Safire: Job and Dean

The New York Times ^ | 01/05/04 | William Safire

[Pokey78]

WASHINGTON — "Who is this that darkeneth knowledge by words without counsel?"

So thundered God in the Hebrew Bible to his servant Job. That upright and blameless man had dared to challenge the Lord's unfairness in stripping him of his wealth and killing his children.

Last week, some five or six millennia later, "words without counsel" by Howard Dean were heard about the most controversial book in all theology.

As he heads into what H. L. Mencken called the "Bible Belt," the candidate moved to plug an apparent hole in his résumé about an interest in religion. After hearing Dean's observation beginning "If you know much about the Bible — which I do," a reporter asked about his favorite New Testament book. Dean named Job, adding, "But I don't like the way it ends . . . in some of the books of the New Testament, the ending of the Book of Job is different . . . there's one book where there's a more optimistic ending, which we believe was tacked on later."

The candidate returned an hour later to confess error: Job was in the Old Testament, not the New. Beyond that slip, his recollection of "one book where there's a more optimistic ending" is muddled; the Book of Job in the Old Testament has an upbeat ending, with God doubling Job's former wealth and giving him new children for having sustained his piety through all his trials.

"Many people believe that the original version of Job is the version where . . . Job ends up completely destitute and ruined," said Dean in his correction. That's accurate, though there's no other Job book in Scripture with an optimistic ending other than the familiar one. I think he means that some scholars believe that the Old Testament Book of Job that we know was amended by later rabbis fearful of portraying God as unjust.

"Many people believe," concluded Dean, presumably among them, "that the original ending was about the power of God, and the power of God was almighty and all knowing, and it wasn't necessary that everybody was going to be redeemed."

He's right about the existence of that interpretation. A decade ago, in "The First Dissident," a book about the politics of the Book of Job, I reported the belief that a "Hollywood ending" had possibly been tacked on.

Despite his fuzziness, Dean is on to something. The moral excitement in the Book of Job is the sufferer's outrage at God's refusal to do justice. We are told at the outset that this pious, wealthy and powerful man is the subject of a wager between God and the Satan about whether Job's piety was merely the result of his prosperity. When afflicted, Job scandalizes his comforters by damning the day that he was born, calling for a redeemer who could take God to court on a charge of moral mismanagement.

God hears this incessant dissidence and, in the Voice from the Whirlwind, blows Job's whining away in the longest direct quotation of the Lord in Scripture, beginning "Who is this that darkeneth knowledge." In magnificent imagery and biting sarcasm, God answers Job's challenge by rebuking him for presuming to question the wisdom of the Creator of the Universe.

Where does that amazing diatribe leave sufferers seeking solace, or victims seeking retributive justice? Holocaust witness Elie Wiesel has written that he was dismayed by this non-response. The author Virginia Woolf wrote in her diary, "I read the Book of Job last night — I don't think God comes well out of it." Others say the book proves that suffering is no evidence of sin, and may even be a blessing in disguise — that it is beyond human understanding to know God's ways or discern his ultimate purpose.

Job, having succeeded in making direct contact with his Creator, reacts to God's awesome rebuke by putting his hand over his mouth and accepting the limits of his knowledge. In the ending that some find incongruous, he is forgiven and rewarded.

Dean, under Democratic fire for shooting from the lip, says, "I'm feeling a little more Job-like recently." He identifies with the Gentile from the Land of Uz, now called Iraq, because he feels he is being unjustly punished for standing up to authority. How's that for chutzpah?

[goldstategop]

Dean is under pressure and has begged Clintleone to call his goons off.

[Support Free Republic]

Rank	Location	Receipts	Donors/Avg		Freepers/Avg		Monthlies
4	New York	666.00	17	39.18	669	1.00	308.00	19

Thanks for donating to Free Republic!

Move your locale up the leaderboard!

[js1138]

I understand that Job occurs near the end or at the end of the Hebrew Bible. Am I wrong about this? I thought it was in response to the observable fact that the just do not always prosper in this world. Not a bad segway into Christianity.

[docmcb]

Well, my goodness, there's a bit more to say in God's defense in "Job." First of all, Satan has a very good question when he provokes God by asking "Does Job fear God for nothing?" I.e., of course he worships you, look at all the stuff you've given him.

Now God, being omniscient, knows that Job will pass the test. But that isn't the point. JOB doesn't know that he'll pass the test. At the end, Job is much BETTER off than he is at the beginning. yes, he gets back all his wealth and family, big deal. The important thing is that Job now knows that he is doing the right thing for the right reason, not because he's been bribed.

