« If This is True, I Want Some of the Credit
Main
How to Recognize a Scribal School »
June 25, 2006
The Rebel Job
I just finished reading Loren Fisher's latest book, The Rebel Job. The anchor and longest chapter of the book is a fresh and refreshing translation of Job 3-26 which Loren the scholar calls Job II and which Loren the poet calls "the rebel Job." Job 1-2; 27; 29-31 and 38-42 are Job I and he argues that the goal of the author of Job II was "to crush the entire story of Job I." Job I represents religious orthodoxy while Job II represents an early version of the beliefs of a "reality based community." "Reality based community" are my words but I think they reflect what Loren is trying to tell us.
Those who have studied under Loren or who are acquainted with his work will not be surprised that he manages to place the rebel Job in its larger ancient Near Eastern context, in the context of our contemporize world, and also in the context of his own personal life's experiences. For this reason alone, the book is at the same time deeply personal and richly academic.
I would like to highlight a comment Loren makes in his preface that reflects my best memories of him as a teacher and, if nothing else, should recommend this book to anyone interested in the Book of Job or in religion in general.
In this book you will on occasion find the words, I do not know. Those four words are important to me. When I was teaching, I uttered them many times in each class that I taught. To put this in Greek terms, I am an agnostic; I do not know. This does not apply to everything but to many things. Also I have decided that at this stage of my life I will not worry too much about all that I do not know; I will spend my time trying to be responsible concerning what I do know, if such knowledge is at all helpful. p. 11.
Would that many more of us could be content with being responsible concerning what we do know. This does not mean that learning should stop. It certainly hasn't meant that to Loren. Rather, I think the real emphasis is intended to be on the word "responsible."
I am not competent to review Loren's translation. He offers over 200 endnotes to assist those who are. However, one thing that does strike me is that when faced with a choice of using a divine name or a common noun, he prefers the divine name; for example "Mot" rather than "death" in Job 3:5 and elsewhere and "Shamesh" rather than "sun" in Job 8:16. And of course he sees "Yamm" rather than "day" in Job 3:8 and the quite literal "son of Resheph" in Job 5:7. But, as always, see his notes. I think he is correct in making a point of this. We can debate when radical monotheism came to dominate the religion of Israel. My guess is later rather than earlier. But for me, it is not debatable that the conceptual difference we now see between the god Mot and the state of being dead was not so apparent to many of the ancient people of the Near East. And this includes those many whose thoughts are found in the Hebrew Bible. You'll find your own gems in Loren's little book.
Posted by Duane Smith at June 25, 2006 12:44 PM | Read more on Hebrew Bible |
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.telecomtally.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/1747
Comments
Sorry, comments are closed for this post.
Send me an email if it is important.