John Gill Commentary Job 32

So these three men ceased to answer Job
His three friends, Eliphaz the Temanite, Bildad the Shuhite, and Zophar the Naamathite, who came to visit and comfort him under his afflictions; but unawares were led into a controversy with him, occasioned by some rash and impatient expressions of his; which controversy had been carried on between them a considerable time, but now dropped; they grew weary of it, and now rested themselves as men do on a sabbath, as the word signifies; they set themselves down, and made no reply to Job's vindication of himself, not caring to give themselves any further trouble, or labour the point any more and longer, perceiving it was all to no purpose: or "and these three men ceased" the last words of the preceding chapter are, "the words of Job are ended", (Job 31:40); and the copulative "and" connects these with them, and shows that these men also had done speaking; so that the dispute was closed between Job and them, and the way was clear for another disputant that might think fit to enter, as Elihu did, after mentioned

because he [was] righteous in his own eyes ;
some take this to express the state of the question between them, rendering the words, "that he was righteous" ^F6 . The notion his friends had of him was, that he was righteous in his own account, and as he professed to be, and might so seem to others; but was a wicked man, and an hypocrite, as his afflictions showed; this point they had been labouring to prove, but, upon Job's long and clear vindication of his integrity, they ceased to defend it: others suppose the words to be an inference of Job's from their silence: "therefore he was righteous" they making no reply to him, he concluded himself to be quit and clear of the charge they had brought against him; but they rather, according to our version, contain a reason why they ceased to answer him; because they thought him self-conceited, self-willed, obstinate, and incorrigible; not open to conviction, stiffly insisting on his own innocence, not allowing that he was guilty of any sin or sins, which were the cause of his afflictions; otherwise, in the article of justification before God, Job was no self-righteous man, nor was he so charged by his friends; to say he was is to abuse his character, and is contrary to that which God himself has given of him; nor would he have so highly commended him as to suggest there was none like him on earth, when of all men in the world there are none more abominable to God than a self-righteous man; see (Isaiah 65:4) (Luke 16:15) (18:14) . It is contrary to Job's knowledge of and faith in Christ, as his living Redeemer, (Job 19:25) ; and to many clear and strong expressions, confessing his sin, disclaiming perfection, and declaring himself no self-justiciary, (Job 7:20) (Job 9:2Job 9:20Job 9:31–33) .

FOOTNOTES:

• F6: (qydu awx yk) "quod ille (tantum) justus in oculis suis", Schmidt.

Then was kindled the wrath of Elihu the son of Barachel the
Buzite

Both against Job and his three friends, for reasons after given; who this person was is not easy to say; they debase him too much, who make him Balaam the soothsayer, according to the tradition of the Jews^F7; for neither the time he lived in, nor his character, will agree with him; this man lived before the times of Balaam and was also a holy good man, which all his discourses show: and they too much exalt him who make him Christ; for though some phrases, when strained, may seem to agree with him, and some things in the signification of his name, and the names of his ancestors, may be thought to correspond to him; Elihu signifying, "my God is he"; the son of Barachel, "the son of the blessed God"; of the kindred of Ram, of the high and holy line; the Buzite, one "despised" and reproached; yet there are other things that cannot be said of him, as particularly in (Job 32:22) ; besides, the Messiah seems to be spoken of by him as another person, (Job 33:23Job 33:24) ; it is very probable that he was one of Job's relations who had come to visit him in his melancholy circumstances, had been a bystander and a hearer of the whole dispute between Job and his friends, with the management of which he was not a little displeased; he is described by his descent, when Job's other three friends are not, because he was a young man, and not known as they were: and this serves to show the truth of this history, that it is not a mere apologue, or moral fable, but a real fact; though who his father Barachel the Buzite was cannot easily be determined; it is probable he was a descendant of Buz, the son of Nahor, Abraham's brother, (Genesis 22:20Genesis 22:21) ; of this opinion are Aben Ezra and Ben Gersom; unless it can be thought he was so called from the city Buz, of which he might be an inhabitant, mentioned along with Dedan and Tema, (Jeremiah 25:23) , places in Edom or Idumea, where or near to which Job lived.

