Part 3: The Framework

The prologue and epilogue are expressed in readable and elegant prose. The first chapter describes Job’s piety and orthodoxy and then refers to the day on which ‘the sons of god’ congregated in His front. It adds that ‘Satan’ came with them and that he questioned the motive of Job’s piety, alleging that it was due to the protection and prosperity conferred on him by divinity. Satan says that if these were taken from Job, he would curse God ‘to [His] face’.

In this manner, Satan challenges God to a bet respecting Job’s motivation. This, though, ought really to have been clear to God! Another passage of the MT advises that “a man looks on the outward appearance, but the Lord looks on the heart” [Sam. I. 16:7].

All the same – and notwithstanding the ensuing misery that would follow – God accepts the bet. He permits Satan to try Job, whereupon a series of disasters destroy Job’s prosperity. Notably, his sons and daughters also perish. Job withstands these calamities and actually praises the Lord.

In the next chapter, the sons of God and Satan presents themselves again before the Almighty, who tells Satan that Job has remained pious notwithstanding his misfortune and says to Satan that “thou did move me against him, to destroy him without cause” [2:3].¹ Satan replies that Job’s stand would change if God touched his bone and flesh. In this manner, Satan seeks to extend the bet he made with God. The latter grants Satan the required permission but orders Satan to spare Job’s soul (meaning life). Satan thereupon smites Job “with vile soars from the sole of his foot to his crown” [2:7].

At this stage, Job’s wife counsels him to curse God and die. Job refuses and scolds her. We are told that “[i]n all this [Job] did not sin with his lips” [2:10].

Thereafter Job’s three friends, namely Elifaz [Eliphas], Bildad and Zofar “come to mourn with him and to comfort him” [2:11]. The ensuing debates between Job and his friends about divine justice take place in his house or, in other words, inter partem.

These debates (and Elihu’s speeches) are followed by God’s Replies from the Whirlwind [Caps. 38 – 42:6]. In the epilogue, which is expressed in the same prose style as the prologue, God tells Elifaz that the three comrades “have not spoken of me the thing that is right, like my servant” [42:7] Job and instructs them to entreat Job to ‘pray for’ them, viz. to induce God to forgive them.

The epilogue ends with God restoring Job to his wealth and position. Job lives to ripe old age and is blessed to see four generations of offspring.

The prologue and epilogue give rise to a number of issues. First and foremost, they do not make any reference to Elihu, who is, thus, not foreshadowed in the setting of the work.

Second, Job’s sons and daughters are considered part and parcel of Job’s prosperity. God sanctions their demise at the hand of Satan, although there is no hint that they deserve this harsh treatment. It is true that, when Job is restored to his erstwhile position, he is blessed with fresh sons and daughters. It is, at the same time, noteworthy that those who perished were not brought back to life. In reality, the harsh fate of Job’s original sons and daughters would be condemned by Jeremiah and Ezekiel,² who took the view that the sins of the fathers ought not to be visited on their sons. A fortiori, they would be perplexed by the demise of Job’s offspring in a mere attempt to test his piety.

Third, the MT version does not describe Satan as ‘evil’. He is an accuser and doubter, who ascribes mean motives to people.³ He acts only when granted permission by the Almighty. Still, the LXX and the late Targum refer to him as a source of evil. In this manner, these texts accommodate the view taken of Satan by Orthodox Judaism during the height of the Second Temple period.

Fourth, the MT version refers to the sons of God. Such an anthropomorphic designation was not acceptable to later Jewish Orthodoxy. Accordingly, the late Targum refers to the sons of the angels. The LXX simply refers to the Lord’s angels, whose presence appears also in books of the prophets.⁴

Regrettably, the extant portion of the Qumran Scroll does not comprise the prologue. In contrast, part of the epilogue has survived.⁵ All in all, it may be surmised that right from the beginning the ‘setting’ has been part of Job. This assumption leads to the next question, viz. when was the setting composed: was it written prior to the composition of the MT version or was it composed by the anonymous author of the debates?

The prevailing view is that the legend, in which Job remains patient and penitent throughout his ordeal, is antique and was used by the anonymous author of the MT version. Presumably, in the fable Job speaks about the greatness of the Lord and his friends express doubts.

Notably, Greenstein and Newsom refer to some legends reminiscent of Job.⁶ Indeed, the story of the penitent Job, narrated in the prologue, has been found in Mesopotamian sources.⁷ However, when looked at carefully, no text is in pari materia with the MT version. The ancient texts discuss the theodicy issue from the viewpoint of a society with a polytheistic religion. The hero (akin to Job) often wonders which deity he has offended. This issue does not arise in Job. Here the hero believes in a single God. In reality, the Mesopotamian sources do not include an analysis of the theodicy issue against a monotheistic background. Admittedly, Job is mentioned as praiseworthy by Ezekiel [14:14, 20], who likens him to Noah. There is, at the same time, no basis for the suggestion that Ezekiel was familiar with the highly articulated text here considered.

This analysis demonstrates that another explanation need be considered, viz. that the anonymous author, who composed the speeches, was familiar with Job of the Mesopotamian tales. He used the legend when composing the setting, but then embarked on a detailed discussion of the theodicy issue. In support of this argument, it is strongly arguable that the epilogue was meant to appear after chapter 31, which concludes with the words: “tamu divrei Iyyov [תמו דברי איוב]”, meaning “The words of [Job] are concluded” [31:40].

If this construction is accepted, then chapter 32-37 (Elihu’s speeches) and 38-42:1-6 [God’s Reply from the Whirlwind] are late additions. Actually, the epilogue is an appropriate sequel to the debate between Job and his three friends. It clarifies that the Almighty prefers Job’s honest attestations of his innocence – which is the gamut of the book – to the false accusations and the dogmatic stance of Elifaz, Bildad and Zofar.

In support of this construction, it is to be noted that God tells Elifaz that the speeches of the three friends were not ⁸נכונה {‘nechona’ viz., “the thing that is right” [42:7,8]}. The sins the friends attributed to Job were, of course, untrue whilst Job’s manifestation of his innocence was, as is clear from the setting, factual.