Job was perfect?

[tsth]

Job wasn't so perfect to oppose the message of Elihu....Job was willing to hear and receive TRUTH. Job repented before God, just as Elihu counseled. (Read Chap. 36. and then 42.)

Elihu was somewhat of a John the Baptist for Job. He prepared the way for the Lord, and Job did not reject it. If you notice, Elihu was nowhere in God's rebuke against the 3 friends.

In His Love,

Suzanne

[nebula]

This is from Strongs on the word.

From H8552; complete; usually (morally) pious; specifically gentle, dear: - coupled together, perfect, plain, undefiled, upright.

Perfect is the wrong word to use in the translation, yes it maybe King James, but King James is not a perfect translation. I like the NIVs translation of Job 1 it is better,it is written as "This man was blamless and upright."

Verse 1 is simply saying that Job was spiritually and morally upright. IT is not implying that Job was perfect, which is why translating this as "perfect" is probably wrong choice of word, as Job admits he is a sinner and is not perfect.

The Scriptures state also that David was perfect (or similar term), except with regards to Bathsheba. . . .

God does not look at perfection differently. Only person to walk this earth who was Perfect was Christ. Everyone of us, even JOB comes a long way short of Gods definition of perfection.

Thanks, Andrew!

Actually, what you said was more aligned with what I was thinking - a lot of our confusion has to do with our understanding of words and how they have been translated. I was attempting to express that. You did a great job at pulling on my thoughts and creating a better presentation.

[Teach]

I believe the perfection that is attributed by God to man is a perfection of character.

God is not a respector of persons but He is a respector of charactor.

When we daily walk with Him, He will continually visit our character and shortcomings and

desire for us to change and remedy these things. It is our obedience in these areas, that

He wishes us to conquer or change or even hone, that eventually makes Him declare us to be perfect in His eyes.

It just means that we are obedient in every way.

[BlindSeeker]

I always believed perfection was in ones heart resolve and not one performance.

This becomes most evident when one is confronted with error in their life . . . do they just defend themselves or do they receive correction?

[Fraught]

no and no. there is no one perfect in the eyes of God. there are, however, from these imperfect ones, those who are beloved of God, despite all our imperfections and also many friends of God. the well-knows bible heroes like Job, David, Abraham, etc. had plenty of faults but in my comparisons, one thing they all seem to have in common is LOYALTY. they had to cope with the the world and deal with the good times and the bad times as best they could, but through it all, God could trust Himself to them. Jesus makes this point himself, when he met some people who seemed like they were on his side, but it was said, "he did not trust himself to them." lucky for Him, he could see men's hearts.

i could go on but long story short, i think loyalty is a thing that God valued highly in Job and these others and that is very important to Him still.

[Floatingaxe]

I always believed perfection was in ones heart resolve and not one performance.

This becomes most evident when one is confronted with error in their life . . . do they just defend themselves or do they receive correction?

and there's the thing with job. he defended himself to the hilt--and told how unfair things were in the process. the correction his friends brought him was coming from the same place job himself was--the obvious. but job's wrong wasn't obvious. his friends assumed it was there because, of course, A follows B: you do wrong and "punishment" follows. job could see no wrong done, so he could not receive any correction of any sort. until God showed up. elihu was the only one who spoke truth. and God never condemned his words. but people tend to brush over this fact when reading job.

i think the lesson from job has less to do with job's "innocense", and has a lot more to do with us trusting God. everybody quotes him "though He slay me, yet will i trust him." nobody quotes him saying "if i sin, what do i do to you, you watcher of mankind? why have you made me your mark? why have i become a burden to you?" (7:20) or "God has cast me into the mire, and i have become like dust and ashes. i cry unto you for help and you do not answer me; i stand, and you only look at me. you have turned cruel to me; with the might of your hand you persecute me. you lift me up on th wind; you make me ride on it, and you toss me about in the roar of the storm. for i know that you will bring me to death, and to the house appointed for all living. (30:19-23).

job wasnt perfect.

You've got to keep in mind also that the Book of Job is not a factual account. It is literature on the order of Homer's Illiad, a Hebrew epic, if you will.

