FULLER THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY
THE INNOCENT SUFFERER IN
THE BOOK OF PROVERBS
A Dissertation
submitted to
the
Faculty of the
Fuller Theological
Seminary
in partial fulfillment of
the
requirements for the degree of
Doctor of
Philosophy
BY
DANIEL P. BRICKER
MAY
1998
Copyright 1998 by
Daniel P. Bricker
All Rights Reserved
Cited with permission by
Ted Hildebrandt
Report any errors to
thildebrandt@gordon.edu
Center for Advanced
Theological Studies
Dissertation
Approval Sheet
This dissertation
entitled
The Innocent Sufferer in the Book
of Proverbs
written by
Daniel P.
Bricker
and
submitted in partial fulfillment of the
requirements for the degree of
Doctor of
Philosophy
has been awarded
by the Faculty of Fuller Theological Seminary
upon
the recommendation of the following readers:
__________________
Ronald
Youngblood
__________________
Frederic
William Bush
___________________
Duane
Garrett
5/27/98
Date
Acknowledgments
It is difficult for me to thank everyone who deserves
credit. My
friends and
family members deserve recognition for the role they
played in
offering unswerving support.
First on the list are my parents, Paul and Therese
Bricker of
and I can
never repay them for all they have done for me, both in
relation to
this program and in almost every other area of my life as
well. Then
I would like to thank all my friends who are far too
numerous to
mention by name. I would not have made it without
their
prayers and encouragement.
I must make special mention of the late Dr. David Allan
Hubbard, my first mentor in the
program, who provided me with the
guidance and
encouragement that I sorely needed. I was admitted to
the
program with a nine-year gap between my master's degree and
the start
of doctoral work, and I had a lot of catching up to do. I
regret very
deeply that I was unable to present him with a finished
copy of
this dissertation before he passed away June 6, 1996.
I would also like to thank my primary mentor, Dr. Ronald
F.
Youngblood, whose advice was
helpful in many ways. Dr. Young-
blood was
kind enough to take over about halfway through the
program when
Dr. Hubbard retired in 1993. I appreciate his patience
due to the
length of time it took me to complete the program because
iv
of
financial restraints and a whole host of computer and word
processing
problems. My secondary mentor, Dr. Fred Bush, also
offered some
extremely helpful advice and I wish I had been able to
incorporate some
of his thoughts and insights into this study a little
earlier in the
process. My external reader, Dr. Duane Garrett also
deserves
recognition. This study interacts with Dr. Garrett's
commentary at
many points and I feel honored that he was willing to
read and
evaluate my dissertation.
And special thanks go to Dr. Francis I. and Dr. Lois C.
Ander-
sen, who
treated me like family, offering advice and practical help in
many ways
that I could not have done without as I drew near to the
end of
this project.
I would like to dedicate this dissertation to the memory
of my
close
friend, Zane A. Mills, who died tragically on March 3, 1996. He
was like
family to me for nearly twenty years and no one could have
asked for a
better friend. He knew more about innocent suffering
from
personal experience than anyone I have ever known.
It is my sincere desire that this dissertation not be
left on the
academic shelf,
but that someday it will contribute toward the min-
istry of the
Church. If this dissertation adds to the knowledge of Pro-
verbs and
makes a contribution to that ministry, whether mine or
anyone
else's, it will have been worth it.
v
Outline
and Table of Contents
Acknowledgments iv
Outline and Table of Contents vi
List of Abbreviations xiv
Chapter 1: An Examination of
the Issues 1
Introduction 1
I. The Issue of Theodicy 3
A. Definition 3
B. OT Books Related to Theodicy 6
1. Job 7
a. The Prologue 7
b. The Dialogue 9
c. The Divine Speeches 10
d. The Epilogue 17
2. Qoheleth 18
a. 3:16-17 19
b. 4:1-3 20
c. 6:1-9 22
d. 7:15-18 24
e.
8:9-9:12 26
II. Suffering in the Literature
of the Ancient Near East 28
A. Mesopotamian Literature 29
1. Sumerian Literature 35
a
"Man and His God" 36
vi
b.
Letter-Prayers 38
2. Akkadian Literature 42
a. The Pious Sufferer 42
b. Ludlul Bel Nemeqi 44
c. R.S. 25.460 49
d. Babylonian Theodicy 50
e. The Poem of Erra 54
B. Egyptian Literature 58
1. The Absence of Theodicy in
2. Suffering Is Due to Perversion of Ma’at 65
a. Admonitions of Ipuwer 66
b. Dispute of a Man with His Ba 67
c. Tale of the Eloquent Peasant 70
d. Teaching of Amenemhet 73
3. Inequality or Injustice was Often
Rectified in the
Afterlife 75
C. Conclusion 75
1. A Clear Sense of Right and Wrong 77
a.
b.
2. Significant Individual Worth 79
a.
b.
3. Conflict Between
Deities 82
4. Judgment in the Afterlife 83
vii
a.
b.
Chapter
2: The Lack of Discussion Related to Innocent
Suffering in the Book of Proverbs 86
Introduction 86
I. Past Assumptions 86
A. Proverbs is Conventional Wisdom 87
1. Reflection of a "Divine" Order 87
2. Doctrine of Retribution 96
a. Forensic Retribution 100
(1) Proverbs 3:32-35 101
(2) Proverbs 5:21-23 103
b. Dynamistic Retribution 105
(1) Proverbs 11:31 106
(2) Proverbs 24:15-16
110
B. Job and Qoheleth React Against the Dogmatism
of Proverbs 111
II. A Current Proposal 116
A. Many Proverbs Refer to and/or Assume
Innocent Suffering 116
1. Parental Suffering 116
2. Emotional Suffering 117
3. Suffering Due to the Words/Deeds of Others 117
B. Job and Qoheleth are Not Necessarily in Opposition
to Proverbs 118
C. Correctly Understanding the Proverb Genre Negates
Dogmatizing 122
viii
D. Conclusion 124
Chapter
Three: Parental Suffering in Proverbs 126
Introduction 126
I. Parents in the OT 126
A. Social Structure and Duties 127
1. Structure of Kin Groups 127
a. Tribe Fb,we, hF.,ma 128
b. Clan hHAPAw;mi 128
c. Family bxA-tyBe 130
2. Roles of Individuals 132
a. Father 132
b. Mother 133
c. Children 136
B. The Family as a Setting for Wisdom 137
1. The Origin of Family Wisdom 138
a. Parents as Teachers 145
b. "My Son(s)"--Literal
or Figurative? 147
2. The Purpose of Family Wisdom 149
a. Proverbs Directed Toward
Children 150
b. Proverbs Directed Toward
Parents 151
II. Analysis of Individual
Proverbs 154
A. Parents of Fools 154
1. 10:1 (lysiK;) 156
ix
2. 15:5 (lyvix< ) 159
3. 15:20
(lysiK;) 160
4. 17:21
(lysiK;, lbAnA), 17:25 (lysiK;) 162
5. 19:13
(lysiK;) 165
B. Parents and Public Shame, Mocking, Disgrace, etc 167
1. Shame (wybime) and
Disgrace (MlaKA) 167
a. 10:5
(wybime NB,) 167
b. 19:26
(wybime NB,//ryPiH;ma) 171
c. 29:15
(wybime) 174
d. 28:7
(MlaKA) 176
2. Cursing (llaqA) 182
a. 20:20
183
b. 30:11
184
3. Mocking (gfalA) and Scorning (zUB) 30:17
186
4. Robbery (lzaGA) 28:24
189
C. Conclusion 191
Chapter
4: Emotional Suffering in the Book of Proverbs 193
Introduction 193
I. The Somatic Expression of
Ancient Hebrew Psychology 193
A. Pre-Scientific Terminology and Broad Meanings 193
1. Heart (ble/bbAle) 193
a. ble as the Anatomical Organ 194
x
b. ble as the Center of Inner Life 195
c. ble as the
Religious Life 195
d. ble as Representative of the Whole 196
e. ble as a
2. Spirit (HaUr) 196
3. Soul (wp,n,) 197
B. Similar Uses in Egyptian, Akkadian and Ugaritic 198
1. Egyptian 198
a. Heart (ib and ha.ty) 198
b. Spirit (ba and ka) 199
(1) ba 199
(2) ka 199
2. Akkadian and Ugaritic 200
a. Akkadian 200
(1) libbu 200
(2) napistu 200
b. Ugaritic 201
(1) lb 201
(2) rwh 201
(3) nps 201
II. Analysis of Specific
Proverbs Related to Emotional Suffering 202
A. Heart (ble) 202
1. 12:25 202
xi
2. 13:12 206
3. 14:10, 13 213
4. 15:13
217
5. 25:20 219
B. Spirit (HaUr) 225
1. 15:4 225
2. 15:13 226
3. 17:22 227
4. 18:14 229
C. Soul (wp,n,) 230
1. 14:10 231
2. 28:17 231
3. 29.10 232
D. Conclusion 236
Chapter 5: Innocent
Suffering Due to the Words or Deeds
of
Others 238
Introduction 238
I. The Legal System 238
A. Judicial Process in the Ancient Near
East 239
B. Judicial Process in Ancient
C. The Legal Process at Work 245
D. Proverbs and Legal Action 246
1. False Witness/False Accusation 246
2. Reversal of Justice 247
3. Value of the Legal Process 248
xii
4.
Royal Justice 249
5. The Legal Process and Everyday Life 251
6. How Can Justice Be Understood? 254
E. Analysis of Individual Proverbs Regarding Innocent
Suffering and the Legal System 255
1. 3:30 255
2. 13:23 257
3. 17:15 259
4. 17:26 260
II. Damaging Words 11:9, 11 263
III. Harmful Actions 265
A. 1:8-19 266
B. 3:27-35 268
C.
6:16-19 272
D. 16:29 274
E. 17:13 278
IV. Conclusion 279
Chapter
6: Final Summary 281
Bibliography 293
CurriculumVitae
318
xiii
List
of Abbreviations
This is a list of abbreviations
commonly used in this
dissertation. They are the standard
abbreviations found in most
scholarly publications, but are listed here for
the reader's
convenience. For full documention see the
bibliography.
Abbreviations
for books of the Bible are standard.
AB Anchor
Bible
ABD David
N. Freedman, ed., Anchor Bible
Dictionary, 6 vols.
AEL Miriam
Lichtheim, Ancient Egyptian
Literature, 3 vols.
AfO Archiv fur Orientforschung
ANE Ancient Near East(ern)
ANET James B. Pritchard, ed., Ancient Near.
Eastern Texts Related to the Old
Testament,
3rd ed. with
supplement
AnSt Anatolian Studies
AOAT Alten Orient and
Altes Testament
BA Biblical Archaeologist
BASOR Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental
Research
BDB Francis
Brown, S. R. Driver, and C. A.
Briggs, Hebrew and English Lexicon of the
Old
Testament
BHS Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia
Bib Biblica
BibSac Bibliotheca Sacra
BKAT Biblischer
Kommentar, Alten Testament
xiv
BWL W.
G. Lambert, Babylonian Wisdom
Literature
BZAW Beihefte
zur Zeitschrift fur die
alttestamentliche Wissenschaft
CAD
the
Oriental Institute of the University of
CBQ Catholic Biblical Quarterly
CTA Andrea Herdner, Corpus des Tablettes en
Cuneiformes
Alphabetiques Decouvertes a
Ras Shamra-Ugarit, 2 vols.
FOTL Forms
of Old Testament Literature
HAL Ludwig
Koehler and Walter Baumgartner,
Hebraisches and Aramaisches Lexikon
zum Alten Testament. Dritte Auflage; 4 Bande
HS Hebrew Studies
HUCA
IDB G.
A. Buttrick, ed., Interpreter's
Dictionary
of the
Bible,
3 vols.
IDBSup K.
Crim, ed., Interpreter's Dictionary of
the
Bible, Supplementary Volume
ICC International
Critical Commentary
ISBE Geoffrey
Bromiley, ed., International
Standard Bible Encyclopedia, rev. ed., 4 vols.
JANES Journal of Ancient Near Eastern Studies of
JAOS Journal of the American Oriental Society
JBL Journal of Biblical Literature
xv
JETS Journal of the Evangelical Theological
Society
JNES Journal of Near Eastern Studies
JNSL Journal of Northwest Semitic Languages
JSOT Journal for the Study of the Old Testament
JSOTSS JSOT Supplement Series
JSS Journal of Semitic
Studies
JTS Journal of
Theological Studies
KAT Kommentar zum Alten Testament
KJV Holy Bible, King James Version
LA W. Helck and E.
Otto, Hrsg., Lexikon
der
Agyptologie, 7
Bande
LAE William K. Simpson, ed., Literature of
Ancient
MDOG Mitteilungen der
deutschen Orient-
Gesellschaft
NAC New American Commentary
NCBC New
Century Bible Commentary
NIDNTT Colin Brown, ed., New International
Dictionary
of New Testament Theology, 4 vols.
NICOT New
International Commentary on the Old Testament
NIV Holy
Bible, New International Version
NASV Holy Bible, New American Standard Version
NKJV Holy
Bible, New King James Version
NRSV Holy
Bible, New Revised Standard Version
OBO Orbis
Biblicus et Orientalis
OT Old
Testament
xvi
OTL Old
Testament Library
Or Orientalia
RB Revue
Biblique
RQ Restoration
Quarterly
RSV Holy
Bible, Revised Standard Version
RTP Revue
de theologie et de philosophie
SBLDS Society
of Biblical Literature Dissertation
Series
SBLSBS Society
of Biblical Literature Sources for
Biblical Study
SJT Scottish
Journal of Theology
TDNT G.
Kittel, ed., Theological Dictionary of
the
New Testament, 10 vols.
TDOT G. J.
Botterweck and H. Ringgren, ed.,
Theological Dictionary of the Old
Testament, 8 vols.
ThZ Theologische
Zeitschrift
TLZ Theologische
Literaturzeitung
TOTC Tyndale
Old Testament Commentaries
TQ Theologische
Quartalschrift
Tr./tr. translator
TWAT G. J.
Botterweck and H. Ringgren, Hrsg.,
Theologisches Worterbuch zum Ahem
Testament, 8
Bande
TWOT R. L.
Harris, G. L. Archer, and B. K.
Waltke, ed.,
Theological Wordbook of the
Old Testament, 2 vols.
TynBul Tyndale
Bulletin
xvii
UF Ugarit-Forschungen
Ug Ugaritica
UT Cyrus
H. Gordon, Ugaritic Textbook, 3 vols.
VT Vetus
Testamentum
VTSup Vetus Testamentum,
Supplements
WBC Word
Biblical Commentary
WMANT Wissenschaftliche
Monographien zu:m
Alten and Neuen Testament
ZAW Zeitschrift
fur die alttestamentliche
Wissenschaft
ZTK Zeitschrift
fur Theologie and Kirche
xviii
CHAPTER ONE
AN EXAMINATION OF THE
ISSUES
Introduction
The main issue of this dissertation is the topic of the
innocent
sufferer/suffering as it
appears in the book of Proverbs. It will be my
purpose to
identify the various proverbs that refer to or imply this issue and
categorize them
in their collections according to subject matter and literary
form.
To the best of my knowledge, a study of this topic has
never been
undertaken at
this level.1 Analyses of the innocent sufferer or righteous
suffering have
frequently focused on other portions of the OT such as Job,
Qoheleth, Jeremiah or Habakkuk,
and that is appropriate. However, there
are
certain assumptions held by scholarship that exclude the book of Pro-
verbs from
this discussion. Part of this dissertation will examine these
assumptions and
show why Proverbs should be given its proper place in the
Biblical
treatment of this subject.
In order to begin the discussion of these assumptions the
first issue
to
address is that of theodicy. We will briefly define the term and discuss
how the
matter is expressed in Job and Qoheleth, in keeping with the
classification of
these two books as wisdom literature. This discussion may
1 There are studies which are similar; note J. A. Gladson,
"Retribu-
tive Paradoxes in Proverbs 10-29" (Ph.D. diss.,
Vanderbilt University, 1978),
and K. T. Kleinknecht, Der leidende Gerechtfertigte (
Mohr
[Paul Siebeck], 1984). The former author takes a different approach to
the topic than I do, while the latter hardly
mentions Proverbs at all.
1
seem to
cover ground that is already very familiar but it is important for
this study
in relation to the topic of the dissertation.
The second major section of the first chapter will
analyze innocent
suffering in the
literature of Mesopotamia and
tention that
the documents recovered to date do not show a willingness to
place the blame
for suffering on anyone but the individual involved, and the
reason for
the suffering is almost always sin.
At the end of chapter 1 there will be comparisons and
contrasts of
Mesopotamian and Egyptian
culture as expressed by the pertinent primary
literature on
suffering. These will serve as a basis of comparison in chap-
ter 2 with
the literature of
the topic
of suffering.
Chapter 2 will examine the assumptions of scholarship to
discern
why the
book of Proverbs has been left out of studies of innocent suffering. I
will argue
that the exclusion of Proverbs from these studies is due pri-
marily to the
classification of Proverbs as conventional wisdom, with Job
and
Qoheleth reacting against the perceived superficial positions of con-
ventional
wisdom.
The practice of placing Job and Qoheleth in opposition to
Proverbs
arises partly
as a result of some inadequate views of order and retribution.
Until recently it was virtually
a given among scholars to equate the world
view in
Proverbs with the Egyptian concept of ma'at.
This is now in
question and,
in my opinion, inaccurate. It was also thought that Proverbs
expressed a
world view that held a doctrine of retribution tied to an "act-
2
consequence"
relationship. This is also in need of revision, as the study will
show.
After these discussions, I will set forth suggestions for
viewing the
innocent
sufferer/suffering in Proverbs. The first thesis is that there are
many
proverbs that show an awareness of an innocent sufferer/suffering.
This should come as no great
surprise, but the fact is that it has never been
explored in any
depth. The second thesis is that the assertion that Job and
Qoheleth stand in opposition or
contrast to the wisdom of Proverbs needs
revision.
I.
The Issue of Theodicy
The discussion here will focus on defining theodicy and
exploring
some of the
issues this term implies. The definition of Max Weber will be
evaluated and
shown why it is not an acceptable working definition for this
study. Then
I will examine the four elements of theodicy suggested by
Wolfram von Soden which show
the conditions that must be present for
theodicy to
occur. The last part of this section will be a very brief look at the
OT books which contain wisdom
literature.
A. Definition
Theodicy is a term popularized in Essais de theodicee (1710) by
the German
philosopher G. W. Leibniz.2 It is an attempt to defend divine
2 L.
ed. P. Wiener, 4 vols. (New York: Scribner, 1973),
4.378-379. The term "theo-
dicy" was known before this in Leibniz’ earlier
work but it gained more
widespread exposure through this essay.
3
justice in the
face of aberrant phenomena that appear to indicate the deity's
indifference or
hostility toward virtuous people.3 The problems of evil and
suffering may be
solved philosophically for any theological system if a
theodicy is
successful, since it will show that the existence of suffering is
not
incompatible with the belief that a moral deity created the world and
has
sovereignty over it. In other words, a theodicy seeks to reconcile con-
tradictions within
a theological system by explaining why things happen as
they do.4
Another approach to the discussion of this issue is to
redefine
theodicy. This
is the approach of German sociologist Max Weber, who
referred to any
situation of inexplicable or unmerited suffering as a
theodicy
problem, and said theodicy itself was any rationale for explaining
suffering.5 While
this broader definition may have some value in allow-
ing for a
comparison across a wider range of religious experiences,6 in
my opinion
it will not serve in the present study. The reason is that it
"beheads"
the word theodicy by removing God (or a god) from the equation.
While this might be acceptable
for some modern philosophical systems it is
3 James
L. Crenshaw, "Theodicy," ABD,
6.444.
4 John S. Feinberg,
"Theodicy," in Evangelical
Dictionary of Theo-
logy, ed. Walter A. Elwell
(Grand Rapids: Baker, 1984), 1083; in more detail
idem, The Many
Faces of Evil (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994); and in
general from the perspective of several
different cultures, David Parkin,
ed.,
The Anthropology of Evil (Oxford:
Blackwell, 1984).
5 Max Weber, The Sociology of Religion (Boston: Beacon,
1963), 112-
115,
138-150.
6 Gerald L. Mattingly,
"The Pious Sufferer:
tional Theodicy and Job's Counselors," in The Bible in the Light of Cunei-
form Literature, ed. W. W. Hallo, B. W. Jones, and G. L.
Mattingly
(Lewiston, New York: Mellen, 1990), 313.
4
clearly inappropriate for any discussion of the cultures and religions of the
ANE, since religion was an
extremely important part of society.7 The
result of
this, as I intend to show, is that a true theodicy is not found in
either
Egyptian or Sumero-Babylonian literature. It is only in the literature
of
ancient
Isaiah.8
The next question to be dealt with is that of the
conditions required for
the
question of theodicy to be raised. Wolfram von Soden has listed four
basic
elements that must be present:
1. a clear sense of right and
wrong, so that a sufferer could
reasonably claim to be suffering
undeservedly;
2. significant individual worth,
so that personal suffering must be
justified;
3. minimal competition within
the godhead or pantheon, so that
suffering cannot be blamed on
one deity due to human loyalty to
another; and
4. a limited view of judgment in
the afterlife.9
7 R. E. Clements, "
The World of Ancient
University
Press, 1989), 9; James K. Hoffmeier, "Egyptians," in Peoples of
the Old Testament World, ed. A. J. Hoerth, G. L. Mattingly, and E. M.
Yamauchi
(Grand Rapids: Baker, 1994), 283, who cites Herodotus' words
regarding the Egyptians being the most religious
people on earth; and
Gladson,
"Retributive Paradoxes," 100, who calls attention to the
"pervasive
religiosity" in Mesopotamian thought.
8 See
Isaiah 40:27, where the question is implicitly posed.
9 Adapted from W. von
Soden, "Das Fragen Nach der Gerechtigkeit
Gottes
im Alten Orient," MDOG 96
(1965): 41-59.
5
If any of these four elements
is lacking, the tension which generally leads
to a
theodicy can be relieved. This is because the absence of any one of these
components can
negate or qualify the principle of equitable or just retri-
bution. The
presence of these four factors in any given situation may not
answer the
question of suffering but it allows the deity to be absolved of
responsibility and
therefore accusations of divine injustice are no longer
appropriate.10
B. OT Books Related to Theodicy
Not surprisingly, the book which most often
comes to mind in
discussions of
innocent suffering in the OT is the book of Job. A vast
amount of
literature exists on this topic, far too much to summarize here.
Other books which refer to this
theme are Ecclesiastes (or Qoheleth),
certain psalms
(especially 37, 49, 73), Isaiah, Jeremiah and Habakkuk.11
While there are quite a few
other scattered references to pain, suffering,
sickness, etc.
in the OT, I will limit the study to those passages in the
Wisdom books which contribute
to the current topic.
In relation to the topic of theodicy one of the most
common ways to
view the
wisdom corpus of the OT is to see Job and Qoheleth reacting
against the
strict dogmatism of Proverbs regarding the doctrine of retri-
bution. This
will be taken up in some detail in chapter two, but I mention it
now in
order to form a backdrop to the later discussion on the literature of
10 John H. Walton, Ancient Israelite Literature in Its Cultural
Con-
text, rev.
(Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1990), 180.
11 See James L. Crenshaw,
ed., Theodicy in the Old Testament
(Philadelphia: Fortress, 1983), for discussion
of many of these texts. Also
idem, "Theodicy," ABD, 6.445-446.
6
the ANE. The following discussion of Job and Qoheleth will be
specifically
focused on how
they deal with the issue of theodicy.
1. Job
Job's claim to innocent suffering went
against the con-
ventions of
virtually every religious system in the ANE. The response of the
three
friends and Elihu to Job's assertions of innocence shows their
disagreement and
disapproval of Job in his protestations of unmerited
suffering.
In the discussion which follows I will refrain from
matters of dating,
structure, and
the like. For these background issues the commentaries of
Hartley,12
Clines,13 Rowley14 and Habel15 will be
sufficient.
The issue of theodicy as expressed in the book of Job is
very complex,
with a huge
amount of secondary literature that can only be summarized
here. The
topic will be analyzed in Job by literary division.
a. The Prologue
In the first two chapters the
narrator goes to great
lengths to
portray Job as a man of integrity, one completely undeserving of
all the
woes that befall him, bringing Job's experience into conflict with the
doctrine of
retribution, which is assumed to lie behind the book. It is
surprising that
two of Job's statements in the prose introduction go counter
12 John E. Hartley, The Book of Job, NICOT (
mans, 1988).
13 David
J. A. Clines, Job 1-20, WBC vol. 17
(Dallas: Word, 1989).
14 H.
H. Rowley, Job, NCBC (Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 1980).
15 Norman C. Habel, The Book of Job, OTL (
ster, 1985).
7
to the
reward/retribution theologoumenon
that those who fear God are
guaranteed divine
blessing and protection from misfortune and tragedy.16
First, in 1:21 Job states that
Yahweh gives blessings to the righteous and
may take
them away; second, in 2:10 he says that wellbeing (bOF) may
attend the
life of those who fear God or they may suffer misfortune (frA).
The latter statement comes in
reaction to his wife's charge to "curse God
and
die" (2:9). In this she apparently believes that the righteous will pros-
per and
the wicked will suffer.17 Since Yahweh has allowed the righteous
Job to suffer, Yahweh is no
longer worthy of the adoration and worship
which Job
gives. She places the blame for Job's misfortunes directly on
God. One
might have expected a theodicy, a justification of God here, but
Job does not attempt to acquit
God of the responsibility for his tragedies.
Job's reaction is to affirm his
loyalty to Yahweh.18
Job's declaration can be viewed at two levels. When
viewed "from
above,"
it vindicates God's confidence in Job against the Satan's accusa-
tions
(1:9-11; 2:4-5). However, when it is viewed "from below," i. e., from
a
standpoint which
has no knowledge of the conversations which took place
in the
heavenly court, it is a stunning admission of the fact of innocent
suffering, since
not even the righteous are guaranteed safety from life's
misfortunes and
tragedies.19
16 E. W. Nicholson,
"The Limits of Theodicy as a Theme of the Book of
Job," in Wisdom in Ancient
Williamson (Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 1995), 72.
17 Clines, Job 1-20, 51.
18
Nicholson, “Limits,” 72; Hartley, Job,
84.
19 Nicholson,
"Limits," 72.
8
b. The
Dialogue
According to Nicholson the
declaration at the cli-
max of the
prologue in 2:10 sets the agenda for the rest of the book.20 In the
discussion of the
problem of suffering in the poetical dialogue issues of
divine
justice would be shown to give meaning to life in the midst of
suffering. As
will be argued below, those in surrounding cultures believed
that
suffering was almost invariably due to the sin of the sufferer, not the
fault of
some deity. This is essentially what Job's three friends are
claiming,
especially Eliphaz (chs. 4-5), who offers three explanations for
Job's
predicament. These three theodicies are expounded by Eliphaz
and
the other
human speakers but never added to. Thus Nicholson sees
Eliphaz' first speech as more
or less "programmatic"21 for the rest of the
following
dialogue between Job and the three counsellors:
1. No innocent person has ever perished (4:7-8).
This pronouncement is intended to encourage Job, in the
sense that
he needs
to have patience and endurance. This axiom is based on a con-
ditional
assumption, viz., if he is innocent then he will not die. It is an
affirmation of the
doctrine of retribution but does not explain Job's suffer-
ing, since
Job's integrity is not being questioned yet,
2. All human beings are sinners (4:18-19).
Since God charges his angels with error how can Job
believe that
mankind is
without fault? If Job is not without fault, then he should not
20 "Limits,"
73.
21 "Limits,"
74.
9
expect to be
exempt from punishment. This view is met very clearly in
Sumero-Babylonian literature,
e. g. "Man and His God," addressed below
under
II.A.1.
3. God chastens people with the intent to correct
shortcomings (5:17-
27).
This aspect of the theodicy is not taken up again until
the speeches of
Elihu (33:19-28; 34:31-37;
36:7-13, 15-16), but the previous two elements are
frequently
discussed with increasing fervor and intensity.22
Without a doubt, the principles of retribution and reward
are
affirmed time
and again in other places in the OT, just as the three friends
do, but
their primary mistake was in the misapplication of these principles
to Job's
particular situation.23
c. The Divine Speeches
The logical place in the book of
Job to seek answers
to the
problem of innocent suffering is in the divine speeches. There is no
shortage of
material from which to draw opinions, so the discussions here
must be
limited to some of the more meaningful suggestions.
Unfortunately, there is no unanimous opinion on how the
speeches of
Yahweh are
to be viewed in relation to the issue of theodicy. At one extreme
of the
spectrum are those who claim the speeches ignore Job's complaints
of
injustice and show Yahweh to be a "blustering deity" who humiliates
Job
22 Nicholson,
"Limits," 74. Discussing this in detail takes us too far
from the primary topic; for a brief treatment see
Nicholson, "Limits," 74-79.
23 Michael L.
van, 1995), 173. One of the lessons Job learned is
that serving God cannot
always be reduced to a mathematical formula, as if
trouble and tragedy
could never happen in the life of a God-fearer (cf.
1:2).
10
into
submission.24 At the opposite extreme are those who attempt to solve
the
problem of innocent suffering by dissolving it. According to this view,
the world
is not founded on the retribution principle whereby righteousness
is
rewarded and wickedness is punished. This view portrays the world as
"amoral"
and thus it is absurd to expect a fate which morally corresponds to
one's deeds.25
Both of these views are unsatisfactory. The first view
portrays God as
an
incompetent deity who is incapable of answering Job's accusations of
misgoverning the
world. Because Yahweh has been called into account
and found
wanting, Job is bullied into submission. The author therefore is
declaring Job's
case unanswerable, and Yahweh stands guilty as charged.
