The “Seeking Alignment” project is an experiment. The materials that I post on the internet are my research notes. It is important to understand that what I write is speculative. In each section I begin with a hypothesis, I devise a way to test that hypothesis and then I reassess afterwards.
I studied the Book of Job about two years ago for four purposes:
- To better understand the image of God recorded in the Bible.
- To better understand the relationship between God and Satan in the Bible
- To use what I learned in Job to help me better understand Revelations.
- To test the two-dimensional model that I was working with at the time.
The technique that I used at that time was convoluted. I was still mostly focused in the upper half of the grid of coping styles. It was in studying Job that I developed a broader understanding of the lower half of that grid. In the two years that have passed since then I have learned a lot more about coping styles and theology.
Two years ago I was focused on the image of God described by the characters in the Book of Job. The story told in the Book of Job is about one person and it is about all humanity. The real plot in the Book of Job is a debate about the Theology of Retribution. Job’s friends all believe that God is obligated to help those who worship Him, and also obligated to punish those who do not. When I worked on this material two years ago I focused on the theology and I found a strong theme of obligation.
Today I am more focused on the implications for society and less focused on religion. Thus my interpretation of this book has changed. Verses that describe the obligation of God to reward good and punish evil sound like obligation when you think about theology. Those same verses, however, sound like subjugation when you think about humanity. Both interpretations, however, imply that there is a lack of knowledge. And that is precisely the theme of the wisdom literature in the Bible. We do not understand, we cannot understand, and yet we need to work at trying to understand anyway.
Today I can build on the previous research. Through that research, and in the two years since, I have formed a much better understanding of the two-dimensional coping styles. And thus the way I record the vectors in these verses has changed. Where previously I struggled to identify the theme in some of these verses, I now know that it is best to take blocks of text at a time. I also know now that it is best to work with the vectors and the coping styles as twin tools. When I have a hard time finding the vector I switch and search for the coping style. And then I use the coping style to help validate the vectors.
The results for Job chapters three through twenty-seven are shown below.
| Ch | Verses | Count | Awareness | Emotion | Vector | Speaker | Percent | Destination |
| 3 | 1--10 | 10 | -1 | 1 | (-1,1) | Job | 2.7% | 4 Subjugated |
| 3 | 11-26 | 16 | 1 | 1 | (1,1) | Job | 4.3% | 2 Chaos |
| 4 | 1-6 | 6 | 1 | -1 | (1,-1) | Eliphaz | 5.3% | 8 Aligned |
| 4 | 7-21 | 15 | -1 | 1 | (-1,1) | Eliphaz | 13.3% | 4 Subjugated |
| 5 | 1-7 | 7 | -1 | 1 | (-1,1) | Eliphaz | 6.2% | 4 Subjugated |
| 5 | 8-16 | 9 | 1 | 0 | (1,0) | Eliphaz | 8.0% | 1 Transform |
| 5 | 17-27 | 11 | 1 | -1 | (1,-1) | Eliphaz | 9.7% | 8 Aligned |
| 6 | 1-7 | 7 | 1 | 0 | (1,0) | Job | 1.9% | 1 Transform |
| 6 | 8-10 | 3 | 1 | -1 | (1,-1) | Job | 0.8% | 8 Aligned |
| 6 | 11-30 | 20 | 1 | 0 | (1,0) | Job | 5.4% | 1 Transform |
| 7 | 1-6 | 6 | 1 | 1 | (1,1) | Job | 1.6% | 2 Chaos |
| 7 | 7-10 | 4 | 1 | 0 | (1,0) | Job | 1.1% | 1 Transform |
| 7 | 11-21 | 11 | 1 | 1 | (1,1) | Job | 3.0% | 2 Chaos |
| 8 | 1-4 | 4 | -1 | 0 | (-1,0) | Bildad | 6.7% | 5 Distracted |
| 8 | 5-10 | 6 | 1 | 0 | (1,0) | Bildad | 10.0% | 1 Transform |
