[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 206 KB, 1606x1233, BookofJob.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1056271 No.1056271 [Reply] [Original]

Job is by far the best book of the Bible, and my favorite. I say this because it deals with the largest and most timeless struggle of all mankind: how do we justify our pathetic little existence in a universe full of chaos and disorder? Job has his family, all of his wealth, and even his health taken from him for no good reason at all, and he then must justify the purpose of his suffering against the backdrop of a cosmic struggle. There are so few stories that deal with this enormous struggle of mankind's heart in such a direct manner, and it's no wonder that this book is claimed by many to be amongst the greatest works of ancient literature.

inb4 the atheists shit all over this thread, because if you think the existence of God is even relevant to the meaning of any system of mythology, then I truly pity you.

>> No.1056310

Gospel of Matthew for me.

I love this prophecy/quote:
>Do not think that I came to bring peace on the earth; I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I came to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; and a man’s enemies will be the members of his household. He who loves father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me; and he who loves son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me. And he who does not take his cross and follow after Me is not worthy of Me. He who has found his life will lose it, and he who has lost his life for My sake will find it.

And mainly for BWV 244 from Bach.

>> No.1056466
File: 55 KB, 524x600, pope.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1056466

>>1056310
>Do not think that Jerry came to bring peace on the earth; Jerry did not come to bring peace, but a sword. For Jerry came to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; and a man’s enemies will be the members of his household. He who loves father or mother more than Jerry is not worthy of Jerry; and he who loves son or daughter more than Jerry is not worthy of Jerry. And he who does not take his cross and follow after Jerry is not worthy of Jerry. He who has found his life will lose it, and he who has lost his life for Jerry's sake will find it.

Replace every reference to god/jesus with Jerry and one will instantly realize how fucking ridiculous religion is.

>> No.1056475
File: 32 KB, 350x285, DontFuckwithHitchens.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1056475

>>1056271

>because if you think the existence of God is even relevant to the meaning of any system of mythology, then I truly pity you.

is that so?

>> No.1056477

>>1056466
...totally missed the point of the OP's post...

>> No.1056482

>>1056466

Dude, he inb4'd. Not cool, dude. Not cool.

>> No.1056487

atheist here. i prefer revelations, because apocalyptic stuff is cool stuff.

>> No.1056488

>>1056475

I think what OP is saying in non-Bachelor of Arts terms is that it doesn't matter whether God exists, the Bible's a decent read

>> No.1056502

>>1056466

Wow, that Jerry guy sure seems like a narcissistic, psychopathic man-child....

>> No.1056533

>>1056475
>u read the bible? stupid fat american, lol
>u don't read greek mythology? stupid fat american, lol

>> No.1056545

>>1056533
I'm American, and I read the Bible AND Greek mythology. WHAT NOW, NIGGUH?

>> No.1056559

at least we got Hermeneutics out of it

>> No.1056565

>>1056545
You are obviously a Canadian in denial. Enjoy your national identity crisis and Christfaggotry.

>> No.1056574

idk, seems like the existence and fidelity of his god is pretty important to the way one would evaluate job's decision.

>> No.1056589

copy and pasted from wiki:

According to Maimonides, the correct view of providence lies with Elihu, who teaches Job that one must examine his religion (Job 33). This view corresponds with the notion that "the only worthy religion in the world is an examined religion." A habit religion, such as that originally practiced by Job, is never enough. One has to look deep into the meaning of religion in order to fully appreciate it and make it a genuine part of one's life. Elihu believed in the concepts of divine providence, rewards to individuals, as well as punishments. He believed, according to Maimonides, that one has to practice religion in a rational way. The more one investigates religion, the more he will be rewarded or find it rewarding. In the beginning, Job was an unexamining, pious man, not a philosopher, and he did not have providence. He was unwise, simply grateful for what he had. God, according to Elihu, did not single out Job for punishment, but rather abandoned him and let him be dealt with by natural, unfriendly forces.

>> No.1056602

>>1056574

But God doesn't need to be really real for the narrative to work. Fiction bro

>> No.1056609

>>1056602
meh. the problem of meaning and such is utterly uninteresting, becuz it's just a function of your ability to construct your willful self and project meaning into stuff. story of job is just a guy accepting absurd torture because of his beliefs.

