Bible Commentary - Job 34

In this chapter, Elihu says that he will speak to the three friends, but actually addresses his remarks to Job, extending his criticism of Job’s complaint.

This is a peculiar chapter.  In verse 2 Elihu makes it clear he is addressing the three friends, but the substance of his remarks is much more targeted to Job, continuing to rebuke Job in a similar way to the previous chapter.

Elihu opens his speech once again by quoting Job (verses 5-6, 9), paraphrasing Job’s complaint.  Elihu’s summary seems fair to me; I think Job really is saying that he is innocent and God is punishing him unfairly.

Elihu’s response in verses 6-7 is that Job is a wicked man living in the company of wicked men, because Elihu believes that Job is making sinful arguments by accusing God of doing wrong.  Elihu sees Job’s complaint as an accusation directed against God, so Elihu’s response is that God does not “do wickedness” (v. 10) or “pervert justice” (v. 12).  God “pays a man according to his work”.

Even though Elihu opened by addressing the three friends, I once again find that Elihu’s argument substantially mimics the three friends, and that he is directing his remarks to Job and not, indeed, the friends.  “Paying a man according to his work” feels very close to the doctrine of the three friends who argued that God would bless the righteous and punish the wicked.  It’s strange because the narrative positions Elihu as a contrarian, coming in and bringing some fresh perspective to the dialogue between Job and the friends.  If Elihu believed the same thing as the three friends, then there isn’t really any reason why he would feel a need to speak here.  In chapter 32, Elihu’s motivation for speaking at all is the shortcomings he perceives in the three friends, that “there was no one who refuted Job” (Job 32:12).  Here, however, it feels like Elihu is responding to Job almost exactly the same way the three friends would.  I can’t really see anything here the friends would disagree with.

Starting in verse 13, Elihu speaks in defense of God.  In verses 13-19, Elihu says that God is impartial and judges everyone the same way.  Even if they are princes or nobles, God regards all men equally because all men are the work of his hands and all live by the breath and the spirit of God.  This is a defense of God’s justice, similar to the concepts of social justice employed by Job and the three friends.  They focused more on the negative side, abusing the vulnerable orphans and widows, and here Elihu does the opposite, claiming that God would not give privileged treatment to the wealthy or powerful.  It’s in the opposite direction but with the same basic impulse towards an expression of fairness and justice for all people regardless of their status.

Continuing in verses 20-30, Elihu emphasizes God’s fairness because God sees everything.  Even when the wicked try to hide their sins in darkness, God perceives it and will punish and destroy them.  This is another way of claiming that God is just and fair.  Earlier Elihu said that God judges all men equally, and here he is saying that God judges all men perfectly.  There is no deception or hiding from God’s inspection, and God “does not need to consider a man further” (v. 23), because God’s judgments are always correct and true.  This is why Job’s complaint rubs Elihu the wrong way, because Job is claiming that God judged him incorrectly.

Finally, in verses 31-37 Elihu rebukes Job once more, because Job is trying to speak to God on his own terms instead of accepting God’s terms.  Job previously said that he wanted God to come and tell him what he did wrong, that he wanted to go with God before a judge or arbitrator to decide who was in the right.  Elihu calls this “rebellion” (v. 37), because God is the great king and Job is rebelling against his judgments and authority.  According to Elihu, Job should submit to God’s “chastisement” (v. 31) and repent, rather than challenge God to show what Job has done wrong.  Elihu, like the three friends, is presuming that Job has sinned in some way and further presuming that Job knows what it is.  From that point of view, Job’s denials look like rebellion because Job knows what he should change but isn’t submitting to God’s authority.

In conclusion, Elihu is saying that God always judges correctly, and Job is “rebelling” against God by questioning God’s fairness and impartiality.  This is Elihu’s defense of the Lord.

In the next chapter, Elihu continues replying to Job.