The main problem with this
view, in my opinion, is that it shows God to be
immoral, petty
and abusive.26 Job's righteousness is of no value to God,
who uses
and manipulates Job to prove a point. Then in the concluding
prose
passage this same God restores Job to wellbeing once the point has
been made.27
This seems hardly credible or likely.
The second view suffers from the problem of Job's
previous rejection
24 E. g., J. L. Crenshaw,
"The Shift from Theodicy to Anthropodicy,"
in Theodicy
in the Old Testament, ed. J. L. Crenshaw (
Fortress,
1983), 9; and D. Robertson, The Old Testament and
the Literary
Critic (Philadelphiaa,;Fortress, 1977), 48-50.
25 Matitiahu Tsevat,
"The Meaning of the Book of Job," HUCA
37
(1966):
73-106; and more recently Habel, Job,
65, 534-535.
26 Cf. Nicholson,
"Limits," 80.
27 See Habel, Job, 533, and Nicholson,
"Limits," 80, for a critique of
this position, which arises from a naive
identification with Job on the part
of the commentators.
11
of the
dogmatization of the reward/retribution doctrine. It seems unneces-
sary for
Yahweh to simply endorse what Job has already maintained all
along,
especially since the divine speeches censure Job.28 However,
according to some,
Yahweh's speeches are not intended to humiliate but to
educate.29 Job is
enlightened and comes away with knowledge that he had
not
previously possessed as a result of the divine speeches.30
Nicholson's view of theodicy in relation to Yahweh's speeches
is
based on the
ANE Chaoskampf also reflected in
Psalms and Isaiah,31
where God's
primeval victory over chaos is referred to or invoked in
contexts in
which chaos seems to persist.32 His premise is that chaos,
represented by
Leviathan, the Sea, or Rahab, etc. has been confined but not
eliminated.33 This,
for Nicholson, raises the possibility that the enemy's
defeat may be
reversed and it revives all the anxiety that goes with this idea.
The claim is that these texts
acknowledge the "jarring disjunction between
present
experience and belief in God's absolute sovereignty."34 It is
only
due to
God's intervention and vigilance that disaster is prevented. Creation
28 Nicholson,
"Limits," 79.
29 E. g., F. I. Andersen,
Job: An Introduction and Commentary,
TOTC (Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1976), 269.
30 Note the emphasis on
the use of the root fdy in Job's confession in
42:1-6,
and the comments of Habel, Job,
578-580.
31 Pss 74:12-17;
89:10-13[9-12]; Isa 51:9-11; cf. Job 38:8-11; 40:25-
41:26[41:1-34].
32 Nicholson,
"Limits," 80; building on the studies of Jon D. Leven-
son, Creation
and the Persistence of Evil (
1988),
and John Day, God's Conflict with the
Dragon and the Sea (
bridge:
33 Nicholson,
"Limits," 81.
34 Levenson, Creation, 24.
12
endures
because God has pledged it so (the Noahic covenant), and com-
pelled
obeisance toward the great adversary (Leviathan, the Sea, Rahab,
etc.).35
To react briefly to Nicholson's position, it must be
pointed out that the
passages cited
do not always contain a reference to a "confined" or "per-
sistent"
chaos other than people (as opposed to primordial forces or
creatures). In other
words, the breakdown of society enumerated in Ps 74,
for
example, is not due to the continued existence and activity of Leviathan,
who was
crushed and its body parts fed to the desert creatures (Ps 74:13-14),
making it
difficult to see how it could continue to cause chaos. The enemy
(74:18) is identified as
"foolish people," and those who do violence to the
oppressed, the
poor and needy (74:20-21). Animal symbols are prominent in
74:19, with Yahweh's enemy
symbolized by wild beasts and the covenant
people
symbolized by a dove. This is hardly the same thing as Job, or
another human
being, feeling anxiety over threats from primordial
creatures. The
symbolic language of Ps 74 serves to express realities of life
in the
language of human imagination in the form of mythical images.36
A similar observation can be
made regarding Ps 89:10-13[9-12] where Rahab
is
crushed. The use of the Canaanite myth is to emphasize Yahweh's vic-
tory over
Rahab in the past, and forms a basis on which to call on Yahweh
to assert
control over present circumstances.37 It is also important to note
35 Nicholson,
"Limits." 81; Levenson, Creation, 17.
36 Marvin E. Tate, Psalms 51-100, WBC vol. 20 (Dallas:
Word, 1990),
254-255.
37 J. Day, God's Conflict, 26.
13
that the
"chaos" brought upon
45]), even though it is
possible that this is an instance of double agency, with
Yahweh allowing the forces of
chaos to have temporary domination.38
This may be the case, but this
psalm places the responsibility for
"chaos"
solely on Yahweh. A similar observation may be made regarding
the Satan
and Job's tragedies. Yahweh never blames the Satan in his
speeches,
accepting full responsibility for the governance of the world, and
Job's
misfortunes along with it.
This sense of agency is the main problem with Nicholson's
view, in
my
opinion. One of the emphases in Yahweh's speeches is divine control
over
nature. In Job 38:8-11 Yahweh has the Sea firmly under control with
fixed limits
and boundaries, and Job can no more control the Sea than he
could bind
Pleiades or loose the cords of Orion (38:31). Leviathan, a
frighteningly
powerful creature compared to Job, is simply one of Yah-
weh's pets
(40:29[41:5]) and numbered among several other phenomena
from the
natural world seen as part of Yahweh's creation.39
Thus I cannot agree with Nicholson and Levenson that the
presence
of chaos
in the world indicates a failure on the part of God,40 especially
when the
divine speeches show these natural forces and amazing creatures
to be
directly under Yahweh's control. Yahweh's defense of the design of
38 Cf.
Day, God's Conflict, 26, n. 70.
39 See Ps 104:25-26,
where the vast sea is the playground for Levia-
than, which Levenson (Creation, 24) humorously refers to as God's "rubber
duckey."
40 Nicholson,
"Limits," 81; Levenson, Creation,
24.
14
the cosmos
takes, place in a legal setting,41 keeping continuity with the
judicial
setting of the dialogue.42 Many studies have shown the impor-
tance of the
legal metaphor for understanding the theology of the book,43
and in my
opinion it is the best way to understand the unfolding argument
of the
dialogue and the resultant divine speeches, as well as the theology
behind the
speeches. Job had appealed to God to answer him in a lawsuit
and the
two divine speeches do just that. The details of this are too complex
to enter
into the discussion here and Scholnick has done this already.44
Scholnick's study places the
entire book in the legal genre but it is not
necessary to
limit this book to a single literary form. It is probably more
accurate to see
several different literary forms within the book, and
recognize it as
a masterful blending of genres.45 The book of Job is better
41Sylvia
H. Scholnick, "Poetry in the Courtroom: Job 38-41," in Direc-
tions in Hebrew Poetry, ed. E. Follis (Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1987),
186.
42 See B. Gemser,
"The Rib- or Controversy-Pattern in Hebrew Men-
tality," in Wisdom
in Israel and in the Ancient Near East, ed. M. Noth and
D.
W. Thomas, VTSup 3 (Leiden: Brill, 1969), 134-135; J. Limburg, "The
Lawsuit
of God in the Eighth Century Prophets" (Th.D. thesis,
Theological
Seminary in
ed.
(Garden City:; Doubleday & Co., 1973), lxxi; H. Richter, Studien zu Hiob
(Berlin:
Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 1959); and C. Westermann, Der
Aufbau des Buches Hiob (Tubingen: J. C. B. Mohr
[Paul Siebeck], 1956).
43 E. g., Richter, Studien zu Hiob, and more recently S. H.
Scholnick,
"Lawsuit
Drama in the Book of Job" (Ph.D. diss.,
1975); G. Many, "Der
Rechtsstreit mit Gott (Rib) im Hiobbuch" (Diss. Kath.-
theol. Fakultat der Ludwig-Maximilian Universitat,
Dick,
"Job 31: A Form-critical Study" (Ph.D. diss., Johns Hopkins Uni-
versity, 1977); and J. J. M. Roberts,
"Job's Summons to Yahweh: The
Exploitation
of a Legal Metaphor," RQ 16 (1973):
159-165.
44 Scholnick,
"Poetry in the Courtroom," 185-204.
45 See Hartley, Job, 37-43.
15
classified sui generis.46
More to the point, the Yahweh speeches do not deny innocent
suffer-
ing. In
the divine speeches Job is assumed to be innocent but unin-
formed.47 He has
doubted both the plan48 (38:2) and justice49 (40:8) of
Yahweh's
universe. In seeing a legal background as the setting for
the
divine
speeches in which Yahweh is shown to be both Owner and King of
the world,
I believe we come closer to their true intent. Job is informed of
Yahweh's right of ownership due
to his role as Creator, and administra-
tion of the
world is Yahweh's right by reason of his role as King.
In the divine speeches Job is shown the paradoxes of the
cosmic
creation which
operate under Yahweh's control and by his design.50
46 James
L. Crenshaw, Old Testament Wisdom:
An Introduction
(Atlanta: John Knox, 1981), 120; and Pope, Job, xxxi.
47 The reverse is usually
true in Sumero-Babylonian literature, with
sufferers assumed to be ignorant of their offenses
but not innocent. This
will be shown in more detail below in the discussion
of that literature.
48 "Plan" here
is hcAfe also
"design." Yahweh's first speech answers
the charge of a disorderly world, see S. Scholnick,
"Poetry in the Court-
room," 185-186. This Hebrew word is used in the
creation poetry of Isa 40:13
to speak of God's design for the universe. It is
used to refer to the divine
plan for mankind in Isa 5:19; 46:10; Jer 32:19;
49:20; 50:45; Mic 4:12; Ps
33:11;
73:24; 106:13; 107:11; Prov 19:21. For a chart of Job's doubts and
Yahweh's
responses see Habel, Job, 530-532.
49 "Justice" FPAw;mi
is an important term in the book, which is replete
with legal terminology, see S. Scholnick, "The
Meaning of Mispat in the
Book
of Job," JBL 101 (1982):
521-529; and in more detail her Lawsuit
Dra-
ma. Job had accused God of
misgoverning the world and turning justice
upside down. Thus Yahweh challenged Job to match his
ability to control
evil in 40:9-14.
