An Introduction to the Jewish and Christian Tradition of the Book of Job

FREED-HARDEMAN UNIVERSITY

AN INTRODUCTION TO THE JEWISH AND CHRISTIAN TRADITION OF JOB

SUBMITTED TO DR. CLYDE WOODSIN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF

BIB 515 SEMINAR IN JOB

BY NEAL MATHISAPRIL 18, 2011

AN INTRODUCTION TO THE JEWISH AND CHRISTIAN TRADITION OF JOB

The Biblical account of Job holds a unique place in Jewish and Christian tradition. While there

is a wide range of debate on the importance of the story, the background of the main character,

and the connection it has with the other text of the Bible, that debate is significant. Scholars,

ancient and recent, evaluating the work of Job have exposed abounding difficulties, of a textual,

theological, and even logical nature.1 While it is impossible to adequately discuss all the material

available over the course of this study, a brief introduction will be provided. This discussion will

begin with the Christian tradition of Job found in the writing of the early Church fathers through

the medieval times.

Any discussion about the Christian tradition of Job should begin with a quick dissection

of Job’s inclusion in the NT text. While there are several verses that seem to allude to the book

of Job (i.e. Mark 10:27, Phil 1:19 and 2 Thess 2:8), two passages need to be addressed for the

sake of this discussion, 1 Cor 3:19 and Jas 5:10-11.

1 Cor 3:19 contains a direct quotation from Job 5:13. The Apostle Paul was a devout Jew

and student of Hebrew history, law, and tradition for many years before converting to

Christianity. Studying at the feet of Gamaliel (Acts 22:3) gave him a great opportunity to study

the Hebrew Bible and the written and oral traditions of the rabbis. This use of the OT

1. H. Joel Laks, “The Enigma of Job - Maimonides and the Moderns,” JBL 83 (1964): 345.

1

wisdom literature could be a direct reference to the lessons learned from that background.2 If the

Apostle Paul found any theological importance in the story of Job, this may have been a subtle

reminder to the readers, especially those of Jewish heritage. On the other hand, it could simply

be the wisdom of the Holy Spirit in divine revelation validating the message of Job and modern

scholarship could be reading too much into its inclusion.

The second passage worth considering is found in Jas 5:10-11. There, James make a

reference to the “steadfastness of Job” (ESV). This comes on the heels of a discussion centered

on patience and suffering in 5:7-9. Here, Job is presented as an “example of suffering and

patience.” Some modern commentators believe that James sees Job as a holy proselyte in the

mold of Abraham and Rahab.3 Some of them also believe the influence of the Testament of Job

plays a role in the description of the OT patriarch. They conclude that compared to the book of

Job, which presents him as a grumbler, the Testament of Job depicts him in a positive light

especially in consideration of his suffering.4 However, the book of Job does not really present

Job as a grumbler, merely a student without an answer or a servant without knowledge. Once

again, this discussion seems to limit the power of the Holy Spirit and the work of inspiration in

the formation of the NT. However, it is not outside of the realm of possibility to conclude that

the lessons learned about Job through their Hebrew education did influence Paul and James.

2. Carl Holladay, The First Letter of Paul to the Corinthians (Living Word Commentary; Abilene, Tex: ACU Press, 1984), 56.

3. Sophie Laws, The Epistle of James (Black’s New Testament Commentary; Peabody, Mass: Hendrickson, 1980), 215-216.

4. Ralph P. Martin, Job (Word Bible Commentary; Waco, TX: Word Books, 1988), 194.

2

That influence could have easily been translated to the epistles they wrote without compromising

the work of the Holy Spirit.

Now that the NT text has been addressed, a discussion of the Patristic interpretation of

Job can be presented. This discussion will be presented in chronological order, not order of

relevance. Before that discussion, it must be noted that the writers were confined to using the

LXX as their text for Job. Without a proper understanding of the original text, these men were

hindered due to problems found in the LXX in regard to Job. At points, whole verses were

missing, some were moved from original positions, and some verses were filled in with

information from apocryphal literature.5 While that problem did not keep these men from

discovering the purpose of the book of Job, it did hinder their studies by excluding some divinely

inspired text.

