Elihu's Words (VIII)

Elihu next says:

"Elihu further answered and said: “Hear my words, you wise men; Give ear to me, you who have knowledge. For the ear tests words As the palate tastes food. Let us choose justice for ourselves; Let us know among ourselves what is good. “For Job has said, ‘I am righteous, But God has taken away my justice; Should I lie concerning my right? My wound is incurable, though I am without transgression.’ What man is like Job, Who drinks scorn like water, Who goes in company with the workers of iniquity, And walks with wicked men? For he has said, ‘It profits a man nothing That he should delight in God." (34: 1-9)

Elihu's Address to the Three Friends

In the above words of Elihu he speaks directly to the three senior speakers, in the second person. But, he does not speak to Job in the second person, but in the third person, talking to the three elders about Job. 

When he says "you wise men," "you men of knowledge," he spoke sarcastically and condescendingly. It was said in wrath and in pride. Repeat those words orally with a tone of anger, with sarcasm. Elihu speaks scoffingly with contempt. This being so, it becomes obvious that Elihu does not really believe that the three senior friends are wise and well learned men. In other words his words mean "you three seniors who think you are, or pretend to be, wise men of learning." His speeches condemn the three elders for their inability to answer Job or to prove their case against him. His words essentially say "YOU so-called wise ones!" It was a slur, an insult, a sarcasm. 

Several times Elihu addresses the three seniors (Job too) by saying (with emotion) "Listen to me!" Why the need to do so? What is Elihu wanting to accomplish by his constant exhortation? Did he see the three seniors losing interest in his words? Becoming uninterested in what he has been saying? Because he cannot hold the attention of the three? It seems ironic how often the idea of being a good listener comes up in the dialogues of the story. Who is the good listener? Job's three friends? Elihu? Or, Job? Who listens to God and man well? After all, wise and learned men are good listeners, and good students. Good teachers are they who are good listeners. Wise speakers have little difficulty holding the attention of hearers and students. Ignorant teachers and explainers have difficulty holding the attention of their audiences. 

Again, what Elihu said to the three men about their being wise and learned men, was said with emotion (pathos), with anger and hate. It was scorn and contempt. Thus far, in his ranting speech, he has relied upon ethos and pathos to convince those listening to him, and very little on logical argument (logos). 

After scorning the three senior counselors, he then invites them to "choose justice for ourselves." Well, if they are so unwise, so stupid, then why call upon them for judgment about justice and righteousness? He first condemns their inability to detect (by taste) what is just, right, and true and then, ironically, though having no palate for such, he invites them to discern the truth of what he is saying by tasting it. 

Two times he calls for a consensus with the three elders who preceded him, saying "let us choose justice for ourselves" and "let us know among ourselves what is good." He believes that the reasoning of great men can discover what is good and right. Yet, he has already said that the reasoning of his three seniors has not been right. His reason for calling for a consensus on the definitions of what is just and good, true and right, is because they are able to do so by using their reason or by a divine vision or dream. He says "For the ear tests words As the palate tastes food." But, obviously, all men do not have a relish for the truth. Because of an evil bent to their nature, and a bias, they rather sometimes have a taste for falsehood and for lies, such as deceivers and con men possess. We cannot rely upon our subjective taste for truth, especially if we have lost our taste buds. Truth is not relative to taste. Truth is truth whether it pass a creature's taste test.

The Misrepresentation of Elihu

“For Job has said ‘I am righteous'," and has said “God has taken away my justice." Elihu says: “For Job has said 'should I lie concerning my right? My wound is incurable, though I am without transgression.’ "

Did Job say those things? Or, is Elihu again misquoting or misrepresenting him, as many bible commentators have affirmed (as I also do)? Pulpit Commentary says (emphasis mine):

"For Job hath said, I am righteous. Job had maintained his "righteousness" in a certain sense, i.e. his integrity, his honesty, his conviction that God would ultimately acquit him; but he had not maintained his sinlessness (see the comment on Job 33:9). He had not even said, in so many words, "I am righteous." The nearest that he had come to saying it was when (in Job 13:18) he had exclaimed, "I know that I shall be held righteous," or "justified.""

