icism regards as the best evidence of genuineness and authenticity in any work.
3. Luther first suggested the theorj' which, in some form or other, is most generally received. In his intro- duction to the first edition of his translation of the Bi- ble he speaks of the author as having so treated the his- torical facts as to demonstrate the truth that God alone is righteous ; and in the Tischrederi (ed. Walch, xxii, 2093) he says: "I look upon the book of Job as a true history, yet I do not believe that all took place just aa it is written, but that an ingenious, pious, and learned man brought it into its present form." This position was strongly attacked by Bellarmine and other Roman theologians, and was afterwards repudiated by most Lu- therans. The fact that Spinoza, Clericus, Du Pin, and Father Simon held nearly the same opinion, the first de- nymg, and the others notoriously holding low views of the inspiration of Scripture, had of course a tendency to bring it into disrepute. J. D. Michaelis first revived the old theory of Bar-Nachman, not upon critical, but dog- matic gromids. In a mere history the opinions or doc- trines enounced by Job and his friends could have no dogmatic authority : whereas, if the whole book were a pure inspiration, the strongest arguments could be de- duced fiom them on behalf of the great truths of the resurrection and a future judgment, which, though im- plied in ether early books, are nowhere so distinctly in- culcated. The arbitrary character of such reasoning is obvious. At present no critic doubts that the narrative rests on facts, although the prevalent opinion among Continental scholars is certainly that in its form and general features, in its reasonings and representations of character, the book is a work of creative genius.
Taking this view, we must still abstain from under- taking to determine what the poet derived from tradi- tion, and what he added himself, since we know not how far tradition had already embellished the original fact. Thus much only will it be safe to conclude : that the in- dividual really existed, possibly in the region indicated ; that he literaUy miderwent a trial substantially like that represented, and that a discussion grew out of it, held, perhaps, between him and a party of his friends after its first severity was passed, covering the essential principles developed in the book, but briefly and simply expressed.
IV. Descent. Country, cindAf/e of the A uthor. — 1. Opin- ions differed in ancient times as to the nation to which the author belonged, some considering him to have been an Arab, others an Israelite. Various indications favor the latter supposition: (1st), We find in our book many ideas of genuine Israelitish growth : the creation of the world is described, in accordance with the prevailing notions of the Israelites, as the immediate effect of di- vine omnipotence ; man is formed of clay ; the spirit of man is God's breath ; God employs the angels for the performance of his orders ; Satan, the great enemy of the children of God, is his instrument for tempting them; men are weak and sinful; nobody is pure in the sight of God ; moral corruption is propagated. There is promidgated to men the law of God, which they must not infringe, and the transgressions of which are visited on offenders with punishments. Moreover, the nether world, or Sheol, is depicted in hues entirely Hebrew. To these particulars might, without much trouble, be added many more; but the deep-searching inquirer will par- ticidarly weigh, (2dly), the fact that the book displays a strength and fervor of religious faith such as coidd only be expected -within the domain of revelation. Mono- theism, if the assertions of ancient Arabian authors may be trusted, prevailed, indeed, for a long period among the Arabs, and it held its ground at least among a portion of the nation till the age of Blohammed, who obtained for it a complete triumph over polytheism, which was spreading from Syria. Still the god of the Arabs was, as those of the heathens generally were, a retired god, dwelling far apart, while the people of the Old Covenant enjoyed the privilege of a vital communion with God; and the warmth with which our author enters into thia
JOB
933
JOB
view incontrovertibly proves that he was an Israelite. (3dly), As regards the language of our book, several an- cient writers asserted that it was originally written in the ^Vranijean or Arabic tongue, and aftenvards trans- lated into Hebrew bj-^ Sloses, David, Solomon, or some unknown writer. Of this opinion was the author of the Appendix in the Septuagint, and the compiler of the tract on Job added to the works of Origen and Jerome ; m modern times it has been chiefly defended by Span- hcim, in his IJistoria Jobi. But for a translation there is too much propriety and precision in the use of words and phrases; the sentences are too compact, and free from redundant expressions and members; and too much care is bestowed on their harmony and easy flow. The parallelism also is too accurate and perfect for a trans- lation, and the whole breathes a freshness that could be expected from an original work only.