Okay, what I'd like you to do and we're only going to take what I'll tell you what I'll give you until the big hand reaches a four. We'll take 18 minutes of those of you in video land can take 18 minutes to do this as well. I want you to ask yourself two questions and discuss them as a group in relation to the book of Joe to exceedingly central questions. One is what does it mean that Job was blameless and upright? And by the way, when you've considered these, I want you to formulate as a group a brief answer to the two questions and just turn in one sheet from each group. Okay, I'd like to see that and I'll use it in some way. So first of all, the question is what does it mean that Job was blameless and upright? And if you want to figure out how to approach that, imagine that you first of all want to determine that from your reading of the text and then explain it to someone. I don't get into a lengthy explanation, but just imagine that someone comes up to you in your church and says, Job was blameless and upright. That astonishes me. What does that mean? Explain that. And then secondly, the second question, and this is sort of all inclusive, what in your opinion is the central message? I mentioned earlier that there are messages in the book of Job, but what in your opinion is the central message of the book of Job? Okay, hard question. And you have now 17 minutes to work on both of those questions together. So pace yourselves. Okay, time is up. I hope you got something of an answer to both of those questions. Would you send a representative from each group to bring your sheet with the writing on it forward? Because I'd like to have a quick look at these. This is your chance to be on camera, too. You know, so much fun. From behind the best side. Okay, I know there are more than four groups. I will, as long as your name's wrong here, I will try to return things for the groups. Okay, I know there are more than five groups. You're not going to make me reveal everything I know. Are you? Well, that's true. This could be very embarrassing if I can't read. Well, let's just let me just take a random sampling. Okay, I won't, I won't go through all of these, but I'd like us just to see if if we're in the same ballpark. And in a real life situation where we weren't being filmed, I would do this interactively, allow you to speak for yourselves. But since we're being filmed, I'd have to repeat it anyway. It'd take twice as long. So I might as well just read what some of you have written here. What does it mean that Job was blameless and upright? That he was a sinful man. That's not where most people would start, but it's dead on that he was a sinful man, but shunned evil and feared God. Job one, one. Job was righteous because God declared him righteous. Okay, we're getting a, we're waxing theological there, which is not a bad thing to wax, I suppose, but that may be reading the rest of scripture, a bit which, you know, imputed righteousness and such is not bad. But you did begin very interesting that he was a sinful man. Now why I don't know what group that David Brown's group? Why did you begin there? He was a sinful man. Because he was, you're assuming because he was sinful. Okay, and you're assuming that all human beings are sinful, save Christ. Any other reason other groups that you could mention that fact? Yes, Michelle? If you read what in its context? Right, what blameless and upright means, right? Yeah, Dave? Yeah. Okay, he was acutely aware of sin and made sacrifices for sin. Anything even more explicit than that? Well, he repented at the end of whatever it was he needed to repent of without assuming too much. But what about the fact? I can turn my notes back here a little bit. What about the fact that on numerous, on several occasions he admits to being a sinner? That's a good indication that he's a sinner. 721, just to look at some of these. I'll give you a couple of references and we won't look at all of them. But 721, he says, why do you not pardon my offenses and forgive my sins? It's not denying he has them. He's just saying, why don't I get a pardon for these things? So he was a sinner. He admitted at 721, we could also look at 1326 or 1416 to 17. Yes, sin, blameless and upright is not to be equated with being sinless. Let's see if others came up with that point one. He feared God and shunned evil was repentant before God. Now being repentant would imply that he had a knowledge of sin. Rose early in the morning, sense of urgency, perhaps my children have sinned in their hearts and offered up or issued up burnt offerings. OK, good. I think the notion that he was a repentant individual indicates a knowledge of sin and not that the two should be confused. Fear of the Lord, blameless and upright in the sense of fearing God more than most men do, characterizes jobs. Was this written by a woman here, but more than most men do? I think that's men and a generic sense. Fear in God more than most men do, characterizes jobs, blamelessness and uprightness. Job cultivated his relationship with God by sacrifices of repentance and delighting in the law of the Lord. I like these so far. I'll just get you to do this each time and let you teach the class. I won't have to do anything, but read. Well, let's see. You can tell I'm just leafing through here. I'm not going to read them all. I'm looking at the ones that are written in big bold letters that I think I