50 See Habel, Job, 534-535. In my opinion Habel's
discussion of the
Yahweh
speeches is an excellent treatment, see 526-535; cf. also Hartley,
Job, 515-517.
16
There is no failure on the part
of God, but an assertion that Yahweh
governs the
cosmos by means which include the law of reward and
retribution but
also by standards which go beyond its mechanical
application.51 Job
must recognize his creaturely limitations, and realize
that he is
not in a position to doubt Yahweh's orderly design of the world,
nor his
just governance of it.52 In my opinion the speeches of Yahweh
demonstrate just
the opposite of Nicholson's view--viz., rather than show-
ing Yahweh
to be a failure at controlling the forces of nature, he is in
sovereign
control over all.
d. The Epilogue
The epilogue of this book has no
direct bearing on
the issue
of theodicy but it is extremely problematic in relation to this topic
except for
those who view it as a reaffirmation of the doctrine of reward and
retribution. Job
is restored to health and prosperity, seemingly as a
validation of the
dogma that teaches that the righteous will be rewarded.53
This is all the more surprising
when it seems that the retribution dogma
had been
marginalized, or as was shown above, to be only one of many
factors in
God's governance of the world.
In 42:12a (cf. 8:7) we are told that Yahweh blessed the
latter part
(tyriHExa) of Job's life more than the
first (tywixre). Yet this does not
neces-
sarily mean
that this was a reward for his perseverance, as Hartley says:
51 Cf. Habel, Job, 535.
52 For a discussion on
the difference in perspectives and perceptions
in the book see Stuart Lasine, "Bird's-Eye
and Worm's-Eye Views of Justice
in the Book of Job," JSOT 42 (1988): 29-53.
53 Clines, Job 1-20, xlvii.
17
the doubling of Job's
estate does not mean that he received a bountiful
reward for
the endurance of undeserved affliction, but rather that
Yahweh freely and abundantly blessed
him. The blessing proves that
Yahweh is a life-giving God, not a
capricious deity who takes
pleasure in
the suffering of those who fear him. In his sovereign
design he
may permit a faithful servant to suffer ill-fortune for a
season, but
in due time he will bring total healing.54
The retraction55 of
the lawsuit by Job (42:6) and his intercession for the
three
friends (42:8, 10) led to the doubling of his former wealth by Yahweh,
and
abundant blessings are poured out on him. Had Yahweh been com-
mitted to a
strict dogma of retribution the wealth given to Job would have
equaled the
amounts listed in 1:2-3 rather than doubled.
2. Qoheleth
There may be less agreement
regarding the interpreta-
tion,
message and meaning of this book than any other in the Hebrew
Bible.56 Though higher-critical issues may influence the
interpretation of
the
various passages under consideration, the discussion will be limited to
the issue
of theodicy.57 This issue has been ably dealt with in Michael V.
54 Hartley, Job, 540.
55 The translation of sxm is complicated by the
lack of an object. If
the legal framework of the book is accepted there
may be a clue to the object
of the verb in 31:13, where Job claims that he did
not "dismiss/reject the
case (FPAw;mi)" of a slave. The
implied object of sxm in 42:6 would be Job's
case against God, which he
"dismisses/retracts," cf. Scholnick, Lawsuit
Drama, 303.
56 In the view of R.
Gordis, Poets. Prophets and Sages (
Song of Solomon (Dallas: Word, 1991),
19, 23.
57 For those interested
in these background issues see, e. g., R. E.
Murphy,
Ecclesiastes, WBC vol. 23a (Dallas:
Word, 1992), and his biblio-
graphies; also G. S. Ogden, Qoheleth (Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1987); and J.
18
Fox's work on Qoheleth58
and to some extent I follow his lead. However,
the
approach taken here will be to analyze specific passages, in contrast to
Fox,
who treats the issue topically.
The passages in Qoheleth which specifically make
reference to
injustices going
uncorrected are 3:16-17; 4:1-3; 6:1-9; 7:15-18; and 8:9-9:12.59
a. 3:16-17
These verses are set within a
pericope which
extends
through 3:22.60 The main topic is the miscarriage of justice in
society, a
situation which does not evoke a demand for fair treatment in the
courts, or to
have dishonest judges removed. This generalized observation
of one
human's injustice to another will be rectified somehow at an
unspecified time
and place,61 apparently saying that God has, as it were,
L.
Crenshaw, Ecclesiastes, OTL
(Philadelphia: Westminster, 1987), al-
though his personal skepticism (53) must be taken into
account in assess-
ing his interpretation of the text.
58 Michael V. Fox, Qohelet and His Contradictions, JSOTSS
71 (Shef-
field: Almond, 1989), 121-150, though not without reservations.
Fox is overly
influenced by A. Camus in his understanding of the
book. See the brief
assessment, both positive and negative, by Duane A.
Garrett, Proverbs,
Ecclesiastes. Song of Songs, NAC vol. 14 (Nashville: Broadman, 1993), 275-
277,
283.
59 Another passage which
might be treated in this connection is 10:5-
14,
but see Murphy, Ecclesiastes,
102-103, and Fox, Qohelet, 124-125;
both of
whom assert that this passage teaches that the
consequences of the deeds
listed are a danger but not a certainty. The results
are portrayed as unex-
pected, not as absolute causal linkages.
60 Murphy, Ecclesiastes, 31; R. N. Whybray, Ecclesiastes, NCBC
(London:
Marshall, Morgan & Scott, 1989), 76-81; J. A. Loader, Ecclesias-
tes: A Practical Commentary, tr. J. Vriend (
1986),
42-47.
61 Murphy, Ecclesiastes, 36.
19
"a
time to judge and a time to refrain from judging" (cf. 3:2-8 and 8:10-
13).62 The Hebrew
text of 3:17 says:
Myhilox<hA
FPow;yi fwArAhA-tx,v; qyDica.ha-tx, yBiliB; ynixE
yTir;maxA
:MwA
hW,fEm.aha lfav; Cp,He-lkAl; tfe-yKi
This raises the question of the
meaning of "there" (MWA).
Garrett holds to an
eschatological usage
(cf. Ps 14:5a), with "there" being shorthand for the
time and
place of eschatological judgment (cf. Zeph 1:14) or referring to
Sheol, in which case the ideas
of the grave and judgment have been com-
bined.63
This deferment of divine judgment till the indefinite
future makes it
a
foregone conclusion, then, that distortions of justice are a fact of life,64
and
mankind's only choice is to simply make the best of it (3:22).65
There is
no
encouragement to work for justice or to strive against legal, oppression.
Social abuses are unalterable
realities.
b. 4:1-3
Many commentators correctly
connect these ver-
ses with
the flow of thought begun in chapter 3.66 Human oppression is
62 Whybray, Ecclesiastes, 77-78.
63 Garrett, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, 302-303. He
notes a related usage
in Job 3:17-19 where "there" refers to
the grave, an impartial judge that
treats the mighty and the weak alike, see 303, n. 86,
and cf. Robert Gordis,
Koheleth--the Man and
His World (
nary of
64 Fox,
Qohelet, 141.
65 Whybray, Ecclesiastes, 77-78.
66 E. g., Murphy (Ecclesiastes, 28-39) treats 3:1-4:6 as
the overall unit,
20
the subject of these verses, as indicated by the three distinct nuances of the
root qwf: the first as the abstract notion of oppression, the second as the
objects of this villainy ("the oppressed"), and the third as, those who are
involved in carrying out the actions ("oppressors").67 The repetition of the
phrase MHenam; Mh,lA Nyxev; shows how utterly hopeless the lot of the oppressed
is.68 The threefold repetition of the root qwf and the double use of the
statement regarding the lack of comfort produce an effect of emotional
intensity which is rare for Qoheleth.69
The writer is not saying that one is better off dead than alive, but that
death is preferable to a life made miserable by oppression, since it frees
from trouble. A similar thought can be found in Sir 41:2 (NRSV):
O death, how welcome is your sentence
to one who is needy and failing in strength,
worn down by age and anxious about everything;
to one who is contrary, and has lost all patience!70
This view is consistent with the general wisdom teaching concerning
"life," which in the book of Proverbs is not equated with bare existence.
while Crenshaw (Ecclesiastes, 101-107) sees 3:16-4:3 as a unit of thought.
67 A. Lauha, Kohelet, BKAT 19 (Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener
Verlag, 1978), 81; cf. Crenshaw, Ecclesiastes, 105, and Whybray, Ecclesias-
tes, 81.
68 Loader, Ecclesiastes, 47. See Murphy, Ecclesiastes, 37-38, and
Crenshaw, Ecclesiastes, 105, for arguments that the repetition is not a gloss
and should therefore be retained.
69 According to Whybray, Ecclesiastes, 81.
70 Murphy (Ecclesiastes, 38) observes that the thought of Qoh 4:2-3 is
close in spirit to Job 3 and Jer 20:14-18.
21
Those who were poor (e. g. Prov 14:20; 18:23; 19:4, 7) and those who were
oppressed by the powerful (e. g. Prov 28:15-16) were not regarded as posses-
sing "life" in the sense of the fullness of life, which was the goal and reward
of those who followed the counsels of wisdom.71
Qoheleth laments the frequent occurrence of oppression and unjust
treatment, thus he is aware of innocent suffering. But the similar under-
standing of "life" to that of Proverbs shows that his thought here is not
unique.
In Qoheleth's reflections on injustice death is a prominent feature.
In 3:16-17 death appears as the area of hope for the oppressed; it is "there"
that God judges the oppressor. Here death is simply the better alternative to
a life of oppression. It is not surprising that in 3:18-22, which comes
between these two texts, the subject is death itself.72
c. 6:1-9
This part of chapter 6 contains an extended reflec-
tion on the person who is prevented from enjoying all his possessions. The
overall point seems to be that it would be better not to have riches than to
have to give them over to a stranger to enjoy. The thought of this passage is
part of the larger context begun in 5:9[10] discussing the relative value of
possessions.73
The specific statement regarding innocent suffering very pointedly
71 E. g. Prov 3:2, 22; 4:22; 16:22. See Whybray, Ecclesiastes, 81-82.
72 Garrett, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, 306.
73 See Murphy, Ecclesiastes, 49, who considers the broad context to
consist of 4:17[5:1]-6:9, and breaks it down as an instruction on conduct
associated with the cult in 4:17-5:6[5:1-7], an instruction on officials in 5:7-
8[8-9] and on possessions in 5:9[5:10]-6:9.
