Thomas Aquinas Commentary Job 34

After accusing Job of wanting to dispute with God, Elihu begins to dispute two points he had already mentioned (Job 33:9–12; Job 35:1). First, he argues against his own interpretation of Job's words—namely, that Job had said divine judgment was unjust. Since this subject is exceedingly difficult and sublime, he is not content to address his words only to Job, especially since he thought Job was mistaken. Instead, he invokes wise men to judge the matter.

He addresses those who attain wisdom by themselves, saying, Hear my words, wise men. He then addresses those who are instructed in wisdom by others, saying, and you learned men... hear me. He explains why he invites others to listen, saying, for the ear proves the argument, as if to say: "I invite you to listen so that after you have heard my words, you may judge them." He uses a comparison, saying, and the palate judges the taste of food, as if to say: "Just as taste judges food, so hearing judges words." He shows what this judgment pertains to, saying, Let us choose what is right for us, as if to say: "Let us judge by common consensus what is true," and among ourselves let us determine what is better—that is, decide between what Job has said and what I am about to say against him.

Therefore, he proposes Job's argument, saying, since you have said, Job: I am a just man. Job had said this already: I will not desert my justification which I have begun to have (Job 27:6). Furthermore, Job had clearly shown his justice in many ways in chapter thirty-one. Elihu continues, and God is overturning my cause. Elihu understands this to mean the same as what Job had said in chapter twenty-seven, Long live God who has rejected my cause (Job 27:2), and it seems to relate to what he had said in chapter nineteen, God did not afflict me with right judgment (Job 19:6). Elihu interprets these words in the worst sense.

For Job had said his cause was rejected not because he thought God was punishing a fault, but because God was acting according to providential justice for the purpose of proving his righteousness. Thus, he had said, He will prove me like gold which passes through fire (Job 28:10). Someone who refrains from judgment does not take away right judgment; only one who pronounces judgment unjustly does so. Therefore, Elihu interpreted what Job said, God took away my judgment (Job 27:2), as if Job were saying, "God has ruined my cause by judging me unjustly." Thus, Elihu adds the charge, In judging me there is a lie—a falsity of judgment that Job had never maintained. But Elihu believed Job's intention in those words was to say that he had been punished unjustly.

Elihu formed this opinion because he could not see how someone could be afflicted without sin unless it were done unjustly. Since Job had said that he was without sin, Elihu thought Job believed he was struck by God in violation of justice. So he says, and my arrow is violent without sin, as if Job were saying: "Since I am without sin, the arrow with which God wounded me—the adversity He sent—was violent and unjust." This seems to allude to Job's earlier words, The arrows of the Lord are in me (Job 6:4).

After attributing this perversity to Job, he begins to reprimand him, saying, What man is like Job? as if to say: "There is no one as perverse as he seems to be." For it seemed to be the greatest perversity for someone to laugh at God by disparaging His judgments, and so he says, who drinks derision... like water—that is, the derision and criticism of divine judgments. This is drunk easily and for refreshment, as if charging him with the crime of finding relief from his suffering in what bursts forth as an affront to God, and doing so without his conscience rebuking him.

It is characteristic of those who want to persevere in their sins to condemn divine judgments, and so he says, who walks—that is, he consents—with those who do evil, who despise divine judgments. Moreover, men who act against religious piety not only despise divine judgments but also deny them or assert that they are unjust. He believed that Job was one of them, and so he says, and he walks with evil men, who cast aside religious piety. He shows why he asserts that Job consents with them, saying, For he said: A man will not please God even if he has run with him, that is, even if he has followed Him in the way of justice. Job did not say this, but Elihu twists Job's words in a way they were never intended to make this charge against him. For Job had said, My feet followed his steps (Job 23:11), and later, You have changed into someone cruel in my opinion and you persecute me with a heavy hand (Job 30:21). From these words, Elihu concluded that Job thought he was displeasing to God even though he had followed Him, but Job was referring to external persecution, not internal reprobation.

Since Elihu misused Job's words and was eager to attribute to him thoughts he neither had nor expressed, it is clear that the entire subsequent discussion was not actually directed against Job. Yet, because Elihu thought Job was so perverse as to consider God's judgment unjust, he scorned him as unworthy of a direct debate on the subject. Instead, he calls on other wise men to decide the question, saying, Therefore, prudent men—that is, you who understand—hear me. For just as the heart is the source of bodily life, so the intellect is the source of all intellectual life, and so the word "heart" was used earlier to mean the intellect, as in the verse, I have a heart just like yours (Job 12:3).

