The text concludes that Elihu had listened to the whole debate between Job and the friends. Now, however, he has decided to speak, because not only had both Job and the friends ceased their debate (Job 31:40; 32:1), but it seems that, rather than formerly adjourning the affair, they waited to see if anyone who stood by would have anything to say (Job 32:15-16). Therefore, Elihu took advantage of this opportunity to express his judgment about the matter of God’s righteousness and how Job’s calamities fit into that perspective. The matter at hand wasn’t simply why good folks suffer. Rather. it was a debate over the then current worldview of a righteous God. If he were a righteous judge, how could Job’s calamities come to a righteous man? Indeed, the presence of a righteous God demands that Job’s calamities prove he is a wicked person under the then current worldview. Certainly, this was the assumption of the friends, and the reason for the confusion Job was in, over why the Lord treated him so severely. How could the calamities of the righteous fit into the worldview of a righteous God?
The Book of Job is all about a false worldview and how God works to change that worldview in the land of the living. Job and his friends hold to the same worldview, hence Job’s confusion, because he **knows** he isn’t a wicked person. He **knows** he doesn’t deserve how he’s been treated by God. So, how does a righteous God fit into all this? Job is confused and cries out to God to explain himself. How is Job able to praise him and worship him, if he doesn’t know who he is? What would Job say? Could he worship someone or something he doesn’t know (cp. Acts 17:23)? Thus, Job understands that his worldview of God doesn’t explain his current calamities, but he’s unable give up on the idea that God is righteous. Yet, this judgment, vis-à-vis what Job and the friends have presumed was judgment over Job’s calamities, simply doesn’t make sense, if God is righteous.
On the other hand, the friends have taken a different perspective. They were not confused: God is righteous. Therefore, Job’s calamities prove he is a wicked person, albeit secretly so, because they can’t identify his terrible sins. They believe, if Job comes clean and repents, God would be merciful and forgive him, even restore to him his former wealth and position in the community.
However, in the first two chapters of the book, the reader is given insight into what God is doing, but neither Job nor the friends are privy to what’s going on behind the scenes. The reader **knows** God isn’t punishing Job, but we don’t know why the Lord has destroyed him. So, although we do know the Lord has acted in accordance with the desires of one of Job’s enemies, we don’t know the underlying reason why the Lord has acted as he has, and this why is the subject of the remainder of book.
Elihu is a new character, who is introduced two-thirds of the way through the book. He is an interesting actor in the play, and he has grown upset with Job for being so obsessed with his own integrity that he, presumably, questions the righteousness of God. He is also upset with the friends, because they failed to show why the worldview of a righteous God was the correct worldview. Their perceived understanding that Job accused God of unrighteous judgment is understood in Job’s persistent claim that he was righteous, while God punished him with calamities he didn’t deserve. The problem stems not so much from their assertions that God is righteous, as it does in their perception of what a righteous God looks like! While Job admitted his blindness, as that pertained to one’s perception of a righteous God, both the friends and Elihu claimed they could see! (cp. John 9:39-41). Thus, Job questions his worldview of a righteous God, while both the friends and Elihu embrace the current worldview at the expense of questioning Job’s righteousness.
Smoodock's Blog 