can see. Job was blameless upright because he knew his position before God that God was sovereign. Despite his suffering, he never turned from God even though he questioned the Lord. He always trusted him, though he slay me yet will I trust him. Good. Let's see. What does it mean? Job was blameless and upright. Fear is God, John's evil. Like Noah, righteous in his generation, very good. Bring in that that was said of Noah as well. He walked with God, Genesis 6.9. He was blameless in his generation. Heart toward God, no one like him. Motives of obedience were pure, walked with God and did good in his sight. Interesting stuff there. Here's one that hits its right up front. Blameless and upright does not mean that Job was sinless since this would contradict the rest of Scripture concerning the consequences of the fall upon men, and indeed also Job's own admissions, as we've now seen. Job was blameless and upright before men, meaning that he was a good man of integrity. Good man is in quotes, by the way. This description of Job sets the final question of why bad things happen to good people and why there is suffering in this world. Good. Let me now pose this question. I've read only a sampling of these. Is there anything that came up in your group that is significantly different from what we've been reading? No one said he was sinless. That's good. This is basically in the ballpark. Let me ask the second question. What is the central message of the book of Job? The book of Job presents the Christian paradox of God's sovereignty and human responsibility in the question. Why do the righteous suffer? I have to think about that one a little bit. I think that's got potential there. This one says central message. God is sovereign. I've got to find that one that you guys did. God is sovereign and just. Groups were sitting right next to each other and looking at each other's paper. This one says the sovereignty of God. You can tell this is covenant seminary, you know. Reform theology, sovereignty of God. God can do what he wants when he wants and how he wants to do it. That's true. That's good. Central message, next page. Even the next page is pretty confusing. See, the Lord is sovereign. I knew I could find a keyword there somewhere. And bless those who belong to him. Lord puts limits on Satan. Continuous belief in God, despite tests, faith allowed him to see God. Some people have problems answering a simple question. You know, that was a lot of good answers though. Thank you very much. I got to find this other one here. See what's a central message that we can suffer or not. This is yours, Mike. We can suffer or not see God. Okay. And be assured that there is some divine plan or reason for our suffering or injustice even though we may not ever see it. Like that. I like. Oh, here it is. God is still God. And we are still not. Yeah. Well, it's going to be hard to top that one as the central message. So let's stop there. Good. Very good. I think I think you're getting the point. Well, now what I'd like us to do now is simply flash this out a little bit, maybe tweak it a little bit, maybe nuance it a little bit. As we talk through the content of the book of the Job, this is point B on your outline, a survey of the book of Job with attendant questions. That means with excuse to digress wherever we want to. So let's just look at the major. Oh, you got to get back in your places. All right. Well, give you a minute to get back in your your chosen seats. Okay. Well, let's let's begin then with point B, a survey of the book of Job. The narrative introduction, chapter one, verse one to two, ten. That's the pros prologue that we saw before. First question, Job's righteousness. That's what you've just been talking about. This man was perfect and upright or blameless and upright. The word blameless can also mean perfect in the sense of being complete. He was he was complete. He was perfect. He was genuine and he was upright, upstanding. He feared God and turned from evil. And God is the one we need to be careful about this. It is God who says this of Job. The narrator says it first within God confirms it in verse eight. And then the Lord said to Satan, have you considered my servant, Job chapter one, verse eight, there is no one on earth like him. He is blameless and upright. A man who fears God and shuns evil. He is perfect and upright, perfect in the sense of integrity, of genuineness does not imply Job sinlessness as most of you noted. I gave you references, 721 and following that point that out. The point seems to be this, as you can find in the theological word book of the Old Testament in Dr. Harris's article there, he simply defines this kind of blamelessness as follows. Wholehearted, Job was wholehearted in his commitment to the person and requirements of God. He was a committed follower of God. He was not trying to be, he was not a double-minded man, unstable in all his ways. He was not trying to serve God and man to invoke other scripture references. He was single-minded in his desire to serve God. He was the genuine article. He had integrity in his relationship to God. And that is something that is open to all of us by God's grace and through his spirit. Not that we will ever be sinless until we are glorified, but we can be blameless in this sense. We can be single-minded in our focus, and that should be our prayer. Now, after the narrator's description of Job, God's description of Job, the accuser, the Satan, the Satan, the Satan, the accuser, it's not certain whether we should capitalize the S here and see this as Satan the being, although that's who it was, but the understanding of Satan was probably not, maybe not that. It's not that full at this juncture. The Hebrew says, the Satan, which means the accuser, the accuser came into that heavenly assembly and noticed that it is the Lord himself who begins to address the accuser in verse 7 when he says, where have you come from, Satan answered the Lord from roaming through the earth and going back and forth in it. So the Lord said to Satan, have you considered my servant Job? There is no one on earth like him. He is blameless and upright, a man who fears God and shuns evil. And then the accuser begins to accuse and to question verse 9. Does Job fear God for nothing? The accuser replied, have you not put a hedge around him in his household and everything he has? You have blessed the work of his hand so that his flocks and herds are spread throughout the land, but stretch out your hand and strike everything he has. And he will surely curse you to your face. The Hebrew word there is not curse, but bless. In the sense of he will surely bless you out. We use the word bless as a euphemism for getting cursed out. Boy, I sure got blessed out. That's exactly the same thing. That was a euphemism, a nicer way of saying curse. The writers would have been reticent to put curse next to God's name anyway. He will surely bless you out, curse you to your face. Now what is exactly then the accuser's charge? What is he saying? He is first of all attacking Job's integrity and he is saying, is it for not that Job fears God? Job's wife even will come to him later and say, are you still fearing God? Are you still holding on to your integrity? Curse God and die. She will say, bless God out and die. There are some Renaissance paintings, at least one of which I am aware in which you have the blessing of Job's wife where it actually is implying that she is in a devotional sense saying, Job, make your peace with God, bless God and die. I am misunderstanding again of the euphemism, the very euphemism that the accuser used. So even Job's wife at this point becomes more of a problem than a helper and says, why don't you just curse God and die? Are you still holding on to your integrity? Now on this nature of integrity maybe one more word before we move on to what the accuser is really after. He is first of all attacking Job's integrity, but that integrity of which we speak is the opposite of duplicity in Proverbs 11-3, let me give you one cross reference from a book you read. Proverbs 11-3 it says, the integrity of the upright guides them but the unfaithful are destroyed by their duplicity. Opposite of integrity duplicity. Remember I said before Job was not a double-minded man, he was a man of integrity, he was blameless perfect in that sense and that's precisely what Job attacks. He is not attacking the fact that it appears so but he is saying, why is Job doing that? Is it out of pure devotion for you or is it not simply because you have blessed him so? So what is the more fundamental charge, the more serious charge that the accuser is issuing here? He is certainly questioning Job's motives, that's right. Yes, he is certainly saying that Job is only blameless because God has blessed him, but what underlies that? Yes. Okay, saying there is no one righteous on earth who serves God for the right reason. Is he perhaps, I see some nods, is he perhaps attacking God? It's God's word against his, is it not? What is God just said? He is blameless in upright, what is Satan saying? You're a buffoon. You think so? Check it out, take it away and see what he really is like. Satan's real attack is not just on Job's integrity but on God's integrity. Either God is gullible and Job is pulling the wool over his eyes or God is assuming that his audience is gullible and he knows better and lacks integrity and thus is trying to pull the wool over their eyes, but at any rate the attack, the more serious attack, is on the very integrity of God. It's as if Satan is saying, you call him blameless but in fact he's only in it for himself. God, you are wrong, you're mistaken, you have put a hedge around him, around him and all that he has, take that away and he will surely curse you to your face. Job's righteousness is really nothing more than self-interest. You see, a challenge is issued here that although God can do all things, I can see why God would not choose in the presence of the assembly to sweep this one aside. It's a serious charge not only relating to Job's integrity but to God's own integrity. And so the Lord gives Job permission, point C on your outline, at least our outlines, it may not be your outline, those of you who watched the videos later, but the Lord gives permission, this is not dualism, it's not the forces of good against the forces of evil. God is sovereign as every single one of your papers said. Yahweh is the Lord is in complete control and only allows the accuser to act. And when stripping Job of all that he has, which was his initial request, fails to bring the desired result in chapter 1, then the accuser asks to be allowed to touch Job's body. We say sometimes, well, if you have your health, you have everything. Well, in a sense, there's some truth in that and the accuser knew