We must understand, first and foremost, that there were no major commentaries produced

on the topic of Job until the third century. Even then, those commentaries did not produce any

major influence on the thoughts and applications of Job during the medieval times.6

Consideration should begin with Clement and his First Epistle. Clement lived and wrote

during the late part of the first century and early part of the second century. In this epistle, Job is

referred to as the “righteous and blameless true worshipper of God . . . heralding the coming of

Christ.” Job is mentioned alongside Abraham, Moses, Elijah, Elisha, Ezekiel and other prophets,

a group he was also placed with in Jas 5:10-11 as well.7 It is interesting to note in Eusibius’

5. C.F. Keil and F. Delitzsch, Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, and Job (Commentary on the Old Testament 4; Peabody, Mass: Hendrickson, 2001), 262.

6. John H. Hayes, “Book of Job,” Dictionary of Biblical Interpretation, 587.

7. J.R. Baskin, “Job as Moral Exemplar in Ambrose,” VC 35 (1981): 223.

3

Ecclesiastical History that this Clement is believed to be the same one mentioned in Phil 4:13.8

If that is the case, then this connection to the Apostle Paul may have provided inspiration to

Clement to search the OT scriptures for illusions to Christ.

Tertullian, who wrote during the early second century in his Treatise on Patience

referenced Job, by stating the following:

Happy, too, was that man who displayed every manner of patience against every vicious attack of the Devil! His flocks were driven away, his wealth in cattle destroyed by lightning, his children killed at a single stroke when his house collapsed, his own body, finally was tortured by painful sores-yet, by none of these was he lured from his patience and the trust he owed the Lord. Though the Devil struck him with all his strength, he struck in vain! Far from being turned away by so many misfortunes from the reverence which he owed to God, he set for us an example and proof of how we must practice patience in the spirit as well as in the flesh, in soul as well as in body, that we may not succumb under the loss of worldly goods, the death of our dear ones, or any bodily afflictions. What a trophy over the Devil God erected in the case of that man! What a banner of His glory He raised above His enemy when that man let fall from his lips no other word than “Thanks be to God!” as each bitter message reached him; when he severely rebuked his wife who, weary by now of misfortunes, was urging him to improper remedies.9

It seems obvious that Tertullian considered Job to be a remarkable example for those who need

patience. Especially patience in the face of suffering.

The works of Origen also find a significant place of importance in this discussion.

Origen lived and wrote during the early part of the third century. While he never wrote a

commentary on Job, he mentioned the OT account close to 300 times in his writings.10 An

example of those citations can be found in his defense of Christianity entitled Against Celsus.

8. Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History (trans. C.F. Cruse; Peabody, Mass: Hendrickson, 2001), 82.

9. Tertullian, Treatise on Patience (trans. Rudolph Arbesmann, Emily Joseph Daly, Edwin A Quain; New York: Fathers of the Church, Inc., 1959), 218.

10. Hayes, “Book of Job,” 587.

4

In this discussion, Origen cites from the story of Job during a section on Satan. In Chapter 43, he

writes, “in the book of Job . . . the devil is distinctly described as presenting himself before God,

and asking for power against Job, that he might involve him in trials of the most painful kind.”11

Throughout those citations, Origen presented Job as a model or prototype of the Christian martyr.

12 Eventually, that idea of Job as an example of how to suffer as a follower of God will found its

way to other influential authors.

During the third century, commentaries on Job were written by John Chrysostom,

Augustine, and Julian of Eclanum. Alongside these commentaries are the works of Ambrose,

who never wrote a full-scale commentary but did reference Job frequently in his writings.13 The

writers’ viewpoints found in these commentaries and other texts share some characteristics that

should be noted. The first of those characteristics was an appeal to Job’s virtue. According to

Augustine, the story of Job portrays suffering as a test for one just and pious person who then

becomes an example to all the readers of his story.14 Augustine later mentions Job in his work

The City of God as someone who “is so praised by the divine oracle, that no man of his time is

put on a level with him as regards to justice and piety” and continues by saying, “that from this

one case we might know that among other nations also there might be men pertaining to the

11. Origen, “Against Celsus” in Origen (ed. Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson; vol. 4 of The Anit-Nicene Fathers, ed. Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson; Grand Rapids, Mich: Eerdmans, 1972), 593.


