Yet much of Elihu's speech seems similar to the speeches of the first three. For instance, in Job Elihu seems to argue along similar lines to the other three friends that Job suffers justly for things he has done. 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. 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 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. See also.
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. In my framework for understanding Job, Elihu is an Elijah 1 figure. He is the voice of one crying in the wilderness: "Prepare the way of the Lord". 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:. He burned with anger at Job because he justified himself rather than God. 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 especially his friends, have been digging a hole for themselves with their words; it is time for them to be silent. Elihu continues the accusations of Eliphaz, Bildad, and Zophar, lacks their wisdom, and is beneath contempt. 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.
O that I had someone to give me a hearing; O that Shaddai would reply to my writ, Or my accuser draw up a true bill! 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:. These three men ceased replying to Job, for he considered himself right. 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.
Then Elihu son of Barachel the Buzite , of the family of Ram, was angry — angry at Job because he thought himself right against God. He was angry as well at his three friends, because they found no reply, but merely condemned Job. But when Elihu saw that the three men had nothing to reply, he was angry. Buzite —literally, "contempt". The other names associated with Elihu meaning "He is my God" are not negative, so this is not decisive.
Barachel means "God blesses" and Ram means "high" or "exalted". It should be noted that while Job 's name meaning "hated" seems symbolic, none of the other friend's names seem to be particularly helpful in understanding their character. Angry —carries a connotation of what we might call in English "flaring nostrils" or "red in the face". Anger was not a valued trait according to ancient wisdom.
See Proverbs Worse, there is some indication he was drunk:. For I do not know how to temper my speech— My Maker would soon carry me off! By his own words, Elihu seems a man out of control. It's possible to read this as "righteous anger", but I don't see support of this idea in the text.
Youth —specifically, he labels himself as being "small in days". Being younger than the others is Elihu's reason for not speaking up earlier, but the ancient custom was that age was associated with wisdom. Elihu defies that tradition:. It is not the aged who are wise, The elders, who understand how to judge. While our culture easily accepts these words, it would have been an almost insurmountable obstacle to the original readers of Job. Despite claiming that he won't repeat the friends' arguments Job , Elihu persists in accusing Job of wrongdoing:.
He adds to his sin; He increases his transgression among us; He multiplies his statements against God. His primary argument, that God uses pain and suffering to discipline the righteous has already been broached by Eliphaz in chapter 5.
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 He rhetorical asks what effect sin and righteousness have on God:. Similarly the Emeetto team gave the example: "We Manuel, waari vayi? For Enahara, the speaker of "Whe!
Bahimu, khahintu sana! Another instance mentioned by the Elomwe team is when someone is calling out to someone else at a distance perhaps across a river. The use of the name is a device for getting attention. The Elomwe, Emeetto, and Echuwabo teams also allowed that meeting a close friend after a long while apart might call for the use of the name.
In Echuwabo, names can also be used in other contexts of special intimacy, but the Emeetto team specifically excluded it between husband and wife. Across all these languages, the pattern is consistent: using a name in direct address is very unusual and implies a limited range of special circumstances.
Any such usage is highly marked. It is not normal, proper, polite address, especially from a younger man to an older man. This pattern closely parallels that of biblical Hebrew. So, in any of these languages, Elihu's use of Job's name should be translated literally. It will sound rude and disrespectful. It will challenge a reader to think critically about Elihu's role. That is not the case with modern, common language translations in English, Portuguese and French.
But in these languages, using someone's name directly is common. It is more likely to sound warm and friendly than it is rude and offensive. Consider the wonderful things God does. Such translations fail their readers.
They hide important clues about the role of Elihu. Instead, translations with a more formal, word-for-word, approach should use notes to draw the reader's attention to Elihu's consistently offensive style. A common language translation in English should say something like: "Hey, you! Listen up," in , 31 and Getting just the right level of rudeness for each audience is, of course, difficult, because it depends profoundly on cultural assumptions.
Where brash young men are applauded, it will always be hard to see Elihu critically. But Bible translations can do better, much better. Elihu's use of Job's name, over and over again, is both striking and significant when set in its larger contexts. Understanding it is essential to understanding Elihu's role in the book of Job. For too long, this detail has been neglected by commentators and obscured by translators.
But a perspective from northern Mozambique can help it be heard, and communicated. Aquinas, Thomas. Translated by Anthony Danico. Atlanta, Georgia: Scholars Press, Ash, Christopher. Job: The Wisdom of the Cross. Wheaton, Ill: Crossway, Calvin, Jean. Sermons from Job. Translated by Leroy Nixon. Carson, Donald A. How Long, O Lord? Reflections on Suffering and Evil. Nottingham: Inter-Varsity Press, Cheney, Michael.
Clines, David J. JSOTSuppl and Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press. Nashville: Tyndale House, A Commentary on the Book of Job. Translated by Harold Knight. London: Thomas Nelson, Gordis, Robert. Habel, Norman. Edited by W. Boyd Barrick, John R. JSOTSup The Book of Job: A Commentary. London: SCM Press, Hakkam, Amos. The Bible: Job with the Jerusalem Commentary. Jerusalem: Mosad Harav Kook.
