Why does God need to be worshiped? (page 11)

Narkissos

Ross:

Do you think the Jobian prologue/epilogue was an addition, as they seem to carry the same kind of language, encapsulating the prosaic body quite neatly?

If it is not a later addition, I guess the author is ironically using a naive folk story (Job being an old legendary character, along with Noah and Dan[i]el, in Ezekiel 14:14,20) to encapsulate his deep and corrosive poetic dialogue. But you must also take into account that a big part of the poetic dialogue itself is secondary (chapter 28 about Wisdom in the late mood of Proverbs 8--9, Elihu's discourse and Yhwh's second discourse at the very least). So it is very difficult to imagine how the author of the essential dialogues built his work in the first place.

Taking the line that the end result was rejection, surely that would then take him outside of the "family" and thus the covenantal blessings? Ergo if the original story ends badly, then it's potentially an example of what can happen to even the greatest of people, if they ultimately reject God?

Interestingly both the prosaic Prologue and the poetic dialogues (carefully avoiding the name Yhwh, with only one exception in 12:9) depict Job as a non-Israelite, out of any "covenant" relationship with God. Moreover, Wisdom literature in general is remarkably universalistic: the concepts of revelation and covenant play almost no part in it.

I personally tend to see the covenant theology (from Deuteronomism down to Calvinism) as one of the most perverse ever: any criticism is swept away because the critic puts him/herself out of the game and his/her protest is ipso facto invalid. How convenient.

LittleToe

Didier:

Job being an old legendary character, along with Noah and Dan[i]el, in Ezekiel 14:14,20

That's one beautiful thing about such literature - you always find something else that you've missed
It's a short passage, but it eluded me. It would place Job on the side of the "good guys", I guess

Given that there appears to be a propensity to not discard anything (as seen, for example, in the interweaving of the pentatuach) do you suppose it might originally simply have been an epic poem?

...depict Job as a non-Israelite, out of any "covenant" relationship with God.

Well given that it's supposed to predate the "Mosaic covenant", the Israelite connection would likely be missing anyhow, yes? There's certainly no allusion to "Mosaic sacrifice", rather a similitude with earlier sacrificial forms, maybe dating back to the time of Abraham (though I freely admit that the dating of the work is widely contested).

Moreover, Wisdom literature in general is remarkably universalistic: the concepts of revelation and covenant play almost no part in it.

I agree that there's little, if any mention of covenant. Surely revelation is, though, since wisdom is to be sought out. It panders well to gnostic theology.

I personally tend to see the covenant theology (from Deuteronomism down to Calvinism) as one of the most perverse ever: any criticism is swept away because the critic puts him/herself out of the game and his/her protest is ipso facto invalid. How convenient.

That would be one way of viewing it
Setting aside the covenantal position of the critic, however, what do you protest in it?

Narkissos

Aren't we drifting off topic?

It would place Job on the side of the "good guys", I guess
Given that there appears to be a propensity to not discard anything (as seen, for example, in the interweaving of the pentatuach) do you suppose it might originally simply have been an epic poem?

We have no idea about the original legendary Job character. What we can gather from Ezekiel is: a wise and righteous man. The Danel character as it appears in the Ugaritic Aqhat Epic, to whom Ezekiel very probably refers, has little narrative connection, if any, with the Daniel character of the 2nd century BC Biblical book. The book of Job is certainly later than Ezekiel, so the latter is hardly a help to interpret the former (except on the origin of the name).

Surely revelation is, though, since wisdom is to be sought out. It panders well to gnostic theology.

Interesting: I think of "seeking out" (man's effort) as the very opposite of revelation (divine act). And if Gnosticism draws heavily upon Wisdom literature, especially in its later Hellenistic reception, Wisdom is not Gnosticism.

About covenant theology: I guess almost all our theological problems with "God" ultimately come from the shift from polytheism to monotheism. What we found earlier in this thread about "worship" we also found before about the "name of God" (a god needs a name, God doesn't) and we now find about "covenant" and "election".

