a conspicuous fact in the historical developement of both, -the thoughtful and devout among them were naturally more anxious to expound, if possible, consistently with the providence of a just and holy God, the cause of temporal good and evil. And it was not unnatural that the idea should prevail among them more strongly even than among most of the ancient nations, that the outward good and evil of life were to be regarded as retributions of Providence for the virtues and the vices of those on whom they were sent. To other nations, if there was a Providence, it was in the hands of many and often conflicting deities; but to the Jews, God was One; and "shall not the Judge of all the earth do right?"

Accordingly, the prevailing doctrine of the Jews in ancient times was that of temporal retribution. We see it prevailing still in the more modern times of Jesus Christ, who expostulated earnestly against its cruel application to the case of the man born blind, and to various temporal calamities which were popularly interpreted as judgments: "Neither did this man sin, nor his parents, that he was born blind." "Suppose ye that those men were sinners above all others, because they suffered such things? I tell you, Nay!" Such was our Saviour's protest against the cruel dogma that sufferers are shewn thereby to be sinners.

The book of Job is a much earlier protest against this cruel doctrine of temporal retribution. Its manifest purpose is to dispute and disprove that very prevalent idea, and to suggest more reverential and trusting, if less absolute and less presumptuous, views of Providence.

This design is manifest even from the opening of the book, where we are expressly informed that the man who is about to be introduced as involved in the most dreadful sufferings and afflictions is "a perfect and upright man, and one that fears God and turns aside

from evil." Then the Satan suggests the awful trial by which it shall be seen whether his integrity is genuine or not. He insinuates, "Doth Job fear God for nought?" "Put forth thine hand now, and touch all that he hath, and he will curse Thee to thy face;" thus reversing the human doctrine of retribution by the suggestion that piety springs from earthly blessings, and sin from earthly troubles. The test is applied; and Job's uprightness is again proclaimed towards the conclusion of the book, where the Almighty himself appears upon the scene and vindicates him against the insinuations of his friends. And it seems to be designed also (whether judiciously or not) as an attestation to his integrity, that the prosperity and happiness of Job are not only restored, but doubled, after his trial, according to the most approved principles of poetical justice.

This, then, is the foundation of the whole book. That an upright man is grievously afflicted—such is the problem to be solved. This is the theme for the religious philosopher,-the datum of the inquiry which the book pursues into the ways of Providence. Earnestly but reverently it asks, why life's sufferings are permitted to befal the good.

The poetical part of the book pursues this discussion in the form of dialogue between Job and his friends, who, on hearing of his affliction, came to condole with him. The outline of their discussion is as follows: When they have sat long in silence (the one only respectful and sympathizing thing that these friends did),

66

seven days and seven nights," says the narrator, "for they saw that his grief was very great,"-Job is the first, at length, to speak. And then the vehemence, the eloquence of suppressed grief bursts forth in repeated, passionate, figurative, exaggerated exclamations. "After this Job opened his mouth and cursed his day!" He

pours out the bitterness of his soul's anguish in the most impassioned regret that he should ever have been born, or should have lived to be the miserable and loathsome object he finds himself. He longs for death. He would welcome annihilation (ch. iii.).

Then Eliphaz, one of the three friends, after rebuking the impatience of Job, insinuates (with as much gentleness and address as was practicable in making such an insinuation) that the sufferings of his friend must be regarded as a proof of some secret, if not notorious, wickedness; and he exhorts him to repent of his sins, whatever they may be, in the assurance that the Divine favour might then be restored to him (iv. v.).

Job replies, that he is not conscious of the wickedness insinuated. He "holds fast his integrity," and points again to the magnitude of his sufferings as excusing his impatience, complaining, not without reason, of the unkindness of his friend's reproaches (vi. vii.).

Bildad next urges the same cruel doctrine of retributive temporal providence, with still less reserve and delicacy than Eliphaz had done (viii.); and to him Job replies (ix. x.), still "holding fast his integrity," but despairing of the opportunity of "proving his cause,' as it were, against the Almighty as accuser. The language of a legal inquiry, it may be observed, prevails from this point, as plaintiff and defendant "call and answer" (cite and reply). Job, who would plead his cause boldly when a little further exasperated by his companions' injustice, meekly says at the present stage of the conversation,

"How much less should I answer Him,

Even should I carefully choose my words?

Whom, though I am righteous, I would not answer;
I would make supplication unto Him as my Judge.
Should I cite, for Him to answer me,

I could not be confident that He would listen to

my

If by force I would contend,-lo, He is strong;
If by judgment,-who shall appoint Him a day!"

voice.

Zophar next, the third of "the friends," pursues the same subject with greater bitterness still (xi.); and Job replies with increasing indignation at their want of common justice and human feeling. His speech begins with that fine irony

"No doubt but ye are the people,

And wisdom shall die with you!"

and concludes with that pathetic chapter on the frailty and vanity of "man that is born of a woman" (xii.-xiv.).

The same round of speakers is three times presented to us; Job each time replying to each of his "comforters;" they maintaining with varied illustrations the same point, that he must be a sinner who suffers; and he still holding fast his own integrity," and appealing to fact and experience against their doctrine.

occurs.

66

But in the third round of argument a striking variation When Job has replied to Eliphaz, the first in order, we find the second speaker, Bildad, shewing plain symptoms of conscious defeat, as he contents himself with a brief exclamation on the power of God and the insignificance of man (xxv.), without being able to add one word of argument; and Job's reply (xxvi.-xxxi.) exhibits him proudly conscious of his opponent's failure of argument, while he, now master of the field, enlarges in a strain of incomparable eloquence on the same grand topics of God's almightiness and man's insignificancy, and declares that man is unable to expound, and ought not to attempt the exposition of, the ways of Providence. He quotes some of their "altogether vain" speeches with contempt. He waits twice, and then, no one

speaking, "continues his parable." Zophar, the third speaker in each of the previous rounds of argument, is wisely satisfied to be silent; and Job is thus left victor over the false and heartless doctrine, that suffering is the constant result of sin alone. "So these three men ceased to answer Job, because he was just in his own eyes" (xxxii. 1).

But the inquirer into Providence still asks, What, then, is the real purpose, or what the true explanation, of the sufferings that befal the virtuous? And a new speaker is now introduced, whom we naturally regard as uttering the writer's own sentiments on this subject. Having silenced the unjust and cruel doctrine of temporal retribution, he sets forth, from the lips of this new speaker, what he considers the true doctrine and the right deportment in respect to the sufferings of life.

The umpire now introduced (at ch. xxxii.) has been silently present during the discussion, and has disapproved alike the extreme self-justification of Job when it has seemed to impugn the Divine justice, and the unreasoning but arrogant condemnation pronounced by the other three upon him; but, being a younger man than either Job or any of the other three, he has waited till they have all spoken and the latter have been reduced to silence. Elihu is this new speaker.

"Then was kindled the wrath of Elihu the son of Barachel the Buzite, of the kindred of Ram: against Job was his wrath kindled, because he justified himself rather than God. Also against his three friends was his wrath kindled, because they

* Some have endeavoured to make a third speech for Zophar out of the verses (xxvii. 13—23) which are more forcibly taken as Job's citation of the doctrine of his opponents. But why so curiously conjecture that Zophar must have spoken a third time, when Bildad could scarcely find a word to say in his turn? The great beauty of the poem, artistically viewed, is seen in this gradual vanishing of the speakers from the third encounter. It is nobly conceived and finely executed.