In the previous verse, Paul has just labeled the false teaching as another version of the gospel. Here he is quick to deny that it can even be called that, as he affirms that there is no “other gospel.” Literally rendered, this expression is “which is not another” or “not that it is another” (New English Bible follows the second of these). The apostasy which is affecting the Galatians is simply not another gospel which can be substituted for the gospel which Paul has proclaimed to them. In denying the possibility of “another gospel,” one may say in some languages “but there is no other message which is good news,” “but what is called good news is really not good news,” or “but this other good news really isn’t good news.”

But I say this because renders the Greek word often translated “except,” but in this case it introduces a special factor which needs to be considered, perhaps best introduced by “but I say this only because.” Paul is not through minimizing the fact that he described the false teaching as another gospel. The reason for Paul’s previous statement is that there are some people who were really at work among the Galatians upsetting them and trying to change the gospel of Christ. This is the first mention of those who are preaching the “other gospel” among the Galatians. The verb for upsetting is in the present tense, indicating perhaps that these people are still in Galatia. The verb itself can mean “to disturb mentally, with excitement, perplexity, or fear” (Revised Standard Version “trouble,” New English Bible “unsettle your minds,” New American Bible “confuse”).

Trying to change the gospel of Christ is literally “want to pervert the gospel of Christ.” This indicates that the Galatians have not yet fully succumbed to the influence of the Judaising missionaries. The Greek word for to change is in itself neutral, and simply means to change from one thing into another, or from one state to another, or to an opposite state, but in this context it means to change for the worse (Revised Standard Version “to pervert,” New English Bible “to distort”).

The gospel of Christ is not the gospel belonging to Christ, but the Good News about Christ, hence the Good News with Christ as the content.

There is a serious but subtle problem involved in rendering to change the gospel of Christ since, in fact, to alter the Good News about Christ would be to make it no longer Good News. Therefore, in some languages it may be necessary to say “to take away the good news about Christ and to put in lies,” or “to substitute false words for true words in the good news about Christ.”

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 .

The whole point of this verse is that being put right with God, even for Jews, is not by doing what the Law requires, but by faith in Jesus Christ. Paul starts his argument by a general statement (a person), continues with a reference to Jewish Christians alone (we, too), and ends with another general statement encompassing both Jews and Gentiles (no one).

Put right with God is literally “justified.” For Paul, “to justify” (and the nominal form “righteousness”) when applied to God, refers to an activity of God in which he rights a wrong or vindicates, the goal of such “righting” being man. “Righteousness” is therefore better translated “God’s act of putting man right with himself” (that is, with God) or “God’s activity in restoring man to a right relationship with him.” Rather than the passive expression a person is put right with God, it may be necessary in some languages to use an active form, for example, “God puts a man right.” However, the man is put right with God, not merely put right with himself as a person. Therefore it is essential that the person with whom a man is put right is clearly identified as being God. In some languages this concept of being put right with God is expressed idiomatically as “God leads a man back to himself,” or even “God ties a man to himself,” as an expression of the renewal of a proper relationship.

Faith in Jesus Christ includes not only believing the message about Jesus Christ, but also trust in and commitment of oneself to him. Only through faith in Jesus Christ expresses the means by which a man is put right with God. But since faith must often be expressed as a verb meaning “to trust,” it may be necessary to express this means in some languages as cause, for example, “only because a man trusts in Jesus Christ,” or “… puts his confidence in Jesus Christ.”

Doing what the Law requires is literally “works of law,” and Paul means by it the obeying of certain rules and regulations in the Law in order to win God’s approval. The Law here probably refers to the Jewish Law, the Torah, although it can also be understood as referring to any law (New American Bible “legal observance”), especially if a person is interpreted as referring to any person, rather than to Jewish Christians alone.

It is possible to interpret the Greek to mean that obeying the Law is not enough to put man in a right relationship with God, and that therefore it needs to be accompanied or supplemented by faith, but that is not what Paul means. What he does mean is that “faith in Jesus Christ” and “works of law” are two different ways: the first one is valid, and the second one is not. It is only by faith that one is put right with God, not by anything else. Good News Translation makes this clear: never by doing what the Law requires (compare New English Bible “no man is ever justified by doing what the law demands, but only through faith in Christ Jesus”). In some languages one may render this clause as “he never gets in a right relation with God by doing what the Law says he must do.” There is, however, a very serious complication involved at this point in the translation of Law. In some languages it is simply impossible to use a singular form even with some graphic symbolization such as the use of capital letters to indicate the Law of Moses. Since the Law of the Old Testament actually consisted of many different regulations, one can only refer to the Law as “laws.” However, Paul is obviously not referring here to the laws of any society but only to the laws handed down through Moses. Since the Law is often referred to in the New Testament as “the Law of Moses” or “the Law given through Moses,” it may be appropriate in this instance also to speak of “the laws which came by means of Moses,” or “… through Moses.” Some translators prefer to use an expression such as “the laws of the old covenant,” “… the old agreement,” or “… the former agreement.”