13. Baskin, “Job in Ambrose,” 223.


5

spiritual Jerusalem, who have lived according to God and pleased Him.”15 Job’s virtue is

highlighted in Chrysostom’s commentary on Job 1:1 where he says, “each of these epithets is

sufficient to show the beauty of Job’s soul. But, as a lover multiplies the details in order to

describe the one he loves, so the same occurs here. ‘Blameless’ the text says, that is perfectly

virtuous.”16 Julian of Eclanum defines Job as a virtuous person in his commentary on 1:13-15,

“the day of trial is chosen by the devil in order that he may now overthrow the holy Job with the

variety of damages and afflictions.”17 Ambrose takes it a step further by saying about Job, “his

virtues had no point of contact with any vices, but stood firm on their own ground.”18 It is

obvious that the moral excellence of Job stood out in the mind of these early writers. They saw

in his life an example of right living, even if it did come from an ancient follower of God not

connected with their faith in Christ.

There was also a connection made by these authors in consideration to Job’s suffering

and God’s providence. As far as Augustine was concerned, all of God’s children must endure

suffering. Job’s suffering was no different than anyone else’s ordeal.19 Chrysostom, in his

commentary on Job 1:16 says, “therefore we cannot consider these blows as coming directly

from God. The Devil amplifies the tragedy, as seen in the variety of the announced calamities.”20


16. John Chrysostom, Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture (ed. Manlio Simonetti and Marco Conti; Downers Grove, Ill: InterVarsity, 2006), 1.

17. Julian Eclanum, Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture (ed. Manlio Simonetti and Marco Conti; Downers Grove, Ill: InterVarsity, 2006), 5.



20. Chrysostom, Ancient Commentary, 6.

6

Julian of Eclanum finds a connection to the providence of God in his commentary on the opening

verses of Job 36. He comments saying, “the author of the book, while distributing the chapters

the different speeches to us, connects the words that follow to the beginning. Since he had

stirred the attention of the listeners by discussing the providence of God, he also asks their

patience for the things that he is about to say.”21 He seems to believe that Elihu’s discourse in

chapters 33 to 35 is an appeal to the providence of God. This idea about the providence of God

brought about a question to consider that is still debated today. Why would God allow the devil

to afflict the righteous? Or in other words, why do bad things happen to good people? Ambrose

answered this by connecting David and Job and wrote about them saying, “so I have it at heart

to meditate upon the prayers of both (David from Psalm 41 and Job), for in them the nature of

human life is portrayed, its case is pleaded, and its privileged position is given form.”22 Ambrose

found a connection between suffering and freedom in the lives of David and Job by stating “that

real and muscular suffering leads to a truer perception of reality that, in turn, frees the sufferer

from earthly entanglements.” 23

Ambrose tended to differ from the rest on two points. He did not see the suffering of Job

as a prefiguration of the suffering of Christ. 24 That connection was popular even beyond the

scope of these men. Zeno, the Bishop of Verona said in his Tractate 2.15, “Job, rich

21. Eclanum, Ancient Commentary, 184.

22. Ambrose, “The Prayer of Job and David” in St. Ambrose Seven Exegetical Works (ed. Michael P. McHugh; vol. 65 of The Fathers of the Church Series, ed. Michael P. McHugh; Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America Press), 330.



7

in goods of this earth, and then reduced to poverty, prefigures Christ.”25 Ambrose, rejecting this

idea went on to say in his commentary on Luke,

Christ did not want to be the father of a small number, as was Job, but to be father of all. As for bodily wounds, it would be vain to test him by those-he who took all bodily sufferings on himself-and to show that he had right to a victory without blemish, which would defeat the enemy of the body. (Job) was a man who was tempted in his human possessions, (Christ) was tempted in the kingly domain. One lost his patrimony, to the other the kingdom of the world was offered . . . Job accumulated wounds, but this courageous athlete (Christ) did not have a troubled soul.”26

Ambrose never devalued Job, he was just unwilling to make his suffering comparable to Christ

or even a prefiguration of Christ’s suffering. Ambrose is essentially keeping Job’s example

grounded, something that all men can relate to. He showed this in a sermon by comparing those

in the crowd to Job. He said, “in each of you Job lives again, in each the patience and valor of

that saint has shone forth again.”27 His goal was to keep the example of Job realistic and

approachable to Christians.

