The right time translates the Greek phrase “the fullness of time,” for which a variety of meanings has been suggested by various commentators. The most probable is that Paul has in mind the end of the reign of the Law (and therefore of man’s hopelessness) and the beginning of a new era when the decisive aspect is not what man does or attempts to do, but what God does on behalf of man. Whatever meaning we can see in the expression, the main thing to remember is that the emphasis is on a time designated by God as appropriate for his act in order to assure man’s deliverance from helplessness and subservience to the Law and to those forces that are opposed to God (compare Phillips “the proper time”; Jerusalem Bible “the appointed time”; New American Bible “the designated time”). In a number of languages one simply cannot speak of “time coming.” One can often say, however, “when it was the right time,” “… the right occasion,” “when the right day was happening,” or “when it was the day that God had decided upon.” In some languages it may be necessary to indicate in what respect a particular time or occasion is “right,” and the quality of being right can only be stated in some languages with reference to God’s determining it as being right. For this reason one must specify the occasion as being appropriate in terms of God having designated it or selected it.

It is possible to interpret the expression God sent his own Son to mean God’s sending of Jesus from Galilee to fulfill his ministry in other parts of Palestine. It is more likely, however, that Paul is referring to God’s act of sending his Son from his pre-existent state into the world. In some languages it is almost essential to indicate the place to which God’s Son was sent, and therefore it may be necessary to say “God sent his own Son into the world.” This particular interpretation seems to be by far the more acceptable of the two.

The son of a human mother is literally “born of a woman.” In the Bible this is an idiomatic expression referring simply to what is human (see Job 14.1 and Matt 11.11). The emphasis, therefore, is not on the human mother, but on the fact that the Son took upon himself human nature; in other words, he became a human being. The closest equivalent of the son of a human mother may in some languages be simply “his mother was a human being,” “a woman gave birth to him,” or even “he had a mother just as other people do”; but often a more appropriate rendering would be “he became a person” or “he came as a man.”

Lived under the Jewish Law is literally “born under law,” although the Greek construction would suggest “subject to law” as a more accurate rendering. The absence of the article before “law” is interpreted by some to indicate the general nature of the phrase. It could then refer simply to Jesus’ status as man, since all men are under law of some kind. There is, however, an undeniable reference to the Jewish Law. What Paul very likely means is that the Son of God took upon himself human form and was subject to all the requirements of the Jewish Law. There is a serious complication involved in a literal translation of the expression lived under the Jewish Law, since in a number of languages an expression such as “under the law” would suggest illegal activity, that is to say, he “lived like an outlaw.” It may therefore be necessary to say “he lived in obedience to the Jewish Law,” or better “he lived in a society which had the Jewish Law.” It is true, of course, that Jesus did violate a number of the ceremonial laws in order to reach people, but it is equally true that his general pattern of life was in conformance with Old Testament regulations.

Quoted with permission from Arichea, Daniel C. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on Paul’s Letter to the Galatians. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1976. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .