462 Philippe Guillaume – Michael Schunck at all repents in Job 42,6, is he repenting in dust and ashes (although he is already there since Job 2,8) or he is repenting of dust and ashes and thus end his mourning? And what is he repenting about? (23) Some readers want the Epilogue to rescue the integrity of God more than Job’s (24) while others claim that Job’s contrition (hmjn) in 42,6a is a veritable repentance although the term hbwçt is not stated (25). In Job, the problem of suffering applies first and foremost to the translators. Blaming Job rather than God may alleviate some of their pain, but it forces them to dispute the force of the divine stamp of approval in favour of Job (26) and puts the blamers in the precarious position of Job’s friends whom YHWH declares guilty (Job 42,7-8). 4. Resolving the Meaning of the Prologue That God may be guilty of foolishly bringing evil upon innocent Job throws light upon Job’s statement in the Prologue concerning how humans should receive good and evil. That we receive good from God’s hand is unproblematic, but translators render the second part of the phrase as a rhetorical question “don’t we also receive evil from the hand of God?” (lbqn al [rhAtaw) (27). Yet, there is not the faintest trace of a question in that sentence in the Hebrew text. Since a rhetorical question can legitimately be postulated in the presence of an interrogative proposition — which is not the case here — the phrase can only mean “although we receive the good from the god, the evil we do not receive” (Job 2,10). The second requirement to postulate a rhetorical question is that the answer is too obvious to be supplied. However, if Job 2,10 asked a question its answer would be far from obvious. The Psalms display no ready acceptance of evil from the hand of God and suggest that humans should respond to evil with lament (23) W.L. MICHEL, “Confidence and Despair. Job 19,25-27 in Light of Northwest Semitic Studies”, The Book of Job (ed. W. BEUKEN), 176-177. (24) L.G. PERDUE, Wisdom in Revolt (JSOTSS 112; Sheffield 1991) 238. Resisting C.G. Jung’s devastating critique of the deity in the Book of Job, M.A. COREY, Job, Jonah and the Unconscious (Lanham 1995) 116-143 claims that God multiplied Job’s wound without apparent cause and develops an instrumental perspective to exonerate God. (25) A. LACOCQUE, ‘The Deconstruction of Job’s Fundamentalism’, JBL 126 (2007) 91. (26) N. WHYBRAY, Job (Sheffield 1998) 172-173 limits God’s commendation to Job’s retraction in 42,1-6. (27) W. VOGELS, “Job’s Empty Pious Slogans (Job 1,20-22; 2,8-10)”, The Book of Job (ed. BEUKEN), 373.