Where Was Uz? Job 1:1 (RSV) There was a man in the land of Uz, whose name was Job; . . . Uz, according to the book, was in close proximity to the I provide examples in the book of Job of verifiable historical peoples and lands, & also note accurate mentions of copper, coral, and various indigenous animals.
Atheist and anti-theist Bob Seidensticker runs the influential Cross Examined blog. I have critiqued 80 of his posts, but he hasn't counter-replied to any I provide answers to atheist anti-theist Bob Seidensticker's "2-Minute" anti-Christian arguments: neatly compiled into fifty two-page provocative, polemical queries.
<p>The authority of Scripture means every word and stroke of the Bible possesses the authority of God and the right to rule the hearts, minds, and bodies of every inhabitant of earth.</p>
“Conventional Bible chronology”?? Way back in 1910, the
Catholic Encyclopedia (“Job”), stated:
The author of the book is unknown, neither can the period in which it was written be exactly determined. . . . It is now universally and correctly held that the book is not earlier than the reign of Solomon [approximately 960-920 BC].
Protestant evangelical (“conservative”) scholar Gleason L. Archer, in his book,
A Survey of Old Testament Introduction (Chicago: Moody Press, 1964, gave his opinion:
Inasmuch as Job contains no references to historical events and reflects a non-Hebraic cultural background concerning which we possess little or no information, it is not easy to assign a probable date for the lifetime and career of Job. . . .
The last word of the book of Daniel
It is not news to students of the Bible that the book of Daniel was written in two ancient languages, Hebrew and Aramaic. Daniel starts the book in Hebrew but, beginning with Daniel 2:4, he shifts to Aramaic and continues in it until the end of chapter 7. Then, beginning with chapter 8, he resumes in Hebrew. However, when it comes to the very last word of the book, we discover something interesting. Daniel starts the last word in Hebrew but adds to it an Aramaic ending. It appears as if in the last word, he tries to connect the two languages employed in the book. Some scholars have argued that Daniel was probably tired and just by mistake connected the two languages, something easily done by people proficient in two or more languages. However, the big question remains: Could it be that Daniel intentionally added an Aramaic plural ending to a Hebrew word?