In the polytheistic context, each god is linked to his people by a covenant. He received his people by inheritance (through a decision of the supreme god El, cf. Deuteronomy 32:8ff), he elects it as his people. The relation of Yhwh to Israel is no different from the relation of Kamosh to Moab (Judges 11:23ff). It's logical. But what if a god becomes "God" (monotheism)? Then his choosing one people and establishing a covenant with it alone out of the whole world is a complete mystery (or nonsense).

One think I'd like to add, although it is very loosely connected to the above, just because I think you might understand: I stopped referring to "God," not for rationalistic reasons, but because I felt "God" is not the right word for what I experience and believe.

shotgun

Scully, God is very generous with his deserved worship.

He has been so unclear about it that he now shares his worship with cows and elephants in India, a chubby guy with a beer belly in many other lands and a Polish guy with a white hat that no one even understands anymore.

Pole

:: a Polish guy with a white hat that no one even understands anymore.

Yeah. Whatever.

Pole of the white hat class

LittleToe

Didier:

Aren't we drifting off topic?

Totally. Fun, isn't it
I'm sure Scully will beat us, when she feels it approaches an unacceptible level.
What she can't do with a wooden spoon isn't worth knowing about...

The book of Job is certainly later than Ezekiel

I take it you mean the completed work, rather than portions thereof?
I understand there's great uncertainty regardling precise dated, within a margin of about a millenia.

Wisdom is not Gnosticism

True, though gnosis is about knowledge, however received.

About covenant theology: I guess almost all our theological problems with "God" ultimately come from the shift from polytheism to monotheism.

That complaint isn't limited to "Covenant" theology, though, is it?

What we found earlier in this thread about "worship" we also found before about the "name of God" (a god needs a name, God doesn't) and we now find about "covenant" and "election".

Though in a pluralistic society, even the designation"God" doesn't really cut it anymore, does it? Giving rise to the JW's use of "Jehovah God".
It seems the non-Christian religions have taken back the designator, requiring the modern idiom to differentiate with names, once more.

But what if a god becomes "God" (monotheism)? Then his choosing one people and establishing a covenant with it alone out of the whole world is a complete mystery (or nonsense).

Agreed, especially if worship is exclusive and geographically limited. Which again begs the question: does he need to be worshiped, as part of any such covenant? (I knew I'd somehow manage to help you get the thread back on track, eventually, mon ami )

I stopped referring to "God," not for rationalistic reasons, but because I felt "God" is not the right word for what I experience and believe.

Now that's an interesting insight into the man. Would you mind elaborating, please?

Scully

LT:

I'm sure Scully will beat us, when she feels it approaches an unacceptible level.
What she can't do with a wooden spoon isn't worth knowing about...

hmmmm... that sounds like wishful thinking to me....

Too bad that I'm enjoying seeing this discussion unfold, eh??

LittleToe

Scully:

hmmmm... that sounds like wishful thinking to me....

Darn, ya mean the allegations aren't true...

I leave here a wiser and sadder man...

Scully

LT:

Darn, ya mean the allegations aren't true...

I leave here a wiser and sadder man...

Now, now... I didn't say that... although I'd like to know who ~~squealed~~.. *ahem*... spilled the beans...

Soledad

Good question Scully...it's a good one to discuss with even the most ardent jws...it's not an apostate-type question, so it may open their minds just a little.

funny I should bump into this thread

just on Saturday I was having this type of discussion with my mother. She just couldn't get it. Or mabe she wouldn't. It was the same old JW type rhetoric over and over again, until she finally got flustered and said "If I had known that you would grow up to one day to say these awful things I would have had an abortion!" Harsh words but I understood where she was coming from---she knows that there are no answers but she needs to have answers and she needs to always be right. She can't contemplate, not even for a second, that it all may be a big old scam--no way, not now, not ever.

I couldn't help but chuckle to myself when she said those words above. This coming from a woman who says that people who have abortions should be stoned to death, yet here she is wishing she had aborted me for "questioning God!" Pretty amazing stuff.

Why does God need to be worshiped?

Share this