Thoughts On Elihu

(click the picture to enlarge)

Many think that Elihu was a prophet, rather than Job. I vehemently deny it. Job was a prophet of God, a fact I have already proven. Many believe that Elihu was the one who spoke most correctly about God, about the character of Job, and about the reason for Job's sufferings. In doing this they make a bad character (Elihu) into a good character and make a good character (Job) into an evil character. In this short series of postings we will look at the words of Elihu, which take up chapters 32-37, the end dialogue portion of the narrative. 

In an eye-catching title, "Eli-Who? The mysterious man in The Book of Job" (here), we have some interesting observations given on Elihu's character and thinking, and are well worth citing as an introduction to this study of Elihu's words and character. Said the author (emphasis mine): 

"Elihu rejects the notion that God Himself would turn up to address Job personally (Job 32:12-14, 34:21-23, 35:9-15, 37:19-24). Elihu’s picture of God is mighty, righteous, just and holy, but He is also completely inaccessible. Like how the clouds are so high above us (Job 35:5) and how you can’t look directly at the sun (Job 37:21), Elihu is confident that Job’s request for a one on one audience with God is arrogant and in vain."

Since Elihu affirmed that God was unapproachable, and would not so lower himself so as to converse with finite creatures, would not answer Job's call for God to speak and settle the matter, God's actual showing up in the whirlwind refuted and rebuked the foolish contentions of Elihu. By showing up in the whirlwind God refuted, ironically, one of the foundational principles of Elihu's theology and unfounded assertions. The clouds were not as high as Elihu thought. They were beholding God in the courtroom and thus looking into the sun.

Job's plea to be given an answer from God as to why he has brought his evils upon him is not arrogant and not in vain. No more is it so when all the people of God think and pray the same thing. Do they not all seek answers from God? Do they not make plea for him to speak to them? What is wrong with wanting to see and converse with God their Father? What is wrong with asking him the reason why? Is that not what children do?

The author above well describes the views and character of Elihu and it is clear that what Elihu said was not right. He too, like the elder three, was a "physician of no value" and a "forger of lies." 

The same writer says:

"Job’s final defence in Chapter 31 was like his affidavit of innocence. Within this courtroom-like scene, Elihu presents himself, in the absence of God, as the impartial judge to answer Job’s claims (Job 32:17-22). Elihu states he will teach them wisdom (Job 33:31-33) and speak on God’s behalf (Job 36:2). And judge he does! He judges Job’s friends for not being able to prove Job wrong (Job 32:12) and he judges Job for not speaking rightly about himself or God (Job 33:12)."

Though I will speak more on the words of Elihu in postings to follow this introduction, yet I do wish to observe that the analysis above is correct. I also wish to observe how Elihu, as respects arrogance and pride, shows that he is the guilty one, not Job. It certainly is pride to begin a discourse by saying "I speak for God," or "I judge in the stead of God." Further, he thinks that such a declaration ought not to be challenged, although he offers no proof for his claims of inspiration. 

In such comments he appeals to Job and the three elder friends to accept what he says because of his supposed credibility (ethos). In other words "you should believe me because I can be trusted to speak the truth." But, he assumes that fact, and in any court such argumentation would be of no weight. Elihu gives no reason why he should be believed and asks all to accept what he says as true because he is not one to speak falsehood. But, that is no argument at all, being not a fact in evidence. Courts are concerned with facts, with truth and reality, and since there is no evidence to prove that Elihu is always right, then his appeal to that supposed fact is of no weight. 

The one thing that Elihu was right about was his judgment that the three friends of Job had not been able to prove that Job's sufferings were a direct result of his apostasy from God. But, he thinks he can do what those three senior men could not do. He will be a superior prosecutor of Job. Is that not arrogant presumption? Does it not show that he has a high opinion of himself? 

The same writer says:

"The question remains, is Elihu right? Is Elihu’s role to just be another incorrect voice of folly in this great debate, or does he actually speak words of truth on God’s behalf? As we listen to Elihu’s speech, we will find both are actually the case. Elihu says many true things about God, but he wrongly dismisses Job’s claims of blamelessness and wrongly assesses God’s purpose behind Job’s suffering (Job 33:19-30, 34:34:11, 36:6-12)."

Is Elihu right? No, he is wrong. Does that mean he said nothing right? No. Every con man knows how to mix the truth with error. So does every counterfeiter. So does Satan. Elihu misapplied what truth he stated. Elihu also made illogical deductions from the facts. He also was guilty, like the three elder friends, of misrepresenting what Job said, often adding to his words or taking him out of context. 

Elihu was another "incorrect voice" and he spoke for the Satan, not for God. There was much folly in his words as in the words of the three elder friends. He is guilty of "condemning the righteous" just like the three seniors who preceded him, in condemning righteous Job. This is sin, as much so as "justifying the wicked." (Prov. 17: 15) 

The same writer says:

"Ultimately it seems Elihu’s role in The Book of Job, with both his correct and false words of judgement, is to prepare Job (and us) for the coming words of the true Judge. By the end of Elihu’s six chapter speech, Job is left with absolutely no hope of meeting with God face to face. As Elihu states in his conclusion, “The Almighty is beyond our reach” (Job 37:23). It is at that point in the story, with all hope gone, that God turns up."

