Ayub 1:22

1:22 In all this Job did not sin, nor did he charge God with moral impropriety. ¹ 

Ayub 6:24

No Sin Discovered

6:24 “Teach ²  me and I, for my part, ³  will be silent;

explain to me ⁴  how I have been mistaken. ⁵ 

Yakobus 1:12

1:12 Happy is the one ⁶  who endures testing, because when he has proven to be genuine, he will receive the crown of life that God ⁷  promised to those who love him.

[1:22]  ¹ tn The last clause is difficult to translate. It simply reads, “and he did not give unseemliness to God.” The word תִּפְלָה (tiflah) means “unsavoriness” or “unseemliness” in a moral sense. The sense is that Job did not charge God with any moral impropriety in his dealings with him. God did nothing worthless or tasteless. The ancient versions saw the word connected with “foolishness” or “stupidity” (תָּפֵל, tafel, “to be tasteless”). It is possible that “folly” would capture some of what Job meant here. See also M. Dahood, “Hebrew-Ugaritic Lexicography XII,” Bib 55 (1974): 381-93.

[6:24]  ² tn The verb “teach” or “instruct” is the Hiphil הוֹרוּנִי (horuni), from the verb יָרָה (yarah); the basic idea of “point, direct” lies behind this meaning. The verb is cognate to the noun תּוֹרָה (torah, “instruction, teaching, law”).

[6:24]  ³ tn The independent personal pronoun makes the subject of the verb emphatic: “and I will be silent.”

[6:24]  ⁴ tn The verb is הָבִינוּ (havinu, “to cause someone to understand”); with the ל (lamed) following, it has the sense of “explain to me.”

[6:24]  ⁵ tn The verb שָׁגָה (shagah) has the sense of “wandering, getting lost, being mistaken.”

[1:12]  ⁶ tn The word for “man” or “individual” here is ἀνήρ (anhr), which often means “male” or “man (as opposed to woman).” However, as BDAG 79 s.v. 2 says, here it is “equivalent to τὶς someone, a person.”

[1:12]  ⁷ tc Most mss ([C] P 0246 Ï) read ὁ κύριος (Jo kurio", “the Lord”) here, while others have ὁ θεός (Jo qeo", “God”; 4 33^vid 323 945 1739 al). However, several important and early witnesses (̲³ א A B Ψ 81 co) have no explicit subject. In light of the scribal tendency toward clarification, and the fact that both κύριος and θεός are well represented, there can be no doubt that the original text had no explicit subject. The referent (God) has been specified in the translation for clarity, not because of textual basis.