464 Philippe Guillaume – Michael Schunck the notion of compensation because this verse is supposed to sever from the onset the link between piety and reward. Job’s initial prosperity being granted on a purely gratuitous and unconditional basis, Job’s restored riches must also be granted unconditionally and thus cannot be compensatory (30). That Job’s initial prosperity is not rewarding his piety is probably correct, but the principle does not apply to his renewed fortunes in the Epilogue. Compensation is not reward. Compensation seeks to make up for losses incurred, irrelevant of whether or not the injured party deserved the lost goods in the first place. Compensation is a consequence of ownership while reward has to do with merit. Since Job is innocent and YHWH admits having hurt Job for nothing, the matter is not one of reward for Job’s piety but of compensation for YHWH’s misdeed. This bears directly on the translation of Job 1,21. “YHWH gave and YHWH took” does not delve into whether or not Job merited what YHWH gave him. The problem is that YHWH gave and then took back (31), and it is all the more problematic since YHWH took back for naught (Job 2,3). The consensus in translating the verb ˚rb in “May the name of YHWH be blessed” as if it obviously means “to bless” and cannot possibly mean “to curse” misses an important aspect of the Pro- logue (32). The first of the six occurrences of this crucial verb in the Prologue has to be translated euphemistically: “maybe my sons sinned and cursed Elohim in their hearts” (Job 1,5) while the next occurrence requires a normal rendering: “You have blessed the work of his hand” (Job 1,10). The alternation between cursing and blessing expressed by the same verb precludes any recourse to context and requires considering each of the following occurrences in its own right (33). Does (30) D. IVANSKI, The Dynamics of Job’s Intercession (AnBib 161; Roma 2006) 358-359. (31) According to a French proverb, Donner c’est donner, reprendre c’est voler (A gift is a gift; to take it away is theft). (32) H. SPIECKERMANN, “Die Satanisierung Gottes: Zur inneren Konkordanz von Novelle, Dialog und Gottesreden im Hiobbuch”, “Wer ist wie du, Herr, unter den Göttern?” (eds I. KOOTTSIEPER – J. van OORSCHOT – D. RÖMHELD – H.M. WAHL) (Göttingen 1994) 435. (33) A. COOPER, “Reading and Misreading in the Prologue of Job”, JSOT 46 (1990) 67-79; T. LINAFELT, “The Undecidability of ˚rb in the Prologue to Job and Beyond”, BibInt 4 (1996) 154-172; Ph. GUILLAUME, “Caution: Rhetorical Questions”, BN 103 (2000) 11-16; H.S. PYPER, An Unsuitable Book (Sheffield 2005) 59; D. MATHEWSON, Death and Survival in the Book of Job (LHB/OTS 450; London 2006) 56-63.