| 8 | 11-19 | 9 | -1 | 1 | (-1,1) | Bildad | 15.0% | 4 Subjugated |
| 8 | 20-22 | 3 | 1 | -1 | (1,-1) | Bildad | 5.0% | 8 Aligned |
| 9 | 1-12 | 12 | 1 | -1 | (1,-1) | Job | 3.2% | 8 Aligned |
| 9 | 13-35 | 23 | -1 | 1 | (-1,1) | Job | 6.2% | 4 Subjugated |
| 10 | 1-7 | 7 | -1 | 1 | (-1,1) | Job | 1.9% | 4 Subjugated |
| 10 | 8-22 | 15 | 1 | 1 | (1,1) | Job | 4.1% | 2 Chaos |
| 11 | 1-12 | 12 | -1 | 1 | (-1,1) | Zophar | 21.1% | 4 Subjugated |
| 11 | 13-20 | 8 | -1 | -1 | (-1,-1) | Zophar | 14.0% | 6 Obligated |
| 12 | 1-3 | 3 | -1 | 1 | (-1,1) | Job | 0.8% | 4 Subjugated |
| 12 | 4-25 | 22 | 1 | 0 | (1,0) | Job | 5.9% | 1 Transform |
| 13 | 1-3 | 3 | 1 | 0 | (1,0) | Job | 0.8% | 1 Transform |
| 13 | 4-8 | 5 | -1 | 1 | (-1,1) | Job | 1.4% | 4 Subjugated |
| 13 | 9-10 | 2 | 1 | 0 | (1,0) | Job | 0.5% | 1 Transform |
| 13 | 11-12 | 2 | -1 | 1 | (-1,1) | Job | 0.5% | 4 Subjugated |
| 13 | 13-28 | 16 | 1 | 0 | (1,0) | Job | 4.3% | 1 Transform |
| 14 | 1-22 | 22 | 1 | 0 | (1,0) | Job | 5.9% | 1 Transform |
| 15 | 1-16 | 16 | -1 | 1 | (-1,1) | Eliphaz | 14.2% | 4 Subjugated |
| 15 | 17-35 | 19 | 1 | 1 | (1,1) | Eliphaz | 16.8% | 2 Chaos |
| 16 | 1-5 | 5 | -1 | 1 | (-1,1) | Job | 1.4% | 4 Subjugated |
| 16 | 6-22 | 17 | 1 | 1 | (1,1) | Job | 4.6% | 2 Chaos |
| 17 | 1-16 | 16 | 1 | 1 | (1,1) | Job | 4.3% | 2 Chaos |
| 18 | 1-21 | 21 | -1 | 1 | (-1,1) | Bildad | 35.0% | 4 Subjugated |
| 19 | 1-3 | 3 | -1 | 1 | (-1,1) | Job | 0.8% | 4 Subjugated |
| 19 | 4-22 | 19 | 1 | 1 | (1,1) | Job | 5.1% | 2 Chaos |
| 19 | 23-27 | 5 | 1 | -1 | (1,-1) | Job | 1.4% | 8 Aligned |
| 19 | 28-29 | 2 | 1 | 1 | (1,1) | Job | 0.5% | 2 Chaos |
| 20 | 1-29 | 29 | -1 | 1 | (-1,1) | Zophar | 50.9% | 4 Subjugated |
| 21 | 1-34 | 34 | 1 | 0 | (1,0) | Job | 9.2% | 1 Transform |
| 22 | 1-20 | 20 | -1 | 1 | (-1,1) | Eliphaz | 17.7% | 4 Subjugated |
| 22 | 21-30 | 10 | 1 | -1 | (1,-1) | Eliphaz | 8.8% | 8 Aligned |
| 23 | 1-2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | (1,1) | Job | 0.5% | 2 Chaos |
| 23 | 3-14 | 12 | 1 | -1 | (1,-1) | Job | 3.2% | 8 Aligned |
| 23 | 15-17 | 3 | 1 | 1 | (1,1) | Job | 0.8% | 2 Chaos |
| 24 | 1-17 | 17 | 1 | 0 | (1,0) | Job | 4.6% | 1 Transform |
| 24 | 18-25 | 8 | -1 | 1 | (-1,1) | Zophar | 14.0% | 4 Subjugated |
| 25 | 1-6 | 6 | 1 | -1 | (1,-1) | Bildad | 10.0% | 8 Aligned |
| 26 | 1-4 | 4 | -1 | 1 | (-1,1) | Job | 1.1% | 4 Subjugated |
| 26 | 5-14 | 10 | 1 | 0 | (1,0) | Job | 2.7% | 1 Transform |
| 27 | 1-6 | 6 | 1 | 0 | (1,0) | Job | 1.6% | 1 Transform |
| 27 | 7-10 | 4 | 1 | 1 | (1,1) | Job | 1.1% | 2 Chaos |
| 27 | 11-12 | 2 | 1 | 0 | (1,0) | Job | 0.5% | 1 Transform |
| 27 | 13-23 | 11 | -1 | 1 | (-1,1) | Bildad | 18.3% | 4 Subjugated |
| (1,0) | zzz-index | 0.0% | 1 Transform | |||||
| (1,1) | zzz-index | 0.0% | 2 Chaos | |||||
| (0,1) | zzz-index | 0.0% | 3 Conflict | |||||
| (-1,1) | zzz-index | 0.0% | 4 Subjugated | |||||
| (-1,0) | zzz-index | 0.0% | 5 Distracted | |||||
| (-1,-1) | zzz-index | 0.0% | 6 Obligated | |||||
| (0,-1) | zzz-index | 0.0% | 7 Pampered | |||||
| (1,-1) | zzz-index | 0.0% | 8 Aligned |
The “Ch” column is the chapter. The “Verses” column shows which verses were analyzed. “Count” is the number of verses in this set. “Awareness” is 1 for increased information, 0 when information is neutral and -1 when information is suppressed. “Emotion” is -1 for love, 0 for neutral and 1 for hate. The “Vector” is the concatenation of “Awareness” with “Emotion” formatted as a vector. “Speaker” is the third dimension in this analysis. “Percent” is calculated by dividing the “Count” by the total number of verses – for this speaker. “Style” is then found by using the vector to do a lookup onto the “Coping Styles” table. The extra rows at the bottom labeled “index” are required to ensure the graph has all eight destinations.