>> No.1056614

>>1056609
no, actually that's the opinion that Job's friends were trying to project onto him. Job however, found a different path to... i guess you could call it 'enlightenment.'

>> No.1056615

>>1056614
jobs friends were wise, job is a retard.

>> No.1056620

>>1056615
ok now your just trollin GTFO

>> No.1056625

>>1056620
no, i think you are just being silly.

>> No.1056639

job's friends were stuck in their theology, they claimed that job must have sinned in order to deserve punishment. it was the crisis that ripped job's mind apart and flung him into questioning the nature of the universe. basically the lesson we learn from the book of Job is that shit happens, and we have to deal with it. once we learn to justify this, it leads to an inner serenity comparable to the myths of the first buddha, who was trying to answer the same question: why to human beings suffer?

>> No.1056644

>>1056639
why would you turn to buddha when modern science can tell you the same thing but only better. learn to naturalism.

>> No.1056662

>>1056644
because it's science, and not literature, which is what this whole board is about isn't it?

>> No.1056667

>>1056662

He's a-trippin and a-trollin

Don't fall for his tangents

>> No.1056672

>>1056662
it's the understanding of what you are and how your thoughts function, orienting yourself with the world and your "problems."

>> No.1056718

>>1056271
I agree with you OP, about the story of Job being the best. Have you read the book: When bad things happen to good people? A lot of the book revolves around the story of Job.

I'm an agnostic leaning atheist and I still think the story holds value to non theists and theists alike.

>> No.1057111

bump for the sake of discussion.

>> No.1057139

>>1056271
>Bible appretiation
>appretiation

:|

>> No.1057196

Catholic here.

Book of Job is about teaching men to rely on God and nothing else. In the beginning of the book, Satan says to God that Job will deny God if God withdrew His hand. This happens three times, the first two times Job just keeps a stiff upper lip. The last time, he basically complains (who can blame him) and sits in a pile of ashes while his wife tells him to deny God.

The friends of Job come to explain that he must have done something wrong in order to deserve punishment. Job is unsatisfied since he has, according to himself, never sinned (which is incorrect as all have sinned or are at least afflicted with original sin - except Mary, different story, too complicated for now).

At the end of it all, Job is about to deny God when God comes down and says "who are you to question me?" Makes sense, God is God and we are not.

Job, in the beginning, was simply following the letter of the law. No, he never broke a Commandment, but, as a man, he certainly wasn't perfect. It took getting his shit ruined to realize this, at which point he goes beneath the surface of the letter of the law to the spirit of the law. Job was essentially dealt a big dose of humility from on high.

>> No.1057227

>>1057196
Isn't a God that meddles in mortal affairs purely for the purpose of egotistically minded gambling a God that is highly suspect?

If God's love was really with man and not himself, then he wouldn't need or want us to bow to him, merely be good people to one and other.

>> No.1057256

>>1057227

You're making the assumption that God wasn't acting in Job's best interest. Or ours for that matter.

If we think of an adult taking a toy away from a child because the child has become overly attached to the toy (security blanket or a soother) we see no problem. It is in the child's best interest.

So too with Job. It may have been worse for Job if God left him alone. Of course we cannot know for sure, but it is certainly a false, or at least unprovable, assumption that God was only thinking of himself when acting.

>> No.1057260
File: 39 KB, 612x681, image002.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1057260

>>1056639

You're leaving out the part where God makes a bet with the Devil that he could make Job bend to his will no matter how hard he (or they) kicks the man and humiliate him. The story of Job sucks.

Destructive natural forces can be understood, avoided or even reversed. It's perfectly within human ability to makes living a kinder experience than it is or has been. The Bible idealises the very opposite.

>> No.1057267

>>1057256

I should probably add that it is also a false or unprovable assumption to think that God was indeed acting in Job's best interest.

That is where faith begins to play a part.

However, considering this work of literature comes from a culture saturated with faith, understanding that faith is key to understanding the work.

