The argument as to date drawn from parallel passages is one that the hest critics do not press, as it is encumbercci with doubt rnd dilficulty, and is apt to resolve itself into a matter of subjective impressions. But a comparison of some pas.sa(;e8 in Job with otlier books in tlic OT is instructive, to whatever conclusions it may lead, and a few words may be said upon the subject. The parallels are numerous, tl»ouj,'h in no case are they exceedingly close ; tliey are chiefly found in Dt, Ps, Pr, Is, Jer, and La ; the books of Hos, Am, and Zee presenting in a minor det:ree certain points of comparison. The chief par- allels nith l)t are Job S" compared with Dt 2829, Job 5'" with Dt 3239, Job 20* with Dt 432, whilst the references to the re- moval of landmarks and other offences in Job 2^2 and 31^' *1 have been thought to imply a knowledge of Dt 10'* 22^2. Davidson goes so far as to say that if Dt he understood to be a composition of the reign of Josiah, B.C. 620 is the point above which the composition of Job cannot be <yirried. As to the Psalms, it appears quite certain that Job 7'" imi'lies Ps S*. but the dat« of the latter cannot easily be fixed. The reader mav further compare Job 10' nith Ps 1388 139, Job 3.=.i* with Ps iiTiJ, Job 221» with Ps lOV", and Job 13* with Ps IVf'-'. The Books of Job and Pr, as both belonging to the class of Wisdom- literature, exhibit, as might have been expected, considerable affinity. The personification of Wisdom is found in both ; the providential features of human life are dealt with in both, though from different points of view ; whilst some phrases are common to both books, the coincidence of form being such as can hardly be the result of accident. The proverbial expression concerning 'the lamp of the wicked being put out' of Pr 13* 2421), is taken up in Job 211' in a way which absolutely proves the priority of the former. Job 63 may be coniparecl with Pr 273, and Job 32* with Pr lO^*, though the comparison pre- sents nothing conclusive as to date. Much more reliance may be placed upon a general comparison of the representations of Wisdom in Pr chs. 1-9 and Job 28, with regard to which it would appear manifest that Job is the later. It has been already admitted that ch. 28 may be a later addition to Job, and the date of the opening section of Pr is not conclusively fixed ; but of the general teaching of Job it is clear that it must have followed upon and not preceded the general teaclung of Proverbs. For the proverbial philosophy of the latter ia in the main that true but insufficient generalization from experi- ence, embodied in prudential maxims, which forms the ground- work of the arguments of the friends. Upon this Jt>b forms a searching criticism, and represents a considerably later stage of thought.
The relation between Job and Isaiah, especially Peutero- Isaiah, is exceedingly interesting. It has been discussed at length by Cheyne in the essay appended to his Proph. of Isaiah (ii. 235 f.X Job I4II presents coincidence in expression with Is 19*, the latter being probably the earlier passage. But a more extended parallel with the later chapters of Isaiah naj
JOB, BOOK OF
JODA
671
b€ establiahed by a compariBon of Job 129 with Is 4120, Job IS^s with la .W, Job 98 with Is 44»> and 4512, job ajii la with Is 619, »nd Job 132< with la SO". The whole teaching of the Bk. of Job should be studied in connexion with the remarkable picture of the Servant of J", which ia one of tlie chief features of Deutcro-Isaiah. The spectacle of the righteous sen'ant of God ButTering, desolate, mocked of men and apparently afflicted of God, yet retaining his hold upon God and ultimately justilk-d by Iliin, is so far common to the two books and to these almost alone in the OT as to make the comparison full of interest. Cheyne and Davidson have discussed it in full, but the question of priority is not easily settled. Perhaps the conclusion to which most readers will be brought by a study which cannot e\en be outlined here, will be that announced by Davidson and Diiver, a<;quie8ccd in by Cheyne, that the two writers were 'surrounded by the same atmosphere of thought* and 'worked up common conceptions into uidependent creations.' Most critics incline to place Job the later of the two, but the view of suffering taken in Is 63 can never have presented itself to the author of Job. Either the two were entirely independent, or Job is earlier than Deutero-Isaiah, would seem to be the tnentable verdict.
A comparison with Jer furnishes two or three parallel paa- sa^es in which coincidence can hardly be accidental, though priority may not be easy to determine. One of the chief of these 18 the 'curse' of Job 3'-^-^^ compared with Jer '20i^-W. Dillniann in 1869 judged that the pas-sage in Job must have been the earlier of the two, an opinion which he modified later (Uiob*, p. 33); while Cheyne writes that Jer 2015 'clearly be- tokens the hand of the original writer.' Other parallels are Job «'» and Jer IS'S, Job W and Jer 20', whilst Job '.l'» may be compared with La 315, j„b 309 with La S", and Job 161^ with La 312. In the latter passages opinion is likely to assign a later date to the highly wrought elegy of La than to the vigorous and forcible language of Job. I's 37 and 88 suggest a general comparison with Job, and there are points of coincidence in expression with other psalms: but all that can be said is that the writer of Job seems to have been acquainted with some psalms, whilst other psalmists appear more or less to have Imitated the greater poet.