NOTES for Job 32:1-22

Job waits for an answer from God. But instead of God, it is the young charismatic Elihu who answers him, having until now listened in silence to his elders' speeches. He had kept silent, however, only out of respect for the accepted etiquette concerning age. In fact, by his own account, Elihu had long wanted to answer. And he is utterly certain that he, at least, will find the words to convince Job. Elihu is a typical charismatic. He is convinced that neither the experience that comes with age nor even Tradition as such necessarily means anything. What matters is only a person's spiritual state.

If God's spirit speaks within a person, they will have something to say and will be able to answer any question and resolve any problem. The main thing is to show no partiality and say only what God reveals. Elihu is clearly not a prophet and does not describe himself as one, but he asserts the primacy of direct revelation experienced as inspiration, as a special kind of ecstasy in which a person, even without being a prophet, nevertheless does not speak on their own behalf. Such charismatics have existed in every age and in every religious community; the Synagogue of the Second Temple period was apparently no exception. One might say that Elihu represents the religious community's last chance to answer Job.

The irony of the situation is precisely that, in addressing Job, the charismatic Elihu speaks immediately before God: God will begin to speak as soon as Elihu falls silent. But charismatics like Elihu are by no means prophets. A true prophet always bears witness to God's will. He describes the situation as God sees it, insofar, of course, as a human being can understand it. Elihu, however, does not step beyond the religious boundaries within which Job's friends have remained. He does not try to see Job and his situation differently, in a new way.

On the contrary, Elihu wants to answer Job in a way that will sustain his religiosity, and at the same time his own and that of Job's friends. In Elihu's view, the friends have answered Job incorrectly. He, Elihu, wants to answer correctly. Correctly even from the friends' own point of view. The author of the book says explicitly that Elihu became angry with Job for the very thing his friends accused him of: that he, Job, justified himself more than God. What displeases Elihu is only that Job's friends failed to persuade their friend and ended up berating him for no reason. And now Elihu himself takes on the task of changing Job's mind.

In chapter 32 a new character enters the action, Elihu. The author tells us that until now he had remained silent out of respect for the age of the speakers and in the expectation that they would answer Job's outrageous speeches. Elihu, then, is a young man who thinks and acts with greater energy than the elders. Elihu is indignant with everyone: with Job because he dares to question God, and with his friends because they cannot win their argument with Job.

Elihu is simply bursting with the desire to display his opinion. As he begins his speech, he rejects the answers of Job's friends and says that he would have answered quite differently in their place. Perhaps he really does have something to say; perhaps the author of the book will put into his mouth a truly wise answer to the questions that have been raised? Alas, in the next four chapters Elihu will say almost the same things as Job's friends who so angered him. The only difference is that Elihu is energetic; given the opportunity, he would punish Job himself without waiting for God.

Elihu has not been mentioned even once until now. He appears quite unexpectedly, and we know nothing about him except his origin and the fact that he is young. Still less do we know whether he had known Job in earlier times and, if he had, what their relationship had been. In any case, Elihu did not try to accuse Job under the guise of sympathy, and his words were not a stab in the back from someone whose support was expected.

Elihu's anger is prompted by zeal for God, whom none of the participants in the long conversation managed to defend properly. Here again we encounter the evaluative judgment of the unnamed narrator, who notes that Job justified himself rather than God. Elihu is a human being like everyone else, and he is aware of his lesser experience compared with those present. His words, like those of the other participants in the conversation, cannot contain the whole truth in an absolute sense. Yet to draw nearer to it, every point of view must be taken into account, especially one that comes from an unexpected direction.