22
fixing the responsibility on God is found in 6:2.74 Qoheleth's observation
may refer back to a similar idea in 5:12-13[13-14], and enlarge on it some-
what. In these verses riches are shown to be of dubious value because of the
harm possessions might bring to the owner. In the lines which follow,
Qoheleth's meaning is made clear. Wealth lost through some misfortune,
be it natural catastrophe or of human cause (theft, vandalism, etc.) means
that all the time and toil invested to gain the wealth went for nought. All
this was costly to the owner but did not profit him in the end.75 Following
this is a statement echoed in other places in the Hebrew Bible, notably Job
1:21; Ps 139:15; see also Sir 40:1. The idea expressed in the modern dictum
"You can't take it with you" in regard to wealth is similar to a theme
prominent in Ps 49.76
In 6:2 a slightly different situation is pictured. The wealth is not seen
as lost so that a son, a rightful heir is deprived, but that it is taken by a
stranger.77 This would cause distress since the owner is denied not only
the enjoyment of his possessions but also the satisfaction of seeing his
accumulated wealth passed on to his son, thereby keeping it in the family.
This would have touched a raw nerve among some within the wisdom
74 Fox, Qohelet, 219.
75 Loader, Ecclesiastes, 64.
76 Murphy, Ecclesiastes, 52; and note Loader's pointed comment:
"There are no pockets in a shroud," Ecclesiastes, 65.
77 It is probably useless to attempt to identify the stranger beyond that
of an unknown person who is not a family member. The point may be only
that someone is enjoying the wealth who has no legitimate claim to it, cf.
Whybray, Ecclesiastes, 104, and Crenshaw, Ecclesiastes, 126.
23
tradition, according to Ogden.78 Material success and tangible posses-
sions were viewed as evidence of the divine blessing which was the
consequence of living a life pleasing to God (Prov 13:21, 25; cf. Deut 8:10).
Here Qoheleth casts doubt on this belief by suggesting that a wealthy person
may not be allowed to derive any pleasure from material possessions, thus
inferring an anomaly in human experience much like Job's, or that the
fate of a wise man in this situation is little different from that of a fool.
Qoheleth's comment on this is like that on many other sad circumstances:
"This is meaningless, a grievous evil."
d. 7:15-18
The traditional view of the retribution dogma is
contradicted here in Qoheleth's experience. He claims to have seen the
righteous one (qyDica destroyed in his righteousness, while the wicked one
(fwArA) lives long despite his wickedness. The use of the particle wye ("there
is") may express the fact that Qoheleth is aware that the righteous do not
always prosper and the wicked do not always suffer. The exceptions in his
experience show that the doctrine of retribution, one of the most funda-
mental principles of wisdom literature, has its cases where the exact oppo-
site is true.79 The equation of prosperity with righteousness and suffering
with sin is far too simplistic to apply to every circumstance.
Verses 16-18 have been misinterpreted at times to teach that Qoheleth
advocates participation in some kind of sin,80 with the advice not to be
78 Ogden, Qoheleth, 91.
79 Loader, Ecclesiastes, 87.
80 J. A. Loader, Polar Structures in the Book of Qohelet, BZAW 152
(Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1979), 48.
24
overly righteous or overly evil. Some have asserted that these verses teach a
"golden mean."81 This view, held by Delitzsch,82 Hertzberg,83 Gordis,84
etc. says that Qoheleth was encouraging readers to follow an immoral
doctrine, that is, to practice sin in moderation. However, this is a mis-
understanding, just as it would be wrong to believe that Deut 27:24 ("Cursed
be he who slays his neighbor in secret" RSV) approves of murdering a
neighbor publicly.85 A modern way to say a similar thing would be "Do not
be a fanatic."86 Crenshaw observes that 7:17 does not claim that sin in
moderation is acceptable. The teaching is that sin in an individual's life
may be unavoidable, but those who practice evil as a way of life are
destroyed by it.87 Thus Qoheleth is not dealing with the issue of personal
sins as such, but rather, an attitude of life that seeks the benefits of long
life, prosperity and personal happiness through strict observation of
religious and wisdom principles. The affirmation of fearing God as the
81 According to Whybray, Ecclesiastes, 120. For an interpretation of
these verses which claims the warning here is against being self-righteous
and pretentions to wisdom, see R. N. Whybray, "Qoheleth the Immoralist?
(Qoh 7:16-17)," in Israelite Wisdom: Essays in Honor of Samuel Terrien, ed.
J. G. Gammie et al. (New York: Scholars Press, 1978), 191-204. But against
this see Fox, Qohelet, 233-235.
82 Franz Delitzsch, Commentary on the Song of Songs and Ecclesi-
astes, tr.
83 Hans Wilhelm Hertzberg, Der Prediger, KAT 17/4 (
Gerd Mohr, 1963), 154.
84 Gordis, Koheleth, 265-266.
85 Crenshaw, Ecclesiastes, 141.
86 Garrett, Proverbs. Ecclesiastes, 323.
87 Crenshaw, Ecclesiastes, 140. We could also say that it means that
we should not let sin get out of hand. Just because sin is unavoidable does
not necessarily mean it is uncontrollable.
25
advisable route in life is common to the wisdom literature, and shows the
contact of Qoheleth with the conventional tenets of wisdom thought.
e. 8:9-9:12
In this larger unit 8:14 is part of Qoheleth's reflec-
tion regarding the reversal of the retribution dogma also seen in 9:11-12.88
The failure to bring criminals to punishment is the general thrust of
8:9-13. Qoheleth comments that the lack of swift justice leads to increased
scheming and evil plans on the part of the wicked, then seems to affirm the
conventional wisdom belief that in the end "it will go better with God-
fearing men" and for those who do not fear God "it will not go well with
them, and their days will not lengthen like a shadow." This affirmation of
faith in divine justice seems to go directly against all the evidence Qoheleth
has cited. Living a long life is indicative of happiness and divine blessing in
the wisdom tradition (Prov 3:2, 16) and his admission of evidence to the
contrary combined with the tension seen in 8:14 regarding retribution
shows that it is not always possible to align the fact of suffering with the
simplistic claim that divine justice distinguishes between the righteous and
the wicked.89
The conclusion to 9:1-12 affirms the arbitrary nature of life from a
human perspective rather than a divine point of view. Five examples taken
from different areas of life (racing, war, livelihood, wealth, favor) show that
88 Garrett (Proverbs. Ecclesiastes, 328) treats 8:9-9:1 as a section en-
titled "On Theodicy," with 9:11-12 as transitional statements to another
section.
89 Cf. Murphy, Ecclesiastes, 85.
26
the optimistic view of life presented by the retribution principle (the right-
eous will prosper or succeed) must be moderated against a phony prosperity
piety, since regardless of one's talents events beyond one's control may
determine the outcome of a venture quite to the contrary of one's moral
character.90 Another way to state this in simpler terms is that it is diffi-
cult for one who holds to a belief in a rigid principle of equitable retribution
to make all the facts fit the theory.
To summarize, the treatment of the topic of theodicy in the books of
Job and Qoheleth shows the doctrine of retribution to be less than dogmatic.
The righteous do not always prosper and the wicked do not always suffer.
On top of this is the problem of equitable suffering. The scale of suffering
does not always balance with the degree of the sin, if one was committed.
Both books present cases where exceptions are noted, thus removing the
stigma of divine disfavor from those who were not prospering or enjoying
the blessings of God. In his use of contradictions of conventional wisdom
Qoheleth loosens the rigidity of conventional wisdom to come to terms with
empirical realities,.
For both Job and Qoheleth, Yahweh is given more respect and credi-
bility than the gods of other ancient societies, which often relegated the
relationship between the god and the worshipper to superficial levels. This
frequently led to supplicants attempting to cajole or manipulate the god or
goddess into blessing them, or, at least, removing the negative situation.
Yahweh, on the other hand, simply could not be manipulated. Good deeds
90 Fox (Qohelet, 260) says the passage does not teach that, e. g., the
swift never win, but that they do not necessarily win.
27
and worship were not viewed as bargaining chips, and there was no
exchange of material blessing for adoration. This was also asserted in the
Torah where
Qoheleth acknowledges the justice of God as well as the mystery of God in
how justice is worked out.92
II. Suffering in the Literature of the Ancient Near East
This part of the study will focus on the attitudes or views of suffering
displayed by some of the more prominent documents from certain cultures
surrounding ancient
number of texts which have been recovered it is possible to examine only a
sample of the documents, which will, by and large, be representative of the
rest. In the analysis of this topic I will discuss the literary works of the
ANE under two broad categories, Mesopotamian literature and Egyptian
literature.
There is evidence for wisdom literature in
focus of this part of the study will necessarily be limited to Egyptian and
Mesopotamian sources since only
large amounts of this kind of material. Most of the discussion which
91 See Deut 17:10.
92 Murphy, Ecclesiastes, lxvi.
93 See M. J. Dahood, "Canaanite-Phoenician Influence in Qoheleth,''
Bib 33 (1952): 30-52, 191-211. A more recent study, Gordon D. Young, ed.,
ence to wisdom literature at all in reference to
28
follows will break no new ground and risks oversimplification. The pur-
pose is to provide a larger context for the specific problem to be addressed in
later chapters, and to show that the texts do not contain discussions that
can be called "theodicy" in the modern sense. Gods and goddesses were
rarely blamed for human suffering. It was almost always the human who
was at fault.
The discussion of Mesopotamian literature will be divided into two
groups: Sumerian and Akkadian. In the conclusion I will examine von
Soden's four elements necessary for theodicy listed above and evaluate the
literature of Mesopotamia and
A. Mesopotamian Literature
A brief discussion of the Mesopotamian viewpoint is necessary
in order to appreciate the documents examined below, and the focus here is
specifically on how individuals related to the gods. Two groups of texts will
be discussed, Sumerian and Akkadian.