In his argument, Elihu first proposes what he intends to prove: that there cannot be injustice in divine judgment. For God Himself is the one to whom pious worship is due, and through His omnipotence He governs all things, establishing for humanity the laws of justice. Therefore, it would be against His divinity if He were to favor impiety, and so he says, Let impiety be far from God. It would also be against the rule of His omnipotence if He were to stoop to injustice, and so he says, and (let) evil (be far) from the Almighty. After rejecting divine injustice, he shows the nature of divine justice, saying, For he will render the work of a man to him, because He bestows good and evil on a person according to his deeds. Since some who do good things do them better than others, and some who do evil deeds sin more than others, he then adds, and he will render to each one according to his ways—to those who are better, better things; to those who are worse, worse things.

He proves there is no injustice in God, first, from the fact that if God were unjust, one would not find justice anywhere, since the universal judgment of all people belongs to Him. And so he says, What other has he constituted on the earth? as if to say: "Is it believable that someone was appointed by God to judge the whole earth justly if God Himself is evil?" Thus, he says that one should not believe there is someone else to judge the earth, because the same one is both its maker and its governor.

So, just as He did not commit the making of the world to anyone else, neither did He give its governance to anyone else, which he expresses by saying, Or whom did he place over the world which he has fashioned?—that is, as governor of the whole world. He implies the answer is "no one," because just as He has fashioned the world by Himself, so also He governs and judges it by Himself. It is true that He has executors of His government, like ministers, but He Himself is the one who orders all things. The governance of the whole world cannot possibly be unjust in any way.

Second, he shows from experience that there is no violence or evil in God. For so great is His power, by which He preserves things in being, that if He wished to use violence against His own justice, He could immediately annihilate all humanity. So he says, If he (God) should turn to him (to destroy man) his heart (his will) his spirit (his soul) and breath (the life of the body supported by the soul) he will draw to himself, separating it from the body by His power. This agrees with the last chapter of Ecclesiastes: And the Spirit will return to God who gave it (Ecclesiastes 12:7).

When the spirit that was divinely given to man is taken away, the result is that bodily life fails, and so he says, All flesh will be destroyed together, for the human species will cease and will be broken down into its component parts. So he then says, and man will return to ashes, as Psalm 103 says, You take back their spirit and they will fail and will return to dust (Psalms 103:29). He calls the dust into which flesh dissolves "ashes," either because the bodies of the dead were reduced to ashes by fire among the ancients, or because the elements into which a dead body dissolves are a kind of residue from the natural heat of the human body. Since it is so easy for God, if He wills, to reduce the entire human race to ashes, it is apparent from the very preservation of humanity that He does not use unjust violence against them.

Since Elihu considered these arguments sufficient, he invites Job to consider them, saying, If then you have an intellect—to understand the power of my arguments—hear what is said—with the outer ear—and—with inner attention—perceive the voice of my eloquence, to recognize the justice of divine judgment. He urges him to act for his own good, saying, Can one who does not love judgment be healed? as if to say: "You who need healing, crushed as you are by many illnesses, cannot be healed unless you love divine judgment." He rejects what he thought was Job's opinion—that divine judgment is unjust—by using many clear examples of divine justice, and so he says, How can you condemn the one who is just... to such a degree that you would call Him a subverter of justice?

He commends divine justice by establishing that God does not show partiality to the powerful but accuses and punishes them for their sins. He presents this in four points:

1. First, regarding the preeminent human power of royalty, he says, Who (God) says to the king: Apostate! because He is not afraid to accuse a king of apostasy from the oath in which he promises to preserve justice.
2. Second, he considers the generals of armies, about whom he says, who calls army leaders wicked, as if to say: He is not afraid to accuse them of cruelty.
3. Third, he considers the rulers of cities when he says, who does not discriminate in favor of the princes, so that He does not fail to accuse and judge them for their sins.
4. Fourth, he speaks about tyrants who lack legitimate authority but have usurped power, saying, he did not know (approve) the tyrant (by deferring to him) when he (the tyrant) disputed against the poor man, as if to say: He does not favor the strong against the weak, which expresses His justice.