We, too, is emphatic in the Greek, the idea behind it being that “although we are Jews, yet we also have believed.” For translating we, refer to previous discussion at the beginning of this section. In at least one translation, the exclusive form is used (Jerusalem Bible “We had to become believers in Christ Jesus no less than you had”). In some languages it may be useful to introduce this sentence as “Even we have believed in Christ Jesus.”

For no one is put right with God by doing what the Law requires seems to be a quotation from Psalm 143.2, following the Septuagint. That is, the Septuagint reads “each one who lives” whereas Paul has “all flesh.” Also, the Old Testament verse does not have the phrase “works of Law” but instead has “before you.” No one is literally “no flesh,” with “flesh” equivalent to “human being.”

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 .

This verse functions not only as the climax of Paul’s argument in this section, but picks up again the theme started in verse 7 and referred to again in verses 9, 14, and 16, namely, the question of who are the real descendants of Abraham. The condition for becoming a descendant of Abraham is here stated differently, but the meaning is the same: if you belong to Christ. The if does not introduce a mere hypothesis, but it suggests that what follows is true and certain (compare Jerusalem Bible “merely by belonging to Christ”). Since this condition does imply an actual fact, it may be expressed more accurately as a condition of cause, for example, “because you belong to Christ, then you are the descendants of Abraham,” or “… belong to the lineage of Abraham.”

Will receive what God has promised is literally “heirs according to the promise.” As in verse 18, the inheritance implied in the word “heirs” is the gift of God, the content of God’s promise, and therefore the “heirs” are the recipients of God’s promised gift. It may, moreover, be necessary to specify those to whom the promise was made, for example, “will receive what God has promised to you as descendants of Abraham,” or “will receive what God has promised Abraham’s descendants,” or even “… Abraham and his descendants.”

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 .

There is an obvious connection between this verse and the preceding one (4.31); both are concerned with freedom. Accordingly, it is sometimes preferred to include 5.1 with the preceding section rather than with what follows, as is the case in the UBS Greek New Testament.

This close relation, coupled with the unusual construction of the first part of this verse, has given rise to serious textual problems, various solutions of which are reflected in modern translations. The decision we have to take regarding the textual variants centers primarily on whether one should take 5.1 with what immediately precedes or with what follows. If the former, the following rendering is possible: “We are children … of the free woman with the freedom for which Christ set us free” (Moffatt; compare Knox “we are sons of the free woman, not of the slave; such is the freedom Christ has won for us”). The evidence, however, strongly favors the latter alternative, and this is reflected in Good News Translation.

After deciding what text to follow, one has to determine what Paul means by the statements in this verse. The grammatical form of “freedom” is dative, and this can be either a dative of instrument or a dative of purpose or designation. If the dative of instrument is understood, the following rendering is possible: “by means of this freedom Christ set us free.” Most translators, however, understand here a dative of purpose, so that Paul is understood to be saying “Christ has set us free in order that we can live as free people” (Jerusalem Bible “when Christ freed us, he meant us to remain free”; New English Bible “Christ set us free, to be free men”).

Freedom here should be understood as freedom from the Law, and the pronoun us is inclusive, referring to both Paul and his readers.

Though the Good News Translation rendering Freedom is what we have—Christ has set us free! is rhetorically effective and indicates a close relation to the preceding verse, it may be difficult to reproduce this type of structure in another language, especially if the freedom which the Christian possesses is to be interpreted as the purpose for which Christ set believers free. Therefore one may translate “Christ has set us free so that we could truly be free.” In a number of languages, however, there is no appropriate term for “free” which would suggest freedom from arbitrary obligations or control, and therefore it may be necessary to speak of being free in terms of “not being slaves,” for example, “Christ has rescued us so that we need not be slaves at all,” or “… so that we need not live like slaves.”