To begin with, the Mesopotamians believed in a pantheon of gods.
Some were major deities, others played more minor roles. They were
essentially personifications of various aspects of reality,94 and guided the
world according to their purposes and laws.95 The gods often displayed
characteristics such as spite, lust and rage, and sometimes there was con-
tention between various gods due to competing purposes. They were
94 Giorgio Buccellati, "Wisdom and Not: The Case of
JAOS 101 (1981): 36.
95 Samuel N. Kramer, The Sumerians: Their History, Culture and
Character (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1963), 113.
29
members of a "divine assembly"96 which sought to determine a common
course. The interests of the gods ran roughly parallel to that of humanity,
since humans were created for the purpose of serving the gods:
Blood I will mass and cause bones to be.
I will establish a savage, "man" shall be his name.
Verily, savage-man I will create.
He shall be charged with the service of the gods
That they might be at ease!97
This view of mankind was more a reflection of their society than their
theology, according to H. W. F. Saggs:
In the Sumerian city-state,...the characteristic and most significant
organization was the temple-estate, in which thousands of people co-
operated in works of irrigation and agriculture in a politico-economic
system centered on the temple, with all these people thought of as the
servants of the god. The myth of the creation of man, therefore, was
not basically a comment on the nature of man but an explanation of a
particular social system, heavily dependent upon communal
irrigation and agriculture, for which the god's estates were primary
foci of administration.98
The gods needed people to care for them and, provide sustenance through
the sacrifices. From this the ancient Mesopotamians derived personal
96 E. T. Mullen, Jr., "Divine Assembly," ABD, 2.214-217.
97 ANET, 68. The quote is from tablet VI:5-8; cf. also VI:33-34. In
other works this poem is often called Enuma Elish, after the opening line
of the poem. Much the same attitude is taken during the Old Babylonian
period in the Atrahasis Epic; see W. G. Lambert and Alan R. Millard,
Atra-hasis: The Babylonian Story of the Flood (Oxford: Clarendon, 1969),
59.
98 H. W. F. Saggs, Encounter with the Divine in
30
dignity and self-worth.99 Dignity and self-esteem for the individual person
were determined by function in that society.
The lot in life for the average person was to be quiet, keep the land in
good order and attend to the needs of the gods, yet the number of requests
for divine intervention show that the purposes and plans of the gods were
not clearly discernible.100 These plans or principles which kept the cosmos
running smoothly were designated by the Sumerian word me, the exact
meaning of which is still uncertain.101 These divinely ordained decrees
covered over one hundred aspects of human life and civilization, though
many are still obscure in meaning due to the fragmentary nature of the
texts where they are listed, translation problems, and the difficulty in-
herent in attempting to understand a culture that has not existed for over
three thousand years.102 Thus there was a concern on the part of the
99 Saggs, Encounter, 170.
100 Karel van der Toorn, Sin and Sanction in Israel and Mesopotamia
(Assen: Van Gorcum, 1985), 4. Atrahasis gives the reason for destroying
mankind in a flood as "noise." The debate over the term rigmu has a bear-
ing over whether the flood was justified by human sin; or whether humans
are merely a nuisance. It has been suggested that the noise which dis-
turbed Enlil was a metaphoric reference to wicked behavior; see Robert
Oden, "Divine Aspirations in Atrahasis and in Genesis 1-11," ZAW 93
(1981): 197-216, thus the need to keep "quiet." Population control is another
possibility suggested by A. D. Kilmer, in "The Mesopotamian Concept of
Overpopulation and Its Solution as Reflected in the Mythology," Or 41 (1972):
160477.
101 Kramer, The Sumerians, 115. A list of the discernible portions of
the mes is on 116.
102 For a discussion of me, see Gertrud Farber-Flugge, Der Mythos
"Inanna and Enki" unter besonderer Berucksichtigung der Liste der me
(Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1973). This book lists previous discus-
sions (116, n. 121); and cf. also W. W. Hallo and J. J. A. van Dijk, The
31
individual to live according to the divine order that regulated virtually all
areas of life.103
For the ordinary human the more prominent deities seemed remote
and unapproachable. Thus the individual's main focus in religion had to
do with personal gods, who were seen as intermediaries and intercessors
between the supplicant and the great gods.104 The personal god was inti-
mately involved with an individual's success or failure, as indicated by the
following proverb:
The destruction is from his own (personal) god;
He knows no savior.105
The personal god was often envisioned or addressed as a parent. Under
this metaphor the god was seen in four ways: (1) the physical aspect (the
father as engenderer of a child or the mother who gave birth), (2) the
provider aspect, (3) the protector and intercessor, and (4) the claim parents
have upon children for honor and obedience.106
Exaltation of Inanna (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1968), 49-50 for
Hallo's view, which is that a me represents a divine attribute.
103 See John Gray, "The Book of Job in the Context of Near Eastern
Literature," ZAW 82 (1970): 251-252.
104 For a discussion of the personal gods see T. Jacobsen, The Trea-
sures of Darkness: A History of Mesopotamian Religion (
University Press, 1976), 147-164, and H. Vorlander, Mein Gott: die Vorstel-
lungen vom personlich Gott irn Alten Orient and im Alten Testament,
AOAT 23 (Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1975).
105
Life in Ancient Mesopotamia (
sity of Pennsylvania Press, 1959), 45, 306.
106 Jacobsen, Treasures of Darkness, 158.
32
The metaphor of the parent under which the personal god was
viewed made the cosmic powers of the gods more immediate and approach-
able, and this ultimately led to the paradox of the righteous sufferer in
Mesopotamian literature. The personal deities were imaged as parental
figures and portrayed in a positive light. Yet when misfortune came upon
the individual there seemed to be no way to know what had been done to
offend the god other than reading omens or trial-and-error guessing.107
This is very evident in dingir.sa.dib.ba texts:
My god, I did not know how severe your punishment is.
I frivolously took a solemn oath in your name,
I profaned your decrees, I went too far,
I .... your mission in trouble,
I transgressed your way much,
I did not know, much .[...
My iniquities are many: I know not what I did.108
In the last line quoted the supplicant appears to portray both parts of the
theological problem faced by the one who suffers: an assumption of guilt
and an ignorance of the offense.
To these people there was no sharp distinction between the care of the
body and care of the soul, as opposed to modern Western societies in which
religious faith and scientific medical practice are frequently viewed as
mutually exclusive categories.109 For the ancient Mesopotamians the onset
107 Van der Toorn, Sin and Sanction, 94-97; see also Walton, Ancient
Israelite Literature, 153.
108 W G. Lambert, "DINGIR.SA.DIB.BA Incantations," JNES 33
(1974): 275, lines 23-29. The expression dingir.sa.dib.ba has reference to
appeasing an angry god."
109 Brown,
33
of disease, illness and misfortune were often seen to have mysterious
causes. Speaking specifically of the situation of debilitating illness,
Michael Brown says:
If one lost one's health and vigor one became a burden to both family
and society, apparently suffering from divine disfavor as well. Thus
it was crucial that the deity's favor be incurred and his or her help
secured. To the ancient Near Eastern--and biblical!--mind, it was
impossible to countenance a major god /God who did not heal.110
Another factor in the problem of suffering is that of the human
element in healing, i. e., the existence of those who practiced medicine.
They practiced magical arts and divination in order to diagnose the cause of
the disease or malady, and also prescribed appropriate incantations or
other kinds of treatment to alleviate the suffering, or appease the offended
deity who would take away the problem. The two most frequent terms
referring to those who practiced the medical art were the asipu and asu.
The asipu viewed the onset of disease as a chain of events initiated under
the influence of "supernatural" powers or forces, which proceeded on a
predetermined course to an outcome that could be predicted by the skillful
reading of "signs."111 The asu viewed disease as the complex of presenting
symptoms and findings; by his "practical grasp" (intuition plus accumu-
"The Healing Christ," in Healing and Christianity, ed. M. Kelsey (New
110 Brown, Israel's Divine Healer, 53 (emphasis in original).
111 E. K. Ritter, "Magical-expert (=asipu) and Physician (=asu).
Notes on Two Complementary Professions in Babylonian Medicine," in
Studies in Honor of Benno Landsberger on his 75th Birthday, ed. H. Guter-
bock and T. Jacobsen (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1965), 301.
34
lated experience) of the immediate situation he prescribed treatment.112
Treatment most often included herbs, plants, animal parts, etc., mixed
with carriers such as beer, vinegar, honey, or tallow, and introduced into
the patient's body by means of ingestion, enema or suppository. Other
treatments were topical lotions or salves used directly on the body.113
Mesopotamian medicine shows a highly developed internal system
which integrated folk-belief, cultic ritual, and prescribed treatment.114
However it shows change over time, with the asu falling out of use in favor
of the asipu, so one should not expect to see both offices featured
prominently in all Mesopotamian medical texts.115
1. Sumerian Literature
Although the Sumerians are never referred to in the
Bible116 their language, culture and religion had a profound effect on the
Assyrians and, later, the Babylonians, both of which had considerable
influence militarily, politically, culturally and religiously on
112 Ritter, "Magical-expert," 302. For more discussion of these two
professions see
heim, Ancient
(Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1977), 288-305.
113 Oppenheim, Ancient
114 See Brown, Israel's Divine Healer, 42-43, and the accompanying
documentation.
115 For a brief sketch of the history of Mesopotamian medicine see
Oppenheim, Ancient Mesopotamia, 288-305; and J. V. Kinnier
"Medicine in the Land and Times of the Old Testament," in Studies in the
Period of David and Solomon and Other Essays, ed. T. Ishida (
116 Walter R. Bodine, "Sumerians," in Peoples of the Old Testament
World, ed. A. J. Hoerth, G. L. Mattingly, and E. M. Yamauchi (Grand
Rapids: Baker, 1994), 19-20, especially n. 1.