I totally agree. God's own testimony was that Job was righteous as none other. Did that mean that Job never had a foolish thought? "The thought of foolishness is sin: and the scorner is an abomination to men." (Prov. 24: 9) Did it mean that he no longer had still a corrupt nature ("the flesh") so that he could not live above sin, contrary to the teaching of the apostle? (Rom. 7: 14-25; Gal. 5: 17) No, it did not mean that. Further, Job never asserted that his claim to be righteous, godly, moral, good, etc. included the idea that he was in every way perfect. He knew that "there is not a just man upon earth, that does good, and sins not." (Eccl. 7: 20) In fact, as we have observed before, Job confessed that he was a sinner, though he affirmed that his sins were not to the same extent as when he was a youth (and unsaved). Job was a man who fought against sin by the help of God and was always on guard against it. 

Job was not self righteous by his denial of the charge of being ungodly, a bad character, unrighteous, etc. After all, many of the most righteous men and women of the bible have been falsely accused of being evil people. Job was being falsely accused by Elihu, as by his supposed three senior friends. Further, he was not fighting against God as accused. Also, he was not speaking evil of God and charging God with foolishness or injustice as accused. He was not proud as accused. He had no great secret sins of the mind (as Job himself testified). Nothing in his conduct and worship was condemned by God. 

Pulpit Commentary on Verse 6 and the words - "Should I lie against my right?" 

"This was an essential portion of Job's argument (see Job 27:4). Against the theory of his secret heinous wickedness put forward by his "comforters," he maintained consistently his freedom from conscious deliberate opposition to the will of God, and refused to make the confessions which they suggested or required, on the ground that they would have been untrue - in making them he would have "lied against his right." In this certainly Job "sinned not." But it was essential to the theory of Elihu, no less than to that of Eliphaz and his friends, that Job was suffering on account of past iniquity, whether he were being punished for it in anger or chastised for it in love (see Job 33:17, 27). My wound (literally, my arrow; comp. Job 6:4) is incurable without transgression; i.e. without my having committed any transgression to account for it. Job 34:6"

Again, think of an innocent person being tortured and who is told to confess to the accusation of being guilty for the torture to stop. That person also must ask himself - "should I lie against my innocence?" Should I confess to that which I am not guilty? 

The Accusations

Job was accused by Elihu of being a "scorner" and a wicked man. Ironically, it was Elihu who scorned Job. A scorner is one who scorns, mocks, scoffs, who expresses contempt in anger against others. In the scriptures they are described as being people who refuse all criticism of themselves. Said Solomon: "Proud and haughty scorner is his name, who deals in proud wrath." (Prov. 21: 24) We have also seen how Elihu's wrath is highlighted by the narrator. Job did not scorn his friends even though he found no comfort and little truth in what they said to him. Solomon connects wrath with scorning.

Pulpit Commentary on Verse 7 says:  

"What man is like Job, who drinketh up scorning like water? This comment is not only unnecessary, but unfair. It was not for Elihu, who professed a desire to "justify" (or completely exonerate) Job, to aggravate his guilt by means of rhetorical comment; and the comment itself was unfair, for Job had not indulged in scorn to any extent, much less "drunk it up like water" (comp. Job 15:16). He had in no respect scorned God; and if he had occasionally poured some scorn upon his "comforters" (Job 6:21; Job 12:2; Job 13:4-13; Job 16:2; Job 21:2-5; Job 26:2-4), must it not be admitted that they had deserved it? It was the duty of Elihu to act as moderator between Job and the "comforters," whereas he here seeks to exasperate them, and lash them up to fury against their afflicted friend. Perhaps Job's impassive attitude has embittered him. Job 34:7"

What Elihu said about the character of Job was character assassination. He, and the three seniors, all condemned Job as being a very wicked man. They were false accusers and show that they were sent by Satan to aggravate Job. 

For myself, I become angered when I read the speeches of Elihu, seeing him as the very emissary of Satan. It amazes me that some commentators see him as the only one who spoke and acted right. It is obvious to me that Elihu is not speaking by inspiration of God, but by inspiration of Satan.

"For he has said, ‘It profits a man nothing That he should delight in God."

On this accusation of Elihu against Job, Pulpit Commentary says:

"Again it must be remarked that Job had not said this. The nearest approach to it is to be found in Job 9:22, where this passage occurs: "It is all one; therefore I say, He destroyeth the perfect and the wicked" (Revised Version). Elsewhere Job speaks, not generally, but of his own individual case, remarking that his righteousness has not saved him from calamity (Job 9:17, 18; Job 10:15; Job 17:9-17, etc.). And the fact is one that causes him the deepest perplexity. Job 34:9"

Of course Job believed that there was profit, yea, eternal life, in being a servant of God. However, he did not believe that the profit was in regard to material well being in this world. The repentance and salvation of the thief on the cross with Christ did not save him from being crucified. It did guarantee his entrance in the afterlife into Paradise.