The last part of the verse presents both exhortation and warning. Stand, then, as free people is intensive and is better translated “stand firm” or, in a figurative sense, “dig your heels in firmly.” While the Greek does not have as free people, yet it is clear that what Paul wants the Galatians to be firm about is their freedom in Christ. Stand, then, as free people may be rendered as “Determine to remain free,” or “Be sure that you remain as people who have been released.”

Do not allow yourselves to become slaves again is literally “do not be caught again by a yoke of slavery.” The verb Paul uses means “to be ensnared” and is in the passive form; the false teachers are the implied agents.

Paul refers to “a” yoke of slavery, not “the” yoke, thus addressing both Jews and Gentiles. Any legalistic system, whether Jewish or Gentile, is bound to make slaves of people. The yoke is an appropriate metaphor for bondage, since an animal under a yoke has to obey its master. The Jew spoke of “taking the yoke of the law” upon himself, and it could be that the false teachers have been using this kind of language with the Galatians.

It is interesting to note that Jesus also used the figure of the yoke, but to describe obedience and apostleship (Matt 11.29).

In translating this type of expression, there are three alternatives: (1) the figure can be retained, as long as the readers understand what it means; (2) another metaphor can be substituted (as in Phillips “shackles of slavery”); (3) the metaphor can be replaced by a nonmetaphor, as in Good News Translation.

The addition of again makes it clear that Paul is referring to their former state of subservience either to the Jewish or to the pagan system before they accepted the Christian message.

In rendering do not allow yourselves to become slaves again, it may be important to indicate some type of agent, for example, “do not let people cause you to become slaves again,” or “… to enslave you again.” It may be, however, that a reference to “becoming slaves” or “enslaving” would be understood only in a literal sense. One may therefore change the metaphor into a simile, for example, “to become like slaves again,” or “to live as though you were slaves again.”

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 .

The introductory so connects this verse with the one immediately preceding. In the light of what Paul has just said, he now defines for his readers and for himself a corresponding course of action.

The verbs translated become tired and give up are similar in meaning, both containing the elements of fatigue and exhaustion. The first verb puts emphasis on losing interest (for example, “spiritless”) and the second on becoming discouraged or relaxing one’s efforts. These are reflected in some translations (Revised Standard Version “grow weary … lose heart”; New American Bible “grow weary … relax our efforts”).

The word translated good is literally “well-being”; a different word for good is used in verse 10. Perhaps we should not press the distinction between these two words, but if one is to be made, doing good in this verse would refer generally to any action done for others or for oneself that results in well-being. In verse 10 it would refer primarily to things done for the benefit of others.

The last part of verse 9 suggests that Paul is thinking eschatologically. It could be that the time will come refers to the expected return of the Lord or to the end of the world. In place of this expression one may say, in some languages, “there will be a day,” or “the day will happen.”

An expression for reaping the harvest must refer to something beneficial or good. This may be expressed in some languages as “we will have the benefit of a harvest,” or “we will have a good harvest.”

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 .

Since Paul is here mentioning several items which indicate his very brief contact with the apostles in Jerusalem, it may be useful to begin verse 19 with a conjunction such as “furthermore” or “moreover” (“Furthermore, I did not see…”).

Not only did Paul stay in Jerusalem for only a brief time; but also he did not see anyone except Peter and James. As Good News Translation indicates, the phrase except James presents a problem of interpretation. Does Paul mean to include James with the apostles? If that is the case, he is saying that he saw no other apostle except James. Or does Paul exclude James from the apostolic group? In that case he is saying “I did not see any of the other apostles; I only saw James” (as in the TEV footnote and in Jerusalem Bible). Either interpretation of the Greek is possible.

James is probably the same person mentioned in Mark 6.3 as Jesus’ brother and is referred to simply as James in Galatians 2.9,12; 1 Corinthians 15.7; Acts 15.13; 21.18. He was known in later tradition as the first bishop of the church in Jerusalem. He should be distinguished from James the Son of Zebedee and James the son of Alphaeus, who were two of the Twelve (Matt 10.2-3).

Depending upon the interpretation which is adopted, the exception of James may be introduced as “I saw only James,” or “the only other apostle was James.” One may then introduce the apposition as a separate sentence: “He is the brother of our Lord.” In this rendering the Lord is often expressed as “our Lord,” since in many languages the relation of people to the Lord must be indicated.

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 .

The Greek word used to introduce this section (Revised Standard Version “thus”) could be taken either (1) as introducing a subordinate clause which is dependent on the preceding section, (2) or as introducing a new topic. The latter interpretation seems to be preferred. In the previous verses (1-5), Paul has been appealing to the experience of the Galatians. Now he brings in the case of Abraham, and from this point until the end of chapter 4, Paul affirms his fundamental contention that Abraham was put right with God by faith, and that therefore those who are put right with God in the same manner are the true descendants of Abraham.

