)
The
thought
of
'
the
day
of
Jahweh
'
as
a
day
of
terror
is
conunon
to
both
(1'=
and
2"
[Heb.
3<]).
(c)
The
alleged
lack
of
originaUty
in
the
second
part,
in
so
far
as
it
exists,
can
be
reasonably
accounted
for
by
its
apocalyptic
character.
iji)
The
distinctive
features
of
the
first
part,
which
is
mainly
historic,
are
largely
due
to
the
special
theme
—
the
descrip-tion
of
locusts
and
their
ravages,
which
is
unique
in
Heo.
Uterature.
3.
Date
.
—
There
is
no
external
evidence.
The
place
of
the
book
in
the
Canon
is
not
conclusive,
lOr
the
Book
of
Jonah,
which
was
manifestly
written
after
the
fall
of
Nineveh,
is
also
found
in
the
former
part
of
the
collection
of
the
Twelve,
and
comes
before
Micah,
the
earliest
portions
of
which
are
beyond
doubt
much
older.
Hence
the
question
can
be
answered,
in
so
far
as
an
answer
is
possible,
only
from
the
book
itself.
