Matthew Johnson:

>You wrote in consideration of Job 2:10: "It is also of interest to
note
>that even if "at the hand of" _did_ imply authorship, Job did _not_
say
>"shall we not receive evil at the hand of God". The _departure_ from
>parallelism looks deliberate. It could very well be to deny that God
is
>the author of evil."

>How would you reconcile your interpretation with Job 12:9 "Who among
>all these does not know that the hand of the LORD has done this?"

'Reconcile'? No 'reconciliation' is necessary. I think you would have
understood
this if you had not passed over the James citation in such suspicious
silence.

The James passage is completely irrelevant.  In the Book of Job, God
does evil not to tempt but to test.  The difference is in the
"intention" not the "act".  God intends that Job passes
the trial,
hence the trial is a test.  If God had intended that Job fail the test,
then it would be a temptation.

The question remains: Job says the evil he endures comes from the hand
of God (Job 2:10; 12:9) and God says Job is right in what he says about
God (Job 42:7-8)

I reconcile that through the distinction between causal responsibility
and moral blameworthiness that is at the heart of the notion of
necessity.

You merely deny that Job said what he said.  I still don't see how you
can do that from the text itself.

((( s.r.c.b-s is a moderated group.  All posts are approved by a moderator. )))
(((   Read http://srcbs.org for details about this group BEFORE you post.   )))


--- UseNet To RIME Gateway {at} 3/1/05 1:34:37 PM ---