The Man Θεός (Theos - "God") Called "None Like Him" Was Not a Jew

 

                                           Artwork by Thomas Richards using Photoshop 7.0

The Missing Genealogy

Have you ever wondered who Job was? Where did he come from? How does he fit into biblical history? Every major biblical figure has a genealogy -- Abraham, Moses, David, even the minor prophets typically have their lineage identified. Yet in most Bibles, Job appears from nowhere, with no family history, no placement in the biblical timeline, and no explanation of how this man -- whom Θεός points to as His exemplary servant -- fits into the story of scripture.

This absence is strange. Readers naturally want to know: Who is this man? The question has puzzled readers for centuries.

But here is what most people do not know: Job's genealogy exists. It was preserved in the ancient Greek Septuagint (LXX) manuscript known as Codex Alexandrinus. And what it reveals demolishes centuries of theological assumptions about ethnic exclusivism and "chosen people" theology.

Why We Use the LXX

Thomas Richards began studying the Septuagint (LXX) approximately nine years ago when he discovered that the New Testament quotations of the Old Testament come from the LXX, not from the Masoretic text. The Masoretic text was compiled and standardized by Jewish scribes centuries after their leaders rejected Ἰησοῦς Χριστός (Iesous Christos). The LXX, by contrast, is a Greek translation of the Hebrew scriptures that predates the birth of Ἰησοῦς Χριστός -- preserving readings that are older and more accurate than the later Masoretic versions.

What the Alexandrinus LXX Reveals

The ending of Job in Codex Alexandrinus (Job 42:17) contains an extended passage that identifies exactly who Job was and promises his resurrection. Here is the text in Greek with translation:

Greek: καὶ γέγραπται αὐτὸν πάλιν ἀναστήσεσθαι μεθ᾽ ὧν ὁ κύριος ἀνίστησιν

Transliteration: kai gegraptai auton palin anastesestha meth hon ho kyrios anistēsin

Translation: "And it is written that he will rise again with those whom the Lord raises up."

Greek: Οὗτος ἑρμηνεύεται ἐκ τῆς Συριακῆς βίβλου

Transliteration: Houtos hermēneuetai ek tēs Syriakēs biblou

Translation: "This man is interpreted from the Syriac [Aramaic] book..."

The passage continues, providing Job's full identification:

"...as living in the land of Ausitis, on the borders of Idumea and Arabia, and previously his name was Iobab; now he took an Arabian wife and fathered a son, whose name was Ennon, and he in turn had as father Zare, a son of the sons of Esau, and as mother Bosorra, so that he was the fifth from Abraam."

The text continues to list the kings who reigned in Edom, including "Iobab, who is called Iob" -- and identifies Job's friends: "Eliphaz, of the sons of Esau, king of the Thaimanites, Baldad, the tyrant of the Sauchites, Sophar, the king of the Minites."

Job was an Edomite. He was a descendant of Esau -- not Jacob. He came AFTER Abraham, through the line that was supposedly "rejected." He will rise in the resurrection. And Θεός Himself declared this man to have no equal on earth at that time.

The Genealogy of Job

According to the LXX ending, Job was "the fifth from Abraham" through Esau's line:

1.      Abraham

2.     Isaac

3.     Esau

4.     Zerah/Zare (through Reuel, Esau's son -- Genesis 36:13)

5.     Job/Jobab

This places Job clearly after Abraham and the covenant -- not before, as some have suggested in order to explain away how a non-Israelite could be held up by Θεός as the standard of righteousness.

Corroborating Evidence from Scripture

The LXX Alexandrinus ending is not an isolated claim. Other scripture also corroborates Job's Edomite identity:

1. Genesis 36:33 (in ALL manuscripts, including the Masoretic): "When Bela died, Jobab son of Zerah from Bozrah succeeded him as king" -- listing Jobab as a king of Edom. This is the same Jobab, same father (Zerah), same location (Bozrah/Bosorra) as the LXX Job ending.

2. Lamentations 4:21: "Rejoice and be glad, O daughter of Edom, who dwells in the land of Uz." This directly places Uz -- where Job lived -- in Edom.

3. Eliphaz "the Temanite": Teman was Esau's grandson (Genesis 36:11). The district of Teman was in Edom. Eliphaz being called "the Temanite" means he was an Edomite -- which makes perfect sense if Job was also an Edomite king, as the LXX ending explicitly states: "Eliphaz, of the sons of Esau, king of the Thaimanites."

The evidence is clear: Uz was in Edom, Jobab son of Zerah ruled as king in Edom, and Job's friend Eliphaz was an Edomite from Teman. The LXX ending simply makes explicit what scripture already implies.

The Syriac Source

Notice what the LXX ending says: "Οὗτος ἑρμηνεύεται ἐκ τῆς Συριακῆς βίβλου" -- "This man is interpreted from the Syriac book." The LXX translators are not inventing this information -- they are explicitly citing their source. They had access to an Aramaic/Syriac text about Job that contained his genealogy.

This is significant because Syriac (Aramaic) was the language of the region before Greek dominated. This suggests the genealogical information existed in an even older Semitic source that predates our Greek manuscripts. The LXX translators preserved this ancient tradition and told us exactly where they got it.

Why Was This Removed?

The obvious question: if Job's genealogy existed in ancient texts, why is it missing from most Bibles today?

Most modern English translations use the Masoretic Hebrew text, which was finalized centuries after Ἰησοῦς Χριστός by those who rejected Him -- and it lacks this ending. Even among Septuagint manuscripts, Codex Vaticanus -- which Van der Pool's translation uses as its base text -- also lacks it. The ending is preserved in Codex Alexandrinus, which explicitly cites an older Syriac source for this genealogical information.

