n the book of Job, it becomes clear that the first three of Job's friends - Eliphaz, Blidad, and Zophar - speak wrongly. Not only do they incur the indignation of Job and his other friend Elihu, but God himself rebukes them, saying to Eliphaz, "I am angry with you and your two friends, because you have not spoken the truth about me, as my servant Job has." (42:7 NIV)
Elihu is not rebuked: neither by Job nor by God. Yet much of Elihu's speech seems similar to the speeches of the first three. For instance, in Job 34:12 Elihu seems to argue along similar lines to the other three friends that Job suffers justly for things he has done.
How is Elihu's speech to be interpreted? Is he supposed to have spoken the truth?
| |||||||||||||||||||||
|
13
|
The problem is that the three friends, Zophar, Eliphaz and Bildad, claim that God always brings punishment to the wicked and blessings to the good. Their theology states that if something bad happens to someone, it must be because they did something bad. If something good happens, it must be because they did something good.
Using this theology, they try to get Job to admit what he has done wrong.
When God finally comes to Eliphaz, the fault that he finds with them is that he (and his two friends) have spoke incorrectly about God:
If we compare this to Elihu, there is no doubt that Elihu agrees that God punishes the wicked (Job 34:21-30). However, Elihu also sees that God brings bad things on people to preserve them from going into "the pit".
It's this correct theology that God is appreciating from Elihu and the lies about God that God rebukes from the three friends.
Summary
Elihu spoke correctly about how God brings punishment on people and that sometimes it makes sense (punishment on the wicked) and sometimes it doesn't (punishment for other purposes). The three friends spoke lies about God (that God only punishes the wicked). That was why God was so angry with the three friends.
| ||||||||||||||||||||
|
6
|
In my framework for understanding Job, Elihu is an Elijah figure. He is the voice of one crying in the wilderness: "Prepare the way of the Lord"
This is part of a wider Bible pattern of both:
Elihu prepares the way for God's arrival by silencing Job and rebuking both him and his friends. His arrival coincides with the cessation of the back and forth debate, and his words are summed up early on:
As you mention, Elihu is not rebuked by God. Furthermore, God does not even refer to Elihu once he arrives on the scene—this strongly suggests he is an agent of God rather than a character in the play like Job and his friends.
There is no reason to assume that everything Job or his friends said was factually wrong. Much of what Job's friends say is based on the wisdom of Proverbs. Job also speaks wisdom, more similar in tone to the wisdom of Ecclesiastes. God also does not directly address any of what has been said—but addresses the lack of understanding about his power, majesty and righteousness which is implied by Job's conclusions: he skirts with disaster by questioning God's justice (and in so doing foolishly sets himself up as one who judges God).
The first act of the the drama is revealed to us at the beginning of Job, but of course it is not revealed to Job or his friends. Had they understood the context of the disasters visited on Job, they would not have got their responses so wrong—Eliphaz, Bildad and Zophar would not have blamed him for his own suffering and Job would probably not have (nearly) accused God of unrighteousness. God judges them in this context—not on the individual merits of each thing they said.
Aside from questions about the content of Elihu's speech, the result is unquestionably the right one. Job and his friends have been digging a hole for themselves with their words, and it is time for them to be silent.
| ||||||||
|
5
| Abstract
Elihu continues the accusations of Eliphaz, Bildad, and Zophar, lacks their wisdom, and is beneath contempt.
Structure of the dialogue
The core of Job follows a strict order of speeches for three cycles:
The basic content of Job's words is always the same: questioning God why the calamities of chapter 1 and 2 came upon him. We know from those chapters that Job was singled out for being "blameless and upright man who fears God and shuns evil". But his friend's speeches try to convince Job of the precise opposite: he is being punished for sin. As readers, we are signaled to sympathize with Job, who really receives unfair treatment at the hands of God, the Adversary, and his friends.
In his final speech in the the final cycle, Job demands an audience before God:
From chapter 27 to 31, Job swears what amounts to an oath of innocence. The concept stems from the Babylonian legal system in which an accused could clear themselves by swearing they are innocent. The effect of such oaths was to compel an accuser to bring evidence against the accused. If the accuser did not have evidence, the accused was declared innocent and could press false witness charges to his accuser.
It seems the three friends took this as the end of the dialogue, since it puts the onus on God to prove the charge that Job sinned:
The structure of the book is broken at this point, since Zophar can not continue to charge Job with sin against God—Job has taken the proper legal step to answer such a charge. At this point, only God has legal standing and if He does not speak, Job has reason to charge Him with false punishment. So when Elihu stands up, he is simultaneously completing the pattern and speaking out of turn. Structurally, despite his protestations, Elihu stands on the side of Job's accusers.
Elihu the fool
When the author of Job introduces Elihu, it is not particularly flattering:
I've italicized three terms that carry negative connotation:
Combining these indicators together, we get a strong sense that Elihu is set up to be a fool.
Elihu still accuses Job of sin
Despite claiming that he won't repeat the friends' arguments (Job 32:14), Elihu persists in accusing Job of wrongdoing:
His primary argument, that God uses pain and suffering to discipline the righteous has already been broached by Eliphaz in chapter 5.
Elihu is wrong about God
Further, Elihu says that God does not need to respond to Job's case (or that He can do so in His own time depending on the translation of Job 35:12-16). He rhetorical asks what effect sin and righteousness have on God:
The implied answer to each is a variation on "nothing". In what must be the most devastating courtroom tactic every employed, God blows into the scene (literally) and asks "Who is this who darkens counsel, speaking without knowledge?" (Job 38:2) While the text does say that God responds to Job, He also is undercutting Elihu's argument.
Why doesn't God rebuke Elihu?
Perhaps the most powerful argument for Elihu is God's silence about his argument. The other three friends are rebuked and required to make sacrifice in the epilogue. Job himself is commended for all that he had done and receives a double blessing. But Elihu disappears from the story. If God were displeased with Elihu, why didn't He include him in the rebuke?
On the other hand, why didn't God praise Elihu? The book of Job purposely leaves his status ambiguous: he could be correct in his argument or he could be incorrect. But a close reading of Elihu's words (as I show above) reveals that he simply amplifies the other (incorrect) theodicies or distances God from caring about humanity. Further, he speaks out of turn and has no standing before God. Like a man who disrupts the order of the court, he is quickly and quietly dismissed. Elihu is not even worthy of being answered.
References
The bulk of this argument comes from Putting God on Trial: The Biblical Book of Job by Robert Sutherland.
The "Elihu" entry in the Eerdmans Dictionary of the Bible provided some further hints.
| ||||||||
|
-2
|
Both Jack Douglas and Jon Ericson gave some great educated answers. There seems to be a dichotomy between the two views. But I would like to provide a connection anyway.
I am leaning towards the concept that Elihu is a type of Elijah. The only connection I have to the "foolishness" of Elihu is that God uses the foolishness of the World to confound the wise (1 corinthians 1:27):
And Elihu truly is one of those characters that tends to throw people off. The fact that this can be easily pointed out only shows that Elihu was an instrument of God from start to finish.
| ||||
|
-3
|
Elihu is the author of the book of Job. Read 32.15-17, (KJV) to verify this. He is speaking in the 1st person in these verses.
Elihu is the spokesman of God, for 6 chapters, leading up to the summit of the book, which begins in 38.1... the one-on-one with the LORD and Job! In 42.5-6, Job admits that he had only heard about God; but now he knows who God really is. Compare his confident words (without knowledge of the Almighty) in 23.1-6, with his later words, after facing the LORD, in 42.4-6. Elihu's mission? Set the tone for the appearance of the LORD in the whirlwind, chapters 38 through 42. Mission accomplished!
Edit (pasted from a second post on this question): To all who are seriously looking for the logic in the statement I have made: it may be more obvious, in 32.16, but actually in several verses, (possibly 32.15-20), Elihu is talking to HIMSELF. Although I referenced the KJV, you can do a parallel comparison, with many versions, with still the same outcome, or translate the original Hebrew, even better. The basic logic, is that an outside author who is recording dialogue, does not speak in this type of language. Let us not over-complicate this, if you were reading a news report, would the journalist speak in the 3rd person, for someone else? As far as context goes, I look at the entire book of Job, as one single context. Do you know, in one sentence, why God rebuked Job? Do you know why God rebuked the 3 friends? Totally different answers here. Do you know why God did not rebuke Elihu, AT ALL? There are real treasures in this book, for those who genuinely seek the truth.
| ||||||||||||||||||||
|
