Or why was I not as a hidden stillborn child, as infants who never see the light?
Job's lament has climbed from cursing the day of his birth to something more extreme. Here he wishes he had never lived at all — which raises two questions: how far had his faith slipped, and does his picture of the unborn dead tell us the truth about death?
Where the verse sits
The lament has a shape, and this line belongs to its third movement. One writer maps it out in five steps:
Samuel RidoutTaking up now the lament, we may divide it into five parts. First: Job curses the day of his birth (vv. 1-9). Second: he wishes he had died in infancy (vv. 10-12). Third: death described as a rest (vv. 13-19). Fourth: he longs for death (vv. 20-23). Fifth: he is oppressed by terror (vv. 24-26).
So the stillborn child is not an isolated horror. It is one item in a list of people Job envies, and what they share is that nothing can reach them any more.
Samuel RidoutDeath is here described as a rest (vv. 13-19) in which all have an equal share — the old and the young, even the unborn baby. The great and the small alike are at rest. Kings whose palaces have crumbled into ruins, and princes who left behind all their vast wealth, are here at last in deep and equal repose. The wicked cannot trouble them. A master cannot demand service from his slave. Prisoners and their captors find no difference in the presence of death, that great leveller of mankind.
The force of the question
Job is not just sad. He is reasoning: if this was always going to be my life, why was I kept alive at all?
William KellyHe asks, in the anguish of his soul, why, if this was to be his lot while living, did he not die from the womb? Why was he cared for so tenderly, only to meet such agony at last?… Or why was he not like a stillborn baby that never saw light, and so be where the wicked trouble no more, and the weary are at rest?
Not a curse on God — but not clear of Him either
The narrative has already told us Job did not charge God wrongly. Yet the wish in this verse points somewhere.
Leslie M. GrantJob did not even now charge God foolishly, but he did curse the day of his birth. This was not directly blaming God. But however little he realised it, he was indirectly blaming God, for it was God who gave him life… Later Job would thank God for his birth, and that thankfulness will last for eternity. When trouble comes like the trouble God called Job to bear, we do not tend to think soberly and calmly. And wishful thinking will never do anything.
Sleep, extinction, or rest?
Commentators differ sharply here. One reads it as a real collapse in Job's grasp of the future:
Samuel RidoutJob goes further and puts everyone into an unconscious sleep, "as infants who never see the light." Is there no difference between the condition of the wicked and of the righteous after death?… By blurring the future like this, Job shows how far his soul had drifted from the truth of God. In plain language he is longing for annihilation. Materialists and believers in conditional immortality have turned to these and similar sayings to support their unscriptural views.
Another writer replies to a man who built such an argument on this verse:
Frederick William Grant"Infants who never see the light," despite Mr. R.'s protest, are beings that have begun to live. His argument from Job's reference to them has no foundation. Besides, that is not the point. Job speaks of non-existence as to the present scene, not absolute non-existence.
The same writer adds a simple test: rest needs someone to rest.
Frederick William GrantTo weariness like his, the unseen world was indeed a place of "rest." But "rest" is not extinction. And if it were a "land of darkness" too, darkness and non-existence are flatly contradictory thoughts.
The One who did not say it
Job could not see why he had been brought into a world holding such pain. Another Sufferer faced the same question and answered it.
William KellyThe great point is his mourning over his terrible situation: that he was ever allowed to come into the world to bear such awful suffering. Where do you find that in Christ? "For this purpose I was sent." The Lord accepts it. He felt it, and felt it deeply. He was troubled in spirit. He felt it, but He also accepted it. For this purpose He had come. But not so Job.
Job's own answer, later
And Job himself would later overturn his own words:
Samuel RidoutJob's own words are a refutation of his unbelief here: "I know that my Redeemer lives" (Job 19:25)… And what of the full Christian statements in the letters? Do words like "away from the body and at home with the Lord," or "my desire is to depart and be with Christ, for that is far better," echo Job's unbelieving laments?
Summary
- Darkness wanted. Job wishes he had never lived. If this is life, better the hidden child who never saw daylight.
- Darkness levelled. He envies the dead because nothing reaches them. Kings, princes, slaves, prisoners and unborn infants lie in the same quiet.
- Darkness misread. Commentators differ. One says Job has drifted into longing for annihilation. Another says he means non-existence as to this world only, since extinction cannot rest.
- Darkness accepted. Job asked why he was ever brought into such suffering. Christ met His suffering and said, "For this purpose I was sent."
- Darkness answered. The same mouth that wished it had never seen light later said, "I know that my Redeemer lives." The Christian letters answer too: "to depart and be with Christ" is far better.