The first post in this series is available here. The present post will continue the series by surveying several ancient near eastern parallels to the Book of Job. It will necessarily deal more with the Book of Job as a whole than with Job 5.2-7 specifically.

The Book of Job is not an unique example of disputation literature in the ancient near east. There are several works which fall into the category of disputation literature from the ancient world. Three examples will be briefly surveyed, the first is The Babylonian Theodicy, the second is The Dispute between a Man and his Ba, an Egyptian composition, while the third is also from Egypt and entitled The Protest of the Eloquent Peasant.¹

The Babylonian Theodicy has several similarities to the Book of Job, though these similarities are not so striking as to require literary dependence of the latter on the former.² The text revolves around the dispute between a sufferer and his friend. This is an obvious similarity between The Babylonian Theodicy and the Book of Job, though Job disputes with three friends, rather than one. The friend argues for the traditional understanding of things while the sufferer, much like Job, pushes out to the fringes, and argues that traditional explanations do not provide answers. One major difference between the Book of Job and the Babylonian Theodicy is that in the latter there is a “politeness which the two speakers maintain to the end.”³ In Job, Eliphaz’ first speech is moderate–even polite–but after he concludes his initial oration things quickly deteriorate. On the other hand the end of the Babylonian text, as Pope has noted, is somewhat perplexing.⁴

Perhaps the most striking similarity between these two texts is the friends’ persistent contention that the doctrine of retribution works. Lambert explains that on several occasions the friend defends the doctrine of retribution when he writes, “the friend repeats that in the end they [the unrighteous] are discomfited.”⁵ Of course, this is Eliphaz’ point in Job 5.2-7. In fact, the friend’s response in lines 235-242 of The Babylonian Theodicy has certain thematic similarities to Eliphaz’ first speech. Specifically, lines 237-238 appear to be a proverbial saying of some type.⁶ Eliphaz makes use of such sayings throughout his first speech, but especially in 5.2 and 5.6-7. In addition, the friend’s admonition in line 239 that the sufferer “seek the will of the god” is vaguely reminiscent of Eliphaz’ admonition in Job 5.8, “but as for me, I would seek God.”

The Egyptian story known as The Dispute between a Man and His Ba has similarities with both the biblical books of Job and Qohelet.⁷ In the words of Francis Andersen, when speaking about this Egyptian story, “a poignant longing for death is expressed in words which invite comparison with chapter 3 of Job. But here the similarity ends.”⁸ Job does not, however, cease longing for death after chapter three. Even so, the similarities between the two works are limited to the desire for death. Because of this the words of the man in the story have no direct bearing on the passage at hand. The man’s Ba, on the other hand, encourages the enjoyment of life.⁹ This appears to have more in common with the central sections of Qohelet, in which the reader is implored to enjoy life.

The Egyptian Protest of the Eloquent Peasant has several similarities with the biblical Book of Job. The story goes as follows: a peasant is bringing certain items to market. A rival robs him in a way so as to make his robbery seem legitimate. The peasant pleads with the magistrate that his goods be returned. After giving nine soliloquies the peasant receives his possessions back, as well as the entirety of the possessions of the one who robbed him. Pope notes the following, “the text is introduced by a prose prologue and epilogue…the central portion of the text is composed of…semipoetic appeals for justice.”¹⁰ The form is strikingly similar to Job, though there are narrative interludes between the speeches that serve to move the story along to a greater extent than the short prose portions embedded within the poetry of Job (cf. Job 31.40; 32.1-6; 38.1; 40.3, 6; 42.1). Setting aside for the moment the difference in the quantity of prose between the two works, the general form of Prose-Poetry-Prose is identical. The prologue for each even begins similarly, with the information that “there was a man named X.” Furthermore, the location of said man is specified (cf Job 1.1). There are major differences between the texts as well. An obvious, though still important, difference is that the eloquent peasant addresses his complaint to a human judge, whereas Job demands that he be allowed to plead his case before a divine judge. As Andersen has noted, the speeches made by the peasant are entirely concerned with human justice. ¹¹ Job, on the other hand, is concerned with divine justice. Furthermore, the eloquent peasant does not so much doubt the possibility of receiving justice, as feel the need to argue in order to receive said justice.

In summary, the three texts from the ancient near east which have been examined, The Babylonian Theodicy, The Dispute of a Man with His Ba, and The Protest of the Eloquent Peasant each provide certain similarities with the Book of Job. None of these similarities are great enough to suggest literary dependence, but they do serve to illustrate the fact that the author(s) of Job was not the only one struggling with the issues raised by belief in a strict doctrine of retribution. Furthermore, this confirms that the genre of disputation literature was well known in the ancient near east, and in use by scribes in dealing with difficult issues that challenged the status quo.