What is the context?
Elihu invites wise listeners to test words and choose what is right. He then summarizes Job’s claim to righteousness and denial of justice and accuses him of speaking like the wicked.
He attributes to Job the conclusion that delighting in God brings no profit. The charge extends beyond simply reporting that righteous people can suffer.
This distinction matters because Job has explicitly rejected the wicked people’s counsel. Elihu’s argument must be assessed for whether the conclusion really follows from the observation he challenges.
How is this passage commonly understood?
Wesley says the statement about devotion’s lack of profit is not Job’s express wording but an inference Elihu makes from his account of unequal suffering. That helps distinguish the speech’s allegation from a new admission by Job that he sees no reason to serve God.
What is our position?
We don't have a position on this passage yet. When our study reaches a conclusion the text supports, it will appear here.
Where can I study this further?
No deeper study linked yet.