In this statement, St. paul tells us that the way of salvation 9as outlined by JC) is clear-there is no confusion of what the lord expects of his followers. My question:
if God in fact tempts his followers, is this not confusion? take the (OT) temptation of Job: God and the devil engage in a contest, to see if poor Job will remain faithful. Is Paul saying that this will never happen again?
YHWH never tempts Job. YHWH just allows The Satan to test Job’s faith.
By murdering Job’s children and his servants. Yeah, that’s just.
The thread topic is not justice. Are you confused?
Sez who? If anyone thinks it’s just, they’re totally missing the point of the book.
IIRC, Satan at the time meant a being that worked for God, not the devil. And even if you go by to more common belief these days, you are still talking about a being that God allows to tempt Job. In either case, your argument is just an attempt to push God’s obvious ultimate responsibility onto someone else. It makes God sound like he should have a name like Jimmy “the Weasel” Jehovah; “What ?! It wasn’t me ! It was that Satan fellah. Nope, never saw him before, nuthin’ to do with me.”
I expect Skald the Rhymer is referring to the standard Christian claim that God is ALWAYS just.
Or was being a jerk. Rhymers are sometimes jerkish.
Ahh… so YHWH is not the author of confusion… just the ghost writer.
In Job, the Satan is most likely a member of the divine council.
It is mistake to take the Book of Job literally, as your post seems to do. It is Wisdom Literature and is intended to teach about the nature of God and virtue. It is not a history lesson. The book deals with the old question of why do bad things happen to good people. Job was the perfect man. There is no obvious reason why bad things should happen to him. When bad things do happen to Job, he questions YHWH. He wants to know this is happening. YHWH responds that Job has no idea what it means to be God and that Job cannot understand why YHWH does what he does.
There is nothing in the story to suggest that YHWH was tempting Job. To conclude that is to miss the point the book. To conclude that YHWH is gangster is, also, to miss the point of the book.
Is St. Paul therefore correct, that God does not tempt-that all evil comes from inside a man, and not external?
If one were to accept the idea that God tests his believers, then, God would indeed cause confusion-how would one know the right path?
He was having Satan do it for him, which is the same thing.
And I’m well aware that it’s about teaching people to submit to being punching bags. But the OP was asking about it from a literalist position.
No, it’s to make a joke. And to make a point by mockery.
Did YHWH ask the Satan to anything, or did the Satan solicit permission?
Agreed. The “devil’s advocate” if you will.
Tempting? No. Torturing? Yes. Sowing confusion in Job’s mind? Yes.
Not sure about gangster… gambler perhaps. Perhaps they bet $1.
Did YHWH or the Satan torture Job?
And when Job was confused, YHWH came as a voice from the whirlwind and cleared up Job’s confusion as best a human could understand.
You are drawing a distinction between the two?! God creates a special prosecutor (ha-satan), and then permits that being to torture Job (along with slaying his family let us not forget) as part of an inquiry into Job’s faith. We may assume that Satan’s methods, thoughts, and very being were created by god; where would you say the responsibility lay?
Do you see ha-satan as a free-willed being?
Yes, and also asserts that he’s allowed to do bad things to good people because (and I paraphrase here): “It’s good to be King”, and “Because”. And then, after all is said, done, sackcloth and ashes, his majesty puts it all right – not we note by restoring Job’s family – but by replacing them… but that’s ok, because “nowhere in all the land were there found women as beautiful”.
{Aside – I’m usually a fairly calm and rational agnostic… but you might have noticed; the book of Job punches my buttons} 
The verse you’re referring to is Paul telling the early christians to have an orderly worship service.* Nothing there about whether the way of salvation outlined by JC is clear.
-FrL-
*Note that “confusion” is juxtaposed against “peace” in that verse, so the concern doesn’t even seem to me to be centrally about order per se.
Try to keep in mind that it did not really happen.
(I am also an agnostic ,and the Book of Job does not push my buttons any more than Hildy’s actions in His Girl Friday.)
Yes.
I do not claim that YHWH comes across as a nice guy. One of the beauties of the Tanakh is the complexity of YHWH.
The complexity comes in part from the development of God over time. Job, if I understand it, is considered to be one of the oldest books. Clearly at this point there was no expectation of benevolence, just as there is no expectation that Zeus or Odin will be benevolent.
It doesn’t matter that this is clearly not literal. It is a problem for anyone thinking that the Bible should be consistent in its description of God, either by supposed accurate reporting of actions or by telling educational stories.
And, while God tells Job not to complain because he isn’t God and wouldn’t understand, we understand very well why it happened.