Florian Kreuzer, «Der Antagonist: Der Satan in der Hebräischen Bibel – eine bekannte Größe?», Vol. 86 (2005) 536-544
Considering the figure of N+#) in the Hebrew Bible, the attempt to reconstruct a
figure which already existed in the imaginary world of Ancient Israel in biblical
times must fail. Zech 3 and Job 1-2 obstruct the development of a precise image
out of YHWH’s environment. The texts achieve that by their inherent vagueness
of description. For this reason the antagonistic element necessary for the dramatic
plot of both texts does not consist in an already existing, known being. It is
rather named by the abstract term ‘the opponent’, in Hebrew "N+#)".
A Touch of Support: Ps 3,6 and the Psalmist’s Experience 201
(3) 1 Sam 3: Spending the night in the temple of Shiloh near “the
Ark of God†(v. 3) Samuel seems to set the stage for an incubation
dream. But as the story unfolds it reveals that this is far removed from
his intentions (vv. 5-10). The divine call that repeatedly wakes him he
mistakes for Eli’s call. Three times he goes to Eli until finally, directed
by Eli how to respond, he follows the directions meticulously,
apparently quite awake by now. As the “boy†(v. 1) becomes a
“prophet†(v. 20) also the traditional, archetypal prophetic dream
(Num 12,6) turns into a direct encounter, to suit the author’s idea of a
prophet: one chosen by God to hear his word directly and deliver it
truthfully (1 Sam 3,19-20; cp. Num 12,7-8).
(4) Job 4,12-21: Eliphaz reports an uncanny nocturnal revelation
that brought a sapiential “word†with an a fortiori argumentation on
the physical and moral frailty of humanity (vv. 17-21). The reference
to hmdrt (RSV: “when deep sleep falls on menâ€, v. 13) may be
intended to indicate the time rather than the condition of the
recipient (34). In distinction from the oblique description in Elihu’s
speech (where the same phrase is used; 33,15) dream terminology is
absent here. The phraseology and structure of Eliphaz’ report can be
traced to prophetic or quasi-prophetic accounts of theophany as Gen
15,12, Exod 33,19; 34,6 and 1 Kgs 19,11-12. Yet unlike Abraham,
Moses, and Elijah in these stories, he remains vague about the divine
entity, and the “word†comes to him “stealthily†(v. 12). Apart from
showing the author’s art in ‘double entendre’ (35), such qualities
suggest that Job 4,12-21 is an adaptation of the prophetic liminal report
to a sapiential milieu.
(5) Ps 17: A “prayer†(according to the superscription) for
god’s response and protection from cruel enemies (vv. 6-14) is
encased between two motifs that are typical of liminal reports:
“night†(v. 3), when God is invited to examine the psalmist’s
innermost being, and awakening (v. 15), here associated with his
hope of seeing God’s “face†and “form†(hnwmt, the term that in Num
12,8 characterizes God’s direct appearance to Moses which is
(34) Byron in Hebrew Melodies rendered this phrase: “Deep sleep came down
on ev’ry eye save mineâ€. See D. CLINES, “Job 413: A Byronic Suggestionâ€, ZAW
92 (1980) 289-291.
(35) The technique was first described by K. FULLERTON, “Double Entendre in
the First Speech of Eliphazâ€, JBL 49 (1930) 320-374, but not related to this
particular verse. See also R.J.Z. WERBLOWSKY, “Stealing the Wordâ€, VT 6 (1956)
105-106.