Ooh.  Neat question.  I'm really interested in seeing what the bible folks are going to say.  It's been probably over a decade since I read Job, so I can't say I'm qualified to weigh in.

It sure does sound like a morality play, doesn't it?

I will start, I suppose, in a moderator position.  Here are some possible textual points that would lead to one side or another.

Job's Author the Theist

• Job's author does not just claim the existence of one God it seems.  Job 1:6, "One day the heavenly beings (sons of God) came to present themselves before the Lord..." (also 2:1)  At the end, God speaks to Job and goes on about his long list of credentials.  Job is humbled and satisfied by Gods feats.  God gives Job all the more and doubles his lifespan.

Job's Author the Atheist

• When it comes down to it, the story does not jive so well with the rest of the Hebrew Bible.  Job rightly brings up the suffering in the world, and continues to show how the unjust do not suffer but are successful in life.  His three companions, arguing on the side of the law, seem to be punished by God later in the story for not speaking right of God (Job 42:7). 

I would add it is very odd the positions that Job takes, that in the end God deems right, over the law which is presented in the words of his three companions which God deems inaccurate.  I would like to see what your opinions are.  This may require everyone to read Job...OH NOES! =)

I doubt Job’s author was an atheist, at least not in the modern sense. It’s been a while since I’ve read Job, but of what I remember, it was trying to solve “the problem of evil.” Actually, it’s worse than that. The question isn’t, “Why do bad things happen?” It’s, “Why does God allow evil things to happen to his faithful servants so God can win a bet with Satan?” And the answer is, “Because God can.”

Now, in the modern day, this might-makes-right answer to theodicy is a strong argument against the Judeo-Christian God, but I doubt that at the time Job was written that atheism was a viable option.

The new testament theology is that "believers" are saved by faith. This is the theology of Paul. Yet, he was supposedly  blinded by a light from Heaven and Jesus spoke to Him. Now, if these miracles happend to members of the RRS, at first we might think it was a delusion. If it happened reapatedly as in Paul's case, we'd eventually believe based on this revelation directly from God. So Paul, if his story is true, didn't have any faith. He had a direct revelation.

So how could he have been saved if he didn't have any faith? The say is true of all bible authors, they all had a direct revelation from God so there was no need for faith. So they are all not saved.

Christian theology is that the entire bible is the word of God. So god is the true author of all books of the bible including Job. They claim the human authors received a revelation from the almighty and that this is how the book of Job came into being. So to a Christian the author would have to believe in God since God spoke to them and caused them to write this book.

So the author of Job was a believer, yet he didn't need faith to believe since he has a personal revelation. So if Christian theology is to be consistent with itself, he was a believer without faith so he was unsaved, therefore going to Hell.

The first time I read the book of Job, I figured it was a work from a completely different religion.  With the exception of the astonishing cruelty, the book just doesn't fit in.  What I noticed most, is that it makes Satan the main character, and in the rest of the OT, he is either non-existent, or unimportant.  I was quite young when I first read the Bible, and I didn't know at that time that Job is one of the oldest books since it is a good ways into the OT.

As for Rook's question... Quite frankly, I doubt the sincerity of most of the BuyBull's authors.  I find it hard to believe that any of them believed a word they wrote.