Job 34:18

KJV

[Is it fit] to say to a king, [Thou art] wicked? [and] to princes, [Ye are] ungodly?

KJV (with Strong's)

Is it fit to say {H559} to a king {H4428}, Thou art wicked {H1100}? and to princes {H5081}, Ye are ungodly {H7563}?

Berean Standard Bible

who says to kings, ‘You are worthless!’ and to nobles, ‘You are wicked,’

American Standard Version

Himthat saith to a king, Thou art vile, Orto nobles, Ye arewicked;

Commentary

### SUMMARY
Job 34:18 presents a potent rhetorical question from Elihu, challenging the propriety of accusing an earthly king or prince of wickedness or ungodliness. This analogy serves as a foundational premise for Elihu's defense of God's absolute righteousness and sovereignty, subtly rebuking Job's persistent complaints and questioning of divine justice. By highlighting the unsuitability of such accusations against human rulers, Elihu underscores the far greater impropriety of a finite human presuming to judge the infinite and perfectly just Creator.

### CONTEXT
* **Literary Context:** Elihu enters the theological debate in the book of Job after Job and his three elder friends—Eliphaz, Bildad, and Zophar—have exhausted their arguments. Elihu positions himself as a younger, yet divinely inspired, voice who believes both Job and his friends have erred: Job in questioning God's righteousness, and the friends in failing to adequately defend Him. Chapter 34 specifically sees Elihu asserting God's absolute power, impeccable justice, and the impossibility of Him acting wickedly. This verse, Job 34:18, serves as a rhetorical opening, setting the stage for Elihu's sustained argument that if it is unthinkable to accuse an earthly king, it is utterly blasphemous to accuse the Almighty God. He builds a case for God's inherent justice, which is a central theme throughout his discourse, particularly in [Job 34](/job/34 "Job 34 - Elihu's Defense of God's Justice").

* **Historical & Cultural Context:** In the ancient Near East (ANE), kings and princes were often viewed with immense reverence, sometimes even seen as divine representatives or possessing a sacred aura. To openly accuse a ruler of wickedness or ungodliness was not merely disrespectful; it could be considered an act of treason or rebellion, punishable by death. Such accusations challenged the very legitimacy and stability of the social and political order. Elihu leverages this deeply ingrained cultural understanding of respect for earthly authority to draw a powerful parallel: if human rulers, despite their fallibility, commanded such deference, how much more should the perfectly righteous God be beyond reproach and accusation? This cultural norm provides the rhetorical force behind Elihu's question, making the implied answer universally understood by his audience.

* **Key Themes:** This verse contributes significantly to several overarching themes within the book of Job and Elihu's speeches. Firstly, it emphasizes **Respect for Authority**, both earthly and, by extension, divine. Elihu posits that proper societal order requires respect for those in power, a principle that applies even more profoundly to the ultimate authority of God. Secondly, the verse underpins the theme of **God's Unquestionable Justice and Sovereignty**. Elihu's central tenet is that God is inherently just and righteous in all His ways, incapable of wickedness or ungodliness, unlike fallible human rulers. This conviction is foundational to his entire argument, asserting God's perfect character as seen in passages like [Deuteronomy 32:4](/deuteronomy/32-4 "Deuteronomy 32:4 - God's Perfect Work"). Finally, it subtly introduces the theme of **Human Presumption and Humility**. By drawing this analogy, Elihu implicitly rebukes Job for what he perceives as Job's arrogant presumption in challenging God's divine actions and wisdom, questioning the fitness of a finite creature to judge its infinite Creator, a sentiment echoed later in [Job 40:2](/job/40-2 "Job 40:2 - Can He Who Argues with the Almighty Correct Him?").

### EXPOSITION AND ANALYSIS
#### Key Word Analysis
* **Wicked (Hebrew, _rasha'_):** This term (רָשָׁע) generally denotes someone who is guilty, unrighteous, or in the wrong, often in a legal, moral, or ethical sense. It describes a person who deviates from what is right or just, implying a state of culpability and moral failure. To call a king "wicked" would be to accuse him of injustice, corruption, or a fundamental misalignment with righteous governance, a severe indictment in any society.
* **Ungodly (Hebrew, _beliyya'al'_):** This is a particularly strong and pejorative term (בְּלִיַּעַל), often translated as "worthless," "wicked," "lawless," or "scoundrel." It implies utter depravity, moral worthlessness, and a rebellious disposition against what is good or right. In some contexts, it can even carry connotations of demonic influence or extreme villainy. To label a ruler as "belial" would be an extreme insult, suggesting they are utterly without value, principle, or moral compass, and entirely unfit to rule. Elihu's choice of this potent term underscores the profound impropriety of such an accusation, especially when directed toward God.

