TURNright.....

*BOAZ reaches for the torch and calls the villagers....* :)

Not at all...

Its good to have a cynical review of such a book. Probably one of the most difficult to come to grips with in the Bible.

I recommend the Wikipedia treatment for what seems to me to be a reasonably balanced presentation of the various views.

There seems little connection with contemporary history, apart from a reference to the land of UZ.

If it is a 'poem' in prose style, then it should be viewed as such.
It has also been described as a long 'parable', the technical nature of which would mean that it has a 'central point' rather than every detail having specific significance. (such as some Jesus told.. (example "Lazarus and the Rich man..calling to each other between heaven and hell)
There is indeed an important message, perhaps found in the words of Job at the end.

2 "I know that you can do all things;
no plan of yours can be thwarted. "

There is also the blessing of Job at the end.. showing that suffering is not always the end of the story.

All I would say on Job would be conjecture :) But I hold that it is rightfully part of the Canon, and is to be valued as such.

One point to note. His state of blessing at the end, does not mention any more than one wife. Same at the beginning.

Contrast this with the Islamic view ..which views prosperity in terms of sexual fulfillment with many women.....Specially for mohamed.. 'unlimited wives & unlimited slave girls. (read Sura 33:37 to 50 VERY closely.

I believe the Bible promotes the view of fulfilling love with one woman, rather than pleasurable sex with many.

Response to David Boaz:

It’s clear from your 5 Sep 2006 8:20am post, that you require assurance understanding my espousing of Australian values is worthwhile and contributes, in a small way, to the fight against terrorism and other discredited ideologies.

But enough about me. This is what you wrote:

“Your espousing of 'Australian values' to pound Arjay is also your undoing.”

Not in any sense true.

Unless I am misrepresenting them (very doubtful), it’s disappointing to hear this lack of faith in Australian values, perhaps because of other beliefs, perhaps they are secular or perhaps because you do not think they help fight terrorism.

Your video link, which I could not access, I assume is a protest or riot against the US or the West. These could be people supportive of extreme Islamic fundamentalism.

Out of frame and not protesting are millions of Muslims; worldwide hundred of millions; some in Australia. You assume Australian values do not have a universal quality and that the religious freedom we strive to offer each Australian is insufficient. If so, then you agree with the propaganda of Islamic terrorist groups who say that the Western world insults and subjugates Muslims.

I don't.

Australia has passed laws, such as the Racial Discrimination Act to condemn racism and religious intolerance in all its forms. Being racist or grossly intolerant is not an option for an Australian citizen, because we have the rule of law. We're free to discuss if this is a good or bad law, however the law itself remains effective and binding.

It is without doubt that tolerance and diversity are integral to the values law-abiding Australians hold -- just as we are bound not to give any support whatsoever to terrorist action.

Some comments in this forum suggest we should treat all Muslims as though they are personally responsible for or supportive of terrorism. This is not only silly, it is defiant of Australian law and values – the guarantor of our freedom, security and prosperity; the expression of our democratic will. Through our values lies the ultimate defeat of terrorism.

95% of suicide bombings or terrorist acts are carried out by non-muslims. Yet they get the blame.

Tamil Tigers account for 50%.

The 5% muslim are mostly the work of Hamas.

Why do we need our Govt. keeping us on edge? To keep them in power.

I can imagine the conversation "George, could you get OBL to mention Australia? Sure Johnny "man of steel" I'll get the CIA on to it".

Each time I see Phillip Ruddock I squirm. No conscience, no morals, no ethics.

"Is there a vested interest in keeping the terrorist threat alive and at the forefront of the West’s collective conscience?"

...gee... ya think?

There's a real threat, we have already seen it.

The vested interests have, er, vested interest in milking the fear factor for everything they can get. Emotion is a much stronger motivator than logic. The most powerful motivational emotion is fear. It helps people do all sorts of dumb stuff. Its also very useful to get people to do (or at least put up with) dumb stuff.

Any fool who is in power knows that the quickest way to steer a person is with fear. Its a strange thing. On a primal level, its linked to survival instinct. Its not hard to understand why the frightened gazelle is running from the hungry lioness.

l used to buy into conspiracy theories, tho now they strike me more as a cacophony of useful coincidences rather than deliberate planning. Powerful interests, like politicians, are first and foremost, at heart... OPPORTUNISTS.

They relish something like physical threat to our well being as it gives them endless supply of fuel to run their motors. They will always exaggerate the thing. Sometimes they actually invent a fear (thru misrepresentation and exaggeration).

They always put themselves foward as the champions of our protection, but only if you vote for them (a useful coincidence?).

Of course, no politician worth its salt would ever pass up even the slightest potentially lucrative bit of dross to drive fear in order to EXPAND POWER. The point of politics is power (and control). The point of power is, power itself.

Fear is a great way for them to get all their crap over the line via the back door... their favourite entrance.

While that is true Trade215, i.e the power mongers like Bush and the like,do use our fears to elevate their power,we should not fall into the trap of embracing his enemies who want to subjugate us with ignorance.George Bush is a fool who mishandled the whole Middle East Saga,but that does not mean we have throw the baby out with the bath water.

The oil must flow,but not at the cost of us being toady boys to Muslim Facism.The Middle East has earnt trillions in petro dollars,but little has filtered down to the masses in terms of education and improvement in real living standards.This is the main reason why they are besieged with religious fundamentalism that appeals to the oppressed.Give people the power of their enterprise which is only reflected in money,and the concept of god ,will come a poor second.

Our two biggest enemies in the world today are unfetted multi-national power,which Bush to an extent represents,and Muslim Facism.These two forces are not mutually exclusive,they have a lot in common.

It’s all a "Catch 22" though isn't it? It’s very easy for powerful people to manufacture 'terror threats' and create opposing sides. If events are not proceeding as governments want - they can easily create a threat - real or imagined. Western governments are indeed behaving more and more like agitators.

Eventually though the governments can sit back glibly as we go through a spate of real terrorism - there is always gullibility and herd mentality on all sides - someone eventually will do it for real - and then the government can say "we told you so" and slap down hard with all the draconian legislation they have been teasing us with for the last few years - just waiting for the 'right' opportunity to ensure public backing.

Gathering the collective consciousness to one’s own ends is a drawn out affair - it even took Hitler several years strategising and agitating before he could unleash the full force of fascism and its associated propaganda. But what is currently a scattergun approach now could eventually become a barrage. Western leaders believe they have to be seen to be ‘winning’ (the western competitive spirit is overly developed). This mindset therefore excludes them from using peaceful, bridge-building language. Until all the 'puppets' are in place, genuine discussion could result in western populations hearing things our leaders would rather we didn’t.

The irony of course, is that the number of people who can guess what might be said, is far bigger than any leader would like to admit to – hence their continuing self-delusional diatribes supported by and in concert with their complicit media barons. The 'rich' are on one side (still very few) and the rest of the world on the other. The 'rich' are ruthless - just look at the weapons they come up with and how they twist the truth. Ordinary folk would generally never entertain such things.

Time to unplug everyone and throw away the TV sets.