An observation, which leads to questions which have no answer

[pecunium]

I was reading a book last week (Skinwalkers, Tony Hillerman) and something in it gave me a strange epiphany.

There is a piece of the God of Job in the words of Jesus.

The God of Job, for those who aren't versed in Christian/Jewish theology is a difficult aspect of the divine. It's a God who, on a bet, destroys a man. Kills his cattle, destroys his home, slaughters his children; and their families just to test him.

Job wasn't some foul sinner.

Job 1:5

And it was so, when the days of feasting were gone about, that Job sent and sanctified them, and rose up early in the morning, and offered burnt offerings to the number of them all: for Job said, It may be that my sons have sinned, and cursed God in their hearts. Thus did Job continually.

An upright man, who worries that his sons might be committing sins inadvertently, and makes amends on their behalf.

Job 1:9/1:11-12

Then Satan answered the LORD, and said, Doth Job fear God for nought?

But put forth thine hand now, and touch all that he hath, and he will curse thee to thy face.

And the LORD said unto Satan, Behold, all that he hath [is] in thy power; only upon himself put not forth thine hand. So Satan went forth from the presence of the LORD.

And Satan (who is a loyal servant of God's, not his dire opponent: that interpretation of him comes later) goes out and kills the children, and the animals (well, to be fair, some were stolen away).

Job's response... he worships God. From this book we get that most difficult of fatalistic comforts, "The Lord giveth, and the Lord taketh, Blessed be the Name of the Lord."

And it goes on, with Satan upping the ante, and God calling the bet, until Job is siting in the ashes of him home, afflicted with boils and flies, mourning in sackcloth.

His friends come, and they argue. Job knows God is answerable to none. He rails against the injustice of it: He doesn't blame God, per se, he merely wishes he had never been born.

When one of his friends tells him to plead his case (if he is blameless) Job (rightly) says there is no way, for the awe, and dread of God will overwhelm him. Despite this, Job does appeal to the Almighty for explanation.

And God does appear, and Job is overwhelmed. No answer does God make to the question of, "Why, what did I do" but to say,


Job 38:1-7

Then the LORD answered Job out of the whirlwind, and said,
Who [is] this that darkeneth counsel by words without knowledge?

Gird up now thy loins like a man; for I will demand of thee, and answer thou me.

Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding.
Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it?

Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof;

When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?

And He goes on, at length of the wonder and power and majesty and ineffable nature of Himself.

Which is the only answer Job gets. A more poetic form of, "I am that I am."

We are taught the God of the New Testament, of the Covenant of the Cross is better than this, that he is all loving, and forgiving.

Which brings me to my epiphany... the one which set me, as I ate my breakfast repeating a passage of the Lord's Prayer to myself; said to be the very words of Jesus, and wondering at "and lead us not into temptation."

Think on that sentence for a moment. Just by itself, forget the rest of the prayer which surrounds it. Ponder what it says about God.

Because it's not, "Keep us from", nor is it, "Strengthen us against." No it asks God to refrain from actively leading us into it.

Lead us not into temptation.

So many questions arise from that phrase.

Lead us not into temptation.

Comments

having lapsed in faith but remembering my questions

[dragonet2.livejournal.com]

the whole story of Job makes Yw** seem like one of the whimsical, jealous, etc. Greek or Roman Gods.

Just saying, ymmv. I became a cynic and now I'm loosely a pagan but pretty much a nonbeliever.

Re: having lapsed in faith but remembering my questions

[pecunium.livejournal.com]

Sort of.

At passover we had some of this point. Had one called one of the greek/roman gods to account the way Job did, it wouldn't be the voice from the whirlwhind taking one to task, but hounds tearing one to pieces.

There are, even in the most hideous of retributions (the bears and the children) some differences in how the Hebrews god dealt with those who stood up to him.

[geekosaur]

When did Psalm 24 stop being penned by King David?

[pecunium.livejournal.com]

When did the writing of Psalms precede the writing of Job? (I'm not even going into the questions of who wrote which Psalms).

Job is a difficult book, with at least two authors, but it's core story (the piece in the middle, bookended by the later bits at the front at back) is old. The tropes, the names, and the styles put it pretty far back.

There are a lot of pieces which come out of it (For I know that my redeemer liveth, for one).

There are also a lot of phrases which recurr, from book to book, as one author, or another, elects to borrow some piece of past writing to make the piece being done seem more trenchant.

[geekosaur]

You missed my point. Your phrasing suggests it was written by the Christian Messiah — but regardless of exactly when you date it predates Christianity.

[pecunium.livejournal.com]

Um... where did I ascribe Psalm 24 to Jesus.

