Charles Ellicott Commentary Job 32

So these three men ceased.—The next six chapters are taken up with the reply of a fourth person not before mentioned, but who appears to have been present during the discussion, and who is described as Elihu, the son of Barachel the Buzite, of the kindred of Ram. The name appears to mean, He is my God. The person from whom he was descended seems to have been the son of Nahor, Abraham’s brother (Genesis 22:21); and a city of the same name is mentioned in Jeremiah 25:23.

There is a Ram mentioned in Ruth 4:19, who was the great-grandson of Judah; but we can hardly suppose this was the Ram of whose kindred Elihu was. On the other hand, we have no clue to the identification. For even if, with some, we suppose him to have been the same as Aram, the son of Kemuel, and great-nephew of Abraham, it is not easy to see how a descendant of Buz, his uncle, should have been described as of the kindred of Ram.

One tradition identifies Ram with Abraham, but this is mere conjecture, and in this case highly improbable. The only inference we can draw is that this specification of Elihu serves to show that he was a real, and not an imaginary, personage. The Targum speaks of Elihu as a relative of Abraham. If we are correct in placing the life of Elihu so far back, the whole historical context of Job’s story becomes more probable, because what is told us of Abraham and the patriarchs corresponds with the description and character of Job. And then, also, the traditional Mosaic origin of the Book of Job becomes more probable.

Because he was righteous in his own eyes.—This appears from Job 3:26; Job 6:10; Job 6:29; Job 10:7; Job 13:15; Job 19:6 and others, Job 23:7; Job 23:10–12; Job 27:6; Job 29:12 and others.

Because he justified himself rather than God. —See Job 19:6. Job maintained his innocence, and could not understand how his affliction could be reconciled with the justice of God. Yet, at the same time, he declared that God was his salvation (Job 13:16), and that it was impossible for man to be absolutely just with God (Job 9:2; Job 9:28), though at the same time he might hope in His righteousness (Job 23:3 and following).

They had found no answer.—They could not reply to Job, nor deny that his conduct had been as he described, and yet they concluded that he must be wicked because God had afflicted him.

Now Elihu had waited until Job had spoken. —Literally, Had waited in words for or regarding Job; that is, as some understand it, had waited to speak to Job, or, more probably, had waited until the argument was closed to declare his opinion with reference to Job. The line taken by Elihu is an intermediate one, and is neither that of Job nor his friends.

He admits the integrity of Job—or, at least, he does not deny it—although he uses very strong expressions as to the course which Job has adopted (Job 34:7–9; Job 34:35–37); but he considers that Divine afflictions have a disciplinary purpose, and that they may be sent because God has discerned the seeds of unfaithfulness and defection in the sufferer; and this may serve to explain their purpose in Job's case. He has very lofty ideas of the righteousness of God (Job 34:10 and following), and of His power and majesty (Job 37:22). He holds that with regard to the Almighty we cannot find Him out, but that we may safely trust His mercy and His justice. This is the position to which he leads Job when the Lord answers him out of the whirlwind.

I am young. —The way in which Elihu comes forward is very interesting, and full of character. It gives us also a picture of the times and habits.