35
a. "Man and His God"
This poem, which is dated c. 1700 B. C. or
earlier,117 can be divided into five sections: (1) lines 1-9, introduction; (2)
lines 10-20+, description of an individual's sickness and misfortune; (3)
lines 26-116, the main body of the poem, a description of poor treatment by
his contemporaries (26-55), a lament (56-95) and confession of guilt, sin and
an appeal for deliverance (96-116); (4) lines 117-129, the response of the god;
and (5) lines 130-140 praise to the god, followed by a one-line colophon.118
Since, in the Sumerian world view, humanity was created to serve
the gods119 and blessings and prosperity gained thereby, the penitent
sufferer in the poem confesses his sin and guilt in the hope that his present
misfortune will be reversed. However, there is no mention of a specific
transgression and the sin is never explicitly stated.
In general, offense to the gods, or sin, was more often seen in terms
117 S. N. Kramer, "‘Man and His God': A Sumerian Variation on the
Job Motif," in Wisdom in
and D. W. Thomas, VTSup 3 (Leiden: Brill, 1955), 170, suggests it may go
back as far as the Third Dynasty of Ur, c. 2000 B. C. This dating has gained
general acceptance. But for a list of some dissenting scholars see
Mattingly, "The Pious Sufferer," 308-309.
118 Kramer, "Man and His God," 171; cf. ANET, 590. Because of
numerous lacunae in the text and the obscurity of a number of crucial
passages the suggested section division is not quite certain, according to
Kramer.
119 See Enuma Elish VI:5-8; also Kramer, The Sumerians, 123; and
Thorkild Jacobsen, "
Ancient Man, ed. H. Frankfort et al. (
1946; repr.
36
of the cult and the rituals associated with it.120 Moral evil does not seem to
have been experienced in any way other than when it was reduced to the
"pain of suffering" by the victims.121 In "Man and His God" this seems to be
the case, since the confession of guilt never goes beyond generalization.
The only proper recourse the supplicant had "was not to argue and
complain in the face of seemingly unjustifiable misfortune, but to plead and
wail, lament and confess, his inevitable sins and failings."122 A pointed
statement in this regard is found in lines 102-103 of the poem:
Never has a sinless child been born to its mother,
.... a sinless workman(?) has not existed from of old.
This belief in original sin123 provided a solution to the problem of suffering
without challenging the justice of the gods, thus removing this poem from
the ranks of theodicy.124 W. G. Lambert has recently stated that in his view
"Man and His God" should not be considered part of the wisdom literature
120 Some see the Mesopotamian idea of sin tied very strongly to ritual
offenses, see G. R. Driver, "The Psalms in Light of Babylonian Research,"
in The Psalmists, ed. D. C. Simpson (
1926), 136; while more recently, others have pointed out the exceptions to
this, e. g. Saggs, Encounter, 117.
121 Jean Bottero, "The Problem of Evil in Mesopotamian Mythology
and Theology," in Mythologies, ed. Y. Bonnefoy, rev. W. Doniger, 2 vols.
(Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1991), 1.162.
122 Kramer, The Sumerians, 125-126.
123 Saggs, Encounter, 115.
124 Von Soden, "Das Fragen," 46. Mattingly, "The Pious Sufferer,"
312-313, seeks to retain this document as a theodicy by arguing for a
limitation of power on the part of a god and a new definition of theodicy,
which is related to an explanation of suffering, apparently with or without
reference to a divine being.
37
genre because the Sumerian sufferer confessed sins while asking for
release from his sufferings, apparently in the belief that this was more a
confession than a struggle over philosophical questions regarding evil and
the innocent, since it never questions divine justice.125 To put it bluntly,
since there are none without guilt there is no such thing as an innocent
sufferer, only an ignorant one.
Apparently belief in mankind's inherent sinfulness was justification
enough to account for the misfortunes and sickness the penitent in this
poem begged to have relieved. The belief in allgemeine menschliche Sund-
haftigkeit negated any objections a human might raise.126 The attitude of
the ancient Mesopotamians of "guilty as charged" had the disadvantage of
not knowing what the charge was. Supplicants were forced to throw them-
selves on the mercy of the gods hoping to gain a positive hearing, since the
will of the gods was often inscrutable.127
b. Letter-Prayers128
This type of letter had been previously referred to
as "letters of petition" by F. Ali or “Gottesbrief” by A. Falkenstein.129 Hallo
125 W G. Lambert, "Some New Babylonian Wisdom Literature," in
Wisdom in Ancient
son (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995), 30-31.
126 Hans-Peter Muller., "Keilschriftliche Parallelen zum Biblischer
Hiobbuch: Moglichkeit und Grenze des Vergleichs," Or 47 (1978): 369.
127 This is a brief statement of a more complex situation, see Kramer,
The Sumerians, 126; and in more detail, Mattingly, "The Pious Sufferer,"
313-318.
128 This genre of literature was so named by W. W. Hallo, "Individual
Prayer in Sumerian: The Continuity of a Tradition," JAOS 88 (1968): 76.
129 See Hallo, "Individual Prayer in Sumerian," 76, n. 32.
38
suggested letter-prayers for this genre since the term seemed "preferable"
to Ali's suggestion and Falkenstein's was "difficult to translate."130 He also
points out that the letters are not always addressed to a god, but might also
be addressed to the king, one of the king's servants, or a deified king who
was deceased but addressed as "my god." Two letter-prayers are addressed
to private individuals, or at most to officials.131
In the view of the Mesopotamians, if a personal god was angry with
an individual, a sacrifice and the appropriate ritual was necessary to
appease the divine anger. Sacrifices were carried out in the various tem-
ples dedicated to the gods. But what if, as Jacobsen asks, the god is not
present when the supplicant presents a sacrifice to appease the god's
anger? Or what if the person is too sick to travel to the temple to present
prayers and sacrifices?132 The answer was to send a letter to the god which
was placed near the statue of the deity, relieving the supplicant of the need
to appear personally before the god.133
Many of these letters have been recovered and they essentially follow
a similar pattern. They begin with a salutation to the divine addressee
followed by the message and a conclusion. The body of the letter has no
recognizable structural divisions but most of the contents express com-
plaints, protests, prayers and formal reinforcements of the appeal, though
130 Hallo, "Individual Prayer in Sumerian," 76-77.
131 Hallo, "Individual Prayer in Sumerian," 77.
132 Jacobsen, "
133 These prayers were originally inscribed on a valuable object
belonging to the worshipper, but economic factors eventually led to the
development of this literary genre, and letters were deposited, rather than
inscribed objects, according to Hallo, "Individual Prayer in Sumerian," 75.
39
not always in this order.134
One of the longest of these letters is one addressed to Enki, the
personal god of a scribe by the name of Sin-gamubi, son of Ur-Nim.135 He
complains of attacks by a hostile deity (line 15) despite his loyalty and proper
observance of the offerings at the festivals "to which I go regularly" (lines
11-12). Although there is no question of his guilt (line 17), no omen has
revealed the specific nature of his offense (line 14). Following a long list of
complaints regarding his physical condition and treatment by contempo-
raries he promises to dwell in the "gate of Guilt-Absolved," sing praises and
proclaim the god's exaltation (lines 46-56) when the sin is cleansed.
As in the poem "Man and His God," there is no specific sin referred
to, only a conviction on the part of the penitent worshipper that he was
guilty. At worst, the blame is placed on a hostile deity for the illness and
the supplicant pleads for his personal god to intervene.
One might also enlist the aid of a more powerful god:
To the god my father speak; thus says Apil-Adad, your servant:
"Why have you neglected me (so)?
Who is going to give you one who can take my place?
Write to the god Marduk, who is fond of you,
That he may break my bondage;
Then I shall see your face and kiss your feet!
Consider also my family, grownups and little ones;
Have mercy on me for their sakes, and let your help reach me."136
134 Hallo, "Individual Prayer in Sumerian," 76-77.
135 Hallo, "Individual Prayer in Sumerian," 85, lines 1, 8.
136 Marten Stol, Altbabvlonische Briefe im Umschrift und Uber-
setzung, Heft 9 (Leiden: Brill, 1981), 141; Jacobsen, "
40
Apil-Adad calls on his personal god to act on his behalf since mankind
exists to serve the gods. The logic is impeccable. If the personal god allows
Apil-Adad to remain indisposed for an extended period, or to die, then there
will be one less person to serve the needs of the personal god. Along with
this there is also the pleading for the personal god to consider the needs of
the worshipper as well. He points out all the other members of his family
who depend on him. The case is argued that a failure on the part of the
gods to restore this man to health will have dire consequences not only on
the man's family but on the gods themselves. This "spiritual arm-twisting"
is a typical example of the manipulations attempted in Mesopotamian
literature to cajole or convince a god to act on behalf of a person.
To sum up, in the traditional definitions of theodicy137 one seeks to
justify the ways of God (or a god) when faced with suffering that is seem-
ingly undeserved. It is an attempt to remove the contradictions in a theo-
logical system that holds to a doctrine of a benevolent deity and acknow-
ledges the possibility of undeserved suffering. In my view the claim of
Mattingly that "Man and His God" should retain the classification of theo-
dicy fails to convince, since the Mesopotamian gods were not seen as "holy"
in the same way
by Mesopotamians when faced with misfortunes and/or sickness. The very
opposite almost always holds true. Guilt is assumed, and the prayers are
characterized by the confession of sin and guilt in a "shotgun blast"
approach. This method seeks to cover all aspects or possibilities by making
137 See Mattingly's discussion in "The Pious Sufferer," 311-312.
41
the confessions in the most generalized terms, since humans are seen as
inherently sinful. This is validated by the world view held by the Mesopota-
mians which was strongly tied to the act-consequence relationship.
2. Akkadian Literature
The main point of the study here is to get an idea of the
content of four representative literary pieces, so the analysis may not delve
as deep into all the issues as one might like.
a. The Pious Sufferer
This text is stored in the Louvre, where it is desig-
nated AO 4462.138 It was published by Jean Nougayrol in 1952 and dates
from the seventeenth or sixteenth century.139
After the introduction (lines 1-11) the suffering one speaks, addres-
sing his master, saying that his affliction is due to no known sin:
Maitre, j'ai bien reflech