15 GOD’S ANSWER AND JOB’S RESPONSE making the opposite point, it must be distanced from the psalm. New- som devotes more attention to this problem than most commentators do. She notes three features of the Theophany which distinguish it from the psalm: “[1] the suppression of descriptions of human activity, [2] the explicit opposition between animals and human purposes, and [3] repeated references to God’s provision for these creatures” 51. The following are my responses. (1) The deliberate omission of human activity cannot be intended to show that God treats humans differently or that his providence does not extend to them. Certainly we are not meant to understand that humans alone are not cared for. It is hardly the case that hu- mans alone inevitably starve or fail to bear infants and feed their young. God is painting a picture which Job is invited to extend to mankind, as happens also in Psalm 107 and similar hymns. (2) The opposition between animal and human purposes is of little consequence to humans. How many people want to harness a wild buffalo or corral the wild ass or catch an ostrich? To do so is not a human purpose, any more than Job’s inability to bind the Pleiades (38,31) implies that humans wish to do this. These are all simply examples of things that Job cannot do. Besides, much of what God describes does serve human purposes, such as his creating a world, holding back the sea, and bringing rain. (3) When God says that he provides for animals he does not mean that he fails to provide for humans. But it is true that this is not ex- plicit, and the question is why. The first reason is that for God to list the blessings he bestows on mankind would look like an attempt to ingratiate himself with Job: I gave you this and I gave you that, so why don’t you trust me? This would diminish God’s dignity, which God himself certainly takes seriously. Second, there is the touchy issue of what became of these blessings in the case of Job. God gave great things to the species, but he snatched them away from this in- dividual. Third, God wants Job to draw his own conclusions. That is why much of the description is in the form of rhetorical questions. Newsom believes that the cluster of the three distinctions she ob- serves between the Theophany and Psalm 104 “destabilizes the cus- tomary binary oppositions of order and the chaotic, culture and nature, NEWSOM, Book of Job, 245 (Numbers added). 51 © Gregorian Biblical Press 2012 - Tutti i diritti riservati