At this point in Elihu’s discourses (Job 35:14), he seems to point to Job’s argument that he was unable to perceive God’s purpose. There, Job claimed that no matter which direction he took in his dilemma, forward, backward or to the right or to the left, he was unable to perceive God’s design in treating him as he did (Job 23:8-9), and his question: “Why God, why?” points to his confusion. However, once again Elihu misrepresents what Job has said. Elihu says: “Although you say you will not see him, yet judgment is before him. Therefore, trust in him” (Job 35:14). In other words, Elihu accuses Job of despairing, because he was unable to understand what God was doing. So, he advises Job to wait upon the Lord. Be patient, because God is just, and he will come through eventually. You may not see his purpose today, but you will, because God is trustworthy!
Perhaps, even Job had used this argument in the past with folks who couldn’t understand why the Lord was treating them so undesirably. What if they also suffered when they didn’t believe they had done anything worthy of what they had to endure. “Keep on keeping on, and God will show up to reveal your sin!” While that may be good advice under certain circumstances, what about the times when the righteous weren’t guilty of a “secret” sin that brought about their suffering? If, indeed, Job had in the past similarly counseled the ignorant, his errors were suddenly brought home to him now, with Elihu’s accusations and advice.
However, Elihu takes the argument even further, by speaking in theoretical and theological terms, instead of taking an objective perspective, which would be sympathetic towards the suffering Job had already endured. Remember, Elihu must defend the truth, as he knows it. It is his worldview of God, and that must be preserved at all cost. Therefore, compassion and mercy will be sacrificed to serve the desired end. Elihu says that Job claims ignorance, but, if he were sincere, all he needed to do was wait upon the Lord, trust him, and he would enlighten him accordingly (Job 35:14). Nevertheless, Job is avoiding the obvious. God has showed up in anger and has brought all these calamities upon him, because of Job’s wickedness (Job 35:15). Moreover, “…he knows it not in great extremity!” In other words, God had actually passed over the great gravity of Job’s sins and treated him far more gently than his sins deserved!
Imagine! The Lord had already taken away Job’s family, his wealth and even his good health, so that every breath Job took was a challenge! What else, exactly, could an oppressor do to afflict a person? It seems evident that Elihu didn’t know God in his mercy, nor in his kindness. If he did, where is that God in any one of his discourses? While Elihu claims to be inspired by God (Job 32:8), it is certainly not by the spirit of kindness, nor by the spirit of gentleness, nor by the spirit of compassion. None of these attributes of the Spirit (cp. Galatians 5:22-23) had inspired Elihu. He claimed that the spirit of God constrained him (Job 32:18), but there is little evidence of virtue in Elihu’s claims. Rather, what he offers Job is an idealistic attitude in support of what he is convinced is true. He speaks theoretically of the Lord apart from intimacy. He defends the Lord, yet has no regard for the one God protects.
Elihu concludes by saying: “Therefore Job opens his mouth in vain and multiplies words without knowledge!” (Job 35:16). Therefore… meaning because the Lord had treated Job so lightly, because he hadn’t treated him with the severity his sin deserves …Job speaks vainly without knowledge. In other words, Job had attacked the worldview of the righteous, or what they commonly held to be truth, namely, what a man sows, that shall he reap! Just as the friends before him, Elihu condemned Job, not by exposing his theoretical sin, but because he has challenged what is commonly held as truth. Their argument against Job is circular: God punishes the wicked and rewards the righteous in kind, vis-à-vis what a man sows that shall he reap – Job has reaped suffering; therefore, he must be wicked. Aside from the fact that none of the participants of the debate, including Job, are privy to the Lord’s wager in the first two chapters of this book, no one has identified Job’s sin. They say the Lord has treated him far better than what he deserves (Job 35:15; cp. 11:6), but no one has pointed out what Job has done. If he hadn’t sinned, how could God be judging him?
Smoodock's Blog 