Textual analysis of Old Testament

Quote: Dalex64

What's the message, keep the faith even when bad things happen? If bad things were all that happened, maybe that lesson from that story would make sense. However, in this case, the bad things were caused by the very thing that you are supposed to keep faith in. That makes it easy to take a lesson that the thing does not deserve your faith.

The question of "why do bad things happen to good people?" is perhaps the fundamental question that all religion faces. The related question is "if God is all powerful, then why do bad things still happen?".

Of course if faith was rewarded with wealth, good health, a happy family, respect and a painless death at old age, then there would be no reason for religion. It would just be empirically the obvious choice.

Quote: FrGamble

What I fail to understand is why you think taking the most irrelevant parts of the story need to be the only thing you are focused on.

Don't you mean, the most relevant?

The story is presented as the answer to the questions raised in "the problem of evil"? These parts you want to hide under the rug are the answer: bad things happen because god has so little regard for us, he finds it of interest to "test" people this way.

I confess I find this kind of honesty in religion surprising. But one has to keep in mind we're talking about fictional characters.

Quote:

As far as God berating or belittling Job you are way off base.

Have you read the book? It's Jehovah bragging about his power and questioning Job what he knows about creating the world.

BTW, funny thing the all powerful deity doesn't seem to know 99.9999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999% of all that exists is outside this world.

Quote: Pacomartin

Of course if faith was rewarded with wealth, good health, a happy family, respect and a painless death at old age, then there would be no reason for religion. It would just be empirically the obvious choice.

If we accept the whitewash offered by a certain Catholic priest, we wind up thinking if one keeps "faith" in "god," then "god" will make things "right" eventually. But we can empirically see this is obviously not true.

An interesting item is that Satan (The Adversary) is only used in four books of the Old Testament. One would expect him to be a major player in the Old Testament. In fact he is mentioned once in Psalms, twice in Zechariah, in the first two chapter of Job (11 times) and in 1 Chronicles in the opening post of this thread. Satan is mentioned much more often in the New Testament in all four gospels, Acts, several letters from Paul, and seven times in Revelation.



Tradition identifies Satan with the snake in the Garden of Eden , and also identifies him with Lucifer even though the text does is not explicit. He is also identified with "devils" which is used 4 times in the plural in the old testament and many times in the new testament (51 plural and 61 times in the singular). The word "satan" without the definitive article "The Satan" is used 7 times and is usually taken to refer to an adversary in general , often human.

Some analysts view such textual analysis as an evolving theology, a somewhat abhorrent view to those who view the entire bible as God given.

You know I think it's all fictional, or mythical if you'd rather, but there's a theory floating around that the devil and hell are an influence from the time Persia ruled over Israel and Judea. I can tell you in my years going over the Old testament in school, no mention was ever made of the devil. Also no rabbi I've ever heard do a sermon has said a peep about it, or about hell, or much about any kind of afterlife.

If the whole notion is a Persian import, then it got adapted to whatever little mention there was in the Old Testament, but got written down only in the New Testament.

I don't know what the timing is, or when Zoroastrianism or the cult of Ahura Mazda got started in Persia. By the time of the NT, Persia itself was long gone. It was the Parthian Empire, successor of whatever Alexander left of Persia and what some of his generals built it into.

Quote: Pacomartin

Some analysts view such textual analysis as an evolving theology,.

The authors of the NT elevated Satan
to rock star proportions. There had to
be a battle between good and evil
so they could get converts. Without
Satan and hell, there's nothing to be
'saved' from. Even the Church of Satan
realizes that it's a mythical person. Too
bad the Christians aren't that wise.

Quote: Nareed

If the whole notion is a Persian import, then it got adapted to whatever little mention there was in the Old Testament, but got written down only in the New Testament.

Well, satan שָּׂטָן‎‎ (little 's') is a generic word that means adversary. Satan (capital 's') is the English translation when the definitive article "the" appears. So it could be a title or a proper name. Tradition says that "Lucifer" is the proper name, but that appears only once in the bible, and really about a fallen Babylonian king, who during his lifetime had persecuted the children of Israel.

I guess I didn't realize that the concept was so relatively absent in the Jewish texts. The word "Christ" appears 500 times in the New Testament, although the word "messiah" appears twice in the Old Testament.

That is the issue with textual analysis, as many assumptions were made a thousand years ago, and it is nearly impossible to not see things in historical context.

Quote: Pacomartin

Tradition says that "Lucifer" is the proper name, but that appears only once in the bible, and really about a fallen Babylonian king, who during his lifetime had persecuted the children of Israel.

I thought Lucifer was a Latin name, meaning "light-bringer." "Lux" is Latin for "light." That's very elementary etymology (picked up in physics class, of all places). I suppose, though, the Aramaic original uses a different name.

Quote:

I guess I didn't realize that the concept was so relatively absent in the Jewish texts. The word "Christ" appears 500 times in the New Testament, although the word "messiah" appears twice in the Old Testament.

Twice? Really?

That one I expected more of. It's in a popular Passover song about Elijah. At Passover Seder it's customary to leave out a glass of wine for Elijah. Apparently his return (how?) will precede the coming of the messiah. But then, other than that song, there isn't much mention of a messiah. Except for an old Yiddish saying which translates, loosely, as "And monkeys might fly out of my butt."

Quote: Pacomartin

Some analysts view such textual analysis as an evolving theology, a somewhat abhorrent view to those who view the entire bible as God given.

Yes, it is the development of doctrine and a growing understanding of God's Revelation and Salvific actions throughout history. I like how you clarify the difficulty some fundamentalists might have with this understanding by calling it, "somewhat abhorrent". Most thinking people realize that the Bible records the pedagogy of God the great teacher leading us from chaos to Christ.

Quote: FrGamble

Most thinking people realize that the Bible records the pedagogy of God the great teacher leading us from chaos to Christ.

You mean thinking god believers. Real thinking
people don't believe in god at all.