In my previous study, it was understood that, if true government should exist at all, God must be righteous, because the sole purpose of government is to repel evil/rebellion and punish the wicked. Government doesn’t exist in order to afflict the innocent. That would be the work of an oppressor, against whom government exists to destroy or punish. Therefore, if Job has received calamities from the Lord, he must be wicked and needs to repent, if he holds out any hope of being healed. Elihu has accused Job of blasphemy against God, because he assumes Job has accused God of mistreating him or had rashly judged him in error, because Job claims to be innocent of evil. However, if this were true, how could God know all things? How could God be righteous, if he erroneously or deliberately afflicts the innocent?
Of course, each of the participants in the debate would agree that God is righteous and is incapable of error, and this is Elihu’s point: if God is righteous and the Judge/King of the universe, how could Job claim to be innocent? The Lord had virtually destroyed Job, killing his children, taking away his wealth and even taking away his health. If God is a righteous Judge/King, why has he destroyed Job? Obviously, something’s amiss, which once more goes to Elihu’s point. Surely, Job couldn’t be correct by arguing he is innocent, because his innocence would mean the whole current system of knowing God is in error! Therefore, Job must be guilty of wicked behavior!
Consider what was known about God in that generation. The Lord was mighty beyond one’s imagination. He is able to slay either the king or the peasant effortlessly and without partiality. In the context of Job 34, the king is unrighteous, so God removes the wicked or the oppressor and the righteous or the victims of oppression, according to his will. The works of the Lord are clothed in darkness, but their effects trouble both the king and the people alike (Job 34:20; cp. 20:26; Exodus 12:29-30) He knows all their deepest secrets, and no one is able to escape his hand, because, although he seeks to cover his wicked deeds, he is naked before his Maker (Genesis 3:8-10). Simply put, man is unable to hide from God (Job 34:21-22; 2Chronicles 16:9; Jeremiah 32:19), but the Lord is able to hide himself from men (cp. Genesis 19:11; 2Kings 6:18-20), so that men are simply unaware of what the Lord is doing, as he leads them to their destruction.
Earlier, although he knew the Lord judged men without needing to explain himself to them (Job 9:32-33), Job had expressed a desire to plead his case before God. It wasn’t for the purpose of accusing the Lord of wrongdoing (Job 9:2-3, 20), but for two reasons. First, Job wished to understand why the Lord had treated him so woefully, when he had not sinned (Job 13:18-23); and secondly, Job wanted to close the mouths of his accusers by showing them that he, Job, was innocent of wrongdoing that would bring the calamites upon himself that the Lord had brought (Job 23:5-6, 10).
However, Elihu misinterpreted Job’s desire to appear before the Lord, believing Job was accusing the Lord of not judging righteously. Elihu believed that Job thought God had mistakenly brought calamity upon him unnecessarily and over and above what was just for his sins (Job 34:23). Elihu then went on to say that the Lord is able to destroy the mightiest of men and replace them with others, according to his desire. God knows their works and exposes their judgment before everyone (Job 34:24-26; cp. 2Samuel 12:12), which Elihu believes the Lord has done to Job. He believes Job had secretly rebelled against the Lord and had mistreated the poor. Therefore, Job’s sufferings had resulted from the prayers the poor had prayed to the Lord against him (Job 34:27-28).
Finally, Elihu asks, if God chose to be silent, who could cause him to answer (Job 34:29)? It makes no difference, if one considers the prayers of a nation or those of a man, if God chose to be silent, who could force him to speak? Therefore, Job’s prayers have gone unanswered, because he is a hypocrite and must be punished. Otherwise, if he were to go unpunished, the people would be ensnared into following his example (Job 34:30). Thus, when worldviews are questioned, the burden of proof obviously must lay with the challenger. However, the challenger is often mocked, because no work or logical reason he could offer would be accepted by the authorities or those who embrace the current and erroneous worldview. In fact, they cloak their own demand for God to break his silence by demanding that the challenger must cause the Lord to reply to him. Not only so, but any reply from God, must be given according to the authorities’ own demands in order to show their tradition, or the then dominant worldview, is wrong (cp. John 2:18; 6:30).
Smoodock's Blog 