Psalm 24 (KJV)

The earth is the LORD's, and the fulness thereof; the world, and they that dwell therein.
For he hath founded it upon the seas, and established it upon the floods.
Who shall ascend into the hill of the LORD? or who shall stand in his holy place?
He that hath clean hands, and a pure heart; who hath not lifted up his soul unto vanity, nor sworn deceitfully.
He shall receive the blessing from the LORD, and righteousness from the God of his salvation.
This is the generation of them that seek him, that seek thy face, O Jacob.
Lift up your heads, O ye gates; and be ye lift up, ye everlasting doors; and the King of glory shall come in.
Who is this King of glory? The LORD strong and mighty, the LORD mighty in battle.
Lift up your heads, O ye gates; even lift them up, ye everlasting doors; and the King of glory shall come in.
Who is this King of glory? The LORD of hosts, he is the King of glory.

Those are not the words,

"Our Father, who art in Heaven, hallowed be Thy name
Thy Kingdom come, Thy will be done,
On earth as it is in Heaven
Give us this day our daily bread,
and forgive us our trespasses,
as we forgive those who trespass against us,
and lead us not into temptation
but deliver us from evil.
For Thine is the kingdom,
the power and the glory
forever and ever.

Yes, that's a very Jewish sentiment. It echoes things to be found much earlier in the texts (it would be surprising if it didnt), but you also missed the point: The Christian Messiah, the Incarntation of God, the Word made flesh, has in His prayer; the one He commends, a God who leads his beloved children astray. If He didn't, there would be no need to pray that He wouldn't.

Even allowing for the words being written by later men, that's a really strange habit to have the Messiah attribute to God.

[inflectionpoint.livejournal.com]

And then there are those of us who walked away from that god.

My Lord tests me. And tests His other followers. But when I first prayed to my Lord, He asked me to do something that is illegal and wrong... and I respectfully said no. I figured if He was going to strike me down for that, so be it. I'd rather be struck down than be immoral for the request of my God. And I mean it.

And then, He welcomed me with warmth and love. My Lord is the Peacock Angel, Melek Taus. And He is a hard god, but he seeks followers who stand up and ask those questions, who are able to stand up even in the face of something that Big and Profound. There are other ways to relate to Divinity than the rolling over in an abject obedience that I was taught as a child. I relearnt the story of Job as a practicing pagan, and I hold him in the deepest respect for being strong in doing what was right and in being willing to stand up and question God Himself.

[pecunium.livejournal.com]

Well... as I said to dragonet2 the Hebrew god is tolerant of dissent. Look at Abraham and the negotiations for Sodom/Gomorrah, or Moses telling god he is making an evil mistake in his desire to wipe the Isrealites from the face of the earth for their impiety.

Jesus asks for the cup to pass, Job challenges god. He can't stand up to him, but I don't now that, Face to Face, any of us could stand up to any actual god.

Then again, since I happen (in my strange way) to believe more in the rational god of Moses, Abraham and Job than I do of the whimsical, petty god of the American Noisy Protestant, I may not be the best person to try to persuade to the merits of such standing up/the lack of tolerance in my deity.

[inflectionpoint.livejournal.com]

I think we're pretty similar in thought here, I may be expressing it differently and not super clearly, if so, I apologise.

Yep - I was raised Christian, and raised to do a lot of obeying and submitting and Not Asking Questions. Then I read the whole darn Bible. And yes, I was on the story of Job like white on rice - hey, this guy actually had the courage to stand up to God and ask him What Gives? One of the things that got me away from the practices and attitudes of the Christianity I was raised in was actually reading the Bible. Admittedly in an English translation of a document that was from totally different languages, but even so, it was quite an eye opener. I learnt that the Christianity we were taught and that we practiced was not highly related to the things that Jesus actually did or said. I also learnt that the Old and New Testament Gods were sufficiently different as to make me wonder how they were related at all.

Of the two of them, if I hadta pick one, I'd take the O.T. God. (Except I cannot. He says no other Gods before Me, and I have another before him. So YHVH and I live in a strange sort of negotiated truce with each other. My own God made it Quite Clear that I'm not to just write off YHVH, but rather to relearn and redefine His place in my life and my place with Him. I was less than thrilled about this Request, but it was not phrased as one that was negotiable.)

One of the other things that got me away from it was meeting some of the other Gods. When I got first hand experience that didn't line up with the teachings I'd been given, I had to choose what to do with that. I chose to live with the experience and refine the teachings. Perhaps this is an odd perspective, but I thought I would comment. My Lord has asked me to revist and reconnect with the O.T. and the N.T. Gods, and it's been hard. And educational and variable.

