— xvi. 15 — — xxix. 23, 24.
We may infer from this group of parallels that the author of Job not only studied venerated ‘Solomonic’ models, but even ventured directly to controvert their leading doctrine; see especially Job xxi. 17. In our next comparison the relation seems reversed. The author of Prov. xxx. 1-4 not improbably alludes sarcastically to the theophany in Job xxxviii.-xlii. 6. Note in passing the occurrence of Eloah for ‘God’ in Prov. xxx. 5 (comp. the speeches in Job).
There are several parallels in the Book of Lamentations; I restrict myself to those in the third elegy, which differs in several points from the others, especially in its poetic feebleness. It is easier to believe that the author of the elegy was dependent on Job than to take the reverse view. A poem, the hero of which was obviously the typical righteous man, naturally suggested features in the description of the representative Israelite. Compare, then, Lam. iii. 7, 9 with Job xix. 8; iii. 8 with Job xxx. 20; iii. 10 with Job. x. 16; iii. 12, 13 with Job vii. 20, xvi. 12, 13; iii. 14, 63 with Job xxx. 9.
Parallels to Job also occur in Jeremiah. It is often, indeed, not easy to say on which side is the originality. But in one of the most important instances we may pronounce decidedly in favour of Job (comp. Jer. xx. 14-18 with Job iii. 3-10). The despairing utterance referred to is an exaggeration in the mouth of Job, but suitable enough in Jeremiah’s. In Job, l.c., we seem to recognise the slightly artificial turn which the author loves to give to the ideas and phrases of his predecessors; while the cutting irony of the words ‘making him very glad’ (Jer. xx. 15) as clearly betokens the hand of the original writer. Compare also Job vi. 15 with Jer. xv. 18; ix. 19 with Jer. xlix. 19; x. 18-22 with Jer. xx. 14-18; xii. 4, xix. 7 with Jer. xx. 7, 8; xii. 6, xxi. 7 with Jer. xii. 1; xix. 24 with Jer. xvii. 1; xxxviii. 33 with Jer. xxxi. 35, 36.
There are two plausible points of contact in Job with Deuteronomy (comp. Job xxiv. 2, Deut. xix. 14 [removing landmarks]; Job xxxi. 9, 11, Deut. xxii. 22), but only one worth mentioning with Genesis (xxii. 16; comp Gen. vi. &c.), and here observe that the word for A.V.’s ‘flood’ (Job, l.c.) is not mabbūl but nāhār.[[109]] Hitzig and Delitzsch find another in xxxi. 33. But ādām in Job always means ‘men:’ in xv. 7, 8, where the first man is referred to, he is not named. The reference in xxxi. 33 is not to hiding sins from God, but from man. I think, however, that the Prologue implies a general acquaintance with some current descriptions of the patriarchal period—the ‘golden age’ to men of a more advanced civilisation.
It is remarkable, what interesting parallels are afforded by the prophets of the Assyrian period. Isaiah, as might be expected, contains the largest number (see The Prophecies of Isaiah, ed. 3, ii. 243); but Hosea follows close after. Compare especially—
| Isa. xix. 5, certainly the original of Job, l.c., where the special reference to the sea-like Nile is dropped | Job xiv. 11, ‘the waters fail from the sea,’ i.e. any inland body of water |
| Isa. xxviii. 29 | Job xi. 6 (God’s wisdom marvellous; see Merx, and Isaiah, ii. 154) |
| Hos. x. 13, combined with Prov. xxii. 8 | Job iv. 8 (‘ploughing iniquity,’ &c.) |
| Hos. vi. 1 (or Deut. xxxii. 39) | Job v. 18 (‘he maketh sore and bindeth up,’ &c.) |
| Hos. v. 14, xiii. 7, 8 | Job x. 16 (God compared to a lion) |
| Hos. xiii. 12 (or Deut. xxxii. 34) | Job xiv. 17 (‘transgression sealed up,’ &c.) |
| Am. iv. 13, v. 8 (the comparison suggests that v. 8, 9 stood immediately after iv. 13 when Job was written, and that ‘the sea,’ i.e. the upper ocean, stood for ‘the earth’) | Job ix. 8, 9 (‘that treadeth upon the heights of the sea; that maketh the Bear, Orion, and the Pleiades’) |
Comp. also Am. v. 8, ix. 6 with Job xii. 15; Am. ii. 9 with Job xviii. 16.
I say nothing here of the parallels in the Song of Hezekiah (Isa. xxxviii. 10-20). I have shown reason in Isaiah, i. 228, for believing that the Song is a highly imitative work, and largely based on Job, such a work in fact as can only be accounted for in the Exile or post-Exile period.
There still remains the great body of psalms of disputed date. The parallelisms in Ps. xxxvii.[[110]] are too general to be mentioned here, striking as they are; but we may venture to compare Ps. viii. 5 with Job vii. 17; Ps. xxxix. 12b with Job iv. 19b; ib. 14a with Job vii. 19a, x. 20; ib. 14b with Job x. 21, 22; Ps. lxxii. 12 with Job xxix. 12; ib. 16 with Job v. 25b; Ps. lxxxviii. 16b with Job xx. 25 (the rare word ’ēmīm); ib. 17 with Job vi. 4 (bi’ūthīm); ib. 19 (lxix. 9) with Job xix. 14; and note throughout this psalm the same correspondence of extreme inward and outward suffering which we find in Job. Then, turning to the psalms of different tenor, comp. lxxii. 12 with Job xxix. 12; ib. 16 with Job v. 25b. I have selected these instances precisely because they allow us to draw an inference as to priority. Ps. lxxxviii. is clearly imitative, and no doubt there is more imitation of the great poem in other psalms. Psalms viii., xxxix., and (probably) lxxii. were however known to and imitated by the authors of Job. The parallel in Ps. viii. is specially important. That this psalm is not earlier than the Exile is disputed, but extremely probable; the bitter ‘parody’ in Job vii. 17 must in this case be of the same or a later period.