“The three men” (“his three friends” [LXX]), Eliphaz, Bildad, and Zophar, stopped answering Job or, according to the Septuagint, discontinued “contradicting” him. This was because “he [was] righteous in his own eyes” (“righteous before them” [LXX]). Job had continued to insist that he had lived an upright life, not one that merited the kind of suffering to which he thought God had submitted him. They, however, had claimed that his calamities must have come upon him on account of his godless conduct. (32:1)

Elihu (Elious [LXX]), a young man who had listened to Job’s words and the replies of Eliphaz, Bildad, and Zophar, is identified as the “son of Barachel [Barachiel (LXX])] the Buzite of the family of Ram.” If the designation “Buzite” (Bouzite [LXX]) applies to a descendant of Buz, the son of Abraham’s brother Nahor (Genesis 22:20, 21), this would mean that Elihu was a descendant of Abraham’s nephew. The Septuagint says that the family of Ram (concerning whom only the name is known) resided in Ausitis, the same region as did Job. (1:1) An epilogue in the Septuagint refers to the “land of Ausitis” as bordering Idumea and Arabia. (42:17b) Elihu became angry with Job “because he justified himself rather than God.” Repeatedly Job had spoken of God as the one who had afflicted him, whereas he personally had not lived contrary to his ways. (32:2)

Elihu’s anger was also directed against Job’s three associates. According to the Masoretic Text, this was because Eliphaz, Bildad, and Zophar “had not found an answer” (“counter response” [LXX]) to what Job had said but had “declared Job to be wicked” or in the wrong. In this case, the reference to “Job” is marked as a scribal correction for the reading “God.” The Septuagint, however, agrees with the reading of the Masoretic Text. It indicates that Eliphaz, Bildad, and Zophar represented Job as “impious.” (32:3)

Elihu had respectfully waited until Job had finished speaking (literally, “waited on Job with words”) and perceived that his three associates had nothing further to say. Whereas Elihu would have spoken earlier, he had held back from doing so because the men were “older in days” than he was. (32:4; see the Notes section regarding the Septuagint rendering.)

Seeing that there was “no answer in the mouth of the three men,” Elihu became inflamed with anger. He felt impelled to speak out when he perceived that Eliphaz, Bildad, and Zophar had been unable to provide an answer to Job’s words. (32:5; see the Notes section.)

When Elihu the son of Barachel the Buzite began to speak, he acknowledged his being “young in days [time (LXX)],” much younger than Eliphaz, Bildad, and Zophar to whom he respectfully referred as “aged.” Out of regard for them as elders, he held back and feared to express his “knowledge” or his view about Job’s situation. (32:6; see verse 1 for comments about Elihu.)

Elihu had concluded that “days [time (LXX)],” or those who had lived for considerable time, “should speak, and a multitude of years,” or those who had lived a long time, “should teach wisdom.” On the basis of experience gained over the course of many years, the aged should have been able to impart wise instruction. (32:7)

Elihu did recognize that age in itself did not make an individual wise. There is a “spirit” in man, the “mortal.” In the parallel expression, this spirit is called the “breath of the Almighty,” and Elihu identified it as giving mortals understanding or, according to the Septuagint, it “teaches,” imparting understanding or instruction. (32:8)

Recognizing the Almighty as the source of wisdom, Elihu indicated that the “great ones” or prominent men are not always wise nor do the aged understand “judgment,” sound reasoning, or what is right. The expression “great ones” is the rendering of the plural form of the Hebrew adjective rav, meaning “much,” “many,” “chief,” or “great.” If the meaning “many” is chosen, it could be understood to refer to those who had lived many years. In the Septuagint, the corresponding term is the plural form of polychrónios (“long-lived”), designating those of advanced age. (32:9)

Aware that wisdom was not the exclusive possession of the “great ones,” the “long-lived ones,” or the aged, Elihu decided to speak, saying, “Listen to me. I, even I, will declare my knowledge,” or what he had come to know. The Hebrew verb for “listen” is second person singular, and thus may be understood as directed to the men individually. (32:10)

Elihu had “waited for the words” of Eliphaz, Bildad, and Zophar, wanting to hear what they had to say in response to Job. He “gave ear” to their “understanding,” or listened to their reasoning about Job’s situation. The phrase about their “searching out declarations” could apply to their efforts to decide just what to say. The Septuagint rendering departs from the reading of the extant Hebrew text. It represents Elihu as requesting that Eliphaz, Bildad, and Zophar “give ear” or listen to his words. He would speak, and they would hear or listen. According to the marks of Origen in the third century CE, the phrase about “searching out” was added from the Greek version of Theodotion but differs from the wording of the extant Hebrew text. This phrase reads, “until you have tested words.” This could refer to Eliphaz, Bildad, and Zophar as making an examination of what Elihu would say. (32:11)

Elihu considered what the three men said to Job. He then concluded that none of them had corrected Job, truly answering his words. They were unable to establish that Job was in the wrong. (32:12; see the Notes section regarding the Septuagint rendering.)

After Elihu had pointed out the failure of Eliphaz, Bildad, and Zophar to answer Job satisfactorily, he admonished them not to say, “We have found wisdom. Let God defeat [nadáph] him.” The thought appears to be that Elihu did not want the three men to conclude that they had properly assessed Job’s situation and had provided wise reproof to him but that he is the one who had disregarded their helpful words. Therefore, for them to say, “Let God defeat him, not man” could be understood to mean that they expected God to vindicate the position they had taken when reproving Job. God would reveal Job to be in the wrong, whereas they had not been able to convince him of this. (32:13; see the Notes section.)