Thank you for making me think. I appreciate that.

[jonathankorman.livejournal.com]

YHVH and I live in a strange sort of negotiated truce with each other. My own God made it Quite Clear that I'm not to just write off YHVH, but rather to relearn and redefine His place in my life and my place with Him. I was less than thrilled about this Request, but it was not phrased as one that was negotiable

This gave me quite a chuckle. You're not alone in that onPr

[lalouve.livejournal.com]

I think that this English translation comes from the Latin version, not the Greek original. No time today, but I could look up what it actually says at some point - I know the new Swedish translation, which is reasonably good, says 'do not test us', which is a slightly different thing.

[pecunium.livejournal.com]

Well... yes, I am sure that some of this is the trial of translation.

Do not test us, is similar in the problem... it puts the role of God as that of one who is going to lay traps for those whom he is purported to love.

[niamh-sage.livejournal.com]

Wow. I never noticed that. Food for thought indeed. Do you mind if I share this post with my Mum? She's a theology student and has spent a bit of time on the story of Job - I'd be interested to find out her take on this.

ETA: Wait a second. When we were back in Australia and having our son christened, I remember noticing that the words of the Lord's Prayer were different. We (Anglicans) don't have "lead us not into temptation" any more. Instead there's "save us from the time of trial", which is something distinctly different (and I have to say, although I don't understand why, also disappointing). I wonder what brought that revision about? I'm intrigued now. I'm going to see what I can find out.

ETA2: I think I've figured out what is disappointing about that revision: it's that it waters God down. It takes away from him the apparently capricious behaviour of putting in front of us precisely what we're not meant to have/do, and then watching to see what choice we make. Consequently, it also takes away from us a particular kind of learning opportunity. Someone upthread mentioned being challenged to do something immoral/illegal and saying no - that's the sort of thing I'm talking about.

Maybe I'm going off on a bit too much of a tangent, but that "lead us not into temptation" line makes us sound a little scared of what God could "make" us do. That's quite a dollop of ambivalence in an individual's relationship with God!

[pecunium.livejournal.com]

Well, I did sit there, sort of stunned; repeating it to myself.

Feel free to share it (I put it in the public sphere). I havve some thoughts on it, which are in another reply.

[pecunium.livejournal.com]

Any study of Job leads to serious questions of Theodicy. God kills his children. They aren't taken away, in the manner of Joseph, to be later returned; rather a divinely ordained wind collapses the house on them.

Job's later joys can't really be seen to assuage that grief, and the children are still dead.

[starcat-jewel.livejournal.com]

Yes. It's always seemed odd to me that the behavior the Christian God displays toward Job is so very much like the behavior of an abusive parent or spouse -- the whole "testing" thing, "How much shit can I do to you and make you prove that you still love me?"

And yet that God is supposed to be greater than human. Why, then, are Christians commanded to accept behavior that is lesser than human from him? Isn't he supposed to be BETTER than that? I've never gotten any answer for this except the standard copouts.

[pecunium.livejournal.com]

Job isn't the Christian God, or least not quite. Job is an Old Testament story, and like Ecclesiastes is dealing with the problem that good doesn't always lead to a happy/easy life.

It's a difficult book.

[inflectionpoint.livejournal.com]

Yes. Doing the right thing, doing the good thing, living one's life in alignment with or dare I say it, in submission to the will of God... isn't about happy or easy life. I fear I'm going to lose a lot of people by saying that, but that's what it has been coming to in my experience. There's submission to something that's bigger than you and can dope slap you. That's not what I'm talking about. Because if all you've got on me is I'm bigger and stronger, forget it. I'd rather curse God and die in that situation. Not enough.

But if what's going on is submission to the Bigger, to the Unknown, to what is there, and if it leaves a place for one's skill, talent, strength, discipline and passion, then it's well worth doing, IMO anyway. Submission is often misunderstood as caving in, rolling over, and just letting people do as they please. There's a strength and a grace to it, that can be incredible. It's much more active than one might imagine.

Strangely enough, I used to be submissive in other parts of my life. (Draws the curtain of TMI over these, perhaps in another discussion.) I found that once I learnt more about God, I wasn't interested in submission elsewhere except as an occasional amusement. And I'd been -very- interested in it for fourteen years.

My Lord is bigger than me. And my Lord asks for a lot. But He also asks me to be the best, strongest, and most whole person I can be. And He guides me through that work. And then He asks for all of it back and more. There are some wonderful side benefits I've found from working with my Lord, and it's improved my life by light years. And yet, those are Side Benefits, they aren't the main course. The main course... is being in alignment with/submission to the Will of God.

I struggle with this one a lot. Because that's where my path leads to. Living in submission to the will of God. And it isn't always happy or easy. Sometimes it is downright horrible. I can explain some pains and loss as growing pains, but some pains and loss are in the category of Shit Happens. To people we love. To people who can't withstand it. And I can't save them from it.

And yet, it is the most wonderful thing possible, when one commits to it. I imagine I am a strange example of a pagan, but I'm delighted for the chance to discuss this and to discuss Job with folks. The book has stayed with me for years.

[pindar.livejournal.com]

I think I've said it before, I think God has a cruel sense of humour about who he plays favourites with.

As you know I was brought up a Catholic, and that church teaches about the final judgement. If that's the case I think God and I are in for a bit of a ruck. Mind you, I've incurred excommunication latae sentiae anyway, so I'm frying in hell for all eternity no matter what happens now.

[pecunium.livejournal.com]

I'm not excommunicate only because the Bishop and I don't talk theology.

[pindar.livejournal.com]

The last time I spoke to the (Arch)bishop it wasn't about theology but about him refusing to comply with the data protection laws for not complying with my demand to have all of my former baptismal, confirmation, and other records destroyed. When I took action I was told I was putting my soul in grave danger blah blah blah. The prissy little queen didn't take kindly to being dictated to by a court and threw his toys out of the pram so i gave him the option of excommunicating me instead, which he did by virtue of my refusal to submit to his (sic) authority (latae sentiae). I still took him to court and won though. :D

[inflectionpoint.livejournal.com]

I'd be curious to ask you more about this process.

I serve a different God now. And that works for me. Being able to remove the marks of the old one from my life might be a blessing.

And I wouldn't be unhappy about excommunication. It would just be formalising what happened years ago anyway.

[txanne.livejournal.com]

Job's friends in the middle are a later interpolation. The story makes much more sense if you skip that part. And, FWIW, the names of his second set of daughters mean things like "makeup jar", according to my ex-Jewish friend.

I read the Bible in 90 days last year with my church. The OT nearly made me stop believing in God--the misogyny gave me panic attacks.

[aeditimi.livejournal.com]

Wow, 90 days is way too fast! With no time to actually reflect and say "hmm, that story stinks!" I bet you were left with a lot of panic. Sometimes the words we ascribe to God are the biggest barriers between us and God. That's why I think the Scriptures (of any tradition) are only one way that persons of faith know God.

[txanne.livejournal.com]

Going fast was kind of the point--you get an overview, and with deadlines and accountability to the group, it's actually not that hard to get it done. If I hadn't had to do that 12pp/day, I'd have gotten stuck in the catalogue of ships census of the twelve tribes like I always have before.

[aeditimi.livejournal.com]

I'd say a couple of things.

First, I would say that "lead us not into temptation" does depend a lot on the translation, and the formality of the words. Not knowing Greek, I can't speak to that, but it may or may not be as suggestive of God's control over leading us into tests/tempting places as it appears. That is to say, I don't know if Jesus (here quoted by a later author) was married to the idea that God causes suffering or temptation or whatever.

That said, the overall speculation is an important one, and your linking of it to the Lord's Prayer is one that I honestly haven't heard before, and I've done a lot of studying of Job and similar texts. Don't get me started on last week's story about God 'testing' Abraham by asking him to kill Isaac (I mean, I *did* get started on it and preached on it and everything). What kind of monster would 'test' someone by asking them to murder a child? or by killing everyone important to them?

I think the text of Job presupposes that God is responsible for everything and therefore is the agent (or at least the one who sanctions) violence and suffering. This is not the only answer to the question 'where does evil come from'? but it is a pretty prevalent one. The overarching point of the book is not to question whether or not God causes pain (presupposed that God does), but to question whether or not God can be confined by human definitions of good and evil (and the answer is a resounding no).

And yet, this God, pictured in Job to be all-powerful and beyond categories of good/evil does not prohibit questioning, raging against, or begging to get out of the pain and violence that exists and God's role in it. Job is slapped back for his questions, but not killed or even punished beyond what has already happened to him (which was not a punishment). Jesus most certainly is not punished for begging God to let the cup pass him by, nor is Abraham for bartering with God about the fate of Sodom.

Have you read _When Bad Things Happen to Good People_ by Rabbi Harold Kushner? It's my favorite take on Job (although obviously unrelated to the Lord's prayer, as Kushner is Jewish). Kushner basically rejects the idea that God is the one who causes pain and evil, but that God is in some ways powerless to stop it. In this reading, God could not lead us into temptation, but could perhaps help us find our way out.

