update from sparkleup

writing/3/unknown-things/iyov/reverse/intro.md

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 > Job puts forward a note of interrogation; God answers with a note of exclamation.[^intro-approaches] Instead of proving to Job that it is an explicable world, He insists that it is a much stranger world than Job ever thought it was.
 >
-> \parencite{intro-to-job}
+> \parencite{intro-to-job}[^intro-thesis]
 
 I've heard it said that "forgiveness is releasing the hope for a better past," \parencite{wakefield} but it's more complicated than that, isn't it? That quote itself is more complicated than that:
 
@@ -46,6 +46,10 @@ Stories are as bound to time as we are, and all we can do is steal back a bit of
 [^intro-approaches]: The Book of Job, out of all of the books in the Hebrew bible, is buried deepest under layers of guesses. Even in the Christian bible, the only book that comes close is Revelation. Perhaps it is the dire nature by which both approach the world. Job takes a look at the world, heaves a weary sigh, and says, "I suppose this is it. This is the lot we have been given in life." While Revelation looks at the world and growls deep in its throat, a sound coming from the belly, and says, "This must not be it. This cannot be the way in which the world works."
 
     Or perhaps it is the way in which they view death. While Job looks on death almost fondly, Revelation reiterates the Christian sentiment that death has been defeated using the genre of apocalypse (that is, a revealing, a pulling back of the curtain). The world that was is no more, and as there is everlasting life beyond it, it is worth considering only in that context and otherwise only worth discarding.
+    
+[^intro-thesis]: Gustavo Gutiérrez, in his investigation into the Book of Job *On Job: God-Talk and the Suffering of the Innocent*, posits that Job exemplifies *disinterested religion* --- that is, a non-transactional faith that holds even when there is not a direct benefit or punishment. "[The author of the Book of Job] believes it to be possible, although he undoubtedly knew the difficulty that human suffering, one's own and that of others, raises against authentic faith in God. Job, whom he makes the vehicle of his own experience, will be his spokesman." \parencite[1]{onjob} I find this argument extremely compelling as a way to describe the entirety of Job and its role in both Judaism and Christianity, my own thesis does not necessarily have anything to do with theodicy.
+
+    Rather, I'd like to posit that there are at least two possible outcomes for Job *after* the events of the book. On the one hand, Job might follow the path of Qohelet in the eponymous book (called Ecclesiastes in Christian bibles), or he can follow the path of Jonah. That is, he can maintain his disinterested faith, or doubt can overtake him. He can become the wise, if perhaps jaded, author of a text that argues "there is nothing better for people under the sun than to eat, and drink, and enjoy themselves, for this will go with them in their toil through the days of life that God gives them under the sun." (Ecclesiastes 8:15, NRSV) Or he can become the reluctant prophet who says to God that he is "angry enough to die." (Jonah 4:9, NRSV)
 
 [^intro-symbols]: The framing for The Book of Job takes the form of a fable, a set of universal symbols designed to instruct as well as entertain. The structure is as follows: