Commentary - Job 32:1-5

Bird's-eye view

We come now to a dramatic shift in the book of Job. The formal debate, the structured back and forth between Job and his three friends, has ground to a halt. It has ended in a stalemate born of exhaustion and futility. The friends are out of arguments, and Job is resolute in his own integrity. Into this silence steps a new character, a young man named Elihu. He is not just another counselor with another set of tired platitudes. He is a firebrand, and his arrival changes everything. He is angry, and the text emphasizes this four times in five verses. But his anger is not the petty frustration of the other three. His is a righteous zeal, directed at both Job and his friends. He is angry at the friends for their theological incompetence, for failing to answer Job and yet condemning him anyway. And he is angry at Job for the central sin that had emerged from his suffering: justifying himself rather than God. Elihu's speech serves as the transition from the failed wisdom of man to the glorious revelation of God Himself.

Outline

Context In Job

Chapters 3 through 31 contain the three cycles of speeches between Job and his friends, Eliphaz, Bildad, and Zophar. This entire section has been an exercise in futility. The friends operate on a rigid, mechanical view of the universe: God blesses the righteous and punishes the wicked, therefore Job must be a secret sinner. Job, knowing his own integrity, rightly rejects their premise but, in his desperation, veers into self-justification that borders on accusing God of injustice. The debate has collapsed. Job has delivered his final, magnificent oath of innocence in chapter 31, and the friends have nothing left to say. The air is thick with the failure of human reasoning to solve the problem of suffering. It is into this theological void that Elihu speaks, preparing the way for the Lord's appearance in the whirlwind.

Key Issues

Commentary

Job 32:1

Then these three men ceased answering Job because he was righteous in his own eyes.

The debate is over, not because truth has triumphed, but because the debaters are exhausted. The three friends pack up their rhetorical bags and go home. And the reason given is profoundly important. It was not because Job had successfully proven his case, but because he was righteous in his own eyes. His self-conception had become an impenetrable fortress. When a man sets himself up as the final arbiter of his own righteousness, no external argument can possibly prevail. He has made his own heart the supreme court, and all other evidence is ruled inadmissible. This is the dead end of all pride. The friends could not get through to Job because Job's ultimate standard of righteousness had become Job himself. They were speaking different languages. They were arguing from a flawed premise, to be sure, but Job was arguing from the premise of his own blamelessness, which is a far more dangerous error.

Job 32:2

But the anger of Elihu the son of Barachel the Buzite, of the family of Ram, burned; against Job his anger burned because he was proving himself righteous before God.

Into the silence steps a new voice. Notice his full pedigree is given. He is not some anonymous upstart. He is Elihu, son of Barachel the Buzite, of the clan of Ram. This is to establish his standing. And the first thing we are told about him is that he is angry. His anger burned. This is not a petty irritation. This is a holy fire. And the target of his anger is specified. First, against Job. Why? Because he was proving himself righteous before God. The Hebrew can also be rendered "righteous rather than God." This is the heart of the matter. In his magnificent defense, Job had crossed a line. He had begun to set his own integrity in opposition to God's. In order to maintain his own righteousness, he had to imply that God was, in some way, unrighteous in His dealings with him. This is the creature putting the Creator in the dock. Elihu's anger is a zeal for the glory of God. He sees this for what it is: cosmic treason. And it makes him burn.

Job 32:3

And his anger burned against his three friends because they had found no answer, and yet had condemned Job.

Elihu is an equal opportunity critic. His anger is not just for Job; it burns against the three friends as well. Their failure was a compound fracture. First, they had found no answer. Their theological system was simplistic and brittle, and when confronted with the complexity of Job's suffering, it shattered. They were intellectually bankrupt. They had no real answer for Job's predicament. But second, and worse, yet had condemned Job. When their arguments failed, they did not retreat into humble silence. They doubled down on condemnation. They were bullies for God, which is the worst kind of bully. They could not win the argument, so they tried to win by sheer assertion. They maligned Job's character and, in doing so, misrepresented God's. They were miserable comforters because they were miserable theologians. Elihu is angry because they have made the case for God look weak and foolish.

Job 32:4

Now Elihu had waited with his words for Job because they were years older than he.

This verse gives us insight into Elihu's character. His fiery intervention is not the result of a rash, youthful impatience. He is not a hothead. He has been sitting there, listening to this entire sorry spectacle, and he has held his tongue out of deference to his elders. He observed the proper cultural courtesies. This tells us that his anger is not an uncontrolled outburst. It has been simmering. It is a considered, thoughtful, and deliberate anger. He gave the older men every opportunity to speak wisdom, to correct Job, to rightly defend God. He waited. But there comes a time when deference to age must give way to a defense of the truth. His respect for his elders was commendable, but his ultimate allegiance was to the glory of God.

Job 32:5

Then Elihu saw that there was no answer in the mouth of the three men, so his anger burned.

This is the final trigger. The silence. When Elihu saw the utter and complete failure of the three friends, when he realized they were spent, that they had nothing left but their own foolishness, his anger was kindled. The time for waiting was over. The silence of the friends was not a humble admission of ignorance; it was the silence of intellectual and spiritual defeat. And in that silence, Job's self-righteousness was left standing, unanswered and unchallenged. Nature abhors a vacuum, and so does theology. Someone had to speak for God. Someone had to correct the record. The failure of the elders made it necessary for the youth to speak. And so, fueled by a righteous zeal for the name of God, Elihu prepares to enter the fray.

Application

The introduction of Elihu is a bucket of cold water on our modern sensibilities. We are uncomfortable with anger, especially in a theological context. But Elihu teaches us that there is a place for righteous anger. We ought to be angry when the character of God is maligned, whether by the simplistic moralism of the legalist or the proud self-justification of the victim. Our first loyalty is not to our own comfort, or our own reputation, or our own sense of fairness, but to the glory of God.

Job's error is a subtle and constant temptation for every believer in the midst of trial. It is easy to slip from "Why is this happening?" to "I don't deserve this," and finally to "God is being unfair." We begin to defend our own righteousness at the expense of God's. Elihu reminds us that this is a dead end street. The right response to suffering is not to justify ourselves, but to justify God, trusting His character even when we cannot trace His hand.

And the failure of the friends is a perennial warning to all who would offer counsel. Do not speak when you do not know. Do not offer cheap formulas for profound pain. And above all, do not condemn when you have no answer. Your job is not to win an argument, but to faithfully represent the God of all comfort and truth. Sometimes the wisest thing to do is to remain silent. But as Elihu shows us, there also comes a time when silence is complicity, and the truth must be spoken, boldly and with fire.