[pecunium.livejournal.com]

At one level, the original text matters. At another it doesn't.

The KJV is the touchstone text for a lot (perhaps most) Native speakers of English, even those who aren't christian. Even Catholics such as myself read it. When new versions come out, some of the structural issues of the text are meant to evoke it (I am very fond of the Cambridge University Bible, with Apocrypha, of (IRRC, 1982. Mine is in storage so I'm not sure). My preference for it is that it's the last one before more neutral gender language came in, and I'm old, default masculine is familar, and familiarity makes it more apprehensible; which is why the KJV is the touchstone).

So, since at least the Book of Common Prayer, 1559, the language has been there. It has seeped into the zietgeist. If it's a mis-translation, that mistranslation has become canon.

[sharon-masters.livejournal.com]

In the last few years, as i watched the Universe unfold, i realized that standing around watching people argue over who has the best invisible friend was just as destructive as expecting humans to do anything they don't want to do.
Every one of us that claims to be doing their god's work is doing EXACTLY what they want to do in their hearts- but they have an excuse.
i refuse to look for an excuse, to hide behind an invisible friend, to blame some omnipotent big daddy of forever or to look to human interpretations of infinite beauty if it does exist.
i am responsible for me. i own my own soul such as it is, and the evil of the world is human-- just as is the much less seen divine.

[nancylebov.livejournal.com]

For more of the same problem, there's also God hardening Pharaoh's heart.

[pecunium.livejournal.com]

Yep... theodicy is a difficult problem, and one which has several different answers in the bible itself.

The usual interpretation is that harden is a bad translation, and it ought to be something, along the lines of, "stiffened his resolve". Re-reading the relevant chapters a couple of months ago, next years Seder will be difficult, because I don't buy that version of events anymore.

[jonathankorman.livejournal.com]

Of course, the very first story the Torah gives us of the encounter between the human and the divine is one of Ha'Shem leading humans into temptation. Even if you had somehow never heard the story before, when it told you that there right in the middle of the garden was the one tree whose fruit the people were forbidden to eat you would know exactly where that story was heading, and suspect that this was what Ha'Shem had planned all along.

As for Job, you may find Stephen Mitchell's unique translation interesting. A Jew with many years of Zen Buddhist practice, he sees the the Voice From The Whirlwind as an encounter with something of a very different order than the mere tribal god of the Hebrews. Job has a shocking apprehension of the All, he is transformed by the Voice's “eloquent non-answer.” He says that he came to this reading as a result of learning that with modern language scholarship, Job's final comment which the KJV translates (http://bible.cc/job/42-6.htm) as “Wherefore I abhor myself, and repent in dust and ashes” would better be translated, “Therefore I am quiet, comforted that I am dust.&rdquo%Pr

[inflectionpoint.livejournal.com]

Fascinating.

And yes, I have been led to reexplore the story of the garden. And of Bab El Tower. The reexplorations were fruitful.

However, for the kicker, even after reexploration of these, I ended up in the same place. At the end of the day (for me anyway) it's about alignment with, or submission to the will of God. (Can I say that without scaring people? Read naiively, the notion of submission to the will of God is very very wrong. Read with more understanding, it's all there is. And there is a comfort in it, even when it is not comfortable, pleasant, or even understandable.)

I like your comment here a lot. There is comfort indeed in dust, if you can accept it. That takes strength and struggle. Please see my longer comment above for more on that.

[jonathankorman.livejournal.com]

I remember when I was hanging around with evangelicals some time ago, they would say to me that I was “running away from doing God's will.” I'd always say, “How could I possibly do that? There is nothing but God's will, isn't there?”

[inflectionpoint.livejournal.com]

One word: Jonah.

[jonathankorman.livejournal.com]

Just so! The example I typically used was Moses' encounter with the burning bush. “Wait, are you sure it was me you wanted to talk to?”

[zaimoni.livejournal.com]

Thank you. (Both for the initial post, and for hosting the subsequent conversation. I did not care to interrupt early, as God as known by Job was not the occasion of losing 50% of my religious beliefs in under a minute — while remaining within the Visible Church.)

Most of my emotional theodicy issues had been to do with either the Fall, or the tradeoff that I use to pay into OASDI rather than collect from it. The emotional understanding of the God of Job (and Habakkuk) rendered the latter excuse irrelevant.

Having demonstrated both that calling God to account respectfully is fine, and furthermore that an emotionally satisfying nonverbal answer is given in both cases, gave me the courage to do the first myself (with less drama).

[dclarion.livejournal.com]

aesmael linked to this post. Damn, I like the way you think! I shall put you on my friend list immediately.

:o)