Job 32:5

When Elihu saw that [there was] no answer in the mouth of [these] three men,.... That could be called an answer; nay, when he perceived they were quite nonplussed and silenced, though men of years

So these three men ceased to answer Job, because he was righteous in his own eyes. Prose (poetry begins with "I am young," Job 32:6). Verse 1. Because ... - and because they could not proves to him that he was unrighteous.

Job 32:5 When Elihu saw that [there was] no answer in the mouth of [these] three men, then his wrath was kindled.Ver. 5. When Elihu saw that there was no answer] And therefore Job looked upon himself as one that had won the day. St Austin professeth this was it that heartened him, and made him to triumph in his former Manichecism, that he met with feeble opponents, and such as his nimble wit was easily able to overturn. And when Carolostadius opposed Luther’ s consubstantiation but weakly and insufficiently, Zuinglius said he was sorry that so good a cause, non satis humerorum haberet, lacked shoulders. then his wrath was kindled] viz. From their coldness, like as Nehemiah 3:20. Baruch repaired earnestly ( se accendit, he burst out into heat, angry with his own and others’ sloth); so Elihu here, when he saw that Job’ s eloquence triumphed over their wisdom, and that their silence was a loud acknowledgment of their defeat, he grew more angry than before; and, transported with zeal, be saith to them very briskly,

2–5. Introduction of Elihu, a new speaker, who appears to have been a listener during the progress of the former debate. The descent of Elihu is given with fuller details than in the case of the other speakers. The name Elihu, meaning probably my God is he, occurs elsewhere, 1 Samuel 1:1; 1 Chronicles 12:20. He is named the Buzite. Buz was brother of Uz, Genesis 22:21, and son of Nahor. In Jeremiah 25:23 Buz is mentioned along with Tema (cf. Job 6:19), and reckoned among the Arab tribes. The name Ram, therefore, which does not occur elsewhere, is scarcely to be taken as a contraction for Aram or Syria (though comp. 2 Chronicles 22:5, where Ramites = Aramites). justified himself rather than God] The meaning appears to be, justified himself as against God, in his plea with God and at the expense of God’s justice. The sense is given in ch. Job 40:8, where the Lord says to Job, “Wilt thou condemn me that thou mayest be righteous”? There are two points to be attended to in these passages when the question of right is raised, the one a formal point and the other a material one. God had afflicted Job and thus, in Job’s view and the view of his time, passed a verdict of wickedness on him. Against this verdict Job reclaims, God does him wrong in this. This is the formal question of right between Job and God. But this naturally goes back into the material question of Job’s past life. Elihu, defending the righteousness of God, keeps before him chiefly the formal question. He touches little upon Job’s life and history, differing in this entirely from the three friends. He makes a general, abstract question out of Job’s complaints against God, which he argues on general lines with almost no reference to Job’s particular case. Job’s complaints do little more than suggest to him the question, Can God be justly complained of?