Job 36:6

So he says, "but he does not save the wicked," that is, he damns them. He shows the cause of this damnation saying, "and he grants right judgment to the poor," because he passes judgment on evil powerful men in favor of the poor who …

Job had said that the wicked live, become old, and are mighty in power, ch. xxi. "No," says Elihu: "he seldom suffers wicked men to become old. He preserves not their life so long as they expected, nor with that comfort and satisfaction which are indeed our life; and their preservation is but a reservation for the day of wrath," Rom. ii.

He preserveth not the life of the wicked,....

He preserveth not the life - He will not give life to the wicked; all such forfeit life by their transgressions. But giveth right - Justice will he give to the afflicted or humble, עניים aniyim.

He preserveth not the life of the wicked - Elihu here maintains substantially the same sentiment which the three friends of Job had done, that the dealings of God in this life are in accordance with character, and that strict justice is thus maintained. But giveth right to the poor - Margin, “or afflicted.” The Hebrew word often refers to the afflicted, to the humble, or the lowly; and the reference here is to the “lower classes” of society. The idea is, that God deals justly with them, and does not overlook them because they are so poor and feeble that they cannot contribute anything to him. In this sentiment Elihu was undoubtedly right, though, like the three friends of Job, he seems to have adopted the principle that the dealings of God here are according to the “characters” of people. He had some views in advance of theirs. He saw that affliction is designed for “discipline” Job 33; that God is willing to show mercy to the sufferer on repentance; that he is not dependent upon human beings, and that his dealings “cannot” be graduated by any reference to what he would receive or suffer from people; but still he clung to the idea that the dealings of God here are a proof of the character of the afflicted. What was mysterious about it he resolved into sovereignty, and showed that man “ought” to be submissive to God, and to “believe” that he was qualified to govern. He lacked the views which Christianity has furnished, that the inequalities that appear in the divine dealings here will be made clear in the retributions of another world.