what would really get to him. Oh, you can take away his things but take away his health, make him miserable and see what he won't do. So in all of this, bringing, coming to a conclusion, Job remains steadfast. He perseveres as the writer of James said, Job maintains the integrity of his faith in the Lord. And he says in chapter, he says, shall we accept good from God and not trouble also? In all this we read in chapter 2 verse 10, Job did not sin with his lips. And at this point in the book, the contest with Satan or with the accuser is finished. The accuser is not mentioned again in the rest of the book. That's over. However, Job's trial is only beginning because as a human being he wants to know why he wants to know what's going on. And unlike the reader, unlike we who have the opportunity to read what went on in the heavenly assembly, Job has no clue. That's one reason that this is called a book of speculative wisdom. If you missed that answer on the test, speculative wisdom speculating making judgments where insufficient information is available. Job didn't have information about the heavenly assembly. And so he is left to speculate in a rather serious way about the cause of his suffering. He is to seek meaning in his suffering. And the arrival of his friends, his so-called comforters, Job's comforters will only be an added element in his torture as it turns out. So this brings us then to the next page on your outline entitled Job and his friends. And this is a long section goes from chapter 2 verse 11, pretty much to end of chapter 27, perhaps also into chapter 28 depending on whether we view that poem in 28 as an interlude or as words of Job. So now the visitation of the three friends begins with a narrative description of their arrival and a seven day vigil as they sit together in silence. Job finally in chapter 3 breaks the silence and he does this cursing the day of his death. And notice what he says in chapter 3 verse 23. Because why is life given to a man whose way is hidden, whom God has hedged in? Notice the ironic echo of the words of the accuser. Haven't you put a hedge around him? And now in a quite different sense, Job is saying you've hedged me in. Not a protective hedge, but a restrictive hedge that locks me into this suffering, which I am now experiencing. So with that, with that, with Job breaking the silence, then the dialogues begin. Ella Faz build that and so far. Now you might want to look briefly. Let me just at this juncture explain what the fine print is and these other handouts I've given you. Just glance there for a minute. What this is as the name implies is an inductive survey of the book. This is a book, as I'm sure you experienced when you were reading it, where it seems like as you move from chapter to chapter, you say, haven't we read that before? Didn't we cover that? Hasn't that been said a number of times already? And that, yeah, that is true. And that's part of the genius of the book. So what I was trying to do in this inductive survey is just in two fashions work through the book, try to see what if there was movement, if there was some progress in the dialogues. And I think there is, but so what I did first of all is not what you see where you see overview. That came second. What I did first of all is go chapter by chapter or section by section. Sometimes I would take two chapters together or even a few more like chapters four and five, chapter six and seven, if that's all of a piece. And what I did was simply try to pull out the highlights sort of summarized to myself some of the main points or interesting points as I was working through the chapters. And then at the end of each section, I would put down a summary. For instance, summary of chapter one, the Lord allows Satan to strip Job of all. He has yet Job remains faithful summary of chapter two. The Lord allows Satan to strike Job's body yet Job remains faithful. Remember what we learned earlier that reducing poetry to prose summaries pretty much flattens them out to nothing. So recognize that. But I was just trying to summarize each time what the basic content of the chapter was. And then I pulled out all those summaries and dumped them at the start, which is overview. So if you want to read through some of this, you might want to read through the overview. Or in your own reading, you may, if you're reading along and you say, that's interesting. I want, that's an interesting point. Maybe look where I've jotted down my notes. That's basically what this is, is my notes. And see if I notice the same thing. You may notice many things that I didn't or we may mutually confirm one another. So you can use it that way. But if you look at the overview, you can at least get the sense that once the dialogues begin in chapter three, Job speaks first. Then we have Ella Fas, Job responds. Build that, Job responds. So far, Bill responds. And then it starts over again with Ella Fas. Now we could go through that. But I think I'll leave you to read those summaries on your own and see if they jive with your general sense. I do think there's progress. I do think there's movement. But what I'd like to do now is go ahead and talk about some major themes that come out of these dialogues. So this would be point C on your outline, three cycles of dialogue in chapters four to 28. We'll talk a little bit about some of these and then we'll take our next break in just a few