"At that point" God appears on the scene! When Elihu rambled on in nonsense, saying things that were not fitting or correct, and says "The Almighty is beyond our reach," then boom! God shows up, cuts off the rambling of Elihu, takes him away by his whirlwind presence. If Elihu is so full of the Spirit and inspiration, spewing out oracles, saying the most wonderful things, then why would God suddenly cut him off? 

In an article titled "Why Elihu is So Mysterious" Peter Krol (here) also wrote (emphasis mine) some observations worth considering:

"At a recent pastor’s conference on the book of Job, a leader asked the attendees whether the speeches of Elihu (Job 32-37) should be trusted, like God’s (Job 38-41), or discarded, like those of Job’s three friends (Job 4-5, 8, 11, 15, 18, 20, 22, 25). The show of hands was evenly divided. I couldn’t believe my eyes; every attendee was fully committed to studying and explaining God’s word carefully, and yet there was a widespread and fundamental disagreement on how to read a significant part of the book of Job."

Is that not very interesting? Why is there such confusion about understanding the Book of Job? For understanding the arguments of Elihu and the others? Who is right about Elihu? How can we decide the matter? Well, for one, no one who does not spend the time reading and contemplating the Book of Job, the speeches of the three elder friends of Job, his colleagues and closest associates, and that of Job, Elihu, and of God himself, will never know the answer. Perhaps many Christians are not even interested in the Book of Job and in what any of the speakers in the Book said. Well, that is sad indeed. It is the oldest Book of the Bible and is full of talk about the most important subject, the subject of God's works, his providence, on the problem of evil (theodicy). It is no wonder that it is a must read for anyone studying ancient literature.

I believe that Elihu's words demonstrate how incorrect he was in his theology and in his judgment of Job. When we look at his words, in future posts, we will see this to be true.

Said Krol:

"He pops on the scene out of nowhere: “Then Elihu the son of Barachel the Buzite, of the family of Ram, burned with anger” (Job 32:2). He speaks a few times and then vanishes. God clearly vindicates Job and condemns Eliphaz, Bildad, and Zophar (Job 42:7-8), but he says nothing about Elihu."

"He speaks a few times and then vanishes." And, what are we to make of that fact? I have already observed how Dr. Piper and others make invalid arguments on why Elihu is not mentioned by God in the prologue, either condemnatory or justifyingly (commendatory). What arguments can be deduced from the fact that Elihu seems to vanish? I have already given my interpretation (he was taken away in the whirlwind, God being angry at the anger of Elihu). 

Said Krol:

"In addition, we’re clearly told that Elihu is young (Job 32:4, 6), raving mad (Job 32:2, 3, 5 – four times!), and full of criticism for Job (Job 33:12, 34:7-8, 34:35-37, etc.). Yet God clearly claims that Job has “spoken of me what is right” (Job 42:7-8). What’s all the fuss? This case should be closed."

Elihu is no model of a "servant" of God as was Job. He shows he cannot "keep his cool," how he is governed by emotion, with little self control. We might say he was "hot headed." He speaks, as we will see, in disjointed sentences, with little logical reasoning. He certainly speaks presumptuously, assuming many things which have not been proven or established as true. He speaks of things not applicable to the case at hand, throwing out "red herrings" and "ad hominem" and personal attacks as a Sophist. He rambles, rants, speaking in a confused and inconsequential way. 

From the length of his speeches (exceeding by far that of the three elder speakers) one can conclude that he likes to hear himself talk. From the language he uses one can also conclude that he thinks highly of himself, that he is self confident, and though younger and less experienced, puts himself forth as the senior in wisdom and knowledge. But, he also shows other traits of Sophists and men who only want to win an argument so as to promote themselves. He pretends to be humble, having what is called a "false show of humility" (Col. 2: 18). He does not flatter Job or his seniors, no, he reserves all flattery to be directed to himself. In fact, he shows his egotism and narcissism in how many times he uses the word "I." 

The same author has a sub heading titled "Why Elihu is Just Like the Other" and says "Here is the main challenge": 

Elihu draws the same conclusion as Eliphaz, Bildad, and Zophar. 

That’s why many interpreters think Elihu is just like them. 

 Eliphaz: “Job has sinned” (Job 4:7, 15:4-6, 22:5). 

 Bildad: “Job has sinned” (Job 8:5-6, 18:4). 

 Zophar: “Job has sinned” (Job 11:6, 20:29). 

 Elihu: “Job has sinned” (Job 34:7, 37; 35:16). 

"Of course, the reader knows Job has not sinned: “There is none like [Job] on the earth, a blameless and upright man, who fears God and turns away from evil” (Job 1:8, 2:3). But Elihu charges him with sin, just as the other three do. What’s all the fuss? This case should be closed."

I like how this author says more than once "what's all the fuss? This case should be closed." It is true. The testimony of God himself is that Job alone has spoken correctly.

In the next several postings we will analyze the words of Elihu and add to our remarks about this mysterious character.