Dialogue Between Satan and God in the Book of Job

To further illustrate the concept that the law of Moses is the prosecutor of God I draw your attention to Deuteronomy 28. Toward the end of his life Moses directs representatives of the twelve tribes to stand upon two mountains. Six representatives are to stand on Mount Gerizim to bless the people. And six representatives are to stand upon Mount Ebal (Duet. 27:11-14).The Levitical tribe of priests are instructed to respond with twelve words of curses for disobedience to the law (verses 15 - 26). It is interesting that words of blessing are not found coming from the priests of the law in that chapter but only words of condemnation. This underscores that the law of God was God's instrument to condemn the sinful before Him.Now we do have many blessings for obedience to the law uttered by Moses in chapters 28 (28:1-14). And these positive words are followed by more negative words of cursing for disobedience to the law of God (28:15-68)The reader may deduce what he will from the greater volume of words dedicated to cursings for disobedience, (54 verses of curses as compared to 14 of blessing).The law of Moses is God's condemning instrument to assist Him in His righteous and just judgment.The king Hezekiah discovered the long unused and nearly forgotten law of Moses. He had it read to the whole congregation of the nation. The people then realized that they were in for severe judgments. Why? Because they were condemned by the law. They were accused before God by the contents of the law of Moses.At the same time some partriarchs loved the law of Moses. It prosecution was not because God is mean or it was mean spirited. It prosecution was activated because men are indeed lawless, sinners, and trangressors against God. So the prosecuting law simply does its divine assigned function.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

An instrument is not a prosecutor.The law is not a prosecutor any more than a ball-point pen is a prosecutor or a legal pad is a prosecutor. A prosecutor uses those instruments, including the (letter of the) law, to apply the (spirit of the) law.A prosecutor is an instrument of the judicial system. Satan was God's instrument in the book of Job.

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

have you ever actually read the law, jay? i mean, all of it, including all of the wonderfully dull offering rituals? as anyone who has read all those boring bits will tell you, the vast majority of the law deals with atonement for sins, not condemnations of them. the law is literally designed for justification of man in the eyes of god. to say anything else is really to misrepresent it to such an extent that it forces me to believe you have only read paul's opinion of the law and not the law itself.Edited by arachnophilia, : No reason given.

---

Arachnophelia, Yes. They are not really that dull to me. They are shadows and types of the work of the Christ the Son of God.And I do agree with you that there are these extrememly positive aspects of the law. I agree that there is not only the condemning side of the law. I can make no comment about proportions - how much is atonement and how much is not. But I do agree with you that God included considerable portions designed to deal with the atonement of transgressions which He know would take place.It was high time someone pointed that out. So I'm glad you did point that out. I was emphasizing one aspect of the law in order to correct the error that Satan is God's handy prosecuting attorney. Music to my ears! Your going to end up skating very close to Pauline theology. Well, I wrote a few posts highlighting and underscoring a certain aspect of the law of Moses. That does not mean that was the only aspect.Because I thought there would be a danger of being misunderstood I did add some balance. I said some patriarchs loved the law and that it was only doing its job and was not mean spirited. Remember?Now about Paul. It is not wise for you to say "You have a bad concept of the law only because of Paul." If you say that to me I will turn the question around to you ' "Have you read all of Paul?"It is not accurate to blame the Apostle Paul for my underscoring the condemning of the law. Our Christian brother Paul spoke of the positive aspect of God's law. And he helped us to see the typology embodied in it exactly points to the redemptive work of Christ.The Apostle Paul wrote: "For we know that the law is spiritual; but I am fleshly, sold under sin" (Romans 7:14) In other words the problem is not with God's law but with the fleshly sinner.The Apostle Paul wrote: "So then the law is holy, and the commandment holy and righteous and good." (Rom. 7:12)He further wrote: "For I delight in the law of God according to the inner man, but I see a different law in my members, warring against the law of my mind and making me a captive to the law of sin which is in my members" (Rom. 7:23) Again, he delights in God's law just like David in Psalm 119. But a different force is operating in his members captivating him to sin against the law of God.The Apostle further wrote: "But we know that the law is good, if one uses it lawfully" (1 Tim. 1:8)I could go on. My point is that you cannot blame the Apostle Paul for denegrading the law of Moses. He taught that Christ is the end of the law to everyone who believes and that Christ is final Justifier and Redeemer of the trangressors of God's law.The prosecutor is the law. But the defense attorney is Christ.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Bringing the subject back a little to the book of Job, I am surprised that no one (whose posts I read) has yet brought up that Job is before the giving of the law of Moses.Anyway, Job does say that he knows that his redeemer lives. He knows that in the end of history in his invisible part after his body is destroyed he will see his Redemeer. It is a precious instance in Scripture for we Christians.Here's Job: I take this as his prophecy that at the end of history the Redeemer Christ, who is God incarnate, will be Job's comfort and advocate in his trial.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

We need to consider the context of why this book, one of the oldest books in the Bible...was first written. If a man (or woman) writes a book with God as a character, does that person invent and interpret the character with limitations and characteristics of the authors own choosing, or does the author show a cultural reverence for the character as commonly interpreted by others? The reason that I ask is because the God that I have known of cannot be tricked and would not ignore Job.

​

When iron is hardened into steel, it is tempered. Satan is not just a tempter...he is a temperer. He is used and allowed to heat up the situations in our own lives so that we become stronger and have a more thorough and steely resolve to avoid evil the next time it happens.

​

Edited by Phat, :

The writer of this paragraph clearly loves Satan more than God. If the Devil is so smart he sure is not able to escape his eternal fate:"And the devil, who deceived them, was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where also the beast and the false prophet were; and they will be tormented day and night forever and ever." (Rev.20:10)And every moment of his torment will be another moment of happiness for the saints of God.The little snake will burn. Shame on you Satan - the incompetent fallen angel. Jesus is Lord. The writer champions Satan. Allow the rot of his thoughts to enter into your own soul at your own risk. What you'd like and what you get are two different things.Satan has not won, cannot win, cannot get out of the game, cannot break even. He must lose.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

I did mention that the book is set in the time before Moses. That's one reason Job can't be an Israelite, even if the storyteller was.No one was talking about Torah law, though, because, as the product of a later era, it is not relevant to the story (though it may well have been relevant to the storyteller.) The passage is famous, yes, but its proper translation is widely disputed. Scholars reguarly point out that the meaning of the original text is far from clear. English renderings of the passage have traditionally been made by Christian translators who had a knack of seeing the Pauline doctrines they expected to see in books written long before Paul was born.The interpration you put forward here is the traditional one taught within Christianity. But if Job really is declaring belief in an afterlife, it would be the only such declaration in the entire Hebrew canon.One could perhaps surmise some kind of afterlife from narratives in the Tanakh about the assumption of figures like Enoch and Elijah, or from the appearance of Samuel's ghost at Endor, but that doesn't give you much. Key questions about any afterlife--is it for everybody? how is it structured? how long does it last?--would remain unanswered.___Edited by Archer Opterix, : typo repair.

---

ArcherAll species are transitional.