minutes. Well, first of all, the theology of, and notice I left you a blank just to keep you active, the theology of what is sometimes called retributive justice, retributive justice. If you don't know how to spell that look over your shoulder, somebody will know the theology of retributive justice. Now, what does that mean? Well, that good behavior is rewarded, bad behavior is punished, retribution, positive or negative. Now, this is the theology that is espoused by Job's friends. Ella Fas is generally regarded as being a little more gracious than the others, but nevertheless all three are espousing this notion, this theology of retributive justice. Are they right or are they wrong? Not a rhetorical question. I hear mixed answers, that's good. Are they right or are they wrong? Okay, they're right and wrong. Their theology is essentially correct. Their application is dead wrong. What they're saying in itself is basically sound, we could find it elsewhere and even the New Testament sometimes quotes from one of Job's friends. Okay, so what they're not cultists or something that are bringing a new theology, they're talking about a God of justice. But they are wrong in their rigorous application of this particular notion of retributive justice to every single case, particularly including Job's case. Notice that Job himself does not accuse them of being wrong in their theology. In fact, he says, for instance, turn to chapter 12, I love the way he starts out in chapter 12. Then Job replied, doubtless you are the people and wisdom will die with you. That was the ancient Near Eastern, this was the Hebrew equivalent of saying doubtless you're the man. Okay, you are the man and wisdom will die with you undoubtedly. Okay, but then he goes on, but I have a mind as well as you. I am not inferior to you. Who does not know all these things? He doesn't know that he doesn't say you're wrong. He says, I know that. Who doesn't know that? Everyone knows that. Every child knows that. Look also at chapter 13 verses 1 and 2. My eyes have seen all this. My ears have heard and understood it. What you know, I also know I am not inferior to you. He's not contradicting their theology. He's disagreeing with their application. Chapter 16 verses 4 and 5, 1 more. I also could speak like you if you were in my place. I could make fine speeches against you and shake my head at you, but my mouth would encourage you comfort from my lips would bring you relief. He is at least hopeful that though he will, though he knows the same theology and could talk like them and make us fine speeches as they're making, he's at least hopeful that he would be a true comforter, not simply spouting off theological truth that happens to be irrelevant in this particular circumstance, but far more sensitive to them as individuals. So he admits that the theology they espouse as right is right, but he cannot admit that it has any validity in his own case. He knows that something must, more, must be at work in his own case other than purely retributive justice. In fact, he is eventually driven to the point of saying in chapter 27, if this is all that is involved, then God has denied me justice. He jumped to chapter 27, which is toward the end of these dialogues. In the first six verses, this is what Job says. And Job continued his discourse, as surely as God lives, who has denied me justice, the Almighty who has made me taste bitterness of soul, as long as I have life within me. The breath of God in my nostrils, my lips will not speak wickedness, and my tongue will utter no deceit. I will never admit that you are in the right till I die, I will not deny my integrity. I will maintain my righteousness and never let go of it, my conscience will not reproach me as long as I live. Now, we need to relativize what he's saying about my conscience will not reproach me. He's not saying he will never have be conscience stricken because of sin. He's not at all claiming again to be sinless. He's simply saying in terms of the charge you're bringing against me, i.e. that my suffering is rightly explained by my wickedness, some secret horrendous sin, I will never admit that you're right. My conscience in regard to that charge will not allow it, will not reproach me as long as I live. So, Job does not disagree with the friend's theology of retributive justice. He simply disagrees with their application of it to him. This brings us to another major point that we see in the friend's dialogues, and it's dispute between Job and his friends, and that is the narrow view of causation that is to say, what is it that may bring about suffering? The friend's arguments, the words they speak to Job, in a sense, force Job to appeal to God for vindication. Remember what their charge is, sin brings punishment and suffering, you're suffering, you must be being punished for sin. So, he has to appeal to God for vindication in chapter 17, verse 3. He says, give me, oh God, the pledge you demand, who else will put up security for me? You have closed their minds to understanding, but God remains silent. And so, by verse 6 of chapter 17, Job is saying, I have become a byword, my shawl, in Hebrew, a saying, I have become a household name for what? Well, I suppose for one whom God doesn't vindicate, for one who is suffering because of some secret hidden sin, people are talking about Job. And he's driven more and more to the position of questioning