This is priceless self-knowledge and he could only have gotten it through being tested. Job also has a personal encounter with the Creator of the universe. Yes, God engages in a cosmic put-down of Job -- "Where were you when I made the world?" -- but He also speaks directly to Job, who now understands that he had been putting God into a box, i.e. had far too small an idea of God.

Job says, in one translation, that he is "comforted that he is dust." GK Chesterton commented that God comforts Job with riddles, but he does comfort him. Frederick Beuchner says God doesn't explain, He explodes. Chesterton likens it to a small child saying, "Mommy, I don't understand," and the mother, who DOES understand, can only say to the child, "Yes, you don't understand." And that is comforting if the child knows that the loving mother DOES understand, even if he doesn't.

[docmcb]

Job is one of the earliest books in the Bible.

[Billthedrill]

I actually feel a little sorry for Dean on this one - it isn't often a candidate humiliates himself quite this openly, even for an intellectual third-rater like Howie. This one is actually painful to read, and I don't even like the guy.

Job is, of course, about as deep waters as you're going to find anywhere in any literature at all. It is one place where we are confronted directly with the profound difference between the nature of God and the nature of Man, covered up by anthropomorphism and very uneasy to contemplate. If there is a "Hollywoodization" of Job I'd say it's in the putative bet Safire alludes to, which is entirely outside the central question of whether a human can call God to account on the terms of the moral guidance that He has given his creation. Christians and Jews alike can debate this book for hours. My guess is that Dean's thoughts are measured in microseconds.

[woofie]

I often get my Testaments mixed up

[Salvation]

**Last week, some five or six millennia later, "words without counsel" by Howard Dean were heard about the most controversial book in all theology.**

But Dean thought that Job was in the New Testament!

Words of Counsel to Dean: Forget quoting the Bible. It's obvious you don't know what you are talking about!

[mvpel]

Dean's flack: "I think he means that some scholars believe that the Old Testament Book of Job that we know was amended by later rabbis fearful of portraying God as unjust."

We now know that Dean likely subscribes to the "Bible as Literature" model, as opposed to the "Divine Dictation" model of scripture.

[Salvation]

Just another Dean gaafe!

But I haven't heard the big new coverage teams pounce on it, (like they did the other gaafes) have you?

[GulliverSwift]

Jack Napier's brother likely chose Job since his advisers thought it would help him with the Reagan Democrat union crowd.

[arasina]

Very nicely stated defense. I'd attend one of your classes any day!

[Billthedrill]

Yes, and that "some scholars" out is the same one Dean used to excuse his little innuendo that Bush knew about 9/11 in advance. It doesn't wash.

It's a pity, really, because this is an absolutely essential discourse in Christianity, Judaism, and Islam, and you cannot escape the questions Job addresses if you are to reconcile a loving God, or Yahweh, or Allah, with the existence of pain and tragedy on earth. For Christians, of course, the answer is that the covenant wasn't for here on earth, but afterward; but that answer doesn't arrive until the New Testament (better scholars than I may contest that, and I will gladly defer to greater learning).

I just wish Dean had picked another book to practice his line of bovine excrement on. He just isn't up to it. A few sessions with a decent priest or rabbi and he might glimpse the depths of the waters he's dogpaddling in, but that would require a certain humility that is a rare characteristic among politicians.

[docmcb]

Yes, Dean has jumped into very deep waters. Along with Abraham's near-sacrifice of Isaac (a harder test than Job's, many think) and the whole book of Ecclesiastes, Dean has picked just about the toughest material in Scripture to comment on.

[neverdem]

After hearing Dean's observation beginning "If you know much about the Bible — which I do," a reporter asked about his favorite New Testament book. Dean named Job,

Priceless, what a student of the Bible. One of the reasons it wasn't mentioned by the media is maybe the media couldn't recognize it.

[Billthedrill]

Frankly, I'm a little intimidated by it myself. And it's old, very, very old, and very, very vital.

[CFC__VRWC]

I actually feel a little sorry for Dean on this one - it isn't often a candidate humiliates himself quite this openly, even for an intellectual third-rater like Howie.

I just can't feel sorry for him - he brought this one on all by himself, because he's trying to pander to people he openly considers to be vastly inferior to himself intellectually and morally, by trying to flim-flam them. And Howie's so arrogant, so utterly secure in his ignorance, that he probably can't even begin to understand just how much of a fool he has made himself look like. No doubt he will consider himself to be that much more intelligent than the "ignorant Bible-bangers" he's trying to scam, when none of them believe his Christian act.

[CFC__VRWC]

Priceless, what a student of the Bible. One of the reasons it wasn't mentioned by the media is maybe the media couldn't recognize it.

The media saw the word "Job", and went "Oh yeah, Bush has lost 3 billion of them since he stole the 2000 election."