Job had defended himself against the contentions of Eliphaz, Bildad, and Zophar, directing his words against them. He, however, had not directed any words against Elihu, and Elihu determined not to answer Job with the “speeches” or the kind of comments the three men had made. His words would not follow their reasoning. (32:14; see the Notes section regarding the Septuagint rendering.)

Elihu described the state in which Eliphaz, Bildad, and Zophar had been left after Job made his last reply. They were “terrified” or “dismayed,” having been shocked to silence by Job’s words. “They answered no more, and words moved away from them,” for they were at a complete loss as to what to say in reply. (32:15; see the Notes section.)

Elihu waited, but Eliphaz, Bildad, and Zophar said nothing. They just stood there, having no more to say to Job. (32:16; see the Notes section.)

As no one spoke a word, Elihu felt free to express his answer to Job. He decided to state his “part” or to have his say and to disclose his “knowledge” or to make known his view of Job’s situation. The Septuagint rendering does not correspond to the wording of the extant Hebrew text but functions only as a brief introduction. “But replying, Elihu [Elious] said.” (32:17)

Whereas the others were silent, having no words to say, Elihu was “full of words.” The “spirit of [his] belly” or the agitation that Elihu sensed within himself “constrained” him,“pressed upon” him, or impelled him to speak. The Septuagint quotes Job as saying, “I will speak again, for I am full of words. For the spirit of [my] belly is killing me.” This rendering suggests that the pressure within him to make known his pent-up expressions proved to be more than he could stand. (32:18)

Having held back from speaking, Elihu felt as if his belly was like a wineskin with the wine inside fermenting but having no vent. The Septuagint refers to his belly as being like a bound-up wineskin of fermenting sweet new wine. He felt as if his belly was like new skin bottles or wineskins ready to burst on account of the strain the fermentation process exerted. The Septuagint rendering has Elihu likening his belly to “burst bellows” of a metal worker. (32:19)

In order for him to have relief from the pressure he felt within him, Elihu had to speak. He had to open his lips to utter words and answer Job. (32:20; see the Notes section.)

Elihu indicated that he would be impartial in his expressions. This is apparent from the words that he would not “lift up the face of a man,” showing favoritism or according the individual undue honor. The Septuagint indicates that he would “by no means” feel shame before a man, assuming the position of an inferior before him. Elihu would not bestow a title on a man or on an earthling, according him an honor that amounted to flattery. The Septuagint rendering could be understood as either meaning that Elihu would “by no means” have undue regard for a mortal or be ashamed before him. (32:21; see the Notes section.)

Elihu stated that he did not “know” how to give a title or flatteringly to elevate another human. The Septuagint says that he did not know how to “marvel at a face,” to show favoritism, or to accord undue honor. If he were to do so, then the “moths” should consume him. The extant Hebrew text, however, refers to God as acting against him if he were to bestow flattering titles. Elihu is quoted as saying, “Quickly my Maker would carry me away” or put an end to me. (32:22)

Notes

In verse 4, only the initial phrase is part of the Septuagint text. “But Elious [Elihu] waited to give an answer to Job.” According to the marks of Origen, the Greek text that follows was added from the version of Theodotion (“because they were older in days than he”).

Origen’s marks identify the wording of verse 5 as having been added from the Greek version of Theodotion. The wording corresponds to that of the extant Hebrew text.

Origen marked the wording of verse 12 as having been added from the Greek version of Theodotion. In connection with the previous verse, the thought of the added text is that Elihu would speak “until” he could understand Eliphaz, Bildad, and Zophar. The remainder of the verse from the version of Theodotion basically conveys the same meaning as does the extant Hebrew text.

The form of the Hebrew word nadáph in verse 13 basically means “scatter.” In this context, however, “defeat” is an appropriate rendering. Renderings found in modern translations include “vanquish” (NAB, NRSV), “rebut” (REB), and “refute” (NIV). A number of Hebrew manuscripts do not contain a form of nadáph but have a form of hadáph (“push away” or “drive away”) or radáph (“pursue”). In the Septuagint, the participle is a form of the verb prostíthemi, which often denotes “to add” or “to increase.” The rendering of the Septuagint could be understood to indicate that, because Eliphaz, Bildad, and Zophar had added themselves or joined themselves to the Lord (as his defenders), they had found wisdom.

Verse 14 in the Septuagint may be rendered, “But you permitted a man to speak such words.” This could mean that Eliphaz, Bildad, and Zophar had allowed Job to utter words that were left unanswered, providing him with the opportunity to express the thoughts that he did.

According to the marks of Origen in the third century CE, the wording of verse 15 was added from the Greek version of Theodotion. It is much like the Hebrew text, with a somewhat different thought expressed in the concluding phrase. This concluding phrase could be understood to mean that Eliphaz, Bildad, and Zophar “of themselves made words old” or made an end to words, ceasing to speak.

The marks of Origen identify the wording of verse 16 of the Greek text to have been added from the version of Theodotion. This Greek rendering is basically the same as the extant Hebrew text.

In verse 20, the thought the Septuagint conveys is basically the same as that of the extant Hebrew text.

The expression “by no means” preserves the emphatic sense of the two Greek words for “not” that appear twice in verse 21.