Thomas Aquinas Commentary Job 14:18-22

"But the mountain falling cometh to nought; And the rock is removed out of its place; The waters wear the stones; The overflowings thereof wash away the dust of the earth: So thou destroyest the hope of man. Thou prevailest for ever against him, and he passeth; Thou changest his countenance, and sendest him away. His sons come to honor, and he knoweth it not; And they are brought low, but he perceiveth it not of them. But his flesh upon him hath pain, And his soul within him mourneth." — Job 14:18-22 (ASV)

After Job has presented his idea about the future resurrection, he now strengthens it with plausible arguments. The first argument comes from a comparison between humans and lesser creatures, which are completely destroyed with no hope of restoration. For all created things are subject to decay, and so even mountains, after a period of time, are dissolved by certain causes, although they seem very solid. He addresses this by saying, A falling mountain is leveled. Rocks are also shattered by violence or by some natural cause, even though they seem very strong. He continues, and the rock is displaced. Even stones are worn away by water, although they seem very hard. He expresses this, saying, water wears away stones. The earth, too, is gradually changed in its state, although it seems very stable, and so he says, The earth is gradually consumed by flood.

But it would be inappropriate to apply the same reasoning to the decay of man and the decay of these other things. So he concludes, as if leading the argument to an absurd conclusion: "Will you then destroy man in the same way?" He seems to be saying that it is not right for humans to experience decay like other physical creatures. For all the other creatures mentioned are completely destroyed and are therefore not restored individually. However, although a person's body may decay, the soul remains incorruptible, transcending the entire category of physical things. Therefore, the hope of restoration remains.

He then draws the same conclusion using arguments based on human characteristics. Man excels all lesser creatures in two ways. One of these is the power to act, for through free will, he is truly the master of his own actions—a quality unique among all physical creatures. Because of this, man is more powerful than any other physical creature and uses the others for his own purposes. The second way he excels them is in intellectual knowledge. He has a mind, and this is indicated in his body—especially in the face, which is very different from that of other animals.

As a result of these two qualities, it is clear that man is not destroyed like other things, which cease to exist forever. Regarding the first quality, he says, Have you strengthened him a little to allow him to disappear forever? He means: It is not fitting for You to strengthen man so much for only a short time, only for him to cease to exist forever afterward. For it seems foolish for someone to make a very strong tool, use it for only a short time, and then throw it away for good. The power of every physical creature is limited to finite effects, while the power of the free will is directed toward infinite actions. This in itself testifies to the soul's power to endure infinitely.

Regarding the second quality, he says, will you change his face and let him go to waste? He means: It is not fitting that You should make his face so different from other animals, only to dismiss him from this life forever, never to return, just as they do. Intellectual knowledge is commonly symbolized by the "face" because it is unique to the rational creature, and it can only properly belong to an incorruptible substance, as the philosophers prove.

But someone could object that even if a person does not return to life after death, he does not pass away forever, because he lives on, in a sense, through his children. The words of Bildad seem to have addressed this theme when he said, This is the joy of its life, that others may be brought forth from the earth again (Job 8:19). But Job dismisses this idea, saying, Whether his sons are noble or base, he will not understand.

He means that a person grasps eternal good through the intellect and therefore also naturally desires it. However, the good that comes from the succession of one's children cannot satisfy this intellectual appetite if the person is completely consumed by death and ceases to exist forever. A person does not comprehend the good in the succession of his children, either while he lives or after he dies, if he completely ceases to exist through death. Therefore, a person's intellectual appetite is not directed toward the eternity of this kind of good, but toward the good or evil which he possesses in himself. And so he adds, yet his flesh will suffer pain while he lives, his soul will grieve over him. Here he distinguishes between two kinds of pain: one of the flesh, perceived by the senses, and the other of the soul, perceived by the intellect or imagination, which is properly called sorrow and is here termed grief.