Ambrose also differed from the normal viewpoints on Job by using the story to discuss

the difficult impediment of wealth in regards to salvation.28 Ambrose discusses this line of

thinking in his Commentary on Psalm 118 by saying, “who would question the justice of God

knowing that if Job had not parted with all his possessions, he would not have found such

grace?” Ambrose then finishes saying, “truly the just man blesses God when he suffers, the

sinner only when he is abounding in riches.”29 Ambrose believes Job was proven by God to be

25. Baskin,“Job in Ambrose,” 229.





8

righteous in his suffering, partially due to the loss of his possessions. That loss allowed him to

grasp the providence of God and handle the suffering with patience.

When moving to the Medieval writings on Job, two authors find relevance, Gregory the

Great and Thomas Aquinas. It is important to point out that their writings on Job were somewhat

different. Gregory the Great highlighted the allegorical tradition of Job in a way that stood out

from other authors of his time. He states in the Dedicatory Letter of his Commentary on Job, “at

times we neglect to expound the obvious words of the narrative so as not to reach too late the

obscure meanings. At times they cannot be understood literally because, when the obvious

meaning is taken, they engender the readers, not instruction, but error.”30 Aquinas addresses this

difference in the introduction of his commentary by saying, “with trust in God’s aid, I intend to

explain this book entitled the Book of Job briefly as far as I am able according to the literal

sense. The mystical sense has been explained for us both accurately and eloquently by the

blessed Pope Gregory so that nothing further need be added to this sort of commentary.”31 It is

interesting to note that Gregory’s work was not as one-sided as it may come across in the

introduction to Aquinas. In fact, Gregory himself said in the same Dedicatory Letter from above,

“that we run over some topics in historical exposition, and in some we search for allegorical

meaning in our examination of types; in still others we discuss morality but through the

allegorical method; and in several instances we carefully make an attempt to apply all three

30. Gregory the Great, Commentary on Job (trans. George E. McCracken; Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1954), 187.

31. Brian Mullady, “The Commentary of St. Thomas Aquinas on the Book of Job,” 1 [accessed 18 April 2011]. Online: http://fatherbtm.com.

9

methods.”32 In his work Morals on the Book of Job, Gregory shows this idea by saying, “nor is it

without propriety, that in the midst of Hebrew lives, that of a righteous Gentile is placed in that

authority which commands the reverence of men.”33 To pigeon-hole each commentary as either

allegorical or literal would be a mistake.

These two medieval works, like the aforementioned Patristic works on Job, ultimately

come back to the same ideas and conclusions about the character of Job and the importance of

his story. Job is a great example of faith (Julian of Eclanum and Augustine), patience (Tertullian

and Ambrose) , and virtue (John Chrysostom and Gregory the Great) for every student of the Old

Testament.

When considering the Jewish tradition of the book of Job, it must be taken into

consideration that hundreds of years of oral tradition took place before the Talmud was put into

written form. This gap surely allows for some of the verbal traditions about Job (the book and

character) to simply be lost to time. Before a discussion of the tradition takes place, a quick

dissection of relevant passages outside of the book of Job is necessary. It is worth noting that

several passages from the OT text seem to elude to Job. One such verse is Prov 3:11 which says,

“my son, do not despise the Lord’s discipline or be weary of his reproof.” (ESV) This verse

compares favorably to Job 5:17 which says, “behold, blessed is the one whom God reproves;

therefore despise not the discipline of the Almighty.” (ESV) Another parallel can be found

between Psa 8:4 and Job 7:17, and yet another between Prov 10:28 and Job 2:13. These parallels

validate the unity of scripture and the overall message of the OT. While no concrete evidence

32. Gregory, Commentary, 186-187.

33. Gregory the Great, Morals on the Book of Job (trans. members of the English Church; Oxford: John Henry Parkes, 1844), 18.

10

can support a fact-based assumption that the authors knew of the other texts, the allusions seem

to support that possibility. As mentioned during the discussion about 1 Cor 3:19 and Job 5:13

this seems to be evidence that supports the divinely inspired work of the Holy Spirit, even among

the authors of the OT text (see 2 Pet 1:20-21).