He then explains why God does not show deference to them: for they are all the work of his hands, both great and small. Therefore, He does not despise the humble but loves them as His own works, nor does He fear the strong, since they are subject to His power.

To answer the possible objection that God only accuses the powerful but does not punish them, Elihu continues by describing their twofold punishment.

1. First, death overcomes them unexpectedly, and so he says, They will die suddenly, as Isaiah says, Suddenly, when it is not expected, his grief will come (Isaiah 30:13). For if death overcame them in the usual, expected way, it would not be attributed to divine judgment but to secondary causes.
2. Second, he describes the punishment of rebellion by their subjects, through which they lose power. So he says, and in the middle of the night the people will be moved aside, for the peoples subject to princes and kings suddenly turn in a hidden plot to revolt against their leaders. And so he says, and they will pass away, changing their rulers, and they will take away... the violent man—that is, he who inflicted violence on his subjects by despising justice—without the aid of armed men. For when a prince is deposed by foreigners, he must have an armed force against him, but when his own subjects, in whom his whole power consisted, suddenly desert him, he seems to be carried off without an armed force.

Although this could also refer to the punishment of the peoples, the first interpretation is better because he is currently speaking about the justice God exercises over the great; he will later speak about the justice God exercises toward the peoples (Job 34:24). He shows that such punishments are caused by divine judgment, saying, For his eye—that is, the foresight of divine providence—is on the ways of men, on their works. He then expresses the idea that God knows every particular detail of human actions, saying, and all their steps... he considers—not just in general but individually.

Someone might believe that since God is light and the wicked are in darkness, they are hidden from God, but Elihu rules this out, saying, There is no darkness—of ignorance—nor shadow of death—which refers to the darkness of sin that leads to death—where those who do evil can hide. This is not to say, "Just as they did not want to know God, so God does not want to know them." That is said as a rebuke for their ignorance. Since Elihu had said that princes die suddenly and are dispossessed for their sins (Job 34:20)—which seems to be an irreversible punishment—he then shows the reason for this: when God judges a person for his sins and finally condemns him, that person is not given the ability to further contest the judgment with God. He expresses this by saying, No more... is there the ability in man that he should come to God in judgment, as if God should retract His judgment on that person's account. Elihu seems to say this especially against Job, who, after being condemned to suffer, had said earlier, I will come to his throne and I will place my case before him (Job 23:3).

There are two primary reasons why people deviate from justice. The first is that they show deference to important persons, and the second is that they yield to the majority against what is just. Elihu had already shown the perfection of divine justice (Job 34:18–23) in that God does not show deference to the powerful. Consequently, he now shows that God also does not yield to the majority, who are sinners.

Thus, he says God will destroy many sinners by killing them or punishing them in other ways. To prevent anyone from believing that divine justice applies only to a certain number of the multitude and goes no further, he then adds, without number. This is as if to say: Those whom God’s justice destroys for their sins cannot be counted within a fixed number.

To counter the idea that the human race might be utterly destroyed by this, he says, and who will make others take their places. This means that others take the place of those who have died, and others are raised up to replace those who lose their prosperity, thereby preserving a certain stability in the human race.

Ordinarily, when many people must be punished, human judges cannot examine each case with great care. So that this would not be believed about God, Elihu says, for he knows their works—that is, what each one deserves. Therefore, God gives to each according to his works. And so he says, for that reason he will bring about the night, meaning sudden and unexpected adversity, and they will be destroyed unexpectedly.

Elihu shows why they are destroyed “in the night”: although they could see what they ought to do, they despised it. It is therefore just that they are not given the ability to foresee the evils threatening them in order to prepare for them. He expresses this by saying that as evil men who reject the knowledge of piety, God has stricken them where they live, in the place of those who see. This refers to the state in which they are able to see—by both natural reason and sacred doctrine—what must be done and what must be avoided.

But they themselves rejected this light. As Elihu says, they are those who have departed from him almost on purpose, sinning against God out of a determined malice. He therefore suggests they have a willful ignorance when he adds, and they did not wish to understand all of his ways—that is, the commandments of God. It is clear, then, that they are not excused by ignorance but are all the more worthy of condemnation.

He shows the effect of this willful malice by adding that they cause the cry of the poor to come to him. This is to say: They show themselves to be so ignorant of God’s ways that they oppress the poor, whom God hears. Just as they do not recoil in horror from oppressing the poor, so they do not fear the anger of God. Thus, when the text says, and he hear the voice of the poor, it means they make light of the fact that God reveals His will to hear the poor.

