In my earlier articles on Job, I mentioned some of the reasons why I think it makes more sense to view Job's accuser before God as Satan rather than as a good angel. The accuser is questioning God after God has publicly stated that He knows Job to be righteous, God refers to the accuser as inciting Him for no good reason, and the accuser continues in his accusations even after being told that he's wrong and seeing evidence to that effect. It's simpler to see the accuser as a bad angel rather than assuming some unmentioned heavenly office of "prosecuting attorney", as John Loftus has suggested.
John Hartley writes:
"He [Job's accuser before God] answered God's questions obtrusively and brusquely, reflecting a contemptuous attitude. He sought to misconstrue a person's actions by imputing impure motives to good deeds. Thus he immediately doubted what God affirmed and sternly resisted persuasion to a different viewpoint. In the second scene before Yahweh the Satan would not even debate the issue of Job's integrity, but rather denied it in an impudent style by challenging God with verbs in the imperative." (The Book Of Job [Grand Rapids, Michigan: Eerdmans, 1988], n. 8 on p. 72)
We have other reasons to identify Job's accuser as an evil angel. For example, the behavior of the angel is consistent with what later scripture tells us about Satan's behavior as an accuser of the godly. John Loftus doesn't believe in the Divine inspiration of scripture, but what other passages of scripture tell us (and what later Jewish and Christian traditions tell us) is a factor that we can take into account, even if Loftus doesn't.
But this issue of whether Job's accuser is a good or a bad angel is of secondary importance. The evidence suggests that an evil angel is in view, but let's assume for the sake of argument that a good angel is intended. We still wouldn't have any reason to accept Loftus' larger argument about the book of Job. Nothing that the book of Job tells us logically leads us to the conclusion that Job suffered for no good reason, and the concept that an ancient Jewish author would argue in such a manner, and that his book would then be accepted as scripture, is absurd. The fact that Loftus thought that his argument was good to begin with, then continued to defend it even after being told why it's unreasonable, undermines Loftus' credibility rather than undermining the book of Job.
Mr. Loftus,
ReplyDeleteFirst of all it wasn't a "bet". It is not a little wager between God and Satan. God always has the good of His people in mind, and though you don't understand it, Job's place in glory was greatly increased because of his faithfulness and his holy conduct. If you are so short-sited as to look at this life only--then you don't understand the Christian faith. If you could ask Job now about the trials, he would say it was but a small thing to endure for the glory of God. He is now enjoying a blissful eternity in heaven. God is not "selfish" to display His glory. It may be selfish for a man to seek to do so, but God is not a man. Don't bring God down to man's level, He is all together different. You are making perverse moral judgements against a God you don't really know. Regardless, you will stand before this God you speak so irreverently against. It is my heart-felt desire that you come to know God, that you would seek Him with all your heart, that you would repent of your rebellion and sin, and that you would not go into a Christless eternity. Please consider what I say....
--Jon Unyan
John Loftus insists on seeing Satan as someone who God has to 'prove' something to. God did not need to make a bet with Satan. God did use Satan's evil for eventual good. If only Mr. Loftus knew how the mere retelling of the Job story has helped thousands of Christians in their spiritual walk. Mr. Loftus, like Satan, wanted Job to turn around and curse God. Like Satan, Mr. Loftus just does not understand how God will use even the evil of lesser beings to bring about a greater good.
ReplyDeleteGod bless,
A. Shepherd
The Aspiring Theologian
Mr. Loftus,
ReplyDeleteAgain, you are displaying an ignorance of God. Christians are seeing what God intended to communicate through the book of Job. You just can't accept the fact that God is sovereign and that He is good because He doesn't do what you prefer or what you would like. God is not intending to put YOUR family or finances through Job's trials, but He had a good and holy purpose for doing so with Job. Remember, Christ said that if you love even your closest relatives more than Him you are not worthy of Him, otherwise you would value your family more highly than God. You think God is self-serving? Is it not that you would rather have Him be John Loftus-serving? And because He is not, then He is not worthy of your respect? Much less your praise and adoration? I find the book of Job to be very comforting because I know that God is a God that is infinitely trustworthy and "though He slay me, yet will I trust Him." You never came to this point, which is the dividing line between true believers and false professors. That is why you were a "nominal" (in name only) Christian. May you seek His mercy while it is still day...
--Jon Unyan
Mr. Loftus,
ReplyDeleteJob's affirmation is "THOUGH He slay me", in other words even if it came to that, I will yet trust Him. But if it were to come to that, what would follow? Eternal life in heaven for the Christian. Since you look no further than this life in your atheistic world view, you don't understand it. You embrace an existential Godless amoral world view with no hope, an existence that came about by chance, and you think what I said was utterly stupid?
--Jon Unyan