Satan's Argument for Job's Faithfulness

[Poly]

I'm currently listening to a series on Job. We know that when God asked Satan if he had considered His servant Job, Satan of course claimed that the only reason Job was faithful was because he was so tremendously blessed. His argument was that if Job wasn't wealthy and blessed, then things would be different. Notice that Satan's response wasn't that the only reason Job was faithful was because it was ordained or predestined to be so by God.

 

[blackbirdking]

I'm currently listening to a series on Job. We know that when God asked Satan if he had considered His servant Job, Satan of course claimed that the only reason Job was faithful was because he was so tremendously blessed. His argument was that if Job wasn't wealthy and blessed, then things would be different. Notice that Satan's response wasn't that the only reason Job was faithful was because it was ordained or predestined to be so by God.

Exactly; Satan believed he could cause Job to turn against God.

Looks like Satan thought he could change the future!

 

[Bradley D]

Job one of the books of wisdom. What was the lesson learned?

 

[Bob Enyart]

Hey Poly! Thanks for asking this question. And Bradley asked what is the lesson learned in Job. There were a few of course. Some of the primary lessons appear to be:
- After the great wealth of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, & Job, God realized the many might believe the lie that only those made wealthy would worship Him
- Satan believed his own lie that men would only worship God if they were given much wealth
- God accepted Satan's challenge in order to dispel the claim that men would only worship Him if they were made wealthy
- What happened to Job was extraordinary and therefore made it into the Scriptures
- When a believer contracts coronavirus or any disease, it is invalid hermeneutics to extrapolate from Job that this was arranged in heaven
- In the beginning of his suffering Job's initial response was godly and admirable
- Much of what Job's "counsellors" claimed as insights into his dilemma is provably false because their ideas contradicted the "given" information of the first chapters
- The book of Job is a warning about the effects of bad counsel
- After weeks of listening to ungodly advisors Job's godly initial response began to falter, and he began to want to make a case against God
- Finally God appears to Job (as He will appear to all men eventually) and gives him the opportunity to make his case
- Instead of boldly prosecuting his own case, like Job wanted to do, when He had the opportunity, to paraphrase, he said, "Oh God I'm so sorry please forgive me."
- Men are wise to trust God.
- God is good.

To Poly's question, if Satan were the only one in Scripture who acted as though that the future was not settled, then appealing to that fact would seem unwise. (Of course even the demons believe that there is one God and there's nothing wrong with pointing that out (James 2:19), including to make the point that mere mental assent alone is insufficient to enter into a love relationship.) But in Scripture, many passages indicate that:
- God’s People Believe that God Can Change His Mind opentheism.org/verses#23 (including Abraham and Moses)
- God’s People Do Change God's Mind opentheism.org/verses#24 (as Jesus teachs, and Moses, and Jeremiah, etc.)
- God Says that He Repents and Changes His Mind opentheism.org/verses#8
- God’s People Believe a Prophecy Does Not Have to Come To Pass opentheism.org/verses#25
- God Himself Indicates the Future is Uncertain opentheism.org/verses#7
- God Says Things Are Possible that would be Impossible if the future were settled opentheism.org/verses#9
- God Intervenes to Prevent what would Otherwise Happen and addresses contingencies opentheism.org/verses#16
- God Explicitly Says He Does Not Know What Will Happen opentheism.org/verses#19
- The Bible Shows Things Could Have Been Different opentheism.org/verses#32

 

[Jerry Shugart]

- God Says that He Repents and Changes His Mind opentheism.org/verses#8

Here God said the following about the children of Israel to Moses:

"And the LORD said unto Moses, I have seen this people, and, behold, it is a stiffnecked people: Now therefore let me alone, that my wrath may wax hot against them, and that I may consume them: and I will make of thee a great nation" (Ex.32:9-10).​

If we are to take His words literally then that would mean that the following prophecy concerning the children of Israel would never be fulfilled:

"And Jacob called unto his sons, and said, Gather yourselves together, that I may tell you that which shall befall you in the last days...Judah, thou art he whom thy brethren shall praise: thy hand shall be in the neck of thine enemies; thy father's children shall bow down before thee. Judah is a lion's whelp: from the prey, my son, thou art gone up: he stooped down, he couched as a lion, and as an old lion; who shall rouse him up? The sceptre shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his feet, until Shiloh come; and unto him shall the gathering of the people be" (Gen.49:2, 8-10).​

How could this prophecy ever be fulfilled if all of the children from the tribe of Judah were destroyed? Later we see that God said that He repented of the evil which he thought to do unto his people:

"And the LORD repented of the evil which he thought to do unto his people" (Gen.32:14).​

Did God actually intend to destroy the children of Israel and begin again with Moses? Does God repent?:

"I the LORD have spoken it: it shall come to pass, and I will do it; I will not go back, neither will I spare, neither will I repent; according to thy ways, and according to thy doings, shall they judge thee, saith the Lord GOD" (Ezek.24:14).​

Now let us look again at what God said here:

"Now therefore let me alone, that my wrath may wax hot against them, and that I may consume them: and I will make of thee a great nation" (Ex.32:10).​

Since God said He would consume them then why didn't He since He said that "He has spoken it and it shall come to pass?

It is because the words of God at are not to be taken literally at Exodus 32:9-10 but instead they are to be understood in a figurative sense:

"An-throp'-o-path-ei'-a; or, Condescension (Genesis 1:2; 8:21. Psalm 74:11. Jeremiah 2:13. Hosea 11:10). Ascribing to God what belongs to human and rational beings, irrational creatures, or inanimate things" (The Companion Bible; Appendix # 6).​

​

 

[Derf]

It is because the words of God at are not to be taken literally at Exodus 32:9-10 but instead they are to be understood in a figurative sense:

Why pick this one, Jerry? Why can’t we also say God was not to be taken literally in Eze 24:14?

Who gets to choise when to take God literally? is it you?