A second passage worth considering is found in Ezek 14:13-14 which says, “Son of man,

when a land sins against me by acting faithlessly, and I stretch out my hand against it and break

its supply of bread and send famine upon it, and cut off man and beast, even if these three men,

Noah, Daniel, and Job, were in it, they would deliver but their own lives by their righteousness,

declares the Lord God.” (ESV) In this prophetic text, Job is mentioned as a character of great

righteousness. Keil and Delitzsch make an interesting point in their commentary on Job about

this passage,

By the end of the time of the kings, Job was a person generally known in Israel, a recognized saint: for Ezekiel, in the year 593-2 B.C., complains that the measure of Israel’s sin is so great, that if Noah, Daniel, and Job were in the midst of Israel, though they might save themselves, they would not be able to hold back the arm of divine justice...Ezekiel would not have been able to mention Job, if he had not, by means of the written narrative, been a person well known among the people to whom the prophetical discourse was addressed.34

It seems obvious that this appeal to Job’s righteousness and the ease to which the prophet Ezekiel

and God use the character of Job would grant some relevance to his importance in the Hebrew

text. Several modern commentators believe this appeal to a non-Israelite example signifies a

universal understanding of righteousness that should govern the lives of all people, not just

34. Keil and Delitzsch, Commentary, 258.

11

the Israelites.35 As mentioned earlier, if that seems to read too much into the text then a firm

belief in the work of the Holy Spirit in revelation would not rule out the connection.

While discussing the Jewish tradition of the book of Job, several observations should be

made. First of all, there is ambivalence when it comes to the story of Job. In Hellenistic Jewish

literature, such as the Testament of Job, Job comes across as a hero. In Rabbinic Jewish

literature there is a real mixed assessment. In reality, the sayings of the rabbis as they are in the

Talmud and Midrashim present an incoherent, non-uniform message.36 At times the Babylonian

Talmud agrees with Job in questioning the justice of God, however, it never really gets around to

addressing Job as anything other than rebellious. That mixed assessment seems to come from a

refusal to sanctify the attitude of defiance found in Job. In the end, the rabbis seem to have

marginalized Job because of this defiance.37 The ultimate conclusion on the ambivalence is

found as the rabbis ultimately define God as just and Job as flawed and mistaken in his challenge

to God.38

Secondly, that marginalization leads to some negative opinions and commentary about

the character of Job. Garrett sums it up best when she says, “the major trend of Jewish tradition

is represented by the Bible commentators and religious philosophers who acknowledge some

35. Leslie G. Allen, Ezekiel 1-19 (Word Bible Commentary; Dallas: Word Books, 1994), 218; Walter Zimmerli, Ezekiel 1 (Hermeneia; Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1969), 315.

36. J. Weinburg, “Job versus Abraham: The Quest for the Perfect God-Fearer in Rabbinic Tradition” (paper presented at Colloquium Biblicum Lovaniense XLII, Leuven, Belguim, August 1993), 281.

37. Alan Mittleman, “The Job of Judaism and the Job of Kant,” HTR 102 (2009): 25.

38. Mittleman, “The Job of Judaism,” 29.

12

form of rebellion, heresy, or, at least, an imperfection on the part of Job.”39 Sometimes, Job was

even defined as a Gentile only blessed in this world so that he might be cursed in the afterlife.

Take a look at the tractate Baba Bathra 15b where a commentator says, “there was a certain

pious man among the heathen named Job, but he came into this world only to receive his reward,

and when the Holy One, blessed be He, brought chastisements upon him, he began to curse and

blaspheme, so the Holy One, blessed be He, doubled his reward in this world so as to expel him

from the world to come.”40 Moving on further into this tractate, you will find in Baba Bathra

16a that it says about Job, “with his lips he did not sin, but he did sin in his heart” and that Job

“sought to turn the dish upside down.”41 It seems that the commentators believe Job wanted to

deny the sovereignty and justice of God and prove Him to be wrong. In the end, this distrust in

Job seems to be found in his apparent lack of respect for God. Again, in Baba Bathra 16a we

find the statement, “he makes himself the colleague of heaven.”42 All of these seems to produce

evidence that supports the low view of Job held by many of the rabbis. The third observation

that should be noted is the frequent comparison between Job and Abraham. In the Tosefta, a

supplement to the Mishnah, discussion is brought up that compares the two characters. The term