Janzen, J. Atlanta: John Knox Press, Lewis, M. Paul, Gary F. I can think of a few possible answers to this question: 1. So as to distinguish him from the other 3 who were so wrong.
His Spirit chose to give Elihu more lines than anyone else in the play besides Job. Keep in mind, though, that the question, framed in this way, makes a few assumptions, which could be true but might not be. But this is doubtful exegesis. I recognized that his speeches were different from the three friends as they truly reflected the character and attributes of God, but thank you for breaking up the study into chewable sizes.
Your study of Job has taken my love for the book to an entirely new level…. Elihu is the only Hebrew name guys…! Wisdom is the key to the book of Job. It is not found in the land of the living, why? Because if you are saved you are dead.
We have died with Christ, we have been buried with Christ, we have been raised with Christ and we are seated in heavenly places with Christ. To depart from evil is to reckon yourself dead to this evil world.
The whole world has become Babel… confusion. As a saved Christian we are dead. Our life is hid with God in Christ and when he comes back we will be revealed with Him in glory.
The judgement at the end of the world is not for those se who have been saved. We are dead… to depart from evil is to understand we have died to this world. Therefore recognize no one according to the flesh any longer… including yourselves.
I have much more if anyone is interested. The Holy Spirit reveals the Word of God. God desires to be worshipped in Spirit and in Truth, once you have the Holy Spirit in you He will reveal the truth, He will reveal Jesus, He will open up the Bible and it will always lead back to Jesus.
The author and finisher of our faith. Tell me if you have understanding…. We who are saved were saved before the foundation of the world. When Adam and Eve sinned they hid from God and made fig leaves to cover themselves, but God made for them skins… so God made the 1st sacrifice in the beginning. Could it be the Lamb that was slain? Jesus is our covering. Top and both sides had to have the blood.
The cross has the blood the opposite direction bottom feet nailed and both side hands … it makes the Star of David when you put this together. Trinity going up and the trinity coming down. You have misprinted and misinterpreted verse It ends with a question mark not an explanation mark. God is being sarcastic. And in the end, the Lord told the three friends to offer a sacrifice and Job would pray for them.
So where was Elihu??? Satan said he Job would curse GOD if he were not watching over him. That satan could do anything to Job, except kill him. I believe that Elihu is really satan raging mad because the first three, and all the bad that satan put on Job could not make Job curse GOD. My position on Elihu is straight forward. Elihu is certainly god in the flesh! Pray for revelation knowledge concerning his advice and see what the spirit reveals.
Seriously a no brainier. Holy Spirit made it so clear to me this advice from Elihu was doctrinally sound and exactly what I was to meditate on…nuff said! Who said God needed a mouthpiece here? Does not God speak for Himself in this story? Elihu is speaking about himself. Does this raise a red flag for anyone else?
Elihu is commending himself as one perfect in knowledge, and yet it is established in the text that he is a young man with a particular human lineage, so he is not a divine being of some kind. We also know Elihu is younger than everyone in the story. Oftentimes it is younger people who think they know everything, which seems like it could be the case here. That does not mean Elihu does not have any truth, but perhaps not as much knowledge as he presumes.
Secondly, Elihu is dead wrong at times. That is blatantly wrong as anyone who reads the story will know. Elihu is not implying that Job is suffering because he is being punished. Elihu is stating that judgement is upon Job because of his response to the suffering. Thanks so much! I will have to eagerly check out some of your other writings. God is love and love can only build upon itself.
If one try to build upon any other foundation it is not love. It is corruption and is good for nothing. This is the message in the book of Job. To be a messiah or to walk in christ one must speak for themselves like Elihu did building upon the foundation of christ.
Therefore because God is love. Job saw God in Elihu and repented. Jesus said he did not come to condemn instead he came to save. Unlike the three friends that condemn Job, Elihu spoke as a messiah with the goal to save.
I am very ignorant of the lineage for all of the people mentioned in the book of Job and if their lineage can be historically and archeologically traced. I do not know whether they actually existed or not, but could we suppose the book of Job to be a Hebrew myth or legend? Using this lens, could Elihu represent a Christ-like Messiah that the ancient Israelites were expecting or even desiring to come and relieve them of their suffering?
They were real people who actually existed. However, often in scripture, the stories or the characters may also be representative or symbolic. Job, like Joseph in Genesis , can be a representative of the suffering Christ. The representations are not exact, but they foreshadow Jesus. Job, like Jacob of Genesis , also represent Everyman.
Wait then why is he in the bible if we should ignore him? He put Elihu in the bible for a reason. This is my understanding of the book of Job after reading the book and perusing through each person argument.
The words spoken by each person is aligned with deep emotions. Though, Ellihu was not a priest he spoke like one. He was a type of priest before God and man. He was not Christ but a shadow. In other words, he was a man and juror.
He was their to listen and make conclusions. There is nothing supernatural about him. Therfore, he held is peace until all utter thier discourse. His conclusion was that Job needs a saviour and his three friends fabricated arguments are feebly. Job was righteous because God said it, not because Job declared himself to be righteous.
This was no exception to Job. What Elihu seemed to forget was, trial can overtake the saintliest of men 1 Pet. The best value in digital Bible study. Try it FREE. Font Size Font Size.
0コメント