The results are then summarized in a pivot table and graphs.
| Row Labels | Bildad | Eliphaz | Job | Zophar |
| 1 Transform | 10% | 8% | 45% | 0% |
| 2 Chaos | 0% | 17% | 30% | 0% |
| 3 Conflict | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
| 4 Subjugated | 68% | 51% | 17% | 86% |
| 5 Distracted | 7% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
| 6 Obligated | 0% | 0% | 0% | 14% |
| 7 Pampered | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
| 8 Aligned | 15% | 24% | 9% | 0% |
The graph is not as pretty as the version that I created two years ago but this one has advantages. First, this one is automated. The numbers go into a spreadsheet – like they did before – but this spreadsheet is easier to use. The numbers are then summarized – like before – but this time it is a simple sum. And in the prior method I needed to then draw the graph by hand. Now I click on a button and the graph is automatically generated by Microsoft Excel. The one draw back is that it is a bit harder to see the shapes.
One work-around is to plot separate graphs for the main speakers.
| Focus on Humanity | Focus on Theology |
| 
|
| 
|
I know it is a bit hard to see, but the graphs on the left match well enough with the graphs on the right to convince me that this new model adequately confirms the old model – and improves on it. The key difference is that the “Focus on Theology” put an emphasis on obligation, while the “Focus on Humanity” reorients the debate towards subjugation. Those are scoring differences based on the bias in my readings.
The other key difference is the pinched hourglass shape in the new charts. In the previous work I thought there was supposed to be symmetry in the area so I filled in the horizontal dimension with a formula. Now that I have studied other text I appreciate that the Book of Job is a debate. Job is focused on the exchange of information – and that is displayed on the vertical dimension. Within chapters three through twenty-seven there is little hostility and, as Job reminds his friends, there is little love.
Thus, while the old graphs are pretty and add emphasis, the new graphs are more accurate.
The next challenge is to figure out how to plot multiple people and multiple stages on the same graph. I avoided that challenge when I charted First John because there was only one author. I avoided that challenge in the Book of Job because I assumed the developmental stages are flat.
I believe story within the Book of Job is told in such a way that any of us can visualize our self as Job. The there are only a few stage-three groups in Job. One mention of groups occurs when antagonists plunder Job’s belongings. Another mention of groups is in a vague reference to caravans seeking water. And yet, none of those groups are relevant to the great debate between the four speakers.
There are a couple other subtle references to groups. One is the division between the people who worship God and the people who ignore God. Another division is the vague allusion to “laborers”. It is the concept of “laborers” that reminds us that at the time Job was written, the only people who had the leisure required to read or study were the wealthy. Thus, like the writings from Plato and other Greeks, the wisdom literature of the Hebrews was written by and written for the wealthy who could devote their time to contemplation.
My next challenge is to test this model on text that has both a mixture of stages and speakers.
The other unresolved problem is how to explain the religious aspects of discipleship when I now believe that religion is 90% culture, 9% self-justification and only about 1% God.