Job vs. The Poem of a Righteous Sufferer and The Code of Hammurabi vs. Leviticus

The book of Job and the Poem of a Righteous Sufferer both have a similar storyline and address the issues of suffering (more specifically, undeserved suffering). Both protagonists go through great sufferings, and turn to their God(s) in bewilderment as to why. They both felt their suffering was underserved and questioned their God(s) in search of understanding. The major difference between the stories is the deities. Wherein the Poem the protagonist believed in many Gods, in the book of Job, Job believed in one all-powerful God. In the poem of the Righteous Sufferer, the Mesopotamian culture believed in many Gods. The good which one God might wish for an individual could be challenged by another God, therefore concluding that suffering could come from any deity or any reason. From the story, it seems the problem of suffering in Mesopotamian religion is dealt with “through one God working through an intermediary to deliver justice.” Meaning, the God’s will deal with you justly eventually. In time, they would redress your wrongs and cure your afflictions. So, the sufferer is given comfort, knowing that eventually their suffering will be compensated for. In the story of Job, the suffering was not brought upon by God, but rather by Satan (the adversary). God allowed this suffering to occur to Job although he considered him “blameless” and “upright.” The answer to the question of human suffering is not really answered in Job, and for the God in the story of Job, justice is not a main concern. God tells Job in a whirlwind that Job will never understand God’s ways from his limited human capacity. This meant that Job had to trust in God’s will, although he will not understand it. In Christianity, Christians believe that we cannot trust our own will because of the idea of original sin. The idea of original sin is that what is natural to humans is to sin. The will of God is always greater, therefore you must submit to it. The issues of understanding or knowing God’s will is addressed in Job, wherein God says we will never fully understand it. The will of Marduk and the other gods was a prominent issue in the poem of the righteous sufferer as well. The righteous sufferer states “I wish I knew that these things were pleasing to a god! What seems good to one’s self could be an offense to a god. What in one’s own heart seems abominable, could be good to one’s god! Who could learn the reasoning of the gods in heaven?” This questioning reflects the idea in Christianity, in some ways, that your will cannot be trusted. The righteous sufferer says, what could seem good to you could be an offense to a god. This also reflects the idea in Job, that the will of God may never be understood. In both stories, divine intervention saves them from their suffering. But the issue of suffering is dealt with differently in each story. In the Code of Hammurabi and Leviticus, many parallels are seen in the values and ideas in the laws. One thing I observed in the Code of Hammurabi that was different from Leviticus was that there was distinct social class. Your penalties for wrong-doings depended on social class of yourself and of the person affected. In Leviticus, there was no real distinction between people. One similarity between the texts is that respect for parents is emphasized. Each provided laws that governed family affairs. The father is seen as the head leader and primary decision maker in both. In the code of Hammurabi, if a son struck his father, his hands would be cut off. Theft was also discussed in both texts and dealt with similarly. The thief made restitution or repaid what they stole in both texts. Hammurabi justifies revenge with the idea of “an eye for an eye.” Many laws in the code of Hammurabi support this idea. In Leviticus, the same idea is seen in chapter 24 “a fracture for a fracture, an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth. Whatever anyone does to injure another person must be paid back in kind.”