God-fearing is used to connect them.43 It says, “a fearer of God is said in relation to Abraham

and a fearer of God is said in relation to Job. Just as the fear of God said in connection with

39. Susan R. Garrett, “The Patience of Job and the Patience of Jesus,” Int 53 (1999): 255.

40. Babylonian Talmud (trans. Isidore Epstein; London: Soncino Press, 1935), 75.

41. Babylonian Talmud, 79.

42. Babylonian Talmud, 80.

43. Weinburg, “Job versus Abraham,” 290.

13

Abraham stems from love, so too, the fear of God said in connection with Job stems from love.

And all the rest of the complaints found in the section were only due to the circumstances.”44

Not all commentary on the two characters spoke so highly of Job. In a section discussing seven

types of pharisees in the Palestinian Talmud, a ranking is put down that finishes with our two

characters by describing “a Pharisee of fear-like Job; a Pharisee of love-like Abraham. The most

beloved of them all is the Pharisee of love, like Abraham.”45 While both of their examples are

commended, the example of Abraham is given precedence. While there are some

commendations of the actions of Job, they always pale in comparison to that of Abraham. In a

similar discussion, two different teachers, Rabban Johanan be Zakki and Rabbi Joshua ben

Hyrkanus in B. Sotah 27b, have differing views on Job: one believes Job worshipped God out of

fear and one believes he was inspired by love.46 This discussion always seemed to revolve

around what motivated the men to honor God. Abraham served God out of love, Job out of fear.

In a strange sense, Abraham’s faithfulness is used to set up Job faithfulness. It is almost as if the

commentators would not allow the character of Job to outshine the character of Abraham. In the

Babylonian Talmud, tractate Baba Bathra 15a-16b, the commentary fills in a presumed gap in

biblical narrative from Job 1:7. It says there,

I have roamed round the whole of the earth and have not found anyone as faithful as your servant Abraham to whom you said, “Arise and walk through the earth through the length and its breadth, to you have I given it.” For even at the time when he was unable to find a burial-place for Sarah he did not question Your ways. And God said, “Have you considered my servant Job for there is none like him on earth?47


46. Laks, “The Enigma of Job,” 349-50.


14

That line of thinking probably arose from the general belief that Job was wrong in his

challenging of God’s justice. However, could it be that a hint of racism was to blame? Abraham

was, after all, the father of the Jewish nation and Job was merely a non-Israelite or even pre-

Israelite. It does not seem to be out of the realm of possibility that this racism impacted the

commentators of the Talmud when it came to their evaluation of Job.

The Testament of Job must be considered in this discussion due to its contribution to

present day scholarship. This text was probably written sometime during the first century B.C.

or A.D., however, it was universally rejected by the rabbis. Its greatest contribution is the

validation it presents in showing the variety of beliefs found among the Hellenistic Jews about

Job. The Testament of Job even goes so far as to present Job is a direct descendant of Esau and

husband to Dinah.48

The Targum of Job is also worthy of short consideration. The targum, an aramaic text of

the HB around the time of second temple presents a unique look into the historical acceptance of

the book of Job. In Neuser’s translation the following is said about a scroll of Job that is worth

noting,

Said R. Yose, “There was the case involving Abba Halapta, who went to Rabban Gamaliel b. Ribbi in Tiberius and found him sitting at the table of Yohanan Hannizzop, and in his hand was a scroll of Job in Aramaic translation, and he was reading in it. He said to him, ‘Remember Rabban Gamaliel, your father’s father, who was standing on the steps of the Temple mount, and they brought before him a scroll of Job in Aramaic translation, and he said to the builders, ‘Store it away under a row of stones.’ So he too, gave orders concerning in and they stored it away.”49


49. David Shepherd, Targum and Translation: A Reconsideration of the Qumran Aramaic Version of Job (The Netherlands: Royal Van Gorcum Press, 2004), 1.

15

At the very least, it can be determined that there was some sort of discernment and caution

placed around the reading and studying of the text of Job at that time.