I think it is quite apparent that Job is not an Israelite. Not much digging is required to understand that. As far as I know I brought up the Torah as the real prosecuting attorney if there is one, in the whole Bible - Old and New Testament.Of course the official giving of the law is recorded at the time of Moses on Mt. Sinai. I don't think that that necessarily means that the law had not been communicated in any way before then.Some are quick to point to the code of Hammarabi as a moral law pre-dating the law of Moses. But that could have been remnants of some code previously passed down to early men from prophets among the Gentile nations. Balaam was a Gentile prophet of God (not a very good one but one nonetheless).So I am not too confident that the age of Job knew nothing of God's moral commandments even though the time predates Moses.Have you spent any time at Glenn Miller's Christian Think Tank?
He entertains quite a few scholarly discussions of questions around the law of Moses. I assume that you are at least a little interested in what Christian scholars and other scholars for that matter would have to say about Law.Re-creating some of those articles here in discussion mode is very redundant. For those genuinely interested in honest questions and criticisms of the Law they should spend time at that website reading some of the articles which are very well annotated and bibliograhically referenced. There you go again trying to blame big bad Paul for pulling the wool over people's eyes.Though I personally don't care for the term "afterlife" how could you not understand Job as meaning something like that.He says that his body, though dissolved, he outside of his body at the end of history, will see his Redeemer. If that is not a reference to an "afterlife" I don't know what is.And the Hebrew canon does of course echo Job's belief. The book of Daniel is a part of the Hebrew canon. And it speaks of resurrection and eternal life.Isaiah also speaks of God abolishing the plague of death which has covered humanity. So we can't blame an "afterlife" concept in the Old Testament on Paul. Besides Paul, a trained Pharisee, would have believed in an "afterlife" of some kind even before he became an apostle of Jesus Christ. The Pharisees believed in the resurrection of the dead by God in the end of time.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Congratulations. You 'answered' half a dozen points and completely whiffed on understanding a single one.That's an impressive batting average. I'm used to being misrepresented, but rarely do I see a response determined to be so thorough fall so flat.I won't explain. My posts are still out there for anyone who is interested in what I really said.I was especially amused by your comment: 'There you go again, blaming Paul.' As if anyone was 'blaming' Paul for anything, and as if Paul really did represent some kind of favorite whipping boy of mine. Care to count how many my posts even mention Paul?You're a stitch. Toodles.___Edited by Archer Opterix, : brev.

---

ArcherAll species are transitional.

I don't think I missed your point. But you're welcomed to show me what you object to me not addressing.I sometimes and usually do write for the benefit of others who may be reading along. I anticipate points that may be raised and deal with them beforehand.So you get a little more than you asked for. The last paragraph that you wrote did somewhat agree with what I responded. So in that regard we were saying somewhat the same thing. You said Enoch and Elijah's experience suggest an afterlife. I went on to show that more explicit references are in Daniel. And my response is out there for all interested in a reasonable reply.If you think I ommited something or missed the point, I'm opened to what you think I missed. Its up to you. Okay. Possibly I lumped you in with some of my other favorite skeptics on this forum. Point taken.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Sorry to say. You're only average.Happy twisting.

Blaming Paul for Christians seeing such things as resurrection from the dead and judgment of them in the Old Testament.Beats me what Toodles is saying I evaded. Demonstrably false by the book fo Daniel. The book of Daniel contains references which are more explicit and require little "surmising". It is as plain as the nose on your face.I do hope you have a nose though.Happy twisting dino bird.

You didn't evade. You misunderstood.And Toodles is not my name. You misunderstood that, too.And the beat goes on. What passage in Daniel are you talking about?
Please provide a reference or a quote.Raising the subject of Daniel also raises the question of that book's date of authorship. Daniel was written centuries later than Job. The book--or at least the last section (lots of issues here)--dates from around the time of Antiochus Epiphanes. Severe persecutions in that period fueled the first widespread belief in an afterlife among Jews. So it would not be surprising to see some intimation of blief in an afterlife in Daniel. I don't know of one, though.Regardless, nothing written later obliges the author of Job to say the thing you want to read. If really you think you know something about an obscure passage in Job that Hebrew scholars are missing, you are welcome to make your case. Logically, though, you have to argue that case on other grounds. A later book doesn't help you.______Edited by Archer Opterix, : typo.

---

ArcherAll species are transitional.

Jon, do you have anything to add to your topic since you started it? Is God still fooled, in your opinion? How could the Creator get fooled by an unemployed cherub?Edited by Phat, : clarification