Talk:Answer to Job

Father Victor White
Father Victor White challenged Jung's "Answer to Job", and a number of letters were written one to the other. In one I understand Jung said: Of all faiths, Christanity lends itself to the healing of the human psyche ,(in the Unpublished Letters; Jung/White). His correspondence with Father Victor White is mentioned in the article page of Carl Gustav Jung under section "Later Life". The letters (some) have been published, I understand, but where? (Published by Cunningham).

MacOfJesus (talk) 11:48, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

I've been told that these letters, on both sides of families, are not published but have been lent to students of Carl Gustav Jung at certain Universities. Some of the letters were published, but I understand not all, and this comment mentioned above is in those letters.

MacOfJesus (talk) 19:26, 2 July 2009 (UTC)MacOfJesus (talk) 15:08, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Please do not delete these pages, i.e.: Father Victor White, or Answer to Job. They are essential to Carl Gustav Jung, and even though they appear scanty, blame the families who refuse to publish the corespondance between the two, they are holding out for more money, I think. They have only published, last month, the Red Book (Jung), which I havn't yet! I am not prepared to pay an extrardingly inflated price for it! And I'm not mad, I think!

MacOfJesus (talk) 00:38, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

In the lecture of Murray Stein on The Role of Victor White in C.G. Jung's writings, he said of Fr. Victor White that he was the only Theologian who understood something of what the problem of psychology in our present world means. Jung/White Oct/1945. He called him: to me you are a white raven.

Murray Stein said in his lecture: Some of Jung's greatest letters were written to White.

MacOfJesus (talk) 13:15, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Appraisal
I now have the published work of Jung: "Answer to Job", this publication 1963. It has a preface: Lectori Benevolo and translators notes and a formal preface.

However, Jung makes it clear in the preface: He is not concerned what the people of The Old Testament felt of God, but rather what the modern man with a Christian education and background comes to term with the divine darkness, which, he feels is unveiled in the Book of Job.

This makes it impossible for a Scripture Student to interpit his work for it is impossible to equate the two; namely the understanding of God in the Old Testament times and that of the Christian. The Resurrection belief being the most significant. This was hinted at (for the first time in Old Testament writings) in the Book of Job; given in the mouth of Job: Job 19: 23-29. In fact this is a major testament of Job.

Hence, to answer Jung with his "answer to Job" from a Christian point of view, the answer has to be the words of Job himself. "....and from my flesh I shall look on God. He whom I shall see will take my part: these eyes will gaze on Him and find Him not aloof..." Job 19: 23-29.

Hence, Job answers Jung!

MacOfJesus (talk) 18:23, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

For further clarity: The understanding of God in The Old Testament times incorporated a certain confusion over the nature of God, as hi-lighted in The Book of Job. However, with a belief in Resurrection to new life as outlined in the Christian belief, this confusion is resolved. For if you invisage a reward system in the next life, then God's goodness / justice is never in question. For after all, the whole message of Christ on the Cross, The Son of The Father, is this.

MacOfJesus (talk) 09:28, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

However, he does relate to The Gospels as, "propaganda". Such a free thinker is also a very fair thinker.

MacOfJesus (talk) 12:03, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Some Gems
However, there are some gems:

At the end of Chapter VII:

"Today we have an empirical psychology,....But myth is not fiction: it consists of facts that are continually repeated and can be observed over and over again. It is something that happens to man, and men have mythical fates just as much as the Greek hereos do."

MacOfJesus (talk) 11:42, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Missing perspective
Answer to Job as well as the Book of Job fails to make it clear that the prologue and epilogue are written in a different language, centuries after the main body; and in what is essential a play meant to be performed, Job in making a "Negative Confession" (from the Book of the Dead,) discloses that he wasn't all that righteous, but more like me. --Pawyilee (talk) 17:34, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

The Book of Job, is one of the Wisdom Books of The Old Testament. It takes on the format of a drama as we would see in a Shakespearean play. A figure of Ancient times is taken and a drama is enacted surrounding them. However, in the case of Job, the whole understanding of the Escatological end of Man is played-out. Job asserts a belief in the resurrection of the body. This in Old Testament times was denied, and was extremely inflammatory. It is essential to understand this to appreciate the reason and aims of The Book of Job. MacOfJesus (talk) 23:12, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

The Book of Job is a drama in format, but never meant to be played as we would understand a Shakespearean Play would be. It is an essential part of the Bible, however. MacOfJesus (talk) 23:26, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

The form of the book is that of a long dialogue poem, with a prose prologue and epilogue. The likely date is the beginning of the 5th century BC. It has indeed been suggested that later writers have added to an original text. The speeches of Elihu, in particular, may be a later addition. But these, too, make a contribution to the book. There is little suggestion that the prologue and the epilogue because they are prose are added later. MacOfJesus (talk) 20:20, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

If you read: Job 19: 23-29, you could not accept that Job is making negative confessions.... MacOfJesus (talk) 22:07, 27 November 2012 (UTC)