#### Verse Breakdown
* **"[Is it fit] to say to a king, [Thou art] wicked?":** This opening clause, presented as a rhetorical question, immediately establishes the premise. The bracketed words in the KJV, though supplied for clarity, accurately capture the implied sense. The Hebrew is more direct, "Is it good/proper to say to a king, 'Wicked'?" The question expects a resounding "No." It challenges the very notion of a subject, no matter how aggrieved, openly accusing their sovereign of fundamental moral failings. Such an act would be seen as an egregious breach of decorum, respect, and social order, implying a challenge to the king's authority and legitimacy.
* **"[and] to princes, [Ye are] ungodly?":** This second clause functions as a parallel to the first, reinforcing and expanding the rhetorical force. By including "princes," Elihu extends the prohibition against open accusation beyond the supreme monarch to all those in positions of authority. The use of "ungodly" (belial) intensifies the accusation, moving beyond mere "wickedness" to a state of utter moral depravity and worthlessness. The parallelism emphasizes the universal unacceptability of such direct and severe denunciations against any established ruler, thereby setting up the *a fortiori* argument for God.

#### Literary Devices
Job 34:18 is masterfully crafted using several powerful literary devices. The most prominent is the **Rhetorical Question**, which is not intended to elicit an answer but to make a forceful assertion. Elihu poses a question whose negative answer is so self-evident that it underscores the absurdity and impropriety of the implied action (accusing God). This rhetorical strategy immediately engages the listener and compels agreement. Furthermore, the verse employs a strong **Analogy** (or *a fortiori* argument), moving from the lesser to the greater. If it is unthinkable to accuse a human king, how much more unthinkable is it to accuse the perfectly just and sovereign God? This analogical reasoning forms the bedrock of Elihu's entire argument for God's righteousness. Finally, the verse exhibits clear **Parallelism**, specifically synonymous parallelism, where the second clause ("to princes, [Ye are] ungodly") reiterates and intensifies the thought of the first ("to a king, [Thou art] wicked"). This structural symmetry adds emphasis and rhythm, reinforcing the unacceptability of such accusations against any figure of authority, thereby magnifying the offense when directed at the divine.

### THEOLOGICAL AND THEMATIC CONNECTIONS
Elihu's rhetorical question in Job 34:18 serves as a theological cornerstone, asserting the absolute and unquestionable righteousness of God. It posits that God's character is beyond human scrutiny and accusation in the same way that an earthly king's authority, in that cultural context, was considered inviolable. This perspective underscores the vast chasm between finite human understanding and infinite divine wisdom, challenging the human tendency to impose our limited sense of justice upon the Almighty. While Job's laments were genuine expressions of pain, Elihu argues that they veered into an inappropriate questioning of God's fundamental goodness and justice. The verse thus reinforces the biblical theme of divine sovereignty, reminding us that God's ways are higher than our ways, and His judgments are always just, even when they appear inscrutable to us.

* [Deuteronomy 32:4](/deuteronomy/32-4 "Deuteronomy 32:4 - God's Perfect Work and Justice")
* [Isaiah 55:8-9](/isaiah/55-8 "Isaiah 55:8-9 - God's Thoughts and Ways are Higher")
* [Romans 9:20](/romans/9-20 "Romans 9:20 - Who Are You to Answer Back to God?")

### REFLECTION AND APPLICATION
Job 34:18 invites us to cultivate a posture of profound humility and reverence before God. While the book of Job ultimately validates Job's right to lament and question, Elihu's point here is crucial: there is a difference between honest lament born of pain and an accusatory posture that presumes to declare God "wicked" or "ungodly." Our finite minds cannot fully comprehend the infinite wisdom, justice, and purposes of God. Therefore, when we face suffering, injustice, or circumstances that defy our understanding, this verse calls us to trust in God's perfect character rather than to accuse Him. It reminds us that our primary response should be one of humble submission and faith, even when we do not have all the answers. This does not preclude wrestling with God in prayer, but it calls us to do so with an underlying conviction of His goodness and an acknowledgment of His ultimate sovereignty.

#### Questions for Reflection
* **How does our understanding of God's absolute sovereignty impact our prayers and complaints during times of suffering?**
* **In what subtle ways might we, like Job, be tempted to accuse God of injustice or ungodliness when circumstances do not align with our expectations?**
* **What is the difference between honest lament and an accusatory posture towards God, and how can we ensure our expressions of pain remain reverent?**

### FAQ
**Why does Elihu use an earthly king as an analogy for God?**

Answer: Elihu uses the analogy of an earthly king to make a powerful *a fortiori* argument, meaning "from the stronger." In ancient Near Eastern cultures, it was considered unthinkable and highly disrespectful—even treasonous—to openly accuse a king or prince of wickedness or ungodliness. By drawing this parallel, Elihu aims to highlight the far greater impropriety and blasphemy of accusing the perfectly righteous and sovereign God. The analogy grounds a profound theological truth in a relatable, culturally understood social norm, emphasizing that if humans demand such reverence, God, who is infinitely superior, deserves even more. His goal is to show the absurdity of a creature questioning its Creator's inherent justice, as further expounded in [Job 34:31-32](/job/34-31 "Job 34:31-32 - Elihu's Challenge to Job").

