[George]

Originally Posted by Brother Tim

"Brandon, I do not agree that a switch was made in v.15. Nearly the entire chapter is a quote from Elihu. It is therefore all in first person. It starts in 32:6 and ends in 33:33, and then a new quote begins in 34:2. The narrator remains a third person.

As for Elihu being a type of Christ, I disagree. The reason for not being included in the condemnation at the end of the book is the same as for why he was not answered by Job. It is found in 32:3 and 32:6, his youth. His accusations against Job are just as wrong, but he does not have the experience of age to qualify his speech as worthy of response. "

Aloha Brother Tim,

Just a few comments on your Post #8 <> “King Job Bible”.

Brandon engaged in a slight bit of “speculation”:

“In chapter 32, verses 15-17, Elihu seems to switch to the first person as if he is narrating.”

To which you answered:

“Brandon, I do not agree that a switch was made in v.15. Nearly the entire chapter is a quote from Elihu. It is therefore all in first person. It starts in 32:6 and ends in 33:33, and then a new quote begins in 34:2. The narrator remains a third person.”

I personally lean towards Brandon’s “viewpoint”, but your viewpoint may be just as valid, and so in the scope of things, the issue of who wrote the Book of Job is “a wash”. However, someone had to have written the Book of Job (and who would have been better qualified than Elihu – who witnessed (both saw & heard) the entire episode?

The second part of your response should have been directed at “Tandi”, since it was Tandi that “speculated”:

“I wonder if Elihu is a type of Christ .....or perhaps even a pre-incarnate appearance (theophany). Any thoughts?”

To which you responded:

“As for Elihu being a type of Christ, I disagree.”

And I am in complete agreement with you that Elihu couldn’t have possibly been a “type of Christ” or a “theophany” – the “type” just doesn’t fit the “Majesty” and “Glory” of the Lord.

However I must take issue with some of the things you said in your last quote:

“The reason for not being included in the condemnation at the end of the book is the same as for why he was not answered by Job. It is found in 32:3 and 32:6, his youth. His accusations against Job are just as wrong, but he does not have the experience of age to qualify his speech as worthy of response.”

You said: “His accusations against Job are just as wrong,” Can you point out just exactly “where” Elihu was “wrong”? Could you be more specific please?

If you will recall we had a small disputation before about Job’s friends: Eliphaz. Bildad, & Zophar – see: http://av1611.com/forums/showpost.ph...40&postcount=1 http://av1611.com/forums/showpost.ph...98&postcount=7 in which I disagreed with your “assessment” of their statements. I reiterate what I said then: “Can you not see the distinction between being "factually correct" about issues and having "faulty judgment"?

The case of Elihu is entirely different than Eliphaz. Bildad, & Zophar. Since God never called Elihu down for “faulty judgment” (as he did Job’s “friends”); you are going to have to “prove” just exactly where Elihu was "WRONG" (specifically). The idea that God “excused” him or his supposed “faulty judgment” because of his “youth” won’t hold any water – at least not Scripturally. Since when does God “excuse” sin because a man (NOT a boy!) is young?

Job and his "friends" were at least in their 60’s (probably older) – what does that make Elihu? The fact that Elihu was younger (perhaps 30-50 - Certainly NOT in his TEENS!) wouldn’t “excuse” him if he had been wrong in his “judgment”. I can think of NO instance in the Bible that God “excused” a young man (NOT a child) of his sins because of his “youth” perhaps you can provide me with some examples?

It is far more likely that, had Elihu been “wrong” in his judgment, that God would have “lumped” him in with Eliphaz. Bildad, & Zophar (regardless of his age) and would have required of him the same “sacrifice” as He did Job’s “friends”:
Job 42:7 And it was so, that after the LORD had spoken these words unto Job, the LORD said to Eliphaz the Temanite, My wrath is kindled against thee, and against thy two friends: for ye have not spoken of me the thing that is right, as my servant Job hath.
8 Therefore take unto you now seven bullocks and seven rams, and go to my servant Job, and offer up for yourselves a burnt offering; and my servant Job shall pray for you: for him will I accept: lest I deal with you after your folly, in that ye have not spoken of me the thing which is right, like my servant Job.

In my former Posts <> AV1611 Bible Forums <> Doctrine <> “Are the words of Job, Eliphaz, Bildad, Zophar, & Elihu "suspect" or "Truth"?” <> Thread #1 & Post #7: http://av1611.com/forums/showpost.ph...40&postcount=1 http://av1611.com/forums/showpost.ph...98&postcount=7 I listed 18 verses spoken by Eliphaz; 8 verses by Bildad; and 6 verses by Zophar - all of which were in regard to God, God’s Character, the Creation, the Flood, etc. (all of which were TRUE); I then listed another 48 verses spoken by Elihu (all of which were TRUE); (I could have listed another 76 verses spoken by Job - all of which were TRUE) trying to demonstrate to you that although Job’s three “friends” were “wrong” in their “judgment” about Job, they were “factually correct” about everything else that they spoke about.

God’s wrath was “kindled against” Eliphaz. Bildad, & Zophar because of “faulty judgment” (on their part) – had Elihu’s judgment been “wrong” also, God would have been just as angry with him as He was with Job’s three “friends” (regardless of his age), the fact that God did not call Elihu down indicates that his judgment was NOT “faulty” or “wrong”.

Your statement: “His accusations against Job are just as wrong, but he does not have the experience of age to qualify his speech as worthy of response.” Is pure “speculation” on your part – unless you can PROVE (from the Holy Scriptures) otherwise.