Job 2:10

2:10 But he replied, ¹  “You’re talking like one of the godless ²  women would do! Should we receive ³  what is good from God, and not also ⁴  receive ⁵  what is evil?” ⁶  In all this Job did not sin by what he said. ⁷ 

James 1:4

1:4 And let endurance have its perfect effect, so that you will be perfect and complete, not deficient in anything.

James 1:12

1:12 Happy is the one ⁸  who endures testing, because when he has proven to be genuine, he will receive the crown of life that God ⁹  promised to those who love him.

James 1:1

Salutation

1:1 From James, ¹⁰  a slave ¹¹  of God and the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes dispersed abroad. ¹²  Greetings!

Ecclesiastes 1:7

1:7 All the streams flow ¹³  into the sea, but the sea is not full,

and to the place where the streams flow, there they will flow again. ¹⁴ 

[2:10]  ¹ tn Heb “he said to her.”

[2:10]  ² tn The word “foolish” (נָבָל, naval) has to do with godlessness more than silliness (Ps 14:1). To be foolish in this sense is to deny the nature and the work of God in life its proper place. See A. Phillips, “NEBALA – A Term for Serious Disorderly Unruly Conduct,” VT 25 (1975): 237-41; and W. M. W. Roth, “NBL,” VT 10 (1960): 394-409.

[2:10]  ³ tn The verb קִבֵּל (qibbel) means “to accept, receive.” It is attested in the Amarna letters with the meaning “receive meekly, patiently.”

[2:10]  ⁴ tn The adverb גָּם (gam, “also, even”) is placed here before the first clause, but belongs with the second. It intensifies the idea (see GKC 483 §153). See also C. J. Labuschagne, “The Emphasizing Particle GAM and Its Connotations,” Studia Biblica et Semitica, 193-203.

[2:10]  ⁵ tn The two verbs in this sentence, Piel imperfects, are deliberative imperfects; they express the reasoning or deliberating in the interrogative sentences.

[2:10]  ⁶ tn A question need not be introduced by an interrogative particle or adverb. The natural emphasis on the words is enough to indicate it is a question (GKC 473 §150.a).

[2:10]  ⁷ tn Heb “sin with his lips,” an idiom meaning he did not sin by what he said.

[1:12]  ⁸ 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]  ⁹ 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.

[1:1]  ¹⁵ tn Grk “James.” The word “From” is not in the Greek text, but has been supplied to indicate the sender of the letter.

[1:1]  ¹⁶ tn Traditionally, “servant” or “bondservant.” Though δοῦλος (doulos) is normally translated “servant,” the word does not bear the connotation of a free individual serving another. BDAG notes that “‘servant’ for ‘slave’ is largely confined to Biblical transl. and early American times…in normal usage at the present time the two words are carefully distinguished” (BDAG 260 s.v.). The most accurate translation is “bondservant” (sometimes found in the ASV for δοῦλος), in that it often indicates one who sells himself into slavery to another. But as this is archaic, few today understand its force.

[1:1]  ¹⁷ tn Grk “to the twelve tribes in the Diaspora.” The Greek term διασπορά (diaspora, “dispersion”) refers to Jews not living in Palestine but “dispersed” or scattered among the Gentiles.

[1:7]  ²² tn Heb “are going” or “are walking.” The term הֹלְכִים (holÿkhim, Qal active participle masculine plural from הָלַךְ, halakh,“to walk”) emphasizes continual, durative, uninterrupted action (present universal use of participle). This may be an example of personification; this verb is normally used in reference to the human activity of walking. Qoheleth compares the flowing of river waters to the action of walking to draw out the comparison between the actions of man (1:4) and the actions of nature (1:5-11).

[1:7]  ²³ tn Heb “there they are returning to go.” The term שָׁבִים (shavim, Qal active participle masculine plural from שׁוּב, shuv, “to return”) emphasizes the continual, durative action of the waters. The root שׁוּב is repeated in 1:6-7 to emphasize that everything in nature (e.g., wind and water) continually repeats its actions. For all of the repetition of the cycles of nature, nothing changes; all the constant motion produces nothing new.