There are two features of the hook that strikes one at the first glance: ( 11 That the story of Job has nothing to do with the religion: pr01110111 that forms the kernel of the book: (2) that the close of the story. in which Job is justified and rewarded. hardly accords with the light in which lie appears in the course of the discussion of the problem. It appears that the author of the hook has used a popular story of a pious man who midured severe tests and was finally re warded for his steadfastness and unswerving piety as a medium for a thorough and philo sophical consideration of the questions whether the suffering that man endures is in all eases due to his own guilt, or, in other words, whether God. the author of everything, acts according to recognized standards of justice. That Ile does is the onlinary and conventional view of reli gious .people represented by the three friends. Job, acknowledged to be a good and pious man, seems to prove the contrary: and the arguments against the conventional views come, therefore, with great force from his mouth. Incidentally, a second question is raised and by implication answered. Is the popular story correct in as suming that a pions man will endure suffering that he considers unjust in silence and resigna tion? The discourse of Job in which he curses the day of his is birth (chapter iii.) declares that his sufferings are out of all proportion to any possible wrongs that lie may have emmuitted (chapter vi.). takes a most gloomy view of hu man life (chapter vii.), bitterly accuses God of not acting fairly, of not permitting one to plead his ease (chapter ix.). boldly declaring himself to be in the right, and that no one can answer the arguments he presents (chapter xiii.), im plying that God persecutes him (xiii. 20-22: xvi.: xix. 22). declaring that the wicked flourish in this world (chapter xxi.)—sueh utterances prove that the good man of the story-books has no real existence.
There can indeed be but little doubt that the original character of the Book of Job was skep• Beal. precisely as the Book of Ecclesiastes (q.v.). Wo may suppose that the hook consisted of two parts: (a) the popular story used as a kind of text. and (b) the discussions between job and his friends furnishing the illustration how the real .fob would conduct himself under the eir cmnstances, and in the course of the argument justifying the attitude of .Toll which implies that suffering, does not come from guilt. that the inno cent often are punished, and that divine govern ment is not based on justice. The Book of Job in this form, it may well he supposed. would have been offensive to religious circles. This appears indeed to have been the ease: and. as a conse quenee. a number of interpolations were made in the speeches of Job. calculated to remove their sting. just as in the Book of Ecclesiastes words and phrases are added here and tlwre \Od•ll give a different turn to the thought. That the entire hook was not rejected was due to the weight attached to the speeches of the three friends. Here were three men noted for their wisdom— friends. moreover. of Job—W110 all agreed that God was just and that Job was wrong in ques tioning the divine justice. Three against one represents a powerful majority. Moreover, their arguments seemed forcible. Eliphaz is certainly right in declaring (chapter v.) that no mortal is righteous before God : nor can any one gainsay Bildad when he declares (chapter viii.) that we are not wiser in penetrating the divine will than cur ancestors were: and Job himself declares his acquiescence in Zophar's panegyric on divine wisdom (chapter xi.). which is so far superior to human knowledge and power. Tt might easily seem. therefore. despite the one] charges brought by the friends against •oh that he must have committed some awful crime. that .Tob's charges against God were not justified. and merited the n Mike they received at. the lmnds of his friends. All. therefore. that is needed to make the Book of Job acceptable and teach just the contrary lesson that God was just and that Job deserved the test, was to take the edge off of some of Job's utterances. This' was not difficult. for even in the boldest passages of the book the expression is somewhat veiled.
It must not be supposed that the Book of Job as we have it was produced 'at one sitting.' as it were; it is a growth. and the very popularity which it appears to have enjoyed was a factor in accounting for modifications to which it was submitted. The introduction of Elihu is an illus• tration of the thesis regarding the gradual forma tion of the present book. There is no reference to Elibu in the prologue. His speeches are not es sential either to the story or to the moral of the book. They are simply a reiteration of the whole problem—the reason and object of suffering. the righteousness of God, the of faith. and the beneficence of divine government. How and when the speeches of Elihu came to be united with the Book of Job are questions in regard to which scholars have not yet reached general agreement. It is plausible to suppose that the Book of Job found imitators. The problem was attractive, and other writers tried their hand at presenting the arguments in favor of the current religious attitude. Ile speeches of Elilm impress one in this way as another Book of Job in epitome. Lastly. the speeches of Yahweh (chapters 6), forming a separate part. while they do not offer a solution of the problem of suffering, still reinforce the attitude of the pious —that man. not having been present at. creation and not being admitted into the counsels of the Almighty. dare not and must not question divine justice. These speeches again acid nothing to the situation nor to the moral; but they add another witness against Job. and so powerful a one that Job must needs confess his error. In a way. the introduction of Yahweh. who severely rebukes Job. contradicts the epilorne in which Yahweh turns with favor to •Tob and rebukes Job's friends. although the latter have all throughout pleaded Yahweh's cause. If. however, we omit these speeches and the discourses of Elihu and connect the epilogues directly (a) with chapter xxxi. 40, where it is said here "end the words of Job." and (b) with chapter xxxii. I. where we are told "the three men ceased answering Job, for be was justified in his own eyes." the contradiction is at least. weakened. lt is not implied that chapter xxxii. 1 was once immediately followed by xlii. 7, but only that a form of the Book of Job existed in which Job's arguments were justified. and that some one in placing the conclusion of the popular story of Job at the end of the discussion between Job and his friends, felt obliged to state that GOd approved of Job and rebuked the three friends.
The Book of Job. in its present form. is prob ably post-exilic. and the tendency at present among scholars is to bring the date down toward the third century B.C. One reason for the favor which the book attained in pious eireles was the similarity between Job and Israel which natu rally suggested itself. .Tob's sufferings typified lsrael's fate. His resignation in the popular story served as an example to the post-exilic Jewish community to endure in faith and pa tience. while the justification of Job by Yahweh Himself is one form of the presentation of the problem. and his restored happiness and pros perity were interpreted as an assurance of the glory that was destined to be again lsrael's lot.
BIBLIOGRAPHY. Consult the Old Testament Bibliography. Consult the Old Testament introductions. and the commentaries of Ewald, Delitzsch, Dillmann, Duhm, _hers, Hitzig, David son, Budde, Siefried, Z6ckler; also Budde, Beitriiqe zur Kritik des 'inches Hiob (Bonn. IS76). On the text consult: Bicknell, "Kritische Bear beitung des Job-Dialogs," in Wiener Zeitsehrif t f iir die Kunde des ilorgenlandes (Vienna. 1892-93) ; id.. Des Bach Hiob na•h _Inleitung der ;:qrophik and der ;:eptuaginta (ib., 1894). On the growth and purport, consult: Henan, Lc' lirre do Job iParis. 1859) ; Cheyne, Job and ,Solomon (Lon don, 18871 : Bradley. Lectures on the Book of „lob (Oxford, 1887) : Meinhold. "Das Problem des Buches Hiob," in :Vote Jahrbiichcr fiir deutsche Theologie (Bonn. 1S92) ; Lave, Die Composition des Bashes 11iob (1ti9q: Green, The Argument of the Book of Job Unfolded (New York. 1873) Fairhairn. Problem of Job," in The City of God (London. 1886).