of the kindred of Ram ;

according to the Targum, of the kindred of Abraham, in which it is followed by other Jewish writers^F8; and some even take him to be Isaac, the son of Abraham^F9; Aben Ezra thinks he is the same with Ram the father of Amminadab, (Ruth 4:19) ; but he is abundantly too late for this man to be of his kindred; others take him to be the same with Aram, the son of Kemuel, a brother of Buz, (Genesis 22:21) ; these names are used for one another, either by adding or removing a letter; see (Matthew 1:3) ; compared with (Ruth 4:19) ;

against Job was his wrath kindled, because he justified himself rather
than God ;

not that he made himself more just than God, he could never think or say so, see (Job 4:17) ; nor that he was just before him or by him; for he was so in an evangelic, though not in a legal sense; and Elihu would not have been displeased with him for asserting that; he did not deny that Job was a righteous man in the sight of God; nor that he was righteous, and in the right in the sight of God, with respect to the controversy between him and his friends; nor did he blame him for justifying himself from their charges; but that he justified himself "more" than God; so the Jewish writers^F11 generally render it: he spent more time, and insisted longer on his own justification than upon the justification of God in the dealings of his providence with him; he was more careful of his own character and reputation than he was of the honour of God, and the glory of his justice; he said more for himself than he did for God; and this displeased Elihu;

it gave this good man some concern, that, though Job did not directly charge God with unrighteousness in his dealings with him, yet by consequence; and he expressed himself in such language that would bear such a construction, whether it was his real sense or not; and to hear him complain so heavily of God, and at the same time enlarge so much on his own innocence, and to importune in so bold and daring a manner to have a hearing of his cause; these things being observed by Elihu, raised his choler and indignation.

FOOTNOTES:

• F7: T. Hieros. Sotah, fol. 20. 4. Hieron. Quaest. seu Traditiones in Gen. fol. 69. D. so Bolducius.
• F8: Jarchi, Bar Tzemach
• F9: T. Hieros. Sotah, fol. 20. 4.
• F11: Jarchi, Aben Ezra. Ben Gersom.

Also against his three friends was his wrath kindled
He did not take part with either side, but blamed both, and took upon him to be a moderator between them, and deal impartially with them: what highly displeased him, and raised his spirit against the three friends of Job, was,

because they had found no answer ;
they were at a loss for one, for a sufficient one; they had all of them been answering him in their turns again and again, but with nothing to the purpose, not with anything conclusive and convincing; and particularly they could find and give no answer to Job's last vindication of himself:

and [yet] had condemned Job ;
as a very wicked man, and an hypocrite, for no other reason but because he was afflicted; and they still persisted in their sentiment, though Job had so fully cleared himself, and put them to entire silence; this exasperated Elihu, to observe these men to retain so unreasonable a sentiment, to pronounce such a rash sentence, and yet could make no reply to Job's defence of himself. Jarchi says, this place is one of the corrections of the Scribes, it having been formerly written "God" instead of "Job"; as if the sense was, that Elihu was provoked with them, because by their silence they had condemned the Lord, not vindicating his honour and glory as became them; but Aben Ezra declares his ignorance of that correction, and observes, that they that say so knew what was hid from him.

Now Elihu had waited till Job had spoken
Made an end of speaking, until he had thus expressed himself, "the words of Job are ended", (Job 31:40) : and waited likewise until his three friends had said all they had to say, and which is here supposed and implied, as appears by what follows:

because they [were] elder than he ;
it may be added, from the original text, "in", or "as two days" ^F12 ; they had lived longer in the world than he, and therefore did not take upon him to speak till they had done; he, as became a young man, was swift to hear, and slow to speak; that they were old men, appears from what Eliphaz says, (Job 15:10) .

FOOTNOTES:

• F12: (Mymyl) "diebus", Beza, Montanus, Mercerus; "quod ad dies", Schultens.

When Elihu saw that [there was] no answer in the mouth of
[these] three men
That could be called an answer; nay, when he perceived they were quite nonplussed and silenced, though men of years and experience, and reputed wise and knowing:

then his wrath was kindled ;
his spirit was stirred up; his heart was hot within him; he burned with anger against those men; he was all on fire, as it were, and wanted to vent his resentment.