Elihu's response to Job

I was contemplating Elihu's response to Job for the past few nights. Elihu seems to be the only one of the men that answer's Job that is not rebuked for his answer. The other three friends of Job are rebuked in the end for their responses, probably because they kept telling Job he must have sinned and that is the reason these things befell him. Elihu's answer is different though; he rebukes Job not for some mysterious sin he committed in the past that brought this judgment upon him, but instead he rebukes him for justifying himself instead of God. This is really where the heart of the matter always is though: who's going to be god, you or the Lord.

One of the attributes that Elihu extols though is justice and making judgments between good and evil. Consider Job 34:3-4:

3 For the ear tests words

As the palate tastes food.

4 Let us choose justice for ourselves;

Let us know among ourselves what is good

Notice how making judgments is compared to tasting food. It's something that has to be considered and thought upon--chewed upon a little if you will. We need to be meditating on the Word so that we can accurately identify what is good. Our ears need to be trained to test the words that are constantly brought to their attention--whether they are just or no, and whether they are good or not.

The modern world does not seem to follow anything close to this. Compare the commandment to the recent outcry against the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Peter Pace's comment about Homosexuality being "Immoral." If ever the left's agenda about redefining right and wrong was evident here it is. This was the most tame statement possible about homosexuality. In fact, the general even said he supports the U.S. policy of "don't ask, don't tell" which allows gays to serve in the military as long as they don't do so openly. He wasn't advocating rounding them up, removing them from the military, or otherwise using any kind of graphic "hate-speech." He simply said: "I do not believe the United States is well served by a policy that says it is OK to be immoral in any way," and "I believe homosexual acts between two individuals are immoral and that we should not condone immoral acts." The simplicity of these statements is astounding. That's probably why the press and activists groups hated it so much; someone in power actually making a clear, understandable statement without a whole bunch of exceptions? For goodness sake, it's 2007, haven't all such things been banned yet?

Now, I don't know General Pace's religious convictions, but he's making a decidedly Christian statement in this. God delights in calling evil, evil and good, good. Or as Elihu put it, "Let us know among ourselves what is good." The foolish and wicked delight in doing the opposite. They prefer to call evil, good and good, evil. Some gay advocacy groups are calling "for a full apology from Gen. Pace, 'not his lame statement of 'regret' -- and if he fails to do that, his prompt dismissal.'" (From here) This almost makes me laugh. For them the highest offense is calling their pet sin immoral; heads need to roll if someone actually does that. These individuals are so drunk upon modern relativism that they despise even a hint of truth. They realize deep down that if it is immoral, then they will have to give an account of themselves and their opposition to the truth to the divine judge. Perhaps if they yell loud enough, though, truth will cease to be truth.