Consider the logic of textual transmission:

What motive would exist to ADD this material? Who benefits from making Job an Edomite? What theological agenda is served by connecting Job to Esau's line? Why would a scribe invent a resurrection promise for a non-Israelite? The answer: no one benefits. This information actually undermines Jewish exclusivism.

What motive would exist to REMOVE this material? Consider what this genealogy proves:

1.     The most righteous man of his time was an Edomite, not an Israelite -- and temporally, he coexisted with the Israelites, yet exceeded all of them in righteousness

2.     He came from the "rejected" line of Esau, not the "chosen" line of Jacob

3.     He lived AFTER the Abrahamic covenant, so his righteousness cannot be explained away as "pre-covenant"

4.     Θεός Himself declared this non-Jew "my servant... none like him in the earth"

5.     The resurrection promise applies to this non-Israelite

Jewish exclusivist theology has enormous motivation to suppress this information. If Job is just some "ancient patriarch" of unclear ethnicity from before Abraham, he does not threaten the "chosen people" narrative. But if Job is explicitly an Edomite king -- a descendant of the "rejected" Esau -- and Θεός holds him up as having no equal on earth -- that demolishes ethnic favoritism entirely.

Why Earlier Jewish Sources Preserve What Later Ones Remove

An apparent question requires explanation: the LXX was translated by Jewish scholars. Why would Jews preserve Job's Edomite identity if it undermines exclusivism?

The answer is timing. The LXX was translated during the Second Temple period (3rd-2nd century BC), before the Christian-Jewish split hardened. At that time, Job's Edomite identity was simply accepted, (along with other parts of the LXX which were later changed by the Masoretes) -- there was no particular reason to suppress it.

The Masoretic Hebrew text, however, was standardized between the 6th and 10th centuries AD -- centuries after Ἰησοῦς Χριστός, after Christianity had spread throughout the Roman world using the LXX, and after rabbinic Judaism had consolidated in explicit opposition to Christian teaching. By this time, Christians were actively using passages like Acts 10:34-35 ("Θεός shows no partiality") to argue against ethnic exclusivism. Material showing that Θεός declared an Edomite to be the most righteous man on earth would powerfully support the Christian position.

The very fact that pre-Christian Jewish sources (the LXX) preserve this tradition while post-Christian texts (Masoretic) lack it is itself evidence of deliberate removal. The tradition is genuinely ancient -- it was suppressed by later authorities who had theological reasons the earlier translators did not have.

Jethro: Another Witness

Job is not the only example of a non-Israelite who served Θεός faithfully. Consider Jethro (also called Reuel in Exodus 2:18 -- a different Reuel than Esau's son), the priest of Midian and father-in-law of Moses.

The Midianites descended from Abraham through Keturah (Genesis 25:1-2), not through Isaac or Jacob. When Moses told him all that Θεός had done, Jethro responded: "Blessed be the LORD, who has delivered you out of the hand of the Egyptians... Now I know that the LORD is greater than all gods" (Exodus 18:10-11). He then offered burnt offerings and sacrifices to Θεός, and gave Moses wise counsel that Moses accepted.

Here again we see a man outside the line of Jacob -- outside even the line of Isaac -- who was a servant of Θεός, whose blessing and counsel were honored.

The Logic of Non-Favoritism

There is a simple logical reason why Θεός cannot show favoritism based on ethnicity: it would contradict His own declared principle of justice.

In Ezekiel 18:20, Θεός declares: "The soul who sins is the one who will die. The son will not bear the punishment for the father's iniquity, nor will the father bear the punishment for the son's iniquity." (LXX: ὁ υἱὸς οὐ λήμψεται τὴν ἀδικίαν τοῦ πατρός -- "the son will not receive the unrighteousness of the father")

If Θεός does not hold children accountable for what their parents did, then Θεός cannot judge anyone by their ethnicity -- because ethnicity is ancestry. To favor or disfavor someone because they descended from Jacob rather than Esau, or from Shem rather than Ham, would be to judge them for what their ancestors did or did not do. This is precisely what Θεός says He does not do.

The principle is simple: Θεός judges individuals as individuals. "In every nation anyone who fears Him and does what is right is acceptable to Him" (Acts 10:35). Job the Edomite and Jethro the Midianite are living proof of this principle.

Why This Matters

The book of Job -- with its restored genealogy -- proves this conclusively that Θεός does not show favoritism. The man whom Θεός Himself held up as having no equal on earth was not from the "chosen" line. He was an Edomite. He was a descendant of Esau. And he was more faithful than anyone in Israel at that time.

This aligns perfectly with what Ἰησοῦς Χριστός taught and what the apostles confirmed. Ethnic exclusivism contradicts the character of Θεός as revealed throughout scripture.

The removal of Job's genealogy from most biblical texts serves a theological agenda -- one that contradicts the clear testimony of scripture itself. The Alexandrinus LXX, Genesis 36:33, and Lamentations 4:21 all point to the same truth: Job was an Edomite, and Θεός declared him without equal.

Every reader who has ever wondered "Who was Job?" deserves to know the answer that ancient texts preserved -- and that later editors tried to hide.

---

All δόξα (doxa -- glory) to Θεός (Theos) through Ἰησοῦς Χριστός (Iesous Christos), who alone was truly righteous, and through whom this truth has been preserved across millennia despite attempts to suppress it.