**Does this verse mean we can never question God or express our struggles to Him?**

Answer: No, this verse does not forbid honest questioning, lament, or the expression of struggles to God. The book of Job itself is a testament to the validity of crying out to God in pain and confusion, as Job does throughout his ordeal. Rather, Elihu's point in [Job 34:18](/job/34-18 "Job 34:18 - Elihu's Rhetorical Question on Accusing Authority") is against an *accusatory* posture—one that presumes to declare God inherently unjust, wicked, or ungodly. There is a crucial distinction between wrestling with God in prayer, expressing doubt or pain (which is permitted and encouraged, as seen in the Psalms), and making a definitive judgment that God is acting unrighteously. The verse calls for humility and reverence, even in our deepest anguish, acknowledging God's ultimate sovereignty and perfect character, even when His ways are mysterious to us.

**How does Elihu's perspective compare to Job's friends or God's later response?**

Answer: Elihu's perspective in [Job 34](/job/34 "Job 34 - Elihu's Defense of God's Justice") is distinct from both Job's initial friends and God's ultimate revelation. Unlike Eliphaz, Bildad, and Zophar, who rigidly adhered to a retribution theology (that Job must have sinned to suffer), Elihu introduces the idea of suffering as a means of correction and instruction, not solely punishment (e.g., [Job 33:14-30](/job/33-14 "Job 33:14-30 - Elihu on God's Discipline")). He is closer to the truth than the friends in that he acknowledges God's absolute justice without necessarily linking all suffering to specific sin. However, Elihu still falls short of God's direct revelation in [Job 38-41](/job/38 "Job 38 - God Answers Job from the Whirlwind"), which emphasizes God's incomprehensible wisdom and power, rather than just His justice, as the ultimate answer to Job's questions. While Elihu correctly defends God's character, he, like the friends, presumes to know the *reason* for Job's suffering, which God later corrects.

### CHRIST-CENTERED FULFILLMENT
Job 34:18, with its emphasis on the impropriety of accusing a king and, by extension, God, finds profound Christ-centered fulfillment. While Elihu argues that no one should dare to call God "wicked" or "ungodly," the irony of salvation history is that the perfectly righteous Son of God, Jesus Christ, *was* indeed called "wicked" and "ungodly" by human authorities and crowds. He, the King of kings and Lord of lords, was unjustly accused, condemned, and crucified as a criminal, though He "committed no sin, nor was any deceit found in His mouth" ([1 Peter 2:22](/1_peter/2-22 "1 Peter 2:22 - Christ's Sinlessness")). The very one who perfectly embodied God's justice and righteousness was treated as the epitome of ungodliness, bearing the sin of the world upon Himself ([John 1:29](/john/1-29 "John 1:29 - Jesus, the Lamb of God")). This ultimate act of divine humility—where God Himself, in Christ, endured the false accusations of humanity—demonstrates God's perfect justice not by avoiding accusation, but by absorbing it for our sake. Through Christ's sacrifice, we, who are truly wicked and ungodly, are reconciled to a perfectly just God, no longer needing to accuse Him, but able to approach His throne with confidence, not based on our merit, but on the righteousness of the King who was unjustly accused for us ([Hebrews 4:16](/hebrews/4-16 "Hebrews 4:16 - Approach the Throne of Grace")).

Note: Commentary is generated by AI with a directive for Biblical fidelity. Always rely on the Holy Spirit for discernment. The Scripture text and cross-references are from verified, non-AI sources.

Cross-References

Exodus 22:28

Thou shalt not revile the gods, nor curse the ruler of thy people.

Proverbs 17:26

¶ Also to punish the just [is] not good, [nor] to strike princes for equity.

Acts 23:5

Then said Paul, I wist not, brethren, that he was the high priest: for it is written, Thou shalt not speak evil of the ruler of thy people.

Romans 13:7

¶ Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute [is due]; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour.

Jude 1:8

¶ Likewise also these [filthy] dreamers defile the flesh, despise dominion, and speak evil of dignities.

Acts 23:3

Then said Paul unto him, God shall smite thee, [thou] whited wall: for sittest thou to judge me after the law, and commandest me to be smitten contrary to the law?

2 Peter 2:10

¶ But chiefly them that walk after the flesh in the lust of uncleanness, and despise government. Presumptuous [are they], selfwilled, they are not afraid to speak evil of dignities.