Many commentators suggest that Job 32:1-37:24, were written by someone else and that someone else is probably Elihu because he hasn’t said a word up until now. This possibly suggests that he wasn’t originally a part of the group of friends that initially came to Job. Elihu was apparently present during the other speeches, although we weren’t told he was there.
The reason the three men stopped speaking is because they were unsuccessful in moving Job from this position, that is, Job was righteous in his own eyes, Job 32:1. The fourth friend of Job, Elihu, is now introduced, Job 32:2. Elihu whose name means, ‘He is my God,’ was a relative to Job, Job 1:1. Elihu is given a genealogy, he is a Buzite, Job 32:2, which is thought by some commentators to be from Syria or perhaps Arabia, Genesis 22:21 / Jeremiah 25:23.
Ash, in his commentary, says the following concerning the footnote.
‘This is all the more so if the Buz here is the descendant of Abraham’s brother named in Genesis 22:21.’ If this is indeed the case, then Elihu comes from a very godly pedigree reaching all the way back to the father of the Jewish nation.’
Notice the contrast between Elihu and the three men. The three men recommended that Job repents of the sin he committed before his situation but Elihu recommends that Job repents of pride and praise the work of God and have respect for Him, Job 32:1. The three claimed he suffered because he has sinned but Elihu gets to the heart of the matter when he states he is sinning because of his suffering.
By justifying himself before God, Job 32:2, Elihu saw Job was making God the wrongdoer. As far as Elihu is concerned, either God is justified in punishing Job for wrongdoing or God is unjustified in punishing Job and is, therefore, less than God. He obviously doesn’t agree with his second thought and so, he must somehow find fault with Job. Elihu points out to Job that he never once gave God the credit.
Notice we are told that he was angry four times, once with Job, Job 32:2, and three times with his friends, Job 32:3. The reason he was angry with Job was because he justified himself before God, Job 32:2, and the reason he was angry with his friends was because they had no answer to Job’s arguments but condemned him anyway, Job 32:3.
It’s interesting to note that Elihu did see the friends were unjust in their treatment of Job. If they had found fault with Job, then they would have had a basis on which to judge. But they were completely incapable of responding to Job’s arguments, and so, since they had no response to Job’s arguments, they should have kept silent and not issued a condemnation of Job, Job 32:3. It appears that Elihu has the task of showing Job why he’s worthy to be condemned, while at the same time showing the three friends where they went wrong in their thinking.
Elihu respected the traditions of the time and had kept silent probably because he was the youngest, Job 32:4 / 1 Timothy 4:12. Yet, in his silence, his anger and frustration were building, Job 32:5.
Clarke, in his commentary, says the following.
‘How young he was, or how old they were, we cannot tell; but there was no doubt a great disparity in their ages.’
Now that the friends and apparently Job, have ceased their debate, Elihu takes advantage of the opportunity to voice his arguments.
From Job 32:6-33:33, we read Elihu’s first speech. He feels compelled to list his qualifications, which gives him a reason to speak. His introduction is quite lengthy, with Elihu not getting to his main argument until Job 33:8. He doesn’t want his friends to think his silence was because he didn’t have anything to say, he was silent out of respect. Elihu points out that age doesn’t automatically mean wisdom, and so, Job 32:6-9, they should listen to the voice of youth, Job 32:10 / 1 Timothy 4:12.
He hadn’t spoken because of his youth but then reasons that since God gives wisdom, Job 32:10, he has the right to speak because God had given him special understanding. Elihu repeats what he stated earlier and goes on to expose the thinking of the friends, and the reason for their silence, Job 32:11-12. They seemed to think it best or wise at this point, to just be quiet and let God’s full wrath be poured out on Job, Job 32:13.
Elihu claims he won’t follow the same line of reasoning the friends used and he won’t use the same foolish arguments, Job 32:14. The irony is that Elihu then proceeded to use those same arguments.
Elihu now specifically addresses Job but is speaking about the three friends. He notices that they have had nothing to say, Job 32:15-17, but he, on the other hand, has a wealth of wisdom to share with Job, Job 32:18. This would give Job some hope in that he is finally going to hear someone who has something to say in response to his arguments. There was originally Job, the three friends and God, now Elihu comes into the discussions as a self-appointed arbitrator.
Elihu says he full of words and the spirit within him compels him and inside he is like bottled-up wine, like new wineskins ready to burst, Job 32:18-19. He says he must speak and find relief, he must open his lips and reply, Job 32:20. He says he will show no partiality nor will he flatter anyone for if he were skilled in flattery, his Maker would soon take him away, Job 32:21-22.
Coffman, in his commentary, says the following.
‘In this Elihu reveals that his theological position on sin and suffering is exactly that of the three friends who have been silenced. He believes that if he should sin in flattering people God would immediately, in this present life, punish him by taking him away from the earth. This is exactly the same error that caused Eliphaz, Bildad and Zophar to brand Job as a gross sinner.’