God's justice, moreover, he does comment along the way that if retributive justice is as certain and immediate as his friend's claim it to be, how is it, he asks, that they are not now suffering themselves? You know, if your formula is correct, why are you sitting there all cozy and comfortable? Look at chapter 19, verses 28 and 29. If you say, how we will hound him since the root of the trouble lies in him, you should fear the sword yourselves, for wrath will bring punishment by the sword, and then you will know that there is judgment. Now, when Zofar hears this, moving on into the next chapter, then Zofar the Nemithite replied, my troubled thoughts prompt me to answer because I am greatly disturbed, I hear a rebuke that dishonors me and my understanding inspires me to reply. He got the point. Job said, well, if all you're saying is true, how come I'm the only one suffering here, guys? And Zofar took that up and began to reply. Well, then we come to Job's final response to his friends and this is abbreviating a whole lot of dialogue going on. In chapters 26 and 27, Job makes his final response to his friends. These are not his final words because he will later have more to say, but to his friends, this is his final words. And in the beginning of chapter 27, he begins first of all by protesting his innocence one more time. I just read to you earlier verses one to six in which he concludes, I will maintain my righteousness and never let it go. My conscience will not reproach me as long as I live at the end of verse five. I will never admit that you are in the right till I die. I will not deny my integrity. He protests his innocence of the charge. Then interestingly, in the beginning in verse 13 or so, he articulates the principle of retributive justice very much in the same terms that his friends have been speaking. Here is the fate God lots to the wicked, the heritage of ruthless man receives from the Almighty. However, many his children, their fate is the sword. His offspring will never have enough to eat. The plague will bury those who survive him and their wettles will not weak for them and so forth and so on. He's saying the very same thing that his friends have been saying, but notice he's not applying it to himself. He's just articulating that principle. Then we come to chapter 28 which again is a disputed debated chapter. Is this from the lips of Job or is this an interlude by the narrator to kind of say, okay, calm down. Let's have a breather. Let's take a break. Let's listen to some wisdom that will anticipate wisdom that will come at the end. This chapter, this chapter 28 describes in poetical terms man's inability to discover wisdom which ultimately is the province of God. It begins there is a there is a mind for silver in a place where gold is refined. Iron is taken from the earth and copper is smelted from ore. Man puts an end to the darkness. He searches the farthest recesses for ore in the blackest darkness far from where people dwell. He cuts a shaft in places forgotten by the foot of man. Far from man he dangles and sways and on it goes but talking about the depths to which man can dig and then in verse 12 it says, but where can wisdom be found? He's unearthed all these other things but where can wisdom be found? Where does understanding dwell man does not comprehend its worth. It cannot be found in the land of the living. The deep says it's not in me. The sea says it's not with me. It cannot be bought with the finest gold nor can its price be weighed in silver. It cannot be bought with the gold of Ophere with precious onyx or sapphires and ultimately he comes to verse 23. God understands the way to it. And he alone knows where it dwells. For he views the ends of the earth and sees everything under the heavens. When he established the force of the wind and measured out the waters. When he made a decree for the rain in a path for the thunderstorm. Then he looked at wisdom and appraised it. He confirmed it and tested it and said to man, the fear of the Lord, that is wisdom and to shine evil is understanding. Job is searching to understand what's going on and God's response is and at this moment of, I don't know what the right word is, this moment of clarity, lucidity, calmness, whether from the mouth of the poet, if distinct from Job or from Job himself. And I'm attracted to seeing this as from Job himself. When we're in these dire distresses we do blow hot and cold. We do experience these swings and this seems to be a moment of clarity in Job's mind and he realizes God understands the way. I'm searching for understanding and God's response is the fear of the Lord. That's wisdom to shine evil. That's understanding what's a him we've seen trust and obey. Fear God, shine evil, trust and obey. That is the extent to which human wisdom should aspire not necessarily beyond. I want to take a break. We're not done by any means. I want to come back and when we come back I want to talk about what happened at the end of the third cycle because if you read Kidner, I think you know that there is debate as to whether the text has been disrupted in some way because we're looking for three cycles. Job starts talking a lot like so far. Has something gotten messed about? Well you know what my answer is going to be but let me explain it when we come back. So if you'll come back when the big hand reaches the two, ten minute break, eleven minute break.