The Mind of David Krider

I’ve been using AI to research scripture lately. I’m asking it questions posed by sudden, crippling physical ailments, mental anguish from the betrayal of decades-old friends, and spiritual emptiness because, after decades of a close walk with God, He has not yet spoken to these situation(s). So I have been looking for something deeper than the tired and flaccid interpretations provided by “corporate” church and preachers. While I’m certainly not under the impression that LLM’s can generate a new thought about these issues after thousands of years, I had been hoping that I could cause it to dig up something novel in its accumulated training on basically everything that’s ever been written in the history of mankind.

In all of your knowledge base, all of the accumulated writings and philosophy about the story of Job, what do you conclude about it? What are the takeaways for today?

The book of Job has generated enormous interpretation precisely because it resists easy answers. Here are what I see as the most enduring insights:

The collapse of retribution theology:

Job demolishes the idea that suffering is always proportional to sin, or that righteousness guarantees prosperity. His friends represent conventional theology – “you must have done something wrong” – and they’re explicitly rebuked by God at the end. This is perhaps the book’s clearest message: simple formulas about suffering are false and harmful.

The problem isn’t answered, it’s reframed:

Job demands an explanation for his suffering. God’s response from the whirlwind doesn’t answer that question at all – instead, God essentially says “Where were you when I laid the earth’s foundations?” It’s not an explanation but an invitation to see the vastness of creation and divine mystery. The “answer” is that Job is asking the wrong question, or asking from the wrong position.

Honest protest is validated:

Job curses the day he was born, demands audience with God, and refuses to accept his friends’ neat explanations. And God vindicates Job, not his pious friends. There’s something here about the legitimacy of wrestling with God, of honest anger and confusion, rather than false piety that papers over real pain.

The troubling framing narrative:

The heavenly wager between God and Satan is deeply disturbing to many readers. God appears to permit Job’s suffering as a cosmic test. Some interpreters see this as ancient storytelling framework not meant to be taken literally; others struggle with what it suggests about divine character. The text itself doesn’t resolve this tension.

Restoration but not full resolution:

Job gets his wealth back doubled, has new children. But that doesn’t “fix” the loss of his first children or undo his suffering. Some see this as a gracious ending; others see it as inadequate – you can’t replace dead children with new ones as if they were interchangeable.

Modern takeaways:

• Suffering doesn’t require explanation or justification. We don’t owe sufferers theological explanations for their pain, and sufferers don’t owe us acceptance of those explanations.
• Mystery is okay. Not every “why” has an answer we can access. Living with uncertainty is part of the human condition.
• Protest is faithful. Demanding answers from God, expressing anger and confusion – this is within bounds of authentic faith.
• Community can fail us. Job’s friends meant well but caused harm. Sometimes the “right” thing to say is nothing, or simply “I’m here.”
• God is not safe, but perhaps trustworthy. Job never gets his explanation, but he does get an encounter with the divine that somehow satisfies him (“I had heard of you by the hearing of the ear, but now my eye sees you”).

The book refuses to comfort us cheaply. It sits with the hardness of innocent suffering without explaining it away. In a sense, that is the lesson – that some realities are too immense and painful for tidy resolution, and faith must find a way to exist within that.

To my utter surprise and delight, what I’ve found is that it dispenses with all of the typical liturgical language used by Christian writers and speaker, and cuts to the heart of the things I’m asking about. No feigned moralism. No clichés. No pride. No defensiveness. This has been the most refreshing Bible studying I’ve ever done.

When people try to give answers to my complicated questions, it’s always couched in fear that they might look like they don’t have an answer or undermine my faith by saying, “I don’t know,” or leaving things up in the air. But I think it’s precisely in that (narrow) gap between what scripture directly speaks to, and what life brings us to, where we’re supposed to engage in faith and prayer. And those answers are not corporate. They’re personal. And I think this bothers a lot of preachers, because in that moment, they’ve lost control of the narrative.

The even-bigger problem I have with all of this is that preachers will stand in their pulpits, week after week, all across this country, and tell people that if they “just” do X, Y, and Z — pray harder, worship exuberantly, give lavishly, whatever — God will swoop in a solve all their problems. They’ll imply that if you “leave the same way you came in” then you must have done it wrong. After all, if God is all powerful, and He doesn’t answer your prayer at the altar that day, you must have unrepented sin, or haven’t forgiven someone of something, or you weren’t sincere, or whatever. In the end, unanswered requests of God are your fault. And all of that is in direct contradiction to the story of Job.

To be fair, this isn’t a new problem. Even Jesus’ disciples tried to blame someone for his own problems. In John 9:1-3, the asked him why a man was blind. What it because of his sin, or that of his parents? The answer? Neither. And that’s the point. Even with the story of Job in hand, the disciples still acted like Job’s friends, trying to blame the man himself for his predicament. And even with the story of Job and this scripture in hand, modern evangelical Christianity still falls back on the trite explanations that you deserve what you get because you’re “bad,” and you can’t get “better” until you do enough spiritual obeisance to motivate God to give you your deliverance.

As someone who is struggling with years-long physical and emotional problems — caused, in very large part, by a pastor and his family — I’m really tired of being preached at like these scriptures don’t exist. It’s condemning. It’s a modern variation of the prosperity gospel. Instead of just giving a bunch of money to solve all your problems, now it’s everything: giving, praying, worshipping, serving, fasting, etc., but it’s the same message at its core.