Since Elihu had attributed the suffering of many to divine judgment, someone might think that the destruction of a great number and the prosperity of others was not the result of divine judgment, but of some powerful prince who governs or attacks them. To exclude this possibility, Elihu says, For if he grants peace, who will condemn him? This is as if to say: It is God who destroys many without number (Job 34:24). For if He willed to grant them temporal peace and prosperity, no one could condemn the multitude; and vice versa, if He intends to condemn it, no one can grant it peace. So he says, If he hides his face—by taking away the presence of His consolation—who will contemplate him? That is, who can find consolation in Him as if by seeing His beauty?

Besides suffering, there is another punishment for the multitude: affliction under the rule of tyrants. Elihu expresses this punishment by saying, And over people and all men, as if to say: God exercises His judgments through suffering or the oppression of tyrants not only over one nation, but over everyone. Regarding the oppression of tyrants, he then says God makes a hypocrite reign because of the sins of the people, who are afflicted under his regime. In this, Elihu seems to answer the question Job had proposed: Why do the wicked live? Why have they been comforted and raised up with riches? (Job 21:7). For he asserted that this was not because of their own merits, as Job had proved, but because of the demerits of others who are punished through the prosperity of the wicked.

Therefore, after showing that there can be no injustice in God and that His justice is especially manifested by the judgments He exercises on princes and the multitude, Elihu gives Job a chance to answer. He says, Since, then, I have spoken about God in matters concerning God’s honor, I also will not prohibit you from responding. He shows what kind of answer he expects, saying, If I have erred—as you attributed to your other friends when you said they were cultivators of false dogmas (Job 13:4)—you teach me the truth, so that I can be free from error. One can be mistaken in speech not only by erring against true doctrine, but also by making a particular judgment against the truth of justice. And so he adds, If I have spoken evil, I will not add anything further, showing he is ready for correction.

Since Elihu thought Job was deeply disturbed with him, he consequently shows that this disturbance is not justified. He continues, Does God seek it from you? This is as if to say: Even if I have spoken wrongly, you are not bound by God to answer for it, and so you should not be so disturbed by it, asking, because you were unhappy?—that is, through a disordered agitation of your soul.

Second, he shows why Job should not be disturbed: Job himself began the argument with his speech, Let the day perish... (Job 3:3). This was the beginning of the entire dispute, and so Elihu says, for you began to speak and not I. Third, he argues that Job should not be disturbed because he also has the ability to say what he likes. Thus, he says, If you know something better than what I have said, speak, to show my error or evil.

But lest Elihu seem to have said this because he doubted his own righteousness and the truth of his words, he proceeds to assert that Job lacks both wisdom and understanding, and for this reason, he judges him unworthy of debate. An opponent in a debate must have the sharpness of intellect required to find reasonable ways to prove his proposition. So Elihu says, Let intelligent men speak to me and make objections against me. The other role in a debate belongs to the one who answers, who must have the wisdom required to judge well what he has heard. And so he says, and let a wise man hear me, for I am an opponent ready to argue. Elihu had inferred a defect in both of these areas from Job’s own words, and so he says, Job has spoken stupidly—against wisdom, insofar as he considered that Job had said something against the righteousness of divine judgment—and his words do not show discipline, which is a characteristic of an ordered intellect. He seems to relate this to the fact that Job had asserted his own justice.

Since Job did not recognize these defects in himself, Elihu turns his words to God, requesting that Job be tested so that he might recognize his faults. He says, My Father—meaning, “O God, whom I regard as a father because of the reverence I have for You and whose justice I defend in all things”—Let Job be tried, let his defect be shown to him through scourges, even to the end, until death. He shows the justice of this petition, saying, Do you desist from testing the man of iniquity? This is as if to say: His evil merits that the scourges should never cease. He says with greater exaggeration that Job is one who in addition to all his sins—the past sins for which he has been scourged—adds blasphemy by saying he is just but God is unjust. For this, Elihu first desires present punishment for him, saying, let him be bound among us meanwhile with adversities. Second, he implies future punishments, saying, and then, after he has already suffered in this life, let him be brought to judgment—that is, to future retribution—and let him provoke God by his speeches, by which he blasphemes against Him.