Job is a literal account of an actual man of God.

[Floatingaxe]

I always believed perfection was in ones heart resolve and not one performance.

This becomes most evident when one is confronted with error in their life . . . do they just defend themselves or do they receive correction?

and there's the thing with job. he defended himself to the hilt--and told how unfair things were in the process. the correction his friends brought him was coming from the same place job himself was--the obvious. but job's wrong wasn't obvious. his friends assumed it was there because, of course, A follows B: you do wrong and "punishment" follows. job could see no wrong done, so he could not receive any correction of any sort. until God showed up. elihu was the only one who spoke truth. and God never condemned his words. but people tend to brush over this fact when reading job.

i think the lesson from job has less to do with job's "innocense", and has a lot more to do with us trusting God. everybody quotes him "though He slay me, yet will i trust him." nobody quotes him saying "if i sin, what do i do to you, you watcher of mankind? why have you made me your mark? why have i become a burden to you?" (7:20) or "God has cast me into the mire, and i have become like dust and ashes. i cry unto you for help and you do not answer me; i stand, and you only look at me. you have turned cruel to me; with the might of your hand you persecute me. you lift me up on th wind; you make me ride on it, and you toss me about in the roar of the storm. for i know that you will bring me to death, and to the house appointed for all living. (30:19-23).

job wasnt perfect.

You've got to keep in mind also that the Book of Job is not a factual account. It is literature on the order of Homer's Illiad, a Hebrew epic, if you will.

Job is a literal account of an actual man of God.

Um...no, it isn't.

Yes, Job is the earliest account of Scripture. It is about an actual man named Job. There is no reason under the sun to believe it is fictional. There must be an agenda afoot that purveys the view it is not biographical.

Sudden pronouncements that it is fiction with no proof other than a "no, it isn't", is powerless to change one's view.

[Botz]

Rufus of Cyrene

Who was the witness that recorded the conversation between God and Satan at the beginning? Who wrote the book?

According to the Wycliffe Bible Commentary, while Job was certainly a real person, the account given in the Bible is not a literal description of his experience. In other words, it is not straight reporting. The literary structure of the book as a whole indicates that the entire book is a figurative account.

We do not know who the witness was...he might have been told the event through G-d rather than actually being there.

We do not know who wrote the book.

I do not think most Believers have ever doubted the book of Job as being a factual account of a known person, and in Ezekiel he is included in a list of righteous men...I hardly think he would have been included amongst them if he was just a hero of fiction, albeit a real person.

[traveller]

Some think Job himself may have written it. He lived, what, another 140 Years? Plenty of time to write. Of course, Moses, Solomon, and even Elihu are included in the possibilites.

[Fraught]

I always believed perfection was in ones heart resolve and not one performance.

This becomes most evident when one is confronted with error in their life . . . do they just defend themselves or do they receive correction?

and there's the thing with job. he defended himself to the hilt--and told how unfair things were in the process. the correction his friends brought him was coming from the same place job himself was--the obvious. but job's wrong wasn't obvious. his friends assumed it was there because, of course, A follows B: you do wrong and "punishment" follows. job could see no wrong done, so he could not receive any correction of any sort. until God showed up. elihu was the only one who spoke truth. and God never condemned his words. but people tend to brush over this fact when reading job.

i think the lesson from job has less to do with job's "innocense", and has a lot more to do with us trusting God. everybody quotes him "though He slay me, yet will i trust him." nobody quotes him saying "if i sin, what do i do to you, you watcher of mankind? why have you made me your mark? why have i become a burden to you?" (7:20) or "God has cast me into the mire, and i have become like dust and ashes. i cry unto you for help and you do not answer me; i stand, and you only look at me. you have turned cruel to me; with the might of your hand you persecute me. you lift me up on th wind; you make me ride on it, and you toss me about in the roar of the storm. for i know that you will bring me to death, and to the house appointed for all living. (30:19-23).

job wasnt perfect.

You've got to keep in mind also that the Book of Job is not a factual account. It is literature on the order of Homer's Illiad, a Hebrew epic, if you will.

Job is a literal account of an actual man of God.

Um...no, it isn't.

now, how could you possibly know that?