Suriano stays close to a literal
reading, asserting that what is at stake is an honorable versus a dishonorable
death. “It is Job’s kinsman-redeemer, through the performance of his duties,
who will act against this threat and effectively preserve Job’s name.” But I
think Suriano is underestimating the metaphorical force of this passage. If
postmortem honor is all that is at stake, it is hard to account for the live
encounter embraced in the saying “I shall see God” (19:26). The literal referent
is clearly a kinsman-redeemer, and he may indeed be, as Suriano insists, functioning
in the role of preserving the memory of the deceased Job, but the author uses
this metaphorically. It is God who will preserve Job himself, and not
just his memory. Job will be alive to see God, stated in v. 26 and
repeated in v. 28 (“whom I shall see on my side, and my eyes shall behold, and
not another”). It is an afterlife vision, in contrast to the gloomy half-awake
sleep of Mesopotamian imagining. Job envisions a fully awake state where he is
able to see God.
. . .
But I think the metaphor of God as
Goel works perfectly well. Further, God as Gole is an image that
occurs numerous times in the Bible, being a main theme of Second Isaiah
(Pss 19:14; 78:35; Prov 23:11; Isa 41:14; 43:14; 48:17; 49:7; 54:5). Job 19:25
is a dramatic high point in the tale, and expresses one of Job’s momentary assertions
of faith. However, Job is unable to remain at the height where he makes the
affirmation. It is a flash of faith that quickly fades. “The flashes are always
followed by the most profound darkness. The old patriarchal conception returns
and presses upon him with its whole weight.” (Stephen Finlan, The Drama of
Job: Burning Questions and Incomplete Answers [Eugene, Oreg.: Cascade
Books, 2025], 29, 30)