>> No.1057274

>>1057267
ya, properly understanding the role of faith there leads one to the conclusion that the book of job is a terrible story.

>> No.1057280

>>1057260

>Destructive natural forces can be understood, avoided or even reversed. It's perfectly within human ability to makes living a kinder experience than it is or has been.

Ya, natural forces are easy to contain. It's those artificial ones (human) that are damn near impossible.

Naive anon is naive

>> No.1057289

>>1057274

Uhh.... you don't understand the role of faith in this story. Sorry. You think you do. You don't.

>> No.1057294

>>1057289
i could say the same to you.

>> No.1057301

>>1057294

Yes you could.

We also could get into an enormous debate about the finer points of Christian/Catholic theology. Which I will almost certainly school you in. Or we could not.

>> No.1057315

>>1057301
how confident are you about that? i'm really rusty with this stuff but i think i can do pretty well.

>> No.1057321

>>1056488
And that's how it should be. As long as you can realize the Bible is mythology then you're not insane.

>> No.1057322

>>1057301
please stop responding to this tripfag, he's an attentionwhoring troll.

>> No.1057327

>>1057301
>>1057315
FIGHT!

>> No.1057337

>>1057322
aww, i'm sorry your love for job was crushed.

>> No.1057341

>>1057256
If it was all about Job and Job's development as a person then why is the story framed around God making bets with the Devil over who loves him the most?

>> No.1057506

>>1057341

The story wasn't framed around who loves Job the most. It was framed around God letting Satan fuck up Job's shit. It is this action which I said earlier was in Job's best interest (as per faith, not human reason - fascist goldfish is an moron).

>> No.1057525

>>1057506
to be fair to a hypothetical fascist gold fish, faith and god etc are nothing to it since it does not have any stake in the afterlife, nor does it know that it is owned by god by virtue of creation and thus must receive its tortures with joy. a fish does what a fish gotta do, although i do hope the fish would stop being fascist.

>> No.1057550
File: 736 KB, 2560x1920, fishfood.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1057550

>>1057525

what the FUCK are you talking about?

inb4 your answer because i know it won't make sense either.

>> No.1057570
File: 110 KB, 500x396, 1281678501929.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1057570

>>1057550
you shouldn't call a fish a moron for not caring about human religions!

>> No.1057579

>>1057570
i don't even care to get anything stimulating from your tripfagging whore-ass, but just to humor you, WTF does that have to do with the Book of Job?

>> No.1057584

>>1057579
whatever. i see this is a lost cause. byebye

>> No.1057585

>>1056271

It's framed around the resurrection: Who can pull out leviathan with a hook?

>> No.1057588

>>1057570
that is the most adorable thing I have ever seen

>> No.1057595

>>1057584
finally! he's gone! we are free!

>> No.1058002

bump. maybe we can have an argument without tripfaggotry this time.

>> No.1058117

>>1057280

Your retort is a mess. Where do social relations come into play where Job is concerned?

>> No.1058212

Mythology is only interesting when slandering the gods, making villains of gods, or, if need be, revising old tales to do so (e.g. Prometheus Unbound). The ending of Job is the ending of 1984. Job is only good when read from a human's point of view, and it becomes, like 1984, a tragedy.

>> No.1058216
File: 85 KB, 250x350, 1282268348329.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1058216

>enter bible appreciation thread
>ctrl-F "eccle"
>no results
>51 posts and 5 image replies omitted. Click Reply to view.

>> No.1058843

>>1058212
that's interesting. never thought of it that way before.
please elaborate...

>> No.1058962

>>1056589
Bible revisionists. Makes shitty despicable things into things that are less despicable to justify their version of the story. Same thing with holocost deniers.

>> No.1058975

>>1056589
>You're making the assumption that Stalin wasn't acting in the Russians best interest. Or ours for that matter.

>If we think of an adult taking a toy away from a child because the child has become overly attached to the toy (security blanket or a soother) we see no problem. It is in the child's best interest.

>So too with the Russians. It may have been worse for the Russians if Stalin left him alone. Of course we cannot know for sure, but it is certainly a false, or at least unprovable, assumption that Stalin was only thinking of himself when acting.