A brief mention of certain medieval Jewish teachers also seems important. Saadia, during

the tenth century, believed that conflicting viewpoints on Job led students to miss the point of

Job. That point was simple, God bestows “sufferings of love” upon those servants who can

handle them and survive with their faith intact.50 Maimonides taught that Job truly was a

righteous person who acted foolish. He said that Job acquired the wisdom that “wealth, health,

and children are not the ultimate goal” from his ordeals.51 Gersonides used Job to teach about the

importance of understanding the nature of God’s providence.52 It is worth noting as we conclude

that the two most notable Jewish historians, Philo and Josephus, pay very little attention to Job.

Philo mentions him once and Josephus totally ignores the hero of the great book.

In conclusion, it would seem obvious to point out that the Jewish teachers did not have a

consensus view on the topic of Job. Some would have undoubtedly championed his character,

patience or virtue but most would have been to busy focusing on his race or his errors in

judgment to even give him the time of day in a discussion of great Bible heroes. Unlike the

Christian teachers who focused on the example Job set, the Jewish tradition focused on his

perceived weaknesses and missed the point presented by Ezekiel and James that Job is a great

example of righteousness to Jews and Christians.



52. Mark Kellner, “Gersonides, Providence, and the Rabbinic Tradition,” JAAR 42 (1974): 673.

16

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Allen, Leslie G. Ezekiel 1-19. Word Bible Commentary. Dallas: Word Books, 1994.

Ambrose. “The Prayer of Job and David.” Pages 327-420 in Fathers of the Church. Edited by Michael P. McHugh. Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America Press, 1972.

Baskin, J.R. “Job as Moral Exemplar in Ambrose.” Vigiliae Christianae 35 (1981): 222-231.

Eusebius. Ecclesiastical History. Translated by C.F. Cruse. Peabody, Mass: Hendrickson, 1998.

Garrett, Susan R. “The Patience of Job and the Patience of Jesus.” Interpretation 53 (1999): 254-264.

Gregory the Great. “The Commentary on Job.” Pages 183-191 in Early Medieval Theology. Translated by George E. McCracken. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1954.

Hayes, John H., ed. Dictionary of Biblical Interpretation, A-J. Nashville: Abindgon Press, 1999.

Holladay, Carl. The First Letter of Paul to the Corinthians. Living Word Commentary Series. Abilene, Tex: ACU Press, 1984.

Keil, C.F. and F. Delitzsch. Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, Job. Commentary on the Old Testament. Peabody, Mass: Hendrickson, 2001.

Kellner, Mark. “Gersonides, Providence, and the Rabbinic Tradition.” Journal of the American Academy of Religion 42 (1974): 673-685.

Laks, H. Joel. “The Enigma of Job: Maimonides and the Moderns.” Journal of Biblical Literature 83 (1964): 345-364.

Laws, Sophie. The Epistle of James. Black’s New Testament Commentary. Peabody, Mass: Hendrickson, 1980.

Martin, Ralph P. Job. Word Bible Commentary. Waco, Tex: Word Books, 1988.

17

Mittleman, Alan. “The Job of Judaism and the Job of Kant.” Harvard Theological Review 102 (2009): 25-50.

Mulladay, Brian. “The Commentary of St. Thomas Aquinas on the Book of Job.” Cited April 18, 2011. Online: http://fatherbtm.com.

Origen. “Against Celsus.” Pages 395-428 in The Ante-Nicene Fathers. Edited by Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson. Grand Rapids, Mich: Eerdmans, 1972.

Shepherd, David. Targum and Translation: A Reconsideration of the Qumran Aramaic Version of Job. The Netherlands: Royal Van Gorcum Press, 2004.

Simonetti, Manlio and Marco Conti, ed. Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture, Old Testament Volume 6. Downers Grove, Ill: InterVarsity Press, 2006.

Tertullian. “Treatise on Patience.” Pages 191-222 in Fathers of the Church. Translated by Rudoph Arbesmann. Translated by Emily Joseph Daly. Translated by Edwin A. Quain. New York: Fathers of the Church, Inc., 1959.

Weinburg, J. “Job versus Abraham: The Quest for the Perfect God-Fearer in Rabbinic Tradition.” Paper presented at Colloquium Biblicum Lovaniense XLII. Leuven, Belgium, August 1993.

Zimmerli, Walter. Ezekiel 1. Hermeneia. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1969.

18

Documents

An Introduction to the Jewish and Christian Tradition of the Book of Job