The Highway Forums General Discussion Theology Discussion Forum Job

Would it be too far off base to posit that Elihu-- his words and even himself, is a preview of the New Covenant, in the Old?
I do NOT mean that he is a prefigure of Christ, only that he may be a kind of representation of the clash between the old and new wine?

Can you elaborate on where you (might) see this in the text?

Hmmmmm, I carefully read through the 6 chapters in Job in which Elihu gives his discourse (chapters 32-37). To be honest, I simply could not bring myself to see anything there that could be considered a "preview of the New Covenant". Along with CovenantInBlood, I would be interested to know where and/or upon what this idea is founded upon. Perhaps I'm missing something?

In His grace,

Nowhere specific, but rather by deduction. However, the thought occured to me when I read 33:23 ff. Elihu is a young man, but wise-- wiser than the older men. He is a newcomer to the scene who does not refute the OT but gives a new perspective on it. He rebukes the older men for their misunderstanding of Job, his situation and God. Then in the verses above, he gives us a proto-Gospel. Words like mediator, v 23, ransom, v 24, and restoration, v. 26, and the fact that someone else is redeeming the offender,v. 28, 29. In following chapters and verses I see some elaboration on this.

Do I read too much into it?

That's all interesting regarding the words, e.g., ransom, restoration, etc., yet one must first understand them in their immediate context. I see them as describing one's life here on earth, i.e., this is a rebuke to those unwise counselors who brought false charges against Job and his tender soul was brought even lower rather than lifting it up in contrast to one who would do rightly in such a situation.

Now, what about this idea about the "new covenant"? Was there not a mediator in those days to whom one could look for help and deliverance? Was there not a ransom paid for one's sins? Was not restoration given to those who looked to God in faith? I would say unreservedly, "Yes!", albeit these things were to be found in types and shadows. In these things there is no difference between the administration of the old and new covenants. The Redeemer saved all who believed God in the old administration no less and in the same way, i.e., by faith as those who came after Christ.

What I can see, however, are these wonderful truths of redemption as they are found in Christ in their fullness. But I would not want to go so far as to say that these passages are a "preview of the new covenant"? To do so he (Elihu) would then have to be deemed a precursor of Christ... I can't do that. My reluctance is in regard to the "spiritualizing" of texts without solid warrant to do so. That warrant must come the Scriptures themselves. For example, can we find Elihu mentioned in the NT or even eluded to? Is Christ from the line of Elihu? Ya know what I'm drivin' at here, Vern?

Lastly, I think it is prudent to not fall into what I like to call a "psycho-statistical-mean" hermeneutic. In short, this is the error of restricting the meaning of words to a single definition or a very narrow definition which disregards the broader meaning of words as they are used contextually. Let me give you just one example: IIPet 2:1 and the word "bought". Does the word "bought" in this verse mean "save" in the salvific sense? Some think so... but wrongly. Thus, when we read in this Job passage words such as "deliver", "ransom", etc. we must be careful not to impose a meaning upon them which is inappropriate.

In His grace,

I think I'll have to go with Pilgrim on this one.

Personally, I don't see any "clash" between old & new with Elihu in Job. Some of what he says undoubtedly reflects the substance of both, but the Mosaic (old) covenant is not in view from what I can see.