Some translations smooth out the rather abrupt introduction of a new topic in order to bring in the case of Abraham more naturally (Jerusalem Bible “Take Abraham for example”; New American Bible “Consider the case of Abraham”; New English Bible “Look at Abraham”). It is also possible to begin this paragraph by a phrase such as “Now think about Abraham,” “And now we should consider what happened to Abraham,” or “What happened to Abraham is here important.”

As the scripture says is not in the text; it is added in Good News Translation to signal to the reader that what follows is a quotation from the Old Testament. The quotation itself is from Genesis 15.6 and follows the Septuagint rather than the Hebrew version. In a number of languages one cannot speak of “the scripture saying” or “… speaking”; it is only people who say things. One can, however, use some such phrase as “as one may read in the Scriptures,” or “… in a passage of the Scriptures.”

Abraham is considered the father of the Jewish nation. An appeal to his experience would be an effective argument against the Judaizers, that is, those who insisted that conformance to the Law was necessary for salvation.

He believed God indicates more than mental assent. It describes Abraham’s willing and unreserved surrender to God, his humble and utter dependence on him, and his confident trust in his word. This meaning is frequently expressed in translations as “Abraham trusted God,” or “Abraham put his confidence in God.” In some languages trust is expressed idiomatically, for example, “Abraham leaned his weight upon God,” or “Abraham hung onto God with his heart.”

Because of his faith God accepted him as righteous is literally “It was reckoned to him as righteousness.” “It” is, of course, his faith, and the implicit agent of “was reckoned” is God. The phrase “reckoned to him as righteousness” can be interpreted either to mean that God recognized Abraham as having acted rightly, or that it was Abraham’s faith that was accounted as the ground of his being accepted by God. “Righteousness” in the latter case would have the primary element of being put right with God or being put into a right relationship with him.

The phrase because of his faith may be rendered as “because he trusted God.”

God accepted him as righteous may be rendered as “God received him as one who is righteous,” or “… who had done what was right.” However, if “righteousness” is to be understood in terms of being put right with God or being placed in a right relation to God, one may say in some languages “God joined him to himself in the right way.”

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 .

Paul ends this section with a statement expressing his fear that everything he has done among the Galatians might end up in nothing. This shows how seriously Paul regarded the effects of legalism; once the Galatians start to observe a legalistic system, they have for all intents and purposes repudiated the Good News of God’s free gift of love and reconciliation.

In the Greek this verse is actually one declarative sentence, but Good News Translation restructures it into two sentences. The first expresses Paul’s concern and worry for the Galatians, and the second expresses, in the form of a rhetorical question, his doubt, unbelief, and dismay at what he fears may actually happen, if it has not already become a reality among them.

It is possible to translate the first part of this verse with the worry or fear being connected with the efforts of Paul rather than with the Galatians themselves (Revised Standard Version “I am afraid I have labored over you in vain”; Jerusalem Bible “you make me feel I have wasted my time with you”; New English Bible “you make me fear that all the pains I spent on you may prove to be labour lost”). It is more likely, however, that the meaning of the Greek is more as Good News Translation renders this passage; that is, Paul is showing his concern for the Galatians themselves, and not simply expressing fear that his efforts have been in vain (compare Knox “I am anxious over you”).

I am worried about you is literally “I fear for you,” but special care would have to be exercised in translating “I fear for you.” It could be translated “I am afraid for you,” but too often it has been rendered in such a way as to mean “I am afraid of you.” In some languages one can best say “I’m afraid for what may happen to you.” However, in some languages one cannot speak of “fear” in a context such as this one. What was in Paul’s mind was not fright, but deep concern and worry, as Good News Translation indicates, and therefore one may translate “I am very much worried because of you,” or, as expressed idiomatically in one language, “My mind is killing me because of you.”

In place of the rhetorical question Can it be that all my work for you has been for nothing?, one may have in some languages an emphatic statement, “I sincerely trust that all my work on your behalf has not been for nothing.” In many languages, however, a double negative is quite inappropriate, and may even be grammatically improper. Thus it may be necessary to say “I do trust that my work for you has had results.”

To avoid the implication that Paul’s work has been merely physical effort, it may be important in some languages to translate all my work for you as “all that I have done on your behalf,” or “all that I have done in order to help you.”

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 .